Research Paper about Altruism and The Selfish Gene

Altruism is a trait in organisms that have puzzled scientists for decades. Yakubu (2014) has challenged traditional thinking and offered a new perspective on the paradox. The main objective of the article put forth by Yakubu was to criticize the current scientific view of altruism. He states that the altruism trait is not based on genetics, as many scientists claim, but rather on the environmental condition that an individual finds themself in. The lack of genetics in determining altruism helps explain why the trait, which can be seen as lowering the fitness of an individual, has not been selected against in natural selection. The trait persists throughout generations because it offers benefits to the individual as well as to the functioning of their group. Yakubu illustrates the many examples that prove that there are no genetic undertones in determining if an individual is selfish or altruistic and offers an alternative perspective. 

Scientists have been trying to determine the source of altruism and selfishness for some time, and Yakubu has demonstrated two contrasting models. The first model, the Altruism Selfishness Allelomorphism model (ASA), is a traditional model where scientists usually assume that altruism and selfishness are contrasting alleles (A1 and A2, respectively). Thus, the ASA model believes that there is a separate “altruistic gene” and a “selfish gene”. Yakubu disagreed with this method of thinking and so he proposed a different model that better encapsulates what is viewed in nature. His proposed model that he believes is closest to the truth is called the Altruism Selfishness Plasticity (ASP) model. The ASP model endorses the idea that altruism and selfishness are alternative phenotypes of a singular plastic genotype. The different phenotypes can be brought out depending on the environmental conditions of the organism. Both models offer reasons for the origin of the two traits but differ in how they think they came to be. The ASA model focuses on the specific genetics of the individual, whereas the ASP model looks at the environmental conditions and the plasticity of the phenotype.

There are numerous shortcomings of the ASA model and Yakubu outlined many great explanations and examples as to why that is. He states that the “altruistic gene”, which is considered less fit, is still prevalent in natural populations. His point illustrates a significant flaw in the ASA model of thinking. Natural selection would have selected against altruism at some point in evolutionary history, but it hasn’t. An example that he included was concerning the water flea, Daphnia lumholtzi. The type of water of flea he discussed can exist in two different phenotypes: one with a spiky helmet and longer tail and one with no spiky helmet and shorter tail. These differences are not genetic whatsoever. The spiky helmet arises once the individual is in an environment with chemical cues from a predacious fish. There can be clones, wherein one gets the adaptation to protect against predators and the other to receive no protection. Yakubu explains that assigning separate alleles to both forms would be unfair since the changes occurred based on environment, post-birth. According to him, altruism and selfishness follow the same pattern and should not have separate genes. 

Yakubu provided an example of a vampire bat to prove his ASP model. Vampire bats engage in reciprocity. When one individual does not feed during the night, they beg other roost mates to regurgitate blood to share. The ASA model would argue that those who share have an “altruistic gene”, whereas those who refuse to share have a “selfish gene”. Yakubu argues that since bats can change whether they choose to share or not, it is not possible to be linked to genetics. He claims that it is based solely on the social environment because the probability for a bat to be “altruistic” depends on factors such as if the begging bat has ever given them blood in the same situation. Therefore, it is not possible to change from one gene to another in certain situations, which reinforces his ASP model and discredits the ASA model.

The ASP model can be applied to naked mole rats because they are eusocial animals. They also have a queen, much like the wasps that Yakubu mentioned in his article. When there is a queen, there is no genetic predetermination that results in that outcome. All factors contributing to the development of the queen happen externally from the environment. This factor contributes to the proof of the ASP model because the roles of the group are not based around genotypes. 

Although the ASP model can be applied to naked mole rats, it does not better predict altruism over the inbreeding hypothesis. The inbreeding hypothesis better predicts altruism because when there is inbreeding, the genes between the individuals are more identical. The close genetics give an incentive to the naked mole rats to cooperate and work together for the better of the group because it is their genes that they are protecting. They are not demonstrating altruism because they have an “altruistic gene” but because they receive benefits from protecting their own. The ASP model can predict altruism in a small manner, but overall, altruism is determined by the inbreeding hypothesis.

In conclusion, Yakubu demonstrated with many examples why the traditional view of altruism is flawed and should be reconsidered. His proposed ASP model better encapsulates the altruistic behaviour in many organisms. His criticisms of the ASA model were valid and reinforced with excellent examples found in nature.