对稀缺性的对立反应来自功能独特的社会性驱动因素。

IF 2.4 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ECOLOGY American Naturalist Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1086/725426
Albert B Kao, Amanda K Hund, Fernando P Santos, Jean-Gabriel Young, Deepak Bhat, Joshua Garland, Rebekah A Oomen, Helen F McCreery
{"title":"对稀缺性的对立反应来自功能独特的社会性驱动因素。","authors":"Albert B Kao,&nbsp;Amanda K Hund,&nbsp;Fernando P Santos,&nbsp;Jean-Gabriel Young,&nbsp;Deepak Bhat,&nbsp;Joshua Garland,&nbsp;Rebekah A Oomen,&nbsp;Helen F McCreery","doi":"10.1086/725426","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>AbstractFrom biofilms to whale pods, organisms across taxa live in groups, thereby accruing numerous diverse benefits of sociality. All social organisms, however, pay the inherent cost of increased resource competition. One expects that when resources become scarce, this cost will increase, causing group sizes to decrease. Indeed, this occurs in some species, but there are also species for which group sizes remain stable or even increase under scarcity. What accounts for these opposing responses? We present a conceptual framework, literature review, and theoretical model demonstrating that differing responses to sudden resource shifts can be explained by which sociality benefit exerts the strongest selection pressure on a particular species. We categorize resource-related benefits of sociality into six functionally distinct classes and model their effect on the survival of individuals foraging in groups under different resource conditions. We find that whether, and to what degree, the optimal group size (or correlates thereof) increases, decreases, or remains constant when resource abundance declines depends strongly on the dominant sociality mechanism. Existing data, although limited, support our model predictions. Overall, we show that across a wide diversity of taxa, differences in how group size shifts in response to resource declines can be driven by differences in the primary benefits of sociality.</p>","PeriodicalId":50800,"journal":{"name":"American Naturalist","volume":"202 3","pages":"302-321"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Opposing Responses to Scarcity Emerge from Functionally Unique Sociality Drivers.\",\"authors\":\"Albert B Kao,&nbsp;Amanda K Hund,&nbsp;Fernando P Santos,&nbsp;Jean-Gabriel Young,&nbsp;Deepak Bhat,&nbsp;Joshua Garland,&nbsp;Rebekah A Oomen,&nbsp;Helen F McCreery\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/725426\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>AbstractFrom biofilms to whale pods, organisms across taxa live in groups, thereby accruing numerous diverse benefits of sociality. All social organisms, however, pay the inherent cost of increased resource competition. One expects that when resources become scarce, this cost will increase, causing group sizes to decrease. Indeed, this occurs in some species, but there are also species for which group sizes remain stable or even increase under scarcity. What accounts for these opposing responses? We present a conceptual framework, literature review, and theoretical model demonstrating that differing responses to sudden resource shifts can be explained by which sociality benefit exerts the strongest selection pressure on a particular species. We categorize resource-related benefits of sociality into six functionally distinct classes and model their effect on the survival of individuals foraging in groups under different resource conditions. We find that whether, and to what degree, the optimal group size (or correlates thereof) increases, decreases, or remains constant when resource abundance declines depends strongly on the dominant sociality mechanism. Existing data, although limited, support our model predictions. Overall, we show that across a wide diversity of taxa, differences in how group size shifts in response to resource declines can be driven by differences in the primary benefits of sociality.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50800,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Naturalist\",\"volume\":\"202 3\",\"pages\":\"302-321\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Naturalist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/725426\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Naturalist","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/725426","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

【摘要】从生物膜到鲸荚,不同分类群的生物群居生活,从而积累了许多不同的社会性利益。然而,所有的社会有机体都要付出资源竞争加剧的内在代价。人们预计,当资源变得稀缺时,这一成本将增加,导致群体规模缩小。的确,这种情况发生在一些物种中,但也有物种的群体规模在稀缺情况下保持稳定甚至增加。是什么导致了这些相反的反应?我们提出了一个概念框架、文献综述和理论模型,表明对突然资源转移的不同反应可以通过哪种社会利益对特定物种施加最大的选择压力来解释。我们将与资源相关的社会性利益分为六个功能不同的类别,并建立了它们对不同资源条件下群体觅食个体生存的影响模型。我们发现,当资源丰富度下降时,最优群体规模(或其相关因素)是增加、减少还是保持不变,以及在多大程度上取决于占主导地位的社会机制。现有数据虽然有限,但支持我们的模型预测。总的来说,我们表明,在广泛的分类群中,群体大小如何响应资源下降的变化可能是由社会性主要利益的差异驱动的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Opposing Responses to Scarcity Emerge from Functionally Unique Sociality Drivers.

AbstractFrom biofilms to whale pods, organisms across taxa live in groups, thereby accruing numerous diverse benefits of sociality. All social organisms, however, pay the inherent cost of increased resource competition. One expects that when resources become scarce, this cost will increase, causing group sizes to decrease. Indeed, this occurs in some species, but there are also species for which group sizes remain stable or even increase under scarcity. What accounts for these opposing responses? We present a conceptual framework, literature review, and theoretical model demonstrating that differing responses to sudden resource shifts can be explained by which sociality benefit exerts the strongest selection pressure on a particular species. We categorize resource-related benefits of sociality into six functionally distinct classes and model their effect on the survival of individuals foraging in groups under different resource conditions. We find that whether, and to what degree, the optimal group size (or correlates thereof) increases, decreases, or remains constant when resource abundance declines depends strongly on the dominant sociality mechanism. Existing data, although limited, support our model predictions. Overall, we show that across a wide diversity of taxa, differences in how group size shifts in response to resource declines can be driven by differences in the primary benefits of sociality.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
American Naturalist
American Naturalist 环境科学-进化生物学
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
3.40%
发文量
194
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Since its inception in 1867, The American Naturalist has maintained its position as one of the world''s premier peer-reviewed publications in ecology, evolution, and behavior research. Its goals are to publish articles that are of broad interest to the readership, pose new and significant problems, introduce novel subjects, develop conceptual unification, and change the way people think. AmNat emphasizes sophisticated methodologies and innovative theoretical syntheses—all in an effort to advance the knowledge of organic evolution and other broad biological principles.
期刊最新文献
Secretary's Report, 2024 : American Society of Naturalists. Treasurer's Report, 2023 : Statement of Activities For the Year Ending December 31, 2023. Bee Phenological Distributions Predicted by Inferring Vital Rates. Differential Survival and Background Selection in Cryptic Trunk-Dwelling Arthropods in Fire-Prone Environments. Natural Selection after Severe Winter Favors Larger and Duller Bluebirds.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1