Evolution and behavour re-imagined

A couple of Nobel prize winners thinking about the biology of behaviour. My favourite dance expert Karl von Frisch is missing unfortunately from this classic photograph.

New MSc in Molecular and Cellular Exercise Physiology begins in 2012

Our new MSc in Molecular and Cellular Exercise Physiology was approved with flying colours. I am the programme leader, so this is an early call to all students of behavioural biology encouraging their applications. Especially the ones who want to learn how to conduct evolutionary based wet lab research. Watch this space for more details in the coming months.

A new theory of language evolution

Language—as with most communication systems—likely evolved by means of natural selection. Accounts for the natural selection of language can usually be divided into two scenarios, either of which used in isolation of the other are insufficient to explain the phenomena: (1) there are group benefits from communicating, and (2) there are individual benefits from being a better communicator. In contrast, this paper argues that language emerged during a coevolutionary struggle between parental genomes via genomic imprinting, which is differential gene expression depending on parental origin of the genetic element. It is hypothesized that relatedness asymmetries differentially selected for patrigene-caused language phenotypes (e.g., signals of need) to extract resources from mother early in child development and matrigene-caused language phenotypes (e.g.,  socially transmitted norms) to influence degree of cooperativeness  among kin later in development. Unlike previous theories for language evolution, parental antagonism theory generates testable predictions at the proximate (e.g., neurocognitive areas important for social transmission and language capacities), ontogenetic (e.g., the function of language at different points of development), ultimate (e.g., inclusive fitness), and phylogenetic levels (e.g., the spread of maternally derived brain components in mammals, particularly in the hominin lineage), thus making human capacities for culture more tractable than previously thought.

Enjoy the forthcoming contribution to the study of language evolution (all comments welcome) appearing in the journal Human Biology in 2011.

Link to proof of paper

You may cite the paper as follows:

Brown, W.M. (2011). The parental antagonism theory of language evolution: Preliminary evidence for the proposal. Human Biology, 83 (2), 213-245.

If you are interested in learning more about this idea and feel like travelling to Lausanne, Switzerland Tuesday 21 June 2011, come see my talk on the subject at The University of Lausanne’s Center for Integrative Genomics.

More information below:

http://www.unil.ch/cigsymposium/page60154.html

 

 

 

 

Laws of Attraction at the Natural History Museum in London Friday April 29th 2011 7pm

Wire Frame Body Models courtesy of Lisa Naugle University of California

The Laws of Attraction – After Hours event

Come see me give a talk on the laws of attraction. Drink, food and debate — cannot think of a better way to spend a Friday night in April

Debate

Restaurant

29 April 2011

19:00

Before love and lust comes attraction. Stolen glances, butterflies, tingly spine, your eyes meet across a crowded room, and sparks fly.

But what is it that makes us attractive? And can we do anything to boost our levels – or even play them down?

Join us to talk about the many strategies humans, and animals too, have to bring us all closer to the object of our desires.

We’ll be discussing physical features, colour, display, scent and more as we explore the art of attraction, the science of seduction and what sometimes comes in between… the connivance of cheating!

Looking to bag yourself a prince… or princess? Then don’t miss this.

We’ll be joined by guest speakers. Watch this space for details.

Tickets
£10
£9 members

Booking Required
Book tickets online

 

Genetics of Behavior Lausanne June 20-21 2011

CIG_SYMPOSIUM_2011The Center for Integrative Genomics (CIG) has the privilege to announce the

CIG Symposium 2011

“Genetics of Behavior”

June 20-21, 2011

Center for Integrative Genomics (CIG)

UNIL, Lausanne, Switzerland

This Symposium will be the 5th in the series of annual meetings at our institute, a new, dynamic research center of the University of Lausanne, enjoying the stunning backdrop of Lake Geneva and the Alps. By bringing together international leaders in the chosen field, these Symposia have rapidly become a major meeting in Switzerland and attract substantial numbers of researchers from across Europe and beyond. Further information about the CIG and previous Symposia are provided in the enclosed documents and on the website: www.unil.ch/cigsymposium.

For “Genetics of Behavior”, we have designed a program that will discuss the many ways in which organisms behavior is influenced by their genes and how the interplay between the genetic and environmental contributions lead to individual variations in behavior. By bringing together the best researchers studying important, but diverse, aspects of this topic, we aim for a highly interactive Symposium that provokes new reflections on this fascinating research field.

With the annual CIG Symposiaa, the Center for Integrative Genomics (CIG) aims are:

• to bring together the best european and non-european scientists on a particular field of research of the CIG
• to promote interactions between junior and senior scientists
• to help the dialogue between scientists using different approaches on a similar topic

The conference will feature oustanding speakers. In addition, a poster session will be organized and some speakers will be selected to give short talks on the basis of the abstracts submitted. Inscription fees are kept to a minimum. We encourage you to join this event and to submit an abstract of your work.
We are looking forward to meeting you at the CIG symposium 2011.

The organizing committee

Prof. Mehdi Tafti
Prof. Laurent Keller
Prof. Carmen Sandi

Center for Integrative Genomics (CIG)
Université de Lausanne (UNIL)
Génopode quartier Sorge
1015 Lausanne

 

Primitive agriculture in a social amoeba

Debra A. Brock, Tracy E. Douglas, David C. Queller & Joan E. Strassmann

Agriculture has been a large part of the ecological success of humans[1]. A handful of animals, notably the fungus-growing ants, termites and ambrosia beetles[2–4], have advanced agriculture that involves dispersal and seeding of food propagules, cultivation of the crop and sustainable harvesting[5]. More primitive examples, which could be called husbandry because they involve fewer adaptations, include marine snails farming intertidal fungi[6] and damselfish farming algae[7]. Recent work has shown that microorganisms are surprisingly like animals in having sophisticated behaviours such as cooperation, communication[8,9] and recognition[10,11], as well as many kinds of symbiosis[12–15]. Here we show that the social amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum has a primitive farming symbiosis that includes dispersal and prudent harvesting of the crop. About one-third of wild-collected clones engage in husbandry of bacteria. Instead of consuming all bacteria in their patch, they stop feeding early and incorporate bacteria into their fruiting bodies. They then carry bacteria during spore dispersal and can seed a new food crop, which is a major advantage if edible bacteria are lacking at the new site. However, if they arrive at sites already containing appropriate bacteria, the costs of early feeding cessation are not compensated for, which may account for the dichotomous nature of this farming symbiosis. The striking convergent evolution between bacterial husbandry in social amoebas and fungus farming in social insects makes sense because multigenerational benefits of farming go to already established kin groups.

SOURCE: Nature (2011), 469, 393–396

doi:10.1038/nature09668

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v469/n7330/full/nature09668.html

Amygdala and social network size

Amygdala at the centre of your social network

JANELLE WEAVER

A larger emotion-processing brain centre is linked to a bigger circle of friends.

The size of your amygdala indicates the extent of your social network.

How many friends do you have? A rough answer can be predicted by the size of a small, almond-shaped brain structure that is present in a wide range of vertebrates, scientists report today in Nature Neuroscience.

The researchers studied the amygdala, which is involved in inter-personal functions such as interpreting emotional facial expressions, reacting to visual threats and trusting strangers. Inter-species comparisons in non-human primates have previously shown that amygdala volume is associated with troop size, suggesting that the brain region supports skills necessary for a complex social life

On the basis of these past findings, psychologist Lisa Feldman Barrett of Northeastern University in Boston, Massachusetts, wondered whether a larger amygdala size allows some humans to build a richer social world.

Barrett’s team measured the amygdala volume in 58 healthy adults using brain images gathered during magnetic resonance imaging sessions. To construct social networks, the researchers asked the volunteers how many people they kept in regular contact with, and how many groups those individuals belonged to.

They found that participants who had bigger and more complex social networks had larger amygdala volumes. This effect did not depend on the age of the volunteers or their own perceived social support or life satisfaction, suggesting that happiness is not the underlying causal factor that links the size of this brain structure in an individual to their number of friends

“We’d all predict this relationship should be found, but [the authors] did it in a very smart way by ruling out other variables,” says cognitive neuroscientist Kevin Ochsner of Columbia University in New York City. “That’s why I think this paper is going to end up being a citation classic, because it demonstrates the relationship in a way that gives you confidence that it’s real,” he adds.

Brain teaser

But it’s still a mystery how the amygdala contributes to social networks. Perhaps the structure’s response to faces, emotions or emotional memories influences whether someone decides to develop and maintain relationships, says Brad Dickerson, a cognitive neuroscientist at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, who helped lead the study.

It’s likely that social behaviour relies on a much broader set of brain regions, Dickerson says. In the future, the team will use functional neuroimaging approaches to determine the relationship between patterns of brain activity in an individual and the size of social groups to which they belong.

Another important question is whether a big amygdala is a cause or a consequence of having a large social network. “In the end, it’s probably some of both,” Ochsner says. “But you first had to establish that the relationship really exists before you could address those critical questions.”

Source: Nature News