Cited by 38Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyCognitive Abilities and TestingGenetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders

Exploiting human anatomical variability as a link between genome and cognome

Open access
Leonard, C. M., Eckert, M. A., Kuldau, J. M.·2006·Genes, Brain and Behavior

Abstract

Although talents and disabilities appear to run in families, direct links between genes and cognitive ability are difficult to establish. Investigators are currently searching for intermediate phenotypes with plausible links to both genome and cognome (the cognitive phenotype). Cortical anatomy could provide one such intermediate phenotype. Variation in cortical size, asymmetry and sulcal pattern is influenced by genetic variation in neurotrophic factors and can predict variation in verbal and mathematical talent. Anecdotal evidence suggests that individuals with a rare morphological variant of Sylvian fissure sometimes have superior visualization ability combined with verbal deficits. Documentation of such ‘cognitive cortical syndromes’ might prove as genetically informative as the identification of dysmorphic syndromes associated with mental retardation. A necessary prerequisite for the establishment of such syndromes is a reliable technique for the identification of cortical patterns. Recent technical advances in software for automatically labeling and measuring cortical sulci now provide the possibility of establishing standard measures for their shape, size and location. Such measures are a prerequisite for genetic studies of cortical patterns that could illuminate the neurodevelopmental pathways by which genes affect cognitive ability.

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 · 10.1111/j.1601-183x.2006.00196.x

Cites

125 of 125 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?

  • Several cross-laboratory studies of inbred mouse behavior have produced significantly different results across laboratories despite rigorous standardization of husbandry conditions, apparatus, and testing protocols.

    “Several cross-laboratory studies of inbred mouse behavior have produced significantly different results across laboratories despite rigorous standardization of the husbandry conditions, apparatus, and testing protocols (Crabbe et al. 1999; Lewejohann et al. 2006; Richter et al. 2011).”

    From How does cognition evolve? Phylogenetic comparative psychology (2012) · cites this paper as Lewejohann et al. 2006

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

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Hollingshead AB. Four Factor Index of Social Skills. Yale University; New Haven: 1975. [Google Scholar]
  2. Ide A, Dolezal C, Fernandez M, Labbe E, Mandujano R, Montes S, Segura P, Verschae G, Yarmuch P, Aboitiz F. Hemispheric differences in variability of fissural patterns in parasylvian and cingulate regions of human brains. J Comp Neurol. 1999;410:235–242. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. SAS. SAS/STAT guide for personal computers, Version 8. Cary NC: SAS Institute; 2002. [Google Scholar]
  4. West TG. In the Mind’s Eye. Prometheus Books; Amherst, NY: 1997. [Google Scholar]
  5. Woodcock RW, Johnson RB. Woodcock–Johnson tests of achievement: standard and supplemental batteries. Allen, TX, DLM/Teaching Resources; 1989. [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Leonard, C. M., Eckert, M. A., & Kuldau, J. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Florida (US)
  • Medical University of South Carolina (US)
Corresponding author
Leonard, C. M.
Venue
Genes, Brain and Behavior
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-01-16
Volume
5
Issue
S1
Pages
64-77
ISSN
  • 1601-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1601-1848
OpenAlex
W1971765969
Cited by
38
References
125
Citations by year
2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
FWCI
3.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Genes Brain & Behavior (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (R01DC002922, R03DC005364, DC002922, R01DC006957, DC005364, DC006957)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Keywords
cognitive ability, endophenotypes, cortical anatomy, cortical asymmetry, sulcal patterns, neurotrophic factors, Sylvian fissure, verbal ability, mathematical ability, visualization ability, genetic variation, brain development
MeSH terms
Adult, Cerebral Cortex, Child, Cognition, Female, Humans, Language Disorders, Functional Laterality, Learning Disabilities, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Organ Size, Schizophrenia, Verbal Behavior, Genome

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