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.
The main "problem" re. the Q you ask is due only to the semantics of what
is held to constitute "activation". The view I've converged upon that it's
actually much-more than "action potentials" that constitutes
"activation"... the whole ionic flux inherent in neural dynamics is what
"activation" is... not just action potentials. It's the ionic stuff that
"gently massages" the microscopic trophic modifications... and even
relatively-quiescent neurons are subject to such... the internal "ionic
Geometry", including the action-potential stuff, of course, transforms the
external energy gradients in a way that preserves the external-energy
Geometry within the unified-with-respect-to-TD E/I-minimization Topological
order inherent in the nervous system (see AoK).
Check it out... it's either this way, or "Learning" is "impossible". K. P.
Collins
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?
>> Ben.
