Skip Navigation


Behavioral Ecology Advance Access originally published online on October 20, 2004
Behavioral Ecology 2005 16(2):358-363; doi:10.1093/beheco/arh170
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Lay Summary
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
16/2/358    most recent
arh170v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ridley, J.
Right arrow Articles by Sutherland, W. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Ridley, J.
Right arrow Articles by Sutherland, W. J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Behavioral Ecology vol. 16 no. 2 © International Society for Behavioral Ecology 2004; all rights reserved.

Why long-lived species are more likely to be social: the role of local dominance

Jo Ridley, Douglas W. Yu and William J. Sutherland

Centre for Ecology, Evolution and Conservation, School of Biological Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK

Address correspondence to J. Ridley. E-mail: j.ridley{at}uea.ac.uk.

Recent studies have shown that individuals of species that live in groups tend to have high annual survival, but this link has lacked a theoretical explanation. We evaluate two hypotheses that explain how longevity could have led to the evolution of group living. The first is the territory inheritance hypothesis, and it proposes that longevity increases the probability of nonbreeding subordinates surviving long enough to have the opportunity of inheriting their natal territory. Second, we propose a novel hypothesis, the reciprocal altruism hypothesis, which is that longevity increases local dominance by favoring nonaggression pacts among neighboring residents because longevity increases the likelihood of reciprocal altruism. Birds thus accept subordinate residency because the exclusion of nonlocal birds will mean that, if they survive long enough, they will be likely to actually achieve territory inheritance. The reciprocal altruism hypothesis is supported by a wider array of evidence; becomes progressively more powerful as longevity increases, thus producing a positive feedback; explains the evolution of local dominance (whereas the territory inheritance hypothesis assumes its existence); and provides an explanation for why cooperative breeding should be found more often in aseasonal environments.

Key words: cooperative breeding, delayed breeding, localized dominance, reciprocal altruism, short-distance dispersal, social queuing.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Behav EcolHome page
A. R. Ridley and N. J. Raihani
Variable postfledging care in a cooperative bird: causes and consequences
Behav. Ecol., November 1, 2007; 18(6): 994 - 1000.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.