The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
PERSPECTIVE: SEVEN REASONS (NOT) TO NEGLECT NICHE CONSTRUCTION
Abstract
The niche-construction perspective within evolutionary biology places emphasis on the changes that organisms bring about in their selective environments. Advocates of this viewpoint argue that there is both accuracy and utility in treating niche construction as an evolutionary process in its own right, rather than merely as a product of evolution. Here we discuss and assess seven putative weaknesses of the niche-construction perspective. Niche construction has been neglected or rejected on the grounds that (1) it is not prevalent, (2) its study is not tractable, (3) it is not a process, (4) it is caused by natural selection, (5) it does not change our understanding of evolution in any fundamental way, (6) it does not bring about adaptation, and (7) it is not a single phenomenon. In each case, we critically evaluate the theoretical standing of these arguments and consider the empirical evidence that can be brought to bear on the debate. We conclude that none of these are strong criticisms of the niche-construction perspective and maintain that there are compelling reasons for treating niche construction as a major evolutionary process.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Developmental Plasticity and Evolution
West-Eberhard, M. J. (2003) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780195122343.001.0001 · Cited by 6,115
Not By Genes Alone: How Culture Transformed Human Evolution
Richerson, P. J., & Boyd, R. (2004) · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226712130.001.0001 · Cited by 2,793 · cited 1×
“The significance of acquired characters to evolutionary processes becomes amplified with stable transgenerational culture, and it is now widely believed that such characters were probably extremely important to hominid evolution (Richerson and Boyd 2004).”
BackgroundCoevolution: Genes, Culture, and Human Diversity
Durham, W. H. (1991) · doi:10.1515/9781503621534 · Cited by 1,117
Evolutionary consequences of niche construction and their implications for ecology
Laland, K. N., Odling-Smee, F. J., & Feldman, M. W. (1999) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.96.18.10242 · Cited by 624
Self-citation
Cited by
Evolution, the Extended Synthesis
(2010) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/9780262513678.001.0001 · Cited by 964
Beyond DNA: integrating inclusive inheritance into an extended theory of evolution
Danchin, É., Charmantier, A., Champagne, F. A., Mesoudi, A., Pujol, B., & Blanchet, S. (2011) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg3028 · Cited by 860
Developmental plasticity and the evolution of parental effects
ULLER, T. (2008) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2008.04.005 · Cited by 624
Emerging horizons in biodiversity and ecosystem functioning research
Reiss, J., Bridle, J. R., Montoya, J. M., & Woodward, G. (2009) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2009.03.018 · Cited by 607
Metadata
- Authors
- Laland, K. N., & Sterelny, K.
- Venue
- Evolution
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2006-09
- Volume
- 60
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1751-1762
- ISSN
- 0014-3820 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-5646
- OpenAlex
- W2118113983
- Cited by
- 380
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 98.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: PERSPECTIVE: SEVEN REASONS (NOT) TO NEGLECT NICHE CONSTRUCTION. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.0014-3820.2006.tb00520.x
- The paper
- Laland, K. N., & Sterelny, K. (2006). PERSPECTIVE: SEVEN REASONS (NOT) TO NEGLECT NICHE CONSTRUCTION. Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0014-3820.2006.tb00520.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
