Toggle light / dark theme

Brain keeps familiar routes intact as new experiences get layered on top, study suggests

Every time we move through a familiar environment, the hippocampus consults an internal map, a detailed spatial representation built up through repeated experience. But what happens when something unexpected occurs on a well-known route? Researchers at the University Hospital Bonn (UKB) and the University of Bonn demonstrated in a mouse model that the brain does not redraw its maps from scratch. Instead, it annotates them, preserving the underlying spatial layout while overlaying new information on top of the existing map. The paper is published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The hippocampus, the brain’s working memory, is shaped like a seahorse and is located in the temporal lobe of both the left and right hemispheres. Hippocampal CA3 circuits, which link information and support the recognition of memories, keep their spatial maps stable while layering new annotations on top, much like a navigation app that preserves your route while flagging an incident ahead.

A Bonn-based research team arrived at these findings by recording the activity of CA3 axons in mice traversing a familiar linear running route. At a fixed point along the route, the scientists introduced a mildly aversive but harmless air puff stimulus, comparable to an unexpected obstacle on a road, and tracked how the hippocampal network updated its representation before, during and after the event.

Scientists Revived Activity in a Disembodied Human Brain

Further Reading.

Thumbnail image credit: Not alive, but not dead… FEATURED SCIENCE ARTICLE.
MRI image: Britannica: brain.
anatomy.

Not alive, but not dead: disembodied human brains used for drug testing.
https://www.science.org/content/artic

Restoration of brain circulation and cellular functions hours.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30996

Science #explained #brains #organoid #sciencenews

Frontiers: For nearly a decade, the idea that ‘the body keeps the score’ has shaped public and clinical understanding of trauma (van der Kolk, 2014)

It is an enticing metaphor—implying that experience is literally inscribed in flesh, that the body bears the scars of what the mind cannot face. Yet recent advances in computational and systems neuroscience reveal that this image, while emotionally compelling, is biologically inaccurate. The body proper does not store trauma; the brain dynamically reenacts it through maladaptive inference. What endures after trauma is not a memory lodged in non-innervated tissue but a collapse of flexibility—a loss of metastability, the brain’s ability to fluidly switch among semi-stable network states.

In computational terms, trauma over-weights the precision of danger priors: the brain assigns excessive confidence to threat predictions, constraining inference based on the prior premise of enduring danger. The result is hypervigilance, flashbacks, and avoidance—symptoms of a system caught in self-confirming predictions. Mathematically, this overconfidence means one cannot escape local minima—in a free energy landscape—that become deeply and precisely engrained (i.e., trapped in a ravine with steep sides, where precision corresponds to the local curvature or steepness).

This rigidity contrasts with a healthy brain’s metastable dynamics, where neuronal networks continually integrate and segregate in response to context. This allows neuronal dynamics to explore multiple (unstable) interpretations of the world. Hellyer and colleagues demonstrated that metastability is a hallmark of cognitive flexibility: the capacity for neural coalitions to assemble transiently and adapt quickly. Using both empirical and computational approaches, Hellyer et al. (2015) showed that reduced metastability arising from damage to the structural connectome was associated with diminished cognitive flexibility and impaired information processing. Trauma erodes this fluidity, trapping the brain in narrow basins of fear and defensive salience. To restore mental health is not about ‘releasing’ stored emotion but reestablishing dynamic equilibrium enabling the brain’s ability to move with graceful agility over a landscape of beliefs, commitments and intentions.

Third electrode pair can sharpen deep brain stimulation technique, mouse experiments suggest

A study by UNIGE, in collaboration with ETH Zurich, has significantly improved the accuracy of a noninvasive brain stimulation technique, paving the way for its use in the treatment of neurological and psychiatric disorders.

Brain stimulation techniques can correct abnormal activity in the neural circuits involved in conditions such as Parkinson’s disease and depression. However, current transcranial stimulation methods delivered through the scalp reach only the brain’s surface, limiting their effectiveness. Deep brain stimulation, on the other hand, can target deeper structures but requires surgical implantation of electrodes.

A team from the Synapsy Center for Neuroscience and Mental Health Research at the University of Geneva (UNIGE), in collaboration with ETH Zurich, the Wyss Center Geneva and EPFL, has improved a promising intermediate technology called “temporal interference stimulation.” This method could allow deeper and more targeted noninvasive brain stimulation. The study is published in Cell Systems.

China Just Beat Elon Musk With A Chip Inside The Human Brain

🔒 Stay private online with NordVPN →
https://go.nordvpn.net/SHBMd.

Beat censorship and tracking. 30-day money-back guarantee.

Affiliate link — I earn a small commission at no cost to you.

A major new development in brain-computer technology is raising eyebrows across the tech world. While Elon Musk’s Neuralink has dominated headlines for years, a breakthrough emerging from China is now sparking fresh debate about who is really leading the race to connect the human brain with advanced computing systems.

In this video, we take a closer look at the latest brain-chip innovation, what makes it different from existing neural interface projects, and why experts are paying close attention. As competition intensifies between global technology powers, advances in neural implants could reshape medicine, communication, and even the future relationship between humans and machines.

Could this new achievement challenge Neuralink’s position at the center of the brain-tech conversation? And what does it mean for the future of artificial intelligence, neuroscience, and human enhancement? The implications may be far bigger than many people realize.

/* */