Public Release: 

How habitat destruction figures in long-term survival plans

eLife

Some organisms might have an interesting strategy for long-term survival: switching between two unsustainable forms of behaviour that, when kept unchecked, can actually cause them to wipe out their own homes.

This discovery, published in the journal eLife, could provide insight into how some species, including humans, can survive and even thrive in harsh conditions and with limited environmental resources.

During their life cycles, organisms such as slime moulds switch between living as single, free-ranging individuals (known as 'nomads') and living communally in a colony. To explore the benefits of this adaptation, researchers from the Singapore Institute of Technology and Yale University created a mathematical model that can be applied to such behaviour-switching organisms. Their model suggests that the strategy can ensure survival, even when each behavior would independently result in extinction.

"This is an example of a counter-intuitive phenomenon called Parrondo's paradox, where two losing games, when played in a specific order, can surprisingly end in a victory," says first author Zong Xuan Tan, an undergraduate at Yale University.

"Previous studies have demonstrated that the paradox can occur when organisms are faced with unpredictable environments. However, our research shows that externally caused environmental variation is not actually needed for organisms to display this behaviour - the paradox can also occur when they form colonies that destroy their own habitats."

The model considers a situation where nomads live relatively independently and are unaffected by competition and cooperation, but are subject to steady extinction under poor environmental conditions. Colonists, on the other hand, live in close proximity and are subject to both competitive and cooperative effects. They can also deplete the resources of their habitat over time, resulting in their own extinction.

"These two losing strategies can actually lead to survival because when the organisms switch from their destructive colonial form to live as nomads instead, this allows for habitat regeneration," says senior author Kang Hao Cheong, Assistant Professor in the Engineering Cluster at the Singapore Institute of Technology. "Once colonial population sizes are sufficiently small, environmental resources are allowed to recover. The nomads can then take advantage of the restored stocks by switching back to colonialism."

Cheong explains that a variety of mechanisms might trigger this switching behaviour. For example, highly mobile nomadic organisms could frequently re-enter their original colonial habitat, thereby detecting whether resource levels are high enough for recolonization. Switching behaviour could also be genetically programmed, such that 'involuntary' individual sacrifice ends up promoting the long-term survival of the species.

"The possibility of an ecological Parrondo's paradox could have wide-ranging applications across the fields of ecology and population biology," Cheong says.

Tan and Cheong are already exploring ways to adapt their model to specific organisms, and to investigate the possible evolutionary origins of this behavioural phenomenon.

###

Reference

The paper 'Nomadic-colonial life strategies enable paradoxical survival and growth despite habitat destruction' can be freely accessed online at http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.21673. Contents, including text, figures, and data, are free to reuse under a CC BY 4.0 license.

Media contact

Emily Packer, eLife
e.packer@elifesciences.org
01223 855373

About eLife

eLife is a unique collaboration between the funders and practitioners of research to improve the way important research is selected, presented, and shared. eLife publishes outstanding works across the life sciences and biomedicine -- from basic biological research to applied, translational, and clinical studies. All papers are selected by active scientists in the research community. Decisions and responses are agreed by the reviewers and consolidated by the Reviewing Editor into a single, clear set of instructions for authors, removing the need for laborious cycles of revision and allowing authors to publish their findings quickly. eLife is supported by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, the Max Planck Society, and the Wellcome Trust. Learn more at elifesciences.org.

Disclaimer: AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert system.