The environment: An ambiguous concept in Waddington's biology

Waddington is usually acknowledged as a biologist who proposed a more subtle concept of environment than the one generally in currency during the rise of the Modern Synthesis. As such, he was among the few scientists in the mid-twentieth century to develop an elaborated concept of the environment that would fully embrace its constructive role both in development and evolution. Yet, on close inspection, there is an inconsistency in Waddington's theoretical positioning. On the one hand, as a critic of population genetics, Waddington never stopped claiming that natural selection acts on phenotypes and that the phenotype is the outcome of both the genome and the environment. On the other, however, the topology of his famous epigenetic landscape was anchored only in the genome, and the variation of the environment was treated as an external perturbation. In other words, the genes and the environment were sometimes considered as symmetric agents in the epigenetic system, and sometimes not. My aim is to shed light on the significance of this tension in Waddington's theoretical framework. I show that Waddington's biology is best characterized as an asymmetric understanding of the causal role of genes and environment both in development and evolution. His model of genetic assimilation was based on the idea of differential levels of hereditary responsiveness to environmental variations, giving the genome a leading role and paving the way for critics of his conceptions. In the final section, I argue that eventually Waddington was trapped by his diagram of the epigenetic landscape, which might also have been an obstacle to achieving a proper conception of the creativity of embryogenesis.

Biosociological ethodiversity in the social system

A comprehensive understanding of human sociality needs to embrace the coevolution of genes and culture. Recent advances in biological research about niche construction by organisms, and the development of the concepts of social niche and ethodiversity, can be integrated into a common approach to understand this coevolution, which implies the interaction between sociology and ecology in an integrative framework of knowledge. In this paper the authors propose such inclusive biosociological and heuristic framework to improve the understanding of the evolution of social niche construction. In addition, it allows a better understanding of the concept of sociotype in non-human organisms and explains some aspects of the social or presocial behavior through the concept of ethodiversity.

An introduction to niche construction theory

Niche construction refers to the modification of selective environments by organisms. Theoretical and empirical studies of niche construction are increasing in importance as foci in evolutionary ecology. This special edition presents theoretical and empirical research that illustrates the significance of niche construction to the field. Here we set the scene for the following papers by (1) discussing the history of niche construction research, (2) providing clear definitions that distinguish niche construction from related concepts such as ecosystem engineering and the extended phenotype, (3) providing a brief summary of the findings of niche construction research, (4) discussing the contribution of niche construction and ecological inheritance to (a) expanded notions of inheritance, and (b) the extended evolutionary synthesis, and (5) briefly touching on some of the issues that underlie the controversies over niche construction.

A niche construction approach on the central Netherlands covering the last 220,000 years

This paper shows what a niche construction theory (NCT) approach can contribute to the long-term social and environmental history of an area when applied to both sedentary and non-sedentary communities. To understand how communities create and respond to environmental change, hominin presence of the central Netherlands within the last 220,000 years is used as a case study. For this case study we studied the interrelationship between hominins, water and landscape gradients for four periods of interest within this long-term hominin presence. During each of these periods the study area had a specific environmental setting and (possible) traces of hominin presence. These periods cover the (1) Middle to Late Saalian (~220–170 ka), (2) Late Glacial (~14.7–11.7 ka, (3) Mid-Holocene (6000–5400 BP) and (4) Late Holocene (1200–8 BP). This review shows that traces of niche construction behaviour related to water and landscape gradients in the central Netherlands can be shown for both sedentary and non-sedentary communities. Furthermore, in this review it is shown that the transition from inceptive to counteractive change in ecosystem management style in the central Netherlands took place between the Mid- and Late Holocene periods.