Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40109118›Full record

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

Helping niches may trigger the development of task specialization and division of labour.

Barbara Taborsky

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Insects · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. 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 evolution of division of labour: preconditions and evolutionary feedback.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.

Barbara TaborskyDivision of Behavioural Ecology, Institute of Ecology and Evolution, University of Bern, Wohlenstrasse 50A, Hinterkappelen CH-3032, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-1690-8155

Funding

Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multimember societies often exhibit Division of labour (DoL), where different individuals perform distinct tasks such as brood care, food acquisition and defence. While demand for tasks exists at the group level, assigning them to specific members poses an organizational challenge. I propose the 'Helping Niche Specialization hypothesis' (HeNS hypothesis), which suggests that cues indicating societal demand for tasks along with the current distribution of help, influence individual biases towards specific task preferences. This process may begin during early ontogeny, even before helping behaviours are actively performed. I first introduce the concept of the 'helping niche', a special form of the social niche. Next, I outline procedures central to the HeNS hypothesis, which represent a stepwise process: (i) societal and environmental cues bias individuals towards task preferences, which may arise already during early life, (ii) experience with preferred tasks reinforces these biases, (iii) learning-by-doing enhances task performance, and/or (iv) reduced response thresholds make task execution more likely, leading to (v) differentiation and specialization. Furthermore, I discuss the costs and benefits of specialization, how helping niches may emerge during development, the environmental conditions that favour them, and alternative pathways to DoL.This article is part of the theme issue 'Division of labour as key driver of social evolution'.

Indexed as

Behavior, AnimalHelping BehaviorSocial BehaviorAnimalsCuesLearningdevelopmental plasticitydivision of labourhelping nicheontogenysocial nichetask specialization

Identifiers

PMID40109118
PMCPMC11923612

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.