Feedbacks in ecology and evolution
Creators & Contributors
Ecology and evolutionary biology have focused on how organisms fit the environment. Less attention has been given to the idea that organisms can also modify their environment, and that these modifications can feed back to the organism, thus, providing a key factor for their persistence and evolution [1]. We propose that there are at least three independent lines of evidence emphasising these biological feedback processes at different scales (figure below): niche construction (population scale); alternative biome states (community scale); and the Gaia hypothesis (planetary scale). Flammability is an example of niche construction [2], and the forest-savanna mosaics are an example of the alternative biome states [3] (figure below).
The importance of feedback processes make us rethink traditional concepts like niche and adaptation. For instance, the idea of evolution as a process of adaptation to fit a pre-existing environment needs to be replaced by a 'co-evolutionary' species-environment approach. An implication is that the concept of species niche, and niche occupancy, is less relevant than traditionally thought. That is, organisms do not adapt to a pre-existing environment (available niche), they construct their environment and then both 'co-evolve'. A higher level of fitness is the result of this coevolution. Feedbacks also provide an alternative framework for understanding spatial and temporal patterns of vegetation that differ from those based on gradual changes (e.g., gradient analysis and succession), and suggest that multi-stability and abrupt transitions in a given environment are common [3]; this also has implications for species’ niche modelling [4].
Earth is in transition to a new and warmer state due to anthropogenic forcing, and feedback thinking may help us understand the process. We suggest that incorporating feedback thinking and understanding how feedbacks may operate at different scales may help in opening our minds to key processes contributing to the dynamics and resilience of our biosphere.

References
[1] Pausas J.G. & Bond W.J. 2022. Feedbacks in ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol. Evol. [doi | pdf]
[2] Pausas J.G., Keeley J.E., Schwilk D.W. 2017. Flammability as an ecological and evolutionary driver. J. Ecol. 105: 289-297. [doi | wiley | pdf]
[3] Pausas J.G. & Bond W.J. 2020. Alternative biome states in terrestrial ecosystems. Trends Plant Sci. 25: 250-263. [doi | sciencedirect | cell | pdf]
[4] Pausas J.G. & Bond W.J. 2021. Alternative biome states challenge the modelling of species’ niche shifts under climate change. J. Ecol. 109: 3962-3971. [doi | wiley | pdf]
Additional details
Description
Ecology and evolutionary biology have focused on how organisms fit the environment.
Identifiers
- GUID
- https://jgpausas.blogs.uv.es/?p=7234
- URL
- https://jgpausas.blogs.uv.es/2022/04/21/feedbacks-in-ecology-and-evolution/
Dates
- Issued
-
2022-04-21T15:43:33
- Updated
-
2022-04-21T15:59:01
References
- Pausas, J. G., & Bond, W. J. (2022). Feedbacks in ecology and evolution. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 37(8), 637–644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2022.03.008
- Pausas, J. G., Keeley, J. E., Schwilk, D. W., & Rees, M. (2016). Flammability as an ecological and evolutionary driver. Journal of Ecology, 105(2), 289–297. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.12691
- Pausas, J. G., & Bond, W. J. (2020). Alternative Biome States in Terrestrial Ecosystems. Trends in Plant Science, 25(3), 250–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2019.11.003
- Pausas, J. G., & Bond, W. J. (2021). Alternative biome states challenge the modelling of species' niche shifts under climate change. Journal of Ecology, 109(12), 3962–3971. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.13781