Acta Biotheretica 37: 321-327, 1988. © 1988 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

REVIEWS

Mae-Wan

Ho and Sidney

metaphors. In

the

theory

Wiley

last

few

of e v o l u t i o n

evolutionary fruitful Sidney

paradigm,

present

Fox

want

writes

more.

turning

point

underpinnings

multitude

of

write

their

in

try

critical

theme

is

which

returns

the common

criticism

of

of

looking

this book,

theory. a

should

with

a

Evolutioto these

attention.

denominator

predominant

on the

of selection, authors

as an external

in the

theme',

One of the elements

Various

As Ho

very crucial

regard

special

'is an emphasis

the book.

But Ho and

'try to a r t i c u l a t e be

a common

and

looks

new e v o l u t i o n a r y

may

the concept

is

they

perspective.

civilisation'.

nature'.

which

which

of what

'A

and

evidence

problems,

for

powerful

Ho and

of) N e o - D a r w i n i s m .

of human

of s e l e c t i o n

as a

New-Darwinism',

empirical

different

sounds.

with

throughout

metaphor

(versions

identify

introduction,

tion of the o r g a n i s m

In

'Beyond

so they deserve

to

it

processes

on e v o l u t i o n a r y

are p a r t i c u l a r l y

Fox

see

Mae-Wan

scientists

perspectives,

and

still

new h u m a n i s t i c

in the history

nary m e t a p h o r s humanistic

are

for a

or synthetic

as the core of

'Evolutionary

combination

They

and

is increasing.

of

to

debates

processes

1988.

regarded

biologists

regarding

her preface:

the conceptual

Ho

a

analysis

as a basis

in

been

the dissenters.

approaches

etc.,

the N e o - D a r w i n i a n

of Ho and Saunders'

for various

paradigm

Most

editors

The book offers

helpful

decades

are among

critical

conceptual

Chichester

but c r i t i c i s m

the

the successor

Evolutionary

(Eds.),

has g e n e r a l l y

biology.

Fox,

metaphors',

Fox

and Sons,

they

integraof this

a criticism argue

agent

that

working

322

upon passive nary

organisms

importance

levels,

from

tion, force.

(Goodwin)

to

not

Ho and

and that much of evolution

generate selection

assumption

and covert

in

at

unity over

of possible -

might

Oyama would

Oyama

in connection

Ho wants

with

this,

and

sees the

different

Though

Ho and

emphasis Still

different,

a

on the

these

On the

one hand

of

systems

separation (p. 121). But

be

related,

are

Ho,

approach

as and the

in her

here:

you

and external looks

view. is

the

a

one

to evolution.

Brian Goodwin

into

and

great differences

conflict

biologist

transformed

regards

To me Oyama's view

there

and a 'historical'

developmental

systems

organisms

(p. 259).

and Ho's anti-selectionist

should

agent and,

contradiction" internal

of the

internal

and selection

of

Susan

distinction

selecting

a separation

"serious

although

a 'rational'

definition

metaphorical

an active

interact

for selection

biology

the

selection,

for organism-environment

and interesting.

between

that

natural

here are two examples

not just the organism

between her approach - A

which

there are overt

differences.

with a

Within

continuously

against

consistent

of

away with

and

She opts

contribution,

forces

terms of

before

their views.

to do

against

evolve.

system as a whole,

can't be

not in

the processes

they seem to prefer

against

organisms

that

environment

own

the new paradigm

level

not be unimportant;

argues

forces.

the units

of

will agree:

scrutiny

be satisfied

between passive

external

evolutionary

interest:

While Mae-Wan

concept.

Oyama).

(p.13).

between

Fox are aware of some of them,

discrepancies

every

the book

discrepancies

paradigmatic

to

random nor arbitrary,

but through

variation

author

Ho)

shows that varia-

can be understood,

could be said to act"

Not every

Gray,

determining

are neither

of fitness,

form and

the

different

this idea as the core of the emerging

variation

the maximization

at

Pollard,

(Bateson,

this activity be

"The fundamental

form and

(Cullis,

behaviour

must

the evolutio-

organisms

to DNA

Fox all

even regard

new paradigm:

within

(Fox)

and

selection,

They

is that

forces

molecules

form-fields According

of

will not do. They stress

argues

more rational

323

science. form,

A

rational

that

determine

is

the

to Goodwin, stresses hand

laws

is p r i m a r i l y

the

internal

authors

like

argue

between

organisms

Although

the p r e v a i l i n g less

are

no unity. It

example, evolution turn

to

alternatives by vague

very

there

is

a

in

far

like

of a new

my opinion.

from clear,

out these

for

approach

differences

the

construction

This

undertaking

to may

of forceful is not

served

concepts. are

simple

deep anchors.

effective

and c o n v i n c i n g

If one takes

it is not only n e c e s s a r y

to d e v e l o p

book,

is c e r t a i n l y

'historical'

Working in

created

seriously

but also

and

of i n t e r a c t i o n

the a l t e r n a t i v e s

alarming

It

of N e w - D a r w i n i s m

developed

in science ones

is not at all attention.

and Patrick

the o u t l i n e s

in some respects

New-Darwinism.

The m e t a p h o r s and have

that

he thereby

in this

selection,

suggest

but

helpful

and h a s t i l y

enemies

which

according

On the other

Oyama

open process

of natural

in detail.

be to

organisms.

clear

laws of

field

Form,

fields;

Susan

are some

'rational'

differ

out

within

environment.

serious a

by such

Gray,

historically

The d i s u n i t y

how

determined

Ho and Fox

with

morphogenetic

and their

visible,

deserves

be c o n c e r n e d

of organisms.

relations

metaphor

clear.

paradigm

unity

Russell

for a

there

should

concerning

structural

Bateson

are

biology

metaphors

to c r i t i c i z e

old

alternatives.

Cor van der Weele Lucasbolwerk 3512

EH

14

Utrecht

The N e t h e r l a n d s

The

Leo W. Buss, University illustr.

evolution

Press,

Hardcover,

The author

of this

evolution

of

consistent

with

of

Princeton, U.S.

individuality, N.J.,

1987.

$ 40; paperback,

book

embryological Neo-Darwinism.

proposes

an

processes, Leo

Buss

Princeton

xv + 203 pp., U.S.

$ 12.95.

explanation from argues

a

52

of the

perspective (correctly,

I

324

believe)

that

either in the

Neo-Darwinism evolutionary

multicellularity, processes

(such

has

not

made enough emphasis,

transition

of

unicellularity to

or in how the more fundamental embryological as cleavage

patterns, gastrulation,

neurula-

tion, etc.) arose in evolution. The book

consists of

four chapters.

Buss critiques August Weissman's been

considered

Darwinism.

as

Briefly,

germ plasm

of

doctrine. This

fundamental

giving rise to gametes) early stage,

from

from

influences

inheritance of is considered

coming

the

acquired characteristics an impossibility.

says Buss, the

ontogeny

Second, tion

he

what is is

did

this

germ

Weissman proposed.

is separated

and is protected

latter.

Thus,

the

(in Lamarck's sense)

inheritance of acquired

perturbations occurring in

genetic material and not the germline.

in the great majority of

between

the

with the wrong theory. First,

isolated from the

Neo-

Buss proposes that, although

Weissman was right in questioning the characteristics,

for

in the individual,

from the somatoplasm at a very any

doctrine has

importance

it postulates that,

(germ cells,

In the first chapter,

and

existing phyla,

somatic

Usually,

the

lines

is

the separa-

not

embryo develops

as clear as from a group

of stem cells, which give rise to both germ and somatic lines. In many cases, individual.

stem cells persist

Moreover,

somatic

for the cells

cells. Therefore,

possibility for heritable mutants

calls them) to arise in somatic cells, and the germline. in

the

Lamarck's

This phenomenon,

course

of

of

sense,

while

must

acquired

first case, variants occur Darwinian

be

there

(or "variants" as he eventually pass to

the

distinguished

characteristics.

as somatic in

to

called "the origin of variants

ontogeny",

inheritance

of the

may dedifferentiate

stem cells and eventually become germ is the

whole life

mutations

second

in

variants

from In the

the Neoappear as

heritable ontogenetic adaptations. After this, Buss proposes his theory that evolutionary

organisms arose as variants Chimeric

(chapter 2). He argues

innovations in the development of the first

individuals

would

(mutations) produced have

appeared,

in ontogeny.

in which a given

325

(somatic)

cell

be normal, variant

lineage has mutated.

and

cell

the

other

line would

the next generation, would

be

organism, would

lineages

individuals

where

all

to

Buss,

between

normal

and

in

order

to

faster

the organism,

of reaching

the germline

a competition

between

sense.

between

different and

consisting

to

chimeric cell

lines

The cell

occupy more

to produce variants also,

of

where

normals.

for

their

It

would

cells

own

not be

has a higher

would

Only the variant

both their own replication

work at

and the second,

the organism

variant

in the Neo-

would

germline,

organisms.

the

In addition,

of the competition

variants

to the

sufficient

than

able

selection

cellular

of the selection

better

the

would also exist,

the first,

consisting

replicate

in

variant

descendants.

natural

the access

chance of survival;

The

and in

cells are variant

the individual. be

and having

organisms

levels:

the

would

mutant).

and would have a higher probability

Therefore,

two different

replication

occupy

(or

to the germ line,

According

replicating

favouring

variant

produced.

of

Darwinian

part,

have access

a competition

occur,

regions

Part of the organism would

and that of

have to

cell

lines

the organism

would be selected. From

my

r~plication

perspective, between

variant

convincing.

It

superior

normals

to

reasons.

Let

somatic

variation.

is

us

line

not in

On the

ment

to

matters in

for

their

a

a

factor

when

moment

the

variant

is

an

cells

replication,

but

of

by Buss)

produce

If

is the it is

than normals.

superior

too late

in their

in develop-

to the germline.

point),

is not to be superior to

in the

in the organism

slower

contribution important

to be

phylogenetic

appears.

be variants

significant

is not

cells

that mutations

of variants

but arising

lines

for

for the following

source

variant

numbers

cells,

(and this

cell variant

(not discussed

there may

to normal

make

Furthermore

for

even if they replicate

other hand,

replication

for

the relative

will be elevated,

normal

important

important

early enough,

and

of the competition

their replication,

an

period of development

concept

necessary

grant

were

An

the

enough

what

really

than normals gametes

to

326 guarantee

the

chimeric

individual

descendants, selection

and at

evolutionary In the about na.

reproduction

the mutants

the

level

advantage

Although

theoretical

in

different tion

cell

(i.e.,

occurs

of

arising

having

3, Buss

speculates

embryological hypotheses fit

they

problem

"variant"

phenomeare

in

very

the above

appears

here.

denotes

mutant

examples,

If in

embryological

differentia-

etc.).

The c o m p e t i t i o n

cell

within

the organism,

For example,

of the

inducing

inducing

embryonic

tissue

induction

tissue.

is favoured

now that

that results

of the induced tissue

cell

this word denotes

ectoderm,

identical.

of the

by natural

types.

how

types

A

normal

thereby

proposes

during

in the p r o l i f e r a t i o n

replication

be favoured

organism,

in chapter

given

different

seen as a strategy decrease

than

of many

the word

endoderm,

are g e n e t i c a l l y

mutant

the normal

clear

the

types

between

less

An a d d i t i o n a l

scheme

many

organisms.

still

2 and

the

not

scheme.

the t h e o r e t i c a l lines,

of

is

mutant

the

origins

some it

may

of

over

the e v o l u t i o n a r y

enough

produce

rest of chapter

interesting,

the

may

of

in

is

in a

Thus,

the

relation

to

induced. We

have

variants, cell

then

and

This

that

replication.

cell

the r e p l i c a t i o n

it occurs

to

variants

of a cell

the tissue

is b e c a u s e

with

access

will

be p h e n o t y p i c a l l y

tissue; of

be enough

that

some growth

that

and

some

factor

(3)

is (I)

it

(2)

not

favour

and this

to a t t r i b u t e

in any

of the cell the

the

need

the

favoured

cell

type

type

that

future

genera-

itself to

replication

increased

for the

may

own

for the o r g a n i s m

localize

their

the

their

in its replication.

in

not

does

cells

specific

favoured may occur

will

identical

to others,

of survival

regardless

enhancing

other

a mutation

in relation

affected;

mutation

the cells

increase

context,

between

even more muddy

to

it is a mistake

to the germline,

phenotype

genetically

makes

tend

type

the m u t a t i o n

genetic

particular

between

chances

However,

This

the

of the c o m p e t i t i o n

interpretation

in increased

or its descendants.

tions,

form

In a N e o - D a r w i n i a n

may result

mutation

second

is that

types.

concept

a

in any

change

the

- it would

production cells.

of

In other

327

words,

although

change

there

the relative

mutations

occur

may

numbers

in the

different

advantageous

of cell

genetic

and not in a particular how the

be

cell

in

that

the organisms,

system of the whole organism,

line.

cell types

types

mutations

Therefore,

it is

not clear

in the organism may favour their

own replication. In

the

fourth

description -

and

of changes

last

chapter,

of units of selection

origin of eukaryotes,

of societies,

effort

in

the theoretical

processes.

fundamental

problem.

that he proposes, such

as

the

interesting. particular

In

consider

being

However,

Buss

the

Also,

some

phenomena,

origin

Weissman's

of

the

of

subject,

of developa

solution the book are

very

presented

about

as well.

anyone

serious

recognizing

doctrine,

hypotheses

developmental

it as an obligatory

is

Some parts of

of

are attractive the

the first

type of general

does not satisfy me.

be the only book on evolutionary

sense,

his

to other contexts

study of the evolution

this

critique

generalizes

etc.

This book has the merit of possibly

mental

Buss

Since this may

interested

processes

in the

will have to

reading.

Francisco

Aboitiz

Neuroscience 73-346

Center

University

for the Health

of California, California

Office

Sciences

Los Angeles

90024,

U.S.A.