Selection at the gene level does not imply that the phenotype does what is "good for the genes" necessarily.
All else equal, the non-cub eaters will outcompete and may completely displace the cub eaters. (let's assume they don't/can't interbreed).
-
-
So there may be a local competitive advantage to cub eating (or some other trait) but a larger scale competitive disadvantage.
-
Whatever ends up winning is going to depend on the nature of the various kinds of competition. I think the process of non-cub eaters winning
-
could reasonably be called "group selection"
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
You have to assume that they are isolated genetically, like lions and hyaenas -- separate species.
-
In that case the one with the cub-killing behavior will have a selective disadvantage, yes.
-
But, if cub-killing arises in the other population then it will be selected for too.
-
Also, being nice to non-offspring isn't selected for. In your example, a mutation just doesn't arise that makes selfishness more efficient.
-
So one species is less efficient at being selfish in its social behavior. The altruism is an accident, like the "altruism" toward cuckoos.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.