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.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Animal social networks can be extremely complex and are characterized by highly non-random interactions between group members. However, very little is known about the underlying factors affecting interaction preferences, and hence network structure. One possibility is that behavioural differences between individuals, such as how bold or shy they are, can affect the frequency and distribution of their interactions within a network. We tested this using individually marked three-spined sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus), and found that bold individuals had fewer overall interactions than shy fish, but tended to distribute their interactions more evenly across all group members. Shy fish, on the other hand, tended to associate preferentially with a small number of other group members, leading to a highly skewed distribution of interactions. This was mediated by the reduced tendency of shy fish to move to a new location within the tank when they were interacting with another individual; bold fish showed no such tendency and were equally likely to move irrespective of whether they were interacting or not. The results show that animal social network structure can be affected by the behavioural composition of group members and have important implications for understanding the spread of information and disease in social groups.