Cited by 632Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Monkey to human comparative anatomy of the frontal lobe association tracts

Thiebaut de Schotten, Michel, Dell’Acqua, Flavio, Valabregue, Romain, Catani, Marco·2012·Cortex

Abstract

The greater expansion of the frontal lobes along the phylogeny scale has been interpreted as the signature of evolutionary changes underlying higher cognitive abilities in humans functions in humans. However, it is unknown how an increase in number of gyri, sulci and cortical areas in the frontal lobe have coincided with a parallel increase in connectivity. Here, using advanced tractography based on spherical deconvolution, we produced an atlas of human frontal association connections that we compared with axonal tracing studies of the monkey brain. We report several similarities between human and monkey in the cingulum, uncinate, superior longitudinal fasciculus, frontal aslant tract and orbito-polar tract. These similarities suggest to preserved functions across anthropoids. In addition, we found major differences in the arcuate fasciculus and the inferior fronto-occipital fasciculus. These differences indicate possible evolutionary changes in the connectional anatomy of the frontal lobes underlying unique human abilities.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cortex.2011.10.001

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Thiebaut de Schotten, M., Dell’Acqua, F., Valabregue, R., & Catani, M.
Affiliations
King's College London (GB)
Venue
Cortex
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-01
Volume
48
Issue
1
Pages
82-96
ISSN
0010-9452 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1979298827
Cited by
632
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 28 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 58 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 49 · 2018: 46 · 2017: 47 · 2016: 51 · 2015: 39 · 2014: 48 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 20
FWCI
27.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cortex (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-09-EMER-0006)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
frontal lobe, association tracts, human-macaque comparison, cortical connectivity, arcuate fasciculus, inferior fronto-occipital fasciculus, superior longitudinal fasciculus, cingulum, uncinate fasciculus, frontal aslant tract, cognitive evolution, axon tracing
MeSH terms
Adult, Algorithms, Animals, Atlases as Topic, Axons, Brain Mapping, Biological Evolution, Frontal Lobe, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Macaca mulatta, Male, Nerve Fibers, Neural Pathways, Species Specificity, Databases, Factual, Diffusion Tensor Imaging

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review