Skip to main content
Log in

Can altruism evolve in purely viscous populations?

  • Papers
  • Published:
Evolutionary Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Limited dispersal is often thought to facilitate the evolution of altruism by increasing the degree of relatedness among interacting individuals. Limited dispersal can have additional effects, however, such as local population regulation, that inhibits the evolution of altruism. Many models of structured populations assume that a viscous stage of the life cycle alternates with a global mixing stage, which allows the advantages of interactions among close relatives without the disadvantages of local population regulation. Here we analyse a computer simulation model of ‘pure’ population viscosity, in which offspring are always deposited close to parents and no global mixing stage exists. As expected, limited dispersal generates a high coefficient of relatedness among interacting individuals. Patches of altruists, however, are unable to ‘export’ their productivity to other regions of the landscape and are easily invaded by selfish types from neighbouring patches. Unlike models of alternating viscosity, in which high relatedness and local population regulation can be decoupled, these two opposing effects are inextricably linked in purely viscous populations, which therefore are not conducive to the evolution of altruistic traits.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Axelrod, R. and Hamilton, W. D. (1981) The evolution of cooperation.Science 211, 1390–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, R. (1982) Density dependent mortality and the evolution of social behavior.Anim. Behav. 30, 972–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, R. and Richerson, P. J. (1990) Group selection among alternative evolutionarily stable strategies.J. Theor. Biol.

  • Charlesworth, B. (1979) A note on the evolution of altruism in structured demes.Am. Nat. 113, 601–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crow, J. F. and Aoki, K. (1984) Group selection for a polygenic behavioral trait: a differential proliferation model.Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 79, 2628–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falconer, D. S. (1981)Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. 2nd edn. Longman, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodnight, K. (1992) Kin selection in a structured population.Am. Nat. (in press)

  • Govindaraju, D. R. (1988) Mating systems and the opportunity for group selection in plants.Evolutionary Trends in Plants 2. pp. 99–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, W. D. (1964) The genetical evolution of social behavior, I and II.J. Theor. Biol. 7, 1–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harpending, H. C. and Roger, A. R. (1987) On Wright's mechanism for intergroup selection.J. Theor. Biol. 127, 51–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, J. K. (1992a) The evolution of altruism in density regulated populations.J. Theor. Biol. (in press).

  • Kelly, J. K. (1992b) Restricted migration and the evolution of altruism.Evolution (in press).

  • McCauley, D. E., Wade, M. J., Breden, F. J. and Wohltman, M. (1988) Spatial and temporal variation in group relatedness: evidence from the imported willow leaf beetle.Evolution 42, 184–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michod, R. E. (1982) The theory of kin selection.Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 13, 23–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Queller, D. C. (1985) Kinship, reciprocity and synergism in the evolution of social behavior.Nature 318, 366–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollock, G. B. (1983) Population viscosity and kin selection.Am. Nat. 122, 817–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, A. R. (1990) Group selection by selective emigration: the effects of migration and kin structure.Am. Nat. 135, 398–413.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schall, B. A. (1975) Population structure and local differentiation inLiatris cylindracea.Am. Nat. 109, 511–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seger, J. (1976) Evolution of responses to relative homozygosity.Nature 262, 578–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, P. D. (1992) Altruism in viscous populations — an inclusive fitness model.Evol. Ecol. 6, 352–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, M. E., Stephens, J. C. and Anderson, W. W. (1982) Homozygosity and patch structure in plant populations as a result of nearest-neighbor pollination.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 79, 203–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wade, M. J. (1985) Soft selection, hard selection, kin selection and group selection.Am. Nat. 125, 61–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, D. S. (1977) Structured demes and the evolution of group advantageous traits.Am. Nat. 111, 157–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, D. S. (1979) Structured demes and trait-group variation.Am. Nat. 113, 606–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, D. S. (1980) The natural selection of populations and communities. Menlo Park: Benjamin Cummings.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, D. S. (1990) Weak altruism, strong group selection.Oikos 59, 135–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, D. S. and Colwell, R. K. (1981) Evolution of sex ratio in structured demes.Evolution 35, 882–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, J. B. (1987) Group selection in plant populationsTheor. Appl. Genet., 493–502.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wilson, D.S., Pollock, G.B. & Dugatkin, L.A. Can altruism evolve in purely viscous populations?. Evol Ecol 6, 331–341 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02270969

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02270969

Keywords

Navigation