Public Information: From Nosy Neighbors to Cultural Evolution

Danchin, Étienne; Giraldeau, Luc‐Alain; Valone, Thomas J.; Wagner, Richard H.

doi:10.1126/science.1098254

Cited by 1,315 publications

(1,230 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

1,171

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…, Aunger 2000b;Blackmore 1999;Boyd & Richerson 2005;Danchin et al 2004;Mace & Holden 2005;Mufwene 2001;Pagel & Mace 2004;Plotkin 2002b;Richerson & Boyd 2005;Runciman 2005;Shennan 2002;Wheeler et al 2002;Ziman 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a unified science of cultural evolution

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We suggest that human culture exhibits key Darwinian evolutionary properties, and argue that the structure of a science of cultural evolution should share fundamental features with the structure of the science of biological evolution. This latter claim is tested by outlining the methods and approaches employed by the principal subdisciplines of evolutionary biology and assessing whether there is an existing or potential corresponding approach to the study of cultural evolution. Existing approaches within anthropology and archaeology demonstrate a good match with the macroevolutionary methods of systematics, paleobiology, and biogeography, whereas mathematical models derived from population genetics have been successfully developed to study cultural microevolution. Much potential exists for experimental simulations and field studies of cultural microevolution, where there are opportunities to borrow further methods and hypotheses from biology. Potential also exists for the cultural equivalent of molecular genetics in "social cognitive neuroscience," although many fundamental issues have yet to be resolved. It is argued that studying culture within a unifying evolutionary framework has the potential to integrate a number of separate disciplines within the social sciences.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a unified science of cultural evolution

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One possible mechanism for changes in rank between pre-and post-fusion, such that only postfusion ranks reflected individuals' body sizes, is that aggressive interactions provide information regarding an individual's ability [26]. In this way, changes to group size and composition destabilize hierarchy structure previously maintained by external effects [14] and, as individuals re-establish hierarchies through aggressive interactions, they gain information regarding their relative competitive abilities.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The ghost of social environments past: dominance relationships include current interactions and experience carried over from previous groups

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

).Dominance hierarchies pervade animal societies. Within a static social environment, in which group size and composition are unchanged, an individual's hierarchy rank results from intrinsic (e.g. body size) and extrinsic (e.g. previous experiences) factors. Little is known, however, about how dominance relationships are formed and maintained when group size and composition are dynamic. Using a fusion -fission protocol, we fused groups of previously isolated shore crabs (Carcinus maenas) into larger groups, and then restored groups to their original size and composition. Pre-fusion hierarchies formed independently of individuals' sizes, and were maintained within a static group via winner/loser effects. Post-fusion hierarchies differed from pre-fusion ones; losing fights during fusion led to a decline in an individual's rank between pre-and post-fusion conditions, while spending time being aggressive during fusion led to an improvement in rank. In post-fusion tanks, larger individuals achieved better ranks than smaller individuals. In conclusion, dominance hierarchies in crabs represent a complex combination of intrinsic and extrinsic factors, in which experiences from previous groups can carry over to affect current competitive interactions.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, plant synapses might represent the crucial structures that determine the integrity of individual plants by allowing their cells and organs to define and detect 'self ' and recognize 'nonself ' [13,49]. Last but not least, the plant synapse concept would explain why plants are able to use non-genetic 'public' information [50] transmitted between species boundaries [12,50] for their trial-and-error-navigated and experience-based behaviour [11,12]. Synapses might provide the information platform that confers the integrity and self-consciousness [13,49] to multicellular organisms.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%