Search tips
Search criteria 


Logo of procbThe Royal Society PublishingProceedings BAboutBrowse by SubjectAlertsFree Trial
Proc Biol Sci. 1999 April 7; 266(1420): 687–694.
PMCID: PMC1689825

How quickly do brains catch up with bodies? A comparative method for detecting evolutionary lag.


A trait may be at odds with theoretical expectation because it is still in the process of responding to a recent selective force. Such a situation can be termed evolutionary lag. Although many cases of evolutionary lag have been suggested, almost all of the arguments have focused on trait fitness. An alternative approach is to examine the prediction that trait expression is a function of the time over which the trait could evolve. Here we present a phylogenetic comparative method for using this 'time' approach and we apply the method to a long-standing lag hypothesis: evolutionary changes in brain size lag behind evolutionary changes in body size. We tested the prediction in primates that brain mass contrast residuals, calculated from a regression of pairwise brain mass contrasts on positive pairwise body mass contrasts, are correlated with the time since the paired species diverged. Contrary to the brain size lag hypothesis, time since divergence was not significantly correlated with brain mass contrast residuals. We found the same result when we accounted for socioecology, used alternative body mass estimates and used male rather than female values. These tests do not support the brain size lag hypothesis. Therefore, body mass need not be viewed as a suspect variable in comparative neuroanatomical studies and relative brain size should not be used to infer recent evolutionary changes in body size.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (171K).

Supplementary Material

Supplementary data file:

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Aboitiz F. Does bigger mean better? Evolutionary determinants of brain size and structure. Brain Behav Evol. 1996;47(5):225–245. [PubMed]
  • Barton RA. Visual specialization and brain evolution in primates. Proc Biol Sci. 1998 Oct 22;265(1409):1933–1937. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Gould SJ. Allometry in primates, with emphasis on scaling and the evolution of the brain. Contrib Primatol. 1975;5:244–292. [PubMed]
  • Harvey PH, Krebs JR. Comparing brains. Science. 1990 Jul 13;249(4965):140–146. [PubMed]
  • Pagel MD, Harvey PH. Taxonomic differences in the scaling of brain on body weight among mammals. Science. 1989 Jun 30;244(4912):1589–1593. [PubMed]
  • Plavcan JM, van Schaik CP. Intrasexual competition and body weight dimorphism in anthropoid primates. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1997 May;103(1):37–68. [PubMed]
  • Purvis A. A composite estimate of primate phylogeny. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1995 Jun 29;348(1326):405–421. [PubMed]
  • Purvis A, Rambaut A. Comparative analysis by independent contrasts (CAIC): an Apple Macintosh application for analysing comparative data. Comput Appl Biosci. 1995 Jun;11(3):247–251. [PubMed]
  • Purvis A, Nee S, Harvey PH. Macroevolutionary inferences from primate phylogeny. Proc Biol Sci. 1995 Jun 22;260(1359):329–333. [PubMed]
  • Sawaguchi T. The size of the neocortex in relation to ecology and social structure in monkeys and apes. Folia Primatol (Basel) 1992;58(3):130–145. [PubMed]
  • Smith RJ, Jungers WL. Body mass in comparative primatology. J Hum Evol. 1997 Jun;32(6):523–559. [PubMed]
  • Stephan H, Frahm H, Baron G. New and revised data on volumes of brain structures in insectivores and primates. Folia Primatol (Basel) 1981;35(1):1–29. [PubMed]
  • Sterck EH. Female dispersal, social organization, and infanticide in langurs: are they linked to human disturbance? Am J Primatol. 1998;44(4):235–254. [PubMed]

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society