Abstract
A multitude of hypotheses claim that abiotic factors are the main drivers of macroevolutionary change. By contrast, Van Valen's Red Queen hypothesis is often put forward as the sole representative of the view that biotic forcing is the main evolutionary driver. This imbalance of hypotheses does not reflect our current knowledge: theoretical work demonstrates the plausibility of biotically driven long-term evolution, whereas empirical work suggests a central role for biotic forcing in macroevolution. We call for a more pluralistic view of how biotic forces may drive long-term evolution that is compatible with both phenotypic stasis in the fossil record and with non-constant extinction rates. Promising avenues of research include contrasting predictions from relevant theories within ecology and macroevolution, as well as embracing both abiotic and biotic proxies while modelling long-term evolutionary data. By fitting models describing hypotheses of biotically driven macroevolution to data, we could dissect their predictions and transcend beyond pattern description, possibly narrowing the divide between our current understanding of micro- and macroevolution.
Highlights
A multitude of hypotheses claim that abiotic factors are the main drivers of macroevolutionary change
The evidence that abiotic change drive macroevolutionary change is beyond dispute (e.g. [12,13,14]), many palaeobiologists disagree with the categorical idea that abiotic perturbations are the only drivers and allow for a significant role for biotic factors in driving macroevolutionary change [15,16,17,18]
A more pluralistic approach that moves beyond the formulation of the original Red Queen hypothesis is needed: just as there are multiple Court Jester hypotheses that detail how abiotic forcing might initiate and drive macroevolution [6], we find it necessary to encourage development of alternative hypotheses for how biotic forces might drive macroevolution
Summary
‘A fundamental question on how the physical world relates to evolution remains unsolved. Further testing and discussion of the specific assumptions of Van Valen’s original Red Queen (e.g. constant extinction rates or the zero-sum assumption) will not settle the issue This point has perhaps been most convincingly demonstrated by the many theoretical models that exhibit intrinsically driven continuous trait evolution or repeated lineage branching and extinction [33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40]. Because these models are built on assumptions that are very different from those of the original Red Queen, their validity is unaffected by the criticisms raised against her They lend plausibility to the view that long-term evolution may occur independent of changes in the physical environment. We end by discussing some hypotheses for how biotic forces shape macroevolutionary patterns, challenges that lie ahead in studying biotic factors in macroevolution and paths that may be challenging but fruitful to explore
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
