Posts tagged neuroscience
Articles and news from the latest research reports.
When Head Meets Soccer Ball, How Does Your Brain Fare?
Soccer players who frequently head-butt the ball—a commonly used tactic for passing or scoring in a game—may be risking brain injury, memory loss, and impaired cognitive ability, according to a study published in the journal Radiology.
Brain injury and the lasting effects of concussion in sport have become a major health issue in recent years, especially in such hard-hitting sports as American football. Although the thump of a soccer ball on a forehead seems fairly innocuous, compared with a crashing tackle on the three-yard line, a soccer player may “head” the ball hundreds or even thousands of times during the course of the season. The cumulative effect of many “sub-concussive” blows to the brain has been unknown and unstudied until now.
"We chose to study soccer because it is the world’s most popular sport," says the report’s lead author Michael Lipton, associate director of the Gruss Magnetic Resonance Research Center at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York. "It is widely played by millions of people of all ages, including children, and there is concern that heading the ball, an essential part of the game, might cause damage to the brain."
Lipton and his colleagues examined 37 amateur players, all adults, who had played soccer for an average of 22 years each and had played regularly over the previous year. They filled out questionnaires about their playing style and how frequently they headed the ball on the field and in training drills. Then they were given memory tests and highly sophisticated brain scans, using a type of MRI called diffusion-tensor imaging that looks at microscopic changes in the white matter in the brain. White matter is the tissue that conveys messages from one region of the brain to another.
The researchers found that players had to head the ball a certain number of times in a season before white matter abnormalities started to appear on imaging. The threshold varied from player to player but was generally in the range of 900 to 1,500 headers in a season. Beyond this threshold, the brain abnormalities quickly became more apparent. Those who headed the ball more than 1,800 times in a season scored measurably worse on memory tests than those who had headed the ball less frequently. The difference in scores was in the range of 10 to 20 percent.
"To put this into perspective I should make it clear that all of these players’ functions were still within norms," said Lipton. "These are all basically functional young professionals and students."
So, should soccer players—and parents of young soccer players—be worried?
"All we have at this point is some evidence that shows an association between heading and what looks like brain injury. However, we do not yet have the type of data that permits us to prove a causal role for heading or to generalize our findings to other specific individuals. In the meantime, controlling the amount of heading that people do may provide an approach for preventing brain injury as a consequence of heading."
"I should emphasize that we very much see soccer as an excellent source of beneficial physical activity. This should not be curtailed. Our message is to understand the role of heading in the game and look at how we can enhance the safety of soccer play and facilitate its expansion."
The quest to build a brain in the lab
"I’m a neuroengineer, and one of my goals is building brains."
Prof Steven Potter was disarmingly understated as he introduced himself.
It’s not that tissue engineering is unusual. Nor even that doing it with neural cells should be an issue.
If heart cells or skin cells can be reprogrammed, why not neurons?
But “building brains” had been my flip way of labelling an intriguing, indeed unnerving, branch of science: the neurophysiology of disembodied brain-cell cultures. It was not a term I was expecting a serious scientist to turn to, as I set out on making "Build Me a Brain" for BBC Radio 4’s Frontiers Programme.
The Present and Future of Neurogenomics
Support the BRAIN Initiative, but don’t overlook the neurogenomic diagnostics that are already driving breakthroughs in brain and rare neurological disorders.
On April 2nd, 2013, President Obama proposed a forward-thinking, $100 million research program designed to unlock the mysteries of the human brain. The BRAIN (Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies) Initiative seeks to identify how brain cells and neural circuits interact in order to inform the development of future treatments for brain disorders, including Alzheimer’s disease, epilepsy, and traumatic brain injury.
This Initiative could favorably contribute to medical practice years from now. It should not, however, overshadow the potential of neurogenomic advances to improve the diagnosis, treatment and management of neurological disorders right now.
Most of my career has focused on neurogenomics. During the Human Genome Project era, I managed a clinical neurogenomics program at the National Institutes of Health to further understanding the genetic underpinnings of neurological disorders to help diagnose, treat, cure, and even prevent disease. Today, I oversee the development of neurodiagnostics for the neurology business of Quest Diagnostics, with an emphasis on rare neurological disorders, autism, and dementias.
Over the years, I’ve come to identify certain obstacles that prevent the translation of neurogenomic science into effective clinical management. These obstacles are surmountable, but they require a fundamental shift in how care is delivered to patients with neurological disorders.
Our current healthcare system groups healthcare professionals into two categories: generalists, such as primary care physicians and internists, and specialists, including neurologists. We assume that the former have the knowledge to reliably refer patients, when appropriate, to the latter. This may have been a fair assumption in the past, but in the age of genomic medicine, is it still valid?
In the case of neurogenomic disorders, such as genetic forms of epilepsy, neuromuscular disorders, dementia, and developmental disabilities overlapping clinical signs and symptoms often present a diagnostic challenge for neurologists, and even more so for generalists. A dearth of clinical information available on rare disorders, and the infrequency with which primary care physicians come in contact with effected patients, makes diagnosis even more difficult.
Dravet syndrome, for example, is a rare and catastrophic form of infantile epilepsy that is associated with a high incidence of developmental delays and even SUDEP (sudden unexplained death in epilepsy). Dravet is caused by a genetic defect in the SCN1A gene-affecting sodium channel. While not curable, the condition can be managed if diagnosed—but only if treating physicians are aware of the disorder, treatment options, and the detrimental effects of certain anticonvulsants.
Through advances in laboratory diagnostics, physicians are increasingly equipped to pinpoint the molecular causes of these diseases—some of which are amenable to treatment. But too often, the only clinicians who know about the tests and treatment options are specialists.
We must work more closely with medical societies and advocacy groups to educate primary care professionals and even patients in the value of, and tools for, diagnosing and treating neurological disorders.
Neurogenomic research is revealing that some rare disorders share similar molecular markers and mechanisms. By categorizing these rare disorders into clinical areas, we potentially reduce an otherwise lengthy diagnostic process for the patient and advance the development of new treatment options. Greater investment in new diagnostics that pinpoint molecular markers for disease will help remove the mystery that clouds the diagnosis of many disorders.
Too few clinicians, including neurologists, can keep on top of the rapid evolution of genomic science and diagnostics. As a result, patients are often referred from physician to physician, and administered test after test, in a protracted process to diagnose and treat. This wastes healthcare dollars. More importantly, it creates terrible anxiety and frustration for patients.
To alleviate this problem, medical societies need to do more to cultivate sub-specialists in neurogenomics—clinicians who have deep specialized expertise in specific neurological diseases, particularly rare disorders. With such experience, these experts can more efficiently and reliably diagnose the patient’s disorder.
While the BRAIN Initiative may yield clinically valuable insights in the future, scientists and physicians can do a great deal now with current technologies to translate genomic knowledge into effective diagnosis, management and, in some cases, treatment. With greater genomics education and collaboration, we can help improve the quality of life for patients with neurological disorders—and that, ultimately, is the most meaningful measurement of success.
(Source: the-scientist.com)
Inside the Letterbox: How Literacy Transforms the Human Brain
Although I find the diversity of the world’s writing systems bewildering, there is also a striking regularity that remains hidden. Whenever we read—whether our language is Japanese, Hebrew, English, or Italian—each of us relies on very similar brain networks. In particular, a small region of the visual cortex becomes active with remarkable reproducibility in the brains of all readers. A brief localizer scan, during which images of brain activity are collected as a person responds to written words, faces, objects, and other visual stimuli, serves to identify this region. Written words never fail to activate a small region at the base of the left hemisphere, always at the same place, give or take a few millimeters.
Experts call this region the visual word form area, but in a recent book for the general public, I dubbed it the brain’s letterbox, because it concentrates much of our visual knowledge of letters and their configurations. Indeed, this site is amazingly specialized. The letterbox responds to written words more than it does to most other categories of visual stimuli, including pictures of faces, objects, houses, and even Arabic numerals.Its efficiency is so great that it even responds to words that we fail to recognize consciously—words made subliminal by flashing them for a fraction of a second. Yet it performs highly sophisticated operations that are indispensable to fluent reading. For instance, the letterbox is the first visual area that recognizes that “READ” and “read” depict the same word by representing strings of letters invariantly for changes in case, which is no small feat if you consider that uppercase and lowercase letters such as “A” and “a” bear very little similarity. Furthermore, if it is impaired or disconnected via brain surgery or a cerebral infarct (type of stroke), the patient may develop a syndrome called pure alexia. He or she will be unable to recognize even a single word, as well as faces, objects, digits, and Arabic numerals. Yet many of these patients can still speak and understand spoken language fluently, and they may even still write; only their visual capacity to process letter strings seems dramatically affected.
The brain of any educated adult contains a circuit specialized for reading. But how is this possible, given that reading is an extremely recent and highly variable cultural activity? The alphabet is only about 4,000 years old, and until recently, only a very small fraction of humanity could read. Thus, there was no time for Darwinian evolution to shape our genome and adapt our brain networks to the particularities of reading. How is it, then, that we all possess a specialized letterbox area?
People can sense a smile before it appears on the face
But a forced or polite smile does not transmit the same signals, meaning we only detect it when it is visible, reports journal Psychological Science.
Researchers say the study reflects the unique social value of a heartfelt smile, which involves specific movements of muscles around the eyes.
A team from Bangor University had noted that pairs of strangers getting to know one another not only exchanged smiles, they almost always matched the particular smile type, whether genuine or polite.
But they responded much more quickly to their partners’ genuine smiles than their polite smiles, suggesting that they were anticipating the genuine smiles.
In the lab, the results were repeated and data from electrical sensors on participants’ faces revealed that they engaged smile-related muscles when they expected a genuine smile to appear but showed no such activity when expecting polite smiles.
The different responses suggest that genuine smiles are more valuable social rewards, said Dr Erin Heerey.
She said: “These findings give us the first clear suggestion that the basic processes that guide responses to reward also play a role in guiding social behaviour on a moment-to-moment basis during interactions.
"No two interactions are alike, yet people still manage to smoothly coordinate their speech and nonverbal behaviors with those of another person."
She said that polite smiles typically occur when sociocultural norms dictate that smiling is appropriate.
Genuine smiles, on the other hand, signify pleasure, occur spontaneously, and are indicated by engagement of specific muscles around the eye.
She said the study could help those who find social interactions tricky.
She explained: “As we progress in our understanding of how social interactions unfold, these findings may help to guide the development of interventions for people who find social interactions difficult, such as those with social anxiety, autism, or schizophrenia.”
Can you feel me now?
New array measures vibrations across the skin, may help engineers design optimal, wearable tactile displays.
In the near future, a buzz in your belt or a pulse from your jacket may give you instructions on how to navigate your surroundings.
Think of it as tactile Morse code: vibrations from a wearable, GPS-linked device that tell you to turn right or left, or stop, depending on the pattern of pulses you feel. Such a device could free drivers from having to look at maps, and could also serve as a tactile guide for the visually and hearing impaired.
Lynette Jones, a senior research scientist in MIT’s Department of Mechanical Engineering, designs wearable tactile displays. Through her work, she’s observed that the skin is a sensitive — though largely untapped — medium for communication.
“If you compare the skin to the retina, you have about the same number of sensory receptors, you just have them over almost two square meters of space, unlike the eye where it’s all concentrated in an extremely small area,” Jones says. “The skin is generally as useful as a very acute area. It’s just that you need to disperse the information that you’re presenting.”
Knowing just how to disperse tactile information across the skin is tricky. For instance, people may be much more sensitive to stimuli on areas like the hand, as opposed to the forearm, and may respond best to certain patterns of vibrations. Such information on skin responsiveness could help designers determine the best configuration of motors in a display, given where on the skin a device would be worn.
Now Jones has built an array that precisely tracks a motor’s vibrations through skin in three dimensions. The array consists of eight miniature accelerometers and a single pancake motor — a type of vibrating motor used in cellphones. She used the array to measure motor vibrations in three locations: the palm of the hand, the forearm and the thigh. From her studies with eight healthy participants, Jones found that a motor’s mechanical vibrations through skin drop off quickly in all three locations, within 8 millimeters from where the vibrations originated.
Jones also gauged participants’ perception of vibrations, fitting them with a 3-by-3 array of pancake motors in these three locations on the body. While skin generally stopped vibrating 8 millimeters from the source, most people continued to perceive the vibrations as far away as 24 millimeters.
When participants were asked to identify specific locations of motors within the array, they were much more sensitive on the palm than on the forearm or thigh. But in all three locations, people were better at picking out vibrations in the four corners of the array, versus the inner motors, leading Jones to posit that perhaps people use the edges of their limbs to localize vibrations and other stimuli.
“For a lot of sensory modalities, you have to work out what it is people can process, as one of the dictates for how you design,” says Jones, whose results will appear in the journal IEEE Transactions on Haptics. “There’s no point in making things much more compact, which may be a desirable feature from an engineering point of view, but from a human-use point of view, doesn’t make a difference.”
Mapping good vibrations
In addition to measuring skin’s sensitivity to vibrations, Jones and co-author Katherine Sofia ’12 found that skin has a strong effect on motor vibrations. The researchers compared a pancake motor’s frequency of vibrations when mounted on a rigid structure or on more compliant skin. They found that in general, skin reduced a motor’s vibrations by 28 percent, with the forearm and thigh having a slightly stronger dampening effect than the palm of the hand.
The skin’s damping of motor vibrations is significant, Jones says, if engineers plan to build tactile displays that incorporate different frequencies of vibrations. For instance, the difference between two motors — one slightly faster than the other — may be indistinguishable in certain parts of the skin. Likewise, two motors spaced a certain distance apart may be differentiable in one area but not another.
“Should I have eight motors, or is four enough that 90 percent of the time, I’ll know that when this one’s on, it’s this one and not that one?” Jones says. “We’re answering those sorts of questions in the context of what information you want to present using a device.”
Roberta Klatzky, a professor of psychology at Carnegie Mellon University, says that measurements taken by Jones’ arrays can be used to set up displays in which the location of a stimulus — for example, a pattern to convey a letter — is important.
“A major challenge is to enable people to tell the difference between patterns applied to the skin as, for example, blind people do when reading Braille,” says Klatzky, who specializes in the study of spatial cognition. “Lynette’s work sets up a methodology and potential guidelines for effective pattern displays.”
Creating a buzz
Jones sees promising applications for wearable tactile displays. In addition to helping drivers navigate, she says tactile stimuli may direct firefighters through burning buildings, or emergency workers through disaster sites. In more mundane scenarios, she says tactile displays may help joggers traverse an unfamiliar city, taking directions from a buzzing wristband, instead of having to look at a smartphone.
Using data from their mechanical and perceptual experiments, Jones’ group is designing arrays that can be worn across the back and around the wrist, and is investigating various ways to present vibrations. For example, a row of vibrations activated sequentially from left to right may tell a driver to turn right; a single motor that buzzes with increasing frequency may be a warning to slow down.
“There’s a lot of things you can do with these displays that are fairly intuitive in terms of how people respond,” Jones says, “which is important because no one’s going to spend hours and hours in any application, learning what a signal means.”
(Source: web.mit.edu)
From the mouths of babes – The truth about toddler talk
The sound of small children chattering has always been considered cute – but not particularly sophisticated. However, research by a Newcastle University expert has shown their speech is far more advanced than previously understood.
Dr Cristina Dye, a lecturer in child language development, found that two to three- year-olds are using grammar far sooner than expected.
She studied fifty French speaking youngsters aged between 23 and 37 months, capturing tens of thousands of their utterances.
Dr Dye, who carried out the research while at Cornell University in the United States, found that the children were using ‘little words’ which form the skeleton of sentences such as a, an, can, is, an, far sooner than previously thought.
Dr Dye and her team used advanced recording technology including highly sensitive microphones placed close to the children, to capture the precise sounds the children voiced. They spent years painstakingly analysing every minute sound made by the toddlers and the context in which it was produced.
They found a clear, yet previously undetected, pattern of sounds and puffs of air, which consistently replaced grammatical words in many of the children’s utterances.
Dr Dye said: “Many of the toddlers we studied made a small sound, a soft breath, or a pause, at exactly the place that a grammatical word would normally be uttered.”
“The fact that this sound was always produced in the correct place in the sentence leads us to believe that young children are knowledgeable of grammatical words. They are far more sophisticated in their grammatical competence than we ever understood.
“Despite the fact the toddlers we studied were acquiring French, our findings are expected to extend to other languages. I believe we should give toddlers more credit – they’re much more amazing than we realised.”
For decades the prevailing view among developmental specialists has been that children’s early word combinations are devoid of grammatical words. On this view, children then undergo a ‘tadpole to frog’ transformation where due to an unknown mechanism, they start to develop grammar in their speech. Dye’s results now challenge the old view.
Dr Dye said: “The research sheds light on a really important part of a child’s development. Language is one of the things that makes us human and understanding how we acquire it shows just how amazing children are.
“There are also implications for understanding language delay in children. When children don’t learn to speak normally it can lead to serious issues later in life. For example, those who have it are more likely to suffer from mental illness or be unemployed later in life. If we can understand what is ‘normal’ as early as possible then we can intervene sooner to help those children.”
The research was originally published in the Journal of Linguistics.
(Source: ncl.ac.uk)
Functional MRI provides support in operations on the brain
Researchers at the MedUni Vienna have proved in a so far unique multicenter study that clinical functional magnetic resonance tomography (fMRI), in the area in which the MedUni Vienna has a leading role internationally, is a safe method in brain surgery. With the aid of fMRI imaging can pinpoint to the millimetre where critical nerve fibres (e.g. vital for speech or hand function) lie and which have to be avoided – in operations on brain tumours for example.
"With the assistance of functional magnetic resonance tomography we are, if you like, drawing a red line for the surgeon so he knows where not to make an incision so as to avoid damage," says Roland Beisteiner from the University Department of Neurology at the MedUni Vienna. The neurologist and president of the Austrian Society for fMRI was playing a part in the development of fMRI as early as 1992, initiating its development in Austria. Since then this method has been developed and implemented at the University Department of Neurology and the High Field MRI Center of Excellence.
Now Beisteiner’s team have been able for the first time to demonstrate in a current paper in the top journal “Radiology" that functional magnetic resonance tomography provides diagnostic certainty in operations on the brain – no matter what the equipment is (whether a 7Tesla magnetic resonance tomograph as in Vienna or even only a 1.5Tesla), no matter in which location and also irrespective of who is operating it. The Medical Universities in Innsbruck and Salzburg, the Heinrich Heine University of Düsseldorf and the Stiftungsklinikum Koblenz (Koblenz Hospital Foundation) also took part in the study.
The “Imaging and Cognition Biology” Research Cluster of the MedUni and Vienna University
Likewise, with the help of functional magnetic resonance tomography, the teams of Beisteiner and Tecumseh Fitch (Faculty of Life Sciences of the University of Vienna) are investigating in a joint research cluster belonging to the MedUni Vienna and the University of Vienna whether the structural and syntactic processing of music takes place in similar areas of the brain as does the processing of speech. Says Beisteiner: “It is never exactly the same area of the brain; however, brain activities can overlap when talking or playing an instrument.”
The main focus of the research cluster is to determine precisely the common areas of the brain involved and to develop new treatments by activating them. These could perhaps then be used on people suffering from aphasia, which is a loss of language as the result of brain damage mostly to the left half of the brain.
According to Beisteiner there have been some astonishing results: “People, who could no longer speak because of their aphasia, have been able to sing the words they have learned to the matching tune.” From this one can conclude that it would seem to make sense to also practise music skills during speech therapy.
The “Imaging and Cognition Biology” research cluster is one of six joint clusters at the MedUni Vienna with the University of Vienna, which were set up in 2011. Further information: http://forschungscluster.meduniwien.ac.at/.
(Source: meduniwien.ac.at)
Stress Test and Brain Scans Pinpoint Two Distinct Forms of Gulf War Illness
Researchers at Georgetown University Medical Center say their new work suggests that Gulf War illness may have two distinct forms depending on which brain regions have atrophied. Their study of Gulf War veterans, published online today in PLOS ONE, may help explain why clinicians have consistently encountered veterans with different symptoms and complaints.
Using brain imaging that was acquired before and after exercise tests, the researchers studied the effects of physical stress on the veterans and controls. Following exercise, subgroups were evident. In 18 veterans, they found that pain levels increased after completion of the exercise stress tests exercised; fMRI scans in these participants showed loss of brain matter in adjacent regions associated with pain regulation.
During cognitive tasks, this group showed an increased use of the basal ganglia — a potential compensatory strategy the brain uses that is also seen in neurodegenerative disorders such as Alzheimer’s disease. Following exercise, this group lost the ability to employ their basal ganglia, suggesting an adverse response to a physiological stressor.
In addition, “a separate group of 10 veterans had a very different clinical alteration,” says lead author Rakib Rayhan, a researcher in the lab of the study’s senior investigator, James Baraniuk, MD, a professor of medicine at GUMC.
In these 10 veterans, the researchers found substantial increases in heart rate. They also discovered that this subgroup had atrophy in the brain stem, which regulates heart rate. .
In addition, brain scans during a cognitive task performed prior to exercise showed increased compensatory use of the cerebellum, again a trait seen in neurodegenerative disorders. Like the other group, this cohort lost the ability to use this compensatory area after exercise.
Alterations in cognition, brain structure and exercise-induced symptoms found in the veterans were absent in the 10-participant matched control group, the researchers say.
“The use of other brain areas to compensate for a damaged area is seen in other disorders, such as Alzheimer’s disease, which is why we believe our data show that these veterans are suffering from central nervous system dysfunction,” Rayhan explains. He adds, however, that because such changes are similar to other neurodegenerative states, it doesn’t mean that veterans will progress to Alzheimer’s or other diseases.
These findings — a surprise to researchers — follow a study in Gulf War veterans published in March in PLOS ONE that reported abnormalities in the bundle of nerve fibers connecting the brain areas involved in the processing and perception of pain and fatigue.
Gulf War Illness is the mysterious malady believed to have affected more than 200,000 military personnel who served in the 1990-1991 Operation Desert Shield and Desert Storm.
Although veterans were exposed to nerve agents, pesticides and herbicides (among other toxic chemicals), no one has definitively linked any single exposure or underlying mechanism to Gulf War illness.
The symptoms of Gulf War illness — which have not been widely accepted by the public or medical professionals — range from mild to debilitating and can include widespread pain, fatigue and headache, as well as cognitive and gastrointestinal dysfunctions.
“Our findings help explain and validate what these veterans have long said about their illness,” Rayhan says.
Scientists identify neurons that control feeding behavior in Drosophila
Scientists at the University of Massachusetts Medical School have developed a novel transgenic system which allows them to remotely activate individual brain cells in the model organism Drosophila using ambient temperature. This powerful new tool for identifying and characterizing neural circuitry has lead to the identification of a pair of neurons – now called Fdg neurons – in the fruit fly that decide when to eat and initiate the subsequent feeding action. Discovery of these neurons may help neurobiologists better understand how the brain uses memory and stimuli to produce classically conditioned responses, such as those often associated with phobias or drug tolerance. The study appears in the journal Nature.
"For any organism, the decision to eat is a complex integration of internal and external stimuli leading to the activation of an organized sequence of motor patterns," said Motojiro Yoshihara, PhD, assistant professor of neurobiology at the University of Massachusetts Medical School and lead author of the Nature study. “By developing genetic tools to remotely activate individual brain cells in Drosophila, we’ve been able to isolate a pair of neurons that are critical to the act of eating in fruit flies. More importantly, we now have a powerful new tool with which we can answer important questions about the function and composition of neural circuitry.”
To isolate the neurons responsible for sensing food and initiating the complex feeding program in Drosophila, UMMS scientists had to develop a method of studying the behavior of freely moving flies while targeting and manipulating individual neurons. To accomplish this, Dr. Yoshihara expressed temperature activated genes in random neurons in more than 800 Drosophila lines. Placing these genetically modified flies in a small temperature-controlled chamber, he was able to active these genes by increasing and decreasing the ambient temperature. This, in turn, activated the corresponding neurons.
Under wild conditions, when a hungry fly comes in contact with food it ceases motion and executives eight basic motor functions resulting in the consumption of the food. When the temperature in the chamber was increased, Yoshihara and colleagues were able to isolate a single Drosophila line which exhibited these eight motor functions, even in the absence of food or other stimuli. Subsequent experiments revealed that the feeding mechanism initiated by activating the transgenes was being controlled by a single pair of neurons in the fly’s brain. Furthermore, these feeding (Fdg) neurons were responsible for synthesizing cues about available food and hunger, and using them to start the feeding mechanism.
"Our results showed that these neurons become active in the presence of a food source for the fly, but the response was contingent on whether the animal was hungry," said Yoshihara. "This means that these neurons are integrating both internal and external stimuli in order to initiate a complex feeding behavior with multiple motor programs."
Yoshihara believes this discovery will provide researchers with a powerful new tool for isolating, analyzing and characterizing aspects of the brain’s neural circuitry and studying how information is integrated in the brain. In the future, Yoshihara plans to use the Fdg-neurons to study the biological basis of classical or Pavlovian conditioning. Doing so, he hopes to uncover how memory integrates stimuli to illicit a conditioned behavior.
(Source: eurekalert.org)