Reconciling ecology and evolutionary game theory or When not to think cooperation

Corina Tarnita,Arne Traulsen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.07.10.602961

2024-07-15

Abstract:Evolutionary game theory (EGT) — overwhelmingly employed today for the study of cooperation in a variety of systems, from microbes to cancer and from insect to human societies — started with the seminal 1973 paper by John Maynard Smith and George Price, in which they probed the logic of limited war in animal conflict. If fighting was essential to get access to mates and territory, then why did fights rarely lead to serious injury? Maynard Smith and Price developed game theory to show that limited war can be selected at the individual level. Owing to the explanatory potential of this first paper, and enabled by the elegant and powerful machinery of the soon-to-be-developed replicator dynamics, EGT took off at an accelerated pace and began to shape expectations across systems and scales. But, even as it expanded its reach from animals to microbes and from microbes to cancer, the field did not revisit a fundamental assumption of that first paper, which subsequently got weaved into the very fabric of the framework — that individual differences in reproduction are determined only by payoff from the game (i.e. in isolation, all individuals, regardless of strategy, were assumed to have identical intrinsic growth rates). Here, we argue that this original assumption substantially limits the scope of EGT. But, because it is not explicitly presented as a caveat, predictions of EGT have been empirically tested broadly across real systems, where the intrinsic growth rates are generally not equal. That has, unsurprisingly, led to puzzling findings and contentious debates. Flagging the high potential for confusion to arise from applications of EGT to empirical systems that it is not designed to study and suggesting a way forward constitute our main motivation for this work. In the process, we reestablish a dialog with ecology that can be fruitful both ways, e.g., by providing a so-far-elusive explanation for how diverse ecological communities can assemble evolutionarily.

Evolutionary Biology

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The main problem this paper attempts to address is the limitations of Evolutionary Game Theory (EGT) when applied to different systems. Specifically, the paper points out that a fundamental assumption of EGT—that differences in reproduction among individuals are solely determined by game payoffs—does not hold in many real-world systems, as different strategies or types may have different intrinsic growth rates. This assumption leads to confusion and controversy when EGT is used to predict the dynamics of actual systems.

### Background and Core Issues of the Paper
1. **Origin of Evolutionary Game Theory**:
- Evolutionary Game Theory (EGT) originated from the research of John Maynard Smith and George Price in 1973, who explored the logic of limited war in animal conflicts.
- EGT quickly developed into an important tool for studying cooperative behavior across a range of subjects, from microbes to cancer, and from insects to human societies.

2. **Limitations of Fundamental Assumptions**:
- The fundamental assumption of EGT is that differences in reproduction among individuals are solely determined by game payoffs, meaning all individuals have the same intrinsic growth rate in the absence of strategy differences.
- This assumption may be reasonable in some systems (such as snakes, mule deer, and Arabian oryx), but it is not always applicable in systems like microbes and cells.

3. **Problems in Practical Applications**:
- When EGT is applied to systems with different intrinsic growth rates, its predictions may not align with actual situations, leading to confusion and controversy.
- For example, in microbial and cellular systems, differences in intrinsic growth rates among types can lead to different dynamic outcomes, which EGT fails to capture.

### Solutions and Methods
1. **Introduction of Generalized Lotka-Volterra Equations**:
- The Generalized Lotka-Volterra equations can account for differences in intrinsic growth rates among different types, thereby more accurately describing the dynamics of the system.
- By comparing the predictions of EGT and the Generalized Lotka-Volterra equations, the paper demonstrates the impact of different intrinsic growth rates on system dynamics.

2. **Case Analysis**:
- Using the Prisoner's Dilemma as an example, the paper shows how system dynamics change when different types have different intrinsic growth rates.
- For instance, if cooperators have a higher intrinsic growth rate than defectors, cooperators and defectors can coexist even under the matrix of the Prisoner's Dilemma.

### Conclusion
- **Main Conclusions**:
- The fundamental assumption of EGT does not hold in many real-world systems, limiting its predictive power.
- Introducing the Generalized Lotka-Volterra equations can more accurately describe the dynamics of systems with different intrinsic growth rates.
- Re-examining and revising the assumptions of EGT is crucial for improving its applicability and accuracy in different systems.

- **Future Directions**:
- Establishing a dialogue between EGT and ecology can provide new perspectives for explaining how diverse ecological communities evolve.
- Exploring intrinsic growth rate differences in more real-world systems to further validate and extend the application of the Generalized Lotka-Volterra equations.

Through these methods, the paper aims to provide solutions to the limitations of Evolutionary Game Theory in practical applications and to promote further research in the related field.