4.5 Article

Cooperation facilitates the colonization of harsh environments

期刊

NATURE ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION
卷 1, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41559-016-0057

关键词

-

资金

  1. Swedish Research Council (VR)
  2. Knut and Alice Wallenberg foundation
  3. Royal Society
  4. US National Science Foundation [IOS-1121435, IOS-1257530, IOS-1439985]
  5. European Research Council
  6. Division Of Integrative Organismal Systems
  7. Direct For Biological Sciences [1257530] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Animals living in harsh environments, where temperatures are hot and rainfall is unpredictable, are more likely to breed in cooperative groups. As a result, harsh environmental conditions have been accepted as a key factor explaining the evolution of cooperation. Howewer, this is based on evidence that has not investigated the order of evolutionary events, so the inferred causality could be incorrect. We resolved this problem using phylogenetic analyses of 4,707 bird species and found that causation was in the opposite direction to that previously assumed. Rather than harsh environments favouring cooperation, cooperative breeding has facilitated the colonization of harsh environments. Cooperative breeding was, in fact, more likely to evolve from ancestors occupying relatively cool environmental niches with predictable rainfall, which had low levels of polyandry and hence high within-group relatedness. We also found that polyandry increased after cooperative breeders invaded harsh environments, suggesting that when helpers have limited options to breed independently, polyandry no longer destabilizes cooperation. This provides an explanation for the puzzling cases of polyandrous cooperative breeding birds. More generally, this illustrates how cooperation can play a key role in invading ecological niches, a pattern observed across all levels of biological organization from cells to animal societies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据