Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40109116›Full record

ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2025

Role specialization and reproductive division of labour at the origin of eusociality.

Jeremy Field

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Division of labour as key driver of social evolution.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Review
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.

Jeremy FieldCentre for Ecology and Conservation, University of Exeter, Penryn, Cornwall TR10 9EZ, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0663-4031

Funding

Natural Environment Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The evolution of primitive eusociality from non-social ancestors in organisms such as bees and wasps is often regarded as a major evolutionary transition. The division of labour between reproductives that specialize on egg production and workers that specialize on tasks such as foraging is the key feature defining eusociality and is why social insects are so successful ecologically. In taxa with morphological castes, individuals are often irreversibly specialized for particular roles when they reach adulthood. At the origin of sociality, however, such adaptations were absent, and we must consider why selection would favour individuals specializing when they are undifferentiated from the ancestral, non-social phenotype. Here, I focus on constraints based on life-history tradeoffs and plasticity that would be faced by ancestral females when specializing. These include limited efficiency of within-individual tradeoffs between reproductive and worker functions, imperfect matching of the productivities of social partners and lack of coordination. I also discuss the possibility that payoffs through specialization could be condition dependent. Eusocial taxa lacking morphological castes have traditionally been the testing grounds to understand the origin of eusociality, but significant adaptation has occurred since helping first evolved. Investigating role specialization at the origin of eusociality therefore requires utilizing non-social taxa.This article is part of the theme issue 'Division of labour as key driver of social evolution'.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionInsectaSocial BehaviorAnimalsFemaleReproductiondivision of laboureusocialitylife historysubfertilitytask specializationtradeoffs

Identifiers

PMID40109116
PMCPMC11923616

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.