Evolution of Colony Characteristics in Social Insects. I. Sex Allocation

Pamilo, Pekka

doi:10.1086/285147

Cited by 183 publications

(182 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

176

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Likewise, in populations in which the queen number varies, workers should concentrate on raising queens in single-queen (monogynous) colonies and males in multiple-queen (polygynous) colonies (Boomsma & Grafen 1990. In principle, workers can bias colony sex ratios by selectively destroying male brood or by altering the fraction of diploid brood that they rear as queens (Pamilo 1991). Sundströ m et al (1996) have shown that in a monogynous population of the ant Formica exsecta in which queens vary in mating frequency, sex ratios are split as predicted and that, in colonies with a singly mated queen, workers bias sex allocation by selectively killing developing males.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ant workers selfishly bias sex ratios by manipulating female development

Hammond

Bruford

Bourke

2002

Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Kin selection theory predicts that social insects should perform selfish manipulations as a function of colony genetic structure. We describe a novel mechanism by which this occurs. First, we use microsatellite analyses to show that, in a population of the ant Leptothorax acervorum, workers' relatedness asymmetry (ratio of relatedness to females and relatedness to males) is significantly higher in monogynous (singlequeen) colonies than in polygynous (multiple-queen) colonies. Workers rear mainly queens in monogynous colonies and males in polygynous colonies. Therefore, split sex ratios in this population are correlated with workers' relatedness asymmetry. Together with significant female bias in the population numerical and investment sex ratios, this finding strongly supports kin-selection theory. Second, by determining the primary sex ratio using microsatellite markers to sex eggs, we show that the ratio of male to female eggs is the same in both monogynous and polygynous colonies and equals the overall ratio of haploids (males) to diploids (queens and workers) among adults. In contrast to workers of species with selective destruction of male brood, L. acervorum workers therefore rear eggs randomly with respect to sex and must achieve their favoured sex ratios by selectively biasing the final caste (queen or worker) of developing females.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ant workers selfishly bias sex ratios by manipulating female development

Hammond

Bruford

Bourke

2002

Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Second, if the worker can bias her own offspring sex ratio toward the rarer sex, then this makes her own offspring relatively more valuable and hence inhibits helping (Iwasa 1981;Pamilo 1991). Specifically, if the population consists mainly of males, the potential for helping decreases as the worker produces more sons over daughters…”

Section: Split Sex Ratios and Helpingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We make this assumption for ease of analysis and also because we wish to consider the bestcase scenario for the evolution of helping-differences in productivity would reduce the effective variance in sexallocation strategies in the population, leading to lower potential for helping and hence inhibit helping (Abugov 1981;Iwasa 1981;Andersson 1984;Grafen 1986;Pamilo 1991;Gardner et al 2012a). From equation (1), it is clear that the potential for helping depends on the population sex ratio (and also on the colony sex ratio, if helping is facultative).…”

Section: Worker Control Of Sex Allocationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Haplodiploidy and the Evolution of Eusociality: Worker Revolution

Alpedrinha

Gardner

West

2014

The American Naturalist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. Online enhancements: appendixes.abstract: Hamilton suggested that inflated relatedness between sisters promotes the evolution of eusociality in haplodiploid populations. Trivers and Hare observed that for this to occur, workers have to direct helping preferentially toward the production of sisters. Building on this, they proposed two biological scenarios whereby haplodiploidy could act to promote the evolution of eusociality: (a) workers biasing the sex allocation of the queen's brood toward females and (b) workers replacing the queen's sons with their own sons. This "worker revolution," whereby the worker class seizes control of sex allocation and reproduction, is expected to lead to helping being promoted in worker-controlled colonies. Here, we use a kinselection approach to model the two scenarios suggested by Trivers and Hare. We show that (1) worker control of sex allocation may promote helping, but this effect is likely to be weak and short lived; and (2) worker reproduction tends to inhibit rather than promote helping. Furthermore, the promotion of helping is reduced by a number of biologically likely factors, including the presence of workers increasing colony productivity, workers being unmated, and worker control of sex allocation being underpinned by many loci each having a small effect. Overall, our results suggest that haplodiploidy has had a negligible influence on the evolution of eusociality.

show abstract

“…Workers will therefore be selected to invest three quarters of the colony's reproductive efforts in the production of sister sexuals and only one quarter in raising brothers. The queen, however, being equally related to her sons and daughters, is selected to enforce equal investment in both sexes of her reproductive offspring [16,17]. In addition, workers have the option of producing their own sons.…”

Section: Levels Of Conflict In Ant Coloniesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In such situations, the queen and the workers should initially favor roughly equal investment in female and male reproductives [27,28]. However, when polyandrous colonies spread in the population, workers should prefer queen-biased sex ratios if their queen has mated with a below-average number of males, but malebiased sex ratios if she has mated with an aboveaverage number of males [17,29]. Ultimately, a continuing "arms race" could result, with mate numbers and the sex ratio preferences of workers coevolving [30].…”

Section: Sexual Deception Multiple Mating and Polygynymentioning

confidence: 99%

Conflict and cooperation in ant societies

Heinze¹,

Hölldobler²,

Peeters³

1994

Naturwissenschaften

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dedicated to Ernst Mayr on the occasion of his 90th birthdayWe review the different levels of reproductive conflict within ant societies. Workers and queens may disagree about sex allocation and the origin of males. Other conflicts arise between queens in multiply queened colonies and occasionally also between workers. These conflicts are resolved either by manipulation, such as sexual deception, changed mating patterns, or pheromonal signaling, or by physical aggression among nestmates. We outline the conditions under which physical aggression occurs and which behaviors are involved in the regulation of reproductive dominance. * Permanent address: CNRS URA 667, Universit6 Paris Nord,

show abstract

Evolution of Colony Characteristics in Social Insects. I. Sex Allocation

Cited by 183 publications

References 52 publications

Ant workers selfishly bias sex ratios by manipulating female development

Ant workers selfishly bias sex ratios by manipulating female development

Haplodiploidy and the Evolution of Eusociality: Worker Revolution

Conflict and cooperation in ant societies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About