Back

Entraining corticocortical plasticity changes oscillatory activity in action control and inhibition

Sel, A.; Verhagen, L.; Angerer, K.; David, R.; Klein-Flugge, M.; Rushworth, M. F.

2020-06-11 neuroscience
10.1101/2020.06.10.142398 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Oscillatory activity may reflect interactions between brain areas[1]. Here we tested whether inducing corticocortical plasticity in a specific set of connections changes oscillatory activity and cortico-cortical interactions and, if this is the case, whether the changes manifest in a manner that is behaviour state-dependent. We either increased or decreased the influence of activity in human ventral premotor cortex (PMv) over activity in primary motor cortex (M1) using cortico-cortical paired associative stimulation (ccPAS)[2, 3]. Before and after stimulation participants performed a Go/No-Go task. While M1 TMS pulses revealed the excitatory state of the motor system at specific time points, the electroencephalogram (EEG) revealed the evolution of oscillatory activity dynamics in the motor system over several hundreds of milliseconds before, during, and after each movement. Augmenting cortical connectivity between PMv and M1, by evoking synchronous pre- and postsynaptic activity in the PMv-M1 pathways, led to a state-dependent modulation of the causal influence of PMv over M1, and at the same time, enhanced oscillatory beta and theta rhythms in Go and No-Go trials, respectively. No changes were observed in the alpha rhythm. The plasticity induction effect was dependent on PMv-M1 stimulation order; the opposite patterns of results were observed after an equal amount of stimulation of PMv and M1 but applied in a temporal pattern that did not augment PMvs influence over M1. These results are consistent with Hebbian principles of synaptic plasticity[4] and show that artificial manipulation of cortico-cortical connectivity produces state-dependent functional changes in the spectral fingerprints of the motor circuit.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.