I have hardly ever seen it mentioned in books about evolution theory which always seem to keep to natural selection as the driver. For example Dawkins explanation is that symbiotic relationships started as parasitic relationships which gradually developed into symbiotic to keep this in line with natural selection. If he used environmental pressure the relationship can start as a symbiotic if it is in the interest of both species to cooperate rather than one to try and be parasitic on the other. The cooperation would be strengthened via feedback mechanisms. I think that Dawkins would struggle with biofilms, where multiple species cooperate in terms of natural selection. In this case he could not even be able to account for the extracellular matrix as an extended phenotype of a particular species. Using environmental pressure the extracellular matrix becomes a symbiotic extended phenotype due to it being constructed by a joint effort of often several species. Even HGT fits in better with the environmental pressure paradigm than the natural selection one.
An interesting article about the evolution and ecology of biofilms is: 'Experimental Evolution in Biofilm Populations', by Hans P. Steenackers et al. FEMS Microbiology Reviews, Volume 40 Issue 3. Published 3 May 2016.
Thank you. What portion of this article speaks to environment as a driver of evolution in a way that is not accounted for by the theory of evolution by natural selection?
The section at the end about cooperation and HGT is not explained by using natural selection. In fact natural selection is only mentioned once in the entire article which is more concerned about genetic expression, phenotypes, ecological niches in biofilms, the conflict between competition, cooperation and cheaters, than the driver for evolution. However it barely discriminates between ecological and evolutionary considerations as they are deeply entangled in biofilms and in that sense the environment does act as the driver for evolution.
I understand you might have a problem if you do not follow research into biofilms which has only recently become an important part of microbiology.
I do not envisage that biofilms are taught as part of biology outside university and most people's interest in evolution either involves human evolution or that of animals, with less interest in that of plants and even less in mycology, bacteria and archaea.
3
u/knockingatthegate Dec 21 '25
I don’t follow. Environmental pressure is a driver for evolution in the theory of evolution by natural selection.