(logo) Natural Genesis (logo text)
A Sourcebook for the Worldwide Discovery of a Creative Organic Universe
Table of Contents
Introduction
Genesis Vision
Learning Planet
Organic Universe
Earth Life Emerge
Genesis Future
Glossary
Recent Additions
Search
Submit

V. Life's Corporeal Evolution Develops, Encodes and Organizes Itself: An EarthWinian Genesis Synthesis

5. Cooperative Member/Group Societies

Ozogany, Katalin and Tamas Vicsek. Modeling Leadership Hierarchy in Multilevel Animal Societies. arXiv:1403.0260. Eotvos Lorand University, Budapest, biophysicists show how such groupings, whether equine, avian, or indeed any creature, express and are guided by a universal network phenomena that forms a dynamic coherence. If to compare, for example, with Mones, Pollner, and Vicsek (search), the same patterns and processes are again duplicated in our scientific studies as Universal Hierarchical Behavior of Citation Networks. Once more, the presence of an independent mathematical, implicate, source in generative effect everywhere is robustly proven.

A typical feature of many natural and social networks is the presence of communities giving rise to multiple levels of organization. We investigate the decision-making process of a group combining self organization and social dynamics, and reproduce the simultaneous emergence of a hierarchical and modular leadership network. All individuals in the model try, with varying degrees of ability, to find a direction of movement, with the result that leader-follower relationships evolve between them, since they tend to follow the more successful ones. The harem-forming ambitions of male individuals inspired by an observed Przewalski horse herd leads to modular structure. In this approach we find that the harem-leader to harem-member ratio observed in horses corresponds to an optimal network regarding common success, and that modularly structured hierarchy is more beneficial than a non-modular one, in the sense that common success is higher, and the underlying network is more hierarchical.

Papacopoulou, Marina, et al. Self-Organization of Collective Escape in Pigeon Flocks. PLOS Computational Biology. January, 2022. University of Groningen, Institute for Evolutionary Life Sciences, University of Exeter and Royal Holloway University of London researchers including Charlotte Hemelrijk and Steven Portugal add further technical insights which report and confirm a universal presence of nature’s optimum, member me + We group = US orientation. See also Zebrafish Collective Behavior by Yushi Yang, et al in the same issue and Nicholas Ouellette 2022 review. As a record we note the 2005 volume Self-Organization and Evolution of Social and Biological Systems edited by C. Hemelrijk when animal behavior studies began not long ago. (I had to fetch the paper book at Yale,) By 2022 such work can evinces our Earthropo Sapiens scientific discovery.

Bird flocks show intricate patterns of collective motion, especially when escaping a predator. But little is known about their underlying mechanisms. Here we analyze GPS data of pigeon flocks under attack by a robotic-predator by a computer simulation. We show that pigeon activity increases the closer they get to a predator by a self-organiized coordination among individuals. A key aspect is an increasing consensus among flock members over the escape direction. (Summary)

Papageorgiou, Danai, et al. The Multilevel Society of a Small-Brained Bird. Current Biology. 29/21, 2019. Seven researchers mainly at MPI Animal Behavior including Iain Couzin, along with Brendah Nyaguthii at the University of Eldoret, Kenya, quantify how even ground-dwelling avians form typical complex viable groupings with many interactive members. The work merited a N, Y. Times science review Tiny Brains Don’t Stop These Birds from Having a Complex Society by Elizabeth Preston on Nov. 4, 2019. We also cite as an example of how all manner of creatures take to this similar communal form, as if due to and exemplifying an independent structural source.

Animal societies can be organized in multiple hierarchical tiers. Such multilevel societies, where stable groups move together through the landscape, associating with specific other groups, are thought to represent one of the most complex forms of social structure in vertebrates. Here, we provide detailed quantitative evidence for the presence of a multilevel society in a small-brained bird, the vulturine guineafowl (Acryllium vulturinum). We demonstrate that this species lives in large, multi-male, multi-female groups. (Abstract)

Pasquaretta, Cristian, et al. Social Networks in Primates: Smart and Tolerant Species have More Efficient Networks. Nature Scientific Reports. 4/7600, 2014. A team of 21 behavioral anthropologists, cognitive ethologists, and primatologists from across Europe, onto Japan and the US, provide a synoptic confirmation of the presence of beneficial cooperative groupings. The first paragraph, as the second quote, is a good example of how articles now begin by noting that just as every other phase of nature and society, we find in this certain instance still another verification.

Network optimality has been described in genes, proteins and human communicative networks. In the latter, optimality leads to the efficient transmission of information with a minimum number of connections. Whilst studies show that differences in centrality exist in animal networks with central individuals having higher fitness, network efficiency has never been studied in animal groups. Here we studied 78 groups of primates (24 species). We found that group size and neocortex ratio were correlated with network efficiency. Centralisation (whether several individuals are central in the group) and modularity (how a group is clustered) had opposing effects on network efficiency, showing that tolerant species have more efficient networks. Such network properties affecting individual fitness could be shaped by natural selection. Our results are in accordance with the social brain and cultural intelligence hypotheses, which suggest that the importance of network efficiency and information flow through social learning relates to cognitive abilities. (Abstract)

Networks are observed at every level of biological organisation, from molecular pathways to ecosystems. The way genes, proteins and other entities interact is selected by evolutionary processes leading to so-called optimal networks. For instance, gene networks have been selected to be dynamically robust to mutation, stochasticity, and changes in the environment. Protein networks increase the adaptability of bacteria, which have colonised every ecological niche on earth. Neural networks can approximate statistically optimal decisions. Finally, at a larger scale, human communicative networks are also described as efficient when they enhance cooperation between individuals or result in improved communication and decision making. (1)

Pauls, James, et al. Quantum Coherence and Entanglement in the Avian Compass. Physical Review E. 87/062704, 2013. In a paper that also attests to a reconception and unity of physics and life, Purdue University and LANL physicists including Sabre Kais find deep similarities and explanations. The artificial quantum-classical barrier is being removed to reveal a creative reiteration in kind and turn from universe to human.

The radical-pair mechanism is one of two distinct mechanisms used to explain the navigation of birds in geomagnetic fields, however little research has been done to explore the role of quantum entanglement in this mechanism. In this paper we study the lifetime of radical-pair entanglement corresponding to the magnitude and direction of magnetic fields to show that the entanglement lasts long enough in birds to be used for navigation. We also find that the birds appear to not be able to orient themselves directly based on radical-pair entanglement due to a lack of orientation sensitivity of the entanglement in the geomagnetic field. To explore the entanglement mechanism further, we propose a model in which the hyperfine interactions are replaced by local magnetic fields of similar strength. The entanglement of the radical pair in this model lasts longer and displays an angular sensitivity in weak magnetic fields, both of which are not present in previous models. (Abstract)

Penny, David. Cooperation and Selfishness Both Occur During Molecular Evolution. Biology Direct. Online November, 2014. Just a few years ago, the presence of cooperative interactions between creatures was of minor notice and import. Today the Massey University, New Zealand, biologist makes a case that even at the level of biomolecules and bacteria, cooperative behavior is present and essential for such integrated systems to form, function, and prosper.

Just a few years ago, the presence of cooperative interactions between creatures was of minor notice and import. Today the Massey University, New Zealand, biologist makes a case that even at the level of biomolecules and bacteria, cooperative behavior is present and essential for such integrated systems to form, function, and prosper.

Peysakhovich, Alexander, et al. Humans Display a ‘Cooperative Phenotype’ that is Domain General and Temporally Stable. Nature Communications. 5/4939, 2014. Peysakhovich and David Rand, Yale, and Martin Nowak, Harvard, offer further theory and evidence for a common natural tendency and incentive across evolution and societies to behave in reciprocally beneficial ways regardless of the species or situation.

Understanding human cooperation is of major interest across the natural and social sciences. But it is unclear to what extent cooperation is actually a general concept. Most research on cooperation has implicitly assumed that a person’s behaviour in one cooperative context is related to their behaviour in other settings, and at later times. Here, we provide such evidence by collecting thousands of game decisions from over 1,400 individuals. A person’s decisions in different cooperation games are correlated, as are those decisions and both self-report and real-effort measures of cooperation in non-game contexts. We conclude that there is a domain-general and temporally stable inclination towards paying costs to benefit others, which we dub the ‘cooperative phenotype’. (Abstract)

Pfeiffer, Thomas, et al. Evolution of Cooperation by Generalized Reciprocity. Proceedings of the Royal Society B. 272/1115, 2005. It has previously been thought that cooperative behaviors could only occur by direct reciprocity when individuals had the cognitive ability to remember with whom they interacted. In this simulation study, an inherent propensity to cooperate in groups exists even if members lack this capability.

Pinheiro, Flavio, et al. Linking Individual and Collective Behavior in Adaptive Social Networks. Physical Review Letters. 116/128702, 2016. With Francisco Santo and Jorge Pacheco, University of Minho, Portugal biophysicists quantify and describe an inherent, beneficial balance between personal entities and communal cooperation.

Adaptive social structures are known to promote the evolution of cooperation. However, up to now the characterization of the collective, population-wide dynamics resulting from the self-organization of individual strategies on a coevolving, adaptive network has remained unfeasible. Here we establish a (reversible) link between individual (micro)behavior and collective (macro)behavior for coevolutionary processes. In particular, we show that the faster the relative rate of adaptation of the network, the smaller the critical fraction of cooperators required for cooperation to prevail, thus establishing a direct link between network adaptation and the evolution of cooperation. The framework developed here is general and may be readily applied to other dynamical processes occurring on adaptive networks, notably, the spreading of contagious diseases or the diffusion of innovations. (Abstract)

Powers, Simon, et al. The Concurrent Evolution of Cooperation and the Population Structures that Support It. Evolution. 65/6, 2011. A University of Southampton, Natural Systems Group, that includes Alexandra Penn and Richard Watson, further evinces per the extended Abstract that competition for survival alone does not force or control animal groupings. The paper is another sophisticated quantification of this neglected but now proven attribute. See also a commentary on this significant work “To Group or Not to Group?” by Eors Szathmary in Science (334/1648, 2011).

The evolution of cooperation often depends upon population structure, yet nearly all models of cooperation implicitly assume that this structure remains static. This is a simplifying assumption, because most organisms possess genetic traits that affect their population structure to some degree. These traits, such as a group size preference, affect the relatedness of interacting individuals and hence the opportunity for kin or group selection. We argue that models that do not explicitly consider their evolution cannot provide a satisfactory account of the origin of cooperation, because they cannot explain how the prerequisite population structures arise. Here, we consider the concurrent evolution of genetic traits that affect population structure, with those that affect social behavior. We show that not only does population structure drive social evolution, as in previous models, but that the opportunity for cooperation can in turn drive the creation of population structures that support it. This occurs through the generation of linkage disequilibrium between socio-behavioral and population-structuring traits, such that direct kin selection on social behavior creates indirect selection pressure on population structure. We illustrate our argument with a model of the concurrent evolution of group size preference and social behavior. (Abstract, 1527)

The coevolution model of Powers et al illustrates how genetic preference for a smaller group size can evolve because it increases the benefits of cooperation that its bearers experience. This view also may help our understanding of an important aspect of the major transitions in evolution – when originally separate individuals come together to form a higher-level evolutionary unit. The success of such a transition hinges on the evolutionary capacity of the groups in which the original individuals come together. As a simple example, the cell membrane that encompasses replicating molecules defines which components interact – a rigorous population structure that strongly favors cooperation because individuals “are sitting in the same boat.” (Szathmary, 1649)

Puy, Andreu, et al. Self-similarity of Turning Avalanches in Schooling Fish. arXiv:2309.16455. Five Barcelona system theorists including Romualdo Pastor-Satorras contribute further insights into nature’s ubiquitous preference for self-organized, critically poised activity. In this case it is well exhibited by all manner of animal groupings on the move. It is now customary for articles like this to lead with a review of how wide spread this beneficial phenomena seems to be (see below). For example, we note Temporal Criticality at arXiv:2309.15070 and Non-equilibrium Critical Scaling and Universality in a Quantum Simulator at. 2309.10856.

Our report will discuss how animal groupings transmit information by way of propagating waves or avalanches of behaviour. These cascades often display scale-free signatures in duration and size from a single individual to the whole group. We then contend that these findings can be seen expressions of critical phenomena from statistical physics. We argue that turning avalanches are collective decision-making processes so to select a new direction to move. We conclude by noting spatial and temporal similarities to aftershocks from seismology. (Excerpt)

A fascinating hypothesis in biology is that some systems may operate close to a critical point from statistical physics, separating an ordered from a disordered state of the system. Biological systems at a critical point are believed to possess functional advantages such as optimality in signal detection, storing and processing, large correlations in coordinated behaviour and widest spectrum of possible responses. Criticality is often associated to scale invariance, exemplified by power-law distributions lacking relevant characteristic scales besides natural cut-offs. There has been evidence of criticality signatures in neural activity and brain networks, gene regulatory networks, collective behaviour of cells or collective motion such as flocks of birds, fish schools, insect swarms, herds of mammals and human crowds. (1)

We believe our work represents a relevant contribution to the long-standing question of criticality, in particular to animal collective motion and in general to biological systems. Analysis of large data sets of experimental data reporting evidences of criticality have been scarce and are necessary to further elucidate this topic. (12)

Queller, David and Joan Strassmann. Beyond Society: The Evolution of Organismality. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. 364/3143, 2009. For these Rice University biologists, evolutionary science has matured to a point where one may to discern an alternative pathway for life’s advance than an aimlessly branching bush or web. Rather, an emergent nest of wholes within Wholes, agent entities within a bounded creature, arises from genomes to cells to multi-cellular beings, and onto “multi-species groups’ in a grand natural recapitulation.

The evolution of organismality is a social process. All organisms originated from groups of simpler units that now show high cooperation among the parts and are nearly free of conflicts. We suggest that this near-unanimous cooperation be taken as the defining trait of organisms. (3143) We now recognize that there are several levels of organism and that each level was attained by merging formerly separate individuals from a lower level (Buss 1987, Maynard Smith & Szathmary 1995, Michod 2000). Multi-cellular individuals are cooperative groups of cells, eukaryotic cells are cooperative assemblages of multiple prokaryotic lineages and prokaryotic cells must have emerged by assembly of formerly independent replicators. These major transitions in evolution construct new levels of organism out of separate individuals. (3143)

[Prev Pages]   Previous   | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18  Next  [More Pages]