Skip to main content
Log in

Consequences of fluctuating group size for the evolution of cooperation

  • Published:
Journal of Mathematical Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Studies of cooperation have traditionally focused on discrete games such as the well-known prisoner’s dilemma, in which players choose between two pure strategies: cooperation and defection. Increasingly, however, cooperation is being studied in continuous games that feature a continuum of strategies determining the level of cooperative investment. For the continuous snowdrift game, it has been shown that a gradually evolving monomorphic population may undergo evolutionary branching, resulting in the emergence of a defector strategy that coexists with a cooperator strategy. This phenomenon has been dubbed the ‘tragedy of the commune’. Here we study the effects of fluctuating group size on the tragedy of the commune and derive analytical conditions for evolutionary branching. Our results show that the effects of fluctuating group size on evolutionary dynamics critically depend on the structure of payoff functions. For games with additively separable benefits and costs, fluctuations in group size make evolutionary branching less likely, and sufficiently large fluctuations in group size can always turn an evolutionary branching point into a locally evolutionarily stable strategy. For games with multiplicatively separable benefits and costs, fluctuations in group size can either prevent or induce the tragedy of the commune. For games with general interactions between benefits and costs, we derive a general classification scheme based on second derivatives of the payoff function, to elucidate when fluctuations in group size help or hinder cooperation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
€32.70 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Finland)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Axelrod R (1984) The Evolution of Cooperation. Basic Books, New York, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Axelrod R, Hamilton WD (1981) The evolution of cooperation. Science 211: 1390–1396

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Brännström Å, Dieckmann U (2005) Evolutionary dynamics of altruism and cheating among social amoebas. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B 272: 1609–1616

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown SP (1999) Cooperation and conflict in host-manipulating parasites. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B 266(1431): 1899–1904

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown SP, Johnstone RA (2001) Cooperation in the dark: signalling and collective action in quorum-sensing bacteria. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B 268: 961–965

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buss LW (1982) Somatic cell parasitism and the evolution of somatic tissue compatibility. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B 79: 5337–5341

    Google Scholar 

  • Dao DN, Kessin RH, Ennis HL (2000) Developmental cheating and the evolutionary biology of Dictyostelium and Myxococcus. Microbiology 146: 1505–1512

    Google Scholar 

  • Dieckmann U, Law R (1996) The dynamical theory of coevolution: a derivation from stochastic ecological processes. J Math Biol 34: 579–612

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Doebeli M, Hauert C (2005) Models of cooperation based on the Prisoner’s Dilemma and the Snowdrift game. Ecol Lett 8: 748–766

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doebeli M, Hauert C, Killingback T (2004) The evolutionary origin of cooperators and defectors. Science 306: 859–863

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fortunato A, Queller DC, Strassman JE (2003) A linear dominance hierarchy among clones in chimeras of the social amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum. J Evol Biol 16: 438–445

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foster KR (2004) Diminishing returns in social evolution: the not-so-tragic commons. J Evol Biol 17(5): 1058–1072

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Geritz SAH (2005) Resident-invader dynamics and the coexistence of similar strategies. J Math Biol 50: 67–82

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Geritz SAH, Kisdi E, Meszéna G, Metz JAJ (1998) Evolutionary singular strategies and the adaptive growth and branching of the evolutionary tree. Evol Ecol 12: 35–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geritz SAH, Gyllenberg M, Jacobs FJA, Parvinen K (2002) Invasion dynamics and attractor inheritance. J Math Biol 44: 548–560

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Gore J, Youk H, van Oudenaarden A (2009) Snowdrift game dynamics and facultative cheating in yeast. Nature 459: 253–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greig D, Travisano M (2004) The Prisoner’s Dilemma and polymorphism in yeast SUC genes. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B 271: S25–S26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton WD (1963) The evolution of altruistic behavior. Am Nat 97: 354–356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton WD (1964) The genetical theory of social behaviour I, II. J Theor Biol 7: 1–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton WD (1972) Altruism and related phenomena, mainly in social insects. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 3: 193–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardin G (1968) The tragedy of the commons. Science 162: 1243–1248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hauert C, Holmes M, Doebeli M (2002) Volunteering as Red Queen mechanism for cooperation in public goods games. Science 296: 1129–1132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hauert C, Holmes M, Doebeli M (2006) Evolutionary games and population dynamics: maintenance of cooperation in public goods games. Proc R Soc Londo Ser B 273: 2565–2570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hauert C, Wakano JY, Doebeli M (2008) Ecological public goods games: cooperation and bifurcation. Theor Popul Biol 73: 257–263

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Hofbauer J, Sigmund K (1998) Evolutionary Games and Population Dynamics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchinson GE (1961) The paradox of the plankton. Am Nat 95: 137–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kagel JH, Roth AE (1995) The Handbook of Experimental Economics. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Killingback T, Doebeli M, Knowlton N (1999) Variable investment, the Continuous Prisoner’s Dilemma, and the origin of cooperation. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B 266: 1723–1728

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kun A, Boza G, Scheuring I (2006) Asynchronous snowdrift game with synergistic effect as a model of cooperation. Behav Ecol 17: 633–641

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mar G, Denis PS (1994) Chaos in cooperation – continuous-valued Prisoner’s Dilemmas in infinite-valued logic. Int J Bifurcat Chaos 4: 943–958

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Maynard Smith J (1982) Evolution and the Theory of Games. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Maynard Smith J, Szathmáry E (1995) The Major Transitions in Evolution. W. H. Freeman & Co., Oxford, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Metz JAJ, Nisbet RM, Geritz SAH (1992) How should we define “fitness” for general ecological scenarios?. Trends Ecol Evol 7: 198–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Metz JAJ, Geritz SAH, Meszéna G, Jacobs FJA, van Heerwaarden JS (1996) Adaptive dynamics: a geometrical study of the consequences of nearly faithful reproduction. In: Strien SJ, Lunel SMV (eds) Stochastic and spatial structures of dynamical systems. North Holland, Amsterdam, pp 183–231

    Google Scholar 

  • Nowak MA (2006) Five rules for the evolution of cooperation. Science 314: 1560–1563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parvinen K (2010) Adaptive dynamics of cooperation may prevent the coexistence of defectors and cooperators and even cause extinction. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B (in press)

  • Poulin R, Vickery WL (1995) Cleaning symbiosis as an evolutionary game: to cheat or not to cheat?. J Theor Biol 175: 63–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rainey PB, Rainey K (2003) Evolution of cooperation and conflict in experimental bacterial populations. Nature 425: 72–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raper KB (1984) The Dictyostelids. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapoport A (1966) The game of chicken. Am Behav Sci 10: 10–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross-Gillespie A, Gardner A, Buckling A, West SA, Griffin AS (2009) Density dependence and cooperation: theory and a test with bacteria. Evolution 63: 2315–2325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strassmann JE, Zhu Y, Queller DC (2000) Altruism and social cheating in the social amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum. Nature 408: 965–967

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sugden SR (1986) The Economics of Rights, Cooperation and Welfare. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Sumpter DJT, Brännström Å (2008) Synergy in social communication. In: Hughes D (eds) Social communication. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 191–209

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Trivers RL (1971) The evolution of reciprocal altruism. Q Rev Biol 46: 35–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner PE, Chao L (2003) Escape from Prisoner’s Dilemma in RNA phage phi 6. Am Nat 161: 497–505

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson DS (1980) The Natural Selection of Populations and Communities. Benjamin-Cummings, Menlo Park, CA, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson DS, Dugatkin LA (1997) Group selection and assortative interactions. Am Nat 149: 336–351

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Åke Brännström.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brännström, Å., Gross, T., Blasius, B. et al. Consequences of fluctuating group size for the evolution of cooperation. J. Math. Biol. 63, 263–281 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00285-010-0367-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00285-010-0367-3

Mathematics Subject Classification (2000)

Navigation