CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 156Pleistocene-Era Hominins and ArchaeologyPrimate Behavior and EcologyEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 64 of the 64 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Reconstructing the Neanderthal brain using computational anatomy

Open access
Kochiyama, Takanori, Ogihara, Naomichi, Tanabe, Hiroki C., Kondo, Osamu, Amano, Hideki, Hasegawa, Kunihiro, Suzuki, Hiromasa, Ponce de León, Marcia S., Zollikofer, Christoph P. E., Bastir, Markus, Stringer, Chris, Sadato, Norihiro, Akazawa, Takeru·2018·Scientific Reports
DOI 10.1038/s41598-018-24331-0PMC PMC5919901
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The present study attempted to reconstruct 3D brain shape of Neanderthals and early Homo sapiens based on computational neuroanatomy. We found that early Homo sapiens had relatively larger cerebellar hemispheres but a smaller occipital region in the cerebrum than Neanderthals long before the time that Neanderthals disappeared. Further, using behavioural and structural imaging data of living humans, the abilities such as cognitive flexibility, attention, the language processing, episodic and working memory capacity were positively correlated with size-adjusted cerebellar volume. As the cerebellar hemispheres are structured as a large array of uniform neural modules, a larger cerebellum may possess a larger capacity for cognitive information processing. Such a neuroanatomical difference in the cerebellum may have caused important differences in cognitive and social abilities between the two species and might have contributed to the replacement of Neanderthals by early Homo sapiens .

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41598-018-24331-0

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Reconstructed Neanderthal brains. (a) Population-average. (b) Representative modern human subject. (c) The reconstructed brains with the neuroanatomical labels.
Figure 1 Reconstructed Neanderthal brains. (a) Population-average. (b) Representative modern human subject. (c) The reconstructed brains with the neuroanatomical labels.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Comparisons of the brain surface morphology among Neanderthal, early Homo sapiens and modern Homo sapiens. (a) Surface statistical map shows the surface area where the differences are statistically significant (p < 0.05 with family-wise error (FWE) correction). See Extended Data Fig. 1 for more details. (b) Surface displacement maps show the morphological difference in the direction perpendicular to the tangential surface. The displacement maps were calculated by subtracting modern Homo sapiens (MH) from Neanderthal (NT), early Homo sapiens (EH) from NT, and MH from EH, respectively. See Extended Data Fig. 2 for more details.
Figure 2 Comparisons of the brain surface morphology among Neanderthal, early Homo sapiens and modern Homo sapiens. (a) Surface statistical map shows the surface area where the differences are statistically significant (p < 0.05 with family-wise error (FWE) correction). See Extended Data Fig. 1 for more details. (b) Surface displacement maps show the morphological difference in the direction perpendicular to the tangential surface. The displacement maps were calculated by subtracting modern Homo sapiens (MH) from Neanderthal (NT), early Homo sapiens (EH) from NT, and MH from EH, respectively. See Extended Data Fig. 2 for more details.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 Comparisons of the relative volumes of the parcellated brain regions among NT, EH and MH. (a) Each parcellated volume was normalized to the mean MH volume to calculate a ratio (i.e. relative volume unit). The regionally specific volume differences were evaluated after removing the effects of ICV by analysis of variance (ANOVA) across 13 parcellated regions. We employed Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons, so that the threshold of p < 0.003 (=0.05/13) is set to statistically significant. The relative volume differences were found in Pa SI (F2,1190 = 9.31, p = 0.0001), Oc SM (F2,1190 = 8.15, p = 0.0003), Ce V (F2,1190 = 7.34, p = 0.0007), and Ce P (F2,1190 = 6.70, p = 0.0013) (Extended Data Table 3). The mean (±standard deviation) MH volumes of the parcellated brain regions are 161.61 ± 5.22 cc for Fr SM, 41.57 ± 1.00 cc for Fr I, 65.46 ± 3.45 cc for Fr O, 96.93 ± 2.82 cc for Sm, 88.30 ± 1.98 cc for Pa SI, 37.38 ± 1.41 cc for Pa TP, 91.27 ± 3.92 cc for Te SM, 82.50 ± 2.60 cc for Te I, 93.70 ± 4.17 cc for Oc SM, 39.99 ± 1.32 cc for Oc I, 12.38 ± 0.23 cc for Ce V, 13.86 ± 0.21 cc for Ce A, and 114.41 ± 3.76 cc for Ce P. (b) As the ANOVA results indicated a significant group-by-laterality difference in the size-adjusted volume of the cerebellar hemisphere (F2,1190 = 14.28, p < 0.001 for Ce A, F2,1190 = 12.73, p < 0.001 for Ce P), we tested if there is a significant difference between the size-adjusted volume of the left and right cerebellar regions within each group and between groups based on the symmetrized volume analysis. Fr, frontal lobe; Pa, parietal lobe; Te, temporal lobe; Oc, occipital lobe; Ce, cerebellum; Sm, sensorimotor cortex; SM, superior and middle region; I, inferior region; O, orbitofrontal region; SI, superior and inferior region; TP, temporo-parietal junction; A, anterior region; P, posterior region; V, vermis. *p < 0.05 corrected for multiple comparisons. Data are means ± s.d. See Extended Data Table 1 for correspondence between the automated anatomical labelling (AAL) atlas and the parcellated brain regions.
Figure 3 Comparisons of the relative volumes of the parcellated brain regions among NT, EH and MH. (a) Each parcellated volume was normalized to the mean MH volume to calculate a ratio (i.e. relative volume unit). The regionally specific volume differences were evaluated after removing the effects of ICV by analysis of variance (ANOVA) across 13 parcellated regions. We employed Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons, so that the threshold of p < 0.003 (=0.05/13) is set to statistically significant. The relative volume differences were found in Pa SI (F2,1190 = 9.31, p = 0.0001), Oc SM (F2,1190 = 8.15, p = 0.0003), Ce V (F2,1190 = 7.34, p = 0.0007), and Ce P (F2,1190 = 6.70, p = 0.0013) (Extended Data Table 3). The mean (±standard deviation) MH volumes of the parcellated brain regions are 161.61 ± 5.22 cc for Fr SM, 41.57 ± 1.00 cc for Fr I, 65.46 ± 3.45 cc for Fr O, 96.93 ± 2.82 cc for Sm, 88.30 ± 1.98 cc for Pa SI, 37.38 ± 1.41 cc for Pa TP, 91.27 ± 3.92 cc for Te SM, 82.50 ± 2.60 cc for Te I, 93.70 ± 4.17 cc for Oc SM, 39.99 ± 1.32 cc for Oc I, 12.38 ± 0.23 cc for Ce V, 13.86 ± 0.21 cc for Ce A, and 114.41 ± 3.76 cc for Ce P. (b) As the ANOVA results indicated a significant group-by-laterality difference in the size-adjusted volume of the cerebellar hemisphere (F2,1190 = 14.28, p < 0.001 for Ce A, F2,1190 = 12.73, p < 0.001 for Ce P), we tested if there is a significant difference between the size-adjusted volume of the left and right cerebellar regions within each group and between groups based on the symmetrized volume analysis. Fr, frontal lobe; Pa, parietal lobe; Te, temporal lobe; Oc, occipital lobe; Ce, cerebellum; Sm, sensorimotor cortex; SM, superior and middle region; I, inferior region; O, orbitofrontal region; SI, superior and inferior region; TP, temporo-parietal junction; A, anterior region; P, posterior region; V, vermis. *p < 0.05 corrected for multiple comparisons. Data are means ± s.d. See Extended Data Table 1 for correspondence between the automated anatomical labelling (AAL) atlas and the parcellated brain regions.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 64 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–154 of 154

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Kochiyama, T., Ogihara, N., Tanabe, H. C., Kondo, O., Amano, H., Hasegawa, K., Suzuki, H., Ponce de León, M. S., Zollikofer, C. P. E., Bastir, M., Stringer, C., Sadato, N., & Akazawa, T.
Affiliations
  • Advanced Telecommunications Research Institute International (JP)
  • Keio University (JP)
  • Nagoya University (JP)
  • The University of Tokyo (JP)
  • National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (JP)
  • University of Zurich (CH)
  • Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales (ES)
  • Natural History Museum (GB)
  • National Institute for Physiological Sciences (JP)
  • Kochi University of Technology (JP)
Corresponding author
  • Ogihara, Naomichi
  • Tanabe, Hiroki C.
ORCID
Venue
Scientific Reports
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2018-04-26
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
6296-6296
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1038/s41598-018-24331-0
PMC
PMC5919901
OpenAlex
W2801185600
Cited by
156
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 50 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 3
FWCI
99.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • DIGITAL.CSIC (Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Natural History Museum, London (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (NS092988, 1U54MH091657)
  • Harvard University
  • Calleva Foundation
  • Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (22101006, 22101007, 22101001)
  • Universität Wien
  • Tel Aviv University
  • Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle
  • National Institutes of Health (5u54mh091657-05, 1U54‐MH‐091657)
  • McDonnell Center for Systems Neuroscience (1U54MH091657)
  • Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (15H01846, 17H06381, 16K16080)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (U54-MH091657)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NS‐092988, 1U54MH091657, R24NS092988)
  • NIH Blueprint for Neuroscience Research (NS092988, 1U54-MH-091657)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Primate Behavior and Ecology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Keywords
Neanderthals, early Homo sapiens, cerebellum, cerebellar volume, computational neuroanatomy, cognitive flexibility, attention, language processing, episodic memory, working memory, Neanderthal replacement, human evolution
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Analysis of Variance, Animals, Anthropology, Cerebellum, Cognition, Fossils, Humans, Memory, Short-Term, Skull, Tomography Scanners, X-Ray Computed, Linear Models, Computational Biology, Imaging, Three-Dimensional, Executive Function, Climate Change, Neanderthals, Social Skills

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