Ecological dominance and the final sprint in hominid evolution

In contrast to many other models of human evolution the “balance of power” theory of Alexander has a clear answer to the question why a runaway selection process for unique social and moral capacities occurred in our ancestry only and not in other species: “ecological dominance” is hypothesized to have diminished the effects of “extrinsic” forces of natural selection such that withinspecies, intergroup competition increased (Alexander, 1989). Alexander seems to be wrong, however, in his claim that already the common HUCHIBO (Humans, Chimps, Bonobo's)-ancestor has crossed the ecological dominance barrier. In this paper an adapted version of Alexander's model is presented and several different ways are proposed to make this adapted version testable. A preliminary survey of the available paleontological and paleoecological data suggests that there is some evidence of a less vulnerable position towards predators in earlyHomo and that there are clear signs related to a crossing of the ecological dominance barrier inHomo sapiens sapiens.     

Perspective: repression of competition and the evolution of cooperation

Abstract Repression of competition within groups joins kin selection as the second major force in the history of life shaping the evolution of cooperation. When opportunities for competition against neighbors are limited within groups, individuals can increase their own success only by enhancing the efficiency and productivity of their group. Thus, characters that repress competition within groups promote cooperation and enhance group success. Leigh first expressed this idea in the context of fair meiosis, in which each chromosome has an equal chance of transmission via gametes. Randomized success means that each part of the genome can increase its own success only by enhancing the total number of progeny and thus increasing the success of the group. Alexander used this insight about repression of competition in fair meiosis to develop his theories for the evolution of human sociality. Alexander argued that human social structures spread when they repress competition within groups and promote successful group-against-group competition. Buss introduced a new example with his suggestion that metazoan success depended on repression of competition between cellular lineages. Maynard Smith synthesized different lines of thought on repression of competition. In this paper, I develop simple mathematical models to illustrate the main processes by which repression of competition evolves. With the concepts made clear, I then explain the history of the idea. I finish by summarizing many new developments in this subject and the most promising lines for future study.     

No unique effect of intergroup competition on cooperation: non-competitive thresholds are as effective as competitions between groups for increasing human cooperative behavior

Explaining cooperation remains a central topic for evolutionary theorists. Many have argued that group selection provides such an explanation: theoretical models show that intergroup competition could have given rise to cooperation that is costly for the individual. Whether group selection actually did play an important role in the evolution of human cooperation, however, is much debated. Recent experiments have shown that intergroup competitions do increase human cooperation, which has been taken as evidence for group selection as a mechanism for the evolution of cooperation. Here we challenge this standard interpretation. Competitions change the payoff structure by creating a threshold effect whereby the group that contributes more earns an additional prize, which creates some incentive for individuals to cooperate. We present four studies that disentangle competition and thresholds, and strongly suggest that it is thresholds – rather than competitions per se – that increase cooperation. Thus, prior intergroup competition experiments provide no evidence of a unique or special role for intergroup competition in promoting human cooperation, and shed no light on whether group selection shaped human evolution.     

The handicap principle and the argument of subversion from within

This paper examines the very disparate positions that various actors have taken towards the argument of subversion from within (a classical argument against the evolution of altruism by group selection) in a set of related debates on group selection, altruism and the handicap principle. Using this set of debates as a case study, this paper argues that different applications of epistemic values were one of the factors behind the disagreements between John Maynard Smith and Amotz Zahavi over a number of important evolutionary issues. The paper also argues that these different applications were connected to important epistemological differences related in part (but not solely) to their disciplinary background. Apart from conflicting evolutionary views concerning the theoretical feasibility of the handicap effect, these antagonists both differed in the confidence they ascribed to mathematical modeling and over the hereditary basis for altruistic behavior.     

WHY EPISTASIS IS IMPORTANT FOR SELECTION AND ADAPTATION

Organisms are built from thousands of genes that interact in complex ways. Still, the mathematical theory of evolution is dominated by a gene‐by‐gene perspective in which genes are assumed to have the same effects regardless of genetic background. Gene interaction, or epistasis, plays a role in some theoretical developments such as the evolution of recombination, reproductive isolation, and canalization, but is strikingly missing from our standard accounts of phenotypic adaptation. This absence is most puzzling within the field of quantitative genetics, which, despite its polygenic perspective and elaborate statistical representation of epistasis, has not found a single important role for gene interaction in evolution. To the contrary, there is a widespread consensus that epistasis is evolutionary inert, and that all we need to know to predict evolutionary dynamics is the additive component of the genetic variance. This view may have roots in convenience, but also in theoretical results showing that the response to selection derived from epistatic variance components is not permanent and will decay when selection is relaxed. I show that these results are tied to a conceptual confusion, and are misleading as general statements about the significance of epistasis for the selection response and adaptation.     

Natural selection. VII. History and interpretation of kin selection theory

Kin selection theory is a kind of causal analysis. The initial form of kin selection ascribed cause to costs, benefits and genetic relatedness. The theory then slowly developed a deeper and more sophisticated approach to partitioning the causes of social evolution. Controversy followed because causal analysis inevitably attracts opposing views. It is always possible to separate total effects into different component causes. Alternative causal schemes emphasize different aspects of a problem, reflecting the distinct goals, interests and biases of different perspectives. For example, group selection is a particular causal scheme with certain advantages and significant limitations. Ultimately, to use kin selection theory to analyse natural patterns and to understand the history of debates over different approaches, one must follow the underlying history of causal analysis. This article describes the history of kin selection theory, with emphasis on how the causal perspective improved through the study of key patterns of natural history, such as dispersal and sex ratio, and through a unified approach to demographic and social processes. Independent historical developments in the multivariate analysis of quantitative traits merged with the causal analysis of social evolution by kin selection.     

The history of Hayek’s theory of cultural evolution

This paper traces the historical origins of Friedrich A. Hayek’s theory of cultural evolution, and argues that Hayek’s evolutionary thought was significantly inspired by Alexander M. Carr-Saunders and Oxford zoology. While traditional Hayek scholarship emphasizes the influence of Carl Menger and the British eighteenth-century moral philosophers, I claim that these sources underdetermine what was most characteristic of Hayek’s theory, viz. the idea that cultural evolution is a matter of group selection, and the idea that natural selection operates on acquired as well as on inherited properties.     

The genomics of adaptation

The amount and nature of genetic variation available to natural selection affect the rate, course and outcome of evolution. Consequently, the study of the genetic basis of adaptive evolutionary change has occupied biologists for decades, but progress has been hampered by the lack of resolution and the absence of a genome-level perspective. Technological advances in recent years should now allow us to answer many long-standing questions about the nature of adaptation. The data gathered so far are beginning to challenge some widespread views of the way in which natural selection operates at the genomic level. Papers in this Special Feature of Proceedings of the Royal Society B illustrate various aspects of the broad field of adaptation genomics. This introductory article sets up a context and, on the basis of a few selected examples, discusses how genomic data can advance our understanding of the process of adaptation.     

Estimating Selection Coefficients in Spatially Structured Populations from Time Series Data of Allele Frequencies

Inferring the nature and magnitude of selection is an important problem in many biological contexts. Typically when estimating a selection coefficient for an allele, it is assumed that samples are drawn from a panmictic population and that selection acts uniformly across the population. However, these assumptions are rarely satisfied. Natural populations are almost always structured, and selective pressures are likely to act differentially. Inference about selection ought therefore to take account of structure. We do this by considering evolution in a simple lattice model of spatial population structure. We develop a hidden Markov model based maximum-likelihood approach for estimating the selection coefficient in a single population from time series data of allele frequencies. We then develop an approximate extension of this to the structured case to provide a joint estimate of migration rate and spatially varying selection coefficients. We illustrate our method using classical data sets of moth pigmentation morph frequencies, but it has wide applications in settings ranging from ecology to human evolution.     

Adaptation and Natural Selection revisited

In Adaptation and Natural Selection, George C. Williams linked the distinction between group and individual adaptation with the distinction between group and individual selection. Williams’ Principle, as we will call it, says that adaptation at a level requires selection at that level. This is a necessary but not a sufficient condition; for example, group adaptation requires group selection, but the fact that group selection influences a trait’s evolution does not suffice for the resulting trait frequency to be a group adaptation. What more is required? In this paper, we describe an answer to this question that has been developed in multilevel selection theory. We also discuss an alternative framework for defining units of adaptation that violates Williams’ Principle.     

Moral Darwinism: Ethical evidence for the descent of man

Could an ethical theory ever play a substantial evidential role in a scientific argument for an empirical hypothesis? InThe Descent of Man, Darwin includes an extended discussion of the nature of human morality, and the ethical theory which he sketches is not simply developed as an interesting ramification of his theory of evolution, but is used as a key part of his evidence for human descent from animal ancestors. Darwin must rebut the argument that, because of our moral nature, humans are essentially different in kind from other animals and so had to have had a different origin. I trace his causal story of how the moral sense could develop out of social instincts by evolutionary mechanisms of group selection, and show that the form of Utilitarianism he proposes involves a radical reduction of the standard of value to the concept of biological fitness. I argue that this causal analysis, although a weakness from a normative standpoint, is a strength when judged for its intended purpose as part of an evidential argument to confirm the hypothesis of human descent.     

Variable predation regimes predict the evolution of sexual dimorphism in a population of threespine stickleback

Sexual dimorphism is widespread in nature and can be influenced by sex-specific natural selection resulting from ecological differences between the sexes. Here we show that contrasting life-history pressures and temporal shifts in ecology can exert a strong influence on the evolution of sexual dimorphism. The bony spines exhibited by stickleback are a defense against open-water avian predators but may be detrimental against benthic macroinvertebrate predators. Female stickleback from a coastal lake in western Canada occupy a more open-water ecological niche and exhibit greater dorsal and pelvic spine number than males, but the magnitude of these differences varies among life-history stages, seasons, and years. Ecological data on diet and parasite load and 62 seasonal estimates of selection over a 15-year period show that selection favors increased spine number in females and decreased spine number in males, but only when pronounced ecological differences between the sexes results in differential exposure to the two, divergent predation regimes. Thus occasional sex-reversals in ecological niche reversed the mode of selection. These processes caused a predictable response in the subsequent generation, indicating that divergent predation caused evolutionary change in dimorphism. However, temporal oscillations in sex-specific selection resulted in no net change in sexual dimorphism over the 15-year study period, indicating that fluctuations in directional selection can be responsible for long-term stasis. Replicated shifts in selective regime can demonstrate the primacy of ecological processes in driving evolution and our results illustrate how such shifts are detectable using long-term monitoring of natural populations.     

Group selection in plant populations

Summary Several mechanisms have been proposed for group selection, to account for the evolution of altruistic traits. One type, Neighbourhood models, suggests that individuals react with those immediately around them, but with no recognition mechanism. The organization of plant populations seems especially favorable for this type of selection. The possibility of Neighbourhood selection was investigated by simulating a plant population. It was possible for an altruistic trait to evolve, though only under restricted conditions. The main requirement was gene flow only by very restricted pollen dispersal, and a high benefit : cost ratio in the altruistic relationship. Under conditions favourable for such evolution, the starting frequency of the allele, the initial pattern, and the population size, had little effect. Inbreeding tended to prevent the increase of the altruism allele, though this depended on the mechanism of selfing. Known ecological features of plants are discussed that could be considered altruistic and hence require some form of group selection for their evolution, and whether the benefit : cost requirements are likely to be met. Neighbourhood models of group selection are a possibility in plant populations, and we therefore cannot exclude the possibility of altruism in plants. However, Neighbourhood selection is weak force, unlikely to be effective in the face of opposing individual selection. It may be more important as reinforcement of individual selection.     

The extended replicator

This paper evaluates and criticises the developmental systems conception of evolution and develops instead an extension of the gene's eye conception of evolution. We argue (i) Dawkin's attempt to segregate developmental and evolutionary issues about genes is unsatisfactory. On plausible views of development it is arbitrary to single out genes as the units of selection. (ii) The genotype does not carry information about the phenotype in any way that distinguishes the role of the genes in development from that other factors. (iii) There is no simple and general causal criterion which distinguishes the role of genes in development and evolution. (iv) There is, however, an important sense in which genes but not every other developmental factor represent the phenotype. (v) The idea that genes represent features of the phenotype forces us to recognise that genes are not the only, or almost the only, replicators. Many mechanisms of replication are involved in both development and evolution. (vi) A conception of evolutionary history which recognises both genetic and non-genetic replicators, lineages of replicators and interactors has advantages over both the radical rejection of the replicator/interactor distinction and the conservative restriction of replication to genetic replication.     

Kin groups and trait groups: population structure and epidemic disease selection

A Monte Carlo simulation based on the population structure of a small-scale human population, the Semai Senoi of Malaysia, has been developed to study the combined effects of group, kin, and individual selection. The population structure resembles D.S. Wilson's structured deme model in that local breeding populations (Semai settlements) are subdivided into trait groups (hamlets) that may be kin-structured and are not themselves demes. Additionally, settlement breeding populations are connected by two-dimensional stepping-stone migration approaching 30% per generation. Group and kin-structured group selection occur among hamlets the survivors of which then disperse to breed within the settlement population. Genetic drift is modeled by the process of hamlet formation; individual selection as a deterministic process, and stepping-stone migration as either random or kin-structured migrant groups. The mechanism for group selection is epidemics of infectious disease that can wipe out small hamlets particularly if most adults become sick and social life collapses. Genetic resistance to a disease is an individual attribute; however, hamlet groups with several resistant adults are less likely to disintegrate and experience high social mortality. A specific human gene, hemoglobin E, which confers resistance to malaria, is studied as an example of the process. The results of the simulations show that high genetic variance among hamlet groups may be generated by moderate degrees of kin-structuring. This strong microdifferentiation provides the potential for group selection. The effect of group selection in this case is rapid increase in gene frequencies among the total set of populations. In fact, group selection in concert with individual selection produced a faster rate of gene frequency increase among a set of 25 populations than the rate within a single unstructured population subject to deterministic individual selection. Such rapid evolution with plausible rates of extinction, individual selection, and migration and a population structure realistic in its general form, has implications for specific human polymorphisms such as hemoglobin variants and for the more general problem of the tempo of evolution as well.     

Selectionism and neutralism in molecular evolution

Charles Darwin proposed that evolution occurs primarily by natural selection, but this view has been controversial from the beginning. Two of the major opposing views have been mutationism and neutralism. Early molecular studies suggested that most amino acid substitutions in proteins are neutral or nearly neutral and the functional change of proteins occurs by a few key amino acid substitutions. This suggestion generated an intense controversy over selectionism and neutralism. This controversy is partially caused by Kimura's definition of neutrality, which was too strict (|2Ns|< or =1). If we define neutral mutations as the mutations that do not change the function of gene products appreciably, many controversies disappear because slightly deleterious and slightly advantageous mutations are engulfed by neutral mutations. The ratio of the rate of nonsynonymous nucleotide substitution to that of synonymous substitution is a useful quantity to study positive Darwinian selection operating at highly variable genetic loci, but it does not necessarily detect adaptively important codons. Previously, multigene families were thought to evolve following the model of concerted evolution, but new evidence indicates that most of them evolve by a birth-and-death process of duplicate genes. It is now clear that most phenotypic characters or genetic systems such as the adaptive immune system in vertebrates are controlled by the interaction of a number of multigene families, which are often evolutionarily related and are subject to birth-and-death evolution. Therefore, it is important to study the mechanisms of gene family interaction for understanding phenotypic evolution. Because gene duplication occurs more or less at random, phenotypic evolution contains some fortuitous elements, though the environmental factors also play an important role. The randomness of phenotypic evolution is qualitatively different from allele frequency changes by random genetic drift. However, there is some similarity between phenotypic and molecular evolution with respect to functional or environmental constraints and evolutionary rate. It appears that mutation (including gene duplication and other DNA changes) is the driving force of evolution at both the genic and the phenotypic levels.     

Darwin's "beloved barnacles": tough lessons in variation

In 1846, burdened by insecurity and self-doubt, and having been convinced that he needed to study some group of organisms closely, Darwin embarked on an eight-year odyssey in the protean and perplexing world of barnacles. At the time, he was searching for evidence in support of his theory of evolution by natural selection. In the course of his long study of barnacles, however, he was not just validating his preexisting theoretical system, but was also modifying his views on such fundamental aspects as the universality of individual variation, which is the focus of this paper. According to this notion, the members of any population of living things are expected to exhibit sufficient differences from one another for natural selection to operate. By emphasizing the theoretical value of the barnacle project, my analysis contributes to the historiographic tradition which highlights the significance of the period between the first comprehensive formulation of the theory of evolution by natural selection in 1844 and its urgent publication in the late 1850s. In the course of these years, Darwin's theory was not just accumulating empirical laurels, but was also expected to adapt to a changing conceptual landscape.     

Evolutionary perspectives on human height variation

Human height is a highly variable trait, both within and between populations, has a high heritability, and influences the manner in which people behave and are treated in society. Although we know much about human height, this information has rarely been brought together in a comprehensive, systematic fashion. Here, we present a synthetic review of the literature on human height from an explicit evolutionary perspective, addressing its phylogenetic history, development, and environmental and genetic influences on growth and stature. In addition to presenting evidence to suggest the past action of natural selection on human height, we also assess the evidence that natural and sexual selection continues to act on height in contemporary populations. Although there is clear evidence to suggest that selection acts on height, mainly through life‐history processes but perhaps also directly, it is also apparent that methodological factors reduce the confidence with which such inferences can be drawn, and there remain surprising gaps in our knowledge. The inability to draw firm conclusions about the adaptiveness of such a highly visible and easily measured trait suggests we should show an appropriate degree of caution when dealing with other human traits in evolutionary perspective.     

Advanced eusociality, kin selection and male haploidy

Abstract  The generation-long primacy of kin selection in explaining the evolution of advanced eusociality in social insects has been challenged in recent papers. Does this challenge succeed? I consider three questions: is kin selection still the unchallengeable explanation for the evolution of eusociality; is the male haploidy of Hymenoptera important in this explanation; and, a subsidiary question of why are there no male workers in Hymenoptera? I briefly trace the origins of kin selection back to Darwin and then consider the explanations of mutualism, group selection, parental manipulation, and kin selection and its variant 'green beard' alleles. I stress that in the kin selection equation, however written, relatedness is deeply intertwined with ecology so that both are essential. Kin selection does remain unchallengeable but, for some, the role of male haploidy has lost favour recently despite several modelling efforts all finding that it favours the evolution of eusociality. Sex allocation is deep at the heart of the evolution of hymenopteran advanced eusociality, indicating the interacting roles of population genetics and general biology. Modellers have also found no reason for a lack of male workers, so that a biological superiority of females for this role is indicated for social Hymenoptera.