超越合作眼假说:重新思考人类眼睛外观的进化。

IF 11 1区 生物学 Q1 BIOLOGY
Juan Olvido Perea-García, Aurora Teuben, Kai R Caspar
{"title":"超越合作眼假说:重新思考人类眼睛外观的进化。","authors":"Juan Olvido Perea-García, Aurora Teuben, Kai R Caspar","doi":"10.1111/brv.70033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The external appearance of the human eye has been prominently linked to the evolution of complex sociocognitive functions in our species. The cooperative eye hypothesis (CEH) proposes that human eyeballs, with their weakly expressed conjunctival and scleral pigmentation, are uniquely conspicuous and evolved under selective pressures to behave cooperatively, therefore signalling attentiveness to conspecifics. Non-human primates are instead assumed to display less-salient eye morphologies that help mask their gaze to facilitate competitive, rather than cooperative actions. Here, we argue that the CEH, although continuing to be influential, lacks robust empirical support. Over the past two decades, multidisciplinary research has undermined its original rationale and central premises: human eye pigmentation does not uniquely stand out among primates, it is not uniform at species level and the available evidence does not conclusively suggest that it facilitates gaze following to notable extents. Hence, the CEH currently provides a theoretical framework that risks confusing, rather than informing, inferences about the evolution of human external eye appearance and its selective drivers. In a call to move past it, we review alternative hypotheses with the potential to elucidate the emergence of the human ocular phenotype from the considerable spectrum of diversity found within the primate order.</p>","PeriodicalId":133,"journal":{"name":"Biological Reviews","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":11.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Look past the cooperative eye hypothesis: reconsidering the evolution of human eye appearance.\",\"authors\":\"Juan Olvido Perea-García, Aurora Teuben, Kai R Caspar\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/brv.70033\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The external appearance of the human eye has been prominently linked to the evolution of complex sociocognitive functions in our species. The cooperative eye hypothesis (CEH) proposes that human eyeballs, with their weakly expressed conjunctival and scleral pigmentation, are uniquely conspicuous and evolved under selective pressures to behave cooperatively, therefore signalling attentiveness to conspecifics. Non-human primates are instead assumed to display less-salient eye morphologies that help mask their gaze to facilitate competitive, rather than cooperative actions. Here, we argue that the CEH, although continuing to be influential, lacks robust empirical support. Over the past two decades, multidisciplinary research has undermined its original rationale and central premises: human eye pigmentation does not uniquely stand out among primates, it is not uniform at species level and the available evidence does not conclusively suggest that it facilitates gaze following to notable extents. Hence, the CEH currently provides a theoretical framework that risks confusing, rather than informing, inferences about the evolution of human external eye appearance and its selective drivers. In a call to move past it, we review alternative hypotheses with the potential to elucidate the emergence of the human ocular phenotype from the considerable spectrum of diversity found within the primate order.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":133,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biological Reviews\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":11.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biological Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.70033\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biological Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.70033","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人类眼睛的外观与人类复杂的社会认知功能的进化有着显著的联系。合作眼假说(CEH)提出,人类的眼球具有结膜和巩膜色素的弱表达,是唯一明显的,并且在选择压力下进化为具有合作行为,因此对同种物发出注意信号。而非人类灵长类动物则被认为表现出不太明显的眼睛形态,这有助于掩盖他们的目光,以促进竞争,而不是合作行为。在这里,我们认为CEH虽然继续具有影响力,但缺乏强有力的实证支持。在过去的二十年里,多学科的研究已经破坏了它最初的基本原理和中心前提:人类眼睛的色素沉着在灵长类动物中并不是唯一突出的,它在物种水平上不是统一的,现有的证据并不能决定性地表明它在很大程度上促进了目光跟随。因此,CEH目前提供的理论框架可能会混淆,而不是提供有关人类外部眼睛外观及其选择性驱动因素进化的推断。在呼吁过去它,我们回顾了有可能阐明人类眼部表型的出现从相当大的范围内发现的灵长类动物的多样性的假说。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Look past the cooperative eye hypothesis: reconsidering the evolution of human eye appearance.

The external appearance of the human eye has been prominently linked to the evolution of complex sociocognitive functions in our species. The cooperative eye hypothesis (CEH) proposes that human eyeballs, with their weakly expressed conjunctival and scleral pigmentation, are uniquely conspicuous and evolved under selective pressures to behave cooperatively, therefore signalling attentiveness to conspecifics. Non-human primates are instead assumed to display less-salient eye morphologies that help mask their gaze to facilitate competitive, rather than cooperative actions. Here, we argue that the CEH, although continuing to be influential, lacks robust empirical support. Over the past two decades, multidisciplinary research has undermined its original rationale and central premises: human eye pigmentation does not uniquely stand out among primates, it is not uniform at species level and the available evidence does not conclusively suggest that it facilitates gaze following to notable extents. Hence, the CEH currently provides a theoretical framework that risks confusing, rather than informing, inferences about the evolution of human external eye appearance and its selective drivers. In a call to move past it, we review alternative hypotheses with the potential to elucidate the emergence of the human ocular phenotype from the considerable spectrum of diversity found within the primate order.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Biological Reviews
Biological Reviews 生物-生物学
CiteScore
21.30
自引率
2.00%
发文量
99
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Biological Reviews is a scientific journal that covers a wide range of topics in the biological sciences. It publishes several review articles per issue, which are aimed at both non-specialist biologists and researchers in the field. The articles are scholarly and include extensive bibliographies. Authors are instructed to be aware of the diverse readership and write their articles accordingly. The reviews in Biological Reviews serve as comprehensive introductions to specific fields, presenting the current state of the art and highlighting gaps in knowledge. Each article can be up to 20,000 words long and includes an abstract, a thorough introduction, and a statement of conclusions. The journal focuses on publishing synthetic reviews, which are based on existing literature and address important biological questions. These reviews are interesting to a broad readership and are timely, often related to fast-moving fields or new discoveries. A key aspect of a synthetic review is that it goes beyond simply compiling information and instead analyzes the collected data to create a new theoretical or conceptual framework that can significantly impact the field. Biological Reviews is abstracted and indexed in various databases, including Abstracts on Hygiene & Communicable Diseases, Academic Search, AgBiotech News & Information, AgBiotechNet, AGRICOLA Database, GeoRef, Global Health, SCOPUS, Weed Abstracts, and Reaction Citation Index, among others.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信