Neuroscience seminars

Stereopsis – deriving information about distance by comparing views from two eyes – is widespread in vertebrates but so far known in only class of invertebrates, the praying mantids. Understanding stereopsis which has evolved independently in such a different nervous system promises to shed light on the constraints governing any stereo system. Behavioral experiments indicate that insect stereopsis is functionally very different from that studied in vertebrates. Vertebrate stereopsis depends on matching up the pattern of contrast in the two eyes; it works in static scenes, and may have evolved in order to break camouflage rather than to detect distances. Insect stereopsis matches up regions of the image where the luminance is changing; it is insensitive to the detailed pattern of contrast and operates to detect the distance to a moving target. Work from my lab has revealed a network of neurons within the mantis brain which are tuned to binocular disparity, including some that project to early visual areas. This is in contrast to previous theories which postulated that disparity was computed only at a single, late stage, where visual information is passed down to motor neurons. Thus, despite their very different properties, the underlying neural mechanisms supporting vertebrate and insect stereopsis may be computationally more similar than has been assumed.

Traditionally, the term dynamics means changes in a system evolving over time. However, in the brain action potentials propagate along axons to induce postsynaptic currents with different delays at many sites simultaneously. This fundamental computational mechanism evolves spatially to engage the neuron populations involved in brain functions. To identify and understand the spatial processing in brains, this workshop will focus on the spatial principles of brain dynamics that determine how action potentials and membrane currents propagate in the networks of neurons that brains are made of. We will focus on non-artificial dynamics, which excludes in vitro dynamics, interference, electrical and optogenetic stimulations of brains in vivo. Recent non-artificial studies of spatial brain dynamics can actually explain how sensory, motor and internal brain functions evolve. The purpose of this workshop is to discuss these recent results and identify common principles of spatial brain dynamics.

Among mammals, excellent color vision has evolved only in certain non-human primates. And yet, color is often assumed to be just a low-level stimulus feature with a modest role in encoding and recognizing objects. The rationale for this dogma is compelling: object recognition is excellent in grayscale images (consider black-and-white movies, where faces, places, objects, and story are readily apparent). In my talk I will discuss experiments in which we used color as a tool to uncover an organizational plan in inferior temporal cortex (parallel, multistage processing for places, faces, colors, and objects) and a visual-stimulus functional representation in prefrontal cortex (PFC). The discovery of an extensive network of color-biased domains within IT and PFC, regions implicated in high-level object vision and executive functions, compels a re-evaluation of the role of color in behavior. I will discuss behavioral studies prompted by the neurobiology that uncover a universal principle for color categorization across languages, the first systematic study of the color statistics of objects and a chromatic mechanism by which the brain may compute animacy, and a surprising paradoxical impact of memory on face color. Taken together, my talk will put forward the argument that color is not primarily for object recognition, but rather for the assessment of the likely behavioral relevance, or meaning, of the stuff we see.

Though the term has many definitions, computational neuroscience is mainly about applying mathematics to the study of the brain. The brain—a jumble of all different kinds of neurons interconnected in countless ways that somehow produce consciousness—has been described as “the most complex object in the known universe”. Physicists for centuries have turned to mathematics to properly explain some of the most seemingly simple processes in the universe—how objects fall, how water flows, how the planets move. Equations have proved crucial in these endeavors because they capture relationships and make precise predictions possible. How could we expect to understand the most complex object in the universe without turning to mathematics? — The answer is we can’t, and that is why I wrote this book. While I’ve been studying and working in the field for over a decade, most people I encounter have no idea what “computational neuroscience” is or that it even exists. Yet a desire to understand how the brain works is a common and very human interest. I wrote this book to let people in on the ways in which the brain will ultimately be understood: through mathematical and computational theories. — At the same time, I know that both mathematics and brain science are on their own intimidating topics to the average reader and may seem downright prohibitory when put together. That is why I’ve avoided (many) equations in the book and focused instead on the driving reasons why scientists have turned to mathematical modeling, what these models have taught us about the brain, and how some surprising interactions between biologists, physicists, mathematicians, and engineers over centuries have laid the groundwork for the future of neuroscience. — Each chapter of Models of the Mind covers a separate topic in neuroscience, starting from individual neurons themselves and building up to the different populations of neurons and brain regions that support memory, vision, movement and more. These chapters document the history of how mathematics has woven its way into biology and the exciting advances this collaboration has in store.

We have long known that rod and cone signals interact within the retina and can even contribute to color vision, but the extent of these influences has remained unclear. New results with more powerful methods of RNA expression profiling, specific cell labeling, and single-cell recording have provided greater clarity and are showing that rod and cone signals can mix at virtually every level of signal processing. These interactions influence the integration of retinal signals and make an important contribution to visual perception.

Though studies show that abuse, neglect or trauma during childhood can lead to lifelong lifelong struggles including in mental health, research also indicates that solutions and interventions at various stages of life can be developed to help. And while many people manage to remain resilient, a lack of opportunity early in life, including because of poverty and systemic racism, can constrain their ability to realize their full potential. In what ways are health and other outcomes affected? How can systems instead restore opportunity? "The Picower Institute for Learning and Memory's biennial spring symposium, 'Early Life Stress & Mental Health,' will examine these issues. The daylong event will feature talks by neuroscientists, policy experts, physicians, educators and activists as they discuss how our experiences and biology work together to affect how our minds develop and what can be accomplished in helping people overcome early disadvantages.

Over the last fifteen years, Simona Ginsburg and I developed an evolutionary approach for studying basic consciousness, suggesting that the evolution of learning drove the evolutionary transition to from non-conscious to conscious animals. I present the rationale underlying this thesis, which has led to the identification of a capacity that we call the evolutionary transition marker, which, when we find evidence of it, we have evidence that the major evolutionary transition in which we are interested has gone to completion. I then put forward our proposal that the evolutionary marker of basic consciousness is a complex form of associative learning that we call unlimited associative learning (UAL), and that the evolution of this capacity drove the transition to consciousness. I discuss the implications of this thesis for questions pertaining to the neural dynamics that constitute conscious, to its taxonomic distribution and to the ecological context in which it first emerged. I end by pointing to some of the ways in which the relationship between UAL and consciousness can be experimentally tested in humans and in non-human animals.

Dr. Aixa V. Morales has been working for more than 20 years in the field of Developmental Biology and from 2005, she is the PI of the laboratory on “Molecular Control of Neurogenesis” at Cajal Institute. Along these years, she has contributed to understanding the control of neurogenesis during development, the dorsoventral specification of neural progenitors, and the temporal control of the migration of neural crest cells. More recently, her lab interest moved towards understanding modulation of adult neurogenesis. Her lab current interest is the control of quiescence, as a mechanism of long-term neural stem cell maintenance in adult niches.

Claude Desplan is a Silver Professor of Biology and Neuroscience at NYU. He was born in Algeria and was trained at Ecole Normale Supérieure St. Cloud, France. He received his DSc at INSERM in Paris in 1983 and joined Pat O’Farrell at UCSF as a postdoc. There he demonstrated that the homeodomain, a conserved signature of many developmental genes, is a DNA binding motif. Currently, Dr. Desplan works at NYU where he investigates the generation of neural diversity using the Drosophila visual system.

Biological neural networks can represent information in the collective action potential discharge of neurons, and store that information amongst the synaptic connections between the neurons that both comprise the network and govern its function. The strength and organization of synaptic connections adjust during learning, but many cognitive neural systems are multifunctional, making it unclear how continuous activity alternates between the transient and discrete cognitive functions like encoding current information and recollecting past information, without changing the connections amongst the neurons. This lecture will first summarize our investigations of the molecular and biochemical mechanisms that change synaptic function to persistently store spatial memory in the rodent hippocampus. I will then report on how entorhinal cortex-hippocampus circuit function changes during cognitive training that creates memory, as well as learning to learn in mice. I will then describe how the hippocampus system operates like a competitive winner-take-all network, that, based on the dominance of its current inputs, self organizes into either the encoding or recollection information processing modes. We find no evidence that distinct cells are dedicated to those two distinct functions, rather activation of the hippocampus information processing mode is controlled by a subset of dentate spike events within the network of learning-modified, entorhinal-hippocampus excitatory and inhibitory synapses.

Biological neural networks can represent information in the collective action potential discharge of neurons, and store that information amongst the synaptic connections between the neurons that both comprise the network and govern its function. The strength and organization of synaptic connections adjust during learning, but many cognitive neural systems are multifunctional, making it unclear how continuous activity alternates between the transient and discrete cognitive functions like encoding current information and recollecting past information, without changing the connections amongst the neurons. This lecture will first summarize our investigations of the molecular and biochemical mechanisms that change synaptic function to persistently store spatial memory in the rodent hippocampus. I will then report on how entorhinal cortex-hippocampus circuit function changes during cognitive training that creates memory, as well as learning to learn in mice. I will then describe how the hippocampus system operates like a competitive winner-take-all network, that, based on the dominance of its current inputs, self organizes into either the encoding or recollection information processing modes. We find no evidence that distinct cells are dedicated to those two distinct functions, rather activation of the hippocampus information processing mode is controlled by a subset of dentate spike events within the network of learning-modified, entorhinal-hippocampus excitatory and inhibitory synapses.

The ability to simultaneously record the activity from tens to thousands and maybe even tens of thousands of neurons has allowed us to analyze the computational role of population activity as opposed to single neuron activity. Recent work on a variety of cortical areas suggests that neural function may be built on the activation of population-wide activity patterns, the neural modes, rather than on the independent modulation of individual neural activity. These neural modes, the dominant covariation patterns within the neural population, define a low dimensional neural manifold that captures most of the variance in the recorded neural activity. We refer to the time-dependent activation of the neural modes as their latent dynamics, and argue that latent cortical dynamics within the manifold are the fundamental and stable building blocks of neural population activity.

Neuroscientists believe that perception, action and cognition arise from brain’s activity. A major challenge in neuroscience is to understand how brain’s complex circuits give rise to activity patterns that support these different functions. I will discuss different ways of mapping neural circuits in the brain, and how we can relate the structure of neural circuits to the computations that take place within them, with an emphasis on the visual system.