Non‐invasive brain stimulation has the potential to boost neuronal plasticity in the primary motor cortex (M1), but it remains unclear whether the stimulation of both superficial and deep layers of the human motor cortex can effectively promote M1 plasticity. Here, we leveraged transcranial ultrasound stimulation (TUS) to precisely target M1 circuits at depths of approximately 5 mm and 16 mm from the cortical surface. Initially, we generated computed tomography images from each participant's individual anatomical magnetic resonance images (MRI), which allowed for the generation of accurate acoustic simulations. This process ensured that personalized TUS was administered exactly to the targeted depths within M1 for each participant. Using long‐term depression and long‐term potentiation (LTD/LTP) theta‐burst stimulation paradigms, we examined whether TUS over distinct depths of M1 could induce LTD/LTP plasticity. Our findings indicated that continuous theta‐burst TUS‐induced LTD‐like plasticity with both superficial and deep M1 stimulation, persisting for at least 30 min. In comparison, sham TUS did not significantly alter M1 excitability. Moreover, intermittent theta‐burst TUS did not result in the induction of LTP‐ or LTD‐like plasticity with either superficial or deep M1 stimulation. These findings suggest that the induction of M1 plasticity can be achieved with ultrasound stimulation targeting distinct depths of M1, which is contingent on the characteristics of TUS. image Key points: The study integrated personalized transcranial ultrasound stimulation (TUS) with electrophysiology to determine whether TUS targeting superficial and deep layers of the human motor cortex (M1) could elicit long‐term depression (LTD) or long‐term potentiation (LTP) plastic changes. Utilizing acoustic simulations derived from individualized pseudo‐computed tomography scans, we ensured the precision of TUS delivery to the intended M1 depths for each participant. Continuous theta‐burst TUS targeting both the superficial and deep layers of M1 resulted in the emergence of LTD‐like plasticity, lasting for at least 30 min. Administering intermittent theta‐burst TUS to both the superficial and deep layers of M1 did not lead to the induction of LTP‐ or LTD‐like plastic changes. We suggest that theta‐burst TUS targeting distinct depths of M1 can induce plasticity, but this effect is dependent on specific TUS parameters.

The primary motor cortex (M1) is broadly acknowledged for its crucial role in executing voluntary movements. Yet, its contributions to cognitive and sensory functions remain largely unexplored. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a noninvasive neurostimulation method that can modify brain activity, thereby enabling the establishment of a causal link between M1 activity and behavior. This study aimed to investigate the online effects of tDCS over M1 on cognitive-motor and sensory-motor functions. Sixty-four healthy participants underwent either anodal or sham tDCS while concurrently performing a set of standardized robotic tasks. These tasks provided sensitive and objective assessments of brain functions, including action selection, inhibitory control, cognitive control of visuomotor skills, proprioceptive sense, and bimanual coordination. Our results revealed that anodal tDCS applied to M1 enhances decision-making capacity in selecting appropriate motor actions and avoiding distractors compared to sham stimulation, suggesting improved action selection and inhibitory control capabilities. Furthermore, anodal tDCS reduces the movement time required to accomplish bimanual movements, suggesting enhanced bimanual performance. However, we found no impact of anodal tDCS on cognitive control of visuomotor skills and proprioceptive sense. This study suggests that augmenting M1 activity via anodal tDCS influences cognitive-motor and sensory-motor functions in a task-dependent manner.

Temporal interference stimulation (TIS) is a novel non‐invasive neuromodulation technique enabling targeted stimulation of deep brain structures with enhanced focality. By applying multiple high‐frequency (≥ 1 kHz) electric fields with a small frequency difference (Δ f ), TIS generates a low‐frequency amplitude‐modulated envelope at the interference focus, modulating neural activity while minimizing superficial stimulation. Since its introduction, research has rapidly explored TIS's computational foundations, biophysical mechanisms, experimental validation, and therapeutic potential. This review synthesizes advancements, detailing computational optimization strategies for personalized targeting and dynamical modeling insights into neuronal mechanisms like nonlinear ion channel rectification, which underpin TIS efficacy. Preclinical and human studies validating functional outcomes (e.g., memory, motor) and assessing the safety profile are evaluated, confirming TIS's ability to modulate deep targets like the hippocampus and striatum. TIS is compared with conventional tES and invasive DBS, highlighting its unique advantages (non‐invasive depth access) and limitations (lower focal intensity, modeling complexity). Emerging clinical applications in disorders like Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, epilepsy, and depression are discussed. Future directions focus on refining protocols, enhancing personalization (e.g., multi‐channel, closed‐loop), and establishing long‐term safety/efficacy. This review consolidates multidisciplinary findings to advance TIS translation from experimental concepts toward clinical reality as a potentially transformative neuromodulation tool.

Motor learning involves acquiring new movement sequences and adapting motor commands to novel conditions. Labile motor memories, acquired through sequence learning and dynamic adaptation, undergo a consolidation process during wakefulness after initial training. This process stabilizes the new memories, leading to long-term memory formation. However, it remains unclear if the consolidation processes underlying sequence learning and dynamic adaptation are independent and if distinct neural regions underpin memory consolidation associated with sequence learning and dynamic adaptation. Here, we first demonstrated that the initially labile memories formed during sequence learning and dynamic adaptation were stabilized against interference through time-dependent consolidation processes occurring during wakefulness. Furthermore, we found that sequence learning memory was not disrupted when immediately followed by dynamic adaptation and vice versa, indicating distinct mechanisms for sequence learning and dynamic adaptation consolidation. Finally, by applying patterned transcranial magnetic stimulation to selectively disrupt the activity in the primary motor (M1) or sensory (S1) cortices immediately after sequence learning or dynamic adaptation, we found that sequence learning consolidation depended on M1 but not S1, while dynamic adaptation consolidation relied on S1 but not M1. For the first time in a single experimental framework, this study revealed distinct neural underpinnings for sequence learning and dynamic adaptation consolidation during wakefulness, with significant implications for motor skill enhancement and rehabilitation.

Touch sensation from the glabrous skin of the hand is essential for precisely controlling dexterous movements, yet the neural mechanisms by which tactile inputs influence motor circuits remain largely unexplored. By pairing air-puff tactile stimulation on the hand's glabrous skin with transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the primary motor cortex (M1), we examined the effects of tactile stimuli from single or multiple fingers on corticospinal excitability and M1's intracortical circuits. Our results showed that when we targeted the hand's first dorsal interosseous (FDI) muscle with TMS, homotopic (index finger) tactile stimulation, regardless of its point (fingertip or base), reduced corticospinal excitability. Conversely, heterotopic (ring finger) tactile stimulation had no such effect. Notably, stimulating all five fingers simultaneously led to a more pronounced decrease in corticospinal excitability than stimulating individual fingers. Furthermore, tactile stimulation significantly increased intracortical facilitation (ICF) and decreased long-interval intracortical inhibition (LICI) but did not affect short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI). Considering the significant role of the primary somatosensory cortex (S1) in tactile processing, we also examined the effects of downregulating S1 excitability via continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS) on tactile–motor interactions. Following cTBS, the inhibitory influence of tactile inputs on corticospinal excitability was diminished. Our findings highlight the spatial specificity of tactile inputs in influencing corticospinal excitability. Moreover, we suggest that tactile inputs distinctly modulate M1's excitatory and inhibitory pathways, with S1 being crucial in facilitating tactile–motor integration.