Working memory and working attention: What could possibly evolve?

The concept of “working” memory is traceable back to nineteenth century theorists (Baldwin, 1894; James 1890) but the term itself was not used until the mid-twentieth century (Miller, Galanter & Pribram, 1960). A variety of different explanatory constructs have since evolved which all make use of the working memory label (Miyake & Shah, 1999). This history is briefly reviewed and alternative formulations of working memory (as language-processor, executive attention, and global workspace) are considered as potential mechanisms for cognitive change within and between individuals and between species. A means, derived from the literature on human problem-solving (Newell & Simon, 1972), of tracing memory and computational demands across a single task is described and applied to two specific examples of tool-use by chimpanzees and early hominids. The examples show how specific proposals for necessary and/or sufficient computational and memory requirements can be more rigorously assessed on a task by task basis. General difficulties in connecting cognitive theories (arising from the observed capabilities of individuals deprived of material support) with archaeological data (primarily remnants of material culture) are discussed.

Fish oil supplementation alters numbers of circulating endothelial progenitor cells and micro particles independent of eNOS genotype

Background Emerging cellular markers of endothelial damage and repair include endothelial microparticles (EMPs) and endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) respectively. Effects of long chain n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (LC n-3 PUFA) and influence of genetic background on these markers are not known. Objective This study investigated the effects of fish oil supplementation on both classical and novel markers of endothelial function in subjects prospectively genotyped for the Asp298 eNOS polymorphism and at moderate risk of CVD. Design 84 subjects with moderate risk of CVD (n=40 GG and n=44 GT/TT) completed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 8-week cross-over trial of fish oil supplementation providing 1.5 g/d LC n-3 PUFA. Effects of genotype and fish oil supplementation on the blood lipid profile, inflammatory markers, vascular function (EndoPAT) and numbers of circulating EPCs and EMP (flow cytometry) were assessed. Results There was no significant effect of fish oil supplementation on blood pressure, plasma lipids or plasma glucose, although there was a trend (P = 0.069) towards a decrease in plasma TG concentration after FO supplementation compared to placebo. GT/TT subjects tended to have higher levels of total cholesterol and LDL-cholesterol, but vascular function was not affected by either treatment or eNOS genotype. Biochemical markers of endothelial function were also unaffected by treatment and eNOS genotype. In contrast, there was a significant effect of fish oil supplementation on cellular markers of endothelial function. Fish oil supplementation increased numbers of EPCs and reduced numbers of EMPs relative to the placebo, potentially favouring maintenance of endothelial integrity. There was no influence of genotype for any of the cellular markers of endothelial function, indicating that the effects of fish oil supplementation were independent of eNOS genotype. Conclusions Emerging cellular markers of endothelial damage, integrity and repair appear to be sensitive to potentially beneficial modification by dietary n-3 PUFA.