The Red Queen Hypothesis of Evolution Quiz

Answer: Coevolution

The answer is coevolution, and the Red Queen hypothesis of evolutionary biology is exhausting. Put your running shoes on, kids.

The idea behind the hypothesis is that species have to keep evolving just to avoid falling behind. It describes the endless evolutionary arms race between predators and prey, parasites and hosts, or basically anything alive whose survival is endangered by another species.

It's most strongly tied to coevolution because the changes in one species directly shape the evolution of another. It's quite a ride. Newts develop toxins, snakes develop resistance, so newts develop stronger toxins, and snakes develop better resistance. On and on. Nobody wins. It's an evolutionary treadmill, widely accepted by biologists as an extension of natural selection, and a really cool topic to read about if you're into biology.

I recall enjoying Matt Ridley's "The Red Queen", for what it's worth.

Answer: True

The Red Queen hypothesis revolves around a pretty exhausting view of life: standing still is losing. Species are under constant pressure from predators, parasites, competitors, and even sexual selection. So, evolution never really takes a day off; it's just slow in comparison to our lifespan.

An organism can become better adapted, but so can everything around it. Relative fitness matters more than absolute improvement. A gazelle does not need to outrun every predator on Earth. It just needs to outrun the local predators picking off its friends one by one.

It helps explain why sexual reproduction continues to thrive. From a standpoint of efficiency, cloning yourself would seem much easier, if also less fun. Sex forces the continual reshuffling of genes, which is crucial for evolution in more complex species.

Answer: Through the Looking-Glass

The name of the Red Queen hypothesis comes from "Through the Looking-Glass" by Lewis Carroll, when the Red Queen tells Alice:

"Now, here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to stay in the same place. If you want to get somewhere else, you must run at least twice as fast as that!"

Evolutionary biologist Leigh Van Valen adopted this image in 1973 because it perfectly captures the relentless nature of evolution. Species must constantly adapt just to maintain their current position relative to predators, parasites, competitors, and changing environments. If cheetahs evolve to accelerate more quickly, you can bet gazelles will need to adapt just to "stay in the same place". That is, maintain relative fitness.

Answer: True

The Red Queen hypothesis is all about evolutionary pressure staying permanently turned on. Species are forced to adapt continuously because the organisms around them are also changing. Predators improve. Prey improve. Parasites evolve newer and nastier tricks. Immune systems answer back. In some cases, this back-and-forth can drive relatively rapid evolutionary change, especially when survival depends on keeping pace with another rapidly evolving species.

The hypothesis does not claim all evolution is rapid all the time. However, it does absolutely focus on the conditions that can produce ongoing and sometimes accelerated evolutionary change.

Answer: Better egg recognition evolves in the host, while better mimicry evolves in parasites

Brood parasitism is one of the cleanest real-world examples of the Red Queen in action. Birds like cuckoos and cowbirds sneak their eggs into the nests of other species, outsourcing that whole parenting thing.

The host birds are not thrilled about this arrangement. Natural selection favors individuals that can recognize and reject foreign eggs. In response, parasitic birds evolve eggs that increasingly resemble those of their hosts. Better forgery meets better detection. Round and round it goes. That's the Red Queen.

Answer: Hosts and parasites

Hosts and parasites are the poster children for the Red Queen hypothesis. Parasites evolve new ways to exploit their hosts, while hosts evolve better defenses to resist them. Then the parasites adapt again. Then the hosts answer back.

It is an endless arms race fueled by mutation, selection, and a complete refusal by either side to quietly go extinct. Viruses, bacteria, worms, and countless other parasites reproduce quickly. This means they can occasionally evolve at crazy speeds (for evolution). Hosts have to keep adapting just to avoid getting steamrollered.

Answer: True

Cheetahs and gazelles are one of the classic examples used to illustrate the Red Queen, because both species influence each other's evolution. Faster cheetahs are more successful hunters. Natural selection favors speed, acceleration, and agility in the cheetah.

Meanwhile, gazelles that can dodge, sprint, or zigzag more effectively are more likely to survive long enough to find that special lady. Each side pushes the other to improve. Nobody gets to relax.

Cheetahs are famous for explosive acceleration and top speeds that can exceed 60 miles per hour (97 kilometers per hour) in short bursts, though gazelles don't stand back and admire their prowess. Thomson's gazelles, for example, combine speed with endurance and ridiculously sharp directional changes that can throw off even the hungriest kitty.

Answer: Common garter snake

When it comes to evolutionary chemical warfare, the battle between rough-skinned newts and common garter snakes wins hands down. Rough-skinned newts produce an extremely powerful neurotoxin that can kill many predators outright. That means you.

Unlike you, garter snakes evolved resistance to the toxin and continued eating them anyway. Then the newts evolved even stronger toxicity in response. Then the snakes evolved greater resistance. Back and forth it goes. Who wins? Nobody, really. As the Red Queen says, "It takes all the running you can do, to stay in the same place." (Lewis Carroll)

Fun fact: Researchers have found that different regions show different levels of escalation. In places where highly toxic newts live, local garter snakes often show astounding resistance. In areas with weaker newts, the snakes are less resistant because maintaining that defense carries costs, biologically speaking. Resistant snakes actually move more slowly, which creates a trade-off between surviving poison and catching dinner.

Answer: Leigh Van Valen

The Red Queen hypothesis was formally proposed in 1973 by evolutionary biologist Leigh Van Valen. He borrowed the name from the Red Queen's race in "Through the Looking-Glass" by Lewis Carroll. In the story, you have to run as fast as you can just to remain in the same place. Van Valen looked at evolution and thought nature seemed to operate under the same exhausting policy.

The hypothesis became hugely influential in evolutionary biology, especially in studies of coevolution and host-parasite interactions. It also helped end the image of evolution as a ladder leading upward. Instead, he proposed something more like a nonstop balancing act performed on a precipice while running on a treadmill that occasionally catches fire. I guess what I'm saying is he chose to embrace the chaos.

Answer: Malaria

The evolutionary battle between humans and malaria is probably the most famous (and infamous) example of the Red Queen as it relates to our own species. Malaria is caused by parasites of the genus Plasmodium. It sounds like a really cool superhero name until you remember its superpower. The parasite is transmitted through mosquito bites, and it has been absolutely hammering humanity for thousands of years.

In response, human populations in malaria-prone regions have evolved genetic traits that offer some protection against the disease. The best-known example is the sickle cell trait. Carrying a single copy of the sickle cell gene can help protect against severe malaria. That's a remarkable biological breakthrough... with tragic consequences when inherited in two copies, as it can cause anemia, lockage in blood vessels and severe pain.

Like all Red Queen effects, neither side gets to celebrate a happy ending, because it never ends.