Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39471864›Full record

ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2024

Models of animal coalitions and their implications for human evolution.

Yasuo Ihara

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Yasuo IharaDepartment of Biological Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Hongo 7-3-1, Bunkyoku, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-3072-2410

Funding

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Social interaction is a prime driver for the evolution of animal behaviour. Dyadic interaction, in particular, has been the focus of intensive research on the evolution of mutualistic, altruistic, selfish or spiteful behaviours. Meanwhile, triadic interaction has been the minimal framework for the study of animal coalition as observed in some species of primates, as well as in carnivores and cetaceans, where two or more individuals act jointly against a third party in a competitive context. Previous mathematical models of animal coalition have either failed to explain the observed diversity in the configuration of coalition or presumed fine-tuned decision-making that may be unrealistic for non-human animals. To approach these issues, the present study develops a new model that is fairly simple, but still able to account for the observed diversity in animal coalitions. Analysis of the model specifies key parameters affecting the predicted types of coalition: the nature of the benefit being contested, the cost-to-benefit ratio associated with fighting and the synergistic effect in coalition formation. Additionally, the model is used to evaluate the social selection hypothesis, which claims that coalition formation induced social selection favouring reduced aggression and lower fighting abilities during human evolution.

Indexed as

Cooperative BehaviorSocial BehaviorAggressionAnimalsBehavior, AnimalBiological EvolutionHumansModels, BiologicalArdipithecus ramidusconflict interventionprimate behaviourrevolutionary coalitionsocial selectionthree-player coalition game

Identifiers

PMID39471864
PMCPMC11521593

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.