Abstract

Different forms of sociality have evolved via unique evolutionary trajectories. However, it remains unknown to what extent trajectories of social evolution depend on the specific characteristics of different species. Our approach to studying such trajectories is to use evolutionary case-studies, so that we can investigate how grouping co-evolves with a multitude of individual characteristics. Here we focus on anti-predator vigilance and foraging. We use an individual-based model, where behavioral mechanisms are specified, and costs and benefits are not predefined. We show that evolutionary changes in grouping alter selection pressures on vigilance, and vice versa. This eco-evolutionary feedback generates an evolutionary progression from “leader-follower” societies to “fission-fusion” societies, where cooperative vigilance in groups is maintained via a balance between within- and between-group selection. Group-level selection is generated from an assortment that arises spontaneously when vigilant and non-vigilant foragers have different grouping tendencies. The evolutionary maintenance of small groups, and cooperative vigilance in those groups, is therefore achieved simultaneously. The evolutionary phases, and the transitions between them, depend strongly on behavioral mechanisms. Thus, integrating behavioral mechanisms and eco-evolutionary feedback is critical for understanding what kinds of intermediate stages are involved during the evolution of particular forms of sociality.

Highlights

  • Understanding how different forms of sociality evolve is a major challenge

  • To determine how social evolution is affected by the specifics of individuals and eco-evolutionary feedback, we examined a simplistic evolutionary case-study, focusing on the co-evolution between grouping, vigilance and foraging

  • Our results reveal an evolutionary trajectory with multiple evolutionary phases with different forms of sociality, namely (i) societies with leaderfollower pairs, and (ii) small-group societies with fission-fusion dynamics

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Sociality has probably evolved due to common evolutionary pressures, such as predation [1,2,3], the evolutionary consequences of grouping differ across taxonomic groups. Compared to antelope, primates typically have stronger social bonds and greater relative brain size [4, 5]. Differences between these two taxonomic groups probably depend on how grouping has co-evolved with other aspects of biology such as morphology, diet, defense of resources, life-history parameters, and cultural inheritance [6,7,8,9,10]. PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0117027 January 28, 2015

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call