Closing the gap between mind and brain with the dynamic connectome.
Closing the gap between mind and brain with the dynamic connectome.
复制标题
通过动态连接组缩小思想和大脑之间的差距。
DOI：
10.1073/pnas.2005329117
复制
发表时间：
2020
影响因子：
11.1
通讯作者：
Quian Quiroga R
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Quian Quiroga R
在17世纪科学革命的巅峰时期，现代哲学之父笛卡尔发表了他的不朽著作《第一哲学沉思录》(1)，在书中他提出了灵魂和身体的划分——心灵和大脑——前者负责我们的思想和有意识的决定（res cogitans），后者通过机械行为（res extensa）来执行它们。如今的科学家们已经脱离了笛卡尔的二元论，主要信奉唯物主义，认为精神和大脑是一回事：精神不是控制我们思想的无形实体，而是神经元的活动，神经元连接和形成回路的方式决定了我们的行为。在20世纪40年代末，Donald Hebb(2)描述了一种自然机制，通过这种机制，神经元之间的连接可以被改变以编码新的经验，几十年后，这种机制在非常有影响力的Hopfield神经网络(3)中得以实现，通过更新节点之间的权重来存储不同的记忆。因此，似乎神经元之间的结构连接，被称为“连接体”(4)，决定了行为。然而，尽管结构连接应该明确地约束大脑功能，但行为的巨大丰富性不能仅仅归结为物理连接，在特定时间发生的“功能连接”是依赖于上下文和状态的(5)。此外，神经调节剂调节神经节律，并在调节功能连接中发挥关键作用(6)。在这个框架内，Kringelbach等人(7)在PNAS上的研究展示了如何将结构解剖连接与神经调节系统的动力学整合到一个“动态连接组”中。如果行为完全是由大脑的结构连接决定的，那么对于给定的刺激，我们总是会得到完全相同的反应。然而，事实远非如此。特别是，模糊感知提供了一个很好的例子，说明大脑如何对相同的感觉做出不同的反应
At the pinnacle of the 17th century scientific revolution, René Descartes, the father of modern philosophy, published his monumental Meditations on First Philosophy (1), in which he proposed a division between soul and body—mind and brain—with the former in charge of our thoughts and conscious decisions (res cogitans) and the latter executing them through mechanical acts (res extensa). Scientists nowadays have departed from Cartesian dualism and mainly embrace materialism, the notion that mind and brain are one and the same thing: The mind is not an intangible entity in charge of our thoughts, but, rather, the activity of neurons, and the way neurons connect and form circuits determine our behavior. In the late 1940s, Donald Hebb (2) described a natural mechanism by which the connection between neurons can be changed to encode new experiences, something that was, a few decades later, implemented in the very influential Hopfield neural networks (3), updating the weights between nodes to store different memories. So, it seems that the structural connectivity between neurons, what has been named the “connectome”(4), determines behavior. However, although structural connectivity should clearly constrain brain function, the vast richness of behavior cannot merely be reduced to physical connections, and the “functional connectivity” taking place at a particular time is context and state dependent (5). Furthermore, neuromodulators regulate neural rhythms and should play a key role in modulating functional connectivity (6). Within this framework, the study by Kringelbach et al.(7) in PNAS shows how to integrate the structural anatomical connectivity with the dynamics of neuromodulatory systems into a “dynamic connectome.” If behavior were solely determined by the structural connectivity of the brain, we would always obtain exactly the same response to a given stimulus. However, this is far from being the case. In particular, ambiguous percepts provide an excellent example of how the brain can react differently to the same sensory