Abstract
The Clever Foraging Hypothesis asserts that organisms living in a more spatially complex environment will have a greater neurological capacity for cognitive processes related to spatial memory, navigation, and foraging. Because the telencephalon is often associated with spatial memory and navigation tasks, this hypothesis predicts a positive association between telencephalon size and environmental complexity. The association between habitat complexity and brain size has been supported by comparative studies across multiple species but has not been widely studied at the within‐species level. We tested for covariation between environmental complexity and neuroanatomy of threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) collected from 15 pairs of lakes and their parapatric streams on Vancouver Island. In most pairs, neuroanatomy differed between the adjoining lake and stream populations. However, the magnitude and direction of this difference were inconsistent between watersheds and did not covary strongly with measures of within‐site environmental heterogeneity. Overall, we find weak support for the Clever Foraging Hypothesis in our study.
Highlights
The Clever Foraging Hypothesis (CFH) posits that organisms living in more complex environments will require greater neurobiological capacity to navigate and forage for food (Park & Bell, 2010; Parker & Gibson, 1977)
Tasks that are more important tend to be managed by brain regions that are comparatively larger (Dukas, 1999), and the CFH predicts that organisms in more complex environments should have larger brains, all else equal (Kotrschal et al, 1998)
| 3373 et al, 1977; Broglio et al, 2003, 2005; Gonda et al, 2009; Park & Bell, 2010; Rodriguez et al, 2002), and relatively larger cerebella (Kotrschal et al, 1998), larger occipital lobes for chemosensation (Bauchot et al, 1977; Kotrschal et al, 1998), and larger brains overall (Huntigford & Wright, 1992; Kotrschal et al, 1998; Park & Bell, 2010). These correlative, comparative studies suggest that habitat complexity drives brain size evolution, but few studies have investigated brain differences among conspecific populations inhabiting contrasting environments to test the CFH, thereby making it unclear whether interspecific findings are supported by intraspecific patterns
Summary
The Clever Foraging Hypothesis (CFH) posits that organisms living in more complex environments will require greater neurobiological capacity to navigate and forage for food (Park & Bell, 2010; Parker & Gibson, 1977). | 3373 et al, 1977; Broglio et al, 2003, 2005; Gonda et al, 2009; Park & Bell, 2010; Rodriguez et al, 2002), and relatively larger cerebella (Kotrschal et al, 1998), larger occipital lobes for chemosensation (Bauchot et al, 1977; Kotrschal et al, 1998), and larger brains overall (Huntigford & Wright, 1992; Kotrschal et al, 1998; Park & Bell, 2010) These correlative, comparative studies suggest that habitat complexity drives brain size evolution, but few studies have investigated brain differences among conspecific populations inhabiting contrasting environments to test the CFH (see; Burns & Rodd, 2008; Burns et al, 2009; Gonda et al, 2009; Park & Bell, 2010 for exceptions), thereby making it unclear whether interspecific findings are supported by intraspecific patterns. We ask whether there are consistent, “parallel” differences between lake and stream stickleback in brain morphology
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
