Effects of public good properties on the evolution of cooperation

Cooperation is a still unsolved and ever-controversial topic in evolutionary biology. Why do organisms engage in activities with long-term communal benefits but short-term individual cost? A general answer remains elusive, suggesting many important factors must still be examined and better understood. Here we study cooperation based on the secretion of a public good molecule using Aevol, a digital platform inspired by microbial cooperation systems. Specifically, we focus on the environmental and physical properties of the public good itself, its mobility, durability, and cost. The intensity of cooperation that evolves in our digital populations, as measured by the amount of the public good molecule organisms secrete, strongly depends on the properties of such a molecule. Specifically, and somewhat counter intuitively, digital organisms evolve to secrete more when public good degrades or diffuses quickly. The evolution of secretion also depends on the interactions between the population structure and public good properties, not just their individual values. Environmental factors affecting population diversity have been extensively studied in the past, but here we show that physical aspects of the cooperation mechanism itself may be equally if not more important. Given the wide range of substrates and environments that support microbial cooperation in nature, our results highlight the need for careful consideration of public good properties when studying the evolution of cooperation in bacterial or computational models.

[1]  A. Griffin,et al.  Phenotypic plasticity of a cooperative behaviour in bacteria , 2009, Journal of evolutionary biology.

[2]  Wolf-Dietrich Hardt,et al.  Self-destructive cooperation mediated by phenotypic noise , 2008, Nature.

[3]  C. Ofria,et al.  Genome complexity, robustness and genetic interactions in digital organisms , 1999, Nature.

[4]  Michael Doebeli,et al.  ENVIRONMENTAL VISCOSITY DOES NOT AFFECT THE EVOLUTION OF COOPERATION DURING EXPERIMENTAL EVOLUTION OF COLICIGENIC BACTERIA , 2010, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[5]  François Taddei,et al.  The Durability of Public Goods Changes the Dynamics and Nature of Social Dilemmas , 2007, PloS one.

[6]  A. Griffin,et al.  Cooperation and competition in pathogenic bacteria , 2004, Nature.

[7]  M. Dworkin,et al.  Multicellular behavior in bacteria: communication, cooperation, competition and cheating. , 2008, BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology.

[8]  R. MacLean,et al.  Resource competition and social conflict in experimental populations of yeast , 2006, Nature.

[9]  A. Griffin,et al.  Density Dependence and Cooperation: Theory and a Test with Bacteria , 2009, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[10]  Charles Ofria,et al.  Avida , 2004, Artificial Life.

[11]  Michael Doebeli,et al.  A simple and general explanation for the evolution of altruism , 2009, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

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

[13]  J. Pollack,et al.  Sexual reproduction and Muller's ratchet in digital organisms , 2004 .

[14]  J C Paton,et al.  The contribution of pneumolysin to the pathogenicity of Streptococcus pneumoniae. , 1996, Trends in microbiology.

[15]  Guillaume Beslon,et al.  Importance of the rearrangement rates on the organization of transcription. , 2010 .

[16]  Andy Gardner,et al.  Resource supply and the evolution of public-goods cooperation in bacteria , 2008 .

[17]  A. Griffin,et al.  Limited Dispersal, Budding Dispersal, and Cooperation: An Experimental Study , 2009, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[18]  E. Greenberg,et al.  Sociomicrobiology: the connections between quorum sensing and biofilms. , 2005, Trends in microbiology.

[19]  Thomas Bell,et al.  Character Displacement Promotes Cooperation in Bacterial Biofilms , 2006, Current Biology.

[20]  J. Strassmann,et al.  Single-Gene Greenbeard Effects in the Social Amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum , 2003, Science.

[21]  G. J. Velicer,et al.  Evolution of novel cooperative swarming in the bacterium Myxococcus xanthus , 2003, Nature.

[22]  G. Beslon,et al.  Evolutionary coupling between the deleteriousness of gene mutations and the amount of non-coding sequences. , 2007, Journal of theoretical biology.

[23]  Sam P. Brown,et al.  Molecular and regulatory properties of a public good shape the evolution of cooperation , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[24]  J. Strassmann,et al.  Altruism and social cheating in the social amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum , 2000, Nature.

[25]  Freya Harrison,et al.  Viscous medium promotes cooperation in the pathogenic bacterium Pseudomonas aeruginosa , 2009, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[26]  A. Griffin,et al.  Social evolution theory for microorganisms , 2006, Nature Reviews Microbiology.

[27]  Guillaume Beslon,et al.  The Topology of the Protein Network Influences the Dynamics of Gene Order: From Systems Biology to a Systemic Understanding of Evolution , 2008, Artificial Life.

[28]  David Murrell,et al.  Frequency-dependent advantages of plasmid carriage by Pseudomonas in homogeneous and spatially structured environments , 2007, The ISME Journal.

[29]  Rolf F. Hoekstra,et al.  Microbial Communication, Cooperation and Cheating: Quorum Sensing Drives the Evolution of Cooperation in Bacteria , 2009, PloS one.

[30]  G. J. Velicer,et al.  Exploitative and Hierarchical Antagonism in a Cooperative Bacterium , 2005, PLoS biology.

[31]  A. Griffin,et al.  Cooperation and conflict in quorum-sensing bacterial populations , 2007, Nature.

[32]  Juan Manuel Peña,et al.  Scaling laws in bacterial genomes: A side-effect of selection of mutational robustness? , 2010, Biosyst..

[33]  B. Crespi The evolution of social behavior in microorganisms. , 2001, Trends in ecology & evolution.