Search

The cellular biology of brains is relatively well-understood, but neuroscientists have not yet generated a theory explaining how brains work. Explanations of how neurons collectively operate to produce what brains can do are tentative and incomplete. Without prior assumptions about the brain mechanisms, I attempt here to identify major obstacles to progress in neuroscientific understanding of brains and central nervous systems. Most of the obstacles to our understanding are conceptual. Neuroscience lacks concepts and models rooted in experimental results explaining how neurons interact at all scales. The cerebral cortex is thought to control awake activities, which contrasts with recent experimental results. There is ambiguity distinguishing task-related brain activities from spontaneous activities and organized intrinsic activities. Brains are regarded as driven by external and internal stimuli in contrast to their considerable autonomy. Experimental results are explained by sensory inputs, behavior, and psychological concepts. Time and space are regarded as mutually independent variables for spiking, post-synaptic events, and other measured variables, in contrast to experimental results. Dynamical systems theory and models describing evolution of variables with time as the independent variable are insufficient to account for central nervous system activities. Spatial dynamics may be a practical solution. The general hypothesis that measurements of changes in fundamental brain variables, action potentials, transmitter releases, post-synaptic transmembrane currents, etc., propagating in central nervous systems reveal how they work, carries no additional assumptions. Combinations of current techniques could reveal many aspects of spatial dynamics of spiking, post-synaptic processing, and plasticity in insects and rodents to start with. But problems defining baseline and reference conditions hinder interpretations of the results. Furthermore, the facts that pooling an, The cellular biology of brains is relatively well-understood, but neuroscientists have not yet generated a theory explaining how brains work. Explanations of how neurons collectively operate to produce what brains can do are tentative and incomplete. Without prior assumptions about the brain mechanisms, I attempt here to identify major obstacles to progress in neuroscientific understanding of brains and central nervous systems. Most of the obstacles to our understanding are conceptual. Neuroscience lacks concepts and models rooted in experimental results explaining how neurons interact at all scales. The cerebral cortex is thought to control awake activities, which contrasts with recent experimental results. There is ambiguity distinguishing task-related brain activities from spontaneous activities and organized intrinsic activities. Brains are regarded as driven by external and internal stimuli in contrast to their considerable autonomy. Experimental results are explained by sensory inputs, behavior, and psychological concepts. Time and space are regarded as mutually independent variables for spiking, post-synaptic events, and other measured variables, in contrast to experimental results. Dynamical systems theory and models describing evolution of variables with time as the independent variable are insufficient to account for central nervous system activities. Spatial dynamics may be a practical solution. The general hypothesis that measurements of changes in fundamental brain variables, action potentials, transmitter releases, post-synaptic transmembrane currents, etc., propagating in central nervous systems reveal how they work, carries no additional assumptions. Combinations of current techniques could reveal many aspects of spatial dynamics of spiking, post-synaptic processing, and plasticity in insects and rodents to start with. But problems defining baseline and reference conditions hinder interpretations of the results. Furthermore, the facts that pooling

How do neurons and networks of neurons interact spatially? Here, we overview recent discoveries revealing how spatial dynamics of spiking and postsynaptic activity efficiently expose and explain fundamental brain and brainstem mechanisms behind detection, perception, learning, and behavior.

Brain dynamics are often taken to be temporal dynamics of spiking and membrane potentials in a balanced network. Almost all evidence for a balanced network comes from recordings of cell bodies of few single neurons, neglecting more than 99% of the cortical network. We examined the space-time dynamics of excitation and inhibition simultaneously in dendrites and axons over four visual areas of ferrets exposed to visual scenes with stationary and moving objects. The visual stimuli broke the tight balance between excitation and inhibition such that the network exhibited longer episodes of net excitation subsequently balanced by net inhibition, in contrast to a balanced network. Locally in all four areas the amount of net inhibition matched the amount of net excitation with a delay of 125 ms. The space-time dynamics of excitation-inhibition evolved to reduce the complexity of neuron interactions over the whole network to a flow on a low-(3)-dimensional manifold within 80 ms. In contrast to the pure temporal dynamics, the low dimensional flow evolved to distinguish the simple visual scenes.

In the cerebral cortex, membrane currents, i.e., action potentials and other membrane currents, express many forms of space-time dynamics. In the spontaneous asynchronous irregular state, their space-time dynamics are local non-propagating fluctuations and sparse spiking appearing at unpredictable positions. After transition to active spiking states, larger structured zones with active spiking neurons appear, propagating through the cortical network, driving it into various forms of widespread excitation, and engaging the network from microscopic scales to whole cortical areas. At each engaged cortical site, the amount of excitation in the network, after a delay, becomes matched by an equal amount of space-time fine-tuned inhibition that might be instrumental in driving the dynamics toward perception and action.

Fluorescence molecular tomography (FMT) is a promising tool for real time in vivo quantification of neurotransmission (NT) as we pursue in our BRAIN initiative effort. However, the acquired image data are noisy and the reconstruction problem is ill-posed. Further, while spatial sparsity of the NT effects could be exploited, traditional compressive-sensing methods cannot be directly applied as the system matrix in FMT is highly coherent. To overcome these issues, we propose and assess a three-step reconstruction method. First, truncated singular value decomposition is applied on the data to reduce matrix coherence. The resultant image data are input to a homotopy-based reconstruction strategy that exploits sparsity via ℓ1 regularization. The reconstructed image is then input to a maximum-likelihood expectation maximization (MLEM) algorithm that retains the sparseness of the input estimate and improves upon the quantitation by accurate Poisson noise modeling. The proposed reconstruction method was evaluated in a three-dimensional simulated setup with fluorescent sources in a cuboidal scattering medium with optical properties simulating human brain cortex (reduced scattering coefficient: 9.2 cm-1, absorption coefficient: 0.1 cm-1 and tomographic measurements made using pixelated detectors. In different experiments, fluorescent sources of varying size and intensity were simulated. The proposed reconstruction method provided accurate estimates of the fluorescent source intensity, with a 20% lower root mean square error on average compared to the pure-homotopy method for all considered source intensities and sizes. Further, compared with conventional ℓ2 regularized algorithm, overall, the proposed method reconstructed substantially more accurate fluorescence distribution. The proposed method shows considerable promise and will be tested using more realistic simulations and experimental setups.

Most neurons have a threshold separating the silent non-spiking state and the state of producing temporal sequences of spikes. But neurons in vivo also have a second threshold, found recently in granular layer neurons of the primary visual cortex, separating spontaneous ongoing spiking from visually evoked spiking driven by sharp transients. Here we examine whether this second threshold exists outside the granular layer and examine details of transitions between spiking states in ferrets exposed to moving objects. We found the second threshold, separating spiking states evoked by stationary and moving visual stimuli from the spontaneous ongoing spiking state, in all layers and zones of areas 17 and 18 indicating that the second threshold is a property of the network. Spontaneous and evoked spiking, thus can easily be distinguished. In addition, the trajectories of spontaneous ongoing states were slow, frequently changing direction. In single trials, sharp as well as smooth and slow transients transform the trajectories to be outward directed, fast and crossing the threshold to become evoked. Although the speeds of the evolution of the evoked states differ, the same domain of the state space is explored indicating uniformity of the evoked states. All evoked states return to the spontaneous evoked spiking state as in a typical mono-stable dynamical system. In single trials, neither the original spiking rates, nor the temporal evolution in state space could distinguish simple visual scenes. Introduction, Most neurons have a threshold separating the silent non-spiking state and the state of producing temporal sequences of spikes. But neurons in vivo also have a second threshold, found recently in granular layer neurons of the primary visual cortex, separating spontaneous ongoing spiking from visually evoked spiking driven by sharp transients. Here we examine whether this second threshold exists outside the granular layer and examine details of transitions between spiking states in ferrets exposed to moving objects. We found the second threshold, separating spiking states evoked by stationary and moving visual stimuli from the spontaneous ongoing spiking state, in all layers and zones of areas 17 and 18 indicating that the second threshold is a property of the network. Spontaneous and evoked spiking, thus can easily be distinguished. In addition, the trajectories of spontaneous ongoing states were slow, frequently changing direction. In single trials, sharp as well as smooth and slow transients transform the trajectories to be outward directed, fast and crossing the threshold to become evoked. Although the speeds of the evolution of the evoked states differ, the same domain of the state space is explored indicating uniformity of the evoked states. All evoked states return to the spontaneous evoked spiking state as in a typical mono-stable dynamical system. In single trials, neither the original spiking rates, nor the temporal evolution in state space could distinguish simple visual scenes.

Neurons in the primary visual cortex spontaneously spike even when there are no visual stimuli. It is unknown whether the spiking evoked by visual stimuli is just a modification of the spontaneous ongoing cortical spiking dynamics or whether the spontaneous spiking state disappears and is replaced by evoked spiking. This study of laminar recordings of spontaneous spiking and visually evoked spiking of neurons in the ferret primary visual cortex shows that the spiking dynamics does not change: the spontaneous spiking as well as evoked spiking is controlled by a stable and persisting fixed point attractor. Its existence guarantees that evoked spiking return to the spontaneous state. However, the spontaneous ongoing spiking state and the visual evoked spiking states are qualitatively different and are separated by a threshold (separatrix). The functional advantage of this organization is that it avoids the need for a system reorganization following visual stimulation, and impedes the transition of spontaneous spiking to evoked spiking and the propagation of spontaneous spiking from layer 4 to layers 2-3.

In principle, cortico-cortical communication dynamics is simple: neurons in one cortical area communicate by sending action potentials that release glutamate and excite their target neurons in other cortical areas. In practice, knowledge about cortico-cortical communication dynamics is minute. One reason is that no current technique can capture the fast spatio-temporal cortico-cortical evolution of action potential transmission and membrane conductances with sufficient spatial resolution. A combination of optogenetics and monosynaptic tracing with virus can reveal the spatio-temporal cortico-cortical dynamics of specific neurons and their targets, but does not reveal how the dynamics evolves under natural conditions. Spontaneous ongoing action potentials also spread across cortical areas and are difficult to separate from structured evoked and intrinsic brain activity such as thinking. At a certain state of evolution, the dynamics may engage larger populations of neurons to drive the brain to decisions, percepts and behaviors. For example, successfully evolving dynamics to sensory transients can appear at the mesoscopic scale revealing how the transient is perceived. As a consequence of these methodological and conceptual difficulties, studies in this field comprise a wide range of computational models, large-scale measurements (e.g., by MEG, EEG), and a combination of invasive measurements in animal experiments. Further obstacles and challenges of studying cortico-cortical communication dynamics are outlined in this critical review.

A key issue in brain imaging concerns how to detect the functionally activated regions from PET and fMRI images. In earlier work, it has been shown that the scale-space primal sketch provides a useful tool for such analysis [1]. The method includes presmoothing with different filter widths and automatic estimation of the spatial extent of the activated regions (blobs). The purpose is to present two modifications of the scale-space primal sketch, as well as a quantitative evaluation which shows that these modifications improve the performance, measured as the separation between blob descriptors extracted from PET images and from noise images. This separation is essential for future work of associating a statistical p-value with the scale-space blob descriptors., QC 20111209