Can Selfish Symbioses Effect Higher-Level Selection?

The role of symbiosis in macro-evolution is poorly understood. On the one hand, symbiosis seems to be a perfectly normal manifestation of individual selection, on the other hand, in some of the major transitions in evolution it seems to be implicated in the creation of new higher-level units of selection. Here we present a model of individual selection for symbiotic relationships where individuals can genetically specify traits which partially control which other species they associate with - i.e. they can evolve species-specific grouping. We find that when the genetic evolution of symbiotic relationships occurs slowly compared to ecological population dynamics, symbioses form which canalise the combinations of species that commonly occur at local ESSs into new units of selection. Thus even though symbioses will only evolve if they are beneficial to the individual, we find that the symbiotic groups that form are selectively significant and result in combinations of species that are more cooperative than would be possible under individual selection. These findings thus provide a systematic mechanism for creating significant higher-level selective units from individual selection, and support the notion of a significant and systematic role of symbiosis in macroevolution.

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

[2]  G. Wagner,et al.  The road to modularity , 2007, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[3]  Dan Dumitrescu,et al.  Overcoming hierarchical difficulty by hill-climbing the building block structure , 2007, GECCO '07.

[4]  R. Axelrod The Complexity of Cooperation , 2011 .

[5]  Richard A. Watson,et al.  Evolution of Individual Group Size Preference Can Increase Group-Level Selection and Cooperation , 2009, ECAL.

[6]  Wolfgang Banzhaf,et al.  Advances in Artificial Life , 2003, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[7]  Eörs Szathmáry,et al.  The Major Transitions in Evolution , 1997 .

[8]  David Sloan Wilson,et al.  The Natural Selection Of Populations And Communities , 1981 .

[9]  J M Smith,et al.  Evolution and the theory of games , 1976 .

[10]  Jordan B. Pollack,et al.  Modular Interdependency in Complex Dynamical Systems , 2005, Artificial Life.

[11]  D. Wilson A theory of group selection. , 1975, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[12]  Sadri Hassani,et al.  Nonlinear Dynamics and Chaos , 2000 .

[13]  N. Moran,et al.  Colloquium Papers: Symbiosis as an adaptive process and source of phenotypic complexity , 2007 .

[14]  Richard A. Watson,et al.  Moderate Contact between Sub-populations Promotes Evolved Assortativity Enabling Group Selection , 2009, ECAL.

[15]  Richard A. Watson,et al.  Individual Selection for Cooperative Group Formation , 2007, ECAL.

[16]  L. Dugatkin,et al.  Group Selection and Assortative Interactions , 1997, The American Naturalist.

[17]  Richard A. Watson,et al.  The Effect of Hebbian Learning on Optimisation in Hopfield Networks , 2009 .

[18]  Richard A. Watson,et al.  Symbiosis Enables the Evolution of Rare Complexes in Structured Environments , 2009, ECAL.

[19]  José F. Fontanari,et al.  Model ecosystem with variable interspecies interactions , 2007 .

[20]  L Margulis,et al.  Origins of species: acquired genomes and individuality. , 1993, Bio Systems.

[21]  Thomas Jansen,et al.  A building-block royal road where crossover is provably essential , 2007, GECCO '07.

[22]  V. W. Noonburg A neural network modeled by an adaptive Lotka-Volterra system , 1989 .