Altruism.

[Saturnine Pariah]

Manipulation is often thought of as morally repugnant, but it might be responsible for the evolutionary origins of some helpful or altruistic behavior, according to a new study.
In evolutionary biology, manipulation occurs when an individual, the manipulator, alters the behavior of another individual in ways that is beneficial to the manipulator but may be detrimental to the manipulated individual. Manipulation not only occurs in humans and animals but also at the cellular level, such as among cells in a multicellular organism, or in parasites, which can alter the behavior of their hosts.
Consider the case of the parasitic roundworm Myrmeconema neotropicum, which once ingested by the tropical ant Cephalotes atratus in Central and South America, causes the ant to grow a bright red abdomen, mimicking berries. This bright abdomen constitutes a phenotype manipulated by the roundworm. Birds eat the "berries," or infected ants, and then spread the parasite in their droppings, which are subsequently collected by foraging Cephalotes atratus and fed to their larva, and the cycle of manipulated behavior begins anew.
In the study published this week in the journal American Naturalist, the researchers developed a mathematical model for the evolution of manipulated behavior and applied it to maternal manipulation in eusocial organisms, such as ants, wasps, and bees, which form colonies with reproductive queens and sterile workers. In the model, mothers produce two broods, and they manipulate the first-brood offspring to stay in the maternal site and help raise the second brood. Mothers can do this by disrupting the offspring's development in some way, for example through poor feeding or aggressive behavior. Manipulated offspring of the first-brood stay and help to raise the second brood. Alternatively, first-brood offspring can resist manipulation and leave.
The researchers show that an offspring's resistance to manipulation may often fail to evolve, if the costs of resistance are high. In a sense, then, helping or altruistic behavior is coerced through manipulation.
"The evidence in so-called primitive eusociality, where helping is often coerced through aggression or differential feeding, appears consistent with these results," said lead author Mauricio Gonzalez-Forero, who conducted the study while a graduate research assistant at the National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis.

The above story is based on materials provided by National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis (NIMBioS), via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.

Journal Reference:
Mauricio González-Forero and Sergey Gavrilets. Evolution of manipulated behavior. American Naturalist, 2013;

 

[wellwisher]

I think altruism is more based on that aspect of the maternal instinct, where the mother animal demonstrates her willingness to sacrifice her own safety for the protection of her young. She is less concerned for her own well being, which would be optimized if she ran away. Rather she puts herself at risk to help those who need her help. Altruism is about the survival/advancement of the species not the individual.

 

[wegs]

I think altruism is more based on that aspect of the maternal instinct, where the mother animal demonstrates her willingness to sacrifice her own safety for the protection of her young. She is less concerned for her own well being, which would be optimized if she ran away. Rather she puts herself at risk to help those who need her help. Altruism is about the survival/advancement of the species not the individual.

This.

Manipulating people in relationships for example, in order to derive one's own way...no, that would not be altruistic. Altruism is based on the principle of being selfless. Manipulating others is not about doing what's best for others...it's usually done to only benefit the manipulator.

Saturnine Pariah, you always post such curious topics that get me to think.

 

[Jeeves]

I think altruism is more based on that aspect of the maternal instinct, where the mother animal demonstrates her willingness to sacrifice her own safety for the protection of her young.

That's not altruism. That's DNA insurance. It's not a social behaviour but a biological one.

She is less concerned for her own well being, which would be optimized if she ran away.

Actually, that happens more often in nature. The parents try to defend offspring, but when they realize it's futile, they abandon the offspring and survive to make another clutch of eggs. There is always risk, and most animals put up a fight - but they calculate the odds and don't sacrifice themselves in futile gestures.

Altruism is about the survival/advancement of the species not the individual.

The aim is survival of both: every time a member of a community does something to help another member, he gets brownie points - social credit. So, when he's in trouble, others feel obliged to help him. It's not just tit for tat (though that's at the base of it) it's also emotional investment: how much regard, respect, affection, gratitude and other positive feelings you've instilled in your fellow tribesmen. The more popular you've made yourself, the quicker they'll come to put out the fire in your hut.

I think the article shows that people (and probably other species) build up this kind of social credit by devious means; that they manipulate other people to be altruistic in their behalf.