THE COMPONENTS OF KIN COMPETITION

It is well known that competition among kin alters the rate and often the direction of evolution in subdivided populations. Yet much remains unclear about the ecological and demographic causes of kin competition, or what role life cycle plays in promoting or ameliorating its effects. Using the multilevel Price equation, I derive a general equation for evolution in structured populations under an arbitrary intensity of kin competition. This equation partitions the effects of selection and demography, and recovers numerous previous models as special cases. I quantify the degree of kin competition, α, which explicitly depends on life cycle. I show how life cycle and demographic assumptions can be incorporated into kin selection models via α, revealing life cycles that are more or less permissive of altruism. As an example, I give closed‐form results for Hamilton's rule in a three‐stage life cycle. Although results are sensitive to life cycle in general, I identify three demographic conditions that give life cycle invariant results. Under the infinite island model, α is a function of the scale of density regulation and dispersal rate, effectively disentangling these two phenomena. Population viscosity per se does not impede kin selection.     

OF MICE AND KIN: THE FUNCTIONAL SIGNIFICANCE OF KIN BIAS IN SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR

1. Sharing recent ancestry (kinship) increases the degree of genetic similarity between individuals, where genetic similarity could mean anything from sharing a particular allele to sharing an entire genome. 2. Genetic similarity can influence behavioural and other responses between individuals in a number of ways, discriminatory and non-discriminatory. All are likely to result in kin bias, because of the correlation between genetic similarity and kinship, but only some should be regarded as involving kin discrimination. 3. Non-discriminatory kin bias could arise through close relatives sharing, for instance, physical characteristics (such as those influencing competitive ability), thresholds of behavioural response or requirements for particular resources. 4. Discriminatory kin bias could arise through the direct perception of genetic similarity between individuals (direct similarity discrimination) or the use of cues likely to correlate with genetic similarity (indirect similarity discrimination--of which kin discrimination is one form). Alternatively, it could arise incidentally through mistaken identity or discrimination at some other level, such as species identification. 5. Experiments with laboratory and wild house mice have revealed kin bias in a number of contexts, including (a) parental and infanticidal behaviour, (b) sexual development and behaviour and (c) investigatory behaviour and passive body contact among juveniles and adults. 6. While kin bias in mice has been interpreted as evidence for kin discrimination, there are several problems with such an interpretation. These include (a) pronounced and complex effects of familiarity on discrimination, (b) a high risk of error-proneness in the indirect cues used in apparent kin discrimination and (c) weak and easily disrupted kin bias effects in certain contexts. 7. Consideration of social structure and discriminatory responses within populations of wild house mice leads to an alternative explanation for some kin bias in terms of incidental discrimination based on social group membership. 8. Several results from laboratory experiments suggest incidental discrimination is a more parsimonious explanation than kin discrimination for some intrasexual kin bias in behaviour. However, kin or direct similarity discrimination appears to be the most likely explanation for other aspects of intrasexual kin bias and for intersexual kin bias.     

NESTMATE RECOGNITION AND KIN RECOGNITION IN ANTS

Abstract  All ants (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) are highly eusocial insects that are characterized by reproductive division of labor with sterile castes (worker and soldier) helping fertile castes (queen and male) to reproduce.
Ant societies, like other complex animal societies, have developed a sophisticated communication system, in which recognition behaviors are frequently involved Recognition abilities allow individuals to orient and modulate their behaviors effectively and appropriately in response to the characteristics andlor signals expressed by other organisms. Among recognition behaviors, nestmate recognition and kin recognition mechanisms have attracted great attention of sociobiologists, ecologists, insect physiologists and biochemists since 1970's. This is parallel with the popularization of Hamilton's kin selection theory. The present paper aims at reviewing the current understanding on nestmate/kin recognition in ants. This review consists of three parts. The first part concerns the diversity of recognition behaviors and their ecological implications with emphasis on nestmatelkin recognition; in the second part, the current understandings on the mechanism of nestmatelkin recognition are outlined; and in the third part, we discuss the ontogenetic development of nestmate recognition behavior and naturally mixed colonies. The study of the integration mechanism of social parasite may provide heuristic clues to the understanding of kin/nestmate recognition system.     

“KIN RECOGNITION” AMONG SPADEFOOT TOAD TADPOLES: A SIDE-EFFECT OF HABITAT SELECTION?

Many animals modify their behavior toward unfamiliar conspecifics as a function of their genetic relatedness. A fundamental problem of any kin recognition study is determining what is being recognized and why. For anuran tadpoles, the predominant view is that associating with relatives is kin-selected because these relatives may thereby accrue benefits through increased growth or predation avoidance. An alternative view is that kin associations are simply a side-effect of habitat selection and thus do not represent attempts to identify kin per se. In the laboratory, spadefoot toad tadpoles (Scaphiopus multiplicatus) preferentially associated with unfamiliar siblings over unfamiliar nonsiblings, as do other anurans. However, same age tadpoles also were more likely to orient toward unfamiliar nonsiblings reared on the same food (familiar food) than toward unfamiliar siblings that were reared on unfamiliar food. These results, together with the results of previous tadpole kin recognition studies, suggest that tadpoles orient toward cues learned early in ontogeny, regardless of the cues' source. Tadpoles that preferentially associated with cues learned from their environment at birth would tend to be philopatric. Censuses of 14 natural ponds revealed that tadpole density remained greatest near oviposition sites until four days before metamorphosis. Tadpole philopatry may be advantageous: tadpoles restricted to their natal site had greater growth and survivorship than did their siblings restricted to randomly selected sites elsewhere within the same pond. Thus kin affiliative tendency observed in the laboratory in this and perhaps other species of anurans may be a byproduct of habitat selection. Since kin discrimination in animals is most commonly assayed as orientation toward kin, it follows that many examples of “kin recognition” may not represent true attempts to identify kin as such, but rather may reflect some other recognition system that is under entirely different selective pressures.     

ON MULTILEVEL SELECTION AND KIN SELECTION: CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS MEETS DIRECT FITNESS

When Hamilton defined the concept of inclusive fitness, he specifically was looking to define the fitness of an individual in terms of that individual's behavior, and the effects of its’ behavior on other related individuals. Although an intuitively attractive concept, issues of accounting for fitness, and correctly assigning it to the appropriate individual make this approach difficult to implement. The direct fitness approach has been suggested as a means of modeling kin selection while avoiding these issues. Whereas Hamilton's inclusive fitness approach assigns to the focal individual the fitness effects of its behavior on other related individuals, the direct fitness approach assigns the fitness effects of other actors to the focal individual. Contextual analysis was independently developed as a quantitative genetic approach for measuring multilevel selection in natural populations. Although the direct fitness approach and contextual analysis come from very different traditions, both methods rely on the same underlying equation, with the primary difference between the two approaches being that the direct fitness approach uses fitness optimization modeling, whereas with contextual analysis, the same equation is used to solve for the change in fitness associated with a change in phenotype when the population is away from the optimal phenotype.     

The joint effects of kin, multilevel selection and indirect genetic effects on response to genetic selection

Kin and levels-of-selection models are common approaches for modelling social evolution. Indirect genetic effect (IGE) models represent a different approach, specifying social effects on trait values rather than fitness. We investigate the joint effect of relatedness, multilevel selection and IGEs on response to selection. We present a measure for the degree of multilevel selection, which is the natural partner of relatedness in expressions for response. Response depends on both relatedness and the degree of multilevel selection, rather than only one or the other factor. Moreover, response is symmetric in relatedness and the degree of multilevel selection, indicating that both factors have exactly the same effect. Without IGEs, the key parameter is the product of relatedness and the degree of multilevel selection. With IGEs, however, multilevel selection without relatedness can explain evolution of social traits. Thus, next to relatedness and multilevel selection, IGEs are a key element in the genetical theory of social evolution.     

Ecology and multilevel selection explain aggression in spider colonies

Progress in sociobiology continues to be hindered by abstract debates over methodology and the relative importance of within‐group vs. between‐group selection. We need concrete biological examples to ground discussions in empirical data. Recent work argued that the levels of aggression in social spider colonies are explained by group‐level adaptation. Here, we examine this conclusion using models that incorporate ecological detail while remaining consistent with kin‐ and multilevel selection frameworks. We show that although levels of aggression are driven, in part, by between‐group selection, incorporating universal within‐group competition provides a striking fit to the data that is inconsistent with pure group‐level adaptation. Instead, our analyses suggest that aggression is favoured primarily as a selfish strategy to compete for resources, despite causing lower group foraging efficiency or higher risk of group extinction. We argue that sociobiology will benefit from a pluralistic approach and stronger links between ecologically informed models and data.     

Inclusive fitness,asymmetric competition and kin selection in plants

The findings that some plants alter their competitive phenotype in response to genetic relatedness of its conspecific neighbour (and presumed competitor) has spurred an increasing interest in plant kin‐interactions. This phenotypic response suggests the ability to assess the genetic relatedness of conspecific competitors, proposing kin selection as a process that can influence plant competitive interactions. Kin selection can favour restrained competitive growth towards kin, if the fitness loss from reducing own growth is compensated by increased fitness in the related neighbour. This may lead to positive frequency dependency among related conspecifics with important ecological consequences for species assemblage and coexistence. However, kin selection in plants is still controversial. First, many studies documenting a plastic response to neighbour relatedness do not estimate fitness consequences of the individual that responds, and when estimated, fitness of individuals grown in competition with kin did not necessarily exceed that of individuals grown in non‐kin groups. Although higher fitness in kin groups could be consistent with kin selection, this could also arise from mechanisms like asymmetric competition in the non‐kin groups. Here we outline the main challenges for studying kin selection in plants taking genetic variation for competitive ability into account. We emphasize the need to measure inclusive fitness in order to assess whether kin selection occurs, and show under which circumstances kin selected responses can be expected. We also illustrate why direct fitness estimates of a focal plant, and group fitness estimates are not suitable for documenting kin selection. Importantly, natural selection occurs at the individual level and it is the inclusive fitness of an individual plant – not the mean fitness of the group – that can capture if a differential response to neighbour relatedness is favoured by kin selection.     

Kin discrimination in salmonids

Summary The data presented here suggest that significant selection pressures towards kin discrimination behaviour patterns result from kin-biased territorial defence behaviour patterns. Salmonids employ a phenotype matching recognition mechanism allowing individuals to discriminate unfamiliar kin. Kin discrimination abilities allow individuals to reduce the levels of aggression associated with territorial defence towards related conspecifics and to defend smaller territories near kin versus non-kin. This kin-biased territorial defence behaviour is observed in at least one species under a wide range of territorial quality conditions. Within kin groups, subordinate individuals obtain a greater number of foraging attempts, resulting in kin-biased foraging within the social group. As a result of this kin-bias, individuals within kin groups show significantly higher mean weight increases (increased direct fitness benefits) and reduced variance in these increases (increased indirect benefits). Since all individuals within the kin groups obtained higher, less variable weight increases, we can argue that individuals are increasing their inclusive fitness as a result of these kin-biased behaviour patterns.Based on these results, and on what is known about the life history of a variety of salmonid and non-salmonid species, we can formulate a number of testable predictions. By testing these predictions, we may be better able to understand both the proximate and ultimate causation of kin discrimination abilities in a variety of fishes.     

Adaptive responses and disruptive effects: how major wildfire influences kinship-based social interactions in a forest marsupial

Environmental disturbance is predicted to play a key role in the evolution of animal social behaviour. This is because disturbance affects key factors underlying social systems, such as demography, resource availability and genetic structure. However, because natural disturbances are unpredictable there is little information on their effects on social behaviour in wild populations. Here, we investigated how a major wildfire affected cooperation (sharing of hollow trees) by a hollow-dependent marsupial. We based two alternative social predictions on the impacts of fire on population density, genetic structure and resources. We predicted an adaptive social response from previous work showing that kin selection in den-sharing develops as competition for den resources increases. Thus, kin selection should occur in burnt areas because the fire caused loss of the majority of hollow-bearing trees, but no detectable mortality. Alternatively, fire may have a disruptive social effect, whereby postfire home range-shifts 'neutralize' fine-scale genetic structure, thereby removing opportunities for kin selection between neighbours. Both predictions occurred: the disruptive social effect in burnt habitat and the adaptive social response in adjacent unburnt habitat. The latter followed a massive demographic influx to unburnt 'refuge' habitat that increased competition for dens, leading to a density-related kin selection response. Our results show remarkable short-term plasticity of animal social behaviour and demonstrate how the social effects of disturbance extend into undisturbed habitat owing to landscape-scale demographic shifts. We predicted long-term changes in kinship-based cooperative behaviour resulting from the genetic and resource impacts of forecast changes to fire regimes in these forests.     

Individuals and groups in evolution: Darwinian pluralism and the multilevel selection debate

Outlined here is an updated review of the long-standing ‘kin selection vs group selection’ debate. Group selection is a highly contentious concept, scientifically and philosophically. In 2012, Dawkins’ attack against Wilson’s latest book about eusociality concentrated all the attention on group selection and its mutual exclusivity with respect to inclusive fitness theory. Both opponents seem to be wrong, facing the general consensus in the field, which favours a pluralistic approach. Historically, despite some misunderstandings in current literature, such a perspective is clearly rooted in Darwin’s writings, which suggested a plurality of levels of selection and a general view that we propose to call ‘imperfect selfishness’. Today, the mathematically updated hypothesis of group selection has little to do with earlier versions of ‘group selection’. It does not imply ontologically unmanageable notions of ‘groups’. We propose here population structure as the main criterion of compatibility between kin selection and group selection. The latter is now evidently a pattern among others within a more general ‘multilevel selection’ theory. Different explanations and patterns are not mutually exclusive. Such a Darwinian pluralism is not a piece of the past, but a path into the future. A challenge in philosophy of biology will be to figure out the logical structure of this emerging pluralistic theory of evolution in such contentious debates.     

KIN RECOGNITION: FUNCTIONS AND MECHANISMS A REVIEW

1. The aim of this paper has been to review the theory behind kin recognition to examine the benefits individuals obtain by recognizing their kin and to review the mechanisms used by individuals in their recognition of kin. 2. The ability to discriminate between kin and non-kin, and between different classes of kin gives individuals advantages in fitness greater than individuals unable to recognize their kin. Four specific areas of benefit were considered: altruistic behaviour, co-operative behaviour, parental care and mate choice. Finally the possibility that kin recognition has arisen as a byproduct from some other ability was discussed. 3. Mechanisms of kin recognition were considered with respect to three essential components of kin recognition. The cue used to discriminate kin, how individuals classify conspecifics as kin, etc. and how the ability to recognize kin develops. 4. Individuals can use a number of cues to discriminate kin from non-kin. These were divided into cues presented by conspecifics (conspecific cues), of which three types were considered: individual, genetic and group/colony cues, and non-conspecific cues, environmental, state and no cues. Kin recognition could be achieved by use of all these cues. 5. How individuals classify their conspecifics as kin, etc. can be achieved in a number of ways; dishabituation or self-matching, which require no learning of kinship cues, or by phenotype matching or familiarity, both of which require the learning of kinship information. 6. It may be necessary for individuals to acquire information concerning kinship. This may be learned, and can be achieved in a number of ways; physiological imprinting, exposure learning or associative learning. Acquisition by these means is non-selective, in that the cues which are most salient in the individual's environment will be learned. Selectivity can be introduced into this process to increase the probability of acquiring kinship information by a number of means; learning from parents, sensitive periods for learning and prenatal learning. Finally, kinship information could be supplied by recognition genes. 7. A distinction is drawn between cues which are used by an individual in the discrimination of kin, discriminators, and cues which are used by individuals in the acquisition of information about kinship, acquisitors. 8. Experiments used to support previous categories of mechanisms of kin recognition were examined in the light of this discussion and it was found that the results were open to a number of different interpretations and yielded little specific information about the mechanisms of kin recognition. 9. It was concluded that there was much evidence, both theoretical and experimental to support the proposed benefits individuals gain from recognizing kin, but much more research is required before the mechanisms of kin recognition are fully understood.     

Kin Selection in Primate Groups

Altruism poses a problem for evolutionary biologists because natural selection is not expected to favor behaviors that are beneficial to recipients, but costly to actors. The theory of kin selection, first articulated by Hamilton (1964), provides a solution to the problem. Hamilton's well-known rule (br > c) provides a simple algorithm for the evolution of altruism via kin selection. Because kin recognition is a crucial requirement of kin selection, it is important to know whether and how primates can recognize their relatives. While conventional wisdom has been that primates can recognize maternal kin, but not paternal kin, this view is being challenged by new findings. The ability to recognize kin implies that kin selection may shape altruistic behavior in primate groups. I focus on two cases in which kin selection is tightly woven into the fabric of social life. For female baboons, macaques, and vervets maternal kinship is an important axis of social networks, coalitionary activity, and dominance relationships. Detailed studies of the patterning of altruistic interactions within these species illustrate the extent and limits of nepotism in their social lives. Carefully integrated analyses of behavior, demography, and genetics among red howlers provide an independent example of how kin selection shapes social organization and behavior. In red howlers, kin bonds shape the life histories and reproductive performance of both males and female. The two cases demonstrate that kin selection can be a powerful source of altruistic activity within primate groups. However, to fully assess the role of kin selection in primate groups, we need more information about the effects of kinship on the patterning of behavior across the Primates and accurate information about paternal kin relationships.     

Behavior of an all-juvenile group of Rhesus monkeys

The behavior and organization of a group of 33 juvenile rhesus monkeys removed from a single free-ranging group were found to parallel closely intact rhesus social groups. Dominance ranking among the juveniles was 95% predictable from prior knowledge of mothers' ranks. Grooming, sitting close together, sitting touching, and play were found to occur much more frequently between matrilineal kin than expected from random selection of partner. Some estrous behavior was observed, including two instances of peri-menstrual estrus. One lengthy homosexual interaction between two two-year-old females was observed. The basis of much of the behavior and organization shown by the juveniles was found to be the matrilineal kin bonds brought from their natal group.     

Dispersal,nepotism, and primate social behavior

High degrees of relatedness within primate social groups are thought to promote the evolution of altruistic behavior via kin selection. Dispersal, for whatever reason, should limit opportunities for nepotistic behaviors. Conversely, emigration is usually attributed to the avoidance of inbreeding depression. Actual dispersal patterns may result from a balance of these forces. Systematic behavioral differences are expected between taxa that differ in such patterns. In fact, comparisons of (a) colobines vs. cercopithecines, (b) bonnet, stumptailed, and Barbary macaques vs. Japanese and rhesus macaques, and (c) red vs. mantled howler monkeys yield a perplexing blend of unexplained differences and unmet theoretical expectations. Kin selection may be less important than generally believed, and/or methodological standardization more so.     

Kin selection,kin avoidance and correlated strategies

Summary Kin selection of correlated strategies is examined for both weak and strong altruism under simple haploid inheritance. While kin assortment enhances the range of evolutionary stability for (strongly altruistic) correlated strategies (defined herein), kin avoidance is possible under a weakly altruistic correlated strategy. When social competition induces role assignments of variable fitness, group mates may prefer association with non-relatives. Even when group life is mandatory, an individual may accept the risk of abandonment (and reproductive death) rather then associate with kin: a competitive superior may behave altruistically by permitting competitively inferior kin to emigrate. Thus, kin selection and social competition are not necessarily mutually supportive processes within groups. I conclude by interpreting dominance as a strongly altruistic correlated strategy in two social hymenopteran contexts.     

Multilevel selection theory and evidence: a critique of Gardner, 2015

Gardner (2015) recently developed a model of a ‘Genetical Theory of Multilevel Selection, which is a thoughtfully developed, but flawed model. The model's flaws appear to be symptomatic of common misunderstandings of the multi level selection (MLS) literature and the recent quantitative genetic literature. I use Gardner's model as a guide for highlighting how the MLS literature can address the misconceptions found in his model, and the kin selection literature in general. I discuss research on the efficacy of group selection, the roll of indirect genetic effects in affecting the response to selection and the heritability of group‐level traits. I also discuss why the Price multilevel partition should not be used to partition MLS, and why contextual analysis and, by association, direct fitness are appropriate for partitioning MLS. Finally, I discuss conceptual issues around questions concerning the level at which fitness is measured, the units of selection, and I present a brief outline of a model of selection in class‐structured populations. I argue that the results derived from the MLS research tradition can inform kin selection research and models, and provide insights that will allow researchers to avoid conceptual flaws such as those seen in the Gardner model.     

Consequences of group fission for the patterns of relatedness among rhesus macaques

When mammalian social groups exceed their optimal size, they often tend to split. In view of the potential evolutionary benefits, it should be more advantageous for animals to stay with kin, rather than nonkin, during such fission events. In the present study, the spontaneous fission of two social groups, R and S, of rhesus macaques living on Cayo Santiago, Puerto Rico, provided the opportunity to compare the kinship structure of the corresponding parent and daughter groups, using information on both maternal and paternal relatedness. In both instances, maternal half-siblings and pairs of animals from the same family were significantly more prevalent in the fission products than in the parent group. During the split of group R, significantly more paternal half-siblings stayed in the remnants of the parent group than joined the seceding group. Our findings are compatible with previous behavioural studies demonstrating that female primates bias their social behaviour more to maternal than to paternal kin, but that both types of half-siblings prefer each other more than unrelated animals. It remains to be clarified by future research, however, whether the observed co-segregation of paternal half-sibs in our study reflects active choice or is a by-product of the group-specific kin structures, prior to fission.     

Sex,kinship, and the evolution of social manipulation

In recent years kin selection has been widely used to explain social systems and the evolution of complex social traits. However, because a knowledge of kin is a prerequisite of kin selection theory, and because a male has less certainty of kin and, in many cases, few or none available to him within a social group, he will be unable to favor kin or benefit from them as reliably as will a female. It is predicted, therefore, that social strategies involving unrelated individuals will be more common among males than females and suggested that the greater encephalization among higher mammals, particularly primates, allowed complex nonkin strategies of social manipulation to evolve, realizing its greatest sophistication in human political systems. Finally, the question whether selection for certain types of social strategies in males may not have led to differences from females in assessment and manipulation skills is considered.