Maternal investment, life histories and the evolution of brain structure in primates

Quantifying maternal investment in mammals using allometry

Maternal investment influences the survival and reproduction of both mothers and their progeny and plays a crucial role in understanding individuals' life-history and population ecology. To reveal the complex mechanisms associated with reproduction and investment, it is necessary to examine variations in maternal investment across species. Comparisons across species call for a standardised method to quantify maternal investment, which remained to be developed. This paper addresses this limitation by introducing the maternal investment metric - MI - for mammalian species, established through the allometric scaling of the litter mass at weaning age by the adult mass and investment duration (i.e. gestation + lactation duration) of a species. Using a database encompassing hundreds of mammalian species, we show that the metric is not highly sensitive to the regression method used to fit the allometric relationship or to the proxy used for adult body mass. The comparison of the maternal investment metric between mammalian subclasses and orders reveals strong differences across taxa. For example, our metric confirms that Eutheria have a higher maternal investment than Metatheria. We discuss how further research could use the maternal investment metric as a valuable tool to understand variation in reproductive strategies.

Both Diet and Sociality Affect Primate Brain-Size Evolution

Increased brain size in humans and other primates is hypothesized to confer cognitive benefits but brings costs associated with growing and maintaining energetically expensive neural tissue. Previous studies have argued that changes in either diet or levels of sociality led to shifts in brain size, but results were equivocal. Here we test these hypotheses using phylogenetic comparative methods designed to jointly account for and estimate the effects of adaptation and phylogeny. Using the largest current sample of primate brain and body sizes with observation error, complemented by newly compiled diet and sociality data, we show that both diet and sociality have influenced the evolution of brain size. Shifting from simple to more complex levels of sociality resulted in relatively larger brains, while shifting to a more folivorous diet led to relatively smaller brains. While our results support the role of sociality, they modify a range of ecological hypotheses centered on the importance of frugivory, and instead indicate that digestive costs associated with increased folivory may have resulted in relatively smaller brains. [adaptation; allometry; bayou; evolutionary trend; energetic constraints; phylogenetic comparative methods; primate brain size; Slouch; social-brain hypothesis.].

Face to face interactions in chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) and human (Homo sapiens) mother-infant dyads

Human mothers interact with their infants in different ways. In Western, educated, industrialized, rich and democratic (WEIRD) societies, face-to-face interactions and mutual gazes are especially frequent, yet little is known about their developmental trajectories and if they differ from those of other primates. Using a cross-species developmental approach, we compared mother-infant interactions in 10 dyads of urban humans from a WEIRD society (Homo sapiens) and 10 dyads of captive zoo-based chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), when infants were one, six and 12 months old. Results showed that face-to-face interactions with mutual gaze events were common in both groups throughout the infant's first year of life. The developmental trajectories of maternal and infants' looks partially differed between species, but mutual gaze events were overall longer in humans than in chimpanzees. Mutual gazes were also more frequent in humans, peaking at six months in humans, while increasing with age in chimpanzees. The duration and frequency of mutual gazes varied across contexts in both groups, with mutual gazes being longer during caring/grooming and feeding contexts. These findings confirm that some aspects of early socio-cognitive development are shared by humans and other primates, and highlight the importance of combining developmental and cross-species approaches to better understand the evolutionary roots of parenting behaviour. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue 'Face2face: advancing the science of social interaction'.

Coevolution of relative brain size and life expectancy in parrots

Previous studies have demonstrated a correlation between longevity and brain size in a variety of taxa. Little research has been devoted to understanding this link in parrots; yet parrots are well-known for both their exceptionally long lives and cognitive complexity. We employed a large-scale comparative analysis that investigated the influence of brain size and life-history variables on longevity in parrots. Specifically, we addressed two hypotheses for evolutionary drivers of longevity: the cognitivebuffer hypothesis, which proposes that increased cognitive abilities enable longer lifespans, and the expensive brain hypothesis, which holds that increases in lifespan are caused by prolonged developmental time of, and increased parental investment in, large-brained offspring. We estimated life expectancy from detailed zoo records for 133 818 individuals across 244 parrot species. Using a principled Bayesian approach that addresses data uncertainty and imputation of missing values, we found a consistent correlation between relative brain size and life expectancy in parrots. This correlation was best explained by a direct effect of relative brain size. Notably, we found no effects of developmental time, clutch size or age at first reproduction. Our results suggest that selection for enhanced cognitive abilities in parrots has in turn promoted longer lifespans.

Experts in action: why we need an embodied social brain hypothesis

The anthropoid primates are known for their intense sociality and large brain size. The idea that these might be causally related has given rise to a large body of work testing the 'social brain hypothesis'. Here, the emphasis has been placed on the political demands of social life, and the cognitive skills that would enable animals to track the machinations of other minds in metarepresentational ways. It seems to us that this position risks losing touch with the fact that brains primarily evolved to enable the control of action, which in turn leads us to downplay or neglect the importance of the physical body in a material world full of bodies and other objects. As an alternative, we offer a view of primate brain and social evolution that is grounded in the body and action, rather than minds and metarepresentation. This article is part of the theme issue 'Systems neuroscience through the lens of evolutionary theory'.

Why big brains? A comparison of models for both primate and carnivore brain size evolution

Despite decades of research, much uncertainty remains regarding the selection pressures responsible for brain size variation. Whilst the influential social brain hypothesis once garnered extensive support, more recent studies have failed to find support for a link between brain size and sociality. Instead, it appears there is now substantial evidence suggesting ecology better predicts brain size in both primates and carnivores. Here, different models of brain evolution were tested, and the relative importance of social, ecological, and life-history traits were assessed on both overall encephalisation and specific brain regions. In primates, evidence is found for consistent associations between brain size and ecological factors, particularly diet; however, evidence was also found advocating sociality as a selection pressure driving brain size. In carnivores, evidence suggests ecological variables, most notably home range size, are influencing brain size; whereas, no support is found for the social brain hypothesis, perhaps reflecting the fact sociality appears to be limited to a select few taxa. Life-history associations reveal complex selection mechanisms to be counterbalancing the costs associated with expensive brain tissue through extended developmental periods, reduced fertility, and extended maximum lifespan. Future studies should give careful consideration of the methods chosen for measuring brain size, investigate both whole brain and specific brain regions where possible, and look to integrate multiple variables, thus fully capturing all of the potential factors influencing brain size.

An agent-based model clarifies the importance of functional and developmental integration in shaping brain evolution

Background

Vertebrate brain structure is characterised not only by relative consistency in scaling between components, but also by many examples of divergence from these general trends.. Alternative hypotheses explain these patterns by emphasising either ‘external’ processes, such as coordinated or divergent selection, or ‘internal’ processes, like developmental coupling among brain regions. Although these hypotheses are not mutually exclusive, there is little agreement over their relative importance across time or how that importance may vary across evolutionary contexts.

Results

We introduce an agent-based model to simulate brain evolution in a ‘bare-bones’ system and examine dependencies between variables shaping brain evolution. We show that ‘concerted’ patterns of brain evolution do not, in themselves, provide evidence for developmental coupling, despite these terms often being treated as synonymous in the literature. Instead, concerted evolution can reflect either functional or developmental integration. Our model further allows us to clarify conditions under which such developmental coupling, or uncoupling, is potentially adaptive, revealing support for the maintenance of both mechanisms in neural evolution. Critically, we illustrate how the probability of deviation from concerted evolution depends on the cost/benefit ratio of neural tissue, which increases when overall brain size is itself under constraint.

Conclusions

We conclude that both developmentally coupled and uncoupled brain architectures can provide adaptive mechanisms, depending on the distribution of selection across brain structures, life history and costs of neural tissue. However, when constraints also act on overall brain size, heterogeneity in selection across brain structures will favour region specific, or mosaic, evolution. Regardless, the respective advantages of developmentally coupled and uncoupled brain architectures mean that both may persist in fluctuating environments. This implies that developmental coupling is unlikely to be a persistent constraint, but could evolve as an adaptive outcome to selection to maintain functional integration.