Evolution of Nervous System: What’s So Special About Brains?
Do more complex brains operate on the same principles as simpler brains, merely employing more of the same; or has evolution produced new principles? A neglected research agenda is the search for relevant differences between brains of animals belonging to different major grades of complexity and cognitive capacity. More complex brains are believed to be capable of more transactions, discriminations, memory and repertoire—functional criteria of “better” brains. While comparative cognition needs to test these expectations to verify what must be one of the major consequences of evolution, comparative neurobiology needs to discover what, in detail, by all the methods and measures of neuroanatomy, neurophysiology and neurochemistry is different in more complex brains and which of these differences are relevant to behavioral differences.
Formerly it was fashionable to deny differences in the dimension that might be called higher and lower. The criterion of complexity, defined as the number of different parts, processes, interactions and behaviors, may be a useful index of advancement. Unequivocal advancement has occurred between some major taxa, although it is not inevitable. Anatomically, it is clear that novelties have evolved and complexity is more than size or number of the same components. Physiologically, new types of cells, local and larger circuits and emergent properties of assemblies have increased the complexity of operations and organization.
It needs to be reasserted that more complex brains have evolved repeatedly, both among invertebrates and among vertebrates, because similar assertions have been incorrectly labeled as “intuitive scaling” and anthropocentric or moral statements. None of these or any necessary implications about tendencies or causation need be involved.
The main thrust of this essay is to underline three propositions as steps toward a plan of action: (i) We are deeply ignorant of the exact ways in which the more and the less complex brains differ-emphasizing those from higher taxonomic categories clearly different in grades of complexity. (ii) The needed comparisons require the methods of natural history prior to mechanistic analysis, since unfamiliar traits must be uncovered. (iii) Especially to include the higher nervous functions in these comparisons, new approaches are needed.
I perceive a major frontier of new insights about brains. Pursuit of this large agenda of research will be profoundly significant both for neurobiology and gen?eral biology.
KeywordsHigh Function Major Taxon Dorsal Cochlear Nucleus Complex Brain Torus Semicircularis
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Citations without names, in the form: [year-number], are found in the author's bibliography, page 633 et seq.Google Scholar
- Bauchot R, Randall JE, Ridet J-M, Bauchot M-L (1989): Encephalization in tropical teleost fishes and comparison with their mode of life.J Hirnforsch 30: 645 - 669Google Scholar
- Bonner TT (1988): The Evolution of Complexity by Means of Natural Selection. Princeton NJ: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
- Diamond n (1979): The subdivisions of neocortex: a proposal to revise the traditional view of sensory, motor and association areas. Prog Psychobiol 8: 1 - 43Google Scholar
- Harvey PH, Pagel MD (1991):The Comparative Method in Evolutionary Biology. New York: OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Hille B (1987):Evolutionary origins of voltage-gated channels and synaptic transmission. In: Synaptic Function, Edelman GM, Gall WE, Cowan WM, eds. New York: John Wiley & Sons, pp 163 - 176Google Scholar
- Jenson HJ (1991): Brain Size and the Evolution of Mind. New York: American Museum of Natural HistoryGoogle Scholar
- Kaas JH (1987): The organization and evolution of neocortex. In: Higher Brain Functions, Wise SP, ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, pp 347 - 378Google Scholar
- Kassem M, Ridet JM, B auchot R (1989): Analyse volumétrique des principales subdivisions encéphaliques chez les Gobioidei ( Téléostéens, Perciformes). J Hirnforsch 30: 59-67Google Scholar
- Martin RD (1983): Human Brain Evolution in an EcologicalContext. New York: American Museum of Natural HistoryGoogle Scholar
- Nitecki MH (1988): Evolutionary Progress? Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
- Ridet J-M, Bauchot R (1990): Analyse quantitative de l'encéphale des téléostéens: caractères evolutifs et adaptatifs de l'encéphalisation. I. Généralités et analyse globale..1 Hirnforsch 31: 51 - 63Google Scholar
- Wicht H, Northcutt RG (1992): The forebrain of the Pacific hagfish: a cladistic reconstruction of the ancestral craniate forebrain. Brain Behav Evol 40: 25 - 64Google Scholar