Brief Communication: Seasonality of diet composition is related to brain size in New World Monkeys

New World monkeys exhibit a more pronounced variability in encephalization than other primate taxa. In this comparative study, we tested two current hypotheses on brain size evolution, the Expensive Brain hypothesis and the Cognitive Buffer hypothesis, in a sample of 21 platyrrhine species. A high degree of habitat seasonality may impose an energetic constraint on brain size evolution if it leads to a high variation in caloric intake over time, as predicted by the Expensive Brain Hypothesis. However, simultaneously it may also provide the opportunity to reap the fitness benefits of increased cognitive abilities, which enable the exploitation of high‐quality food resources even during periods of scarcity, as predicted by the Cognitive Buffer hypothesis. By examining the effects of both habitat seasonality and the variation in monthly diet composition across species, we found support for both hypotheses, confirming previous results for catarrhine primates and lemurs. These findings are in accordance with an energetic and ecological view of brain size evolution. Am J Phys Anthropol 154:628–632, 2014. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Multiple determinants of whole and regional brain volume among terrestrial carnivorans

Mammalian brain volumes vary considerably, even after controlling for body size. Although several hypotheses have been proposed to explain this variation, most research in mammals on the evolution of encephalization has focused on primates, leaving the generality of these explanations uncertain. Furthermore, much research still addresses only one hypothesis at a time, despite the demonstrated importance of considering multiple factors simultaneously. We used phylogenetic comparative methods to investigate simultaneously the importance of several factors previously hypothesized to be important in neural evolution among mammalian carnivores, including social complexity, forelimb use, home range size, diet, life history, phylogeny, and recent evolutionary changes in body size. We also tested hypotheses suggesting roles for these variables in determining the relative volume of four brain regions measured using computed tomography. Our data suggest that, in contrast to brain size in primates, carnivoran brain size may lag behind body size over evolutionary time. Moreover, carnivore species that primarily consume vertebrates have the largest brains. Although we found no support for a role of social complexity in overall encephalization, relative cerebrum volume correlated positively with sociality. Finally, our results support negative relationships among different brain regions after accounting for overall endocranial volume, suggesting that increased size of one brain regions is often accompanied by reduced size in other regions rather than overall brain expansion.     

Effects of seasonality on brain size evolution: evidence from strepsirrhine primates

Seasonal changes in energy supply impose energetic constraints that affect many physiological and behavioral characteristics of organisms. As brains are costly, we predict brain size to be relatively small in species that experience a higher degree of seasonality (expensive brain framework). Alternatively, it has been argued that larger brains give animals the behavioral flexibility to buffer the effects of habitat seasonality (cognitive buffer hypothesis). Here, we test these two hypotheses in a comparative study on strepsirrhine primates (African lorises and Malagasy lemurs) that experience widely varying degrees of seasonality. We found that experienced seasonality is negatively correlated with relative brain size in both groups, controlling for the effect of phylogenetic relationships and possible confounding variables such as the extent of folivory. However, relatively larger-brained lemur species tend to experience less variation in their dietary intake than indicated by the seasonality of their habitat. In conclusion, we found clear support for the hypothesis that seasonality restricts brain size in strepsirrhines as predicted by the expensive brain framework and weak support for the cognitive buffer hypothesis in lemurs.     

Large brains buffer energetic effects of seasonal habitats in catarrhine primates

Ecological factors have been shown to be important for brain size evolution. In this comparative study among catarrhine primates, we examine two different ways in which seasonality may be related to brain size. First, seasonality may impose energetic constraints on the brain because it forces animals to deal with periods of food scarcity (Expensive Brain hypothesis). Second, seasonality may act as a selective pressure to increase brain size, as behavioral flexibility helps to overcome periods of food scarcity (Cognitive Buffer hypothesis). Controlling for phylogeny, we found a strong negative relationship between brain size (relative to body mass) and the degree of experienced seasonality, as estimated by the variation in net energy intake. However, we also found a significant positive relationship between relative brain size and the effect of so-called cognitive buffering, proxied by the difference between environmental seasonality and the seasonality in net energy intake actually experienced by the animals. These results show that both energetic constraints of seasonal habitats as well as cognitive buffering affect brain size evolution, leaving environmental seasonality uncorrelated to brain size. With this study we show the importance of simultaneously considering both costs and benefits in models of brain size evolution.     

Group Size Predicts Social but Not Nonsocial Cognition in Lemurs

The social intelligence hypothesis suggests that living in large social networks was the primary selective pressure for the evolution of complex cognition in primates. This hypothesis is supported by comparative studies demonstrating a positive relationship between social group size and relative brain size across primates. However, the relationship between brain size and cognition remains equivocal. Moreover, there have been no experimental studies directly testing the association between group size and cognition across primates. We tested the social intelligence hypothesis by comparing 6 primate species (total N = 96) characterized by different group sizes on two cognitive tasks. Here, we show that a species’ typical social group size predicts performance on cognitive measures of social cognition, but not a nonsocial measure of inhibitory control. We also show that a species’ mean brain size (in absolute or relative terms) does not predict performance on either task in these species. These data provide evidence for a relationship between group size and social cognition in primates, and reveal the potential for cognitive evolution without concomitant changes in brain size. Furthermore our results underscore the need for more empirical studies of animal cognition, which have the power to reveal species differences in cognition not detectable by proxy variables, such as brain size.     

Trajectories and Constraints in Brain Evolution in Primates and Cetaceans

A negative allometric relationship between body mass (BM) and brain size (BS) can be observed for many vertebrate groups. In the past decades, researchers have proposed several hypotheses to explain this finding, but none is definitive and some are possibly not mutually exclusive. Certain species diverge markedly (positively or negatively) from the mean of the ratio BM/BS expected for a particular taxonomic group. It is possible to define encephalization quotient (EQ) as the ratio between the actual BS and the expected brain size. Several cetacean species show higher EQs compared to all primates, except modern humans. The process that led to big brains in primates and cetaceans produced different trajectories, as shown by the organizational differences observed in every encephalic district (e.g., the cortex). However, these two groups both convergently developed complex cognitive abilities. The comparative study on the trajectories through which the encephalization process has independently evolved in primates and cetaceans allows a critical appraisal of the causes, the time and the mode of quantitative and qualitative development of the brain in our species and in the hominid evolutionary lineage.     

Social complexity and the fractal structure of group size in primate social evolution

Compared to most other mammals and birds, anthropoid primates have unusually complex societies characterised by bonded social groups. Among primates, this effect is encapsulated in the social brain hypothesis: the robust correlation between various indices of social complexity (social group size, grooming clique size, tactical behaviour, coalition formation) and brain size. Hitherto, this has always been interpreted as a simple, unitary relationship. Using data for five different indices of brain volume from four independent brain databases, we show that the distribution of group size plotted against brain size is best described as a set of four distinct, very narrowly defined grades which are unrelated to phylogeny. The allocation of genera to these grades is highly consistent across the different data sets and brain indices. We show that these grades correspond to the progressive evolution of bonded social groups. In addition, we show, for those species that live in multilevel social systems, that the typical sizes of the different grouping levels in each case coincide with different grades. This suggests that the grades correspond to demographic attractors that are especially stable. Using five different cognitive indices, we show that the grades correlate with increasing social cognitive skills, suggesting that the cognitive demands of managing group cohesion increase progressively across grades. We argue that the grades themselves represent glass ceilings on animals' capacity to maintain social and spatial coherence during foraging and that, in order to evolve more highly bonded groups, species have to be able to invest in costly forms of cognition.     

The primate neocortex in comparative perspective using magnetic resonance imaging.

In this study we use neuroanatomic data from living anthropoid primate subjects to test the following three hypotheses: (1) that the human neocortex is significantly larger than expected for a primate of our brain size, (2) that the human prefrontal cortex is significantly more convoluted than expected for our brain size, and (3) that increases in cerebral white matter volume outpace increases in neocortical gray matter volume among anthropoid primates. Whole brain MRI scans were obtained from 44 living primate subjects from 11 different species. Image analysis software was used to calculate total brain volume, neocortical gray matter volume, cerebral white matter volume, and the cross sectional area of the spinal cord in each scan. Allometric regression analyses were used to compare the relative size of these brain structures across species, with an emphasis on determining whether human brain proportions correspond with predictions based on nonhuman primate allometric trajectories. All three hypotheses were supported by our analysis. The results of this study provide additional insights into human brain evolution beyond the important observation that brain volume approximately tripled in the hominid lineage by demonstrating that the neocortex was uniquely modified throughout hominid evolution. These modifications may constitute part of the neurobiological substrate that supports some of our species most distinctive cognitive abilities.     

Teeth, brains, and primate life histories

This paper explores the correlates of variation in dental development across the order Primates. We are particularly interested in how 1) dental precocity (percentage of total postcanine primary and secondary teeth that have erupted at selected absolute ages and life cycle stages) and 2) dental endowment at weaning (percentage of adult postcanine occlusal area that is present at weaning) are related to variation in body or brain size and diet in primates. We ask whether folivores have more accelerated dental schedules than do like-sized frugivores, and if so, to what extent this is part and parcel of a general pattern of acceleration of life histories in more folivorous taxa. What is the adaptive significance of variation in dental eruption schedules across the order Primates? We show that folivorous primate species tend to exhibit more rapid dental development (on an absolute scale) than comparably sized frugivores, and their dental development tends to be more advanced at weaning. Our data affirm an important role for brain (rather than body) size as a predictor of both absolute and relative dental development. Tests of alternative dietary hypotheses offer the strongest support for the foraging independence and food processing hypotheses.     

Neocortex size predicts deception rate in primates

Human brain organization is built upon a more ancient adaptation, the large brain of simian primates: on average, monkeys and apes have brains twice as large as expected for mammals of their size, principally as a result of neocortical enlargement. Testing the adaptive benefit of this evolutionary specialization depends on finding an association between brain size and function in primates. However, most cognitive capacities have been assessed in only a restricted range of species under laboratory conditions. Deception of conspecifics in social circumstances is an exception, because a corpus of field data is available that encompasses all major lines of the primate radiation. We show that the use of deception within the primates is well predicted by the neocortical volume, when observer effort is controlled for; by contrast, neither the size of the rest of the brain nor the group size exert significant effects. These findings are consistent with the hypothesis that neocortical expansion has been driven by social challenges among the primates. Complex social manipulations such as deception are thought to be based upon rapid learning and extensive social knowledge; thus, learning in social contexts may be constrained by neocortical size.     

The hippocampus, spatial memory and food hoarding: a puzzle revisited

Behavioural ecology assumes that cognitive traits and their underlying neural substrates are shaped by natural selection in much the same way as morphological traits are, resulting in adaptation to the natural environment of the species concerned. Recently, however, the 'neuroecology' approach of attempting to gain insight into brain structure and function by testing predictions about variation in brain structure based on knowledge of the lifestyle of the animal has been criticized on the grounds that such an adaptationist view cannot provide insight into the underlying mechanisms. Furthermore, the criticism has focussed on attempts to use variation in demand for spatial memory and in hippocampal size as a basis for predicting variation in cognitive abilities. Here, we revisit this critique against the field of so-called 'neuroecology' and argue that using knowledge of the natural history of animals has lead to a better understanding of the interspecific variation in spatial abilities and hippocampal size, and to the generation of novel hypotheses and predictions.     

Body mass variation is negatively associated with brain size: Evidence for the fat-brain trade-off in anurans

Species can evolve diverse strategies to survive periods of uncertainty. Animals may either invest in energy storage, allowing them to decrease foraging costs, such as locomotion or risk of predation, or they may invest in better cognitive abilities helping them to flexibly adapt their behavior to meet novel challenges. Here, we test this idea of a fat-brain trade-off in 38 species of Chinese anurans by relating the coefficient of variation of body mass (CV_bodymass; as an indicator of how much animals invest into storage over the season) to brain anatomical features. After correcting for shared ancestry and body mass, we found a negative relationship between relative brain size and CV_bodymass. This indicates that anurans seem to trade-off physiological and cognitive buffering during energy shortages. As similar patterns have been reported in arboreal mammals and primates our findings suggest that the fat-brain trade-off, where animals either invest into physiological or cognitive strategies to survive harsh conditions, may be a general pattern across vertebrates.     

Comparative analysis of encephalization in mammals reveals relaxed constraints on anthropoid primate and cetacean brain scaling

There is a well-established allometric relationship between brain and body mass in mammals. Deviation of relatively increased brain size from this pattern appears to coincide with enhanced cognitive abilities. To examine whether there is a phylogenetic structure to such episodes of changes in encephalization across mammals, we used phylogenetic techniques to analyse brain mass, body mass and encephalization quotient (EQ) among 630 extant mammalian species. Among all mammals, anthropoid primates and odontocete cetaceans have significantly greater variance in EQ, suggesting that evolutionary constraints that result in a strict correlation between brain and body mass have independently become relaxed. Moreover, ancestral state reconstructions of absolute brain mass, body mass and EQ revealed patterns of increase and decrease in EQ within anthropoid primates and cetaceans. We propose both neutral drift and selective factors may have played a role in the evolution of brain-body allometry.     

The Evolution of Human Brain Development

The human brain is a large and complex organ, setting us apart from other primates. It allows us to exhibit highly sophisticated cognitive and behavioral abilities. Therefore, our brain??s size and morphology are defining features of our species and our fossil ancestors and relatives. Endocasts, i.e., internal casts of the bony braincase, provide evidence about brain size and morphology in fossils. Based on endocasts, we know that our ancestors?? brains increased overall in size and underwent several reorganizational changes. However, it is difficult to relate evolutionary changes of size and shape of endocasts to evolutionary changes of cognition and behavior. We argue here that an understanding of the tempo and mode of brain development can help to interpret the evolution of our brain and the associated cognitive and behavioral changes. To do so, we review structural brain development, cognitive development, and ontogenetic changes of endocranial size and shape in living individuals on the one hand, and ontogenetic patterns (size increase and shape change) in fossil hominins and their evolutionary change on the other hand. Tightly integrating our knowledge on these different levels will be the key of future work on the evolution of human brain development.     

Sociality, ecology, and relative brain size in lemurs

The social brain hypothesis proposes that haplorhine primates have evolved relatively large brains for their body size primarily as an adaptation for living in complex social groups. Studies that support this hypothesis have shown a strong relationship between relative brain size and group size in these taxa. Recent reports suggest that this pattern is unique to haplorhine primates; many nonprimate taxa do not show a relationship between group size and relative brain size. Rather, pairbonded social monogamy appears to be a better predictor of a large relative brain size in many nonprimate taxa. It has been suggested that haplorhine primates may have expanded the pairbonded relationship beyond simple dyads towards the evolution of complex social groups. We examined the relationship between group size, pairbonding, and relative brain size in a sample of 19 lemurs; strepsirrhine primates that last share a common ancestor with monkeys and apes approximately 75 Ma. First, we evaluated the social brain hypothesis, which predicts that species with larger social groups will have relatively larger brains. Secondly, we tested the pairbonded hypothesis, which predicts that species with a pairbonded social organization will have relatively larger brains than non-pairbonded species. We found no relationship between group size or pairbonding and relative brain size in lemurs. We conducted two further analyses to test for possible relationships between two nonsocial variables, activity pattern and diet, and relative brain size. Both diet and activity pattern are significantly associated with relative brain size in our sample. Specifically, frugivorous species have relatively larger brains than folivorous species, and cathemeral species have relatively larger brains than diurnal, but not nocturnal species. These findings highlight meaningful differences between Malagasy strepsirrhines and haplorhines, and between Malagasy strepsirrhines and nonprimate taxa, regarding the social and ecological factors associated with increases in relative brain size. The results suggest that factors such as foraging complexity and flexibility of activity patterns may have driven selection for increases in brain size in lemurs.     

The evolution of the social brain: anthropoid primates contrast with other vertebrates

The social brain hypothesis argues that large brains have arisen over evolutionary time as a response to the social and ecological conflicts inherent in group living. We test predictions arising from the hypothesis using comparative data from birds and four mammalian orders (Carnivora, Artiodactyla, Chiroptera and Primates) and show that, across all non-primate taxa, relative brain size is principally related to pairbonding, but with enduring stable relationships in primates. We argue that this reflects the cognitive demands of the behavioural coordination and synchrony that is necessary to maintain stable pairbonded relationships. However, primates differ from the other taxa in that they also exhibit a strong effect of group size on brain size. We use data from two behavioural indices of social intensity (enduring bonds between group members and time devoted to social activities) to show that primate relationships differ significantly from those of other taxa. We suggest that, among vertebrates in general, pairbonding represents a qualitative shift from loose aggregations of individuals to complex negotiated relationships, and that these bonded relationships have been generalized to all social partners in only a few taxa (such as anthropoid primates).     

Metabolic costs of brain size evolution

In the ongoing discussion about brain evolution in vertebrates, the main interest has shifted from theories focusing on energy balance to theories proposing social or ecological benefits of enhanced intellect. With the availability of a wealth of new data on basal metabolic rate (BMR) and brain size and with the aid of reliable techniques of comparative analysis, we are able to show that in fact energetics is an issue in the maintenance of a relatively large brain, and that brain size is positively correlated with the BMR in mammals, controlling for body size effects. We conclude that attempts to explain brain size variation in different taxa must consider the ability to sustain the energy costs alongside cognitive benefits.     

Evidence for coevolution of sociality and relative brain size in three orders of mammals

As the brain is responsible for managing an individual's behavioral response to its environment, we should expect that large relative brain size is an evolutionary response to cognitively challenging behaviors. The "social brain hypothesis" argues that maintaining group cohesion is cognitively demanding as individuals living in groups need to be able to resolve conflicts that impact on their ability to meet resource requirements. If sociality does impose cognitive demands, we expect changes in relative brain size and sociality to be coupled over evolutionary time. In this study, we analyze data on sociality and relative brain size for 206 species of ungulates, carnivores, and primates and provide, for the first time, evidence that changes in sociality and relative brain size are closely correlated over evolutionary time for all three mammalian orders. This suggests a process of coevolution and provides support for the social brain theory. However, differences between taxonomic orders in the stability of the transition between small-brained/nonsocial and large-brained/social imply that, although sociality is cognitively demanding, sociality and relative brain size can become decoupled in some cases. Carnivores seem to have been especially prone to this.     

Communicative roots of complex sociality and cognition

Mammals living in more complex social groups typically have large brains for their body size and many researchers have proposed that the primary driver of the increase in brain size through primate and hominin evolution was the selection pressures associated with sociality. Many mammals, and especially primates, use flexible signals that show a high degree of voluntary control and these signals may play an important role in forming and maintaining social relationships between group members. However, the specific role that cognitive skills play in this complex communication, and how in turn this relates to sociality, is still unclear. The hypothesis for the communicative roots of complex sociality and cognition posits that cognitive demands behind the communication needed to form and maintain bonded social relationships in complex social settings drives the link between brain size and sociality. We review the evidence in support of this hypothesis and why key features of cognitively complex communication such as intentionality and referentiality should be more effective in forming and maintaining bonded relationships as compared with less cognitively complex communication. Exploring the link between cognition, communication and sociality provides insights into how increasing flexibility in communication can facilitate the emergence of social systems characterised by bonded social relationships, such as those found in non‐human primates and humans. To move the field forward and carry out both within‐ and among‐species comparisons, we advocate the use of social network analysis, which provides a novel way to describe and compare social structure. Using this approach can lead to a new, systematic way of examining social and communicative complexity across species, something that is lacking in current comparative studies of social structure.     

The evolution of non-maternal care in anthropoid primates: a test of the hypotheses

The amount of non-maternal care (allocare) found in primates varies greatly from species to species. Our paper examines this variation and focuses on possible reasons why mothers in some anthropoid primate species are prepared to relinquish their infants to other carers whereas others are not. We use data collected from the literature to test a number of hypotheses that attempt to explain the observed variation in non-maternal care. Analyses were carried out using comparative methods that control for the influence of both body size and phylogeny on life-history and ecological variation. The results support previous studies of both primates and other mammals in finding a clear link between the amount of allocare provided and female reproductive rates. Species with high allocare levels grow rapidly post-natally and wean their infants at a younger age (but at the same relative size) than species of the same body size with lower allocare levels. This early weaning allows high allocare species to support higher birth rates than low allocare species but does not result in earlier maturation. Our results, therefore, suggest that mothers allow non-maternal care of their infants in order to increase their own reproductive output. It is not clear whether such a strategy also benefits the infant, as we could find no link between the presence of allocare and early maturation (which would increase the infant's reproductive output) or between allocare levels and infant survival (as measured by vulnerability to infanticide). This suggests that mothers and infants might come into conflict over transfer to other carers, as the benefits to the mother may not be accompanied by benefits to the infant. However, although mothers may benefit from allocare in some circumstances, they will not be expected to allow allocare if the costs are high (e.g. if there is a high risk to the infant).