Garin · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2022 · Comparative phylogenetic neuroanatomical study · n=18 species

Multilevel atlas comparisons reveal divergent evolution of the primate brain.

Cited 23 times in the scientific literature.

Level 5 - mechanism / opinion, no new human data

Level 5 by design analogy (comparative non-clinical evolutionary neuroanatomy study across species atlases)

PubMed 35700361 · doi:10.1073/pnas.2202491119 · record verified 2026-08-26

What was done

The authors adapted anatomical regions from digital brain atlases across 18 mammalian species to generate a unified interspecies classification. They used phylogenetic generalized least squares (PGLS) regression and bootstrap analysis to analyze whole-brain volumetric scaling and identify patterns of anatomical over- and under-expansion across evolutionary lineages.

What was found

Cerebral lobe volume scaling slopes in Catarrhini primates (Old World monkeys, apes, and humans) ranked as parietal ≈ frontal > temporal > occipital. This pattern contrasted with other mammalian species, where scaling slopes ranked as occipital > temporal > frontal ≈ parietal, with frontal and parietal slopes differing significantly between Catarrhini and non-Catarrhini mammals based on bootstrap testing (exact numerical slopes, confidence intervals, and p-values were not provided in the abstract). Prefrontal cortex expansion drove frontal expansion in Catarrhini, and frontal expansion was linked to parietal expansion across all species. Relative human frontal and parietal volumes fit expected Catarrhini scaling trends rather than showing human-specific disproportionate enlargement.

Why it matters

This study reframes human brain evolution by demonstrating that coordinated prefrontal and parietal expansion is an ancestral Catarrhini primate adaptation rather than a uniquely human structural anomaly.

Limits

The analysis was limited to 18 mammalian species. The abstract provides qualitative rankings and slope comparisons without specific numerical coefficients, effect sizes, or test statistics. Cross-species harmonization across heterogeneous digital atlases risks segmentation and parcellation inaccuracies.

Cited by