Direct fitness, reciprocity and helping: A perspective from primitively eusocial wasps

Substantial direct fitness gains of workers in a highly eusocial ant

Hamilton's theory of inclusive fitness suggests that helpers in animal societies gain fitness indirectly by increasing the reproductive performance of a related beneficiary. Helpers in cooperatively breeding birds, mammals and primitively eusocial wasps may additionally obtain direct fitness through inheriting the nest or mating partner of the former reproductive. Here, we show that also workers of a highly eusocial ant may achieve considerable direct fitness by producing males in both queenless and queenright colonies. We investigated the reproductive success of workers of the ant Temnothorax crassispinus in nature and the laboratory by dissecting workers and determining the origin of males by microsatellite analysis. We show that workers are capable of activating their ovaries and successfully producing their sons independently of the presence of a queen. Genotypes revealed that at least one fifth of the males in natural queenright colonies were not offspring of the queen. Most worker-produced males could be assigned to workers that were unrelated to the queen, suggesting egg-laying by drifting workers.

Predictors of nest growth: diminishing returns for subordinates in the paper wasp Polistes dominula

ABSTRACT

In cooperative breeders, subordinates that have alternative reproductive options are expected to stay and help dominant breeders only as long as they contribute to group productivity, if their fitness is linked with colony success. Female Polistes dominula paper wasps live as cooperative breeders in small groups of typically fewer than 10 females. Subordinates tend to have high-quality outside options, and so could choose alternative breeding tactics if their work efforts increased productivity negligibly. In the founding stage before workers emerge, we tested the effect of various predictors on nest growth, as a proxy for group productivity, and explored the shape of the relationship between group size and nest growth. We found group size to be the only significant predictor of nest growth: variation among body sizes within the group showed no effect, suggesting a lack of size-dependent task specialization in this species. Average body size and average genetic relatedness between group members similarly showed no effects on nest growth. Group size had a non-linear effect so that per-capita benefits to nest growth decreased in larger groups, and groups of 10 or more would benefit negligibly from additional group members. Hence, females might be better off pursuing other options than joining a large group. This finding helps to explain why P. dominula groups are usually relatively small in our study population. Further studies may illuminate the mechanisms behind the smaller per-capita nest growth that we found in larger groups.

SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT

Identifying which factors influence the productivity of animal groups is key to understanding why different species breed cooperatively in groups of varying sizes. In the paper wasp Polistes dominula, we investigated the growth rate of nests as a measure of group productivity. We found that average body size, the variation in body sizes within the group, and average genetic relatedness between group members did not affect nest growth, while group size had a strong, positive effect: nests grew faster with more group members, but the per-capita benefit decreased in larger groups. The addition of extra group members in groups of 10 or more had negligible effects on nest growth. Hence, wasps may be better off pursuing other options than joining large groups. This finding helps to explain why groups normally consist of fewer than 10 wasps in this population.

Biological markets in cooperative breeders: quantifying outside options

A major aim in evolutionary biology is to understand altruistic help and reproductive partitioning in cooperative societies, where subordinate helpers forego reproduction to rear dominant breeders' offspring. Traditional models of cooperation in these societies typically make a key assumption: that the only alternative to staying and helping is solitary breeding, an often unfeasible task. Using large-scale field experiments on paper wasps (Polistes dominula), we show that individuals have high-quality alternative nesting options available that offer fitness payoffs just as high as their actual chosen options, far exceeding payoffs from solitary breeding. Furthermore, joiners could not easily be replaced if they were removed experimentally, suggesting that it may be costly for dominants to reject them. Our results have implications for expected payoff distributions for cooperating individuals, and suggest that biological market theory, which incorporates partner choice and competition for partners, is necessary to understand helping behaviour in societies like that of P. dominula. Traditional models are likely to overestimate the incentive to stay and help, and therefore the amount of help provided, and may underestimate the size of reproductive concession required to retain subordinates. These findings are relevant for a wide range of cooperative breeders where there is dispersal between social groups.

Market forces influence helping behaviour in cooperatively breeding paper wasps

Biological market theory is potentially useful for understanding helping behaviour in animal societies. It predicts that competition for trading partners will affect the value of commodities exchanged. It has gained empirical support in cooperative breeders, where subordinates help dominant breeders in exchange for group membership, but so far without considering one crucial aspect: outside options. We find support for a biological market in paper wasps, Polistes dominula. We first show that females have a choice of cooperative partners. Second, by manipulating entire subpopulations in the field, we increase the supply of outside options for subordinates, freeing up suitable nesting spots and providing additional nesting partners. We predicted that by intensifying competition for help, our manipulation would force dominants to accept a lower price for group membership. As expected, subordinates reduce their foraging effort following our treatments. We conclude that to accurately predict the amount of help provided, social units cannot be viewed in isolation: the surrounding market must also be considered.

In cooperatively breeding species, subordinates help to raise the dominant breeders' offspring in return for benefits associated with group membership. Here, Grinsted and Field show that the amount of help provided by subordinate paper wasps depends on the availability of alternative nesting options, as predicted by biological market theory.

Cooperation between non-relatives in a primitively eusocial paper wasp, Polistes dominula

In cooperatively breeding vertebrates, the existence of individuals that help to raise the offspring of non-relatives is well established, but unrelated helpers are less well known in the social insects. Eusocial insect groups overwhelmingly consist of close relatives, so populations where unrelated helpers are common are intriguing. Here, we focus on Polistes dominula-the best-studied primitively eusocial wasp, and a species in which nesting with non-relatives is not only present but frequent. We address two major questions: why individuals should choose to nest with non-relatives, and why such individuals participate in the costly rearing of unrelated offspring. Polistes dominula foundresses produce more offspring of their own as subordinates than when they nest independently, providing a potential explanation for co-founding by non-relatives. There is some evidence that unrelated subordinates tailor their behaviour towards direct fitness, while the role of recognition errors in generating unrelated co-foundresses is less clear. Remarkably, the remote but potentially highly rewarding chance of inheriting the dominant position appears to strongly influence behaviour, suggesting that primitively eusocial insects may have much more in common with their social vertebrate counterparts than has commonly been thought.

Major Hurdles for the Evolution of Sociality

Why do most animals live solitarily, while complex social life is restricted to a few cooperatively breeding vertebrates and social insects? Here, we synthesize concepts and theories in social evolution and discuss its underlying ecological causes. Social evolution can be partitioned into (a) formation of stable social groups, (b) evolution of helping, and (c) transition to a new evolutionary level. Stable social groups rarely evolve due to competition over food and/or reproduction. Food competition is overcome in social insects with central-place foraging or bonanza-type food resources, whereas competition over reproduction commonly occurs because staying individuals are rarely sterile. Hence, the evolution of helping is shaped by direct and indirect fitness options and helping is only altruism if it reduces the helper's direct fitness. The helper's capability to gain direct fitness also creates within-colony conflict. This prevents transition to a new evolutionary level.

The role of threats in animal cooperation

In human societies, social behaviour is strongly influenced by threats of punishment, even though the threats themselves rarely need to be exercised. Recent experimental evidence suggests that similar hidden threats can promote cooperation and limit within-group selfishness in some animal systems. In other animals, however, threats appear to be ineffective. Here I review theoretical and empirical studies that help to understand the evolutionary causes of these contrasting patterns, and identify three factors-impact, accuracy and perception-that together determine the effectiveness of threats to induce cooperation.

Unrelated helpers in a primitively eusocial wasp: is helping tailored towards direct fitness?

The paper wasp Polistes dominulus is unique among the social insects in that nearly one-third of co-foundresses are completely unrelated to the dominant individual whose offspring they help to rear and yet reproductive skew is high. These unrelated subordinates stand to gain direct fitness through nest inheritance, raising the question of whether their behaviour is adaptively tailored towards maximizing inheritance prospects. Unusually, in this species, a wealth of theory and empirical data allows us to predict how unrelated subordinates should behave. Based on these predictions, here we compare helping in subordinates that are unrelated or related to the dominant wasp across an extensive range of field-based behavioural contexts. We find no differences in foraging effort, defense behaviour, aggression or inheritance rank between unrelated helpers and their related counterparts. Our study provides no evidence, across a number of behavioural scenarios, that the behaviour of unrelated subordinates is adaptively modified to promote direct fitness interests.

Reproductive constraints, direct fitness and indirect fitness benefits explain helping behaviour in the primitively eusocial wasp, Polistes canadensis

A key step in the evolution of sociality is the abandonment of independent breeding in favour of helping. In cooperatively breeding vertebrates and primitively eusocial insects, helpers are capable of leaving the group and reproducing independently, and yet many do not. A fundamental question therefore is why do helpers help? Helping behaviour may be explained by constraints on independent reproduction and/or benefits to individuals from helping. Here, we examine simultaneously the reproductive constraints and fitness benefits underlying helping behaviour in a primitively eusocial paper wasp. We gave 31 helpers the opportunity to become egg-layers on their natal nests by removing nestmates. This allowed us to determine whether helpers are reproductively constrained in any way. We found that age strongly influenced whether an ex-helper could become an egg-layer, such that young ex-helpers could become egg-layers while old ex-helpers were less able. These differential reproductive constraints enabled us to make predictions about the behaviours of ex-helpers, depending on the relative importance of direct and indirect fitness benefits. We found little evidence that indirect fitness benefits explain helping behaviour, as 71 per cent of ex-helpers left their nests before the end of the experiment. In the absence of reproductive constraints, however, young helpers value direct fitness opportunities over indirect fitness. We conclude that a combination of reproductive constraints and potential for future direct reproduction explain helping behaviour in this species. Testing several competing explanations for helping behaviour simultaneously promises to advance our understanding of social behaviour in animal groups.

On the further integration of cooperative breeding and cooperation theory

We present a synopsis about the commentaries to the target article "Integrating cooperative breeding into theoretical concepts of cooperation", in which we attempted to integrate general mechanisms to explain cooperative behaviour among unrelated individuals with classic concepts to explain helping behaviour in cooperative breeders that do not invoke kin-based benefits. Here we (1) summarize the positions of the commentators concerning the main issues we raised in the target article and discuss important criticisms and extensions. (2) We relate our target article to some recent reviews on the evolution of cooperation and, (3) clarify how we use terminology with regard to cooperation and cooperative behaviour. (4) We discuss several aspects that were raised with respect to cooperative interactions including by-product mutualism, generalised reciprocity and multi-level selection and, (5) examine the alternatives to our classification scheme as proposed by some commentaries. (6) Finally, we highlight several aspects that might hinder the application of game theoretical mechanisms of cooperation in cooperatively breeding systems. Although there is broad agreement that cooperative breeding theory should be integrated within the more general concepts of cooperation, there is some debate about how this may be achieved. We conclude that the contributions in this special issue provide a fruitful first step and ample suggestions for future directions with regard to a more unified framework of cooperation in cooperative breeders.