2007
DOI: 10.2307/4541098
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Frequency Dependence and Cooperation: Theory and a Test with Bacteria

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

4
141
3
1

Year Published

2007
2007
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 76 publications
(149 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
4
141
3
1
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, (a) at lower population density, cells will be less able to use the public goods produced by other cells and so cheats will do worse (Brown & Johnstone 2001, Greig & Travisano 2004, (b) cheats do better when they are at lower frequencies in the population (frequency dependence) because they are then better able to exploit cooperators (Dugatkin et al 2003(Dugatkin et al , 2005Harrison et al 2006;Ross-Gillespie et al 2007;Velicer et al 2000), (c) individuals would be expected to change their production of public goods depending upon the availability of resources in the environment, which will also be influenced by the behavior of their neighbors, and (d ) competition between relatives reduces the kin-selected benefit of cooperation and hence favors reduced levels of cooperation (Griffin et al 2004). The work in these areas stresses the importance of developing specific theory that can be tested with specific systems (Ross-Gillespie et al 2007).…”
Section: β-Lactamasementioning
confidence: 98%
“…For example, (a) at lower population density, cells will be less able to use the public goods produced by other cells and so cheats will do worse (Brown & Johnstone 2001, Greig & Travisano 2004, (b) cheats do better when they are at lower frequencies in the population (frequency dependence) because they are then better able to exploit cooperators (Dugatkin et al 2003(Dugatkin et al , 2005Harrison et al 2006;Ross-Gillespie et al 2007;Velicer et al 2000), (c) individuals would be expected to change their production of public goods depending upon the availability of resources in the environment, which will also be influenced by the behavior of their neighbors, and (d ) competition between relatives reduces the kin-selected benefit of cooperation and hence favors reduced levels of cooperation (Griffin et al 2004). The work in these areas stresses the importance of developing specific theory that can be tested with specific systems (Ross-Gillespie et al 2007).…”
Section: β-Lactamasementioning
confidence: 98%
“…Many competitive interactions are frequency dependent, either negatively or positively [12][13][14][15]. Negative frequency dependence (NFD) of fitness has long been recognized to promote diversity when the fitness ranks of competitors reverse at a threshold frequency and rarity confers a fitness advantage [14,[16][17][18][19].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The extent to which traits are social is commonly tested by competing mutant strains against wild‐type strains and examining both the extent to which the mutants are able to exploit the wild type and the group level consequences. However, experiments performed to date have utilized mutant phenotypes that either carry large fitness effects, which can lead to complications such as frequency‐dependence (Ross‐Gillespie et al. , 2007), or exhibit pleiotropic effects on other traits (Foster et al.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…, 2006; MacLean & Gudelj, 2006; Diggle et al. , 2007a; Ross‐Gillespie et al. , 2007, 2009; Rumbaugh et al.…”
Section: Introductionunclassified
See 1 more Smart Citation