Climatic Change

, Volume 58, Issue 1–2, pp 21–45 | Cite as

The Gaia Hypothesis: Conjectures and Refutations

  • James W. Kirchner


The uncertainties surrounding global climate change provide ample evidence, if any were necessary, of the need for a whole-system view of the Earth. Arguably the most visible – and controversial – attempt to understand Earth as a system has been Lovelock's Gaia theory. Gaia has been a fruitful hypothesis generator, and has prompted many intriguing conjectures about how biological processes might contribute to planetary-scale regulation of atmospheric chemistry and climate. In many important cases, however, these conjectures are refuted by the available data. For example, Gaia theory predicts that the composition of the atmosphere should be tightly regulated by biological processes, but rates of carbon uptake into the biosphere have accelerated by only about 2% in response to the 35% rise in atmospheric CO2 since pre-industrial times. Gaia theory would predict that atmospheric CO2 should be more sensitively regulated by terrestrial ecosystem uptake (which is biologically mediated) than by ocean uptake (which is primarily abiotic), but both processes are about equally insensitive to atmospheric CO2 levels. Gaia theory predicts that biological feedbacks should make the Earth system less sensitive to perturbation, but the best available data suggest that the net effect of biologically mediated feedbacks will be to amplify, not reduce, the Earth system's sensitivity to anthropogenic climate change. Gaia theory predicts that biological by-products in the atmosphere should act as planetary climate regulators, but the Vostok ice core indicates that CO2, CH4, and dimethyl sulfide – all biological by-products – function to make the Earth warmer when it is warm, and colder when it is cold. Gaia theory predicts that biological feedbacks should regulate Earth's climate over the long term, but peaks in paleotemperature correspond to peaks in paleo-CO2 in records stretching back to the Permian; thus if CO2 is biologically regulated as part of a global thermostat, that thermostat has been hooked up backwards for at least the past 300 million years. Gaia theory predicts that organisms alter their environment to their own benefit, but throughout most of the surface ocean (comprising more than half of the globe), nutrient depletion by plankton has almost created a biological desert, and is kept in check only by the nutrient starvation of the plankton themselves. Lastly, where organisms enhance their environment for themselves, they create positive feedback; thus Gaia theory's two central principles – first, that organisms stabilize their environment, and second, that organisms alter their environment in ways that benefit them – are mutually inconsistent with one another. These examples suggest that the further development of Gaia theory will require more deliberate comparison of theory and data.


Dimethyl Sulfide Anthropogenic Climate Change Nutrient Starvation Biological Feedback Ocean Uptake 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Arens, N. C. and Jahren, A. H.: 2000, ‘Carbon Isotope Excursion in Atmospheric CO2 at the Cretaceous-Tertiary Boundary: Evidence from Terrestrial Sediments’, Palaios 15, 314–322.Google Scholar
  2. Charlson, R. J., Lovelock, J. E., Andreae, M. O., and Warren, S. G.: 1987, ‘Oceanic Phytoplankton, Atmospheric Sulphur, Cloud Albedo and Climate’, Nature 326, 655–661.Google Scholar
  3. Cox, P. M., Betts, R. A., Jones, C. D., Spall, S. A., and Totterdell, I. J.: 2000, ‘Acceleration of Global Warming Due to Carbon-cycle Feedbacks in a Coupled Climate Model’, Nature 408, 184–187.Google Scholar
  4. Goodnight, C. J. and Stevens, L.: 1997, ‘Experimental Studies of Group Selection: What Do They Tell Us about Group Selection in Nature?’, Amer. Nat. 150, S59–S79.Google Scholar
  5. Gorham, E.: 1991, ‘Biogeochemistry–its Origins and Development’, Biogeochemistry 13, 199–239.Google Scholar
  6. Hamilton, W. D.: 1995, ‘Ecology in the Large: Gaia and Ghengis Khan’, J. Appl. Ecol. 32, 451–453.Google Scholar
  7. Hardin, G.: 1968, ‘The Tragedy of the Commons’, Science 162, 1243–1248.Google Scholar
  8. Hutchinson, G. E.: 1950, ‘Survey of Contemporary Knowledge of Biogeochemistry.-3. The Biogeochemistry of Vertebrate Excretion’, Bull. Amer. Museum Nat. Hist. 96, 1–553.Google Scholar
  9. Hutchinson, G. E.: 1954, ‘The Biogeochemistry of the Terrestrial Atmosphere’, in Kuiper, G. P. (ed.), The Earth as a Planet, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 371–433.Google Scholar
  10. Jahren, A. H., Arens, N. C., Sarmiento, G., Guerrero, J., and Amundson, R.: 2001, ‘Terrestrial Record of Methane Hydrate Dissociation in the Early Cretaceous’, Geology 29, 159–162.Google Scholar
  11. Kamen, M. D.: 1946, ‘Survey of Existing Knowledge of Biogeochemistry. 1. Isotopic Phenomena in Biogeochemistry’, Bull. Amer. Museum Nat. Hist. 87, 110–138.Google Scholar
  12. Kirchner, J. W.: 1989, ‘The Gaia Hypothesis: Can it Be Tested?’, Rev. Geophys. 27, 223–235.Google Scholar
  13. Kirchner, J. W.: 1990, ‘Gaia Metaphor Unfalsifiable’, Nature 345, 470.Google Scholar
  14. Kirchner, J. W.: 1991, ‘The Gaia Hypotheses: Are They Testable? Are They Useful?’, in Schneider, S. H. and Boston, P. J. (ed.), Scientists on Gaia, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp. 38–46.Google Scholar
  15. Kirchner, J. W.: 2002, ‘The Gaia Hypothesis: Fact, Theory, and Wishful Thinking’, Clim. Change 52, 391–408.Google Scholar
  16. Kirchner, J.W. and Roy, B. A.: 1999, ‘The Evolutionary Advantages of Dying Young: Epidemiological Implications of Longevity in Metapopulations’, Amer. Nat. 154, 140–159.Google Scholar
  17. Kleidon, A.: 2002, ‘Testing the Effect of Life on Earth's Functioning: How Gaian is the Earth System?’, Clim. Change 52, 383–389.Google Scholar
  18. Lashof, D. A.: 1989, ‘The Dynamic Greenhouse: Feedback Processes that May Influence Future Concentrations of Atmospheric Trace Gases in Climatic Change’, Clim. Change 14, 213–242.Google Scholar
  19. Lashof, D. A., DeAngelo, B. J., Saleska, S. R., and Harte, J.: 1997, ‘Terrestrial Ecosystem Feedbacks to Global Climate Change’, Ann. Rev. Energy Environ. 22, 75–118.Google Scholar
  20. Legrand, M., Feniet-Saigne, C., Saltzman, E. S., Germain, C., Barkov, N. I., and Petrov, V. N.: 1991, ‘Ice-core Record of Oceanic Emissions of Dimethylsulphide during the Last Climate Cycle’, Nature 350, 144–146.Google Scholar
  21. Legrand, M. R., Delmas, R. J., and Charlson, R. J.: 1988, ‘Climate Forcing Implications from Vostok Ice-core Sulphate Data’, Nature 334, 418–420.Google Scholar
  22. Lenton, T. M.: 1998, ‘Gaia and Natural Selection’, Nature 394, 439–447.Google Scholar
  23. Lenton, T. M.: 2001, ‘The Role of Land Plants, Phosphorus Weathering and Fire in the Rise and Regulation of Atmospheric Oxygen’, Global Change Biol. 7, 613–629.Google Scholar
  24. Lenton, T. M.: 2002, ‘Testing Gaia: The Effect of Life on Earth's Habitability and Regulation’, Clim. Change 52, 409–422.Google Scholar
  25. Lenton, T. M. and von Bloh, W.: 2001, ‘Biotic Feedback Extends the Life Span of the Biosphere’, Geophys. Res. Lett. 28, 1715–1718.Google Scholar
  26. Lenton, T. M. and Watson, A. J.: 2000, ‘Redfield Revisited 1. Regulation of Nitrate, Phosphate, and Oxygen in the Ocean’, Global Biogeochem. Cycles 14, 225–248.Google Scholar
  27. Lenton, T. M. and Wilkinson, D. M.: 2003, ‘Developing the Gaia Theory: A Response to the Criticisms of Kirchner and Volk’, Clim. Change 58, this issue.Google Scholar
  28. Lovelock, J. E.: 1983, ‘Daisy World: A Cybernetic Proof of the Gaia Hypothesis’, Coevolution Quarterly 38, 66–72.Google Scholar
  29. Lovelock, J. E.: 1986, ‘Geophysiology: A New Look at Earth Science’, in Dickinson, R. E. (ed.), The Geophysiology of Amazonia: Vegetation and Climate Interactions, Wiley, New York, pp. 11–23.Google Scholar
  30. Lovelock, J. E.: 1988, The Ages of Gaia, W. W. Norton, New York.Google Scholar
  31. Lovelock, J. E.: 1990, ‘Hands Up for the Gaia Hypothesis’, Nature 344, 100–102.Google Scholar
  32. Lovelock, J. E.: 1991, Gaia–The Practical Science of Planetary Medicine, Gaia Books, London.Google Scholar
  33. Lovelock, J. E.: 1995, The Ages of Gaia, W. W. Norton, New York.Google Scholar
  34. Lovelock, J. E.: 2000, Homage to Gaia: The Life of an Independent Scientist, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  35. Lovelock, J. E. and Kump, L. R.: 1994, ‘Failure of Climate Regulation in a Geophysiological Model’, Nature 369, 732–734.Google Scholar
  36. Lovelock, J. E. and Margulis, L.: 1974, ‘Atmospheric Homeostasis by and for the Biosphere: The Gaia Hypothesis’, Tellus 26, 2–9.Google Scholar
  37. Lovelock, J. E. and Watson, A. J.: 1982, ‘The Regulation of Carbon Dioxide and Climate: Gaia or Geochemistry’, Planet. Space Sci. 30, 795–802.Google Scholar
  38. Malthus, T. R.: 1798, An Essay on the Principle of Population as it Affects the Future Improvement of Society with Remarks on the Speculations of Mr. Godwin, M. Condorcet and Other Writers, J. Johnson, London.Google Scholar
  39. Petit, J. R., Jouzel, J., Raynaud, D., Barkov, N. I., Barnola, J.-M., Basile, I., Bender, M., Chappellaz, J., Davisk, M., Delaygue, G., Delmotte, M., Kotlyakov, V. M., Legrand, M., Lipenkov, V. Y., Lorius, C., Pepin, L., Ritz, C., Saltzmank, E., and Stievenard, M.: 1999, ‘Climate and Atmospheric History of the Past 420,000 Years from the Vostok Ice Core, Antarctica’, Nature 399, 429–436.Google Scholar
  40. Popper, K. R.: 1963, Conjectures and Refutations; The Growth of Scientific Knowledge, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.Google Scholar
  41. Retallack, G. J.: 2002, ‘Carbon Dioxide and Climate over the Past 300 Myr’, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London Series A 360, 659–673.Google Scholar
  42. Schimel, D. S., House, J. I., Hibbard, K. A., Bousquet, P., Ciais, P., Peylin, P., Braswell, B. H., Apps, M. J., Baker, D., Bondeau, A., Canadell, J., Churkina, G., Cramer, W., Denning, A. S., Field, C. B., Friedlingstein, P., Goodale, C., Heimann, M., Houghton, R. A., Melillo, J. M., Moore, B., Murdiyarso, D., Noble, I., Pacala, S. W., Prentice, I. C., Raupach, M. R., Rayner, P. J., Scholes, R. J., Steffen, W. L., and Wirth, C.: 2001, ‘Recent Patterns and Mechanisms of Carbon Exchange by Terrestrial Ecosystems’, Nature 414, 169–172.Google Scholar
  43. Schlesinger, W. H.: 1997, Biogeochemistry: An Analysis of Global Change, Academic Press, San Diego.Google Scholar
  44. Schneider, S. H.: 2001, ‘A Goddess of Earth or the Imagination of a Man?’, Science 291, 1906–1907.Google Scholar
  45. Sober, E. and Wilson, D. S.: 1998, Unto Others: The Evolution and Psychology of Unselfish Behavior, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  46. Volk, T.: 1998, Gaia's Body: Toward a Physiology of Earth, Copernicus, New York.Google Scholar
  47. Volk, T.: 2002, ‘Toward a Future for Gaia Theory’, Clim. Change 52, 423–430.Google Scholar
  48. Watson, A. J. and Liss, P. S.: 1998, ‘Marine Biological Controls on Climate Via the Carbon and Sulphur Geochemical Cycles’, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London, Series B 353, 41–51.Google Scholar
  49. Watson, A. J. and Lovelock, J. E.: 1983, ‘Biological Homeostasis of the Global Environment: The Parable of Daisyworld’, Tellus, Series B: Chem. Phys. Meterol. 35, 284–289.Google Scholar
  50. Woodwell, G. M., Mackenzie, F. T., Houghton, R. A., Apps, M., Gorham, E., and Davidson, E.: 1998, ‘Biotic Feedbacks in the Warming of the Earth’, Clim. Change 40, 495–518.Google Scholar
  51. Zachos, J., Pagani, M., Sloan, L., Thomas, E., and Billups, K.: 2001, ‘Trends, Rhythms, and Aberrations in Global Climate 65 Ma to Present’, Science 292, 686–693.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • James W. Kirchner
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Earth and Planetary ScienceUniversity of CaliforniaBerkeleyU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations