The Evolution of Genetic Odor-Cue Diversity in Social Hymenoptera

Recognition in many taxa is mediated by genetic-cue diversity. The present study investigates the likely effects of two recognition contexts on genetic odor-cue diversity in social Hymenoptera by means of single-locus, two-allele, and multiple-allele population-genetics models. Full-sister versus half-sister discrimination in polyandrous societies, as in queen-rearing discrimination in the honey bee, leads to reduced allelic diversity when queens mate with more than two males. In doubly mated species, discrimination may raise or lower allelic diversity, depending on the rules used by workers in discrimination, but most plausibly it results in a reduction in allelic diversity to two alleles. In contrast, colony recognition based on genetic odors can increase allelic diversity, if colonies with rare odors produce more reproductives. This assumption seems likely for social insects that use genetic cues for nest-mate recognition. This result is the reverse of one obtained earlier in an analysis of genetic recognition cues in marine invertebrates. This discrepancy occurs because opposite fitness assumptions were made as a result of differences in ecology. The idea that existing allelic diversity at the sex-determination locus can be used in a system of signaling to prevent matched matings is also considered. Signaling may evolve when both queens and males benefit from avoiding matched matings, such as in the fire ant Solenopsis invicta, but not in the honey bee, Apis mellifera, or the stingless bee Melipona quadrifasciata. However, the high incidence of matched matings in the fire ant suggests that signaling does not occur, although signaling cannot be ruled out without additional information about the random expectation of matched matings. Signaling, which depends on coordinated adaptations of cue production and perception, may not occur because it is disadvantageous when rare, on account of small costs in the component adaptations. These results suggest that intercolonial recognition is the most plausible means by which recognition itself can generate genetic odor-cue diversity. However, in species such as the honey bee, in which intercolonial recognition appears primarily environmental, the effect may be small. This leads to the possibility that the weak full-sister versus half-sister discrimination shown by honey bees is partly due to a low diversity of odor cues. Low diversity of odor cues may also facilitate the evolution of highly cooperative worker behavior by making queen-rearing discrimination less worthwhile.

[1]  W. Getz,et al.  The honey bee as a model kin recognition system , 1991 .

[2]  P. Pamilo Evolution of Colony Characteristics in Social Insects. I. Sex Allocation , 1991, The American Naturalist.

[3]  F. Ratnieks,et al.  The evolution of queen‐rearing nepotism in social Hymenoptera: Effects of discrimination costs in swarming species , 1991 .

[4]  P. Frumhoff,et al.  Nepotism in the honey bee , 1990, Nature.

[5]  M. Woyciechowski Do honey bee, apis mellifera L., workers favour sibling eggs and larvae in Queen rearing? , 1990, Animal Behaviour.

[6]  F. Ratnieks,et al.  The Population Density of Feral Colonies of Honey Bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae) in a City in Upstate New York , 1990 .

[7]  A. Grafen Do animals really recognize kin? , 1990, Animal Behaviour.

[8]  Francis L. W. Ratnieks,et al.  Worker policing in the honeybee , 1989, Nature.

[9]  R. Grosberg,et al.  THE EVOLUTION OF SELECTIVE AGGRESSION CONDITIONED ON ALLORECOGNITION SPECIFICITY , 1989, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[10]  H. Reeve,et al.  The Evolution of Conspecific Acceptance Thresholds , 1989, The American Naturalist.

[11]  M. West-Eberhard KIN RECOGNITION IN ANIMALS , 1989, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[12]  G. B. Pollock,et al.  Intraspecific Brood Raiding, Territoriality, and Slavery in Ants , 1989, The American Naturalist.

[13]  R. Grosberg The Evolution of Allorecognition Specificity in Clonal Invertebrates , 1988, The Quarterly Review of Biology.

[14]  F. Ratnieks Reproductive Harmony via Mutual Policing by Workers in Eusocial Hymenoptera , 1988, The American Naturalist.

[15]  M. Breed,et al.  The ontogeny of kin discrimination cues in the honey bee,Apis mellifera , 1988, Behavior genetics.

[16]  S. Menken,et al.  SEX‐INVESTMENT RATIOS AND RELATEDNESS IN THE MONOGYNOUS ANT LASIUS NIGER (L.) , 1988, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[17]  P. Frumhoff,et al.  The social consequences of honey bee polyandry: the effects of kinship on worker interactions within colonies , 1987, Animal Behaviour.

[18]  K. Ross Kin selection and the problem of sperm utilization in social insects , 1986, Nature.

[19]  R. Crozier GENETIC CLONAL RECOGNITION ABILITIES IN MARINE INVERTEBRATES MUST BE MAINTAINED BY SELECTION FOR SOMETHING ELSE , 1986, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[20]  T. Seeley,et al.  Kin discrimination and aggression in honey bee colonies with laying workers , 1986, Animal Behaviour.

[21]  K. Ross,et al.  GENETIC ORIGIN OF MALE DIPLOIDY IN THE FIRE ANT, SOLENOPSIS INVICTA (HYMENOPTERA: FORMICIDAE), AND ITS EVOLUTIONARY SIGNIFICANCE , 1985, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[22]  M. Breed,et al.  Kin discrimination by worker honey bees in genetically mixed groups. , 1985, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[23]  G. Robinson,et al.  Do Worker Honey Bees Discriminate among Unrelated and Related Larval Phenotypes , 1984 .

[24]  E. Erickson,et al.  Selective Rearing of Queens by Worker Honey Bees: Kin or Nestmate Recognition , 1984 .

[25]  B. H�lldobler,et al.  Nestmate and Kin Recognition in Interspecific Mixed Colonies of Ants , 1983, Science.

[26]  R. Jeanne,et al.  Relatedness and mate selection in Polistes fuscatus (Hymenoptera: Vespidae) , 1983, Animal Behaviour.

[27]  P. Sherman,et al.  Kin Recognition by Phenotype Matching , 1983, The American Naturalist.

[28]  W. Getz,et al.  Genetic kin recognition: honey bees discriminate between full and half sisters , 1983, Nature.

[29]  M. Breed Nestmate recognition in honey bees , 1983, Animal Behaviour.

[30]  W. Getz An analysis of learned kin recognition in hymenoptera , 1982 .

[31]  R. Marks,et al.  The population genetics of sex determination in honey bees: random mating in closed populations , 1982, Heredity.

[32]  V. Scofield,et al.  Protochordate allorecognition is controlled by a MHC-like gene system , 1982, Nature.

[33]  W. Getz Genetically based kin recognition systems , 1981 .

[34]  R. Lubbock Clone-specific cellular recognition in a sea anemone. , 1980, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[35]  L Greenberg,et al.  Genetic Component of Bee Odor in Kin Recognition , 1979, Science.

[36]  D. Cowan Sibling Matings in a Hunting Wasp: Adaptive Inbreeding? , 1979, Science.

[37]  M. Nei,et al.  Population dynamics of sex-determining alleles in honey bees and self-incompatibility alleles in plants. , 1979, Genetics.

[38]  P. Bateson,et al.  Sexual imprinting and optimal outbreeding , 1978, Nature.

[39]  F. Benford Fisher's theory of the sex ratio applied to the social hymenoptera. , 1978, Journal of theoretical biology.

[40]  J. Adams,et al.  Estimation of the number of sex alleles and queen matings from diploid male frequencies in a population of Apis mellifera. , 1977, Genetics.

[41]  P. Sherman,et al.  Local Mate Competition and Parental Investment in Social Insects , 1977, Science.

[42]  B. Hölldobler Tournaments and slavery in a desert ant. , 1976, Science.

[43]  W. L. Morrill Production and Flight of Alate Red Imported Fire Ants , 1974 .

[44]  E. Wilson The Insect Societies , 1974 .

[45]  F. Burnet Multiple Polymorphism in Relation to Histocompatibility Antigens , 1973, Nature.

[46]  D. Janzen Evolution of polygynous obligate Acacia-ants in western Mexico , 1973 .

[47]  R. Crozier Heterozygosity and Sex Determination in Haplo-Diploidy , 1971, The American Naturalist.

[48]  W. Hamilton The genetical evolution of social behaviour. I. , 1964, Journal of theoretical biology.

[49]  W. Hamilton The genetical evolution of social behaviour. II. , 1964, Journal of theoretical biology.

[50]  H. Kalmus,et al.  The origin of the odours by which honeybees distinguish their companions , 1952, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B - Biological Sciences.

[51]  G. Robinson,et al.  Nepotism in the honey bee , 1990, Nature.

[52]  G. Robinson,et al.  Genetic specialists, kin recognition and nepotism in honey-bee colonies , 1989, Nature.

[53]  T. Seeley The honey bee colony as a superorganism. , 1989 .

[54]  J. Free,et al.  Pheromones of social bees , 1987 .

[55]  L. Packer The Biology of a Subtropical Population of Halictus ligatus IV: A Cuckoo-Like Caste , 1986 .

[56]  D. Pfennig,et al.  The evolution and ontogeny of nestmate recognition in social wasps , 1986 .

[57]  R. Page Sperm Utilization in Social Insects , 1986 .

[58]  J. E. Lloyd Bioluminescence and Communication in Insects , 1983 .

[59]  P. Bateson Preferences for cousins in Japanese quail , 1982, Nature.

[60]  R. Jeanne Evolution of Social Behavior in the Vespidae , 1980 .

[61]  C. A. Camargo Sex Determination in Bees. XI Production of Diploid Males and Sex Determination in Melipona Quadrifasciata , 1979 .

[62]  Charles D. Michener,et al.  The Social Behavior of the Bees , 1974 .

[63]  M. Nasrallah Genetic control of quantitative variation in self-incompatibility proteins detected by immunodiffusion. , 1974, Genetics.

[64]  J. Woyke,et al.  Spermatogenesis in Diploid Drones of the Honeybee , 1974 .

[65]  J. Woyke What Happens to Diploid Drone Larvae in a Honeybee Colony , 1963 .

[66]  A. I. Root,et al.  The ABC and XYZ of bee culture , 1908 .