High Relatedness Is Necessary and Sufficient to Maintain Multicellularity in Dictyostelium

Experimental evolution shows that the cooperation of cells in multicellular organisms degrades under low relatedness. Most complex multicellular organisms develop clonally from a single cell. This should limit conflicts between cell lineages that could threaten the extensive cooperation of cells within multicellular bodies. Cellular composition can be manipulated in the social amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum, which allows us to test and confirm the two key predictions of this theory. Experimental evolution at low relatedness favored cheating mutants that could destroy multicellular development. However, under high relatedness, the forces of mutation and within-individual selection are too small for these destructive cheaters to spread, as shown by a mutation accumulation experiment. Thus, we conclude that the single-cell bottleneck is a powerful stabilizer of cellular cooperation in multicellular organisms.

[1]  L W Buss,et al.  Somatic cell parasitism and the evolution of somatic tissue compatibility. , 1982, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[2]  J. Bonner,et al.  VARIATIONS IN CELL SIZE DURING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SLIME MOLD, DICTYOSTELIUM DISCOIDEUM , 1953 .

[3]  Prespore Cell Fate Bias in G1 Phase of the Cell Cycle in Dictyostelium discoideum , 2005, Eukaryotic Cell.

[4]  J. Strassmann,et al.  Cheating does not explain selective differences at high and low relatedness in a social amoeba , 2010, BMC Evolutionary Biology.

[5]  R. Kessin.  Dictyostelium: Evolution, Cell Biology, and the Development of Multicellularity , 2001 .

[6]  G. Shaulsky,et al.  Self-Recognition in Social Amoebae Is Mediated by Allelic Pairs of Tiger Genes , 2011, Science.

[7]  M. Brockhurst.  Population Bottlenecks Promote Cooperation in Bacterial Biofilms , 2007, PloS one.

[8]  R. Grosberg,et al.  The Evolution of Multicellularity: A Minor Major Transition? , 2007 .

[9]  D. Queller,et al.  Relatedness and the fraternal major transitions. , 2000, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[10]  Anup Parikh,et al.  Facultative cheater mutants reveal the genetic complexity of cooperation in social amoebae , 2008, Nature.

[11]  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.

[12]  Madeleine Beekman,et al.  Ancestral Monogamy Shows Kin Selection Is Key to the Evolution of Eusociality , 2008, Science.

[13]  R E Michod,et al.  Cooperation and conflict in the evolution of individuality. II. Conflict mediation , 1996, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[14]  D. A. Brock,et al.  A cell-counting factor regulating structure size in Dictyostelium. , 1999, Genes & development.

[15]  B. Charlesworth.  Levels of Selection in Evolution , 2000, Heredity.

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

[17]  R. Kessin,et al.  Dictyostelium amoebae lacking an F-box protein form spores rather than stalk in chimeras with wild type. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[18]  M. Lynch,et al.  PERSPECTIVE: SPONTANEOUS DELETERIOUS MUTATION , 1999, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[19]  M. Sussman,et al.  Cultivation and synchronous morphogenesis of Dictyostelium under controlled experimental conditions. , 1987, Methods in cell biology.

[20]  K. Foster,et al.  Conflict resolution in insect societies. , 2006, Annual review of entomology.

[21]  Kevin R Foster,et al.  High relatedness maintains multicellular cooperation in a social amoeba by controlling cheater mutants , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

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

[23]  G. Shaulsky,et al.  Social evolution: Kin preference in a social microbe , 2006, Nature.

[24]  R E Michod,et al.  Transitions in individuality , 1997, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[25]  G. Shaulsky,et al.  Kin Discrimination Increases with Genetic Distance in a Social Amoeba , 2008, PLoS biology.

[26]  J. Strassmann,et al.  An invitation to die: initiators of sociality in a social amoeba become selfish spores , 2010, Biology Letters.

[27]  Richard E. Michod,et al.  Cooperation and Conflict in the Evolution of Individuality. I. Multilevel Selection of the Organism , 1997, The American Naturalist.

[28]  M. Travisano,et al.  Strategies of microbial cheater control. , 2004, Trends in microbiology.