Group size, queuing and helping decisions in facultatively eusocial hover wasps

Field, Jeremy; Shreeves, Gavin; Sumner, Seirian

doi:10.1007/s002650050574

Cited by 76 publications

(75 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In Seychelles warblers (Acrocephalus sechellensis) helpers modify their dispersal behaviour according to the territory quality of independent breeding options (Komdeur 1992;Komdeur et al 1995). By contrast, subordinates in the hover wasp (Liostenogaster flavolineata) were unlikely to accept nearby experimental high-quality breeding sites, a free nest provided by the experimenters, which seems to relate to the high benefits of queuing for a breeding position in this species (Field et al 1998(Field et al , 1999(Field et al , 2000. Third, this study demonstrates that predators affect helper dispersal.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Predation risk is an ecological constraint for helper dispersal in a cooperatively breeding cichlid

Heg

Bachar

Brouwer

et al. 2004

Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B

184

231

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental conditions are thought to be responsible for the extent and benefits of cooperative breeding in many animal societies, but experimental tests are scarce. We manipulated predator pressure in the cooperatively breeding cichlid Neolamprologus pulcher in Lake Tanganyika, where predators have been suggested to influence helper and breeder survival, helper dispersal and group reproductive success. We varied the type and intensity of predation by releasing medium, large, or no predators inside large underwater cages enclosing two or three group territories. Helper and breeder survival, helper dispersal and group reproductive success decreased from the control, to the medium-and large-predator treatments. These effects were modified by helper body size and the number of adults protecting the group from predators, supporting the 'group augmentation hypothesis'. Predators forced helpers to stay closer to, and spend more time inside, protective shelters. The results demonstrate the importance of predators for group living in this species, and support the 'ecological constraints hypothesis' of cooperative breeding, in the sense that subordinates stay at home rather than leave and breed independently under the risk of predation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Predation risk is an ecological constraint for helper dispersal in a cooperatively breeding cichlid

Heg

Bachar

Brouwer

et al. 2004

Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B

184

231

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, some other facultatively social species show no per capita productivity decrease when moving from solitary to social nesting. Increased per capita productivity in social relative to solitary nests has been shown in halictid bees (Coelho 2002), stenogastrine wasps (Field et al 1999(Field et al , 2000, and allodapine bees (Schwarz 1994;Schwarz et al 1998;Tierney et al 1997Tierney et al , 2000Tierney et al , 2002Hogendoorn and Zammit 2001;Joyce and Schwarz 2006;Thompson and Schwarz 2006). Thus, while a move from solitary to social behavior may carry a per capita productivity cost as predicted by Michener (1964), enough species show the opposite result that a decrease in per capita productivity should not be viewed as generally selecting against the transition from solitary behavior to sociality (see below for the merits of per capita productivity estimates).…”

Section: Productivitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, many facultatively and/or primitively social species show an increase in per capita productivity when moving from solitary to social groups (Schwarz 1994;Tierney et al 1997Tierney et al , 2000Tierney et al , 2002Schwarz et al 1998;Field et al 1999Field et al , 2000Hogendoorn and Zammit 2001;Coelho 2002;Joyce and Schwarz 2006;Thompson and Schwarz 2006), and even in larger-colony species, the negative relationship may not be universal (Bouwma et al 2005(Bouwma et al , 2006. Studies of per capita productivity that are based on nest collections may overestimate productivity of small groups by ignoring failed nests (douse 2001).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Survival and productivity benefits to social nesting in the sweat bee Megalopta genalis (Hymenoptera: Halictidae)

Smith

Wcislo

O’Donnell

2007

Behav Ecol Sociobiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Facultatively solitary and eusocial species allow for direct tests of the benefits of group living. We used the facultatively social sweat bee Megalopta genalis to test several benefits of group living. We surveyed natural nests modified for observation in the field weekly for 5 weeks in 2003. First, we demonstrate that social and solitary nesting are alternative behaviors, rather than different points on one developmental trajectory. Next, we show that solitary nests suffered significantly higher rates of nest failure than did social nests. Nest failure apparently resulted from solitary foundress mortality and subsequent brood orphanage. Social nests had significantly higher productivity, measured as new brood cells provisioned during the study, than did solitary nests. After accounting for nest failures, per capita productivity did not change with group size. Our results support key predictions of Assured Fitness Return models, suggesting such indirect fitness benefits favor eusocial nesting in M. genalis. We compared field collections of natural nests to our observation nest data to show that without accounting for nest failures, M. genalis appear to suffer a per capita productivity decrease with increasing group size. Calculating per capita productivity from collected nests without accounting for the differential probabilities of survival across group sizes leads to an overestimate of solitary nest productivity.

show abstract

“…In many societies, group members form a dominance or inheritance hierarchy in which low-ranking individuals can attain breeding status by outliving or supplanting those ahead of them in the queue (Strassmann and Meyer 1983;Wiley and Rabenold 1984;Hughes and Strassmann 1988a;Stacey and Koenig 1990;Field et al 1999;Monnin and Peeters 1999;Monnin and Ratnieks 1999;Buston 2003Buston , 2004Monnin et al 2003). Inheritance ranks can be settled by contests in which individuals of superior size, strength, or fighting ability assert dominance over weaker individuals (Pardi 1948;Turillazzi and Pardi 1977;Queller and Strassmann 1989;Heinze 1990;Clarke andFaulkes 1997, 2001) or by some convention such as age, maternal rank, or order of arrival (Field et al 1999;Engh et al 2000;Seppä et al 2002). In either case, the presence of an inheritance hierarchy erects systematic differences in the amount of future fitness that different group members stand to lose through engaging in risky behavior (Cant and Johnstone 2000;Kokko et al 2001;Cant andField 2001, 2005;Shreeves and Field 2002;Cant and English, forthcoming).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Individual Variation in Social Aggression and the Probability of Inheritance: Theory and a Field Test

Cant¹,

Llop²,

Field³

2006

The American Naturalist

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent theory suggests that much of the wide variation in individual behavior that exists within cooperative animal societies can be explained by variation in the future direct component of fitness, or the probability of inheritance. Here we develop two models to explore the effect of variation in future fitness on social aggression. The models predict that rates of aggression will be highest toward the front of the queue to inherit and will be higher in larger, more productive groups. A third prediction is that, in seasonal animals, aggression will increase as the time available to inherit the breeding position runs out. We tested these predictions using a model social species, the paper wasp Polistes dominulus. We found that rates of both aggressive "displays" (aimed at individuals of lower rank) and aggressive "tests" (aimed at individuals of higher rank) decreased down the hierarchy, as predicted by our models. The only other significant factor affecting aggression rates was date, with more aggression observed later in the season, also as predicted. Variation in future fitness due to inheritance rank is the hidden factor accounting for much of the variation in aggressiveness among apparently equivalent individuals in this species.

show abstract

Group size, queuing and helping decisions in facultatively eusocial hover wasps

Cited by 76 publications

References 24 publications

Predation risk is an ecological constraint for helper dispersal in a cooperatively breeding cichlid

Predation risk is an ecological constraint for helper dispersal in a cooperatively breeding cichlid

Survival and productivity benefits to social nesting in the sweat bee Megalopta genalis (Hymenoptera: Halictidae)

Individual Variation in Social Aggression and the Probability of Inheritance: Theory and a Field Test

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About