Literature DB >> 17133858

Sex ratios when helpers stay at the nest.

Geoff Wild1.   

Abstract

This study investigates the evolution of the sex ratio (parental investment in sons) when breeding adults are supported by help provided by nonbreeding individuals of one sex. The study also assumes that the helping sex remains on its natal site to compete for the opportunity to breed, whereas the nonhelping sex disperses. Two kin-selection models are presented, both of which incorporate the age structure found in many natural populations where such helping occurs. The first model assumes that helpers increase the survival of their parents. The second model assumes that helpers are indiscriminant: a helper chooses to increase the survival of a random pair of adults breeding on its natal patch. In both models, sex ratios are not always biased toward the sex that provides the most help. When helpers do not discriminate (second model), the direction of sex-ratio bias is determined solely by the size of the benefit of helping behavior. When this benefit is small, sex-ratio evolution is primarily influenced by local resource competition and sex ratios are biased toward the nonhelping (dispersive) sex. If the benefit of help is large enough, the effect of local resource competition is reduced and sex-ratio bias favors the helpful sex. When helpers help only their parents, the same qualitative relationship exists between the direction of sex-ratio bias and the benefit of helping. In this case, however, the direction of sex-ratio bias is also influenced by the size of the social group, mortality, and which individual (mother or father) controls the sex ratio. This study also investigates a sex-ratio conflict that exists between mates. Helping behavior of nonbreeders can act to alleviate the disparities between the optimal sex ratio from the perspective of a mother and that from the perspective of a father. This consequence of helping has not been previously recognized.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17133858

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Evolution        ISSN: 0014-3820            Impact factor:   3.694


  5 in total

1.  Promiscuity and the evolution of cooperative breeding.

Authors:  Helen C Leggett; Claire El Mouden; Geoff Wild; Stuart West
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2011-10-12       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 2.  Models of social evolution: can we do better to predict 'who helps whom to achieve what'?

Authors:  António M M Rodrigues; Hanna Kokko
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2016-02-05       Impact factor: 6.237

3.  Resource transfers and evolution: helpful offspring and sex allocation.

Authors:  J William Stubblefield; Steven Hecht Orzack
Journal:  Theor Popul Biol       Date:  2012-11-16       Impact factor: 1.570

4.  Inclusive-fitness logic of cooperative breeding with benefits of natal philopatry.

Authors:  Geoff Wild; Cody Koykka
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2014-03-31       Impact factor: 6.237

5.  Costs of Rearing the Wrong Sex: Cross-Fostering to Manipulate Offspring Sex in Tammar Wallabies.

Authors:  Lisa E Schwanz; Kylie A Robert
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-02-05       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.