ArticleRoyal Society open science2016
Discrete but variable structure of animal societies leads to the false perception of a social continuum.
Article in Royal Society open science, 2016. 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, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- More social species live longer, have longer generation times and longer reproductive windows.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Group augmentation underlies the evolution of complex sociality in the face of environmental instability.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
- Senescence: why and where selection gradients might not decline with age.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2021Article
- The weird eusociality of polyembryonic parasites.Biology letters · 2021Article
- What constitutes "social complexity" and "social intelligence" in birds? Lessons from ravens.Behavioral ecology and sociobiology · 2019Review
- Monotocy and the evolution of plural breeding in mammals.Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral EcologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Animal societies are typically divided into those in which reproduction within a group is monopolized by a single female versus those in which it is shared among multiple females. It remains controversial, however, whether these two forms of social structure represent distinct evolutionary outcomes or endpoints along a continuum of reproductive options. To address this issue and to determine whether vertebrates and insects exhibit the same patterns of variation in social structure, we examined the demographic and reproductive structures of 293 species of wasps, ants, birds and mammals. Using phylogenetically informed comparative analyses, we found strong evidence indicating that not all reproductive arrangements within social groups are viable in nature and that in societies with multiple reproductives, selection favours instead taxon-specific patterns of decrease in the proportion of breeders as a function of group size. These outcomes suggest that the selective routes to sociality differ depending upon whether monopolization of reproduction by one individual is possible and that variation within and among taxonomic groups may lead to the false perception of a continuum of social structures. Thus, the occurrence of very large societies may require either complete reproductive monopolization (monogyny/singular breeding) or the maintenance of a taxon-specific range of values for the proportional decrease in the number of breeders within a group (polygyny/plural breeding), both of which may reduce reproductive conflict among females.
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.