Missing Martin Brasier (April 1947 - December 2014)

Sad news came at the end of December, Martin Brasier had been killed in an automobile accident. He had retired from teaching and I know he had plans for more books to follow Darwin's Lost World: The Hidden History of Animal Life and Secret Chambers: The Inside Story of Cells & Complex Life. Most of us from the last decade of the Margulis Lab were introduced to Martin Brasier in the Symbiosis and Earth History Seminar taught one semester by Dr. Michael Dolan, our lab’s expert protistologist. He had us read the Philosophial Transactions of the Royal Society B- Biological Sciences,Vol. 361, No. 1470, 2006 that covered the meeting, ‘Major steps in cell evolution: palaeontological, molecular and cellular evidence of their timing and global effects’ organized by T. Cavalier-Smith, M. Brasier and T. M. Embley. We all came away from that seminar completely won over with respect and admiration for Martin Brasier, paleobiologist, expert on foraminifera, astrobiologist, geologist and polymath.

When Lynn went to England in 2009 to receive the Darwin-Wallace Medal and to spend her year as Eastman Professor at Balliol College, Oxford University, Matin Brasier became one of her colleagues. He later visited UMass-Amherst.I met Martin around the time of the Homage to Darwin debate on evolution. He was one of those people who had an infectious love for life and I liked him instantly. Here is a brief exchange from the debate. Martin and Richard Dawkins disagree over whether extinctions are selection events in evolution. I love Martin’s use of the phrase “there is an argument slightly against that”--its so tactful.Brasier,  “This  is  the  parable  I  tell  and  it’s  a  little  story  of  a  happy  couple  called  Albert  and  Emily  who  are  in  their  40s  or  whatever,  and  they  live  in  a  little  block  of  Alats.  And  Albert’s  taken  to  smoking  cigars  and  

Emily  gets  tired  of  him  smoking  cigars  in  bed  and  asks  him  to  go  out  on  the  balcony  to  smoke  his  cigar.    And  eventually  she  gets  tired  even  of  this  because  it  stinks  the  Alat  out  and  she  gives  him  a  little  push.  A  very  slight  push.  He’s  on  the  edge  of  the  balcony.  Over  he  goes  and  he  falls  down  into  the  Alowerbed.  It  stubs  his  cigar  out,  but  Albert  gets  up  and  climbs  back  up  because  they’re  on  the  Airst  Aloor.    But  she  repeats  exactly  the  same  operation  after  she’s  had  them  relocated  to  the  

Lynn Margulis & Martin Brasierat Oxford University, 2009

12th    Aloor.  She  pushes  with  exactly  the  same  force,  but  because  of  the  energy  built  up  in  the  system,  of  course  the  fall  is  fatal  not  only  to  the  cigar  but  to  him.     My  point  here  is:  it’s  not  the  meteorite,  it’s  the  nature  of  the  system  that  the  meteorite  or  anything  else  perturbed.  What  we’re  showing  with  this  foram  work  is  that  often  systems  which  experience  mass  extinctions  seem  to  have  tuned  themselves  right  to  the  edge  of  efAiciency,  so  they’ve  got  enormously  large,  very  complicated  structures,  and  they  are  set  up  for  the  kill  in  some  way.    The  answer  is  then  that  mass  extinctions  are  caused  by  what  happened  in  the  5  or  10  million  years  beforehand.! Mass  extinctions  then  require  us  to  look  at  the  connections  within  a  system  and  understand  those  connections  and  the  degree,  the  way  in  which  they  feed  through  the  system.    If  that  matters,  if  connections  are  important  to  extinction,  and  presumably  connections  are  important  to  speciation  and  specialization  too  because  you  could  argue  that  mass  extinctions  and  speciation  are  part  of  the  process,  part  of  a  systems  process,  which  we  ought  to  see  in  this  bigger  way.  “   Dawkins,  “Well,  I  suppose  mass  extinctions  are  very  likely  selective,  but  a  very  different  kind  of  selection  from  the  ordinary  selection  that  goes  on  between  mass  extinctions.  So  a  mass  extinction  is  more  like  a  one-­‐off  event.  In  the  Permian  extinction,  most  of  the  brachiopods  went  extinct  and  mollusks  didn’t  …but  it’s  a  totally  different  kind  of  selective  event  from  the  one  that  produces  individual  level  adaptations  within  brachiopods  or  within  mollusks.”   Brasier:  “Well,  there  is  an  argument  slightly  against  that  which  is  the  parallel  pattern  of  distribution  of  extinctions,  which  suggests  that  mass  extinctions  are  part  of  a  parallel  spread  so  that  there  is  a  sort  of  continuum  from  small  extinctions  through  medium  to  very  large.  Which  to  me  suggests  that  the  nature  of  the  causes  as  with  the  explanations  for  avalanches,  big  ones  and  small  ones  are  not  caused  by  different  things.  So  it  does  raise  the  possibility  then  that  we  don’t  have  to  look  outside  the  system.  What  I’m  arguing  is  we  need  to  look  inside  the  system  and  start  to  analyze  system  structure  and  to  extrapolate  that  back  through  time.”    

A GIFT TO THE ARCHIVE FROM LELENG ISAACS“Three 16 mm films made when I was Lynn's Ph.D. student. Lynn, Jim Schadt and I made these films over several Saturdays. Lynn only took Sundays off from the lab and as her student, I worked 7 days a week.  Jim Schadt retired from BU around 1978 and moved to Iowa.  He might have more stuff if he is still around. Also in the box are some original correspondence with Dave Chase, the other co-author in the 1977 Science paper on Microtubules in Prokaryotes.I also included a picture of Lynn Margulis taken in the 1970's.  I think you can figure out the year by looking at the partial calendar on the back.  Lynn was in her late thirties. Regards, LeLeng”

ZOMBIE IDEASThe November issue of National Geographic magazine features a story about zombies. Mindsuckers: Meet Nature's Nightmare is written by science reporter Carl Zimmer and features gorgeous photographs by Anand Varma. The spread also includes graphic novellas by Matthew Twombly reminiscent of one of my childhood favorite comics,Tales from the Crypt. I was thrilled to see such creativity arrayed to introduce National Geographic’s readership to symbiosis and symbiogenesis! Then, I read the story.

There was no discussion of the featured necrotizing symbioses (ecological relationships) that lead over generations to the various forms of evolutionary change (symbiogenesis) seen in the “zombies” and “mindsuckers” (symbionts) Instead, chief among the zombies in the article was the “extended phenotype”, an idea that is dead but thanks to “science reporting” still has legs. THE WALKING DEAD“…development  is  terribly  complicated,  and  we  don't  yet  understand  much  about  how  phenotypes  are  generated.  But  that  they  are  generated  and  that  genes  contribute  signiAicantly  to  their  variation  are  incontrovertible  facts,  and  those  facts  are  all  we  need  in  order  to  make  neo-­‐Darwinism  coherent.”    -­‐-­‐Richard  Dawkins,  The  Extended  Phenotype  (2nd  Edition)  (1990)  Oxford  University  Press,  New  York,  pg  22.

In his book,The Extended Phenotype, Richard Dawkins presents us with a new way of looking at the world as a network. A network of selfish genes that are not limited to the control of the inclusive fitness of selfish organisms, but a network of selfish “genes for” extended phenotypes (i.e., movement, growth, feeding, metabolism, habit, behavior, tools, works, biochemistry, excretion, or any other effect they have on the world).“Just  as  every  gene  is  the  center  of  a  radiating  Aield  of  inAluence  on  the  world,  so  every  phenotypic  character  is  the  center  of  convergent  inAluences  from  many  genes,  both  within  and  outside  the  body  of  the  individual  organism.  The  whole  biosphere...the  whole  world  of  plant  and  animal  matter  is  crisscrossed  with  an  intricate  network  of  Aields  of  genetic  inAluence,  a  web  of  phenotypic  power.”  pg  238It is Dawkins inclusion of a parasite’s “gene for” the control of other living creatures that Zimmer offers up as the explanation of mindsuckers and zombies.

WAY WAR THREETo my request for a comment on the National Geographic story, Third Way evolutionist, James A. Shapiro wrote the following.

photo Anand Varma

! ”Zimmer's  story  is  another  just-­‐so  story,  positing  a  causal  relationship  and  then  concluding  that  it  must  be  so  without  any  evidence.  To  say  that  DNA  encodes  behavior  ignores  a  great  deal  of  molecular,  cell,  developmental  and  behavioral  biology  that  document  all  the  other  factors  that  come  into  play.  Saying  something  is  a  cause  doesn't  show  it  is  a  cause.  Removing  one  part  of  the  system  and  changing  a  behavior  only  shows  that  the  eliminated  part  is  necessary  for  the  behavior,  not  that  it  is  the  sole  or  a  sufAicient  cause  of  the  behavior.     All  biology  requires  molecules  encoded  in  DNA.  But  DNA  is  not  sufAicient.  The  butterAly  and  the  caterpillar  have  the  same  DNA,  but  the  history  of  development  is  critical  to  which  appears  at  a  certain  time.  The  DNA  of  a  normally  developing  salamander  limb  and  a  regenerating  salamander  limb  are  the  same,  but  the  developmental  history  is  different.  How  can  that  be  if  the  whole  process  is  written  in  the  DNA?  The  same  goes  for  every  example  of  embryonic  regulation,  regeneration,  or  healing  that  we  know.     Genomic  data  cannot  express  itself;  a  living  cell  is  required.  Only  the  cell  reproduces  itself.  Extrinsic  factors  control  how  the  DNA  data  get  used.  DNA  is  a  rewritable  memory  system  in  a  very  complex  computer,  and  we  have  yet  to  learn  much  about  how  the  architecture  of  that  computer  evolves.”

ALL MODELS ARE WRONG, SOME ARE USEFULThe incoherence in The Extended Phenotype begins with its assertion that its scientific facts (i.e., corrigible approximations) are precise and accurate certainties. It mistakes its models for accurate, precise and complete representations of nature (i.e., animals = life, DNA molecules = “genes for” extended phenotypes, random mutation = novelty, natural selection = evolution). It assigns to a part of the system an emergent property of the system (e.g., DNA replicates). It is reductionism that has forgotten the system(s) it artificially conceptualizes as parts, forgotten that systems are by definition more than the sum of their parts, and forgotten that parts of living systems often change radically when isolated. CONVERGENT EVOLUTIONThe Extended Phenotype is not without some thought provoking ideas. As I read the book, I noted quite an astounding number of instances where the arguments Richard Dawkins was making could have been applied equally well to the Gaia hypothesis, especially in its early days. Here are just three samples and they get better throughout the book.“What  I’m  advocating  is  a  point  of  view,  a  way  of  looking  at  for  familiar  facts  and  ideas,  and  a  way  of  asking  new  questions  about  them…  I'm  not  trying  to  convince  anyone  of  the  truth  of  any  factual  proposition,  rather  I  am  trying  to  show  the  reader  a  way  of  seeing  biological  facts.”  (pg  1)

“I  use  the  example  simply  to  demonstrate  that  it  is  possible  for  a  theoretical  book  to  be  worth  reading  even  if  it  does  not  advance  testable  hypotheses  but  seeks,  instead,  to  change  the  way  we  see.”    (pg  2)

“One  feature  of  life  in  this  world  which,  like  sex,  we  have  taken  for  granted  and  maybe  should  not,  is  that  living  matter  comes  in  discrete  packages  called  organisms.  …  One  of  my  aims  in  this  book  is  to  break  that  hold.    I  want  to  switch  emphasis  from  the  individual  body  as  focal  unit  of  functional  discussion.    At  the  very  least  I  want  to  make  us  aware  of  how  much  we  take  for  granted  when  we  look  at  life  as  a  collection  of  discreet  individual  organisms.”  (pg  4)

Dawkins must have found it bitterly ironic that his carefully constructed arguments for The Extended Phenotype adapted so easily to Lovelock’s Gaia hypothesis. As the arch foe of such “a  lapse  into  sloppily  unconscious  group  selectionism”  (pg  6), Dawkins finally has to admit the truth of this in the pages of his own book.“There  is  a  risk,  which  I  had  better  forestall,  that  such  talk  of  adaptation  on  a  global  scale  may  call  to  the  reader’s  mind  the  fashionable  image  of  the  ecological  ‘web’,  of  which  the  most  extreme  manifestation  is  the  ‘Gaia’  hypothesis  of  Lovelock  (1979).  My  web  of  interlocking  extended  phenotypic  inAluences  bears  a  superAicial  resemblance  to  the  webs  of  mutual  dependence  and  symbiosis  that  bulk  so  largely  in  the  pop-­‐ecology  literature  (e.g.  The  Ecologist)  and  in  Lovelock’s  book.  The  comparison  could  hardly  be  more  misleading.  Since  Lovelock’s  ‘Gaia’  hypothesis  has  been  enthusiastically  espoused  by  no  less  a  scientist  then  Margulis  (1989),  and  extravagantly  praised  by  Mellanby  (1979)  as  the  work  of  a  genius,  it  cannot  be  ignored,  and  I  must  digress  in  order  categorically  to  disclaim  any  connection  with  the  extended  phenotype.”  (pg  234-­‐235)

ANTHROPOCENTRICITY 101: Are Genes Selfish? Is Natural Selection Bad?During the Homage to Darwin debate on Evolution, Lynn Margulis asked how a gene, regardless of definition, could be thought of as selfish when it had no self. She was pointing out another danger of being anthropocentric: the inappropriate application of human values as metrics for natural systems. In 2013, Toby Tyrrell, a professor of Earth system science at the National Oceanography Centre, University of Southampton in the UK published On Gaia: A Critical Investigation of the Relationship between Life and Earth. You can use this link to find my review on Amazon if you want a longer explanation, but Tyrrell actually bases most of his critique of Gaia on neo-Darwinist (zombie) ideas and what he states as his strongest argument against Gaia theory rests on death as bad. He reasons that if Gaia regulated Earth to favor life, fewer or perhaps even no organisms would die. He ties this to “nitrogen starvation”, the lack of fixed nitrogen.

So let’s say Gaia self-organized in such a way that there was enough nitrogen being fixed (by the cells that do that) to go around. That would only swap mortality from the fixed nitrogen users to the nitrogen fixers. Fixed nitrogen might no longer be a limiting factor, but the Earth would still not be able to support the reproductive capacity of the estimated 30 million extant species that compete for the other finite energy, gases, chemicals, water and habitable space of the biosphere. Natural selection would still maintain a balance of what is possible, would still recycle. As an emergent property of the Earth system that is both necessary and inevitable, natural selection is well beyond Disney dichotomies of good or bad.

CRITTERS SAM BOWSER WOULD LOVE Ann Cox sent along the following link to Lily Simonson’s website and she writes,“Have been thinking a lot about the late Lynn Margulis recently. Lily Simonson paints yeti crabs and other creatures that inhabit harsh environments.  I wish Lily and Lynn could have met, but it's not too late for you to meet Lily.  Google her after you have seen her website.  Lily is a rather wonderful artist. Lily Simonson is worth revisiting, especially since she just returned from a SCUBA trip under the ice of Antarctica.” 

BOSTON GLOBE MAGAZINE HAS PROBIOTICS ON THE BRAINA growing number of scientists now believe that gut bacteria can influence mental health. More food for thought about your gut instincts. Depression can be treated with probiotics. Lynn used to say, “If you feel like you’re falling apart, you probably are.”

DESPERATELY SEEKING SIGNS OF LIFE The Lynn Margulis Archive at ScholarWorks is looking for HD videos of the Signs of Life: A Symposium Celebrating the 50th Anniversary of NASA’s Exobiology Program. Lynn, James Lovelock and Martin Brasier all spoke at this event and I have been trying without success since Lynn’s memorial symposium to obtain copies of these videos. If you know how these videos might be secured by the Archive, please write to me at jmacallister@environmentalevolution.org.