Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Nov-Dec;15(6):1435-1438.
doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2022.10.006. Epub 2022 Oct 28.

Cerebellar anodal tDCS does not facilitate visuomotor adaptation or retention

Caroline R Nettekoven  1 , Rebecca Jurdon  2 , Tulika Nandi  3 , Ned Jenkinson  4 , Charlotte J Stagg  5
Affiliations

Cerebellar anodal tDCS does not facilitate visuomotor adaptation or retention

Caroline R Nettekoven et al. Brain Stimul. 2022 Nov-Dec.
No abstract available

Keywords: Adaptation; Cerebellum; Neuromodulation; Retention; tDCS.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1. Results.
A. Visuomotor Adaptation Task. Participants used a joystick to shoot targets on a screen. Targets appeared in one of eight possible locations radially aligned around the centre starting position, separated by 45° (middle panel). After 80 baseline trials, the visual feedback of the cursor was rotated by 10°. This resulted in a 10° offset between joystick movement and cursor movement (right panel). Over time, participants learned to adapt to this offset. B. No effect of cerebellar tDCS on visuomotor adaptation or retention. Participants adapted to a visuomotor rotation while receiving sham or real anodal tDCS to the cerebellum. Participants shot targets on a screen. They began by performing 80 trials with no rotation imposed serving as the baseline in both conditions. After the baseline, stepwise increasing rotated visual feedback (red blocks), required participants to adapt movements to reduce errors. One block at each angle and each block consisted of 40 trials of 4 seconds duration each. The numbers in the red and blue boxes indicate the degree to which the visual feedback was rotated, with 0° indicating no rotation. The imposed rotation reached a maximum of 80°. Interspersed blocks in which visual feedback was removed (crossed out eye) served to probe retention of the adapted movement. The rotation was washed out after task (144 trials, no rotation). Behavioural data is shown as angular error at each trial averaged across participants. Shaded area represents standard error of the mean. There was no difference in angular error between the real condition (red) and sham condition (blue). C. Electrical Field Magnitude in cerebellum. The injected current (left) and mean electrical field magnitude (right) induced by cerebellar anodal tDCS in a representative participant. The distribution of the electrical field magnitude in the cerebellum is shown on the SUIT flatmap [20]. The electric field induced in the brain was estimated using SimNIBS 3.2.3. The head model was built from the representative subject’s T1-weighted structural image using the standard headreco pipeline. The cerebellum grey and white matter segmentation estimated using headreco was replaced by a more refined segmentation obtained using CERES, after visual inspection revealed superior segmentation results from CERES [21]. The anode was centered on the right cerebellar cortex, 3 cm right of the inion, in line with the pre-auricular point. The cathode was positioned over the right buccinator muscle. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Miall RC, Christensen LO, Cain O, Stanley J. Disruption of state estimation in the human lateral cerebellum. PLoS Biol. 2007;5:2733–44. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Tseng YW, Diedrichsen J, Krakauer JW, Shadmehr R, Bastian AJ. Sensory prediction errors drive cerebellum-dependent adaptation of reaching. J Neurophysiol. 2007;98:54–62. - PubMed
    1. Imamizu H, Kuroda T, Miyauchi S, Yoshioka T, Kawato M. Modular organization of internal models of tools in the human cerebellum. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003;100:5461–6. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nettekoven Caroline R, Mitchell Leah, Clarke William T, Emir Uzay, Campbell Jon, Johansen-Berg Heidi, et al. Cerebellar GABA change during visuomotor adaptation relates to adaptation performance and cerebellar network connectivity: A magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging study. J Neurosci. 2022;42(41):7721–32. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0096-22.2022. In this issue. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Galea JM, Vazquez A, Pasricha N, Orban De Xivry JJ, Celnik P. Dissociating the roles of the cerebellum and motor cortex during adaptive learning: the motor cortex retains what the cerebellum learns. Cerebr Cortex. 2011;21:1761–70. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms