Recently I've been digesting a lot of newspaper articles and online seminar talks regarding neuroscience. Although I have known about the Connectome project which from my knowledge was given life by Sebastian Seung at MIT only recently have I seen it pop up in news articles. The idea of the Connectome parallels in many senses the various other "-omes" that are either in progress or have been completed within our lifetimes, most notably the Human Genome Project. An arduous task that took several years, and whose implications will likely not be fully felt for several more. So the question is whether or not to -"ome". Like many others I understand that it needs to get done at somepoint, but just like in the field of bioinformatics I worry about the prospect of unraveling all this information, developing novel ways to speed it up and make the data collecting more commonplace and not having the manpower to analyze it and put in layman's terms. Now for those who are not familiar with the Connectome Project, it is trying to establish a map of a human brain. In Seung's lab I believe it is being done part by brain imaging and dissection, and in large part by computational methods. If interested here is their website - http://www.humanconnectomeproject.org/. If anything just go and check out the gallery, the images are just unreal and will give you a sense of the major connections wiring certain portions of the brain together. Much of this has been possible due to Jeff Lichtman, neuroscience professor at Harvard, who first created brainbows by genetically altering neurons to express certain fluorescent colors. He cleverly placed these segments of DNA near vital proteins which varied in expression from neuron to neuron and through this was able to distinguish individual neurons by fluorescence.
This leads me into optogenetics, a fascinating new method of studying neurobiology. It incorporates the fact that our nervous system has the most diverse population of cells, and that each cell differs in the receptors, and proteins that it expresses. With gene therapy researchers are able to incorporate a transmembrane protein which can transmit electrical signals when exposed to certain wavelengths of light to the desired cells. Now those cells may be activated under the researcher's control allowing actions potentials, connections, and synaptic potentials to be studied. The research is being done in vivo in mice, I have not dived further into any dense papers that this field has published but I am skeptical about the process of being able to activate only portions of the brain. We know that the brain is constantly firing, and that its connections are immense, so if your looking to study one area of the brain in live animals how do you incorporate the activation of your area of study from different brain areas? My idea is that you would have to implement some sort of measuring device to allow you to measure potentials at least initially when the light is on and when it is off to allow you to set a baseline and ensure a difference between the two scenarios.
Optogenetics is very fascinating! I saw the TED video of Ed Boyden and learned a lot more about the theory behind his idea and his pursuit to learn more about brain signals to cure different types of brain disorders. I know that over a billion people will encounter a brain disorder (migraines, ADHD, anxiety, obesity, traumatic brain injury, etc.)in their liftetime. Ed Boyden said that these disorders can change a person's individual personality and emotions. Medication, of course, does not cure these disorders. I find it interesting that this field of study uses the proteins from alga cells because they are light sensitive, and the idea is to implant the DNA protein using a gene therapy vector into neurons. Boyden found that neurons fabricate the light sensitive protein therefore the neuron reacts to light. Having the ability to turn neuron circuits on or off using light sensitivity is a step closer to curing different types of brain disorders.
ReplyDeleteGood Read! The whole optogenetic theory is very interesting to me from a Paramedic viewpoint. I have read an interesting article http://io9.com/optogenetics/ which talks about using optogenetics to power pacemakers in people suffering with lethal heart arrhythmias using light.
ReplyDeleteOptogenetics is a highly fascinating subject especially when looking towards the future of neuroscience. With the ability to study the neurons within the brain, scientists will be able to view the brain in a new unimaginable way. As Optogenetics picks up more momentum and becomes more standard, the brain will be able to be studied not merely in sections or in blood flow, but we will be able to begin to get a clear picture of the elaborate inner workings of our minds. Studying neurons in the future will go far beyond enhancing the field of neurology and even help in new medical advances. If we can accurately study the the immense network of neurons imagine all the new research that will begin to surface!
ReplyDeleteThis is the first time that I have heard about optogenetics. It looks like this has the potential to cause an explosion in neuroscience research and we will make significant progress in understanding the brain that in ways we haven't been able to before. After taking a few classes about the brain and seeing that we just don't have the tools to push the science forward, but that is all changing now.
ReplyDeleteI am looking forward to the breakthroughs that will come from utilizing this technique.
ReplyDeleteI would like to start by saying that I had never heard of this before, but it sounds awesome. This sort of research could open a lot of doors, particularly in the area of neurodegenerative diseases. Imagine being able to see precisely which connections are lost during the progress of a disease. I share the posters skepticism, while this seems to be making progress I feel like it will be awhile before what we learn from optogenetics can be used to treat patients.
ReplyDeleteMy first thought when I heard about the Connectome was something like, "That's awesome........it's about time!" I always thought diffusion tensor imaging was crazy looking and super cool. But another thing that came to mind was....well, what about individual differences? How differently wired are two people's brains? Are they more different than they are the same? Why not? I mean, if we think that unique wiring plays a big role in our memories, personality, experiences, coping differences....the list goes on and on...., then how in the world can we make a brain wiring schematic, blueprint, or template from multiple subjects? Is there really some baseline wiring pattern (nature?) from which everyone eventually deviates (nurture?)? If so, how does studying the deviants (everyone) help find the "baseline" template? Averaging all of the "wires" of everyone may very well give you an imaginary model that might be meaningless.
ReplyDelete(There's a relevant joke I'll speed up here: A doctor, lawyer, and statistician go hunting. Doctor misses to the left. Dang! Lawyer misses to the right. Dang! Statistician does nothing and yells, we got it!)
This is a very interesting article. The complexity of the brain's macro & micro systems are perplexing yet unique in & of itself. I wonder if this would work in newly brain dead patients? New research on this would be astounding!
ReplyDelete