DOCSLIB.ORG

Haplodiploidy and the Evolution of Eusociality: Split Sex Ratios

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Haplodiploidy and the Evolution of Eusociality: Split Sex Ratios vol. 179, no. 2 the american naturalist february 2012 Haplodiploidy and the Evolution of Eusociality: Split Sex Ratios Andy Gardner,1,2,* Joa˜o Alpedrinha,1,3 and Stuart A. West1 1. Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PS, United Kingdom; 2. Balliol College, University of Oxford, Broad Street, Oxford OX1 3BJ, United Kingdom; 3. Instituto Gulbenkian de Cieˆncia, Apartado 14, PT-2781-901 Oeiras, Portugal Submitted June 29, 2011; Accepted October 20, 2011; Electronically published December 21, 2011 the rearing of an extra sister to provisioning a cell for a daugh- abstract: It is generally accepted that from a theoretical perspec- ter of her own. (Hamilton 1964, p. 28–29) tive, haplodiploidy should facilitate the evolution of eusociality. How- ever, the “haplodiploidy hypothesis” rests on theoretical arguments The eusocial societies are dominated by species with hap- that were made before recent advances in our empirical understand- lodiploid genetics, especially the social Hymenoptera—the ing of sex allocation and the route by which eusociality evolved. Here ants, bees, and wasps. Although eusociality is also found we show that several possible promoters of the haplodiploidy effect would have been unimportant on the route to eusociality, because in diploid species, such as termites, its distribution is sig- they involve traits that evolved only after eusociality had become nificantly biased toward haplodiploid families (Crozier established. We then focus on two biological mechanisms that could 2008). Hamilton (1964, 1972) suggested that this was be- have played a role: split sex ratios as a result of either queen virginity cause haplodiploidy facilitates the evolution of altruistic or queen replacement. We find that these mechanisms can lead hap- helping. Altruistic helping behaviors are favored if the ben- lodiploidy to facilitating the evolution of helping but that their im- efit of helping relatives outweighs the costs to the altruist portance varies from appreciable to negligible, depending on the and to other relatives, with all costs and benefits weighted assumptions. Furthermore, under certain conditions, haplodiploidy by the genetic relatedness of the recipients to the actor can even inhibit the evolution of helping. In contrast, we find that the level of promiscuity has a strong and consistently negative in- (Hamilton 1963, 1964, 1970). Haplodiploidy involves fe- fluence on selection for helping. Consequently, from a relatedness males developing from fertilized (i.e., diploid) eggs and perspective, monogamy is likely to have been a more important driver having both a mother and a father, and males developing of eusociality than the haplodiploidy effect. from unfertilized (i.e., haploid) eggs, and having no father. Hamilton (1964, 1972) suggested that because this leads Keywords: altruism, helping, inclusive fitness, kin selection, monog- to a worker being more related to her full sisters (life-for- p amy, sex allocation. life relatedness,R 3/4 ) than to her own daughters (R p 1/2 ), haplodiploidy makes eusociality easier to evolve, even in the absence of efficiency benefits to Introduction cooperation. Trivers and Hare (1976) showed that while Hamilton’s If a female is fertilized by only one male all the sperm she “haplodiploidy hypothesis” can work, things are not so simple. Haplodiploidy also leads to a female being less receives is genetically identical. Thus, although the relationship related to her brothers (p ) than to her sons of a mother to her daughters has the normal value of 1/2, the R 1/4 (p ). In the simplest case, with an unbiased sex ratio relationship between daughters is 3/4. Consider a species where R 1/2 the female consecutively provisions and oviposits in cell after among reproductives, the relative benefit of rearing sisters is exactly canceled by the relative cost of rearing brothers, cell so that she is still at work when the first of her female and so haplodiploidy has no overall influence (Trivers and offspring ecloses, leaves the nest and mates. Our principle tells Hare 1976). A female-biased sex ratio does not solve this us that even if this new adult had a nest ready constructed problem, because the benefit of more sisters is exactly and vacant for her use she would prefer, other things being counterbalanced by the fact that it increases the average equal, returning to her mother’s and provisioning a cell for number of mates for each male, making females worth * Corresponding author; e-mail: [email protected] relatively less (Trivers and Hare 1976; Craig 1979). Con- Am. Nat. 2012. Vol. 179, pp. 000–000. ᭧ 2011 by The University of Chicago. sequently, in order to make the haplodiploidy hypothesis 0003-0147/2012/17902-53146$15.00. All rights reserved. work, it is required that workers preferentially help sisters DOI: 10.1086/663683 but that the population sex ratio is not biased to the same 000 The American Naturalist Table 1: Split sex ratios and the evolution of eusociality Empirical evidence that this has Could such split sex ratios have occurred on Reason for split sex ratios led to split sex ratios the route to eusociality? Partially overlapping generations (Seger No (West 2009) Potentially 1983) Worker control of sex allocation in some No, but would be transient Potentially (to be analyzed in a companion broods and queen control in others (Triv- (West 2009) paper: J. Alpedrinha et al. unpublished ers and Hare 1976) manuscript) Variation across colonies in the relative cost No (West 2009) Potentially of producing males and females (Grafen 1986) Virginity (or any other factor which con- Yes, this occurs in solitary and Yes strains some queens to produce only social hymenopteran species, males; Taylor 1981; Godfray and Grafen although usually at low 1988) (!6%) frequencies (Godfray and Hardy 1992; West 2009 Competition for mates between related males No (West 2009) Potentially, although LMC is very rare in so- (local mate competition, LMC; Frank cial Hymenoptera (West et al. 2005) 1987) Synergistic benefits of rearing siblings (Frank No (West 2009) Potentially and Crespi 1989) Variation in response to whether sibmated or No (West 2009) No evidence for such sex ratio shifts in any not (Greeff 1996; Reece et al. 2004) organism, and sibmating is rare in social Hymenoptera Competition between related females for re- Yes, in ants (West 2009) No, this occurs in multiple-queen colonies, sources (local resource competition; which only evolved after obligate eusocial- Brown and Keller 2000) ity was established (Boomsma 2007, 2009; Hughes et al. 2008) Queen control (Passera et al. 2001) Yes, in ants and bees (West No, this occurs only in obligately eusocial 2009) colonies Relatedness asymmetry due to variation in Yes, in ants (Chapuisat and Kel- No, multiple mating only evolved after obli- queen mating frequency (Boomsma and ler 1999; Meunier et al. 2008; gate eusociality was established (Boomsma Grafen 1991) West 2009) 2007, 2009; Hughes et al. 2008) Relatedness asymmetry due to variation in Yes, in ants and wasps (Cha- No, this occurs in multiple-queen colonies, queen number (Boomsma and Grafen puisat and Keller 1999; Meu- whereas eusociality has only arisen in mo- 1991; Boomsma 1993) nier et al. 2008; West 2009) nogynous species (Boomsma 2007, 2009; Hughes et al. 2008). Relatedness asymmetry due to queen re- Yes, in bees (Chapuisat and Kel- Yes placement (Boomsma 1991) ler 1999; Meunier et al. 2008; West 2009) Note: Although there are many mechanisms that lead to split sex ratios in hymenoptera, only two of these (virginity and queen replacement) are supported by empirical evidence (column 2) and are also likely to have occurred during the transition from solitary to eusocial living (column 3). extent. Trivers and Hare (1976) suggested that this could facilitates the spread of genes that lead to more specialized happen if workers at some nests gained control of sex helping en route to eusociality. allocation and biased this toward sisters. Such sex ratio Since Trivers and Hare’s (1976) landmark article, a large variation between broods, termed “split sex ratios,” can body of theoretical work has arisen showing that split sex allow helpers at the relatively female-biased broods to gain ratios can be favored in response to a multitude of selective the relatedness benefit of rearing sisters, without this being forces, with many of these scenarios being supported by exactly canceled by a reduced reproductive value of fe- the empirical data (table 1). Indeed, work on split sex ratios males, thanks to the relatively male-biased broods leading has even been hailed as one of the most successful and to a more even sex ratio at the population level (Seger productive areas of evolutionary biology, with a rich in- 1983; Grafen 1986). The idea here is that this favors the terplay between theoretical, observational, and experi- initial evolution of helping at some broods and hence mental studies (West 2009). Furthermore, subsequent Haplodiploidy and Eusociality 000 work has suggested other ways that might allow haplo- is able to assess the sex ratio of the brood that she would diploidy to facilitate the evolution of helping, via its impact help to rear. Another issue is whether we are examining on relatedness, for example, by selecting for the enforce- the initial evolution (origin) of helping, or the subsequent ment of cooperation with worker policing (Ratnieks 1988) elaboration (maintenance) of helping (Charnov 1978). In or by increasing the benefit of helping siblings in struc- the former, a potential worker must decide whether to stay tured populations (Lehmann et al. 2008; Johnstone et al. at her mother’s nest and rear siblings or disperse away to 2011). Overall, this body of work has led to the general found her own nest, whereas in the latter, a potential assumption that from a theoretical perspective, the hap- worker must decide how much to invest in rearing the lodiploidy effect does facilitate the evolution of eusociality queen’s offspring versus selfishly pursuing her own re- (Seger 1991; Krebs and Davies 1993; Bourke and Franks production within the same nest.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sensory and Cognitive Adaptations to Social Living in Insect Societies Tom Wenseleersa,1 and Jelle S
    COMMENTARY COMMENTARY Sensory and cognitive adaptations to social living in insect societies Tom Wenseleersa,1 and Jelle S. van Zwedena A key question in evolutionary biology is to explain the solitarily or form small annual colonies, depending upon causes and consequences of the so-called “major their environment (9). And one species, Lasioglossum transitions in evolution,” which resulted in the pro- marginatum, is even known to form large perennial euso- gressive evolution of cells, organisms, and animal so- cial colonies of over 400 workers (9). By comparing data cieties (1–3). Several studies, for example, have now from over 30 Halictine bees with contrasting levels of aimed to determine which suite of adaptive changes sociality, Wittwer et al. (7) now show that, as expected, occurred following the evolution of sociality in insects social sweat bee species invest more in sensorial machin- (4). In this context, a long-standing hypothesis is that ery linked to chemical communication, as measured by the evolution of the spectacular sociality seen in in- the density of their antennal sensillae, compared with sects, such as ants, bees, or wasps, should have gone species that secondarily reverted back to a solitary life- hand in hand with the evolution of more complex style. In fact, the same pattern even held for the socially chemical communication systems, to allow them to polymorphic species L. albipes if different populations coordinate their complex social behavior (5). Indeed, with contrasting levels of sociality were compared (Fig. whereas solitary insects are known to use pheromone 1, Inset). This finding suggests that the increased reliance signals mainly in the context of mate attraction and on chemical communication that comes with a social species-recognition, social insects use chemical sig- lifestyle indeed selects for fast, matching adaptations in nals in a wide variety of contexts: to communicate their sensory systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Plasticity‐Led Evolution: a Survey of Developmental Mechanisms and Empirical Tests
    DOI: 10.1111/ede.12309 PERSPECTIVE Plasticity‐led evolution: A survey of developmental mechanisms and empirical tests Nicholas A. Levis | David W. Pfennig Department of Biology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, Abstract North Carolina Recent years have witnessed increased interest in evaluating whether phenotypic plasticity can precede, facilitate, and possibly even bias adaptive Correspondence “ ‐ ” Nicholas A. Levis, Department of Biology, evolution. Despite accumulating evidence for plasticity led evolution (i.e., CB#3280, University of North Carolina, “PLE”), critical gaps remain, such as: how different developmental Chapel Hill, NC 27599. mechanisms influence PLE; whether some types of traits and taxa are Email: [email protected] especially prone to experience PLE; and what studies are needed to drive the field forward. Here, we begin to address these shortcomings by first speculating about how various features of development—modularity, flexible regulation, and exploratory mechanisms—mightimpactand/orbias whether and how PLE unfolds. We then review and categorize the traits and taxa used to investigate PLE. We do so both to identify systems that may be well‐suited for studying developmental mechanisms in a PLE context and to highlight any mismatches between PLE theory and existing empirical tests of this theory. We conclude by providing additional suggestions for future research. Our overarching goal is to stimulate additional work on PLE and thereby evaluate plasticity’s role in evolution. 1 | INTRODUCTION 2011; West‐Eberhard, 2003). Under this view, novel traits start out evolutionarily as environmentally The environment has long been viewed as crucial in induced phenotypic variants. Later, they come under both selecting on phenotypes and in creating those genetic control through selection on developmental phenotypes in the first place (e.g., Baldwin, 1896, processes.
    [Show full text]
  • Gene-Culture Coevolution, Group Selection, and the Evolution of Cooperation
    EC_2018_A12 Gene-Culture coevolution, group selection, and the evolution of Cooperation The Evolution of Cooperation How can altruism / cooperation evolve? 1 EC_2018_A12 Levels of Selection "although a high standard of morality gives but a slight or no advantage to each individual man and his children over the other men of the same tribe (...) an advancement in the standard of morality will certainly give an immense advantage to one tribe over another.” (C. Darwin, Descent of Man, 1871) Levels of Selection Individuals (“basic” [Neo]Darwinism) Genes (“Selfish-gene” Sociobiology) Groups? Multilevel selection? Higher-level adaptations? Genetic Group Selection? “Naïve group selectionism”: The probability of survival of individual living things, or of populations, increases with the degree with which they harmoniously adjust themselves to each other and to their environment. This principle is basic to the concept of the balance of nature, orders the subject matter of ecology and evolution, underlies organismic and developmental biology, and is the foundation for all sociology. (Allee et al. 1949) “The good of the species” (Wynne-Edwards) 2 EC_2018_A12 Levels of Selection Migration, genetic drift, etc: Intergroup effects weaker than intragroup, interindividual selection. Intra x intergroup differences X Wilson DS & Wilson EO (2007) Rethinking the theoretical foundation of sociobiology Multi-level selection/ limits in kin selection theory/ “major transitions” Eusociality: Kin Selection X Individual selection + preadaptations. (communal nests) Nowak, Tarnita & Wilson, “The Evolution of Eusociality”, Nature 2010 (X Abbot et al [+100!], Nature 2011) “Major Transitions” in Evolution Maynard Smith & Szathmáry 1997 “Apart from the evolution of the genetic code, all these transitions involve the coming together of previously independent replicators, to cooperate in a higher-level assembly that reproduces as a single unit.” 3 EC_2018_A12 Natural selection & the evolution of cooperation Cooperation is needed for evolution to construct new levels of organization.
    [Show full text]
  • Low Cost of Worker Policing in the Honeybee. Author(S): Martin H
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Sussex Research Online The University of Chicago Killing and Replacing Queen-Laid Eggs: Low Cost of Worker Policing in the Honeybee. Author(s): Martin H. Kärcher and Francis L. W. Ratnieks Source: The American Naturalist, Vol. 184, No. 1 (July 2014), pp. 110-118 Published by: The University of Chicago Press for The American Society of Naturalists Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/676525 . Accessed: 17/03/2015 11:53 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. The University of Chicago Press, The American Society of Naturalists, The University of Chicago are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The American Naturalist. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 139.184.161.95 on Tue, 17 Mar 2015 11:53:31 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions vol. 184, no. 1 the american naturalist july 2014 Killing and Replacing Queen-Laid Eggs: Low Cost of Worker Policing in the Honeybee Martin H. Ka¨rcher* and Francis L. W. Ratnieks School of Life Sciences, University of Sussex, Brighton BN1 9QG, United Kingdom Submitted November 2, 2013; Accepted February 5, 2014; Electronically published May 15, 2014 Dryad data: http://dx.doi.org/10.5061/dryad.g4052.
    [Show full text]
  • Kin Recognition in Social Insects and Other Animals-A Review of Recent Findings and a Consideration of Their Relevance for the Theory of Kin Selection
    Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. (Anim. Sci.), Vol. 94, No. 6, December 1985, pp. 587-621. © Printed in India. Kin recognition in social insects and other animals-A review of recent findings and a consideration of their relevance for the theory of kin selection RAGHAVENDRA GADAGKAR Centre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560012, India MS received 23 May 1985; revised 26 November 1985 Abstract. Kin selection is a widely invoked mechanism to explain the origin and evolution of social behaviour in animals. Proponents of the theory of kin selection place great emphasis on the correlation between asymmetries in genetic relatedness created by haplodiploidy and the multiple origins ofeusociality in the order Hymenoptera. The fact that a female is more closely related genetically to her full sister than to her daughters makes it more profitable for a Hymenopteran female, in terms of inclusive fitness,to raise full sisters rather than daughters or full siblings with a female biased sex ratio rather than offspring. This is sometimes referred to as the haplodiploidy hypothesis. In reality however, genetic relatedness between workers in social insect colonies and the reproductive brood they rear is far below ()75, the value expected for full sisters, often below (}5 the value expected between mother and daughter and, not uncommonly, approaching zero. Such values are on account of queen turnover, multiple mating by queens or polygyny. This situation raises doubts regarding the haplodiploidy hypothesis unless workers can discriminate between full and half sisters and preferentially direct their altruism towards their full sisters only. This would still mean an effective coefficient of genetic relatedness of(}75 between altruist and recipient.
    [Show full text]
  • The Enforcement of Cooperation by Policing
    ORIGINAL ARTICLE doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.2010.00963.x THE ENFORCEMENT OF COOPERATION BY POLICING Claire El Mouden,1,2 Stuart A. West,1 and Andy Gardner1 1Department of Zoology, Oxford University, South Parks Road, Oxford, OX1 3PS, United Kingdom 2E-mail: [email protected] Received December 14, 2009 Accepted January 11, 2010 Policing is regarded as an important mechanism for maintaining cooperation in human and animal social groups. A simple model providing a theoretical overview of the coevolution of policing and cooperation has been analyzed by Frank (1995, 1996b, 2003, 2009), and this suggests that policing will evolve to fully suppress cheating within social groups when relatedness is low. Here, we relax some of the assumptions made by Frank, and investigate the consequences for policing and cooperation. First, we address the implicit assumption that the individual cost of investment into policing is reduced when selfishness dominates. We find that relaxing this assumption leads to policing being favored only at intermediate relatedness. Second, we address the assumption that policing fully recovers the loss of fitness incurred by the group owing to selfishness. We find that relaxing this assumption prohibits the evolution of full policing. Finally, we consider the impact of demography on the coevolution of policing and cooperation, in particular the role for kin competition to disfavor the evolution of policing, using both a heuristic “open” model and a “closed” island model. We find that large groups and increased kin competition disfavor policing, and that policing is maintained more readily than it invades. Policing may be harder to evolve than previously thought.
    [Show full text]
  • Honey Bee Presentation
    Population Dynamics of Honeybees – Megan Asche and Kelly Sears Honeybees are eusocial insects that have huge economic importance to the agricultural industry. They are unique in that they have a sex-determination system know as haplodiploidy, which is further complicated through the complementary sex determination (csd) locus. The Csd locus induces a significant genetic load through the consequences of homozygosity in diploid males and heightens the effects of inbreeding. Queen bees are polyandrous, and mate with 10-20 drones. This mating behavior minimizes the likelihood of inbreeding in feral populations. However, within domesticate colonies multiple breeding techniques (closed population, artificial insemination, queen production) have been employed that have selected for economically important traits at the expensive of likely reducing many other traits that are important for colony health. Luckily, despite the breed tendencies of the industry, hybridization with Africanized honeybees has occurred in the Southern US and provided significant gene flow that will help slowly reduce some of the consequences of artificial selection and prohibition of honeybee importation. 1. Graham, Joe M. (editor). The Hive and the Honey Bee (ninth printing). Dadant & Sons. 2010. 2. Guzman-Novoa, Ernesto. Elemental genetics and breeding for the honeybee. 2011 3. Seeley, Thomas D. "Honeybee Ecology: a Study of Adaptation in Social Life 71–74." (1985). 4. Snodgrass, Robert Evans. Anatomy and Physiology of the Honeybee. 1925. 5. Winston, Mark L. The Biology of the Honey Bee. Harvard University Press. 1987. 6. P. R. Oxley. The genetic architecture of honeybee breeding. Advances in insect physiology. (2010) 39: 83-118. 7. Rinderer, Thomas R. Bee Genetics and Breeding.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetic Accommodation and the Role of Ancestral Plasticity in the Evolution of Insect Eusociality Beryl M
    © 2018. Published by The Company of Biologists Ltd | Journal of Experimental Biology (2018) 221, jeb153163. doi:10.1242/jeb.153163 COMMENTARY Genetic accommodation and the role of ancestral plasticity in the evolution of insect eusociality Beryl M. Jones1,* and Gene E. Robinson1,2,3,4 ABSTRACT novel genetic combinations and phenotypes (Carroll, 2008). ‘ ’ For over a century, biologists have proposed a role for phenotypic Mutation-first evolution (see Glossary), where a new mutation ‘ ’ plasticity in evolution, providing an avenue for adaptation in addition provides novel phenotypes that can be screened by natural to ‘mutation-first’ models of evolutionary change. According to the selection, is easily studied when the mutation can be directly linked various versions of this idea, the ability of organisms to respond to the phenotype. Even without knowledge of the phenotypic adaptively to their environment through phenotypic plasticity may consequences of alleles, mutation-first evolution studies can be lead to novel phenotypes that can be screened by natural selection. If initiated in both natural populations and laboratories simply by these initially environmentally induced phenotypes increase fitness, documenting changes in allele frequencies over time. then genetic accommodation can lead to allele frequency change, However, novel traits are also suggested to originate independent influencing the expression of those phenotypes. Despite the long of new mutations, via the environmental and developmental history of ‘plasticity-first’ models, the importance of genetic induction of phenotypes. One of the first biologists to emphasize accommodation in shaping evolutionary change has remained this was Baldwin, who at the turn of the 20th century suggested a ‘ ’ controversial – it is neither fully embraced nor completely discarded process of organic selection by which fitness differences arising by most evolutionary biologists.
    [Show full text]
  • Enforcement Is Central to the Evolution of Cooperation
    REVIEW ARTICLE https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-019-0907-1 Enforcement is central to the evolution of cooperation J. Arvid Ågren1,2,6, Nicholas G. Davies 3,6 and Kevin R. Foster 4,5* Cooperation occurs at all levels of life, from genomes, complex cells and multicellular organisms to societies and mutualisms between species. A major question for evolutionary biology is what these diverse systems have in common. Here, we review the full breadth of cooperative systems and find that they frequently rely on enforcement mechanisms that suppress selfish behaviour. We discuss many examples, including the suppression of transposable elements, uniparental inheritance of mito- chondria and plastids, anti-cancer mechanisms, reciprocation and punishment in humans and other vertebrates, policing in eusocial insects and partner choice in mutualisms between species. To address a lack of accompanying theory, we develop a series of evolutionary models that show that the enforcement of cooperation is widely predicted. We argue that enforcement is an underappreciated, and often critical, ingredient for cooperation across all scales of biological organization. he evolution of cooperation is central to all living systems. A major open question, then, is what, if anything, unites the Evolutionary history can be defined by a series of major tran- evolution of cooperative systems? Here, we review cooperative evo- Tsitions (Box 1) in which replicating units came together, lost lution across all levels of biological organization, which reveals a their independence and formed new levels of biological organiza- growing amount of evidence for the importance of enforcement. tion1–4. As a consequence, life is organized in a hierarchy of coop- By enforcement, we mean an action that evolves, at least in part, to eration: genes work together in genomes, genomes in cells, cells in reduce selfish behaviour within a cooperative alliance (see Box 2 for multicellular organisms and multicellular organisms in eusocial the formal definition).
    [Show full text]
  • Insects with Similar Social Complexity Show Convergent Patterns Of
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Insects with similar social complexity show convergent patterns of adaptive molecular Received: 13 December 2017 Accepted: 22 June 2018 evolution Published: xx xx xxxx Kathleen A. Dogantzis1, Brock A. Harpur 1,2, André Rodrigues3, Laura Beani4, Amy L. Toth5 & Amro Zayed 1 Eusociality has independently evolved multiple times in the hymenoptera, but the patterns of adaptive molecular evolution underlying the evolution and elaboration of eusociality remain uncertain. Here, we performed a population genomics study of primitively eusocial Polistes (paper wasps), and compared their patterns of molecular evolution to two social bees; Bombus (bumblebees), and Apis (honey bees). This species triad allowed us to study molecular evolution across a gradient of social complexity (Polistes < Bombus < Apis) and compare species pairs that have similar (i.e. Polistes and Bombus) or diferent (i.e. Polistes and Apis) life histories, while controlling for phylogenetic distance. We found that regulatory genes have high levels of positive selection in Polistes; consistent with the prediction that adaptive changes in gene regulation are important during early stages of social evolution. Polistes and Bombus exhibit greater similarity in patterns of adaptive evolution including greater overlap of genes experiencing positive selection, and greater positive selection on queen-biased genes. Our fndings suggest that either adaptive evolution of a few key genes underlie the evolution of simpler forms of eusociality, or that the initial stages of social evolution lead to selection on a few key traits orchestrated by orthologous genes and networks. Understanding the origin and elaboration of eusociality is a major goal of evolutionary biology.
    [Show full text]
  • Larval Helpers and Age Polyethism in Ambrosia Beetles
    Larval helpers and age polyethism in ambrosia beetles Peter H. W. Biedermann1 and Michael Taborsky Department of Behavioral Ecology, Institute of Ecology and Evolution, University of Bern, CH-3012 Bern, Switzerland Edited by Bert Hölldobler, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, and approved September 1, 2011 (received for review May 14, 2011) Division of labor among the workers of insect societies is a the role of division of labor is unknown. Ambrosia beetles live conspicuous feature of their biology. Social tasks are commonly inside trees, which is a habitat extraordinarily favoring social shared among age groups but not between larvae and adults with evolution (12), apparently having fostered at least seven in- completely different morphologies, as in bees, wasps, ants, and dependent origins of fungiculture in beetles (13). Hence, they beetles (i.e., Holometabola). A unique yet hardly studied holome- represent a unique model system to study the evolution of so- tabolous group of insects is the ambrosia beetles. Along with ciality in relation to fungiculture. Interestingly, ambrosia beetles one tribe of ants and one subfamily of termites, wood-dwelling vary in their mating system (inbreeding vs. outbreeding species) ambrosia beetles are the only insect lineage culturing fungi, a trait and ploidy level (haplodiploid vs. diploid species), which are predicted to favor cooperation and division of labor. Their sociality factors that have been assumed to contribute to social evolution, has not been fully demonstrated, because behavioral observations although their respective roles in social evolution are contro- have been missing. Here we present behavioral data and experi- versial (1). The ambrosia beetle subtribe Xyleborini is charac- ments from within nests of an ambrosia beetle, Xyleborinus sax- terized by regular inbreeding, haplodiploidy, and fungiculture (8, esenii.
    [Show full text]
  • Distinct Chemical Blends Produced by Different Reproductive Castes in the Subterranean Termite Reticulitermes Flavipes
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Distinct chemical blends produced by diferent reproductive castes in the subterranean termite Reticulitermes favipes Pierre‑André Eyer*, Jared Salin, Anjel M. Helms & Edward L. Vargo The production of royal pheromones by reproductives (queens and kings) enables social insect colonies to allocate individuals into reproductive and non‑reproductive roles. In many termite species, nestmates can develop into neotenics when the primary king or queen dies, which then inhibit the production of additional reproductives. This suggests that primary reproductives and neotenics produce royal pheromones. The cuticular hydrocarbon heneicosane was identifed as a royal pheromone in Reticulitermes favipes neotenics. Here, we investigated the presence of this and other cuticular hydrocarbons in primary reproductives and neotenics of this species, and the ontogeny of their production in primary reproductives. Our results revealed that heneicosane was produced by most neotenics, raising the question of whether reproductive status may trigger its production. Neotenics produced six additional cuticular hydrocarbons absent from workers and nymphs. Remarkably, heneicosane and four of these compounds were absent in primary reproductives, and the other two compounds were present in lower quantities. Neotenics therefore have a distinct ‘royal’ blend from primary reproductives, and potentially over‑signal their reproductive status. Our results suggest that primary reproductives and neotenics may face diferent social pressures.
    [Show full text]