Explore the vast range of titles available.

There is more than one way to develop neuronal complexity, and animals frequently use different molecular toolkits to achieve similar functional outcomes. Genomics and metabolomics data from basal metazoans suggest that neural signalling evolved independently in ctenophores and cnidarians/bilaterians. This polygenesis hypothesis explains the lack of pan-neuronal and pan-synaptic genes across metazoans, including remarkable examples of lineage-specific evolution of neurogenic and signalling molecules as well as synaptic components. Sponges and placozoans are two lineages without neural and muscular systems. The possibility of secondary loss of neurons and synapses in the Porifera/Placozoa clades is a highly unlikely and less parsimonious scenario. We conclude that acetylcholine, serotonin, histamine, dopamine, octopamine and gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) were recruited as transmitters in the neural systems in cnidarian and bilaterian lineages. By contrast, ctenophores independently evolved numerous secretory peptides, indicating extensive adaptations within the clade and suggesting that early neural systems might be peptidergic. Comparative analysis of glutamate signalling also shows numerous lineage-specific innovations, implying the extensive use of this ubiquitous metabolite and intercellular messenger over the course of convergent and parallel evolution of mechanisms of intercellular communication. Therefore: (i) we view a neuron as a functional character but not a genetic character, and (ii) any given neural system cannot be considered as a single character because it is composed of different cell lineages with distinct genealogies, origins and evolutionary histories. Thus, when reconstructing the evolution of nervous systems, we ought to start with the identification of particular cell lineages by establishing distant neural homologies or examples of convergent evolution. In a corollary of the hypothesis of the independent origins of neurons, our analyses suggest that both electrical and chemical synapses evolved more than once.

The evolutionary origin of the nervous system has been a matter of long-standing debate. This is due to the different perspectives taken. Earlier studies addressed nervous system origins at the cellular level. They focused on the selective advantage of the first neuron in its local context, and considered vertical sensory-motor reflex arcs the first nervous system. Later studies emphasized the value of the nervous system at the tissue level. Rather than acting locally, early neurons were seen as part of an elementary nerve net that enabled the horizontal coordination of tissue movements. Opinions have also differed on the nature of effector cells. While most authors have favoured contractile systems, others see the key output of the incipient nervous system in the coordination of motile cilia, or the secretion of antimicrobial peptides. I will discuss these divergent views and explore how they can be validated by molecular and single-cell data. From this survey, possible consensus emerges: (i) the first manifestation of the nervous system likely was a nerve net, whereas specialized local circuits evolved later; (ii) different nerve nets may have evolved for the coordination of contractile or cilia-driven movements; (iii) all evolving nerve nets facilitated new forms of animal behaviour with increasing body size. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Basal cognition: multicellularity, neurons and the cognitive lens’.

On the basis of evolutionary and behavioral biology, neuroscience and anthropology, this book investigates to which extent it is possible to reconstruct the evolution of nervous systems and brains as well as of mental-cognitive abilities, in short \"intelligence\", and to which extent we can correlate the one with the other. One central question is, whether or not abilities exist that make humans truly unique, or whether the evolution of the human mind was a gradual process. Exactly which neural features make animals and humans intelligent and creative? Is it absolute or relative brain size or the size of \"intelligence centers\" inside the brains, the number of nerve cells inside the brain in total or in such \"intelligence centers\" decisive for the degree of intelligence, of mind and eventually consciousness? Which are the driving forces behind these processes? Here, many different answers exist. For some experts the driving force for brains and minds are the conditions for biological survival: the more complex these conditions, the more effective need to be sense organs, nervous systems and brains, and the stronger is the tendency to an increase in learning abilities, behavioral flexibility and innovation power of animals. This is the ecological intelligence hypothesis. Other authors believe that the true driving force is the challenge from social life of an animal: the more complex the social conditions, the more sophisticated are abilities such as social learning, imitation, empathy, knowledge transfer, consciousness and the development of a theory of mind and meta-cognition. This, again, needs progressive changes inside the brains. This is the social intelligence hypothesis. Again other authors distinguish physical intelligence as a third form of cognitive functions mostly related to tool use, tool fabrication and understanding of the principles of how things work. Finally, some experts believe that the decisive factor in the evolution of brains and minds consisted in an increase in the speed and efficacy of information processing in cognitive brain centers. This is the general intelligence or information processing hypothesis. It is discussed, which of these hypotheses is the most convincing one. At its end, the book deals with the eminent question of whether we can arrive at a naturalistic concept of mind and consciousness. Is it possible to explain mind and intelligence within the framework of the natural science, or do mind and intelligence as found in humans, transcend nature? -- Back cover.

The origin of nervous systems has traditionally been discussed within two conceptual frameworks. Input–output models stress the sensory-motor aspects of nervous systems, while internal coordination models emphasize the role of nervous systems in coordinating multicellular activity, especially muscle-based motility. Here we consider both frameworks and apply them to describe aspects of each of three main groups of phenomena that nervous systems control: behaviour, physiology and development. We argue that both frameworks and all three aspects of nervous system function need to be considered for a comprehensive discussion of nervous system origins. This broad mapping of the option space enables an overview of the many influences and constraints that may have played a role in the evolution of the first nervous systems.

In nervous systems, there are two main modes of transmission for the propagation of activity between cells. Synaptic transmission relies on close contact at chemical or electrical synapses while volume transmission is mediated by diffusible chemical signals and does not require direct contact. It is possible to wire complex neuronal networks by both chemical and synaptic transmission. Both types of networks are ubiquitous in nervous systems, leading to the question which of the two appeared first in evolution. This paper explores a scenario where chemically organized cellular networks appeared before synapses in evolution, a possibility supported by the presence of complex peptidergic signalling in all animals except sponges. Small peptides are ideally suited to link up cells into chemical networks. They have unlimited diversity, high diffusivity and high copy numbers derived from repetitive precursors. But chemical signalling is diffusion limited and becomes inefficient in larger bodies. To overcome this, peptidergic cells may have developed projections and formed synaptically connected networks tiling body surfaces and displaying synchronized activity with pulsatile peptide release. The advent of circulatory systems and neurohemal organs further reduced the constraint imposed on chemical signalling by diffusion. This could have contributed to the explosive radiation of peptidergic signalling systems in stem bilaterians. Neurosecretory centres in extant nervous systems are still predominantly chemically wired and coexist with the synaptic brain. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Basal cognition: multicellularity, neurons and the cognitive lens’.

Molecular biology has provided a rich dataset to develop hypotheses of nervous system evolution. The startling patterning similarities between distantly related animals during the development of their central nervous system (CNS) have resulted in the hypothesis that a CNS with a single centralized medullary cord and a partitioned brain is homologous across bilaterians. However, the ability to precisely reconstruct ancestral neural architectures from molecular genetic information requires that these gene networks specifically map with particular neural anatomies. A growing body of literature representing the development of a wider range of metazoan neural architectures demonstrates that patterning gene network complexity is maintained in animals with more modest levels of neural complexity. Furthermore, a robust phylogenetic framework that provides the basis for testing the congruence of these homology hypotheses has been lacking since the advent of the field of ‘evo-devo’. Recent progress in molecular phylogenetics is refining the necessary framework to test previous homology statements that span large evolutionary distances. In this review, we describe recent advances in animal phylogeny and exemplify for two neural characters—the partitioned brain of arthropods and the ventral centralized nerve cords of annelids—a test for congruence using this framework. The sequential sister taxa at the base of Ecdysozoa and Spiralia comprise small, interstitial groups. This topology is not consistent with the hypothesis of homology of tripartitioned brain of arthropods and vertebrates as well as the ventral arthropod and rope-like ladder nervous system of annelids. There can be exquisite conservation of gene regulatory networks between distantly related groups with contrasting levels of nervous system centralization and complexity. Consequently, the utility of molecular characters to reconstruct ancestral neural organization in deep time is limited.

Prerequisite for tracing nervous system evolution is understanding of the body plan, feeding behaviour and locomotion of the first animals in which neurons evolved. Here, a comprehensive scenario is presented for the diversification of cell types in early metazoans, which enhanced feeding efficiency and led to the emergence of larger animals that were able to move. Starting from cup-shaped, gastraea-like animals with outer and inner choanoflagellate-like cells, two major innovations are discussed that set the stage for nervous system evolution. First, the invention of a mucociliary sole entailed a switch from intra- to extracellular digestion and increased the concentration of nutrients flowing into the gastric cavity. In these animals, an initial nerve net may have evolved via division of labour from mechanosensory-contractile cells in the lateral body wall, enabling coordinated movement of the growing body that involved both mucociliary creeping and changes of body shape. Second, the inner surface of the animals folded into metameric series of gastric pouches, which optimized nutrient resorption and allowed larger body sizes. The concomitant acquisition of bilateral symmetry may have allowed more directed locomotion and, with more demanding coordinative tasks, triggered the evolution of specialized nervous subsystems. Animals of this organizational state would have resembled Ediacarian fossils such as Dickinsonia and may have been close to the cnidarian–bilaterian ancestor. In the bilaterian lineage, the mucociliary sole was used mostly for creeping, or frequently lost. One possible remnant is the enigmatic Reissner's fibre in the ventral neural tube of cephalochordates and vertebrates.