Canonical or not is a straw man argument.. certainly there are some things generalizable across the cortex, but I never liked the word choice as it implies that there is more generalizable than might be the case, and that the canonical bits are necessarily the most interesting.
"Our results challenge the classical view of a canonical microcircuit repeated through the neocortex"
Wouldn't it be nice test this with whole-brain nanometer-scale #connectomics.https://twitter.com/AToliasLab/status/1078648961806802946 …
-
-
-
Whole point of "canonical" is to announce its promise of a simplifying principle: the study of the whole cortex becomes the study of a unit of the presumably repeated circuit and the interunit connectivity.
-
If cell type variation across the cortex discredits the idea of a simplifying principle, the idea was disqualified by our classical neuroanatomists long before it came in vogue.. asking "what is" rather than "is it" generalizable is more useful.
-
I think the mistake of searching for "the canonical circuit" is that you depend an assumption that things are more conserved across the cortex (and between species) than has ever been demonstrated.. doesn't mean there isn't some simplifying principle though.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
can we add aligned transcriptomics to the wish list? ;)
-
Do you need anybody's permission to raise fuding and go for it? Grant yourself such a present for 2019!
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.