Affiliation:
1. CREED, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Abstract
How generally Hamilton’s rule holds is a much debated question. The answer to that question depends on how costs and benefits are defined. When using the regression method to define costs and benefits, there is no scope for violations of Hamilton’s rule. We introduce a general model for assortative group compositions to show that, when using the counterfactual method for computing costs and benefits, there is room for violations. The model also shows that there are limitations to observing violations in equilibrium, as the discrepancies between Hamilton’s rule and the direction of selection may imply that selection will take the population out of the region of disagreement, precluding observations of violations in equilibrium. Given what it takes to create a violation, empirical tests of Hamilton’s rule, both in and out of equilibrium, require the use of statistical models that allow for identifying non-linearities in the fitness function.
Publisher
eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd
Subject
General Immunology and Microbiology,General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology,General Medicine,General Neuroscience
Reference38 articles.
1. Inclusive fitness theory and eusociality;Abbot;Nature,2011
2. Hamilton's rule and its discontents;Birch;The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science,2014
3. Kin selection and its critics;Birch;BioScience,2015
4. Hamilton's rule and the causes of social evolution;Bourke;Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences,2014
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献