首页> 外文期刊>Frontiers in Human Neuroscience >Language, Paleoneurology, and the Fronto-Parietal System
【24h】

Language, Paleoneurology, and the Fronto-Parietal System

机译:语言,古生物学和额顶系统

获取原文
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Paleoneurology and the frontal lobes Broca's area has represented a major issue in evolutionary anthropology since the discovery of its association with language impairment. It was generally presumed that the whole frontal lobes had undergone important changes in our phylogenetic lineage, also because of their involvement in personality and executive functions. Accordingly, plenty of authors have declared so far that the fossil record supplies patent evidence of frontal lobe evolution, despite the fact that the fossil record, to date, has supplied none. In terms of frontal sulcal pattern, all human species display a similar scheme, at least from two million years (Tobias, 1987 ; Holloway, 1995 ). In terms of volume, there are still disagreements on whether or not humans and living apes share a similar allometric proportion of frontal cortex, and whether any minor difference may be statistically or functionally significant, (e.g., Semendeferi et al., 1997 ; Rilling, 2006 ; Barton and Venditti, 2013 ; Smaers, 2013 ; Gabi et al., 2016 ). If there are such critical uncertainties when dealing with living species, it can be easily imagined that these same issue can be particularly difficult to investigate in fossils, which can only provide information on the external gross anatomy of the brain and according to extremely reduced sample sizes. Many statements concerning the evolution of specific frontal cortical traits in fossil hominids are based on individual and fragmented cranial remains. Such punctual and partial information may be useful to delineate further hypotheses, but we don't have to forget that it can only provide incomplete and speculative perspectives (Bruner, 2013 ). These limitations may generate blurred frontiers between opinions (i.e., personal and subjective assessments) and hypotheses (perspectives that can be evaluated through experimental or quantitative approaches).An actual increase of the frontal or prefrontal cortex volume cannot be tested in fossils because of the many operational limits (like for example the localization of reliable boundaries). Apart from variation in absolute size, Neandertals and modern humans display relatively wider frontal lobes, when compared with other human species (Bruner and Holloway, 2010 ). In these two species, the breadth of the anterior fossa at the Broca's cap is larger, relative to the general brain width. Therefore, the term “wider” refers to endocranial proportions, and not necessarily to an absolute enlargement or expansion of the lobes. It is worth noting that modern humans and Neandertals are also the only hominids in which the frontal lobes lie entirely above the orbits (Bruner et al., 2014a ). The eyeball and the prefrontal cortex are separated by a tiny bony layer (this was the unfortunate principle of lobotomy), and these two districts exert reciprocal spatial constraints during morphogenesis. Orbits are anterior to the braincase in chimps, inferior to the frontal lobes in Neandertals and modern humans, and in an intermediate position in archaic humans (Bruner et al., 2014a ; Beaudet and Bruner, 2017 -Figure 1 ). Therefore, we cannot exclude that the lateral frontal widening displayed in modern humans and Neandertals could be a secondary structural consequence (lateral redistribution of the neural mass) of this vertical spatial limitation, with no functional meaning in terms of neural organization. Furthermore, in modern humans, the facial block (the bones forming the face) is much reduced when compared with earlier hominids or apes, and the temporal muscle is reduced accordingly (Cachel, 1978 ). The Broca's cap is adjacent to the temporal fossa, and the reduction of the muscle further decreases any possible lateral spatial constraints, if any. This does not mean that frontal widening in modern humans and Neandertals was not associated with true brain changes, but only that the influence of cranial architecture cannot be ruled out, and such frontal widening cannot be hence indisputably interpreted as evidence of change in brain organization. Figure 1 (Above) Projected parasagittal MRI slices (in red) showing the spatial relationship between the frontal cortex and upper face in modern humans, and projected midsagittal MRI slices (in blue) showing the parietal, occipital, and cerebellar areas. (Middle) Digital reconstruction of a chimp, of an African Middle Pleistocene fossil human, and of a modern human skull, showing the endocranial cavity (blue) and the orbital space (pink) (after Beaudet and Bruner, 2017 ). (Below) CT scout views of chimpanzees, Homo heidelbergensis and Homo sapiens , showing the position of the orbital boundaries; on the left, the thin-plate spline deformation pattern that separates chimps from modern humans, with fossil humans displaying an intermediate morphology (after Pereira-Pedro et al., 2017 ). The only specimen which goes against this structural hypothesis is the skull of Maba, found in China and dated to the tran
机译:自古人类学与语言障碍的联系被发现以来,古生物学和额叶布罗卡地区就代表了进化人类学的一个主要问题。一般认为,整个额叶在我们的系统发育谱系中发生了重要变化,这也是因为它们参与了人格和执行功能。因此,到目前为止,许多作者已经宣布,化石记录提供了额叶进化的专利证据,尽管迄今为止化石记录没有提供任何证据。就额沟模式而言,所有人类至少在两百万年以来都表现出相似的计划(Tobias,1987; Holloway,1995)。就体积而言,关于人类和活猿是否具有相似的额叶皮层异体比例,以及在统计学上或功能上是否存在任何细微差异,仍存在分歧(例如,Semendeferi等,1997; Rilling, 2006; Barton和Venditti,2013; Smaers,2013; Gabi等人,2016)。如果在处理生物物种时存在如此关键的不确定性,那么可以很容易地想象到,在化石中研究这些相同的问题可能特别困难,因为化石只能提供有关大脑外部整体解剖结构的信息,并根据极小的样本量提供信息。关于人类化石中特定额叶皮层性状演变的许多说法都是基于个体和零碎的颅骨残骸。这样的准时和部分信息可能有助于描述进一步的假设,但我们不必忘记它只能提供不完整和投机的观点(Bruner,2013)。这些限制可能会在观点(即个人和主观评估)与假设(可以通过实验或定量方法进行评估的观点)之间产生模糊的边界。由于化石很多,因此无法测试额叶或前额叶皮层体积的实际增加操作限制(例如可靠边界的定位)。除了绝对大小的变化外,尼安德特人和现代人类的额叶都比其他人类物种宽(Bruner和Holloway,2010年)。在这两个物种中,相对于一般的脑部宽度,布罗卡帽前窝的宽度较大。因此,术语“更宽”是指颅内比例,而不一定是指叶的绝对扩大或扩张。值得注意的是,现代人类和尼安德特人也是仅有的额叶完全位于轨道上方的原始人(Bruner等人,2014a)。眼球和前额叶皮层之间被微小的骨质层隔开(这是肺叶切除术的不幸原理),并且这两个区域在形态发生过程中施加了相互的空间约束。黑猩猩的轨道位于脑壳的前面,在尼安德特人和现代人类中次于额叶,在古人类中处于中间位置(Bruner等人,2014a; Beaudet和Bruner,2017年-图1)。因此,我们不能排除在现代人和尼安德特人中显示的额叶外侧变宽可能是这种垂直空间限制的次要结构性后果(神经质的侧向再分布),在神经组织方面没有任何功能意义。此外,在现代人类中,与早期的原始人或猿相比,面部块(形成面部的骨骼)大大减少了,颞肌也相应减少了(Cachel,1978)。布罗卡的帽子靠近颞窝,肌肉的减少进一步减少了任何可能的横向空间限制(如果有)。这并不意味着现代人和尼安德特人的额叶拓宽并不与真正的大脑变化相关,而只是不能排除颅结构的影响,因此,这种额叶拓宽不能毫无疑问地解释为大脑组织变化的证据。图1(上)显示了现代人类的矢状旁MRI切片(红色),显示了额叶皮层和上脸之间的空间关系;显示了矢状中MRI切片(蓝色)显示了顶叶,枕骨和小脑区域。 (中)黑猩猩,非洲中更新世化石人类和现代人类头骨的数字化重建,显示出颅内腔(蓝色)和眼眶空间(粉红色)(Beaudet and Bruner,2017年)。 (下)黑猩猩,海德堡人和智人的CT侦查图,显示了轨道边界的位置;左侧是薄板样条线变形模式,将黑猩猩与现代人类区分开来,化石人类呈现出中间形态(在Pereira-Pedro等人之后,2017年)。唯一与这种结构假设背道而驰的标本是Maba的头骨,它在中国发现并可以追溯到

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号