Behavioral Ecology Vol. 10 No. 2: 178-184
© 1999 International Society for Behavioral Ecology
Costly young and reproductive skew in animal societies
Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, UK
Address correspondence to M. A. Cant, Department of Biology, University College London, Wolfson House, 4 Stephenson Way, London NW1 2HE, U.K. E-mail: mcant{at}galton.ucl.ac.uk
Many recent models of reproductive skew explain subordinate reproduction as a staying incentive offered by dominants, who can produce more young with a helper present than without. Here, we present a new, alternative explanation for subordinate reproduction, which applies whenever the fitness cost to a parent of producing young is an accelerating function of the number produced (as commonly assumed in optimal clutch size theory). Under these circumstances, a dominant individual may be selected to offer a share of reproduction to a related subordinate, not as an incentive to stay, but because additional offspring that would be expensive for the dominant to produce are cheap for the subordinate. "Beneficial sharing" of this kind is more likely the more closely related the subordinate is to the dominant, so that the model predicts a negative relationship between skew and relatedness. This result runs directly counter to the positive relationship predicted by previous incentive-based models. We explore the interaction of these contrasting effects by developing an integrated model that allows for both beneficial sharing and staying incentives. When offspring are cheap to produce, this integrated model predicts that the incentive effect will dominate, and skew will increase with relatedness. When young are costly, in contrast, beneficial sharing will be of greater importance, and skew will decrease with relatedness.
Key words: cooperative breeding, cost of reproduction, dominance, reproductive skew, subordinate.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  T. B. Ryder, P. G. Parker, J. G. Blake, and B. A. Loiselle It takes two to tango: reproductive skew and social correlates of male mating success in a lek-breeding bird Proc R Soc B, July 7, 2009; 276(1666): 2377 - 2384. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. M. Buston and A. G. Zink Reproductive skew and the evolution of conflict resolution: a synthesis of transactional and tug-of-war models Behav. Ecol., May 1, 2009; 20(3): 672 - 684. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. F Russell and V. Lummaa Maternal effects in cooperative breeders: from hymenopterans to humans Phil Trans R Soc B, April 27, 2009; 364(1520): 1143 - 1167. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
I. M. Hamilton and D. Heg Clutch-size adjustments and skew models: effects on reproductive partitioning and group stability Behav. Ecol., March 1, 2007; 18(2): 467 - 476. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Hannonen and L. Sundstrom Reproductive sharing among queens in the ant Formica fusca Behav. Ecol., November 1, 2003; 14(6): 870 - 875. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Strohm and A. Bordon-Hauser Advantages and disadvantages of large colony size in a halictid bee: the queen's perspective Behav. Ecol., July 1, 2003; 14(4): 546 - 553. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Haydock and W. D. Koenig Reproductive skew in the polygynandrous acorn woodpecker PNAS, May 14, 2002; 99(10): 7178 - 7183. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Kokko, R. A. Johnstone, and J. Wright The evolution of parental and alloparental effort in cooperatively breeding groups: when should helpers pay to stay? Behav. Ecol., May 1, 2002; 13(3): 291 - 300. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|