In Cell Biology

ReseaRch highlights

only ‘winning’ strategy is to try resources has helped to frame our Journal club defection. The authors asked, what thinking about the evolution of happens if the game is played development. Recent studies on stem ‘TiT-for-TaT’ in cell biology repeatedly? The winning strategy is cell competition inform us about simple: cooperate in the first round, cancer and related pathologies Although my colleagues (and, and, in subsequent meetings, do what (discussed in Green, 2010) and hopefully, readers) value the the other did last time. This Axelrod and colleagues have importance of evolutionary theory in The tit-for- ‘tit-for-tat’ strategy beats all others, speculated about cooperation in biology, many of us fail to incorporate tat strategy and Axelrod and colleagues oncogenesis (Axelrod et al., 2006). it into our research. Therefore, I am is found subsequently showed (Riolo et al., Personally, I’m not done thinking going to tell you about a paper that 2001) that cooperation evolves even about tit-for-tat and its consequences influenced me long ago. throughout when recognition is only for a for cell biology, and such theoretical In 1981, Axelrod and Hamilton nature and ‘marker’ that may be shared among work might lead to novel avenues in asked how cooperation evolves; the human society. divergent individuals. readers’ own research. prevailing notion was that this occurs But why discuss this here? The Douglas R. Green when individuals are sufficiently tit-for-tat strategy is found Department of Immunology, genetically identical that altruism throughout nature and human MS 351, Room E7050, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, serves to promote genome society. My research focuses on 262 Danny Thomas Place, Memphis, replication, regardless of whose physiological cell death, which can be Tennessee 38105–3678, USA. genome is replicating. They explored viewed as altruism in the ‘society of e-mail: [email protected] the game theory construct of the cells’ that constitutes an organism. The author declares no competing financial interests. ‘prisoner’s dilemma’, in which two Thinking about cellular cooperation criminals are caught and questioned in the immune system and tumour ORIGINAL RESEARCH PAPERS Axelrod, R., & separately. If each gives up the other suppression, and being influenced Hamilton, W. D. The evolution of cooperation. (defection), both will get long by these papers (among others), led Science 211, 1390–1396 (1981) | Riolo, R., Cohen, M. D. & Axelrod R. Evolution of cooperation sentences. If neither defects, both me to investigate cell death when I without reciprocity. Nature 414, 441–443 (2001) | will serve minor sentences. If one founded my laboratory in the 1980s. Axelrod, R., Axelrod D. E. & Pienta, K. J. Evolution of cooperation among tumor cells. Proc. Natl defects, this person will go free and Although cooperation between Acad. Sci. USA 103, 13474–13479 (2006) the other will serve a full sentence. cells in a multicellular organism is fuRtHER REAdING Green, D. R. Cell Even though cooperation (no generally viewed as a given, the idea competition: pirates on the tangled bank. Cell Stem Cell 6, 287–288 (2010) defection) gives a net benefit, the that cells compete for niches and