The psychological, sociological and evolutionary roots of conspecific violence in humans are still debated, despite attracting the attention of intellectuals for over two millennia. Here we propose a conceptual approach towards understanding these roots based on the assumption that aggression in mammals, including humans, has a significant phylogenetic component. By compiling sources of mortality from a comprehensive sample of mammals, we assessed the percentage of deaths due to conspecifics and, using phylogenetic comparative tools, predicted this value for humans. The proportion of human deaths phylogenetically predicted to be caused by interpersonal violence stood at 2%. This value was similar to the one phylogenetically inferred for the evolutionary ancestor of primates and apes, indicating that a certain level of lethal violence arises owing to our position within the phylogeny of mammals. It was also similar to the percentage seen in prehistoric bands and tribes, indicating that we were as lethally violent then as common mammalian evolutionary history would predict. However, the level of lethal violence has changed through human history and can be associated with changes in the socio-political organization of human populations. Our study provides a detailed phylogenetic and historical context against which to compare levels of lethal violence observed throughout our history.

Summary: Temporal turnover events in biotic interactions involving plants are rarely assessed, although such changes might afford a considerable acclimation potential to the plant. This could enable fairly rapid responses to short‐term fluctuations in growth conditions as well as lasting responses to long‐term climatic trends. Here, we present a classification of temporal turnover encompassing 11 possible scenarios. Using orchid mycorrhiza as a study model, we show that temporal changes are common, and discuss under which conditions temporal turnover of fungal symbiont is expected. We provide six research questions and identify technical challenges that we deem most important for future studies. Finally, we discuss how the same framework can be applied to other types of biotic interactions.