evolution of coop breeding 2 Flashcards
cooperative breeding is explained through which model:
Emlen 1982
Ecological constraints hypothesis
- independent breeding is constrained
- grown offspring delay dispersal and “stay at home”
- grown offspring help to rear later broods
coop breeding: direct benefits:
1) current reproduction
2) increase future reproduction
- – acquisition of skills/mate/territory
- – group augmentation - better survival in group
coop breeding: indirect benefits:
increased fitness of relatives
- – better productivity
- – better survival of breeders (lighten load)
eusociality =
‘true sociality’ with non-reproductive castes
-wasps, termites, bees
does high relatedness play key role in transition of asocial to eusocial:
- monogamy hypothesis: strict lifetime monogamy = relation to offspring & siblings = 0.5. any benefit from raising sibling rather than offspring favours cooperation
- predictions: species passed through ‘monogamy window’ & multiple mating occurred later
- all eusocial did come through monogamy window
- –LIKELY TO BE TRUE, kinship important
non-social organisms –> eusocial organisms: the cooperative transition
facilitated by relatedness, determined by strict lifetime monogamy
—kinship important in evolution of eusocial insects
does the monogamy hypothesis apply to other taxa?
- Mammals = supports monogamy hypothesis
- birds = also agrees with monogamy hypothesis
cooperation breeding has evolved in kin groups:
HATCHWELL 2009
look at all cooperative taxa, see how many species cooperation occur in kin and non-kin groups
-majority cooperate in kin group (92% of species)
why is kinship so important in cooperative breeding:
- group of close relatives, less conflict within groups (inbreeding avoidance)
- kin-selected helping
a sceptics view of evidence for kin selection importance in cooperative breeding:
1) group productivity increase may be due to individual / territory quality –> laughing kookaburra
2) direct benefits of helping under-estimated, fairy wren (splendid & superb) over 70% of EPP
3) costs of kin competition ignored
4) there is little evidence for active kin discrimination, more related, the more they help: lots of evidence for this: bell miner more r, more help
kin selection driving force for coop behaviour
yes,
was for then against (sceptic views) and now for.
kinship importance across species:
variable, unimportant in some species (dunnock)