The effects of social rank and payoff structure on the evolution of group hunting

PLoS One. 2022 Jun 10;17(6):e0269522. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0269522. eCollection 2022.

Abstract

Group hunting is common among social carnivores, and mechanisms that promote this behavior are a central topic in evolutionary biology. Increased prey capture success and decreased losses from competitors are often invoked as factors promoting group hunting. However, many animal societies have linear dominance hierarchies where access to critical resources is determined by social rank, and group-hunting rewards are shared unequally. Despite this inequality, animals in such societies cooperate to hunt and defend resources. Game theoretic models predict that rank and relative rewards from group hunting vs. solitary hunting affect which hunting strategies will evolve. These predictions are partially supported by empirical work, but data needed to test these predictions are difficult to obtain in natural systems. We use digital evolution to test how social rank and tolerance by dominants of subordinates feeding while sharing spoils from group hunting influence which hunting strategies evolve in digital organisms. We created a computer-simulated world to reflect social and hunting dynamics of spotted hyenas (Crocuta crocuta). We found that group hunting increased as tolerance increased and as the relative payoff from group hunting increased. Also, top-ranking agents were more likely to group hunt than lower-ranking agents under despotic sharing conditions. These results provide insights into mechanisms that may promote cooperation in animal societies structured by dominance hierarchies.

Publication types

  • Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.

MeSH terms

  • Animals
  • Carnivora*
  • Hyaenidae*
  • Predatory Behavior*
  • Social Dominance

Associated data

  • figshare/10.6084/m9.figshare.17124041

Grants and funding

This work was supported by the BEACON Center for the Study of Evolution in Action (NSF DBI-0939454). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.