Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Parental investment and family dynamics: interactions between theory and empirical tests

  • Review
  • Special feature: Conflict among related individuals
  • Published:
Population Ecology

Abstract

The pattern of parental investment (PI) seen in nature is a product of the simultaneous resolution of conflicts of interest between the members of a family. How these conflicts are resolved depends upon the mating system, the genetic mechanism, on whether extra PI affects current or future offspring, and the behavioural mechanisms underlying supply and demand of PI. Until recently very little empirical work has been done to underpin these key determinants of conflict resolution. This review examines recent empirical progress in understanding both (1) how conflict is resolved and (2) its evolutionary consequences. How offspring demand interacts with parental supply of resources determines how conflict is resolved. Two extremes are: passive parental choice of competing offspring, relating to offspring control of resource allocation, and active parental choice relating to parental control. Although most previous empirical work has tended to conclude or assume that parents primarily control resource allocation decisions, recent studies explicitly examining predictions from theoretical analyses have shown that offspring control of resource allocation is more important than previously realised. The amount of PI supplied at resolution depends not on who controls food allocation, however, but on the nature of the supply and demand mechanisms. These have yet to be established experimentally, but a recent regression model illustrates how this could be achieved in the field. Determination of the effect of supply on demand (ESD) and the effect of demand on supply (EDS) mechanisms is critical to parent–offspring conflict theory, which has not been adequately tested empirically. There is an underlying, and until recently untested, assumption of models of intrafamilial conflict that there is genetic variation for both offspring demand and parental supply behaviours, so that the behaviours can coevolve. Recent studies on great tits, burrower bugs and mice all found evidence for genetic variation in supply and demand behaviours, but the predicted negative correlation between genes expressed in mothers and their offspring (i.e. parent–offspring coevolution), was found only for burrower bugs. The lack of a negative relationship for great tits and mice may have been a consequence of antagonistic coevolution between the sexes (sexual conflict). These studies illustrate the importance of the underlying genetics and mating system in determining conflict resolution, and point to the need for new models (especially of interbrood competition) taking differences in the genetics and the co-evolution of the ESD and EDS mechanisms into account. We also discuss the importance of the comparative approach in determining evolutionary consequences of conflicts, and use the recent work on growth costs of begging to illustrate the difficulties of measuring costs of conflict in an evolutionary currency. The recent growth in empirical work on conflicts in families illustrates an increasing, and increasingly productive, integration between theoreticians and empiricists.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agrawal AF, Brodie ED, Brown J (2002) Parent–offspring coadaptation and the dual genetic control of maternal care. Science 292:1710–1712

    Google Scholar 

  • Bachmann GC, Chappell MA (1998) The energetic cost of begging behaviour in nestling house wrens. Anim Behav 55:1607–1618

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bañuelos MJ, Obeso JR (2003) Maternal provisioning, sibling rivalry and seed mass variability in the dioecious shrub Rhamnus alpinus. Evol Ecol 17:19–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briskie JV, Naugler CT, Leech SM (1994) Begging intensity of nestling birds varies with sibling relatedness. Proc R Soc London B 258:73–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Bustamente J, Castro JJ, Moreno J (1992) The function of feeding chases in the chinstrap penguin Pygoscelis antarctica. Anim Behav 44:753–759

    Google Scholar 

  • Cash K and Evans RM (1986) The occurrence, context and functional significance of aggressive behaviours in young American white pelicans. Behaviour 102:119–128

    Google Scholar 

  • Chappell MA, Bachmann GC (2002) Energetic costs of begging behaviour. In: Wright J, Leonard ML (eds) The evolution of begging: competition, cooperation and communication. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 143–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Charalambous M, Ward A, Hurst LD (2003) Evidence for a priming effect on maternal resource allocation: implications for interbrood competition. Proc R Soc London B 270:S100–S103

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnov EL (1993) Life history invariants: some explorations of symmetry in evolutionary ecology. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Chase ID (1980) Cooperative and non-cooperative behaviour in animals. Am Nat 115:827–857

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke GM (1998) Developmental stability and fitness: the evidence is not quite so clear. Am Nat 152:762–766

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delesalle VRA, Mazer SJ (2002) The neighborhood matters: effects of neighbor number and sibling (or kin) competition on floral traits in Spergularia marina (Caryophyllaceae). Evolution 56:2406–2413

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert AN (1986) Mammary number and litter size in rodentia: the one half rule. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 83:4828–4830

    Google Scholar 

  • Godfray HCJ (1991) The signalling of need by offspring to their parents. Nature 353:328–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godfray HCJ (1995) Evolutionary theory of parent–offspring conflict. Nature 376:1133–1138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godfray HCJ, Johnstone RA (2000) Begging and bleating: the evolution of parent–offspring signalling. Phil Trans R Soc London B 355:1581–1591

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gustafsson L, Sutherland WJ (1988) The costs of reproduction in the collared flycatcher Ficedula albicollis. Nature 335:813–815

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagar R, Johnstone RA (2003) The genetic basis of family conflict resolution in mice. Nature 421:533–535

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Haig D (1992) Genomic imprinting and the theory of parent–offspring conflict. Sem Dev Biol 3:153–160

    Google Scholar 

  • Haig D (2003) Family matters. Nature 421:491–492

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Haskell DG (2002) Begging behaviour and nest predation. In: Wright J, Leonard ML (eds) The evolution of begging: competition, cooperation and communication. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 163–172

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstetter SH, Ritchison G (1998) The begging behaviour of nestling eastern screech-owls. Wilson Bull 110:86–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Houston AI, Davies NB (1985) The evolution of co-operation and life history in the dunnock Prunella modularis. In: Sibly RM, Smith RH (eds) Behavioural ecology: the ecological consequences of adaptive behaviour. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 471–487

    Google Scholar 

  • Hussell DJT (1988) Supply and demand in tree swallow broods: a model of parent–offspring food provisioning interactions in birds. Am Nat 131:175–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kacelnik A, Cotton PA, Stirling L, Wright J (1995) Food allocation among nestling starlings: sibling competition and the scope of parental choice. Proc R Soc London B 259:259–263

    Google Scholar 

  • Kedar H, Rodríguez-Gironés MA, Yedvab S, Winkler DW, Lotem A (2000) Experimental evidence for offspring learning in parent–offspring communication. Proc R Soc Lond B 267:1723–1727

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kilner RM (2001) A growth cost of begging in captive canary chicks. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 98:11394–11398

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kölliker M (2003) Estimating mechanisms and equilibria for offspring begging and parental provisioning. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:S110–S113

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kölliker M, Brinkhof MWG, Heeb P, Fitze PS, Richner H (2000) The quantitative genetic basis of offspring solicitation and parental response in a passerine bird with biparental care. Proc R Soc Lond B 267:2127–2132

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Leech SM, Leonard ML (1996) Is there an energetic cost to begging in nestling tree swallows Tachycineta bicolor? Proc R Soc Lond B 263:215–222

    Google Scholar 

  • Leonard ML, Horn AG (1998) Need and nestmates affect begging in tree swallows. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 42:431–436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonard ML, Horn AG, Porter J (2003) Does begging affect growth in nestling tree swallows Tachycineta bicolor? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 54:573–577

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lessells CM (2002) Parental favouritism: why should parents specialize in caring for different offspring? Phil Trans R Soc London B 357:381–403

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lessells CM, Parker GA (1999) Parent–offspring conflict: the full-sib-half-sib fallacy. Proc R Soc London B 266:1637–1643

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd JD, Martin TE (2003) Sibling competition and the evolution of prenatal development rates. Proc R Soc London B 270:735–740

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macnair MR, Parker GA (1979) Models of parent–offspring conflict. III. Intra-brood conflict. Anim Behav 27:1202–1209

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin TE (2002) A new view of avian life-history evolution tested on an incubation paradox. Proc R Soc London B 269:309–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maynard-Smith J, Harper D (2003) Animal signals. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarty JP (1996) The energetic cost of begging in nestling passerines. Auk 113:178–188

    Google Scholar 

  • McNamara JM, Houston AI, Barta Z, Osorno JL (2003) Should young ever be better off with one parent than with two? Behav Ecol 14:301–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mock DW, Forbes LS (1992) parent–offspring conflict: a case of arrested development. Trends Ecol Evol 7:409–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mock DW, Parker GA (1997) The evolution of sibling rivalry. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Mondloch CJ (1995) Chick hunger and begging affect parental allocation of feedings in pigeons. Anim Behav 49:601–603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuenschwander S, Brinkhof MWG, Kölliker M, Richner H (2003) Brood size, sibling competition, and the cost of begging in great tits Parus major. Behav Ecol 14:457–462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker GA (1985) Models of parent–offspring conflict. V. Effects of the behaviour of the two parents. Anim Behav 33:519–533

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker GA, Macnair MR (1978) Models of parent–offspring conflict. I. Monogamy. Anim Behav 26:97–110

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parker GA, Macnair MR (1979) Models of parent–offspring conflict. IV. Suppression: evolutionary retaliation by the parent. Anim Behav 27:1210–1235

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker GA, Mock DW, Lamey TC (1989) How selfish should stronger sibs be? Am Nat 133:846–868

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker GA, Royle NJ, Hartley IR (2002a) Intrafamilial conflict and parental investment: a synthesis. Phil Trans R Soc London B 357:295–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker GA, Royle NJ, Hartley IR (2002b) Begging scrambles with unequal chicks: interactions between need and competitive ability. Ecol Lett 5:206–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rauter CM, Moore AJ (1999) Do honest signalling models of offspring solicitation apply to insects? Proc R Soc London B 266:1691–1696

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redondo T, Castro F (1992) Signalling of nutritional need by magpie nestlings. Ethology 92:193–204

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricklefs RE (1993) Sibling competition, hatching asynchrony, incubation period, and lifespan in altricial birds. Curr Ornithol 11:199–276

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodríguez-Gironés MA (1999) Sibling competition stabilizes signaling resolution models of parent–offspring conflict. Proc R Soc London B 266:1581–1591

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodríguez-Gironés MA, Enquist M, Lachmann M (2001a) Role of begging and sibling competition in foraging strategies of nestlings. Anim Behav 61:733–745

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodríguez-Gironés MA, Zuniga JM, Redondo T (2001) Effects of begging on growth rates of nestling chicks. Behav Ecol 12:269–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Royle NJ, Hartley IR, Owens IPF, Parker GA (1999) Sibling competition and the evolution of growth rates in birds. Proc R Soc London B 266:923–932

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Royle NJ, Hartley IR, Parker GA (2002a) Sexual conflict reduces offspring fitness in zebra finches. Nature 416:733–736

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Royle NJ, Hartley IR, Parker GA (2002b) Begging for control: when are offspring solicitation behaviours honest? Trends Ecol Evol 17:434–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sederstrom R, Mayntz M, Sender G (2002) Effect of afterstimulation on milk yield and fat composition in beef cattle: a form of honest begging? Acta Agric Scand A 52:161–166

    Google Scholar 

  • Smiseth PT, Darwell CT, Moore AJ (2003a) Partial begging: an empirical model for the early evolution of offspring signaling. Proc R Soc London B: 270:1773–1777

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smiseth PT, Bu RJ, Eikenæs AK, Amundsen T (2003b) Food limitation in asynchronous bluethroat broods: effects on food distribution, nestling begging, and parental provisioning rules. Behav Ecol 14:793–801

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stamps J, Metcalf RA, Krishnan VV (1978) A genetic analysis of parent-offspring conflict. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 3:369–392

    Google Scholar 

  • Stamps JA, Clarke AB, Arrowood B, Kus B (1985) Parent–offspring conflict in budgerigars. Behaviour 94:1–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Stockley P, Parker GA (2002) Life history consequences of mammal sibling rivalry. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:12932–12937

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Teather KL (1992) An experimental study of competition for food resources between male and female nestlings of the red-winged blackbirds. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 31:81–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Trivers RL (1972) Parental investment and sexual selection. In: Campbell B (ed) Sexual selection and the decent of man, 1871–1971. Aldine Atherton, Chicago, pp 136–179

    Google Scholar 

  • Trivers RL (1974) Parent–offspring conflict. Am Zool 14:249–264

    Google Scholar 

  • Weathers WW, Hodum PJ, Anderson DJ (1997) Is the energy cost of begging by nestling passerines surprisingly low? Auk 114:133

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells JCK (2003) Parent–offspring conflict theory, signaling of need, and weight gain in early life. Q Rev Biol 78:169–202

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Werren JH, Hatcher MJ, Godfray HCJ (2002) Maternal-offspring conflict leads to the evolution of dominant sex determination. Heredity 88:102–111

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Westneat DF, Rambo BT (2000) Copulation exposes female red-winged blackbirds to bacteria in male semen. J Avian Biol 31:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf JB (2000) Gene interactions from maternal effects. Evolution 54:1882–1898

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf JB, Brodie ED (1998) The coadaptation of parental and offspring characters. Evolution 52:299–308

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

N.J.R. would like to thank Yukihiko Toquenaga, Koichi Fujii and staff and students at the Institute of Biological Sciences, University of Tsukuba, for organising an excellent and stimulating symposium and for their hospitality during his visit to Japan. The authors would also like to thank two anonymous referees for comments on a previous version of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Environmental and Evolutionary Biology, Institute of Biological and Life Sciences, Graham Kerr Building, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, , UK

    Nick J. Royle

  2. School of Biological Sciences, Institute of Environmental and Natural Sciences, University of Lancaster, Lancaster LA1 4YQ, , UK

    Ian R. Hartley

  3. Population and Evolutionary Biology Research Group, School of Biological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 7ZB, , UK

    Geoff A. Parker

Authors
  1. Nick J. Royle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ian R. Hartley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Geoff A. Parker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nick J. Royle.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Royle, N.J., Hartley, I.R. & Parker, G.A. Parental investment and family dynamics: interactions between theory and empirical tests. Popul Ecol 46, 231–241 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10144-004-0196-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10144-004-0196-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation