Hi Bhairavi,

Einstein’s brain is of interest in context of understanding the neural basis of intelligence. Given that Einstein was considered a genius, several groups have looked at his preserved brain to investigate whether there is anything notable that makes it a little different from the majority of other people. The idea is that if such a difference is found, that difference may - in part - account for, or contribute to, high intelligence (although type of intelligence is a whole other discussion point).

Of course, Einstein’s brain is a revered historical case, so there’s no sectioning the brain and investigating the microscopic architecture that may have provided the basis for his intelligence. Instead, the research performed to date has been restricted to the gross morphology of his preserved brain, in particular, the documentation of the morphology of the cortical gyri and sulci. As someone who’s looked in detail at many brains - both preserved and using neuroimaging - there are very few features of Einstein’s brain that is remarkable. There are studies that have reported that the sulci/fissure defining the anterior portion of his parietal lobe are somewhat different - look at the interesting paper by Witelson et al. (1999, Lancet, Vol 353, pg 2149). The parietal lobe has many important functions, and it has been claimed that the slight difference in Einstein’s parietal lobe may have contributed to his intellect. Another study reported that his brain had a slightly different structure of the somatosensory and motor cortices, which may have contributed to his language difficulties (Falk, 2009, Front Evol Neurosci). Most recently, a study reported that areas of the corpus callosum - the white matter fibres that connect the two halves of the brain - were thicker in Einstein than in other people (Men et al., 2013, Brain).

However, it is very difficult to make assumptions about the complexities of brain function and human behaviour, skill and intellect on the basis of gross anatomical morphology. Whilst cortical folds are consistent with the transition between architectonic cellular regions in some areas of the brain (e.g. some primary sensory regions), the brain’s convolutions generally don’t really offer a realistic insight into the complexities of human behaviour.

Ultimately, if we are to take large steps in understanding the neuroanatomical substrate of intelligence we will likely need to do this using highly sophisticated neuroimaging techniques of alive people. These techniques are constantly evolving, and the highly complex nature of human ability, behaviour, cognition and intelligence are increasingly being modelled on the basis of the brain’s structural and functional connections, networks and integrity - which are somewhat out of reach of preserved dead brains.

The size and weight of Einstein’s brain is not significantly different from you and I, indicating that gross brain size is not important for intelligence. We knew this already - males generally have larger brains than females, but are certainly not more globally intelligent.

Just ask my daughter.

Hi Bhairavi,

Einstein’s brain is of interest in context of understanding the neural basis of intelligence. Given that Einstein was considered a genius, several groups have looked at his preserved brain to investigate whether there is anything notable that makes it a little different from the majority of other people. The idea is that if such a difference is found, that difference may - in part - account for, or contribute to, high intelligence (although type of intelligence is a whole other discussion point).

Of course, Einstein’s brain is a revered historical case, so there’s no sectioning the brain and investigating the microscopic architecture that may have provided the basis for his intelligence. Instead, the research performed to date has been restricted to the gross morphology of his preserved brain, in particular, the documentation of the morphology of the cortical gyri and sulci. As someone who’s looked in detail at many brains - both preserved and using neuroimaging - there are very few features of Einstein’s brain that is remarkable. There are studies that have reported that the sulci/fissure defining the anterior portion of his parietal lobe are somewhat different - look at the interesting paper by Witelson et al. (1999, Lancet, Vol 353, pg 2149). The parietal lobe has many important functions, and it has been claimed that the slight difference in Einstein’s parietal lobe may have contributed to his intellect. Another study reported that his brain had a slightly different structure of the somatosensory and motor cortices, which may have contributed to his language difficulties (Falk, 2009, Front Evol Neurosci). Most recently, a study reported that areas of the corpus callosum - the white matter fibres that connect the two halves of the brain - were thicker in Einstein than in other people (Men et al., 2013, Brain).

However, it is very difficult to make assumptions about the complexities of brain function and human behaviour, skill and intellect on the basis of gross anatomical morphology. Whilst cortical folds are consistent with the transition between architectonic cellular regions in some areas of the brain (e.g. some primary sensory regions), the brain’s convolutions generally don’t really offer a realistic insight into the complexities of human behaviour.

Ultimately, if we are to take large steps in understanding the neuroanatomical substrate of intelligence we will likely need to do this using highly sophisticated neuroimaging techniques of alive people. These techniques are constantly evolving, and the highly complex nature of human ability, behaviour, cognition and intelligence are increasingly being modelled on the basis of the brain’s structural and functional connections, networks and integrity - which are somewhat out of reach of preserved dead brains.

The size and weight of Einstein’s brain is not significantly different from you and I, indicating that gross brain size is not important for intelligence. We knew this already - males generally have larger brains than females, but are certainly not more globally intelligent.

Just ask my daughter.

Thanks Simon for that excellent and comprehensive reply.

My wife and my daughters are further proof of your last point.

:-)

The other thing to keep in mind is neuroplasticity.

Even if we scanned Einstein's brain and did discover significantly unusual features, this would not mean we had discovered the basis of intelligence or "genius".

We would more likely have discovered the brain regions most heavily involved in the sort of thinking he had engaged in for all those years. These regions would have developed far more elaborate and complex axonal arborisation (and so more connective white matter fibres) than in any person who had not spent decades engaged in such thought, so the reportedly increased or deepened cortical folds and enlarged corpus-callosum might be the result, not the cause, of his great genius..

Here is an analogous example- your hippocampus is like a muscle, exercise makes it grow;

http://www.pnas.org/content/97/8/4398.full

.

What happens if you're social experience is limited to closely-minded individuals, or you are rigid and conditioned in your thinking from an early age? If you don't use it, you loose it...

http://www.pnas.org/content/97/8/4398.full

.

Regards,

Paul.

Completely agree Paul!