In Search of Memory
In Search of Memory: The Emergence of a New Science of Mind.¶
- Kandel, E. R. (2006). In Search of Memory: The Emergence of a New Science of Mind. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
Synaptic strength is not fixed.¶
Consolidation¶
- The first rigorous test of memory consolidation came in 1949, when the American psychologist C. P. Duncan applied electrical stimuli to the brain of animals during or immediately after training, resulting in convulsions that disrupted memory and caused retrograde amnesia. Producing seizures several hours after training had little or no effect on recall.
- Almost twenty years later, Louis Flexner at the University of Pennsylvania made the remarkable discovery that drugs that inhibit the synthesis of proteins in the brain disrupt long-term memory if given during and shortly after learning, but they do not disrupt short-term memory. This finding suggested that long-term memory storage requires the synthesis of new proteins.
- Together, the two sets of studies seemed to confirm the idea that memory storage takes place in at least two stages: a short-term memory lasting minutes is converted -- by a process of consolidation that requires the synthesis of new protein -- into stable, long-term memory lasting days, weeks, or even longer.
Same Storage Sites?¶
- Carew, Castellucci, and I found that the same synaptic connections between sensory and motor neurons that are altered in short-term habituation and sensitization are also altered in long-term habituation and sensitization. Moreover, in both cases, the synaptic changes parallel the changes in behavior we observed: in long-term habituation, the synapse is depressed for a period of weeks, whereas in long-term sensitization, it is enhanced for weeks. This suggested that, in the simplest cases, the same site can store both short- and long-term memory and that it can do so for different forms of learning.
Mechanism?¶
- Bailey and his colleague, Mary Chen, and Carew and I found that long-term memory is not simply an extension of short-term memory: not only do the changes in synaptic strength last longer but, more amazingly, the actual number of synapses in the circuit changes. Specifically, in long-term habituation the number of presynaptic connections among sensory neurons and motor neurons decreases, whereas in long-term sensitization sensory neurons grow new connections that persist as long as the memory is retained. There is in each case a parallel set of changes in the motor cell.
- Functional Changes vs. Anatomical Changes
Molecules and Short-Term Memory¶
- Release more or less transmitter?
- Increase/decrease number of receptors?
- Increase/decrease sensitivity of receptors?
We found that the change is quite one-sided: during short-term habituation lasting minutes, the sensory neuron releases less neurotransmitter, and during short-term sensitization it releases more neurotransmitter.
How? Biochemical Signaling Pathways? By cyclic AMP?¶
Injected an inhibitor of PKA into a sensory neuron and found that it indeed blocked the ability of serotonin to enhance glutamate release.
In finding that cyclic AMP and protein kinase A are both necessary and sufficient for strengthening the connections between sensory and motor neurons, we were able to identify the first links in the chain of biochemical events leading to short-term memory storage.
Similarly in Mice Hippocampus¶
In both Aplysia and mice, the late phase of long-term potentiation is strongly affected by modulatory interneurons, which in mice are recruited to switch a short-term, homosynaptic into long-term, heterosynaptic change. In mice those neurons release dopamine, a neurotransmitter commonly recruited in the mammalian brain for attention and reinforcement. Like serotonin in Aplysia, dopamine prompts a receptor in the hippocampus to activate an enzyme that increases the amount of cyclic AMP. However, an important part of the increase in cyclic AMP in the mouse hippocampus occurs in the postsynaptic cell, whereas in Aplysia the increase occurs in the presynaptic sensory neuron. In each case, the cyclic AMP recruits protein kinase A and other protein kinases, which leads to the activation of CREB and the turning on of effector genes.
Memory Genes and Long-Term Memory¶
Gene Expression¶
We summarized our views in "The Long and Short of Long-Term Memory", a conceptual review published in 1986 in Nature. In this paper, we proposed that if gene expression was required to convert short-term memory at a synapse into long-term memory, then the synapse stimulated by learning somehow had to send a signal to the nucleus telling it to turn on certain regulatory genes. In short-term memory, synapses use cyclic AMP and protein kinase A inside the cell to call for the release of more neurotransmitters. Goelet and I hypothesized that in long-term memory this kinase moves from the synapse to the nucleus, where it somehow activates proteins that regulate gene expression.
cAMP PKA MAPK CREB¶
- We now collaborated with Roger Tsien at the University of California, San Diego and used a method developed by him that allowed us to visualize the location of the cyclic AMP and protein kinase A in the neuron. We found that whereas a single pulse of serotonin increases cyclic AMP and protein kinase A primarily at the synapse, repeated pulses of serotonin produce even higher concentrations of cyclic AMP, causing protein kinase A to move into the nucleus, where it activates genes. Later studies found that protein kinase A recruits another kinase, called MAP kinase, which is also associated with synaptic growth and also migrates to the nucleus. Thus we confirmed our idea that one of the functions of repeated sensitization training -- why practice makes perfect -- is to cause the appropriate signals in the form of kinases to move into the nucleus.
- Once in the nucleus, what do these kinases do? We knew from recently published studies of non-neuronal cells that protein kinase A can activate a regulatory protein called CREB (cyclic AMP response element-binding protein), which binds to a promoter (the cyclic AMP response element). This suggested to us that CREB might be a key component of the switch that converts short-term facilitation of synaptic connections to long-term facilitation and the growth of new connections.
- An environmental stimulus -- a shock to an animal's tail activates modulatory interneurons that release serotonin. The serotonin acts on the sensory neuron to increase cyclic AMP and to cause protein kinase A and MAP kinase to move to the nucleus and activate CREB. The activation of CREB, in turn, leads to the expression of genes that changes the function and the structure of the cell.
- In 1995 Bartsch found that there are in fact two forms of the CREB protein, much as the model of Jacob and Monod might have predicted: one that activates gene expression (CREB-1), and one that suppresses gene expression (CREB-2). Repeated stimulation causes protein kinase A and MAP kinase to move to the nucleus, where protein kinase A activates CREB-1 and MAP kinase inactivates CREB-2. Thus long-term facilitation of synaptic connections requires not only a switching on of some genes, but also the switching off of others.
Specific Synapses?¶
- A single sensory neuron has 1200 synaptic terminals and makes contact with about 25 target cells: gill motor neurons, siphon motor neurons, inking motor neurons, and excitatory and inhibitory interneurons.
- Individual synapses can be modified independently.
Local Protein Synthesis¶
- In the early 1980s Oswald Steward, now at the University of California, Irvine, had discovered that even though the vast majority of protein synthesis takes place in the cell body of the neuron, some also occurs locally, at the synapses themselves.
- The proteins synthesized in the cell body and shipped to the terminals are sufficient to initiate synaptic growth, but to sustain that growth, proteins synthesized locally are necessary.
Memory is far more complicated...¶
1. 遗忘症的分类
在研究学习与记忆时,一种重要的方法是观察记忆丧失的情况,即遗忘症(Amnesia)。遗忘症大致可以分为两种形式:
- 逆行性遗忘(Retrograde Amnesia): 无法回忆起脑损伤事件之前的经历。例如,摔倒撞到头后不记得事故发生前瞬间的情况。
- 顺行性遗忘(Anterograde Amnesia): 这更为严重,患者在受伤后无法形成新的记忆。
2. 患者 HM 的案例背景
人类神经科学史上最著名的患者 HM(后证实其全名为亨利·莫莱森,Henry Molaison):
- 手术原因: HM 在年轻时因自行车事故引发了极其严重的癫痫,且药物难以治愈。
- 手术内容: 在 1950 年代初,医生为了切除产生癫痫的病灶,对他进行了双侧手术,切除了大部分内侧颞叶(MTL),包括内嗅皮层、部分杏仁核以及几乎完整的双侧海马体。
- 结果: 癫痫有所改善,但他成了最后一位接受这种手术的患者,因为手术对其记忆能力产生了无法预见的严重影响。
3. 手术后的身心状态
HM 在手术后的表现展现了惊人的解离现象:
- 完好的能力: 他的智商(IQ)甚至略有提高,性格调整良好,感知能力和运动能力(如走路、感官)完全未受影响。
- 受损的记忆:
- 轻微逆行性遗忘: 手术前几年的生活记忆消失了。
- 严重的顺行性遗忘: 失去了形成新的显性记忆(Explicit memory)或情境记忆(Episodic memory)的能力。
- 遗忘的深度: 心理学家布伦达·米尔纳(Brenda Milner)和苏·科金(Sue Corkin)的研究发现,HM 搬家后无法认路,且只要他的注意力一转移,遗忘就会瞬间发生。即便刚与人交谈并介绍过自己,只要对方离开一分钟再回来,他就不再记得见过对方。
4. 记忆系统的区分:短期与长期
HM 的案例揭示了脑内存在不同的记忆系统:
- 短期/工作记忆(Working Memory): HM 在数字广度测试(记住 6-7 个随机数字)或敲击彩色方块的任务中表现与常人无异。这说明只要他能保持注意力,其短期记忆是完好的。
- 长期记忆(Long-term Memory): 这部分被细分为不同的形式:
- 声明性/显性记忆: 涉及日常事件(情境记忆)或事实(语义记忆)。HM 在这方面严重受损。
- 非声明性/隐性记忆: 包括技能学习、启动效应和条件反射。
5. 启动效应与条件反射测试
- 启动效应(Priming): 让 HM 看一组单词(如『蘑菇』),虽然几分钟后他无法有意识地回忆起看过这些词,但在词干补全测试中,他能像正常人一样迅速说出『蘑菇』。不过,对于 1950 年代以后才出现的词(如『分形』、『个人电脑』),由于缺乏先前的经验,他的表现较差。
- 经典条件反射(Conditioning): 实验通过声音信号和喷向眼球的气流(引发眨眼)对 HM 进行训练。HM 的表现会随着训练而提高,最终对声音产生眨眼反应。但他无法有意识地描述自己接受过这类训练,也说不出自己为什么眨眼。
6. 科学启示与总结
HM 案例的核心贡献在于:
- 脑区功能特化: 证明了内侧颞叶(含海马体)对形成新记忆至关重要,但对技能学习、启动和条件反射等程序性记忆并非必需。
- 记忆巩固过程: 由于 HM 只丧失了术前几年的记忆,这说明旧的记忆在经过一段时间的巩固(Consolidation)后,会变得不再依赖于海马体等结构。
- 多重系统的必要性: 虽然遗忘症患者可以进行程序性学习,但他们无法将这些记忆转移到新的情境中。声明性系统赋予了人类在不同经验背景下灵活应用知识的能力。
最后推荐苏·科金 2002 年在《自然神经科学评论》上发表的文章,以深入了解这一里程碑式的案例。
问题 1:尽管 H.M. 的工作记忆完好,但『只要他的注意力一转移,遗忘就会瞬间发生』。在缺乏内侧颞叶(MTL)的情况下,究竟是哪些具体的神经生理机制(尤其是海马体-前额叶皮层 (PFC) 的振荡耦合机制)发生了故障,从而阻碍了工作记忆痕迹向长期存储的短暂稳定化?
背景:
文章突显了 H.M. 认知特征中的一个深刻悖论:他的工作记忆(例如数字广度测试)完全完好,这意味着只要他保持主动注意,就能在脑海中维持信息。然而,一旦他的注意力转移,记忆痕迹就会瞬间消失。这表明 MTL 并非信息临时维持所必需,但对于在注意力重新分配之前对这些信息进行稳定或转移却是绝对关键的。
文献与机制:
为了理解这种『瞬间遗忘』,我们必须超越静态的解剖学模型,去考察海马体与新皮层之间动态的、振荡的对话。根据人类记忆振荡同步的框架,分布式皮层表征的绑定严重依赖于相位同步,尤其是在 theta (4–8 Hz) 和 gamma (30–100 Hz) 频段 (Fell & Axmacher, 2011)。
在健康大脑中,当新刺激进入工作记忆(由背外侧 PFC 的持续放电维持)时,海马体会迅速参与以『索引』这些信息。这是通过海马体和 PFC 之间精确的 theta-gamma 跨频率耦合 (cross-frequency coupling) 来实现的。海马体本质上提供了一个时间支架,使相关皮层神经元的放电与相位锁定 (phase-locking),以确保在 PFC 有限的注意力资源被重新定向到新感觉输入之前,记忆痕迹被牢固地编码。
在 H.M. 的案例中,MTL 的双侧切除切断了这座振荡桥梁。虽然他的 PFC 仍可通过持续的神经放电暂时维持信息(解释了他完好的数字广度),但由于缺乏海马体,没有机制能够快速『印刻』或相位同步这种皮层活动。因此,当他的注意力转移时——这一过程本质上涉及 PFC 更新其表征状态以适应新刺激——脆弱的、未同步的皮层痕迹会立即被覆盖或衰减。这种现象是计算神经科学家所说的『灾难性干扰 (catastrophic interference)』的行为表现,即在缺乏快速学习索引系统的网络中,新输入会迅速擦除未巩固的表征。
讨论与推测:
尽管我们无法在死后测量 H.M. 大脑中这种故障的精确毫秒级动态,但现代啮齿动物研究支持这一推测。对清醒状态下海马体尖波涟漪 (sharp-wave ripples, SWRs) 的研究表明,即使是注意力或行为的短暂停顿,也会触发快速的海马体-皮层重放,从而稳定先前的体验 (Jadhav et al., 2016)。我们可以推测,H.M. 的『瞬间遗忘』之所以发生,是因为在没有海马体的情况下,他的大脑缺乏进行这些快速微观巩固事件的能力。他的新皮层本质上是一个『漏水的水桶』:只要他主动用手捧着(注意力),它就能装水(信息),但一旦他松手去做别的事,水就会瞬间流光,因为没有海马体机制将其转移到稳定的长期水库中。这将我们对 H.M. 的理解从简单的『长期记忆缺陷』提升到了动态、跨脑区网络同步特定故障的层面。
问题 2:H.M. 对术前词汇表现出完好的启动效应,但对 1950 年代后的新概念(如『个人电脑』)表现受损。从计算神经科学的角度来看,MTL 的切除是如何破坏『互补学习系统 (Complementary Learning Systems, CLS)』框架的,特别是关于新语义特征逐渐整合到新皮层网络的过程?
背景:
文章详细描述了 H.M. 内隐记忆中一个微妙的解离现象。虽然他对术前认识的单词(例如完成『蘑菇』的词干)表现出正常的启动效应,但他对 1950 年代以后出现的新概念(如『个人电脑』或『分形』)的表现显著下降。这表明,尽管他既有的语义网络保持功能完好,但他获取或内隐整合新语义知识的能力受到了严重损害,尽管启动任务本身具有程序性特征。
文献与机制:
这一特定缺陷可以通过互补学习系统 (Complementary Learning Systems, CLS) 理论得到优雅的解释。该理论最初由 McClelland, McNaughton 和 O’Reilly (1995) 提出,并在现代计算神经科学中不断完善。CLS 理论认为,大脑利用两个不同的学习系统来避免『灾难性干扰』(即在学习新事物时覆盖旧记忆)。
- 新皮层是一个慢速学习系统。它通过多次重复,逐渐提取经验的统计规律和共享特征,构建一个结构化的、泛化的语义网络。
- 海马体 (MTL) 是一个快速学习系统。它迅速将新经验的各个元素绑定成一个连贯的痕迹,充当新皮层的临时『导师』。
当 H.M. 遇到像『个人电脑』这样的 1950 年代后的新概念时,他完好的新皮层可以处理该单词的视觉或听觉特征。然而,由于他的海马体缺失,没有快速学习系统能够将这些新特征迅速绑定成临时的高保真表征。在 CLS 框架中,新皮层需要在新海马体的指导下,通过重复、交替的暴露 (interleaved exposure) 来缓慢调整其突触权重,以免破坏既有知识(如『打字机』的概念)。没有 MTL 提供这种结构化的快速索引,『个人电脑』的新语义特征就无法整合到他的新皮层网络中,即使是内隐层面也是如此。因此,当后来呈现词干线索时,新皮层网络缺乏产生启动效应所需的强化连接,导致表现受损。
讨论与推测:
这种计算视角为 H.M. 『完好』的旧记忆的本质提供了一个深刻的推测。它表明,他对 1950 年代前词汇的启动能力根本不是主动的『学习』过程,而仅仅是对一个已完全巩固、不再需要海马体支持的静态新皮层网络的激活。他的大脑本质上被冻结在了 1950 年代初期的语义景观中。
此外,这引发了关于 CLS 框架中语义记忆和情景记忆边界的有趣问题。虽然文章侧重于启动(通常被认为是内隐的),但获取像『个人电脑』这样的新概念的含义,本质上需要某种程度的关系绑定(例如,将『电脑』与『机器』、『电子』、『新事物』联系起来)。我们可以推测,MTL 不仅仅是情景记忆的门户,它从根本上也是任何快速关系绑定所必需的,包括新语义节点的最初形成。因此,H.M. 无法对新概念产生启动效应,直接反映了一个失去了『导师』的新皮层,使其无法调整其内部世界模型以适应 1950 年代后的现实。