Cited by 131Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchNeural dynamics and brain function

Paired Associative Stimulation Enforces the Communication between Interconnected Areas

Open access
Veniero, Domenica, Ponzo, Viviana, Koch, Giacomo·2013·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Paired associative stimulation (PAS) protocols induce forms of spike-timing-dependent-plasticity (STDP) when paired pulses are repeatedly applied with different timing over interconnected cortical areas such as the posterior parietal cortex (PPC) and the primary motor cortex (M1). However, the assessment of PAS effects is usually limited to M1 through recording of motor-evoked potential (MEP) amplitude. Here, by combining transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) with EEG we aimed at investigating PAS effects over both areas (PPC, M1) and the modulation induced on their connectivity in humans. In different PAS conditions, PPC preceded or followed M1 TMS by 5 ms. We found that TMS-evoked potentials (TEPs) changed differently according to the long-term depression (LTD) or potentiation (LTP) after-effect assessed by MEPs, but did not vary at PPC level. Moreover, there was no change in local oscillatory power. However, there was a remarkable increase of coherence between the PPC and the M1 areas. When the PAS protocol induced LTD as revealed by MEPs, there was a specific increase of the coherence between PPC and M1 within the beta band. On the contrary, when PAS induced LTP, the coherence crucially increased in the alpha band. The same LTP results were confirmed when rotating the stimulating coil in M1 during the PAS protocol. In conclusion, we report new evidence that opposite STDP-like effects induced by corticocortical PAS are associated with increased communication between involved brain areas and that antithetic forms of STDP-like after-effects result in distinct cortical rhythms connectivity changes.

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 · 10.1523/jneurosci.1777-13.2013

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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?

  • An assembly of time-locked inputs would consolidate information processing by inducing spike-timing-dependent plasticity between optimally myelinated axons and their postsynaptic neurons, or in the local cortical circuit.

    “An assembly of time‐locked inputs would consolidate information processing by inducing spike‐timing‐dependent plasticity (STDP) between optimally myelinated axons and their postsynaptic neurons, or in the local cortical circuit (Feldman, 2012 ; Nave, 2010 ; Veniero, Ponzo, & Koch, 2013 ).”

    From Motor learning requires myelination to reduce asynchrony and spontaneity in neural activity (2020) · cites this paper as Veniero, Ponzo, & Koch, 2013

    The Introduction (page unavailable) describes how the timing of presynaptic and postsynaptic activity governs STDP. The Discussion (page unavailable) reports that repeated pairing of parietal and motor activation increased communication between cortical areas. The paper does not address optimally myelinated axons or show that this process consolidates information processing. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Veniero, D., Ponzo, V., & Koch, G.
Affiliations
  • Fondazione Santa Lucia (IT)
  • University of Rome Tor Vergata (IT)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2013-08-21
Volume
33
Issue
34
Pages
13773-13783
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2086481242
Cited by
131
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 1
FWCI
5.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • IRIS eCampus Telematic University (Università degli Studi eCampus) (submittedVersion)
  • Institutional Research Information System University of Ferrara (University of Ferrara) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Ministero della Salute
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
Keywords
paired associative stimulation, spike-timing-dependent plasticity, corticocortical connectivity, posterior parietal cortex, primary motor cortex, long-term depression, long-term potentiation, TMS-evoked potentials, motor evoked potentials, beta-band coherence, cortical oscillations
MeSH terms
Adult, Analysis of Variance, Brain Mapping, Electric Stimulation, Electroencephalography, Female, Humans, Functional Laterality, Male, Motor Cortex, Neural Pathways, Neuronal Plasticity, Parietal Lobe, Time Factors, Evoked Potentials, Motor, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Young Adult, Electroencephalography Phase Synchronization

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