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}
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.
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.