Premium
Mother's little helpers: What we know (and don't know) about cooperative infant care in callitrichines
Author(s) -
Erb Wendy M.,
Porter Leila M.
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
evolutionary anthropology: issues, news, and reviews
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.401
H-Index - 85
eISSN - 1520-6505
pISSN - 1060-1538
DOI - 10.1002/evan.21516
Subject(s) - kin selection , inclusive fitness , cooperative breeding , natural selection , selection (genetic algorithm) , affect (linguistics) , competitor analysis , helping behavior , variation (astronomy) , darwin (adl) , genetic fitness , altruism (biology) , psychology , social psychology , biology , evolutionary biology , ecology , computer science , communication , economics , artificial intelligence , physics , management , software engineering , astrophysics
Since Darwin ([Darwin, C., 1859]), scientists have been puzzled by how behaviors that impose fitness costs on helpers while benefiting their competitors could evolve through natural selection. Hamilton's ([Hamilton, W. D., 1964]) theory of inclusive fitness provided an explanation by showing how cooperative behaviors could be adaptive if directed at closely related kin. Recent studies, however, have begun to question whether kin selection is sufficient to explain cooperative behavior in some species (Bergmüller, Johnstone, Russell, & Bshary, [Bergmüller, R., 2007]). Many researchers have instead emphasized the importance of direct fitness benefits for helpers in the evolution of cooperative breeding systems. Furthermore, individuals can vary in who, when, and how much they help, and the factors that affect this variation are poorly understood (Cockburn, [Cockburn, A., 1998]; Heinsohn, [Heinsohn, R. G., 2004]). Cooperative breeders thus provide excellent models for the study of evolutionary theories of cooperation and conflict (Cant, [Cant, M. A., 2012]).