Kinship reduces alloparental care in cooperative cichlids where helpers pay-to-stay

Nature Communications

Volumn 4, Issue , 2013, Pages

  Zöttl, Markus ^a,b   Heg, Dik ^a   Chervet, Noémie ^a   Taborsky, Michael ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BERN   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALLOPARENTAL CARE; CANNIBALISM; CICHLID; DOMINANCE; EGG PRODUCTION; FEMALE; FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEM; KINSHIP;

ARTICLE; BODY SIZE; BREEDING; CANNIBALISM; CICHLID; CLUTCH SIZE; CONSANGUINITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; NONHUMAN; PREDICTION; PROGENY; REPRODUCTION; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; ANIMAL; ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; COOPERATION; HISTOLOGY; MALE; PHYSIOLOGY; SOCIAL DOMINANCE;

ANIMALS; BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; BREEDING; CICHLIDS; COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; HELPING BEHAVIOR; MALE; REPRODUCTION; SOCIAL DOMINANCE;

MLCS; MLOWN;

EID: 84878367291     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20411723     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ncomms2344     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Hamilton, W. D. The genetical evolution of social behaviour I u. II. J. Theor. Biol. 7, 1-52 (1964).
2. Wilson, E. O. The Insect Societies (Bellknap Press, 1971).
3. Bourke, A. Principles of Social Evolution (Oxford University Press, 2011).
4. Griffin, A. S. & West, S. A. Kin discrimination and the benefit of helping in cooperatively breeding vertebrates. Science 302, 634-636 (2003). (Pubitemid 37310917)
5. Komdeur, J. The effect of kinship on helping in the cooperative breeding seychelles warbler (Acrocephalus sechellensis). Proc. R. Soc 256, 47-52 (1994).
6. Russell, A. F. & Hatchwell, B. J. Experimental evidence for kin-biased helping in a cooperatively breeding vertebrate. Proc. R. Soc. 268, 2169-2174 (2001). (Pubitemid 33016095)
7. Nam, K. B., Simeoni, M., Sharp, S. P. & Hatchwell, B. J. Kinship affects investment by helpers in a cooperatively breeding bird. Proc. R. Soc. 277, 3299-3306 (2010).
8. Clarke, M. F. Cooperative breeding by the australian bell miner Manorina melanophrys Latham-a test of kin selection theory. Behav. Ecol. 14, 137-146 (1984).
9. Wright, J. et al. Helping effort increases with relatedness in bell miners, but 'unrelated' helpers of both sexes still provide substantial care. Proc. R. Soc. 277, 437-445 (2010).
10. Clutton-Brock, T. H. et al. Individual contributions to babysitting in a cooperative mongoose, Suricata suricatta. Proc. R. Soc. 267, 301-305 (2000). (Pubitemid 30098987)
11. Le Vin, A. L. et al. Individual variation in helping in a cooperative breeder: relatedness versus behavioural type. Anim. Behav. 82, 467-477 (2011).
12. Canestrari, D., Marcos, J. M. & Baglione, V. Effect of parentage and relatedness on the individual contribution to cooperative chick care in carrion crows Corvus corone corone. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 57, 422-428 (2005). (Pubitemid 40383631)
13. Leadbeater, E., Carruthers, J. M., Green, J. P., van Heusden, J. & Field, J. Unrelated helpers in a primitively eusocial wasp: is helping tailored towards direct fitness? PLoS One 5, e11997 (2010).
14. Ligon, J. D. & Ligon, S. H. Communal breeding in Green Woodhoopoes as a case for reciprocity. Nature 276, 496-498 (1978).
15. Reyer, H. U. Breeder-helper-interactions in the pied kingfisher reflect the costs and benefits of cooperative breeding. Behaviour 96, 277-303 (1986).
16. Stiver, K. A. et al. Relatedness and helping in fish: examining the theoretical predictions. Proc. R. Soc. 272, 1593-1599 (2005). (Pubitemid 41414693)
17. Clutton-Brock, T. Cooperation between non-kin in animal societies. Nature 462, 51-57 (2009).
18. Leimar, O. & Hammerstein, P. Cooperation for direct fitness benefits. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 365, 2619-2626 (2010).
19. Taborsky, M. Broodcare helpers in the cichlid fish Lamprologus brichardi-their costs and benefits. Anim. Behav. 32, 1236-1252 (1984).
20. Leadbeater, E. et al. Nest Inheritance is the missing source of direct fitness in a primitively eusocial insect. Science 333, 874-876 (2011).
21. Kokko, H., Johnstone, R. A. & Clutton-Brock, T. H. The evolution of cooperative breeding through group augmentation. Proc. R. Soc. 268, 187-196 (2001). (Pubitemid 32147366)
22. Cockburn, A. Evolution of helping behavior in cooperatively breeding birds. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 29, 141-177 (1998). (Pubitemid 29033029)
23. Clutton-Brock, T. H. et al. Predation, group size and mortality in a cooperative mongoose, Suricata suricatta. J. Anim. Ecol. 68, 672-683 (1999). (Pubitemid 29342008)
24. Heg, D., Brouwer, L., Bachar, Z. & Taborsky, M. Large group size yields group stability in the cooperatively breeding cichlid Neolamprologus pulcher. Behaviour 142, 1615-1641 (2005). (Pubitemid 47226408)
25. Kingma, S. A., Hall, M. L., Arriero, E. & Peters, A. Multiple benefits of cooperative breeding in purple-crowned fairy-wrens: a consequence of fidelity? J. Anim. Ecol. 79, 757-768 (2010).
26. Gaston, A. J. The evolution of group territorial behavior and cooperative breeding. Am. Nat. 112, 1091-1100 (1978).
27. Kokko, H., Johnstone, R. A. & Wright, J. The evolution of parental and alloparental effort in cooperatively breeding groups: when should helpers pay to stay? Behav. Ecol. 13, 291-300 (2002). (Pubitemid 35249703)
28. Hamilton, I. M. & Taborsky, M. Unrelated helpers will not fully compensate for costs imposed on breeders when they pay to stay. Proc. R. Soc. 272, 445-454 (2005). (Pubitemid 41411108)
29. Taborsky, M. Breeder-helper conflict in a cichlid fish with broodcare helpers-an experimental analysis. Behaviour 95, 45-75 (1985).
30. Reeve, H. K. Queen activation of lazy workers in colonies of the eusocial naked mole-rat. Nature 358, 147-149 (1992).
31. Mulder, R. A. & Langmore, N. E. Dominant males punish helpers for temporary defection in superb fairy-wrens. Anim. Behav. 45, 830-833 (1993).
32. Cant, M. A. The role of threats in animal cooperation. Proc. R. Soc. 278, 170-178 (2011).
33. West, S. A., Griffin, A. S. & Gardner, A. Evolutionary explanations for cooperation. Curr. Biol. 17, R661-R672 (2007). (Pubitemid 47259365)
34. Skubic, E., Taborsky, M., McNamara, J. M. & Houston, A. I. When to parasitize? a dynamic optimization model of reproductive strategies in a cooperative breeder. J. Theor. Biol. 227, 487-501 (2004).
35. Heg, D., Jutzeler, E., Mitchell, J. S. & Hamilton, I. M. Helpful female subordinate cichlids are more likely to reproduce. PLoS One 4, e5458 (2009).
36. Grantner, A. & Taborsky, M. The metabolic rates associated with resting, and with the performance of agonistic, submissive and digging behaviours in the cichlid fish Neolamprologus pulcher (Pisces: Cichlidae). J. Comp. Physiol. B 168, 427-433 (1998). (Pubitemid 28403886)
37. Taborsky, M. & Grantner, A. Behavioural time-energy budgets of cooperatively breeding Neolamprologus pulcher (Pisces: Cichlidae). Anim. Behav. 56, 1375-1382 (1998). (Pubitemid 29053274)
38. Heg, D. & Taborsky, M. Helper response to experimentally manipulated predation risk in the cooperatively breeding cichlid Neolamprologus pulcher. PLoS One 5, e10784 (2010).
39. Wong, M. & Balshine, S. The evolution of cooperative breeding in the African cichlid fish, Neolamprologus pulcher. Biolog. Rev. 86, 511-530 (2011).
40. Heg, D. & Hamilton, I. M. Tug-of-war over reproduction in a cooperatively breeding cichlid. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 62, 1249-1257 (2008).
41. Trivers, R. L. The evolution of reciprocal altruism. Qu. Rev. Biol. 46, 35-57 (1971).
42. Dierkes, P. et al. Genetic relatedness in groups is sex-specific and declines with age of helpers in a cooperatively breeding cichlid. Ecol. Lett. 8, 968-975 (2005). (Pubitemid 41247272)
43. Balshine-Earn, S., Neat, F. C., Reid, H. & Taborsky, M. Paying to stay or paying to breed? field evidence for direct benefits of helping behavior in a cooperatively breeding fish. Behav. Ecol. 9, 432-438 (1998).
44. Bergmuller, R. & Taborsky, M. Experimental manipulation of helping in a cooperative breeder: helpers 'pay to stay' by pre-emptive appeasement. Anim. Behav. 69, 19-28 (2005). (Pubitemid 40033307)
45. Bruintjes, R. & Taborsky, M. Helpers in a cooperative breeder pay a high price to stay: effects of demand, helper size and sex. Anim. Behav. 75, 1843-1850 (2008).
46. Bergmuller, R., Heg, D. & Taborsky, M. Helpers in a cooperatively breeding cichlid stay and pay or disperse and breed, depending on ecological constraints. Proc. R. Soc. 272, 325-331 (2005). (Pubitemid 40731841)
47. Bruintjes, R. & Taborsky, M. Size-dependent task specialization in a cooperative cichlid in response to experimental variation of demand. Anim. Behav. 81, 387-394 (2011).
48. Heg, D., Bachar, Z., Brouwer, L. & Taborsky, M. Predation risk is an ecological constraint for helper dispersal in a cooperatively breeding cichlid. Proc. R. Soc. 271, 2367-2374 (2004).
49. Bruintjes, R., Bonfils, D., Heg, D. & Taborsky, M. Paternity of subordinates raises cooperative effort in cichlids. PLoS One 6, e25673 (2011).
50. Dierkes, P., Taborsky, M. & Kohler, U. Reproductive parasitism of broodcare helpers in a cooperatively breeding fish. Behav. Ecol. 10, 510-515 (1999).
51. Taborsky, B., Skubic, E. & Bruintjes, R. Mothers adjust egg size to helper number in a cooperatively breeding cichlid. Behav. Ecol. 18, 652-657 (2007). (Pubitemid 47216473)
52. Mileva, V. R., Gilmour, K. M. & Balshine, S. Effects of maternal stress on egg characteristics in a cooperatively breeding fish. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. A. 158, 22-29 (2011).
53. Taborsky, M. & Limberger, D. Helpers in fish. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 8, 143-145 (1981).
54. Balshine, S. et al. Correlates of group size in a cooperatively breeding cichlid fish (Neolamprologus pulcher). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 50, 134-140 (2001). (Pubitemid 32635601)
55. Le Vin, A., Mable, B. & Arnold, K. Kin recognition via phenotype matching in a cooperatively breeding cichlid, Neolamprologus pulcher. Anim. Behav. 79, 1109-1114 (2010).
56. Siemens, M. Broodcare or egg cannibalism by parents and helpers in Neolamprologus brichardi (Poll 1986) (Pisces: Cichlidae): a study on behavioural mechanisms. Ethol 84, 60-80 (1990).