2010
DOI: 10.1038/hdy.2010.24
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

What traits are carried on mobile genetic elements, and why?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

5
289
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 292 publications
(295 citation statements)
references
References 123 publications
(147 reference statements)
5
289
1
Order By: Relevance
“…For example MacLean et al (2010) demonstrate the overall social utility of organisms behaving in a way that at first assessment seems to be obviously anti-social-free riding off of prosocial agents that manufacture costly public goods. Singlecell organisms produce a wide array of shared goods ranging from shelter to instructions for combating antibiotics (Rankin et al 2010). MacLean et al (2010) focus on the production of digestive enzymes by the more 'altruistic' of two isogenic yeast strains.…”
Section: Fundamental Social Behaviourmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example MacLean et al (2010) demonstrate the overall social utility of organisms behaving in a way that at first assessment seems to be obviously anti-social-free riding off of prosocial agents that manufacture costly public goods. Singlecell organisms produce a wide array of shared goods ranging from shelter to instructions for combating antibiotics (Rankin et al 2010). MacLean et al (2010) focus on the production of digestive enzymes by the more 'altruistic' of two isogenic yeast strains.…”
Section: Fundamental Social Behaviourmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another issue is that Rankin et al (2010)'s model does not explicitly denote when cooperation occurs relative to plasmid transfer. If, for instance, toxins produced before host infection allow host colonization, followed by MGE transfer within hosts to plasmid-free bacteria, the toxinproducing bacteria would have helped bacteria not carrying the plasmid, and therefore, MGEs would not have preferentially helped copies of themselves for host infection.…”
Section: What Comes First: Cooperation or Plasmid Transmission?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, if kin cooperate, but also compete for resources, the advantages of cooperation are cancelled. Rankin et al (2010) and Nogueira et al (2009) consider a population structured in distinct patches, and show that relatedness increases within patches due to MGE transmission, but they fail to discuss where competition occurs. For their arguments to work, competition for resource acquisition in bacteria must occur between and not within patches.…”
Section: The Problem Of Kin Selection In a Structured Populationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations