Skip to main content
UKPMC Funders Author Manuscripts logoLink to UKPMC Funders Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Nov 25.
Published in final edited form as: Brain Stimul. 2019 Aug 31;13(1):105–108. doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2019.08.016

Dopamine depletion effects on cognitive flexibility as modulated by tDCS of the dlPFC

Ciara Borwick 1,#, Reece Lal 1,#, Lee Wei Lim 2, Charlotte J Stagg 3,4, Luca Aquili 1,*
PMCID: PMC7116421  EMSID: EMS104579  PMID: 31494070

Abstract

Background

Recent evidence suggests that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) may interact with the dopaminergic system to affect cognitive flexibility.

Objective/hypotheses

We examined whether putative reduction of dopamine levels through the acute tyrosine/phenylalanine depletion (ATPD) procedure and excitatory anodal tDCS of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) are causally related to cognitive flexibility as measured by task switching and reversal learning.

Method

A double-blind, sham controlled, randomised trial was conducted to test the effects of combining anodal tDCS and depletion of catecholaminergic precursor tyrosine on cognitive flexibility.

Results

Anodal tDCS and tyrosine depletion had a significant effect on task switching, but not reversal learning. Whilst perseverative errors were significantly improved by anodal tDCS, the ATPD impaired reaction times. Importantly, the combination of ATPD and anodal tDCS resulted in cognitive performance which did not statistically differ to that of the control condition.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that the effects of tDCS on cognitive flexibility are modulated by dopaminergic tone.

Keywords: transcranial direct current stimulation, tDCS; dopamine depletion; flexibility; learning

1. Introduction

Changes in dopaminergic signalling have been implicated in the regulation of cognitive flexibility [15]. In humans, administration of the dopamine precursors L-dopa and tyrosine leads to enhanced cognitive flexibility [1, 6, 7], whereas reducing dopaminergic tone through the acute phenylalanine/tyrosine depletion procedure (APTD) impairs indices of cognitive flexibility [8, 9].

Neuroanatomically, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) studies in humans have indicated that the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) is an important modulator of cognitive flexibility. Whilst anodal tDCS improved cognitive flexibility performance [10, 11], cathodal tDCS worsened performance [12, 13]. Despite these findings, the effects of tDCS are highly variable because of both methodological (e.g. position of the reference/return electrode, see [14, 15] and biological heterogeneity [15]). In particular, polymorphisms in the COMT gene, which at least in part determines dopamine activity, have been associated with the effects of anodal/cathodal tDCS on indices of cognitive flexibility [16, 17].

In line with converging evidence that tDCS may exert its behavioural effects via modulation of the dopaminergic system, anodal tDCS applied to the dlPFC increased extracellular dopamine levels in the striatum [18].ηMoreover, administration of the dopamine precursor L-DOPA influences cortical excitability after cathodal tDCS in a dose-dependent manner [19, 20], whilst tyrosineηmodulates tDCS effects on measures of working memory [21].

These results have also prompted the suggestion of an inverted U-shaped relationship between dopamine concentration and cognitive performance. Recently, our group tested the effects of combining an increase in dopaminergic tone with tDCS on indices of cognitive flexibility [22]. In line with the inverted U-shaped model, cathodal tDCS had the most detrimental effects on cognitive flexibility, whereas tyrosine was most beneficial to cognitive flexibility. Importantly, the combination of cathodal tDCS plus tyrosine resulted in a cognitive flexibility performance that was statistically indistinguishable from that of the control condition (sham tDCS + placebo), which provides at least some behavioural evidence of the modulation of dopaminergic tone in the effects of tDCS on cognitive flexibility.

In the current study, we further investigated the modulatory influence of dopamine on the effects of tDCS of the dlPFC on cognitive flexibility. Specifically, our goal was to substantially extend our understanding of this important interaction by decreasing dopaminergic tone using the APTD procedure combined with anodal tDCS of the dlPFC.

2. Materials and methods

Thirty-six university students (19 females and 17 males; Mean Age = 21.7, SD= 2.4) took part. Exclusion criteria included: suffering from cardiac, hepatic, renal or neurological disorders; a history of alcohol or drug addiction; psychiatric illness; pregnancy; taking medication known to lower seizure threshold; having taken tyrosine supplements; regularly consumed more than five beverages containing caffeine per day; smoking; and having a damaged or sensitive scalp.

The study was approved by the ethics committee of Sheffield Hallam University and was conducted in compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT03462303).

This was a double-blind, sham/placebo-controlled, randomised trial. The experimental protocol is summarised in Fig. 1A and a model of the predicted effects of the tDCS/dopamine depletion procedure is shown in Fig. 1B. The experimental session consisted of one of four conditions: tyrosine depletion plus anodal tDCS (n=9), tyrosine depletion plus sham tDCS (n=9), balanced plus anodal tDCS (n=9), and balanced plus sham tDCS (n=9). The sample size was determined using G*Power 3.1 with a power level of 80% based on mixed-design ANOVA analyses (4 groups, 4 repeated measurements [2 blocks] x [time; pre-drug/tDCS and post-drug/tDCS]) and a large effect size of 0.14 (partial eta squared).

Figure 1.

Figure 1

A. Outline of the experimental procedure. Participants were instructed to refrain from eating/drinking overnight for a minimum of 8 h prior to testing. During the experimental session, participants first completed a visual analogue scale mood questionnaire (VAS1), followed by cognitive testing (T1) with the order of presentation of the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST) and Probabilistic Reversal Learning (PRL) counterbalanced across all participants. After completing the mood and cognitive testing, either a tyrosine depletion drink or a balanced mixture was administered. At 4 h and 40 min after taking the tyrosine depletion/balanced drink, which is the approximate peak plasma depletion time [34], a second mood questionnaire was completed (VAS2) and then anodal or sham tDCS was administered for 20 min. Immediately after the tDCS, a third mood questionnaire was given (VAS3) followed by the second cognitive testing (T2). At the end of the cognitive testing, a final mood questionnaire was completed (VAS4). Participants were asked to report whether they thought they had been administered the tyrosine depletion or balanced drink together with anodal or sham tDCS.ηB. Model of the hypothesized non-linear relationship between anodal tDCS and tyrosine depletion on cognitive flexibility. Predictions of the effects of combinations of tyrosine depletion/balanced and sham/anodal tDCS on cognitive flexibility are highlighted.

C. Illustrating task switching results with respect to perseverative errors. Perseverative errors (measured changes from baseline) on the WCST showed a significant main effect of tDCS (sham/anodal). D. Non-significant interaction between drugs and tDCS (perseverative errors). E. Illustrating task switching results with respect to reaction times. .Reaction times on the WCST showed a significant main effect of drugs (balanced/depleted). F. Non-significant interaction between drugs and tDCS (reaction times). Error bars as SEM. * represents p <0.05

Cognitive flexibility was measured by task switching and reversal learning using the Psychology Experiment Building Language (PEBL) test battery [23] as used in previous studies by our research group [24, 25]. The APTD procedure consisted of a depletion mixture which contained 90 g of amino acids without tyrosine and phenylalanine (depleted condition) as used in previous studies [2629]. The balanced mixture (control) also contained tyrosine and phenylalanine (balanced condition). Both the depleted and balanced mixtures had equivalent metabolic energy content (480 and 487 kcal, respectively).

tDCS over the dlPFC was applied using a DC Stimulator Plus (neuroConn, Germany) with two 5 cm x 7 cm rubber electrodes. The anode was positioned over the left dlPFC centred on F3 in the 10-20 electroencephalography (EEG) system and the cathode was positioned on the contralateral supraorbital ridge. For anodal tDCS, a current of 1.5 mA was delivered for 20 min plus 30 s fade in/fade out period. A current of 1.5 mA was chosen based on previous reports demonstrating that 2.0 mA can compromise the blinding robustness of the tDCS procedure [3032]. For the sham treatment, a current of 1.5 mA was faded in over 30 s and then switched off. Double-blinding was achieved using the neuroConn study mode software. At the end of the experiment, participants were asked to report whether they thought they had been administered depleted or balanced drink and anodal (active) or sham (inactive) tDCS (see supplementary materials for statistical results). An electric field simulation was performed to better understand the spread of anodal stimulation over the dlPFC (see Fig. S1).

3. Results

3.1. Anodal tDCS, and dopamine depletion modulate changes in task switching (WCST)

We first analysed changes in the proportion of perseverative errors across conditions. As in our previous study [22], we measured a change in the performance from baseline (T1) to post drug/tDCS (T2) (i.e. [T2] - [T1]). Prior to doing that, we tested for potential baseline differences between the groups. There was no significant difference in perseverative errors between the four groups at baseline (see supplementary materials). A factorial between-subjects ANOVA with drug (Placebo, ADTP) as one factor and tDCS (Anodal, Sham) as the other factor demonstrated a significant main effect of tDCS [F (1, 32) =4.81, p=0.036, η2 p= 0.13]. This effect was driven by a decrease in perseverative errors during anodal tDCS of the dlPFC compared to sham (Fig. 1C). There was neither a main effect of drug [F (1, 32) =0.44, p=0.512, η2 p=0.01] nor an interaction between tDCS and drug [F (1, 32) =1.20, p=0.280, η2 p=0.03] (Fig.1D).

We then analysed changes in the response times (RT) across conditions (see supplementary materials for baseline tests). A 2x2 factorial between-subjects ANOVA demonstrated a significant main effect of drug [F (1, 32) =6.06, p=0.019, η2 p=0.15], with dopamine depletion negatively affecting reaction times compared to placebo (Fig. 1E). There was neither a main effect of tDCS [F (1, 32) =2.12, p=0.154, η2 p=0.06] nor an interaction between tDCS and drug [F (1, 32) =0.01, p=0.912, η2 p=0.00] (Fig. 1F).

3.2. No significant effect on Probabilistic Reversal Learning (PRL)

We investigated changes in reversal errors and total errors across conditions. We did not find any main or significant interaction effects.

4. Discussion

The primary goal of this study was to extend our recent work [22], in which we found that combining cathodal tDCS of the dlPFC (which by itself impaired cognitive flexibility) with tyrosine administration (which by itself improved cognitive flexibility) resulted in cognitive flexibility performance on par with the control condition (sham tDCS + placebo). These results suggested that increasing dopaminergic tone could counteract the detrimental effects of inhibitory cathodal tDCS of the dlPFC. In line with these findings, here we reportηthat combining anodal tDCS of the dlPFC (which, by itself, produced improvements in cognitive flexibility, when perseverative errors were measured) with tyrosine depletion (which, by itself, impaired cognitive flexibility, when reaction times were measured) resulted in cognitive flexibility performance similar to that of the control condition (sham tDCS + balanced) (at least for reaction times: see Fig 1F), suggesting that excitatory stimulation of the dlPFC could restore the negative effects of decreasing dopaminergic tone. Overall, these data support the dopamine inverted-U hypothesis and cognitive function [33], and also supports the interaction between dopamine tone and tDCS in regulating cognitive performance, specifically cognitive flexibility [16, 17, 21].

Supplementary Material

Supplemental material

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the Department of Psychology, Sociology and Politics at Sheffield Hallam University for funding this research. We also would like to thank Dr Evan Edmond (Clinical Research Fellow, The University of Oxford) for his help with the electric field simulations. CJS holds a Sir Henry Dale Fellowship funded by the Wellcome Trust and the Royal Society (102584/Z/13/Z).

Footnotes

Conflicts of interest:

None

References

  • [1].Cools R, Barker RA, Sahakian BJ, Robbins TW. l-Dopa medication remediates cognitive inflexibility, but increases impulsivity in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Neuropsychologia. 2003;41(11):1431–41. doi: 10.1016/s0028-3932(03)00117-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [2].Kehagia AA, Murray GK, Robbins TW. Learning and cognitive flexibility: frontostriatal function and monoaminergic modulation. Current Opinion in Neurobiology. 2010;20(2):199–204. doi: 10.1016/j.conb.2010.01.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [3].Klanker M, Feenstra M, Denys D. Dopaminergic control of cognitive flexibility in humans and animals. Frontiers in Neuroscience. 2013;7(201) doi: 10.3389/fnins.2013.00201. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [4].Logue SF, Gould TJ. The neural and genetic basis of executive function: Attention, cognitive flexibility, and response inhibition. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior. 2014;123:45–54. doi: 10.1016/j.pbb.2013.08.007. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [5].Waltz JA. The neural underpinnings of cognitive flexibility and their disruption in psychotic illness. Neuroscience. 2017;345:203–17. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2016.06.005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [6].Colzato LS, Jongkees BJ, Sellaro R, van den Wildenberg WPM, Hommel B. Eating to stop: Tyrosine supplementation enhances inhibitory control but not response execution. Neuropsychologia. 2014;62:398–402. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.12.027. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [7].Steenbergen L, Sellaro R, Hommel B, Colzato LS. Tyrosine promotes cognitive flexibility: Evidence from proactive vs: reactive control during task switching performance. Neuropsychologia. 2015;69:50–5. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2015.01.022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [8].de Wit S, Standing HR, DeVito EE, Robinson OJ, Ridderinkhof KR, Robbins TW, et al. Reliance on habits at the expense of goal-directed control following dopamine precursor depletion. Psychopharmacology. 2012;219(2):621–31. doi: 10.1007/s00213-011-2563-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [9].Nagano-Saito A, Leyton M, Monchi O, Goldberg YK, He Y, Dagher A. Dopamine depletion impairs frontostriatal functional connectivity during a set-shifting task. Journal of Neuroscience. 2008;28(14):3697–706. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3921-07.2008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [10].Dajani DR, Uddin LQ. Demystifying cognitive flexibility: Implications for clinical and developmental neuroscience. Trends in neurosciences. 2015;38(9):571–8. doi: 10.1016/j.tins.2015.07.003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [11].Metuki N, Sela T, Lavidor M. Enhancing cognitive control components of insight problems solving by anodal tDCS of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Brain Stimulation. 2012;5(2):110–5. doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2012.03.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [12].Chrysikou EG, Hamilton RH, Coslett HB, Datta A, Bikson M, Thompson-Schill SL. Noninvasive transcranial direct current stimulation over the left prefrontal cortex facilitates cognitive flexibility in tool use. Cognitive neuroscience. 2013;4(2):81–9. doi: 10.1080/17588928.2013.768221. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [13].Gómez-Ariza CJ, Martín MC, Morales J. Tempering proactive cognitive control by transcranial direct current stimulation of the right (but not the left) lateral prefrontal cortex. Frontiers in neuroscience. 2017;11 doi: 10.3389/fnins.2017.00282. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [14].Nasseri P, Nitsche MA, Ekhtiari H. A framework for categorizing electrode montages in transcranial direct current stimulation. Frontiers in human neuroscience. 2015;9:54. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00054. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [15].Thair H, Holloway AL, Newport R, Smith AD. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS): a beginner's guide for design and implementation. Frontiers in neuroscience. 2017;11:641. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2017.00641. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [16].Nieratschker V, Kiefer C, Giel K, Krüger R, Plewnia C. The COMT Val/Met Polymorphism Modulates Effects of tDCS on Response Inhibition. Brain Stimulation. 2015;8(2):283–8. doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2014.11.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [17].Plewnia C, Zwissler B, Längst I, Maurer B, Giel K, Krüger R. Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on executive functions: Influence of COMT Val/Met polymorphism. Cortex. 2013;49(7):1801–7. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2012.11.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [18].Fonteneau C, Redoute J, Haesebaert F, Le Bars D, Costes N, Suaud-Chagny M-F, et al. Frontal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Induces Dopamine Release in the Ventral Striatum in Human. Cerebral Cortex. 2018;28(7):2636–46. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhy093. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [19].Kuo M-F, Paulus W, Nitsche MA. Boosting Focally-Induced Brain Plasticity by Dopamine. Cerebral Cortex. 2008;18(3):648–51. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhm098. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [20].Monte-Silva K, Liebetanz D, Grundey J, Paulus W, Nitsche MA. Dosage-dependent non-linear effect of l-dopa on human motor cortex plasticity. The Journal of Physiology. 2010;588(18):3415–24. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.2010.190181. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [21].Jongkees BJ, Sellaro R, Beste C, Nitsche MA, Kühn S, Colzato LS. l-Tyrosine administration modulates the effect of transcranial direct current stimulation on working memory in healthy humans. Cortex. 2017;90(Supplement C):103–14. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2017.02.014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [22].Dennison O, Gao J, Lim LW, Stagg CJ, Aquili L. Catecholaminergic modulation of indices of cognitive flexibility: a pharmaco-tDCS study. Brain stimulation. 2018 doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2018.12.001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [23].Mueller ST, Piper BJ. The psychology experiment building language (PEBL) and PEBL test battery. Journal of neuroscience methods. 2014;222:250–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2013.10.024. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [24].Riby LM, Ong DLT, Azmie NBM, Ooi EL, Regina C, Yeo EKW, et al. Impulsiveness, postprandial blood glucose, and glucoregulation affect measures of behavioral flexibility. Nutrition Research. 2017;48:65–75. doi: 10.1016/j.nutres.2017.10.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [25].Teik DOL, Lee XS, Lim CJ, Low CM, Muslima M, Aquili L. Ginseng and ginkgo biloba effects on cognition as modulated by cardiovascular reactivity: a randomised trial. PloS one. 2016;11(3):e0150447. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0150447. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [26].Hitsman B, MacKillop J, Lingford-Hughes A, Williams TM, Ahmad F, Adams S, et al. Effects of acute tyrosine/phenylalanine depletion on the selective processing of smoking-related cues and the relative value of cigarettes in smokers. Psychopharmacology. 2008;196(4):611–21. doi: 10.1007/s00213-007-0995-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [27].Lythe K, Anderson I, Deakin J, Elliott R, Strickland P. Lack of behavioural effects after acute tyrosine depletion in healthy volunteers. Journal of Psychopharmacology. 2005;19(1):5–11. doi: 10.1177/0269881105048886. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [28].McTavish SF, Cowen PJ, Sharp T. Effect of a tyrosine-free amino acid mixture on regional brain catecholamine synthesis and release. Psychopharmacology. 1999;141(2):182–8. doi: 10.1007/s002130050823. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [29].Munafò MR, Mannie ZN, Cowen PJ, Harmer CJ, McTavish SB. Effects of acute tyrosine depletion on subjective craving and selective processing of smoking-related cues in abstinent cigarette smokers. Journal of Psychopharmacology. 2007;21(8):805–14. doi: 10.1177/0269881107077216. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [30].Kessler SK, Turkeltaub PE, Benson JG, Hamilton RH. Differences in the experience of active and sham transcranial direct current stimulation. Brain stimulation. 2012;5(2):155–62. doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2011.02.007. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [31].Palm U, Reisinger E, Keeser D, Kuo M-F, Pogarell O, Leicht G, et al. Evaluation of sham transcranial direct current stimulation for randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials. Brain stimulation. 2013;6(4):690–5. doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2013.01.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [32].Russo R, Wallace D, Fitzgerald PB, Cooper NR. Perception of comfort during active and sham transcranial direct current stimulation: a double blind study. Brain stimulation. 2013;6(6):946–51. doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2013.05.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [33].Cools R, D'Esposito M. Inverted-U–shaped dopamine actions on human working memory and cognitive control. Biological psychiatry. 2011;69(12):e113–e25. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2011.03.028. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [34].Harmer C, McTavish S, Clark L, Goodwin G, Cowen P. Tyrosine depletion attenuates dopamine function in healthy volunteers. Psychopharmacology. 2001;154(1):105–11. doi: 10.1007/s002130000613. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplemental material

RESOURCES