Kinship influences sperm whale social organization within, but generally not among, social units

Konrad, Christine M.; Gero, Shane; Frasier, Timothy R.; Whitehead, Hal

doi:10.1098/rsos.180914

Cited by 32 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In ‘resident’ killer whales, for example, both males and females form groups with close maternal kin where they remain for their entire lives 25 , 28 , 53 . Both long-finned ( Globicephala melas ) and short-finned ( G. macrorhynchus ) pilot whale societies are structured along similar lines 26 , 54 , while female sperm whales ( Physeter macrocephalus ) form stable multi-generational matrilineal social units 27 , 29 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It has been postulated that beluga whale group structure centres around females with their calves of different ages 16,21 and is similar to the group structure in killer whales (Orcinus orca) and some other odontocete whale species 21,24 that primarily comprise closely related individuals from the same maternal lineage [25][26][27][28][29] . Group structure is quite different in other odontocetes, such as the bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops spp.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Group structure and kinship in beluga whale societies

O’Corry‐Crowe

Suydam

Quakenbush

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evolutionary explanations for mammalian sociality typically center on inclusive-fitness benefits of associating and cooperating with close kin, or close maternal kin as in some whale societies, including killer and sperm whales. Their matrilineal structure has strongly influenced the thinking about social structure in less well-studied cetaceans, including beluga whales. in a cross-sectional study of group structure and kinship we found that belugas formed a limited number of distinct group types, consistently observed across populations and habitats. certain behaviours were associated with group type, but group membership was often dynamic. MtDNA-microsatellite profiling combined with relatedness and network analysis revealed, contrary to predictions, that most social groupings were not predominantly organized around close maternal relatives. they comprised both kin and non-kin, many group members were paternal rather than maternal relatives, and unrelated adult males often traveled together. the evolutionary mechanisms that shape beluga societies are likely complex; fitness benefits may be achieved through reciprocity, mutualism and kin selection. At the largest scales these societies are communities comprising all ages and both sexes where multiple social learning pathways involving kin and non-kin can foster the emergence of cultures. We explore the implications of these findings for species management and the evolution of menopause. Interpreting gregarious behaviour in terms of cooperative strategies that maximize individual fitness, Hamilton 1 developed the theory of kin selection. This theory uses the concept of inclusive fitness to explain the evolution of social organization and cooperation where individuals indirectly enhance their fitness through positive effects on the reproduction of relatives. However, individuals can also derive benefits from associations with unrelated individuals where cooperation is conditional on the behaviour of the companion (i.e., reciprocity 2,3), always yields the highest benefit (i.e., mutualism 4,5) or results in shared fitness advantages from helping increase group size (i.e., group augmentation 6,7) which, for example, could lead to more effective group defense. In fluid aggregations, such as herds or flocks, benefits to the individual alone (e.g., reducing personal predation risk at the expense of other group members) may drive the tendency to associate with conspecifics 8,9. Thus, resolving the genetic relationships among group members is central to understanding the advantages of group living, the emergence of cooperative behaviour, and the evolution of social organization. The recent re-emergence of arguments for group selection theory, where kinship plays a minor role in social evolution 10,11 , and the debate these arguments have elicited 12 , as well as the growing evidence for culture in non-primate species 13-15 (defined as the acquisition or inheritance of knowledge or behaviours from conspecifics through social learning 13), has further heightened the intere...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Group structure and kinship in beluga whale societies

O’Corry‐Crowe

Suydam

Quakenbush

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In group-living mammals like meerkats (Suricata suricatta), the growth of pups is positively correlated to the number of carers per pup, demonstrating the importance of a sufficient group size (22). In sperm whales (Physeter macrocephalus), sociality was shown to be primarily driven and maintained by kinship selection and the alloparental care function provided by closely related adult females to calves within matrilineal females/immatures social units (80,81). The likely alteration of this female sociality caused by the rapid loss of individuals was proposed as one of the factors potentially contributing further to the decline of some populations (80,82,83).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In sperm whales (Physeter macrocephalus), sociality was shown to be primarily driven and maintained by kinship selection and the alloparental care function provided by closely related adult females to calves within matrilineal females/immatures social units (80,81). The likely alteration of this female sociality caused by the rapid loss of individuals was proposed as one of the factors potentially contributing further to the decline of some populations (80,82,83). Female killer whales are also known to take care of their kin, protect them during attacks, transmit ecological knowledge like hunting techniques, and share prey with them (9,47,(84)(85)(86)(87).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Role of sociality in the response of killer whales to an additive mortality event

Busson

Authier

Barbraud

et al. 2019

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In highly social top predators, group living is an ecological strategy that enhances individual fitness, primarily through increased foraging success. Additive mortality events across multiple social groups in populations may affect the social structure, and therefore the fitness, of surviving individuals. This hypothesis was examined in a killer whale (Orcinus orca) population that experienced a 7-y period of severe additive mortality due to lethal interactions with illegal fishing vessels. Using both social and demographic analyses conducted on a unique long-term dataset encompassing periods before, during, and after this event, results indicated a decrease in both the number and the mean strength of associations of surviving individuals during the additive mortality period. A positive significant correlation between association strength and apparent survival suggested that the fitness of surviving individuals was impacted by the additive mortality event. After this event, individuals responded to the loss of relatives in their social groups by associating with a greater number of other social groups, likely to maintain a functional group size that maximized their foraging success. However, these associations were loose; individuals did not reassociate in highly stable social groups, and their survival remained low years after the mortality event. These findings demonstrate how the disruption of social structure in killer whales may lead to prolonged negative effects of demographic stress beyond an additive mortality event. More importantly, this study shows that sociality has a key role in the resilience of populations to humaninduced mortality; this has major implications for the conservation of highly social and long-lived species. sociality | survival | social structure | anthropogenic disturbances | killer whales

show abstract

“…The costs of inbreeding and kin competition vary with differences in dispersal and the spatial scale of competition. Therefore, some species, such as Australian sleepy lizards (Tiliqua rugosa), show kin avoidance (Godfrey et al 2014), while others, such as sperm whales (Physeter macrocephalus), preferentially associate with kin (Konrad et al 2018). Kin-biased assortment or dispersal (e.g.…”

Section: Bottom-up: Individual States Influencing Social Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

The importance of individual-to-society feedbacks in animal ecology and evolution

Cantor

Chaparro²,

Beck

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1.The social decisions that individuals make, in terms of where to move, who to interact with and how frequently, scale up to generate social structure. Such structure has profound consequences: individuals each have a unique social environment, social interactions can amplify or dampen individual differences at the population level, and population-level ecological and evolutionary processes can be governed by higher-level ‘emergent properties’ of animal societies.2.Here we review how explicitly accounting for social structure in animal populations has generated new hypotheses and has revised existing predictions in ecology and evolution. That is, we synthesize the insights gained by applying ‘network-thinking’ rather than the utility of applying social network analysis as a methodological tool. 3.We start with what has been learned about the generative mechanisms that underpin social structure. We then outline the major implications that social structure has been found to have on population processes, on how selection operates and organisms can evolve, and on co-evolutionary dynamics between social structure and population processes. Finally, we highlight areas for which there is clear evidence that accounting for social structure will refine current thinking, but where examples remain scarce.4.Applying ‘network thinking’ in biology presents not only new challenges, but also many opportunities to advance different areas of research. Addressing the question of how social structure changes the biological relationships linking individuals to populations, and populations to processes, is revealing commonalities across scientific disciplines. In doing so, animal social networks can bridge otherwise disparate research topics and, in the future, we hope will allow for more unified theories in biology.

show abstract

Kinship influences sperm whale social organization within, but generally not among, social units

Cited by 32 publications

References 72 publications

Group structure and kinship in beluga whale societies

Group structure and kinship in beluga whale societies

Role of sociality in the response of killer whales to an additive mortality event

The importance of individual-to-society feedbacks in animal ecology and evolution

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About