Nanotools for Neuroscience and Brain Activity Mapping

Neuroscience is at a crossroads. Great effort is being invested into deciphering specific neural interactions and circuits. At the same time, there exist few general theories or principles that explain brain function. We attribute this disparity, in part, to limitations in current methodologies. Traditional neurophysiological approaches record the activities of one neuron or a few neurons at a time. Neurochemical approaches focus on single neurotransmitters. Yet, there is an increasing realization that neural circuits operate at emergent levels, where the interactions between hundreds or thousands of neurons, utilizing multiple chemical transmitters, generate functional states. Brains function at the nanoscale, so tools to study brains must ultimately operate at this scale, as well. Nanoscience and nanotechnology are poised to provide a rich toolkit of novel methods to explore brain function by enabling simultaneous measurement and manipulation of activity of thousands or even millions of neurons. We and others refer to this goal as the Brain Activity Mapping Project. In this Nano Focus, we discuss how recent developments in nanoscale analysis tools and in the design and synthesis of nanomaterials have generated optical, electrical, and chemical methods that can readily be adapted for use in neuroscience. These approaches represent exciting areas of technical development and research. Moreover, unique opportunities exist for nanoscientists, nanotechnologists, and other physical scientists and engineers to contribute to tackling the challenging problems involved in understanding the fundamentals of brain function

Cerebral Astrocyte Response to Micromachined Silicon Implants

tudied and was well developed but loosely organized at 2 weeks. By 6 and 12 weeks, the sheath was highly compacted and continuous, isolating the probe from the brain. At 2 and 4 weeks, the sheath was disrupted when the probe was removed from the fixed tissue, indicating that cells attached more strongly to the surface of the probe than to the nearby tissue. The later times showed much less disruption. Scanning electron microscopy of the probes showed adherent cells or cell fragments at all time points. Thus, as the sheath became compact, the cells on the probe and the cells in the sheath had decreased adhesion to each other. Immunocytochemistry demonstrated that the sheath was labeled with antibodies to glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), an indicator for reactive gliosis. The tissue surrounding the insertion site showed an increased number of GFAP-positive cells which tended to return to control levels as a function of time after probe insertion. It was concluded that reactive gl