title: Parental care masks a density-dependent shift from cooperation to competition among burying beetle larvae.
abstract: Studies of siblings have focused mainly on their competitive interactions and to a lesser extent on their cooperation. However, competition and cooperation are at opposite ends on a continuum of possible interactions and the nature of these interactions may be flexible with ecological factors tipping the balance toward competition in some environments and cooperation in others. Here we show that the presence of parental care and the density of larvae on the breeding carcass change the outcome of sibling interactions in burying beetle broods. With full parental care there was a strong negative relationship between larval density and larval mass, consistent with sibling competition for resources. In the absence of care, initial increases in larval density had beneficial effects on larval mass but further increases in larval density reduced larval mass. This likely reflects a density-dependent shift between cooperation and competition. In a second experiment, we manipulated larval density and removed parental care. We found that the ability of larvae to penetrate the breeding carcass increased with larval density and that feeding within the carcass resulted in heavier larvae than feeding outside the carcass. However, larval density did not influence carcass decay.
authors: Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 3EJ, United Kingdom. mss63@cam.ac.uk.
authors: Matthew
authors: M
authors: Schrader
authors: Benjamin J M
authors: BJ
authors: Jarrett
authors: Rebecca M
authors: RM
authors: Kilner
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D001522:Behavior, Animal; D001517:Coleoptera / Q000502:physiology*; D003163:Competitive Behavior; D003299:Cooperative Behavior; D007814:Larva; D011156:Population Density
keywords: Burying beetle; Nicrophorus vespilloides; offspring size and number; parental care; sibling rivalry; trade-offs
references: Anim Behav. 1998 Jan;55(1):97-107
references: 9480676
references: PLoS One. 2012;7(2):e31713
references: 22355390
references: J Evol Biol. 2007 Mar;20(2):415-32
references: 17305808
references: Oecologia. 2008 Apr;155(4):677-89
references: 18228040
references: Am Nat. 2014 Apr;183(4):547-57
references: 24642498
references: J Evol Biol. 2012 Sep;25(9):1703-10
references: 22845831
references: Ecol Lett. 2013 May;16(5):695-706
references: 23363430
references: Evolution. 2007 Oct;61(10):2331-9
references: 17711464
references: J Anim Ecol. 2010 Jan;79(1):35-43
references: 19627394
references: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2002 Mar 29;357(1419):295-307
references: 11958698
references: Annu Rev Entomol. 1998;43:595-618
references: 15012399
references: J Evol Biol. 2012 May;25(5):930-7
references: 22409257
references: Am Nat. 2015 May;185(5):610-9
references: 25905504