Track your comments!
[x]


When you register, comments on your articles and replies to your comments appear here. Register Now!

Sign in to your account
[x]

Not a Scientific Blogging member yet?

Register Now for a Free Scientificblogging.com Account

  • Customize your profile with pictures, banner, a blogroll and more.
  • Leave comments on articles, add other members to your friend lists, chat with people on the site.
  • Write blog posts that can be seen by hundreds of thousands of readers.

It's free and it only takes a minute!

Already a Scientific Blogging member?

Sign In Now

Banner
By Danna Staaf | September 13th 2009 01:56 AM | 2 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
.

More Squid A Day articles

All

About Danna Staaf

Cephalopods have been rocking my world since I was in grade school. Now I'm a graduate student at Stanford University's Hopkins Marine Station, where I study the development and dispersal of Humboldt... Full Bio

May not sound like news, but for the last 70 years, we've been making assumptions about human neurons based on measurements from squid neurons. That's not quite as ludicrous as it sounds--squid axons are enormous, and so for a long time, they were the only tractable system for learning much of anything about neurobiology.

However, technology has since advanced to the point that someone could finally make the same measurements on our near and dear mammalian cousin, the long-suffering lab rat, and found--surprise!--different results.

The New Scientist article linked above gives a great account of the study, except for one glaring error: they say that axons are "each 1 millimetre in diameter in the giant squid."

No one, as far as I know, has ever voltage clamped axons from giant squid. They use giant axons from regular squid, and these giant axons can indeed reach 1 mm in diameter. But the common market squid that have been generously providing their axons to generations of neuroscientists--well, they're only about 10 cm long.

Comments

You didn't mention in what way the results are different, which I think is especially interesting, though not perhaps surprising: mammalian neurons are more efficient than squid neurons. Now I'm thinking about how smart cephalopods already are, and wondering how much smarter they would be if their neurons were only up to snuff.

Danna Staaf's picture
Whoa, that just started me thinking! So, squid use several times more energy than rats to propagate an equivalent signal. It's possible that if their neurons were more efficient, they'd be smarter--not because of greater neuronal efficiency per se, but as an indirect result of a longer lifespan. Sounds crazy, but follow me through here: a nervous system that requires so much energy must be part of what keeps their metabolism so high, and the higher your metabolism, the shorter your lifespan (sweeping generality, of course). So if their neurons were more efficient, they could cut down their metabolism, therefore live longer, therefore have more time to take advantage of all that brainpower by learning, and therefore be smarter. A perennial question of cephalopod biology is why such smart animals have such short lifespans--why have the capability to learn without the time to apply it? It would be pretty funny if the answer turns out to be circular--they shot themselves in the foot, essentially, by developing brains that cut down their lifespan.

Add a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <sup> <sub> <a> <em> <strong> <center> <cite> <code> <TH><ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p> <blockquote> <strike> <object> <param> <embed> <del> <pre> <b> <i> <table> <tbody> <div> <tr> <td> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr> <iframe>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
CAPTCHA
If you register, you will never be bothered to prove you are human again. And you get a real editor toolbar to use instead of this HTML thing that wards off spam bots.