Version 2 2018-04-03, 10:52Version 2 2018-04-03, 10:52
Version 1 2018-04-03, 10:16Version 1 2018-04-03, 10:16
journal contribution
posted on 2018-04-03, 10:52authored byChun Lin Zhao, Long Jin, Mao Jun Zhong, Feng Xie, Jian Ping Jiang, Da Yong Li, Wen Bo Liao
<p>The ‘cognitive buffer’ hypothesis
predicts that the costs of relatively large brains are compensated for later in
life by the increased benefits of large brains providing a higher chance of survival under changing environments through flexible behaviors
in the animal kingdom. Thus, animals that live in a larger range (with a higher probability of environmental
variation) are expected to
have larger brains than those that live in a restricted geographic range. Here, to test the prediction of
the ‘cognitive buffer’ hypothesis that larger brains should be expected to occur
in species living in geographic
ranges of larger size, we analyze the relationship between the size of the geographic
range and brain size and the size of various brain regions among 42 species of
anurans using phylogenetic comparative methods. The results show that there is no
correlation between relative brain size and size
of
the species’ geographic
range when correcting for phylogenetic effects and body size. Our findings suggest that the effects of the cognitive buffer
and the energetic constraints on brains result in non-significant variation in overall
brain size. However, the geographic range is positively correlated
with cerebellum size, but not with
optic tecta, suggesting that species distributed in a wider geographic
range do not exhibit larger optic tecta that provide behavioral
flexibility to allow for an early escape from potential predators and discover
new food resources in unpredictable environments.</p>