Cited by 106Evolution and Genetic DynamicsAnimal Behavior and ReproductionEvolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation

Diversity, Dilemmas, and Monopolies of Niche Construction

Krakauer, David C., Page, Karen M., Erwin, Douglas H.·2009·The American Naturalist

Abstract

The behavior of organisms can contribute to the transformation of their environments. When organismal impacts on the environment feed back to influence organismal density, viability, fertility, or persistence, the environment can be construed as an extension of the organism. This process of fitness-enhancing environmental transformation has been called niche construction. We focus on the relationship of niche construction with species or strain diversity and on the variability of investment in niche construction versus reproduction. We demonstrate a fundamental dilemma of niche construction, whereby the construction of a shared resource leads to a tragedy of the commons, with competition tending to eliminate niche construction strategies. The ability to monopolize a niche, either through spatial proximity or through preferential exploitation, can stabilize niche construction and promote ecological coexistence among polymorphic constructors. We consider both sympatric and allopatric origins of niche construction. Under a variety of different construction mechanisms, variability in the investment in niche construction versus reproduction suggests reproductive altruism but is fully consistent with selfish behavior. We discuss the implications of niche-construction theory on the evolution of life cycles and development, behavioral plasticity, the division of labor, and long-term macroevolutionary trends.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/593707

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Modeling NC as a process that changes the capacity of the environment is common and finds inspiration in natural behaviors, such as nest-constructing species.

    “Modeling NC as a process that changes the capacity of the environment is common (Laland et al., 1999;Krakauer et al., 2009) and finds inspiration in natural behaviors, such as nest-constructing species.”
  • Previous studies have primarily modeled NC in two different ways: as an increase in the amount of resources that increases the environment's capacity and as a direct increase or decrease in fitness that does not affect capacity.

    “Previous studies have primarily modeled NC in two different ways: as an increase in the amount of resources that increases the environment's capacity (Laland et al., 1999;Krakauer et al., 2009) and as a direct increase or decrease in fitness that does not affect capacity (Suzuki and Arita, 2009).”
  • Such models come with limitations, such as the fact that niches are identical and agents are not plastic.

    “Such models lent intuitive insights, such that NC can emerge without direct selection (Laland et al., 1999) and that the ability to monopolize niches enables the emergence of NC (Krakauer et al., 2009) but come with limitations, such as the fact that niches are identical and agents are not plastic.”
  • NC studies were at first primarily theoretical, employing differential equations to predict how NC affects evolution.

    “NC studies were at first primarily theoretical, employing differential equations to predict how NC affects evolution (Laland et al., 1999;Krakauer et al., 2009).”
  • The ability to monopolize niches enables the emergence of NC.

    “Such models lent intuitive insights, such that NC can emerge without direct selection (Laland et al., 1999) and that the ability to monopolize niches enables the emergence of NC (Krakauer et al., 2009) but come with limitations, such as the fact that niches are identical and agents are not plastic.”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Krakauer, D. C., Page, K. M., & Erwin, D. H.
Affiliations
Santa Fe Institute (US)
Venue
The American Naturalist
Published
2009-01
Volume
173
Issue
1
Pages
26-40
ISSN
  • 0003-0147 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5323
OpenAlex
W1986673340
Cited by
106
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 7
FWCI
2.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The American Naturalist (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
Keywords
niche construction, species diversity, tragedy of the commons, ecological coexistence, reproductive altruism, selfishness, behavioral plasticity, division of labor, macroevolutionary trends
MeSH terms
Biological Evolution, Models, Biological, Reproduction, Ecosystem

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review