Collective motion, where large numbers of individuals move synchronously together, is achieved when individuals adopt interaction rules that determine how they respond to their neighbors’ movements and positions. These rules determine how group-living animals move, make decisions, and transmit information between individuals. Nonetheless, few studies have explicitly determined these interaction rules in moving groups, and very little is known about the interaction rules of fish. Here, we identify three key rules for the social interactions of mosquitofish (Gambusia holbrooki): (i) Attraction forces are important in maintaining group cohesion, while we find only weak evidence that fish align with their neighbor’s orientation; (ii) repulsion is mediated principally by changes in speed; (iii) although the positions and directions of all shoal members are highly correlated, individuals only respond to their single nearest neighbor. The last two of these rules are different from the classical models of collective animal motion, raising new questions about how fish and other animals self-organize on the move.

How different levels of biological organization interact to shape each other's function is a central question in biology. One particularly important topic in this context is how individuals' variation in behaviour shapes group-level characteristics. We investigated how fish that express different locomotory behaviour in an asocial context move collectively when in groups. First, we established that individual fish have characteristic, repeatable locomotion behaviours (i.e. median speeds, variance in speeds and median turning speeds) when tested on their own. When tested in groups of two, four or eight fish, we found individuals partly maintained their asocial median speed and median turning speed preferences, while their variance in speed preference was lost. The strength of this individuality decreased as group size increased, with individuals conforming to the speed of the group, while also decreasing the variability in their own speed. Further, individuals adopted movement characteristics that were dependent on what group size they were in. This study therefore shows the influence of social context on individual behaviour. If the results found here can be generalized across species and contexts, then although individuality is not entirely lost in groups, social conformity and group-size-dependent effects drive how individuals will adjust their behaviour in groups.

Collective animal behavior is an emergent phenomenon arising from the local interactions of the members of animal groups. Considerable progress has been made in characterizing these interactions, particularly inferring rules that shape and guide the responses of animals to their near neighbors. To date, experimental work has focused on collective behavior within a single, stable context. We examine the individual and collective behavior of a schooling fish species, the x-ray tetra (Pristella maxillaris), identifying their response to changes in context produced by food cues or conspecific alarm cues. Fish exposed to alarm cues show pronounced, broad-ranging changes of behavior, including reducing speed and predictability in their movements. Alarmed fish also alter their responses to other group members, including enacting a smaller zone of repulsion and increasing their frequency of observation of, and responsiveness to, near neighbors. Fish subject to food cues increased speed as a function of neighbor positions and reduced encounter frequency with near neighbors. Overall, changes in individual behavior and the interactions among individuals in response to external cues coincide with changes in group-level patterns, providing insight into the adaptability of behavior to changes in context and interrelationship between local interactions and global patterns in collective behavior.

The question of how hunger affects locomotory behaviour, in particular how it affects the kinematics of movement and an animal’s interaction with the physical structures in its environment is of broad relevance in behavioural ecology. We experimentally manipulated the hunger levels of individual mosquitofish (Gambusia holbrooki) and recorded their swimming behaviour in shoals of 4 fish. We found that hungry individuals in shoals moved at greater speeds and had higher turning speeds than satiated individuals in shoals, as well as a greater variance in speed and turning speeds. We also found that hungry individuals explored more of the arena and used more of its internal space, away from the square arena’s walls and displayed less wall-following behaviour than satiated individuals. A functional explanation for this change in swimming behaviour and interaction with environmental heterogeneity is discussed in the context of social foraging, as is the consequence of these results for models of search patterns and collective movement.

Why are mitochondria almost always inherited from one parent during sexual reproduction? Current explanations for this evolutionary mystery include conflict avoidance between the nuclear and mitochondrial genomes, clearing of deleterious mutations, and optimization of mitochondrial-nuclear coadaptation. Mathematical models, however, fail to show that uniparental inheritance can replace biparental inheritance under any existing hypothesis. Recent empirical evidence indicates that mixing two different but normal mitochondrial haplotypes within a cell (heteroplasmy) can cause cell and organism dysfunction. Using a mathematical model, we test if selection against heteroplasmy can lead to the evolution of uniparental inheritance. When we assume selection against heteroplasmy and mutations are neither advantageous nor deleterious (neutral mutations), uniparental inheritance replaces biparental inheritance for all tested parameter values. When heteroplasmy involves mutations that are advantageous or deleterious (non-neutral mutations), uniparental inheritance can still replace biparental inheritance. We show that uniparental inheritance can evolve with or without pre-existing mating types. Finally, we show that selection against heteroplasmy can explain why some organisms deviate from strict uniparental inheritance. Thus, we suggest that selection against heteroplasmy explains the evolution of uniparental inheritance. Mitochondria contain genes that encode the machinery needed to power cells. Unlike the nuclear genome, the mitochondrial genome is typically inherited from one parent only (uniparental inheritance). The most common explanation for uniparental inheritance is the genomic conflict theory, which states that uniparental inheritance evolved to prevent the spread of ‘selfish’ mitochondria that replicate quickly but produce energy inefficiently. Current explanations have a major problem: when using realistic parameters, mathematical models cannot show that uniparental inheritance can replace biparental inheritance. Clearly, we need a new explanation that fits with standard population-genetic theory. Recent evidence suggests cells may incur a cost when they carry multiple types of mitochondria. Here we show mathematically that uniparental inheritance could have evolved to avoid the costs of maintaining multiple mitochondrial lineages within a cell. Our results explain the long-standing evolutionary mystery of uniparental inheritance and provide insight into the evolution of mating types and binary sexes. Selection against heteroplasmy also has implications for the evolution of the mitochondrial genome because new mitochondrial haplotypes always lead to heteroplasmy before becoming fixed in the population. Thus, selection against heteroplasmy may explain why mtDNA coding-genes have slower substitution rates than analogous genes within the nucleus.