The stability of cooperation involving variable investment.

In this paper, we attempt to reconcile the results of several studies which have investigated the evolution of cooperation between non-relatives in systems where investment in partners can vary. In contrast to previous proposals, we show for the first time that variable-investment cooperation can be readily maintained in inter-species mutualistic relationships even in the absence of spatial structure, but that the stability of this interaction is dependent on the particular investment-response rule that is employed. By allowing the evolution of investment-response parameters in both inter- and intra-specific versions of the continuous variable-investment Prisoners' Dilemma we show that, in the absence of further factors, the raise-the stakes (RTS) strategy is likely to evolve into a simpler, variable investment form of Give-as-Good-as-you-Get that initially offers a high fixed amount and subsequently matches its partner's investment. Nevertheless, we demonstrate that genuine RTS-like strategies will still be selected if two intuitively reasonable conditions hold: if individuals are limited in terms of the total they can invest in cooperative actions over their lifetimes, and if there are always some individuals in a population that cannot cooperate.

[1]  J Bendor,et al.  Types of evolutionary stability and the problem of cooperation. , 1995, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[2]  R. May More evolution of cooperation , 1987, Nature.

[3]  M Nowak,et al.  Oscillations in the evolution of reciprocity. , 1989, Journal of theoretical biology.

[4]  Thomas N. Sherratt,et al.  The importance of phenotypic defectors in stabilizing reciprocal altruism , 2001 .

[5]  M. Nowak,et al.  The continuous Prisoner's dilemma: II. Linear reactive strategies with noise. , 1999, Journal of theoretical biology.

[6]  G. Wilkinson Reciprocal food sharing in the vampire bat , 1984, Nature.

[7]  M. Doebeli,et al.  ‘Raise the stakes’ evolves into a defector , 1999, Nature.

[8]  T Tom Verhoeff,et al.  A continuous version of the prisoner's dilemma , 1993 .

[9]  H. Kern Reeve,et al.  Familiarity breeds cooperation , 1998, Nature.

[10]  G. Roberts,et al.  The evolution of quantitatively responsive cooperative trade. , 1999, Journal of theoretical biology.

[11]  H. Godfray The evolution of forgiveness , 1992, Nature.

[12]  Gary Mar,et al.  CHAOS IN COOPERATION: CONTINUOUS-VALUED PRISONER’S DILEMMAS IN INFINITE-VALUED LOGIC , 1994 .

[13]  Arnon Lotem,et al.  Evolution of cooperation between individuals , 1999, Nature.

[14]  M. Doebeli,et al.  Variable investment, the Continuous Prisoner's Dilemma, and the origin of cooperation , 1999, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[15]  Marcus Frean The evolution of degrees of cooperation. , 1996, Journal of theoretical biology.

[16]  M. Doebeli,et al.  The evolution of interspecific mutualisms. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[17]  M. Nowak,et al.  Tit for tat in heterogeneous populations , 1992, Nature.

[18]  L. Dugatkin Cooperation Among Animals: An Evolutionary Perspective , 1997 .

[19]  L M Wahl,et al.  The Continuous Prisoner:s Dilemma: I. Linear Reactive Strategies , 1999 .

[20]  J. Koella,et al.  The spatial spread of altruism versus the evolutionary response of egoists , 2000, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[21]  G. Roberts,et al.  Development of cooperative relationships through increasing investment , 1998, Nature.