Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35957842›Full record

ReviewCommunicative & integrative biology2022

The expensive-tissue hypothesis may help explain brain-size reduction during domestication.

Raffaela Lesch, Kurt Kotrschal, Andrew C Kitchener, W Tecumseh Fitch, Alexander Kotrschal

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Communicative & integrative biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Wolf-Dog-Human: Companionship Based on Common Social Tools.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Review
  5. Review
  6. The endangered brain: actively preservingRoyal Society open science · 2023
    Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Raffaela LeschInstitute of Animal Welfare Science, University for Veterinary Medicine, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7151-252X
Kurt KotrschalDepartment of Behavioral and Cognitive Biology, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7254-4347
Andrew C KitchenerDepartment Natural Sciences, National Museums Scotland, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2594-0827
W Tecumseh FitchInstitute of Animal Welfare Science, University for Veterinary Medicine, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1830-0928
Alexander KotrschalBehavioural Ecology, Animal Science, Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3473-1402
University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna · ATNational Museums Scotland · GBUniversity of Vienna · ATWageningen University & Research · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Morphological traits, such as white patches, floppy ears and curly tails, are ubiquitous in domestic animals and are referred to as the 'domestication syndrome'. A commonly discussed hypothesis that has the potential to provide a unifying explanation for these traits is the 'neural crest/domestication syndrome hypothesis'. Although this hypothesis has the potential to explain most traits of the domestication syndrome, it only has an indirect connection to the reduction of brain size, which is a typical trait of domestic animals. We discuss how the expensive-tissue hypothesis might help explain brain-size reduction in domestication.

Indexed as

Brain sizecranial volumegutintestineneural crest

Identifiers

PMID35957842
PMCPMC9359384
OpenAlexW4290077697

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.