October 18, 2010

Open questions in neuroscience

The Allen Brain Institute (or is it in-situte?) has posted a nice series of video lectures from a few weeks ago with well-known scientists (George Church, Steve Smith, Christof Koch, Sydney Brenner, Catherine Dulac and others). The topic was a broad one — “What are the open questions in neuroscience?” — but one that is sure to be of interest to many who are trying to understand what the most important areas in neuroscience to work on (like those of us, for example, currently figuring out a postdoc project!) Click here for the full set of videos on YouTube.

READ MORE: Conferences, Discussion

September 26, 2010

Why Tononi is wrong

In a recent NY Times article, Tononi chooses to propose a rather sketchily-described “Shannon informational” model to supplant a gamma synchrony model partly on these grounds;

“Dr. Tononi sees serious problems in these models. When people lose consciousness from epileptic seizures, for instance, their brain waves become more synchronized. If synchronization were the key to consciousness, you would expect the seizures to make people hyperconscious instead of unconscious, he said. “

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/21/science/21consciousness.html?_r=1

Read on »

READ MORE: Cognitive science

September 9, 2010

Inter-Brain Synchronization during Social Interaction

Guillaume Dumas, Jacqueline Nadel, Robert Soussignan, Jacques Martinerie, Line Garnero. PLoS ONE: Inter-Brain Synchronization during Social Interaction.

Ulman Lindenberger, Shu-Chen Li, Walter Gruber and Viktor Müller. Brains swinging in concert: cortical phase synchronization while playing guitar

Read on »


September 6, 2010

NYT article on study habits research

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/07/health/views/07mind.html

Basically, all of the following improve recall:

  • spacing out study time over a longer period of time
  • alternating between multiple topics in one study session
  • studying the same thing in different locations
  • taking a test

In summary, recalling and using knowledge in a variety of contexts helps you remember it.

READ MORE: Cognitive science

September 3, 2010

Re-examining neurosexism

My dad brought this interesting book review to my attention: Peeling Away Theories on Gender and the Brain (NYT)

In her book Delusions of Gender (which I have not read though am intrigued to do so), cognitive neuroscientist Cordelia Fine places several modern studies of early differences in brain anatomy/function into a long line of sexist explanations for supposed differences in male and female behaviors.

The basic argument is that there has been no convincing connection made between any measured structural differences (which she argues might not exist) to behavioral differences. Just another case of correlation (maybe) and not causation.

Here’s a description of study that you might already be familiar with and Fine’s take on it:

Dr. Baron-Cohen’s lab conducted research on infants who averaged a day and a half old, before any unconscious parental gender priming. Jennifer Connellan, one of Dr. Baron-Cohen’s graduate students, who conducted the study, showed mobiles and then her own face to the infants. The results showed that among the newborns the boys tended to look longer at mobiles, the girls at faces.

Dr. Fine dismantles the study, citing, among other design flaws, the fact that Ms. Connellan knew the sex of some of the babies. Because it was her face they were looking at and she was holding up the mobile, Dr. Fine says, she may have “inadvertently moved the mobile more when she held it up for boys, or looked more directly, or with wider eyes, for the girls.”

Although I am unsure about the scientific merits, it is refreshing to see a new viewpoint in this debate. It provides some food for thought on this interesting topic:

Summarizing the research, she writes, “Nonexistent sex differences in language lateralization, mediated by nonexistent sex differences in corpus callosum structure, are widely believed to explain nonexistent sex differences in language skills.”

What all this adds up to, she says, is neurosexism. It’s all in the brain.


August 31, 2010

Journal of Neuroscience eliminates supplemental material

The Journal of Neuroscience is eliminating supplemental material.

This is a big step backwards and I don’t understand the reason for it. Now that there is no technical or economic reason not to, we need to be encouraging scientists to publish their raw data (in fact, I think that this should be a requirement of publication).

Read on »


July 13, 2010

LabRigger: New blog for neuroscientist-engineers

Today one of our readers brought a new blog to my attention.

LabRigger is a how-to blog with a fresh look (kudos for the design and typography) that already has many interesting and relevant posts up for scientists who like to build. (You know who you are…) Furthermore, it seems especially geared toward neuroscientists and physiology folks. I’ve already added this one to my browser’s bookmarks.

Here are some of my favorites from quickly perusing the site: Printable bolt size charts, Tips on intrinsic optical imaging, Comparison of high NA, low mag objectives, and my favorite, Catalogs as textbooks. (I still remember a neuroscience faculty member here at MIT who told me that he brings science catalogs along on his vacations as “leisure reading” to stay up-to-date on new tools and to generate ideas for experiments.) In fact, I wanted to read just about every post on this blog and I think you will too! And if you’re the author of this blog, please introduce yourself in the comments, too.


June 28, 2010

NeuronBank

http://neuronbank.org/

A catalog of identified neurons, the circuits they form, and inter-species homologies.

READ MORE: Uncategorized

June 23, 2010

The Third Reviewer


Neuroscientists love talking about recent papers (lambasting, exalting), but currently the options for doing this online are bad. You have to log in, with your real name, at whichever journal published the paper. So you’re not going to write anything critical, lest the author be angry at you, nor are you going to go back and follow it up, because it’s such a hassle to find the paper again on the journal site. Enter The Third Reviewer.

It’s a centralized commenting location for all major neuroscience papers. Every recently published paper has a page that you can find by browsing or searching. You can leave comments anonymously, and you can request follow-up emails when others comment. ThirdReviewer currently indexes all papers from 11 major journals, including Neuron, Nature, J Neurosci, and Nature Neuroscience.

Check it out and opine: The Third Reviewer


June 16, 2010

I.B.M. building A.I. to play Jeopardy

NYTimes: I.B.M.’s Supercomputer Challenges ‘Jeopardy!’ Champions – NYTimes.com

IBM is building a massive question answering A.I., named “Watson”, that is going to play on Jeopardy in the fall.


contact us

Neurodudes is moderated by Neville Sanjana, Bayle Shanks, and Stephen Larson. Comments that you post might be delayed so that we can tell our software that it's not spam -- however, not all comments are pre-screened so don't assume that we have read them, either. Any money we make off this site is used to pay for hosting, or given to charity; if in the future we pay contributors, we will include reader-authors. None of us are medical doctors so please don't ask for medical advice. Contact us here.