Always a good bet in biology that the thing we think is "junk" or "passive" or "dumb" is doing much more, we just don't understand it yet.
the experiment on "giving up" is pretty cool:
>All the while, the researchers monitored neurons and astrocytes in the zebra fish’s brain using advanced whole-brain imaging techniques. As the fish fruitlessly fought the current, neurons that release norepinephrine fired; in response, calcium built up in astrocytes. The buildup paralleled the number of attempts the fish made to fight the current, as if the astrocytes were keeping track — until at some point they issued a stop signal, and the zebra fish gave up. When Ahrens’ team disabled the astrocytes using a laser, the fish never stopped swimming. And if the astrocytes were artificially activated, the fish stopped right away.
Maybe it's in the details? The article reads as if it was longer known that astrocytes somehow modulate neurons, but not the mechanism behind it, not what exactly there is modulated and on which stimuli.
I imagine it's the difference between knowing that a layer inside an ANN "processes information" and knowing the specific semantics that this layer represents.
Always a good bet in biology that the thing we think is "junk" or "passive" or "dumb" is doing much more, we just don't understand it yet.
the experiment on "giving up" is pretty cool:
>All the while, the researchers monitored neurons and astrocytes in the zebra fish’s brain using advanced whole-brain imaging techniques. As the fish fruitlessly fought the current, neurons that release norepinephrine fired; in response, calcium built up in astrocytes. The buildup paralleled the number of attempts the fish made to fight the current, as if the astrocytes were keeping track — until at some point they issued a stop signal, and the zebra fish gave up. When Ahrens’ team disabled the astrocytes using a laser, the fish never stopped swimming. And if the astrocytes were artificially activated, the fish stopped right away.
“ New experiments reveal how astrocytes tune neuronal activity to modulate our mental and emotional states”
But it’s already known that they modulate neuronal synaptic activity, this is not new?
Maybe it's in the details? The article reads as if it was longer known that astrocytes somehow modulate neurons, but not the mechanism behind it, not what exactly there is modulated and on which stimuli.
I imagine it's the difference between knowing that a layer inside an ANN "processes information" and knowing the specific semantics that this layer represents.
Researchers also know that astrocytes are active participants in computation for some areas that have been studied (vision and also memory).
The article seems about 5 to 10 years late.