Letter | Published:

Kinship affects morphogenesis in cannibalistic salamanders

Nature volume 362, pages 836838 (29 April 1993) | Download Citation

Subjects

Abstract

INCLUSIVE fitness theory predicts that organisms can often increase their fitness by helping relatives1. Indeed, many animals modify their behaviour towards kin in a fashion consistent with theory2–4. Morphogenesis may also be sensitive to kinship environment, especially in species that facultatively produce distinct morphs that differ in their ability to harm relatives, such as those that produce alternative cannibalistic and non-cannibalistic phenotypes5–9. We tested this hypothesis by examining whether consanguinity affected the probability that structurally distinctive cannibal morphs5,10 would develop in larval Arizona tiger salamanders (Ambystoma tigrinum nebulosum). We report here that when tiger salamander larvae are reared in mixed-brood groups they are significantly more likely to develop the cannibal morphology and at an earlier age than siblings reared in pure-sibship groups. In general, morphogenesis may be responsive to kinship in any species that facultatively develops structures that can be used against conspecifics as weaponry.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    J. theor. Biol. 7, 1–52 (1964).

  2. 2.

    Behavl Ecol. Sociobiol. 8, 251–259 (1981).

  3. 3.

    & Behavl Ecol. Sociobiol. 25, 303–319 (1989).

  4. 4.

    , , & Nature 351, 562–565 (1991).

  5. 5.

    Stud. Univ. Nebraska 7, 197–274 (1907).

  6. 6.

    Ecology 45, 361–365 (1964).

  7. 7.

    Science 181, 63–66 (1973).

  8. 8.

    Evolution 46, 1408–1420 (1992).

  9. 9.

    in Cannibalism. Ecology and Evolution among Diverse Taxa (eds Elgar, M. A. & Crespi, B. J.) 85–101 (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford. 1992).

  10. 10.

    Amphibia-Reptilia 12, 1–14 (1991).

  11. 11.

    & Can. J. Zool. 62, 168–174 (1984).

  12. 12.

    , & Copeia 1992, 672–679 (1992).

  13. 13.

    & Amer. Zool. 23, 77–84 (1983).

  14. 14.

    , & Oecologia 88, 161–166 (1991).

  15. 15.

    & J. anim. Ecol. 45, 713–729 (1976).

  16. 16.

    Evolution 34, 40–50 (1980).

  17. 17.

    & Sov. J. Ecol. 1, 58–62 (1970).

  18. 18.

    Oecologia 77, 407–413 (1988).

  19. 19.

    Evolution 44, 1529–1541 (1990).

  20. 20.

    in Kin Recognition (ed. Hepper, P. G.) 162–219 (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1991).

  21. 21.

    Kin Recognition (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1991).

  22. 22.

    A. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 20, 249–278 (1989).

  23. 23.

    Behavl Ecol. Sociobiol. 23, 93–104 (1988).

  24. 24.

    , & Nature 360, 254–256 (1992).

  25. 25.

    Am. Nat. 129, 221–233 (1987).

  26. 26.

    , & Am. Nat. 133, 846–868 (1989).

  27. 27.

    Practical Nonparametric Statistics (Wiley, New York. 1980).

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Section of Neurobiology and Behavior, Mudd Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853, USA

    • David W. Pfennig
  2. Department of Zoology, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona 85287, USA.

    • James P. Collins

Authors

  1. Search for David W. Pfennig in:

  2. Search for James P. Collins in:

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/362836a0

Further reading

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.