Mass Action and Equipotentiality Reconsidered
Two conceptual views of cortical function have evolved and been used a number of times over the past 150 years to explain puzzling effects of brain damage: mass action and equipotentiality. The mass action hypothesis asserts that the entire cortex participates in every behavior. Thus, removal of any cortical tissue produces a behavioral change that is proportional to the amount of tissue removed. The equipotentiality hypothesis states that each portion of any given area is able to encode or produce the behavior normally controlled by the entire area. Thus, incomplete damage within a zone is compensated for by the remaining area. These concepts were debated extensively for the first half of this century and now are still invoked periodically as explanations for recovery of function. We revisit the concepts by briefly looking at the history before considering their current forms. We then examine the question of whether they are useful concepts to consider as explanations of recovery of function.
KeywordsMigration Neurol Gall Stein Quinine
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Cotman, C. W., 1985, Synaptic Plasticity, Guilford Press, New York.Google Scholar
- Finger, S., and Stein, D. G., 1982, Brain Damage and Recovery: Research and Clinical Perspectives. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
- Glees, P., and Cole, J., 1950, Recovery of skilled motor functions after small repeated lesions of motor cortex in macaque, J. Neurophysiol. 13:137–148.Google Scholar
- Glick, S.D., and Greenstein, S., 1972, Facilitation of recovery after lateral hypothalamic damage by prior ablation of frontal cortex, Nature (New Biol.) 239:187–188.Google Scholar
- Kolb, B., and Whishaw, I. Q., 1985a, Fundamentals of Human Neuropsychology, 2nd ed., Freeman, New York.Google Scholar
- Oakley, D. A., 1979, Cerebral cortex and adaptive behavior, in: Brain, Behavior and Evolution (D. A. Oakley and H. C. Plotkin, eds.), Methuen, London, pp. 154–188.Google Scholar
- Rakic, P., 1984, Defective cell-to-cell interactions as causes of brain malformations, in: Malformations of Development (E. S. Gollin, ed.), Academic Press, New York, pp. 239–285.Google Scholar
- Robinson, T. E. (ed.), 1983, Behavioral Approaches to Brain Research, Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
- Steele-Russell, I. S., 1982, Some observations on the problem of recovery of function following brain damage, Hum. Neurobiol. 1:68–72.Google Scholar
- Vanderwolf, C. H., Leung, L. W. S., and Stewart, D. J., 1985, Two afferent pathways mediating hippocampal rhythmical slow activity, in: Electrical Activity of the Archicortex (G. Buzsaki and C. H. Vanderwolf, eds.), Akademiai Kiado, Tokyo, pp. 47–66.Google Scholar
- Whishaw, I. Q., and Kolb, B., 1984b, Behavioral and anatomical studies of rats with complete or partial decortication in infancy, in: Early Brain Damage (C. R. Almli and S. Finger, eds.), Academic Press, New York, pp. 117–137.Google Scholar