The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Head size constrains forebrain development and evolution in ray‐finned fishes
Abstract
SUMMARY In ray‐finned fishes, which comprise nearly half of all vertebrate species, the telencephalon does not evaginate, as it does in other vertebrates, but instead everts. No detailed explanation for this species difference has ever been offered. Here we propose that telencephalic eversion evolved because ray‐finned fish embryos are so small that their telencephalon cannot evaginate but must, instead, squeeze into the space just dorsal to the developing nasal epithelia and rostral to the eyes—morphogenetic movements that amount to eversion. Evidence for this hypothesis derives from cladistic analyses, which show that early ray‐finned fishes reduced their adult body size and adopted a novel reproductive strategy, based on the production of myriad minute young. Because body size tends to be inversely proportional to brain:body ratio, this phylogenetic reduction in body size implies that embryonic ray‐finned fishes should have proportionately larger brains than embryos of species whose telencephalons evaginate. This prediction was confirmed by comparing serially sectioned heads of representative ray‐finned and cartilaginous fish embryos at several stages of development. The brain, excluding its ventricles, occupies 36–46% of the cranial cavity in embryonic ray‐finned fishes, but less than 20% in embryonic sharks. Moreover, three‐dimensional reconstructions show that in embryonic ray‐finned fishes the telencephalon has no room for a full‐fledged evagination; instead, it spreads into the spaces just dorsal and caudal to the developing nasal epithelia. These morphogenetic movements, in conjunction with a thinning of the forebrain roof, generate telencephalic eversion.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
The telencephalon of actinopterygian fish develops by eversion of the embryonic telencephalic walls, contrasting with evagination in non-actinopterygian vertebrates.
“The telencephalon of actinopterygian fish presents a very divergent process of development compared with all other vertebrates, namely the “folding out” or eversion of the embryonic telencephalic walls, that contrast with the “folding in” or evagination that takes place in non-actinopterygian vertebrates [160,161,162,163].”
From Spatial Cognition in Teleost Fish: Strategies and Mechanisms (2021) · cites this paper as [163]
Citations
Cites
Teleostean and mammalian forebrains contrasted: Evidence from genes to behavior
Wullimann, M. F., & Mueller, T. (2004) · Journal of Comparative Neurology · doi:10.1002/cne.20183 · Cited by 491
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 38
- 10.5962/bhl.title.62097 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.2164-0947.1967.tb02269.x · DOI
- 10.1053/apmr.2002.33985 · DOI
- Bishop S. C., 1943, Handbook of Salamanders; The Salamanders of the United States, of Canada, and of Lower California
- Carroll R. L., 1988, Vertebrate Paleontology and Evolution
- Collette B. B., 2002, Bigelow and Schroeder's Fishes of the Gulf of Maine
- 10.1679/aohc.60.329 · DOI
- Denison R. H., 1968, Early Devonian lungfishes from Wyoming, Utah and Idaho, Feildiana, 17, 353
- Dennett D. C., 1995, Darwin's Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meanings of Life
- Gage S. P., 1893, The Brain of Diemyctilus Viridescens from Larval to Adult Life and Comparison with the Brain of Amia and Petromyzon, 259
- 10.1159/000079117 · DOI
- 10.1016/0896-6273(95)90243-0 · DOI
- Gould S. J., 1979, The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm, a critique of the adaptationist program, 205, 581
- Haller A. V., 1762, Elementa Physiologiae Corporis Humani
- Hanken J., 1983, Miniaturization and its effects on cranial morphology in plethodontid salamanders, genus Thorius (Amphibia, Plethodontidae), II. The fate of the brain and sense organs and their role in skull morphogenesis and evolution, 177, 255
- Hanken J., 1985, Miniaturization of body size, organismal consequences and evolutionary significance, 24, 501
- 10.1002/cne.900340502 · DOI
- 10.1007/BF01650031 · DOI
- 10.1007/s002270050719 · DOI
- Janvier P., 1996, Early Vertebrates, 10.1093/oso/9780198540472.001.0001 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1006/jtbi.2000.1093 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)81476-2 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/dvdy.10395 · DOI
- Long J. A., 1995, The Rise of Fishes: 500 Million Years of Evolution
- Maisey J. G., 1996, Discovering Fossil Fishes
- 10.1007/978-1-4684-6465-8 · DOI
- Nieuwenhuys R., 1963, The comparative anatomy of the actinopterygian forebrain, J. Hirnforsch., 6, 171
- 10.1007/978-3-642-18262-4 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/978-1-4613-2988-6_3 · DOI
- 10.1002/jmor.1051550205 · DOI
- Ridet J.‐M., 1990, Analyse quantitative de l'encéphale des téléostéens, caractéres evolutifs et adaptifs de l'encéphalisation. I. Géneralités et analyse globale, 31, 51
- Rosen G. D., 1990, Brain volume estimation from serial section measurements, a comparison of methodologies, 35, 115
- 10.1159/000113542 · DOI
- Salas C., 2003, Evolution of forebrain and spatial cognition in vertebrates, conservation across diversity, 62, 72
- 10.1002/dvdy.10308 · DOI
- Sanzo L., 1939, Rarissimi stadi larvali di Teleostei, Arch. Zool. Ital., 26, 121
- Scammon R. E., 1911, Normal Plates of the Development of Squalus Acanthias
- Schultze H. ‐P., 1996, Devonian Fishes and Plants of Miguisha, Quebec, Canada
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The pallium and mind/behavior relationships in teleost fishes
Demski, L. S. (2013) · Brain, Behavior and Evolution · doi:10.1159/000351994 · Cited by 65
Spatial Cognition in Teleost Fish: Strategies and Mechanisms
Rodríguez, F., Quintero, B., Amores, L., Madrid, D., Salas-Peña, C., & Salas, C. (2021) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani11082271 · Cited by 59
Metadata
- Authors
- Striedter, G. F., & Northcutt, R. G.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Irvine (US)
- Scripps Institution of Oceanography (US)
- Corresponding author
- Striedter, Georg F.
- Venue
- Evolution & Development
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-02-23
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 215-222
- ISSN
- 1520-541X (ISSN-L)
- 1525-142X
- OpenAlex
- W2084410567
- Cited by
- 54
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 1.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Evolution & Development (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- National Institutes of Health
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology and Gene Regulation
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Developmental Neuroscience › Neurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Anatomy › Comparative Animal Anatomy Studies
- Keywords
- Actinopterygii, telencephalon, forebrain development, body size reduction, reproductive strategies, nasal epithelium, morphogenetic movements, sharks, Chondrichthyes, brain evolution
- MeSH terms
- Ambystoma mexicanum, Animals, Catfishes, Biological Evolution, Sharks, Zebrafish, Prosencephalon
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