Scientists at the Weizmann Institute of Science recently showed that the neural coding in the brains of primates became more efficient - but at the same time became less immune to errors. The researchers hypothesize that these findings may explain a tendency to various types of psychopathology in humans - from attention disorders, anxiety and depression to autism. These findings were published in the scientific journal Cell
Since their invention in the 18th century, washing machines have operated according to the same basic principle: a drum that rotates quickly and allows washing and wringing of clothes. Over the years, various functions have been added to these machines - from washing programs for delicate clothes to Internet connection - but their lifespan has only shortened, the amount of malfunctions has increased and maintenance has become more expensive. Like the industrial evolution of washing machines and many other products, did biological evolution also create a complex and sophisticated human brain, but more exposed to defects and breakdowns? Scientists at the Weizmann Institute of Science recently showed that the neural coding in the brains of primates became more efficient - but at the same time became less immune to errors. The researchers hypothesize that these findings may explain a tendency to various types of psychopathology in humans - from attention disorders, anxiety and depression to autism. These findings were published in the scientific journal Cell.
It is known that the prefrontal cortex of humans is larger and contains more neurons than the cerebral cortex of other primates. In the research group of Prof. Roni Paz from the Department of Neurobiology, they hypothesized that apart from these anatomical differences, there are also differences in neural coding. "We know that there are differences in 'hardware', meaning anatomical differences in the brain between different species, but until now we have not been able to say if there are also differences in 'software' - in the way the nerve cells communicate and encode information," says Prof. Paz.
To test the hypothesis, Raviv Prilok, a research student in Prof. Paz's group, developed a test to measure the efficiency of the neural code, testing how much information a single nerve cell can transmit. "Effective communication is one that uses as little energy as possible to convey a complex message as possible; To convey a complex message in as few words as possible", explains Prilok. "Accordingly, the index we developed tests the efficiency of the coding and transmission of electrical signals in a nerve cell." Later, the researchers recorded the brain activity in humans and macaque monkeys in two areas - in the prefrontal cortex which is responsible for higher functions that enable decision-making and rational thinking, and in the amygdala - an earlier evolutionary area responsible for survival and emotional reactions. The measurement of brain activity in humans was made possible thanks to a collaboration with Prof. Yitzhak Fried, a brain surgeon at the Sourasky (Ichilov) Tel Aviv Medical Center and the Ronald Reagan University of California Medical Center in Los Angeles. Says Prof. Fried: "The research is based on rare recordings from the human brain obtained from patients who are awake and functioning in special medical conditions that require the insertion of electrodes deep into the brain." Dr. Hagar Galbard-Shagiv from Tel Aviv University and Dr. Yoav Kafir, then a research student in Prof. Paz's group, also participated in the study.
The researchers found that the neural coding in the prefrontal cortex is more efficient than in the earlier brain region, the amygdala, in both humans and monkeys. Also the neural coding in both brain areas in humans was more efficient than in these areas in monkeys. However, the researchers found that the higher the efficiency of the neural code, the lower the immunity to errors. For example, the neural code in the amygdala in monkeys was more error-proof than in humans. "The amygdala is responsible for survival. Like the washing machine of old, it doesn't have to be super sophisticated, but it can't make mistakes and it can't fail to detect threats. When she sees a lion, she needs to know it's a lion and convey the message quickly and powerfully," explains Prof. Paz. "If the neural code in the amygdala in humans is more prone to errors, survival reactions may arise even to situations that are not life-threatening - similar to what we know, for example, from anxiety disorders and post-traumatic stress disorder." The amygdala and its connections with other brain areas are indeed known to be central players in various types of psychopathology. Is this the price we pay for the sophistication and creativity of the human mind?
Evolution tried to produce a more efficient system and paid for it with a system less immune to mistakes"
"Seemingly, it would be possible to design a system that is both immune and efficient," says Prilock, "but it is possible that in a complex multidimensional system like the brain, a zero-sum game between efficiency and immunity is inevitable. Evolution tried to produce a more efficient system and paid for it with a system that is less immune to mistakes." In future studies, the scientists are expected to test not only the information transmission potential of the nerve cells, but also the actual transmission of information in different situations. To this end, they plan to test the neural coding in the different areas while doing different types of learning tasks, with an emphasis on model behaviors for different psychiatric disorders. Says Prof. Fried: "The opportunity to compare records at the single nerve cell level between humans and monkeys is a breakthrough in our ability to explore the uniqueness of the human brain." Prof. Paz adds: "A basic question in evolution, in neuroscience, in psychology and in other scientific disciplines, is what is human allowed from other primates?" Why, on the one hand, do humans have enhanced cognitive abilities and abilities to learn and adapt to new environments, and on the other hand are prone to anxiety disorders, depression and other mental disorders? In this study we showed that these may be two sides of the same coin."
16 תגובות
Since the complexity of life and its purpose have not yet been deciphered, there is no reason to decide that these mistakes *do not* serve an unknown purpose...
There is probably a purpose for everything, since the chemical efficiency levels of the cell are 50% - above and beyond any human machine or chemical process that has been discovered or developed.
The level of information processing embodied in cells and biochemistry is another type of information, a unique anti-entropy that we call 'life' (perhaps its exact definition), and therefore deserves to be examined as such.
Lior
I think the opposite. Animals usually fight for food, mates, food and living space - things they must in order to survive.
Most of the human wars today are about honor, territories that we don't need, religion, as a way of demeaning opinions about others - and not for the purpose of survival.
Reader Yehuda Elide writes
Evolution is not a zero sum game and errors can also have a positive value
In biology there is a positive Fitness value even for certain errors. In fact, what we call creativity, or "thinking outside the box" is an error in relation to the way of thinking that evolution prefers by default. Just as certain mutations are responsible for the development of new physiological traits that are useful for the survival of the "abnormals" - a paradoxical deviation from the main goal of genetics, which is the preservation of the existing without change - and by the way, variants with inherently better survival potential are created when environmental constraints require adaptation. In this way, physiological "errors" in the functioning of the nerves open up new logical pathways in the cognitive response, which on rare occasions create an innovative "ex-machina" solution, which is not taught in the traditional study patterns. In fact, the "man allowed" is a rare case of a "supermutation" that succeeded "against all odds", from the point of view of a healthy monkey. Because for him, it's a shame for all the energy wasted on a brain that's too big, that doesn't bring any residual benefit by supporting an unnecessary neural infrastructure, the one with which Grisha Perlman was able to prove the Poincaré hypothesis. Energy that evolution would have preferred instead to devote to developing improved fitness for climbing jungle trees (or "ninja" obstacles) - or at least to survive in the "Big Brother" house.
Hello science site. It seems to me that your title "Scientists of the Weizmann Institute found what is special about the human brain", is very, very exaggerated, and not appropriate for a website that publishes scientific material, in which accuracy is very important.
Thanks and all the best
When expressing information in a concentrated way using a dedicated language, for example, mathematics, then a small error, like "-" instead of "+", will cause big mistakes.
Hence, as the efficiency increases, the possible errors will increase.
This is a logical conclusion that does not derive from experiment or evolution.
-
It is necessary to point out that causing psychiatric disorders to monkeys raises the serious fear of psychiatric disorders among researchers.
Efficiency does not mean complexity. And the opposite is also true.
It seems that in fact these are two opposites.
From the ability of a cell to transmit more and more diverse messages (partly, because of the connections with other cells), in a given period of time (a more correct definition of complexity), it is not possible to conclude about its energy utilization. Reason suggests that the ability of humans will be more complex and less efficient. Therefore it seems that the conclusion-assumption regarding evolution is wrong.
But more than that. It seems that the aforementioned complexity is what allows humans to make diagnoses that animals are not capable of. This is why certain animals do not understand that they are looking in a mirror, that dogs bark on Independence Day, that certain birds will treat oval stones as their eggs, etc. Therefore, it seems that humans will be able to make a diagnosis between real fights and events that constitute a trigger for post-trauma, between social situations that justify feeling bad and those that do not, etc. In other words, with complexity should come greater immunity to error. This is also due to greater flexibility.
As in communication, "efficiency" means less information and fewer mechanisms for detecting errors.
Efficiency does not mean complexity. And the opposite is also true.
It seems that in fact these are two opposites.
From the ability of a cell to transmit more and more diverse messages (partly, because of the connections with other cells), in a given period of time (a more correct definition of complexity), it is not possible to conclude about its energy utilization. Reason suggests that the ability of humans will be more complex and less efficient. Therefore it seems that the conclusion-assumption regarding evolution is wrong.
But more than that. It seems that the aforementioned complexity is what allows humans to make diagnoses that animals are not capable of. This is why certain animals do not understand that they are looking in a mirror, that dogs bark on Independence Day, that certain birds will treat oval stones as their eggs, etc. Therefore, it seems that humans will be able to make a diagnosis between real fights and events that constitute a trigger for post-trauma, between social situations that justify feeling bad and those that do not, etc. In other words, with complexity should come greater immunity to error. This is also due to greater flexibility.
very interesting.
I came across the argument that the person can be frightened by potential pain.
This does not happen in animals.
This is a way to control people.
From the research can we conclude that it is recommended to lower the "brain speed" in order to lower errors? i.e. thc?
"You will add knowledge - you will add from pain..."
Phrases like evolution chose, as if it has consciousness and awareness are problematic and misleading. A system with high energy efficiency with errors in pre-frontal areas should be written in a more survival-efficient style, than determinations with immunity to errors. So questions that were not channeled simply did not survive.
And here it is necessary to explain what functionally it gave to the extent that those who did not go in this direction did not survive.
Experiments on monkeys? Immoral and shocking!
As it is said: "man is allowed" in quantity not in quality...
I ask again, after being censored
Once:
The article is based on the assumption
that psychopathologies are common
less in primates than
in humans.
Is there any evidence for this?
The researchers assume that primates
There are fewer psychopathological disorders.
Is there any evidence for this assumption?
Interesting idea. What was not presented in the discussion on the science website is a hint of the method. Sticking an electrode in the brain is not the method. Which electrode, what does it test and how, what is the method developed for evaluating efficiency and how are errors quantified. All these are reports that scholars of the Hebrew language are thirsty for. High-quality popular science takes care to provide scientific details beyond the framework story. Within reasonable limits and at the level of a 12-year-old child perhaps. The very curious type but with few tools to understand complicated mechanisms