Still less is Gaia the same as the biota, which is simply the collection of all individual living organisms. The biota and the biosphere taken together form part but not all of Gaia. Just as the shell is part of a snail, so the rocks, the air, and the oceans are part of Gaia. Gaia, as a total planetary being, has properties that are not necessarily discernible by just knowing individual species or populations of organisms living together. Specifically, the Gaia hypothesis said that the temperature, oxidation state, acidity and certain aspects of the rocks and waters are at any time kept constant, and that this homeostasis is maintained by active feedback processes that are operated automatically and unconsciously by the biota.
Solar energy sustains comfortable conditions for life.
The conditions are only constant in the short term and evolve in synchrony with the changing needs of the biota as it evolves. The hypothesis caused a stir and was initially dismissed by many scientists because it seemed to require that purpose and planning sprang from the interaction between water, air, microbes, etc. Lovelock developed the Daisyworld model to prove to his critics that purposeful action by the biosphere was not required for temperature regulation, but that instead that processes of natural selection were sufficient to accomplish the task of temperature regulation. While it may not tell us exactly how life on Earth would modify climate in detail, it may still be able to tell us at least whether it can influence climate at all. Daisyworld is such a model.