4.6 Article

Differential Contribution of the Supplementary Motor Area to Stabilization of a Procedural Motor Skill Acquired through Different Practice Schedules

Journal

CEREBRAL CORTEX
Volume 20, Issue 9, Pages 2114-2121

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhp276

Keywords

magnetic stimulation; memory and learning; motor cortex; motor learning; training

Categories

Funding

  1. National Institute of Neurological Disorder and Stroke, National Institute of Health (NIH)
  2. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science Research Fellowship for Japanese Biomedical and Behavioral Researchers at NIH
  3. Exploratory Research for Advanced Technology Shimojo Implicit Brain Function Project
  4. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan [20019041, 20033030]
  5. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [20019041, 20033030] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Behavioral studies have suggested that the stabilization of motor memory varies depending on the practice schedule. The neural substrates underlying this schedule-dependent difference in memory stabilization are not known. Here, we evaluated the effects of 1-Hz repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) applied to different cortical regions and sham after one session of training (Day 1) of sequential motor skills acquired through blocked (each sequence was completely trained before training the next)-practice schedules and random (random training of 3 sequences)-practice schedules. The recall of sequences learned on Day 1 by Day 2 was measured in different groups of healthy volunteers. The rTMS over the supplementary motor area (SMA) but not over control regions or over the primary motor cortex (M1) immediately after practice or over SMA 6 h later reduced recall relative to sham only in the blocked-practice group. In contrast, recall in the random-practice group was unaffected by rTMS. These results document a differential contribution of the SMA to the stabilization of motor memories acquired through different practice schedules. More generally, they indicate that the anatomical substrates underlying motor-memory stabilization (or their temporal operation) do differ depending on the practice schedule.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available