February 26, 2006

RIKEN BSI 7th ADVISORY COUNCIL REPORT
January 24-26, 2006

Introduction.:
RIKEN BSI continues to be among the first rank of internationally-recognized brain
sciences research institutes in the world with many features that make it unique. The
rapid rise of the BSI to the top echelon represents a remarkable accomplishment for
which RIKEN and Japanese government should be very proud.

The founding andvisionary leadership of Dr. Masao Ito has been ably continued under Dr. Shun-chi
Amari, who deserve great credit for establishing a high scientific standard and attracting
talented neuroscientists from all over the world to BSI.
The emergence of the BSI to world status is very timely as many see the 21st century as
one in which brain sciences will have a prominent position, with influence far beyond
the scientific arena.

As noted in the initial draft of the BSI strategic plan, brain

sciences are expected to have three major impacts:
ECONOMIC:

In developed countries, brain diseases collectively have more economic

impact than any other area of medicine. A report carried out by the World HealthOrganization to assess quantitatively the burden of disease found that in developed
countries, eight of the top ten diseases in terms of loss of productivity due to disability
and death were diseases of the brain.

Because age is a risk factor for many brain

diseases including neurodegenerative disease, psychiatric illness and stroke, brain
diseases become more prominent as the population ages.

As health care costs continue

to rise, the economic burden of these diseases becomes substantial.

In Europe andNorth America, they currently represent no less than one third of the total costs forhealth care.
SOCIAL:One of the most exciting developments in modern neuroscience is themerger of neurobiology, cognitive sciences, psychology and social science with the goalof developing a biologically-based understanding of human behavior.

The BSI ispositioning itself to be one of the world leaders in catalyzing this new synthesis.
Understanding the biological basis of human behavior will help us deal more effectively
with social problems such as addiction and aggression, and lead us to a better
understanding of economic behavior.

This new field will have impact on education,

law, economics and engineering among others.

In this sense, brain sciences will be

one of major disciplines at center of the intellectual enterprise in the 21st century.
PERSONAL:

The third impact of brain sciences will be on our understanding of who

we are as human beings and how we as individuals can maximize our capacities.
Our personalities, our creativity, our rational abilities and our empathy for others allarise from our brains. Better understanding of the biological bases of these properties
will improve our quality of life at all stages of life, from the young child to the aging
adult.

Understanding brain development will facilitate our ability to maximize ourindividual potential as children and adults. The amazing ability of the human brain tocontinue to change through learning will be enhanced.

And, as we grow older,methods to preserve cognitive function and general well-being will help us age
gracefully.
Through the BSI, the Japanese Government has made a major investment in brain
sciences that has been spectacularly successful.

The investment should not be

jeopardized by decreasing financial support for the brain sciences.

Because of large

societal impact of brain sciences and because the BSI is poised to play a world-wide
leadership role in advancing the new understanding of the biology of behavior, strong
investment by Japan in neurosciences must be continued and increased.

Our visit isvery timely in that it comes at a time when the Japanese Government is formulating theThird Basic Plan that will guide the development of Japanese science over the next five
years.

We trust and strongly urge that promotion and nourishment of brain sciences

will be a central feature in that planning.

Background:
The BSI Advisory Council made a three day visit to the Institute on January 24-26,
2006.

We metwith the BSI Director, Dr. Shun-ichi Amari, the Deputy Director of

BSI, Dr. Keiji Tanaka, Dr. Doi, the Executive Director of RIKEN and Dr. Kaya, theDirector of the RIKEN Wako campus to hear of general issues with respect to RIKEN
and, from Dr. Amari, an overview of the general status of the BSI, including progresssince our last meeting and the response to our last report. We also met with RIKEN
President Ryoji Noyori at lunch to hear of his visionary plans for RIKEN.

We thenmet with BSI scientists, junior researchers, we visited the labs, and we discussed theoutline of the BSI Strategic Plan with Dr. Tanaka and the BSI researchers on thecommittee that drafted it.

General Comments:
First and foremost, we were impressed by the overall quality of the BSI, which
continues to improve in scientific excellence.
increasingly recognized internationally.

The quality of the Institute is

The rising international standing of the BSI is

exemplified by the Young Investigator Award given to Dr. Takao Hensch by the Society
for Neuroscience, the pre-eminent scientific society for neuroscience, with some 30,000
members world-wide. Dr. Hensch is the first scientist from a non-American institution
to receive this award.
In addition to its high quality, the BSI has several features that make it distinctive incomparison to other leading neuroscience research institutions world-wide. Amongthese are the breadth of research interests, ranging from molecular to human cognitive
function; the excellent facilities; a strong and successful commitment to methodologicaldevelopment, as exemplified by the Group for Advanced Development; and its
international orientation.
With respect to its international activity, we commend the BSI on its leadership in
promoting international scientific exchange, including the summer courses which havean international faculty and students, colloquia, workshops, and its leadership role in thePacific consortium.

These activities give the BSI a strong international presence, help

establish it as a research center that attracts the best scientists and trainees from all over
the world; and allows it to be an agent of change and development in the world
neuroscience community.
We were very impressed with the quality of the new scientists who have been hiredsince the last AC meeting.

We note particularly that Dr. Ikiri is the recipient of theprestigious Golden Brain award.

It is clear that the BSI continues to compete for talent

at a very high level.
The AC commends the BSI for its willingness to encourage leadership by younger
scientists as shown by their appointment as Group Directors.

The success of thispolicy is demonstrated by the fact that several of these groups are among the mostvigorous at the BSI.
The Advisory Council was very gratified by the strong response of the BSI leadership to
the report of the 6th Advisory Council.

We recognize and appreciate the leadership andefforts of Drs. Amari and Tanaka to implement the suggestions of the council.

Among

the positive responses that we noted:•

Increased efforts to promote collaboration at the BSI through the Director’sfund, the Cerebellum Colloquium, journal clubs, and recognition of theimportance of synergistic interactions in evaluation criteria.

•

Assistance to non-Japanese scientists at the BSI.

•

Science communications support.

•

Continuing efforts to increase number of women and international scientists.

•

A thorough-going review of Creating the Brain with plans for restructuring•

Development of a draft of the BSI Strategic Plan•

Continuing efforts to bridge genetics and systems neuroscience•

Appointment of new Group Directors.

•

Annual meeting of the Director with each of the laboratory and unit directors.

.

We believe that all of these actions and changes are very constructive and will resultin a stronger BSI.

Recommendations and Concerns:
1) Budgetary Challenges:
The Advisory Council appreciates the challenges of the recent and unfortunate decline
in the budget of the BSI.

We hope that this is a temporary difficulty and will notcontinue as further decreases could compromise the mission and current success of the
BSI. Director Amari has been very creative and resourceful in his response to thebudgetary challenge. We believe the system of basal support with supplementation is agood one.

It allows implementation of institutional priorities (e.g. promoting

collaboration, encouraging application for outside funds), allows excellence to be
rewarded and recognizes that different groups have different budgetary needs.
We make several suggestions for augmenting the direct funding that the BSI receives
that could help insulate the BSI from the uncertainty caused by variations in direct
funding.

First, we suggest that all investigators be encouraged to apply for outsidefunding, both as individuals and as groups.

To facilitate the applications, BSI should

actively promote the formation of groups of scientists within the BSI or between BSI
scientists and those from outside to qualify for group funding.
Not surprisingly, the system of supplementation instituted by the Director has caused
some anxiety and uncertainty.

To alleviate this situation, we urge the Director to be astransparent as possible in explaining to BSI scientists the basis for his decisions.
We also suggest that the BSI also more actively investigate the possibility of forming
collaborations with industry.

With the recent recovery of Japan’s economy, privatecompanies may be more open to collaborations with academia, which they may see as a
cost-effective way to have acess to basic research.
2) Evaluations of scientific excellence
We urge the Director and BSI leadership to continue rigorous evaluation of research
excellence and productivity, tempered by an understanding that long-term, high risk
projects may not pay off immediately and that some may even fail. The Advisory

Council would like to understand the evaluation process better and suggest that it be oneof the topics for our next meeting.

Many members of the Advisory Council expressed

willingness as individuals to help provide outside assessments and advice, where
requested.
3) Turnover
We were asked by the Director to comment on the issue of laboratory turnover.

The

BSI was started with the revolutionary idea that BSI scientists should not be tenured in
the conventional sense, but should work on a rolling 5 year contract system.

Such asystem can ensure continued productivity and excellence and has been, we believe, oneof the attractive and successful features of the BSI experiment.
The question of how the system will operate at steady-state, however, has not beenadequately faced.

As BSI reaches maturity with the expectation that resources will notcontinue to expand, the time is appropriate to consider whether BSI will have amore-or-less permanent staff employed on a rolling five year plan or whether turnover
will built into the system, i.e. that scientists at BSI will understand that most will not
spend their entire careers at the BSI, but will ultimately move to other positions.

The

latter strategy envisages that as scientists move from BSI to other institutions, they will
actively spread “the BSI philosophy”, thus becoming important agents of change
throughout Japanese science.
The Council strongly believes that to remain at the forefront, the BSI must continue toreceive fresh infusions of talent, energy and innovation from newly recruited scientists,
particularly younger scientists, and that to achieve this goal an expectation of turnovermust be built into the system.

It is important that everyone who comes to the BSI

understands this expectation and, moreover, that there be a planning and mentoringprocess that will help and prepare scientists as they leave to find positions elsewhere.
Although this policy may occasionally have an adverse effect on recruiting, we believethat the disadvantage will be offset by the strong appeal of strengthening a career
trajectory by time spent at the BSI with the superb opportunities for achievement inresearch that it offers.

Such a system has operated very successfully, for example, atCold Spring Harbor in the United States, at the European Molecular Biology Laboratory

in Heidelberg, Germany, and by the fellowship programs of the Wellcome Trust.
Although we did not discuss this extensively, the Council believes that a period of five
years with a single renewal, based on continuing success, should be the normal
expectation.

This limit should be administered with flexibility and judgement, andshould be applied primarily to the four research division, and not to ATDG and the
Research Resource Center in which continuity is important.
4) Permanent positions.
A related, but separate, question is whether or not there should be a small number oftenured positions at the BSI which would allow stability and continuity in BSI
leadership. The Council was somewhat divided on the advisability of this change andwe do not wish to make a direct and strong recommendation at this time.

We believethat it is an important question, however, and we urge the BSI to consider it seriously.
If the change is to be implemented, we are agreed about several recommendations.
-The criteria for award of tenured positions should be both scientific excellence andthe potential for contributing broadly to the leadership of BSI.
-The total number of positions should be relatively small, i.e. no more than 20%- To maintain flexibility, the positions should be filled gradually over a period ofyears and not all at once.
-There should be an age limit, perhaps 60 years of age, after which scientists shouldswitch to a system of rolling contract based on performance.
5.

Groups, Laboratories and Units

The Advisory Council was pleased to see further strengthening of the groups and units
within BSI.

The quality of the newly established groups, laboratories and units is very

high and we believe that they offer a strong resource for the Institute. The energy andleadership of the new group leaders is especially impressive.
We note with particular interest the emergence of a new kind of group whose members
come from diverse backgrounds, but who share common scientific interests that are
fostered by the group leader.

These groups are typically relatively small, but have astrong focus and sense of shared purpose that maximizes the creativity and productivityof the members through synergistic interactions.

These groups also offer thepossibility of strong mentoring of younger scientists which we believe is highly
desirable. While the Advisory Council recognizes that this style may not be suitable
for all groups, we believe that these “ new style groups” will be an importantcomponent of future success.
A difficult challenge is the problem of recruiting group leaders from abroad.

We arepleased to see and strongly support BSI’s persistence and continued efforts in this areain spite of the difficulties.

One suggestion is BSI might use its flexibility in hiring totarget young couples who often have difficulty finding jobs in the same institution.
Finally, the increased emphasis on units is an encouraging development which BSI has
used to its advantage to recruit outstanding young scientists at the earliest stage of their
independent careers.

As the use of resources becomes more limited, however, BSI willneed to engage in strategic thinking about the optimal number of units within theInstitute and to have a well-thought out plan for career advancement of the unit leaders.
6. Trainees
A new and very valuable aspect of our visit was the chance to meet with BSI trainees.
Our general impression, based on these discussions, is that they appreciate theexcellence of the BSI and feel themselves fortunate to be here. Perhaps unusually fortrainees at this stage of development, they offered no strong complaints, which speaks
well for the BSI..

Several specific suggestions and comments are as follows:a. The course which has been instituted appears to be very successful.
suggest that course offerings be expanded.

We

Several post-doctoral fellows

independently told us that they would welcome an opportunity to teach. Their
participation would be a positive aspect of their training and would offer a venue
for improving their presentation skills.
b. We encourage trainees to take full advantage of the rich environment that BSI
offers and suggest that they continue be encouraged in this direction.

Becauseinterdisciplinary collaborations develop through personal interactions, it isimportant to foster an environment at BSI in which junior scientists cancommunicate and learn from each other. We urge BSI to encourage juniorscientists to participate in, and organize themselves, activities such as
mini-courses, journal clubs, small-group workshops by providing administrative
support and modest funding.
c.

Some post-doctoral fellows may remain at the BSI for a protracted period.

We suggest that BSI examine whether a policy and career planning for trainees
would be helpful.
d.

We foresee many opportunities for exchange visits between juniorresearchers and postdocs at BSI and premier neuroscience departments andinstitutes around the world.

In addition to the RIKEN-MIT Center, werecommend the establishment of a program of travel fellowships for funding
travel and living expenses for short- and medium-term visits for purposes ofresearch collaboration.
7.

Strategic Plan

The 6th Advisory Council of RIKEN BSI noted that as the Institute approaches a maturestate, in which continued rapid expansion is not possible, an increasingly high premium
will be set on its ability to set priorities and strategic goals that guide its use of resources.
Accordingly the 6th Advisory Council

recommended that the Institute engage informulation of a strategic plan within which decisions about personnel and resource
allocation could be made.

We also suggested that the planning involve scientists atseveral levels of the BSI.
We are very pleased to see that under the leadership of Deputy Director K. Tanaka, acommittee representing junior, mid-level and senior scientists has undertaken thisproject and, after many months work, has developed an initial draft of such a plan.
Because of limitations of time, the AC was not able to consider the plan in detail. We
are willing to help the Institute in any way that we can in further development of theplan and look forward to seeing and discussing future drafts.

Thematic Areas:

UNDERSTANDING THE BRAIN
Understanding the Brain is the largest theme at the BSI.

It continues to be aparticularly visible aspect of BSI’s contributions to brain science with continuing
contributions to our contemporary understanding of cerebellar learning and plasticity,
the role of the inferotemporal and prefrontal cortices in cognitive function, and of
hippocampal function using state-of-the-art molecular engineering and ensemble
single-unit recording techniques.

This research is organised into three groups - the

Neuronal Circuit Mechanisms Research Group (Masao Ito), the Cognitive Brain
Science Group (Keiji Tanaka) and the RIKEN-MIT Center (Susumu Tonegawa).
Neuronal Circuit Mechanisms Research Group. The wide-ranging work of this very
active group includes a new Laboratory and three new Units that have been added since
2004.

These offer novel concepts and techniques to the studies of neuronal circuitrythat is the essential bridge from molecules to mind and behaviour. We heard about
new work on cerebellar plasticity (first discovered by the group leader), neuron-glia
interactions, novel world-class imaging technologies and the use of genetic animals.
Some examples of exciting new findings include a deeper understanding of the complex
network of signal-transduction pathways at parallel fiber/climbing fiber synapses
mediating the expression of LTD, distinct sites for short- and long-term VOR adaptationin cerebellum, studies of glial-derived L-serine in development, the functional role of
GAD67, and the discovery that BDNF released from a single pyramidal neuron isessential for the formation of GABAergic synapses.
Dr Ito’s group has instituted a number of changes in its management structure including
the introduction of a regular ‘cerebellum discussion club’ that is attended by a large
number of scientists across all of BSI.

This excellent innovation has stimulated

inter-laboratory discussion and collaboration.
The Cognitive Brain Science Group. This group continues its outstanding research
program into the physiology and anatomy of the cerebral cortex.

The group is among

the world leaders in the study of the neural mechanisms underlying visual object
recognition, in the development of optical techniques for the investigation of neuralsystems, and in the application of new virally-mediated anatomical tracers forinvestigating cortical microcircuitry.
excellent.

The quality of research within each laboratory is

A particular strength of the Group is the combination of human brain

imaging, primate physiology, and modern neuroanatomical expertise - all within in asingle research group. Each of these technical approaches can be unusually powerfulwhen it is coordinated with one of the other approaches.
In our laboratory visits, we paid particular attention to human brain imaging.

We

believe that the fMRI facility is unique in the world in terms of its technicalaccomplishments

andcapabilities,

particularly

in

its

application

of

the

high-field-strength magnet to high-resolution imaging of human cortex. We are pleased
that a series of significant and important results from this lab have been reported inrecent years, and that the group has established successful collaborations with five otherlaboratories at RIKEN.

These accomplishments are all the more impressive given therelatively small number of personnel of the fMRI group in comparison to other major
fMRI labs around the world. The impact of this group would, therefore, be amplified
with the addition of research personnel. We understand that this recommendation is a
substantial challenge at a time of limited resources, but it would be a wise investment
for the BSI. There are substantial fixed costs to operating a fMRI facility, and thescientific return on this investment could be enhanced substantially by the addition of
new postdoctoral fellows or unit leaders to the fMRI team.

The planned

reorganization of the fMRI facility under the Research Resources Center with theaddition of technical staff is a positive step that will further enable collaborations withother groups at the BSI. Given the excellence of the fMRI facility and the very large
number of excellent young students in laboratories around the world, there is an
excellent opportunity to recruit young cognitive neuroscientists to lead new laboratories
or units.
The MEG laboratory has focused intensively on the development and application ofhigh-resolution magnetoencephalography (MEG) to the study of a remarkably diverse
set of brain functions ranging from vision and motor performance to music listening andsleep.

Fine temporal resolution has long been recognized as the primary strength of

MEG, but the laboratory has worked hard over a number of years to develop the spatial
resolution of MEG as well.

We are impressed with the recent achievements of thelaboratory in this respect that have emerged from tomographic approaches to MEG.

The technical capability of the laboratory is impressive and recent research publications
validating the MEG techniques are encouraging.

This laboratory could make anunusually important contribution by providing the world brain imaging community withpractical, widely available methods for high spatial resolution MEG studies.

We hopeto see the potential of these MEG technical achievements realized during the next few
years such that they will have a highly visible impact at the international level.

Theestablished collaborations between the MEG group, the fMRI group, and EEG labs (inthe Creating the Brain section) are mutually beneficial and we encourage theseinteractions to continue to grow.
MIT-RIKEN Research Center. The Group Director S. Tonegawa summarized theachievements of the five different laboratories of the RIKEN-MIT Research Center. The
work of all the laboratories is very impressive and it adds importantly to the overall
research contribution of RIKEN-MIT Research Center.
Progress in the RIKEN-MIT Research Center over the past two years includes exciting
new studies using unit recording and cell-biological techniques and publication in highprofile journals.

Of note are studies that have revealed, using monkeys and rats

respectively, more rapid learning in the basal ganglia than in prefrontal cortex in a task
requiring their interaction and reverse replay of place cell sequences during sharp waves.
Both observations challenge current dogma.

Exciting molecular studies are also

underway revealing a presynaptic effect of postsynaptic overexpression of PSD-95 andexploiting region-specific transgenic manipulations.

There has been some movementof scientific personnel between Wako and Cambridge, which could perhaps be
developed further, and a series of joint retreats and seminars that have been enjoyed by
all who have participated in them.

A concern we had was whether the RIKEN-MIT

Research Center had any identity separate from that of the Picower Center with which it
is closely allied.

We suspect that the two Centers gain from each other, but thevisibility of the RIKEN-MIT Research Center is important.
A high priority for the BSI is the interaction with foreign scientists and institutions, tofoster an international and creative scientific environment. This is achieved partially by
an important contribution of the non-Japanese scientific staff hired in different
capacities at BSI -Wako. In this context the RIKEN-MIT Research Center also plays asignificant role. The scientific interaction between the two consists of common retreats,
symposia in common areas and a limited number of collaborative projects, involving
postdocs and other staff.. This exchange already includes MIT neuroscience laboratories
that currently are not part of the RIKEN-MIT Research Center. A number of BSI
laboratories work on problems that are not central to those of the current RIKEN-MIT
Research Center, and can therefore

profit from a collaboration with other MIT

laboratories.
We encourage the leadership at BSI and at the RIKEN—MIT Research Center toparticularly explore formal programs and mechanisms to increase the exchange of
personnel by a variety of means, including short-term (several weeks or months),
medium-length (sabbatical- style, 3 months to a year) and longer term (six months toseveral years) exchanges.

These exchanges would help address the challenge problem

noted by the Council, and by the leadership at the two centers – namely the difficulty of
attracting foreign scientist to the RIKEN BSI in fulfillment of its international role.

Summary:

The section Understanding the Brain has had outstanding leadership overmany years. We are confident that the BSI will maintain this excellence and thereby
ensure that the excellent science of this section is sustained at the same high level.

PROTECTING THE BRAIN
The Section of Protecting the Brain has made excellent progress during the past two
years. Four team leaders were recruited within the last two years. We are very impressedthat two new laboratories established in 2003 already have active research programs andpublished several high quality papers.

The presentations by the group directors wereexcellent, reflecting nicely the wide-ranging research topics covered by the three groups,
from basic mechanisms of neuronal fate specification by transcription factors tomechanisms of axon-dendrite polarity formation, axon guidance, and circuit formation,
to molecular and genetic basis of neurodegenerative and neuropsychiatric diseases.
We noted that the complementary nature of the research expertise and the wide range ofin vitro and in vivo preparations used by various laboratories offer unique opportunities
for crosstalk and collaborations within and across the groups within the Section ofProtecting the Brain.

For example, there is common interest among all threelaboratories with Neural Growth and Regeneration Research Group on the signalingmechanisms underlying various developmental processes, collaboration based onstudies of the same signaling mechanisms (e.g., sonic hedgehog signaling) shared bydifferent developmental processes (from fate determination and axon-dendrite polarity
formation to axon guidance and neuronal migration) appears to be highly attractive.
The unique feature of the Section of Protecting the Brain is to bring together
investigators working in basic neurobiological research and in disease-oriented research,in order to produce fruitful interactions. The creation of many groups within thesection potentially may create artificial boundaries that are counter-productive.

For

example, there are clearly overlapping interests among laboratories of the three groups,
in particular those in the Molecular Neuropathology Group and Neural Growth andRegeneration research Group.

We would like to stress that enhanced communications

among the laboratories are critical for Lab Heads and Unit Leaders to keep abreast the
research progress in BSI laboratories of similar interests.

The regular joint lab

meetings, journal clubs and seminars should be established within the Protecting theBrain Section. Furthermore, the overlapping interests in various developmental
processes of various laboratories in the sections of Protecting the Brain and Nurturing
the Brain also that suggest more extensive interactions will be fruitful.
That the interaction among laboratories needs to be strengthened is evidenced by thefact that many trainees from the Protecting the Brain section attending the meeting withthe council members with young investigators apparently did not even know one
another!

Interactions among lab members of different laboratories not only form thecritical part of learning experience for the trainees, but also facilitate the research
progress in respective labs by the exchange of ideas, expertise, and reagents forinvestigators at the lab bench.
General Concerns of the Lab Heads and Unit Leaders. A recurrent worry among
the team leaders is the anticipated decrease in their budget. They are prepared to apply
for outside funding. Most grants are allocated to groups of researchers. They fear theothers will still consider that the RIKEN scientists are wealthy and thus only need a tiny
piece of the cake. There is also the worry that too many laboratories have been created,which may limit the expansion of more successful laboratories and for them to fruitfully
pursuit of their research towards the goal of protecting the brain by curing neurologicaldiseases.
The appointment of young scientists as Unit Leaders is an important feature in BSI.

It

helps to foster independent research by young investigators, a feature lacking in many
Japanese research institutions.

However, many units are relatively small, consisting of

6 or 7 people, collaboration with other groups may be essential for accomplishing theirresearch goal. We noted that some unit leaders do not have their own office. This mayhinder their management of the laboratory, e.g., having private talks with lab members.
With increasing number of independent laboratories, there is also the concern for thelack of space in the animal facilities.

NURTURING THE BRAIN
The creation of this section several years ago was viewed positively by the 2004
Advisory Council as it brought together a talented group of researchers with interests inbrain development that ranged from basic molecular and cellular mechanisms ofneurogenesis (The Brain Development Research Group) to the formation of complex
circuits that require precisely timed environmental signals (The Critical Period
Mechanisms Research Group). The overall quality of research from these groups has
been high. The Brain Development Research Group has made a number of significant
contributions on molecular aspects of neural development and is to be complimented forthe successful completion of the cerebellar data base, which will be useful resource forscientists worldwide.
The quality and impact of the research from the Critical Period Mechanisms ResearchGroup has been especially impressive. The elucidation of mechanisms that control thetiming of critical periods, during which visual circuits are sensitive to modification by
external stimuli, will now allow such critical periods to be manipulated in different
ways in different sensory systems. The information obtained should be relevant tohuman brain development with respect to potential environmental insults and toeducational practices, and thus fits nicely with the national goal of utilizing theknowledge of brain science to create an environment of life-long learning. The diverse
expertise and technical skills represented within this highly interactive group of
scientists should enable them to effectively elucidate the development of complex
circuits involved in vision, olfaction, and bird song.
We also applaud the decision of the BSI to add three new laboratories that specificallyaddress the development of higher cognitive function. The two laboratories in the
Cognitive Development Research Group utilize animals and humans to study
Biolinguistics and the development of Symbolic Cognitive Function respectively, while
the Language Development Laboratory in the Human Learning Research Group studies
human language development. It is exciting to see the BSI taking these concrete steps,
with strong collaborative scientists, toward realizing its goal in pursuing neuroscience at
all levels, from the molecular to the highest human cognitive activities. We noted thatthese laboratories are already effectively collaborating and were impressed with themultiple levels of analysis. However we strongly encourage additional interactions withother scientists in the Critical Period Mechanisms Research Group to benefit from theircomplimentary expertise. We understand that consideration is being given toreorganizing these three “cognitive” laboratories under one group leader. We see thevalue of this, especially given the emerging synergies between the labs, but would notrecommend this step if it comes at the expense of increasing the focus on humanlearning.

CREATING THE BRAIN
RIKEN BSI, with its abundance of excellent neuroscientists addressing a wide range ofneuroscience questions, offers a unique opportunity for research in computational andmathematical neuroscience, brain style computing and neuroinformatics. Progress in thesefields is essential for the success of BSI as a whole and we are very pleased to note BSI’s
continued commitment to these important activities.
The 7th Advisory Council meeting took place just over a year after the Review of Creating theBrain (CtB) in October 2004. The Review had identified three major factors which could speed

progress at CtB, namely an optimal concentration of intellectual resources, improved
coordination of the activities of the various groups within CtB and across BSI, and increased
collaboration with Japanese industry.
The Review recommended that a new CtB Director be appointed who would be a senior person
who could integrate the various strands represented in CtB and have strong links with industry.
The new CtB Director would engage existing Lab Heads and Unit Leaders in using theopportunity arising through the planned closure of labs to refocus CtB, reorganise existingLabs and Units and establish new ones.
We are very pleased that many of the recommendations of the Review have been implemented.
1. The structure of CtB is now more transparent and focused, with one Group working on
Computational Neuroscience and one Group working on Brain-style Computing.
Development of a shared vision of CtB activity would be very helpful in increasing
further the symbiosis between individual projects.
2. As recommended, fewer resources within CtB are being devoted to empirical studies
and more resources to partnerships between CtB and experimental groups elsewhere in
BSI. In particular, one Lab has been transferred to an environment more suitable to theLab’s extensive experimental program.

It should be considered whether increased

benefit can be gained by taking this process further.
3. Mechanisms are in place (such as the Director’s Fund) to facilitate collaboration and
CtB members particularly should be encouraged to take further advantage of these. We
also note the desirability of encouraging informal interactions at the post-doctorallevel both within CtB and between CtB and other BSI Labs and Units.

Computer andmathematical modeling is being carried out also by BSI researchers who are notmembers of CtB. This will provide another source of inspiration and collaboration for
CtB members.
4. We are very pleased that one lab has been transferred to an environment more suitable
to the lab’s extensive experimental program.

One new Lab Head has been appointed

and it is anticipated that two new Unit Leaders will join BSI in the near future. We are
gratified that, following a recommendation in the Review, an international SearchCommittee was involved in this process, which is essential in this area, wherecompetition for highly qualified researchers is intense.
5. We understand that discussions are ongoing and it may be possible to establish a

RIKEN-industry collaborative program.

Such a collaboration will strengthen thedevelopment within CtB labs of brain-style computing methods and technology.

Onepossibility is for BSI to provide additional basic research input to the Human-Robotproject involving Sony and Honda.
6. The Laboratory for Neuroinformatics was part of the 2004 Review although it is in
ATDG rather than CtB. Progress has been made in developing computational tools andin hosting BSI neuroscience data for the benefit of the BSI.
Neuroinformatics Japan

In addition, the newCenterat BSI is to serve as the Japanese ‘node’ for the

recently established International Neuroinformatics Coordinating Facility. This will hostand support a number of different neuroscience databases originating throughout Japan,
including databases at BSI. Although the Neuroinformatics Lab is within ATDG, we
continue to stress the importance of coordinating the neuroinformatics effort with workwithin CtB.

RECOMMENDATIONS
A. The Creating the Brain grouping is unique amongst the four scientific groupings at BSI
in that it embraces a set of methodologies that potentially are applicable at manydifferent levels, from molecular through neural to behavioural and cognitive.
Managing a group of scientists with such a widely spread set of scientific interests
requires active and careful management. Currently the responsibility of leadershipwithin CtB falls on the shoulders of Professor Amari, who executes this function
together with that of Director of RIKEN BSI as well as the Brain-Style Computing
Group, the Mathematical Neuroscience Lab (shortly to be a Unit) and, a recent addition,
the Japan Centerfor Neuroinformatics. One strong recommendation from the Review
was that a new appointment at the Group Director level be made who could provide theinspirational leadership that CtB deserves, integrate the various strands of research in
CtB and develop strong links with industry. He or she could engage existing Lab Heads
and Unit Leaders in using the opportunity arising through the planned closure of labs torefocus CtB, reorganise existing Labs and Units and establish new ones.
We are very pleased to learn that significant effort has been expended to appointing aperson with strong industrial connections and that the search will continue. We
appreciate that finding such a person will be difficult but nonetheless we wish tore-emphasize the importance of this new senior appointment. The original criterion ofrequiring significant industrial involvement, whilst desirable, could be relaxed. In
collaboration with the BSI Director, Lab Heads and Unit Leaders, this person will
establish and implement in a collaborative manner the vision for CtB, and will be
instrumental in planning and achieving new appointments.
B. We strongly recommend that at least one and preferably two of the five seniorappoinments originally envisaged in the planned reorganisation of CtB be delayed until
the leadership of CtB is in place. There are a number of areas in which new Labs orUnits could be established that will complement the activity already present, or planned,
within BSI.
Achievement of these two measures will enable the Creating the Brain activity to achieve avery high quality concentration of computational neuroscience and brain-inspired
computing expertise that will enable BSI to place itself at the forefront of this very
important activity worldwide.

Advanced Technology Developmental Group (ATDG)
The subdivision into ATDG and the Research Resource Center (RRC), implemented a
few years ago, has provided a logical and efficient organization. The purpose of ATDG
is to develop new technologies and infrastructure of importance for BSI andneuroscience in general. This is now an important part of BSI. The Group director, Dr
Miyawaki, presented the activity of the five different laboratories. His own laboratory,
the Laboratory for Cell Function Dynamics (start 1999), has made remarkable progressin developing new compounds and strategies for cellular imaging that has led not only
to a series of articles in high impact journals, but also to patents and commercial
progress.
The Laboratories of Neural Architecture (start 1997), Behavioral Genetics (start 1997),
and Cell Culture Development (start 1999) are productive and contribute also
importantly through collaboration with laboratories in other sections of BSI and outside
BSI.

The comparatively new laboratory of Neuroinformatics (start 2002) is focused on thedevelopment of advanced technology for database platforms in neuroinformatics,
software development and computational methodology. This section is developing the
Neuroinformatics Japan Center (NIJC) under the Japanese government that will form
the Japanese node within the International Neuroinformatics Coordinating Facility(INCF). The Japanese node will be inaugurated in late February 2006. This Japanese
node is chaired by the BSI Director professor S. Amari and the Laboratory Hirector S.
Usui contributes to running the node. It has already created an efficient organization.

Research Resource Center
The Research Resource Center was presented by the Group Director, Professor C.
Itakura. This section appears to be run in a very efficient way, and provides important
services to the different research laboratories of BSI. It has two divisions, one of Animal
Experiments and one of Common Instrumentation.
The Animal Experiments DivisionThis division runs the animal facilities. Although BSI has a total space of nearly 8000
m2 with a total of 25 000 cages and 123 000 mice, there is a shortage of resources fortransgenic animals. BSI needs more space for animals. This problem is common toother RIKEN institutions and as we understand under common exploration within
RIKEN. This section also provides assistance with extensive services with mouseembryo manipulation, generation of transgenic mice, as well as antibody production,
histology, electron microscopy, and analyses of behaviour in for instance transgenic
animals.
The Division of Common Instrumentation
This division provides services with DNA sequencing, plasmid purification, gene chips,
mass spectrometry, peptide synthesis, flow cytometry and protein purification. The
possibility for the different laboratories of BSI to have this service is obviously a greatcompetitive advantage.
In conclusion: The ATDG and the Research Resource Center together provide a very

impressive infrastructure for BSI that is very difficult to match by any research
environment anywhere in the world.

Members of the BSI Advisory Council
Prof. Sten Grillner（Chair）
Professor, Nobel Institute for Neurophysiology, Department of Neuroscience,
Karolinska Institutet
Prof. Michael A.Arbib
USC Brain Project Drector
University of Southern California
Prof. Heinrich Betz
Director, Department of Neurochemistry
Max-Planck Institute for Brain Research
Prof. Zach.W.Hall
President, California Institute for Regenerative Medicine
Keck school of Medicine
University of Southern California
Prof. David J. Heeger
Professor of Psychology and Center for Neural Science
Department of Psychology and Neural Science
New York University
Prof. Nobutaka Hirokawa
Professor and Chairman, Department of Cell Biology and Anatomy
Graduate School of Medicine and faculty of Medicine
The University of Tokyo
Prof. Ichiro Kanazawa
President
National Center of Neurology and Psychiatry

Prof. Lynn T.Landmesser
Garvin Professor & Chair, Department of Neurosciences
Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine
Prof. Joseph E. LeDoux
Professor, Center for Neural Science
New York University
Prof. Jacques Mallet
Director
Laboratorie de Genetique Moleulaire de la Neurotransmission et des Processus
Neurodegeneratifs
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.
Prof. James L.McClelland
Walter Van Dyke Bingham Professor of Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience
Co-Director, Center for the Neural Basis of Cognition
Carnegie Mellon University
Prof. Richard Morris
Professor, Laboratory for Cognitive Neuroscience
College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine
The University of Edinburgh
Prof. Takashi Muramatsu
Professor, Faculty of Psychological and Physical Science
Aichi Gakuin University
Prof. William Thomas Newsome
Investigator, Howard Hughes Medical Institute and Professor
Department of Neurobiology
Stanford University School of Medicine

Prof. Tsuneko Okazaki
Guest Professor, Institute for Comprehensive Medical Science
Fujita Health University
Prof. Mu-ming Poo
Professor, Department of Molecular and Cell Biology
University of Califolnia, Berkeley
Prof. Yoh-ichi Tohkura
Professor and Deputy Director General
National Institute of Informatics
Prof. David Willshaw
Honorary Professor, University of Edinburgh Institute for Adaptive and NeuralComputation School of Informatics
The University of Edinburgh
Prof. Janet Werker
Director, Ph.D, F.R.S.C, Professor, Department of Psychology
Canada Research Chair
University of British Colimbia
Prof. Ken-ichi Yamamura
Vice President, Institute of Molecular Embryology and Genetics
Kumamoto University