Hamilton’s rule states that social behavior of organisms is supported by natural selection but only if rb-c>0, where r represents the genetic relatedness between actors and beneficiaries, b denotes the benefit that the social behavior confers on the beneficiary, and c is the cost that the social behavior imposes on the actor (Alonso, 2002). It is important to note that the rule suggests that the cost will most certainly diminish the appropriateness of the agent and on the other hand that the benefits will increase the suitability of the agent. Although this is the case, the rule is supposed to work even in the notwithstanding the b and c symbols. Hamilton’s rule is associated with the evolution of cooperation where b is positive and also evolution of altruism whereby the b and c are progressive.
The rule provides that the benefits conferred on relatives should surpass the presumed cost by at the very least a factor of the relationship coefficient. The link between the rule and evolution is also confounded by the fact that Hamilton on random mating assumptions hence the rule is particularly sensitive to the hypothesis of random mating. According to the theory, organisms which share comparable genetic factors can contribute to evolution by stimulating the reproduction and survival of related organisms (Rowthorn, 2006). The theory therefore helps to illuminate the prevailing social evolution perceptions. In a nutshell, the tie between Hamilton’s theory and evolution is based on the assertion that kin selection triggers an increase in the gene frequency when the hereditary connection of a beneficiary to a species multiplied using the benefit to the beneficiary exceeds the reproductive cost of the species.
The article seeks to evaluate the authenticity of Hamilton’s theory with regard to Hamilton’s assertions of kin selection and altruism (West, 2001). In its evaluation the article presents an experiment in the form of observing the behavior among the fig wasps. The experiment suggests that contrary to the Hamilton’s theory, aspects of altruism are not necessarily represented in cases where sibling rivalry is rife. Consequently, the authors also provide that in situations where there is less dispersal among the genetically related organisms competition for resources increases. Where there is increased competition among the related organisms altruism faces very real challenges even among organisms carrying the same genes. The article therefore evaluates two aspects namely limited dispersal among related species and conduct centered upon direct kin recognition amongst individuals.
According to the article, the increased competitive behavior among related species is triggered by limited dispersal and ultimately determines the future opportunities such as mating prospects. This assertion challenges the suggestions of Hamilton’s rule that related species are inclined to be altruistic towards their relatives. The authors therefore conclude that it is not the genetic composition of a particular species that is responsible for determining the way a carrier of the inheritable factor of that species behaves towards a kin but rather different circumstances influence behavior among related species. As such, the experiment goes ahead to show that even in cases where the presumed members of a species carry the same inheritable factor, their behavior to kin also depends on the surroundings.
As regards the experiment, it was undertaken competently. The random data collection method provides a domain of insight and improves greatly upon the success of the experiment. The data collection also considers the effects of variables such as environment and time to ensure that the results will most likely be impartial. The collection of the almost ripe fruit from which fig wasps were on the point of emerging ensured that the species of the wasps used belonged to the same species and shared a close ancestor. As such, the aspect of relation was well represented. This further ensures that the wasps are in proper condition and have minimal or no injuries on them thus making it easier to monitor the breeding and existence or lack of altruistic behavior among the wasps. This way it is easier to test the aspect of evolution within the species which have similar genetic composition.
The experiment accomplishes what it set out to achieve, that is to evaluate the test the Hamilton’s rule in relation to altruism by observing the behavior of related species in a natural environment. The test successfully disapproves the Hamilton’s altruistic assertion among relatives. The experiment is proper because the use of fig wasp species does focus very much on the genetic aspect of the organisms and also on the individual actors. Such multifaceted approach tends to make the result much reliable.
With regard to limitations, the article, just like Hamilton, fails to clear a significant confusion with regard to the precise meaning of the coefficient r. As such, the relatedness coefficient generates significant confusion in the literature. Hamilton’s contention of relatedness was the amount of identical genes existing by descent from identical genes in the closest shared ancestor. However, this definition is seen as a cause of misconception owing to the fact that even the unrelated members of the same species greatly share the bulk of their genes hence the Hamilton’s tenet should attain a near universal altruism. It is also important to note that the article focuses much on critiquing the Hamilton’s theory rather than analyzing the rule to associate it to the evolutionary perspectives.
References
Alonso, J., Schuck-Paim, C. (2002). "Sex-ratio conflicts, kin selection, and the evolution of
altruism". PNAS 99 (10): 6843–6847.
Rowthorn, R. (2006). The Evolution of Altruism between Siblings: Hamilton’s Rule Revisited.
West, A., Murray, G., Machado, A., Griffin, S., Herre, A. (2001). Testing Hamilton's rule with
competition between relatives. Nature (409) in Macmillan Magazines Ltd, pp. 510–513.
