Biological Market models

A game with one boa constructor and two shadowbirds

(for an explanation see Noë & Hammerstein 1994)

There are a number of different approaches to the modelling of biological markets. Our original model (Noë & Hammerstein 1994) and the model by Johnstone & Bshary (2008) are based on game theory.

Other models, such as those published by Mark Schwartz and Jason Hoeksema and by Miro Kummel and Steve Salant, are based on David Ricardo's (1817) principle of 'comparative advantage'. Cowden & Peterson (2009) used cellular automata to build a model of nutrient exchange mutualisms, while Claire de Mazancourt and Mark Schwartz (2010) propose a model based on resource ratio theory. Song & Feldman (2013) propose a solution to the problem of markets heading for clearance with a reduction of variance in supply and reduced levels of choosiness as a result.

Campenni & Schino (2014), using agent-based modelling, very nicely show that positive correlations between investments given and received, which is often seen as a 'proof' for partner control mechanisms, such as reciprocal altruism, can in fact result from pure partner choice mechanisms without any need for partner control. Thus, proof for the existence of partner control is and remains in direct contingencies, e.g. alternation of giving and receiving in the case of reciprocal altruism.

Wyatt et al (2014) constructed a model in the tradition of noncooperative trading games as used in economics, assuming 'Cournot competition', to model the exchange between plants and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Their main conclusion is that plants allocate their resources proportional to the benefits received from their fungal partners ('linear proportional discrimination').

Steidinger and Peay (2021) also present a market model of the exchange between plants and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. They build on the work of Kummel and Salant (2006) and Wyatt et al (2014) and invoke Weber's law from psychophysics and originally formulated to describe phenomena in human perception, which had so far not been linked to choices made by organisms such as plants. (This paper explained in Stanford News)

Velev (2020) uses biological markets to show the universality of the law of supply and demand in biology and beyond

Loch-Temzelides (2021) presents an economic model based on the results of Whiteside et al (2019 - see page underground nutrient trade) and argues that biological markets are 'Walrasian', i.e. consistent with general economic equilibrium theory (GET).

André, J.-B. and N. Baumard 2011. "The evolution of fairness in a biological market." Evolution 65: 1447-1456.
Campennì, M. & Schino, G. 2014. Partner choice promotes cooperation: The two faces of testing with agent-based models. Journal of Theoretical Biology 344, 49-55.
Cowden, C. C. & Peterson, C. J. 2009. A multi-mutualist simulation: Applying biological market models to diverse mycorrhizal communities. Ecological Modelling, 220, 1522-1533.
Ecoffet, P., Bredeche, N. & André, J.-B. (2021). Nothing better to do? Environment quality and the evolution of cooperation by partner choice. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 110805.
Hoeksema, J. D. & Schwartz, M. W. 2003. Expanding comparative-advantage biological market models: contingency of mutualism on partners’ resource requirements and acquisition trade-offs. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 270, 913-919.
Johnstone, R. A. & Bshary, R. 2008. Mutualism, market effects and partner control. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 21, 879-888
Kummel, M. & Salant, S. W. 2006. The economics of mutualisms: optimal utilization of mycorrhizal mutualistic partners by plants. Ecology, 87, 892-902.
Loch-Temzelides, T. (2021). Walrasian equilibrium behavior in nature. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(27), e2020961118
Mazancourt, C. d. & Schwartz, M. W. 2010. A resource ratio theory of cooperation. Ecology Letters, 13, 349-359.
McNamara, J. M. & Leimar, O. (2020). Game theory in biology: Concepts and frontiers: Oxford University Press, USA. (contains a section with models of biological markets)
Noë, R. & Hammerstein, P. 1994. Biological markets: supply and demand determine the effect of partner choice in cooperation, mutualism and mating. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 35, 1-11.
Schwartz, M. W. & Hoeksema, J. D. 1998. Specialization and resource trade: biological markets as a model of mutualisms. Ecology, 79, 1029-1038.
Song, Z. & Feldman, M. W. 2013. Plant–animal mutualism in biological markets: Evolutionary and ecological dynamics driven by non-heritable phenotypic variance. Theoretical Population Biology
Steidinger, B. & Peay, K. G. (2021). Optimal allocation ratios: a square root relationship between the ratios of symbiotic costs and benefits. The American Naturalist
Velev, M. V. (2020). Entropy and free-energy based interpretation of the laws of supply and demand. SN Business & Economics, 1(1), 1
Wyatt, G. A. K., Kiers, E. T., Gardner, A. & West, S. A. (2014). A biological market analysis of the plant-mycorrhizal symbiosis. Evolution, 68(9), 2603-2618

Related theoretical approaches that also revolve around phenomena such as partner choice and competition by outbidding include:

Aktipis, C. A. 2011. "Is cooperation viable in mobile organisms? Simple Walk Away rule favors the evolution of cooperation in groups." Evolution and Human Behavior 32(4): 263-276.
Aktipis, C. A. (2004). Know when to walk away: contingent movement and the evolution of cooperation. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 231(2), 249-260
Boza, G. & Scheuring, I. 2004. Environmental heterogeneity and the evolution of mutualism. Ecological Complexity, 1, 329–339.
Doebeli, M. & Knowlton, N. 1998. The evolution of interspecific mutualisms. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 95, 8676-8680.
Edwards, D. P., Hassall, M., Sutherland, W. J. & Yu, D. W. 2006. Selection for protection in an ant–plant mutualism: host sanctions, host modularity, and the principal–agent game. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 273, 595 - 602.
Ferdy, J. B. & Godelle, B. 2005. Diversification of transmission modes and the evolution of mutualism. American Naturalist, 166, 613-627.
Foster, K. & Kokko, H. 2006. Cheating can stabilize cooperation in mutualisms. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 273, 2233-2239.
Johnson, D. D. P., Stopka, P. & Macdonald, D. W. 2004. Ideal flea constraints on group living: unwanted public goods and the emergence of cooperation. Behavioral Ecology, 15, 181-186.
Nesse, R. M. 2007. Runaway social selection for displays of partner value and altruism. Biological Theory, 2, 1-13.
Roberts, G. 1998. Competitive altruism: from reciprocity to the handicap principle. Proceedings of the Royal Society, London, B., 265, 427-431.
Sosis, R., Feldstein, S. & Hill, K. 1998. Bargaining theory and cooperative fishing participation on Ifakuk Atoll. Human Nature, 9, 163-203.

last update of this page: 13 JUL 2021

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse