The concept of kinship permeates many domains of fundamental and applied biology ranging from social evolution to conservation science to quantitative and human genetics. Until recently, pedigrees were the gold standard to infer kinship, but the advent of next‐generation sequencing and the availability of dense genetic markers in many species make it a good time to (re)evaluate the usefulness of genetic markers in this context. Using three published data sets where both pedigrees and markers are available, we evaluate two common and a new genetic estimator of kinship. We show discrepancies between pedigree values and marker estimates of kinship and explore via simulations the possible reasons for these. We find these discrepancies are attributable to two main sources: pedigree errors and heterogeneity in the origin of founders. We also show that our new marker‐based kinship estimator has very good statistical properties and behaviour and is particularly well suited for situations where the source population is of small size, as will often be the case in conservation biology, and where high levels of kinship are expected, as is typical in social evolution studies.

To date, more than 20 different vertebrate master sex-determining genes have been identified on different sex chromosomes of mammals, birds, frogs and fish. Interestingly, six of these genes are transcription factors ( Dmrt1 - or Sox3 - related) and 13 others belong to the TGF-β signalling pathway ( Amh , Amhr2 , Bmpr1b , Gsdf and Gdf6 ). This pattern suggests that only a limited group of factors/signalling pathways are prone to become top regulators again and again. Although being clearly a subordinate member of the sex-regulatory network in mammals, the TGF-β signalling pathway made it to the top recurrently and independently. Facing this rolling wave of TGF-β signalling pathways, this review will decipher how the TGF-β signalling pathways cope with the canonical sex gene regulatory network and challenge the current evolutionary concepts accounting for the diversity of sex-determining mechanisms. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Challenging the paradigm in sex chromosome evolution: empirical and theoretical insights with a focus on vertebrates (Part I)’.

The gut microbiota influences animal neurodevelopment and behavior but has not previously been documented to affect group-level properties of social organisms. Here we use honeybees to probe the effect of the gut microbiota on host social behavior. We found that the microbiota increased the rate and specialization of head-to-head interactions between bees. Microbiota colonization was associated with higher abundances of one third of the metabolites detected in the brain, including amino acids with roles in synaptic transmission and brain energetic function. Some of these metabolites were significant predictors of the number of social interactions of bees. Microbiota colonization also affected brain transcriptional processes related to amino acid metabolism and epigenetic modifications in a brain region involved in sensory perception. These results demonstrate that the gut microbiota modulates the emergent colony social network of honeybees, and suggest changes in chromatin accessibility and amino acid biosynthesis as underlying processes.

The genetic evolution of altruism (i.e., a behavior resulting in a net reduction of the survival and/or reproduction of an actor to benefit a recipient) once perplexed biologists because it seemed paradoxical in a Darwinian world. More than half a century ago, W. D. Hamilton explained that when interacting individuals are genetically related, alleles for altruism can be favored by selection because they are carried by individuals more likely to interact with other individuals carrying the alleles for altruism than random individuals in the population (“kin selection”). In recent decades, a substantial number of supposedly alternative pathways to altruism have been published, leading to controversies surrounding explanations for the evolution of altruism. Here, we systematically review the 200 most impactful papers published on the evolution of altruism and identify 43 evolutionary models in which altruism evolves and where the authors attribute the evolution of altruism to a pathway other than kin selection and/or deny the role of relatedness. An analysis of these models reveals that in every case the life cycle assumptions entail local reproduction and local interactions, thereby leading to interacting individuals being genetically related. Thus, contrary to the authors’ claims, Hamilton’s relatedness drives the evolution to altruism in their models. The fact that several decades of investigating the evolution to altruism have resulted in the systematic and unwitting rediscovery of the same mechanism is testament to the fundamental importance of positive relatedness between actor and recipient for explaining the evolution of altruism.

No abstract