New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Old vs. Young

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Much work on aging brains has focused on their failings, but two new studies look at how they succeed. In both a University of Michigan at Ann Arbor report on which brain regions respond to challenging tasks and a Johns Hopkins University look at older rats, researchers found that aging brains function differently than young brains.

Cindy Lustig of Ann Arbor used functional magnetic resonance imaging to observe the brains of young adults (aged 18 to 30) and seniors (65 to 92) as they tackled simple and difficult mental exercises. For the easy tasks, brain activity was very similar, but tougher challenges prompted differences. The seniors activated several frontal brain regions that the others did not. In addition, the younger people “turned off” parts of the brain not used during the tasks, but the elders kept those regions active. Lustig concludes that “older adults’ brains can indeed rise to the challenge, at least in some situations, but they may do so differently.”

Michela Gallagher of Johns Hopkins compared the brains of six-month-old rats with those age two (old by rat standards). Her team also divided the elder rats into age-impaired and age-unimpaired groups. When Gallagher compared the synapses—the tiny gaps between neurons where intercellular connections are made—she found that the impaired rats had lost the ability to adjust the activity of synapses appropriately but that the unimpaired rats had not. These connections are how memories are formed and preserved.

SA Mind Vol 17 Issue 1This article was published with the title “Old vs. Young” in SA Mind Vol. 17 No. 1 (), p. 10
doi:10.1038/scientificamericanmind0206-10a

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe