How to measure inclusive fitness
- 22 September 1990
- journal article
- research article
- Published by The Royal Society in Proceedings Of The Royal Society B-Biological Sciences
- Vol. 241 (1302) , 229-231
- https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.1990.0090
Abstract
Although inclusive fitness (Hamilton 1964) is regarded as the basic currency of natural selection, difficulty in applying inclusive fitness theory to field studies persists, a quarter-century after its introduction (Grafen 1982, 1984; Brown 1987). For instance, strict application of the original (and currently accepted) definition of inclusive fitness predicts that no one should ever attempt to breed among obligately cooperative breeders. Much of this confusion may have arisen because Hamilton's (1964) original verbal definition of inclusive fitness was not in complete accord with his justifying model. By re-examining Hamilton's original model, a modified verbal definition of inclusive fitness can be justified.This publication has 13 references indexed in Scilit:
- Campylorhynchus wrens: the ecology of delayed dispersal and cooperation in the Venezuelan savannaPublished by Cambridge University Press (CUP) ,1990
- Group size, survival, reproduction, and routes to breeding in dwarf mongoosesAnimal Behaviour, 1990
- Helping Communal Breeding in BirdsPublished by Walter de Gruyter GmbH ,1987
- Cooperation in breeding by nonreproductive wrens: kinship, reciprocity, and demographyBehavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 1985
- Causes of Reproductive Failure in Two Family Groups of Wolves (Canis lupus)Zeitschrift Fur Tierpsychologie, 1985
- Kinship, Need, and the Distribution of AltruismThe American Naturalist, 1983
- How not to measure inclusive fitnessNature, 1982
- Natural selection and the communal rearing of pups in African wild dogs (Lycaon pictus)Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 1982
- Mating relationships and breeding suppression in the dwarf mongooseAnimal Behaviour, 1980
- Jackal helpers and pup survivalNature, 1979