Evolving Biodiversity

We formulated a mathematical model to study the evolution of biodiversity. Our model describes a collection of sites and incorporates a simple but explicit description of the competitive processes within a site. In our model the characteristics of component species evolve towards an evolutionarily stable state and in this way an evolutionarily stable assemblage of species is formed. We show that the number of species in these assemblages matches two well-documented patterns in biodiversity: the increase in the number of species towards the equator and the dependence of the number of species on the productivity of habitat: the average number of species rises to a maximum and then falls when plotted against increasing productivity of that habitat. Our results show that population dynamical and evolutionary processes can underlie patterns in biodiversity. The distribution of species over the earth is not even or random but seems to follow certain distinct patterns. Probably the best known example of such a pattern is the increase in the number of species towards the equator (Rosenzweig 1995; Gaston & Williams 1998). Another pattern is the dependence of the number of species on the productivity of habitat; the average number of species rises to a maximum and then falls when plotted against increasing productivity of that habitat (Rosenzweig 1995). Such patterns in biodiversity are well documented but as yet not unequivocally explained. Most species do not exist in isolation but coexist and compete with other species. Although communities of competitive species can harbour a large number of species (Zobel 1992), theoretical results predict that the number of competing species is limited by the number of resources. This apparent paradox has been explained by models that describe a collection of sites or patches in which the different species interact. Competing species that cannot coexist in a single site can coexist in a collection of coupled sites, and in this way many species can coexist in the collection of sites, despite the fact that local competition is for a small number of resources The number of species that can coexist somehow depends on the species' characteristics. In most models for biodiversity these characteristics are predefined constants. In real communities, however, the characteristics to a certain extent are formed through evolution. It is still very much an open question how the properties of competitive communities emerge through the evolution of their component species (Levin et al. 1997). Here, we …

[1]  R. Nisbet,et al.  How should we define 'fitness' for general ecological scenarios? , 1992, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[2]  J. Metz,et al.  Adaptive Dynamics: A Geometrical Study of the Consequences of Nearly Faithful Reproduction , 1995 .

[3]  I. Eshel,et al.  On the founder effect and the evolution of altruistic traits. , 1976, Theoretical population biology.

[4]  A. Perelson,et al.  Mathematical and Computational Challenges in Population Biology and Ecosystems Science , 1997, Science.

[5]  Clarence Lehman,et al.  8. Competition in Spatial Habitats , 1998 .

[6]  M A Nowak,et al.  Superinfection and the evolution of parasite virulence. , 1994, Proceedings. Biological sciences.

[7]  M. Nowak,et al.  Habitat destruction and the extinction debt , 1994, Nature.

[8]  A. Hastings Disturbance, coexistence, history, and competition for space , 1980 .

[9]  M. Zobel Plant species coexistence - the role of historical, evolutionary and ecological factors , 1992 .

[10]  David Tilman,et al.  COMMUNITY INVASIBILITY, RECRUITMENT LIMITATION, AND GRASSLAND BIODIVERSITY , 1997 .

[11]  M. Baalen,et al.  Antagonistic Coevolution over Productivity Gradients , 1998, The American Naturalist.

[12]  É. Kisdi,et al.  Evolutionarily singular strategies and the adaptive growth and branching of the evolutionary tree , 2004, Evolutionary Ecology.

[13]  M. Nowak,et al.  Superinfection, metapopulation dynamics, and the evolution of diversity. , 1994, Journal of theoretical biology.

[14]  U. Dieckmann,et al.  On the origin of species by sympatric speciation , 1999, Nature.

[15]  J. M. Smith Group Selection and Kin Selection , 1964, Nature.

[16]  É. Kisdi,et al.  Dynamics of Adaptation and Evolutionary Branching , 1997 .

[17]  S. Frank Foundations of Social Evolution , 2019 .

[18]  D. E. Matthews Evolution and the Theory of Games , 1977 .

[19]  J. Metz,et al.  Evolutionary dynamics of seed size and seedling competitive ability. , 1999, Theoretical population biology.

[20]  É. Kisdi,et al.  Evolutionary branching under asymmetric competition. , 1999, Journal of theoretical biology.

[21]  Josef Hofbauer,et al.  Evolutionary Games and Population Dynamics , 1998 .

[22]  Irene A. Stegun,et al.  Handbook of Mathematical Functions. , 1966 .

[23]  Mark V. Lomolino,et al.  Species Diversity in Space and Time. , 1996 .

[24]  R M May,et al.  Evolutionarily stable dispersal strategies. , 1980, Journal of theoretical biology.

[25]  D. Tilman Competition and Biodiversity in Spatially Structured Habitats , 1994 .