It has been strongly suggested that physical and/or MP of a movement sequence improves performance and induces plasticity in the cerebellum (Jenkins et al., 1994; Toni et al., 1998; Lacourse et al., 2004). Strangely, anodal tDCS over the right cerebellar hemisphere impaired the motor performance. Similarly, a former study using anodal tDCS over the cerebellum showed that anodal tDCS impaired the practice-dependent proficiency increase in working memory (Ferrucci et al., 2008). Galea et al. (2009) found that anodal tDCS over the right cerebellar cortex Selleck Osimertinib can increase the inhibitory tone that the cerebellum exerts over the M1. The inhibition of the M1 after
cerebellar tDCS could be one explanation for the impairment of handwriting legibility observed in our study. Potential Selleckchem Palbociclib limiting aspects of the study should be mentioned. (i) In principle, motor practice alone of the handwriting task with the non-dominant hand over six experimental sessions could have had an impact on motor performance and it might have somewhat compromised the interpretation of the results. However, this is improbable in our opinion as the experimental session order was counterbalanced among subjects and baseline writing performance on the experimental first day did not differ from that on the last day, (ii) It cannot
be ruled out that additional cortical areas may have been influenced by tDCS due to the relatively poor spatial resolution of the technique (Nitsche et al., 2008; Datta et al., 2009). Although we cannot Reverse transcriptase completely rule out this possibility, it should be noted that other studies using tDCS successfully modulated close cortical areas in different ways (Nitsche & Paulus, 2000; Nitsche et al., 2003b; Vollmann et al., 2012). (iii) Some studies have reported gender differences in responses to tDCS (Knops et al., 2006; Boggio et al., 2008; Chaieb et al., 2008). In the present study, as the most of subjects were women, it is possible that sex hormones somewhat influenced the results of our study. It is necessary to replicate the study using male participants in future research to investigate
a potential gender influence on the results. In conclusion, our results suggest that MP-induced effects in improving motor performance can be successfully consolidated by excitatory non-invasive brain stimulation on the M1 and left DLPFC. Although this finding is novel, further investigation is needed to understand how motor performance improvement is consolidated after mental training and whether it can be extended to other populations such as patients with neurological pathologies. If so, tDCS could be effectively used as a complementary method to increase the mental training effects. Moreover, our findings may help to improve to understanding about the specific role of each area involved in the MP effects on motor learning. However, a better understanding of the action mechanisms is essential for MP to be used effectively as a therapeutic tool.