Frontiers in Network PhysiologyNeurosciencePeer-reviewed journal article
Resolving inconsistent effects of tDCS on learning using a homeostatic structural plasticity model
Abstract
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is increasingly used to modulate motor learning. Current polarity and intensity, electrode montage, and application before or during learning had mixed effects. Both Hebbian and homeostatic plasticity were proposed to account for the observed effects, but the explanatory power of these models is limited. In a previous modeling study, we showed that homeostatic structural plasticity (HSP) can explain long-lasting after-effects of tDCS and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). The interference between motor learning and tDCS, which are both based on HSP in our model, is a candidate mechanism to resolve complex and seemingly contradictory experimental observations. We implemented motor learning and tDCS in a spiking neural network subject to HSP. The anatomical connectivity of the engram induced by motor learning was used to quantify the impact of tDCS on motor learning. Our modeling results demonstrated that transcranial direct current stimulation applied before learning had weak modulatory effects. It led to a small reduction in connectivity if it was applied uniformly. When applied during learning, targeted anodal stimulation significantly strengthened the engram, while targeted cathodal or uniform stimulation weakened it. Applied after learning, targeted cathodal, but not anodal, tDCS boosted engram connectivity. Strong tDCS would distort the engram structure if not applied in a targeted manner. Our model explained both Hebbian and homeostatic phenomena observed in human tDCS experiments by assuming memory strength positively correlates with engram connectivity. This includes applications with different polarity, intensity, electrode montage, and timing relative to motor learning. The HSP model provides a promising framework for unraveling the dynamic interaction between learning and transcranial DC stimulation.
- Citations
- 2
- FWCI
- 0.72
- Field percentile
- top 31%
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Neural mechanism underlying task-specific enhancement of motor learning by concurrent transcranial direct current stimulation
Ying Wang, Jixian Wang, … Yunqing Wen·Neuroscience BulletinPeer-reviewed·Jul 30, 2022
- Robust enhancement of motor sequence learning with 4mA transcranial electric stimulation
Gavin Hsu, Ahmed Duke Shereen, … Lucas C. Parra·bioRxiv·Jun 7, 2022
- Repeated tDCS at clinically-relevant field intensity can boost concurrent motor learning in rats.
Forouzan Farahani, Mihály Vöröslakos, … Lucas C. Parra·Journal of NeurosciencePeer-reviewed·Apr 11, 2025
- No effect of anodal high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation during motor sequence learning in older people
Silke Kerstens, Sanne Broeder, … Jean‐Jacques Orban de Xivry·GeroSciencePeer-reviewed·Aug 29, 2026
- Direct current stimulation boosts Hebbian plasticity in vitro
Greg Kronberg, Asif Rahman, … Lucas C. Parra·Brain stimulationPeer-reviewed·Oct 18, 2019
- Intensity-dependent effects of tDCS on motor learning are related to dopamine
Li‐Ann Leow, Jiaqin Jiang, … Hannah L. Filmer·Brain stimulationPeer-reviewed·Apr 9, 2024