<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:creator>Martinez, Pedro</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>Sprecher, Simon G.</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>2020-03-27</dc:date>
  <dc:description xmlns:ns0="xml" ns0:lang="en">Nervous systems are complex cellular structures that allow animals to interact  with their environment, which includes both the external and the internal milieu.  The astonishing diversity of nervous system architectures present in all animal  clades has prompted the idea that selective forces must have shaped them over  evolutionary time. In most cases, neurons seem to coalesce into specific  (centralized) structures that function as “central processing units” (CPU):  “brains.” Why did neural systems adopt this physical configuration? When did it  first happen? What are the physiological, computational, and/or structural  advantages of concentrating many neurons in a specific place within the body?  Here we examine the concept of nervous system centralization and factors that  might have contributed to the evolutionary success of this centralization  strategy. In particular, we suggest a putative scenario for the evolution of neural  system centralization that incorporates different strands of evidence. This  scenario is based on some premises: (1) Receptors originated before neurons  (sensors before transmitters) and there were deployed in the first organisms in  an asymmetric fashion (deposited randomly in the outer layer); (2) Receptors  were segregated in a preferential position in response to an anisotropic  environment, (3) Neurons were born in association with this receptors and used  to transmit signals distally; (4) Energetics preferentially selected the localization  of neurons, and synapsis, close to the receptors (to minimize wire use, for  instance); (5) The presence of condensed areas of neurons could have  stimulated the proliferation of more receptors in the vicinity, increasing the  repertoire of signals processed in an specific body domain (i.e., head) plus  contributing to amplify the computational power of the neuronal aggregate; (6)  The proliferation of receptors would have induced the proliferation of more  neurons in the aggregate, with a further increase in its computational power  (hence, diversifying the behavioral repertoire). These last two steps of  proliferation and aggregation could have been sustained through a feedback  loop, reiterated many times, generating distinct topologies in different lineages.  Our main aim in this paper is to examine the brain as both a biological and a  physical or computational device.</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:identifier>https://folia.unifr.ch/global/documents/308433</dc:identifier>
  <dc:identifier>https://folia.unifr.ch/documents/308433/files/spr_cbo.pdf</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
  <dc:relation>info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.3389/fevo.2020.00082</dc:relation>
  <dc:rights>info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</dc:rights>
  <dc:rights>License undefined</dc:rights>
  <dc:source>Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution. - 2020, vol. 8, p. 82</dc:source>
  <dc:subject>info:eu-repo/classification/udc/57</dc:subject>
  <dc:title xmlns:ns1="xml" ns1:lang="en">Of circuits and brains: the origin and diversification of neural architectures</dc:title>
  <dc:type>http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>
