Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28278153›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2017

A model for brain life history evolution.

Mauricio González-Forero, Timm Faulwasser, Laurent Lehmann

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
22.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Selection shapes diverse animal minds.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Article
  4. Why did the human brain size evolve? A way forward.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The importance of elders: Extending Hamilton's force of selection to include intergenerational transfers.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. The optimal timing of teaching and learning across the life course.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2020
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Nahua mushroom gatherers use area-restricted search strategies that conform to marginal value theorem predictions.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019
    Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Mauricio González-ForeroDepartment of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-1015-3089
Timm FaulwasserLaboratoire d'Automatique, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-6892-7406
Laurent LehmannDepartment of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
University of Lausanne · CHKarlsruhe Institute of Technology · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Complex cognition and relatively large brains are distributed across various taxa, and many primarily verbal hypotheses exist to explain such diversity. Yet, mathematical approaches formalizing verbal hypotheses would help deepen the understanding of brain and cognition evolution. With this aim, we combine elements of life history and metabolic theories to formulate a metabolically explicit mathematical model for brain life history evolution. We assume that some of the brain's energetic expense is due to production (learning) and maintenance (memory) of energy-extraction skills (or cognitive abilities, knowledge, information, etc.). We also assume that individuals use such skills to extract energy from the environment, and can allocate this energy to grow and maintain the body, including brain and reproductive tissues. The model can be used to ask what fraction of growth energy should be allocated at each age, given natural selection, to growing brain and other tissues under various biological settings. We apply the model to find uninvadable allocation strategies under a baseline setting ("me vs nature"), namely when energy-extraction challenges are environmentally determined and are overcome individually but possibly with maternal help, and use modern-human data to estimate model's parameter values. The resulting uninvadable strategies yield predictions for brain and body mass throughout ontogeny and for the ages at maturity, adulthood, and brain growth arrest. We find that: (1) a me-vs-nature setting is enough to generate adult brain and body mass of ancient human scale and a sequence of childhood, adolescence, and adulthood stages; (2) large brains are favored by intermediately challenging environments, moderately effective skills, and metabolically expensive memory; and (3) adult skill is proportional to brain mass when metabolic costs of memory saturate the brain metabolic rate allocated to skills.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionModels, GeneticBrainCognitionEnergy MetabolismLife Cycle Stages

Identifiers

PMID28278153
PMCPMC5344330
OpenAlexW2593058444

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.