Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,642

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cellular Scaling Rules for the Brains of Marsupials: Not as “Primitive” as Expected

Dos Santos, Sandra E., Porfirio, Jairo, da Cunha, Felipe B., Manger, Paul R., Tavares, William, Pessoa, Leila, Raghanti, Mary Ann, Sherwood, Chet C., Herculano-Houzel, Suzana·2017·Brain, Behavior and Evolution
DOI 10.1159/000452856
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In the effort to understand the evolution of mammalian brains, we have found that common relationships between brain structure mass and numbers of nonneuronal (glial and vascular) cells apply across eutherian mammals, but brain structure mass scales differently with numbers of neurons across structures and across primate and nonprimate clades. This suggests that the ancestral scaling rules for mammalian brains are those shared by extant nonprimate eutherians - but do these scaling relationships apply to marsupials, a sister group to eutherians that diverged early in mammalian evolution? Here we examine the cellular composition of the brains of 10 species of marsupials. We show that brain structure mass scales with numbers of nonneuronal cells, and numbers of cerebellar neurons scale with numbers of cerebral cortical neurons, comparable to what we have found in eutherians. These shared scaling relationships are therefore indicative of mechanisms that have been conserved since the first therians. In contrast, while marsupials share with nonprimate eutherians the scaling of cerebral cortex mass with number of neurons, their cerebella have more neurons than nonprimate eutherian cerebella of a similar mass, and their rest of brain has fewer neurons than eutherian structures of a similar mass. Moreover, Australasian marsupials exhibit ratios of neurons in the cerebral cortex and cerebellum over the rest of the brain, comparable to artiodactyls and primates. Our results suggest that Australasian marsupials have diverged from the ancestral Theria neuronal scaling rules, and support the suggestion that the scaling of average neuronal cell size with increasing numbers of neurons varies in evolution independently of the allocation of neurons across structures.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1159/000452856

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 21 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Dos Santos, S. E., Porfirio, J., da Cunha, F. B., Manger, P. R., Tavares, W., Pessoa, L., Raghanti, M. A., Sherwood, C. C., & Herculano-Houzel, S.
Venue
Brain, Behavior and Evolution
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2017
Volume
89
Issue
1
Pages
48-63
ISSN
  • 0006-8977 (ISSN-L)
  • 1421-9743
DOI
10.1159/000452856
OpenAlex
W2581259096
Cited by
2,642
References
21
FWCI
144.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.