Researchers identify brain pathway triggering impulsive eating

New research from the University of Georgia has identified the neural pathways in an insect brain tied to eating for pleasure, a discovery that sheds light on mirror impulsive eating pathways in the human brain.

"We know when insects are hungry, they eat more, become aggressive and are willing to do more work to get the food," said Ping Shen, a UGA associate professor of cellular biology in the Franklin College of Arts and Sciences. "Little is known about the other half-the reward-driven feeding behavior-when the animal is not so hungry but they still get excited about food when they smell something great.

The fact that a relatively lower animal, a fly larva, actually does this impulsive feeding based on a rewarding cue was a surprise.”

The research team led by Shen, who also is a member of the Biomedical and Health Sciences Institute, found that presenting fed fruit fly larvae with appetizing odors caused impulsive feeding of sugar-rich foods. The findings, published Feb. 28 in Cell Press, suggest eating for pleasure is an ancient behavior and that fly larvae can be used in studying neurobiology and the evolution of olfactory reward-driven impulses.

To test reward-driven behaviors in flies, Shen introduced appetizing odors to groups of well-fed larvae. In every case, the fed larvae consumed about 30 percent more food when surrounded by the attractive odors.

But when the insects were offered a substandard meal, they refused to eat it.

"They have expectations," he said. "If we reduce the concentration of sugar below a threshold, they do not respond anymore. Similar to what you see in humans, if you approach a beautiful piece of cake and you taste it and determine it is old and horrible, you are no longer interested."

Shen’s team also tried to further define this phenomenon-the connection between excitement and expectation. He found when the larvae were presented with a brief odor, the amount of time they were willing to act on the impulse was about 15 minutes.

"After 15 minutes, they revert back to normal. You get excited, but you can’t stay excited forever, so there is a mechanism to shut it down," he said.

His work also suggests the neuropeptides, or brain chemicals acting as signaling molecules triggering impulsive eating, are consistent between flies and humans. Neurons receive and convert stimuli into thoughts that are then relayed to the downstream mechanism telling the animals to act. These signaling molecules are required for this impulse, suggesting the molecular details of these functions are evolutionarily tied between flies and humans.

"There are hyper-rewarding cues that humans and flies have evolved to perceive, and they connect this perception with behavior performance," Shen said. "As long as this is activated, the animal will eat food. In this way, the brain is stupid: It does not know how it gets activated. In this case, the fly says ‘I smell something, I want to do this.’ This kind of connection has been established very early on, probably before the divergence of fly and human. That is why we both have it."

Impulsive and reward-driven behaviors are largely misunderstood, partially due to the complex systems at work in human brains. Fly larvae nervous systems, in terms of scheme and organization, are very similar to adult flies and to mammals, but with fewer neurons and less complex wirings.

"A particular function in the brain of mammals may require a large cluster of neurons," he said. "In flies, it may be only one or four. They are simpler in number but not principle."

In the fly model, four neurons are responsible for relaying signals from the olfactory center to the brain to stimulate action. Each odor and receptor translates the response slightly differently. Human triggers are obviously more diverse, but Shen thinks the mechanism to appreciate the combination is likely the same. He is now working with Tianming Liu, assistant professor of computer science at UGA and member of the Bioimaging Research Center and Institute of Bioinformatics, on a computer model to determine how these odors are interpreted as stimuli.

"Dieting is difficult, especially in the environment of these beautiful foods," Shen said. "It is very hard to control this impulsive urge. So, if we understand how this compulsive eating behavior comes about, we maybe can devise a way, at least for the behavioral aspect, to prevent it. We can modulate our behaviors better or use chemical interventions to calm down these cues."

'Network' analysis of the brain may explain features of autism

A look at how the brain processes information finds a distinct pattern in children with autism spectrum disorders. Using EEGs to track the brain’s electrical cross-talk, researchers from Boston Children’s Hospital have found a structural difference in brain connections. Compared with neurotypical children, those with autism have multiple redundant connections between neighboring brain areas at the expense of long-distance links.

The study, using a “network analysis” like that used to study airlines or electrical grids, may help in understanding some classic behaviors in autism. It was published February 27 in BioMed Central’s open access journal BMC Medicine, accompanied by a commentary.

"We examined brain networks as a whole in terms of their capacity to transfer and process information," says Jurriaan Peters, MD, of the Department of Neurology at Boston Children’s Hospital, who is co-first author of the paper with Maxime Taquet, a PhD student in Boston Children’s Computational Radiology Laboratory. "What we found may well change the way we look at the brains of autistic children."

Peters, Taquet and senior authors Simon Warfield, PhD, of the Computational Radiology Laboratory and Mustafa Sahin, MD, PhD, of Neurology, analyzed EEG recordings from two groups of autistic children: 16 children with classic autism, and 14 children whose autism is part of a genetic syndrome known as tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC). They compared these readings with EEGs from two control groups—46 healthy neurotypical children and 29 children with TSC but not autism.

In both groups with autism, there were more short-range connections within different brain region, but fewer connections linking far-flung areas.

A brain network that favors short-range over long-range connections seems to be consistent with autism’s classic cognitive profile—a child who excels at specific, focused tasks like memorizing streets, but who cannot integrate information across different brain areas into higher-order concepts.

"For example, a child with autism may not understand why a face looks really angry, because his visual brain centers and emotional brain centers have less cross-talk," Peters says. "The brain cannot integrate these areas. It’s doing a lot with the information locally, but it’s not sending it out to the rest of the brain."

Research shows why not everyone learns from their mistakes

Some people do not learn from their mistakes because of the way their brain works, according to research led by an academic at Goldsmiths, University of London.

The research, led by Professor Joydeep Bhattacharya in the Department of Psychology at Goldsmiths, examined what it is about the brain that defines someone as a ‘good learner’ from those who do not learn from their mistakes.

Professor Bhattacharya said: “We are always told how important it is to learn from our errors, our experiences, but is this true? If so, then why do we all not learn from our experiences in the same way? It seems some people rarely do, even when they were informed of their errors in repeated attempts.

"This study presents a first tantalising insight into how our brain processes the performance feedback and what it does with this information, whether to learn from it or to brush it aside."

The study, published in a recent issue of the Journal of Neuroscience, investigated brainwave patterns of 36 healthy human volunteers performing a simple time estimation task. Researchers asked the participants to estimate a time interval of 1.7 seconds and provided feedback on their errors. The participants were then measured to see whether they incorporated the feedback to improve their future performances.

'Good learners', who were successful in incorporating the feedback information in adjusting their future performance, presented increased brain responses as fast as 200 milliseconds after the feedback on their performance was presented on a computer screen.

This brain response was weaker in the poor learners who did not learn the task well and who showed decreased responses to their performance errors. The researchers further found that the good learners showed increased communication between brain areas involved with performance monitoring and sensorimotor processes.

Caroline Di Bernardi Luft, one of the research paper’s co-authors from the Federal University of Santa Catarina, commented: “Good learners used the feedback not only to check their past performance, but also to adjust their next performance accordingly.”

The brain responses correlated highly with how well the volunteers learned this simple task over the course of the experiment, and how good they were at maintaining the learned skill without any guiding feedback.

"Though these results are very encouraging in establishing a correlation between brains responses and learning performance, future studies are needed to identify a causal role of these effects," Professor Bhattacharya added.

The great orchestral work of speech

What goes on inside our heads is similar to an orchestra. For Peter Hagoort, Director at the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, this image is a very apt one for explaining how speech arises in the human brain. “There are different orchestra members and different instruments, all playing in time with each other, and sounding perfect together.”

When we speak, we transform our thoughts into a linear sequence of sounds. When we understand language, exactly the opposite occurs: we deduce an interpretation from the speech sounds we hear. Closely connected regions of the brain – like the Broca’s area and Wernicke’s area – are involved in both processes, and these form the neurobiological basis of our capacity for language.

The 58-year-old scientist, who has had a strong interest in language and literature since his youth, has been searching for the neurobiological foundations of our communication since the 1990s. Using imaging processes, he observes the brain “in action” and tries to find out how this complex organ controls the way we speak and understand speech.

Making language visible

Hagoort is one of the first researchers to combine psychological theories with neuroscientific methods in his efforts to understand this complex interaction. Because this is not possible without the very latest technology, in 1999, Hagoort established the Nijmegen-based Donders Centre for Cognitive Neuroimaging where an interdisciplinary team of researchers uses state-of-the-art technology, for example MRI and PET scanners, to find out how the brain succeeds in combining functions like memory, speech, observation, attention, feelings and consciousness.

The Dutch scientist is particularly fascinated by the temporal sequence of speech. He discovered, for example, that the brain begins by collecting grammatical information about a word before it compiles information about its sound. This first reliable real-time measurement of speech production in the brain provided researchers with a basis for observing speakers in the act of speaking. They were then able to obtain new insights about why the complex orchestral work of language is impaired, for example, after strokes and in the case of disorders like dyslexia and autism.

“Language is an essential component of human culture, which distinguishes us from other species,” says Hagoort. “Young children understand language before they even start to speak. They master complex grammatical structures before they can add 3 and 13. Our brain is tuned for language at a very early stage,” stresses Hagoort, referring to research findings. The exact composition of the orchestra in our heads and the nature of the score on which the process of speech is based are topics which Hagoort continues to research.

The great illusion of the self

As you wake up each morning, hazy and disoriented, you gradually become aware of the rustling of the sheets, sense their texture and squint at the light. One aspect of your self has reassembled: the first-person observer of reality, inhabiting a human body.

As wakefulness grows, so does your sense of having a past, a personality and motivations. Your self is complete, as both witness of the world and bearer of your consciousness and identity. You.

This intuitive sense of self is an effortless and fundamental human experience. But it is nothing more than an elaborate illusion. Under scrutiny, many common-sense beliefs about selfhood begin to unravel. Some thinkers even go as far as claiming that there is no such thing as the self.

In these articles, discover why “you” aren’t the person you thought you were.

Study shows human brain able to discriminate syllables three months prior to birth

A team of French researchers has discovered that the human brain is capable of distinguishing between different types of syllables as early as three months prior to full term birth. As they describe in their paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the team found via brain scans that babies born up to three months premature are capable of some language processing.

Many studies have been conducted on full term babies to try to understand the degree of mental capabilities at birth. Results from such studies have shown that babies are able to distinguish their mother’s voice from others, for example, and can even recognize the elements of short stories. Still puzzling however, is whether some of what newborns are able to demonstrate is innate, or learned immediately after birth. To learn more, the researchers enlisted the assistance of several parents of premature babies and their offspring. Babies born as early as 28 weeks (full term is 37 weeks) had their brains scanned using bedside functional optical imaging, while sounds (soft voices) were played for them.

Three months prior to full term, the team notes, neurons in the brain are still migrating to what will be their final destination locations and initial connections between the upper brain regions are still forming—also neural linkages between the ears and brain are still being created. All of this indicates a brain that is still very much in flux and in the process of becoming the phenomenally complicated mass that humans are known for, which would seem to suggest that very limited if any communication skills would have developed.

The researchers found, however, that even at a time when the brain hasn’t fully developed, the premature infants were able to tell the difference between female versus male voices, and to distinguish between the syllables “ba” and “ga”. They noted also that the same parts of the brain were used by the infants to process sounds as adults. This, the researchers conclude, shows that linguistic connections in the brain develop before birth and because of that do not need to be acquired afterwards, suggesting that at least some abilities are innate.

BPA May Affect the Developing Brain by Disrupting Gene Regulation

Environmental exposure to bisphenol A (BPA), a widespread chemical found in plastics and resins, may suppress a gene vital to nerve cell function and to the development of the central nervous system, according to a study led by researchers at Duke Medicine.

The researchers published their findings - which were observed in cortical neurons of mice, rats and humans - in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on Feb. 25, 2013.

"Our study found that BPA may impair the development of the central nervous system, and raises the question as to whether exposure could predispose animals and humans to neurodevelopmental disorders," said lead author Wolfgang Liedtke, M.D., PhD, associate professor of medicine/neurology and neurobiology at Duke.

BPA, a molecule that mimics estrogen and interferes with the body’s endocrine system, can be found in a wide variety of manufactured products, including thermal printer paper, some plastic water bottles and the lining of metal cans. The chemical can be ingested if it seeps into the contents of food and beverage containers.

Research in animals has raised concerns that exposure to BPA may cause health problems such as behavioral issues, endocrine and reproductive disorders, obesity, cancer and immune system disorders. Some studies suggest that infants and young children may be the most vulnerable to the effects of BPA, which led the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to ban the use of the chemical in baby bottles and cups in July 2012.

While BPA has been shown to affect the developing nervous system, little is understood as to how this occurs. The research team developed a series of experiments in rodent and human nerve cells to learn how BPA induces changes that disrupt gene regulation.

During early development of neurons, high levels of chloride are present in the cells. These levels drop as neurons mature, thanks to a chloride transporter protein called KCC2, which churns chloride ions out of the cells. If the level of chloride within neurons remains elevated, it can damage neural circuits and compromise a developing nerve cell’s ability to migrate to its proper position in the brain.

Exposing neurons to minute amounts of BPA alters the chloride levels inside the cells by somehow shutting down the Kcc2 gene, which makes the KCC2 protein, thereby delaying the removal of chloride from neurons.

MECP2, another protein important for normal brain function, was found to be a possible culprit behind this change. When exposed to BPA, MECP2 is more abundant and binds to the Kcc2 gene at a higher rate, which might help to shut it down. This could contribute to problems in the developing brain due to a delay in chloride being removed.

These findings raise the question of whether BPA could contribute to neurodevelopmental disorders such as Rett syndrome, a severe autism spectrum disorder that is only found in girls and is characterized by mutations in the gene that produces MECP2.

While both male and female neurons were affected by BPA in the studies, female neurons were more susceptible to the chemical’s toxicity. Further research will dig deeper into the sex-specific effects of BPA exposure and whether certain sex hormone receptors are involved in BPA’s effect on KCC2.

"Our findings improve our understanding of how environmental exposure to BPA can affect the regulation of the Kcc2 gene. However, we expect future studies to focus on what targets aside from Kcc2 are affected by BPA," Liedtke said. "This is a chapter in an ongoing story."