"A genetic, cellular, and circuit basis for mammalian motor behavior"

This hasn’t been published, and I couldn’t find any reference to it other than this, which was posted by Jay Feierman on the Human Ethology listserv.

What are these “cutting-edge circuit tracing techniques”, and when can someone use them to study PCT?

Ted

University of Southern California
Neurobiology Faculty Candidate Seminar, 25 February 2015
A genetic, cellular, and circuit basis for mammalian motor behavior
Ariel Levine, Ph.D.
Salk Institute
Even very basic behaviors, such as taking a single step, involve precise contractions of many muscles, with each muscle driven directly by a dedicated group of motorneurons. It is not known how this motor coordination is accomplished,
but a classic idea in motor control theory proposes that the central nervous system encodes pre-set neural programs called “motor synergies” that bind together motorneuron activation patterns to produce common movements. We used a combination of cutting-edge
circuit tracing techniques and optogenetics to identify “motor synergy encoder neurons ” in the post-natal mouse spinal cord. These neurons receive direct inputs from key motor command sources such as the motor cortex
and sensory reflex pathways, have direct outputs to spinal motorneurons, and can drive coordinated motor outputs in a simplified model of a motor synergy. We next identified novel molecular markers that define spinal motor synergy encoders (the transcription
factor Tcfap2b and the genome-wide chromatin organization factors Satb1 and Satb2), and generated new genetic tools to probe the function of these marker proteins and neurons during adult mouse behavior. This work provides a molecular, cellular, and circuit
basis for integrating diverse motor cues into coordinated motor synergy programs – the building blocks of movement and behavior.

[From Rick Marken (2015.02.28.0930)]

···

On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 10:20 AM, Ted Cloak csgnet@lists.illinois.edu wrote:

TC: This hasn’t been published, and I couldn’t find any reference to it other than this, which was posted by Jay Feierman on the Human Ethology listserv.

What are these “cutting-edge circuit tracing techniques”, and when can someone use them to study PCT?

RM: Since their assumptions about how the NS works is completely wrong what they find using these “cutting edge techniques” will be wrong too. They will find what they expect to find (programmed output type neurons) and their findings will get the cachet of having been discovered using these “cutting edge technologies”. And the fact that behavior is the control of perception will remain unknown.Â

RM: The science of behavior as the control of perception won’t get going until people start doing research aimed at studying behavior as the control of perception – that is, research aimed at discovering the perceptual variables around which behavior is organized. And as you can see from reading this list there is considerable resistance, even among ostensible supporters of PCT, to doing this kind of research. So PCT will probably not get off the ground in this century either.Â

But on a brighter note, it is my birthday so happy birthday to me;-)

BestÂ

Rick

Even very basic behaviors, such as taking a single step, involve precise contractions of many muscles, with each muscle driven directly by a dedicated group of motorneurons. It is not known how this motor coordination is accomplished,
but a classic idea in motor control theory proposes that the central nervous system encodes pre-set neural programs called “motor synergiesâ€? that bind together motorneuron activation patterns to produce common movements. We used a combination of cutting-edge
circuit tracing techniques and optogenetics to identify “motor synergy encoder neurons â€? in the post-natal mouse spinal cord. These neurons receive direct inputs from key motor command sources such as the motor cortex
and sensory reflex pathways, have direct outputs to spinal motorneurons, and can drive coordinated motor outputs in a simplified model of a motor synergy. We next identified novel molecular markers that define spinal motor synergy encoders (the transcription
factor Tcfap2b and the genome-wide chromatin organization factors Satb1 and Satb2), and generated new genetic tools to probe the function of these marker proteins and neurons during adult mouse behavior. This work provides a molecular, cellular, and circuit
basis for integrating diverse motor cues into coordinated motor synergy programs – the building blocks of movement and behavior.

Â

Richard S. Marken, Ph.D.
Author of  Doing Research on Purpose
Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble

[From Fred Nickols (2015.02.28.1303 EST)]

I don’t have any problem with saying or reading that “behavior serves to control perception� but I have difficulty when I see “behavior IS the control of perception.�

Why might I be having such trouble with that?

Fred Nickols

···

From: Richard Marken (rsmarken@gmail.com via csgnet Mailing List) [mailto:csgnet@lists.illinois.edu]
Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2015 12:32 PM
To: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Subject: Re: “A genetic, cellular, and circuit basis for mammalian motor behavior”

[From Rick Marken (2015.02.28.0930)]

On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 10:20 AM, Ted Cloak csgnet@lists.illinois.edu wrote:

TC: This hasn’t been published, and I couldn’t find any reference to it other than this, which was posted by Jay Feierman on the Human Ethology listserv.

What are these “cutting-edge circuit tracing techniques”, and when can someone use them to study PCT?

RM: Since their assumptions about how the NS works is completely wrong what they find using these “cutting edge techniques” will be wrong too. They will find what they expect to find (programmed output type neurons) and their findings will get the cachet of having been discovered using these “cutting edge technologies”. And the fact that behavior is the control of perception will remain unknown.

RM: The science of behavior as the control of perception won’t get going until people start doing research aimed at studying behavior as the control of perception – that is, research aimed at discovering the perceptual variables around which behavior is organized. And as you can see from reading this list there is considerable resistance, even among ostensible supporters of PCT, to doing this kind of research. So PCT will probably not get off the ground in this century either.

But on a brighter note, it is my birthday so happy birthday to me;-)

Best

Rick

Even very basic behaviors, such as taking a single step, involve precise contractions of many muscles, with each muscle driven directly by a dedicated group of motorneurons. It is not known how this motor coordination is accomplished, but a classic idea in motor control theory proposes that the central nervous system encodes pre-set neural programs called “motor synergiesâ€? that bind together motorneuron activation patterns to produce common movements. We used a combination of cutting-edge circuit tracing techniques and optogenetics to identify “motor synergy encoder neuronsâ€? in the post-natal mouse spinal cord. These neurons receive direct inputs from key motor command sources such as the motor cortex and sensory reflex pathways, have direct outputs to spinal motorneurons, and can drive coordinated motor outputs in a simplified model of a motor synergy. We next identified novel molecular markers that define spinal motor synergy encoders (the transcription factor Tcfap2b and the genome-wide chromatin organization factors Satb1 and Satb2), and generated new genetic tools to probe the function of these marker proteins and neurons during adult mouse behavior. This work provides a molecular, cellular, and circuit basis for integrating diverse motor cues into coordinated motor synergy programs – the buuilding blocks of movement and behavior.

Richard S. Marken, Ph.D.
Author of Doing Research on Purpose.

Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble

[From Rick Marken (2015.02.28.1200)]

 Fred Nickols (2015.02.28.1303 EST)--

Â

FN: I don’t have any problem with saying or reading that “behavior serves to control perceptionâ€? but I have difficulty when I see “behavior IS the control of perception.â€?

Â

FN: Why might I be having such trouble with that?

 RN: I think it's a verbal thing. The word "behavior" is the source of the problem. The word refers to things we can see people (including ourselves) _doing_. What people are doing looks like generated outputs; things that are produced by the person (Bill said behavior looks like "a show pout on for the benefit of the observer". But PCT shows that what we see as generated outputs (except at the lowest level of organization -- muscle cell contractions) ) are actually controlled inputs. For example, the  movement of a limb looks like a generated output but it is actually a set of controlled inputs; the inputs controlled being kinesthetic, proprioceptive and visual perceptions, many of which can only be perceived by the person moving the limb. So what we see as behavioral output is always controlled behavioral input. Behavior -- what we see as what people do - is the observer's perception of the side effects of the outputs (also controlled perceptions) used to control perceptions. Behavior IS the control of perception, as seen by you, an outside observer of the system.
It's really hard to keep this in mind; to really see that this is true when we look at people behaving. But it's also hard to keep in mind that it's the earth that's moving counterclockwise and not the sun moving clockwise during the day. That behavior is the control of perception is as true as the fact that the earth rotates as it goes around the sun. And just as hard to to "see".Â
BestÂ
Rick

···

--
Richard S. Marken, Ph.D.
Author of  <http://www.amazon.com/Doing-Research-Purpose-Experimental-Psychology/dp/0944337554/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1407342866&sr=8-1&keywords=doing+research+on+purpose>Doing Research on Purpose.Â
Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble

[From Ted Cloak (2015.02.28.1340 MST)]

TC: Why don’t we say, “Behavior is
really the control of perception”, as we might say, “Sunrise is really the rotation of the earth”? Not forgetting, of course, that most, indeed nearly all, of the perceptions involved are out of awareness of the behaver him/her/itself.

···

[From Rick Marken (2015.02.28.1200)]

Fred Nickols (2015.02.28.1303 EST)–

FN: I don’t have any problem with saying or reading that “behavior serves to control perception�
but I have difficulty when I see “behavior IS the control of perception.�

FN: Why might I be having such trouble with that?

RN: I think it’s a verbal thing. The word “behavior” is the source of the problem. The word refers to things we can see people (including ourselves) doing. What people are doing looks like generated outputs; things that are produced
by the person (Bill said behavior looks like “a show pout on for the benefit of the observer”. But PCT shows that what we see as generated outputs (except at the lowest level of organization – muscle cell contractions) ) are actually controlled inputs. For
example, the movement of a limb looks like a generated output but it is actually a set of controlled inputs; the inputs controlled being kinesthetic, proprioceptive and visual perceptions, many of which can only be perceived by the person moving the limb.
So what we see as behavioral output is always controlled behavioral input. Behavior – what we see as what people do - is the observer’s perception of the side effects of the outputs (also controlled perceptions) used to control perceptions. Behavior IS the
control of perception, as seen by you, an outside observer of the system.

It’s really hard to keep this in mind; to really see that this is true when we look at people behaving. But it’s also hard to keep in mind that it’s the earth that’s moving counterclockwise and not the sun moving clockwise during the day.
That behavior is the control of perception is as true as the fact that the earth rotates as it goes around the sun. And just as hard to to “see”.

Best

Rick

Richard S. Marken, Ph.D.
Author of Doing Research on Purpose.

Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble

[From Bruce Abbott (2015.02.28.1655 EST)]

Rick Marken (2015.02.28.0930) –

RM: But on a brighter note, it is my birthday so happy birthday to me;-)

Happy birthday, Rick! Which one is it?

Bruce

[From Rick Marken (2015.03.01.0920)

···

Ted Cloak (2015.02.28.1340 MST)–

TC: Why don’t we say, “Behavior is
really the control of perception”, as we might say, “Sunrise is really the rotation of the earth”? Not forgetting, of course, that most, indeed nearly all, of the perceptions involved are out of awareness of the behaver him/her/itself.

RM: I think that’s what we do say. Indeed, that’s what the science of PCT is about; saying that behavior is really the control of perception, even though it doesn’t look that way. But we say it in technical books and papers just as astronomers say that “Sunrise and sunset are really appearances resulting the rotation of the earth” in technical books and papers.

RM: PCT is neither a religion nor political party; it doesn’t try to convince people with “talking points”. If people don’t learn the science behind the claim that “Behavior is really the control of perception” then they will never know what that phrase means. So if they just “believe it” they will be like the dangerous religious and political fanatics who pollute our world because they simply believe the talking points they are told.

RM: What we seek from PCT is understanding, which doesn’t come easy. It certainly doesn’t come from cleverly phrased talking points.

Best

Rick (a year older and light years more curmudgeony)

Richard S. Marken, Ph.D.
Author of Doing Research on Purpose.
Now available from Amazon or Barnes & Noble