ArticleeLife2026
Fitness drivers of division of labor in vertebrates.
Article in eLife, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Although division of labor as a means to increase productivity is a common feature in animal social groups, most previous studies have focused almost exclusively on eusocial insects with extreme task partitioning. Empirical evidence of division of labor in vertebrates is scarce, largely because we lack a theoretical framework to explore the conditions under which division of labor is likely to evolve in cooperatively breeding systems where helpers remain capable of breeding throughout their lifetime. By explicitly considering alternative helping tasks with varying fitness costs, we model how individual decisions on task specialization may influence the emergence of division of labor under both direct and indirect fitness benefits. Surprisingly, we find that direct survival benefits of living in larger groups are the primary force driving the evolution of cooperation to enhance group productivity, and that indirect fitness benefits derived from related group members are only a non-essential facilitator of more stable forms of division of labor in cooperative breeders. In addition, we find that division of labor in vertebrates is favored by harsh environments. Ultimately, our model not only makes key predictions that are consistent with existing empirical data, but also proposes novel avenues for new empirical work in vertebrate and invertebrate systems alike.
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.