Evolutionary explanations for mammalian sociality typically center on inclusive-fitness benefits of associating and cooperating with close kin, or close maternal kin as in some whale societies, including killer and sperm whales. Their matrilineal structure has strongly influenced the thinking about social structure in less well-studied cetaceans, including beluga whales. in a cross-sectional study of group structure and kinship we found that belugas formed a limited number of distinct group types, consistently observed across populations and habitats. certain behaviours were associated with group type, but group membership was often dynamic. MtDNA-microsatellite profiling combined with relatedness and network analysis revealed, contrary to predictions, that most social groupings were not predominantly organized around close maternal relatives. they comprised both kin and non-kin, many group members were paternal rather than maternal relatives, and unrelated adult males often traveled together. the evolutionary mechanisms that shape beluga societies are likely complex; fitness benefits may be achieved through reciprocity, mutualism and kin selection. At the largest scales these societies are communities comprising all ages and both sexes where multiple social learning pathways involving kin and non-kin can foster the emergence of cultures. We explore the implications of these findings for species management and the evolution of menopause. Interpreting gregarious behaviour in terms of cooperative strategies that maximize individual fitness, Hamilton 1 developed the theory of kin selection. This theory uses the concept of inclusive fitness to explain the evolution of social organization and cooperation where individuals indirectly enhance their fitness through positive effects on the reproduction of relatives. However, individuals can also derive benefits from associations with unrelated individuals where cooperation is conditional on the behaviour of the companion (i.e., reciprocity 2,3), always yields the highest benefit (i.e., mutualism 4,5) or results in shared fitness advantages from helping increase group size (i.e., group augmentation 6,7) which, for example, could lead to more effective group defense. In fluid aggregations, such as herds or flocks, benefits to the individual alone (e.g., reducing personal predation risk at the expense of other group members) may drive the tendency to associate with conspecifics 8,9. Thus, resolving the genetic relationships among group members is central to understanding the advantages of group living, the emergence of cooperative behaviour, and the evolution of social organization. The recent re-emergence of arguments for group selection theory, where kinship plays a minor role in social evolution 10,11 , and the debate these arguments have elicited 12 , as well as the growing evidence for culture in non-primate species 13-15 (defined as the acquisition or inheritance of knowledge or behaviours from conspecifics through social learning 13), has further heightened the intere...