Why "late equals large" does not work

Weisbecker, V. (2009) Why "late equals large" does not work. Neuroscience, 164 (4). pp. 1648-1652. DOI doi:doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2009.09.027

[img] PDF
Weisbecker_Neuroscience.pdf
Restricted to Registered users only

Download (224kB)
Official URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6T0F...

Abstract

The concept of conservative scaling of mammalian brain subdivision size with respect to brain size is one of the more contentious issues in neuromorphological studies. What is generally less critically discussed is the widely-cited suggestion that a highly conserved neurogenetic sequence during brain development is the reason for this conservative scaling and other processes of mammalian brain evolution. Here I re-visit the data with which the influential notion of conserved neurogenesis and mechanistic relationship between neurogenesis and mammalian brain subdivision scaling was developed. I suggest that neurogenetic sequences in the species available are not particularly conserved, and that brain subdivision sizes do not correspond well with neurogenetic sequence timing. As an alternative, I propose favouring less generalized and more heterochrony-focused approaches of relating timing differences between species to adult morphology.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: 2010AREP; IA61;
Subjects: 04 - Palaeobiology
Divisions: 04 - Palaeobiology
Journal or Publication Title: Neuroscience
Volume: 164
Page Range: pp. 1648-1652
Identification Number: doi:doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2009.09.027
Depositing User: Sarah Humbert
Date Deposited: 23 Aug 2010 11:38
Last Modified: 23 Jul 2013 10:00
URI: http://eprints.esc.cam.ac.uk/id/eprint/1913

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item

About cookies