Showing posts with label Origin of Species. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Origin of Species. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 24, 2009

Origin of Species: new online variorum

Yesterday, the world celebrated the sesquicentennial of the publication of The Origin of Species. But it is worth stressing that there was not one "Origin of Species", but six different editions produced in Britain alone during Darwin's lifetime. Fifty years ago, in time for the hundredth anniversary of the first publication, Morse Peckham produced a variorum text, which showed the variant readings between the six editions. However, Peckham's variorum has always been difficult to follow and is decidedly old-fashioned with its literal use of cut and paste.

To celebrate the 150th anniversary, my colleague at the University of Birmingham, Barbara Bordalejo, working with John van Wyhe at Darwin Online, has produced a fantastic new digital online variorum, which is much more flexible and user-friendly than Peckham's. Take a look at it here: http://darwin-online.org.uk/Variorum/index.html

For more details, see the editor's introduction: http://darwin-online.org.uk/Variorum/Introduction.html

At last, all of us can follow the evolution of The Origin!

Sunday, January 18, 2009

Charles Darwin: ecologist

Our bicentennial Darwin Day celebrations in Birmingham are fast approaching (I will blog more on our exciting activities soon). Within our multi-disciplinary programme of events, we have a talk on invasive species by local ecologist/biogeographer, Jon Sadler. We have a rule stating that all speakers at our Darwin Day events have to include a quotation from Darwin in their talks, so Jon just asked me to help him find some appropriate quotes for his talk.

In The Rough Guide to Evolution I include a box highlighting Charles Darwin's status as an early ecologist:
The term “ecology” was not coined until in 1866 by Darwin’s German admirer Haeckel. However, in the third and fourth chapters of The Origin, Darwin’s emphasis on the “complex relations of all animals and plants throughout nature” guarantees him the status of an early ecologist. In Chapter 3, he puzzles out how enclosure of land can lead to a proliferation of fir trees and hits on the answer: the exclusion of cattle that graze on seedlings. He speculates on the cascade of ecological changes that might result from an increase in insectivorous birds in Paraguay. And he produces a beautiful English example of “how plants and animals, most remote in the scale of nature, are bound together by a web of complex relations”, by pointing out that (1) humble bees are needed for fertilisation of some plants; (2) the number of bees in an area depends on the number of mice; (3) the number of mice depends on the number of cats, so that the number of cats can determine the frequency of flowers in a district!
In Chapter 4, Darwin writes “It has been experimentally proved that if a plot of ground be sown with one species of grass, and a similar plot be sown with several distinct genera of grasses, a greater number of plants and a greater weight of dry herbage can thus be raised.” Many subsequent studies have confirmed this principle, which lies at the heart of organic farming methods. In his haste, Darwin unfortunately did not say when or where the pioneering study had been carried out. Recently, two British ecologists, Andy Hector and Rowan Hooper, have tracked the source of the information to George Sinclair, head gardener to the Duke of Bedford, who, in an 1826 article, described what must count as the first ecological experiments, conducted at Woburn Abbey in England, a few years earlier.
BUT, as if the above wasn't enough to establish Darwin's ecologist credentials, in trying to help Jon, I have just discovered this fascinating article from 2001:
Here, two modern ecologists, Stuart Ludsin and Andrea Wolfe, compare current thinking on the ecology of biological species with Darwin's views as expressed in the Origin. They draw on a conceptual framework on biological invasions set out by Williamson in 1996, considering Darwin's contributions under ten conceptual framework points:

  1. Most arrivals at present are from human importations, but natural arrivals also are of interest. 
  2. Most invasions fail; only a limited number of taxa succeed (“tens” rule). 
  3. Invasion (or propagule) pressure is an important variable, so invasions are often to accessible habitats by transportable species. 
  4. All communities are invasible, perhaps some more than others. 
  5. The a priori obvious is often irrelevant to invasion success. Among factors to consider: the intrinsic rate of natural increase (r), abundance in native habitat, taxonomic isolation, climatic and habitat matching, vacant niches. 
  6. Spread can be at any speed in any direction. 
  7. Most invaders produce minor consequences (tens rule). 
  8. The consequences of invasions can be severe, ranging from depressed populations to individual extinctions to ecosystem restructuring, and the causal mechanisms driving these changes can be diverse
  9. Genetic factors may determine invasion success; genetic factors affect events at the initial invasion; evolution may occur after invasion. 
  10. Invasions are informative about the structure of communities and the strength of interactions, and vice versa.
In each case, they provide good evidence that Darwin got there first (except for the point on genetic factors)!

They conclude:
"...The Origin of Species is so much more than a seminal text on evolution. Historians and biologists alike have argued that this work provided the basis of modern-day ecology, and a cursory read of The Origin of Species will reveal the true roots of many ecological theories and phenomena (e.g., competitive exclusion, limiting similarity, character displacement, predation, sexual selection, kin selection, island biogeography)...

Given that Darwin’s conceptualization of biological invasion success really does not differ much from the present conventional wisdom (regardless of the correctness of ideas, whether old or new), we, like others feel that Darwin’s insights into biological invasions should be recognized. Quite possibly, had some of Darwin’s observations on biological invasions been better noted, we might not be experiencing the severity and variety of problems that we currently face."
So, as well as one of the greatest travel writers, geologists, specimen collectors and natural historians, we should give Darwin additional credit as one of the founders of ecology!

Thursday, January 8, 2009

Blogging the Origin

John Whitfield, a London-based science writer is reading a chapter of the Origin each day until Darwin's 200th birthday and is going to be blogging on the experience. I for one will follow his progress with great interest.

Here is the advice I provided in the comments on his blog:

I applaud your efforts. I first read the Origin five years ago in the run-up to my Inaugural Lecture and was surprised how contemporary much of it seemed, particularly when viewed in the light of my own field (bacterial genomics) about which Darwin could have known nothing. Having said that, some parts are hard-going!

If you, or anyone else, wants to supplement your reading of the Origin by having someone read it to you, then one good place to start is Richard Dawkins' five hour abridged audiobook version, which you can get from iTunes (at least in the UK) from here. Also worth a look for the less brave is the Penguin abridgment On Natural Selection. If you want someone to hold your hand while reading, try How to Read Darwin by Mark Ridley or Janet Browne's Darwin's Origin of Species, a Biography.

For the completist, a full 19-hour audio version of the Origin is available from Darwin Online, but as it is computer- generated it is hard work to listen to. More palatable is the Librivox audiobook version, but the readers are amateurs and tolerability varies from chapter to chapter.

I briefly discuss Darwin's use of language in the Origin in my own book The Rough Guide to Evolution and provide a one-page summary, which I won't share here for fear of giving away the plot ;-)

If you want a completely barking mad approach to the Origin, you should try listening/watching The Origin of Species in Dub, a celebration of Darwin's masterpiece through the medium of reggae music, which I created with a Jamaican friend a few years back. Currently, Canadian Lit-Hop artist Baba Brinkman is creating The Rap Guide to Evolution for our celebrations in Birmingham this year. He is also mapping each chapter heading from the Origin on to a separate Rap music track. I am very much looking forward to it. And of course to hearing your thoughts on The Origin as you go through it chapter by chapter!

Saturday, October 25, 2008

Even Koonin nods

Classicists have a turn of phrase, "Even Homer Nods". The phrase originates from the Roman poet Horace (et idem indignor quandoque bonus dormitat Homerus) and has become a proverbial phrase not just for Homer's numerous continuity errors, but more generally to allow for slip-ups by someone of such high stature that the idea that they can make mistakes seems unthinkable. 

Eugene Koonin is a colossus in the application of bioinformatics to the study of evolution, with over 500 papers to his name. But I am afraid in a paper just published he suffers from his very own Homeric nod.

An abstract and link to the paper in question can be found here:
Koonin EV (2008). Evolution of genome architecture. Int J Biochem Cell Biol.

The offending phrase is the very first sentence of the abstract:

"Charles Darwin believed that all traits of organisms have been honed to near perfection by natural selection."

which elicits a roar in response: NO, HE DIDN'T!!

Eugene appears to have overlooked a whole section of Chapter XIII of the Origin of Species, entitled Rudimentary, atrophied, or aborted organs and starting off with:
Organs or parts in this strange condition, bearing the stamp of inutility, are extremely common throughout nature. For instance, rudimentary mammæ are very general in the males of mammals: I presume that the "bastard-wing" in birds may be safely considered as a digit in a rudimentary state: in very many snakes one lobe of the lungs is rudimentary; in other snakes there are rudiments of the pelvis and hind limbs. Some of the cases of rudimentary organs are extremely curious; for instance, the presence of teeth in fœtal whales, which when grown up have not a tooth in their heads; and the presence of teeth, which never cut through the gums, in the upper jaws of our unborn calves. It has even been stated on good authority that rudiments of teeth can be detected in the beaks of certain embryonic birds. Nothing can be plainer than that wings are formed for flight, yet in how many insects do we see wings so reduced in size as to be utterly incapable of flight, and not rarely lying under wing-cases, firmly soldered together!
And as Darwin himself recognised, such rudimentary features are not some throwaway feature under the Theory of Evolution, but a crucial pillar of support for it!
On the view of descent with modification, we may conclude that the existence of organs in a rudimentary, imperfect, and useless condition, or quite aborted, far from presenting a strange difficulty, as they assuredly do on the ordinary doctrine of creation, might even have been anticipated, and can be accounted for by the laws of inheritance.
And of course similar arguments apply at the level of genomes. No intelligent designer would ever leave such a mess of junk behind in the genomes of mammals like ourselves. And why would such a creator deliberately break the gene that allows us humans to make vitamin C?! Is scurvy a message from God telling us not to undertake long sea voyages of exploration? (here is an exercise for students on this issue)

But back to the offending paper. So, here we have a "Kooninian nod" equal to the resurrection of Pylaimenes. Even the "well-born" sometimes slip up!

PS. I am afraid that Eugene's outline of natural selection in the paper itself also strikes me as rather shaky, but as I am about to disappear off on vacation, I will leave it to the reader to work out why.