Cooperative Behavior Meshes With Evolutionary Theory

ScienceDaily ^ | Apr. 7, 2009

[Boxen]

ScienceDaily (Apr. 7, 2009) — One of the perplexing questions raised by evolutionary theory is how cooperative behavior, which benefits other members of a species at a cost to the individual, came to exist.

Cooperative behavior has puzzled biologists because if only the fittest survive, genes for a behavior that benefits everybody in a population should not last and cooperative behavior should die out, says Jeff Gore, a Pappalardo postdoctoral fellow in MIT's Department of Physics.

Gore is part of a team of MIT researchers that has used game theory to understand one solution yeast use to get around this problem. The team's findings, published in the April 6 online edition of Nature, indicate that if an individual can benefit even slightly by cooperating, it can survive even when surrounded by individuals that don't cooperate.

[Boxen]

Journal reference:

Jeff Gore, Hyun Youk & Alexander van Oudenaarden. Snowdrift game dynamics and facultative cheating in yeast. Nature, 2009; DOI: 10.1038/nature07921

[Boxen]

From the article:

In short, the study offers a concrete example of how cooperative behaviors can be compatible with evolutionary theory.

[ColoCdn]

“...if an individual can benefit even slightly by cooperating, it can survive even when surrounded by individuals that don’t cooperate.”

Until, of course the individuals that don’t cooperate figure it out and kill and eat the first guy.

[Seruzawa]

It took how long for “scientists” to figure out that co-operative behavior is better for an individual’s survival? What do they teach in schools these days? How much was spent on this?

It reminds me of another study done at the cost of millions to determine why women in abusive relationships are more prone to commit suicide than women in loving relationships.

A total waste of money... like most behavioral “science”.

[Moonman62]

It took how long for “scientists” to figure out that co-operative behavior is better for an individual’s survival?

Evolution is really about the survival of the fittest species (for its environment), not the fittest individual.

[Question_Assumptions]

So, how exactly do birth control and abortions look like they’ll fare as survival strategies?

[OldNavyVet]

“... if only the fittest survive, genes for a behavior that benefits everybody in a population should not last and cooperative behavior should die out,”

The premise here is that good behavior is not characteristic of those more “fit: than others.

Aa Ayn Rand advises: “Check your premises.”

[almcbean]

“says Gore. Unlike humans, yeast have no emotions or thoughts that interfere with rational decision-making”

This guy believes that yeast engage in rational decision-making.

And evolutionists make fun of those who believe in the Bible.

I sure hope the yeast don’t one day decide not to rise-it will devastate the bread industry.

[DevNet]

Most people who I know who believe evolutionary theory to be the best explanation of the diversity of life on this planet happen to be Christan.

How d you explain that?

[LiteKeeper]

Takes after his namesake - more junkscience!

[count-your-change]

Another example of half baked logic. The argument is like saying one predator that cannot consume it's entire kill and thus has to leave part of it is a “cooperator” while the predator that is unable to make a kill and thus feeds on the first’s leavings is a “cheater”.
So the successful predator should eventually become extinct and the less successful predator should continue. Of course what the unsuccessful predator will feed upon when the first is gone isn't stated. And why that terms like “cooperator” and “cheater”, terms loaded with human values for rational, decision making creatures, should be used isn't indicated either unless it's done to intimate some purposeful direction to evolution.

But no matter the silliness of the conclusions, the grant money spends just the same and bringing grant money into an institution is always good for points.

[Jagman]

Cooperation tends to be a pack creature attribute. Humans are pack creatures, and they cooperate. Dogs are pack creatures, and they cooperate. Cats (little ones, not lions) are not pack creatures and therefore do not cooperate. How you get any kind of evolutionary “at-a-boy” out of this is beyond me...