Cited by 137Primate Behavior and EcologyGenetic Syndromes and ImprintingAnimal Behavior and Reproduction

Primate brain evolution : genetic and functional considerations

Eric Barrington Keverne, Fran L. Martel, Claire M. Nevison·1996·Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences

Abstract

Functionally distinct regions of the brain to which maternal and paternal genomes contribute differentially (through genomic imprinting) have developed differentially over phylogenetic time. While certain regions of the primate forebrain (neocortex, striatum) have expanded relative to the rest of the brain, other forebrain regions have contracted in size (hypothalamus, septum). Areas of relative expansion are those to which the maternal genome makes a substantial developmental contribution. This may be significant with respect to the importance of primate forebrain expansion in the development of complex behavioural strategies and the way in which these are deployed, especially by the matriline. In many primate societies the maintenance of social cohesion and group continuity over successive generations is dependent on the matriline, with high ranking females producing high ranking daughters that stay within the group. Regions of relative contraction are those to which the paternal genome makes a differential contribution and these are target areas for gonadal hormones, which is congruent with the diminished role for gonadal hormones in the emancipation of primate reproductive behaviour.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rspb.1996.0103

Cites

41 of 41 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?

  • Ratio measures of relative brain structure size used commonly in comparative studies conflate allometric scaling with selection on specific brain regions.

    “One implication is that the ratio measures of relative brain structure size used commonly in comparative studies, such as neocortex ratio [8], ‘executive’ brain ratio [7,10,11] and ‘cerebrotype’ [50] conflate allometric scaling with selection on specific brain regions.”

    From Embodied cognitive evolution and the cerebellum (2012) · cites this paper as [10]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Keverne, E. B., Martel, F. L., & Nevison, C. M.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Venue
Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences
Published
1996-06-22
Volume
263
Issue
1371
Pages
689-696
ISSN
  • 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
  • 0962-8452
  • 1471-2954
OpenAlex
W2003176587
Cited by
137
References
41
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 4 · 2012: 6
FWCI
8.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Syndromes and Imprinting
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
Keywords
primate brain evolution, neocortex, striatum, hypothalamus, septum, genomic imprinting, maternal genome, paternal genome, gonadal hormones, primate social behavior, brain size
MeSH terms
Animals, Brain, Biological Evolution, Female, Male, Primates, Species Specificity, Genomic Imprinting

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