Limits to the spread of an obligate social cheater in the social amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum
Medina, J. M.; Queller, D.; Strassmann, J. E.
Show abstract
Cooperation is widespread across life, but its existence can be threatened by exploitation. Social cheaters can be obligate, incapable of contributing to a necessary function, so that spread of the cheater leads to loss of the function. In the social amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum, obligate social cheaters cannot become dead stalk cells that lift spores up for dispersal, but instead depend on forming chimeras with fully functional altruistic individuals for forming a stalk. Obligate cheaters in D. discoideum are known to pay the cost of being unable to form fruiting bodies on their own. In this study we discovered that there are two additional costs that can apply to obligate cheaters. Even when there are wild-type cells to parasitize, the chimeric fruiting bodies that result have shorter stalks that are disadvantaged in spore dispersal. Furthermore, we found that obligate cheaters were overrepresented among spore cells in chimeras only when they were at low frequencies. Failure to develop into viable fruiting bodies on their own, negative frequency-dependent cheating, and shorter fruiting bodies represent three limits on obligate social cheating so it is not surprising that obligate cheaters have not been found in nature.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Experimental and theoretical support for costs of plasticity and phenotype in a nematode cannibalistic trait 94%
- Context-dependence in the symbiosis between Dictyostelium discoideum and Paraburkholderia 94%
- Experimental evidence that network topology can accelerate the spread of beneficial mutations 93%
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.