编者按: 脑成像与脑网络

揭示脑的奥秘是人类面临的最大挑战之一。神经元是构成神经系统结构与功能的基本单位。神经元与神经元之间通过突触实现信息交互,并构成神经环路或神经网络。神经环路有局部的,也有跨脑区或长程的,甚至全脑尺度的。神经环路则是脑实现神经信息处理的基本单元。若干神经环路构成脑网络。脑网络研究已经成为脑功能与脑疾病研究领域的热点。 在国家自然科学基金委员会和科技部“973计划”等项目的支持下,我国科学家在这一领域已经开展了卓有成效的工作。2011年第393次香山科学会议“脑网络组及其临床应用的前沿科学问题”曾对此进行过比较深入的研讨。为促进对该领域现状及发展的了解,本期汇集了2篇述评和2篇研究论文,作为脑成像与脑网络专题发表,以飨读者。 利用9.4T功能磁共振成像(fMRI)获得轻度麻醉状态下大鼠静息状态及刺激激活的数据,通过互相关分析构建节点之间的相关系数矩阵并计算相应的网络参数,赖永秀等人报道了大鼠感觉运动系统静息态脑网络的研究成果,发现感觉运动系统在静息态时的脑网络具有小世界属性。 扩散磁共振成像(dMRI)的出现为大脑结构与功能研究提供了全新的检测手段,雷皓等报道了小动物高分辨扩散磁共振成像数据分析方法,为小动物脑dMRI研究提供了统一图像模板与完善的计算方法,对于检测神经纤维微观结构的变化,以及临床诊断,将具有极其重要的意义。 神经环路功能变化的实时在体监测是研究脑网络不可或缺的手段,曾绍群等评述了基于声光偏转器的快速无惯性随机扫描双光子显微成像技术的研究进展及发展趋势,指出该技术的进一步发展将为神经活动观测提供一种全新的方法,从而极大地推动脑科学研究的发展。 针对哺乳动物全脑的神经元网络成像,龚辉等从空间分辨率、探测范围、数据配准和成像速度等方面评述了光学显微水平全脑成像方法的研究进展,并讨论所面临的挑战。他们指出,要在全脑尺度获取突起水平分辨率的结构与功能数据,光学成像方法最为成熟。华中科技大学研制的MOST系统,率先获得了一系列高分辨率的完整大脑解剖数据集,该成果将在神经元网络的构建和脑功能与疾病研究中发挥重要作用。 我们期待更多、更好的有关脑成像与脑网络的论文发表,以更广泛和深入地促进我国脑科学研究领域的学术交流。     

Brain and Mind

In the last few years great progress has been made in many fields of knowledge. Technology has moved forward with rapid strides, and with the appearance of self-regulating systems it has moved to a new stage. Significant progress has been achieved in physics and biology; new branches of medicine have been formulated and are being developed; and substantial changes have also been noted in a sphere of particular relevance and importance for each of us, in psychology, the science of man's mental life and the laws of his behavior.     

脑肿瘤及脑肿瘤图像分类的研究进展

脑肿瘤分类的方法很多,目前尚无统一的分类方法,并且各种肿瘤的组织发生与病理特征不同,其良性与恶性以及物学特性也不一样。通常按组织学可分类如下:(1)发源于神经胶质的肿瘤:星形细胞瘤、少支胶质细胞瘤、髓母细胞瘤等。(2)发源于脑膜的肿瘤:脑膜瘤、脑膜肉瘤、蛛网膜囊肿等。(3)发源于垂体的肿瘤:厌色细胞腺瘤,嗜酸、嗜碱性细胞腺瘤。(4)发源于颅神经的肿瘤:听神经瘤、三叉神经瘤等各种神经鞘瘤。(5)发源于胚胎残余组织:颅咽管瘤、脊索瘤、皮样囊肿等。(6)发源于血管细胞:血管瘤及血管网织细胞瘤等。(7)由其它部位转移或侵入的肿瘤:各种转移瘤及鼻咽癌等。     

脑肿瘤及脑肿瘤图像分类的研究进展

脑肿瘤分类的方法很多,目前尚无统一的分类方法,并且各种肿瘤的组织发生与病理特征不同,其良性与恶性以及物学特性也不一样。通常按组织学可分类如下：（1）发源于神经胶质的肿瘤：星形细胞瘤、少支胶质细胞瘤、髓母细胞瘤等。（2）发源于脑膜的肿瘤：脑膜瘤、脑膜肉瘤、蛛网膜囊肿等。（3）发源于垂体的肿瘤：厌色细胞腺瘤,嗜酸、嗜碱性细胞腺瘤。（4）发源于颅神经的肿瘤：听神经瘤、三又神经瘤等各种神经鞘瘤。（5）发源于胚胎残余组织：颅咽管瘤、脊索瘤、皮样囊肿等。（6）发源于血管细胞：血管瘤及血管网织细胞瘤等。（7）由其它部位转移或侵入的肿瘤：各种转移瘤及鼻咽癌等。     

Status and the Brain

Social hierarchy is a fact of life for many animals. Navigating social hierarchy requires understanding one''s own status relative to others and behaving accordingly, while achieving higher status may call upon cunning and strategic thinking. The neural mechanisms mediating social status have become increasingly well understood in invertebrates and model organisms like fish and mice but until recently have remained more opaque in humans and other primates. In a new study in this issue, Noonan and colleagues explore the neural correlates of social rank in macaques. Using both structural and functional brain imaging, they found neural changes associated with individual monkeys'' social status, including alterations in the amygdala, hypothalamus, and brainstem—areas previously implicated in dominance-related behavior in other vertebrates. A separate but related network in the temporal and prefrontal cortex appears to mediate more cognitive aspects of strategic social behavior. These findings begin to delineate the neural circuits that enable us to navigate our own social worlds. A major remaining challenge is identifying how these networks contribute functionally to our social lives, which may open new avenues for developing innovative treatments for social disorders.

“Observing the habitual and almost sacred ‘pecking order’ which prevails among the hens in his poultry yard—hen A pecking hen B, but not being pecked by it, hen B pecking hen C and so forth—the politician will meditate on the Catholic hierarchy and Fascism.” —Aldous Huxley, Point Counter Point (1929)

From the schoolyard to the boardroom, we are all, sometimes painfully, familiar with the pecking order. First documented by the Norwegian zoologist Thorleif Schjelderup-Ebbe in his PhD thesis on social status in chickens in the 1920s, a pecking order is a hierarchical social system in which each individual is ranked in order of dominance [1]. In chickens, the top hen can peck all lower birds, the second-ranking bird can peck all birds ranked below her, and so on. Since it was first coined, the term has become widely applied to any such hierarchical system, from business, to government, to the playground, to the military.Social hierarchy is a fact of life not only for humans and chickens but also for most highly social, group-living animals. Navigating social hierarchies and achieving dominance often appear to require cunning, intelligence, and strategic social planning. Indeed, the Renaissance Italian politician and writer Niccolo Machiavelli argued in his best-known book “The Prince” that the traits most useful for attaining and holding on to power include manipulation and deception [2]. Since then, the term “Machiavellian” has come to signify a person who deceives and manipulates others for personal advantage and power. 350 years later, Frans de Waal applied the term Machiavellian to social maneuvering by chimpanzees in his book Chimpanzee Politics [3]. De Waal argued that chimpanzees, like Renaissance Italian politicians, apply guile, manipulation, strategic alliance formation, and deception to enhance their social status—in this case, not to win fortune and influence but to increase their reproductive success (which is presumably the evolutionary origin of status-seeking in Renaissance Italian politicians as well).The observation that navigating large, complex social groups in chimpanzees and many other primates seems to require sophisticated cognitive abilities spurred the development of the social brain hypothesis, originally proposed to explain why primates have larger brains for their body size than do other animals [4],[5]. Since its first proposal, the social brain hypothesis has accrued ample evidence endorsing the connections between increased social network complexity, enhanced social cognition, and larger brains. For example, among primates, neorcortex size, adjusted for the size of the brain or body, varies with group size [6],[7], frequency of social play [8], and social learning [9].Of course, all neuroscientists know that when it comes to brains, size isn''t everything [10]. Presumably social cognitive functions required for strategic social behavior are mediated by specific neural circuits. Here, we summarize and discuss several recent discoveries, focusing on an article by Noonan and colleagues in the current issue, which together begin to delineate the specific neural circuits that mediate our ability to navigate our social worlds.Using structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), Bickart and colleagues showed that the size of the amygdala—a brain nucleus important for emotion, vigilance, and rapid behavioral responses—is correlated with social network size in humans [11]. Subsequent studies showed similar relationships for other brain regions implicated in social function, including the orbitofrontal cortex [12] and ventromedial prefrontal cortex [13]. Indeed, one study even found an association between grey matter density in the superior temporal sulcus (STS) and temporal gyrus and an individual''s number of Facebook friends [14]. Collectively, these studies suggest that the number and possibly the complexity of relationships one maintains varies with the structural organization of a specific network of brain regions, which are recruited when people perform tests of social cognition such as recognizing faces or inferring others'' mental states [15],[16]. These studies, however, do not reveal whether social complexity actively changes these brain areas through plasticity or whether individual differences in the structure of these networks ultimately determines social abilities.To address this question, Sallet and colleagues experimentally assigned rhesus macaques to social groups of different sizes and then scanned their brains with MRI [17]. The authors found significant positive associations between social network size and morphology in mid-STS, rostral STS, inferior temporal (IT) gyrus, rostral prefrontal cortex (rPFC), temporal pole, and amygdala. The authors also found a different region in rPFC that scaled positively with social rank; as grey matter in this region increased, so did the monkey''s rank in the hierarchy. As in the human studies described previously, many of these regions are implicated in various aspects of social cognition and perception [18]. These findings endorse the idea that neural plasticity is engaged in specifically social brain areas in response to the demands of the social environment, changing these areas structurally according to an individual''s experiences with others.Sallet and colleagues also examined spontaneous coactivation among these regions using functional MRI (fMRI). Measures of coactivation are thought to reflect coupling between regions [19],[20]; these measures are observable in many species [21],[22] and vary according to behavior [23],[24], genetics [25], and sex [26], suggesting that coactivation may underlie basic neural function and interaction between brain regions. The authors found that coactivation between the STS and rPFC increased with social network size and that coactivation between IT and rPFC increased with social rank. These findings show that not only do structural changes occur in these regions to meet the demands of the social environment but these structural changes mediate changes in function as well.One important question raised by the study by Sallet and colleagues is whether changes in the structure and function of social brain areas are specific outcomes of social network size or of dealing with social hierarchy. After all, larger groups offer more opportunity for a larger, more despotic pecking order. In the current volume, Noonan and colleagues address this question directly by examining the structural and functional correlates of social status in macaques independently of social group size [27]. The authors collected MRI scans from rhesus macaques and measured changes in grey matter associated with social dominance. By scanning monkeys of different ranks living in groups of different sizes, the authors were able to cleave the effects of social rank from those of social network size (Figure 1).Open in a separate windowFigure 1Brain regions in rhesus macaques related to social environment.Primary colors indicate brain regions in which morphometry tracks social network size. Pastel colors indicate brain regions in which morphometry tracks social status in the hierarchy. Regions of interest adapted from [48], overlaid on Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI) macaque template [49].The authors found a network of regions in which grey matter measures varied with social rank; these regions included the bilateral central amygdala, bilateral brainstem (between the medulla and midbrain, including parts of the raphe nuclei), and hypothalamus, which varied positively with dominance, and regions in the basal ganglia, which varied negatively with social rank. These regions have been implicated in social rank functions across a number of species [28]–[32]. Importantly, these relationships were unique to social status. There was no relationship between grey matter in these subcortical areas and social network size, endorsing a specific role in social dominance-related behavior. Nevertheless, grey matter in bilateral mid-STS and rPFC varied with both social rank and social network size, as reported previously. These findings demonstrate that specific brain areas uniquely mediate functions related to social hierarchy, whereas others may subserve more general social cognitive processes.Noonan and colleagues next probed spontaneous coactivation using fMRI to examine whether functional coupling between any of these regions varied with social status. They found that the more subordinate an animal, the stronger the functional coupling between multiple regions related to dominance. These results suggest that individual differences in social status are functionally observable in the brain even while the animal is at rest and not engaged in social behavior. These findings suggest that structural changes associated with individual differences in social status alter baseline brain function, consistent with the idea that the default mode of the brain is social [33] and that the sense of self and perhaps even awareness emerge from inwardly directed social reasoning [34].These findings resonate with previous work on the neural basis of social dominance in other vertebrates. In humans, for example, activity in the amygdala tracks knowledge of social hierarchy [28],[35] and, further, shows activity patterns that uniquely encode social rank and predict relevant behaviors [28]. Moreover, recent research has identified a specific region in the mouse hypothalamus, aptly named the “hypothalamic attack area” [36],[37]. Stimulating neurons in this area immediately triggers attacks on other mice and even an inflated rubber glove, while inactivating these neurons suppresses aggression [38]. In the African cichlid fish Haplochromis burtoni, a change in the social status of an individual male induces a reversible change in the abundance of specialized neurons in the hypothalamus that communicate hormonally with the pituitary and gonads [39]. Injections of this hormone in male birds after an aggressive territorial encounter amplifies the normal subsequent rise in testosterone [40]. Serotonin neurons in the raphe area of the brainstem also contribute to dominance-related behaviors in fish [29],[31] and aggression in monkeys [41].Despite these advances, there are still gaps in our understanding of how these circuits mediate status-related behaviors. Though regions in the amygdala, brainstem, and hypothalamus vary structurally and functionally with social rank, it remains unknown precisely how they contribute to or respond to social status. For example, though amygdala function and structure correlates with social status in both humans and nonhuman primates [27],[28],[35],[42], it remains unknown which aspects of dominance this region contributes to or underlies. One model suggests that the amygdala contributes to learning or representing one''s own status within a social hierarchy [28],[35]. Alternatively, the amygdala could contribute to behaviors that support social hierarchy, including gaze following [43] and theory of mind [44]. Lastly, the amygdala could contribute to social rank via interpersonal behaviors or personality traits, such as aggression [45], grooming [45], or fear responses [46],[47]. Future work will be critical to determine how signals in these regions relate to social status; direct manipulation of these regions, possibly via microstimulation, larger-scale brain stimulation (e.g., transcranial magnetic stimulation and transcranial direct current stimulation), or temporary lesions, will be critical to better understand these relationships.The work by Noonan and colleagues suggests new avenues for exploring how the brain both responds to and makes possible social hierarchy in nonhuman primates and humans. The fact that the neural circuits mediating dominance and social networking behavior can be identified and measured from structural and functional brain scans even at rest suggests the possibility that similar measures can be made in humans. Although social status is much more complex in people than it is in monkeys or fish, it is just as critical for us and most likely depends on shared neural circuits. Understanding how these circuits work, how they develop, and how they respond to the local social environment may help us to understand and ultimately treat disorders, like autism, social anxiety, or psychopathy, that are characterized by impaired social behavior and cognition.     

Brain organization and behaviour

Central question of this essay is, whether it is possible to relate specific aspects of the organization of sensorimotor systems to specific aspects of the behaviour. The role of the auditory system as part of a system for vocalization (song-birds) or as part of a system for prey localization (owls) and the different roles of the trigeminal system in the feeding behaviour of different birds are considered. The ascending sensory systems seem to possess a comparable organization in the various species. Also the descending motor pathways from archistriatum and paleostriatal complex seem to be basically similar. Behavioural specialization may be expressed particularly in the organization of the intratelencephalic circuits and thus in the involvement of specific regions of neostriatum and hyperstriatum ventrale. In discussions on cerebralisation it will be necessary to take such differences in intratelencephalic organization into account.     

Brain synaptogenesis and epigenesis

Synaptic plasticity, or epigenesis, is present and varies throughout the whole life of the cerebral cortex. The adult synapse is formed of large and variable proteins assemblies acting as molecular switches leading to many distinct functional states. In the flow of activity circulating through the synaptic circuits, these multiple synaptic states transitions are modulated by the levels and sequences of activations of the pre- and post-synaptic domains. The efficiency of synaptic transmission is also modulated by competition and/or cooperativity with neighbouring synapses, and by many neuromodulations. Some transitions eventually lead to synaptogenesis. In the adult cerebral cortex, synaptogenesis remains a local event; axonal and dendritic arbors are not reshaped. On the contrary, during pre- and post-natal synaptogenesis, the same molecular mechanisms lead to a significant reorganization of the axonal and dendritic arbors. Early in the development, synapses are generated and differentiate under the control of robust mechanisms governed by genes. Then, during the critical periods, extending from the end of gestation to the end of puberty, the refinement of the synaptic architecture becomes experience-expectant. This "epigenetic opening" of synaptogenesis to environment is maximal in the human brain. It is the source of the exceptional cognitive adaptability of our species, and possibly one of its major fragility. Epigenetic manipulations of these critical periods are undertaken, allowing restoration of synaptic plasticity also in the adult brain.     

Brain and Endocrine Function

A brief review of relationships between brain and pituitarygland is presented. The primary portal plexus of the pituitaryand hypothalamic neurones terminating upon these vessels representthe prime mechanism for neural influence upon adenohypophysealfunction. The vascular architecture here may also permit a feedbackloop from the adenohypophysis to the hypothalamus. Neurones("final neural components") are presumed to be responsible forthe elaboration of releasing factors (hypophysiotrophins). Influencingthese cells is a wide variety of afferent neural circuits withboth excitatory and inhibitory components. In addition to thequestion of identity of many of these circuits, a major problemfor future research is the manner in which this diverse neuralinformation is processed into an integrated signal to the finalcommon neurone.