6th ADVISORY COUNCIL
RIKEN Brain Science Institute
April 12-14, 2004

INTRODUCTION
The 6th review meeting of the Advisory Council of the RIKEN Brain Science
Institute (BSI) comes at a time when the Institute has begun to realize thepromise with which it was founded. It is now well-established as a major
neuroscience research institute in Japan, with world-wide stature and visibility.
It is well-housed on the Wako campus in four modern research buildings, one
recently completed; the laboratories are well-equipped and well-supported; theresearch facilities are excellent; and most importantly, the overall quality of
the faculty is high. RIKEN BSI is a magnet for young Japanese and foreignscientists who come to train here, and through the RIKEN BSI Summer
Program, it offers laboratory and classroom instruction on modern
neurobiology to students from all over the world. It also sponsors a variety ofinternational symposia and workshops and has cooperative agreements andresearch collaborations with institutions and companies from around the globe.
After a six year period of growth and development, RIKEN BSI may be said
to have arrived. Its stature is a tribute to the vision of its founding Director,
Dr. Masao Ito, and to the Japanese government which has supported thisambitious and remarkably successful initiative.
Under a new and distinguished Director, Dr. Shun-ichi Amari, RIKEN now
enters into a new phase of development. RIKEN has been reorganized as anindependent administrative institution, which offers new opportunities andchallenges for RIKEN BSI. Concomitantly, the budget and projected size of
RIKEN BSI have begun to level off. RIKEN BSI has responded to the newadministrative and fiscal environment by reexamination of its management
systems and by developing a new budgetary plan. The new environment also
carries scientific challenges. As its growth slows, and new resources become
more scarce, the ability of the Institute to recruit new scientists and to takeadvantage of new scientific opportunities will critically depend upon its
continuing commitment to the highest scientific standards in evaluating all of
its activities and allocating all of its resources.

BACKGROUND
The Advisory Council made a three day visit to the Institute, where Dr. Amarireviewed the current status of RIKEN BSI and the changes that had occurredsince the last Advisory Council meeting. We were particularly saddened by
the loss of Dr. Gen Matsumoto, the Group Director of the Brainway Group,
who passed away in March, 2003. During the first day and a half, each of thegroups made presentations, outlining the ongoing work in their laboratories.
Members of the Advisory Council then visited scientists in their laboratories
to learn more about their activities. These reports and visits form the basis of
our report.
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS:The Advisory Council was pleased by the continued overall high quality of thescientific presentations, which were in most cases, clear, well-illustrated andinformative. Several of the talks presented work of unusual scientific quality
and excitement.
The quality of the new appointments, particularly the new Laboratory Heads,
appeared to be generally high. We applaud the ability of the RIKEN BSI toattract such outstanding young scientists.
We were delighted to see the confidence placed in outstanding young
scientists who have recently been appointed as Group Directors. Two of thesegroups gave presentations that were outstanding.
The Council applauds the establishment of unit leader positions at BSI, whichhelps to foster independent research career of young investigators. The
Council encourages the BSI administration and Group Directors to pay special
attention to ensure that these research units function independently and are
evaluated in the same way as laboratories.
The Council applauds the recent excellent appointments of several female
laboratory heads and unit leaders. We note that there is a large contingent offemale graduate students and postdoctoral fellows of high quality andcommitment in Japan and BSI provides an excellent environment andinfrastructure for the development of independent research career for female
neuroscientists. The council recommends that continuing efforts be made infuture recruitment and consideration of female candidates for appointments asunit leaders, laboratory heads, and group directors.
We support the formation of the new section on Nurturing the Brain which
addresses a timely and important issue. We note the strong thematicconnections between this group and the Recovery Mechanisms group andhope that strong interactions between the two groups will be encouraged.
The separation of areas of responsibility for the ATDG and RRC is a logicalstep that should further improve the important functions of these groups.
The steps that RIKEN BSI have taken to assist foreign scientists are very
positive, but they need to be continued and expanded in order to attract alarger number of foreign scientists, an explicit goal of the RIKEN
BSI.

RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCERNS
1. Overall vision for the future. As growth of the BSI levels off,
establishment of priorities for future development become extremely
important. We urge Dr. Amari as BSI Director to work with BSI investigators
to develop a coordinated plan for the future of the BSI. Such a vision isneeded to provide focus and direction for future programs and recruitment, toincrease the coherence and integration of work in diverse laboratories. Thisvision is especially important as a prelude to the September effort to reimagine the Creating the Brain section.
2. Systems neuroscience. RIKEN BSI boasts extensive expertise in genetic
manipulation of rodent neural systems, and this expertise is currently
exploited primarily in the arena of neural development and diseasemechanisms. Considerable synergism between molecular biologists andsystems neurophysiologists could occur, however, if a systems
neurophysiologist were recruited to assess the behavioral andelectrophysiological consequences of specific genetic manipulations. With
such a program in place, RIKEN BSI scientists could truly study the nervous
system seamlessly from molecules to behavior in a single organism. Other
promising targets of opportunity for the ‘understanding the brain’ program
would include use of multiple patch electrodes in slice preparations todelineate the computational circuitry of the cerebral cortex. Theseopportunities must be considered in the context of the overall needs of RIKEN
BSI and of those of other thematic areas.
3. Group Directors. We note with concern the delays in hiring Group
directors. Drs Ito and Amari together have responsibility for a large number ofstaff (35% of Japanese and 55% of external people in 5 Groups). This would
seem to put a heavy burden on them and would point to a need for significant
recruitment at the Group Director level in the future.
4. Promoting Communication and Collaboration between Laboratories.
One of the hallmarks of contemporary brain research is the multidisciplinary
and collaborative approach that is often necessary to do cutting edge research.
In this context, one of RIKEN’s strengths is the breadth and variety of theapproaches to brain research that it takes. The Advisory Council believes thatsome of the scientists at the RIKEN BSI are not able to take full advantage ofthese resources because of the low level of interaction between some of thelaboratories within the Institute. It also limits the experience of post-doctoral
fellows at RIKEN BSI, as discussed further below.
The Institute needs to take steps to address this problem. The current
evaluation and funding system appears to offer little incentive forcollaboration. We suggest several possibilities for improving the contact
between scientists.
a. We urge the Director to set aside funds that would be awarded on acompetitive basis for collaborative projects across laboratories andgroups within RIKEN BSI.
b. We suggest that RIKEN BSI incorporate collaboration acrosslaboratories and groups into its evaluation of individual scientists.
Any impediment to collaboration (e.g. who gets credit for
publication) should be identified and removed.
c. We encourage the formation of journal clubs within and acrossgroups. A journal club on the cerebellum, for example, would
attract scientists from across the Institute. Other examples might be
neurodegenerative disease or developmental neurobiology.
As RIKEN BSI becomes a major training
5. Post-doctoral fellows.
institution for young Japanese and foreign scientists at the post-doctoral level,
it is appropriate that more attention be paid at the Institute level to improving
their experience at RIKEN. Developing this area could increase theattractiveness of RIKEN BSI for post-doctoral scholars, particularly thosefrom abroad, and aid in their retention. The Advisory Council wasparticularly concerned about the relative high proportion of fellows who stayfor less than two years. Training of such short duration is not an optimal
investment of RIKEN resources and is a potential loss of valuable researchtime for fellows. We offer the following suggestions to enrich the scientificenvironment for post-doctoral fellows.
a. Isolation.
One impression of the Advisory Council is that
postdoctoral fellows are often isolated, with little contact outside
their immediate laboratories. Some of the suggestions offered in theprevious recommendation on promoting collaboration may improve
this situation. We also urge that Group Directors try to address thisissue within their groups.
b. Courses. The availability of short introductory courses in several
specialized areas of neurobiology (e.g. Computational
Neurobiology; Molecular Neurobiology; Mechanisms of Learning
and Memory; Neurobiology of Disease) aimed specifically at
RIKEN students and post-doctoral fellows and offered on a rotatingbasis over a period of several years would be a major benefit to postdoctoral fellows by expanding their knowledge base of neurobiology.
It would also encourage contact and collaboration between groups.
c. RIKEN BSI might explore the possibility of hiring a full timescience writer who could work with fellows to improve their writingof manuscripts and reviews in English.
6. Students. RIKEN BSI should encourage and expand its opportunities forgraduate students. Perhaps the best solution would be to strengthen ties with
universities. An alternative possibility to consider is the establishment of a
graduate training program at RIKEN BSI similar to that seen at National
Institute for Physiological Science at Okazaki.
7. Animal facilities. The provision of high quality facilities for animals,
particularly mice and non-human primates, is often a critical factor in the
success of modern biomedical research institutions. In view of the increasinguse of transgenic mice and the growing need of behavioral analysis, werecommend that RIKEN BSI analyze its projected needs and to develop a planfor future facilities, if they are needed. Included in the analysis should be an
examination of whether RIKEN investigators are using the present facilities
with maximum efficiency. Outside consultants or professionals from otherinstitutions might aid RIKEN to evaluate its future needs.

8. Future reviews by the Advisory Council. We have several suggestions thatmight improve future reviews by the Advisory Council.
a. We would like to have separate meetings with one or more groups ofpost-doctoral fellows and students, and with unit leaders andlaboratory heads.
b. We would like the short CVs (one page summarizing training andimportant publications) of all laboratory heads and unit leaders. This
would better help us in the evaluation.
We support the use of the outside review mechanism to evaluate RIKEN BSI
investigators. We caution, however, that frequent reviews sometimes have theinadvertent effect of encouraging investigators to publish many small papers
rather than fewer, more substantial papers in major journals.

Thematic Areas:
UNDERSTANDING THE BRAIN
We are pleased with the overall strength of the RIKEN BSI program in‘understanding the brain.’ The program consists of two major laboratories—
Neuronal Circuit Mechanisms (Group Director: M. Ito) and Cognitive Brain
Science (Group Director: K. Tanaka)—in addition to the RIKEN-MIT joint
program.
These research efforts have considerable vitality and arecontributing substantially to our ongoing efforts to understand the basic
principles by which the brain gathers and processes information, learns fromexperience, and produces behavior.
Neuronal Circuit Mechanisms research group
The expertise accumulated in the Laboratory for Memory and Learning
headed by Dr. Ito on cerebellar circuitry is unique. The Advisory Council
urges that this expertise be continued at BSI. The development of fluorescentindicators in the Laboratory for Neuronal Circuit Dynamics is highly
promising, and several recent advances seem now ready for wider application.
The unit leaders are well integrated in the Group and interact at different
levels with each other and the laboratory heads. Specifically, Drs. Endo and
Hirabayashi have developed interesting mouse models for detailed analysis.
Similarly, the GAD knockout mice available in Dr Obata’s unit provide toolsthat will allow important questions to be tackled.

Cognitive Brain Science research group This research group emphasizes
empirical research on the organization and function of the cerebral cortex,
employing an impressive array of modern physiological, anatomical andmodeling techniques. The electrophysiology and optical imaging efforts of
the Tanaka and Tanifuji groups are world class, and the technical developmentof optical coherence tomography in the Tanifuji lab may provide access todeep regions of cortex that have been heretofore inaccessible to opticalimaging technologies. The anatomical investigations of the Rockland
laboratory are interesting, and are particularly powerful when combined withphysiological techniques that provide simultaneous information about function.
Thus we are particularly impressed with the collaboration between the
Tanifuji and Rockland labs in which optical imaging of IT cortex is used to
guide the placement of anatomical tracer injections.
We are pleased that the high resolution fMRI studies are now progressing
beyond “proof-of-principle” demonstrations (i.e. human ocular dominancecolumns) toward addressing new and interesting issues in visual cortical
function (i.e. adaptation, temporal tuning, motion vision). This facility forhigh resolution fMRI is a world-class facility, and we hope to see a stream ofhigh-quality research publications emerge from this group during the next few
years. Unfortunately, the Advisory Council received little information during
this meeting concerning the current status of the MEG research effort. An
original motivation of this imaging group was to combine fMRI with MEG inorder to obtain functional information from the human brain at both highspatial and temporal resolutions. One publication has appeared on this topic
during the past year (NeuroImage, 2003), and this is encouraging. We suggest,
however, that an explicit review of the human imaging effort be included in
the agenda of next meeting of the Advisory Council in 2006. It may beappropriate to invite an ad hoc member with expertise in human neuroimaging
to participate in the next Council meeting. We again raise the possibility ofcreating an additional laboratory directed by a researcher who uses fMRI
and/or MEG to investigate hypotheses concerning human cognition.
RIKEN-MIT Center The presentation by Dr Tonegawa illustrated several
examples of exciting projects being conducted by the groups at the PicowerCenter at MIT. These focus on mechanisms and functions of activitydependent synaptic plasticity from AMPA receptor recycling and receptorassociated protein-protein interactions as well as behavior studies and multiple
single-unit (“tetrode”) recording in awake mice, including geneticallymodified mice. There is no doubt that the work of this center is state-of-theart, notably Tonegawa’s use of brain region-specific conditional knock-out
techniques and their application to network level issues in neuroscience suchas pattern completion.
Two specific examples of collaboration andtechnology-transfer between MIT and BSI-RIKEN were mentioned (use of
FRET imaging, and conditional gene-knockout technology to exploit thediscovery of the cerebellar L7 gene); other opportunities of this kind may
emerge as the American and Japanese labs get to know each other better. We
urge RIKEN to encourage these interactions. The Advisory Council shares Dr
Tonegawa’s view that this venture between the two institutions is exciting andmutually beneficial.
Future opportunities. We note that significant opportunities exist forenriching the RIKEN program in understanding the brain. The existing
programs in neural circuit mechanisms and cognitive brain science are very
impressive, but new research programs in several areas would enhance theeffort of RIKEN BSI to understand how the brain works. We suggest
consideration of a program that studies behavior and systems level
electrophysiology in rodents, as suggested above.
PROTECTING THE BRAIN
This section has been recently reviewed and received a generally excellent
evaluation. All groups within « Protecting the Brain » are excellent andseveral laboratory heads have attained world recognition, although a slightnote of caution exists in some laboratory.
Many laboratories have interactions with hospital units. Interactions withsome hospitals should be formalized to ease these interactions so that greater
advantage can be taken for opportunities of working on problems related topatient populations. For some MD investigators, it may be appropriate toinclude some commitment for clinical time in their responsibilities as RIKEN
investigators.
CREATING THE BRAIN.
The 2002 Council of Advisors stressed the need for the Creating the Brain
section to fully develop meaningful collaborations with experimentalists
across BSI, and welcomed Dr. Amari’s plan for restructuring the Creating theBrain program. While applauding Dr. Amari’s world leadership in themathematical theory of neural networks, they recommended hiring as a Group
Director a world-class computational neuroscientist committed to building
bridges to experimentalists throughout BSI. They also recommended thatappointments should address all levels of modeling from the synaptic tocircuits to systems level. The 2002 Council also suggested a review of the
focus and function of the Brainway group, a task made more urgent by theuntimely death of Gen Matsumoto.
The present Council notes with approval the plan to hold an international
workshop followed by a full-scale re-evaluation of all Creating the Brainlaboratories in September 2004. We stress that the review committee should
be offered alternative plans for major restructuring which fully address the2002 Council recommendations. Interactions between neuroscientists and nonbiological researchers in Creating the Brain must be increased to prevent
isolation and to provide further opportunities for computational modeling ormathematical analysis in BSI’s experimental groups. To give just one example,
we see the opportunity for a major effort in cerebellar modeling.
The 2002 Council recommended the integration within laboratories of workon computational neuroscience, robotics and brain-style computing but thepresent Council favors the formation of more focused laboratories with astrong plan for cross-lab collaboration.
We recommend that the theoretical laboratories in RIKEN engage further withmajor laboratories overseas in computational and cognitive neuroscience aswell in experimental neuroscience. There could be a great payoff, at low cost,through collaborations targeted on specific BSI efforts at Wako, e.g., throughvisiting relationships with researchers at other institutions.
ATDG and RRC.
We welcome the reorganization of ATDC into the Advanced Technology
Development Group (ATDG) and the Research Resource Center (RRC). We
note that Neuroinformatics has been established as part of ATDG. It has afocus on visual mechanisms. However no clear plan has been explained either
for extending work on the Visiome Platform beyond that just completed under5-year funding elsewhere, nor for offering a more general support function
within ATDG to provide a federation of databases and data analysis andmodeling tools for BSI generally. Given its overlap with computational
neuroscience, we recommend that Neuroinformatics be reviewed inSeptember 2004 as part of the plan to restructure Creating the Brain, and that aplan for Neuroinformatics be presented at that time.
NURTURING THE BRAIN
This section has also been recently reviewed with a very favorable evaluation.
The council applauds the formation of the new section on Nurturing the Brainas it brings together a talented group of investigators in the Brain
Development and Critical Period mechanisms groups that are addressing
timely and important issues. The overall quality of research in both groups ishigh. In addition, each group brings together researchers with diverse
approaches and levels of analysis but with conceptually overlapping intereststhat should provide a rich interactive environment. The Critical Period
Mechanisms Group is especially commended for developing structures,
including journal clubs and monthly reports of individual labs to the entire
group, that should facilitate research interactions and provides an optimaltraining environment for postdoctoral fellows and graduate students. We also
noted the strong thematic connections between those in the Nurturing theBrain section and the Recovery Mechanisms Group and hope that strong
interactions between these groups will also be encouraged. In addition, thesuccess of Dr. Furuichi in the Brain Development Group in developing several
interesting and independent lines of research from his cerebellar genetic
screen was noted and the council strongly encourages him to pursue theseendeavors. Finally, with the creation of the Cognitive Development andHuman Learning Groups within this section, it would be advisable to identify
an internationally known scientist with expertise in human cognition andlanguage development to provide guidance in effective development in thesegroups.
Conclusion: RIKEN BSI is an exciting, multidisciplinary research instituteof world-wide stature at the forefront of contemporary brain research. The
Council trusts that its suggestions will aid planning for the future developmentof the Institute. We are confident that RIKEN BSI will continue to flourish as
an exciting focus for obtaining knowledge about the brain and using thatknowledge to the benefit of society.

Members of the BSI Advisory Council
Dr. Nobutaka Hirokawa
Professor, Tokyo University Graduate School of Medicine
Dr. William Thomas Newsome
HHMI Investigator,
Stanford University School of Medicine
Dr. Richard Morris
Professor, Division of Neuroscience,
University of Edinburgh
Dr. Heinrich Betz
Director, Department of Neurochemistry,
Max-Planck Institute for Brain Research
Dr. Thomas Insel
Director, National Institute of Mental Health, NIH
Dr. Jacques Mallet
Director,Laboratoire de Génétique Moléulaire de la Neurotransmission et,des Processus Neurodégénératifs, CNRS
Dr. Ken-ichi Yamamura
Professor, Kumamoto University,
Institute of Molecular Embryology and Genetics
Dr. Zach W. Hall
Senior Associate Dean, Keck School of Medicine,
University of Southern California
Dr. David Willshaw
Honorary Professor, Institute for Adaptive and Neural Computation
Division of Informatics,
University of Edinburgh
Dr. James L. McClelland
Professor, Psychology and Computer Science(CMU),
University of Pennsylvania

Dr. Yohichi Tohkura
Executive Director,
NTT Science and Core Technology Laboratory Group
Dr. Michael A. Arbib
Brian Project Director,
University of Southern California
Dr. Tadaharu Tsumoto
Professor,
Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine
Dr. Lynn T. Landmesser
Professor and Chairman, Dept. of Neuroscience
Case Western Reserve University, School of Medicine
Dr. Dale Purves
Chairman, Department of Neurobiology,
Duke University Medical Center
Dr. Takashi Muramatsu
Professor,
Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine
Dr. Mu-ming Poo
Professor,
Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, UC Berkeley
Dr. Ichiro Kanazawa
Director, National Institute of Neuroscience,
National Center of Neurology and Psychiatry
Dr. Sten Grillner
Professor & Chairman, Dept. Neuroscience,
Karolinska Institute
Dr. Tsuneko Okazaki
Professor, Fujita Health University,
Institute for Comprehensive Medical Science