Behavioral entrainment to rhythmic auditory stimulation can be modulated by tACS depending on the electrical stimulation field properties.
auditory perception
electric field simulation
entrainment
human
individual variability
neuroscience
personalized brain stimulation
tACS
transcranial alternating current stimulation
Journal
eLife
ISSN: 2050-084X
Titre abrégé: Elife
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101579614
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
30 Jan 2024
30 Jan 2024
Historique:
medline:
31
1
2024
pubmed:
30
1
2024
entrez:
30
1
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Synchronization between auditory stimuli and brain rhythms is beneficial for perception. In principle, auditory perception could be improved by facilitating neural entrainment to sounds via brain stimulation. However, high inter-individual variability of brain stimulation effects questions the usefulness of this approach. Here we aimed to modulate auditory perception by modulating neural entrainment to frequency modulated (FM) sounds using transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS). In addition, we evaluated the advantage of using tACS montages spatially optimized for each individual's anatomy and functional data compared to a standard montage applied to all participants. Across two different sessions, 2 Hz tACS was applied targeting auditory brain regions. Concurrent with tACS, participants listened to FM stimuli with modulation rate matching the tACS frequency but with different phase lags relative to the tACS, and detected silent gaps embedded in the FM sound. We observed that tACS modulated the strength of behavioral entrainment to the FM sound in a phase-lag specific manner. Both the optimal tACS lag and the magnitude of the tACS effect were variable across participants and sessions. Inter-individual variability of tACS effects was best explained by the strength of the inward electric field, depending on the field focality and proximity to the target brain region. Although additional evidence is necessary, our results also provided suggestive insights that spatially optimizing the electrode montage could be a promising tool to reduce inter-individual variability of tACS effects. This work demonstrates that tACS effectively modulates entrainment to sounds depending on the optimality of the electric field. However, the lack of reliability on optimal tACS lags calls for caution when planning tACS experiments based on separate sessions.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38289225
doi: 10.7554/eLife.87820
pii: 87820
doi:
pii:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : European Research Council
ID : BRAINSYNC
Pays : International
Informations de copyright
© 2023, Cabral-Calderin et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
YC, Dv, AT, MH No competing interests declared
Références
Front Psychol. 2012 Sep 06;3:320
pubmed: 22973251
Front Cell Neurosci. 2022 Feb 22;16:818703
pubmed: 35273479
Neurosci Insights. 2020 Jul 6;15:2633105520936623
pubmed: 32685924
PLoS Biol. 2021 Feb 26;19(2):e3001142
pubmed: 33635855
J Neurophysiol. 2013 Jun;109(12):3082-93
pubmed: 23515789
Brain Stimul. 2016 Jul-Aug;9(4):560-5
pubmed: 27157057
J Neural Eng. 2014 Aug;11(4):046015
pubmed: 24963838
Neuroimage. 2014 Jan 15;85 Pt 2:761-8
pubmed: 23791839
Clin Neurophysiol. 2004 May;115(5):1063-8
pubmed: 15066531
Neuroimage. 2004;23 Suppl 1:S208-19
pubmed: 15501092
Brain Stimul. 2020 Jan - Feb;13(1):125-136
pubmed: 31653475
Front Hum Neurosci. 2013 Oct 23;7:687
pubmed: 24167483
Neuron. 2013 Mar 6;77(5):980-91
pubmed: 23473326
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Oct 14;111(41):14935-40
pubmed: 25267634
Sci Adv. 2020 Sep 2;6(36):
pubmed: 32917605
Front Psychol. 2018 Jun 20;9:984
pubmed: 29973896
J Neurosci. 2011 Oct 26;31(43):15416-23
pubmed: 22031888
PLoS One. 2021 Aug 5;16(8):e0255424
pubmed: 34351972
Front Cell Neurosci. 2015 May 12;9:181
pubmed: 26029052
Neuroimage. 2016 Nov 1;141:88-107
pubmed: 27393419
Front Hum Neurosci. 2013 Jun 14;7:279
pubmed: 23785325
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Dec 4;109(49):20095-100
pubmed: 23151506
PLoS Comput Biol. 2021 Mar 3;17(3):e1008787
pubmed: 33657098
Neuroimage. 2019 Dec;203:116183
pubmed: 31525498
Brain Stimul. 2018 Jan - Feb;11(1):118-124
pubmed: 29079460
Sci Rep. 2016 Feb 05;6:20612
pubmed: 26847160
Neuroscientist. 2020 Feb;26(1):57-73
pubmed: 30730265
J Cogn Neurosci. 2020 Feb;32(2):226-240
pubmed: 31659922
Hum Brain Mapp. 2016 Jan;37(1):94-121
pubmed: 26503692
Brain Stimul. 2021 Sep-Oct;14(5):1317-1329
pubmed: 34481095
Curr Biol. 2018 Jan 22;28(2):161-169.e5
pubmed: 29290557
Neuroimage. 2019 Nov 15;202:116175
pubmed: 31499178
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019 Mar 19;116(12):5747-5755
pubmed: 30833389
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Feb 16;118(7):
pubmed: 33568530
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015 Nov 10;112(45):E6233-42
pubmed: 26504238
J Neurosci. 2021 Jun 9;41(23):5093-5101
pubmed: 33926996
Nat Commun. 2019 Nov 28;10(1):5427
pubmed: 31780668
PLoS Biol. 2020 Oct 22;18(10):e3000883
pubmed: 33091003
Curr Biol. 2018 Feb 5;28(3):401-408.e5
pubmed: 29358073
Neuroimage. 2018 Feb 15;167:396-407
pubmed: 29170070
Curr Biol. 2015 Dec 21;25(24):3196-201
pubmed: 26628008
J Neurosci. 2022 Feb 2;42(5):894-908
pubmed: 34893547
PLoS Biol. 2022 May 25;20(5):e3001650
pubmed: 35613140
Brain Stimul. 2008 Apr;1(2):97-105
pubmed: 20633376
Front Hum Neurosci. 2013 Apr 30;7:161
pubmed: 23641206
Neuroimage. 2018 May 15;172:766-774
pubmed: 29355765