Making memories last using the peripheral effect of direct current stimulation

  1. Alison M Luckey
  2. Lauren S McLeod
  3. Yuefeng Huang
  4. Anusha Mohan
  5. Sven Vanneste  Is a corresponding author
  1. Trinity College Dublin, Ireland
  2. Texas Tech University, United States
  3. Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, United States

Abstract

Most memories that are formed are forgotten, while others are retained longer and are subject to memory stabilization. We show that non-invasive transcutaneous electrical stimulation of the greater occipital nerve (NITESGON) using direct current during learning elicited a long-term memory effect. However, it did not trigger an immediate effect on learning. A neurobiological model of long-term memory proposes a mechanism by which memories that are initially unstable can be strengthened through subsequent novel experiences. In a series of studies, we demonstrate NITESGON's capability to boost the retention of memories when applied shortly before, during or shortly after the time of learning by enhancing memory consolidation via activation and communication in and between the locus coeruleus pathway and hippocampus by plausibly modulating dopaminergic input. These findings may have a significant impact for neurocognitive disorders that inhibit memory consolidation such as Alzheimer's disease.

Data availability

data is available: https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.dbrv15f46

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Alison M Luckey

    Global Brain Health Institute, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Lauren S McLeod

    School of Medicine, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Yuefeng Huang

    Department of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Anusha Mohan

    Global Brain Health Institute, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Sven Vanneste

    Global Brain Health Institute, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
    For correspondence
    sven.vanneste@tcd.ie
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1513-5752

Funding

Alzheimer Association (AARG-21-848486)

  • Sven Vanneste

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Lila Davachi, Columbia University, United States

Ethics

Human subjects: All experiments were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Declaration of Helsinki (1964). Experiments 1-7 were approved by the Institutional Review Board at the University of Texas at Dallas, All participants signed a written informed consent and consent to publish was obtained.

Version history

  1. Received: November 15, 2021
  2. Preprint posted: July 6, 2022 (view preprint)
  3. Accepted: May 18, 2023
  4. Accepted Manuscript published: May 19, 2023 (version 1)
  5. Version of Record published: June 5, 2023 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2023, Luckey et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 774
    views
  • 153
    downloads
  • 5
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Alison M Luckey
  2. Lauren S McLeod
  3. Yuefeng Huang
  4. Anusha Mohan
  5. Sven Vanneste
(2023)
Making memories last using the peripheral effect of direct current stimulation
eLife 12:e75586.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.75586

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.75586

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Ivan Tomić, Paul M Bays
    Research Article

    Probing memory of a complex visual image within a few hundred milliseconds after its disappearance reveals significantly greater fidelity of recall than if the probe is delayed by as little as a second. Classically interpreted, the former taps into a detailed but rapidly decaying visual sensory or ‘iconic’ memory (IM), while the latter relies on capacity-limited but comparatively stable visual working memory (VWM). While iconic decay and VWM capacity have been extensively studied independently, currently no single framework quantitatively accounts for the dynamics of memory fidelity over these time scales. Here, we extend a stationary neural population model of VWM with a temporal dimension, incorporating rapid sensory-driven accumulation of activity encoding each visual feature in memory, and a slower accumulation of internal error that causes memorized features to randomly drift over time. Instead of facilitating read-out from an independent sensory store, an early cue benefits recall by lifting the effective limit on VWM signal strength imposed when multiple items compete for representation, allowing memory for the cued item to be supplemented with information from the decaying sensory trace. Empirical measurements of human recall dynamics validate these predictions while excluding alternative model architectures. A key conclusion is that differences in capacity classically thought to distinguish IM and VWM are in fact contingent upon a single resource-limited WM store.

    1. Neuroscience
    Emilio Salinas, Bashirul I Sheikh
    Insight

    Our ability to recall details from a remembered image depends on a single mechanism that is engaged from the very moment the image disappears from view.