Kin Selection, Genetic Selection, and Information-dependent strategies

1. Kin Selection, Genetic Selection, and Information-dependent strategies By JC Santos, Thomas Valencia, Jannall Brummell

2. Kin Selection • How natural selection shapes genetically inherited traits that simultaneously impact the reproduction of the carrier of the trait and the reproduction of individuals who share genes underlying that trait • Rushton sees kin selection as a strategy of reproductive trade-off between carrier and recipient that will emerge in the genetic code relative to the strategy needed for that particular environment

3. Genetic Similarity • Between individuals • Substituted for relatedness • Illustrates that selection operates on a genetic level and therefore kin selection and inclusive fitness should be addressed on the genetic level instead if the individual level

4. Flaws of Genetic Similarity Theory • At the genetic level there is no similarity • genetics are either • identical • not identical • information indicating that a replica of a gene will be duplicated. • Genes will replicate regardless of what • individuals they are in • in relation to the environment.

5. 2 Key Questions about Genetic Similarity Theory • 1) Does genetic similarity operate as an evolutionary principle independent of common ancestry? • 2) Can and does a phenotype matching process that samples heritable phenotypic markers (in order to create altruism and/or mating) operate in humans?

6. Answer to Question 1 • “Genetic similarity” does not arise independently from relatedness because of the amount of possible gene combinations created during sex. • likelihood that someone not of common ancestry in the Pleistocene era who was genetically similar to oneself would be virtually impossible due to the countless combinations of sex. • if it did happen there would be no way to really know if a non-related stranger contained a genetically similar trait. • the concept of altruism shared between related kin is lost in this theory due to the fact that we are altruistic toward our own kin and not someone who might have a similar trait as oneself.

7. Answer to Question 2 • “Yes,” adaptations for assessing relatedness between kin must arise as a mechanism • so one will be able to regulate kin relevant strategies such as altruism and mating. • arises out of a shared common ancestry • it is possible that using information of heredity markers could help in constructing patterns of kinship • helps influence mating, friendship, and altruism in humans.

8. Blood Group Data • Deals with the concept of race, and how we as people tend to travel with those of one’s race due to the fact that we share more common genes with those of our own race. • the concept of blood groups does not explain the evolution of kin-selection mechanisms. • a non-relative of one’s own race are only slightly different from individuals of a different race • competition evolving out of the Pleistocene would help in the development of inclusive fitness effects on such concepts as coalitions and altruism.

9. Conclusion • The concept of genetic phenotype markers as a way to form human coalitions is limited • only provides information for the formation of inclusive fitness strategy • Markers do not seem useful in tracing close kinship links as the more distant the relationship tracked the more useless the markers would serve as source of information • Empirical results have a sound basis but the concept of “genetic similarity” distorts the main idea of inclusive fitness and how altruism and coalitions form based on kin ties.

10. Critical Review • Not clear whether it is proper to generalize results from Pleistocene era. • Since blood group data can not explain the evolution of kin-selection is it worth analyzing further? • Should kin selection be addressed on the genetic level instead of the individual level?