Theories of cooperation 2

True and Strong Altruism

  • Definition of Altruism:

    • Altruism is defined as “true altruism” when the cost to the altruist is greater than the individual's benefit.

    • Strong altruism is characterized by:

    • Cost (c) is greater than benefit (x), i.e., (x < c).

    • Weak altruism is characterized by:

    • Cost (c) is less than benefit (x), i.e., (x > c).

  • Concept of Cost:

    • Cost represents a decrease in lifetime personal reproductive fitness of the altruist.

  • Relatedness Factor:

    • Strong altruism can only evolve when relatedness is positive.

    • A high degree of relatedness between altruist and beneficiary increases the likelihood of altruistic behavior.

  • Benefit to Altruist:

    • Helping non-relatives may evolve if it provides feedback benefits to the actor's own reproduction.

Evolution of Altruism

  • Indirect Fitness Benefits:

    • Cooperation can be explained through indirect fitness benefits directed toward individuals carrying the cooperation gene.

  • Kin Selection Theory:

    • The empirical success of kin selection theory (inclusive fitness theory) contributed to the decline of traditional group selection theories.

    • New group selection models are now mathematically equivalent to kin selection theories.

    • Group selection can effectively operate if genetic differentiation exists between groups, meaning group members must be genetically more similar to their group than to those in other groups.

    • Key factors:

    • Limited dispersal leads to population viscosity and the potential for compatibility between kin selection and group selection.

    • Altruistic behaviors may evolve to improve group productivity when genetic similarities within groups enhance indirect fitness benefits.

Mechanisms Promoting Altruism's Evolution

  • Increased Relatedness:

    • Increased relatedness between interacting partners can arise in three ways:

    1. Kin Discrimination:

      • Can involve phenotype matching where individuals recognize and preferentially interact with genetic relatives.

    2. Limited Dispersal (Population Viscosity):

      • Leads to familiarity among relatives and enhances the chance of interacting with kin.

    3. Green Beards:

      • An individual can recognize and help others who share the same gene but are not directly related.

    • The beneficiary of altruistic acts must have a higher probability of sharing genes with the altruist relative to random members of the population.

  • Discriminating Altruism:

    • Increased net fitness for altruists by ensuring that the benefit to the recipient outweighs the cost incurred by the altruist.

The Green Beard Effect

  • Phenotype and Gene Association:

    • A gene may result in a phenotype that allows carriers of the gene to identify each other, directing altruistic behavior towards fellow gene carriers.

  • Case Study:

    • Dictyostelium discoideum, a slime mold species, demonstrates this by selectively cooperating with other csa gene carriers to form fruiting bodies which accommodate only fellow carriers.

Kin Selection and Inclusive Fitness

  • Examples of Kin Selection:

    • Parental care is a prime example where natural selection favors individuals who maximize the transmission of their genes.

    • Inclusive fitness encompasses the genetic contributions made by the altruist to their relatives, not just direct descendants.

  • Common Ancestry and Relatedness:

    • Genetic relatedness can exist without recent common ancestry; relatedness is established whenever genes are correlated among individuals.

  • Correlation Coefficient (r):

    • A general correlation coefficient that illustrates the probability of altruists and recipients sharing genes, regardless of kinship.

Simplified Calculations in Altruism

  • Payoff Example:

    • Scenario: A rabbit encounters 9 carrots and consumes 4, achieving a total payoff of 8 units.

    • If a brother and friend are invited to share, the payoff is recalculated as follows:

    • Total Payoff = $(32)1 + (32)0.5 + (32)0 = 6 + 3 + 0 = 9$ (total payoff).

    • This demonstrates that even with reduced personal payoff, sharing maximizes genetic contribution.

Inclusive Fitness Concept

  • Inclusive Fitness Definition:

    • Inclusive fitness equals direct fitness (from an individual's actions) plus indirect fitness (impact on the reproductive success of relatives weighted by relatedness).

    • Mathematically, (br - c > 0):

    • $r$ = relatedness between helper and beneficiary.

    • $b$ = benefit from rearing additional offspring (recipient).

    • $c$ = cost incurred by the helper.

Hypothetical Alleles for Altruism

  • Gene Perspective:

    • Kin selection is often viewed from a gene-centric angle, where individuals act as vessels to ensure their genetic material is propagated.

    • Individuals maximize their inclusive fitness, leading altruistic behaviors to boost copies of altruistic genes in the population.

Hamilton’s Theory of Altruism

  • Partitioning Individual Fitness:

    • Hamilton posited methods to evaluate how altruistic genes could enhance the fitness of others, potentially at the altruist's cost.

    • He established a framework to assess total inclusive fitness by partitioning direct and indirect contributions resulting from social behaviors.

Link Between Inclusive Fitness and Group Selection

  • Altruism in Groups:

    • Genetic relatedness fosters group altruism that enhances group productivity.

    • Altruistic acts can stem from either inclusive fitness benefits or group selection logic, intertwining their concepts.

    • Strong altruism requires both genetic relatedness and cooperative benefits for it to manifest.

Selection at Colony-Level vs. Kin Selection

  • Weak Altruism:

    • Weak altruism can arise when helping behavior leads to benefits for both the altruist and other group members, while true altruism necessitates positive relatedness to survive.

  • Hamilton's Rule for Evaluation:

    • The assessment model includes evaluating rb = indirect fitness consequences and c = direct fitness consequences, asserting that (rB - c > 0) is critical for altruistic acts to be selected.

Calculation of Relatedness in Diploid Species

  • Coefficients of Relatedness:

    • Example includes multiple individuals (A, B, C) where:

    • Relatedness between A and B calculated as (0.5 imes 0.5) + 0 = 0.25.

    • Relatedness between B and C is calculated as: (0.5 imes 0.5) + (0.5 imes 0.5) = 0.5.

  • Full Sibling and Other Kin Relations:

    • Related coefficients are established for full sibs, uncles, cousins, and half-sibs with corresponding values.

Non-Calculate Need for Relatedness in Altruism

  • Instinctual Behavior:

    • Altruistic behavior occurs without active calculation of relatedness, evidenced by the fulfillment of Hamilton’s Rules which govern altruistic motivations.

    • Cues for relatedness can stem from population viscosity or kin discrimination.

Experimental Support for Kin Selection

  • Research Limitations:

    • It is challenging to manipulate altruistic behaviors and relatedness in experimental designs, but microorganisms allow such experiments.

  • Bacterial Evidence:

    • Studies on bacterial populations maintained altruistic traits (e.g., iron scavenging) confirming higher altruistic actions occur with elevated relatedness levels.

Estimating Benefits and Costs

  • Defining b and c:

    • Both terms represent changes in lifetime reproductive outcomes for altruists and recipients compared to scenarios without altruistic actions.

    • Example provided of Florida scrub jays where helpers increase fledgling survival, yielding a calculated b proportional to their nest contributions.

Maximizing Benefits in Cooperative Contexts

  • Discriminatory vs. Non-Discriminatory Help:

    • Cooperative behaviors are critically examined in context to benefit realization versus costs, suggesting helpers preferentially assist based on kin relationships aligned with kin selection theory.

Costs of Altruism Measurement

  • Difficulty in Quantifying Costs:

    • Cost assessments are convoluted as evidenced by hover wasps, where the queuing system represents direct fitness loss opportunities.

Parental Manipulation and Enforcement of Altruism

  • Definition:

    • Investigations suggest parental coercion creates altruism dynamics that may not appear altruistic on the surface but are fundamentally driven by genetic strategies to enhance progeny survival.

    • The role of enforcement in altruism is prominent in social insect studies, indicating a need to reassess altruism within the context of kin selection theory.