↓ Skip to main content

Differential Adhesion between Moving Particles as a Mechanism for the Evolution of Social Groups

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Differential Adhesion between Moving Particles as a Mechanism for the Evolution of Social Groups
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, February 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003482
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas Garcia, Leonardo Gregory Brunnet, Silvia De Monte

Abstract

The evolutionary stability of cooperative traits, that are beneficial to other individuals but costly to their carrier, is considered possible only through the establishment of a sufficient degree of assortment between cooperators. Chimeric microbial populations, characterized by simple interactions between unrelated individuals, restrain the applicability of standard mechanisms generating such assortment, in particular when cells disperse between successive reproductive events such as happens in Dicyostelids and Myxobacteria. In this paper, we address the evolutionary dynamics of a costly trait that enhances attachment to others as well as group cohesion. By modeling cells as self-propelled particles moving on a plane according to local interaction forces and undergoing cycles of aggregation, reproduction and dispersal, we show that blind differential adhesion provides a basis for assortment in the process of group formation. When reproductive performance depends on the social context of players, evolution by natural selection can lead to the success of the social trait, and to the concomitant emergence of sizeable groups. We point out the conditions on the microscopic properties of motion and interaction that make such evolutionary outcome possible, stressing that the advent of sociality by differential adhesion is restricted to specific ecological contexts. Moreover, we show that the aggregation process naturally implies the existence of non-aggregated particles, and highlight their crucial evolutionary role despite being largely neglected in theoretical models for the evolution of sociality.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Switzerland 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
Australia 1 2%
Unknown 53 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 24%
Student > Postgraduate 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Student > Master 4 7%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 5 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 37%
Physics and Astronomy 14 24%
Environmental Science 3 5%
Neuroscience 3 5%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 8 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 May 2015.
All research outputs
#16,061,963
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#6,970
of 8,964 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,190
of 235,937 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#95
of 135 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,964 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 235,937 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 135 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.