The functions of societies and the evolution of group living: Spider societies as a test case

Whitehouse, M. E. A. and Lubin, Y. (2005) The functions of societies and the evolution of group living: Spider societies as a test case. Biological Reviews, 80 3: 347-361. doi:10.1017/S1464793104006694

Author Whitehouse, M. E. A.
Lubin, Y.
Title The functions of societies and the evolution of group living: Spider societies as a test case
Journal name Biological Reviews   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 1464-7931
Publication date 2005-01-01
Sub-type Critical review of research, literature review, critical commentary
DOI 10.1017/S1464793104006694
Open Access Status Not Open Access
Volume 80
Issue 3
Start page 347
End page 361
Total pages 15
Editor W A Foster
Place of publication New York
Publisher Cambridge Univ Press
Language eng
Subject C1
270799 Ecology and Evolution not elsewhere classified
780105 Biological sciences
0699 Other Biological Sciences
Abstract Many models have been advanced to suggest how different expressions of sociality have evolved and are maintained. However these models ignore the function of groups for the particular species in question. Here we present a new perspective on sociality where the function of the group takes a central role. We argue that sociality may have primarily a reproductive, protective, or foraging function, depending on whether it enhances the reproductive, protective or foraging aspect of the animal's life (sociality may serve a mixture of these functions). Different functions can potentially cause the development of the same social behaviour. By identifying which function influences a particular social behaviour we can determine how that social behaviour will change with changing conditions, and which models are most pertinent. To test our approach we examined spider sociality, which has often been seen as the poor cousin to insect sociality. By using our approach we found that the group characteristics of eusocial insects is largely governed by the reproductive function of their groups, while the group characteristics of social spiders is largely governed by the foraging function of the group. This means that models relevant to insects may not be relevant to spiders. It also explains why eusocial insects have developed a strict caste system while spider societies are more egalitarian. We also used our approach to explain the differences between different types of spider groups. For example, differences in the characteristics of colonial and kleptoparasitic groups can be explained by differences in foraging methods, while differences between colonial and cooperative spiders can be explained by the role of the reproductive function in the formation of cooperative spider groups. Although the interactions within cooperative spider colonies are largely those of a foraging society, demographic traits and colony dynamics are strongly influenced by the reproductive function. We argue that functional explanations help to understand the social structure of spider groups and therefore the evolutionary potential for speciation in social spiders.
Keyword sociality
colonial spiders
social spiders
reproductive skew theory
maternal care
foraging society
Q-Index Code C1

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Critical review of research, literature review, critical commentary
Collections: 2006 Higher Education Research Data Collection
School of Biological Sciences Publications
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 70 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 88 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Wed, 15 Aug 2007, 15:59:46 EST