Some individuals (helpers) in cooperatively breeding species provide alloparental care and often suppress their own reproduction. Kin selection is clearly an important explanation for such behaviour, but a possible alternative is group augmentation where individuals survive or reproduce better in large groups and where it therefore pays to recruit new members to the group. The evolutionary stability of group augmentation is currently disputed. We model evolutionarily stable helping strategies by following the dynamics of social groups with varying degrees of subordinate help. We also distinguish between passive augmentation, where a group member bene¢ts from the mere presence of others, and active augmentation, where their presence as such is neutral or harmful, but where helping to recruit new group members may still be bene¢cial if they in turn actively provide help for the current reproductives (`delayed reciprocity'). The results show that group augmentation (either passive or active) can be evolutionarily stable and explain costly helping by non-reproductive subordinates, either alone or leading to elevated help levels when acting in concert with kin selection. Group augmentation can thus potentially explain the weak relationships between relatedness and helping behaviour that are observed in some cooperatively breeding species. In some cases, the superior mutualistic performance of cooperatively behaving groups can generate an incentive to stay and help which is strong enough to make ecological constraints unnecessary for explaining the stability of cooperatively breeding groups.

SUMMARY To find out whether a mating preference could have initially evolved for adaptive reasons, one must determine whether the preferred trait could have provided useful information about mate quality at the time when the preference first arose. One way to do so is to determine whether the preference evolved before or after the preferred trait. If the preference evolved first, then it cannot initially have served an adaptive function in mate choice, rather it must have arisen by random drift, or as a pleiotropic consequence of selection acting on other aspects of individual perceptual abilities. A number of studies have shown that females exhibit a mating preference (e.g. for movement) in non‐sexual contexts also, which suggests that it may have evolved for reasons unconnected to mate choice. In addition, phylogenetic analyses have revealed that in several cases, females of a certain taxon exhibit a preference for a male trait that is absent in a sister taxon and in outgroup taxa, and that this preference is shared by females of the sister taxon tacking the male trait. The principle of parsimony suggests that such a preference has been inherited from a common ancestor, while the preferred trait arose only once in the lineage exhibiting the trait, i.e. that the preference predates the attractive trait. While the above evidence indicates that females may possess ‘hidden’ preferences for male traits that are not exhibited by members of their own species, and that in at least some cases males have later evolved display traits that exploit preexisting preferences of this kind, there have been too few historical studies of preference evolution to allow one to assess the frequency of such exploitation. Moreover historical studies cannot provide strong support for the adaptive origin hypothesis, because coevolution of trait and preference (as opposed to exploitation of a pre‐existing bias) is compatible with Fisherian models of preference evolution as well as with honest advertisement and the handicap principle. One can conclude only that while some mating preferences did not originally evolve for adaptive reasons, others may or may not have done so. To find out whether a mating preference is currently maintained by natural selection because the preferred trait provides useful information about mate quality, one must investigate the phenotypic and genotypic correlates of display, and the fitness consequences of mate choice. A review of the published data reveals some support for the ideas of adaptive choice and honest advertisement. In a number of species, preferred display traits are correlated with putative measures of quality, and in a small proportion of these, there is evidence that reproductive success and/or offspring performance are higher for individuals mated to attractive partners. Very few studies report a failure to find any such correlates of display or any such benefits. While the above result suggests that honest advertisement does sometimes occur in extant populations (which does not necessarily impl...

Animal societies vary markedly in reproductive skew, the extent to which breeding is monopolised by dominant individuals. In the last few years, a large number of different models have been developed to explain this variation. Here, I review existing models of reproductive skew, distinguishing between two basic types. Transactional models focus on group stability and the constraints this places on the division of reproduction. Compromise models, by contrast, ignore issues of group stability and view the division of reproduction as the outcome of a conflict in which each group member has a limited or partial ability to enforce its own optimum. I go on to show, however, that the division between transactional and compromise models is somewhat artificial, and that both approaches may be combined in a single, synthetic treatment. Different models of reproductive skew are thus better seen as special cases of a general underlying theory, rather than alternative paradigms. I conclude with a brief discussion of the possibilities and problems of empirically testing this unified theory of skew, and the prospects for future theoretical advances.

No abstract

Animals that forage socially often stand to gain from coordination of their behaviour. Yet it is not known how group members reach a consensus on the timing of foraging bouts. Here we demonstrate a simple process by which this may occur. We develop a state-dependent, dynamic game model of foraging by a pair of animals, in which each individual chooses between resting or foraging during a series of consecutive periods, so as to maximize its own individual chances of survival. We find that, if there is an advantage to foraging together, the equilibrium behaviour of both individuals becomes highly synchronized. As a result of this synchronization, differences in the energetic reserves of the two players spontaneously develop, leading them to adopt different behavioural roles. The individual with lower reserves emerges as the 'pace-maker' who determines when the pair should forage, providing a straightforward resolution to the problem of group coordination. Moreover, the strategy that gives rise to this behaviour can be implemented by a simple 'rule of thumb' that requires no detailed knowledge of the state of other individuals.

Sexual competition is associated closely with parental care because the sex providing less care has a higher potential rate of reproduction, and hence more to gain from competing for multiple mates. Sex differences in choosiness are not easily explained, however. The lower-caring sex (often males) has both higher costs of choice, because it is more difficult to find replacement mates, and higher direct benefits, because the sex providing more care (usually females) is likely to exhibit more variation in the quality of contributions to the young. Because both the costs and direct benefits of mate choice increase with increasing parental care by the opposite sex, general predictions about sex difference in choosiness are difficult. Furthermore, the level of choosiness of one sex will be influenced by the choosiness of the other. Here, we present an ESS model of mutual mate choice, which explicitly incorporates differences between males and females in life history traits that determine the costs and benefits of choice, and we illustrate our results with data from species with contrasting forms of parental care. The model demonstrates that sex differences in costs of choice are likely to have a much stronger effect on choosiness than are differences in quality variation, so that the less competitive sex will commonly be more choosy. However, when levels of male and female care are similar, differences in quality variation may lead to higher levels of both choice and competition in the same sex.

In many animal groups, certain individuals consistently appear at the forefront of coordinated movements [1-4]. How such leaders emerge is poorly understood [5, 6]. Here, we show that in pairs of sticklebacks, Gasterosteus aculeatus, leadership arises from individual differences in the way that fish respond to their partner's movements. Having first established that individuals differed in their propensity to leave cover in order to look for food, we randomly paired fish of varying boldness, and we used a Markov Chain model to infer the individual rules underlying their joint behavior. Both fish in a pair responded to each other's movements-each was more likely to leave cover if the other was already out and to return if the other had already returned. However, we found that bolder individuals displayed greater initiative and were less responsive to their partners, whereas shyer individuals displayed less initiative but followed their partners more faithfully; they also, as followers, elicited greater leadership tendencies in their bold partners. We conclude that leadership in this case is reinforced by positive social feedback.

Human females stop reproducing long before they die. Among other mammals, only pilot and killer whales exhibit a comparable period of post-reproductive life. The grandmother hypothesis suggests that kin selection can favour post-reproductive survival when older females help their relatives to reproduce. But although there is an evidence that grandmothers can provide such assistance, it is puzzling why menopause should have evolved only among the great apes and toothed whales. We have previously suggested (Cant & Johnstone 2008 Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 5332–5336 (doi:10.1073/pnas.071191110510.1073/pnas.0711911105)) that relatedness asymmetries owing to female-biased dispersal in ancestral humans would have favoured younger females in reproductive competition with older females, predisposing our species to the evolution of menopause. But this argument appears inapplicable to menopausal cetaceans, which exhibit philopatry of both sexes combined with extra-group mating. Here, we derive general formulae for ‘kinship dynamics’, the age-related changes in local relatedness that occur in long-lived social organisms as a consequence of dispersal and mortality. We show that the very different social structures of great apes and menopausal whales both give rise to an increase in local relatedness with female age, favouring late-life helping. Our analysis can therefore help to explain why, of all long-lived, social mammals, it is specifically among the great apes and toothed whales that menopause and post-reproductive helping have evolved.