A comprehensive analysis of variability in the sulci that define the inferior frontal gyrus in the chimpanzee (<scp><i>Pan troglodytes</i></scp>) brain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objectives In the human brain, the inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) is comprised of three morphological regions, which include the pars opercularis, pars triangularis, and pars orbitalis. These brains regions are implicated in a number of cognitive and linguistic functions, and the pars opercularis and pars triangularis of the language dominant hemisphere are collectively referred to as Broca's area. Evolution of the morphology of the IFG has been a topic of study in comparative neuroscience. Materials and Methods Using magnetic resonance images (MRI) from 294 chimpanzees with known pedigrees, we quantified the folding patterns, surface area, and depth of three sulci and their subdivisions that define the IFG. Results Chimpanzees show considerable individual variation in IFG sulci. A higher proportion of males and chimpanzees with better orofacial motor control had a bifurcation in the dorsal limb of the fronto‐orbital sulcus. For surface area and depth, chimpanzees with better orofacial motor control had greater leftward asymmetries in surface area and increased gyrification for the fronto‐orbital sulcus and greater rightward biases for the inferior precentral sulcus. Quantitative genetic analyses revealed that the average surface area and depth for three of the five sulci subdivisions were significantly heritable. By contrast, we found no evidence for heritability in asymmetries for any of the sulci. Discussion These findings provide context to understanding evolutionary selection for increasing motor, cognitive and linguistic functions among primates, and contribute an essential comparative framework for interpreting IFG evolution in the human lineage.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".