Get Regular Updates!
|Particle 101: The Red Queen Hypothesis



John Tenniel

Particle 101: The Red Queen Hypothesis

Particle 101: The Red Queen Hypothesis

Imagine running all day, every day, just to stay right where you are. One slip and the world swallows you up.

Particle 101: The Red Queen Hypothesis

What happens when a creative evolutionary biologist stumbles upon the famous works of an eccentric writer? A theory that’s so controversial it spurs debate and research to this day.

In 1973, Leigh Van Valen was analysing fossil records when he noticed something that didn’t make sense. Species were consistently becoming extinct without any changes occurring in their environment.

Sure, extinctions happen when an asteroid hits, a flood wipes out a landscape or a lake dries up. But why would a species go extinct when the environment is still perfect for them?

Perhaps Van Valen was reading Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Carroll to his kids. Maybe he remembered a book report from back when he was a schoolboy. Or maybe a colleague just suggested a clever name.

In any case, Van Valen’s analysis led him to propose the idea of an evolutionary race where an organism must constantly mutate and adapt just to keep up with its competitors. And he called it the Red Queen hypothesis, a reference to Lewis Carroll’s Red Queen who says:

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

The Red Queen hypothesis suggests that, when species evolve new traits, they gain an advantage over their competitors. The competitors then evolve and bring things back to a level playing field. And on and on the race goes until a species fails to evolve fast enough and becomes extinct.

You can see it in action everywhere including right here in WA.

The kangaroo and the pea plant

Across Australia, for millions of years, kangaroos have eaten a variety of native plants.

Some WA pea species like Gastrolobium evolved to have a toxin called fluoroacetate (aka the 1080 poison) to deter herbivores.

In response, the kangaroos developed an immunity to the toxin and kept on eating the plant.

Gastrolobium spinosum
. Credit: Jean and Fred Hort via flickr
View Larger
Image |

Jean and Fred Hort via flickr

Gastrolobium spinosum
Gastrolobium hookeri
. Credit: Jean and Fred Hort via flickr
View Larger
Image |

Jean and Fred Hort via flickr

Gastrolobium hookeri

So in another attempt to deter herbivores, some pea species started growing spikes or spines on their leaves.

Unfortunately for them, the kangaroos did not care and found a way to keep on eating them.

Running, running and running, just to stay in the same place.



Now, the Red Queen’s reign over evolution hasn’t been without its challenges. Critics have suggested that it oversimplifies complex phenomena and fails to consider the multitude of factors that drive evolution.

However, it’s unlikely that Van Valen, who died in 2010, would have minded the criticism. As he once said:

“I am a generalist and tend to open new approaches more than fill them in.”

And the Red Queen hypothesis certainly did that. Despite its criticism, Leigh Van Valen’s idea has inspired decades of research and remains one of the most influential evolutionary theories in history.

A thought-provoking view on life itself.

Particle Puns


Creative Commons Logo

Republishing our content

We want our stories to be shared and seen by as many people as possible.

Therefore, unless it says otherwise, copyright on the stories on Particle belongs to Scitech and they are published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

This allows you to republish our articles online or in print for free. You just need to credit us and link to us, and you can’t edit our material or sell it separately.

Using the ‘republish’ button on our website is the easiest way to meet our guidelines.


You cannot edit the article.

When republishing, you have to credit our authors, ideally in the byline. You have to credit Particle with a link back to the original publication on Particle.

If you’re republishing online, you must use our pageview counter, link to us and include links from our story. Our page view counter is a small pixel-ping (invisible to the eye) that allows us to know when our content is republished. It’s a condition of our guidelines that you include our counter. If you use the ‘republish’ then you’ll capture our page counter.

If you’re republishing in print, please email us to let us so we know about it (we get very proud to see our work republished) and you must include the Particle logo next to the credits. Download logo here.

If you wish to republish all our stories, please contact us directly to discuss this opportunity.


Most of the images used on Particle are copyright of the photographer who made them.

It is your responsibility to confirm that you’re licensed to republish images in our articles.


All Particle videos can be accessed through YouTube under the Standard YouTube Licence.

The Standard YouTube licence

  1. This licence is ‘All Rights Reserved’, granting provisions for YouTube to display the content, and YouTube’s visitors to stream the content. This means that the content may be streamed from YouTube but specifically forbids downloading, adaptation, and redistribution, except where otherwise licensed. When uploading your content to YouTube it will automatically use the Standard YouTube licence. You can check this by clicking on Advanced Settings and looking at the dropdown box ‘License and rights ownership’.
  2. When a user is uploading a video he has license options that he can choose from. The first option is “standard YouTube License” which means that you grant the broadcasting rights to YouTube. This essentially means that your video can only be accessed from YouTube for watching purpose and cannot be reproduced or distributed in any other form without your consent.


For more information about using our content, email us:

Copy this HTML into your CMS
Press Ctrl+C to copy

We've got chemistry. Want something physical?