The ecology of cooperative breeding behaviour

Ecology is a fundamental driving force for the evolutionary transition from solitary living to breeding cooperatively in groups. However, the fact that both benign and harsh, as well as stable and fluctuating, environments can favour the evolution of cooperative breeding behaviour constitutes a para...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Ecology letters 2017-06, Vol.20 (6), p.708-720
Hauptverfasser: Shen, Sheng‐Feng, Emlen, Stephen T., Koenig, Walter D., Rubenstein, Dustin R., Hosken, David
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 720
container_issue 6
container_start_page 708
container_title Ecology letters
container_volume 20
creator Shen, Sheng‐Feng
Emlen, Stephen T.
Koenig, Walter D.
Rubenstein, Dustin R.
Hosken, David
description Ecology is a fundamental driving force for the evolutionary transition from solitary living to breeding cooperatively in groups. However, the fact that both benign and harsh, as well as stable and fluctuating, environments can favour the evolution of cooperative breeding behaviour constitutes a paradox of environmental quality and sociality. Here, we propose a new model – the dual benefits framework – for resolving this paradox. Our framework distinguishes between two categories of grouping benefits – resource defence benefits that derive from group‐defended critical resources and collective action benefits that result from social cooperation among group members – and uses insider–outsider conflict theory to simultaneously consider the interests of current group members (insiders) and potential joiners (outsiders) in determining optimal group size. We argue that the different grouping benefits realised from resource defence and collective action profoundly affect insider–outsider conflict resolution, resulting in predictable differences in the per capita productivity, stable group size, kin structure and stability of the social group. We also suggest that different types of environmental variation (spatial vs. temporal) select for societies that form because of the different grouping benefits, thus helping to resolve the paradox of why cooperative breeding evolves in such different types of environments.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/ele.12774
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1896411496</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1896411496</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3534-e4a6747de64008de7d2c52998094cf2431e11a725da0903d451878460c8dcdb03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp10E1LAzEQBuAgiq3Vg39AFrzoYdskm83HUUr9gIKXCt5CNpltt2ybmnQr_fdu3epBcC4zh4eX4UXomuAhaWcENQwJFYKdoD5hnKSYMnn6e2fvPXQR4xJjQpUg56hHJZM4l7yP0tkCErC-9vN94svEer-BYLbVDpIiALhqPU8KWJhd5Ztwic5KU0e4Ou4BenuczMbP6fT16WX8ME1tlmcsBWa4YMIBZxhLB8JRm1OlJFbMlpRlBAgxgubOYIUzx3IihWQcW-msK3A2QHdd7ib4jwbiVq-qaKGuzRp8EzWRijNCmOItvf1Dl-2j6_a7g1JcSCoP6r5TNvgYA5R6E6qVCXtNsD50qNsO9XeHrb05JjbFCtyv_CmtBaMOfFY17P9P0pPppIv8AjateAM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1899678286</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The ecology of cooperative breeding behaviour</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Shen, Sheng‐Feng ; Emlen, Stephen T. ; Koenig, Walter D. ; Rubenstein, Dustin R. ; Hosken, David</creator><contributor>Hosken, David</contributor><creatorcontrib>Shen, Sheng‐Feng ; Emlen, Stephen T. ; Koenig, Walter D. ; Rubenstein, Dustin R. ; Hosken, David ; Hosken, David</creatorcontrib><description>Ecology is a fundamental driving force for the evolutionary transition from solitary living to breeding cooperatively in groups. However, the fact that both benign and harsh, as well as stable and fluctuating, environments can favour the evolution of cooperative breeding behaviour constitutes a paradox of environmental quality and sociality. Here, we propose a new model – the dual benefits framework – for resolving this paradox. Our framework distinguishes between two categories of grouping benefits – resource defence benefits that derive from group‐defended critical resources and collective action benefits that result from social cooperation among group members – and uses insider–outsider conflict theory to simultaneously consider the interests of current group members (insiders) and potential joiners (outsiders) in determining optimal group size. We argue that the different grouping benefits realised from resource defence and collective action profoundly affect insider–outsider conflict resolution, resulting in predictable differences in the per capita productivity, stable group size, kin structure and stability of the social group. We also suggest that different types of environmental variation (spatial vs. temporal) select for societies that form because of the different grouping benefits, thus helping to resolve the paradox of why cooperative breeding evolves in such different types of environments.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1461-023X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1461-0248</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/ele.12774</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28480586</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Animals ; Benign ; bet hedging ; Biological Evolution ; Breeding ; Categories ; Collective action ; Communal breeding ; Conflict resolution ; Cooperative Behavior ; ecological constraint ; Ecology ; Environment ; Environmental quality ; environmental uncertainty ; fluctuating selection ; group living ; Group size ; insider–outsider conflict ; Reproductive behavior ; Sexual Behavior, Animal ; Social Behavior ; social evolution ; sociality ; Structural stability</subject><ispartof>Ecology letters, 2017-06, Vol.20 (6), p.708-720</ispartof><rights>2017 John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd/CNRS</rights><rights>2017 John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd/CNRS.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2017 John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd/CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3534-e4a6747de64008de7d2c52998094cf2431e11a725da0903d451878460c8dcdb03</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3534-e4a6747de64008de7d2c52998094cf2431e11a725da0903d451878460c8dcdb03</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fele.12774$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fele.12774$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28480586$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Hosken, David</contributor><creatorcontrib>Shen, Sheng‐Feng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Emlen, Stephen T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koenig, Walter D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rubenstein, Dustin R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hosken, David</creatorcontrib><title>The ecology of cooperative breeding behaviour</title><title>Ecology letters</title><addtitle>Ecol Lett</addtitle><description>Ecology is a fundamental driving force for the evolutionary transition from solitary living to breeding cooperatively in groups. However, the fact that both benign and harsh, as well as stable and fluctuating, environments can favour the evolution of cooperative breeding behaviour constitutes a paradox of environmental quality and sociality. Here, we propose a new model – the dual benefits framework – for resolving this paradox. Our framework distinguishes between two categories of grouping benefits – resource defence benefits that derive from group‐defended critical resources and collective action benefits that result from social cooperation among group members – and uses insider–outsider conflict theory to simultaneously consider the interests of current group members (insiders) and potential joiners (outsiders) in determining optimal group size. We argue that the different grouping benefits realised from resource defence and collective action profoundly affect insider–outsider conflict resolution, resulting in predictable differences in the per capita productivity, stable group size, kin structure and stability of the social group. We also suggest that different types of environmental variation (spatial vs. temporal) select for societies that form because of the different grouping benefits, thus helping to resolve the paradox of why cooperative breeding evolves in such different types of environments.</description><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Benign</subject><subject>bet hedging</subject><subject>Biological Evolution</subject><subject>Breeding</subject><subject>Categories</subject><subject>Collective action</subject><subject>Communal breeding</subject><subject>Conflict resolution</subject><subject>Cooperative Behavior</subject><subject>ecological constraint</subject><subject>Ecology</subject><subject>Environment</subject><subject>Environmental quality</subject><subject>environmental uncertainty</subject><subject>fluctuating selection</subject><subject>group living</subject><subject>Group size</subject><subject>insider–outsider conflict</subject><subject>Reproductive behavior</subject><subject>Sexual Behavior, Animal</subject><subject>Social Behavior</subject><subject>social evolution</subject><subject>sociality</subject><subject>Structural stability</subject><issn>1461-023X</issn><issn>1461-0248</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp10E1LAzEQBuAgiq3Vg39AFrzoYdskm83HUUr9gIKXCt5CNpltt2ybmnQr_fdu3epBcC4zh4eX4UXomuAhaWcENQwJFYKdoD5hnKSYMnn6e2fvPXQR4xJjQpUg56hHJZM4l7yP0tkCErC-9vN94svEer-BYLbVDpIiALhqPU8KWJhd5Ztwic5KU0e4Ou4BenuczMbP6fT16WX8ME1tlmcsBWa4YMIBZxhLB8JRm1OlJFbMlpRlBAgxgubOYIUzx3IihWQcW-msK3A2QHdd7ib4jwbiVq-qaKGuzRp8EzWRijNCmOItvf1Dl-2j6_a7g1JcSCoP6r5TNvgYA5R6E6qVCXtNsD50qNsO9XeHrb05JjbFCtyv_CmtBaMOfFY17P9P0pPppIv8AjateAM</recordid><startdate>201706</startdate><enddate>201706</enddate><creator>Shen, Sheng‐Feng</creator><creator>Emlen, Stephen T.</creator><creator>Koenig, Walter D.</creator><creator>Rubenstein, Dustin R.</creator><creator>Hosken, David</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201706</creationdate><title>The ecology of cooperative breeding behaviour</title><author>Shen, Sheng‐Feng ; Emlen, Stephen T. ; Koenig, Walter D. ; Rubenstein, Dustin R. ; Hosken, David</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3534-e4a6747de64008de7d2c52998094cf2431e11a725da0903d451878460c8dcdb03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Benign</topic><topic>bet hedging</topic><topic>Biological Evolution</topic><topic>Breeding</topic><topic>Categories</topic><topic>Collective action</topic><topic>Communal breeding</topic><topic>Conflict resolution</topic><topic>Cooperative Behavior</topic><topic>ecological constraint</topic><topic>Ecology</topic><topic>Environment</topic><topic>Environmental quality</topic><topic>environmental uncertainty</topic><topic>fluctuating selection</topic><topic>group living</topic><topic>Group size</topic><topic>insider–outsider conflict</topic><topic>Reproductive behavior</topic><topic>Sexual Behavior, Animal</topic><topic>Social Behavior</topic><topic>social evolution</topic><topic>sociality</topic><topic>Structural stability</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Shen, Sheng‐Feng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Emlen, Stephen T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koenig, Walter D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rubenstein, Dustin R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hosken, David</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Ecology letters</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Shen, Sheng‐Feng</au><au>Emlen, Stephen T.</au><au>Koenig, Walter D.</au><au>Rubenstein, Dustin R.</au><au>Hosken, David</au><au>Hosken, David</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The ecology of cooperative breeding behaviour</atitle><jtitle>Ecology letters</jtitle><addtitle>Ecol Lett</addtitle><date>2017-06</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>20</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>708</spage><epage>720</epage><pages>708-720</pages><issn>1461-023X</issn><eissn>1461-0248</eissn><abstract>Ecology is a fundamental driving force for the evolutionary transition from solitary living to breeding cooperatively in groups. However, the fact that both benign and harsh, as well as stable and fluctuating, environments can favour the evolution of cooperative breeding behaviour constitutes a paradox of environmental quality and sociality. Here, we propose a new model – the dual benefits framework – for resolving this paradox. Our framework distinguishes between two categories of grouping benefits – resource defence benefits that derive from group‐defended critical resources and collective action benefits that result from social cooperation among group members – and uses insider–outsider conflict theory to simultaneously consider the interests of current group members (insiders) and potential joiners (outsiders) in determining optimal group size. We argue that the different grouping benefits realised from resource defence and collective action profoundly affect insider–outsider conflict resolution, resulting in predictable differences in the per capita productivity, stable group size, kin structure and stability of the social group. We also suggest that different types of environmental variation (spatial vs. temporal) select for societies that form because of the different grouping benefits, thus helping to resolve the paradox of why cooperative breeding evolves in such different types of environments.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>28480586</pmid><doi>10.1111/ele.12774</doi><tpages>13</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1461-023X
ispartof Ecology letters, 2017-06, Vol.20 (6), p.708-720
issn 1461-023X
1461-0248
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1896411496
source MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
subjects Animals
Benign
bet hedging
Biological Evolution
Breeding
Categories
Collective action
Communal breeding
Conflict resolution
Cooperative Behavior
ecological constraint
Ecology
Environment
Environmental quality
environmental uncertainty
fluctuating selection
group living
Group size
insider–outsider conflict
Reproductive behavior
Sexual Behavior, Animal
Social Behavior
social evolution
sociality
Structural stability
title The ecology of cooperative breeding behaviour
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T14%3A48%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20ecology%20of%20cooperative%20breeding%20behaviour&rft.jtitle=Ecology%20letters&rft.au=Shen,%20Sheng%E2%80%90Feng&rft.date=2017-06&rft.volume=20&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=708&rft.epage=720&rft.pages=708-720&rft.issn=1461-023X&rft.eissn=1461-0248&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/ele.12774&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1896411496%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1899678286&rft_id=info:pmid/28480586&rfr_iscdi=true