File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Evolution of anuran brains: Disentangling ecological and phylogenetic sources of variation

TitleEvolution of anuran brains: Disentangling ecological and phylogenetic sources of variation
Authors
KeywordsPredation risk
Brain
Diet
Habitat type
Comparative method
Amphibian
Issue Date2015
Citation
Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 2015, v. 28, n. 11, p. 1986-1996 How to Cite?
Abstract© 2015 European Society For Evolutionary Biology. Variation in ecological selection pressures has been implicated to explain variation in brain size and architecture in fishes, birds and mammals, but little is known in this respect about amphibians. Likewise, the relative importance of constraint vs. mosaic hypotheses of brain evolution in explaining variation in brain size and architecture remains contentious. Using phylogenetic comparative methods, we studied interspecific variation in brain size and size of different brain parts among 43 Chinese anuran frogs and explored how much of this variation was explainable by variation in ecological factors (viz. habitat type, diet and predation risk). We also evaluated which of the two above-mentioned hypotheses best explains the observed patterns. Although variation in brain size explained on average 80.5% of the variation in size of different brain parts (supporting the constraint hypothesis), none of the three ecological factors were found to explain variation in overall brain size. However, habitat and diet type explained a significant amount of variation in telencephalon size, as well in three composite measures of brain architecture. Likewise, predation risk explained a significant amount of variation in bulbus olfactorius and optic tecta size. Our results show that evolution of anuran brain accommodates features compatible with both constraint (viz. strong allometry among brain parts) and mosaic (viz. independent size changes in response to ecological factors in certain brain parts) models of brain size evolution.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/292913
ISSN
2019 Impact Factor: 2.72
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 2.009
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLiao, Wen B.-
dc.contributor.authorLou, S. L.-
dc.contributor.authorZeng, Y.-
dc.contributor.authorMerilä, J.-
dc.date.accessioned2020-11-17T14:57:29Z-
dc.date.available2020-11-17T14:57:29Z-
dc.date.issued2015-
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Evolutionary Biology, 2015, v. 28, n. 11, p. 1986-1996-
dc.identifier.issn1010-061X-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/292913-
dc.description.abstract© 2015 European Society For Evolutionary Biology. Variation in ecological selection pressures has been implicated to explain variation in brain size and architecture in fishes, birds and mammals, but little is known in this respect about amphibians. Likewise, the relative importance of constraint vs. mosaic hypotheses of brain evolution in explaining variation in brain size and architecture remains contentious. Using phylogenetic comparative methods, we studied interspecific variation in brain size and size of different brain parts among 43 Chinese anuran frogs and explored how much of this variation was explainable by variation in ecological factors (viz. habitat type, diet and predation risk). We also evaluated which of the two above-mentioned hypotheses best explains the observed patterns. Although variation in brain size explained on average 80.5% of the variation in size of different brain parts (supporting the constraint hypothesis), none of the three ecological factors were found to explain variation in overall brain size. However, habitat and diet type explained a significant amount of variation in telencephalon size, as well in three composite measures of brain architecture. Likewise, predation risk explained a significant amount of variation in bulbus olfactorius and optic tecta size. Our results show that evolution of anuran brain accommodates features compatible with both constraint (viz. strong allometry among brain parts) and mosaic (viz. independent size changes in response to ecological factors in certain brain parts) models of brain size evolution.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Evolutionary Biology-
dc.subjectPredation risk-
dc.subjectBrain-
dc.subjectDiet-
dc.subjectHabitat type-
dc.subjectComparative method-
dc.subjectAmphibian-
dc.titleEvolution of anuran brains: Disentangling ecological and phylogenetic sources of variation-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturelink_to_OA_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/jeb.12714-
dc.identifier.pmid26248891-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-84946492613-
dc.identifier.volume28-
dc.identifier.issue11-
dc.identifier.spage1986-
dc.identifier.epage1996-
dc.identifier.eissn1420-9101-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000364641900007-
dc.identifier.issnl1010-061X-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats