Abstract
In species that live in family groups, such as cooperative breeders, inbreeding is usually avoided through the recognition of familiar kin. For example, individuals may avoid mating with conspecifics encountered regularly in infancy, as these likely include parents, siblings, and closely related alloparents. Other mechanisms have also been reported, albeit rarely; for example, individuals may compare their own phenotype to that of others, with close matches representing likely relatives (“phenotype matching”). However, determinants of the primary inbreeding avoidance mechanisms used by a given species remain poorly understood. We use 24 years of life history and genetic data to investigate inbreeding avoidance in wild cooperatively breeding banded mongooses (Mungos mungo). We find that inbreeding avoidance occurs within social groups but is far from maximised (mean pedigree relatedness between 351 breeding pairs = 0.144). Unusually for a group-living vertebrate, we find no evidence that females avoid breeding with males with which they are familiar in early life. This is probably explained by communal breeding; females give birth in tight synchrony and pups are cared for communally, thus reducing the reliability of familiarity-based proxies of relatedness. We also found little evidence that inbreeding is avoided by preferentially breeding with males of specific age classes. Instead, females may exploit as-yet unknown proxies of relatedness, for example, through phenotype matching, or may employ postcopulatory inbreeding avoidance mechanisms. Investigation of species with unusual breeding systems helps to identify constraints against inbreeding avoidance and contributes to our understanding of the distribution of inbreeding across species.Significance statementChoosing the right mate is never easy, but it may be particularly difficult for banded mongooses. In most social animals, individuals avoid mating with those that were familiar to them as infants, as these are likely to be relatives. However, we show that this rule does not work in banded mongooses. Here, the offspring of several mothers are raised in large communal litters by their social group, and parents seem unable to identify or direct care towards their own pups. This may make it difficult to recognise relatives based on their level of familiarity and is likely to explain why banded mongooses frequently inbreed. Nevertheless, inbreeding is lower than expected if mates are chosen at random, suggesting that alternative pre- or post-copulatory inbreeding avoidance mechanisms are used.
Highlights
Mating between close relatives usually results in a reduction in fitness, known as inbreeding depression (Darwin 1877)
We evaluated the magnitude of inbreeding avoidance within banded mongoose social group reproducing analysis conducted by Sanderson et al (2015). We extended this analysis by testing the hypotheses that inbreeding is avoided by (i) not breeding with individuals that are familiar from early life or during adulthood, namely communal littermates, maternal littermates, carers and other individuals born in the same group, and potential sons; and (ii) through age-assortative breeding patterns that have previously been identified in banded mongoose groups, such as females breeding either with older males or with partners of similar age (Cant 2000; Nichols et al 2010)
Levels of inbreeding in banded mongoose social groups are lower than would be expected under random within-group mating, as the observed mean relatedness of breeding pairs was significantly below that of randomised pairs
Summary
Mating between close relatives usually results in a reduction in fitness, known as inbreeding depression (Darwin 1877). The dispersal of one or both sexes away from the natal site prior to reproductive maturity occurs in the majority of vertebrates and reduces the probability of inbreeding by minimising encounters between close relatives (Waser and DeWoody 2006; Waser et al 2012). In cooperatively breeding species, sexually mature offspring (known as “helpers”) often remain with their parents and assist in rearing subsequent young (Stacey and Koenig 1990; Koenig et al 1992). Under such circumstances, the pool of mates available to an individual (from within and/or outside of the social group) is likely to vary in relatedness. Inbreeding avoidance requires some form of kin discrimination (Pusey and Wolf 1996; Cornwallis et al 2009), whereby behavioural responses of an individual differ towards kin versus non-kin, based on cues correlated with kinship (Waldman et al 1988; Tang-Martinez 2001; Nichols 2017)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.