[Paleopsych] Sigma Xi: Evolution's Many Branches
Premise Checker
checker at panix.com
Fri Aug 12 16:05:02 UTC 2005
Evolution's Many Branches
http://www.americanscientist.org/template/BookReviewTypeDetail/assetid/44476?&print=yes
[28]Douglas Erwin
Assembling the Tree of Life. Edited by Joel Cracraft and Michael J.
Donoghue. xvi + 576 pp. Oxford University Press, 2004. $59.95.
Big problems often require big science. For example, synchrotrons,
cyclotrons, linear accelerators and interplanetary spacecraft all cost
too much for single investigators. Thus high-energy experimental
physicists and planetary geologists have been forced to come up with
communal approaches to research and to acquire the political skills
needed to get their projects funded. The advent of farms of DNA
sequencers and of the necessary computational power to make them
useful has brought molecular biology into the era of big science as
well with a variety of efforts to sequence whole genomes, including
the Human Genome Project. Related developments include various
proteomic and structural biology projects and the sprouting of new
departments of systems biology, in which computer scientists and
underemployed physicists mix freely with biologists. But big science
is not driven exclusively by problems requiring large, expensive
instruments. Innovation in instrumentation can also be a factor,
opening up new avenues for exploration and reopening old questions
that had been abandoned because progress was so difficult.
The effort to produce a Tree of Life--a "correct and verifiable family
tree" of all life, both living and extinct--is unquestionably big
science. This formidable undertaking will require the mobilization of
vast numbers of systematists to acquire and analyze reams of
morphological, behavioral and molecular data, and the informatics
involved in the unenviable task of classifying and storing
phylogenetic information is complex. The end result will show the
evolutionary relationships between all organisms, from those whose
diversity is still poorly explored--such as crenarchaea
(sulfur-metabolizing organisms that thrive at high temperatures) and
heterokonts (which include water molds, diatoms and brown algae)--to
nematodes, probably the most species-rich group of animals.
What might be the justifications for constructing a Tree of Life? E.
O. Wilson nominates simply having a complete accounting of life on
Earth, promoting conservation, searching for new biological products
and improving our understanding of community assembly (how species
coadapt to live together in a given spot). Not surprisingly, Wilson
makes an effective case that a Tree of Life will revolutionize ecology
by marrying NASA-like technology with old-fashioned fieldwork to allow
rapid characterization of broad swaths of the members of a community.
Assembling the Tree of Life grew out of a 2002 symposium (sponsored
jointly by the American Museum of Natural History, Yale University,
The International Union of Biological Science and the international
biodiversity science program DIVERSITAS) that produced a synthesis of
knowledge about evolutionary relationships among the major branches of
the Tree of Life. The book is the first comprehensive scientific
attempt to consider the tree of life since the publication in 1989 of
The Hierarchy of Life (the proceedings of a Nobel Symposium, edited by
Bo Fernholm and others).
Although we are not yet within reach of Wilson's dream, we are much
closer to it than one might have expected in 1989. The "debate"
between molecules and morphology, which was a centerpiece of The
Hierarchy of Life, has vanished with the recognition that no one
source of information can provide an infallible guide; rather, a
variety of combined-evidence approaches are required. Editors Joel
Cracraft and Michael J. Donoghue have two ambitious and at times
contradictory aims: to demonstrate to readers outside the field of
systematics the broader significance of building the Tree of Life
(that is, to explain why systematists need big science) and to provide
a current assessment of phylogenetic efforts across the tree.
The contributors, who include nearly 100 systematic biologists, are
more successful in achieving the latter goal. There is no question
that individual chapters will be useful for those seeking a meaty
overview of a particular clade. Most of the systematic chapters are
written by the premier experts in the area and include a brief
synopsis of the morphology of the group, some anatomical highlights
and comments on diversity. The better chapters include detailed and
critical commentaries on previous phylogenetic analyses and discuss
where they might have gone wrong; the chapter by Maureen A. O'Leary
and colleagues on mammalian phylogeny is particularly noteworthy in
this regard.
The early chapters on microbial phylogeny provide a wealth of
information on the problems of phylogenetic reconstruction in the face
of an unknown degree of lateral gene transfer and serve as an
excellent primer on the evolutionary history of these groups. The
differing perspectives on phylogenetic relationships offered by Sandra
L. Baldauf and colleagues, by Norman R. Pace and by W. Ford Doolittle
illustrate the magnitude of the problem. The chapter on early algal
evolution by Charles F. Delwiche and others provides an outstanding
illustration of how critical a phylogenetic perspective is to
unraveling the evolutionary history of a clade. It is particularly
unfortunate that the authors of many of the chapters on animal groups
did not make a similar effort; many of those authors appear to view a
phylogeny as an end in itself, rather than as a tool to advance other
questions.
The volume is a treasury of unexpected information. Who knew that in
the 1830s France imported 50 million leeches annually for medicinal
bloodletting (and that the government collected a tax of one franc per
thousand leeches)? And who would have guessed that the key to
unraveling lepidopteran phylogeny lies in "an almost infinite variety
of small, drab moths from multiple evolutionary lineages"?
Curiously, different authors in the volume appear to mean different
things by the Tree of Life. Most appear to be principally concerned
with the topology of the tree--with the relationships between various
subclades and species that the tree depicts. Others, including Wilson,
seem more concerned with taxonomic descriptions, databases of images
of types and the like--an effort that has also been described as the
Encyclopedia of Life. The distinction between these disparate views is
critically important for identifying the scope and likely cost of the
project as well as for deciding how it should be carried out. If a
tree alone is the goal, the new effort at DNA bar-coding might be all
that is required. One can even imagine the whole process being
automated, with organisms fed into a hopper at one end and the
critical sequences isolated, sequenced and added to GenBank (the
genetic sequence database of the National Institutes of Health) as the
biological exudates are heaped on a growing recycling pile. Of course
most of the contributors to this volume are not really interested in
topology alone,which would provide us with none of the critical
information that accompanies proper systematic treatments--information
about functional adaptations essential for understanding evolutionary
pattern and process, for example.
What is missing from the volume? Understandably, most clades are not
treated in much detail, with the exception of one subclade of
aberrant, highly encephalized primates. Cnidarians (such as jellyfish
and corals) get short shrift, which is rather unusual given that
significant advances have been made recently in understanding the
group. But Douglas J. Eernisse and Kevin J. Peterson, in their
detailed discussion of metazoan phylogeny, do discuss the recent
evidence that the calcareous and siliceous sponges arose
independently. Happily, arthropods and their ecdysozoan relatives have
been allotted just five chapters (some enthusiasts will doubtless be
disappointed).
[29]click for full image and caption
[30]Ernst Haeckel's tree of life
There are two more telling omissions. Although the editors'
introduction provides a very brief historical synopsis of
tree-building, complete with Darwin's canonical figure from The Origin
of Species and Ernst Haeckel's 1866 Tree of Life, a contribution by a
historian of science on evolving approaches to the subject would have
been most welcome. The second omission is more procedural or
methodological: Few contributions explicitly address our current
abilities to actually produce a rigorous, well-substantiated tree of
life. This is far from a simple matter, as the most serious discussion
of this shortcoming (in the chapter by O'Leary and others) makes
clear. Building supertrees is more complicated than adding up
previously published trees or building a massive character matrix. The
initial steps in resolving this problem have been quite positive, but
ultimately the viability of the Tree of Life enterprise requires
addressing these and related methodological issues. Some might suggest
that it would have been inappropriate to include such dirty laundry in
this volume, but I would argue that to have done so might have gotten
additional computer scientists and mathematicians interested in these
problems.
Reviewers are expected to offer some platitudinous comments on the
appropriate readership for a volume, although whether this is for the
edification of librarians or the gratification of the publisher
continues to elude me. The question is particularly apt in the case at
hand, for the intended readership is as poorly resolved as some of the
topologies. In their introduction, the editors note the impact of
Fernholm's The Hierarchy of Life. My observations suggest that it is
one of the more widely stolen library volumes, which is a sort of
impact metric, and perhaps Assembling the Tree of Life will also
disappear from shelves. It should probably be required reading for
first-year biology graduate students, but otherwise the effort to
demonstrate the significance of the Tree of Life project is largely
preaching to the converted. The first three chapters (by Terry L.
Yates and others, Rita R. Colwell and Douglas J. Futuyama) provide
some stimulating insights into how the Tree of Life could be useful in
human health, conservation and agriculture. The 26 systematic chapters
are most likely to appeal to specialists in related areas and to
students and teachers seeking a solid, tree-based introduction to
specific clades.
So why do we need to construct the Tree of Life? Because ultimately it
is, like a synchrotron or a spaceship, a tool that will allow future
generations of scientists to address a whole new set of
questions--about the ecological and evolutionary processes that have
produced the diversity of life on Earth.
Reviewer Information
Douglas H. Erwin is a senior scientist and Curator of Paleobiology at
the National Museum of Natural History of the Smithsonian Institution,
and an external faculty member at the Santa Fe Institute. His new book
on the end-Permian mass extinction, Extinction: How Life Nearly Died
250 Million Years Ago, will be published by Princeton University Press
in the fall.
References
25.
http://service.bfast.com/bfast/click?bfmid=43945&sourceid=0040348489&categoryid=homepage
26. http://www.americanscientist.org/template/EnewsletterLanding
27. http://www.americanscientist.org/template/BookshelfReviews/issue/741
28. http://www.americanscientist.org/template/AuthorDetail/authorid/1411
30.
http://www.americanscientist.org/template/BookReviewTypeDetail/assetid/44476?&print=yes#44627
31.
http://www.americanscientist.org/template/BookReviewTypeDetail/assetid/44476?&print=yes&print=yes
More information about the paleopsych
mailing list