| Popis: |
John Wiley and Sons 1998. $27.95, hbk (420 pages)ISBN 0 471 32985 1The interaction between embryonic development and evolution has been thought about since the early 19th century. According to the jacket, this book attempts to reconcile the different views of rapid evolution observed in the fossil record and Darwin’s view of slow evolutionary change. Clearly, this is a topic worth discussing, given the progress in the understanding of the conservation and differences in development between phyla that are now known. Unfortunately, the author Jeffrey Schwartz, an accomplished paleoanthropologist, has failed to grasp in this book the fundamentals of genetics or developmental biology; a handicap when trying to combine the recent advances in these fields with evolution. There are numerous factual errors in the text – some trivial, but some that lead to bizarre theories. Even the glossary has mistakes and misleading definitions of some of the technical terms used in the book. For example, an allele is not ‘One of a pair of alternative states for a gene’ (my italics), and the sole function of DNA is described as being that ‘it regulates protein synthesis’. There are also more fundamental errors in the text. The statement that point mutations in genes are ‘essentially silent’ is just plain wrong. This leads to the incorrect conclusion that they cannot be involved in the gradual evolution of an organism. The explanation given that crossing over between homologous chromosomes causes the small discrepancies observed in the expected Mendelian 3:1 ratio in hybrid crosses is again incorrect. Crossing over makes no difference to this ratio. It is stated (page 350) that a Drosophila oocyte will go (rather than has been) through meiosis. These errors and others, including the statement that the Drosophila gene hedgehog and the vertebrate Hoxd complex of genes represent the same homeobox gene, make one doubt that the author has properly interpreted the wealth of developmental genetic and evolutionary data that would be required to make this book a useful addition to library shelves.An interesting aspect of the book is the characterization of some of the scientists who have contributed to this field. I cannot comment on the accuracy of the interesting insights into the ablution habits of Peter Andrews (page 32), for example. However, and even here there are errors, Sean Carroll may or may not be a paleontologist, but what he clearly is, and what he is being referenced for, is his remarkable comparative molecular and developmental work.The book is written more as a collection of essays than as a coherent thesis, and many points are repeated in several chapters, but this is largely a question of style. The history of paleontology reviewed in the early chapters is interesting but this has been covered in many texts before. The overall grand scheme or ‘New Evolution’ in the final chapter is confused and many will strongly disagree with it.As such, I would not recommend this book to the interested non-professional, although few of them would be reading TiG anyway. Readers, especially undergraduates, should proceed with caution – otherwise this book might explain the sudden origins of errors emerging in examination answers to come. |
Full Text from ScienceDirect