In the first installment of this series, I explored the ecological truths that define our evolution and our identity as heterotrophs¹. Acknowledging this identity is crucial for cultivating genuine morality and avoiding fleeting success. However, clarity remains elusive regarding actionable steps we should take to honor this identity.

I previously noted the slim possibility of humans transitioning to autotrophy¹, which could grant greater moral autonomy due to reduced reliance on other life forms. Yet, even in this unlikely scenario, our complete independence from the environment is unattainable. This is evident from historical mass extinctions triggered by early cyanobacteria (an autotroph), demonstrating their struggle despite eventual survival millions of years later.

This illustrates that the balance of power between autotrophic (producers) and heterotrophic (consumers) organisms is just one aspect of the larger narrative about ecosystem or societal stability. Additionally, within ecosystems—encompassing trees, animals, microbes, and more—a fundamental evolutionary force drives niche segregation². Essentially, this means organisms in the same habitat evolve to avoid competing for the same resources, thus promoting mutual survival (which explains why species perceived as "unfit" or "slow," like sloths and pandas, can thrive in the wild).

One of the key forms of niche segregation is the "fast-slow spectrum". This represents a trade-off between maximizing growth and dispersal rates versus enhancing individual survival. The "r-strategist" represents organisms that grow quickly, reproduce rapidly, and expand their populations, while "k-strategists" invest in individual longevity and stress resilience, sacrificing growth rate and reproduction (for more details on life-history trade-offs, refer here). Notably, this segregation can even occur within the same species at different life stages to promote cross-generational survival, emphasizing the power of this evolutionary force.

To frame it differently, r-strategists are often termed "opportunists", adept at exploiting newly available resources and spaces. However, ecosystems dominated by these opportunists tend to become unstable due to rapid resource depletion and waste accumulation, leading to their eventual decline. This instability paves the way for other organisms with varied life strategies, resulting in a more diverse and resilient community that effectively utilizes and recycles resources over extended periods.

Without this transition to a balanced community, ecosystems face ongoing degradation (a prime example being widespread agricultural decline, a consequence of human intervention stifling natural succession). This highlights why “biodiversity” is a critical concept—it enhances ecosystem stability and productivity (see Zhou et al., 2016; Caswell and Coe, 2013 for further insights).

In summary, ecosystems risk deterioration if the balance between r and k traits is disrupted. This imbalance illustrates how our collective lifestyle choices can sway the trajectory between extinction and sustainable evolution (discussed in Part-2). While there is significant variability in individual resource consumption among humans, it appears that modern societies, as a whole, often neglect stress adaptation and sustainable development. Developing nations exhibit high population growth, while developed ones prioritize rapid economic expansion through globalization, often at the expense of developing nations—both tendencies reflect r-traits.

Thus, humanity collectively represents an “off-the-chart” r-opportunist profile, potentially leading to instability if the global ecosystem fails to transition towards a more balanced array of life strategies. In fact, other life forms are currently paying the price for this imbalance, as evidenced by the ongoing sixth mass extinction. Observing the escalating crises around us, it becomes clear that these are not mere coincidences; similar scenarios have likely unfolded countless times throughout history, affecting many life forms beyond humans.

Both ecological principles and the Cambridge Dictionary indicate that excessive opportunism can be detrimental; a recalibration is essential to avert the collapse of our foundational needs pyramid.

But are we inherently wired as r-opportunists? Have we always behaved this way? While genetics play a role, significant variability in resource consumption exists among humans despite our genetic similarities, suggesting that genetics may not be the primary driver behind our r-behaviors. Historically, humans have thrived in small groups as hunter-gatherers, forest gardeners, and other forms that do not conform to an "expand and exploit" strategy. Notably, a defining feature of Hominid evolution corresponds with increased prefrontal cortex size, which is closely linked to habitat diversification, varied life strategies, cultural practices, and social structures. Unfortunately, the dominant r-opportunist group has nearly eradicated these alternative lifestyles, reminiscent of the initial scenes following a successful invasive species introduction.

Paradoxically, despite sitting atop the food chain, enjoying a relatively long lifespan and low birth rates, we should biologically be classified as k-strategists. Recent human evolution, however, reflects trends inconsistent with fundamental evolutionary trade-offs—longer lifespans paired with increased offspring, accelerated growth, and consumption all suggest a cultural rather than biological basis for our r-strategy. We are cultural r-strategists, not biological ones. This indicates that we need not alter our genetic makeup to facilitate essential changes.

While we might hope for miraculous microorganisms that can convert waste back into vital resources without harmful by-products, the responsibility ultimately lies with us.

Fortunately, we possess our greatest evolutionary advantage: a complex prefrontal cortex that allows for conscious, adaptable decision-making. Instead of attributing blame to our genetics or ingrained behaviors, we can override these influences through our highest-level cognitive processes. With this capability, we can shift our life strategies without the need for genetic modification or drugs. If you reject a preordained role as an opportunist, you have the power to redefine yourself. Recognizing this potential allows us to embrace the core attribute of all life—adaptability. What path will you choose? Share your thoughts!

Thank you for following this trilogy! If this article resonates with you, I encourage you to listen to this music while reading it again. Also, check the postscript for my concluding reflections!

1. Heterotrophs are organisms that derive energy from other organisms, while autotrophs obtain energy from sunlight or inorganic chemical reactions.
2. An "ecological niche" refers to how an organism lives and interacts with its environment, including resource use and activity patterns.
3. The concept of being "dead" can signify the slowest state. The rapid pace of life in humans necessitates that other organisms remain in a slower state for balance (even if not directly harmed by our actions).
4. Stay tuned for an upcoming series titled “Adaptiveness — The true extent of adaptation”! It will delve into how our traits and behaviors can evolve for the better.