Literature DB >> 19912449

Demography and the tragedy of the commons.

S A Frank1.   

Abstract

Individual success in group-structured populations has two components. First, an individual gains by outcompeting its neighbours for local resources. Second, an individual's share of group success must be weighted by the total productivity of the group. The essence of sociality arises from the tension between selfish gains against neighbours and the associated loss that selfishness imposes by degrading the efficiency of the group. Without some force to modulate selfishness, the natural tendencies of self interest typically degrade group performance to the detriment of all. This is the tragedy of the commons. Kin selection provides the most widely discussed way in which the tragedy is overcome in biology. Kin selection arises from behavioural associations within groups caused either by genetical kinship or by other processes that correlate the behaviours of group members. Here, I emphasize demography as a second factor that may also modulate the tragedy of the commons and favour cooperative integration of groups. Each act of selfishness or cooperation in a group often influences group survival and fecundity over many subsequent generations. For example, a cooperative act early in the growth cycle of a colony may enhance the future size and survival of the colony. This time-dependent benefit can greatly increase the degree of cooperation favoured by natural selection, providing another way in which to overcome the tragedy of the commons and enhance the integration of group behaviour. I conclude that analyses of sociality must account for both the behavioural associations of kin selection theory and the demographic consequences of life history theory.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19912449      PMCID: PMC2824433          DOI: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2009.01893.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Evol Biol        ISSN: 1010-061X            Impact factor:   2.411


  30 in total

1.  The evolution of social behavior in microorganisms.

Authors:  B J. Crespi
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  2001-04-01       Impact factor: 17.712

2.  Perspective: repression of competition and the evolution of cooperation.

Authors:  Steven A Frank
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 3.694

3.  How does selection reconcile individual advantage with the good of the group?

Authors:  E G Leigh
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1977-10       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  The evolution of trans-generational altruism: kin selection meets niche construction.

Authors:  L Lehmann
Journal:  J Evol Biol       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 2.411

5.  Resolving the tragedy of the commons: the feedback between intraspecific conflict and population density.

Authors:  D J Rankin
Journal:  J Evol Biol       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 2.411

6.  Empty sites can promote altruistic behavior.

Authors:  Samuel Alizon; Peter Taylor
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2008-03-06       Impact factor: 3.694

7.  The evolution of cooperative breeding through group augmentation.

Authors:  H Kokko; R A Johnstone; T H Clutton-Brock
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2001-01-22       Impact factor: 5.349

8.  Host cell preference and variable transmission strategies in malaria parasites.

Authors:  Sarah E Reece; Alison B Duncan; Stuart A West; Andrew F Read
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2005-03-07       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 9.  The tragedy of the commons in evolutionary biology.

Authors:  Daniel J Rankin; Katja Bargum; Hanna Kokko
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  2007-11-05       Impact factor: 17.712

10.  Is bacterial persistence a social trait?

Authors:  Andy Gardner; Stuart A West; Ashleigh S Griffin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2007-08-15       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  14 in total

1.  Microbial secretor-cheater dynamics.

Authors:  Steven A Frank
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2010-08-27       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  Cheating, trade-offs and the evolution of aggressiveness in a natural pathogen population.

Authors:  Luke G Barrett; Thomas Bell; Greg Dwyer; Joy Bergelson
Journal:  Ecol Lett       Date:  2011-09-23       Impact factor: 9.492

Review 3.  Collective action problem in heterogeneous groups.

Authors:  Sergey Gavrilets
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2015-12-05       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 4.  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

5.  The components of kin competition.

Authors:  J David Van Dyken
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2010-08-19       Impact factor: 3.694

6.  Ecological scaffolding and the evolution of individuality.

Authors:  Andrew J Black; Pierrick Bourrat; Paul B Rainey
Journal:  Nat Ecol Evol       Date:  2020-02-10       Impact factor: 15.460

7.  Cheating does not explain selective differences at high and low relatedness in a social amoeba.

Authors:  Gerda Saxer; Debra A Brock; David C Queller; Joan E Strassmann
Journal:  BMC Evol Biol       Date:  2010-03-12       Impact factor: 3.260

8.  Origins of altruism diversity I: The diverse ecological roles of altruistic strategies and their evolutionary responses to local competition.

Authors:  J David Van Dyken; Michael J Wade
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2012-04-16       Impact factor: 3.694

9.  feedback between population and evolutionary dynamics determines the fate of social microbial populations.

Authors:  Alvaro Sanchez; Jeff Gore
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2013-04-30       Impact factor: 8.029

10.  Evolutionary principles and synthetic biology: avoiding a molecular tragedy of the commons with an engineered phage.

Authors:  Eric G Gladstone; Ian J Molineux; James J Bull
Journal:  J Biol Eng       Date:  2012-09-04       Impact factor: 4.355

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.