Comments on: Enhanced integrative properties of immature neurons #sfn11

By: Sil

Sil — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 03:49:49 +0000

Thanks for the coverage also. I agree, some of those posters were great (Mongiat’s got me for a while). In my opinion (and I’m not sure what your thoughts are on this), I felt the posters were way better than most of the symposiums and lectures. I guess my observation has been that something usually ends up in a poster before it ends up in a powerpoint show…the posters are like a view from the trenches for me. But I may be wrong, maybe I haven’t had good luck with presentations yet.

By: Jess

Jess — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 17:45:35 +0000

Thanks for your continued coverage of SfN. Since I didn’t get to go this year, I’m delighted to have the reports of an insider! :)

By: Lucas

Lucas — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 06:30:58 +0000

Exactly. Good SfN poster, though, I would assume.. but, as you say, “MORE DATA!”

By: Jason Snyder

Jason Snyder — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 06:28:19 +0000

You’re exactly right, I think – just because they respond to both doesn’t mean they actually associate them with the inputs are co-activated. I’d really like to see that experiment.

By: Lucas

Lucas — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 06:22:51 +0000

While I agree with your post, the one assumption that strikes at the heart of the conversation is, “However, another population will be activated by both inputs and those neurons are the ones that are best suited for associating information as would happen during memory formation.” The assumption is that just because they respond to both inputs they are better at associating information. I don’t know if I agree with this. Maybe it is just some feature within the inputs that they’re “agreeing” with and not necessarily the entirety of the “message” ?? maybe we can talk about this later. I did not see this poster, so it would be interesting to see it, if you have a picture!