title: Energetics and the evolution of human brain size.
abstract: The human brain stands out among mammals by being unusually large. The expensive-tissue hypothesis explains its evolution by proposing a trade-off between the size of the brain and that of the digestive tract, which is smaller than expected for a primate of our body size. Although this hypothesis is widely accepted, empirical support so far has been equivocal. Here we test it in a sample of 100 mammalian species, including 23 primates, by analysing brain size and organ mass data. We found that, controlling for fat-free body mass, brain size is not negatively correlated with the mass of the digestive tract or any other expensive organ, thus refuting the expensive-tissue hypothesis. Nonetheless, consistent with the existence of energy trade-offs with brain size, we find that the size of brains and adipose depots are negatively correlated in mammals, indicating that encephalization and fat storage are compensatory strategies to buffer against starvation. However, these two strategies can be combined if fat storage does not unduly hamper locomotor efficiency. We propose that human encephalization was made possible by a combination of stabilization of energy inputs and a redirection of energy from locomotion, growth and reproduction.
authors.affiliation: Anthropological Institute and Museum, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland. a.navarrete@aim.uzh.ch
authors.forename: Ana
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Navarrete
authors.forename: Carel P
authors.initials: CP
authors.lastname: van Schaik
authors.forename: Karin
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Isler
mesh_terms: D000273:Adipose Tissue / Q000033:anatomy & histology; D000818:Animals; D005075:Biological Evolution; D001921:Brain / Q000033:anatomy & histology*; D004734:Energy Metabolism / Q000502:physiology*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D009929:Organ Size / Q000502:physiology; D013045:Species Specificity
references.citation: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2011 Apr 12;366(1567):1017-27
references.pmid: 21357224
references.citation: J Hum Evol. 2011 Feb;60(2):205-212
references.pmid: 21190724
references.citation: Am Nat. 2010 Dec;176(6):758-67
references.pmid: 21043783
references.citation: Sao Paulo Med J. 2006 Jul 6;124(4):192-7
references.pmid: 17086299
references.citation: J Hum Evol. 2009 Jan;56(1):43-54
references.pmid: 18986682
references.citation: J Hum Evol. 2006 Sep;51(3):228-43
references.pmid: 16730368
references.citation: Nature. 1981 Sep 3;293(5827):57-60
references.pmid: 7266659
references.citation: Am J Physiol. 1981 Sep;241(3):R203-12
references.pmid: 7282965
references.citation: J Hum Evol. 2010 Jun;58(6):492-504
references.pmid: 20447679
references.citation: J Hum Evol. 2009 Oct;57(4):392-400
references.pmid: 19732937
references.citation: J Hum Evol. 2008 Dec;55(6):967-78
references.pmid: 18817943
references.citation: Biol Lett. 2009 Feb 23;5(1):130-3
references.pmid: 19049952
references.citation: Bioessays. 2011 Mar;33(3):173-9
references.pmid: 21254150
references.citation: Biol Lett. 2009 Feb 23;5(1):125-9
references.pmid: 18842563
references.citation: Brain Behav Evol. 1991;37(3):125-43
references.pmid: 2070254
references.citation: Am J Phys Anthropol. 1998;Suppl 27:93-136
references.pmid: 9881524
references.citation: Biol Lett. 2006 Dec 22;2(4):557-60
references.pmid: 17148287
references.citation: Nature. 2001 Dec 6;414(6864):628-31
references.pmid: 11740557
references.citation: Am Nat. 2004 Jul;164(1):E20-31
references.pmid: 15266377