History of catecholamine research

1:16 PM | BY ZeroDivide EDIT
The catecholamines comprise the endogenous substances dopaminenoradrenaline (norepinephrine) and adrenaline (epinephrine) as well as numerous artificially synthesized compounds such as isoprenaline. Their investigation constitutes a prominent chapter in the history of physiologybiochemistry and pharmacology. Adrenaline was the first hormone extracted from itsendocrine gland and obtained in pure form, before the word hormone was coined.[1] It was also the first hormone the structure and biosynthesis of which were clarified. Apart fromacetylcholine, adrenaline and noradrenaline were the first neurotransmitters to be discovered and the first intercellular biochemical signals to be found in intracellular vesicles. The β-adrenoceptor was the first G protein-coupled receptor the gene of which was cloned.
Goal-directed catecholamine research began with the preparation by George Oliver and Edward Albert Sharpey-Schafer of a pharmacologically active extract from the adrenal glands.

Adrenaline in the adrenal medulla[edit]

Forerunners[edit]

In the best book on asthma of the 19th century, first published in 1860,[2] the British physician and physiologist Henry Hyde Salter (1823–1871) included a chapter on treatment ″by stimulants″. Strong coffee was very helpful, presumably because it dispelled sleep, which favoured asthma. Even more impressive, however, was the response to ″strong mental emotion″: ″The cure of asthma by violent emotion is more sudden and complete than by any other remedy whatever; indeed, I know few things more striking and curious in the whole history of therapeutics. … The cure … takes no time; it is instantaneous, the intensest paroxysm ceases on the instant.″ ″Cure″ due to release of adrenaline from the adrenals is the retrospective interpretation.
At the same time that Salter unwittingly made use of the adrenal medulla, the French physician Alfred Vulpian found that there was something unique about it:[3] material scraped from it coloured green when ferric chloride was added. This did neither occur with the adrenal cortex nor with any other tissue. The adrenal medulla hence contained "une matière spéciale, inconnue jusqu’ici et qui constitue le signe particulier de ces organes". Vulpian even came to the insight that the substance entered "le torrent circulatoire", for blood from the adrenal veins did give the ferric chloride reaction.
Members of University College London around 1895. Schäfer in middle of forefront, Oliver to his left in light coat.
In the early 1890s, the German pharmacologist Carl Jacobj (1857–1944) in the laboratory of Oswald Schmiedeberg in Strasbourg studied the relationship between the adrenals and the intestine. Electrical stimulation of the vagus nerve or injection of muscarine elicited peristalsis. This peristalis was promptly abolished by electrical stimulation of the adrenals.[4] The experiment has been called "the first indirect demonstration of the role of the adrenal medulla as an endocrine organ <and> actually a more sophisticated demonstration of the adrenal medullary function than the classic study of Oliver and Schäfer".[5] While this may be true, Jacobj did not envisage a chemical signal secreted into the blood to influence distant organs, in other words a hormone, but nerves running from the adrenals to the gut, "Hemmungsbahnen für die Darmbewegung".

Oliver and Schäfer 1893/94[edit]

George Oliver was a physician practicing in the spa town of Harrogate in North Yorkshire. Edward Albert Schäfer was Professor of Physiology at University College London. In 1918, he prefixed the surname of his physiology teacher William Sharpey to his own to become Edward Albert Sharpey Schafer. The canonical story, told by Henry Hallett Dale, who worked at University College London from 1902 to 1904, runs as follows:[6]
Dr Oliver, I was told, … had a liking and a ′flair′ for the invention of simple appliances, with which observations and experiments could be made on the human subject. Dr Oliver had invented a small instrument with which he claimed to be able to measure, through the unbroken skin, the diameter of a living artery, such as the radial artery at the wrist. He appears to have used his family in his experiments, and a young son was the subject of a series, in which Dr Oliver measured the diameter of the radial artery, and observed the effect upon it of injecting extracts of various animal glands under the skin. … We may picture, then, Professor Schafer, in the old physiological laboratory at University College, … finishing an experiment of some kind, in which he was recording the arterial blood pressure of an anaesthetised dog. … To him enters Dr Oliver, with the story of the experiments on his boy, and, in particular, with the statement that injection under the skin of a glycerin extract from calf’s suprarenal gland was followed by a definite narrowing of the radial artery. Professor Schafer is said to have been entirely sceptical, and to have attributed the observation to self-delusion. … He can hardly be blamed, I think; knowing even what we now know about the action of this extract, which of us would be prepared to believe that injecting it under a boy’s skin would cause his radial artery to become measurably more slender? Dr Oliver, however, is persistent; he … suggests that, at least, it will do no harm to inject into the circulation, through a vein, a little of the suprarenal extract, which he produces from his pocket. So Professor Schafer makes the injection, expecting a triumphant demonstration of nothing, and finds himself standing ′like some watcher of the skies, when a new planet swims into his ken,′ watching the mercury rise in the manometer with amazing rapidity and to an astounding height.

Why Don't Animals Get Schizophrenia (and How Come We Do)?

12:46 PM | BY ZeroDivide EDIT

Why Don't Animals Get Schizophrenia (and How Come We Do)?

Research suggest an evolutionary link between the disorder and what makes us human


Though psychotic animals may exist, psychosis has never been observed outside of our own species; whereas depression, OCD, and anxiety traits have been reported in many non-human species. 
Credit: IG_Royal/Thinkstock


Many of us have known a dog on Prozac. We've also witnessed the eye rolls that come with canine psychiatry. Doting pet owners—myself included—ascribe all sorts of questionable psychological ills to our pawed companions. But the science does suggest that numerous non-human species suffer from psychiatric symptoms. Birds obsess; horses on occasion get pathologically compulsive; dolphins and whales—especially those in captivity—self-mutilate. And that thing when your dog woefully watches you pull out of the driveway from the window—that might be DSM-certified separation anxiety. "Every animal with a mind has the capacity to lose hold of it from time to time" wrote science historian and author Dr. Laurel Braitman in "Animal Madness."
But there’s at least one mental malady that, while common in humans, seems to have spared all other animals: schizophrenia. Though psychotic animals may exist, psychosis has never been observed outside of our own species; whereas depression, OCD, and anxiety traits have been reported in many non-human species. This begs the question of why such a potentially devastating, often lethal disease—which we now know is heavily genetic, thanks to some genomically homogenous Icelandics and plenty of other recent research—is still hanging around when it would seem that genes predisposing to psychosis would have been strongly selected against. new study provides clues into how the potential for schizophrenia may have arisen in the human brain and, in doing so, suggests possible treatment targets. It turns out psychosis may be an unfortunate cost of our big brains—of higher, complex cognition.  
The study, led by Mount Sinai researcher Dr. Joel Dudley, proposed that since schizophrenia is relatively prevalent in humans despite being so detrimental—the condition affects over 1% of adults—that it perhaps has a complex evolutionary backstory that would explain its persistence and exclusivity to humans. Specifically they were curious about segments of our genome called human accelerated regions, or HARs. HARs are short stretches of DNA that while conserved in other species, underwent rapid evolution in humans following our split with chimpanzees, presumably since they provided some benefit specific to our species. Rather than encoding for proteins themselves, HARs often help regulate neighboring genes. Since both schizophrenia and HARs appear to be for the most part human-specific, the researchers wondered if there might be a connection between the two.
To find out, Dudley and colleagues used data culled from the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium, a massive study identifying genetic variants associated with schizophrenia. They first assessed whether schizophrenia-related genes sit close to HARs along the human genome—closer than would be expected by chance. It turns out they do, suggesting that HARs play a role in regulating genes contributing to schizophrenia. Furthermore, HAR-associated schizophrenia genes were found to be under stronger evolutionary selective pressure compared with other schizophrenia genes, implying that the human variants of these genes are beneficial to us in some way despite harboring schizophrenia risk.
To help understand what these benefits might be, Dudley’s group then turned to gene expression profiles. Whereas gene sequencing provides an organism’s genome sequence, gene expression profiling reveals where and when in the body certain genes are actually active. Dudley's group found that HAR-associated schizophrenia genes are found in regions of the genome that influence other genes expressed in the prefrontal cortex, a brain region just behind the forehead involved in higher order thinking—impaired PFC function is thought to contribute to psychosis.
They also found that these culprit genes are involved in various essential human neurological functions within the PFC, including the synaptic transmission of the neurotransmitter GABA. GABA serves as an inhibitor or regulator of neuronal activity, in part by suppressing dopamine in certain parts of the brain, and it’s impaired transmission is thought to be involved in schizophrenia. If GABA malfunctions, dopamine runs wild, contributing to the hallucinations, delusions and disorganized thinking common to psychosis. In other words, the schizophrenic brain lacks restraint. 
“The ultimate goal of the study was to see if evolution may help provide additional insights into the genetic architecture of schizophrenia so we can better understand and diagnose the disease,” says Dudley. Identifying which genes are most implicated in schizophrenia and how they’re expressed could lead to more effective therapies like, say, those influencing the function of GABA.
But the findings also offer a possible explanation for why schizophrenia arose in humans in the first place, and why it doesn’t seem to occur in other animals. “It’s been suggested,” Dudley explains, “that the emergence of human speech and language bears a relationship with schizophrenia genetics, and incidentally also autism. Indeed, language dysfunction is a feature of schizophrenia, and GABA is critical to speech, language and many other aspects of higher-order cognition. The fact that our evolutionary analysis converged on GABA function in the prefrontal cortex seems to tell an evolutionary story connecting schizophrenia risk with intelligence.”
Put another way, with complicated, highly social human thought—and the complicated genetics at the root of higher cognition—perhaps there’s just more that can go wrong: complex function begets complex malfunction.
Dudley is careful not to exaggerate the evolutionary implications of his work. “It is important to note that our study was not specifically designed to evaluate an "evolutionary trade-off,” he says, “but our findings support the hypothesis that evolution of our advanced cognitive abilities may have come at a cost—a predisposition to schizophrenia.” He also acknowledges that the new work didn’t identify any “smoking gun genes” and that schizophrenia genetics is profoundly complex. Still, he feels that evolutionary genetic analysis can help identify the most relevant genes and pathologic mechanisms at play in schizophrenia, and possibly other mental illnesses that preferentially affect humans as well—specifically neurodevelopmental disorders related to higher-cognition and GABA activity, including autism and ADHD.
In fact, a new study published in Molecular Psychiatry reports a link between gene variants associated with autism spectrum disorder and better cognitive function in people without the disorder. The findings may help explain why those with autism sometimes exhibit extraordinary skill at certain cognitive abilities. They also support Dudley’s speculation that higher cognition might have come at a price. As we broke away from our primate cousins our genomes—HARs especially—hastily evolved, granting us an increasing cache of abilities that other species lack. In doing so, they may have left our brains prone to occasional  complex dysfunction—but also capable of biomedical research aimed at one day, hopefully, curing the ailing  brain. As Dudley and others untangle the genetic underpinnings of schizophrenia and other mental illnesses in search of improved diagnosis and treatment, at least our pugs, poodles and pot-bellied pigs seem to be psychosis free.
Bret Stetka is an Editorial Director at Medscape (a subsidiary of WebMD) and a freelance health, science and food writer. He received his MD in 2005 from the University of Virginia and has written for WIRED, Slate and Popular Mechanics about brains, genomics and sometimes both. Follow Bret on Twitter @BretStetka.
Are you a scientist who specializes in neuroscience, cognitive science, or psychology? And have you read a recent peer-reviewed paper that you would like to write about? Please send suggestions to Mind Matters editor Gareth Cook, a Pulitzer prize-winning journalist at the Boston Globe. He can be reached at garethideas AT gmail.com or Twitter @garethideas.

Binaural beats

8:01 PM | BY ZeroDivide EDIT
Binaural beats
MENU
0:00
To experience the binaural beats perception, it is best to listen to this file with headphones on moderate to weak volume – the sound should be easily heard, but not loud. Note that the sound appears to pulsate only when heard through both earphones.
MENU
0:00
Binaural Beats Base tone 200 Hz, beat frequency from 7 Hz to 12,9 Hz
Binaural beats, or binaural tones, are auditory processing artifacts, or apparent sounds, caused by specific physical stimuli. This effect was discovered in 1839 by Heinrich Wilhelm Dove and earned greater public awareness in the late 20th century based on claims coming from the alternative medicine community that binaural beats could help induce relaxation, meditation, creativity and other desirable mental states. The effect on the brainwaves depends on the difference in frequencies of each tone: for example, if 300 Hz was played in one ear and 310 in the other, then the binaural beat would have a frequency of 10 Hz.[1][2]
The brain produces a phenomenon resulting in low-frequency pulsations in the amplitude and sound localization of a perceived sound when two tones at slightly different frequencies are presented separately, one to each of a subject's ears, using stereo headphones. A beating tone will be perceived, as if the two tones mixed naturally, out of the brain. The frequencies of the tones must be below 1,000hertz for the beating to be noticeable.[3] The difference between the two frequencies must be small (less than or equal to 30 Hz) for the effect to occur; otherwise, the two tones will be heard separately, and no beat will be perceived.
Binaural beats are of interest to neurophysiologists investigating the sense of hearing.[4][5][6][7]
Binaural beats reportedly influence the brain in more subtle ways through the entrainment of brainwaves[3][8][9] and provide other health benefits such as control over pain.[10][11]

Acoustical background[edit]

Interaural time differences (ITD) of binaural beats
For sound localization, the human auditory system analyses interaural time differences between both ears inside small frequency ranges, called critical bands. For frequencies below 1000 to 1500 Hz interaural time differences are evaluated from interaural phase differences between both ear signals.[12] The perceived sound is also evaluated from the analysis of both ear signals.
If different pure tones (sinusoidal signals with different frequencies) are presented to each ear, there will be time-dependent phase and time differences between both ears (see figure). The perceived sound depends on the frequency difference between both ear signals:
  • If the frequency difference between the ear signals is lower than a few hertz, the auditory system can follow the changes in the interaural time differences. As a result, an auditory event is perceived, which is moving through the head. The perceived direction corresponds to the instantaneous interaural time difference.
  • For slightly bigger frequency differences between the ear signals (more than 10 Hz), the auditory system can no longer follow the changes in the interaural parameters. A diffuse auditory event appears. The sound corresponds to an overlay of both ear signals, which means amplitude and loudness are changing rapidly (see figure in the chapter above).
  • For frequency differences between the ear signals of above 30 Hz, the cocktail party effect begins to work, and the auditory system is able to analyze the presented ear signals in terms of two different sound sources at two different locations, and two distinct signals are perceived.
Binaural beats can also be experienced without headphones; they appear when playing two different pure tones through loudspeakers. The sound perceived is quite similar: with auditory events that move through the room, at low-frequency differences, and diffuse sound at slightly bigger frequency differences. At bigger frequency differences, apparent localized sound sources appear.[13] However, it is more effective to use headphones than loudspeakers.

Bipedalism

1:42 PM | BY ZeroDivide EDIT
An ostrich, the fastest living biped[1] at 70 km/h[2][a]
A Man Running - Eadweard Muybridge
Bipedalism is a form of terrestrial locomotion where an organism moves by means of its two rear limbs or legs. An animal ormachine that usually moves in a bipedal manner is known as a biped /ˈbpɛd/, meaning "two feet" (from the Latin bi for "two" and ped for "foot"). Types of bipedal movement include walkingrunning, or hopping.
Few modern species are habitual bipeds whose normal method of locomotion is two-legged. Within mammals, habitual bipedalism has evolved multiple times, with the macropodskangaroo rats and micespringhare,[4] hopping micepangolinsand homininan apes, as well as various other extinct groups evolving the trait independently. In the Triassic period some groups of archosaurs (a group that includes the ancestors of crocodiles) developed bipedalism; among their descendants thedinosaurs, all the early forms and many later groups were habitual or exclusive bipeds; the birds descended from one group of exclusively bipedal dinosaurs.
A larger number of modern species utilize bipedal movement for a short time. Several non-archosaurian lizard species move bipedally when running, usually to escape from threats. Many primate and bear species will adopt a bipedal gait in order to reach food or explore their environment. Several arboreal primate species, such as gibbons and indriids, exclusively utilize bipedal locomotion during the brief periods they spend on the ground. Many animals rear up on their hind legs whilst fighting or copulating. A few animals commonly stand on their hind legs, in order to reach food, to keep watch, to threaten a competitor or predator, or to pose in courtship, but do not move bipedally.