Cited by 46Animal Behavior and ReproductionNeuroendocrine regulation and behaviorFish biology, ecology, and behavior

The evolution of complex brains and behaviors in African cichlid fishes

Open access
Shumway, Caroly A.·2010·Current Zoology

Abstract

Abstract In this review, I explore the effects of both social organization and the physical environment, specifically habitat complexity, on the brains and behavior of highly visual African cichlid fishes, drawing on examples from primates and birds where appropriate. In closely related fishes from the monophyletic Ectodinii clade of Lake Tanganyika, both forces influence cichlid brains and behavior. Considering social influences first, visual acuity differs with respect to social organization (monogamy versus polygyny). Both the telencephalon and amygdalar homologue, area Dm, are larger in monogamous species. Monogamous species are found to have more vasotocin-immunoreactive cells in the preoptic area of the brain. Habitat complexity also influences brain and behavior in these fishes. Total brain size, telencephalic and cerebellar size are positively correlated with habitat complexity. Visual acuity and spatial memory are enhanced in cichlids living in more complex environments. However habitat complexity and social forces affect cichlid brains differently. Taken together, our field data and plasticity data suggest that some of the species-specific neural effects of habitat complexity could be the consequence of the corresponding social correlates. Environmental forces, however, exert a broader effect on brain structures than social ones do, suggesting allometric expansion of the brain structures in concert with brain size and/or co-evolution of these structures.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/czoolo/56.1.144

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Studies of phylogenetic variation in the brain structure of mammals and birds indicate many dimensions of variation, not one or two.

    “And studies of phylogenetic variation in the brain structure of mammals and birds indicate not one or two dimensions of variation but many [21–24].”

    From Embodied cognitive evolution and the cerebellum (2012) · cites this paper as [22]

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 104 · Cited by 46

Authors
Shumway, C. A.
Affiliations
Boston University (US)
Corresponding author
Shumway, Caroly A.
Venue
Current Zoology
Published
2010-02-01
Volume
56
Issue
1
Pages
144-156
ISSN
  • 1674-5507 (ISSN-L)
  • 2396-9814
OpenAlex
W2153858295
Cited by
46
References
104
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
FWCI
3.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Zoology (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Fish biology, ecology, and behavior
Keywords
African cichlid fishes, brain evolution, social organization, habitat complexity, visual acuity, monogamy, polygyny, telencephalon, arginine vasotocin, preoptic area, spatial memory, brain size, cerebellum, Lake Tanganyika, neuroplasticity

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