Cited by 174Primate Behavior and EcologyEvolution and Paleontology StudiesMotor Control and Adaptation

Expansion of the neocerebellum in Hominoidea

MacLeod, C·2003·Journal of Human Evolution

Abstract

Technological and conceptual breakthroughs have led to more serious consideration of the cerebellum as an essential element in cognition. Recent studies show the lateral cerebellum, seat of the neocerebellum, to be most active in cognitive tasks. An examination of the relative volumes of the cerebellar hemispheres in anthropoids would reveal whether some groups show greater neocerebellar development through hemispheric expansion beyond expected allometry, implying a greater contribution of the lateral hemispheres to cognition. This study expands the existing data on primate brain and brain part volumes by incorporating data from both magnetic resonance scans and histological sections for a total sample size of 97 specimens, including 42 apes, 14 humans and 41 monkeys. The resulting volumes of whole brain, cerebellum, vermis, and hemisphere enable a reliable linear regression contrast between hominoids and monkeys, and demonstrate a striking increase in the lateral cerebellum in hominoids. The uniformity of the grade shift suggests that this increase took place in the common ancestor to the hominoids. The importance of the neocerebellum in visual-spatial skills, planning of complex movements, procedural learning, attention switching, and sensory discrimination in manipulation would facilitate the adaptation of these early hominoids to frugivory and suspensory feeding.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0047-2484(03)00028-9

Cites

71 of 71 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?

  • Several comparative studies suggest that cerebellar expansion, specifically involving the lateral cerebellum, was especially marked in apes.

    “Several comparative studies suggest that cerebellar expansion, specifically involving the lateral cerebellum, was especially marked in apes [69–71].”

    From Embodied cognitive evolution and the cerebellum (2012) · cites this paper as [70]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
MacLeod, C.
Affiliations
Langara College (CA)
Corresponding author
MacLeod, C
Venue
Journal of Human Evolution
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2003-04
Volume
44
Issue
4
Pages
401-429
ISSN
0047-2484 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2037393481
Cited by
174
References
71
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 10
FWCI
6.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Human Evolution (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • JuSER (Forschungszentrum Jülich) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Leakey Foundation
  • Simon Fraser University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
Keywords
neocerebellum, lateral cerebellum, cerebellar hemispheres, hominoids, apes, monkeys, brain volume, allometry, hominoid evolution, cognitive evolution, frugivory, primate brain
MeSH terms
Anatomy, Comparative, Animals, Anthropology, Physical, Cebidae, Cercopithecidae, Cerebellum, Biological Evolution, Female, Humans, Hylobates, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Regression Analysis, Hominidae, Observer Variation

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