Brain size scales with body size across large groups of animals, but exactly why this should be the case has not been resolved. It is generally assumed that body size is a general proxy for some more important or specific underlying variable, such as metabolic resources available, surface area of the body, or total muscle mass (which is more extensively innervated than is, e.g., adipose tissue). The present study tests whether brain size in mammals scales more closely with muscle mass (and other components of lean body mass) than with total fat. Felsenstein’s independent comparisons method was used to control for phylogenetic effects on body composition in organ weight data taken from a previously published comparative sample of 39 species in 8 different orders of mammals, all collected and processed by the same researchers. The analysis shows that the size of the central nervous system (CNS) is more closely associated with components of fat-free weight than it is to fat weight. These results suggest a possible explanation for why metabolic resources and brain size both share the same general relationship with body size across mammals. They also suggest that some measure of lean body mass is a more appropriate scaling parameter for comparing brain size across species than is overall body weight.

1.
Abbott S, Trinkaus E, Burr DB (1996) Dynamic bone remodeling in later Pleistocene fossil hominids. Am J Phys Anthropol 99:585–601.
2.
Aiello LC, Bates N (1998) The expensive tissue hypothesis revisited. Am J Phys Anthropol Suppl 26:62.
3.
Aiello LC, Wheeler P (1995) The expensive tissue hypothesis: The brain and the digestive system in human and primate evolution. Curr Anthropol 36:199–221.
4.
Ankney CD (1992) Sex differences in relative brain size: The mismeasure of woman, too? Intelligence 16:329–336.
5.
Armstrong E (1983) Relative brain size and metabolism in mammals. Science 220:1302–1304.
6.
Beals KL, Smith CL, Dodd SM (1984) Brain size, cranial morphology, climate, and time machines. Curr Anthropol 25:301–330.
7.
Blalock HM (1970) Social Statistics, Revised Second Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
8.
Campbell NA (1993) Biology, Third Edition. Redwood City, CA: Benjamin/Cummings.
9.
Count EW (1947) Brain and body weight in man: Their antecedents in growth and evolution. Ann N Y Acad Sci 46:993–1122.
10.
Deacon TW (1990) Fallacies of progression in theories of brain-size evolution. Int J Primatol 11:193–236.
11.
Dubois E (1921) On the significance of the large cranial capacity of Homo Neanderthalensis. Proc Kon Akad Wetenschappen 23:1271–1288.
12.
Falk D, Froese N, Sade DS, Dudek BC (1999) Sex differences in brain/body relationships of Rhesus monkeys and humans. J Hum Evol 36:233–238.
13.
Felsenstein J (1985) Phylogenies and the comparative method. Am Nat 125:1–15.
14.
Gould SJ (1981) The Mismeasure of Man. New York: Norton.
15.
Halliday D, Hesp R, Stalley SF, Warwick P, Altman DG, Garrow JS (1983) Resting metabolic rate, weight, surface area and body composition in obese women. Int J Obesity 3:1–6.
16.
Hartwig-Scherer S (1993) Body weight prediction in early fossil hominids: towards a taxon-‘independent’ approach. Am J Phys Anthropol 92:17–36.
17.
Harvey PH, Krebs JR (1990) Comparing brains. Science 249:140–146.
18.
Ho K-c, Roessmann U, Straumfjord JV, Monroe G (1980) Analysis of brain weight. II. Adult brain weight in relation to body height, weight, and surface area. Arch Pathol Lab Med 104:640–645.
19.
Holloway RL (1981) Volumetric and asymmetry determinations on recent hominid endocasts: Spy I and II, Djebel Ihroud I, and the Sale Homo erectus specimens, with some notes on Neanderthal brain size. Am J Phys Anthropol 55:385–393.
20.
Holloway RL (1985) The poor brain of Homo sapiens neanderthalensis: See what you please... In: Ancestors: The Hard Evidence (Nelson E, ed), pp 319–324. New York: Alan R. Liss.
21.
Jensen MD, Braun JS, Vetter RJ, Marsh HM (1988) Measurement of body potassium with a whole-body counter: relationship between lean body mass and resting energy expenditure. Mayo Clin Proc 1988:864–868.
22.
Jerison HJ (1973) Evolution of the Brain and Intelligence. New York: Academic Press.
23.
Jerison HJ (1985) Animal intelligence as encephalization. Phil Trans R Soc Lond, Ser B 308:21–35.
24.
Kappelman J (1996) The evolution of body mass and relative brain size in fossil hominids. J Hum Evol 30:243–276.
25.
Lehninger AL (1982) Principles of Biochemistry. New York: Worth Publishers.
26.
MacLarnon A (1996) The scaling of gross dimensions of the spinal cord in primates and other species. J Hum Evol 30:71–87.
27.
Manouvrier L (1903) Conclusions générales sur l’anthropologie des sexes et applications sociales. Revue de l’École d’Anthropologie 13:405–423.
28.
Martin RD (1981) Relative brain size and basal metabolic rate in terrestrial vertebrates. Nature 293:57–60.
29.
Martin RD (1995) Phylogenetic aspects of primate reproduction: The context of advanced maternal care. In: Motherhood in Human and Nonhuman Primates: Biosocial Determinants (Pryce CR, Martin RD, Skuse D, eds). Basel: Karger.
30.
Martin RD, MacLarnon AM (1985) Gestation period, neonatal size, and maternal investment in placental mammals. Nature 313:220–223.
31.
McNab BK, Eisenberg JF (1989) Brain size and its relation to the rate of metabolism in mammals. Am Nat 133:157–167.
32.
Owen OR (1988) Resting metabolic requirements of men and women. Mayo Clin Proc 63:503–510.
33.
Pagel MD, Harvey PH (1988) How mammals produce large-brained offspring. Evolution 42:948–957.
34.
Pagel MD, Harvey PH (1989) Taxonomic differences in the scaling of brain on body weight among mammals. Science 244:1589–1593.
35.
Pitts GC, Bullard TR (1968) Some interspecific aspects of body composition in mammals. In: Body Composition in Animals and Man, pp 45–70. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Science, Pub No 1598.
36.
Purvis A, Rambaut A (1995) Comparative analysis by independent contrasts (CAIC): an Apple Macintosh application for analyzing comparative data. Comp Appl Biosci 11:247–251.
37.
Ravussin E, Burnand B, Schultz I, Jequier E (1982) Twenty-four-hour energy expenditure and resting metabolic rate in obese, moderately obese, and control subjects. Am J Clin Nut 35:566–573.
38.
Ruff CB, Walker A, Trinkaus E (1994) Postcranial robusticity in Homo. III: Ontogeny. Am J Phys Anthropol 93:35–54.
39.
Ruff CB, Trinkaus E, Walker A, Larsen CS (1993) Postcranial robusticity in Homo. I: Temporal trends and mechanical interpretation. Am J Phys Anthropol 91:21–53.
40.
Salomon F, Cuneo RC, Hesp R, Morris JF, Poston L, Sönksen PH (1992) Basal metabolic rate in adults with growth hormone deficiency and in patients with acromegaly: Relationship with lean body mass, plasma insulin level and leucocyte sodium pump activity. Clin Sci 83:325–330.
41.
Schoenemann PT (2001) Brain scaling, behavioral ability, and human evolution. Behav Brain Sci 24:293–295.
42.
Smith RJ (1994) Degrees of freedom in interspecific allometry: An adjustment for the effects of phylogenetic constraint. Am J Phys Anthropol 93:95–107.
43.
Stephan H, Frahm H, Baron G (1981) New and revised data on volumes of brain structures in Insectivores and Primates. Folia Primatol 35:1–29.
44.
Trinkaus E (1997) Appendicular robusticity and the paleobiology of modern human emergence. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 94:13367–13373.
45.
Trinkaus E, Howells WW (1979) The Neanderthals. Sci Am 241:118–133.
46.
Wilmore JH, Behnke AR (1969) An anthropometric estimation of body density and lean body weight in young men. J Appl Physiol 27:25–31.
47.
Wilmore JH, Behnke AR (1970) An anthropometric estimation of body density and lean body weight in young women. Am J Clin Nut 23:267–274.
48.
Wood B, Collard M (1999) The human genus. Science 284:65–71.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.