IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v15y2004i6p916-924.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is there an optimal number of helpers in Alpine marmot family groups?

Author

Listed:
  • Dominique Allainé
  • Fabienne Theuriau

Abstract

The consequence of helping behavior on breeders fitness is still controversial. We used multivariate analyses to investigate for the effects of male and female subordinates on breeders' components of fitness in the Alpine marmot, Marmota marmota. We found that male and female subordinates, respectively, increased and decreased juvenile survival during winter. Thus, we give evidence that male subordinates should be considered as helpers, and that helpers provided breeders with immediate reproductive success gains, whereas subordinates females were costly. Helpers had no positive effects on female body condition, on persistence (future survival) of dominants, and on future reproduction (occurrence and size of a litter). Helpers thus did not provide breeders with delayed fitness benefits, and therfore, the load-lightening hypothesis was not supported. On the contrary, helpers had delayed fitness cost for dominant males and, consequently, for dominant females. Immediate benefits counterbalanced by delayed costs suggested an optimal number of helpers in the family group both from male and female perspectives. An optimality model well predicted the observed mean number of helpers in Alpine marmot family groups. Optimal numbers of helpers were slightly different for males and females, suggesting a potential conflict of interest between dominants. We finally discuss the possible mechanisms of helping that may explain the observed pattern in the Alpine marmot. Copyright 2004.

Suggested Citation

  • Dominique Allainé & Fabienne Theuriau, 2004. "Is there an optimal number of helpers in Alpine marmot family groups?," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 15(6), pages 916-924, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:15:y:2004:i:6:p:916-924
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arh096
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:15:y:2004:i:6:p:916-924. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.