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.

Brain size/body weight in the dingo (Canis dingo): comparisons with domestic and wild canids

2017 ◽  
Vol 65 (5) ◽  
pp. 292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bradley P. Smith ◽  
Teghan A. Lucas ◽  
Rachel M. Norris ◽  
Maciej Henneberg
Keyword(s):  
Body Size ◽  
Brain Size ◽  
Cuon Alpinus ◽  
Size Relationship ◽  
Wild Canids ◽  
Free Ranging ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Endocranial Volume ◽  
The Brain

Endocranial volume was measured in a large sample (n = 128) of free-ranging dingoes (Canis dingo) where body size was known. The brain/body size relationship in the dingoes was compared with populations of wild (Family Canidae) and domestic canids (Canis familiaris). Despite a great deal of variation among wild and domestic canids, the brain/body size of dingoes forms a tight cluster within the variation of domestic dogs. Like dogs, free-ranging dingoes have paedomorphic crania; however, dingoes have a larger brain and are more encephalised than most domestic breeds of dog. The dingo’s brain/body size relationship was similar to those of other mesopredators (medium-sized predators that typically prey on smaller animals), including the dhole (Cuon alpinus) and the coyote (Canis latrans). These findings have implications for the antiquity and classification of the dingo, as well as the impact of feralisation on brain size. At the same time, it highlights the difficulty in using brain/body size to distinguish wild and domestic canids.

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 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.

Neocortical Anatomy in the South American Plains Vizcacha, Lagostomus maximus, Reveals Different Strategies in Encephalic Development among Hystricomorpha and Myomorpha Rodents

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Alejandro Raúl Schmidt ◽  
María Constanza Gariboldi ◽  
Santiago Andrés Cortasa ◽  
Sofía Proietto ◽  
María Clara Corso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cortical Thickness ◽  
Brain Size ◽  
Phylogenetic Analyses ◽  
Inverse Correlation ◽  
Bilateral Symmetry ◽  
Mean Value ◽  
South American ◽  
Correlation Pattern ◽  
Lagostomus Maximus ◽  
The Brain

Depending on the presence or absence of sulci and convolutions, the brains of mammals are classified as gyrencephalic or lissencephalic. We analyzed the encephalic anatomy of the hystricomorph rodent <i>Lagostomus maximus</i> in comparison with other evolutionarily related species. The encephalization quotient (EQ), gyrencephaly index (GI), and minimum cortical thickness (MCT) were calculated for the plains vizcacha as well as for other myomorph and hystricomorph rodents. The vizcacha showed a gyrencephalic brain with a sagittal longitudinal fissure that divides both hemispheres, and 3 pairs of sulci with bilateral symmetry; that is, lateral-rostral, intraparietal, and transverse sulci. The EQ had one of the lowest values among Hystricomorpha, while GI was one of the highest. Besides, the MCT was close to the mean value for the suborder. The comparison of EQ, GI, and MCT values between hystricomorph and myomorph species allowed the detection of significant variations. Both EQ and GI showed a significant increase in Hystricomorpha compared to Myomorpha, whereas a Pearson’s analysis between EQ and GI depicted an inverse correlation pattern for Hystricomorpha. Furthermore, the ratio between MCT and GI also showed a negative correlation for Hystricomorpha and Myomorpha. Our phylogenetic analyses showed that Hystricomorpha and Myomorpha do not differ in their allometric patterning between the brain and body mass, GI and brain mass, and MCT and GI. In conclusion, gyrencephalic neuroanatomy in the vizcacha could have developed from the balance between the brain size, the presence of invaginations, and the cortical thickness, which resulted in a mixed encephalization strategy for the species. Gyrencephaly in the vizcacha, as well as in other Hystricomorpha, advocates in favor of the proposal that in the more recently evolved Myomorpha lissencephaly would have arisen from a phenotype reversal process.

scholarly journals Scaling of the Mammalian Brain: the Maternal Energy Hypothesis

Physiology ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 149-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
RD Martin
Keyword(s):  
Body Size ◽  
Metabolic Rate ◽  
Basal Metabolic Rate ◽  
Brain Size ◽  
Developing Brain ◽  
Correlation Network ◽  
Gestation Period ◽  
Mammalian Brain ◽  
Metabolic Capacity ◽  
Simple Scaling

Mammalian brain sizes have been linked to specific behavioral or physiological features because of simple scaling correlations. Examination of the correlation network for body size, brain size, basal metabolic rate, and gestation period indicates that the primary link is between maternal metabolic capacity and the developing brain of the offspring.

scholarly journals Peeking Inside the Lizard Brain: Neuron Numbers in Anolis and Its Implications for Cognitive Performance and Vertebrate Brain Evolution

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Levi Storks ◽  
Brian J Powell ◽  
Manuel Leal
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Performance ◽  
Brain Size ◽  
Motor Task ◽  
Behavioral Flexibility ◽  
Brain Evolution ◽  
Relative Mass ◽  
Published Data ◽  
Vertebrate Brain ◽  
Isotropic Fractionator ◽  
The Brain

Abstract Studies of vertebrate brain evolution have mainly focused on measures of brain size, particularly relative mass and its allometric scaling across lineages, commonly with the goal of identifying the substrates that underly differences in cognition. However, recent studies on birds and mammals have demonstrated that brain size is an imperfect proxy for neuronal parameters that underly function, such as the number of neurons that make up a given brain region. Here we present estimates of neuron numbers and density in two species of lizard, Anolis cristatellus and A. evermanni, representing the first such data from squamate species, and explore its implications for differences in cognitive performance and vertebrate brain evolution. The isotropic fractionator protocol outlined in this article is optimized for the unique challenges that arise when using this technique with lineages having nucleated erythrocytes and relatively small brains. The number and density of neurons and other cells we find in Anolis for the telencephalon, cerebellum, and the rest of the brain (ROB) follow similar patterns as published data from other vertebrate species. Anolis cristatellus and A. evermanni exhibited differences in their performance in a motor task frequently used to evaluate behavioral flexibility, which was not mirrored by differences in the number, density, or proportion of neurons in either the cerebellum, telencephalon, or ROB. However, the brain of A. evermanni had a significantly higher number of nonneurons and a higher nonneuron to neuron ratio across the whole brain, which could contribute to the observed differences in problem solving between A. cristatellus and A. evermanni. Although limited to two species, our findings suggest that neuron number and density in lizard brains scale similarly to endothermic vertebrates in contrast to the differences observed in brain to body mass relationships. Data from a wider range of species are necessary before we can fully understand vertebrate brain evolution at the neuronal level.

scholarly journals Unique allometry of group size and collective brain mass in humans and primates relative to other mammals

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcus J. Hamilton ◽  
Robert S. Walker
Keyword(s):  
Social Networks ◽  
Body Size ◽  
Group Size ◽  
Brain Size ◽  
Social Groups ◽  
Group Living ◽  
Null Model ◽  
Mammalian Brain ◽  
Brain Mass ◽  
Trade Offs

AbstractGroup living is common in mammals, particularly in primates and humans. Across species, groups are social networks where co-residing members exchange information and balance trade-offs between competition and cooperation for space, resources, and reproductive opportunities. From a macroecological perspective, species-specific group sizes are ultimately constrained by body size, population density, and the environmental supply rate of home ranges. Here, we derive an allometric null model for group size in mammals based on individual energy demands and ecological constraints. Using Bayesian phylogenetic mixed models we show that primates exhibit unique allometries relative to other mammals. Moreover, as large-bodied primates, human hunter-gatherers have among the largest social groups of any mammal. We then explore the consequences of this unique social allometry by considering how mammalian brain size scales up in social groups that differ in size across mammals. We show similarly unique allometries in what we term the collective brain mass of social groups in primates relative to all other mammals. These results show that for a given body size primates have both larger brains and larger social networks than other mammals. Consequently, proportionally larger primate brains interact in proportionally larger social networks with important consequences for group cognition. We suggest that the size, scale, and complexity of human social networks in the 21st century have deep evolutionary roots in primate ecology and mammalian brain allometry.

scholarly journals The allometry of brain size in mammals

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Robert Burger ◽  
Menshian Ashaki George ◽  
Claire Leadbetter ◽  
Farhin Shaikh
Keyword(s):  
Body Size ◽  
Brain Size ◽  
Phylogenetic Signal ◽  
Museum Collections ◽  
The Brain ◽  
Size Scales ◽  
Size Data ◽  
Median Slope

AbstractWhy some animals have big brains and others do not has intrigued scholars for millennia. Yet, the taxonomic scope of brain size research is limited to a few mammal lineages. Here we present a brain size dataset compiled from the literature for 1552 species with representation from 28 extant taxonomic orders. The brain-body size allometry across all mammals is (Brain) = −1.26 (Body)0.75. This relationship shows strong phylogenetic signal as expected due to shared evolutionary histories. Slopes using median species values for each order, family, and genus, to ensure evolutionary independence, approximate ∼0.75 scaling. Why brain size scales to the ¾ power to body size across mammals is, to our knowledge, unknown. Slopes within taxonomic orders exhibiting smaller size ranges are often shallower than 0.75 and range from 0.24 to 0.81 with a median slope of 0.64. Published brain size data is lacking for the majority of extant mammals (>70% of species) with strong bias in representation from Primates, Carnivores, Perrisodactyla, and Australidelphian marsupials (orders Dasyuromorphia, Diprotodontia, Peramelemorphia). Several orders are particularly underrepresented. For example, brain size data are available for less than 20% of species in each of the following speciose lineages: Soricomorpha, Rodentia, Lagomorpha, Didelphimorphia, and Scandentia. Use of museum collections can decrease the current taxonomic bias in mammal brain size data and tests of hypothesis.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document