Comments on: The 300-Million-Year-Old Brain: Now In 3-D http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/ A blog about life, past and future. Written by DISCOVER contributing editor and columnist Carl Zimmer. Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:41:26 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Claudia Marcus http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/comment-page-1/#comment-16227 Claudia Marcus Thu, 26 Mar 2009 05:26:49 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/#comment-16227 I'm wondering if this was from a Kansas dig I got to go on with my father, Leslie F. Marcus, from La Brea and the American Museum of Natural History. I’m wondering if this was from a Kansas dig I got to go on with my father, Leslie F. Marcus, from La Brea and the American Museum of Natural History.

]]> By: News Round - Catch up › British Centre for Science Education http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/comment-page-1/#comment-15629 News Round - Catch up › British Centre for Science Education Sun, 15 Mar 2009 11:13:03 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/#comment-15629 [...] The 300-Million-Year-Old Brain: Now In 3-D [...] [...] The 300-Million-Year-Old Brain: Now In 3-D [...]

]]> By: Like A Frightened Turtle? | The Loom | Discover Magazine http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/comment-page-1/#comment-15429 Like A Frightened Turtle? | The Loom | Discover Magazine Tue, 03 Mar 2009 15:01:55 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/#comment-15429 [...] Blogs / The Loom « The 300-Million-Year-Old Brain: Now In 3-D [...] [...] Blogs / The Loom « The 300-Million-Year-Old Brain: Now In 3-D [...]

]]> By: Willy Bemis http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/comment-page-1/#comment-15427 Willy Bemis Tue, 03 Mar 2009 14:47:51 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/#comment-15427 This is great! This is great!

]]> By: Alan Pradel http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/comment-page-1/#comment-15426 Alan Pradel Tue, 03 Mar 2009 14:29:48 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/#comment-15426 whou I can't imagine that my results will be so quickly in the web! Thanks for your interest! Your questions are very interesting... The holotomography is a relatively new approach of Synchrotron X-Ray imaging. It shows the phase contrast (not only the absorption contrast) of the different interphases of the sample with a better resolution than a common Synchrotron X-Ray imaging. some extant fishes possess a small brain compared to the endocranial cavity (e.g. coelacanths). In iniopts, the nerves perfectly reach their respective foramen without any deformation and the overall morphology of the endocranial cavity is different from the morphology of the brain. Consequently we supposed that the brain did not fill the endocranial cavity. Concerning the optic foramen which is very large, a lot of other thing passed through it (e.g. the efferent pseudobranchial artery) as in extant ratfishes. Hum good question about the putative soul of iniopterygians hehe... whou I can’t imagine that my results will be so quickly in the web! Thanks for your interest!

Your questions are very interesting…
The holotomography is a relatively new approach of Synchrotron X-Ray imaging. It shows the phase contrast (not only the absorption contrast) of the different interphases of the sample with a better resolution than a common Synchrotron X-Ray imaging.

some extant fishes possess a small brain compared to the endocranial cavity (e.g. coelacanths). In iniopts, the nerves perfectly reach their respective foramen without any deformation and the overall morphology of the endocranial cavity is different from the morphology of the brain. Consequently we supposed that the brain did not fill the endocranial cavity. Concerning the optic foramen which is very large, a lot of other thing passed through it (e.g. the efferent pseudobranchial artery) as in extant ratfishes.

Hum good question about the putative soul of iniopterygians hehe…

]]> By: Richard http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/comment-page-1/#comment-15424 Richard Tue, 03 Mar 2009 09:46:43 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/#comment-15424 I think it is highly likely that brain size shrank between death and preservation by fossilisation, via dessication, amongst a number of other factors. I've collected skulls from mammals, birds, fish and reptiles for much of my life, and I usually soak them in sodium hypochlorite (Clorox) which is supposed to dissolve everything but the bone, and leave it all white and clean. But there is always a stubborn little bit of stuff, right inside the cranium, that I have to extract with a dental pick, or a bent bit of coat hanger wire. I believe, in humans at least, that that stubborn bit is called the 'soul'. It might be interesting to ask creationists if 300MY old fish had souls. I think it is highly likely that brain size shrank between death and preservation by fossilisation, via dessication, amongst a number of other factors.

I’ve collected skulls from mammals, birds, fish and reptiles for much of my life, and I usually soak them in sodium hypochlorite (Clorox) which is supposed to dissolve everything but the bone, and leave it all white and clean.

But there is always a stubborn little bit of stuff, right inside the cranium, that I have to extract with a dental pick, or a bent bit of coat hanger wire.

I believe, in humans at least, that that stubborn bit is called the ’soul’.

It might be interesting to ask creationists if 300MY old fish had souls.

]]> By: Sven DiMilo http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/comment-page-1/#comment-15417 Sven DiMilo Tue, 03 Mar 2009 01:02:10 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/#comment-15417 I'm with johnk. We know how chondrichthyan brains fit into their crania. I’m with johnk. We know how chondrichthyan brains fit into their crania.

]]> By: johnk http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/comment-page-1/#comment-15415 johnk Tue, 03 Mar 2009 00:06:19 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/#comment-15415 I'd bet dollars-for-donuts that there was a whole lot of brain shrinkage. Can't imagine the difference in size between the braincase and the brain. Also, what appears to be the optic nerve is much smaller than its foramen. Possible, but weird. If it is that much smaller, the question would be, why have such a big braincase? How would the brain maintain its position? What's the extra space for? I'd be very surprised if there are extant examples of such size differences. But it sure does look like a brain. nice movie. (link to PNAS doesn't work for me. Can't find the article in the Feb 24 edition of PNAS) <strong> [Carl: John, for whatever reason, PNAS lifts their embargo on papers before their links work. Go figure.]</strong> I’d bet dollars-for-donuts that there was a whole lot of brain shrinkage. Can’t imagine the difference in size between the braincase and the brain. Also, what appears to be the optic nerve is much smaller than its foramen. Possible, but weird.

If it is that much smaller, the question would be, why have such a big braincase? How would the brain maintain its position? What’s the extra space for? I’d be very surprised if there are extant examples of such size differences.

But it sure does look like a brain. nice movie.

(link to PNAS doesn’t work for me. Can’t find the article in the Feb 24 edition of PNAS)

[Carl: John, for whatever reason, PNAS lifts their embargo on papers before their links work. Go figure.]

]]> By: Pierre Kerner http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/comment-page-1/#comment-15413 Pierre Kerner Mon, 02 Mar 2009 23:54:47 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/#comment-15413 Name's Alan Pradel. You got it right only the last time (he's a colleague, that's why I care...). Most amazing feat is that the fossil was in the collection for a long time. It's time to open all the drawers again! <strong> [Carl: Thanks, Pierre. I made the fix. This week I'm having some sort of name black-out.]</strong> Name’s Alan Pradel. You got it right only the last time (he’s a colleague, that’s why I care…). Most amazing feat is that the fossil was in the collection for a long time. It’s time to open all the drawers again!

[Carl: Thanks, Pierre. I made the fix. This week I'm having some sort of name black-out.]

]]> By: bloodyhell http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/comment-page-1/#comment-15412 bloodyhell Mon, 02 Mar 2009 23:46:46 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/#comment-15412 The fossil was not CT scanned. It was synchrotron holotomography. What is that? The fossil was not CT scanned. It was synchrotron holotomography. What is that?

]]> By: EastwoodDC http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/comment-page-1/#comment-15411 EastwoodDC Mon, 02 Mar 2009 23:44:43 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/#comment-15411 I predict there are going to be a lot a fossils getting CT scans, looking for similar features. >... it doesn’t look like it was a very intelligent animal. Fish aren't for their intelligence, despite all that time they spend in "school". ;-) I predict there are going to be a lot a fossils getting CT scans, looking for similar features.

>… it doesn’t look like it was a very intelligent animal.

Fish aren’t for their intelligence, despite all that time they spend in “school”. ;-)

]]> By: QUASAR http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/comment-page-1/#comment-15409 QUASAR Mon, 02 Mar 2009 22:52:02 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/03/02/the-300-million-year-old-brain-now-in-3-d/#comment-15409 Judging it by the size of the brain, it doesn't look like it was a very intelligent animal. Judging it by the size of the brain, it doesn’t look like it was a very intelligent animal.

]]>