Evolutionary Psychological Science

, Volume 3, Issue 2, pp 181–191 | Cite as

Social Epistasis Amplifies the Fitness Costs of Deleterious Mutations, Engendering Rapid Fitness Decline Among Modernized Populations

  • Michael A. Woodley of MenieEmail author
  • Matthew A. Sarraf
  • Radomir N. Pestow
  • Heitor B. F. Fernandes
Theoretical Article


Deleterious mutations are typically understood exclusively in terms of their harmful effects on carrier organisms. But there are convincing reasons to think that such adverse effects are not confined to the individual level. We argue that in social species, interorganismal gene-gene interactions, which in previous literatures have been termed social epistasis, allow genomes carrying deleterious mutations to reduce via group-level pleiotropy the fitness of others, including noncarriers. This fitness reduction occurs by way of degradation of group-level processes that optimize the reproductive ecology of a population for intergroup competition through, among other mechanisms, suppression of free-riding. Such damage to group regulatory processes suggests a hidden role for the accumulation of behavior-altering "spiteful" mutations in the dynamics of the demographic transition—these mutations may have contributed to the maladaptive outcomes of this process, such as widespread subreplacement fertility. A structured population model is presented describing aspects of this social epistasis amplification model. This phenomenon is also considered as a potential explanation for the results of Calhoun’s mouse utopia experiments, which provide an opportunity to directly test a major prediction stemming from the model.


Mutation accumulation Mutation load paradox Pathological altruism Spiteful mutations Structured population modeling Social epistasis 



We are grateful to two anonymous reviewers for comments that substantially improved this manuscript. We are especially grateful also to Prof. AJ Figueredo and Dr. Bruce Charlton for detailed discussion of and commentary on several of the ideas put forward in the present work.


  1. Ajie, B. C., Estes, S., Lynch, M., & Phillips, P. C. (2005). Behavioral degradation under mutation accumulation. Genetics, 170, 655–660.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. Arslan, R.C., Willführ, K.P., Frans, E., Verweij, K.J.H., Myrskylä, M., Voland, E., … Penke, L. (2016). Older fathers’ children have lower evolutionary fitness across four centuries and in four populations. BioRxiv, 042788.Google Scholar
  3. Barry, T. D., Grafeman, S. J., Bader, S. H., & Davis, S. E. (2011). Narcissism, positive illusory bias, and externalizing behaviors. In C. T. Barry, P. K. Kerig, K. K. Stellwagen, & T. D. Barry (Eds.), Narcissism and Machiavellianism in youth: implications for the development of adaptive and maladaptive behavior (pp. 159–173). Washington: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Basten, S., Lutz, W. & Scherbov, S. (2013). Very long range global population scenarios to 2300 and the implications of sustained low fertility. Demographic Research, 28, 1145–1166.Google Scholar
  5. Benatar, D. (2006). Better never to have been: the harm of coming into existence. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  6. Blaxill, M. F. (2004). What’s going on? The question of time trends in autism. Public Health Reports, 119, 536–551.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Bryant, E. H., & Reed, D. H. (1999). Fitness decline under relaxed selection in captive populations. Conservation Biology, 13, 665–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Budnik, A., & Henneberg, M. (2017). Worldwide increase of obesity is related to the reduced opportunity for natural selection. PLOS ONE, 12, e0170098.Google Scholar
  9. Caldwell, J. C., Caldwell, B. K., Caldwell, P., McDonald, P. F., & Schindlmayr, T. (2006). Demographic transition theory. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  10. Calhoun, J. B. (1973). Death squared: the explosive growth and demise of a mouse population. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 66, 80–88.Google Scholar
  11. Center for Disease Control. (2010). Increasing prevalence of parent-reported attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder among children—United States, 2003 and 2007. Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report, 59, 1439–1443.Google Scholar
  12. Charlton, B. G. (2009). Clever sillies: why high IQ people tend to be deficient in common sense. Medical Hypotheses, 73, 867–870.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Chiao, J. Y., & Blizinsky, K. D. (2010). Culture-gene coevolution of individualism-collectivism and the serotonin transporter gene. Proceedings: Biological Sciences, 277, 529–537.Google Scholar
  14. Clark, G. (2007). A farewell to alms: a brief economic history of the world. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Cushing, J.M. (1998). An introduction to structured population models. Conference Series in Applied Mathematics, 7 1, SIAM, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  16. D’Onofrio, B. M., Rickert, M. E., Frans, E., Kuja-Halkola, R., Almqvist, C., Sjölander, A., & Lichtenstein, P. (2014). Paternal age at childbearing and offspring psychiatric and academic morbidity. JAMA Psychiatry, 71, 432.Google Scholar
  17. Dawkins, R. (1982). The extended phenotype: the gene as the unit of selection. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Dutton, E., & van der Linden, D. (2015). Who are the “Clever Sillies”? The intelligence, personality, and motives of clever silly originators and those who follow them. Intelligence, 49, 57–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Eckersley, R. (2012). Whatever happened to Western civilization? The cultural crisis, 20 years later. The Futurist, 46, 16–22.Google Scholar
  20. Fieder, M., & Huber, S. (2015). Paternal age predicts offspring chances of marriage and reproduction. American Journal of Human Biology, 27, 339–343.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Gayle, D. (2016). Drug-related deaths hit record levels in England and Wales. The Guardian. Retrieved November 22, 2016, from
  22. Goldstone, J. A., Kaufmann, E., & Toft, M. D. (2011). Political demography: how population changes are reshaping international security and national politics. Boulder: Paradigm.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hawrylycz, M. J., Lein, E. S., Guillozet-Bongaarts, A. L., Shen, E. H., Ng, L., Miller, J. A., & Jones, A. R. (2012). An anatomically comprehensive atlas of the adult human brain transcriptome. Nature, 489, 391–399.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Heiderstadt, K. M., Vandenbergh, D. J., Gyekis, J. P., & Blizard, D. A. (2014). Communal nesting increases pup growth but has limited effects on adult behavior and neurophysiology in inbred mice. Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science, 53, 152–160.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. Houle, D. (2000). Is there a g factor for fitness? In G. R. Bock, J. A. Goode, & K. Webb (Eds.), The nature of intelligence (pp. 149–170). Chichester: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Huber, S., & Fieder, M. (2014). Advanced paternal age is associated with lower facial attractiveness. Evolution & Human Behavior, 35, 298–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Inglehart, R. F. (1977). The silent revolution: changing values and political styles among Western publics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Inglehart, R., & Appel, D. (1989). The rise of postmaterialist values and changing religious orientations, gender roles and sexual norms. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 1, 45–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Inglehart, R. F., & Welzel, C. (2005). Modernization, cultural change, and democracy: the human development sequence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ingraham, C. (2015). Americans are drinking themselves to death at record rates. Washington Post. Retrieved November 29, 2016, from
  31. Jones, D. N., & Figueredo, A. J. (2012). The core of darkness: uncovering the heart of the dark triad. European Journal of Personality, 27, 521–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kanazawa, S. (2005). An empirical test of a possible solution to “the central theoretical problem of human sociobiology”. Journal of Cultural & Evolutionary Psychology, 3, 255–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Keightley, P. D., & Caballero, A. (1997). Genomic mutation rates for lifetime reproductive output and lifespan in Caenorhabditis elegans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 94, 3823–3827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kimmerle, E. H., & Jantz, R. L. (2006). Secular trends in craniofacial asymmetry studied by geometric morphometry and generalized procrustes methods. In D. E. Slice (Ed.), Modern morphometrics in physical anthropology (pp. 247–263). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  35. Klein, T. (1990). Postmaterialismus und generatives Verhalten. Zeitschrift Für Soziologie, 19, 57–64.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Kondrashov, A. S., & Crow, J. F. (1993). A molecular approach to estimating the human deleterious mutation rate. Human Mutation, 2, 229–234.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Kong, A., Frigge, M. L., Masson, G., Besenbacher, S., Sulem, P., Magnusson, G., & Stefansson, K. (2012). Rate of de novo mutations and the importance of father’s age to disease risk. Nature, 488, 471–475.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. Lasch, C. (1979). The culture of narcissism: American life in an age of diminishing expectations. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  39. Laursen, T. M., Munk-Olsen, T., Nordentoft, M., & Mortensen, P. B. (2007). A comparison of selected risk factors for unipolar depressive disorder, bipolar affective disorder, schizoaffective disorder, and schizophrenia from a Danish population-based cohort. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 68, 1673–1681.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Lesecque, Y., Keightley, P. D., & Eyre-Walker, A. (2012). A resolution of the mutation load paradox in humans. Genetics, 191, 1321–1330.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. Linksvayer, T. A. (2007). Ant species differences determined by epistasis between brood and worker genomes. PloS One, 2, e994.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. Lynch, M. (2016). Mutation and human exceptionalism: our future genetic load. Genetics, 202, 869–875.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. Lynch, M., Sung, W., Morris, K., Coffey, N., Landry, C. R., Dopman, E. B., & Thomas, W. K. (2008). A genome-wide view of the spectrum of spontaneous mutations in yeast. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105, 9272–9277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. MacDonald, K. B. (1994). A people that shall dwell alone: Judaism as a group evolutionary strategy. Westport: Praeger.Google Scholar
  45. MacDonald, K. B. (2008). Effortful control, explicit processing and the regulation of human evolved predispositions. Psychological Review, 115, 1012–1031.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. MacDonald, K. B. (2009). Evolution, psychology, and a conflict theory of culture. Evolutionary Psychology, 7, 208–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. MacDonald, K.B. (2010). Evolution and a dual processing theory of culture: applications to moral idealism and political philosophy. Politics & Culture, 1.Google Scholar
  48. Mace, R. (2000). Evolutionary ecology of human life history. Animal Behavior, 59, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. McManus, I. C., Moore, J., Freegard, M., & Rawles, R. (2010). Science in the making: right hand, left hand. III: Estimating historical rates of left-handedness. Laterality, 15, 186–208.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Meikle, J. (2016). Alcohol-related deaths in England up 4% in one year. The Guardian. Retrieved November 20, 2016, from
  51. Meisenberg, G. (2011). Secularization and desecularization in our time. The Journal of Social, Political & Economic Studies, 36, 318–359.Google Scholar
  52. Miller, G. F. (2000). Mental traits as fitness indicators: expanding evolutionary psychology’s adaptationism. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 907, 62–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Miller, G. (2007). Sexual selection for moral virtues. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 82, 97–125.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Mukai, T. (1964). The genetic structure of natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster. 1. Spontaneous mutation rate of polygenes controlling viability. Genetics, 50, 1–19.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  55. Muller, H. J. (1950). Our load of mutations. American Journal of Human Genetics, 2, 111–176.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  56. Oakley, B. A. (2013). Concepts and implications of altruism bias and pathological altruism. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 110, 10408–10415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Oakley, B., Knafo, A., Madhavan, G., & Wilson, D. S. (Eds.). (2012). Pathological altruism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Perkins, A. M. (2016). The welfare trait: how state benefits affect personality. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Perkins, A. M., Cserjesi, R., Ettinger, U., Kumari, V., Martin, N. G., & Arden, R. (2013). Personality and occupational markers of ‘solid citizenship’ are associated with having fewer children. Personality & Individual Differences, 55, 871–876.Google Scholar
  60. Pflüger, L. S., Oberzaucher, E., Katina, S., Holzleitner, I. J., & Grammer, K. (2012). Cues to fertility: perceived attractiveness and facial shape predict reproductive success. Evolution & Human Behavior, 33, 708–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Pinker, S. (2011). The better angels of our nature: why violence has declined. New York: Viking.Google Scholar
  62. Potter, M. (Ed.). (1985). The BALB/c mouse: genetics and immunology. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  63. Rahbari, R., Wuster, A., Lindsay, S. J., & Hurles, M. E. (2016). Timing, rates and spectra of human germline mutation. Nature Genetics, 48, 126–133.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Richerson, P. J., & Boyd, R. (2005). Not by genes alone: how culture transformed human evolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  65. Rubin, E. L. (2015). Soul, self, and society: the new morality and the modern state. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  66. Rudd, R. A., Aleshire, N., Zibbell, J. E., & Gladden, R. M. (2016). Increases in drug and opioid overdose deaths—United States, 2000–2014. Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report, 64, 1378–1382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Rühli, F. J., & Henneberg, M. (2013). New perspectives on evolutionary medicine: the relevance of microevolution for human health and disease. BMC Medicine, 11, 115.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  68. Rushton, J.P., & Irwing, P. (2011). The general factor of personality: normal and abnormal. In: T. Chamorro-Premuzic, S.v. Stumm & A. Furnham (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of individual differences (pp. 132–161). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  69. Saha, S., Barnett, A. G., Buka, S. L., & McGrath, J. J. (2009). Maternal age and paternal age are associated with distinct childhood behavioural outcomes in a general population birth cohort. Schizophrenia Research, 115, 130–135.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Sandler, L. (2013). Having it all without having children. Time Magazine. Retrieved January 15, 2017, from
  71. Shabalina, S. A., Yampolsky, L. Y., & Kondrashov, A. S. (1997). Rapid decline of fitness in panmictic populations of Drosophila melanogaster maintained under relaxed natural selection. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 94, 13034–13039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Silverman, J. L., Yang, M., Lord, C., & Crawley, J. N. (2010). Behavioural phenotyping assays for mouse models of autism. Nature Reviews. Neuroscience, 11, 490–502.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  73. Sinervo, B., Clobert, J., Miles, D. B., McAdam, A., & Lancaster, L. T. (2008). The role of pleiotropy vs signaler-receiver gene epistasis in life history trade-offs: dissecting the genomic architecture of organismal design in social systems. Heredity, 101, 197–211.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. Spain, S. L., Pedroso, I., Kadeva, N., Miller, M. B., Iacono, W. G., Mcgue, M., & M.A., S. (2015). A genome-wide analysis of putative functional and exonic variation associated with extremely high intelligence. Molecular Psychiatry, 21, 1145–1151.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  75. Spurk, D., Keller, A. C., & Hirschi, A. (2015). Do bad guys get ahead or fall behind? Relationships of the dark triad of personality with objective and subjective career success. Social Psychological & Personality Science, 7, 113–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Twenge, J. M., & Campbell, W. K. (2009). The narcissism epidemic: living in the age of entitlement. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  77. Twenge, J. M., Zhang, L., & Im, C. (2004). It’s beyond my control: a cross-temporal meta-analysis of increasing externality in locus of control, 1960–2002. Personality & Social Psychology Review, 8, 308–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Twenge, J. M., Gentile, B., Dewall, C. N., Ma, D., Lacefield, K., & Schurtz, D. R. (2010). Birth cohort increases in psychopathology among young Americans, 1938–2007: a crosstemporal meta-analysis of the MMPI. Clinical Psychology Review, 30, 145–154.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. Volk, T., & Atkinson, J. (2013). Infant and child death in the human environment of evolutionary adaptation. Evolution & Human Behavior, 34, 182–192.Google Scholar
  80. Wattenberg, B. J. (1985). The good news is the bad news is wrong. Washington: American Enterprise Institute.Google Scholar
  81. Way, B. M., & Lieberman, M. D. (2010). Is there a genetic contribution to cultural differences? Collectivism, individualism and genetic markers of social sensitivity. Social Cognitive & Affective Neuroscience, 5, 203–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Welzel, C. (2013). Freedom rising: human empowerment and the quest for emancipation. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Wilson, D. S. (2002). Darwin’s cathedral: evolution, religion, and the nature of society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Wong, W. S., Solomon, B. D., Bodian, D. L., Kothiyal, P., Eley, G., Huddleston, K. C., & Niederhuber, J. E. (2016). New observations on maternal age effect on germline de novo mutations. Nature Communications, 7, 10486.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  85. Woodley, M. A. (2010). Are high-IQ individuals deficient in common sense? A critical examination of the ‘clever sillies’ hypothesis. Intelligence, 38, 471–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Woodley of Menie, M. A., & Kanazawa, S. (2017). Paternal age negatively predicts offspring attractiveness in two, large, nationally representative datasets. Personality & Individual Differences, 106, 217–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Woodley of Menie, M. A., Reeve, C. L., Kanazawa, S., Meisenberg, G., Fernandes, H. B. F., & Cabeza de Baca, T. (2016a). Contemporary phenotypic selection on intelligence is (mostly) directional: an analysis of three, population representative samples. Intelligence, 59, 109–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Woodley of Menie, M. A., & Fernandes, H. B. F. (2016). The secular decline in general intelligence from decreasing developmental stability: theoretical and empirical considerations. Personality & Individual Differences, 92, 194–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Woodley of Menie, M.A., Cabeza de Baca, T., Fernandes, H.B.F., Madison, G., & Figueredo, A.J. (2016b). Slow and steady wins the race: K positively predicts fertility in the USA and Sweden. Evolutionary Psychological Science. in press. doi: 10.1007/s40806-016-0077-1.
  90. Woodley, M. A., & Figueredo, A. J. (2013). Historical variability in heritable general intelligence: its evolutionary origins and socio-cultural consequences. Buckingham: Buckingham University Press.Google Scholar
  91. Woods, R. (2008). Long-term trends in fetal mortality: implications for developing countries. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 86, 460–466.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael A. Woodley of Menie
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Matthew A. Sarraf
    • 3
  • Radomir N. Pestow
    • 1
  • Heitor B. F. Fernandes
    • 4
  1. 1.Technische Universität ChemnitzChemnitzGermany
  2. 2.Center Leo Apostel for Interdisciplinary StudiesVrije Universiteit BrusselBrusselsBelgium
  3. 3.Cornell UniversityIthacaUSA
  4. 4.Department of PsychologyUniversity of ArizonaTucsonUSA

Personalised recommendations