Literature DB >> 18691258

Kin selection, local competition, and reproductive skew.

Rufus A Johnstone1.   

Abstract

In a spatially structured population, limited dispersal gives rise to local relatedness, potentially favoring indiscriminate helping behavior. However, it also leads to local competition, which reduces the benefits of helping local kin. This tension has become the focus for a growing body of theoretical work. Existing models, however, have focused chiefly on the net impact of limited dispersal on cooperative or competitive effort in a homogeneous population. Here, I extend existing models of kin selection in a group-structured population to allow for asymmetries in expected fecundity and reproductive success among group members. I explore the consequent impact of limited dispersal on the evolution of helping and harming behavior, and on the degree of reproductive inequality or skew. I show that when individuals in a group differ in their expected fecundity, limited dispersal gives rise to kin selection for harming behavior on the part of more fecund individuals, and for helping behavior on the part of less fecund individuals. As a result, philopatry tends to exaggerate differences in reproductive success, and so promotes greater reproductive skew.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18691258     DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2008.00480.x

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


  10 in total

1.  Probability of successful larval dispersal declines fivefold over 1 km in a coral reef fish.

Authors:  Peter M Buston; Geoffrey P Jones; Serge Planes; Simon R Thorrold
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2011-12-07       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 2.  How life history and demography promote or inhibit the evolution of helping behaviours.

Authors:  Laurent Lehmann; François Rousset
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2010-09-12       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 3.  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

4.  Viscous medium promotes cooperation in the pathogenic bacterium Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Authors:  Rolf Kümmerli; Ashleigh S Griffin; Stuart A West; Angus Buckling; Freya Harrison
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2009-07-15       Impact factor: 5.349

5.  Evolution of cooperation and skew under imperfect information.

Authors:  Erol Akçay; Adam Meirowitz; Kristopher W Ramsay; Simon A Levin
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-08-20       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Is cooperation viable in mobile organisms? Simple Walk Away rule favors the evolution of cooperation in groups.

Authors:  C Athena Aktipis
Journal:  Evol Hum Behav       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 4.178

7.  Local competition increases people's willingness to harm others.

Authors:  Jessica L Barker; Pat Barclay
Journal:  Evol Hum Behav       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 4.178

8.  Simultaneous failure of two sex-allocation invariants: implications for sex-ratio variation within and between populations.

Authors:  António M M Rodrigues; Andy Gardner
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2015-07-07       Impact factor: 5.349

9.  The constant philopater hypothesis: a new life history invariant for dispersal evolution.

Authors:  A M M Rodrigues; A Gardner
Journal:  J Evol Biol       Date:  2015-10-31       Impact factor: 2.411

10.  Factors influencing within-group conflict over defence against conspecific outsiders seeking breeding positions.

Authors:  Susanne Schindler; Andrew N Radford
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2018-12-19       Impact factor: 5.349

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.