Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25819562›Full record

ArticleCurrent biology : CB2015

Fitness Trade-offs Result in the Illusion of Social Success.

Jason B Wolf, Jennifer A Howie, Katie Parkinson, Nicole Gruenheit, Diogo Melo, Daniel Rozen, Christopher R L Thompson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current biology : CB, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Reduced social function in experimentally evolvedProceedings. Biological sciences · 2023
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Developmental constraints enforce altruism and avert the tragedy of the commons in a social microbe.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. WildEcology and evolution · 2020
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Strategic investment explains patterns of cooperation and cheating in a microbe.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2018
    Article
  15. Genetic signatures of microbial altruism and cheating in social amoebas in the wild.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2018
    Article
  16. A single mutation inCommunications biology · 2018
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Jason B WolfDepartment of Biology and Biochemistry, University of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath BA2 7AY, UK. Electronic address: jason@evolutionarygenetics.org.
Jennifer A HowieFaculty of Life Sciences, Michael Smith Building, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PT, UK.
Katie ParkinsonFaculty of Life Sciences, Michael Smith Building, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PT, UK.
Nicole GruenheitFaculty of Life Sciences, Michael Smith Building, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PT, UK.
Diogo MeloDepartamento de Genética e Biologia Evolutiva, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Daniel RozenInstitute of Biology, Leiden University, Sylvius Laboratory, Sylviusweg 72, PO Box 9505, 2300 RA Leiden, the Netherlands.
Christopher R L ThompsonFaculty of Life Sciences, Michael Smith Building, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PT, UK. Electronic address: christopher.thompson@manchester.ac.uk.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/M007146/1Medical Research Council G0900069Wellcome Trust 095643
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cooperation is ubiquitous across the tree of life, from simple microbes to the complex social systems of animals. Individuals cooperate by engaging in costly behaviors that can be exploited by other individuals who benefit by avoiding these associated costs. Thus, if successful exploitation of social partners during cooperative interactions increases relative fitness, then we expect selection to lead to the emergence of a single optimal winning strategy in which individuals maximize their gain from cooperation while minimizing their associated costs. Such social "cheating" appears to be widespread in nature, including in several microbial systems, but despite the fitness advantages favoring social cheating, populations tend to harbor significant variation in social success rather than a single optimal winning strategy. Using the social amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum, we provide a possible explanation for the coexistence of such variation. We find that genotypes typically designated as "cheaters" because they produce a disproportionate number of spores in chimeric fruiting bodies do not actually gain higher fitness as a result of this apparent advantage because they produce smaller, less viable spores than putative "losers." As a consequence of this trade-off between spore number and viability, genotypes with different spore production strategies, which give the appearance of differential social success, ultimately have similar realized fitness. These findings highlight the limitations of using single fitness proxies in evolutionary studies and suggest that interpreting social trait variation in terms of strategies like cheating or cooperating may be misleading unless these behaviors are considered in the context of the true multidimensional nature of fitness.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionAdaptation, BiologicalAmoebaDictyosteliumGenetic FitnessGenotypeSpores, Protozoan

Identifiers

PMID25819562
PMCPMC4406944

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.