Inclusive fitness theory and eusociality

@article{Abbot2011InclusiveFT,
  title={Inclusive fitness theory and eusociality},
  author={Patrick Abbot and Jun Abe and John Alcock and Samuel Alizon and Jo{\~a}o Alpedrinha and Malte Andersson and Jean-Baptiste Andr{\'e} and Minus Van Baalen and François Balloux and Sigal Balshine and Nicholas H. Barton and Leo W. Beukeboom and Jay M. Biernaskie and Trine Bilde and Gerald Borgia and Michael D. Breed and Sam P. Brown and Redouan Bshary and Angus Buckling and Nancy Tyler Burley and Maxwell N. Burton-Chellew and Michael A. Cant and Michel Chapuisat and Eric L. Charnov and Tim H. Clutton‐Brock and Andrew Cockburn and Blaine J. Cole and Nick Colegrave and Leda Cosmides and Iain D. Couzin and Jerry A. Coyne and Scott R. Creel and Bernard J. Crespi and Robert L Curry and Sasha R. X. Dall and Troy Day and Janis Dickinson and Lee Alan Dugatkin and Claire El Mouden and Stephen T. Emlen and Jay D. Evans and R{\'e}gis Ferri{\`e}re and Jeremy Field and Susanne Foitzik and Kevin R. Foster and William A. Foster and Charles W. Fox and Juergen Gadau and Sylvain Gandon and Andy Gardner and Michael G. Gardner and Thomas Getty and Michael A. D. Goodisman and Alan Grafen and Rick Grosberg and Christina M. Grozinger and Pierre Henri Gouyon and Darryl T. Gwynne and Paul H. Harvey and Ben J. Hatchwell and J{\"u}rgen Heinze and Heikki Helantera and Ken R. Helms and Kim R. Hill and Natalie Jiricny and Rufus A. Johnstone and Alex Kacelnik and E. Toby Kiers and Hanna Kokko and Jan Komdeur and Judith Korb and Daniel J. C. Kronauer and Rolf K{\"u}mmerli and Laurent Lehmann and Timothy A. Linksvayer and S{\'e}bastien Lion and Bruce Lyon and James Arthur Robert Marshall and Richard Mcelreath and Yannis Michalakis and Richard E. Michod and Douglas W. Mock and Thibaud Monnin and Robert D. Montgomerie and Allen J. Moore and Ulrich G. Mueller and Ronald No{\"e} and Samir Okasha and Pekka Pamilo and Geoffrey Alan Parker and Jes S{\o}e Pedersen and Ido Pen and David W. Pfennig and David C. Queller and Daniel J. Rankin and Sarah E. Reece and H. Kern Reeve and Max Reuter and G Roberts and Simon K. A. Robson and Denis Roze and François Rousset and Olav Rueppell and Joel L. Sachs and Lorenzo A Santorelli and Paul Schmid-Hempel and Michael P. Schwarz and Thomas C. Scott-Phillips and Janet Shellmann-Sherman and Paul W. Sherman and David M. Shuker and Jeff Smith and Joseph C. Spagna and Beverly I. Strassmann and Andrew V. Suarez and Liselotte Sundstr{\"o}m and Michael Taborsky and Peter Taylor and Graham Thompson and John Tooby and Neil Durie Tsutsui and Kazuki Tsuji and Stefano Turillazzi and Francisco {\'U}beda and Edward L. Vargo and Bernard Voelkl and Tom Wenseleers and Stuart Andrew West and Mary Jane West-Eberhard and David F. Westneat and Diane C. Wiernasz and Geoff Wild and Richard Wrangham and Andrew J. Young and David W Zeh and Jeanne A. Zeh and Andrew G. Zink},
  journal={Nature},
  year={2011},
  volume={471},
  pages={E1-E4}
}
Arising from M. A. Nowak, C. E. Tarnita & E. O. Wilson 466, 1057–1062 (2010)10.1038/nature09205; Nowak et al. replyNowak et al. argue that inclusive fitness theory has been of little value in explaining the natural world, and that it has led to negligible progress in explaining the evolution of eusociality. However, we believe that their arguments are based upon a misunderstanding of evolutionary theory and a misrepresentation of the empirical literature. We will focus our comments on three… 
Clash of the Titans
To supporters of inclusive-fitness theory, these statements are outrageous and strike a blow at population genetics itself. E. O. Wilson and his coauthors simply could not be believed. Because of its
Much ado about nothing: Nowak et al.’s charge against inclusive fitness theory
TLDR
It is shown that some limitations ascribed to inclusive fitness are actually limitations of current evolutionary theory, for which Nowak et al. propose no new solution and their assertedly ‘common sense’ empirical alternative to estimating inclusive fitness is not applicable in cases of interest.
Sociobiology, History of
Evaluating inclusive fitness
TLDR
The aim is to use the recent debates over inclusive fitness not only to highlight interesting divergences between uses of the theory, but also to explore the philosophical questions that it has raised about causality in the study of social evolution, and even about the nature of behaviour across diverse species.
An apology for inclusive fitness.
  • Erol Akçay
  • Biology
    Evolution; international journal of organic evolution
  • 2015
TLDR
Marshall sets out to provide a short, self-contained, and accessible introduction to inclusive fitness theory in the context of the contemporary debate about its status, and largely succeeds.
The validity and value of inclusive fitness theory
  • A. Bourke
  • Biology, Psychology
    Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
  • 2011
TLDR
Inclusive fitness theory deserves to keep its position as the leading theory for social evolution, which has made unique, falsifiable predictions that have been confirmed, and its evidence base is extensive and robust.
“Altruism: a saga”
TLDR
There is a long history of social and biological thought intermingling and influencing each other when it comes to the study of social behavior, going back to Darwin, which suggests that something more than mere academic sword-fighting is going on in the evolution of altruism.
Kin Selection and Its Critics
TLDR
This overview of Hamilton's theory of kin selection highlights a number of conceptual issues that lie at the heart of the current debate, and considers the often-strained relationship between the theories of kin and multilevel selection.
The inclusive fitness controversy: finding a way forward
TLDR
This paper argues that criticisms of the regression-based version of Hamilton's rule, although they undermine its use for predictive purposes, do not undermined its use as an organizing framework for social evolution research.
...
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 87 REFERENCES
The evolution of eusociality
TLDR
It is argued that standard natural selection theory in the context of precise models of population structure represents a simpler and superior approach, allows the evaluation of multiple competing hypotheses, and provides an exact framework for interpreting empirical observations.
A GENERAL MODEL FOR KIN SELECTION
  • D. Queller
  • Biology
    Evolution; international journal of organic evolution
  • 1992
TLDR
It is shown how adopting a genic perspective yields a very general version of inclusive fitness thinking that remains pleasingly simple and transparent.
A defense of sociobiology.
  • K. Foster
  • Biology, Psychology
    Cold Spring Harbor symposia on quantitative biology
  • 2009
TLDR
It is argued that semantic precision is required in discussing terms such as kin selection, group selection, and altruism, but once care is taken, the objections to the unity of theoretical sociobiology largely evaporate.
Ancestral Monogamy Shows Kin Selection Is Key to the Evolution of Eusociality
TLDR
It is found that mating with a single male, which maximizes relatedness, is ancestral for all eight independent eusocial lineages that are investigated, and monogamy was critical in the evolution of eussociality, strongly supporting the prediction of inclusive fitness theory.
The Theory of Kin Selection
TLDR
This paper reviews the apparently diverse theoretical studies of kin selection in a common population genetic framework and discusses the implications of this theory for many of the terms and concepts used in sociobiology.
Lifetime monogamy and the evolution of eusociality
  • J. Boomsma
  • Biology
    Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
  • 2009
TLDR
Focusing on lifetime monogamy as a universal precondition for the evolution of obligate eusociality simplifies the theory and may help to resolve controversies about levels of selection and targets of adaptation.
Social stability and helping in small animal societies
  • J. Field, M. Cant
  • Economics
    Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
  • 2009
TLDR
Evidence that paper-wasp dominants avoid escalated conflicts by ceding reproduction to subordinates is discussed, and how queuing rules may be enforced through hidden threats that rarely have to be carried out is discussed.
The evolution of cooperation.
TLDR
A model is developed based on the concept of an evolutionarily stable strategy in the context of the Prisoner's Dilemma game to show how cooperation based on reciprocity can get started in an asocial world, can thrive while interacting with a wide range of other strategies, and can resist invasion once fully established.
The evolution of cooperation and altruism – a general framework and a classification of models
TLDR
A synthetic conceptual framework is developed that delineates the conditions necessary for the evolution of altruism and cooperation and classifies them into four general categories.
The genetical evolution of social behaviour. I.
...
...