Cerebellar–Motor Cortex Connectivity: One or Two Different Networks?

Anterior-posterior (AP) and posterior-anterior (PA) pulses of transcranial magnetic stimulation over the primary motor cortex (M1) appear to activate distinct interneuron networks that contribute differently to two varieties of physiological plasticity and motor behaviors (Hamada et al., 2014). The AP network is thought to be more sensitive to online manipulation of cerebellar (CB) activity using transcranial direct current stimulation. Here we probed CB-M1 interactions using cerebellar-brain inhibition (CBI) on young healthy female and male individuals. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the cerebellum produced maximal CBI of PA-evoked EMG responses at an inter-stimulus interval of 5ms (PA-CBI), whereas the maximum effect on AP responses was at 7ms (AP-CBI), suggesting that CB-M1 pathways with different conduction times interact with AP and PA networks. In addition, paired associative stimulation using ulnar nerve stimulation and PA TMS pulses over M1, a protocol used in human studies to induce cortical plasticity, reduced PA-CBI but not AP-CBI, indicating that cortical networks process cerebellar inputs in distinct ways. Finally, PA-CBI and AP-CBI were differentially modulated after performing two different types of motor learning tasks that are known to process cerebellar input in different ways. The data presented here are compatible with the idea that applying different TMS currents to the cerebral cortex may reveal cerebellar inputs to both the premotor cortex and M1. Overall, these results suggest there are two independent CB-M1networks that contribute uniquely to different motor behaviors

Cerebellar-M1 Connectivity Changes Associated with Motor Learning Are Somatotopic Specific

One ofthefunctions ofthe cerebellum in motor learning isto predict and accountfor systematic changestothe body or environment. This form of adaptive learning is mediated by plastic changes occurring within the cerebellar cortex. The strength of cerebellar-to-cerebral pathways for a given muscle may reflect aspects of cerebellum-dependent motor adaptation. These connections with motor cortex (M1) can be estimated as cerebellar inhibition (CBI): a conditioning pulse of transcranial magnetic stimulation delivered to the cerebellum before a test pulse over motor cortex. Previously, we have demonstrated that changes in CBI for a given muscle representation correlate with learning a motor adaptation task with the involved limb. However, the specificity of these effects is unknown. Here, we investigated whether CBI changes in humans are somatotopy specific and how they relate to motor adaptation. We found that learning a visuomotor rotation task with the right hand changed CBI, not only for the involved first dorsal interosseous of the right hand, but also for an uninvolved right leg muscle, the tibialis anterior, likely related to inter-effector transfer of learning. In two follow-up experiments, we investigated whether the preparation of a simple hand or leg movement would produce a somatotopy-specific modulation of CBI. We found that CBI changes only for the effector involved in the movement. These results indicate that learning-related changes in cerebellar–M1 connectivity reflect a somatotopy-specific interaction. Modulation of this pathway is also present in the context of interlimb transfer of learning

Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (ctDCS): A Novel Approach to Understanding Cerebellar Function in Health and Disease

The cerebellum is critical for both motor and cognitive control. Dysfunction of the cerebellum is a component of multiple neurological disorders. In recent years, interventions have been developed that aim to excite or inhibit the activity and function of the human cerebellum. Transcranial direct current stimulation of the cerebellum (ctDCS) promises to be a powerful tool for the modulation of cerebellar excitability. This technique has gained popularity in recent years as it can be used to investigate human cerebellar function, is easily delivered, is well tolerated, and has not shown serious adverse effects. Importantly, the ability of ctDCS to modify behavior makes it an interesting approach with a potential therapeutic role for neurological patients. Through both electrical and non-electrical effects (vascular, metabolic) ctDCS is thought to modify the activity of the cerebellum and alter the output from cerebellar nuclei. Physiological studies have shown a polarity-specific effect on the modulation of cerebellar-motor cortex connectivity, likely via cerebellar-thalamocortical pathways. Modeling studies that have assessed commonly used electrode montages have shown that the ctDCS-generated electric field reaches the human cerebellum with little diffusion to neighboring structures. The posterior and inferior parts of the cerebellum (i.e., lobules VI-VIII) seem particularly susceptible to modulation by ctDCS. Numerous studies have shown to date that ctDCS can modulate motor learning, and affect cognitive and emotional processes. Importantly, this intervention has a good safety profile; similar to when applied over cerebral areas. Thus, investigations have begun exploring ctDCS as a viable intervention for patients with neurological conditions

Effects of tDCS on motor learning and memory formation: A consensus and critical position paper

Motor skills are required for activities of daily living. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) applied in association with motor skill learning has been investigated as a tool for enhancing training effects in health and disease. Here, we review the published literature investigating whether tDCS can facilitate the acquisition, retention or adaptation of motor skills. Work in multiple laboratories is underway to develop a mechanistic understanding of tDCS effects on different forms of learning and to optimize stimulation protocols. Efforts are required to improve reproducibility and standardization. Overall, reproducibility remains to be fully tested, effect sizes with present techniques vary over a wide range, and the basis of observed inter-individual variability in tDCS effects is incompletely understood. It is recommended that future studies explicitly state in the Methods the exploratory (hypothesis-generating) or hypothesis-driven (confirmatory) nature of the experimental designs. General research practices could be improved with prospective pre-registration of hypothesis-based investigations, more emphasis on the detailed description of methods (including all pertinent details to enable future modeling of induced current and experimental replication), and use of post-publication open data repositories. A checklist is proposed for reporting tDCS investigations in a way that can improve efforts to assess reproducibility

Consensus Paper: Novel Directions and Next Steps of Non-invasive Brain Stimulation of the Cerebellum in Health and Disease.

The cerebellum is involved in multiple closed-loops circuitry which connect the cerebellar modules with the motor cortex, prefrontal, temporal, and parietal cortical areas, and contribute to motor control, cognitive processes, emotional processing, and behavior. Among them, the cerebello-thalamo-cortical pathway represents the anatomical substratum of cerebellum-motor cortex inhibition (CBI). However, the cerebellum is also connected with basal ganglia by disynaptic pathways, and cerebellar involvement in disorders commonly associated with basal ganglia dysfunction (e.g., Parkinson's disease and dystonia) has been suggested. Lately, cerebellar activity has been targeted by non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques including transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to indirectly affect and tune dysfunctional circuitry in the brain. Although the results are promising, several questions remain still unsolved. Here, a panel of experts from different specialties (neurophysiology, neurology, neurosurgery, neuropsychology) reviews the current results on cerebellar NIBS with the aim to derive the future steps and directions needed. We discuss the effects of TMS in the field of cerebellar neurophysiology, the potentials of cerebellar tDCS, the role of animal models in cerebellar NIBS applications, and the possible application of cerebellar NIBS in motor learning, stroke recovery, speech and language functions, neuropsychiatric and movement disorders