Time constraints and trade-offs among parental care behaviours: effects of brood size, sex and loss of mate

Evolutionary game theory is concerned with the evolutionarily stable outcomes of the process of natural selection. The theory is especially relevant when the fitness of an organism depends on the behaviour of other members of its population. Here we focus on the interaction between two organisms that have a conflict of interest. The standard approach to such two-player games is to assume that each player chooses a single action and that the evolutionarily stable action of each player is the best given the action of its opponent. We argue that, instead, most two-player games should be modelled as involving a series of interactions in which opponents negotiate the final outcome. Thus we should be concerned with evolutionarily stable negotiation rules rather than evolutionarily stable actions. The evolutionarily stable negotiation rule of each player is the best rule given the rule of its opponent. As we show, the action chosen as a result of the negotiation is not the best action given the action of the opponent. This conclusion necessitates a fundamental change in the way that evolutionary games are modelled.

We outline and develop current theory on how inherent genetic conflicts of interest between the various family members can affect the flow of parental investment from parents to offspring, and discuss the problems for empirical testing that this generates. The parental investment pattern realized in nature reflects the simultaneous resolution of all the conflicts between the family players. This depends on the genetic mechanism, the mating system and reproductive constraints, on whether extra demand by progeny affects current or future sibs, and particularly on the behavioural mechanisms underlying demand (begging or solicitation) and supply (provision of parental investment by parents). The direction of deviation from the optimal parental investment for the parent(s) depends on the slope of what we term the 'effect of supply on demand', the mechanism that determines how changes in food supply affect begging levels. If increasing food increases begging (positive slope), less parental investment is supplied than the parental optimum and if increasing food decreases begging (negative slope), more parental investment is supplied. The magnitude of deviation depends on both the 'effect of supply on demand' and on the 'effect of demand on supply' (the mechanism determining how changes in begging affect food supply, which always has a positive slope). We conclude that it will often be impossible to deduce the extent of underlying conflict by establishing the amount of parental investment given relative to the ideal optimum for the parent. Some possible directions for future research are discussed.