title: Patch depletion, niche structuring and the evolution of co-operative foraging.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Many animals live in groups. One proposed reason is that grouping allows cooperative food finding. Group foraging models suggest that grouping could increase food finding rates, but that such group processes could be evolutionarily unstable. These models assume discrete food patches which are fully detectable. However, often animals may only be able to perceive local parts of larger-scale environmental patterns. We therefore use a spatial individual-based model where food patches are aggregates of food items beyond the scale of individual perception. We then study the evolution of foraging and grouping behavior in environments with different resource distributions.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Our results show that grouping can evolve to increase food intake rates. Two kinds of grouping evolve: traveling pairs and opportunistic grouping, where individuals only aggregate when feeding. Grouping evolves because it allows individuals to better sense and deplete patches. Such enhanced patch depletion is particularly apparent on fragmented and partially depleted patches, which are especially difficult for solitary foragers to deplete. Solitary foragers often leave a patch prematurely because a whole patch cannot be observed directly. In groups, individuals that are still eating allow other individuals that inadvertently leave the patch, to return and continue feeding. For this information sharing a grouping tendency is sufficient and observing whether a neighbor is eating is not necessary. Grouping therefore leads to a release from individual sensing constraints and a shift in niche specialization, allowing individuals to better exploit partially depleted patches.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The evolved group foraging can be seen as cooperative in the sense that it leads to a mutually-beneficial synergy: together individuals can achieve more than on their own. This cooperation exists as a group-level process generated by the interaction between grouping and the environment. Thus we reveal how such a synergy can originate in evolution as a side-effect of grouping via multi-level selection. Here there is no cooperative dilemma as individuals cannot avoid producing information for their neighbors. This scenario may be a useful starting point for studying the evolution of further social and cooperative complexity.
authors.affiliation: Courant Research Centre Evolution of Social Behaviour, Georg-August Universität Göttigen, Kellnerweg 6, 37077, Göttingen, Germany. d.j.vanderpost@gmail.com
authors.forename: Daniel J
authors.initials: DJ
authors.lastname: van der Post
authors.forename: Dirk
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Semmann
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D001522:Behavior, Animal / Q000502:physiology*; D005075:Biological Evolution; D017753:Ecosystem; D005247:Feeding Behavior / Q000502:physiology*; D008954:Models, Biological
references.citation: Am Nat. 1993 Jul;142(1):42-58
references.pmid: 19425970
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999 Aug 31;96(18):10242-7
references.pmid: 10468593
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1975 Jan;72(1):143-6
references.pmid: 1054490
references.citation: J Evol Biol. 2007 Mar;20(2):415-32
references.pmid: 17305808
references.citation: J Theor Biol. 1999 Aug 7;199(3):297-309
references.pmid: 10433894
references.citation: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2002 Nov 29;357(1427):1559-66
references.pmid: 12495513
references.citation: PLoS Comput Biol. 2011 Oct;7(10):e1002186
references.pmid: 21998571
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Dec 29;106(52):22055-60
references.pmid: 20018696
references.citation: Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 2009 Sep;63(11):1643-1658
references.pmid: 19701483
references.citation: PLoS One. 2009;4(2):e4530
references.pmid: 19240813
references.citation: Biol Direct. 2008 Mar 27;3:11
references.pmid: 18371199
references.citation: Science. 2006 Dec 8;314(5805):1560-3
references.pmid: 17158317
references.citation: Trends Ecol Evol. 2011 Apr;26(4):193-201
references.pmid: 21353325
references.citation: Nature. 1999 Aug 5;400(6744):557-60
references.pmid: 10448857
references.citation: J Theor Biol. 1964 Jul;7(1):1-16
references.pmid: 5875341
references.citation: Proc Biol Sci. 2007 Jul 7;274(1618):1637-42
references.pmid: 17472913
references.citation: Proc Biol Sci. 2009 Jan 7;276(1654):13-9
references.pmid: 18765343
references.citation: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2010 Sep 12;365(1553):2593-8
references.pmid: 20679104
references.citation: PLoS Comput Biol. 2011 Mar;7(3):e1002021
references.pmid: 21483479
references.citation: J Theor Biol. 2002 Sep 7;218(1):1-11
references.pmid: 12297066
references.citation: Behav Brain Sci. 2000 Feb;23(1):131-46; discussion 146-75
references.pmid: 11303338
references.citation: Artif Life. 2003 Summer;9(3):237-53
references.pmid: 14556686