Voje Kjetil L, Holen Øistein H, Liow Lee Hsiang, Stenseth Nils Chr
Centre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis (CEES), Department of Biosciences, University of Oslo, PO Box 1066 Blindern, Oslo 0316, Norway
Centre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis (CEES), Department of Biosciences, University of Oslo, PO Box 1066 Blindern, Oslo 0316, Norway.
Proc Biol Sci. 2015 Jun 7;282(1808):20150186. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2015.0186.
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.
众多假说认为非生物因素是宏观进化变化的主要驱动因素。相比之下,范·瓦伦的红皇后假说常被视为生物因素是主要进化驱动力这一观点的唯一代表。假说的这种不平衡并未反映我们目前的认知:理论研究表明生物驱动的长期进化具有合理性,而实证研究则表明生物因素在宏观进化中起着核心作用。我们呼吁对生物因素如何驱动长期进化采取更为多元的观点,这种观点既要与化石记录中的表型停滞相契合,又要与非恒定的灭绝率相兼容。有前景的研究途径包括对比生态学和宏观进化中相关理论的预测,以及在对长期进化数据进行建模时兼顾非生物和生物指标。通过将描述生物驱动宏观进化假说的模型与数据拟合,我们可以剖析其预测结果并超越模式描述,有可能缩小我们目前对微观进化和宏观进化理解之间的差距。