Nature’s Arms Race

In an environment characterised by change, a species cannot afford to stand still. Genetic lethargy, genetic detachment or genetic derogation risks evolutionary demise. Certainly, in the evolutionary world, nothing good comes out of doing nothing.

Evolution is a transitional process. The adoption of individual change drives wider change, environmental change. This spurs further individual change as genes adapt to that changed environment. It’s a perpetuating cycle, designed to favour progressive development.

And yet the adoption of change is not straightforward. Choices have to be considered; decisions have to be made. Compromises have to be agreed; trade-offs have to be accepted.

This is because a species faces multiple pressures in order to ensure its survival. The challenge is rarely a singular threat. There are many considerations: predatory dangers that need to be warded off, procuring food, withstanding climatic changes, habitat upheaval, ensuring sexual desirability, and raising and providing for one’s offspring.

Genetically, how does a species decide which one to focus on? What would be the most beneficial? What would best improve the survival prospects of a species? How does a species balance these competing pressures? Do they focus entirely on one particular purpose, or do they spread their ambitions, trying to achieve a number of different aims?

These are life and death decisions. These are the decisions that will determine the fate of the species.

Having decided on a developmental course, mutational opportunities – potential advantages over environmental rivals – are eagerly seized upon in the hope that any adaptation may be the one that provides the edge needed to secure a species’ survival and evolutionary prosperity.

From a species’ point of view, the process of mutational selection is rather like going on a supermarket sweep (or trolley dash, as some people refer to it) – this is when we have a limited time to help ourselves to as many and as varied items as we can, filling our trolley for free. In pursuit of maximum returns, the choices and decisions made will determine the outcome and rewards gained.

• By choosing one aisle, we may have to skip another aisle.
• The longer we spend in one aisle, the less time we have elsewhere.
• The longer we spend in transit, the less time we have filling our trolley.
• If we pick up too many large items, then we may not have space in the trolley for other things.
• Time spent looking for something specific may be wasted and lead us to lose out elsewhere.

Questions are asked: Do we try to get what we want? Or do we just try to fill the trolley? How selective should we be? How do we make the most of the opportunity afforded to us?

And, of course, in this – Nature’s – supermarket sweep we’re in competition with others, all of whom are trying to acquire the best, most abundant trolley.

No actions take place in isolation. It’s not just about what a species does that will determine its fate. There are other forces at work. There is also the wider environment to think about. That environment is constantly changing. With every species’ mutational adaptations, the environment subtly changes. All species must react to such changes.

Any failure to respond risks a weakening of a species’ relative position and, ultimately, possible extinction.

A species must therefore pursue a delicate evolutionary balance, one that is both proactive and reactive. They must both seek to advance their positions, but they must also guard against potential threats to those positions. They must drive change and respond to it.

This means that all species must fight on several fronts. They not only have to choose where to apply their genetic focus, but also guard against external threats and challenges to their existing position.

Nature is, effectively, a multi-dimensional arms race. It forces a species to make complex calculations and considerations.

If a species concentrates its evolutionary efforts in one area, does the neglect of other areas expose it to threats? Should a species focus on developing its strengths or on improving its weaknesses? To what extent should a species strive for genetic advantage? How defensive should a species be in seeking to safeguard its existing niche within Nature?

The right calls have to be made. Survival is about identifying beneficial mutational opportunities and harnessing them through adaptation to improve a species’ position relative to their environment.

In any arms race, survival tends to be reasonably assured if each side can match or surpass its adversary’s weaponry. That applies equally in relation to our genes. As long as they stay in or ahead of the game, then their survival will, in all likelihood, continue.

And yet, sometimes, as in any race, there will be losers. There will be instances when evolutionary failure arises from the pursuit of misguided genetic ambitions. A species may, quite simply, get things wrong and misread its environment.

But, more often, extinct species are not to blame for their own failing. After all, a species can only control so much. Sometimes there’s just nothing they can do to safeguard their future.

Environmental change may occur too quickly for a species to adapt to, or – given that adaptation is based on genetic mutations – the specific mutational opportunities required for survival may simply not arise. It would be rather like waiting for a bus to take us somewhere – if no bus turns up, then there’s not much we can do about it.

Arms races can be criticised for creating an unstable environment, characterised by fear, tension and uncertainty. Yet the competitive element of them does secure advancement. They encourage their participants to strive for betterment.

It is thanks to the relentless pursuit of this competitive advantage that, over millions of years, Nature has developed and diversified in myriad directions. It is this ongoing, open-ended arms race that has generated such diversity within Nature.

Evolutionary ambition will always drive reproductive behaviour. All are looking for that groundbreaking genetic advancement that will give them the edge; that will put them in a stronger position in relation to those around them. Such a development could lead to substantial environmental change and a shift in the balance of power.

By acquiring such an advantage, this generation may be able to secure the future of subsequent generations, the future of the species.

For other interesting blogs on this subject area, check out Articles or the Article Index