In the framework of the evolutionary game theory, two fundamentally different mechanisms, the imitation process and the aspiration-driven dynamics, can be adopted by players to update their strategies. In the former case, individuals imitate the strategy of a more successful peer, while in the latter case individuals change their strategies based on a comparison of payoffs they collect in the game to their own aspiration levels. Here we explore how cooperation evolves for the coexistence of these two dynamics. Intriguingly, cooperation reaches its lowest level when a certain moderate fraction of individuals pick aspiration-level–driven rule while the others choose pairwise comparison rule. Furthermore, when individuals can adjust their update rules besides their strategies, either imitation dynamics or aspiration-driven dynamics will finally take over the entire population, and the stationary cooperation level is determined by the outcome of competition between these two dynamics. We find that appropriate synergetic effects and moderate aspiration level boost the fixation probability of aspiration-driven dynamics most effectively. Our work may be helpful in understanding the cooperative behavior induced by the coexistence of imitation dynamics and aspiration dynamics in the society.
Flower longevity can vary widely between different species, as flowers of some species only persist for several hours (e.g. Epiphyllum oxypetalum) while others can live for several months (e.g. Phalaenopsis).Moreover, variation in flower longevity at the intraspecific level is also often reported (Rathcke, 2003;Spigler & Woodard, 2019). Compared to a short-lived flower, a longer flower life span
Self‐fertilization, prevalent in plants, is typically divided into three modes – prior, competing, and delayed selfing – based on the timing in which it occurs. Flower longevity affects both the opportunity for pollination and the resources allocated for fertility, and thus may influence the selection on different modes of self‐fertilization. Additionally, selfing causes fertilization to depend less on pollinators, which may also influence the evolution of flower longevity. Using game‐theoretical models, I investigate how inbreeding depression and the pollination environment influences the coevolution of the three modes of self‐fertilization with flower longevity. Invasion of prior selfing allows the subsequent evolution of shorter flower longevity, and thus is favored over competing selfing. Prior selfing can also invade even under high inbreeding depression when the pollen deposition rate is low, but is inhibited by a higher level of delayed selfing. In general, the evolution of selfing decreases flower longevity, and reveals asymmetric effects of pollen deposition and removal on flower longevity. This study suggests considering realization of selfing and outcrossing as concrete processes by incorporating flower reproductive strategies (e.g., flower longevity) and pollination ecology (e.g., accrual rate) may offer better understanding of the evolution of mating systems and flower reproductive traits.
Evolution of selfing is common in plant populations, but the genetic basis of selfing rate evolution remains unclear. Although the effects of genetic properties on fixation for mating‐unrelated alleles have been investigated, loci that modify the selfing rate (selfing modifiers) differ from mating‐unrelated loci in several aspects. Using population genetic models, I investigate the genetic basis of selfing rate evolution. For mating‐unrelated alleles, selfing promotes fixation only for recessive mutations, but for selfing modifiers, because the selection coefficient depends on the background selfing rate, selfing can promote fixation even for dominant modifiers. For mating‐unrelated alleles, the fixation probability from standing variation is independent of dominance and decreases with an increased background selfing rate. However, for selfing modifiers, the fixation probability peaks at an intermediate selfing rate and when alleles are recessive, because a change of its selection coefficient necessarily involves a change of the inbreeding coefficient, because both depend on the level of inbreeding depression. Furthermore, evolution of selfing involving multiple modifier loci is more likely when selfing is controlled by few large‐effect rather than many slight‐effect modifiers. I discuss how these characteristics of selfing modifiers have implications for the unidirectional transition from outcrossing to selfing and other empirical patterns.
Self-fertilization is common in hermaphroditic plants and also occurs in some co-sexual animals (Jarne & Charlesworth, 1993). Compared to outcrossing, self-fertilization enjoys an automatic transmission advantage, since a selfing individual not only transmits both its own male and female gametes to its offspring, but also can fertilize other individuals through pollen dispersal (Lande and Schemske, 1985;Lloyd, 1979;Nagylaki, 1976;). Selfing can also provide reproductive assurance when mates of mating opportunities are limited (Pannell & Barrett, 1998). However, macroevolutionary studies show negative diversification rates and higher extinction rates of self-compatible lineages compared to self-incompatible ones (Goldberg et al., 2010;Takebayashi & Morrell, 2001;Wright et al., 2013), which suggests self-fertilization is an evolutionary dead end. One of the most plausible explanations is that selfing leads to more rapid accumulation of deleterious mutations in the population (Bernardes, 1996;
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.