Neurology, cerebellum
The "cerebellum" is often introduced as a
smaller equivalent of the cortex, since they seem to have largely the same
structure. Which is true in one respect: both comprise of a large membrane
of largely the same structure all over, this membrane consisting of layers of
neurons, and for storage in a limited space folded up with a lots of curves,
see the right hand illustration below, the cortex being the large structure below
the skull:
|
|
|
Spinal cord & brainstem |
Cerebellum |
|
Together with the spinal chord below it, the brainstem contains (almost) all of the elements to
control the body's basic functioning - all in a
relatively limited volume and with a relatively limited number of neurons.
Why then suddenly such a big thing - big relative to the brainstem in
volume. And having a huge number of neurons: in the cerebellum, about half of the
total of the brain's neurons are present.
In primitive species, the cerebellum
even takes up much of the whole brain, see the following overview where the
cerebellum is purple:
The cerebellum must therefore have a primitive purpose. This then leaves
two major candidates: observation and movement.
Observation through "sight" requires a lot of computing: the constructing of
an image having a depth from the two
flat images provided by the two eyes, in order to combine this with all
kinds of information necessary for the desired limb control to respond to
the observational information.
Take a
modern example: the baseball player. The pitcher throws a ball at such high
speed toward the batsman, that he has hardly any time to react. The batsman
has to make his move directly after the ball has left the hand of the
pitcher. And that ball does not go in straight line, but changes of
direction first of all because of gravity. So when the batsman hits the ball at the moment it
is just
on its way, he always strikes above it - he has to compensate for the change of
direction that is going to happen. And on such short notice, that there is absolutely no time to think
about it with your conscious mind - it has to be done right away. The second
aspect is typically
something for the autonomic nervous system, and the first is typically
something that requires a lot of "computational power", so many neurons. For
which the obvious place is the cerebellum. Note: this kind of ability has been a crucial survival factor for humans throughout their
entire existence - think of spear and flying deer.
A second indication of the task of the cerebellum lies in the time-honored
neurological knowledge: the complete or partial dysfunction. In this case in
very dramatic form (newscientist.com, 10-9-2014. By Helen Thomson
):
|
Woman of 24 found to have no
cerebellum in her brain
DON’T mind the gap. A woman has reached the age of 24 without anyone
realising she was missing a large part of her brain. The case highlights
just how adaptable the organ is. The discovery was
made when the woman was admitted to the Chinese PLA General Hospital of
Jinan Military Area Command in Shandong Province complaining of
dizziness and nausea. She told doctors she’d had problems walking
steadily for most of her life, and her mother reported that she hadn’t
walked until she was 7 and that her speech only became intelligible at
the age of 6. ... Although it is not unheard of to
have part of your brain missing, either congenitally or from surgery,
the woman joins an elite club of just nine people who are known to have
lived without their entire cerebellum. ... |
In other words: the cerebellum is not indispensable for an individual on
the strongly dysfunctional and deadly leel, as most and possibly all other
parts of the brainstem are.
A third indication of the abstract character of the task of the cerebellum
lies in her structure. Where all previous neurological structures in spinal
cord and brain stem have a shape more or less focused on the task they perform, thus occurring in numerous ganglia ("nodes") and nuclei
of various shape and form, while the cerebellum, with its much larger
size, has an almost uniform structure. It is one large sheet of neuron layers
(a
"cortex" in general terms) of approximately the same structure, folded in
lots of curls
due to its size.
This type of structure is, as noted, found in what
is usually denoted by "cortex" which is in fact the "neocortex", the one that
makes the human brain so large. But also in some smaller ones for which
this structural form is given much less note, for example the olivary
nucleus. All these having in common that they are based on a membrane consisting
of layers of neurons.
This latter type of structure has gotten
another name in another context (that of function) as a "neural network": a
conglomerate consisting of layers of neurons with layers of connections in
between.
The simplest and possibly the (evolutionary) first of these
is the neural network behind the eye: the retina. The eye does not deliver
its information to the rest of the brain in a simple point-by-point pattern
(a pixel map or bitmap), but in coded form, see the illustration below (from
harunyahya.com
):
The right picture shows sketchily that the
photosensitive cells are regularly connected to layers of neurons, i.e.: with
a neural network. That network has two functions: filtering out what is
important, and controlling the relatively limited amount of nerve pathways
toward the brain. What the network conveys are lines, areas, etcetera. Here
are two depictions of that network: a real life and a schematic one:
On the left is an actual microscopic recording, which shows a clear
structure in layers. The dark border just visible at the top are the
undersides of cones and rods.
The structure of the retina is quite
typical for a neural network, with the exception that it is directly coupled to
observational input - usually these networks work on information coming from
other neurological structures.
The cerebellum is such a network,
though not the first - that is probably the olivary nucleus, lower in the
brainstem. Here an overview in which both appear (viewed from behind - from
here
):
Also visible are some of the many smaller nuclei that do specific tasks,
e.g. the vestibular nucleus receives and relays the information
from the organ of balance. Which information has to be coordinated with that
of the eyes in order to get the correct "horizon" in the perceived picture
of reality.
It is clear that the cerebellum, with its widely
different structure, does another kind of job than simple coordination. Yet
it is deeply involved in all this, as the large number of inputs and ouputs
show (side view, nose left):
The inputs and outputs come in three bundles, with as a major local
output that to the red nucleus, that is associated with "gait": the
coordination of the limbs during locomotion.
The input and output
bundles, named inferior, middle and superior peduncle, also tie the cerebellum to the brain stem, see the following illustration (side view, nose left):
The peduncles process types of signals
according to their orientation: the
inferior peduncle contains bundles coming from spinal cord and inferior
olive. The middle peduncle
connects with cores at the height of the cerebellum, in the pons, the bulge
in the middle of the brainstem. And the superior bundles go towards thalamus
and cortex.
The
cross section shows that the outer layer or sheet
consisting of neuron cores, or "gray matter", are endlessly folded, with the
rest of the space filled with "white matter" which are the longer-distance connections
between the neurons, the axons. Here not shown are
the four nuclei in the center of which the largest one, the dentate
nucleus, was shown in the last but previous illustration. All of the outputs of the cerebellum come
from those nuclei, especially the dentate.
So what is the role of the cerebellum in all this control
and coordination of movement and sensory information?
Here simple
observation suffices. That is: information on what happens to systems that
are yet fully functional and which acquire these functionalities so that you
can observe what these developing functionalities do.
The "not yet
fully functioning system" is of course the child and more specifically the
baby.
In the growing up of the baby one can observe the different
stages of coordination - at first the baby waves its arms around wildly and
largely uncontrolled. Etcetera.
Now the coordination is done by the
sequence of smaller nuclei, so what does the cerebellum? Well, it does one
of the things you can see in the baby: it learns fine control of movement.
One can also readily observe how the baby does this: by repeating and
repeating and repeating. And repeating. Parents are known to get tired of
it.
And that's what happens within the "active" layers of the
cerebellum. That is: the storing of these endless repetitions.
The cerebellar cortex consists of two main types of cells: Purkinje cells with a very
widely branching, flat, tree of dendrites, belonging to the largest types of
neurons, and granular cells, belonging to the smallest neurons, of which are in a
very large majority. These two are connected in a
characteristic way. Below left a Purkinje cell in front view, and at the right
a part
of the network, with the "flat" Purkinje cells in side view.
The
granular cells in the lower half of the layer have only a handful of dendrites, and an
axon that rises upwards, see the right image, splitting into two horizontal
branches, forming a "T" with the horizontal branches, and then the called
the "parallel fibres" (being parallel to the layer structure of the cortex).
The parallel fibres run perpendicular to the planes of the Purkinje trees, see
the picture on the right, which they can cut through easily - they make about five
connections to branches of the Purkinje cells during their length, so they
do this sparsely.
The
outputs of the Purkinje cells, their axons, go to the inner nuclei and the
outputs of the latter are the outputs of the cerebellum. Granular cells plus
Purkinje cells form the basic structure of the network. It is clear from the
foregoing which function this provides: the large amount of experience is
stored in the form of the connections between parallel fibres, i.e.
granular cells with Purkinje cells.
In the technology, in particular
the electronics and information processing, such an approach is also known:
there such a system is called a "matrix", which when translated into terms
of the cerebellum would look like this:
Here, a practical technical example in the form of
an old type of computer memory (core memory stands for "core" meaning magnetic
core, the circular magnets through which the wires run):
With the dots or connections in the cerebellum matrix corresponding to
the presence of a magnet at the crossing point.
So firstly: what goes
into this matrix? Within the cerebellar neural network, the inputs are
provided by the granular cells. They in turn get their input from
outside, by what is called the "mossy fibres", axon bundles that have at
their endpoint many
branches within the layer of granular cells suddenly and therefore a little
mossy appearance - here they ar visible in the larger overview (this cross
section runs in the plane of the Purkinje cells, making the parallel fibres
only visible as dots):
The mossy fibres originate in the spinal cord and nuclei in the lower
brainstem and pons, entering via the lower and middle peduncles - see also
the earlier diagrams where they are called spinocerebellar and
pontocerebellar tracts.
The second type of input in the overview is called "climbing
fibres", all of which come from the inferior (lowest) olivary nucleus, and through
the inferior peduncle - in the "wiring diagrams" they are
called olivocerebellar tract.
Already about mentioned about the mossy fibers
is that they branch frequently (about 20 times), then
form structures called "glomeruli" (in the green circle), in which
they often connect (20 -30 times) with the dendrites of granular cells - of
the latter, a few extra large copies were drawn to make this visible.
The role of the second input, the climbing fibres, becomes clear when
looking at the scheme of a single Purkinje cell and its surroundings (from
here
- slightly
adapted to web presentation):
The climbing fibres are here colored green. And prove
to have a crucial role. They do two things: the climbing fibres immediately
excite the neurons of cerebellar nuclei, thus the cerebellum output - see
the plus-sign next to the point where they touch.
But, they are also connected to the base of the branches of the Purkinje cells and
excite those, and thereby the Purkinje cells themselves, i.e. their outputs,
and these inhibit the neurons of the cerebellar nuclei, see the minus sign in the drawing.
So the question
is: who wins? Either way, this is an example of how nature prefers to tackle
things: through equilibriums between opposing "forces".
Because then
a third factor can be introduced as, usually small, distortion of this
equilibrium, in this case the input the Purkinje cells get from the parallel
fibres i.e. the granular cells and the way these are connected to the
Purkinje dendrites, i.e.: the connection matrix. Or: the memory.
This
also makes it clear why it is addressed in this way: the body must also
function without the experience in memory. Less well, but for the time being
good enough. This is executed through the climbing fibres coming from the inferior olivary
nucleus. And by building experiences into the memory matrix, this rough behaviour
coming from the olive is adjusted and improved upon.
This is the
global mode of operation of the cerebellum. The next step is then towards
the detail of how the experiences are included and merged.
For the latter there is a simple and proven to be effective method: the
process of statistical averaging. Just counting the score of every result
and dividing by the number of scores. The prove of
effectiveness of this method has been given by the statistician Francis Galton
,
through his well-known experiment pitting "estimation by experts" versus "estimation
by lots of laymen". He organized a contest
to estimate the weight of an ox between "experts", being (a relatively small
numer of ) farmers and butchers, and
a large amount of ordinary citizens. The citizens won
handsomely. On average they were further away from the correct number, but
their average was better than that of the experts. Because their (random) errors
in the direction of "too much" were eliminated by the
(random) errors in the direction of "too small". And this works better, the
larger the group - or technically: the number of inputs. Later repeated
this is in numerous
forms with the identical results.
But in technology, methods are known to
improve this process, in case something is known or suspected about the
outcome. The first arose along with the first cameras that capture
electronic images in points, pixels. If the light is very weak, you will see
the pixel-for-pixel image and that will become clearer and clear - you can "see it grow".
Imagine that it's a white square, you'll see some white pixels, then some
more, until the contours go down and you see "It's a square". That process
can be accelerated by a simple trick: if of a certain pixel, that has eight neighbours, five or six neighbours
of them are white, then you know almost for certain that
the pixel itself should be white. And that's what you do: you make the pixel
white. And after you have done this for the entire field, you go over it
again in the same way, until you see no further improvements.
This works. It is the way astronomers work with their
present day images of very faint objects.
That is what may also happen in the active layer
of the cerebellum, by means of what is commonly called "internal circuit neurons".
Of these, there are three types. At the boundary layer with the Purkinje
cells there are basket cells, see the overview above, which are connected to the
bodies of several Purkinje cells. Thus, they correlate the result of
multiple Purkinje cells.
The second variant (also in the influence
they exert) are the
stellar cells that are part of the parallel fibres layer and connect multiple
fibres.
The third variant are the Golgi cells, which are located in
the middle of the granular cells and inhibit them, and get their input from the
parallel fibres and the mossy fibres. One of the many examples of feedback
in neurology.
With these additions, the
schematic representation of the cerebellum now becomes (an adaptation from here
, getting as
consistent as
possible with the previous illustrations):
And in these scheme all of the (active) parts of the cerebellum are
represented, which makes it quite simple.
Since the strcuture of the
cerebellum is so relatively simple, mainly because the constituting neurons
are so different from each other, there have been several attempts to cast it into
a model, the most famous of which is that of James Albus
:
This scheme is a
comprehensive global description of the cerebellum network. It includes a
verbal indication ("N → 100N recoder") that the input fibres branch by
around a hundredfold before forming the
connection matrix. If you show a bit more detail of the input
circuit, you get the following scheme:
From the left you first
see the branches of the mossy fibres, then the glomeruli layer, then their
branches to the granular cells and finally the granular-cell axons of the
parallel fibres. Of all these steps, only a few representative specimens have
been drawn in detail, which means that there are many more connections
and elements.
If you show some more detail from the knowledge gained
above, then you get this:
The signals run from left to right unless otherwise
indicated.
This basic scheme finds a technical parallel in the
attempts to construct the computation unit of a computer, a CPU, from basic
logic circuits. Here is such a schedule (from : The Complete Computer
Hobbyist, Donn M. Stewart):
The matrix of connections provides the
appropriate combination of basic signals. At the edge of the matrix there
are some additional input adjustment circuits and to transport the desired
signal as a single result to other units (not visible).
The major
differences between this schedule that focuses on direct control of functions and the
cerebellum scheme are the excessive number of lines in the cerebellum, and
the relatively scarcity of nodes. Where nature is always very careful with its resources, because of
a simple process: those who need less,
survive longer at times of scarcity.
This boils down to one question
that remains: why the "1
to 100" recoder? The answer can be found in the the already mentioned "statistical
averaging". Because in statistics it is highly important that the inputs,
either the people that do the voting or here the different input fibres, do not
influence each other. So after an certain input has been recorded, care must
be taken that the next one doesn't influence the previous one. For which one
method is: have a lot of inputs, and distribute the successive inputs among
them. If you take the number of inputs large enough, the chance of them
getting in the same channel is very small. Which you can enhance by
switching of a channel for some time once it had been used. This is probably
what is happening in the glomuleri.
So in terms of networks, the
cerebellum appears to be a kind of "two and a half" neural network: there
are two main layers of neurons: the Purkinje-layer and the granular layer.
They are supplemented by the
relatively scarce secondary cells: stellar, basketball and Golgi, that serve
as the intermediate or in network terms "hidden" layer.
Another role that
they seem to have is making the cerebellum a "real" neural network is that
they same to provide the other of the two stages that technical networks
have: they have to be trained in two stages: first to
recognize as many cases as possible (avoiding "wrong negatives") , and then
in selectivity (avoids "wrong positives"). The combination of mossy fibers,
globular cells, Purkinje branches, Purkinje cells is the stage of "recognize as much as
possible" or "repeat as much as possible". They all have connections of
excitory nature. The secondary cells all have inhibiting connections: stellar at the
level between separate branches, basket at the level of Purkinje cells so
whole trees, and Golgi that in the form of feedback from output to input.
They provide "avoid wrong positives", or "do not repeat things that did not
work".
Add this to the
following known facts: - The cerebellum is involved in the coordination
of the finer and finest forms of motion (known from cases of pathology). - The nice
forms of motion require considerable training, visible with young animals and
humans, and the finer the longer, see the amount
of training that athletes in "precision" sports do: tennis players, golf
players, etcetera. - All experience gained from training must be saved.
- All stored experiences must be processed to a better result. - The
cerebellum is a simple circuit that is simply very large - it contains half the
total amount of neurons in th brain.
Then the solutions present
themselves as follows: - The
cerebellum is one big memory for movement experiences - the movement
processes are captured by making nodes in the matrix. - The cerebellum
combines experiences through the simple process of averaging (averaging of
many experiences without selection automatically results in better results
than some experiences). - The outcome of the averaging is further
improved by removing those movements with less desired outcomes by
deactivating nodes.
The
rationale for the sustained existence of a cerebellum after a large part of
the functions of the brain haven been taken over by the cortex, has already
been given and is probably
that the latter takes, for a large number of cases, too much time. The
simplicity of the circuit of the
cerebellum gives it the edge as soon as speed of reaction becomes important.
The Wikipedia article about the cerebellum
is comprehensive and
provides more detailed information, which is no longer difficult to decipher
with the structural description given above.
For more on
neurology, see Emotion organs
-
for the connection of neurology with language, go to Abstraction ladder
.
|