Author: MIT News

Mark Harnett named Vallee Foundation Scholar

Anne Trafton |

The Bert L and N Kuggie Vallee Foundation has named McGovern Institute investigator Mark Harnett a 2018 Vallee Scholar. The Vallee Scholars Program recognizes original, innovative, and pioneering work by early career scientists at a critical juncture in their careers and provides $300,000 in discretionary funds to be spent over four years for basic biomedical research. Harnett is among five researchers named to this year’s Vallee Scholars Program.

Harnett, who is also the Fred and Carole Middleton Career Development Assistant Professor in the Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, is being recognized for his work exploring how the biophysical features of neurons give rise to the computational power of the brain. By exploiting new technologies and approaches at the interface of biophysics and systems neuroscience, research in the Harnett lab aims to provide a new understanding of the biology underlying how mammalian brains learn. This may open new areas of research into brain disorders characterized by atypical learning and memory (such as dementia and schizophrenia) and may also have important implications for designing new, brain-inspired artificial neural networks.

The Vallee Foundation was established in 1996 by Bert and Kuggie Vallee to foster originality, creativity, and leadership within biomedical scientific research and medical education. The foundation’s goal to fund originality, innovation, and pioneering work “recognizes the future promise of these scientists who are dedicated to understanding fundamental biological processes.” Harnett joins a list of 24 Vallee Scholars, including McGovern investigator Feng Zhang, who have been appointed to the program since its inception in 2013.

New sensors track dopamine in the brain for more than a year

Anne Trafton |

Dopamine, a signaling molecule used throughout the brain, plays a major role in regulating our mood, as well as controlling movement. Many disorders, including Parkinson’s disease, depression, and schizophrenia, are linked to dopamine deficiencies.

MIT neuroscientists have now devised a way to measure dopamine in the brain for more than a year, which they believe will help them to learn much more about its role in both healthy and diseased brains.

“Despite all that is known about dopamine as a crucial signaling molecule in the brain, implicated in neurologic and neuropsychiatric conditions as well as our ability to learn, it has been impossible to monitor changes in the online release of dopamine over time periods long enough to relate these to clinical conditions,” says Ann Graybiel, an MIT Institute Professor, a member of MIT’s McGovern Institute for Brain Research, and one of the senior authors of the study.

Michael Cima, the David H. Koch Professor of Engineering in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering and a member of MIT’s Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, and Rober Langer, the David H. Koch Institute Professor and a member of the Koch Institute, are also senior authors of the study. MIT postdoc Helen Schwerdt is the lead author of the paper, which appears in the Sept. 12 issue of Communications Biology.

Long-term sensing

Dopamine is one of many neurotransmitters that neurons in the brain use to communicate with each other. Traditional systems for measuring dopamine — carbon electrodes with a shaft diameter of about 100 microns — can only be used reliably for about a day because they produce scar tissue that interferes with the electrodes’ ability to interact with dopamine.

In 2015, the MIT team demonstrated that tiny microfabricated sensors could be used to measure dopamine levels in a part of the brain called the striatum, which contains dopamine-producing cells that are critical for habit formation and reward-reinforced learning.

Because these probes are so small (about 10 microns in diameter), the researchers could implant up to 16 of them to measure dopamine levels in different parts of the striatum. In the new study, the researchers wanted to test whether they could use these sensors for long-term dopamine tracking.

“Our fundamental goal from the very beginning was to make the sensors work over a long period of time and produce accurate readings from day to day,” Schwerdt says. “This is necessary if you want to understand how these signals mediate specific diseases or conditions.”

To develop a sensor that can be accurate over long periods of time, the researchers had to make sure that it would not provoke an immune reaction, to avoid the scar tissue that interferes with the accuracy of the readings.

The MIT team found that their tiny sensors were nearly invisible to the immune system, even over extended periods of time. After the sensors were implanted, populations of microglia (immune cells that respond to short-term damage), and astrocytes, which respond over longer periods, were the same as those in brain tissue that did not have the probes inserted.

In this study, the researchers implanted three to five sensors per animal, about 5 millimeters deep, in the striatum. They took readings every few weeks, after stimulating dopamine release from the brainstem, which travels to the striatum. They found that the measurements remained consistent for up to 393 days.

“This is the first time that anyone’s shown that these sensors work for more than a few months. That gives us a lot of confidence that these kinds of sensors might be feasible for human use someday,” Schwerdt says.

Paul Glimcher, a professor of physiology and neuroscience at New York University, says the new sensors should enable more researchers to perform long-term studies of dopamine, which is essential for studying phenomena such as learning, which occurs over long time periods.

“This is a really solid engineering accomplishment that moves the field forward,” says Glimcher, who was not involved in the research. “This dramatically improves the technology in a way that makes it accessible to a lot of labs.”

Monitoring Parkinson’s

If developed for use in humans, these sensors could be useful for monitoring Parkinson’s patients who receive deep brain stimulation, the researchers say. This treatment involves implanting an electrode that delivers electrical impulses to a structure deep within the brain. Using a sensor to monitor dopamine levels could help doctors deliver the stimulation more selectively, only when it is needed.

The researchers are now looking into adapting the sensors to measure other neurotransmitters in the brain, and to measure electrical signals, which can also be disrupted in Parkinson’s and other diseases.

“Understanding those relationships between chemical and electrical activity will be really important to understanding all of the issues that you see in Parkinson’s,” Schwerdt says.

The research was funded by the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, the Army Research Office, the Saks Kavanaugh Foundation, the Nancy Lurie Marks Family Foundation, and Dr. Tenley Albright.

Neuroscientists get at the roots of pessimism

Anne Trafton |

Many patients with neuropsychiatric disorders such as anxiety or depression experience negative moods that lead them to focus on the possible downside of a given situation more than the potential benefit.

MIT neuroscientists have now pinpointed a brain region that can generate this type of pessimistic mood. In tests in animals, they showed that stimulating this region, known as the caudate nucleus, induced animals to make more negative decisions: They gave far more weight to the anticipated drawback of a situation than its benefit, compared to when the region was not stimulated. This pessimistic decision-making could continue through the day after the original stimulation.

The findings could help scientists better understand how some of the crippling effects of depression and anxiety arise, and guide them in developing new treatments.

“We feel we were seeing a proxy for anxiety, or depression, or some mix of the two,” says Ann Graybiel, an MIT Institute Professor, a member of MIT’s McGovern Institute for Brain Research, and the senior author of the study, which appears in the Aug. 9 issue of Neuron. “These psychiatric problems are still so very difficult to treat for many individuals suffering from them.”

The paper’s lead authors are McGovern Institute research affiliates Ken-ichi Amemori and Satoko Amemori, who perfected the tasks and have been studying emotion and how it is controlled by the brain. McGovern Institute researcher Daniel Gibson, an expert in data analysis, is also an author of the paper.

Emotional decisions

Graybiel’s laboratory has previously identified a neural circuit that underlies a specific kind of decision-making known as approach-avoidance conflict. These types of decisions, which require weighing options with both positive and negative elements, tend to provoke a great deal of anxiety. Her lab has also shown that chronic stress dramatically affects this kind of decision-making: More stress usually leads animals to choose high-risk, high-payoff options.

In the new study, the researchers wanted to see if they could reproduce an effect that is often seen in people with depression, anxiety, or obsessive-compulsive disorder. These patients tend to engage in ritualistic behaviors designed to combat negative thoughts, and to place more weight on the potential negative outcome of a given situation. This kind of negative thinking, the researchers suspected, could influence approach-avoidance decision-making.

To test this hypothesis, the researchers stimulated the caudate nucleus, a brain region linked to emotional decision-making, with a small electrical current as animals were offered a reward (juice) paired with an unpleasant stimulus (a puff of air to the face). In each trial, the ratio of reward to aversive stimuli was different, and the animals could choose whether to accept or not.

This kind of decision-making requires cost-benefit analysis. If the reward is high enough to balance out the puff of air, the animals will choose to accept it, but when that ratio is too low, they reject it. When the researchers stimulated the caudate nucleus, the cost-benefit calculation became skewed, and the animals began to avoid combinations that they previously would have accepted. This continued even after the stimulation ended, and could also be seen the following day, after which point it gradually disappeared.

This result suggests that the animals began to devalue the reward that they previously wanted, and focused more on the cost of the aversive stimulus. “This state we’ve mimicked has an overestimation of cost relative to benefit,” Graybiel says.

The study provides valuable insight into the role of the basal ganglia (a region that includes the caudate nucleus) in this type of decision-making, says Scott Grafton, a professor of neuroscience at the University of California at Santa Barbara, who was not involved in the research.

“We know that the frontal cortex and the basal ganglia are involved, but the relative contributions of the basal ganglia have not been well understood,” Grafton says. “This is a nice paper because it puts some of the decision-making process in the basal ganglia as well.”

A delicate balance

The researchers also found that brainwave activity in the caudate nucleus was altered when decision-making patterns changed. This change, discovered by Amemori, is in the beta frequency and might serve as a biomarker to monitor whether animals or patients respond to drug treatment, Graybiel says.

Graybiel is now working with psychiatrists at McLean Hospital to study patients who suffer from depression and anxiety, to see if their brains show abnormal activity in the neocortex and caudate nucleus during approach-avoidance decision-making. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies have shown abnormal activity in two regions of the medial prefrontal cortex that connect with the caudate nucleus.

The caudate nucleus has within it regions that are connected with the limbic system, which regulates mood, and it sends input to motor areas of the brain as well as dopamine-producing regions. Graybiel and Amemori believe that the abnormal activity seen in the caudate nucleus in this study could be somehow disrupting dopamine activity.

“There must be many circuits involved,” she says. “But apparently we are so delicately balanced that just throwing the system off a little bit can rapidly change behavior.”

The research was funded by the National Institutes of Health, the CHDI Foundation, the U.S. Office of Naval Research, the U.S. Army Research Office, MEXT KAKENHI, the Simons Center for the Social Brain, the Naito Foundation, the Uehara Memorial Foundation, Robert Buxton, Amy Sommer, and Judy Goldberg.

Michale Fee receives McKnight Technological Innovations in Neuroscience Award

by Julie Pryor |

McGovern Institute investigator Michale Fee has been selected to receive a 2018 McKnight Technological Innovations in Neuroscience Award for his research on “new technologies for imaging and analyzing neural state-space trajectories in freely-behaving small animals.”

“I am delighted to get support from the McKnight Foundation,” says Fee, who is also the Glen V. and Phyllis F. Dorflinger Professor in the Department of Brain and Cognitive Neurosciences at MIT. “We’re very excited about this project which aims to develop technology that will be a great help to the broader neuroscience community.”

Fee studies the neural mechanisms by which the brain, specifically that of juvenile songbirds, learns complex sequential behaviors. The way that songbirds learn a song through trial and error is analogous to humans learning complex behaviors, such as riding a bicycle. While it would be insightful to link such learning to neural activity, current methods for monitoring neurons can only monitor a limited field of neurons, a big issue since such learning and behavior involve complex interactions between larger circuits. While a wider field of view for recordings would help decipher neural changes linked to this learning paradigm, current microscopy equipment is large relative to a juvenile songbird, and microscopes that can record neural activity generally constrain the behavior of small animals. Ideally, technologies need to be lightweight (about 1 gram) and compact in size (the size of a dime), a far cry from current larger microscopes that weigh in at 3 grams. Fee hopes to be able to break these technical boundaries and miniaturize the recording equipment thus allowing recording of more neurons in naturally behaving small animals.

“We are thrilled that the McKnight Foundation has chosen to support this project. The technology that Michale’s developing will help to better visualize and understand the circuits underlying learning,” says Robert Desimone, director of MIT’s McGovern Institute for Brain Research.

In addition to development and miniaturization of the microscopy hardware itself, the award will support the development of technology that helps analyze the resulting images, so that the neuroscience community at large can more easily deploy and use the technology.

Advancing knowledge in medical and genetic sciences

Anne Trafton |

Research proposals from Laurie Boyer, associate professor of biology; Matt Shoulders, the Whitehead Career Development Associate Professor of Chemistry; and Feng Zhang, associate professor in the departments of Brain and Cognitive Sciences and Biological Engineering, Patricia and James Poitras ’63 Professor in Neuroscience, investigator at the McGovern Institute for Brain Research, and core member of the Broad Institute, have recently been selected for funding by the G. Harold and Leila Y. Mathers Foundation. These three grants from the Mathers Foundation will enable, over the next three years, key projects in the researchers’ respective labs.

Regenerative medicine holds great promise for treating heart failure, but that promise is unrealized, in part, due to a lack of sufficient understanding of heart development at the mechanistic level. Boyer’s research aims to achieve a deep, mechanistic understanding of the gene control switches that coordinate normal heart development. She then aims to leverage this knowledge and design effective strategies for rewiring faulty circuits in aging and disease.

“We are very grateful to receive support and recognition of our work from the Mathers Foundation,” said Boyer. “This award will allow us to build upon our prior work and to embark upon high risk projects that could ultimately change how we think about treating diseases resulting from faulty wiring of gene expression programs.”

Shoulders’ goal, with this support from the Mathers Foundation, is to elucidate underlying causes of osteoarthritis. There is currently no cure for osteoarthritis, which is perhaps the most common aging-related disease and is characterized by a progressive deterioration of joint cartilage culminating in inflammation, debilitating pain, and joint dysfunction. The Shoulders Group aims to test a new model for osteoarthritis — specifically, the concept that a collapse of proteostasis in aging cartilage cells creates an unrecoverable cartilage repair defect, thus initiating a self-amplifying, destructive feedback loop leading to pathology. Proteostasis collapse in aging cells is a well-known, disease-causing phenomenon that has previously been considered primarily in the context of neurodegenerative disorders. If correct, the proteostasis collapse model for osteoarthritis could one day lead to a novel class of therapeutic options for the disease.

“We are delighted to receive this generous support from the Mathers Foundation, which makes it possible for us to pursue an outside-the-box, high-risk/high-impact idea regarding the origins of osteoarthritis,” said Shoulders. “The research we are now able to pursue will not only provide fundamental, molecular-level insights into joint function, but also could change how we think about this widespread disease.”

Many genetic diseases are caused by the change of just a single base of DNA. Zhang is a leader in the field of genome editing, and he and his team have developed an array of tools based on the microbial immune CRISPR-Cas systems that can manipulate DNA and RNA in human cells. Together, these tools are changing the way molecular biology research is conducted, and they hold immense potential as therapeutic agents to correct thousands of genetic diseases. Now, with the support of the Mathers Foundation, Zhang is working to realize this potential by developing a CRISPR-based therapeutic that works at the level of RNA and offers a safe, effective route to treating a range of diseases, including diseases of the brain and central nervous system, which are difficult to treat with existing gene therapies.

“The generous support from the Mathers Foundation allows us the freedom to explore this exciting new direction for CRISPR-based technologies,” Zhang stated.

Known for their generosity and philanthropy, G. Harold and Leila Y. Mathers created their foundation with the goal of distributing their wealth among sustainable, charitable causes, with a particular interest in basic scientific research. The Mathers Foundation, whose ongoing mission is to advance knowledge in the life sciences by sponsoring scientific research and applying learnings and discoveries to benefit mankind, has issued grants since 1982.

How music lessons can improve language skills

Anne Trafton |

Many studies have shown that musical training can enhance language skills. However, it was unknown whether music lessons improve general cognitive ability, leading to better language proficiency, or if the effect of music is more specific to language processing.

A new study from MIT has found that piano lessons have a very specific effect on kindergartners’ ability to distinguish different pitches, which translates into an improvement in discriminating between spoken words. However, the piano lessons did not appear to confer any benefit for overall cognitive ability, as measured by IQ, attention span, and working memory.

“The children didn’t differ in the more broad cognitive measures, but they did show some improvements in word discrimination, particularly for consonants. The piano group showed the best improvement there,” says Robert Desimone, director of MIT’s McGovern Institute for Brain Research and the senior author of the paper.

The study, performed in Beijing, suggests that musical training is at least as beneficial in improving language skills, and possibly more beneficial, than offering children extra reading lessons. The school where the study was performed has continued to offer piano lessons to students, and the researchers hope their findings could encourage other schools to keep or enhance their music offerings.

Yun Nan, an associate professor at Beijing Normal University, is the lead author of the study, which appears in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences the week of June 25.

Other authors include Li Liu, Hua Shu, and Qi Dong, all of Beijing Normal University; Eveline Geiser, a former MIT research scientist; Chen-Chen Gong, an MIT research associate; and John Gabrieli, the Grover M. Hermann Professor in Health Sciences and Technology, a professor of brain and cognitive sciences, and a member of MIT’s McGovern Institute for Brain Research.

Benefits of music

Previous studies have shown that on average, musicians perform better than nonmusicians on tasks such as reading comprehension, distinguishing speech from background noise, and rapid auditory processing. However, most of these studies have been done by asking people about their past musical training. The MIT researchers wanted to perform a more controlled study in which they could randomly assign children to receive music lessons or not, and then measure the effects.

They decided to perform the study at a school in Beijing, along with researchers from the IDG/McGovern Institute at Beijing Normal University, in part because education officials there were interested in studying the value of music education versus additional reading instruction.

“If children who received music training did as well or better than children who received additional academic instruction, that could a justification for why schools might want to continue to fund music,” Desimone says.

The 74 children participating in the study were divided into three groups: one that received 45-minute piano lessons three times a week; one that received extra reading instruction for the same period of time; and one that received neither intervention. All children were 4 or 5 years old and spoke Mandarin as their native language.

After six months, the researchers tested the children on their ability to discriminate words based on differences in vowels, consonants, or tone (many Mandarin words differ only in tone). Better word discrimination usually corresponds with better phonological awareness — the awareness of the sound structure of words, which is a key component of learning to read.

Children who had piano lessons showed a significant advantage over children in the extra reading group in discriminating between words that differ by one consonant. Children in both the piano group and extra reading group performed better than children who received neither intervention when it came to discriminating words based on vowel differences.

The researchers also used electroencephalography (EEG) to measure brain activity and found that children in the piano group had stronger responses than the other children when they listened to a series of tones of different pitch. This suggest that a greater sensitivity to pitch differences is what helped the children who took piano lessons to better distinguish different words, Desimone says.

“That’s a big thing for kids in learning language: being able to hear the differences between words,” he says. “They really did benefit from that.”

In tests of IQ, attention, and working memory, the researchers did not find any significant differences among the three groups of children, suggesting that the piano lessons did not confer any improvement on overall cognitive function.

Aniruddh Patel, a professor of psychology at Tufts University, says the findings also address the important question of whether purely instrumental musical training can enhance speech processing.

“This study answers the question in the affirmative, with an elegant design that directly compares the effect of music and language instruction on young children. The work specifically relates behavioral improvements in speech perception to the neural impact of musical training, which has both theoretical and real-world significance,” says Patel, who was not involved in the research.

Educational payoff

Desimone says he hopes the findings will help to convince education officials who are considering abandoning music classes in schools not to do so.

“There are positive benefits to piano education in young kids, and it looks like for recognizing differences between sounds including speech sounds, it’s better than extra reading. That means schools could invest in music and there will be generalization to speech sounds,” Desimone says. “It’s not worse than giving extra reading to the kids, which is probably what many schools are tempted to do — get rid of the arts education and just have more reading.”

Desimone now hopes to delve further into the neurological changes caused by music training. One way to do that is to perform EEG tests before and after a single intense music lesson to see how the brain’s activity has been altered.

The research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the Beijing Municipal Science and Technology Commission, the Interdiscipline Research Funds of Beijing Normal University, and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities.

How the brain performs flexible computations

Anne Trafton |

Humans can perform a vast array of mental operations and adjust their behavioral responses based on external instructions and internal beliefs. For example, to tap your feet to a musical beat, your brain has to process the incoming sound and also use your internal knowledge of how the song goes.

MIT neuroscientists have now identified a strategy that the brain uses to rapidly select and flexibly perform different mental operations. To make this discovery, they applied a mathematical framework known as dynamical systems analysis to understand the logic that governs the evolution of neural activity across large populations of neurons.

“The brain can combine internal and external cues to perform novel computations on the fly,” says Mehrdad Jazayeri, the Robert A. Swanson Career Development Professor of Life Sciences, a member of MIT’s McGovern Institute for Brain Research, and the senior author of the study. “What makes this remarkable is that we can make adjustments to our behavior at a much faster time scale than the brain’s hardware can change. As it turns out, the same hardware can assume many different states, and the brain uses instructions and beliefs to select between those states.”

Previous work from Jazayeri’s group has found that the brain can control when it will initiate a movement by altering the speed at which patterns of neural activity evolve over time. Here, they found that the brain controls this speed flexibly based on two factors: external sensory inputs and adjustment of internal states, which correspond to knowledge about the rules of the task being performed.

Evan Remington, a McGovern Institute postdoc, is the lead author of the paper, which appears in the June 6 edition of Neuron. Other authors are former postdoc Devika Narain and MIT graduate student Eghbal Hosseini.

Ready, set, go

Neuroscientists believe that “cognitive flexibility,” or the ability to rapidly adapt to new information, resides in the brain’s higher cortical areas, but little is known about how the brain achieves this kind of flexibility.

To understand the new findings, it is useful to think of how switches and dials can be used to change the output of an electrical circuit. For example, in an amplifier, a switch may select the sound source by controlling the input to the circuit, and a dial may adjust the volume by controlling internal parameters such as a variable resistance. The MIT team theorized that the brain similarly transforms instructions and beliefs to inputs and internal states that control the behavior of neural circuits.

To test this, the researchers recorded neural activity in the frontal cortex of animals trained to perform a flexible timing task called “ready, set, go.” In this task, the animal sees two visual flashes — “ready” and “set” — that are separated by an interval anywhere between 0.5 and 1 second, and initiates a movement — “go” — some time after “set.” The animal has to initiate the movement such that the “set-go” interval is either the same as or 1.5 times the “ready-set” interval. The instruction for whether to use a multiplier of 1 or 1.5 is provided in each trial.

Neural signals recorded during the “set-go” interval clearly carried information about both the multiplier and the measured length of the “ready-set” interval, but the nature of these representations seemed bewilderingly complex. To decode the logic behind these representations, the researchers used the dynamical systems analysis framework. This analysis is used in the study of a wide range of physical systems, from simple electrical circuits to space shuttles.

The application of this approach to neural data in the “ready, set, go” task enabled Jazayeri and his colleagues to discover how the brain adjusts the inputs to and initial conditions of frontal cortex to control movement times flexibly. A switch-like operation sets the input associated with the correct multiplier, and a dial-like operation adjusts the state of neurons based on the “ready-set” interval. These two complementary control strategies allow the same hardware to produce different behaviors.

David Sussillo, a research scientist at Google Brain and an adjunct professor at Stanford University, says a key to the study was the research team’s development of new mathematical tools to analyze huge amounts of data from neuron recordings, allowing the researchers to uncover how a large population of neurons can work together to perform mental operations related to timing and rhythm.

“They have very rigorously brought the dynamical systems approach to the problem of timing,” says Sussillo, who was not involved in the research.

“A bridge between behavior and neurobiology”

Many unanswered questions remain about how the brain achieves this flexibility, the researchers say. They are now trying to find out what part of the brain sends information about the multiplier to the frontal cortex, and they also hope to study what happens in these neurons as they first learn tasks that require them to respond flexibly.

“We haven’t connected all the dots from behavioral flexibility to neurobiological details. But what we have done is to establish an algorithmic understanding based on the mathematics of dynamical systems that serves as a bridge between behavior and neurobiology,” Jazayeri says.

The researchers also hope to explore whether this type of model could help to explain behavior of other parts of the brain that have to perform computations flexibly.

The research was funded by the National Institutes of Health, the Sloan Foundation, the Klingenstein Foundation, the Simons Foundation, the McKnight Foundation, the Center for Sensorimotor Neural Engineering, and the McGovern Institute.

Ed Boyden and Feng Zhang named Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigators

Anne Trafton |

Two members of the MIT faculty were named Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI) investigators today. Ed Boyden and Feng Zhang join a community of 300 HHMI scientists who are “transforming biology and medicine, one discovery at a time.” Both researchers have been instrumental in recognizing, developing, and sharing robust tools with broad utility that have revolutionized the life sciences.

“We are thrilled that Ed and Feng are being recognized in this way” says Robert Desimone, director of the McGovern Institute for Brain Research at MIT. “Being named to the investigator program recognizes their previous achievements and allows them to follow the innovative path that is a trait of their research.”

HHMI selects new Investigators to join its flagship program through periodic competitions. In choosing researchers to join its investigator program, HHMI specifically aims to select ‘people, not projects’ and identifies trail blazers in the biomedical sciences. The organization provides support for an unusual length of time, seven years with a renewal process at the end of that period, thus giving selected scientists the time and freedom to tackle difficult and important biological questions. HHMI-affiliated scientists continue to work at their home institution. The HHMI Investigator program currently funds 300 scientists at 60 research institutions across the United States.

Ed Boyden, the Y. Eva Tan Professor in Neurotechnology at MIT, has pioneered a number of technologies that allow visualization and manipulation of complex biological systems. Boyden worked, along with Karl Deisseroth and Feng Zhang, on optogenetics, a system that leverages microbial opsins to manipulate neuronal activity using light. This technology has transformed our ability to examine neuronal function in vivo. Boyden’s work initiated optogenetics, then extended it into a multicolor, high-speed, and noninvasive toolbox. Subsequent technological advances developed by Boyden and his team include expansion microscopy, an imaging strategy that overcomes the limits of light microscopy by expanding biological specimens in a controlled fashion. Boyden’s team also recently developed a directed evolution system that is capable of robotically screening hundreds of thousands of mutated proteins for specific properties within hours. He and his team recently used the system to develop a high-performance fluorescent voltage indicator.

“I am honored and excited to become an HHMI investigator,” says Boyden, who is also a member of MIT’s McGovern Institute for Brain Research and Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research and an associate professor in the Program in Media Arts and Sciences at the MIT Media Lab; the MIT Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences; and the MIT Department of Biological Engineering. “This will give my group the ability to open up completely new areas of science, in a way that would not be possible with traditional funding.”

Feng Zhang is a molecular biologist focused on building new tools for probing the human brain. As a graduate student, Zhang was part of the team that developed optogenetics. Zhang went on to develop other innovative tools. These achievements include the landmark deployment of the microbial CRISPR-Cas9 system for genome engineering in eukaryotic cells. The ease and specificity of the system has led to its widespread use. Zhang has continued to mine bacterial CRISPR systems for additional enzymes with useful properties, leading to the discovery of Cas13, which targets RNA, rather than DNA. By leveraging the unique properties of Cas13, Zhang and his team created a precise RNA editing tool, which may potentially be a safer way to treat genetic diseases because the genome does not need to be cut, as well as a molecular detection system, termed SHERLOCK, which can sense trace amounts of genetic material, such as viruses.

“It is so exciting to join this exceptional scientific community,” says Zhang, “and be given this opportunity to pursue our research into engineering natural systems.”

Zhang is the James and Patricia Poitras Professor of Neuroscience at MIT, an associate professor in the MIT departments of Brain and Cognitive Sciences and Biological Engineering, an investigator at the McGovern Institute for Brain Research, and a core member of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard.

The MIT Media Lab, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, and MIT departments of Brain and Cognitive Sciences and Biological Engineering contributed to this article.

Biologists discover function of gene linked to familial ALS

Anne Trafton |

MIT biologists have discovered a function of a gene that is believed to account for up to 40 percent of all familial cases of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Studies of ALS patients have shown that an abnormally expanded region of DNA in a specific region of this gene can cause the disease.

In a study of the microscopic worm Caenorhabditis elegans, the researchers found that the gene has a key role in helping cells to remove waste products via structures known as lysosomes. When the gene is mutated, these unwanted substances build up inside cells. The researchers believe that if this also happens in neurons of human ALS patients, it could account for some of those patients’ symptoms.

“Our studies indicate what happens when the activities of such a gene are inhibited — defects in lysosomal function. Certain features of ALS are consistent with their being caused by defects in lysosomal function, such as inflammation,” says H. Robert Horvitz, the David H. Koch Professor of Biology at MIT, a member of the McGovern Institute for Brain Research and the Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, and the senior author of the study.

Mutations in this gene, known as C9orf72, have also been linked to another neurodegenerative brain disorder known as frontotemporal dementia (FTD), which is estimated to affect about 60,000 people in the United States.

“ALS and FTD are now thought to be aspects of the same disease, with different presentations. There are genes that when mutated cause only ALS, and others that cause only FTD, but there are a number of other genes in which mutations can cause either ALS or FTD or a mixture of the two,” says Anna Corrionero, an MIT postdoc and the lead author of the paper, which appears in the May 3 issue of the journal Current Biology.

Genetic link

Scientists have identified dozens of genes linked to familial ALS, which occurs when two or more family members suffer from the disease. Doctors believe that genetics may also be a factor in nonfamilial cases of the disease, which are much more common, accounting for 90 percent of cases.

Of all ALS-linked mutations identified so far, the C9orf72 mutation is the most prevalent, and it is also found in about 25 percent of frontotemporal dementia patients. The MIT team set out to study the gene’s function in C. elegans, which has an equivalent gene known as alfa-1.

In studies of worms that lack alfa-1, the researchers discovered that defects became apparent early in embryonic development. C. elegans embryos have a yolk that helps to sustain them before they hatch, and in embryos missing alfa-1, the researchers found “blobs” of yolk floating in the fluid surrounding the embryos.

This led the researchers to discover that the gene mutation was affecting the lysosomal degradation of yolk once it is absorbed into the cells. Lysosomes, which also remove cellular waste products, are cell structures which carry enzymes that can break down many kinds of molecules.

When lysosomes degrade their contents — such as yolk — they are reformed into tubular structures that split, after which they are able to degrade other materials. The MIT team found that in cells with the alfa-1 mutation and impaired lysosomal degradation, lysosomes were unable to reform and could not be used again, disrupting the cell’s waste removal process.

“It seems that lysosomes do not reform as they should, and material accumulates in the cells,” Corrionero says.

For C. elegans embryos, that meant that they could not properly absorb the nutrients found in yolk, which made it harder for them to survive under starvation conditions. The embryos that did survive appeared to be normal, the researchers say.

Robert Brown, chair of the Department of Neurology at the University of Massachusetts Medical School, describes the study as a major contribution to scientists’ understanding of the normal function of the C9orf72 gene.

“They used the power of worm genetics to dissect very fully the stages of vesicle maturation at which this gene seems to play a major role,” says Brown, who was not involved in the study.

Neuronal effects

The researchers were able to partially reverse the effects of alfa-1 loss in the C. elegans embryos by expressing the human protein encoded by the C9orf72 gene. “This suggests that the worm and human proteins are performing the same molecular function,” Corrionero says.

If loss of C9orf72 affects lysosome function in human neurons, it could lead to a slow, gradual buildup of waste products in those cells. ALS usually affects cells of the motor cortex, which controls movement, and motor neurons in the spinal cord, while frontotemporal dementia affects the frontal areas of the brain’s cortex.

“If you cannot degrade things properly in cells that live for very long periods of time, like neurons, that might well affect the survival of the cells and lead to disease,” Corrionero says.

Many pharmaceutical companies are now researching drugs that would block the expression of the mutant C9orf72. The new study suggests certain possible side effects to watch for in studies of such drugs.

“If you generate drugs that decrease C9orf72 expression, you might cause problems in lysosomal homeostasis,” Corrionero says. “In developing any drug, you have to be careful to watch for possible side effects. Our observations suggest some things to look for in studying drugs that inhibit C9orf72 in ALS/FTD patients.”

The research was funded by an EMBO postdoctoral fellowship, an ALS Therapy Alliance grant, a gift from Rose and Douglas Barnard ’79 to the McGovern Institute, and a gift from the Halis Family Foundation to the MIT Aging Brain Initiative.

McGovern Institute awards 2018 Scolnick Prize to David Anderson

by Julie Pryor |

The McGovern Institute for Brain Research at MIT announced today that David J. Anderson of Caltech is the winner of the 2018 Edward M. Scolnick Prize in Neuroscience. He was awarded the prize for his contributions to the isolation and characterization of neural stem cells and for his research on neural circuits that control emotional behaviors in animal models. The Scolnick Prize is awarded annually by the McGovern Institute to recognize outstanding advances in any field of neuroscience.

“We congratulate David Anderson on being selected for this award,” says Robert Desimone, director of the McGovern Institute and chair of the selection committee. “His work has provided fundamental insights into neural development and the structure and function of neural circuits.”

Anderson is the Seymour Benzer Professor of Biology at Caltech, where he has been on the faculty since 1986, and is currently the director of the Tianqiao and Chrissy Chen Institute for Neuroscience. He is also an investigator of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. He received his PhD in cell biology from Rockefeller University, where he trained with the late Günter Blobel, and he received his postdoctoral training in molecular biology with Richard Axel at Columbia University.

For the first 20 years of his career, Anderson focused his research on the biology of neural stem cells and was the first to isolate a multipotent stem cell from the mammalian nervous system. He subsequently identified growth factors and master transcriptional regulators that control their differentiation into neurons and glial cells. Anderson also made the unexpected and fundamental discovery that arteries and veins are genetically distinct even before the heart begins to beat. Combining this discovery with his interest in neural development, Anderson went on to contribute to the expanding field of vessel identity and the study of molecular cross-talk between developing nerves and blood vessels.

More recently, Anderson has shifted his focus from neural development to the study of neural circuits that control emotional behaviors, such as fear, anxiety, and aggression, in animal models. Anderson has employed various technologies for neural circuit manipulation including optogenetics, pharmacogenetics, electrophysiology, in vivo imaging, and quantitative behavior analysis using machine vision-based approaches. He developed and applied powerful genetic methods to identify and manipulate cells and circuits involved in emotional behaviors in mice — including ways to inactivate neurons reversibly and to trace their synaptic targets. In addition to this work on vertebrate neural circuitry, Anderson mounted a parallel inquiry that dissects the genes and circuits underlying aggressive behavior in the fruitfly Drosophila melanogaster, and has become an international leader in this rapidly developing field.

Among his many honors and awards, Anderson is a Perl-UNC Neuroscience Prize recipient, a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and a member of the National Academy of Sciences. Anderson also played a key role in the foundation of the Allen Institute for Brain Sciences and the Allen Brain Atlas, a comprehensive open-source atlas of gene expression in the mouse brain.

Anderson will deliver the Scolnick Prize lecture at the McGovern Institute on Friday, Sept. 21 at 4 p.m. in the Singleton Auditorium of MIT’s Brain and Cognitive Sciences Complex (Room 46-3002). The event is free and open to the public.