scholarly journals Evolution of cognitive and neural solutions enabling numerosity judgements: lessons from primates and corvids

2018 ◽  
Vol 373 (1740) ◽  
pp. 20160514 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Nieder

Brains that are capable of representing numerosity, the number of items in a set, have arisen repeatedly and independently in different animal taxa. This review compares the cognitive and physiological mechanisms found in a nonhuman primate, the rhesus macaque, and a corvid songbird, the carrion crow, in order to elucidate the evolutionary adaptations underlying numerical competence. Monkeys and corvids are known for their advanced cognitive competence, despite them both having independently and distinctly evolved endbrains that resulted from a long history of parallel evolution. In both species, numerosity is represented as an analogue magnitude by an approximate number system that obeys the Weber–Fechner Law. In addition, the activity of numerosity-selective neurons in the fronto-parietal association cortex of monkeys and the telencephalic associative area nidopallium caudolaterale of crows mirrors the animals' performance. In both species' brains, neuronal activity is tuned to a preferred numerosity, encodes the numerical value in an approximate fashion, and is best represented on a logarithmic scale. Collectively, the data show an impressive correspondence of the cognitive and neuronal mechanisms for numerosity representations across monkeys and crows. This suggests that remotely related vertebrates with distinctly developed endbrains adopted similar physiological solutions to common computational problems in numerosity processing. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue ‘The origins of numerical abilities'.

2018 ◽  
Vol 81 (3) ◽  
pp. 621-636 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron Cochrane ◽  
Lucy Cui ◽  
Edward M. Hubbard ◽  
C. Shawn Green

2013 ◽  
Vol 55 (12) ◽  
pp. 1109-1114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kerstin Hellgren ◽  
Justin Halberda ◽  
Lea Forsman ◽  
Ulrika Ådén ◽  
Melissa Libertus

Genetics ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 150 (2) ◽  
pp. 807-814
Author(s):  
Adalgisa Caccone ◽  
Gi-Sik Min ◽  
Jeffrey R Powell

Abstract For more than 60 years, evolutionary cytogeneticists have been using naturally occurring chromosomal inversions to infer phylogenetic histories, especially in insects with polytene chromosomes. The validity of this method is predicated on the assumption that inversions arise only once in the history of a lineage, so that sharing a particular inversion implies shared common ancestry. This assumption of monophyly has been generally validated by independent data. We present the first clear evidence that naturally occurring inversions, identical at the level of light microscopic examination of polytene chromosomes, may not always be monophyletic. The evidence comes from DNA sequence analyses of regions within or very near the breakpoints of an inversion called the 2La that is found in the Anopheles gambiae complex. Two species, A. merus and A. arabiensis, which are fixed for the “same” inversion, do not cluster with each other in a phylogenetic analysis of the DNA sequences within the 2La. Rather, A. merus 2La is most closely related to strains of A. gambiae homozygous for the 2L+. A. gambiae and A. merus are sister taxa, the immediate ancestor was evidently homozygous 2L+, and A. merus became fixed for an inversion cytologically identical to that in A. arabiensis. A. gambiae is polymorphic for 2La/2L+, and the 2La in this species is nearly identical at the DNA level to that in A. arabiensis, consistent with the growing evidence that introgression has or is occurring between these two most important vectors of malaria in the world. The parallel evolution of the “same” inversion may be promoted by the presence of selectively important genes within the breakpoints.


Perception ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 45 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 44-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fanny Gimbert ◽  
Edouard Gentaz ◽  
Valérie Camos ◽  
Karine Mazens

2021 ◽  
Vol 44 ◽  
Author(s):  
José Luis Bermúdez

Abstract Against Clarke and Beck's proposal that the approximate number system (ANS) represents natural and rational numbers, I suggest that the experimental evidence is better accommodated by the (much weaker) thesis that the ANS represents cardinality comparisons. Cardinality comparisons do not stand in arithmetical relations and being able to apply them does not involve basic arithmetical concepts and operations.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document