Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 505

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Modulation of practice-dependent plasticity in human motor cortex

Ziemann, U.·2001·Brain

Abstract

Motor practice may lead to expansion of trained representations in the motor cortex, but it is unknown whether this practice-dependent plasticity can be purposefully enhanced or depressed. Evidence, mainly based on animal experiments, indicates that the activity of GABA-related cortical inhibition is important in controlling the extent to which plasticity may occur. We tested the role of GABA in modulating practice-dependent plasticity in the human motor cortex. A decrease in GABA-related cortical inhibition was achieved by ischaemic nerve block (INB) in the hand by deafferentation/deefferentation and an increase was achieved by administration of the GABA(A) receptor agonist lorazepam. In Experiment 1, healthy subjects performed motor practice (MP), consisting of repeated ballistic contractions of the biceps muscle in the absence (MP alone) or presence of INB (MP+INB). Changes in the biceps motor cortex representation were assessed by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). MP+INB resulted in a dramatic increase in the size of the motor evoked potential (MEP) and in paired-pulse excitability compared with mild or no changes in the MP-alone and INB-alone conditions. In Experiment 2, this dramatic increase in biceps representation induced by MP+INB was replicated when subjects were pretreated with placebo, but this increase was prevented or even switched to a decrease when subjects were pretreated with lorazepam. These findings indicate that a decrease in GABA-related inhibition facilitates practice-dependent plasticity in the human motor cortex, whereas an increase depresses it. In Experiment 3, practice-dependent plasticity (assessed by TMS, as in the first two experiments) was also tested at the behavioural level. The dramatic increase in biceps MEP size induced by MP+INB was paralleled by an increase in peak acceleration of the fastest elbow flexion movements. Similarly, the lack of change in MEP size in the MP-alone condition was paralleled by a lack of change in peak acceleration. We propose that changes in GABA activity may be instrumented to modulate plasticity purposefully; for instance, to enhance plastic change and recovery of function after a lesion in neurological patients.

Overview

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/brain/124.6.1171

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 8 references

Cited by

See all 505

Metadata

Authors
Ziemann, U.
Venue
Brain
Published
2001-06-01
Volume
124
Issue
6
Pages
1171-1181
ISSN
  • 0006-8950 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2156
OpenAlex
W2115492850
Cited by
505
References
8
FWCI
13.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Modulation of practice-dependent plasticity in human motor cortex. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/brain/124.6.1171
The paper
Ziemann, U. (2001). Modulation of practice-dependent plasticity in human motor cortex. Brain. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/124.6.1171

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.