When should coevolution among competitors promote coexistence versus exclusion?

Coevolution of competitors can lead to niche partitioning promoting coexistence or to heightened conflicts promoting competitive exclusion. If both are possible, when should coevolution favor coexistence versus exclusion? We investigated this question with a general eco-evolutionary model in which species can reduce the interspecific competition they experience through evolutionary investments in two types of competitive traits: partitioning traits that promote coexistence and conflict traits that promote exclusion. We found that communities were generally mixed, consisting of species investing in both trait types or mixtures of species specializing in one type. For each species, its competitors abundances and investments determined its experienced competition, and stronger competition begot greater competitive trait investment. Species investing in conflict traits strengthened competition for other species both directly and indirectly, whereas partitioning traits only weakened competition via direct effects. Conflict traits were therefore the stronger driver of community-wide investments in all traits. However, species investing most in conflict traits experienced less competition, so they ultimately evolved least investment, making them most likely to be excluded by the next invader. Thus, coevolution may provide an open door for species that play nice and a revolving door of exclusion for those that do not.