tDCS-induced alterations in GABA concentration within primary motor cortex predict motor learning and motor memory: a 7 T magnetic resonance spectroscopy study
Open accessAbstract
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique that alters cortical excitability in a polarity specific manner and has been shown to influence learning and memory. tDCS may have both on-line and after-effects on learning and memory, and the latter are thought to be based upon tDCS-induced alterations in neurochemistry and synaptic function. We used ultra-high-field (7 T) magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS), together with a robotic force adaptation and de-adaptation task, to investigate whether tDCS-induced alterations in GABA and Glutamate within motor cortex predict motor learning and memory. Note that adaptation to a robot-induced force field has long been considered to be a form of model-based learning that is closely associated with the computation and 'supervised' learning of internal 'forward' models within the cerebellum. Importantly, previous studies have shown that on-line tDCS to the cerebellum, but not to motor cortex, enhances model-based motor learning. Here we demonstrate that anodal tDCS delivered to the hand area of the left primary motor cortex induces a significant reduction in GABA concentration. This effect was specific to GABA, localised to the left motor cortex, and was polarity specific insofar as it was not observed following either cathodal or sham stimulation. Importantly, we show that the magnitude of tDCS-induced alterations in GABA concentration within motor cortex predicts individual differences in both motor learning and motor memory on the robotic force adaptation and de-adaptation task.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
tDCS is thought to affect neuroplasticity via modulating cellular, molecular and neurochemical mechanisms involved in use-dependent local and distant synaptic plasticity, i.e., GABA and glutamate-mediated long-term potentiation.
“tDCS is thought to affect neuroplasticity via modulating cellular, molecular and neurochemical mechanisms involved in use-dependent local and distant synaptic plasticity, i.e., GABA and glutamate-mediated long-term potentiation (Nitsche et al., 2008; Kim et al., 2014)”
From Cognitive Neuroscience of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and Its Clinical Translation (2018) · cites this paper as Kim et al., 2014
The Introduction (page unavailable) links tDCS-induced excitability changes to synaptic activity, NMDA and GABAA receptors, and GABA-related LTP-like plasticity in motor cortex. The Discussion (page unavailable) says post-stimulation effects appear to involve synaptic plasticity and changes in glutamate and GABA signalling. The paper does not establish distant synaptic plasticity or specifically describe tDCS's effects as GABA- and glutamate-mediated long-term potentiation. (LLM, conf=0.83)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredtDCS is thought to affect neuroplasticity.
“Given that tDCS is thought to affect neuroplasticity (Nitsche et al., 2008; Kim et al., 2014),”
From Cognitive Neuroscience of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and Its Clinical Translation (2018) · cites this paper as Kim et al., 2014
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 34 · Cited by 227
- Authors
- Kim, S., Stephenson, M. C., Morris, P. G., & Jackson, S. R.
- Affiliations
- University of Nottingham (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Jackson, Stephen R.
- Venue
- NeuroImage
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2014-10
- Volume
- 99
- Pages
- 237-243
- ISSN
- 1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4121086
- OpenAlex
- W1976072801
- Cited by
- 227
- References
- 34
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 11
- FWCI
- 9.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- NeuroImage (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Medical Research Council (G0901321)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
- Keywords
- transcranial direct current stimulation, GABA, glutamate, primary motor cortex, motor learning, motor memory, force field adaptation, model-based learning, anodal stimulation, individual differences, neurochemistry
- MeSH terms
- Adaptation, Psychological, Adolescent, Adult, Female, gamma-Aminobutyric Acid, Glutamine, Humans, Learning, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Memory, Motor Cortex, Motor Skills, Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy, Visual Cortex, Glutamic Acid, Young Adult, Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review