Letter | Published:

Altruism in a volatile world

Nature volume 555, pages 359362 (15 March 2018) | Download Citation

Abstract

The evolution of altruism—costly self-sacrifice in the service of others—has puzzled biologists1 since The Origin of Species. For half a century, attempts to understand altruism have developed around the concept that altruists may help relatives to have extra offspring in order to spread shared genes2. This theory—known as inclusive fitness—is founded on a simple inequality termed Hamilton’s rule2. However, explanations of altruism have typically not considered the stochasticity of natural environments, which will not necessarily favour genotypes that produce the greatest average reproductive success3,4. Moreover, empirical data across many taxa reveal associations between altruism and environmental stochasticity5,6,7,8, a pattern not predicted by standard interpretations of Hamilton’s rule. Here we derive Hamilton’s rule with explicit stochasticity, leading to new predictions about the evolution of altruism. We show that altruists can increase the long-term success of their genotype by reducing the temporal variability in the number of offspring produced by their relatives. Consequently, costly altruism can evolve even if it has a net negative effect on the average reproductive success of related recipients. The selective pressure on volatility-suppressing altruism is proportional to the coefficient of variation in population fitness, and is therefore diminished by its own success. Our results formalize the hitherto elusive link between bet-hedging and altruism4,9,10,11, and reveal missing fitness effects in the evolution of animal societies.

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.

    , & The genetical theory of kin selection. J. Evol. Biol. 24, 1020–1043 (2011)

  2. 2.

    The genetical evolution of social behaviour. I. J. Theor. Biol. 7, 1–16 (1964)

  3. 3.

    & Bet-hedging—a triple trade-off between means, variances and correlations. Biol. Rev. Camb. Phil. Soc. 87, 742–755 (2012)

  4. 4.

    & Cooperative breeding: a question of climate? Curr. Biol. 21, R195–R197 (2011)

  5. 5.

    & Temporal environmental variability drives the evolution of cooperative breeding in birds. Curr. Biol. 17, 1414–1419 (2007)

  6. 6.

    & Environmental uncertainty and the global biogeography of cooperative breeding in birds. Curr. Biol. 21, 72–78 (2011)

  7. 7.

    et al. Transitions in social complexity along elevational gradients reveal a combined impact of season length and development time on social evolution. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 281, 20140627 (2014)

  8. 8.

    et al. Different axes of environmental variation explain the presence vs. extent of cooperative nest founding associations in Polistes paper wasps. Ecol. Lett. 18, 1057–1067 (2015)

  9. 9.

    Spatiotemporal environmental variation, risk aversion, and the evolution of cooperative breeding as a bet-hedging strategy. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 10816–10822 (2011)

  10. 10.

    & Temporal variability and cooperative breeding: testing the bet-hedging hypothesis in the acorn woodpecker. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 282, 20151742 (2015)

  11. 11.

    , , & The ecology of cooperative breeding behaviour. Ecol. Lett. 20, 708–720 (2017)

  12. 12.

    , , & Family living sets the stage for cooperative breeding and ecological resilience in birds. PLoS Biol. 15, e2000483 (2017)

  13. 13.

    , & Evolution of sociality by natural selection on variances in reproductive fitness: evidence from a social bee. BMC Evol. Biol. 7, 153 (2007)

  14. 14.

    et al. Mean ecological conditions modulate the effects of group living and communal rearing on offspring production and survival. Behav. Ecol. 25, 862–870 (2014)

  15. 15.

    , , & Radio-tagging technology reveals extreme nest-drifting behavior in a eusocial insect. Curr. Biol. 17, 140–145 (2007)

  16. 16.

    & Climate and the distribution of cooperative breeding in mammals. R. Soc. Open Sci. 4, 160897 (2017)

  17. 17.

    Optimization of inclusive fitness. J. Theor. Biol. 238, 541–563 (2006)

  18. 18.

    Bet hedging based cooperation can limit kin selection and form a basis for mutualism. J. Theor. Biol. 280, 76–87 (2011)

  19. 19.

    & The genetical theory of social behaviour. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 369, 1–18 (2014)

  20. 20.

    , & in Cooperative Breeding in Vertebrates: Studies of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior (eds & ) 353–374 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2016)

  21. 21.

    Hamilton’s rule and the causes of social evolution. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 369, 20130362 (2014)

  22. 22.

    Developments of the Price equation and natural selection under uncertainty. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 267, 1223–1227 (2000)

  23. 23.

    & in Ecology and Evolution of Cooperative Breeding in Birds (eds & ) 48–66 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2004)

  24. 24.

    & Natural selection on fecundity variance in subdivided populations: kin selection meets bet hedging. Genetics 176, 361–377 (2007)

  25. 25.

    Expected relative fitness and the adaptive topography of fluctuating selection. Evolution 61, 1835–1846 (2007)

  26. 26.

    , & Helpers in colonial cooperatively breeding sociable weavers Philetairus socius contribute to buffer the effects of adverse breeding conditions. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 63, 103–112 (2008)

  27. 27.

    & Cooperative foraging, productivity, and the central limit theorem. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 88, 36–38 (1991)

  28. 28.

    , , & The costs and benefits of sociality in a facultatively social bee. Anim. Behav. 97, 77–85 (2014)

  29. 29.

    , , & Division of labor, bet hedging, and the evolution of mixed biofilm investment strategies. MBio 8, e00672-17 (2017)

  30. 30.

    The inclusive fitness controversy: finding a way forward. R. Soc. Open Sci. 4, 170335 (2017)

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank A. Gardner for discussions in the early stages of this work, and P.K. thanks the Behaviour Discussion Group at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute in Panama for the opportunity to present and discuss these ideas. We thank S. Schindler, S. Okasha, B. Autzen, J. McNamara and M. Bentley for comments on the project. P.K. was supported by the National Geographic Society (GEF-NE 145-15) and a University of Bristol Research Studentship, A.D.H. by the Natural Environment Research Council (NE/L011921/1), A.N.R. by a European Research Council Consolidator Grant (award no. 682253) and S.S. by the Natural Environment Research Council (NE/M012913/2).

Author information

Affiliations

  1. School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, 24 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol BS8 1TQ, UK

    • Patrick Kennedy
    •  & Andrew N. Radford
  2. Centre for Research in Animal Behaviour, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter EX4 4QG, UK

    • Andrew D. Higginson
  3. Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK

    • Seirian Sumner

Authors

  1. Search for Patrick Kennedy in:

  2. Search for Andrew D. Higginson in:

  3. Search for Andrew N. Radford in:

  4. Search for Seirian Sumner in:

Contributions

P.K. conceived the idea, P.K. and A.D.H. performed the modelling, A.N.R. and S.S. supervised the project. All authors discussed the ideas and wrote the manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patrick Kennedy.

Publisher's note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data

Supplementary information

PDF files

  1. 1.

    Life Sciences Reporting Summary

  2. 2.

    Supplementary Information

    This file contains Supplementary Information Appendices A-C. Appendix A contains derivations of the main text equations. Appendix B contains information on obtaining benefits and costs and Appendix C provides illustrative examples. These three appendices are merged into a single .pdf file.

Text files

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Data

    This file contains Supplementary Appendix D1, the MATLAB code for simulation detailed in Appendix B.

  2. 2.

    Supplementary Data

    This file contains Supplementary Appendix D2, the MATLAB code for simulation detailed in Appendix C.

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature25965

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.