e. from EoA to retention) revealed a significant effect of stimulation condition (anovaRM, P = 0.043). Post-hoc analysis revealed that AtDCS applied over PMd significantly selleck chemicals attenuated offline learning compared with AtDCS over M1 (P = 0.028) or sham stimulation (P = 0.031; Fig. 3). We investigated the online and offline changes in motor performance resulting from AtDCS applied over M1 and PMd during practice of an implicit

motor sequence. AtDCS applied over M1 enhanced practice performance compared with sham stimulation and also supported offline stabilization of the motor sequence. In contrast, PMd stimulation with AtDCS during practice attenuated offline stabilization of the motor sequence compared with sham and M1 stimulation. Imaging studies during practice of implicitly acquired motor sequences have indicated that M1 is actively engaged during acquisition to promote online changes in performance (Pascual-Leone et al., 1994; Doyon et al., 1997; Honda et al., 1998). Recently, non-invasive brain stimulation techniques have allowed the exploration and modulation of motor learning by enhancing or suppressing the excitability of M1 (Reis et al., 2008; Bolognini et al., 2009; Stagg et al., 2011b). Similar to previously reported findings, we observed that AtDCS over M1 during motor

practice enhanced online changes in motor performance of an implicit motor sequence (Nitsche et al., 2003; Kang & Paik, 2011). AtDCS over M1 improved the performance of the practiced sequence during acquisition as well as at the EoA. The benefit others of AtDCS

over M1 was specific to the practiced sequence Dabrafenib cost and did not change the performance of the random sequence. This indicates that the tDCS online learning effect is implemented by modulation of learning-related mechanisms, and not by an overall change in general motor behavior. While AtDCS is predominantly known to increase motor cortical excitability by altering the membrane potential (Stagg & Nitsche, 2011), behavioral effects on sequence learning may involve a decrease in gamma-aminobutyric acid (Stagg et al., 2011a) and brain-derived neurotrophic factor-dependent synaptic plasticity (Fritsch et al., 2010). Even after practice ends, M1 is actively engaged in post-practice processes that help stabilize (memory stabilization) or enhance (offline learning) sequence performance over the retention interval. Our hypothesis was similar to those proposed for previous studies (Reis et al., 2009; Tecchio et al., 2010) – enhancing M1 activity with AtDCS will enhance online and offline learning of the practiced sequence. Our findings did not support the offline component of our hypothesis. In the current study, although AtDCS over M1 during practice supported offline stabilization of motor performance, it did not enhance offline learning compared with sham stimulation. These differences may arise from difference in our methods compared with the other studies. Reis et al.