Autocatalytic biodiversity hypothesis aims to supplant Darwin's 'war of the species'

February 9, 2017
Dr. Cazzolla Gatti Credit: TSU

If competition is the main evolutionary driver, why do so many species coexist within the same ecosystem? This a central question in ecology. Many ideas have been suggested in an attempt to explain this evolutionary paradox. Most of them are based on the importance of ecological niches for the maintenance of differentiated environments versus dominated environments.

In 2011, Dr. Roberto Cazzolla Gatti, associate professor in Ecology and Biodiversity at the Tomsk State University (Russia) proposed the biodiversity-related niches differentiation theory (BNDT), arguing that themselves are the architects of biodiversity by proportionally increasing the number of potentially available niches in a given ecosystem.

Along similar lines, but independently, the idea of viewing economics, biology and ecology as emergent autocatalytic sets (self-sustaining networks of mutually "catalytic" entities) was suggested by Dr. Wim Hordjik, researcher at the Konrad Lorenz Institute for Evolution and Cognition Research, Klosterneuburg (Austria) and MacArthur Fellowship recipient Professor Stuart Kauffman from the Institute for Systems Biology, Seattle (USA).

Now, in a paper published in Ecological Modelling titled "Biodiversity is autocatalytic," the three scientist merged their ideas in a new hypothesis to explain why and how a great number of species could live together in the same environment. The research paper suggests that one group of species creates niches for other species. This means, the authors say, that "biodiversity can, indeed, be considered a system of autocatalytic sets, and that this view offers a possible answer to the fundamental question of why so many species can coexist in the same ecosystem."

Biodiversity refers to the variability among living organisms in terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems, and the ecological complexes of which they are a part. The central question about biological diversity on Earth is how so many species can coexist within the same ecosystem.

However, the idea that interactions between species are important catalysts of the evolutionary processes that generate the remarkable diversity of life is gaining interest among ecologists. For instance, it has been shown that symbiosis between gall-inducing insects and fungi catalysed both the expansion in resource use (niche expansion) and diversification. Indeed, facilitation, a process that allows the colonization and presence of new species taking advantage of the presence of others by expanding the ecosystem hypervolume, plays a major role in species coexistence, strongly increasing the biodiversity of an area. A species emerges from this environment and is an expression of those interactions. In other words, species are expressed and maintained by a complex interacting ecological network.

An autocatalytic set, a chemical process associated by Cazzolla Gatti and colleagues to biological systems, is a group of entities (e.g. molecules and the chemical reactions between them), each of which can be produced catalytically, i.e., triggered by other entities within the set, such that the entire set is able to sustain and reproduce itself from a basic food source. In other words, the set as a whole is self-sustaining and collectively autocatalytic.

Autocatalytic sets were originally defined in the context of chemistry (in particular, polymer systems), but the authors of this research study showed that biodiversity can also be considered a system of autocatalytic sets.

Dr. Cazzolla Gatti said, "Species themselves, creating favourable conditions for the colonization of other species, allow their concurrent presence, and the fundamental mechanism that supports the coexistence of species is the creation of diversity-related niches."

A species must not only preserve itself, but also engage in autocatalytic feedback cycles (e.g. reward loops, function circles, autopoiesis, etc.) that contribute to the overall function of the local environment. The phenomenon of autocatalysis could, therefore, be considered a process of internal and external selection.

These ideas open up many new and interesting research questions. For instance, we could ask if there is a limit to the growth of biodiversity, and if so, whether this limit coincides with the ecosystem carrying capacity. Another open question that derives from this theory is whether biodiversity is, indeed, autocatalytic, and follows a sigmoidal growth over time, as in autocatalytic reactions.

Considering, for example, the trends of genera during the Phanerozoic, which followed an exponential growth curve, the authors argue that if the answer is positive, global biodiversity should – in absence of catastrophic events – eventually reach a plateau and show a sigmoidal trend, as predicted by the differential equation of the BNDT.

Finally, a more practical and empirically interesting question, which could be answered by the autocatalytic biodiversity hypothesis, is whether we can estimate the number of species of a particular group from ecological variables (mainly influencing the autocatalysis of that group), such as biomass. For example, Prof. Kauffman in 1993 calculated the number of cell types as the square root of the number of genes of an organism. Similarly, the authors attempted to calculate the number of vascular plants by taking the square-root of the estimated total live plant biomass of 550 bTC (billion tonnes of carbon). Their result estimated a maximum number of 741,620 vascular plant species. Considering that an unknown number of plant species have yet to be discovered, and summing the number of accepted species to a mean number of unresolved names, the final sum is surprisingly close to authors' estimate. Is this result just a coincidence or is it truly a consequence of the theory? Dr. Cazzolla Gatti and colleagues hope that in the near future, we will be able to perform a similar calculation for animal groups and resolve this question.

Contrary to Darwin's beliefs, , according to Dr. Cazzolla Gatti, does not derive "from the war of nature, from famine and death," but from the power of life to enable other life; not from war, but from coexistence; not from competition but from the avoidance of it, e.g. from cooperation and facilitation, i.e., by autocatalysis.

Explore further: Cooperation, not struggle for survival, drives evolution

More information: Roberto Cazzolla Gatti et al. Biodiversity is autocatalytic, Ecological Modelling (2017). DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2016.12.003

Related Stories

Cooperation, not struggle for survival, drives evolution

May 13, 2016

Researchers believe that competition tends to differentiate ecological requirements after repeated interactions and allows biodiversity. Even if the mechanisms that allow species to evolve, coexist, compete, cooperate, or ...

Two new studies confirm the 'endogenosymbiosis' hypothesis

October 18, 2016

Endogenosymbiosis, such as the capacity of "gene carriers" (viruses, retrovirus and bacteriophages) to share parts of their genomes in an endogenous symbiotic relationship with their hosts, was proposed in 2015 by Roberto ...

Biodiversity in the balance

September 3, 2014

A new study calls into question the evolutionary stability of an ecological explanation of biodiversity.

Fossils can help predict future species survival

September 27, 2016

Many people are concerned about conservation of the planet's cute and cuddlies. But in a world of global climate change, sometimes we must prioritize which species we can and should save from extinction. Dr. Alycia Stigall ...

Recommended for you

These shrews have heads that shrink with the season

October 23, 2017

If any part of the body would seem ill equipped to shrink, it would probably be the head and skull. And, yet, researchers reporting in Current Biology on October 23 have found that the skulls of red-toothed shrews do shrink ...

Single-molecule dissection of developmental gene control

October 23, 2017

Scientists at EPFL and Max Plank have made significant discoveries on how developmental genes are controlled by the methyltransferase enzyme PRC2. The study is published in Nature Structural & Molecular Biology.

1 comment

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

not rated yet Feb 09, 2017
The perspective of Darwin and Wallace thought of each individual animal as a survivor in the environment. This is a perspective that implicitly underlies Evolutionary thinking and is the usual starting point for discussion on Natural Selection.

But it is also true that each animal plays a role as part of the environment in which other species must survive. The idea that all species are genetically programmed to only seek their own survival and proliferation is an assumption never adequately tested, and yet behaviour bordering on altruistic is liberally seen across a wide variety of species and in humans where researcher strain to trace a benefit to the individual through the proliferation of the genes the altruistic individual shares with those provisioned by such behaviour.

It is far simpler just to consider the individual's role as a member of the environment in which other's must survive, therefore playing the role of facilitation and selection rather than competition.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.