Abstract

BackgroundMost evolutionary studies on the size of brains and different parts of the brain have relied on interspecific comparisons, and have uncovered correlations between brain architecture and various ecological, behavioural and life-history traits. Yet, similar intraspecific studies are rare, despite the fact that they could better determine how selection and phenotypic plasticity influence brain architecture. We investigated the variation in brain size and structure in wild-caught nine-spined sticklebacks (Pungitius pungitius) from eight populations, representing marine, lake, and pond habitats, and compared them to data from a previous common garden study from a smaller number of populations.ResultsBrain size scaled hypo-allometrically with body size, irrespective of population origin, with a common slope of 0.5. Both absolute and relative brain size, as well as relative telencephalon, optic tectum and cerebellum size, differed significantly among the populations. Further, absolute and relative brain sizes were larger in pond than in marine populations, while the telencephalon tended to be larger in marine than in pond populations. These findings are partly incongruent with previous common garden results. A direct comparison between wild and common garden fish from the same populations revealed a habitat-specific effect: pond fish had relatively smaller brains in a controlled environment than in the wild, while marine fish were similar. All brain parts were smaller in the laboratory than in the wild, irrespective of population origin.ConclusionOur results indicate that variation among populations is large, both in terms of brain size and in the size of separate brain parts in wild nine-spined sticklebacks. However, the incongruence between the wild and common garden patterns suggests that much of the population variation found in the wild may be attributable to environmentally induced phenotypic plasticity. Given that the brain is among the most plastic organs in general, the results emphasize the view that common garden data are required to draw firm evolutionary conclusions from patterns of brain size variability in the wild.

Highlights

  • Most evolutionary studies on the size of brains and different parts of the brain have relied on interspecific comparisons, and have uncovered correlations between brain architecture and various ecological, behavioural and life-history traits

  • Direct comparisons of patterns based on data collected from wild populations with those based on data from standardized common garden settings are needed to establish if any evolutionary inferences can be made from wild collected data in such a highly plastic organ as the brain

  • We showed that there is large variation in absolute brain volume, relative brain volume and relative volume of the telencephalon, optic tectum and cerebellum across wild nine-spined stickleback populations

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Most evolutionary studies on the size of brains and different parts of the brain have relied on interspecific comparisons, and have uncovered correlations between brain architecture and various ecological, behavioural and life-history traits. Even fewer studies have compared brains of individuals from different populations reared under standardized settings to exclude the possible effects of phenotypic plasticity [but see: [10,12]] This is surprising considering the fact that phenotypic plasticity in overall brain size, in addition to the size of different brain regions, has often been demonstrated [e.g. seasonality: [20,21]; spatial learning: [22,23], environmental heterogeneity: [24,25]]. How this plasticity might influence population and species comparisons in terms of neural architecture has yet to be explored. Direct comparisons of patterns based on data collected from wild populations with those based on data from standardized common garden settings are needed to establish if any evolutionary inferences can be made from wild collected data in such a highly plastic organ as the brain

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call