van Veelen Matthijs
CREED, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Roetersstraat 11, 1018 WB Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J Theor Biol. 2009 Aug 7;259(3):589-600. doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2009.04.019. Epub 2009 May 3.
Group selection theory has a history of controversy. After a period of being in disrepute, models of group selection have regained some ground, but not without a renewed debate over their importance as a theoretical tool. In this paper I offer a simple framework for models of the evolution of altruism and cooperation that allows us to see how and to what extent both a classification with and one without group selection terminology are insightful ways of looking at the same models. Apart from this dualistic view, this paper contains a result that states that inclusive fitness correctly predicts the direction of selection for one class of models, represented by linear public goods games. Equally important is that this result has a flip side: there is a more general, but still very realistic class of models, including models with synergies, for which it is not possible to summarize their predictions on the basis of an evaluation of inclusive fitness.
群体选择理论一直存在争议。在经历了一段时间的声名狼藉之后,群体选择模型重新获得了一些认可,但围绕其作为一种理论工具的重要性也引发了新的争论。在本文中,我为利他主义和合作的进化模型提供了一个简单的框架,使我们能够看到,使用和不使用群体选择术语进行分类,如何以及在何种程度上都是看待同一模型的有见地的方式。除了这种二元观点之外,本文还包含一个结果,即广义适合度正确地预测了一类以线性公共品博弈为代表的模型的选择方向。同样重要的是,这个结果还有另一面:存在一个更一般但仍然非常现实的模型类别,包括具有协同效应的模型,对于这类模型,不可能基于广义适合度的评估来总结其预测结果。