Final answer:
The generation at which it no longer benefits the 'beta' individual to help the 'alpha' individual in a biological context is determined by Hamilton's rule, which depends on the cost of helping versus the benefit adjusted for the degree of relatedness. The exact point varies depending on the scenario and species. Specific outcomes are influenced by ecological, social factors, and individual fitness.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question “At which generation does it no longer benefit beta to help alpha?” suggests a scenario involving social behavior within a biological context, possibly related to animal behavior, evolutionary biology, or kin selection theory. In this context, the terms 'alpha' and 'beta' are often used to describe the ranking status of individuals within a social hierarchy with 'alpha' typically being the dominant individual and 'beta' being a subordinate.
In the domain of evolutionary biology, the benefits of helping behavior are often evaluated through the lens of inclusive fitness, which measures an individual's success in spreading its genes by both reproducing itself and by helping relatives who share many of those genes to survive and reproduce. One concept relevant to this question is Hamilton's rule, which states that an individual will benefit from helping a relative if the cost of helping (C) is less than the benefit to the receiver (B) weighted by the coefficient of relatedness (r):
B × r > C.
Therefore, the generation at which it no longer benefits the 'beta' individual to help the 'alpha' individual would depend on when the costs to 'beta' (in terms of lost reproductive success and survival) outweigh the benefits multiplied by the degree of relatedness. This would vary with each specific scenario and the species in question. It is important to note that these roles and behaviors can be quite complex and are influenced by numerous factors such as ecology, sociology, and individual fitness outcomes.