Cited by 175Pleistocene-Era Hominins and ArchaeologyPrimate Behavior and EcologyLanguage and cultural evolution

Brain ontogeny and life history in Pleistocene hominins

Open access
Hublin, Jean-Jacques, Neubauer, Simon, Gunz, Philipp·2015·Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences

Abstract

A high level of encephalization is critical to the human adaptive niche and emerged among hominins over the course of the past 2 Myr. Evolving larger brains required important adaptive adjustments, in particular regarding energy allocation and life history. These adaptations included a relatively small brain at birth and a protracted growth of highly dependent offspring within a complex social environment. In turn, the extended period of growth and delayed maturation of the brain structures of humans contribute to their cognitive complexity. The current palaeoanthropological evidence shows that, regarding life history and brain ontogeny, the Pleistocene hominin taxa display different patterns and that one cannot simply contrast an 'ape-model' to a 'human-model'. Large-brained hominins such as Upper Pleistocene Neandertals have evolved along their own evolutionary pathway and can be distinguished from modern humans in terms of growth pattern and brain development. The life-history pattern and brain ontogeny of extant humans emerged only recently in the course of human evolution.

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 · 10.1098/rstb.2014.0062

Cites

144 of 144 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • Anatomically modern humans and Neanderthals display different ontogenetic trajectories resulting in craniofacial differences that invariably lead to a more gracile, juvenile profile in AMH relative to Neanderthals.

    “The two species display different ontogenetic trajectories [18, 19] resulting in craniofacial differences that invariably lead to a more ‘gracile’, ‘juvenile’ profile in AMH relative to Neanderthals.”
  • Brain size and encephalization of humans and Neanderthals is similar.

    “while the brain size and encephalization of humans and Neanderthals is similar9,13,14.”
  • Changes in PTEN, TCF3, and other genes (CCND2, GLI3, RB1CC1) could have contributed to the brain growth trajectory changes hypothesized to give rise to the modern human-specific globular braincase shape during the past several 100,000 years.

    “could have contributed to the brain growth trajectory changes hypothesized to give rise to the modern human-specific globular braincase shape during the past several 100,000 years9,11,15.”
  • We suggest that modifications of a complex network in cognition or learning took place in modern human evolution, possibly related to other brain-related, vocal tract or neural changes.

    “We suggest that modifications of a complex network in cognition or learning took place in modern human evolution128, possibly related to other brain-related9,16,129,130, vocal tract131 or neural changes132.”
  • Early differences in infant brain growth between humans and Neanderthals could have rendered our maturational profile distinct during limited developmental periods and within specific brain regions, imposing different metabolic requirements.

    “early differences in infant brain growth between humans and Neanderthals9,10 could have rendered our maturational profile distinct during limited developmental periods and within specific brain regions, imposing different metabolic requirements163.”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hublin, J.-J., Neubauer, S., & Gunz, P.
Affiliations
Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology (DE)
Venue
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences
Published
2015-03-05
Volume
370
Issue
1663
Pages
20140062
ISSN
  • 0962-8436 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-2970
OpenAlex
W1985807189
Cited by
173
References
144
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 7
FWCI
21.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
  • Social Sciences › Cultural Studies › Language and cultural evolution
Keywords
brain ontogeny, life history, Pleistocene hominins, encephalization, Neanderthals, brain growth, energy allocation, delayed maturation, brain development, human evolution
MeSH terms
Animals, Brain, Biological Evolution, Fossils, Humans, Organ Size, Paleontology, Species Specificity, Hominidae

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