How to make a sterile helper

Downing, Philip A.; Cornwallis, Charlie K.; Griffin, Ashleigh S.

doi:10.1002/bies.201600136

Cited by 14 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 105 publications

(117 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Helpers could also increase breeder survival by, for example, decreasing predation risk. In many social insects, workers take on the risky tasks of foraging and defending the nest [10][11][12]. This protects breeders from predation and has reduced breeder extrinsic mortality to such an extent that they live orders of magnitude longer than workers [10].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Consistent with this idea, across a wide range of species, high investment in reproduction has been shown to limit survival [8,9]. This is often not the case, however, in species that raise young in cooperative groups [10,11]. Breeders often live a very long time despite producing many offspring that require substantial amounts of parental care.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Hard-working helpers contribute to long breeder lifespans in cooperative birds

Downing

Griffin

Cornwallis

2021

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In many species that raise young in cooperative groups, breeders live an exceptionally long time despite high investment in offspring production. How is this possible given the expected trade-off between survival and reproduction? One possibility is that breeders extend their lifespans by outsourcing parental care to non-reproductive group members. Having help lightens breeder workloads and the energy that is saved can be allocated to survival instead. We tested this hypothesis using phylogenetic meta-analysis across 23 cooperatively breeding bird species. We found that breeders with helpers had higher rates of annual survival than those without helpers (8% on average). Increased breeder survival was correlated with reduced investment in feeding offspring, which in turn depended on the proportion of feeding provided by helpers. Helpers had similar effects on female and male breeder survival. Our results indicate that one of the secrets to a long life is reduced investment in parental care. This appears to be a unique feature of cooperative societies with hard-working helpers. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Ageing and sociality: why, when and how does sociality change ageing patterns?’

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Hard-working helpers contribute to long breeder lifespans in cooperative birds

Downing

Griffin

Cornwallis

2021

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Kin selection has played a key role in the evolution of family-based cooperative systems [4][5][6][7][8]. However, as long as the opportunity for future reproduction remains possible, helpers have to trade-off the current kin selected benefits of helping against their potential future direct fitness [56]. This trade-off is known to shape helping behaviour in two cooperative wasps where helpers next in line to inherit a breeding position reduce their investment in helping compared to helpers that have a low probability of inheriting [47,48].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sex differences in helping effort reveal the effect of future reproduction on cooperative behaviour in birds

2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The evolution of helping behaviour in species that breed cooperatively in family groups is typically attributed to kin selection alone. However, in many species, helpers go on to inherit breeding positions in their natal groups, but the extent to which this contributes to selection for helping is unclear as the future reproductive success of helpers is often unknown. To quantify the role of future reproduction in the evolution of helping, we compared the helping effort of female and male retained offspring across cooperative birds. The kin selected benefits of helping are equivalent between female and male helpers-they are equally related to the younger siblings they help raise-but the future reproductive benefits of helping differ because of sex differences in the likelihood of breeding in the natal group. We found that the sex which is more likely to breed in its natal group invests more in helping, suggesting that in addition to kin selection, helping in family groups is shaped by future reproduction.

show abstract

“…The degree of worker altruism differs considerably among insect societies, from no help in the drywood termite Cryptotermes secundus (Korb, 2017) to extreme self‐sacrifice in stinging honeybees and exploding Camponotus workers (Shorter & Rueppell, 2012) and workers that completely lack ovaries in a number of ant genera (e.g. Downing, Cornwallis, & Griffin, 2017). A better understanding of this variation in social complexity requires an estimate of how strongly direct fitness gains contribute to worker inclusive fitness.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Body size and sperm quality in queen‐ And worker‐produced ant males

Giehr

Wallner

Krüger

et al. 2020

J of Evolutionary Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Workers of many species of social Hymenoptera have functional ovaries and are capable of laying haploid, unfertilized eggs, at least in the absence of a queen. Except for honeybees, it remains largely unknown whether worker‐produced males have the same quality as queen‐produced males and whether workers benefit in direct fitness by producing their sons. Previous studies in the monogynous ant Temnothorax crassispinus revealed that a high proportion of males in natural and laboratory colonies are worker offspring. Here, we compare longevity, body size, sperm length and sperm viability between queen‐ and worker‐produced males. We either split queenright colonies into queenright and queenless halves or removed the queen from a fraction of the queenright colonies and then examined the newly produced males. Male quality traits varied considerably among colonies but differed only slightly between queen‐ and worker‐produced males. Worker‐produced males outnumbered queen‐produced males and also had a longer lifespan, but under certain rearing conditions sperm from queen‐produced males had a higher viability.

show abstract

How to make a sterile helper

Cited by 14 publications

References 105 publications

Hard-working helpers contribute to long breeder lifespans in cooperative birds

Hard-working helpers contribute to long breeder lifespans in cooperative birds

Sex differences in helping effort reveal the effect of future reproduction on cooperative behaviour in birds

Body size and sperm quality in queen‐ And worker‐produced ant males

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About