The DOI matches its Crossref record; 116 of the 117 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 97 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds
Open accessAbstract
Song-learning birds and humans share independently evolved similarities in brain pathways for vocal learning that are essential for song and speech and are not found in most other species. Comparisons of brain transcriptomes of song-learning birds and humans relative to vocal nonlearners identified convergent gene expression specializations in specific song and speech brain regions of avian vocal learners and humans. The strongest shared profiles relate bird motor and striatal song-learning nuclei, respectively, with human laryngeal motor cortex and parts of the striatum that control speech production and learning. Most of the associated genes function in motor control and brain connectivity. Thus, convergent behavior and neural connectivity for a complex trait are associated with convergent specialized expression of multiple genes.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
The paper compares brain transcriptomes of vocal-learning birds and humans and identifies convergent gene expression specializations in song and speech brain regions, especially songbird RA with human laryngeal motor cortex and Area X with human putamen/caudate. It argues that convergent vocal-learning behavior and neural connectivity are accompanied by convergent specialized expression of multiple genes.
Key findings
- Dynamic programming alignment of anatomical gene expression specialization trees found songbird Area X best aligned to human putamen, ventral striatum to human nucleus accumbens, and RA to the human central sulcus within primary motor cortex (PrG_cs); HVC and LMAN aligned weakly to cingulate cortex, with their highest hypothesized matches to Wernicke’s and Broca’s areas but without significant permutation/FWER support.
- Statistical tests confirmed Area X–putamen and RA–PrG_cs similarities; 288 genes contributed to shared avian–human striatum specialization, 342 to avian pallium–human cortex, 78 to Area X–putamen, 40 to RA–PrG_cs, and 55 mostly nonoverlapping genes (only 3 overlapping with the 40) to RA analogs–human LMC/dLSC.
- Across all three vocal-learning avian lineages (songbird, parrot, hummingbird), RA analogs showed stronger convergent specialization with human LMC/dLSC than vocal-nonlearning dove/quail arcopallium; 55 genes were identified, with ~91% decreased expression in RA analogs and human LMC/dLSC, and in situ hybridization of 15 genes gave ~95% true positive rate for differential expression in zebra finch RA.
- Proteomics identified 81 proteins differentially expressed in zebra finch RA; mRNA–protein correlation was modest but significant (R² = 0.18, P = 9.4 × 10⁻⁵), and top disease categories included movement disorders (P = 8.7 × 10⁻¹⁴, 29 genes).
Methods
- Six experiments were analyzed: laser-microdissected song nuclei from zebra finches; microarray samples of Area X and ventral striatum; RA analogs and adjacent motor arcopallium across vocal-learning and vocal-nonlearning birds; brainstem vocal and neck motor neurons; 3702 human samples from 231 subregions of six Allen Human Brain Atlas subjects; and 258 macaque cortical-layer samples from 12 regions of four rhesus macaques.
- Avian samples used a custom zebra finch Agilent oligoarray v2.2; human samples used a human Agilent 8×60K array containing 7473 human–finch orthologous genes; cross-species avian filtering yielded 3044 genes for multi-lineage comparisons, and macaque comparisons used 4702 orthologs.
- Analyses included anatomical gene expression specialization trees, pairwise distances and Pearson correlations, a dynamic programming alignment preserving hierarchical structure, permutation/FWER tests, linear regression to count shared specialized genes, functional enrichment, in situ hybridization, and nanoscale capillary tandem mass spectrometry.
Limitations
- The paper states that correlations were low even between biological replicates (mean zebra finch RA vs. adjacent mAC replicate correlation = 0.22), that the analyses do not show the specializations are functionally related to projections or vocal learning and could be a consequence rather than a cause, that HVC/LMAN convergent specializations were not significant, that human premortem vocalizing state was unknown, that brainstem vocal/neck motor neurons could not be aligned to proposed human homologs because they were not isolated in the Allen data, and that macaque data were limited in regions, cortical layers, and ortholog number.
- Evident from the text: cross-species microarray orthology and filtering may miss genes; human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem, which may affect RNA profiles; avian samples were from silent adult males, limiting behavioral-state and sex coverage; and no causal manipulation tests gene function in vocal learning.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
0 of 97 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For example, the mean correlation between biological replicates of zebra finch RA relative to the adjacent mAC specialization is 0.22.”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Framework for finding anatomical molecular similarities across species
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The dynamic programming algorithm found an optimal alignment between the brain gene expression specialization trees of songbird (Fig. 2A) and human (Fig. 2B; see also Table 1).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Molecular specializations shared between songbird and human brains
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In particular, songbird striatal regions (Area X and VS) were confirmed by both methods to have the most similar specialized gene expression to the human striatum (Fig. 3A and fig. S3A; Table 1 and table S3A).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Confirming brain region specializations between human and songbird
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The mAC lateral to RA, which does not participate in song production (9, 51) and does not make direct projections (52, 53), aligned weakly to the human superior rostral gyrus (SRoG) of the frontal lobe (Fig. 2B).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Molecular specializations shared between songbird and human brains
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We found that the Pearson correlations between specializations were low, even in biological replicates, because of noise and large numbers of genes that are not specialized in expression.”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Framework for finding anatomical molecular similarities across species
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesThe paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Values above 0.09 were typically statistically significant (see below).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Framework for finding anatomical molecular similarities across species
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the closest match for nXIIts in the available human data was to the vagus motor neurons (n10) (Fig. 2B and Table 1).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Molecular specializations shared between songbird and human brains
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The avian ventral striatum (VS) adjacent to Area X that does not participate in vocal learning best aligned to the human ventral striatum [i.e., nucleus accumbens (Acb) ventral to the putamen] (Fig. 2B).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Molecular specializations shared between songbird and human brains
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At lower levels of the tree alignment (individual brain regions), songbird Area X best aligned to the human putamen (Pu) (Fig. 2B and Table 1), supporting a prediction made on the basis of other evidence (41, 44, 48).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Molecular specializations shared between songbird and human brains
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Within the brainstem, the songbird vocal (nXIIts) and neck (SSp) motor neurons could not be aligned to their proposed human homologs—the nucleus ambiguus and supraspinal nucleus, respectively (16, 44, 49, 54)—because they were not isolated as part of the Allen Human Brain Atlas data set.”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Molecular specializations shared between songbird and human brains
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 39
- Probably not a substantial claim. 14
- The quote only partly states this claim. 2
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The avian pallial regions were confirmed to be most similar to the human cortex, with a lower significance by the permutation analyses (P = 0.068) and corresponding FWER analyses (0.218) but with the highest number of specialized genes in common of all regions compared (Fig. 3B and fig. S3B; Table 1 and table S3B).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Confirming brain region specializations between human and songbird
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both HVC and LMAN aligned best to the parietal part of the cingulate cortex, but the correlations were low (Fig. 2B).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Molecular specializations shared between songbird and human brains
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At high levels of the alignment, the songbird telencephalic regions corresponded most closely to the human telencephalon (Tel) and the songbird brainstem nuclei corresponded to human brainstem nuclei.”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Molecular specializations shared between songbird and human brains
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Within the telencephalon, the songbird pallial regions corresponded most closely to the human cortex (Cx), and the songbird striatal regions corresponded to the human striatum.”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Molecular specializations shared between songbird and human brains
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The songbird pallial regions sampled did not have a strong similarity to the human claustrum (Cl) and had an inverse gene expression relationship with the amygdala (Amg), meaning that the specialization was in the opposite direction (Table 1).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Molecular specializations shared between songbird and human brains
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“None of the regions hypothesized to be similar to HVC or LMAN had a strong secondary match (correlations > 0.09), but of the hypothesized regions, the highest correlation values were HVC with Wernicke’s auditory speech processing region and LMAN with Broca’s speech production and processing region (Table 1).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Molecular specializations shared between songbird and human brains
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For HVC and LMAN, of the hypothesized human brain regions, again the highest similarities were to Wernicke’s area (plus Heschl’s and transverse auditory gyri; HG, TG) and Broca’s area, respectively, but the relationships were not significant according to the permutation and FWER tests (Table 1, fig. S3F, and table S3F).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Confirming brain region specializations between human and songbird
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The top enrichment categories were behavior (64 genes) and neurotransmission (38 genes; table S5B).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Function of genes specialized between avian and human brains
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Likewise, the RA analogs of all three vocal learners had many more genes specialized in common with the human LMC/dLSC than did the arcopallium of vocal nonlearners, and the number of specialized genes in common was significant only for the vocal learners (Fig. 3, E and F, and table S4, B and C).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > All vocal-learning birds and humans show convergent gene expression specializations
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For a control analysis, we identified the common specialized genes between all the arcopallium samples of each avian species and the entire human frontal lobe, and found them to be similar across all avian species (Fig. 3G).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > All vocal-learning birds and humans show convergent gene expression specializations
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Comparing the arcopallium samples from each of the avian species with the specializations of human LMC/dLSC versus macaque layer 5, we found a weak, nonsignificant difference in the correlation between the arcopallium regions of avian vocal learners versus nonlearners and macaque layer 5 cells (table S4D), but a stronger significant correlation between the RA analogs of avian vocal learners versus”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Songbird RA shows greater similarity to human LMC than to nonhuman primate motor cortex
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The correlations increased for the vocal-learning avian species, but not for the vocal-nonlearning avian species, when comparisons were made to the specific human putative LMC (dLMC and vLMC) and dLSC samples within the PrG_cs and PoG_cs relative to the cortex (fig. S4C, triangles and squares); the correlations were still present when the comparison was relative to only the remaining PrG and PoG (”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > All vocal-learning birds and humans show convergent gene expression specializations
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among the striatal regions, both tests confirmed Area X to have the strongest similarity with the putamen (Fig. 3C and fig. S3C; Table 1 and table S3C) but a significant secondary relationship with the adjacent body of the caudate, consistent with the hypothesis that Area X is similar to adjacent parts of the caudate and putamen (41).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Confirming brain region specializations between human and songbird
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among the pallial regions, both tests confirmed RA to have the strongest similarity to the central sulcus part of the human primary motor cortex (PrG_cs) but also to the adjacent primary somatosensory part of the central sulcus (PoG_cs) and to a region where the ventral LMC is located (PrG_sl) (Fig. 3D and fig. S3D; Table 1 and table S3D).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Confirming brain region specializations between human and songbird
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, LMAN, also part of the nidopallium, had the best match to layer 4 of the PoG and other cortical regions, contradicting previous hypotheses (41, 67) (Table 1, fig. S5, E and F, and table S3I) but consistent with a recent study comparing chicken nidopallium to mouse cortical layers (68).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Songbird RA shows greater similarity to human LMC than to nonhuman primate motor cortex
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The adjacent dLSC showed striking down-regulation throughout the region (Fig. 7).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > In situ patterns of commonly specialized avian RA and human LMC genes
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesThe quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The anatomical profiles of the genes fell into three categories (Fig. 6 and figs. S9 and S10): (i) those with expression specialization in the RA analog and human dLMC/dLSC cortex; (ii) those with expression specialization in the RA plus immediately adjacent intermediate arcopallium and LMC plus the adjacent human primary motor cortex; and (iii) those with a more varied pattern of expression”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > In situ patterns of commonly specialized avian RA and human LMC genes
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The top enrichment categories among the 40 genes shared with motor cortex cells were movement disorders and abnormal morphology of neurons (table S5D), whereas the 55 genes shared more specifically with LMC/dLSC were related to cognitive behaviors (cognition, learning, and memory) and development of neural connections (neuritogenesis, axon and dendrite growth) for different gene subsets (5 to 15”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Function of genes specialized between avian and human brains
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is in contrast to Area X and the analogous putamen/caudate regions, where more than 70% of the genes had increased expression (fig. S7).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Function of genes specialized between avian and human brains
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the basis of these results, we analyzed a subset of 10 of the 15 genes by in situ hybridization in our predicted dLMC/dLSC region of the other hemisphere (right) of two human brain specimens used for the microarrays; although we noted a possible stronger relationship of RA with the speech-dominant left LMC/dLSC hemisphere, the right hemisphere was also correlated (SM8).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > In situ patterns of commonly specialized avian RA and human LMC genes
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We identified 40 genes that contributed to the shared specialized expression between songbird RA and human PrG_cs (table S3D); a subset of these (10 genes) contributed ~50% to the shared specialization between songbird RA and macaque layer 5 of motor cortex (table S3D).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Function of genes specialized between avian and human brains
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
In the paper
“FOXP2 was also in the opposite direction, with up-regulation in layer 5 cells of primary motor cortex (M1; fig. S14) (73).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > In situ patterns of commonly specialized avian RA and human LMC genes
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [73] Hisaoka T Nakamura Y Senba E Morikawa Y The forkhead transcription factors, Foxp1 and Foxp2, identify different subpopulations of projection neurons in the mouse cerebral cortex Neuroscience 166 551 563 2010 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2009.12.055 20040367
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Song-learning birds and humans share independently evolved similarities in brain pathways for vocal learning that are essential for song and speech and are not found in most other species.”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1] Petkov CI Jarvis ED Birds, primates, and spoken language origins: Behavioral phenotypes and neurobiological substrates Front Evol Neurosci 4 12 2012 10.3389/fnevo.2012.00012 22912615 PMC3419981
- Not checked yetcites [4] Doupe AJ Kuhl PK Birdsong and human speech: Common themes and mechanisms Annu Rev Neurosci 22 567 631 1999 10.1146/annurev.neuro.22.1.567 10202549
- Not checked yetcites [5] Bolhuis JJ Okanoya K Scharff C Twitter evolution: Converging mechanisms in birdsong and human speech Nat Rev Neurosci 11 747 759 2010 10.1038/nrn2931 20959859
- Not checked yetcites [6] Arriaga G Jarvis ED Mouse vocal communication system: Are ultrasounds learned or innate? Brain Lang 124 96 116 2013 10.1016/j.bandl.2012.10.002 23295209 PMC3886250
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Vocal-learning species also share the presence of babbling, deafness-induced deterioration of learned vocalizations, dialects, and forebrain circuits that control production and learning of vocalizations (1, 4–6).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1] Petkov CI Jarvis ED Birds, primates, and spoken language origins: Behavioral phenotypes and neurobiological substrates Front Evol Neurosci 4 12 2012 10.3389/fnevo.2012.00012 22912615 PMC3419981
- Not checked yetcites [4] Doupe AJ Kuhl PK Birdsong and human speech: Common themes and mechanisms Annu Rev Neurosci 22 567 631 1999 10.1146/annurev.neuro.22.1.567 10202549
- Not checked yetcites [5] Bolhuis JJ Okanoya K Scharff C Twitter evolution: Converging mechanisms in birdsong and human speech Nat Rev Neurosci 11 747 759 2010 10.1038/nrn2931 20959859
- Not checked yetcites [6] Arriaga G Jarvis ED Mouse vocal communication system: Are ultrasounds learned or innate? Brain Lang 124 96 116 2013 10.1016/j.bandl.2012.10.002 23295209 PMC3886250
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“For vocal learning, it has been hypothesized that the superregions of a motor learning or auditory perception pathway have specialized into subregions that control the production of learned vocalizations (9–11).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [9] Feenders G Molecular mapping of movement-associated areas in the avian brain: A motor theory for vocal learning origin PLOS ONE 3 e1768 2008 10.1371/journal.pone.0001768 18335043 PMC2258151
- Not checked yetcites [10] Margoliash D Distributed representation in the song system of oscines: Evolutionary implications and functional consequences Brain Behav Evol 44 247 264 1994 10.1159/000113580 7842284
- Not checked yetcites [11] Mello CV Vates GE Okuhata S Nottebohm F Descending auditory pathways in the adult male zebra finch (Taeniopygia guttata) J Comp Neurol 395 137 160 1998 10.1002/(SICI)1096-9861(19980601)395:2<137::AID-CNE1>3.0.CO;2-3 9603369
Tests✗ Asserted: fails✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true.
In the paper
“These circuits include a corticostriatal loop and a unique direct connection from motor cortical areas [human laryngeal motor cortex (LMC) and songbird robust nucleus of the arcopallium (RA)] to brainstem vocal motor and respiratory neurons for phonation (Fig. 1).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Fig. 1
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The FOXP2 transcription factor is required for vocal learning in both humans (20) and songbirds (21–24), which suggests that neural circuits for vocal learning across clades may have evolved overlapping molecular mechanisms.”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [20] Lai CS Fisher SE Hurst JA Vargha-Khadem F Monaco AP A forkhead-domain gene is mutated in a severe speech and language disorder Nature 413 519 523 2001 10.1038/35097076 11586359
- Not checked yetcites [21] Haesler S FoxP2 expression in avian vocal learners and non-learners J Neurosci 24 3164 3175 2004 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4369-03.2004 15056696 PMC6730012
- Not checked yetcites [22] Haesler S Incomplete and inaccurate vocal imitation after knockdown of FoxP2 in songbird basal ganglia nucleus Area X PLOS Biol 5 e321 2007 10.1371/journal.pbio.0050321 18052609 PMC2100148
- Not checked yetcites [23] Scharff C Petri J Evo-devo, deep homology and FoxP2: Implications for the evolution of speech and language Philos Trans R Soc London Ser B 366 2124 2140 2011 10.1098/rstb.2011.0001 21690130 PMC3130369
- Not checked yetcites [24] Teramitsu I Kudo LC London SE Geschwind DH White SA Parallel FoxP1 and FoxP2 expression in songbird and human brain predicts functional interaction J Neurosci 24 3152 3163 2004 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5589-03.2004 15056695 PMC6730014
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Some glutamate receptors were found to have specialized expression in forebrain song and speech areas in birds (19) and humans (18), but a direct comparison between species was not made.”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [18] Amunts K Broca’s region: Novel organizational principles and multiple receptor mapping PLOS Biol 8 e1000489 2010 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000489 20877713 PMC2943440 source
- Not checked yetcites [19] Wada K Sakaguchi H Jarvis ED Hagiwara M Differential expression of glutamate receptors in avian neural pathways for learned vocalization J Comp Neurol 476 44 64 2004 10.1002/cne.20201 15236466 PMC2517240
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“A potential mechanism for convergent evolution of brain systems is one in which a larger brain structure (superregion) specializes into multiple subregions, each of which performs a distinct function (7–9).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [7] Oakley TH Rivera AS Genomics and the evolutionary origins of nervous system complexity Curr Opin Genet Dev 18 479 492 2008 10.1016/j.gde.2008.12.002 19152785
- Not checked yetcites [8] Barrett HC A hierarchical model of the evolution of human brain specializations Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109 suppl 1 10733 10740 2012 10.1073/pnas.1201898109 22723350 PMC3386868
- Not checked yetcites [9] Feenders G Molecular mapping of movement-associated areas in the avian brain: A motor theory for vocal learning origin PLOS ONE 3 e1768 2008 10.1371/journal.pone.0001768 18335043 PMC2258151
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“In addition, for echolocating mammals, genome-scale convergence in amino acid sequence was recently found in many genes involved in hearing (31).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [31] Parker J Genome-wide signatures of convergent evolution in echolocating mammals Nature 502 228 231 2013 10.1038/nature12511 24005325 PMC3836225
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Although some avian striatal regions (Area X and VS) are known to have a sparse population of pallidum-like neurons (46–48), we did not find a strong correlation with the human pallidum (Table 1), supporting the conclusion that the avian regions are predominantly striatal (33, 44).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Molecular specializations shared between songbird and human brains
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [46] Carrillo GD Doupe AJ Is the songbird Area X striatal, pallidal, or both? An anatomical study J Comp Neurol 473 415 437 2004 10.1002/cne.20099 15116398
- Not checked yetcites [47] Reiner A Laverghetta AV Meade CA Cuthbertson SL Bottjer SW An immunohistochemical and pathway tracing study of the striatopallidal organization of area X in the male zebra finch J Comp Neurol 469 239 261 2004 10.1002/cne.11012 14694537
- Not checked yetcites [48] Farries MA Perkel DJ A telencephalic nucleus essential for song learning contains neurons with physiological characteristics of both striatum and globus pallidus J Neurosci 22 3776 3787 2002 11978853 PMC6758399
- Not checked yetcites [33] Zhang G Comparative genomics reveals insights into avian genome evolution and adaptation Science 346 1311 1320 2014 10.1126/science.1251385 25504712 PMC4390078
- Not checked yetcites [44] Reiner A The Avian Brain Nomenclature Forum: Terminology for a new century in comparative neuroanatomy J Comp Neurol 473 E1 E6 2004 19626136 PMC2713747
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The lower significance could possibly reflect greater differences between the avian pallium and human cortex than between the avian and human striatum (33, 47).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Confirming brain region specializations between human and songbird
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [33] Zhang G Comparative genomics reveals insights into avian genome evolution and adaptation Science 346 1311 1320 2014 10.1126/science.1251385 25504712 PMC4390078
- Not checked yetcites [47] Reiner A Laverghetta AV Meade CA Cuthbertson SL Bottjer SW An immunohistochemical and pathway tracing study of the striatopallidal organization of area X in the male zebra finch J Comp Neurol 469 239 261 2004 10.1002/cne.11012 14694537
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These results support the cortex hypothesis (33, 43, 44) and contradict the claustrum-amygdala hypothesis of homologies between avian and mammalian pallial brain regions (33, 45).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Molecular specializations shared between songbird and human brains
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [33] Zhang G Comparative genomics reveals insights into avian genome evolution and adaptation Science 346 1311 1320 2014 10.1126/science.1251385 25504712 PMC4390078
- Not checked yetcites [43] Jarvis ED Global view of the functional molecular organization of the avian cerebrum: Mirror images and functional columns J Comp Neurol 521 3614 3665 2013 23818122 PMC4145244
- Not checked yetcites [44] Reiner A The Avian Brain Nomenclature Forum: Terminology for a new century in comparative neuroanatomy J Comp Neurol 473 E1 E6 2004 19626136 PMC2713747
- Not checked yetcites [45] Puelles L Pallial and subpallial derivatives in the embryonic chick and mouse telencephalon, traced by the expression of the genes Dlx-2, Emx-1, Nkx-2.1, Pax-6, and Tbr-1 J Comp Neurol 424 409 438 2000 10.1002/1096-9861(20000828)424:3<409::AID-CNE3>3.0.CO;2-7 10906711
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“We used only animals that did not sing after an overnight period of silence alone, because neural activity associated with singing causes changes in expression of thousands of genes in the song nuclei (37, 42).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Framework for finding anatomical molecular similarities across species
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [37] Whitney O Science 346 1256780 2014 10.1126/science.1256780 25504732 PMC4359888
- Not checked yetcites [42] Jarvis ED Nottebohm F Motor-driven gene expression Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94 4097 4102 1997 10.1073/pnas.94.8.4097 9108111 PMC20574
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Likewise, convergent changes in amino acid sequence among vocal-learning birds and mammals have recently been reported (32, 33).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [32] Wang R thesis Duke University 2011 http://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/10161/5630/Wang_duke_0066D_10911.pdf?sequence=1
- Not checked yetcites [33] Zhang G Comparative genomics reveals insights into avian genome evolution and adaptation Science 346 1311 1320 2014 10.1126/science.1251385 25504712 PMC4390078
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“We examined whether complex behavioral and anatomical convergence is associated with molecular convergence in song-learning birds and humans, species separated from a common ancestor by more than 68 million years (among birds) or 310 million years (between birds and humans) (34–36).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [34] Jarvis ED Avian brains and a new understanding of vertebrate brain evolution Nat Rev Neurosci 6 151 159 2005 10.1038/nrn1606 15685220 PMC2507884
- Not checked yetcites [35] Kumar S Hedges SB A molecular timescale for vertebrate evolution Nature 392 917 920 1998 10.1038/31927 9582070 source
- Not checked yetcites [36] Jarvis ED Whole-genome analyses resolve early branches in the tree of life of modern birds Science 346 1320 1331 2014 10.1126/science.1253451 25504713 PMC4405904 source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The songbird RA and HVC are part of a vocal motor pathway that controls the production of learned vocalizations, whereas Area X and LMAN are part of a pathway that controls imitation and exploration of vocalizations (Fig. 1A) (40, 41).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Framework for finding anatomical molecular similarities across species
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [40] Brainard MS Doupe AJ Translating birdsong: Songbirds as a model for basic and applied medical research Annu Rev Neurosci 36 489 517 2013 10.1146/annurev-neuro-060909-152826 23750515 PMC4130661
- Not checked yetcites [41] Jarvis ED Learned birdsong and the neurobiology of human language Ann NY Acad Sci 1016 749 777 2004 10.1196/annals.1298.038 15313804 PMC2485240
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These findings demonstrate the similarity of avian RA and arcopallium to mammalian layer 5 cells, but a greater similarity of each vocal-learning species’ RA analog to human laryngeal cortex regions (which also contain layer 5 cells) relative to nonhuman primate motor cortex.”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Songbird RA shows greater similarity to human LMC than to nonhuman primate motor cortex
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
In the paper
“The similarity to the somatosensory cortex is not too surprising, considering the underappreciated overlap of cells with motor and somatosensory functions in both walls (PrG_cs and PoG_cs) of the central sulcus (55).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Confirming brain region specializations between human and songbird
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [55] Nii Y Uematsu S Lesser RP Gordon B Does the central sulcus divide motor and sensory functions? Cortical mapping of human hand areas as revealed by electrical stimulation through subdural grid electrodes Neurology 46 360 367 1996 10.1212/WNL.46.2.360 8614495
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These findings indicate that the similarity between RA and the broader primary motor cortex in humans is due in part to similarity with its layer 5 neurons, and is separate from the similarities to LMC/dLSC within primary motor cortex.”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Function of genes specialized between avian and human brains
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the genes and their expression differences can serve as candidates that can lead us to the cause”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Discussion
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“We find the convergent gene expression for RA/LMC and Area X/putamen remarkable in that they involve species separated from a common ancestor by 68 million to 310 million years (34–36), different vertebrate lineages, and many genes.”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [34] Jarvis ED Avian brains and a new understanding of vertebrate brain evolution Nat Rev Neurosci 6 151 159 2005 10.1038/nrn1606 15685220 PMC2507884
- Not checked yetcites [35] Kumar S Hedges SB A molecular timescale for vertebrate evolution Nature 392 917 920 1998 10.1038/31927 9582070 source
- Not checked yetcites [36] Jarvis ED Whole-genome analyses resolve early branches in the tree of life of modern birds Science 346 1320 1331 2014 10.1126/science.1253451 25504713 PMC4405904 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“our analyses do not show that the specializations we discovered are functionally related to the projections of these neurons or to vocal learning”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Discussion
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the correlations we find at first glance may not seem strong, they are highly significant, are predominantly driven by the specialized expression of tens to hundreds of genes (depending on the level in the anatomical tree) out of thousands of genes, and for vocal-learning regions are supported by lack of such findings in vocal-nonlearning birds and primates.”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Discussion
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The match of Area X to the human striatum and of RA analogs to the cortex enables specific hypotheses about which brain regions are analogous in song-learning birds and humans, as well as which regions in humans may be specialized for speech.”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Discussion
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“ROBO1 mutations cause dyslexia and speech disorders in humans (76)”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [76] Fisher SE Francks C Genes, cognition and dyslexia: Learning to read the genome Trends Cognit Sci 10 250 257 2006 10.1016/j.tics.2006.04.003 16675285
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The role of the human striatum in speech acquisition and production has begun to be appreciated (57, 83), but specific loci have not been as well defined as for the cortex.”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [57] Brown S The somatotopy of speech: Phonation and articulation in the human motor cortex Brain Cognit 70 31 41 2009 10.1016/j.bandc.2008.12.006 19162389 PMC2873785 source
- Not checked yetcites [83] Simonyan K Horwitz B Jarvis ED Dopamine regulation of human speech and bird song: A critical review Brain Lang 122 142 150 2012 10.1016/j.bandl.2011.12.009 22284300 PMC3362661
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“the calcium-buffering protein parvalbumin has been noted (16) to be present at unusually high levels in the RA neurons that project to vocal motor neurons in songbirds and in the analogous layer 5 neurons of oral motor cortex (containing vLMC) of humans and chimpanzees, but not in the projection neurons of the adjacent arcopallium or in the oral motor cortex of other primates or mammals (79, 80).”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [16] Hara E Rivas MV Ward JM Okanoya K Jarvis ED Convergent differential regulation of parvalbumin in the brains of vocal learners PLOS ONE 7 e29457 2012 10.1371/journal.pone.0029457 22238614 PMC3253077
- Not checked yetcites [79] Wild JM Williams MN Suthers RA Parvalbumin-positive projection neurons characterise the vocal premotor pathway in male, but not female, zebra finches Brain Res 917 235 252 2001 10.1016/S0006-8993(01)02938-9 11640910
- Not checked yetcites [80] Sherwood CC Holloway RL Erwin JM Hof PR Cortical orofacial motor representation in Old World monkeys, great apes, and humans. II. Stereologic analysis of chemoarchitecture Brain Behav Evol 63 82 106 2004 10.1159/000075673 14685003
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“the dLMC was also only recently described (63)”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [63] Brown S Ngan E Liotti M A larynx area in the human motor cortex Cereb Cortex 18 837 845 2008 10.1093/cercor/bhm131 17652461 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“a recent study that used brain transcriptome profiles to argue that the avian pallium is equally and only weakly similar to the mouse cortex, claustrum, or amygdala (68)”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [68] Belgard TG Adult pallium transcriptomes surprise in not reflecting predicted homologies across diverse chicken and mouse pallial sectors Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 110 13150 13155 2013 10.1073/pnas.1307444110 23878249 PMC3740902
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“does not mean that shared specializations of more specific regions within the cortex do not exist”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Discussion
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We believe our ability to identify a stronger relationship to the cortex was because we organized the expression profiles as specialization trees, developed a dynamic programming algorithm requiring hierarchical anatomical alignment of brain similarities, and performed avian brain dissections using more precise laser capture microdissections.”
§ Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds > Discussion
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The authors state this as an assumption.
The human premortem vocalizing state is unknown, but it is assumed not to prevent identification of convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent, the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem when many vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have subsided.
“We do not know the premortem vocalizing state of the humans, but did not expect this to prevent us from identifying convergent gene expression specializations as long as one species was silent (the birds), the genes are not sensitive to immediate vocalizing behavior, and the human samples were collected 10 to 30 hours postmortem, when many of the vocalizing-regulated gene expression changes have”
The paper relies on this without support.
No examples of widespread convergence in gene expression patterns in brain regions involved in convergently evolved behavioral traits were known before this study.
“However, we are not aware of examples of widespread convergence in gene expression patterns in brain regions involved in convergently evolved behavioral traits.”
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?
In the citing paper
“Studies conducted on avian vocal learners89,90 have shown a convergent differential regulation of axon guidance genes of the SLIT-ROBO families in the pallial motor nucleus of the learning species, allowing for the formation of connections virtually absent in the brains of vocal non-learners.”
From A catalog of single nucleotide changes distinguishing modern humans from archaic hominins (2019) · cites this paper as [89]
Citations
Cites
BEDTools: a flexible suite of utilities for comparing genomic features
Quinlan, A. R., & Hall, I. M. (2010) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btq033 · Cited by 27,437
WGCNA: an R package for weighted correlation network analysis
Langfelder, P., & Horvath, S. (2008) · BMC Bioinformatics · doi:10.1186/1471-2105-9-559 · Cited by 27,252
Smyth, G. K. (2004) · Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology · doi:10.2202/1544-6115.1027 · Cited by 11,829
Haas, B. J., Salzberg, S. L., Zhu, W., Pertea, M., Allen, J., Orvis, J., White, O. R., Buell, C. R., & Wortman, J. R. (2008) · Genome biology · doi:10.1186/gb-2008-9-1-r7 · Cited by 4,083
An anatomically comprehensive atlas of the adult human brain transcriptome
Hawrylycz, M. J., Lein, E. S., Guillozet-Bongaarts, A. L., Shen, E. H., Ng, L., Miller, J. A., van de Lagemaat, L. N., Smith, K. A., Ebbert, A., Riley, Z. L., et al. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11405 · Cited by 3,083 · cited 8×
“1A)—of three to six adult male zebra finches (37), the most commonly studied vocal-learning songbird; (ii) 17 total paired samples from punch biopsy–dissected Area X and adjacent ventral striatum (VS) of male zebra finches hybridized to microarrays of our design (15); (iii) 12 total paired samples from laser-microdiss…”
InfluentialSelf-citationA forkhead-domain gene is mutated in a severe speech and language disorder
Lai, C. S. L., Fisher, S. E., Hurst, J. A., Vargha‐Khadem, F., & Monaco, A. P. (2001) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35097076 · Cited by 2,053 · cited 1×
“The FOXP2 transcription factor is required for vocal learning in both humans (20) and songbirds (21–24), which suggests that neural circuits for vocal learning across clades may have evolved overlapping molecular mechanisms.”
A molecular timescale for vertebrate evolution
Kumar, S., & Hedges, S. B. (1998) · Nature · doi:10.1038/31927 · Cited by 1,936
Whole-genome analyses resolve early branches in the tree of life of modern birds
Jarvis, E. D., Mirarab, S., Aberer, A. J., Li, B., Houde, P., Li, C., Ho, S. Y. W., Faircloth, B. C., Nabholz, B., Howard, J. T., et al. (2014) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1253451 · Cited by 1,901
Self-citationCentral control of song in the canary, Serinus canarius
Nottebohm, F., Stokes, T. M., & Leonard, C. M. (1976) · The Journal of Comparative Neurology · doi:10.1002/cne.901650405 · Cited by 1,645
Birdsong and human speech: common themes and mechanisms
Doupe, A. J., & Kuhl, P. K. (1999) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.22.1.567 · Cited by 1,633
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 117 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- R. Wang thesis Duke University (2011); http://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/10161/5630/Wang_duke_0066D_10911.pdf?sequence=1.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Towards complete and error-free genome assemblies of all vertebrate species
Rhie, A., McCarthy, S. A., Fedrigo, O., Damas, J., Formenti, G., Koren, S., Uliano-Silva, M., Chow, W., Fungtammasan, A., Kim, J., et al. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03451-0 · Cited by 3,097
Self-citationComparative genomics reveals insights into avian genome evolution and adaptation
Zhang, G., Li, C., Li, Q., Li, B., Larkin, D. M., Lee, C., Storz, J. F., Antunes, A., Greenwold, M. J., Meredith, R. W., et al. (2014) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1251385 · Cited by 1,055
Self-citationBirds have primate-like numbers of neurons in the forebrain
Olkowicz, S., Kocourek, M., Lučan, R. K., Porteš, M., Fitch, W. T., Herculano-Houzel, S., & Němec, P. (2016) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1517131113 · Cited by 564
Güntürkün, O., & Bugnyar, T. (2016) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2016.02.001 · Cited by 388
The origin and diversification of birds
Brusatte, S. L., O’Connor, J. K., & Jarvis, E. D. (2015) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2015.08.003 · Cited by 334
Self-citationEvolution of vocal learning and spoken language
Jarvis, E. D. (2019) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aax0287 · Cited by 329
Self-citationEvolutionary constraint and innovation across hundreds of placental mammals
Christmas, M. J., Kaplow, I. M., Genereux, D. P., Dong, M. X., Hughes, G. M., Li, X., Sullivan, P. F., Hindle, A. G., Andrews, G., Armstrong, J. C., et al. (2023) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.abn3943 · Cited by 292
Self-citationKorlach, J., Gedman, G. L., Kingan, S. B., Chin, C.-S., Howard, J. T., Audet, J., Cantin, L. J., & Jarvis, E. D. (2017) · GigaScience · doi:10.1093/gigascience/gix085 · Cited by 244
Self-citationTeeling, E. C., Vernes, S. C., Dávalos, L. M., Ray, D. A., Gilbert, M. T. P., & Myers, E. W. (2017) · Annual Review of Animal Biosciences · doi:10.1146/annurev-animal-022516-022811 · Cited by 247
Self-citationUnderstanding Human Cognitive Uniqueness
Laland, K. N., & Seed, A. M. (2021) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-062220-051256 · Cited by 211
The Control of Vocal Pitch in Human Laryngeal Motor Cortex
Dichter, B. K., Breshears, J. D., Leonard, M. K., & Chang, E. F. (2018) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2018.05.016 · Cited by 183
Yang, X., Hu, R., Yin, H., Jenkins, J. W., Shu, S., Tang, H., Liu, D., Weighill, D. A., Yim, W. C., Ha, J., et al. (2017) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-017-01491-7 · Cited by 193
Symbols and mental programs: a hypothesis about human singularity
Dehaene, S., Roumi, F. A., Lakretz, Y., Planton, S., & Sablé-Meyer, M. (2022) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2022.06.010 · Cited by 216
Neuronal factors determining high intelligence
Dicke, U., & Roth, G. (2016) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2015.0180 · Cited by 175
Towards complete and error-free genome assemblies of all vertebrate species
Rhie, A., McCarthy, S. A., Fedrigo, O., Damas, J., Formenti, G., Koren, S., Uliano-Silva, M., Chow, W., Fungtammasan, A., Gedman, G. L., et al. (2020) · doi:10.1101/2020.05.22.110833 · Cited by 3,097
Self-citationCellular transcriptomics reveals evolutionary identities of songbird vocal circuits
Colquitt, B. M., Merullo, D. P., Konopka, G., Roberts, T. F., & Brainard, M. S. (2021) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.abd9704 · Cited by 167
Molecular and network-level mechanisms explaining individual differences in autism spectrum disorder
Buch, A. M., Vértes, P. E., Seidlitz, J., Kim, S. H., Grosenick, L., & Liston, C. M. (2023) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41593-023-01259-x · Cited by 163
The origins of the vocal brain in humans
Belyk, M., & Brown, S. (2017) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.03.014 · Cited by 144
The wild species genome ancestry of domestic chickens
Lawal, R. A., Martin, S. H., Vanmechelen, K., Vereijken, A., Silva, P., Al-Atiyat, R. M., Aljumaah, R. S., Mwacharo, J. M., Wu, D., Zhang, Y., et al. (2020) · BMC Biology · doi:10.1186/s12915-020-0738-1 · Cited by 168
Brain evolution by brain pathway duplication
Chakraborty, M., & Jarvis, E. D. (2015) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2015.0056 · Cited by 150
Self-citationUnderstanding Language from a Genomic Perspective
Graham, S. A., & Fisher, S. E. (2015) · Annual Review of Genetics · doi:10.1146/annurev-genet-120213-092236 · Cited by 139
Vertebrate brains and evolutionary connectomics: on the origins of the mammalian ‘neocortex’
Karten, H. J. (2015) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2015.0060 · Cited by 125
Beyond brain size: Uncovering the neural correlates of behavioral and cognitive specialization
Logan, C., Avin, S., Boogert, N. J., Buskell, A., Cross, F. R., Currie, A., Jelbert, S. A., Lukas, D., Marés, R., Navarrete, A. F., et al. (2018) · Comparative Cognition & Behavior Reviews · doi:10.3819/ccbr.2018.130008 · Cited by 125
The Forebrain Song System Mediates Predictive Call Timing in Female and Male Zebra Finches
Benichov, J. I., Benezra, S. E., Vallentin, D., Globerson, E., Long, M. A., & Tchernichovski, O. (2016) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2015.12.037 · Cited by 121
The functions of vocal learning in parrots
Bradbury, J. W., & Balsby, T. J. S. (2016) · Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology · doi:10.1007/s00265-016-2068-4 · Cited by 122
Core and region-enriched networks of behaviorally regulated genes and the singing genome
Whitney, O., Pfenning, A. R., Howard, J. T., Blatti, C. A., Liu, F., Ward, J. M., Wang, R., Audet, J., Kellis, M., Mukherjee, S., et al. (2014) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1256780 · Cited by 117
Self-citationConserved transcriptomic profiles underpin monogamy across vertebrates
Young, R. L., Ferkin, M. H., Ockendon-Powell, N., Orr, V. N., Phelps, S. M., Pogány, Á., Richards‐Zawacki, C. L., Summers, K., Székely, T., Trainor, B. C., et al. (2019) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1813775116 · Cited by 115
A catalog of single nucleotide changes distinguishing modern humans from archaic hominins
Kuhlwilm, M., & Boeckx, C. (2019) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-019-44877-x · Cited by 108
Blaxter, M., Archibald, J. M., Childers, A. K., Coddington, J. A., Crandall, K. A., Palma, F. D., Durbin, R. M., Edwards, S. V., Graves, J. A. M., Hackett, K. J., et al. (2022) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2115636118 · Cited by 108
Self-citationThe Biology and Evolution of Speech: A Comparative Analysis
Fitch, W. T. (2018) · Annual Review of Linguistics · doi:10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011817-045748 · Cited by 112
Rhythmic Continuous-Time Coding in the Songbird Analog of Vocal Motor Cortex
Lynch, G. F., Okubo, T. S., Hanuschkin, A., Hahnloser, R. H. R., & Fee, M. S. (2016) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2016.04.021 · Cited by 102
Chabout, J., Sarkar, A., Patel, S. R., Radden, T., Dunson, D. B., Fisher, S. E., & Jarvis, E. D. (2016) · Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2016.00197 · Cited by 101
Self-citationLanguage Evolution: A Changing Perspective
Corballis, M. C. (2017) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2017.01.013 · Cited by 104
Lombardo, M. V., Pramparo, T., Gazestani, V., Warrier, V., Bethlehem, R. A. I., Barnes, C. C., Lopez, L., Lewis, N. E., Eyler, L. T., Pierce, K., et al. (2018) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41593-018-0281-3 · Cited by 96
Karyotype Evolution in Birds: From Conventional Staining to Chromosome Painting
Kretschmer, R., Ferguson-Smith, M., & de Oliveira, E. H. C. (2018) · Genes · doi:10.3390/genes9040181 · Cited by 97
Convergent evolution of complex brains and high intelligence
Roth, G. (2015) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2015.0049 · Cited by 94
Relating enhancer genetic variation across mammals to complex phenotypes using machine learning
Kaplow, I. M., Lawler, A. J., Schäffer, D. E., Srinivasan, C., Sestili, H. H., Wirthlin, M. E., Phan, B. N., Prasad, K., Brown, A. R., Zhang, X., et al. (2023) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.abm7993 · Cited by 97
Self-citationDevelopmental and genetic mechanisms of neural circuit evolution
Tosches, M. A. (2017) · Developmental Biology · doi:10.1016/j.ydbio.2017.06.016 · Cited by 95
Parrot Genomes and the Evolution of Heightened Longevity and Cognition
Wirthlin, M. E., Lima, N. C. B., Guedes, R. L. M., Soares, A. E. R., de Almeida, L. G. P., Cavaleiro, N. P., de Morais, G. L., Chaves, A. V., Howard, J. T., Teixeira, M. D. M., et al. (2018) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2018.10.050 · Cited by 88
Self-citationMapping Human Laryngeal Motor Cortex during Vocalization
Eichert, N., Papp, D., Mars, R. B., & Watkins, K. E. (2020) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhaa182 · Cited by 89
Herold, C., Coppola, V. J., & Bingman, V. P. (2015) · Hippocampus · doi:10.1002/hipo.22463 · Cited by 84
Metabolomics-based screening of salivary biomarkers for early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease
Liang, Q., Liu, H., Zhang, T., Jiang, Y., Xing, H., & Zhang, A. (2015) · RSC Advances · doi:10.1039/c5ra19094k · Cited by 81
From sauropsids to mammals and back: New approaches to comparative cortical development
Montiel, J. F., Vasistha, N. A., García‐Moreno, F., & Molnár, Z. (2015) · The Journal of Comparative Neurology · doi:10.1002/cne.23871 · Cited by 74
What Have We Learned from the First 500 Avian Genomes?
Bravo, G. A., Schmitt, C. J., & Edwards, S. V. (2021) · Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-012121-085928 · Cited by 81
Convergent differential regulation of SLIT-ROBO axon guidance genes in the brains of vocal learners
Wang, R., Chen, C., Hara, E., Rivas, M. V., Roulhac, P. L., Howard, J. T., Chakraborty, M., Audet, J., & Jarvis, E. D. (2015) · Journal of Comparative Neurology · doi:10.1002/cne.23719 · Cited by 74
Self-citationCore and shell song systems unique to the parrot brain
Chakraborty, M., Walløe, S., Nedergaard, S., Fridel, E. E., Dabelsteen, T., Pakkenberg, B., Bertelsen, M. F., Dorrestein, G. M., Brauth, S. E., Durand, S. E., et al. (2015) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0118496 · Cited by 86
Self-citationThe brain dynamics of linguistic computation
Murphy, E. (2015) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01515 · Cited by 84
A Modular Approach to Vocal Learning: Disentangling the Diversity of a Complex Behavioral Trait
Wirthlin, M. E., Chang, E. F., Knörnschild, M., Krubitzer, L. A., Mello, C. V., Miller, C. T., Pfenning, A. R., Vernes, S. C., Tchernichovski, O., & Yartsev, M. M. (2019) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2019.09.036 · Cited by 74
Self-citationFalse gene and chromosome losses in genome assemblies caused by GC content variation and repeats
Kim, J., Lee, C., Ko, B. J., Yoo, D. A., Won, S., Phillippy, A. M., Fedrigo, O. D., Zhang, G., Howe, K., Wood, J. M. D., et al. (2022) · Genome biology · doi:10.1186/s13059-022-02765-0 · Cited by 74
Self-citationResolving a phylogenetic hypothesis for parrots: implications from systematics to conservation
Provost, K. L., Joseph, L., & Smith, B. T. (2017) · Emu - Austral Ornithology · doi:10.1080/01584197.2017.1387030 · Cited by 73
Kleber, B., Friberg, A., Zeitouni, A. G., & Zatorre, R. J. (2016) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.11.059 · Cited by 74
A hypothesis on a role of oxytocin in the social mechanisms of speech and vocal learning
Theofanopoulou, C., Boeckx, C. A., & Jarvis, E. D. (2017) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2017.0988 · Cited by 69
Self-citationMolecular networks of the FOXP2 transcription factor in the brain
den Hoed, J., Devaraju, K., & Fisher, S. E. (2021) · EMBO Reports · doi:10.15252/embr.202152803 · Cited by 64
What bats have to say about speech and language
Vernes, S. C. (2016) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-016-1060-3 · Cited by 60
Wolff, G. H., & Strausfeld, N. J. (2016) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2015.0055 · Cited by 61
Molecular architecture of the zebra finch arcopallium
Mello, C. V., Kaser, T., Buckner, A. A., Wirthlin, M. E., & Lovell, P. V. (2019) · The Journal of Comparative Neurology · doi:10.1002/cne.24688 · Cited by 58
Self-citationAlm, P. A. (2021) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2021.661880 · Cited by 65
Liang, Q., Liu, H., Zhang, T., Jiang, Y., Xing, H., & Zhang, A. (2016) · RSC Advances · doi:10.1039/c5ra19349d · Cited by 60
Ozker, M., Doyle, W., Devinsky, O., & Flinker, A. (2022) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3001493 · Cited by 59
Levels of Homology and the Problem of Neocortex
Dugas‐Ford, J., & Ragsdale, C. W. (2015) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev-neuro-071714-033911 · Cited by 58
The effect of listening to music on human transcriptome
Kanduri, C., Raijas, P., Ahvenainen, M., Philips, A. K., Ukkola‐Vuoti, L., Lähdesmäki, H. J., & Järvelä, I. E. (2015) · PeerJ · doi:10.7717/peerj.830 · Cited by 59
Duetting as a Collective Behavior
Logue, D. M., & Krupp, D. B. (2016) · Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.3389/fevo.2016.00007 · Cited by 59
The effect of music performance on the transcriptome of professional musicians
Kanduri, C., Kuusi, T., Ahvenainen, M., Philips, A. K., Lähdesmäki, H. J., & Järvelä, I. E. (2015) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep09506 · Cited by 57
Boraud, T., Leblois, A., & Rougier, N. P. (2018) · Progress in Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/j.pneurobio.2018.08.003 · Cited by 60
Possible functional links among brain- and skull-related genes selected in modern humans
Benítez‐Burraco, A., & Boeckx, C. A. (2015) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00794 · Cited by 55
The Neural Basis of Vocal Pitch Imitation in Humans
Belyk, M., Pfordresher, P. Q., Mario Liotti, A., & Brown, S. (2015) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/jocn_a_00914 · Cited by 57
The Molecular Basis of Human Brain Evolution
Enard, W. (2016) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2016.09.030 · Cited by 55
Jarvis, E. D. (2016) · Annual Review of Animal Biosciences · doi:10.1146/annurev-animal-021815-111216 · Cited by 54
Self-citationBrains for birds and babies: Neural parallels between birdsong and speech acquisition
Prather, J. F., Okanoya, K., & Bolhuis, J. J. (2017) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.12.035 · Cited by 55
Vocal learning: a language-relevant trait in need of a broad cross-species approach
Lattenkamp, E. Z., & Vernes, S. C. (2018) · Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2018.04.007 · Cited by 54
Developmental origins and evolution of pallial cell types and structures in birds
Zaremba, B., Fallahshahroudi, A., Schneider, C., Schmidt, J., Sarropoulos, I., Leushkin, E. V., Berki, B., Poucke, E. V., Jensen, P., Senovilla-Ganzo, R., et al. (2025) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.adp5182 · Cited by 55
High-throughput metabolomics enables biomarker discovery in prostate cancer
Liang, Q., Liu, H., Xie, L.-X., Li, X., & Zhang, A. (2017) · RSC Advances · doi:10.1039/c6ra25007f · Cited by 52
Lamichhaney, S., Card, D. C., Grayson, P., Tonini, J. F. R., Bravo, G. A., Näpflin, K., Termignoni-Garcia, F., Torres, C., Burbrink, F., Clarke, J. A., et al. (2019) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2018.0248 · Cited by 44
Avian genomics: fledging into the wild!
Kraus, R. H., & Wink, M. (2015) · Journal für Ornithologie · doi:10.1007/s10336-015-1253-y · Cited by 54
Birdsong Learning and Culture: Analogies with Human Spoken Language
Bruno, J. H., Jarvis, E., Liberman, M., & Tchernichovski, O. (2021) · Annual Review of Linguistics · doi:10.1146/annurev-linguistics-090420-121034 · Cited by 43
Self-citationNeural Representations Observed
Thomson, E. E., & Piccinini, G. (2018) · Minds and Machines · doi:10.1007/s11023-018-9459-4 · Cited by 62
Music-listening regulates human microRNA expression
Nair, P. S., Raijas, P., Ahvenainen, M., Philips, A. K., Ukkola‐Vuoti, L., & Järvelä, I. E. (2020) · Epigenetics · doi:10.1080/15592294.2020.1809853 · Cited by 53
What animals can teach us about human language: the phonological continuity hypothesis
Fitch, W. T. (2018) · Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2018.01.014 · Cited by 54
Auditory representation of learned sound sequences in motor regions of the macaque brain
Archakov, D., DeWitt, I., Kuśmierek, P., Ortiz-Rios, M., Cameron, D. J., Cui, D., Morin, E. L., VanMeter, J. W., Sams, M. E., Jääskeläinen, I. P., et al. (2020) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1915610117 · Cited by 53
Lovell, P. V., Wirthlin, M. E., Kaser, T., Buckner, A. A., Carleton, J. B., Snider, B. R., McHugh, A. K., Tolpygo, A. S., Mitra, P. P., & Mello, C. V. (2020) · The Journal of Comparative Neurology · doi:10.1002/cne.24879 · Cited by 50
Self-citationSound sequences in birdsong: how much do birds really care?
Fishbein, A., Idsardi, W., Ball, G. F., & Dooling, R. (2019) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2019.0044 · Cited by 42
The FOXP2-Driven Network in Developmental Disorders and Neurodegeneration
Oswald, F., Klöble, P., Ruland, A., Rosenkranz, D., Hinz, B., Butter, F., Ramljak, S., Zechner, U., & Herlyn, H. (2017) · Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fncel.2017.00212 · Cited by 50
Garcia, S. M., Kopuchian, C., Mindlin, G. B., Fuxjager, M. J., Tubaro, P. L., & Goller, F. (2017) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2017.07.059 · Cited by 47
Animal Models of Speech and Vocal Communication Deficits Associated With Psychiatric Disorders
Konopka, G., & Roberts, T. F. (2015) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2015.07.001 · Cited by 44
What can animal communication teach us about human language?
Fishbein, A. R., Fritz, J. B., Idsardi, W. J., & Wilkinson, G. S. (2019) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2019.0042 · Cited by 45
Evolutionary Divergence of Gene and Protein Expression in the Brains of Humans and Chimpanzees
Bauernfeind, A. L., Soderblom, E. J., Turner, M. E., Moseley, M. A., Ely, J. J., Hof, P. R., Sherwood, C. C., Wray, G. A., & Babbitt, C. C. (2015) · Genome Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/gbe/evv132 · Cited by 44
Self-citationMendoza, E., & Scharff, C. (2017) · Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnmol.2017.00112 · Cited by 44
Sex differences and rapid estrogen signaling: A look at songbird audition
Krentzel, A. A., & Remage‐Healey, L. (2015) · Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology · doi:10.1016/j.yfrne.2015.01.001 · Cited by 42
Concerted and mosaic evolution of functional modules in songbird brains
Moore, J. M., & DeVoogd, T. J. (2017) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2017.0469 · Cited by 42
Genetic Mechanisms Underlying the Evolution of Connectivity in the Human Cortex
Schmidt, E. R. E., & Polleux, F. (2022) · Frontiers in Neural Circuits · doi:10.3389/fncir.2021.787164 · Cited by 49
Inhibition within a premotor circuit controls the timing of vocal turn-taking in zebra finches
Benichov, J. I., & Vallentin, D. (2020) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-019-13938-0 · Cited by 39
Vocal learning–associated convergent evolution in mammalian proteins and regulatory elements
Wirthlin, M. E., Schmid, T. A., Elie, J. E., Zhang, X., Kowalczyk, A. M., Redlich, R. W., Shvareva, V. A., Rakuljic, A., Ji, M. B., Bhat, N. S., et al. (2024) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.abn3263 · Cited by 45
Self-citationGenomics studies on musical aptitude, music perception, and practice
Järvelä, I. E. (2018) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1111/nyas.13620 · Cited by 40
Evolution of the speech‐ready brain: The voice/jaw connection in the human motor cortex
Brown, S., Yuan, Y., & Belyk, M. (2020) · The Journal of Comparative Neurology · doi:10.1002/cne.24997 · Cited by 43
Cahill, J. A., Armstrong, J. C., Deran, A., Khoury, C. J., Paten, B., Haussler, D. H., & Jarvis, E. D. (2021) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.275989.121 · Cited by 43
“These neural pathways are either absent in vocal nonlearning species or rudimentary in many species according to a continuum hypothesis of vocal learning (Wild et al. 1997; Arriaga et al. 2012; Petkov and Jarvis 2012; Liu et al. 2013; Pfenning et al. 2014; Jarvis 2019).”
InfluentialSelf-citationde Sousa, A. A., Beaudet, A., Calvey, T., Bardo, A., Benoît, J., Charvet, C. J., Dehay, C., Gómez‐Robles, A., Gunz, P., Heuer, K., et al. (2023) · Communications Biology · doi:10.1038/s42003-023-04803-4 · Cited by 39
Tramacere, A., Pievani, T., & Ferrari, P. F. (2016) · Biological reviews/Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · doi:10.1111/brv.12310 · Cited by 42
Borland, A. M., Leverett, A., Hurtado-Castano, N., Hu, R., & Yang, X. (2018) · Advances in photosynthesis and respiration · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-93594-2_10 · Cited by 38
The social role of song in wild zebra finches
Loning, H., Verkade, L., Griffith, S. C., & Naguib, M. (2022) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2022.11.047 · Cited by 37
Hayase, S., Wang, H., Ohgushi, E., Kobayashi, M., Mori, C., Horita, H., Mineta, K., Liu, W., & Wada, K. (2018) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.2006537 · Cited by 37
Metadata
- Authors
- Pfenning, A. R., Hara, E., Whitney, O., Rivas, M. V., Wang, R., Roulhac, P. L., Howard, J. T., Wirthlin, M., Lovell, P. V., Ganapathy, G., Mountcastle, J., Moseley, M. A., Thompson, J. W., Soderblom, E. J., Iriki, A., Kato, M., Gilbert, M. T. P., Zhang, G., Bakken, T., Bongaarts, A., Bernard, A., Lein, E., Mello, C. V., Hartemink, A. J., & Jarvis, E. D.
- Affiliations
- Howard Hughes Medical Institute (US)
- Oregon Health & Science University (US)
- Duke University (US)
- RIKEN Center for Brain Science (JP)
- University of Copenhagen (DK)
- Allen Institute for Brain Science (US)
- Allen Institute for Brain Science, Seattle, WA 98103, USA.
- Corresponding author
- Pfenning, Andreas R.
- Hartemink, Alexander J.
- Jarvis, Erich D.
- ORCID
- Pfenning, Andreas R.
- Hara, Erina
- Whitney, Osceola
- Rivas, Miriam V.
- Howard, Jason T.
- Wirthlin, Morgan
- Lovell, Peter V.
- Mountcastle, Jacquelyn
- Moseley, M. Arthur
- Thompson, J. Will
- Soderblom, Erik J.
- Iriki, Atsushi
- Kato, Masaki
- Gilbert, M. Thomas P.
- Zhang, Guojie
- Bakken, Trygve
- Bernard, Amy
- Lein, Ed
- Mello, Claudio V.
- Hartemink, Alexander J.
- Jarvis, Erich D.
- Venue
- Science
- Published
- 2014-12-12
- Volume
- 346
- Issue
- 6215
- Pages
- 1256846-1256846
- ISSN
- 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
- 1095-9203
- PMC
- PMC4385736
- OpenAlex
- W2052801529
- Semantic Scholar
- ff584b8778ab8ff5d15336d922fff27c76b7fb58
- Cited by
- 463
- References
- 117
- Citations by year
- 2026: 25 · 2025: 40 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 36 · 2021: 47 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 38 · 2018: 43 · 2017: 57 · 2016: 33 · 2015: 44 · 2014: 4
- FWCI
- 42.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- DukeSpace (Duke University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- eSpace (Curtin University) (submittedVersion)
- Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Howard Hughes Medical Institute
- National Institutes of Health (DP1OD000448)
- National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (R21DC007478, R01DC007218)
- National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R24GM092842)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Vocal Communication and Behavior
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Music Perception
- Social Sciences › Cultural Studies › Language and cultural evolution
- Keywords
- vocal learning, human speech, convergent evolution, brain transcriptome, gene expression, song nuclei, striatum, motor control, brain connectivity, avian vocal learning
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Animals, Birds, Brain, Brain Mapping, Corpus Striatum, Gene Expression Regulation, Humans, Learning, Male, Motor Cortex, Neural Pathways, Species Specificity, Speech, Transcription, Genetic, Vocalization, Animal, Evolution, Molecular, Finches, Transcriptome
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
