Cooperation-based branching as a mechanism of evolutionary speciation

Wood, Karen Elizabeth; Komarova, Natalia L.

doi:10.1016/j.jtbi.2018.02.033

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As microbes in multi-species communities specialize in particular metabolites and functions, communities may give rise to networks of mutual dependency (Black Queen evolution, [58]). Our model shows how this type of mutual dependency may evolve even in the absence of the costs and trade-offs that are often invoked in other models of cooperation-based specialization (e.g., [59]).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

On the importance of evolving phenotype distributions on evolutionary diversification

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evolutionary branching occurs when a population with a unimodal phenotype distribution diversifies into a multimodally distributed population consisting of two or more strains. Branching results from frequency-dependent selection, which is caused by interactions between individuals. For example, a population performing a social task may diversify into a cooperator strain and a defector strain. Branching can also occur in multi-dimensional phenotype spaces, such as when two tasks are performed simultaneously. In such cases, the strains may diverge in different directions: possible outcomes include division of labor (with each population performing one of the tasks) or the diversification into a strain that performs both tasks and another that performs neither. Here we show that the shape of the population’s phenotypic distribution plays a role in determining the direction of branching. Furthermore, we show that the shape of the distribution is, in turn, contingent on the direction of approach to the evolutionary branching point. This results in a distribution–selection feedback that is not captured in analytical models of evolutionary branching, which assume monomorphic populations. Finally, we show that this feedback can influence long-term evolutionary dynamics and promote the evolution of division of labor.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

On the importance of evolving phenotype distributions on evolutionary diversification

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A defector whose neighbour cooperates enjoys its maximum fitness, W, because it experiences no competition from its killed neighbour. Throughout the manuscript, I will define ‘cooperators’ and ‘defectors’ in game-theoretic terms (referring to whether an agent chooses how much to harm a partner), although this differs slightly from the ecological definition of cooperation, meaning that an organism acts directly for the benefit of another [ 6 ]. The pay-out for mutual cooperators is W – C, where C is the ‘competition term’ describing harmful effects of competition with the surviving neighbour, such as the risk of being killed by that neighbour in the future.…”

Section: The Model–game Theoretic Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yet, natural examples of cooperation (directly benefitting another organism) and even altruism (directly benefitting another organism at a cost to the individual) abound, with major impacts on ecology and evolution [1][2][3]. To give a few examples, cooperation is crucial in avoiding 'tragedies of the commons' that occur from over-exploitation of resources or suboptimal performance by non-cooperators (also called 'cheaters' or 'defectors'; [4]), it facilitates the coexistence of competitors [5], increases speciation [6], and promotes the evolution of phenotypic diversity, behavioural complexity and sociality [3,7,8]. In the simplest terms, cooperation can evolve when its benefits outweigh its costs, although this is complicated by processes such as kin interactions, spatial structure and learning [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Suppression force-fields and diffuse competition: competition de-escalation is an evolutionarily stable strategy

Atwater

2023

R. Soc. open sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Competition theory is founded on the premise that individuals benefit from harming their competitors, which helps them secure resources and prevent inhibition by neighbours. When multiple individuals compete, however, competition has complex indirect effects that reverberate through competitive neighbourhoods. The consequences of such ‘diffuse’ competition are poorly understood. For example, competitive effects may dilute as they propagate through a neighbourhood, weakening benefits of neighbour suppression. Another possibility is that competitive effects may rebound on strong competitors, as their inhibitory effects on their neighbours benefit other competitors in the community. Diffuse competition is unintuitive in part because we lack a clear conceptual framework for understanding how individual interactions manifest in communities of multiple competitors. Here, I use mathematical and agent-based models to illustrate that diffuse interactions—as opposed to direct pairwise interactions—are probably the dominant mode of interaction among multiple competitors. Consequently, competitive effects may regularly rebound, incurring fitness costs under certain conditions, especially when kin–kin interactions are common. These models provide a powerful framework for investigating competitive ability and its evolution and produce clear predictions in ecologically realistic scenarios.

show abstract

“…Indeed, this very robustness makes it difficult to engineer the environment in such a way that microbes with specific metabolic characteristics would be favoured [36]. For a recent analysis of mechanisms that have been proposed to improve the evolutionary robustness of metabolic cooperation, see [3,4,19,37].…”

Section: From Understanding Pathway Evolution To Biotechnological Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolutionary causes and consequences of metabolic division of labour: why anaerobes do and aerobes don’t

Kreft

Griffin

González-Cabaleiro

2020

Current Opinion in Biotechnology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Link to publication on Research at Birmingham portal General rightsUnless a licence is specified above, all rights (including copyright and moral rights) in this document are retained by the authors and/or the copyright holders. The express permission of the copyright holder must be obtained for any use of this material other than for purposes permitted by law.• Users may freely distribute the URL that is used to identify this publication.• Users may download and/or print one copy of the publication from the University of Birmingham research portal for the purpose of private study or non-commercial research.• User may use extracts from the document in line with the concept of 'fair dealing' under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (?) • Users may not further distribute the material nor use it for the purposes of commercial gain.Where a licence is displayed above, please note the terms and conditions of the licence govern your use of this document.When citing, please reference the published version. Take down policyWhile the University of Birmingham exercises care and attention in making items available there are rare occasions when an item has been uploaded in error or has been deemed to be commercially or otherwise sensitive.

show abstract

Cooperation-based branching as a mechanism of evolutionary speciation

Cited by 6 publications

References 41 publications

On the importance of evolving phenotype distributions on evolutionary diversification

On the importance of evolving phenotype distributions on evolutionary diversification

Suppression force-fields and diffuse competition: competition de-escalation is an evolutionarily stable strategy

Evolutionary causes and consequences of metabolic division of labour: why anaerobes do and aerobes don’t

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About