ArticleBiology letters2014
Resolving the evolution of sterile worker castes: a window on the advantages and disadvantages of monogamy.
Article in Biology letters, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- The evolution of eusociality: no risk-return tradeoff but the ecology matters.Ecology letters · 2020Article
- Hamilton's rule is essential but insufficient for understanding monogamy's role in social evolution.Royal Society open science · 2019Article
- Monogamy promotes altruistic sterility in insect societies.Royal Society open science · 2018Article
- A unified model of Hymenopteran preadaptations that trigger the evolutionary transition to eusociality.Nature communications · 2017Article
- Discrete but variable structure of animal societies leads to the false perception of a social continuum.Royal Society open science · 2016Article
- Models of social evolution: can we do better to predict 'who helps whom to achieve what'?Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Many social Hymenoptera species have morphologically sterile worker castes. It is proposed that the evolutionary routes to this obligate sterility must pass through a 'monogamy window', because inclusive fitness favours individuals retaining their reproductive totipotency unless they can rear full siblings. Simulated evolution of sterility, however, finds that 'point of view' is critically important. Monogamy is facilitating if sterility is expressed altruistically (i.e. workers defer reproduction to queens), but if sterility results from manipulation by mothers or siblings, monogamy may have no effect or lessen the likelihood of sterility. Overall, the model and data from facultatively eusocial bees suggest that eusociality and sterility are more likely to originate through manipulation than by altruism, casting doubt on a mandatory role for monogamy. Simple kin selection paradigms, such as Hamilton's rule, can also fail to account for significant evolutionary dynamics created by factors, such as population structure, group-level effects or non-random mating patterns. The easy remedy is to always validate apparently insightful predictions from Hamiltonian equations with life-history appropriate genetic models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.