Friday, April 19, 2013

The Curious Case of the Earworm (Part 1)


I have had “Thrift Shop” stuck in my head for what seems like days.Yes, it is always on the radio, and yes, I usually listen to it when it is playing. Don't judge me. But why (*Stella scream* wwhhhhyyyyy!) has it established a permanent residence in my brain? I’m going to use a few studies to make the case that it isn’t my fault; I’m led around by my biochemistry. Basically, I’m blaming it on my neurons.

Hmmm…where to start. Let’s try to figure out why we like a song (or music in general) in the first place. A study by Valorie Salimpoor et al. in 2011 suggests that it comes down to the biochemistry of pleasure. We, as humans, as animals, find many things in our lives to be pleasurable. Why is this? Well, our brain tells us so. Pleasure is, in essence, a reward for a good stimulus. In the brain, it is largely mediated by dopamine, which also works to reinforce and motivate these behaviors. Now, most people will agree that music is a pleasurable stimulus, but as an abstract stimulus (one not directly related to survival) is it regulated by the same dopamine pathways? In this 2011 study, subjects were asked to select their own “highly pleasurable music” to play for these tests (since musical preferences are so individualized). Then the researchers used PET scanning to estimate dopamine release. Since there are physiological changes that occur during moments of extreme pleasure, they also used the “chills” or “musical frission” response, an objective phychophysiological measurement of clear and discrete patterns of autonomic nervous system arousal. To tease out the response to the music versus the anticipation of the music, they combined the temporal specificity of functional MRI (through the temporal profile of blood oxygenation level - BOLD) with the neurochemical specificity of the PET scan.

Salimpoor's group found that the pleasure experienced when listening to music is associated with dopamine activity, that there was a positive correlation between the intensity of “chills” and dopamine release, and an increased BOLD response. In fact, dopamine levels surge during key passages of favorite music and just in anticipation of it. This release is pivotal for establishing and maintaining the behavior, making listening to music a valued experience.

Ok, biochemistry…check. Let’s go bigger: What parts of your brain light up when you hear music you like? Salimpoor et al. has published a new study in the April 2013 edition of Science that looks at neural processes active when this pleasurable musical event is happening. Specifically, they look at the reward value the first time a song is heard. We now know that dopamine is involved in familiar music, so what about previously unheard music? To test this, the researchers recruited people, asked them to share their musical tastes (“indie” and “electronic” were the most popular), and used music excerpts selected from a music-recommendation software to pick a unheard song within that preference. To assess reward value, to see if participants liked a song enough that they wanted to hear it again, they were given the option purchase the music with their own money (I know if I have to use my own money then I make sure I love it). Then the participants underwent fMRI scans while listening to musical excerpts and were asked to provide bids of how much they were willing to spend for each song.

The researchers found that the reward value (amount of the bid) was directly related to the region of the brain associated with positive prediction error (the NAcc for you brain folks), or pleasant surprises. Increased functional connectivity with this region was made with the auditory cortices, the region known to play a role in the retrieval of previously stored sound information (STG), and the areas implicated in beat processing (caudate and premotor areas). Additionally, increased connectivity was found in regions associated with emotional processing and value-guided decision-making (VMPFC, OFC, and amygdala), but only when sounds gain reward values. When added to the dopamine findings, the activity in these brain regions suggests that when you hear new music your brain looks at its stored information about sound relationships and makes a decision on whether or not to like it based on previous listening experiences and the expectations of tonal events associated with that type of music. If you like it, then your brain gives you a pleasure reward and you end up using your money to buy the song (or otherwise find ways to hear it again). If you like it better than you expected, you get even more delight.

Now we know why we like the song and want to hear it again (and again and again…).In the next post we will go further and explore what turns this likeable song into an earworm. Or is it its likeablity at all? (insert cliffhanger music here…dun dun duuuunnnn…)


ResearchBlogging.orgSalimpoor, V., Benovoy, M., Larcher, K., Dagher, A., & Zatorre, R. (2011). Anatomically distinct dopamine release during anticipation and experience of peak emotion to music Nature Neuroscience, 14 (2), 257-262 DOI: 10.1038/nn.2726


ResearchBlogging.orgSalimpoor, V., van den Bosch, I., Kovacevic, N., McIntosh, A., Dagher, A., & Zatorre, R. (2013). Interactions Between the Nucleus Accumbens and Auditory Cortices Predict Music Reward Value Science, 340 (6129), 216-219 DOI: 10.1126/science.1231059


...and an article in ScienceNOW "Why Your Brain Loves That New Song"


(image via rockandtheology)

Wednesday, April 17, 2013

Scientifically Accurate Spider-Man

What if Spider-Man had the characteristics of a real spider? He probably wouldn't be as popular as he is now.



Note: This will be gross to some people, but pretty hilarious to everyone else. Oh, and it contains some "language," you've been warned and I've been disclaimed

(via NerdApproved via Laughing Squid)

Tuesday, April 16, 2013

What You Should Know About Dark Matter

This is a really nice infographic about dark matter. You can find more over at SPACE.com including some great links to more information.

Source SPACE.com: All about our solar system, outer space and exploration

Monday, April 15, 2013

Claim Your Place in Space!


KLM is running a particularly awesome contest. You can win a trip to space!

Besides having a ridiculously cool contest website, this is a completely legit contest to win a trip to space worth more than $95,000 (£60,000). You could be part of a revolutionary space project that will see the first commercial space trip take off from Curacao on January 1, 2014.

So how does this work?

On April 22, KLM will launch a special high altitude balloon from the Nevada desert in the US, carrying cameras and a GPS to monitor its exact progress. When you go on to their website you go through a few easy steps to predict how high this balloon will get before it pops. The closest predictor to the actual pop-site wins! KLM will will fly you and a friend to Curacao to stay at a luxury hotel before getting on board the SXC Lynx spaceship.

If you choose to register with a social media account, your friends can even help up your chances to win!

Speaking of which, I posted my entry on Science Storiented's Facebook page. Feel free to help me win!

You only have 6 more days to enter. So hurry!

Here's the contest website:

http://space-origin.klm.com/

Friday, April 12, 2013

Om Nom Nom: The Links Between Plant Diversity and Herbivory


I usually start a post with the reason why a particular article caught my eye. Today, I’m not sure why my eyeballs glommed on to this paper, but they did. As it turns out, they have a pretty good taste in articles. Who knew?

An early view paper from the Journal of Ecology looks at how the large herbivores of the African savanna affect the diversity and community structure of plants. More and more studies these days are taking a phylogenetic approach to community ecology questions. That is, they are looking at the evolutionary development and history of a species or taxonomic group to explain the patterns that we currently see. This new study takes this approach in the subtropical woodland biome, or “bushveld,” of the Kruger National Park (KNP) in northeast South Africa. This area is home to 148 mammal species, of which 30 are large herbivores such as elephants, rhinos, and giraffes. The vegetation of this area consists of 1974 species, including 458 species of trees and shrubs. KNP varies from dense thicket, savanna woodlands to forests characterized by tall trees and a closed canopy. These plant communities are under occasional pressure from periodic fire and under constant pressure from large herbivores. This study looks at the impacts of these herbivores on the phylogenetic structure of woody plant assemblages and evaluates the impacts of their removal on plant community composition and structure.

The researchers used DNA sequencing to reconstruct the phylogeny of 448 species of trees and shrubs (using Amborella as an outgroup), representing 246 genera, 71 families and 31 orders. ... Let’s pause for a second to say “Wow!” ... Then they calculated divergence times and used speciation models on these data. Next was the community sampling along a north-south transect through KNP. This transect has enclosures situated along it where large herbivores are partly or fully excluded. These enclosures have been established in the park for between 8 and 43 years. Within 15 defined “ecozones,” the researchers surveyed 110 50x50 meter unrestricted herbivory plots and 15 50x50 meter plots in each of the five herbivore exclusion enclosures. Within these plots they recorded all species of trees and shrubs and the number of individuals per species (abundance). Then they evaluated various physical and mechanical plant defense traits (not including chemical defenses), using wood density of quantify plant resistance to physical damage and specific leaf area (SLA) as a proxy for leaf nutrient content.

All sorts of indices (MPD, MNTD, SR, Shannon, NRI, NTI) and statistics were used that I’m not going to go into because they will just confuse everyone. But when all the statistics were done, they found a latitudinal gradient in diversity with the highest diversity in the south and extreme north and low diversity in the center (which matches rainfall patterns). In parallel, they found shifts in community phylogenetic structure comparable to these changes in community diversity, indicating that the communities in the center are more highly phylogenetically clustered (composed of more closely related species). Plant diversity in the KNP is strongly spatially structured and this clustering is reflective of generalist browsing, the geomorphology of the area, and the patchy distribution of large herbivores. In plots where herbivory is unrestricted they found significant phylogenetic clustering of plant communities, likely the result of the heavy pressure from the herbivores. They also found that plant defense traits had a weak but significant phylogenetic signal, suggesting that they do not fit well into the simple model they used. When the researchers compared the enclosures to the unrestricted areas they found “that when megaherbivores are excluded, species diversity generally decreases, but changes in phylogenetic diversity [vary] by spatial location.” When large herbivores are excluded, plant community structure is contingent upon the initial community structure. If a community was initially overdispersed then the shift towards a more clustered community would occur by excluding large herbivores and vice versa. Ultimately, they conclude that the exclusion of large herbivores results in impoverished species communities.

I think that it is important to mention that these researchers were limited by the study design they had to work with. These enclosures had already been set up by other people. As such, the scientists encountered some issues that they would have been able to control for if they had set up the site themselves. Issues like enclosure age and location. For example, one enclosure was located on a river that periodically floods, altering local plant diversity. Such issues make it difficult for them to predict how specialist vs. generalist herbivores impact community structure and prevents them from drawing strong conclusions about the underlying causes for the patterns they saw.

On the upside, their results add valuable knowledge critical for predicting the impacts of overall herbivore decline on African ecosystems and local increases of these animals in protected reserves. This study “shows not only that large herbivores are key to maintaining woody plant diversity, but also that they may impose specific phylogenetic structure on plant communities.” Shifts in this structure have downstream consequences in that phylogenetic diversity can capture genetic and functional diversity, which has been linked to ecosystem productivity. And, ultimately, we want to keep our ecosystems happy and productive, right?


ResearchBlogging.orgKowiyou Yessoufou, T. Jonathan Davies, Olivier Maurin, Maria Kuzmina, Hanno Schaefer, Michelle van der Bank, & Vincent Savolainen (2013). Large herbivores favour species diversity but have mixed impacts on phylogenetic community structure in an African savanna ecosystem Journal of Ecology : 10.1111/1365-2745.12059


(image via Animals Time)

Thursday, April 11, 2013

Epic Battle of Electricity

If you haven't watched Epic Rap Battles of History then you need to hop on that train. It is hysterical! Here's a recent rap battle featuring two epic minds of their time and their actual battle over electricity.


Wednesday, April 10, 2013

Related Posts with Thumbnails