3 ms·

> 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 p

> 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 4y 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 4y 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
  - SemanticStrengh 4y ago
    it's useful and yet understanding how brain works precisely require better instruments and datasets hence the understanding of the brain is not bottlenecked on infinite complexity but before anything, on good old metrology. Q.E.D oh yeah well done completely avoiding the PNS question, so according to you neurons in the tail are relevant to worm cognition? spoiler except for tail local stimulus (e.g. tactile, heat) I doubt it
    - andbberger 4y ago
      QED is something you write after proofs not incomprehensible sentences. there is a compelling argument to be made that what neuroscience is missing is theory, not data. there is quite a lot of data. i am dissappointed, although not surprised that someone who relies on appeals to authority when arguing a point is of the mindset that in an organism so finely optimized that it uses biomechanical feedback in gait generation where larger organisms use central pattern generations involving larger number of neurons that some neurons are more important than others. neurons are expensive. guess you had better read some more papers.
      - SemanticStrengh 4y ago
        I will plainly repeat my citation from the previous c.elegans paper ""the inability to reliably identify all neurons within whole-brain recordings has precluded a full picture with circuit-level details."" and the lack of glutamate receptors mapping. Those are sufficent to asses we are bottlenecked on data. We lack theories especially because we lack data. Yes of course we have a lot of data, which is useless without a complete picture. try debbugging a complex software with only partial, limited logging, the task become easily intractable. But it seems you are more interested in a clash than in sharing knowledge. My argumentation is sound and valid, which make it cogent, authority is unecessary to come to an agreement.

SemanticStrengh 4y 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 4y 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
- SemanticStrengh 4y ago
  it's useful and yet understanding how brain works precisely require better instruments and datasets hence the understanding of the brain is not bottlenecked on infinite complexity but before anything, on good old metrology. Q.E.D oh yeah well done completely avoiding the PNS question, so according to you neurons in the tail are relevant to worm cognition? spoiler except for tail local stimulus (e.g. tactile, heat) I doubt it
  - andbberger 4y ago
    QED is something you write after proofs not incomprehensible sentences. there is a compelling argument to be made that what neuroscience is missing is theory, not data. there is quite a lot of data. i am dissappointed, although not surprised that someone who relies on appeals to authority when arguing a point is of the mindset that in an organism so finely optimized that it uses biomechanical feedback in gait generation where larger organisms use central pattern generations involving larger number of neurons that some neurons are more important than others. neurons are expensive. guess you had better read some more papers.
    - SemanticStrengh 4y ago
      I will plainly repeat my citation from the previous c.elegans paper ""the inability to reliably identify all neurons within whole-brain recordings has precluded a full picture with circuit-level details."" and the lack of glutamate receptors mapping. Those are sufficent to asses we are bottlenecked on data. We lack theories especially because we lack data. Yes of course we have a lot of data, which is useless without a complete picture. try debbugging a complex software with only partial, limited logging, the task become easily intractable. But it seems you are more interested in a clash than in sharing knowledge. My argumentation is sound and valid, which make it cogent, authority is unecessary to come to an agreement.