Search

In group-living species, the degree of relatedness among group members often governs the extent of reproductive sharing, cooperation and conflict within a group. Kinship among group members can be shaped by the presence and location of neighbouring groups, as these provide dispersal or mating opportunities that can dilute kinship among current group members. Here, we assessed how within-group relatedness varies with the density and position of neighbouring social groups in Neolamprologus pulcher, a colonial and group-living cichlid fish. We used restriction site-associated DNA sequencing (RADseq) methods to generate thousands of polymorphic SNPs. Relative to microsatellite data, RADseq data provided much tighter confidence intervals around our relatedness estimates. These data allowed us to document novel patterns of relatedness in relation to colony-level social structure. First, the density of neighbouring groups was negatively correlated with relatedness between subordinates and dominant females within a group, but no such patterns were observed between subordinates and dominant males. Second, subordinates at the colony edge were less related to dominant males in their group than subordinates in the colony centre, suggesting a shorter breeding tenure for dominant males at the colony edge. Finally, subordinates who were closely related to their same-sex dominant were more likely to reproduce, supporting some restraint models of reproductive skew. Collectively, these results demonstrate that within-group relatedness is influenced by the broader social context, and variation between groups in the degree of relatedness between dominants and subordinates can be explained by both patterns of reproductive sharing and the nature of the social landscape., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: In many cooperatively breeding vertebrates, subordinates assist a dominant pair to raise the dominants' offspring. Previously, it has been suggested that subordinates may help in payment for continued residency on the territory (the 'pay-to-stay hypothesis'), but payment might also be reciprocated or might allow subordinates access to reproductive opportunities., Methodology/principal Findings: We measured dominant and subordinate female alloparental brood care and reproductive success in four separate experiments and show that unrelated female dominant and subordinate cichlid fish care for each other's broods (alloparental brood care), but that there is no evidence for reciprocal 'altruism' (no correlation between alloparental care received and given). Instead, subordinate females appear to pay with alloparental care for own direct reproduction., Conclusions/significance: Our results suggest subordinate females pay with alloparental care to ensure access to the breeding substrate and thereby increase their opportunities to lay their own clutches. Subordinates' eggs are laid, on average, five days after the dominant female has produced her first brood. We suggest that immediate reproductive benefits need to be considered in tests of the pay-to-stay hypothesis.

Unrelated subordinates may invest in costly help to avoid being evicted from groups (the 'pay-to-stay' hypothesis). However, the effectiveness of eviction to enforce help should depend on its being applied accurately and on the costs it imposes on both dominants and subordinates. The relative cost of being evicted is a function of the population frequency of eviction when population growth is limited by density-dependent factors. We describe a stage-structured pay-to-stay model incorporating density-dependent population growth, costly eviction and occasional errors. Breeders demand some amount of help and evict subordinates that do not provide it. Helpers decide on the amount of help they will provide. The threat of eviction alone is sufficient to enforce helping. However, helping will not be favoured if helpers do not impose costs on breeders. The amount of help provided is less than the cost that subordinates impose upon breeders, when any help is provided. Thus, the net fitness effect of a helper under pay-to-stay alone is negative, even if it is investing in cooperative behaviour. Constraints on dispersal have no effect on the amount of help, although they may influence the tolerance threshold of breeders and group stability, depending on the mechanism of density dependence.