[dkv (OP)]

http://www.physorg.com/news110131567.html

I will like to put things in prespective(the whole article will be translated from current biological point of view and my point of view):

Like honey bee workers, wasp workers give up their reproductive capabilities and focus entirely on nurturing their larval siblings, a practice that seems to defy the Darwinian prediction that a successful organism strives, above all else, to reproduce itself. Such behaviors are indicative of a eusocial society, in which some individuals lose, or sacrifice, their reproductive functions and instead work to benefit the larger group.

REP:The current theory states that this behaviour is due to differential natural selection leading to Group fitness.
My View:It is already said that the behaviour defies Darwinian predictions.It DOES NOT serve group either.The fitness of Group gets reduced... The "favourable" gene is limited to few and not many as predicted by Natural selection.
Where as we can clearly see the desire towards sustainable pleasure.
There is no desire to propagate the so called favoured gene produce sterile siblings!!
 ================================

Behavioral scientists have long noted the similarity between the maternal behaviors of some wasps and the nurturing and provisioning activities of workers. Until now, no study had uncovered a genetic link between the two.
The researchers found that the pattern of behavior-related genes expressed in the brains of worker wasps was most similar to that seen in foundresses, the female wasps who alone build new colonies and devote much of their early lives to maternal tasks.

REP: Curent View :Maternal behaviour or Paternal behaviour does not play any role at the genetic level. There is no purpose involved at the gene level.
The robotic gene never carries any purpose . It mindlessly replicates.
My View:The natural selection is highly controversial  and it fails to explain such "maternal instincts" as it demands long term scenario simulation and for this a good brain is required. There are bitches which eat their own litter. There are snakes which kill their young ones....
Such generalizations shows lack of field work.
My View: Maternal tasks are a direct result of TowardsSustainablePleasure .. and it is not only found in Wasps but in most species... Most mothers take care of their young ones.As I said we can not neglect the Male contribution.Nothing special was noted here.
=================================

?These wasps start out as single moms,? said postdoctoral researcher Amy Toth. ?They don?t have any workers to help them, so they?re responsible for laying all the eggs and provisioning the developing larvae which then turn into workers.?

The researchers selected this species because it appears to represent an evolutionary transition. Once a foundress has raised a first generation of workers, she turns over the task of nurturing the larvae to the workers and devotes herself entirely to her ?queenly? reproductive function.

REP: A merely speculation. Cacadia ,a fly goes dormant for 17 years !!
What reproductive purpose does it serve???
And what kind of sterile strategy ensures maximum propagation of favourable genes???
The statements make it appear as if genes are taking decisions. WHICH is totally wrong as per current theory. The natural selection at the level of species is in favour of maximum fiteness genes... which propagates differentially with maximum chances and doesnt produce sterile offsprings.
THIS CASE IS IN  COMPLETE CONTRADICTION WITH GENE REPLICATION AND NATURAL SELECTION.
=========================================

At this point, the researchers discovered, behavioral gene expression in her brain changes, becoming distinct from that seen during her maternal period.

Toth noted that the P. metricus wasps represent a kind of intermediate stage in the evolution of eusocial behavior. The honey bee colony, in which queens never perform maternal tasks, is considered a more developed form of eusociality.

REP: A completely unnecessary classification.
======================================

?In Polistes metricus wasps you have behavior that?s more similar to what you might see in a maternal ancestor,? Toth said. ?That was really important for our study.?
The study team included researchers from 454 Life Sciences, a Connecticut-based company that has pioneered a method for sequencing short segments of DNA.

REP: All this technical gibberish is meant to confuse and hide the fundamental flaw in the theory of gene replication.
 The purpose of the Group has been to achieve collective happiness through TSP. Such a behaviour is a  adaptation against highly probable threats towards stability of Group Happiness.
Inter species or Intra species battle could lead to such scenarios.
========================================

[dkv (OP)]

You might fall into the following trap of reasoning.

There is a theory that altruism has the evolutionary function to promote your own genes. So, altruism normally works in the "family", where you share a lot of genes with your relatives. But I guess you share maybe 10% of the genes with your neighbor too.

The theory is such that it begins with machines having no agenda but to replicate. Then somehow a gene finds  favourable place in the replication process.And this gene largely defines the species.This favourable gene went on to become favourable because it reproduced greater than unfavourable ones. However at no point Natural selection dictates that unfavourable genes should go sterile or the favourable genes practice sterile reproduction.
WHEN WE SAY PROMOTING GENES WE IMPLY THAT THERE IS A PURPOSE AND KNOWLEDGE OF UNDERLYING GENE STRUCTURE.
NATURAL SELECTIONS ALLOWS SELECTION WITH RESPECT TO THE ENVIRONMENT(including the event resulting in greater reproduction) ONLY>
SOMEHOW THIS FIT GENES PRODUCES MORE AND MORE AND MORE TO BECOME THE PREDOMINANT CHARACTERISTIC OF THE GROUP. But it does not predict sterile behaviour.
===
THERE IS NO PURPOSE TO THE EVOLUTION at any level BECAUSE it might happen that the choices one makes with respect to some environment results in a catastrophy for the whole species..
The selection is locally opportunistic and globally unknown..
So even if you may think somethink GENE Promotion  ..there is no NO GUARANTEE that it will work.>
THEREFORE THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE FAVOURABLE GENE IS THE CONSEQUENCE OF DIFFERENTIAL GENETIC ENGINE IS TOTALLY FALSE.

[_Stefan_]

Please stop your TSP delusion. It really is not difficult to understand Darwinian evolution. None of the quotations or comments you present invalidate selfish gene theory. Read just a bit more about the evolutionary basis for altruism and you'll see that it's perfectly reasonable and complies with the theory.

http://ces.iisc.ernet.in/hpg/ragh/publication_list/Gadagkar_Publications/Gadagkar_1994a.pdf

Your TSP ideology has no scientific basis. Drop it. Your insistent ignorance is really becoming quite irritating.