When  I came up with the Mini Terrans, I wondered how small can a brain be and still have the functions of a human / sentient brain. After all the Mini Terran brain is not bigger than that of a mouse.


Thinking about Brain Size...Edit

A first most obvious manner of comparison would be the ratio of body weight to brain weight. Using Cuvier's fraction E/S (where E=brain weight and S= body weight), we find the following ratios:

Species E/S ratio Species E/S ratio
small birds 1/12 lion 1/550
human 1/40 elephant 1/560
mouse 1/40 horse 1/600
cat 1/100 shark 1/2496
dog 1/125 hippopotamus 1/2789
frog 1/172

These ratios are according to relative brain weights from adult individuals.

Notice that the human and mouse ratios are roughly identical and the horse and elephant ratios are also roughly identical. In addition, the ratio of E/S in small birds is much larger than for humans. Does this mean birds (whose brains are comparatively larger than that of humans) are more intelligent or less intelligent than humans??

However, a complexity in this method is that brain weight in vertebrates does not in general appear to increase linearly with body weight, so that heavy vertebrates have proportionally smaller brains than light vertebrates, and many small mammals have, in terms of these simple ratios, relatively larger brains than that of humans. . .

The figure above tells us about the brain/body relations of several familiar animals. Essentially, we see that brain size increases with body size in a specific exponential rate.

This may lead us to question-- if the increase in brain weight that accompanies increases in body weight does not necessarily increase intelligence, what then is the function of the 'extra' brain matter?

In order to remedy inconsistencies in the simple ratio method, let us try "allometry" . The following equation was developed in the late 19th century by Snell: E=CS^r, where E is the weight of the brain, S the body weight, C is a constant "cephalization factor", and r an epirically determined exponential constant. Kuhlenbeck suggests this value to be around 0.56 for mammals. Macphail asserts that this exponent would be approximately 0.66 for most mammals.

Once an acceptable value of r is determined, then we see that brain weight is determined by two other factors, S, the body weight and C, the cephalization factor. This equation, then, gives us a way of establishing the relative capacity of brains of different species with different body weights. When we enter values for the weights of brains and bodies of two species, then a value of C can be determined for each species. We can then find the encephalization quotient (EQ) which is the ratio of C over the average mammalian value. For example, if a certain species has an EQ of 2.0, this means that the species has a value of C twice as high as that expected in a mammal of comparable weight with average encephalization. Or if a species has an EQ of 0.5, then this species has a level of encephalization half that of an [[|"average"]] mammal". Let us look at the following table of encephalization quotients (using Macphail's 0.66 as the constant r value):

Species EQ Species EQ
Man 7.44 Cat 1.00
Dolphin 5.31 Horse 0.86
Chimpanzee 2.49 Sheep 0.81
Rhesus Monkey 2.09 Mouse 0.50
Elephant 1.87 Rat 0.40
Whale 1.76 Rabbit 0.40
Dog 1.17 (Macphail, 243)

Does this information agree with your intuitions regarding relative intelligence of mammals? We see that man is at the top, with dolphins a close second, and on down. Dolphins have a high reputation for intelligence, but do we also assume that dogs are more intelligent than cats? How do we determine if a mouse is more intelligent than a rat? This data seems to indicate that higher primates are generally more "encephalized" than lower primates relative to mammals as a whole and that smaller mammals and rodents are below average.

None of this data necessarily has a definitive link with intelligence. Only behavioral data could show the significance of levels of encephalization of a species. Let's look at other methods for comparing species' brains before we make any final conclusions as to the relevance of this information.

Cerebral Cortex FoldingEdit

 One thing we noticed is that each of the brains have slightly different degrees of folding in the cerebral cortex . Is that significant? Yes!

If we look at evolutionary patterns, we will see that the brain areas that show the most changes are the cerebral hemispheres and cortex (the outer-most layer of the cerebral hemispheres). The more recently evolved animals tend to have more cerebral cortex than less "evolved" animals. In some animals, especially "higher" mammals, the surface of the cerebral cortex is folded, creating grooves ("sulci") and bumps ("gyri") on the surface of the brain (which is what we observed earlier). This folding increases the surface area of the cortex.


Any guesses as to why this is important?? Well, the first step is to guess what the cerebral cortex does . . . Think about it . . . . . . As animals evolved from a simpler organisms to complex beings such as dolphins, monkeys, and humans, the cerebral cortex changed and evolved as well. What kinds of behavioral characteristics distinguish humans from, say, a mouse?

Conclusion : It is not impossible....

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.