Ben Godde wrote:
> Ben Godde wrote:
>> > Hi,
> >
> > is retrograde/anterograde labeling activity dependent?
> > or
> > will all axonal terminations contribute to the labelling regardless of
> > activity?
> >
> > if it is marker-dependent: what about horseradish peroxidase and fluoro
> > ruby?
> >
>>kkollins at pop3.concentric.net schrieb:
> >
> > Step-back a bit, and see the problem at a more-fundamental "level"... if
> > Learning were not activity-dependent, then there'd be no way for the
> > nervous system to cross-correlate microscopic trophic modifications with
> > the energy-content of the external environment in which an organism is
> > experiencing.
> > ...
>> Well, let me concretize my question:
>> If the labelling patterns pre and post (maybe activity dependent)
> learning/plasticity processes are different.
Please tell me why you think it's so... why the "difference"... I need to
understand what you see.
> Does this mean that the ANATOMICAL connectivity pattern is changed, or
> could it depend on the FUNCTIONAL connectivity pattern, only?
Here, I need to understand, "with respect to what?"
I've discussed all this a short time ago in the context of the recent
hippocampal stem-cell activation work. =Both= the anatomical and functional
"connectivities" are plastic. The functional stuff is more-"pliable"...
more-easily "tuned", and more-widely-"tune"-able, but the anatomical stuff can
also be "constructed", and "deconstructed", within the "bounds" of cell-death,
and perhaps, now the hippocampal stem-cell stuff. It's "just" requires a lot
more Physically-Real Work to do the anatomical-plasticity than does the
functional "plasticity" ("tuning"), because, before a "contradictory"
anatomical thing can be "constructed", its contra-stuff must be
"deconstructed". Since the whole CNS is set-up to blindly "strive" to minimize
the topologically-distributed ratios of excitation to inhibition that are
occurring within it (to "seek" TD E/I(min)), and since TD E/I can =only=
increase during any anatomical "deconstruction", CNSs, typically, "decide",
blindly, on the sole basis of TD E/I, to not endure the "deconstruction". It
is =this= one thing that imbues anatomical "connectivity" with its inherent
"inertia"... "old habits are hard to change"... but, if one Chooses not to
mind the "hard" stuff, one can "deconstruce" and "construct" the anatomical
connectivity within the bounds set by cell-death... "at will".
An early nut-shell statement of my work was:
"People hate because they fear. And they fear because they do not understand.
And they do not understand because hating is less work than is understanding."
The "Resolve" to do the Physically-Real Work inherent in "deconstructing" and
"constructing" anatomical "connectivity" is the main thing. This's the stuff
of Volition, which is discussed in AoK, Ap8. The "Resolve" is, itself,
Physically-Real anatomical "connectivity" centralized in prefrontal cortex.
AoK is written at many "levels". One of these is that AoK is a "manual" that
describes how to achieve "Resolve"-ness in the Way that's Rigorously-Aligned
with Truth.
> This question is very important for me having in mind the discussion on
> the relevance of axonal sprouting for cortical reorganizational
> processes.
Axonal sprouting is in-there... so is synaptic-strength incrementing and
decrementing... so is neuralglia "conformation" change, which fine-tunes
everything else (flat-out altering the 3-D Geometry of dendritic trees with
respect to the ongoing TD E/I-minimization convergence, for instance), and
which, in my view, is fundamental within highly-dynamic
functional-"plasticity".
All this said, I'll be able to do more with your Q if you answer my queries,
above. Cheers, ken collins