Slashdot Mirror


Birdsong Studies Lead To a Revolution In Biology

Smithsonian.com covers research that began with the study of birdsong and ended by overturning the common belief that adult animals can't produce new brain cells. "Deconstructing birdsong may seem an unlikely way to shake up biology. But [Fernando] Nottebohm's research has shattered the belief that a brain gets its quota of nerve cells shortly after birth and stands by helplessly as one by one they die — a 'fact' drummed into every schoolkid's skull. [Nottebohm] demonstrated two decades ago that the brain of a male songbird grows fresh nerve cells in the fall to replace those that die off in summer. The findings were shocking, and scientists voiced skepticism that the adult human brain had the same knack for regeneration. ... Yet, inspired by Nottebohm's work, researchers went on to find that other adult animals — including human beings — are indeed capable of producing new brain cells. And in February, scientists reported for the first time that brand-new nerves in adult mouse brains appeared to conduct impulses — a finding that addressed lingering concerns that newly formed adult neurons might not function."

9 of 117 comments (clear)

  1. Thank god! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Drink up, fellas!

    1. Re:Thank god! by dbet · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's a bit of a myth that brain cells are killed when you drink. They are simply impaired.

      So, don't drink because it's now safer, drink because it makes you better looking, funnier, and completely impervious to insults.

  2. Bird brain by oldhack · · Score: 4, Funny

    The new brain cells are still bird brain cells.

    --
    Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
  3. Re:fat cells and muscle cells, too? by LeadLine · · Score: 5, Informative

    I don't know where you studied, but as far as I know, you create tiny rips in your muscles when you work out and new cells are grown to bridge the tear.

  4. Re:So now we can grow wetwear. by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 4, Funny

    Op: Computer, please calculate the optimum trajectory to venus.

    chee chee chee... working

    Optimal path... CHEESE.

    Op: Grr... Computer, please calculate the best stock to buy.

    chee chee chee... working

    Optimal stock... CHEESE.

    --
    She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  5. Re:fat cells and muscle cells, too? by __aasqbs9791 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Blasphemy! Each person only has 1 muscle cell that grows larger as they work out. /s

    I learned the same things in school myself. We ere even taught that nerve cells didn't get repaired after they were damaged (to the point of dying). Oh, except in the tongue. Those were unique for some reason. And then we started learning that other nerve cells (like in the spine) did sometimes heal, but that perhaps the 'muscle memory' was lost, and learning to walk when you are an adult is much harder than it was as a child. At some point I think we may just have to say, "We don't know what we think we know, and maybe we should just start all over again." We stand on the shoulders of giants when we discover something new, but apparently sometimes it turns of those are midget's, not giant's shoulders, and we are forced to unlearn something we thought was true. Thus goes the ways of science.

  6. Well, duh. by pclminion · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't mean "duh" to the researcher -- obviously things must be tested and validated in the real world, not just postulated -- but it never made sense to me in the first place that brain cells can't regenerate. Why the hell not? What is the adaptive purpose of such a limitation? The brain consumes a huge amount of energy, much more so per-pound than any other organ in the body. That seems to imply that the brain is extremely important to the organism. Why would essentially the most important organ in the body have such a stupid limitation that it can't even recover from MINOR damage? That makes no sense.

    One possible explanation for the very limited growth rate of brain cells is that if this growth rate were not tightly controlled, it could lead to "chaotic" brain tissue which could interfere with normal brain function. So general division of brain cells would not be desirable -- but I'm no neuroscientist.

  7. Re:Thank Cliff! by dsginter · · Score: 5, Funny

    In an episode of "Cheers," Cliff Clavin, the trivia-spouting, quirky, irksome mama's boy mailman is seated at the bar describing the buffalo theory to his buddy, Norm Peterson, the beer loving heavyweight bar stool sitting perpetual patron.

    Cliff expounds his "Buffalo Theory" to Norm:
    Well, you see, Norm, it's like this. A herd of buffalo can only move as fast as the slowest buffalo. And when the herd is hunted, it's the slowest and weakest ones at the back that are killed first. This natural selection is good for the herd as a whole, because the general speed and health of the whole group keeps improving by the regular killing of the weakest members.

    In much the same way, the human brain can only operate as fast as the slowest brain cells. Now, as we know, excessive intake of alcohol kills brain cells. But naturally, it attacks the slowest and weakest brain cells first. In this way, regular consumption of beer eliminates the weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine.

    And that, Norm, is why you always feel smarter after a few beers.

    --
    More
  8. Re:fat cells and muscle cells, too? by Hurricane78 · · Score: 4, Informative

    No. That it outdated knowledge and is actually an overworking of your muscles. I know that it's stated again, and again, and again, by people who seem to be experts by all standards. Yet there is proper proof that it's not the right way to get stronger, and actually creates scar tissue. So you might get bigger muscles, but not really stronger ones! The strength comes from the tissue that did *not* rupture,and was allowed to grow.

    So it's better to lift a lighter weight more often, than a heavier one just a couple of times.

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.