CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 280Animal Vocal Communication and BehaviorAnimal Behavior and ReproductionNeuroscience and Music Perception

Relations between song repertoire size and the volume of brain nuclei related to song: comparative evolutionary analyses amongst oscine birds

Timothy J. DeVoogd, John Richard Krebs, Susan D. Healy, Andy Purvis·1993·Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences
DOI 10.1098/rspb.1993.0129
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Song and brain structure are compared amongst 41 species of oscine birds by using the method of independent evolutionary contrasts. We find a significant correlation between the relative volume of the song control centre, the high vocal centre (HVC), and the number of song types typically found in the repertoire. Relative HVC volume is not correlated with the number of different syllable types per song bout. The relative volume of a second song nucleus, area X, is not significantly correlated with either measure. Relative HVC volume is uncorrelated with relative volume of the hippocampus, a brain area involved in other forms of memory. This is the first evidence for repeated independent evolution of an association between complexity of learned song and the relative volume of one of the song control nuclei though to be involved in song learning.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rspb.1993.0129

Cites

52 of 52 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?

  • Each of many dimensions of behavioural ecology has been shown to correlate with brain size and/or with a specific and relevant aspect of brain structure.

    “Each of these and other dimensions of behavioural ecology has been shown to correlate with the brain size and/or with a specific and relevant aspect of brain structure [14–20].”

    From Embodied cognitive evolution and the cerebellum (2012) · cites this paper as [17]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
DeVoogd, T. J., Krebs, J. R., Healy, S. D., & Purvis, A.
Affiliations
Cornell University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences
Publisher
The Royal Society
Published
1993-11-22
Volume
254
Issue
1340
Pages
75-82
ISSN
  • 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
  • 0962-8452
  • 1471-2954
DOI
10.1098/rspb.1993.0129
OpenAlex
W2160980990
Cited by
280
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 11
FWCI
7.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01hd021033-06)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (HD21033)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology › Animal Vocal Communication and Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Music Perception
Keywords
song repertoire size, song control nuclei, Area X, hippocampus, song learning, brain evolution, oscine birds, comparative neuroanatomy
MeSH terms
Animals, Birds, Brain, Biological Evolution, Phylogeny, Species Specificity, Vocalization, Animal

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