Richard Lewontin | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Born | Richard Charles Lewontin (1929-03-29)March 29, 1929 New York City, U.S. |
| Died | July 4, 2021(2021-07-04) (aged 92) Cambridge, Massachusetts |
| Alma mater | Harvard University (BS) Columbia University (MS,PhD) |
| Known for | Evolutionary biology Population genetics Lewontin's Fallacy Not in Our Genes The Dialectical Biologist Spandrel (biology) |
| Awards | Sewall Wright Award (1994) Crafoord Prize (2015) Thomas Hunt Morgan Medal (2017) |
| Scientific career | |
| Fields | Genetics Evolutionary biology Population genetics |
| Institutions | Harvard University North Carolina State University University of Rochester University of Chicago Columbia University |
| Thesis | The Effects of Population Density and Composition on Viability in Drosophila melanogaster (1955) |
| Doctoral advisor | Theodosius Dobzhansky[1] |
| Doctoral students | Adriana Briscoe Jerry Coyne Joseph Felsenstein Martin Kreitman[2] Russell Lande |
Richard Charles Lewontin (March 29, 1929 – July 4, 2021[3]) was an Americanevolutionary biologist, mathematician,geneticist, andsocial commentator. A leader in developing themathematical basis ofpopulation genetics and evolutionary theory, he applied techniques frommolecular biology, such asgel electrophoresis, to questions ofgenetic variation and evolution.
In a pair of seminal 1966 papers co-authored withJ. L. Hubby in the journalGenetics,[4][5] Lewontin helped set the stage for the modern field ofmolecular evolution. In 1979, he andStephen Jay Gould introduced the term "spandrel" intoevolutionary theory. From 1973 to 1998, he held an endowed chair in zoology and biology at Harvard University, and from 2003 until his death in 2021 he was a research professor there.
From a sociological perspective, Lewontin strongly opposedgenetic determinism[6] and neodarwinism as expressed in the fields of sociobiology and evolutionary psychology.
Previously, as a member ofScience for the People, he denounced the involvement of prominent scientists in Pentagon programs aimed at developing weapons for the Vietnam War. From the 1990s, he condemned the lobbying ofGMOs by the "genetic-industrial complex".
Lewontin was born in New York City to parents descended from late 19th-centuryAshkenazi Jewish immigrants. His father was a broker of textiles, and his mother a homemaker.[7] He attended Forest Hills High School and theÉcole Libre des Hautes Études in New York. In 1951 he graduated fromHarvard College with aBS degree inbiology. In 1952, Lewontin received anMS degree in mathematical statistics, followed by aPhD degree in zoology in 1954,[8] both fromColumbia University, where he was a student ofTheodosius Dobzhansky.
He held faculty positions atNorth Carolina State University, theUniversity of Rochester, and theUniversity of Chicago. In 1973 Lewontin was appointed asAlexander Agassiz Professor of Zoology and Professor of Biology atHarvard University, holding the position until 1998.
Lewontin worked in both theoretical and experimentalpopulation genetics. A hallmark of his work was an interest in new technology. In 1960, he andKen-Ichi Kojima gave the equations for change ofhaplotype frequencies with interacting natural selection at two loci.[9] Their paper gave a theoretical derivation of the equilibria expected, and also investigated the dynamics of the model by computer iteration. Lewontin later introduced the D' measure oflinkage disequilibrium.[10]
In 1966, he andJ. L. Hubby published a paper that studied the amount of heterozygosity in a population.[4] They used proteingel electrophoresis to survey dozens of loci in the fruit flyDrosophila pseudoobscura, and reported that a large fraction of the loci werepolymorphic, and that at the average locus there was about a 15% chance that the individual washeterozygous. (Harry Harris reported similar results for humans at about the same time.)[11] Previous work with gel electrophoresis had been reports of variation in single loci and did not give any sense of how common variation was.
Lewontin and Hubby's paper also discussed the possible explanation of the high levels of variability by either balancing selection or neutral mutation.Martin Kreitman was later to do a pioneering survey of population-level variability in DNA sequences while a Ph.D. student in Lewontin's lab.[12]
In a landmark paper published in 1972, Lewontin identified that most of the variation (80–85%) within human populations is found within local geographic groups, and differences attributable to the "race" groups defined in his study are a minor part of human genetic variability (1–15%).[13] In a 2003 paper,A. W. F. Edwards criticized Lewontin's conclusion that race is an invalid taxonomic construct, terming itLewontin's fallacy. He showed that the probability ofracial misclassification of an individual based on variation in a single genetic locus is approximately 30%, but the misclassification probability becomes close to zero if enough loci are studied.[14] That is, it appears that a majority of genetic variation is found within groups only if a singlelocus is used, but the reverse is true if analyzing a multiplicity of loci. Edwards' paper was commented on byJonathan Marks, who argued that "the point of the theory of race was to discover large clusters of people that are principally homogeneous within and heterogeneous between, contrasting groups. Lewontin's analysis shows that such groups do not exist in the human species, and Edwards' critique does not contradict that interpretation."[15][16][17]
As of 2003, Lewontin was theAlexander Agassiz Research Professor at Harvard. He has worked with and had great influence on many philosophers of biology, includingWilliam C. Wimsatt,Elliott Sober,Philip Kitcher,Elisabeth Lloyd,Peter Godfrey-Smith,Sahotra Sarkar, and Robert Brandon, often inviting them to work in his lab.
Since 2013, Lewontin has been listed on the Advisory Council of theNational Center for Science Education.[18]
In 1975, whenE. O. Wilson's bookSociobiology proposed evolutionary explanations for human social behaviors, biologists including Lewontin, his Harvard colleaguesStephen Jay Gould andRuth Hubbard responded negatively.Robert Trivers called these accusations "coming from eminent biologists" "intellectually weak and lazy".[19]
Lewontin and Gould introduced the termspandrel to evolutionary biology, inspired by thearchitectural term "spandrel", in an influential 1979 paper, "The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the Adaptationist Programme." "Spandrels" were described as features of anorganism that exist as a necessary consequence of other (perhaps adaptive) features, but do not directly improve fitness (and thus are not necessarily adaptive).[20]This critique sparked both controversy and a revolution in the study of selection by evolutionary biologists. The subsequent 5–20 years consequently saw some of the most novel and rigorous methods to quantify selection in the wild and lab, test for selection phylogenetically, and reconcile the effects of other evolutionary processes (e.g., drift, gene flow, development, historical contingency); all of which resulted in a sort-of renaissance in evolutionary biology.[citation needed]
Lewontin was an early proponent of a hierarchy oflevels of selection in his article, "The Units of Selection". He has been a major influence on philosophers of biology, notablyWilliam C. Wimsatt (who taught with Lewontin andRichard Levins at the University of Chicago), Robert Brandon andElisabeth Lloyd (who studied with Lewontin as graduate students),Philip Kitcher,Elliott Sober, andSahotra Sarkar. Lewontin briefly argued for the historical nature of biological causality in "Is Nature Probable or Capricious?".[21]
In "Organism and Environment" inScientia, and in more popular form in the last chapter ofBiology as Ideology, Lewontin argued that while traditionalDarwinism has portrayed the organism as a passive recipient of environmental influences, a correct understanding should emphasize the organism as an active constructor of its own environment.Niches are not pre-formed, empty receptacles into which organisms are inserted, but are defined and created by organisms. The organism-environment relationship is reciprocal anddialectical.M. W. Feldman and others[22] have developed Lewontin's conception in more detailed models under the termniche construction.
In the adaptationist view of evolution, the organism is a function of both the organism and environment, while the environment is only a function of itself. The environment is seen as autonomous and unshaped by the organism. Lewontin instead believed in a constructivist view, in which the organism is a function of the organism and environment, with the environment being a function of the organism and environment as well. This means that the organism shapes the environment as the environment shapes the organism. The organism shapes the environment for future generations.[23]
Lewontin criticized traditionalneo-Darwinian approaches toadaptation. In his article "Adaptation" in the ItalianEnciclopedia Einaudi, and in a modified version forScientific American, he emphasized the need to give an engineering characterization of adaptation separate from measurement of number of offspring, rather than simply assuming organs or organisms are at adaptive optima.[24] Lewontin said that his more general, technical criticism ofadaptationism grew out of his recognition that the fallacies ofsociobiology reflect fundamentally flawed assumptions of adaptiveness of all traits in much of themodern evolutionary synthesis.
Lewontin accused neo-Darwinists of tellingJust-So Stories when they try to show how natural selection explains such novelties as long-neckedgiraffes.[25]
Along with others, such as Gould, Lewontin was a persistent critic of some themes inneo-Darwinism. Specifically, he criticized proponents ofsociobiology andevolutionary psychology, such as Edward O. Wilson andRichard Dawkins, who attempt to explain animal behaviour and social structures in terms of evolutionary advantage or strategy. He and others criticize this approach when applied to humans, as he sees it asgenetic determinism. In his writing, Lewontin suggests a more nuanced view of evolution is needed, which requires a more careful understanding of the context of the whole organism as well as the environment.[26]
Such concerns about what he viewed as the oversimplification of genetics led Lewontin to be a frequent participant in debates, and an active life as a public intellectual. He lectured widely to promote his views on evolutionary biology and science. In the bookNot in Our Genes (co-authored withSteven Rose andLeon J. Kamin) and numerous articles, Lewontin questioned much of the claimedheritability of human behavioral traits, such asintelligence as measured byIQ tests.[citation needed]
Some academics have criticized him for rejectingsociobiology for non-scientific reasons. Edward Wilson (1995) suggested that Lewontin's political beliefs affected his scientific view. Others, such as Kitcher (1985), countered that Lewontin's criticisms of sociobiology are genuine scientific concerns about the discipline. He wrote that attacking Lewontin's motives amounts to anad hominem argument.[citation needed] Lewontin at times identified himself asMarxist, and asserted that his philosophical views have bolstered his scientific work (Levins and Lewontin 1985).
Lewontin has written on the economics ofagribusiness. He has contended thathybridcorn was developed and propagated not because of its superior quality, but because it allowed agribusiness corporations to force farmers to buy new seed each year rather than plant seed produced by their previous crop of corn (Lewontin 1982). Lewontin testified in an unsuccessful suit in California challenging the state's financing of research to develop automatic tomato pickers. This favored the profits of agribusiness over the employment of farm workers (Lewontin 2000).
As of mid-2015, Lewontin and his wife Mary Jane (Christianson) lived in a log cabin he built with his family in the 1970's inMarlboro, Vermont.[27] Lewontin served many years as a volunteer fireman in Marlboro and also served as a trustee for theMarlboro Music Festival. Dick and Mary Jane had four sons. He was an atheist.[28]
Lewontin died at his home in Cambridge, Massachusetts on July 4, 2021, at the age of 92.[3][29]
{{cite journal}}:Cite journal requires|journal= (help)
Quotations related toRichard Lewontin at Wikiquote| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
| Academics | |
| Artists | |
| People | |
| Other | |
