Neoteny

[Baldur]

I've come across some interesting stuff about Neoteny, and would like to know more.

 

Neoteny is more or less a process by which evolution is able to start over with a species, prolonging/expanding on infantile qualities. Among other things, this includes plasticity of the mind, and neoteny may be closely related to intelligence.

 

Humans are generally considered neotenous apes, and many other animals, including dogs, show signs of neoteny.

 

And, um, does anyone know how to pronounce it?

 

Here's an interesting article on the subject:

 

http://www.davidbrin.com/neotenyarticle1.html

 

 

 

Baldur

[Supaiku]

I'd imagine like so: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=neoteny.

[Baldur]

Thanks. For those who don't want to follow the link, it's pronounced nee-AHT-in-ee.

 

 

 

Baldur

[Auburngirl05]

If you read Raymond Coppinger's book on the evolution of dogs (It's called Dogs with a lengthy subtitle, can't recall it exactly), it discusses neoteny as part of the domestication process, it's pretty interesting. Not only does it produce "cute" pets, but I've also read that it preserves some of the plasticity of young minds and helps to make domesticated (and thus "neotenized") pets more "trainable".

 

It's definitely an interesting topic, thanks for bringing it up.

[Mokele]

I'd be more specific, that neoteny in mammals probably improves trainability and other such things. Many, many salamenders exhibit neoteny (including one I have as a pet, the Greater Siren), but I doubt there'd be any noticable increase in intelligence, especially since they aren't the brightest animals to begin with.

 

Then again, nobody has serious investigated their intelligence, to my knowledge.

 

Mokele

[Auburngirl05]

I should have specified that I was talking only about mammals, sorry. I would say that even though animals like reptiles and amphibians are kept as pets, they aren't exactly domesticated, the difference in a wild salamander and a captive one probably isn't as dramatic as that between a wolf and a chihuahua.

 

But you do make a really good point, I don't think that pet birds look at all like the result of neoteny, but they can be trained to do some pretty amazing things, so you're right that the neoteny=trainability rule definitely isn't universal.

 

I doubt there'd be any noticable increase in intelligence' date=' especially since they aren't the brightest animals to begin with.

 

Then again, nobody has serious investigated their intelligence, to my knowledge.

 

Mokele[/quote']

Then again, there comes the debate about the degree to which trainability is related to intelligence, I have no doubt that my cat is a hell of a lot smarter than my airhead of a golden retriever, which is probably why she can't be trained to do anything.

[Mokele]

I would say that even though animals like reptiles and amphibians are kept as pets, they aren't exactly domesticated,

 

Not even close, most are pretty much wild. Though, interestingly, animals bred in captivity seem to have a *lot* calmer dispositions towards humans than others, even ones hatched from wild-collected eggs. Nobody knows why, afaik.

 

the difference in a wild salamander and a captive one probably isn't as dramatic as that between a wolf and a chihuahua.

 

I still maintain that Chihuahuas are not dogs, but rather bug-eyed rats with Parkinson's disease.

 

Then again, there comes the debate about the degree to which trainability is related to intelligence, I have no doubt that my cat is a hell of a lot smarter than my airhead of a golden retriever, which is probably why she can't be trained to do anything.

 

Exactly. My experiences have taught me my lizard is rather smart, but hard to train because I won't risk associating food rewards with my fingers (he's a rather larger, carnivorous lizard, a tegu to be precise).

 

One of these days, I'll actually do proper tests on the learning abilities of reptiles and amphibians.

 

Mokele

[Auburngirl05]

I still maintain that Chihuahuas are not dogs' date=' but rather bug-eyed rats with Parkinson's disease.

Mokele[/quote']

 

I most definitely agree with you on that one. I own German Shepherds, and in my opinion toy breeds aren't real dogs, they're real dog food .

[Baldur]

Well, since I started this thread last February, I was pleased to see that Wikipedia has developed a nice article about Neoteny.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoteny

 

Would still like to know more, especially about neotenous traits in humans, but it's a start.

 

 

 

Baldur

[Ophiolite]

However, from Penin X, Berge C, Baylac M. Ontogenetic study of the skull in modern humans and the common chimpanzees: neotenic hypothesis reconsidered with a tridimensional Procrustes analysis. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2002 May;118(1):50-62. we have this observation:

 

Thus, the reduced prognathism, the flexed cranial base (forward position of the foramen magnum which is brought closer to the palate), the reduced anterior portion of the face, the reduced glabella, and the prominent nose mainly correspond to functional innovations which have nothing to do with a neotenic process in human evolution. The statistical analysis used here gives us the possibility to point out that some traits, which have been classically described as paedomorphic because they superficially resemble juvenile traits, are in reality independent of growth.

 

In short, let us be wary of fashion in science.

 

Link: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/abstract/93013173/ABSTRACT?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0

[bombus]

Well' date=' since I started this thread last February, I was pleased to see that Wikipedia has developed a nice article about Neoteny.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoteny

 

Would still like to know more, especially about neotenous traits in humans, but it's a start.

 

 

 

Baldur[/quote']

 

Well, there are many possible traits:

The fact that we are hairless may be one, also our subcutaneous fat, big brains, long noses, small jaws, a skull that articulates at the centre rather than towards the back (compare a baby ape to an adult), crying, tears, our curiosity and playfulness even as adults, possibly our foot design...er.. can't think of any more...

 

Our neoteny may be due IMHO to a semi aquatic ancestry, but thats a different thread - see below!

[bombus]

However' date=' from Penin X, Berge C, Baylac M. [u']Ontogenetic study of the skull in modern humans and the common chimpanzees: neotenic hypothesis reconsidered with a tridimensional Procrustes analysis.[/u] Am J Phys Anthropol. 2002 May;118(1):50-62. we have this observation:

 

Thus, the reduced prognathism, the flexed cranial base (forward position of the foramen magnum which is brought closer to the palate), the reduced anterior portion of the face, the reduced glabella, and the prominent nose mainly correspond to functional innovations which have nothing to do with a neotenic process in human evolution. The statistical analysis used here gives us the possibility to point out that some traits, which have been classically described as paedomorphic because they superficially resemble juvenile traits, are in reality independent of growth.

 

In short, let us be wary of fashion in science.

 

Link: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/abstract/93013173/ABSTRACT?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0

 

Let us also be wary of single scientific papers which possibly hint rather than prove! Although some of the traits mentioned above may well be the result of other processes rather than neoteny. The human spine/skull articulation is unlikely to have arisen via any other process though IMO.