Literature DB >> 24996259

Group augmentation and the evolution of cooperation.

Sjouke A Kingma1, Peter Santema2, Michael Taborsky3, Jan Komdeur4.   

Abstract

The group augmentation (GA) hypothesis states that if helpers in cooperatively breeding animals raise the reproductive success of the group, the benefits of living in a resulting larger group--improved survival or future reproductive success--favour the evolution of seemingly altruistic helping behaviour. The applicability of the GA hypothesis remains debatable, however, partly owing to the lack of a clear conceptual framework and a shortage of appropriate empirical studies. We conceptualise here the GA hypothesis and illustrate that benefits of GA can accrue via different evolutionary mechanisms that relate closely to well-supported general concepts of group living and cooperation. These benefits reflect several plausible explanations for the evolutionary maintenance of helping behaviour in cooperatively breeding animals.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  alloparental care; cooperation; group living; helping; mutualism; reciprocity; sociality

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24996259     DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2014.05.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol        ISSN: 0169-5347            Impact factor:   17.712


  22 in total

1.  Social benefits of non-kin food sharing by female vampire bats.

Authors:  Gerald G Carter; Gerald S Wilkinson
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2015-11-22       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  First- and second-order sociality determine survival and reproduction in cooperative cichlids.

Authors:  Arne Jungwirth; Michael Taborsky
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2015-11-22       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 3.  Correlated pay-offs are key to cooperation.

Authors:  Michael Taborsky; Joachim G Frommen; Christina Riehl
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2016-02-05       Impact factor: 6.237

4.  Cooperation and the common good.

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

5.  Sex differences in helping effort reveal the effect of future reproduction on cooperative behaviour in birds.

Authors:  Philip A Downing; Ashleigh S Griffin; Charlie K Cornwallis
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2018-08-22       Impact factor: 5.349

6.  Predation risk drives social complexity in cooperative breeders.

Authors:  Frank Groenewoud; Joachim Gerhard Frommen; Dario Josi; Hirokazu Tanaka; Arne Jungwirth; Michael Taborsky
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2016-03-28       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Age- and sex-dependent variation in relatedness corresponds to reproductive skew, territory inheritance, and workload in cooperatively breeding cichlids.

Authors:  Dario Josi; Dik Heg; Tomohiro Takeyama; Danielle Bonfils; Dmitry A Konovalov; Joachim G Frommen; Masanori Kohda; Michael Taborsky
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2021-10-19       Impact factor: 4.171

8.  Group size increases inequality in cooperative behaviour.

Authors:  Shay Rotics; Tim Clutton-Brock
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2021-02-17       Impact factor: 5.349

9.  Group augmentation, collective action, and territorial boundary patrols by male chimpanzees.

Authors:  Kevin E Langergraber; David P Watts; Linda Vigilant; John C Mitani
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-06-19       Impact factor: 12.779

10.  Differences in cooperative behavior among Damaraland mole rats are consequences of an age-related polyethism.

Authors:  Markus Zöttl; Philippe Vullioud; Rute Mendonça; Miquel Torrents Ticó; David Gaynor; Adam Mitchell; Tim Clutton-Brock
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2016-09-01       Impact factor: 11.205

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.