Kyra's Bioverse

Author: kyrabioverse

  • Explore the Brain (week 1 in Columbia)

    Hi Bioverse!

    This week, I’ve been taking a pre-college neuroscience course through Columbia University, and I wanted to share some of the most fascinating things I’ve learned—especially where they overlap with anthropology. Here’s a day-by-day highlight reel of my experience:

    Day One – Understanding Pain and Inflammation
    We explored what pain really is—it’s not just discomfort, but often the nervous system detecting tissue damage, a process called nociception. We also learned about inflammation and how ion channels work. These channels are made of proteins within the plasma membrane and usually stay “gated” to regulate ion flow, though they can open when needed. While we didn’t dive deeply into the human brain on this day, we gained a lot of insight into how complex nervous systems function.

    Day Two – Brain Anatomy and Phineas Gage
    We studied the famous case of Phineas Gage, a railroad worker who survived a severe brain injury when a metal rod pierced his left frontal lobe. Although he lived for 11 more years, his personality changed dramatically—he became more impulsive and struggled with social behavior. This is because the prefrontal cortex, which was damaged, is responsible for emotion regulation, decision-making, and social interaction. Interestingly, humans have a uniquely developed prefrontal cortex, which plays a major role in our ability to think rationally and connect with others.

    Day Three – Rationalism vs. Empiricism
    We discussed two ways of knowing: rationalism (innate knowledge, like breathing) and empiricism (learned knowledge, like speaking a language). For example, no one teaches you how to breathe—but you have to learn to talk. This got me thinking about how many things humans do that fall under empiricism: reading, writing, drawing, dancing. These skills may not be necessary for survival, but they’re central to human culture, creativity, and identity—an area where anthropology and neuroscience beautifully intersect.

    Day Four – Touch Receptors in the Skin
    We examined three types of mechanoreceptors in the skin: Pacinian corpuscles, Merkel cells, and Meissner’s corpuscles. Each responds to different types of mechanical stimuli—like pressure, vibration, and texture—helping us interpret the physical world around us.

    Day Five – The Motor System
    We wrapped up the week by looking at how we move. Every motor action involves four key stages: planning, coordination, execution, and muscle contraction. Different parts of the central nervous system are responsible for each. For instance, the cerebral cortex handles execution, while the cerebellum manages coordination. It’s incredible how our brain orchestrates something as simple as lifting a finger through such a complex system.

  • Underwater Stories (week 3 of Curiodyessy)

    This week in Curriodeasy I was in the camp Ocean Adventure and the exsperince was very different to Junior Keepers. It felt like we were going more into the nature and less into the museum, which I was all for. As we studied the marine life more and more I realised that the campers were very much personifing the animals. This was less like in my first week when I noticed that they were favoring certain animals. Here they were giving these animal human traits. I thought about it and realised that I actually do that as well. I think how otters are so “good” for eating the urchins and in turn keeping the seaweed forests health. And the sea urchins had to be “bad” because they were destroying the seaweed. Now I understand that good and bad are very human, other animals don’t have such social constructs. Even with me understanding this I still subconciously thought like this. the answer wasn’t anything earth shattering but It was informative. Humans tend to force these norms onto other animals because we want to see the world in the ways that we see ourselves. We want our social laws to apply to the whole world when in reality they don’t. This can be both good and bad because while it does strengthen our connection with other animals it can also leave us with cognitive biases towards these “bad” animals.This week at CuriOdyssey, I was in the Ocean Adventure camp, and the experience felt very different from Junior Keepers. It seemed like we were more immersed in nature and less focused on the museum side of things—which I really enjoyed. As we spent more time studying marine life, I noticed something interesting: the campers were constantly personifying the animals. Unlike my first week, where they tended to favor certain animals over others, this time they were giving sea creatures actual human traits.

    I started thinking about this and realized—I do it too. For example, I think of otters as “good” because they eat sea urchins and help keep the kelp forests healthy. And I see sea urchins as “bad” because they destroy the kelp. But in reality, ‘good’ and ‘bad’ are human ideas. Other animals don’t operate under those kinds of social rules. Even though I know this, I still found myself thinking that way without realizing it.

    This realization wasn’t anything earth-shattering, but it was informative. Humans often project our own values and norms onto animals because it helps us make sense of the world in familiar ways. We want our rules—our moral codes—to apply universally, even when they don’t. This can be both helpful and harmful. On one hand, it strengthens our emotional connection to animals. On the other, it can lead to cognitive biases, where we unfairly label certain species as “bad” just because they don’t fit into our human worldview.

  • Copy Cats (week 2 of Curiodessy)

    This week, I was once again assigned to the Junior Keepers camp. Since I had already participated in this camp before, I felt more confident and found myself with more mental space to observe the students more closely. One thing that stood out to me was how often the kids would mimic the most random things that I or any other adult would do. At first, I just saw it as typical behavior—something kids do as they grow and learn. But because I’ve been trying to look at this camp experience with an anthropological lens, I decided to pay closer attention and reflect more deeply on what was really happening.

    What I discovered was surprisingly eye-opening. I learned that this kind of mimicking isn’t just about play—it’s actually how children begin to understand and absorb social norms and culture. By copying the actions, words, and even body language of adults, they are learning what is acceptable, what is valued, and how people interact in their community. It’s their way of taking in the beliefs, values, and customs of the world around them.

    Another thing I found really interesting is that mirroring adults can help kids build social connections. When a child imitates an adult, it can actually strengthen the bond between them. That made me feel genuinely touched. When the kids repeated little phrases I would say or copied some of my gestures, it felt like they were trying to connect with me on a deeper level—like they saw me as someone worth trusting or learning from.

    But the deeper I looked into it, the more I realized there’s another layer, too. Sometimes, children mimic adults not just to connect, but also to explore limits. They might be testing boundaries—copying something to see if it gets a reaction, or to figure out what kind of behavior is acceptable. It made me reflect more on my own actions and how carefully children observe them, sometimes even to test what happens when they imitate something questionable.

    Overall, this experience helped me see the kids’ behavior in a new light. It reminded me how much of an influence we have over their future actions.

  • Baby Schema (week 1 of Curiodessy)

    Hello, this is Kyra Mishra. As I mentioned earlier, I’m participating in a LIT (Leader in Training) program at the Curiodyssey museum’s summer camp. Now, I know it might seem like a stretch to connect cleaning up kids’ spit-up with biological anthropology—but bear with me for a moment.
    There are a few topics I’d like to explore in this series of blog posts. The first is human behavior toward animals. At first glance, watching children look at animals may not seem very revealing. But as I observed more closely, something interesting stood out: the cute, fuzzy mammals—those that most closely resembled the stuffed animals kids might have at home—tended to get the biggest reactions. Lots of “awws” and “oohs.”
    One day, we did a project where the campers created enrichment items for the animals—basically toys to keep the animals mentally and physically stimulated. Each group was assigned a different animal. Some kids got the adorable mammals, while others were assigned creatures like snakes or crows. Unsurprisingly, there was a scramble over who got the “cuter” animals.
    That got me thinking: is there an evolutionary reason why we’re so drawn to mammals, especially the soft and fuzzy ones? So I did a bit of research. It turns out that humans are biologically wired to find our own offspring cute—traits like big eyes, round faces, and soft features trigger nurturing instincts. Animals that share those baby-like traits can spark a similar response in us, making them more appealing than animals that don’t resemble human infants. This phenomena is called “baby schema”.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started