IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v25y2014i2p344-351..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Available kin recognition cues may explain why wasp behavior reflects relatedness to nest mates

Author

Listed:
  • Ellouise Leadbeater
  • Leonardo Dapporto
  • Stefano Turillazzi
  • Jeremy Field

Abstract

Relatedness is predicted to be a key determinant of cooperative behavior, but kin discrimination within social insect colonies is surprisingly rare. A lack of reliable cuticular hydrocarbon (CHC) cues is thought to be responsible, but here we show that in a high-profile paper wasp model, kin recognition cues are available for some individuals that found nests with nonrelatives. Thus, unrelated Polistes dominulus helpers could potentially recognize themselves as such. On this basis, we reanalyzed a behavioral data set to investigate whether foraging effort, defense contributions and aggression toward nest mates might thus reflect CHC profiles. Both foraging behavior and aggression varied with genetic relatedness, but genetic relatedness itself was a better predictor of this variation than differences in CHC profiles. We propose that wasps use specific components of the CHC profile, the identity of which is as yet unknown, to identify relatives among nest mates. Our data provide the first evidence of within-nest kin discrimination in primitively eusocial wasps but leave open the question of which cues are responsible.

Suggested Citation

  • Ellouise Leadbeater & Leonardo Dapporto & Stefano Turillazzi & Jeremy Field, 2014. "Available kin recognition cues may explain why wasp behavior reflects relatedness to nest mates," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 25(2), pages 344-351.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:25:y:2014:i:2:p:344-351.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/art113
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:25:y:2014:i:2:p:344-351.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.