Court jester hypothesis
Hypothesis in evolutionary biology / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The court jester hypothesis is used in reference to the idea that abiotic forces (including climate), rather than biotic competition between species, function as a major driving force behind the processes in evolution which produce speciation. In evolutionary theory, the court-jester hypothesis contrasts the Red Queen hypothesis.
The term "Court Jester hypothesis" was coined by Anthony Barnosky in 1999 in allusion to the Red Queen hypothesis.[1] In a 2001 paper on the subject,[2] Barnosky uses the term without citation, suggesting that he is the one who coined it. Westfall and Millar attribute the term to him (citing the 2001 paper) in a paper of their own from 2004.[3] Michael Benton also credits Barnosky with coining the phrase.[4]
Since 2001, many researchers in evolution (such as Tracy Aze,[5] Anthony Barnosky, Michael J. Benton,[4] Douglas Erwin,[6] Thomas Ezard,[5] Sergey Gravilets,[7] J.B.C. Jackson,[6] Paul N. Pearson,[5] Andy Purvis,[5] Robert D. Westfall,[3] and Constance I. Millar[3]) have started to use the term "Court Jester hypothesis" to describe the view that evolution at a macro scale is driven by abiotic factors more than the biotic competition called the Red Queen hypothesis.