Literature DB >> 32996582

Are endocasts reliable proxies for brains? A 3D quantitative comparison of the extant human brain and endocast.

Jean Dumoncel1, Gérard Subsol2, Stanley Durrleman3, Anne Bertrand3,4, Edwin de Jager5, Anna C Oettlé5,6, Zarina Lockhat7, Farhana E Suleman7, Amélie Beaudet5,8,9.   

Abstract

Endocasts (i.e., replicas of the inner surface of the bony braincase) constitute a critical proxy for qualifying and quantifying variations in brain shape and organization in extinct taxa. In the absence of brain tissues preserved in the fossil record, endocasts provide the only direct evidence of brain evolution. However, debates on whether or not information inferred from the study of endocasts reflects brain shape and organization have polarized discussions in paleoneurology since the earliest descriptions of cerebral imprints in fossil hominin crania. By means of imaging techniques (i.e., MRIs and CT scans) and 3D modelling methods (i.e., surface-based comparisons), we collected consistent morphological (i.e., shape) and structural (i.e., sulci) information on the variation patterns between the brain and the endocast based on a sample of extant human individuals (N = 5) from the 3D clinical image database of the Steve Biko Academic Hospital in Pretoria (South Africa) and the Hôpitaux Universitaires Pitié Salpêtrière in Paris (France). Surfaces of the brain and endocast of the same individual were segmented from the 3D MRIs and CT images, respectively. Sulcal imprints were automatically detected. We performed a deformation-based shape analysis to compare both the shape and the sulcal pattern of the brain and the endocast. We demonstrated that there is close correspondence in terms of morphology and organization between the brain and the corresponding endocast with the exception of the superior region. By comparatively quantifying the shape and organization of the brain and endocast, this work represents an important reference for paleoneurological studies.
© 2020 The Authors. Journal of Anatomy published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Anatomical Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  automatic segmentation; brain shape; paleoneurology; sulci; surface-based comparison

Year:  2020        PMID: 32996582      PMCID: PMC7812123          DOI: 10.1111/joa.13318

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anat        ISSN: 0021-8782            Impact factor:   2.610


  20 in total

Review 1.  Endocasts: possibilities and limitations for the interpretation of human brain evolution.

Authors:  Simon Neubauer
Journal:  Brain Behav Evol       Date:  2014-09-20       Impact factor: 1.808

2.  Endomaker, a new algorithm for fully automatic extraction of cranial endocasts and the calculation of their volumes.

Authors:  Antonio Profico; Costantino Buzi; Marina Melchionna; Alessio Veneziano; Pasquale Raia
Journal:  Am J Phys Anthropol       Date:  2020-03-18       Impact factor: 2.868

3.  Automatic labeling of cortical sulci using patch- or CNN-based segmentation techniques combined with bottom-up geometric constraints.

Authors:  Léonie Borne; Denis Rivière; Martial Mancip; Jean-François Mangin
Journal:  Med Image Anal       Date:  2020-02-28       Impact factor: 8.545

4.  Distortion inherent to magnetic resonance imaging can lead to geometric miss in radiosurgery planning.

Authors:  Tyler M Seibert; Nathan S White; Gwe-Ya Kim; Vitali Moiseenko; Carrie R McDonald; Nikdokht Farid; Hauke Bartsch; Joshua Kuperman; Roshan Karunamuni; Deborah Marshall; Dominic Holland; Parag Sanghvi; Daniel R Simpson; Arno J Mundt; Anders M Dale; Jona A Hattangadi-Gluth
Journal:  Pract Radiat Oncol       Date:  2016-06-01

5.  Volume of the crocodilian brain and endocast during ontogeny.

Authors:  Daniel Jirak; Jiri Janacek
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-06-14       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Automatic extraction of endocranial surfaces from CT images of crania.

Authors:  Takashi Michikawa; Hiromasa Suzuki; Masaki Moriguchi; Naomichi Ogihara; Osamu Kondo; Yasushi Kobayashi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-04-13       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Are endocasts good proxies for brain size and shape in archosaurs throughout ontogeny?

Authors:  Akinobu Watanabe; Paul M Gignac; Amy M Balanoff; Todd L Green; Nathan J Kley; Mark A Norell
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  2018-12-03       Impact factor: 2.610

8.  Evidence for independent brain and neurocranial reorganization during hominin evolution.

Authors:  José Luis Alatorre Warren; Marcia S Ponce de León; William D Hopkins; Christoph P E Zollikofer
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2019-10-14       Impact factor: 11.205

9.  Interpreting sulci on hominin endocasts: old hypotheses and new findings.

Authors:  Dean Falk
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2014-05-01       Impact factor: 3.169

10.  Are endocasts reliable proxies for brains? A 3D quantitative comparison of the extant human brain and endocast.

Authors:  Jean Dumoncel; Gérard Subsol; Stanley Durrleman; Anne Bertrand; Edwin de Jager; Anna C Oettlé; Zarina Lockhat; Farhana E Suleman; Amélie Beaudet
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  2020-09-30       Impact factor: 2.610

View more
  4 in total

1.  Endocranial asymmetry in New World monkeys: a comparative phylogenetic analysis of morphometric data.

Authors:  Paula N Gonzalez; Mariana Vallejo-Azar; Leandro Aristide; Ricardo Lopes; Sergio F Dos Reis; S Ivan Perez
Journal:  Brain Struct Funct       Date:  2021-08-29       Impact factor: 3.270

2.  Endocranial ontogeny and evolution in early Homo sapiens: The evidence from Herto, Ethiopia.

Authors:  Christoph P E Zollikofer; Thibault Bienvenu; Yonas Beyene; Gen Suwa; Berhane Asfaw; Tim D White; Marcia S Ponce de León
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2022-08-01       Impact factor: 12.779

3.  Sulci 3D mapping from human cranial endocasts: A powerful tool to study hominin brain evolution.

Authors:  Edwin John de Jager; Laurent Risser; Muriel Mescam; Caroline Fonta; Amélie Beaudet
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2022-06-04       Impact factor: 5.399

4.  Are endocasts reliable proxies for brains? A 3D quantitative comparison of the extant human brain and endocast.

Authors:  Jean Dumoncel; Gérard Subsol; Stanley Durrleman; Anne Bertrand; Edwin de Jager; Anna C Oettlé; Zarina Lockhat; Farhana E Suleman; Amélie Beaudet
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  2020-09-30       Impact factor: 2.610

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.