A review of the evolutionary causes of rodent group-living

I analyze and summarize the empirical evidence supporting alternative hypotheses posed to explain the evolution of rodent group-living. Eight hypotheses are considered: two rely on net fitness benefits to individuals, five rely on ecological and life-history constraints, and one uses elements of both. I expose the logic behind each hypothesis, identify its key predictions, examine how the available evidence on rodent socioecology supports or rejects its predictions, and identify some priorities for future research. I show that empirical support for most hypotheses is meager due to a lack of relevant studies. Also, empirical support for a particular hypothesis, when it exists, comes from studies of the same species used to formulate the original hypothesis. Two exceptions are the hypothesis that individual rodents live in groups to reduce their predation risk and the hypothesis that group-living was adopted by individuals to reduce their cost of thermoregulation. Finally, most hypotheses have been examined without regard to competing hypotheses and often in a restricted taxonomic context. This is clearly an unfortunate situation given that most competing hypotheses are not mutually exclusive. I suggest that in the future comparative approaches should be used. These studies should examine simultaneously the relevance of different benefits and constraints hypothesized to explain the evolution of rodent sociality.