Dataset Information

Assessing sources of error in comparative analyses of primate behavior: Intraspecific variation in group size and the social brain hypothesis.

ABSTRACT: Phylogenetic comparative methods have become standard for investigating evolutionary hypotheses, including in studies of human evolution. While these methods account for the non-independence of trait data due to phylogeny, they often fail to consider intraspecific variation, which may lead to biased or erroneous results. We assessed the degree to which intraspecific variation impacts the results of comparative analyses by investigating the "social brain" hypothesis, which has provided a framework for explaining complex cognition and large brains in humans. This hypothesis suggests that group life imposes a cognitive challenge, with species living in larger social groups having comparably larger neocortex ratios than those living in smaller groups. Primates, however, vary considerably in group size within species, a fact that has been ignored in previous analyses. When within-species variation in group size is high, the common practice of using a mean value to represent the species may be inappropriate. We conducted regression and resampling analyses to ascertain whether the relationship between neocortex ratio and group size across primate species persists after controlling for within-species variation in group size. We found that in a sample of 23 primates, 70% of the variation in group size was due to between-species variation. Controlling for within-species variation in group size did not affect the results of phylogenetic analyses, which continued to show a positive relationship between neocortex ratio and group size. Analyses restricted to non-monogamous primates revealed considerable intraspecific variation in group size, but the positive association between neocortex ratio and group size remained even after controlling for within-species variation in group size. Our findings suggest that the relationship between neocortex size and group size in primates is robust. In addition, our methods and associated computer code provide a way to assess and account for intraspecific variation in other comparative analyses of primate evolution.

SUBMITTER: Sandel AA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5436711 | biostudies-literature | 2016 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Assessing sources of error in comparative analyses of primate behavior: Intraspecific variation in group size and the social brain hypothesis.

Sandel Aaron A AA Miller Jordan A JA Mitani John C JC Nunn Charles L CL Patterson Samantha K SK Garamszegi László Zsolt LZ

Journal of human evolution 20160429

Phylogenetic comparative methods have become standard for investigating evolutionary hypotheses, including in studies of human evolution. While these methods account for the non-independence of trait data due to phylogeny, they often fail to consider intraspecific variation, which may lead to biased or erroneous results. We assessed the degree to which intraspecific variation impacts the results of comparative analyses by investigating the "social brain" hypothesis, which has provided a framewor ...[more]

PMID: 27178464

Similar Datasets

Project description:The National Institutes of Health and the Association of Zoos and Aquariums recommend that captive chimpanzees be housed in multi-male, multi-female, age-diverse groups of no less than seven individuals. These recommendations are rooted in the idea that captive chimpanzee groups should be modeled after free-ranging, wild, fission-fusion chimpanzee societies. However, captive chimpanzees do not face the environmental pressures faced by wild chimpanzees, including food scarcity, inter-group competition, and predation. As such, it has been posited that wild, natural conditions may not be the most relevant metric for defining optimal captive chimpanzee group sizes and compositions. Additionally, captive housing poses a set of restrictions on group sizes and compositions, including the need to balance large, multi-male groups with space per animal limitations and intra-group aggression. In the present study, we examined the behavioral effects of group size, within-group age range, and percentage of males in the group. We collected 713?hr of focal animal samples across 120 captive chimpanzees housed in social groups of 4-10 individuals using a 58-behavior ethogram. Chimpanzees housed in groups with a large age range exhibited less inactivity and more locomotion than chimpanzees housed in groups with smaller age ranges. Additionally, chimpanzees in groups of ?7 with less than half males showed the highest levels of locomotion. Lastly, chimpanzees in groups of ?7 with at least half males showed the highest levels of affiliation. There were no other significant differences in behavior as a function of these variables or their interactions. These findings lend some support to the existing group size and composition recommendations, providing empirical evidence that there may be certain advantages to housing captive chimpanzees in larger groups with a more diverse age range and/or more males. These results also have practical implications for behavioral management programs across captive settings.

Project description:BackgroundRecently we proposed an evolutionary explanation for a spinal pathology that afflicts many people, intervertebral disc herniation (Plomp et al. [2015] BMC Evolutionary Biology 15, 68). Using 2D data, we found that the bodies and pedicles of lower vertebrae of pathological humans were more similar in shape to those of chimpanzees than were those of healthy humans. Based on this, we hypothesized that some individuals are more prone to intervertebral disc herniation because their vertebrae exhibit ancestral traits and therefore are less well adapted for the stresses associated with bipedalism. Here, we report a study in which we tested this "Ancestral Shape Hypothesis" with 3D data from the last two thoracic and first lumbar vertebrae of pathological Homo sapiens, healthy H. sapiens, Pan troglodytes, and several extinct hominins.ResultsWe found that the pathological and healthy H. sapiens vertebrae differed significantly in shape, and that the pathological H. sapiens vertebrae were closer in shape to the P. troglodytes vertebrae than were the healthy H. sapiens vertebrae. Additionally, we found that the pathological human vertebrae were generally more similar in shape to the vertebrae of the extinct hominins than were the healthy H. sapiens vertebrae. These results are consistent with the predictions of the Ancestral Shape Hypothesis. Several vertebral traits were associated with disc herniation, including a vertebral body that is both more circular and more ventrally wedged, relatively short pedicles and laminae, relatively long, more cranio-laterally projecting transverse processes, and relatively long, cranially-oriented spinous processes. We found that there are biomechanical and comparative anatomical reasons for suspecting that all of these traits are capable of predisposing individuals to intervertebral disc herniation.ConclusionsThe results of the present study add weight to the hypothesis that intervertebral disc herniation in H. sapiens is connected with vertebral shape. Specifically, they suggest that individuals whose vertebrae are towards the ancestral end of the range of shape variation within H. sapiens have a greater propensity to develop the condition than other individuals. More generally, the study shows that evolutionary thinking has the potential to shed new light on human skeletal pathologies.

Dataset Information

Assessing sources of error in comparative analyses of primate behavior: Intraspecific variation in group size and the social brain hypothesis.

Publications

Assessing sources of error in comparative analyses of primate behavior: Intraspecific variation in group size and the social brain hypothesis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets