The evolution of complex brains and behaviors in African cichlid fishes
Open accessAbstract
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
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- 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
- diamond
- doi.org
- 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