3 ms·

What an absurd dismissal. > they're not interesting You have a failure of appreciation, yet those facts are potent and surprising. >constructive to a larger u

What an absurd dismissal. > they're not interesting You have a failure of appreciation, yet those facts are potent and surprising. >constructive to a larger understanding Yes they are not, who cares? Teaching neuroscience is of course a non-goal of my comment, what an irrelevant thing to say.. >analogizing the cerebellum to a GPU is naive and misleading to the point of being insulting. Exactly, but if you had allocated a few neurons while reading my comment you would have seen I said "a poor simplist-ification" akin to only transmitting the idea that it is the place in the brain with the most compute power/parallelism. >working neuroscientist don't think about consciousness, we look at neurobiology, Such a useless thing to say. It is a truism that scientists mostly focus on what can be studied by the means of metrology/empiricism and indeed for now, qualias are low-studiable. Saying this has no more value than saying water is wet. Your shallow dismissal is just a pretext to your layman explanation of what is the brain. Explanation with btw zero level of detail. I have read over 1000 papers in neuropharmacology and there are in facts a lot of things we understand about brains. But, the C.elegans ~150-300 neurons, which is much simpler than the fruit flies, is as of now unexplained in terms of neural code, despite having an almost complete connectome of its neuroreceptors. But no the C.elgans is not one of the most complex thing in the universe. This is a fallacy that make seems progress seems impossible. The truth is, C.elgans has a relatively reasonable complexity, however we lack real-time datasets and we lack accurate instruments to observe and retroengineer the while system.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
andbberger 5y ago
> we lack real-time datasets and we lack accurate instruments to observe and retroengineer the while system. wrong again. whole brain 2p imaging is routinely performed in c elegans ( and drosophila for that matter) for a number of years now. in fact whole brain ephys in c elegans is feasible, although it would be an experimental tour de force. c elegans does not have '~150-300 neurons', it has precisely 302, and the complexity therein cannot be underestimated. it wasn't a layman explanation for I am not a layman, and you are missing my point, which is that reductive facts about such staggeringly complex things are neither interesting or useful. it's the feynman magnet explanation, but grumpier
- SemanticStrengh 5y ago
  Come on, who do you think you are talking with? I have read many papers about C.elegans and my claims are backed up: "the inability to reliably identify all neurons within whole-brain recordings has precluded a full picture with circuit-level details." "we expect our work to aid in these endeavors (Bargmann and Marder, 2013; Brennan and Proekt, 2019; Kaplan et al., 2020; Kato et al., 2015). A richer set of network responses, even for simple chemosensory inputs, has broad relevance in understanding sensorimotor processing" "The application of NeuroPAL to whole-nervous-system activity recording is mainly limited by nuclear localization of the GCaMP activity sensor, as this may fail to capture highly localized events in axodendritic compartments. This limitation, combined with potentially incomplete or variable anatomical synaptic annotations, may have contributed to the lack of correlation we observed between functional activity and synaptic connectivity." Neuropal is an extremely recent advance (2021) https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(20)31682-2?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS0092867420316822%3Fshowall%3Dtrue https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(20)31682-2?_re... it is the first to allow a complete mapping of GABA receptors (except mitochondria GABA translocator) however complete maps for other receptors, such as mGLURs, NMDA, kainate, ampa, etc are LACKING, as I said. Let alone realtime data that take into account the individual variances over multiple worms. (they should study genetic clones btw) real time data are rare, nowhere near big-data https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=B4gNamS8Ars https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=B4gNamS8Ars and when they exist, they lack the complete information (receptor locations, precise neurostransmitter density per axon, etc) C.elegans might be trivial to understand, without a complete map of axons and recpetors, it would still appear generally un-studiable. As for the 150-300 neurons it is a matter of debate. IIRC the paper I linked refer to ~150 neurons in the head, the rest would be the PNS, not the CNS. But I'm not sure of the exact CNS/PNS ratio besides this paper.
  - andbberger 5y ago
    i really couldn't care less how many papers you've read. whole brain calcium imaging is routine, no one expects it to be the whole picture. it's useful though. and no it is not a matter of debate, there are precisely 302 neurons

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

andbberger 5y ago

> we lack real-time datasets and we lack accurate instruments to observe and retroengineer the while system. wrong again. whole brain 2p imaging is routinely performed in c elegans ( and drosophila for that matter) for a number of years now. in fact whole brain ephys in c elegans is feasible, although it would be an experimental tour de force. c elegans does not have '~150-300 neurons', it has precisely 302, and the complexity therein cannot be underestimated. it wasn't a layman explanation for I am not a layman, and you are missing my point, which is that reductive facts about such staggeringly complex things are neither interesting or useful. it's the feynman magnet explanation, but grumpier

SemanticStrengh 5y ago
Come on, who do you think you are talking with? I have read many papers about C.elegans and my claims are backed up: "the inability to reliably identify all neurons within whole-brain recordings has precluded a full picture with circuit-level details." "we expect our work to aid in these endeavors (Bargmann and Marder, 2013; Brennan and Proekt, 2019; Kaplan et al., 2020; Kato et al., 2015). A richer set of network responses, even for simple chemosensory inputs, has broad relevance in understanding sensorimotor processing" "The application of NeuroPAL to whole-nervous-system activity recording is mainly limited by nuclear localization of the GCaMP activity sensor, as this may fail to capture highly localized events in axodendritic compartments. This limitation, combined with potentially incomplete or variable anatomical synaptic annotations, may have contributed to the lack of correlation we observed between functional activity and synaptic connectivity." Neuropal is an extremely recent advance (2021) https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(20)31682-2?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS0092867420316822%3Fshowall%3Dtrue https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(20)31682-2?_re... it is the first to allow a complete mapping of GABA receptors (except mitochondria GABA translocator) however complete maps for other receptors, such as mGLURs, NMDA, kainate, ampa, etc are LACKING, as I said. Let alone realtime data that take into account the individual variances over multiple worms. (they should study genetic clones btw) real time data are rare, nowhere near big-data https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=B4gNamS8Ars https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=B4gNamS8Ars and when they exist, they lack the complete information (receptor locations, precise neurostransmitter density per axon, etc) C.elegans might be trivial to understand, without a complete map of axons and recpetors, it would still appear generally un-studiable. As for the 150-300 neurons it is a matter of debate. IIRC the paper I linked refer to ~150 neurons in the head, the rest would be the PNS, not the CNS. But I'm not sure of the exact CNS/PNS ratio besides this paper.
- andbberger 5y ago
  i really couldn't care less how many papers you've read. whole brain calcium imaging is routine, no one expects it to be the whole picture. it's useful though. and no it is not a matter of debate, there are precisely 302 neurons