Skip to main content
. 2020 Sep 2;40(36):6910–6926. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0763-20.2020

Figure 6.

Figure 6.

Cerebellar stimulation alters object-place dynamics in hippocampal cells. a, Location across animals in the arena. Circles represent object location. All groups covered large swaths of the arena. b, Proportion of cells that are responsive to the objects in the training session. Note the decreased responsiveness in simplex and vermis groups relative to controls. *p < 0.05 (Fisher Exact test). c, Same as in b, but for responsiveness to the unmoved object during the testing session. d, Same as in c, but for responsiveness to the moved object. Note the decreased responsiveness of simplex and vermis groups relative to controls. *p < 0.05 (Fisher Exact test). e, Quantification of the distance between place fields and the nearest object during the training session. Control group place fields were closer to objects. *p < 0.05 (Mann–Whitney). f, Representation of location of place field centers recorded across all animals during the testing session relative to the location of the moved and unmoved objects. Gray (top) and white (bottom) circles represent locations of the unmoved and moved objects, respectively. Color bar represents number of place fields observed in that spatial bin. Note the clustering of place fields near the moved object in controls. g, Quantification of the distance between the place field center and each object during the testing session. Place cells from control animals were closer to the moved object than the unmoved object; place cells from simplex- and vermis-targeted animals were not. *p < 0.05 (t test). CTRL, Control; S, simplex; V, vermis.