Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Behavior
Chapter 11
1
Types of social interactions among members of the
same species (Table 11.1)
The actor in any social interaction affects the recipient of the action as well as
himself. The costs and benefits of interactions are measured in units of
surviving offspring (fitness).
2
Kin selection and altruistic behavior
3
Hamiltons Rule
4
Inclusive fitness
5
The coefficient of relatedness, r
6
Proportion of alleles shared ibd by full sibs
P: A1A2 x A3A4
O: Sib 1
A1A3 A2A3 A1A4 A2A4
8
Altruistic behavior in Beldings ground squirrels
Breed in colonies
Male offspring disperse far from native burrow
Female offspring tend to remain and breed close by.
Therefore, females in proximity tend to be closely related
Squirrels give alarm calls when predators are spotted
(different calls for mammalian predators vs. birds of prey)
Is alarm calling altruistic and can it be understood as a
result of kin selection?
9
In ground squirrels most alarm calling is done by
females (Sherman 1977) (Fig. 11.2 b)
Mortality is 8% for
calling individual vs. 4%
for non-callers when
predator is a mammal
10
Female ground squirrels are more likely to give
alarm calls when close kin are nearby (Sherman
1977) (Fig. 11.3)
12
White-fronted bee-eater (Merops bullockoides)
13
In bee-eaters, helpers assist close relatives (Emlen
and Wrege 1988) (Fig.
a) Among non-breeders, those born in a clan are much more likely to be nest helpers than those
who enter a clan from outside and are unrelated to offspring being raised in that season
b) Nest helping is disproportionately directed toward close relatives
14
Nest
helpers
A group size of
increase 2 represents a
the pair without
helpers. The
number of average
young number of
young fledged
birds = 0.51 for pairs
fledged
Each
(Emlen additional
and Wrege helper at the
nest increases
1991) the number of
(Fig. 11.7) young fledged
by 0.47 on
average
15
Kin-selected discrimination in cannibalistic
spadefoot toad tadpoles (Pfennig 1999) (Fig. 11.8 a, b)
Tadpoles develop into typical morphs that eat mostly decaying plant matter or into
carnivores that eat other tadpoles.
Carnivores are more likely to eat non-sibs than sibs when given a choice between
one of each kind 16
Kin selection can explain the presence of discrimination
between sibs and non-sibs in cannibalistic tiger salamander
larvae (Pfennig et al. 1999) (Fig. 11.8c)
Benefit: B 2 Cost: C 0
If selection can favor helping kin, it should also favor avoiding sacrifices for non-kin
Coots that accept eggs from other birds lose 1 offspring of their own for each
parasitic offspring
Coots that reject parasitic eggs have the same number of offspring as unparasitized
birds (dashed line)
18
Eusociality: the ultimate in reproductive
altruism
Characteristics of eusociality
1. Overlap in generations between parents and
offspring
2. Cooperative brood care
3. Specialized castes of non-reproductive
individuals
Insects (termites, hymenoptera), snapping
shrimp, naked mole rats
19
Haplodiploidy and eusociality in hymenoptera
(bees, wasps, ants)
Males are haploid (develop from unfertilized eggs) and
females are diploid
Hamilton (1972) proposed that haplodiploidy predisposes
hymenoptera to eusociality because females are more
closely related to one another (r = 3/4) than they are to
their own offspring (r = 1/2)
Females may maximize inclusive fitness by being sterile
workers and helping to produce reproductive sisters (rather
than by being reproductives themselves)
20
Proportion of alleles shared ibd by sisters in a
haplodiploid species
P: A1A2 x A3
O:
Sister 1
A1A3 A2A3
21
Is haplodiploidy the explanation of eusociality
in hymenoptera?
Probably not
The preceding analysis assumed only 1 male fertilizes a queen
this is not true in honeybees, for example
In some species, colonies may be founded by more than 1 queen
Many eusocial non-hymenoptera are diploid (e.g., termites)
Many hymenoptera are not eusocial (eusociality may have three
independent origins associated with nest-building and the need to
supply larvae with food)
Haplodiploidy may facilitate the evolution of eusociality
but a more important factor may be the need for help in
rearing young
22
Families that
include eusocial
species are
indicated in
boldface type
Sociality and
nesting
behavior in
hymenoptera
(Hunt 1999)
(Fig. 11.13
23
Naked mole rats
25
Parent offspring conflict
26
Parent offspring conflict occurs because parents and offspring value the
costs of parental care differently (Trivers 1985) (Fig 11.18)
As offspring grow, the benefit/cost ratio for the parent declines. Benefit (B) is
measured in terms of increased survival of offspring receiving parental care; cost (C) is
measured in terms of lost future offspring due to continued parental care. From
parents point of view, it should stop giving parental care when B/C declines to 1.
But, the offspring devalues the cost to the parent by 1/2 because lost future full-sibs are
related to the offspring by r = 1/2. Therefore, the offspring wants parental care to
continue until the B/C ratio for the parent is 1/2 - fig. (a) [(or 1/4 if future offspring are
half-sibs - fig. (b)] 27
Harassment in white-fronted bee-eaters can also be
analyzed in the context of parent-offspring conflict
and kin selection
Fathers occasionally coerce sons into helping to raise their
siblings by harassing sons who are trying to raise their own
young
Sons are as closely related to their full sibs as they are to
their own offspring (r = 1/2 in both cases)
Furthermore the average number of offspring in nests
without helpers is 0.51, whereas every helper increases the
number of surviving nestlings by 0.47 on average
Therefore, the direct fitness lost by a son who is coerced
into helping his parents is balanced by the increase in
indirect fitness that results from helping his parents
(provided that the son would not have had helpers)
28
Bee-eaters recruit helpers who are younger and closely
related (Emlen and Wrege 1992) (Fig. 11.19 b)
29
Reciprocal altruism
Reciprocation is offered to explain altruism between unrelated
individuals
The necessary conditions for reciprocal altruism to evolve are:
The fitness cost to the actor must be the fitness benefit to the recipient
Non-reciprocators must be punished in some way (otherwise alleles that
caused cheating would displace alleles for altruism)
Conditions that favor the evolution of reciprocal altruism are:
Stable social groups (so that individuals are involved in repeated
interactions with one another)
Lots of opportunities for altruistic interactions during an individuals
lifetime
Good memory
Symmetry of interactions between potential altruists
30
Blood-sharing in vampire bats an example of
reciprocal altruism? (Wilkinson 1984) 1
Bats are more likely to share blood with relatives and with
associates. Both effects (relationship and association)
were statistically significant. (These data do not include
regurgitation by mother to child because that is parental
care.)
Blood sharing was not random in a group of captive
individuals. Bats were more likely to receive blood from
and individual that they had fed previously.
32
Association,
relatedness
and altruism
in vampire
bats
(Wilkinson
1984)
33