CZ:Ref:DOI:10.1098/rsbl.2008.0469: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Daniel Mietchen (comment) |
imported>Daniel Mietchen m (case) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
| url = http://journals.royalsociety.org/content/006p636h41l22473/ | | url = http://journals.royalsociety.org/content/006p636h41l22473/ | ||
}} | }} | ||
:Builds on the [[ | :Builds on the [[expensive tissue hypothesis]] proposed by [[CZ:Ref:Aiello 1995 The Expensive-Tissue Hypothesis: the Brain and the Digestive System in Human and Primate Evolution|Aiello & Wheeler, 1995]] and provides evidence that the maximum rate of population increase, as defined by [[CZ:Ref:Cole 1954 The Population Consequences of Life History Phenomena|Cole 1954]], is correlated negatively with brain size in [[mammal]]s and [[bird]]s, as long as [[parental care]] is not only provided (and thus the energetic costs of feeding borne) by the [[mother]]s. | ||
Revision as of 09:01, 15 January 2009
Isler, K. & C.P. Van Schaik (2009), "Why are there so few smart mammals (but so many smart birds)?", Biology Letters: in press, DOI:10.1098/rsbl.2008.0469 [e]
- Builds on the expensive tissue hypothesis proposed by Aiello & Wheeler, 1995 and provides evidence that the maximum rate of population increase, as defined by Cole 1954, is correlated negatively with brain size in mammals and birds, as long as parental care is not only provided (and thus the energetic costs of feeding borne) by the mothers.