Foraging specialization without relatedness or dominance among co-founding ant queens

@article{Rissing1989ForagingSW,
  title={Foraging specialization without relatedness or dominance among co-founding ant queens},
  author={Steven W. Rissing and Gregory B. Pollock and Mark R. Higgins and Robert H. Hagen and Deborah Roan Smith},
  journal={Nature},
  year={1989},
  volume={338},
  pages={420-422}
}
HYPOTHESES on the evolution of sociality in the Hymenoptera have focused on two non-exclusive selective processes. First, individuals may help relatives to enhance inclusive fitness (kin selection1,2). Second, group living may be so highly advantageous that competitively inferior individuals are forced into subordinate roles through social competition3–7; in this hypothesis, subordinates help dominants in the expectation that they may benefit from the group's resources if the dominants lose… 
Ecological Drivers of Non-kin Cooperation in the Hymenoptera
TLDR
The diversity and organization of non-kin sociality across the Hymenoptera is reviewed, particularly among the communal bees and polygynous ants and wasps, with a particular focus on ecological factors.
The foundress’s dilemma: group selection for cooperation among queens of the harvester ant, Pogonomyrmex californicus
TLDR
It is shown that group selection can explain the evolution of cooperative nest founding in the harvester ant Pogonomyrmex californicus, and it is found that aggressive individuals had a survival advantage within their nest, but foundress groups with such non-cooperators died out more often than those with only cooperative members.
SIZE AND KINSHIP AFFECT SUCCESS OF CO-FOUNDING LASIUS PALLITARSIS QUEENS*
TLDR
In a theoretical treatment of nest site selection, Nonacs (1989) found that with high mortality rates during search, discriminating potential partners based on degree of relatedness only marginally increases fitness, and therefore predicted that kin discrimination should be rare in ants.
Relatedness does not explain geographic variation in queen cooperation in the seed-harvester ant Messor pergandei
TLDR
The results indicate that kin-selected benefits are not likely to be responsible for the absence of fatal competition in the polygynous region; instead, the cause of geographic variation in queen cooperation must lie in ecological factors that alter the costs and benefits of retaining additional queens into colony maturity.
Unrelated helpers in a social insect
TLDR
Microsatellite markers are used to reveal an unexpected and unique social system in what is probably the best-studied social wasp, Polistes dominulus, which is functionally unlike other social insects, but similar to certain vertebrate societies, in which the unrelated helpers gain through inheritance of a territory or a mate.
Rank orders and division of labour among unrelated cofounding ant queens
  • K. Kolmer, J. Heinze
  • Biology
    Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences
  • 2000
TLDR
It is shown that the division of labour is strongly affected by aggressive interactions between cofounding queens: the dominant remains in the nest and guards the brood, whereas the subordinate is forced to leave and forage.
Efficient Allocation of Labor Maximizes Brood Development and Explains Why Intermediate-Sized Groups Perform Best During Colony-Founding in the Ant, Pogonomyrmex californicus
TLDR
It is found that queens in social founding groups survived longer and had higher productivity, and intermediate sized groups outperformed both solitary queens and groups of nine in the efficiency with which they converted eggs into workers.
Decoupled evolution of mating biology and social structure in Acromyrmex leaf-cutting ants
TLDR
It is suggested that multi-queen nesting and mating frequency evolve independently of one another, indicating that behavioral and ecological factors other than genetic diversity contribute to the evolution of complex mating behaviors in leaf-cutting ants.
Kin selection, kin avoidance and correlated strategies
TLDR
Kin selection and social competition are not necessarily mutually supportive processes within groups, interpreted by interpreting dominance as a strongly altruistic correlated strategy in two social hymenopteran contexts.
...
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 25 REFERENCES
Intraspecific Brood Raiding, Territoriality, and Slavery in Ants
TLDR
Recent research on the establishment of colonies in several non-dulotic, intra-specifically territorial ants provides support for and an extension of the territorial hypothesis as a general explanation for dulosis.
POLYGYNY AND THE EVOLUTION OF SOCIAL BEHAVIOR IN WASPS
TLDR
A "polyg ynous family hypothesis" is proposed as an alternative to the "subsocial" and "semisocial" hypotheses for the evolution of insect sociality.
Regulation of Reproduction in Eusocial Hymenoptera
TLDR
An evolutionary framework focuses attention on the social factors that regulate reproduction, but to avoid separating them artificially from their ecological context, factors extrinsic to a colony must occasionally enter the discussion.
The evolution and ontogeny of nestmate recognition in social wasps
TLDR
In this review, the evidence for nestmate recognition ability in social wasps is summarized, and the mechanism of female-female nestmates recognition using primitively eusocial wasps (Polistes) as a model is examined.
Structured Demes and the Evolution of Group-Advantageous Traits
  • D. Wilson
  • Psychology
    The American Naturalist
  • 1977
TLDR
Models are presented for warning cries and other donor-recipient relations, resource notification, the evolution of prudence in exploitation and interference competition, and the effect of differential trait-group extinction.
Altruism and Related Phenomena, Mainly in Social Insects
TLDR
With better knowledge of heredity and with more facts regarding the social insects to draw upon, Weismann recognized the possible conflict between intergroup and intragroup selection in the evolution of worker attributes.
Soft Selection, Hard Selection, Kin Selection, and Group Selection
  • M. Wade
  • Biology
    The American Naturalist
  • 1985
In this paper I illustrate the theoretical relationship among several different models of selection in structured populations, soft selection, hard selection, kin selection, and group selection, by
...
...