Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T05:19:29.606Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Niche construction earns its keep

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 September 2001

Kevin N. Laland
Affiliation:
Sub-Department of Animal Behaviour, University of Cambridge, Madingley, Cambridge CB3 8AA, United Kingdom kn11001@hermes.cam.ac.uk www.zoo.cam.ac.uk/zoostaff/laland/index.html
John Odling-Smee
Affiliation:
Institute of Biological Anthropology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX2 6QS, United Kingdom john.odling-smee@bioanthropology.ox.ac.uk www.admin.ox.ac.uk/oxro/ad.htm
Marcus W. Feldman
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-5020 marc@charles.stanford.edu www.stanford.edu/dept/biology
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

Our response contains a definition of niche construction, illustrations of how it changes the evolutionary process, and clarifications of our conceptual model. We argue that the introduction of niche construction into evolutionary thinking earns its keep; we illustrate this argument in our discussion of rates of genetic and cultural evolution, memes and phenogenotypes, creativity, the EEA (environment of evolutionary adaptedness), and group selection.

Information

Type
Authors' Response
Copyright
© 1998 Cambridge University Press