Abstract
Hierarchical expansions of the theory of natural selection exist in two distinct bodies of thought in evolutionary biology, the group selection and the species selection traditions. Both traditions share the point of view that the principles of natural selection apply at levels of biological organization above the level of the individual organism. This leads them both to considermultilevel selection situations, where selection is occurring simultaneously at more than one level. Impeding unification of the theoretical approaches of the multilevel selection traditions are the different goals of investigators in the different subdisciplines and the different types of data potentially available for analysis. We identify two alternative approaches to multilevel situations, which we termmultilevel selection [1] andmultilevel selection [2]. Of interest in the former case are the effects of group membership onindividual fitnesses, and in the latter the tendencies for the groups themselves to go extinct or to found new groups (i.e., group fitnesses). We argue that: neither represents the entire multilevel selection process; both are aspects of any multilevel selection situation; and both are legitimate approaches, suitable for answering different questions. Using this formalism, we show that: multilevel selection [2] does not require “emergent” group properties in order to provide an explanatory mechanism of evolutionary change; multilevel selection [1] is usually more appropriate for neontological group selection studies; and species selection is most fruitfully considered from the point of view of multilevel selection [2]. Finally we argue that the “effect hypothesis” of macroevolution, requiring, in selection among species, both the absence of group effects on organismic fitness (multilevel selection [1]), and the direct determination of species fitnesses by those of organisms, is untestable with paleontological data. Furthermore, the conditions for the effect hypothesis to hold are extremely restrictive and unlikely to apply to the vast majority of situations encountered in nature.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alexander, R. D., and G. Borgia: 1978, ‘Group selection, altruism, and the levels of the organization of life’,Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 9, 449–474.
Alker, H. R., Jr.: 1969, ‘A typology of ecological fallacies’, in M. Dogon and S. Rokkan (eds.),Quantitative Ecological Analysis in the Social Sciences. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp. 69–86.
Arnold, A. J., and K. Fristrup: 1982, ‘The theory of evolution by natural selection: a hierarchical expansion’,Paleobiology 8, 113–129.
Bernstein, H., H. C. Byerly, F. A. Hopf, R. A. Michod, and K. Vemulapalli: 1983, ‘The Darwinian dynamic’,Quarterly Review of Biology 58, 185–207.
Boorman, S. A. and P. R. Levitt: 1972, ‘Group selection at the boundary of a stable population’,Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A. 69, 2711–2713.
Boorman, S. A. and P. R. Levitt: 1973, ‘Group selection on the boundary of a stable population’,Theoretical Population Biology 4, 85–128.
Boyd, L. H. and G. R. Iversen: 1979,Contextual analysis: concepts and statistical techniques, Wadsworth, Belmont, California.
Brandon, R.: 1982, ‘The levels of selection’, in P. D. Asquith and T. Nickles (eds.),PSA 1982, Vol. 1. Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing, Michigan, pp. 315–323.
Cracraft, J.: 1985, ‘Species selection, macroevolutionary analysis, and the “hierarchical theory” of evolution’,Systematic Zoology 34, 222–229.
Crow, J. F. and T. Nagylaki: 1976, ‘The rate of change of a character correlated with fitness’,American Naturalist 110, 207–213.
Curtsinger, J. W.: 1984, ‘Evolutionary landscapes for complex selection’,Evolution 38, 359–367.
Damuth, J.: 1985, ‘Selection among “species”: a formulation in terms of natural functional units,’Evolution 39, 1132–1146.
Darlington, P. J.: 1972, ‘Nonmathematical concepts of selection, evolutionary energy, and levels of evolution’,Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A. 69, 1239–1243.
Dawkins, R.: 1982,The extended phenotype: the gene as the unit of selection, Freeman, San Francisco.
Dunbar, M. J.: 1960, ‘The evolution of stability in marine environments: natural selection at the level of the ecosystem’,American Naturalist 94, 129–136.
Eldredge, N.: 1985,Unfinished synthesis: biological hierarchies and modern biological thought, Oxford University Press, New York.
Eldredge, N. and S. J. Gould: 1972, ‘Punctuated equilibria: an alternative to phyletic gradualism’, in T. J. M. Schopf (ed.),Models in Paleobiology, Freeman, San Francisco, pp. 82–115.
Eldredge, N. and S. N. Salthe: 1985, ‘Hierarchy and evolution’,Oxford Surveys in Evolutionary Biology 1, 182–206.
Eshel, I.: 1972, ‘On the neighbor effect and the evolution of altruistic traits’,Theoretical Population Biology 3, 258–267.
Eshel, I.: 1985, ‘Evolutionary genetic stability of mendelian segragation and the role of free recombination in the chromosomal system’,American Naturalist 125, 412–420.
Ghiselin, M. T.: 1975, ‘A radical solution to the species problem’,Systematic Zoology 23, 536–544.
Gilpin, M. E.: 1975,Group selection in predator-prey communities, Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.
Gould, S. J.: 1980, ‘Is a new and general theory of evolution emerging?’Paleobiology 6, 119–130.
Gould, S. J.: 1982a, ‘Darwinism and the expansion of evolutionary theory’,Science 216, 380–387.
Gould, S. J.: 1982b, ‘The meaning of punctuated equilibria and its role in validating a hierarchical approach to macroevolution’, in R. Milkman (ed.),Perspectiveson Evolution, Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts, pp. 83–104.
Gould, S. J. and N. Eldredge: 1977, ‘Punctuated equilibria: the tempo and mode of evolution reconsidered’,Paleobiology 3, 115–151.
Griesemer, J. R. and M. J. Wade: 1988, ‘Laboratory models, causal explanation and group selection’,Biology and Philosophy 3, 67–96.
Heisler, I. L. and J. Damuth: 1987, ‘A method for analyzing selection in hierarchically-structured populations’,American Naturalist 130, 582–602.
Hull, D. L.: 1976, ‘Are species really individuals?’,Systematic Zoology 25, 174–191.
Hull, D. L.: 1980, ‘Individuality and selection’,Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 11, 311–332.
Lande, R. and S. J. Arnold: 1983, ‘The measurement of selection on correlated characters’,Evolution 37, 1210–1227.
Lazarsfeld, P. F. and H. Menzel: 1961, ‘On the relation between individual and collective properties’, in A. Etzioni (ed.),Complex organizations: a sociological reader, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, pp. 422–440.
Leigh, E. B.: 1983, ‘When does the good of the group override the advantage of the individual?’Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A. 80, 2985–2989.
Levin, B. R. and W. L. Kilmer: 1974, ‘Interdemic selection and the evolution of altruism: a computer simulation study’,Evolution 28, 527–547.
Levins, R.: 1970, ‘Extinction’, in M. Gerstenhaber (ed.),Some mathematical questions in biology, American Mathematical Society, Providence, Rhode Island, pp. 77–107.
Levins, R.: 1975, ‘Evolution in communities near equilibrium’, in M. L. Cody and J. M. Diamond (eds.),Ecology and Evolution of Communities, Belknap, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp. 16–50.
Lewontin, R. C.: 1965, ‘Selection in and of populations’, in J. A. Moore (ed.),Ideas in modern biology, Natural History Press, Garden City, New York, pp. 297–325.
Lewontin, R. C.: 1970, ‘The units of selection’,Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 1, 1–18.
Maynard Smith, J.: 1964, ‘Group selection and kin selection’,Nature 201, 1145–1147.
Maynard Smith, J.: 1976, ‘Group Selection’,Quarterly Review of Biology 51, 277–283.
Michod, R. E.: 1982, ‘The theory of kin selection’,Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 13, 23–65.
Nunney, L.: 1985, ‘Group selection, altruism, and structured-deme models’,American Naturalist 126, 212–230.
Ohta, K.: 1983, ‘Hierarchical theory of selection: the covariance formula of selection and its application’,Bulletin of the Biometrical Society of Japan 4, 25–33.
Price, G. R.: 1970, ‘Selection and covariance’,Nature 227, 520–521.
Price, G. R.: 1972, ‘Extension of covariance selection mathematics’,Annals of Human Genetics 35, 485–490.
Sober, E.: 1984,The nature of selection: evolutionary theory in philosophical focus, MIT Press, Cambridge Massachusetts.
Sober, E. and R. C. Lewontin: 1982, ‘Artifact, cause and genic selection’,Philosophy of Science 49, 157–180.
Stanley, S. M.: 1975, ‘A theory of evolution above the species level’,Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A. 72, 646–650.
Stanley, S. M.: 1979,Macroevolution: pattern and process, Freeman, San Francisco.
Thorndike, E. L.: 1939, ‘On the fallacy of imputing the correlations found for groups to the individuals or smaller groups composing them’,American Journal of Psychology 52, 122–124.
Uyenoyama, M. and M. Feldman: 1980, ‘Theories of kin and group selection: a population genetics perspective’,Theoretical Population Biology 17, 380–414.
Van Valen, L. M.: 1976, ‘Individualistic classes’,Philosophy of Science 43, 539–541.
Van Valen, L. M.: 1983, ‘Molecular selection’,Evolutionary Theory 6, 297–298.
Vrba, E. S.: 1980, ‘Evolution, species and fossils: how does life evolve?’South African Journal of Science 76, 61–84.
Vrba, E. S.: 1983, ‘Macroevolutionary trends: new perspectives on the roles of adaption and incidental effect’,Science 221, 387–389.
Vrba, E. S.: 1984a, ‘Patterns in the fossil record and evolutionary processes’, in M. W. Ho and P. S. Saunders (eds.),Beyond Neo-Darwinism, Academic Press, London, pp. 115–142.
Vrba, E. S.: 1984b. ‘Evolutionary pattern and process in the sister-group Alcelaphini-Aepycerotini (Mammalia: Bovidae)’, in N. Eldredge and S. M. Stanley (eds.),Living Fossils, Springer Verlag, New York, pp. 62–79.
Vrba, E. S. and N. Eldredge: 1984, ‘Individuals, hierarchies and processes: towards a more complete evolutionary theory’,Paleobiology 10, 146–171.
Wade, M. J.: 1978, ‘A critical review of the models of group selection’,Quarterly Review of Biology 58, 101–114.
Wade, M. J.: 1984, ‘Soft selection, hard selection, kin selection and group selection’,American Naturalist 125, 61–73.
Wiens, J. A.: 1966, ‘On group selection and Wynne-Edwards' hypothesis’,American Scientist 54, 273–328.
Williams, G. C.: 1966,Adaptation and Natural Selection, Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.
Williams, M. B.: 1970, ‘Deducing the consequences of natural selection: a mathematical model’,Journal of Theoretical Biology 29, 343–385.
Wilson, D. S.: 1975, ‘A theory of group selection’,Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A. 72, 143–146.
Wilson, D. S.: 1980,The natural selection of populations and communities, Benjamin/Cummings, Menlo Park, California.
Wilson, D. S.: 1983, ‘The group selection controversy: history and current status’,Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 14, 159–187.
Wimsatt, W. C.: 1980, ‘Reductionistic research strategies and their biases in the units of selection controversy’, in T. Nickles (ed.)Scientific discovery: case studies, Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 213–259.
Wright, S.: 1945. ‘Tempo and mode in evolution: a critical review’,Ecology 26, 415–419.
Wynne-Edwards, V. C.: 1962,Animal dispersion in relation to social behaviour, Hafner, New York.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Damuth, J., Heisler, I.L. Alternative formulations of multilevel selection. Biol Philos 3, 407–430 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00647962
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00647962