Katz P S
Department of Neurobiology and Anatomy, University of Texas, Medical School, Houston 77030, USA.
Neuron. 1996 Feb;16(2):245-53. doi: 10.1016/s0896-6273(00)80043-4.
The field of motor pattern generation and motor control has progressed markedly in the last decade. There has been a revolutionary shift in thinking from hard-wired circuits to multifunctional networks. Yet, it is clear that we still have a long way to go before we understand how very large ensembles of neurons produce behaviors. The systems where we have made the most headway are those that have an orderly topography, such as the superior colliculus (Sparks) or motor cortex (Georgopoulos). However, even in these systems, although we understand how to interpret the combined activity of the neuronal population, it is not clear how this population activity is translated into a motor command. Similarly, the directional behavior produced in cockroach (Ritzmann) and fish escape (Eaton) systems can be predicted based on the activity of neurons, but the cellular mechanisms producing the turning responses in cockroaches and teleost fish are not completely understood. Undoubtedly, computational approaches, including new mathematical formalisms and computer simulations, will play a role in elucidating how very large ensembles of neurons produce their coordinated output. For now, the systems where motor pattern generation is best understood at the cellular level are those with small numbers of neurons (such as invertebrate circuits) or small numbers of cell types, such as lamprey and tadpole spinal circuits. These systems are thus valuable for pointing to potential mechanisms used in larger systems. (Note that I avoid using the term "simple" systems to describe invertebrates because it is quite clear that these systems are anything but simple.) However, "interphyletic awareness," as it was referred to at this conference, is not important just for what it can tell us about how mammals work. It is also important to learn of alternative ways in which organisms solve similar problems. This may prove to be particularly important for the future of robotics. Already, robots have been designed based on insights gained from studying insect visual (Strausfeld) and motor (Ritzmann) systems. Robotics engineers have also independently converged on some of the same mechanisms used by biological systems (MacPherson). There is clearly a need for better understanding of higher control of pattern-generating circuits. This is not limited to how motor patterns are initiated, but also includes how they are altered on a moment to moment basis to suit the needs of the animal. The next revolution in the field is likely to come from a paradigm shift regarding such control of motor circuits, similar to the shift that has already occurred in our understanding of the pattern-generating circuits themselves. Such flexibility of control is the basis for decision making in the nervous system and the very essence of what animals must do throughout their daily lives. I look forward to the next conference in 2005 to see how far we've progressed in these pursuits.
在过去十年中,运动模式生成与运动控制领域取得了显著进展。从硬连线电路到多功能网络的思维方式发生了革命性转变。然而,很明显,在理解大量神经元如何产生行为之前,我们还有很长的路要走。我们取得最大进展的系统是那些具有有序拓扑结构的系统,例如上丘(斯帕克斯)或运动皮层(乔治波洛斯)。然而,即使在这些系统中,尽管我们知道如何解读神经元群体的联合活动,但尚不清楚这种群体活动是如何转化为运动指令的。同样,基于神经元的活动可以预测蟑螂(里茨曼)和鱼类逃避(伊顿)系统中产生的定向行为,但产生蟑螂和硬骨鱼转向反应的细胞机制尚未完全了解。毫无疑问,包括新的数学形式主义和计算机模拟在内的计算方法,将在阐明大量神经元如何产生其协调输出方面发挥作用。目前,在细胞水平上对运动模式生成理解最好的系统是那些神经元数量较少(如无脊椎动物回路)或细胞类型较少的系统,如七鳃鳗和蝌蚪的脊髓回路。因此,这些系统对于指出大型系统中使用的潜在机制很有价值。(请注意,我避免使用“简单”系统来描述无脊椎动物,因为很明显这些系统一点也不简单。)然而,正如本次会议所提到的“种间认知”,不仅对我们了解哺乳动物的工作方式很重要。了解生物体解决类似问题的替代方法也很重要。这可能对机器人技术的未来尤为重要。已经有基于从研究昆虫视觉(施特劳斯费尔德)和运动(里茨曼)系统中获得的见解设计的机器人。机器人工程师也独立地采用了一些生物系统使用的相同机制(麦克弗森)。显然需要更好地理解模式生成电路的高级控制。这不仅限于运动模式如何启动,还包括它们如何根据动物的需要时刻进行改变。该领域的下一次革命可能来自关于运动电路这种控制的范式转变,类似于我们对模式生成电路本身的理解已经发生的转变。这种控制的灵活性是神经系统决策的基础,也是动物在日常生活中必须做的事情的本质。我期待着2005年的下一次会议,看看我们在这些追求中取得了多大进展。