scholarly journals The evolution of mammalian brain size

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (18) ◽  
pp. eabe2101
Author(s):  
J. B. Smaers ◽  
R. S. Rothman ◽  
D. R. Hudson ◽  
A. M. Balanoff ◽  
B. Beatty ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Body Size ◽  
Brain Size ◽  
Life Sciences ◽  
Mammalian Brain ◽  
Mammalian Evolution ◽  
Major Transitions ◽  
Developmental Mechanisms ◽  
Scaling Relationship ◽  
Relative Brain Size ◽  
Traditional Paradigm

Relative brain size has long been considered a reflection of cognitive capacities and has played a fundamental role in developing core theories in the life sciences. Yet, the notion that relative brain size validly represents selection on brain size relies on the untested assumptions that brain-body allometry is restrained to a stable scaling relationship across species and that any deviation from this slope is due to selection on brain size. Using the largest fossil and extant dataset yet assembled, we find that shifts in allometric slope underpin major transitions in mammalian evolution and are often primarily characterized by marked changes in body size. Our results reveal that the largest-brained mammals achieved large relative brain sizes by highly divergent paths. These findings prompt a reevaluation of the traditional paradigm of relative brain size and open new opportunities to improve our understanding of the genetic and developmental mechanisms that influence brain size.

scholarly journals Do Different Methods Yield Equivalent Estimations of Brain Size in Birds?

2020 ◽  
Vol 95 (2) ◽  
pp. 113-122
Author(s):  
Diego Ocampo ◽  
César Sánchez ◽  
Gilbert Barrantes
Keyword(s):  
Body Size ◽  
Brain Size ◽  
Brain Mass ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Evolutionary Studies ◽  
Relative Brain Size ◽  
Using Data ◽  
Endocranial Volume ◽  
The Brain ◽  
Size Estimates

The ratio of brain size to body size (relative brain size) is often used as a measure of relative investment in the brain in ecological and evolutionary studies on a wide range of animal groups. In birds, a variety of methods have been used to measure the brain size part of this ratio, including endocranial volume, fixed brain mass, and fresh brain mass. It is still unclear, however, whether these methods yield the same results. Using data obtained from fresh corpses and from published sources, this study shows that endocranial volume, mass of fixed brain tissue, and fresh mass provide equivalent estimations of brain size for 48 bird families, in 19 orders. We found, however, that the various methods yield significantly different brain size estimates for hummingbirds (Trochilidae). For hummingbirds, fixed brain mass tends to underestimate brain size due to reduced tissue density, whereas endocranial volume overestimates brain size because it includes a larger volume than that occupied by the brain.

scholarly journals Rethinking the Effects of Body Size on the Study of Brain Size Evolution

2019 ◽  
Vol 93 (4) ◽  
pp. 182-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enrique Font ◽  
Roberto García-Roa ◽  
Daniel Pincheira-Donoso ◽  
Pau Carazo
Keyword(s):  
Body Size ◽  
Brain Size ◽  
Size Variation ◽  
Brain Evolution ◽  
Scaling Effects ◽  
Selection Pressures ◽  
Body Tissues ◽  
Relative Brain Size ◽  
Functional Components ◽  
The Brain

Body size correlates with most structural and functional components of an organism’s phenotype – brain size being a prime example of allometric scaling with animal size. Therefore, comparative studies of brain evolution in vertebrates rely on controlling for the scaling effects of body size variation on brain size variation by calculating brain weight/body weight ratios. Differences in the brain size-body size relationship between taxa are usually interpreted as differences in selection acting on the brain or its components, while selection pressures acting on body size, which are among the most prevalent in nature, are rarely acknowledged, leading to conflicting and confusing conclusions. We address these problems by comparing brain-body relationships from across >1,000 species of birds and non-avian reptiles. Relative brain size in birds is often assumed to be 10 times larger than in reptiles of similar body size. We examine how differences in the specific gravity of body tissues and in body design (e.g., presence/absence of a tail or a dense shell) between these two groups can affect estimates of relative brain size. Using phylogenetic comparative analyses, we show that the gap in relative brain size between birds and reptiles has been grossly exaggerated. Our results highlight the need to take into account differences between taxa arising from selection pressures affecting body size and design, and call into question the widespread misconception that reptile brains are small and incapable of supporting sophisticated behavior and cognition.

scholarly journals Brain Changes during Phyletic Dwarfing in Elephants and Hippos

2018 ◽  
Vol 92 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 167-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
George A. Lyras
Keyword(s):  
Body Size ◽  
Brain Size ◽  
Size Increase ◽  
Allometric Relationships ◽  
Scaling Models ◽  
Brain Changes ◽  
Relative Brain Size

Of all known insular mammals, hippos and elephants present the extremes of body size decrease, reducing to 4 and a mere 2% of their ancestral mainland size, respectively. Despite the numerous studies on these taxa, what happens to their relative brain size during phyletic dwarfing is not well known, and results are sometimes conflicting. For example, relative brain size increase has been noted in the Sicilian dwarf elephant, Palaeoloxodon falconeri, whereas relative brain size decrease has been postulated for Malagasy dwarf hippos. Here, I perform an analysis of brain, skull, and body size of 3 insular elephants (Palaeoloxodon “mnaidriensis,” P. tiliensis, and P. falconeri) and 3 insular hippos (Hippopotamus madagascariensis, H. lemerlei, and H. minor) to address this issue and to test whether relative brain size in phyletic dwarf species can be predicted. The results presented here show that the encephalization of all insular elephants and hippos is higher than that of their continental relatives. P. falconeri in particular has an enormous encephalization increase, which has so far not been reported in any other insular mammal. Insular brain size cannot be reliably predicted using either static allometric or ontogenetic scaling models. The results of this study indicate that insular dwarf species follow brain-body allometric relationships different from the expected patterns seen for their mainland relatives.

scholarly journals Why are there so few smart mammals (but so many smart birds)?

2008 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karin Isler ◽  
Carel P Van Schaik
Keyword(s):  
Body Size ◽  
Brain Size ◽  
Population Increase ◽  
Large Brain ◽  
Cooperatively Breeding ◽  
Steep Decline ◽  
Relative Brain Size ◽  
Altricial Birds ◽  
Rates Of Growth ◽  
Very High

The expensive brain hypothesis predicts an interspecific link between relative brain size and life-history pace. Indeed, animals with relatively large brains have reduced rates of growth and reproduction. However, they also have increased total lifespan. Here we show that the reduction in production with increasing brain size is not fully compensated by the increase in lifespan. Consequently, the maximum rate of population increase ( r max ) is negatively correlated with brain mass. This result is not due to a confounding effect of body size, indicating that the well-known correlation between r max and body size is driven by brain size, at least among homeothermic vertebrates. Thus, each lineage faces a ‘grey ceiling’, i.e. a maximum viable brain size, beyond which r max is so low that the risk of local or species extinction is very high. We found that the steep decline in r max with brain size is absent in taxa with allomaternal offspring provisioning, such as cooperatively breeding mammals and most altricial birds. These taxa thus do not face a lineage-specific grey ceiling, which explains the far greater number of independent origins of large brain size in birds than mammals. We also predict that (absolute and relative) brain size is an important predictor of macroevolutionary extinction patterns.

Animal intelligence as encephalization

1985 ◽  
Vol 308 (1135) ◽  
pp. 21-35 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Body Size ◽  
Brain Size ◽  
Great Apes ◽  
Processing Capacity ◽  
Scientific Question ◽  
Animal Intelligence ◽  
Neural Information ◽  
Neural Information Processing ◽  
Quantitative Analyses ◽  
Relative Brain Size

There is no consensus on the nature of animal intelligence despite a century of research, though recent work on cognitive capacities of dolphins and great apes seems to be on one right track. The most precise quantitative analyses have been of relative brain size, or structural encephalization, undertaken to find biological correlates of mind in animals. Encephalization and its evolution are remarkably orderly, and if the idea of intelligence were unknown it would have to be invented to explain encephalization. The scientific question is: what behaviour or dimensions of behaviour evolved when encephalization evolved? The answer: the relatively unusual behaviours that require increased neural information processing capacity, beyond that attributable to differences among species in body size. In this perspective, the different behaviours that depend on augmented processing capacity in different species are evidence of different intelligences (in the plural) that have evolved.

scholarly journals Testing hypotheses of marsupial brain size variation using phylogenetic multiple imputations and a Bayesian comparative framework

2021 ◽  
Vol 288 (1947) ◽  
Author(s):  
Orlin S. Todorov ◽  
Simone P. Blomberg ◽  
Anjali Goswami ◽  
Karen Sears ◽  
Patrik Drhlík ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Litter Size ◽  
Brain Size ◽  
Size Variation ◽  
Reproductive Traits ◽  
Mammalian Brain ◽  
Gestation Length ◽  
High Coverage ◽  
Ecological Predictors ◽  
Size Evolution ◽  
Relative Brain Size

Considerable controversy exists about which hypotheses and variables best explain mammalian brain size variation. We use a new, high-coverage dataset of marsupial brain and body sizes, and the first phylogenetically imputed full datasets of 16 predictor variables, to model the prevalent hypotheses explaining brain size evolution using phylogenetically corrected Bayesian generalized linear mixed-effects modelling. Despite this comprehensive analysis, litter size emerges as the only significant predictor. Marsupials differ from the more frequently studied placentals in displaying a much lower diversity of reproductive traits, which are known to interact extensively with many behavioural and ecological predictors of brain size. Our results therefore suggest that studies of relative brain size evolution in placental mammals may require targeted co-analysis or adjustment of reproductive parameters like litter size, weaning age or gestation length. This supports suggestions that significant associations between behavioural or ecological variables with relative brain size may be due to a confounding influence of the extensive reproductive diversity of placental mammals.

scholarly journals Relative brain size and cognitive equivalence in fishes

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zegni Triki ◽  
Mélisande Aellen ◽  
Carel van Schaik ◽  
Redouan Bshary
Keyword(s):  
Body Size ◽  
Cognitive Performance ◽  
Brain Size ◽  
Cognitive Tasks ◽  
Teleost Fishes ◽  
Vertebrate Species ◽  
Higher Taxa ◽  
Body Sizes ◽  
Mri Scans ◽  
Relative Brain Size

ABSTRACTThere are two well-established facts about vertebrate brains: brains are physiologically costly organs, and both absolute and relative brain size varies greatly between and within the major vertebrate clades. While the costs are relatively clear, scientists struggle to establish how larger brains translate into higher cognitive performance. Part of the challenge is that intuitively larger brains are needed to control larger bodies without any changes in cognitive performance. Therefore, body size needs to be controlled for in order to establish the slope of cognitive equivalence between animals of different sizes. Potentially, intraspecific slopes provide the best available estimate of how an increase in body size translates into an increase in brain size without changes in cognitive performance. Here, we provide slope estimates for brain-body sizes and for cognition-body in wild-caught “cleaner” fish Labroides dimidiatus. The cleaners’ cognitive performance was estimated from four different cognitive tasks that tested for learning, numerical, and inhibitory control abilities. The cognitive performance was found to be rather independent of body size, while brain-body slopes from two datasets gave the values of 0.58 (MRI scans data) and 0.47 (dissection data). These values can hence represent estimates of intraspecific cognitive equivalence for this species. Furthermore, another dataset of brain-body slopes estimated from 14 different fish species, gave a mean slope of 0.5, and hence rather similar to that of cleaners. This slope is very similar to the encephalisation quotients for ectotherm higher taxa, i.e. teleost fishes, amphibians and reptiles (∼ 0.5). The slope is much higher than what has been found in endotherm vertebrate species (∼ 0.3). Together, it suggests that endo- and ectotherm brain organisations and resulting cognitive performances are fundamentally different.

scholarly journals Relative brain size and cognitive equivalence in fishes

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zegni Triki ◽  
Mélisande Aellen ◽  
Carel P. van Schaik ◽  
Redouan Bshary
Keyword(s):  
Body Size ◽  
Cognitive Performance ◽  
Brain Size ◽  
Regression Line ◽  
Mean Value ◽  
Mammalian Brain ◽  
Regression Slope ◽  
Scan Data ◽  
The Brain

Scientists have long struggled to establish how larger brains translate into higher cognitive performance across species. While absolute brain size often yields high predictive power of performance, its positive correlation with body size warrants some level of correction. It is expected that larger brains are needed to control larger bodies without any changes in cognitive performance. Potentially, the mean value of intraspecific brain-body slopes provides the best available estimate for an interspecific correction factor. For example, in primates, including humans, an increase in body size translates into an increase in brain size without changes in cognitive performance. Here, we provide the first evaluation of this hypothesis for another clade, teleost fishes. First, we obtained a mean intraspecific brain-body regression slope of 0.46 (albeit a relatively large range of 0.26 to 0.79) from a dataset of 51 species, with at least ten wild adult specimens per species. This mean intraspecific slope value (0.46) is similar to that of the encephalisation quotient reported for teleost (0.5), which can be used to predict mean cognitive performance in fishes. Importantly, such mean value (0.46) is much higher than in endothermic vertebrate species (~ 0.3). Second, we used wild-caught adult cleaner fish Labroides dimidiatus as a case study to test whether variation in individual cognitive performance can be explained by body size. We first obtained the brain-body regression slope for this species from two different datasets, which gave slope values of 0.58 (MRI scan data) and 0.47 (dissection data). Then, we used another dataset involving 69 adult cleaners different from those tested for their brain-body slope. We found that cognitive performance from four different tasks that estimated their learning, numerical, and inhibitory control abilities, was not significantly associated with body size. These results suggest that the intraspecific brain-body slope can estimate cognitive equivalence for this species. That is, individuals that are on the brain-body regression line are cognitively equal. While rather preliminary, our results suggest that fish and mammalian brain organisations are fundamentally different, resulting in different intra- and interspecific slopes of cognitive equivalence.

scholarly journals Nasonia Parasitic Wasps Escape from Haller's Rule by Diphasic, Partially Isometric Brain-Body Size Scaling and Selective Neuropil Adaptations

2017 ◽  
Vol 90 (3) ◽  
pp. 243-254 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jitte Groothuis ◽  
Hans M. Smid
Keyword(s):  
Body Size ◽  
Brain Size ◽  
Parasitic Wasp ◽  
Volumetric Analysis ◽  
Relative Volume ◽  
Trichogramma Evanescens ◽  
Size Scaling ◽  
Relative Brain Size ◽  
Brain Architecture ◽  
Size Relation

Haller's rule states that brains scale allometrically with body size in all animals, meaning that relative brain size increases with decreasing body size. This rule applies both on inter- and intraspecific comparisons. Only 1 species, the extremely small parasitic wasp Trichogramma evanescens, is known as an exception and shows an isometric brain-body size relation in an intraspecific comparison between differently sized individuals. Here, we investigated if such an isometric brain-body size relationship also occurs in an intraspecific comparison with a slightly larger parasitic wasp, Nasonia vitripennis, a species that may vary 10-fold in body weight upon differences in levels of scramble competition during larval development. We show that Nasonia exhibits diphasic brain-body size scaling: larger wasps scale allometrically, following Haller's rule, whereas the smallest wasps show isometric scaling. Brains of smaller wasps are, therefore, smaller than expected and we hypothesized that this may lead to adaptations in brain architecture. Volumetric analysis of neuropil composition revealed that wasps of different sizes differed in relative volume of multiple neuropils. The optic lobes and mushroom bodies in particular were smaller in the smallest wasps. Furthermore, smaller brains had a relatively smaller total neuropil volume and larger cellular rind than large brains. These changes in relative brain size and brain architecture suggest that the energetic constraints on brain tissue outweigh specific cognitive requirements in small Nasonia wasps.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document