Extended parental provisioning and variation in vertebrate brain sizes

Schaik, Carel P. van; Song, Zitan; Schuppli, Caroline; Drobniak, Szymon M.; Heldstab, Sandra A.; Griesser, Michael

doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3002016

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 124 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Chickens are specifically selected for production: egg laying or meat. In the case of WLs, this has been a particularly intense selection regime, and one would predict a relatively smaller brain and telencephalon due to allocating more resources to growth or egg production [45]. Instead, chickens have proportionally enlarged the telencephalon compared with junglefowl (Fig.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of Telencephalon Composition among Chickens, Junglefowl, and Wild Galliforms

Racicot,

Ham,

Augustine

et al. 2024

Brain Behav Evol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Domestication is the process of modifying animals for human benefit through selective breeding in captivity. One of the traits that often diverges is the size of the brain and its constituent regions; almost all domesticated species have relatively smaller brains and brain regions than their wild ancestors. Although the effects of domestication on the brain have been investigated across a range of both mammal and bird species, almost nothing is known about the neuroanatomical effects of domestication on the world’s most common bird: the chicken (Gallus gallus). Methods: We compared the quantitative neuroanatomy of the telencephalon of white leghorn chickens with red junglefowl, their wild counterpart, and several wild galliform species. We focused specifically on the telencephalon because telencephalic regions typically exhibit the biggest differences in size in domesticate-wild comparisons. Results: Relative telencephalon size was larger in chickens than in junglefowl and ruffed grouse (Bonasa umbellus). The relative size of telencephalic regions did not differ between chickens and junglefowl, but did differ in comparison with ruffed grouse. Ruffed grouse had larger hyperpallia and smaller entopallial, nidopallial, and striatal volumes than chickens and junglefowl. Multivariate analyses that included an additional three wild grouse species corroborated these findings: chicken and junglefowl have relatively larger nidopallial and striatal volumes than grouse. Conversely, the mesopallial and hyperpallial volumes tended to be relatively smaller in chickens and junglefowl. Conclusion: From this suite of comparisons, we conclude that chickens do not follow a pattern of widespread decreases in telencephalic region sizes that is often viewed as typical of domestication. Instead, chickens have undergone a mosaic of changes with some regions increasing and others decreasing in size, and there are few differences between chickens and junglefowl.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of Telencephalon Composition among Chickens, Junglefowl, and Wild Galliforms

Racicot,

Ham,

Augustine

et al. 2024

Brain Behav Evol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The advent of Neoaves in the early Cenozoic 65 Myr ago 23 led to a diversification of beak morphology, consistent with the increase in overall beak volume, and the associated foraging niches 25 , including extended flight as well as arboreal nesting and foraging. These new niches supported the consumption of novel foods, while the security of arboreal nesting enabled the evolution of both slower life-histories 35 and post-hatching provisioning 15,36 , together facilitating brain size evolution. Thus, this pattern indicates a gradual increase in integration between sensorimotor capacities and morphology.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bird brains fit the bill: morphological diversification and the evolution of avian brain size

Song,

Drobniak,

Liu

et al. 2024

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Brain size varies greatly across and even within lineages. Attempts to explain this variation have mostly focused on the role of specific cognitive demands in the social or ecological domain. However, their predictive power is modest, whereas the effects of additional functions, especially sensory information processing and motor control, on brain size remain underexplored. Here, using phylogenetic comparative models, we show that the socio-cognitive and eco-cognitive demands do not have direct links to relative brain size (that is the residual from a regression against body mass) once morphological features are taken into account. Thus, specific cognitive abilities linked to social life or ecology play a much smaller role in brain size evolution than generally assumed. Instead, parental provisioning, generation length, and especially eye size and beak and leg morphology have a strong direct link to relative brain size. Phylogenetic lability analyses suggest that morphological diversification preceded changes in the rate of brain size evolution and greater visual input, and thus that morphological diversification opened up specialized niches where efficient foraging could produce energy surpluses. Increases in brain size provided general behavioural flexibility, which improved survival by reducing interspecific competition and predation, and was made possible by intense parental provisioning. Indeed, comparative analyses in a subset of species show that thicker beaks are associated with larger size of brain regions involved in behavioural flexibility (telencephalon, pallium). Thus, morphological evolution had a key role in niche diversification, which subsequently may have facilitated the evolution of general cognitive flexibility.

show abstract

“…While this concept is supported by a growing body of literature (discussed in Félix andOliveira, 2021 andKelly, 2022), we note that it cannot explain the differences between batu coris and cleaners. Thirdly, it has been pointed out in interspecies comparisons that brain size often correlates best with the amount of sensory information processed and the precision of motor control that a species possesses (van Schaik et al 2023). Examples include electro-sensing in mormyroid fishes (Sukhum et al 2018), stereoscopic vision in primates (Barton 2004), hand manipulation capacities in primates (Heldstab et al 2016) or even just the number of legs in lizards (de Meester et al 2019).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Examples include electro-sensing in mormyroid fishes (Sukhum et al 2018), stereoscopic vision in primates (Barton 2004), hand manipulation capacities in primates (Heldstab et al 2016) or even just the number of legs in lizards (de Meester et al 2019). Such sensorimotor functions may affect the size of the mesencephalon (optic tectum) and cerebellum without causing an improvement of cognitive processes (Barton 2012;van Schaik et al 2023).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Population density affects whole brain and brain region volumes in a wrasse species Coris batuensis

Emery,

Pessina,

Bshary

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The factors shaping brain evolution and cognition are broadly categorized as being either social or environmental. However, the relative importance of these factors is heavily debated, partly due to the limitations from the standard interspecific evolutionary comparative approach. Here, we adopt a complementary strategy leveraging the high degree of brain plasticity that evolved in fishes to ask how variation in social and environmental factors affect individual brain development. We investigated how overall brain size and brain part sizes varied between demes of the same population in the coral reef associated batu coris Coris batuensis. This wrasse species is ideal for our approach because its local population densities (a correlate of intraspecific social complexity) are dissociated from both densities of other species (reflecting interspecific complexity, including competitors and predators) and habitat complexity (represented by the three-dimensional structure of the coral reefs and adjacent areas). We found that individuals from demes with higher intraspecific population density possess larger overall brain volumes than those from lower population density environment, caused by an enlargement of all five main brain regions. Brain anatomical measures did not correlate with measures of interspecific or habitat complexity. Our results suggest that brain plasticity in the batu coris evolved to allow individuals to adapt specifically to variation in intraspecific social challenges. The results support a broader version of the social brain hypothesis, emphasizing the entire brain over specific regions like the neocortex in mammals or the telencephalon in fishes.

show abstract

Extended parental provisioning and variation in vertebrate brain sizes

Cited by 8 publications

References 124 publications

A Comparison of Telencephalon Composition among Chickens, Junglefowl, and Wild Galliforms

A Comparison of Telencephalon Composition among Chickens, Junglefowl, and Wild Galliforms

Bird brains fit the bill: morphological diversification and the evolution of avian brain size

Population density affects whole brain and brain region volumes in a wrasse species Coris batuensis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About