Suzana Herculano-Houzel

Equal numbers of neuronal and nonneuronal cells make the human brain an isometrically scaled‐up primate brain

The human brain is often considered to be the most cognitively capable among mammalian brains and to be much larger than expected for a mammal of our body size. Although the number of neurons is generally assumed to be a determinant of computational power, and despite the widespread quotes that the human brain contains 100 billion neurons and ten times more glial cells, the absolute number of neurons and glial cells in the human brain remains unknown. Here we determine these numbers by using the isotropic fractionator and compare them with the expected values for a human‐sized primate. We find that the adult male human brain contains on average 86.1 ± 8.1 billion NeuN‐positive cells (“neurons”) and 84.6 ± 9.8 billion NeuN‐negative (“nonneuronal”) cells. With only 19% of all neurons located in the cerebral cortex, greater cortical size (representing 82% of total brain mass) in humans compared with other primates does not reflect an increased relative number of cortical neurons. The ratios between glial cells and neurons in the human brain structures are similar to those found in other primates, and their numbers of cells match those expected for a primate of human proportions. These findings challenge the common view that humans stand out from other primates in their brain composition and indicate that, with regard to numbers of neuronal and nonneuronal cells, the human brain is an isometrically scaled‐up primate brain. J. Comp. Neurol. 513:532–541, 2009.

The human brain in numbers: a linearly scaled-up primate brain.

The human brain has often been viewed as outstanding among mammalian brains: the most cognitively able, the largest-than-expected from body size, endowed with an overdeveloped cerebral cortex that represents over 80% of brain mass, and purportedly containing 100 billion neurons and 10× more glial cells. Such uniqueness was seemingly necessary to justify the superior cognitive abilities of humans over larger-brained mammals such as elephants and whales. However, our recent studies using a novel method to determine the cellular composition of the brain of humans and other primates as well as of rodents and insectivores show that, since different cellular scaling rules apply to the brains within these orders, brain size can no longer be considered a proxy for the number of neurons in the brain. These studies also showed that the human brain is not exceptional in its cellular composition, as it was found to contain as many neuronal and non-neuronal cells as would be expected of a primate brain of its size. Additionally, the so-called overdeveloped human cerebral cortex holds only 19% of all brain neurons, a fraction that is similar to that found in other mammals. In what regards absolute numbers of neurons, however, the human brain does have two advantages compared to other mammalian brains: compared to rodents, and probably to whales and elephants as well, it is built according to the very economical, space-saving scaling rules that apply to other primates; and, among economically built primate brains, it is the largest, hence containing the most neurons. These findings argue in favor of a view of cognitive abilities that is centered on absolute numbers of neurons, rather than on body size or encephalization, and call for a re-examination of several concepts related to the exceptionality of the human brain.

Isotropic fractionator: A simple, rapid method for the quantification of total cell and neuron numbers in the brain

Stereological techniques that estimate cell numbers must be restricted to well defined structures of isotropic architecture and therefore do not apply to the whole brain or to large neural regions. We developed a novel, fast, and inexpensive method to quantify total numbers of neuronal and non-neuronal cells in the brain or any dissectable regions thereof. It consists of transforming highly anisotropic brain structures into homogeneous, isotropic suspensions of cell nuclei, which can be counted and identified immunocytochemically as neuronal or non-neuronal. Estimates of total cell, neuronal, and non-neuronal numbers can be obtained in 24 h and vary by <10% among animals. Because the estimates obtained are independent of brain volume, they can be used in comparative studies of brain-volume variation among species and in studies of phylogenesis, development, adult neurogenesis, and pathology. Applying this method to the adult rat brain, we show, for example, that it contains ∼330 million cells, of which 200 million are neurons, and almost 70% of these are located in the cerebellum alone. Moreover, contrary to what is commonly assumed in the literature, we show that glial cells are not the majority in the rat brain.

Cellular scaling rules for primate brains

Primates are usually found to have richer behavioral repertoires and better cognitive abilities than rodents of similar brain size. This finding raises the possibility that primate brains differ from rodent brains in their cellular composition. Here we examine the cellular scaling rules for primate brains and show that brain size increases approximately isometrically as a function of cell numbers, such that an 11× larger brain is built with 10× more neurons and ≈12× more nonneuronal cells of relatively constant average size. This isometric function is in contrast to rodent brains, which increase faster in size than in numbers of neurons. As a consequence of the linear cellular scaling rules, primate brains have a larger number of neurons than rodent brains of similar size, presumably endowing them with greater computational power and cognitive abilities.

Cellular scaling rules for rodent brains

How do cell number and size determine brain size? Here, we show that, in the order Rodentia, increased size of the cerebral cortex, cerebellum, and remaining areas across six species is achieved through greater numbers of neurons of larger size, and much greater numbers of nonneuronal cells of roughly invariant size, such that the ratio between total neuronal and nonneuronal mass remains constant across species. Although relative cerebellar size remains stable among rodents, the number of cerebellar neurons increases with brain size more rapidly than in the cortex, such that the cerebellar fraction of total brain neurons increases with brain size. In contrast, although the relative cortical size increases with total brain size, the cortical fraction of total brain neurons remains constant. We propose that the faster increase in average neuronal size in the cerebral cortex than in the cerebellum as these structures gain neurons and the rapidly increasing glial numbers that generate glial mass to match total neuronal mass at a fixed glia/neuron total mass ratio are fundamental cellular constraints that lead to the relative expansion of cerebral cortical volume across species.

Changing numbers of neuronal and non-neuronal cells underlie postnatal brain growth in the rat

The rat brain increases >6× in mass from birth to adulthood, presumably through the addition of glial cells and increasing neuronal size, without the addition of neurons. To test this hypothesis, here we investigate quantitatively the postnatal changes in the total number of neuronal and non-neuronal cells in the developing rat brain, and examine how these changes correlate with brain growth. Total numbers of cells were determined with the isotropic fractionator in the brains of 53 Wistar rats, from birth to young adulthood. We find that at birth, >90% of the cells in the rat brain are neurons. Following a dormant period of ≈3 days after birth, the net number of neurons in the cerebral cortex, hippocampus, and remaining tissue (excluding cerebellum and olfactory bulb) doubles during the first week, then is reduced by 70% during the second postnatal week, concurrently with net gliogenesis. A second round of net addition of 6 million neurons is observed in the cerebral cortex over the following 2 weeks. During the first postnatal week, brain growth relates mainly to increased numbers of neurons of larger average size. In the second and third weeks, it correlates with increased numbers of non-neuronal cells that are smaller in size than the preexisting neurons. Postnatal rat brain development is thus characterized by dramatic changes in the cellular composition of the brain, whose growth is governed by different combinations of cell addition and loss, and changes in average cell size during the first months after birth.

The remarkable, yet not extraordinary, human brain as a scaled-up primate brain and its associated cost

Neuroscientists have become used to a number of “facts” about the human brain: It has 100 billion neurons and 10- to 50-fold more glial cells; it is the largest-than-expected for its body among primates and mammals in general, and therefore the most cognitively able; it consumes an outstanding 20% of the total body energy budget despite representing only 2% of body mass because of an increased metabolic need of its neurons; and it is endowed with an overdeveloped cerebral cortex, the largest compared with brain size. These facts led to the widespread notion that the human brain is literally extraordinary: an outlier among mammalian brains, defying evolutionary rules that apply to other species, with a uniqueness seemingly necessary to justify the superior cognitive abilities of humans over mammals with even larger brains. These facts, with deep implications for neurophysiology and evolutionary biology, are not grounded on solid evidence or sound assumptions, however. Our recent development of a method that allows rapid and reliable quantification of the numbers of cells that compose the whole brain has provided a means to verify these facts. Here, I review this recent evidence and argue that, with 86 billion neurons and just as many nonneuronal cells, the human brain is a scaled-up primate brain in its cellular composition and metabolic cost, with a relatively enlarged cerebral cortex that does not have a relatively larger number of brain neurons yet is remarkable in its cognitive abilities and metabolism simply because of its extremely large number of neurons.

The glia/neuron ratio: how it varies uniformly across brain structures and species and what that means for brain physiology and evolution.

It is a widespread notion that the proportion of glial to neuronal cells in the brain increases with brain size, to the point that glial cells represent “about 90% of all cells in the human brain.” This notion, however, is wrong on both counts: neither does the glia/neuron ratio increase uniformly with brain size, nor do glial cells represent the majority of cells in the human brain. This review examines the origin of interest in the glia/neuron ratio; the original evidence that led to the notion that it increases with brain size; the extent to which this concept can be applied to white matter and whole brains and the recent supporting evidence that the glia/neuron ratio does not increase with brain size, but rather, and in surprisingly uniform fashion, with decreasing neuronal density due to increasing average neuronal cell size, across brain structures and species. Variations in the glia/neuron ratio are proposed to be related not to the supposed larger metabolic cost of larger neurons (given that this cost is not found to vary with neuronal density), but simply to the large variation in neuronal sizes across brain structures and species in the face of less overall variation in glial cell sizes, with interesting implications for brain physiology. The emerging evidence that the glia/neuron ratio varies uniformly across the different brain structures of mammalian species that diverged as early as 90 million years ago in evolution highlights how fundamental for brain function must be the interaction between glial cells and neurons. GLIA 2014;62:1377–1391

Scaling of Brain Metabolism with a Fixed Energy Budget per Neuron: Implications for Neuronal Activity, Plasticity and Evolution

It is usually considered that larger brains have larger neurons, which consume more energy individually, and are therefore accompanied by a larger number of glial cells per neuron. These notions, however, have never been tested. Based on glucose and oxygen metabolic rates in awake animals and their recently determined numbers of neurons, here I show that, contrary to the expected, the estimated glucose use per neuron is remarkably constant, varying only by 40% across the six species of rodents and primates (including humans). The estimated average glucose use per neuron does not correlate with neuronal density in any structure. This suggests that the energy budget of the whole brain per neuron is fixed across species and brain sizes, such that total glucose use by the brain as a whole, by the cerebral cortex and also by the cerebellum alone are linear functions of the number of neurons in the structures across the species (although the average glucose consumption per neuron is at least 10× higher in the cerebral cortex than in the cerebellum). These results indicate that the apparently remarkable use in humans of 20% of the whole body energy budget by a brain that represents only 2% of body mass is explained simply by its large number of neurons. Because synaptic activity is considered the major determinant of metabolic cost, a conserved energy budget per neuron has several profound implications for synaptic homeostasis and the regulation of firing rates, synaptic plasticity, brain imaging, pathologies, and for brain scaling in evolution.

Coordinated Scaling of Cortical and Cerebellar Numbers of Neurons

While larger brains possess concertedly larger cerebral cortices and cerebella, the relative size of the cerebral cortex increases with brain size, but relative cerebellar size does not. In the absence of data on numbers of neurons in these structures, this discrepancy has been used to dispute the hypothesis that the cerebral cortex and cerebellum function and have evolved in concert and to support a trend towards neocorticalization in evolution. However, the rationale for interpreting changes in absolute and relative size of the cerebral cortex and cerebellum relies on the assumption that they reflect absolute and relative numbers of neurons in these structures across all species – an assumption that our recent studies have shown to be flawed. Here I show for the first time that the numbers of neurons in the cerebral cortex and cerebellum are directly correlated across 19 mammalian species of four different orders, including humans, and increase concertedly in a similar fashion both within and across the orders Eulipotyphla (Insectivora), Rodentia, Scandentia and Primata, such that on average a ratio of 3.6 neurons in the cerebellum to every neuron in the cerebral cortex is maintained across species. This coordinated scaling of cortical and cerebellar numbers of neurons provides direct evidence in favor of concerted function, scaling and evolution of these brain structures, and suggests that the common notion that equates cognitive advancement with neocortical expansion should be revisited to consider in its stead the coordinated scaling of neocortex and cerebellum as a functional ensemble.