https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-026-01025-6 Mini models of the human brain are revealing how this complex organ takes shape Alison Abbott The development of the human brain, with its extraordinary range of cognitive abilities, is an awe-inspiring feat of evolution. Each of its tens of billions of cells must be born at precisely the right time, migrate to the correct locations, differentiate into as many as 3,000 distinct cell types, and form exquisitely specific synaptic connections with one another. Most of this happens before birth, but development continues for nearly three more decades. None of this is easy to study. Conventionally, scientists have relied on animal models and scarce human brain tissue. But the advent of tiny laboratory-grown models of human brains called organoids has transformed their options. First created more than a decade ago, these organoids started off as very simple models. But in the past few years, scientists have refined the technology to grow more-intricate systems that represent more brain regions. Research has snowballed as scientists have used organoids to probe brain development, model neurodevelopmental conditions such as autism and schizophrenia and test new treatments for brain diseases. These tiny spheres are helping researchers to get at difficult-to-answer questions such as why the human brain develops so much more slowly than other mammalian brains do. And this year, researchers are hoping to run the first clinical trial of a brain-disorder treatment developed entirely in organoids. “The field is at an inflection point,” says developmental biologist Jürgen Knoblich at the Institute for Molecular Biotechnology in Vienna. But organoids are not without their limitations. It’s hard to sustain them in the lab for more than a few months, for instance. And they lack complexity. © 2026 Springer Nature Limited -------------------- https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/07/health/psychedelic-medicine-brain.html How Psychedelics Affect the Brain By Andrew Jacobs As researchers have sought to demonstrate the therapeutic benefits of mind-altering drugs like LSD and psilocybin “magic mushrooms,” many have struggled to explain exactly how these compounds work on the human brain. One way scientists have tried to show what these compounds do is by using functional M.R.I. machines to peer into the brains of research participants in the midst of a psychedelic experience. This has produced evocative color images that show a maelstrom of activity as the drugs disrupt patterns of connectivity between brain regions and networks. But the interpretations of those scans, published in scientific journals, have been inconsistent and even contradictory. Over the past five years, an international consortium of researchers has tried to make sense of the divergent results by bringing together the data from nearly a dozen brain imaging studies in five countries that have been published since 2012. The studies included more than 500 scans of 267 research participants on five substances: LSD, psilocybin, mescaline, DMT and ayahuasca. Their findings, published on Monday in the journal Nature Medicine, suggest that psychedelics prompt a welter of activity between regions of the brain that normally operate somewhat independently: the areas that process sensory information like vision, hearing and touch, and those involved with abstract thinking and self-reflection. The research suggests that psychedelic compounds temporarily reduce the separation between how we think and how we perceive, which could explain the neurological mechanics behind the sensory distortions, mystical experiences and ego dissolution that patients report during sessions. © 2026 The New York Times Company -------------------- https://www.thetransmitter.org/methods/what-a-birds-eye-view-of-half-a-million-papers-reveals-about-neuroscience/ What a bird’s-eye view of half a million papers reveals about neuroscience By Mac Shine The brain is arguably the most complex object in the known universe, and neuroscience—the discipline charged with understanding it—has grown to match that complexity. Today, the field spans everything from the molecular choreography of a single synapse to the large-scale network dynamics that give rise to conscious experience. It is simultaneously one of the most exciting and most disorienting fields to work in. The conceptual map that connects our different subfields hasn’t been written yet. But a new study published in Aperture Neuro in February takes a remarkable step toward drawing that map. Led by Mario Senden, a computational neuroscientist at Maastricht University, the work applies state-of-the-art text embedding and community detection algorithms to nearly half a million neuroscience abstracts published between 1999 and 2023. It carves the literature into 175 distinct research clusters, characterizing each one along dimensions ranging from spatial scale to theoretical orientation. What emerges is a portrait of a discipline that is, in many ways, healthier than it might appear from the inside. Despite its staggering diversity—clusters range from AMPA receptor trafficking to the neural underpinnings of consciousness—the field is remarkably well integrated; the vast majority of research communities actively draw on and feed into one another. The cluster of resting-state functional MRI dynamics and the molecular mechanisms of hippocampal plasticity emerge as some of the field’s great intellectual hubs, providing conceptual and methodological scaffolding for dozens of downstream communities. But the map also has its fault lines. Microscale and macroscale research communities operate in two largely separate epistemic worlds, divided by spatial scale and by the training trajectories that produce different kinds of neuroscientists. Temporal scales are integrated only pairwise, never holistically. And perhaps most provocatively: Not a single cluster in the entire 175-cluster solution is organized around a theoretical framework. The Bayesian brain, the free energy principle and predictive coding are common targets of empirical science, yet none of them anchor their own research community. Theory, it seems, is something neuroscience does around the edges of the phenomena it is really interested in. © 2026 Simons Foundation -------------------- https://www.sciencenews.org/article/animal-parenting-tips-preston-book A new book finds parenting inspiration in the animal kingdom By Erin Garcia de Jesús My early days of nursing a newborn felt like I’d transformed into a 24-hour diner. A demanding yet adorable customer flagged me down with piercing cries to demand milk around the clock. Unfortunately, I was also on clean-up duty, wiping spit-ups and poopy butts. Breastfeeding is hard work. But after reading science journalist Elizabeth Preston’s book The Creatures’ Guide to Caring, I’m glad I’m not a burying beetle. The critters use mouth and anal secretions to knead small dead animals into slick balls of meat. Parent beetles then bury the smothered carcasses and lay their eggs nearby. Some species even feed their brood regurgitated bits of carcass, helping the young beetles grow to 200 times their original size in just six days. “A newborn human growing at that rate would be the size of a beluga whale in less than a week,” Preston writes. Suddenly my own kid doesn’t seem so heavy. The Creatures’ Guide to Caring was born out of Preston’s growing fascination with the biology of parenting after having her first child. “If so many people have done it before you, and are doing it right now — if so many animals are doing it without books or apps or advice to heed — why is it the hardest thing you’ve ever done?” she writes. Perhaps by finding kinship in the animal world, Preston could learn something about her new role as a parent. Each chapter dissects the benefits and drawbacks of parenting, piecing together how it evolved in humans and other creatures. © Society for Science & the Public 2000–2026 --------------------