Bulletin of Mathematical Biology

, Volume 69, Issue 4, pp 1167–1198 | Cite as

Behavioural Interactions Selecting for Symmetry and Asymmetry in Sexual Reproductive Systems of Eusocial Species

Original Article

Abstract

Understanding the life-history complex of eusociality has remained an enduring problem in evolutionary ecology, partially because natural selection models have considered traits in relative isolation. I aim for a more inclusive model that uses ecological interactions to predict the evolutionary existence of sexual reproduction, sexual reproduction asymmetry, and sex ratios in eusocial species. Using a two-level selection process, with within-population selection on the sex ratio of the sexual caste and between-population selection on the worker sex ratio and the degree of sexual reproduction asymmetry, it is found that a male-haploid genome and a worker caste of pure females is the evolutionary optimum of most initial conditions when, like in eusocial hymenoptera, there is no pair bond between the sexual male and female. That a diploid genome and a worker caste with both males and females is the evolutionary optimum of most initial conditions when, like in eusocial termites, there is a pair bond. That sex-linked genomes may evolve in diploid eusocials, and that the model will not generally maintain sexual reproduction by itself. These results hold for ploidy-levels that behave as quantitative or discrete traits, over a relatively wide range of the relative investment in a sexual male versus sexual female, and for partial sexual systems where the genomic portion with diploid inheritance is either fixed or random.

Keywords

Eusocial Sex ratio Sexual reproduction Sexual asymmetry Termites Hymenoptera Life-history 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alexander, R.D., 1974. The evolution of social behavior. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 4, 325–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boomsma, J.J., 1991. Adaptive colony sex ratios in primitively eusocial bees. Trends Ecol. Evol. 6, 92–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bull, J.J. 1983. Evolution of Sex Determining Mechanisms. Benjamin Cummings, Menlo Park, CA.Google Scholar
  4. Bulmer, M., 1994. Theoretical Evolutionary Ecology. Sinauer Associates Publishers, MA.Google Scholar
  5. Bulmer, M.G., Taylor, P.D., 1981. Worker-queen conflict and sex ratio theory in social Hymenoptera. Heredity 47, 197–207.Google Scholar
  6. Choe, J.C., Crespi, B.J., 1997. The Evolution of Social Behavior in Insects and Arachnids. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  7. Christiansen, F.B., 1991. On conditions for evolutionary stability for a continuously varying character. Am. Nat. 138, 37–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Crespi, B.J., 1996. Comparative analysis of the origins and losses of eusociality: Causal mosaics and historical uniqueness. In: Martins, E.P. (Ed.), Phylogenies and the Comparative Method in Animal Behavior. Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 253–287.Google Scholar
  9. Crozier, R.H., Luykx, P., 1985. The evolution of termite eusociality is unlikely to have been based on a male-haploid analogy. Am. Nat. 126, 867–869.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Crozier, R.H., Pamilo, P., 1996. Evolution of Social Insect Colonies. Sex Allocation and Kin Selection. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  11. Dawkins, R., 1976. The Selfish Gene. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  12. Dawkins, R., 1982. The Extended Phenotype: The Gene as the Unit of Selection. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  13. Duffy, J.E., Morrison, C.L., Rios, R., 2000. Multiple origins of eusociality among sponge-dwelling shrimps (Synalpheus). Evolution 54, 503–730.Google Scholar
  14. Eshel, I., 1983. Evolutionary and continuous stability. J. Theor. Biol. 103, 99–111.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. Eshel, I., Feldman, M.W., 1984. Initial increase of new mutants and some continuity properties of ESS in two-locus systems. Amazoniana 124, 631–640.Google Scholar
  16. Eshel, I., Feldman, M.W., and Bergman, A., 1998. Long-term evolution, short-term evolution, and population genetic theory. J. Theor. Biol. 191, 391–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Eshel, I., Motro, U., 1981. Kin selection and strong evolutionary stability of mutual help. Theor. Popul. Biol. 19, 420–433.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. Eshel, I., Motro, U., Sansone, E., 1997. Continuous stability and evolutionary convergence. J. Theor. Biol. 185, 333–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fisher, R.A., 1930. The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. Clarendon, Oxford.MATHGoogle Scholar
  20. Frank, S.A., Crespi, B.J., 1989. Synergism between sib-rearing and sex ratio in Hymenoptera. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 24, 155–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gadagkar, R., 1991. On testing the role of genetic asymmetries created by haplodiploidy in the evolution of eusociality in the Hymenoptera. J. Gen. 70, 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Grafen, A., 1986. Split sex ratios and the evolutionary origins of eusociality. J. Theor. Biol. 122, 95–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hamilton, W.D., 1964. The genetical evolution of social behaviour. J. Theor. Biol. 7, 1–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hamilton, W.D., 1967. Extraordinary sex ratios. Science 156, 477–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hamilton, W.D., 1972. Altruism and related phenomena, mainly in social insects. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 3, 193–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hölldobler, B., Wilson, E.O., 1990. The Ants. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
  27. Hull, D., 1980. Individuality and selection. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 11, 311–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hull, D., 1981. Units of evolution: A metaphysical essay. In: Jensen, U.L., Harre, R. (Eds.), The Philosophy of Evolution. Harvester, Brighton, pp. 23–44.Google Scholar
  29. Kerr, W.E., 1990. Why are workers in social hymenoptera not males? Rev. Brasil. Genet. 13, 133–136.Google Scholar
  30. Kukuk, P.F., Eickwort, G.C., Raveret-Richter, M., Alexander, B., Gibson, R., Morse, R.A., Ratnieks, F., 1989. Importance of the sting in the evolution of sociality in the hymenoptera. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 82, 1–5.Google Scholar
  31. Lacy, R.C., 1980. The evolution of eusociality in termites: A haplodiploid analogy? Am. Nat. 116, 449–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lacy, R.C., 1984. The evolution of termite eusociality: Reply to Leinaas. Am. Nat. 123, 876–879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Leinaas, H.P., 1983. A haplodiploid analogy in the evolution of termite eusociality? Reply to Lacy. Am. Nat. 121, 302–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Liberman, U., 1988. External stability and ESS: Criteria for initial increase of a mutant allele. J. Math. Biol. 26, 477–485.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  35. MacNair, M.R., 1978. An ESS for the sex ratio in animals with particular reference to the social Hymenoptera. J. Theor. Biol. 70, 449–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Matessi, C., Di Pasquale, C., 1996. Long-term evolution of multilocus traits. J. Theor. Biol. 185, 333–343.Google Scholar
  37. Maynard Smith, J., 1968. Evolution in sexual and asexual populations. Am. Nat. 102, 469–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Maynard Smith, J., 1982. Evolution and the Theory of Games. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.MATHGoogle Scholar
  39. Maynard Smith, J., Price, G.R., 1973. The logic of animal conflict. Nature 246, 15–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mueller, U.G., 1991. Haplodiploidy and the evolution of facultative sex ratios in a primitively eusocial bee. Science 254, 442–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Olmland, K.E., 1997. Examining two standard assumptions of ancestral reconstructions: Repeated loss of dichromatism in dabbling ducks (Anatini). Evolution 51, 1636–1646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Oster, G.F., Eshel, I., Cohen, D., 1977. Worker-queen conflict and the evolution of social insects. Theor. Popul. Biol. 12, 49–85.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  43. Pamilo, P., 1991. Evolution of colony characteristics in social insects. Amazoniana 137, 83–107.Google Scholar
  44. Reeve, H.K., Sherman, P.W., 2001. Optimality and phylogeny: A critique of current thought. In: Orzack, S.H., and Sober, E. (Eds.), Adaptation and Optimality. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 64–113.Google Scholar
  45. Rowell, D.M., 1987. Complex sex-linked translocation heterozygosity: Its genetics and biological significance. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2, 242–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Seger, J., 1983. Partial bivoltinism may cause alternating sex-ratio biases that favour eusociality. Nature 301, 59–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Shaw, R.F., Mohler, J.D., 1953. The selective advantage of the sex ratio. Amazoniana 87, 337–342.Google Scholar
  48. Sober, E., Wilson, D.S., 1998. Unto Others: The Evolution and Psychology of Unselfish Behavior. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  49. Starr, C.K., 1985. Enabling mechanisms in the origin of sociality in the hymenoptera–the sting’s the thing. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 78, 836–840.Google Scholar
  50. Sundström, L., 1994. Sex ratio bias, relatedness asymmetry and queen mating frequency in ants. Nature 367, 266–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Syren, R.M., Luykx, P., 1977. Permanent segmental interchange complex in the termite Incisitermes schwarzi. Nature 266, 167–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Taylor, P.D., 1988. Inclusive fitness models with two sexes. Theor. Popul. Biol. 34, 145–168.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Taylor, P.D., 1989. Evolutionary stability in one-parameter models under weak selection. Theor. Popul. Biol. 36, 125–143.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Thorne, B.L., 1997. Evolution of eusociality in termites. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 28, 27–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Trivers, R.L., Hare, H., 1976. Haplodiploidy and the evolution of social insects. Science 191, 249–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. West-Eberhard, M.J., 1975. The evolution of social behavior by kin selection. Quart. Rev. Biol. 59, 257–290.Google Scholar
  57. Witting, L., 1997. A general Theory of Evolution. By Means of Selection by Density Dependent Competitive Interactions. Peregrine Publisher, URL http://www.peregrine.dk, Århus, 330 pp.
  58. Witting, L., 2002. From asexual to eusocial reproduction by multilevel selection by density dependent competitive interactions. Theor. Popul. Biol. 61, 171–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Witting, L., 2003. Major life-history transitions by deterministic directional natural selection. J. Theor. Biol. 225, 389–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Greenland Institute of Natural ResourcesNuukGreenland

Personalised recommendations