phenotype

back to index

description: composite of the organism's observable characteristics or traits resulting from the interaction of its genotype with the environment

279 results

The Extended Phenotype: The Long Reach of the Gene

by Richard Dawkins  · 1 Jan 1982  · 506pp  · 152,049 words

and the Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism. His most recent book is Brainchildren: Essays on Designing Minds (MIT Press and Penguin, 1998). The Extended Phenotype The Long Reach of the Gene Richard Dawkins With a new afterword by Daniel Dennett Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP Oxford

Modifiers 9 Selfish DNA, Jumping Genes, and a Lamarckian Scare 10 An Agony in Five Fits 11 The Genetical Evolution of Animal Artefacts 12 Host Phenotypes of Parasite Genes 13 Action at a Distance 14 Rediscovering the Organism Afterword by Daniel Dennett References Further Reading Glossary Author Index Subject Index Acknowledgements

tend to have low heritability (Falconer 1960); ‘…evolution by natural selection destroys the genetic variance on which it feeds’ (Lewontin 1979b). Functional hypotheses frequently concern phenotypic traits, like possession of eyes, which are all but universal in the population, and therefore without contemporary genetic variation. When we speculate about, or make

increase came about through evolution, probably propelled by natural selection. (4) Whether propelled by selection or not, at least part of the evolutionary change in phenotype reflected an underlying genetic change: allele replacement took place and consequently mean mental ability increased over generations. (5) By definition therefore, at least in the

change. In this sense, the substitution of a neutral allele would not constitute evolution …’ If a whole-organism biologist sees a genetically determined difference among phenotypes, he already knows he cannot be dealing with neutrality in the sense of the modern controversy among biochemical geneticists. He might, nevertheless, be dealing with

a neutral character in the sense of an earlier controversy (Fisher & Ford 1950; Wright 1951). A genetic difference could show itself at the phenotypic level, yet still be selectively neutral. But mathematical calculations such as those of Fisher (1930b) and Haldane (1932a) show how unreliable human subjective judgement can

manifested in changed selection pressures. We have now added the more subtle point that changes in the environment may change the very nature of the phenotypic character we set out to explain. Historical constraints The jet engine superseded the propeller engine because, for most purposes, it was superior. The designers

generation. In this race of Rana esculenta bodies, therefore, ridibunda genes are germ-line replicators, lessonae genes dead-end ones. Dead-end replicators can exert phenotypic effects. They can even be naturally selected. But the consequences of that natural selection are irrelevant to evolution (see Chapter 5). To make the next

being unable to cross over. The ‘experience’ of any part of the ‘inversion supergene’ therefore repeatedly includes the other parts of the supergene and their phenotypic consequences. A habitat selection gene anywhere in such a supergene, say a gene that makes individuals choose dry microclimates, would then provide a consistent habitat

survival and reproduction. Segregation distorters are therefore, on the whole, likely to be outlaws: we expect that selection will favour genes at other loci whose phenotypic effect is to reduce the segregation distortion. This brings us to the topic of modifiers. Modifiers The classic proving ground for the theory of modifier

they are passively carried. The passivity of their genotypes may be an immediate consequence of the lack of cytoplasm in spermatozoa: a gene cannot achieve phenotypic expression except via cytoplasm. This is a proximal explanation. But it is at least worth toying with reversing the proposition to obtain an ultimate functional

explanation: sperms are made small, as an adaptation to prevent the phenotypic expression of the haploid genotype. On this hypothesis we are proposing an arms race between (haploid-expressed) genes for increased competitive ability among spermatozoa on

justified in expecting to see genes assisting molecularly different alleles at their own locus within a species gene-pool, provided they had the same phenotypic effects. A phenotypically neutral mutation at a locus changes molecular identity but does nothing to weaken any selection there may be in favour of mutual assistance. Green

may be transcribed into RNA, but then ‘spliced out’ before the RNA is translated into amino acid sequences. Either way, it is never expressed phenotypically, if by phenotypic expression we mean expression via the orthodox route of controlling protein synthesis (Doolittle & Sapienza 1980). This does not mean, however, that the so-called

properties be? Paradoxically, we are most familiar with the more indirect, elaborate, and roundabout methods by which DNA molecules secure their future. These are their phenotypic effects on bodies, achieved by the proximal route of controlling protein synthesis, and hence by the more distal routes of controlling embryonic development of morphology

to this kind of selection, although here the intragenomic selection pressures will probably be swamped by more powerful pressures, positive and negative, resulting from conventional phenotypic effects. Conventional selection results in changes in the frequency of replicators relative to their alleles at defined loci on the chromosomes of populations. Intragenomic selection

, forward direction. This is why bodily adaptations can come about by selection. Genes are allowed to exert their normal effects on development. Their developmental consequences—phenotypic effects—feed back on those genes’ chances of surviving, and as a result gene frequencies change in succeeding generations in adaptive directions. Selective theories of

adaptation, but not instructive theories, can cope with the fact that the relationship between a gene and its phenotypic effect is not an intrinsic property of the gene, but a property of the forward developmental consequences of the gene when interacting with the consequences

-nuclear inheritance. It is becoming increasingly clear that non-nuclear genes, either in organelles such as mitochondria or loose in cytoplasm, exert noticeable effects on phenotypes (Grun 1976). I had intended to include a section called The Selfish Plasmagene, discussing the expected consequences of selection acting on cytoplasmic replicators, and the

than an ‘external’ behavioural loop. Indeed, a geneticist in the pure sense of the word need not care about the detailed pathway from gene to phenotypic effect. Strictly speaking, a geneticist who concerns himself with these interesting matters is temporarily wearing the hat of an embryologist. The pure geneticist is concerned

elaborate and spectacular bowers (Gilliard 1963). It is as though some species have shifted part of the burden of adaptation from bodily phenotype to extended phenotype. So far the phenotypic effects we have been considering have extended only a few yards away from the initiating genes, but in principle there is no reason

a relative complication. Fundamentally what is going on is that genes, compared with their alleles, exert quantitative, mutually interacting, mutually modifying, effects on a shared phenotype, the mound. They do this proximally by controlling the chemistry of cells in worker bodies, and hence worker behaviour. The principle is the same, whether

internal structural feature—for termite mounds are like bodies with a complex ‘organ’ structure. How could we do a genetic study of such group-manufactured phenotypes? We need not hope to find normal Mendelian inheritance with simple dominance. An obvious complication, as already mentioned, is that the genotypes of the individuals

to explain analogously the principles of how a science of ‘extended genetics’ might work. Using these assumptions, then, we can write down the expected extended phenotypes, considering mud colour only, resulting from crosses between the various possible founding pair genotypes. For instance, all colonies founded by a heterozygous king and a

a working hypothesis we might expect that disputes resulting from genetic heterogeneity in termites would be resolved by similar rules. In this way the extended phenotype could take up a discrete and regular shape, despite being built by genetically heterogeneous workers. The analysis of artefacts given in this chapter seems,

symbiotic cellulose-digesting microorganisms in the gut—flagellates or bacteria. The symbionts are obligately dependent on the termites, and the termites on them. The proximal phenotypic power of the symbiont genes is exerted via protein synthesis in symbiont cytoplasm. But just as termite genes reach out beyond the cells that enclose

closely related individuals, members of a kin-group. The logic of the argument now seems to compel us to contemplate the possibility of an extended phenotype’s being jointly manipulated, not necessarily cooperatively, by genes from distantly related individuals, individuals of different species, even different kingdoms. This is the direction

genes ‘for’ changes in host physiology. The symptoms of parasitic castration, sex-change, increased size, or whatever they may be, are properly regarded as extended phenotypic manifestations of parasite genes. The alternative to Baudoin’s interpretation is that changes in host physiology and behaviour are not parasite adaptations, but simply dull

To recapitulate that story in slightly different terms, a student of snail genetics and a student of fluke genetics might each look at the same phenotypic variation, variation in snail shell thickness. The snail geneticist would partition the variance between a genetic and an environmental component, by correlating the thickness of

the cytoplasm surrounding the nucleus in which the gene sits. Messenger RNA streams through the nuclear membrane and mediates genetic control over cytoplasmic biochemistry. The phenotypic expression of a gene is then, in the first place, its influence on cytoplasmic biochemistry. In its turn, this influences the form and structure

‘We have here simple Mendelian inheritance the expression of which is constantly delayed one generation.’ The phenomenon perhaps arises when the embryological event determining the phenotypic trait occurs so early in development as to be influenced by maternal messenger RNA from the egg cytoplasm, before the zygote has begun to manufacture

it by defeating all available alternative alleles. The weapons with which they won, and the weapons with which their rivals lost, are their respective phenotypic consequences. These phenotypic consequences are conventionally thought of as being restricted to a small field around the replicator itself, its boundaries being defined by the body wall

quote key passages from the summary of Mayr’s chapter (pp. 295–296), showing how they may be adapted to the world of the extended phenotype. The phenotype is the product of the harmonious interaction of all genes. The genotype is a ‘physiological team’ in which a gene can make a maximum

substances which ultimately benefit other cells that do contain germ-line copies of the leaf genes, the genes which gave the leaves their characteristically leafy phenotypes. But we cannot accept the conclusion of the previous paragraph, that inter-leaf vehicle selection, and inter-organ selection generally, could go on if

is a phenomenon which has emerged as a result of natural selection on primitively independent selfish replicators. It has paid replicators to behave gregariously. The phenotypic power by which they ensure their survival is in principle extended and unbounded. In practice the organism has arisen as a partially bounded local concentration

about the conditions under which content can be ascribed to mechanisms. In philosophical jargon, pure extensionality reigns in genetics, and this makes any labelling of phenotypic traits ‘a matter of arbitrary convenience’ but not, for that reason, unmotivated by our interest in drawing attention to the most telling facts about the

34, 247–278. Cavalier-Smith, T. (1980). How selfish is DNA? Nature 285, 617–618. Cavalli-Sforza, L. & Feldman, M. (1973). Cultural versus biological inheritance: phenotypic transmission from parents to children. Human Genetics 25, 618–637. Cavalli-Sforza, L. & Feldman, M. (1981). Cultural Transmission and Evolution. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University

in Ethology (eds P. P. G. Bateson & R. A. Hinde), pp. 7–54. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dawkins, R. (1978a). Replicator selection and the extended phenotype. Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie 47, 61–76. Dawkins, R. (1978b). What is the optimon? University of Washington, Seattle, Jessie & John Danz Lecture, unpublished. Dawkins, R. (1979a

. L. (1980). The Bruce effect: an evaluation of male/female advantages. American Naturalist 114, 932–938. Seger, J. A. (1980). Models for the evolution of phenotypic responses to genotypic correlations that arise in finite populations. PhD thesis, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. Shaw, G. B. (1921). Back to Methuselah. Reprinted 1977. Harmondsworth

preformationism, implies that embryonic development is fundamentally, and in principle, irreversible (see central dogma). epistasis A class of interactions between pairs of genes in their phenotypic effects. Technically the interactions are non-additive which means, roughly, that the combined effect of the two genes is not the same as the sum

. See also segregation distorter. meme A unit of cultural inheritance, hypothesized as analogous to the particulate gene, and as naturally selected by virtue of its ‘phenotypic’ consequences on its own survival and replication in the cultural environment. Mendelian inheritance Non-blending inheritance by means of pairs of discrete hereditary factors (now

is often taken to culminate in the production of the adult, but strictly it includes later stages such as senescence. The doctrine of the extended phenotype would lead us to generalize ‘ontogeny’ to include the ‘development’ of extracorporeal adaptations, for example artefacts like beaver dams. optimon The unit of natural

consider it diploid for most purposes. Chapter 11 suggests that although individual termites are diploid, the whole termite nest may be regarded as the extended phenotypic product of a tetraploid genotype. vehicle Used in this book for any relatively discrete entity, such as an individual organism, which houses replicators (q.

, 11, 186, 195 cellular ecology, 222–223 cellular parasites, 226 central dogma, 97 of embryology, 173–176 of molecular genetics, 168 central theorem of extended phenotype, 233, 248 of sociobiology, 5, 55, 58, 233 centriole, 160 Cepaea nemoralis, 31 characteristic length, 89 chemical gradients, 203 Cheshire Cat, 223 chess, computer,

Beyond Inheritance: Our Ever-Mutating Cells and a New Understanding of Health

by Roxanne Khamsi;  · 21 Apr 2026  · 335pp  · 91,958 words

/​12/​29/​health/​research/​29cancer.html. GO TO NOTE REFERENCE IN TEXT coaxed to become tame: V. M. Weaver et al., “Reversion of the Malignant Phenotype of Human Breast Cells in Three-Dimensional Culture and In Vivo by Integrin Blocking Antibodies,” Journal of Cell Biology 137, no. 1 (1997): 231–45

REFERENCE IN TEXT all of them had PNH clones: David J. Araten et al., “Clonal Populations of Hematopoietic Cells with Paroxysmal Nocturnal Hemoglobinuria Genotype and Phenotype Are Present in Normal Individuals,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 96, no. 9 (1999): 5209–14, doi

/​10.1038/​347434a0. GO TO NOTE REFERENCE IN TEXT found ten specific DNA changes: Amanda Padovan et al., “Differences in Gene Expression Within a Striking Phenotypic Mosaic Eucalyptus Tree That Varies in Susceptibility to Herbivory,” BMC Plant Biology 13, no. 1 (2013): 29, doi.org/​10.1186/​1471-2229-13-29

. GO TO NOTE REFERENCE IN TEXT cells with restored dystrophin: Eric P. Hoffman et al., “Somatic Reversion/Suppression of the Mouse mdx Phenotype In Vivo,” Journal of the Neurological Sciences 99, no. 1 (1990): 9–25, doi.org/​10.1016/​0022-510x(90)90195-s. GO TO NOTE

IN TEXT The reanalysis revealed: Laura K. Jackson et al., “Helicobacter pylori Diversification During Chronic Infection Within a Single Host Generates Sub-Populations with Distinct Phenotypes,” PLOS Pathogens 16, no. 12 (2020): e1008686, doi.org/​10.1371/​journal.ppat.1008686. GO TO NOTE REFERENCE IN TEXT were more adept at colonizing

.1046/​j.1365-2958.1999.01140.x. GO TO NOTE REFERENCE IN TEXT accelerate their evolution by a hundredfold: Ahmad Shafiee et al., “Recombination and Phenotype Evolution Dynamics of Helicobacter pylori in Colonized Hosts,” International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology 66, no. 7 (2016): 2471–77, doi.org/​10.1099

Human Diversity: The Biology of Gender, Race, and Class

by Charles Murray  · 28 Jan 2020  · 741pp  · 199,502 words

into the story of sex differences in cognitive repertoires eventually, but as I write they represent important findings with undetermined or uncertain effects on the phenotype. The Activational Effects of Sex Hormones Almost everyone has heard about sex hormones. Both sexes have all of the major sex hormones to some

varying with their level in the bloodstream, which changes over time. The technical term for these effects is activational. Hormones have many such effects on phenotypic differences between males and females, and the hormones are not limited to estrogen and testosterone. For example: The female advantage in social cognition. A

autism,48 the empathy quotient,49 systemizing quotient,50 social relationships,51 and interest in children.52 The pattern of results linking testosterone to the phenotype has been striking but not dispositive. A 2015 review of the literature on early androgen exposure and sex development (first author was Melissa Hines)

producing more robust evidence. DISSENTING VOICES The best-known and most detailed critiques of the organizational role of testosterone in particular and biological explanations of phenotypic sex differences in general are Rebecca Jordan-Young’s Brain Storm (2010), Cordelia Fine’s pair of books, Delusions of Gender (2010) and Testosterone

is being conducted within a consensus among neuroscientists that the male brain is more lateralized than the female brain. The differences are consistent with observed phenotypic sex differences in visuospatial and verbal skills. Sex Differences in Emotional Cognition and Memory I promised that I would give you a glimpse of

progress in understanding sex differences in emotional response because an extensive technical literature has been accumulating and because of the intriguing links between the female phenotypic advantage in certain kinds of memory and the greater female vulnerability to depression.[109] The story that is emerging has not reached the level

of the story. Recapitulation The takeaways from this chapter’s complicated discussion can be summarized quickly: Circulating sex hormones produce easily observable differences in the phenotype. Those hormones have specific, documented effects that match up with some of the differences in personality and neurocognitive functioning discussed in chapters 2 and 3

of the male brain has been documented by a variety of evidence about sex differences in structural connectivity and functional connectivity. These findings bear on phenotypic sex differences in visuospatial and verbal skills. Differences in the functioning of the amygdala, hypothalamus, and other regions of the limbic system appear to

have links with phenotypic sex differences in memory and vulnerability to depression. These topics barely scratch the surface. For example, I described sex differences in memory as they

are related to the amygdala. Researchers are now integrating the findings on the phenotypic sex differences in memory, spatial abilities, and perceptual processing (the temporal order in which a scene and its individual features are recognized) into an

is to get past the first hurdle in thinking about race differences: to lay out the evidence that it is evolutionarily reasonable to expect that phenotypic differences among races in cognitive repertoires could be at least partly genetic and that expanding knowledge about genetic variants supports that expectation. I also

of molecular evolution,” introduced in the late 1960s and given full expression by population geneticist Motoo Kimura in 1983.30 The neutral theory acknowledges that phenotypic evolution is driven by Darwinian natural selection. But the theory posits that the vast majority of differences at the molecular level are neutral, meaning

years that led to anatomically modern humans, a great deal of genetic variation has arisen that confers no particular advantage or disadvantage. Perhaps SNPs have phenotypic effects, but these effects are too small to have an appreciable impact on reproductive fitness. Perhaps a mutation spread to some percentage of the

may not go to fixation after an environmental change—the spread of any single favorable allele for a polygenic trait slows as the organism’s phenotype becomes satisfactorily adapted to the changed environment—but its frequency within the population increases. These alterations in standing variation are known as soft sweeps,

on hundreds of the relevant sites and thereby produces a cumulatively large effect. Such changes in standing variation can reliably produce dramatic effects in the phenotype through breeding. Humans have known this for millennia, even though they didn’t know anything about alleles. Darwin begins On the Origin of Species

blond hair, and blue eyes. Their conclusion: “Our results suggest that selection on complex traits has been an important force in shaping both genotypic and phenotypic variation within historical times.”51 Also in 2016, Daniel Schrider and Andrew Kern published a sophisticated new machine-learning technique called Soft/Hard Inference through

indefinitely was always implausible. It is now out of the question. Differences in Allele Frequencies Within and Across Continental Population When SNPs cause differences in phenotypic traits, evidence for that role surfaces first in differences in target allele frequencies. The target allele is usually defined as one that is associated

Continental population differences in target allele frequencies associated with personality, abilities, and social behavior are common. I am not presenting proof that those differences cause phenotypic differences, but showing you how different the situation actually facing geneticists is from the impression you may have when you hear that “race is a

later), but the image fostered by “race is a social construct” does not apply. The raw material for investigating genetic sources of population differences in phenotypic traits consists of differences in target allele frequencies. For subpopulations within continents, the raw material is meager. For continental populations, the raw material is

they will in fact be investigated. It is implausible to expect that none of the imbalances will yield evidence of significant genetic differences related to phenotypic differences across continental populations. The results will often be complex. The same SNPs that affect the trait under investigation will typically be correlated with many

pressures. Those environmental pressures have typically been confined to populations in specific geographic areas. Most recently, the task of assembling the genetic story for specific phenotypic traits has begun. It is still in its early stages, but progress is accelerating nonlinearly. Hence the nervousness that has prevented open discussion of

of heritability is unrecognizably different. Expressed in words, heritability is a ratio calculated as the variance attributable to genes divided by total variance in the phenotype. Mathematically, the kind of heritability that I will be discussing, narrow heritability, is denoted as h2. A MINI-INTERLUDE I don’t need to

influences that siblings do not share. In 1987, Robert Plomin, one of the leading students of the nonshared environment, suggested five unshared sources of such phenotypic differences.9 One is a catch-all nonsystematic category (e.g., accidents, illnesses, trauma). Four others are systematic: family composition (e.g., birth order,

times the independent role of personality, the school environment, or parent-reported behavior problems.33 IQ was much more important than self-efficacy in explaining phenotypic variance, several times more important than personality, the school environment, or parent-reported behavior problems. The independent roles of the home environment, well-being,

caused temporary changes in gene expression (as in a broken ankle), but changed the methylation patterns, thereby causing permanent genetic changes that damage the phenotype. Suppose that a subsequent positive environmental event could demethylate and thereby reactivate the genes that had been turned off by the negative event. Suppose—and

-drinking example illustrates just how thoroughly the old jigsaw-puzzle metaphor has been blown up. The process of mapping causal chains from genetic variation to phenotypic trait is immensely more complicated than that. The Great Debate Immensely more complicated, yes. But is it impossibly complicated? Seen from another perspective, the

by which the polygenic score affects the trait.”28 For his part, Turkheimer does not dispute the existence of the correlations between polygenic scores and phenotypic traits that Plomin describes. Yet these two schools nonetheless represent radically different understandings of where genomics and neuroscience are going to take us. The

as of 2020 (e.g., parental SES, education, IQ), researchers have access to polygenic scores for various aspects of criminality. They analyze how the phenotypic measures interact with the polygenic measures as predictors of criminal behavior. In light of the Turkheimer school’s objections, can the researchers be sure that

effects, and the contamination is rightly feared to be worst for people who have come from the most disadvantaged environments. Correlations between polygenic scores and phenotypes cannot be explained by backward causation, and that alone is enough to give us important leverage, despite all the complications.36 Eric Turkheimer has

by sex and by ancestral population. Like most biological classifications, these groups have fuzzy edges. This complicates things analytically, but no more than that. Many phenotypic differences in personality, abilities, and social behavior that we observe between the sexes, among ancestral populations, and among social classes have a biological component. Growing

good to bad, but that tend to be complementary. Neuroendocrinologist Geert de Vries has argued that sex differences in brain structure may work to prevent phenotypic differences. “Intuition tells us that sex differences in brain structure beget sex differences in brain function,” he wrote in 2005. “There is nothing wrong

that these myriad differences must have implications at many levels of brain function. But our understanding of the specifics, and what those differences mean for phenotypic traits, is still rudimentary. Generally Greater Male Variance If you followed the furor about James Damore’s internal memo at Google that got him

study. The meta-analysis focused on which regions were activated, with broad characterizations of the results rather than specific hypotheses about how they related to phenotypic differences. Here is the authors’ overall conclusion (omitting references embedded in the text): Here we have assembled 56 human functional imaging studies that each

6. One of the first systematic evaluations of population stratification using polygenic scores (first author was Alicia Martin) calculated polygenic scores for eight well-studied phenotypes and concluded that polygenic scores based on a single-ancestry population have numerous problems. For example, polygenic scores based on a European sample predict that

papers on measuring degrees of relatedness in 1921. For an accessible discussion of them, see Hill (1995). 5. For a nice illustration of correlations on phenotypic outcomes for different degrees of relatedness, see Cesarini and Visscher (2017): Fig. 1. 6. I adapted this example from Turkheimer, Pettersson, and Horn (2014):

519. “A heritability coefficient represents the proportion of phenotypic variability that is associated with variability in genotype. As such, it is an effect size, a variance ratio, an R2 coefficient; and like any variance

Honk, Schutter, Hermans et al. (2004). 28. Lewontin (1970). 29. Jencks (1979). 30. My conjecture was inspired by Cheverud’s conjecture that genetic correlations and phenotypic correlations are similar. Cheverud (1984); Cheverud (1988). Subsequent research (e.g., Dochtermann (2011); Sodini, Kemper, Wray et al. (2018)) indicates that the conjecture is

the Souls of Today’s Students. New York: Simon & Schuster. Boehmer, Annemie L. M., Hennie Brüggenwirth, Cissy van Assendelft et al. 2001. “Genotype Versus Phenotype in Families with Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome.” Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 86 (9): 4151–60. Bolnick, Deborah A. 2008. “Individual Ancestry Inference and the

M. 1984. “Quantitative Genetics and Developmental Constraints on Evolution by Selection.” Journal of Theoretical Biology 110 (2): 155–71. . 1988. “A Comparison of Genetic and Phenotypic Correlations.” Evolution 42 (5): 958–68. Ciarrochi, Joseph V., Amy Y. C. Chan, and Peter Caputi. 2000. “A Critical Evaluation of the Emotional Intelligence

and a Male Brain: Morphology Versus Functionality.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113 (14): E1971. Goldberg, Lewis R. 1993a. “The Structure of Phenotypic Personality Traits.” American Psychologist 48 (1): 26–34. Goldberg, Steven. 1974. The Inevitability of Patriarchy: Why the Biological Difference Between Men and Women Always Produces

Interactions for Reading Achievement.” PhD dissertation, Florida State University. Sodini, Sebastian M., Kathryn E. Kemper, Naomi R. Wray et al. 2018. “Comparison of Genotypic and Phenotypic Correlations: Cheverud’s Conjecture in Humans.” Genetics 209 (3): 941–48. Sohail, Mashaal, Robert M. Maier, Andrea Ganna et al. 2018. “Signals of Polygenic

Speiser, Phyllis W., Eric S. Knochenhauer, Didier Dewailly et al. 2000. “A Multicenter Study of Women with Nonclassical Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia: Relationship Between Genotype and Phenotype.” Molecular Genetics and Metabolism 71: 527–34. Spengler, Marion, Juliana Gottschling, Elisabeth Hahn et al. 2018. “Does the Heritability of Cognitive Abilities Vary as a

“Socioeconomic Status Modifies Heritability of IQ in Young Children.” Psychological Science 14 (6): 623–28. Turkheimer, Eric, Erik Pettersson, and Erin E. Horn. 2014. “A Phenotypic Null Hypothesis for the Genetics of Personality.” Annual Review of Psychology 65 (1): 515–40. Turkheimer, Eric, and Mary Waldron. 2000. “Nonshared Environment: A Theoretical

3 (2): 159–80. Winkler, Anderson M., Peter Kochunov, John Blangero et al. 2010. “Cortical Thickness or Grey Matter Volume? The Importance of Selecting the Phenotype for Imaging Genetics Studies.” NeuroImage 53 (3): 1135–46. Witchel, Selma Feldman, and Ricardo Azziz. 2010. “Nonclassic Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia.” International Journal of Pediatric Endocrinology

The Genetic Lottery: Why DNA Matters for Social Equality

by Kathryn Paige Harden  · 20 Sep 2021  · 375pp  · 102,166 words

narrowing of scope provides an essential qualification for all of the empirical results that I describe in the book. Genetic research on social and behavioral phenotypes, with its current focus on people of European genetic ancestry, cannot meaningfully inform our scientific understanding of social inequalities between racial and ethnic groups.

3.1). This composite is a polygenic index. FIGURE 3.1.  Creating a polygenic index. Figure reproduced from Daniel W. Belsky and K. Paige Harden, “Phenotypic Annotation: Using Polygenic Scores to Translate Discoveries from Genome-Wide Association Studies from the Top Down,” Current Directions in Psychological Science 28, no. 1 (February

2019): 82–90, https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721418807729. Correlations between individual SNPs and a phenotype are estimated in a “Discovery GWAS” with a large sample size. Many GWAS have samples that exceed millions of people. Then, a new person’s

single sub-continental group, with African ancestry populations showing the greatest genetic diversity. As a consequence, the genetic variants that are most important for a phenotype in one population are not necessarily the most important in another population: a particular mutation in the CFTR gene, for instance, is responsible for over

polygenic indices. We can’t assume that everyone who has the same race shares the same genetic ancestry. Whether we are talking about complicated social phenotypes like education or relatively uncontroversial physical ones like height—modern molecular genetic studies, like the older twin studies, have told us a whole lot

previous chapter, outcomes like height (not to mention more complicated social outcomes like education) are influenced by many genes, which are probabilistically related to the phenotype. We typically observe probabilities by studying the frequency of certain outcomes in groups of people who lived in a particular time and place. As a

In fact, high heritability implies that children of the same parents will diverge in their life outcomes. Heritability is about whether genetically different people show phenotypic differences, and siblings are genetically different. The Heritability of Seven Domains of Inequality We have discussed how sibling differences in identity-by-descent sharing could

of genes on life outcomes is this: Are people who are more genetically different (in this case, fraternal twins compared to identical twins) also more phenotypically different? The more different fraternal twins are in a particular trait, like height, in comparison to identical twins, the higher the heritability of that

identifying all of the causal genetic variants and measuring how much trait variation they explain.”16 We are, obviously, not there yet for any human phenotype, much less complicated ones like education. In the meantime, one method of obtaining a Goldilocks (not too big, not too small) estimate of heritability

experiment to test whether the specific genes captured by a polygenic index cause differences in life outcomes. FIGURE 6.5.  Heritability estimates for four human phenotypes from three different methods. “Education” = educational attainment (years of formal schooling). “Age first birth” = women’s age at first childbirth. “BMI” = body mass index. “

children are allowed to go to school regardless of their hair color. That change in social policy would break the causal chain between genotype and phenotype without directly manipulating anything about children’s genes or gene products. One does not have to edit embryonic DNA or give children pharmaceuticals to

that are necessary for a neuron’s electrical charge. The centrality of the brain in terms of gene expression is also seen for every other phenotype relevant to social inequality—subjective well-being and depression, alcohol use and smoking, obesity and income. Returning again to Jencks’s example of red

the time children were 2 years old. Other research has used polygenic indices created from the GWAS of educational attainment in order to see what phenotypes are correlated with polygenic indices, and when in development these correlations are apparent. This work has shown that the education polygenic index is correlated with

or more generally as “non-cognitive” skills. The label “non-cognitive” is a misnomer: behavioral control and interpersonal skills are obviously brain-based, cognitively demanding phenotypes. But the “non” in “non-cognitive” serves to emphasize what these motivational, behavioral, and emotional traits are not—they are not synonymous with performance on

what most groups have found for IQ (50% to 80%). Second, researchers have taken polygenic indices created from GWAS of educational attainment and seen what phenotypes, other than cognitive test performance, those polygenic indices are correlated with in childhood and adolescence. This work has found that “education” polygenic indices are correlated

the fifty years since, however, we have—thankfully—learned some things. Thousands upon thousands of genetic variants matter for educational attainment and other complicated human phenotypes. These genes exert their effects via largely unknown cellular processes that are happening in neurons and other brain cells. These cellular effects are already happening

educational outcomes, would Koellinger’s probability of getting a PhD have been different if the Berlin wall had not come down? Also yes. Heritable phenotypes are not immune from social change. Unfortunately, the mistaken idea that genetic influences are an impermeable barrier to social change is also widely endorsed not

much more complicated—questions. First, how have social and historical contexts differed in ways that, like putting on eyeglasses, change the relationship between genotype and phenotype? Second, looking forward to the question of policy, what do we want the relationship between people’s genetics and their outcomes to look like? These

thousands of genetic variants with tiny effects and unknown mechanisms.20 To make matters even more complicated, many of these variants are also involved in phenotypes that are valued differently by society: many of the same genetic variants associated with higher educational attainment, for instance, are also associated with higher

inequalities are). The figure also pinpoints the outcomes of two hypothetical individuals who have different genes: genotype A (circle) versus B (triangle). How the expected phenotypic outcomes of individuals with a certain genotype vary across alternative environments is the reaction norm.36 The idea of shifts in reaction norm emphasizes a

societies. The length and complexity of this causal chain means that there are multiple opportunities to intervene in the connection between genotype and a complex phenotype. Changing the health care system so that wages for “low-skilled” workers were not dragged down by the immense cost of employer-provided health

or height, your parents’ genes didn’t make you taller or fatter unless you actually inherited them; the untransmitted alleles were uncorrelated with the child phenotype. For education, on the other hand, your parents’ genes are still associated with your own ultimate educational attainment—even if you didn’t inherit

to blame for being overweight,” or “Genes influence people’s mood and emotions so they are less to blame for being depressed.” Depending on the phenotype, people respond to genetic information differently. FIGURE 10.1.  Rates of criminal justice system involvement and antisocial behavior by polygenic index created from GWAS of

I previously told you about in chapter 2. In that study, psychologists at the University of Minnesota asked people to estimate how heritable different phenotypes are.13 The people who were most accurate were mothers with more than one child, but generally folks converged on something resembling the right answer

in Western industrialized societies. There were, however, two exceptions. In an interesting twist, people in this study substantially over-estimated the heritability of just two phenotypes—breast cancer and sexual orientation. People who described themselves as politically liberal had particularly high estimates of the heritability of sexual orientation. Breast cancer and

ability to respond to complex circumstances in complex and unpredictable ways and in the process build the self. In Turkheimer’s view, the individual phenotypic space that is not determined by either your genotype or the environmental circumstances defines the boundaries in which your free will gets to play. To

agency over their outcomes,18 let us consider what we actually observe about identical-twin differences in social and economic outcomes, and in the psychological phenotypes that are rewarded (in modern industrialized capitalist societies) with social and economic success. Turkheimer notes that the e2 coefficient for IQ is only a

outcomes—scores on intelligence tests foremost among them—automatically activate notions about human inferiority and superiority. I then want to consider alternative examples of human phenotypes—such as height, deafness, and autism—where genetic research has been largely embraced rather than rejected as dangerous. Can we look to these examples

Socially Valued, Not Inherently Valuable The tendency to see intelligence (as measured on standardized IQ tests) and educational success, perhaps more than any other human phenotypes, in terms of a hierarchy of inferior and superior persons is not an accident. It is an idea that was deliberately crafted and disseminated. As

between inherently valuable and socially valued might be unfamiliar as applied to our understanding of intelligence test scores, but we can look to three other phenotypes where it is more typical: height, deafness, and autism spectrum disorders. In chapter 2, I told you about the towering NBA player Shawn Bradley,

-and-effect-20180515/. 15. The evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins made the point that genetic causes should be defined as difference makers even for relatively simple phenotypes that are intuitively “genetic,” such as eye color. He wrote, “The ‘effect’ of any would-be cause can be given meaning only in terms

, whether or not people graduate from college. The scientific and philosophical importance of heritability statistics is derived from the scientific and philosophical importance of the phenotype. Eric Turkheimer, “Three Laws of Behavior Genetics and What They Mean,” Current Directions in Psychological Science 9, no. 5 (October 1, 2000), 160–64,

distribution of Y for those individuals” (p. 40). Selection experiments are an interesting twist on this requirement. The claim that genes (X) cause the phenotype (Y) means that for at least some individuals, there is a possible manipulation of some value of X that they possess. In the case of

certain values, this will change the probability distribution of Y for those individuals’ offspring. If selection experiments demonstrate the causal power of genes for the phenotype, and heritability determines the response to selection, it is impossible to conclude that heritability is somehow irrelevant to causation. As Peter Visscher described in another

steadily mounting evidence that genes mattered for understanding social inequality. But that’s exactly what he didn’t find! Instead, the study found that twins’ phenotypic similarity (i.e., how similar twins are for their outcomes) tracked their actual genetic relationship, not what their parents thought their zygosity was—evidence in

Inequality: A Reassessment of the Effect of Family and Schooling in America (New York: Basic Books, 1972). 2. Complicated human behaviors are not the only phenotypes that are connected to genotypes via long causal chains. As the evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins argued, “What on earth [is] any genetic trait … morphological, physiological

depend on long causal chains involving complex social processes, such as peer norms and teacher effects, in order to be effective. Richard Dawkins, The Extended Phenotype: The Long Reach of the Gene, rev. ed. (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1999) 3. Paul Oppenheim and Hilary Putnam, “Unity of

Academy of Sciences 115, no. 31 (July 31, 2018): E7275–84, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1801238115; Daniel W. Belsky and K. Paige Harden, “Phenotypic Annotation: Using Polygenic Scores to Translate Discoveries from Genome-Wide Association Studies from the Top Down,” Current Directions in Psychological Science 28, no. 1 (February

(1979): 327–47, https://doi.org/10.2307/2553675. 4. Heritability does not have clear implications for whether environmentally induced change is possible for a phenotype, but it might have implications for whether those environmentally induced changes persist across generations. Returning to Goldberger’s example of eyeglasses, one’s own vision

Thomas D. Cook et al., Sesame Street Revisited (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1975). 36. Anthony J. F. Griffiths et al., “Norm of Reaction and Phenotypic Distribution,” in An Introduction to Genetic Analysis, 7th ed., ed. Anthony J. F. Griffiths et al. (New York: W. H. Freeman, 2000), http://www.

the physical causes are genetic? Why are genetic determinants thought to be any more ineluctable, or blame-absolving, than environmental ones?” Richard Dawkins, The Extended Phenotype: The Long Reach of the Gene, rev. ed. (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1999). 15. The existence of genomic differences between monozygotic

twins means that twin estimates of heritability might be systematically underestimated, as phenotypic differences between monozygotic twins caused by genetic differences between them would be misattributed to environmental variation. Hakon Jonsson et al., “Differences between Germline Genomes of

upper bound of the extent to which people have agency. What the neuroscientist Kevin Mitchell calls “developmental variation,” i.e., inherent randomness in processes of phenotypic development, will also pull twins away from one another, without either one of them exerting anything we would typically recognize as agency. Kevin J. Mitchell

as about differences, 115–117; coefficient, 116; criminal behavior, 195–196; equality versus equity and, 159–164; GWAS and, 123–125; objections to, 121–123; phenotypes and, 131–132; red-headed children and, 131–136; of seven domains of inequality, 117–121; twin studies of, 117–121; when the worst environments

70 Padden, Carol, 222–223 Papageorge, Nicholas, 41–43, 44, 189 Parasite, 231–232 Parens, Erik, 175, 213 Pearl, Judea, 103 Pearson, Karl, 13, 19 phenotype, 57, 131–132, 155 phenylketonuria (PKU), 160–161 Pioneer Fund, 15 Plomin, Robert, 15 polygenic indices, 9–10, 33, 35, 42, 43; heritability and, 122

Epigenetics Revolution: How Modern Biology Is Rewriting Our Understanding of Genetics, Disease and Inheritance

by Nessa Carey  · 31 Aug 2011  · 357pp  · 98,854 words

such as particular illnesses. They basically allow us to explore mathematically the link between the sequences of our genes (genotype) and what we are like (phenotype), be this in terms of height, health, freckles or anything else we would like to measure. This is done by calculating how often both

who create the most intriguing scientific problem. Why do two genetically identical individuals, who in many cases have experienced very similar environments, have such variable phenotypes? Similarly, why is it quite rare for both MZ twins in a pair to develop type 1 diabetes? What is it, in addition to the

women) These data are consistent with a model where epigenetic changes could account for at least some of the reasons why MZ twins aren’t phenotypically identical, but there’s still a lot of supposition involved. That’s because for many purposes humans are a quite hopeless experimental system. If

we want to be able to assess the role of epigenetics in the problem of why genetically identical individuals are phenotypically different from one another, we would like to be able to do the following: Analyse hundreds of identical individuals, not just pairs of them;

the experimenters are most interested in. A mouse of a different colour The most useful mouse model for exploring how epigenetic changes can lead to phenotypic differences between genetically identical individuals is called the agouti mouse. Normal mice have hair which is banded in colour. The hair is black at the

The agouti mouse has provided a quite clear-cut example of how epigenetic modification, in this case DNA methylation, can make genetically identical individuals look phenotypically different. However, there is always the fear that agouti is a special case, and maybe this is a very uncommon mechanism. This is particularly of

development lead to non-identical patterns of gene expression. These become epigenetically set and exaggerated over the years, until eventually the genetically identical twins become phenotypically different, sometimes in the most dramatic of ways. Such a random process, caused by individually minor fluctuations in the expression of epigenetic genes during early

to identify the environmental effects that lead to some chronic human conditions. If we study pairs of MZ twins who are discordant for a specific phenotype, for example multiple sclerosis, it may be well nigh impossible to identify an environmental cause. It may simply be that one of the pair

to have larger arm muscles than the sons of weavers (a much less physical occupation). Lamarck interpreted this as the blacksmiths’ sons inheriting the acquired phenotype of large muscles from their fathers. Our modern interpretation is different. We recognise that a man whose genes tended to endow him with the ability

inheritance. If we wanted to summarise a century and a half of evolutionary theory in one paragraph we might say: Random variation in genes creates phenotypic variation in individuals. Some individuals will survive better than others in a particular environment, and these individuals are likely to have more offspring. These offspring

competitors in a particular environment. This is where the Lamarckian model of acquired characteristics really falls over, relative to Darwinian models. An acquired change in phenotype would somehow have to ‘feed-back’ onto the DNA script and change it really dramatically, so that the acquired characteristic could be transmitted in the

This scandal tainted an already controversial field1. One of the statements in our potted history of evolutionary theory was the following, ‘An acquired change in phenotype would somehow have to ‘feed-back’ onto the DNA script and change it really dramatically so that the acquired characteristic could be transmitted in the

risk of dying as a consequence of diabetic illnesses4. Just like Camilla in the Dutch Hunger Winter example, the sons and grandsons had an altered phenotype (a change in the risk of death through cardiovascular disease or diabetes) in response to an environmental challenge they themselves had never experienced. These data

was important, as the more data points we have in an experiment, the more we can rely on the findings. Statistical tests showed that the phenotypic differences between the genetically identical groups were highly significant. In other words, it was very unlikely that the effects occurred by chance5. The results from

epigenetic inheritance has taken place. In other words, an epigenetic modification (probably DNA methylation) was transferred along with the genetic code. This transfer of the phenotype from one generation to the next wasn’t perfect – not all the offspring looked exactly the same as their mother. This implies that the DNA

methylation that controls the expression of the agouti phenotype wasn’t entirely stable down the generations. This is quite analogous to the effects we see in suspected cases of human transgenerational inheritance, such as

the different patterns of colour in his offspring. But there are other examples of epigenetic inheritance transmitted from both males and females. The kinked tail phenotype in mice, which is caused by variable methylation of a retrotransposon in the AxinFu (Axin fused) gene, can be transmitted by either the mother

at the AxinFu gene from either parent to offspring. These model systems have been really useful in demonstrating that transgenerational inheritance of a non-genetic phenotype does actually occur, and that this takes place via epigenetic modifications. This is truly revolutionary. It confirms that for some very specific situations Lamarckian

inheritance is taking place, and we have a handle on the molecular mechanism behind it. But the agouti and kinked tail phenotypes in mice both rely on the presence of specific retrotransposons in the genome. Are these special cases, or is there a more general effect

examples of transgenerational inheritance of non-genetic features are the agouti mouse and the AxinFu mouse, which we met in the previous chapter. The phenotypes in both these models are a consequence of the methylation levels of an IAP retrotransposon upstream of a gene. The DNA methylation levels in the

parent get passed on to the offspring, and so does the phenotype caused by the expression levels of the retrotransposon9. We met other examples of transgenerational inheritance of acquired characteristics in Chapter 6, including the effects of

Figure 8.2 Two children may each have the same deletion on chromosome 15, shown schematically by the absence of the horizontally striped box. The phenotype of the two children will be different, depending on how they inherited the abnormal chromosome. If the abnormal chromosome was inherited from their father, the

copies of this gene, rather than just one, twice as much IGF2 protein as normal is produced and the foetus grows too much. The opposite phenotype to Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome is a condition called Silver-Russell syndrome18,19. Children with this disorder are characterised by retarded growth before and after birth

the correct maternal mark. When this egg is fertilised by a sperm, both copies of chromosome 15 will function like paternal chromosomes, and create a phenotype just like uniparental disomy. Research is ongoing into how all these processes are controlled. We don’t fully understand how imprints are protected from reprogramming

tail trait that we met in earlier chapters. We know that not all transgenerational inheritance happens in the same way. In the agouti mouse the phenotype is transmitted via the mother, but not via the father. In this case, the DNA methylation on the IAP retrotransposon is removed in both

the offspring. Male agouti mice don’t pass on either DNA methylation or repressive histone modifications on their retrotransposon, which is why transmission of the phenotype only occurs through the maternal line30. This is a slightly more indirect method of transmitting epigenetic information. Instead of direct carry-over of DNA methylation

, an intermediate surrogate (a repressive histone modification) is used instead. This is probably why the maternal transmission of the agouti phenotype is a bit ‘fuzzy’. Not all offspring are exactly the same as the mother, because there is a bit of ‘wriggle-room’ in how

a testis-determining pathway in the embryo. This leads to production of testosterone, the archetypal ‘male’ hormone, which then masculinises the embryo. Occasionally, individuals who phenotypically appear to be girls have the male 46, XY karyotype. In these cases the SRY gene is often inactive or deleted and consequently the foetus

develops down the default female pathway1. Sometimes, the other scenario arises. Individuals who phenotypically appear to be boys can have the typically female karyotype of 46, XX. In these cases a tiny section of the Y chromosome containing the

the ultimate demonstration of the power of a random epigenetic event. Two identical individuals, each with two apparently identical X chromosomes, had a completely discordant phenotype, because of a shift in the epigenetic balance of power. Sometimes, however, it is essential that individual cells express the correct amount of a protein

of gametes is severely compromised. Leaving aside the infertility, there are two obvious conclusions we can draw from this table. The first is that the phenotypes are all relatively mild compared with, for example, trisomy of chromosome 21 (Down’s syndrome). This suggests that cells can tolerate having too many or

having extra copies of an autosome. But the other obvious conclusion is that an abnormal number of X chromosomes does indeed have some effects on phenotype. Why should this be? After all, X inactivation ensures that no matter how many X chromosomes are present, all bar one get inactivated early

X females compared with 47, XXX females or with the normal 46, XX female constitution. Similarly, males with the normal 46, XY karyotype should be phenotypically identical to males with the 47, XXY karyotype. In all of these cases there should be only one active X chromosome in the cells. One

we analyse the sequence of a gene in human cells, we can find a gene of broadly similar sequence in the nematode worm. So the phenotypic differences between worms and humans aren’t caused by Homo sapiens having more, different or ‘better’ genes. Admittedly, more complicated organisms tend to splice

compensatory mechanisms, defects may only have relatively subtle impacts. The problem this creates experimentally is that most genetic screens are good at detecting the major phenotypes caused by mutations in proteins, but may not be so useful for more subtle effects. There is a small ncRNA called BC1 which is expressed

a number of related compounds and tested them for their effects in cell culture. The ones that inhibited DNA methylation also caused the changes in phenotype originally observed for 5-azacytidine. Compounds that didn’t inhibit DNA methylation had no effect on phenotype5. The methylation cul-de-sac Cytidine (base

to adult stress, there is probably more than one gene involved. Both the cortisol receptor gene and the arginine vasopressin gene can contribute to this phenotype in rodents. Secondly, the studies also show us that a particular class of epigenetic modification is not in itself good or bad. It’s

of the epigenetic changes that have been observed are relatively small. The sceptics are unconvinced that such small molecular changes could lead to such pronounced phenotypes. They argue that just because the changes are present, it doesn’t mean they’re necessarily having a functional effect. They worry that the

For honeybees the DNA script is constant but the outcome is variable. The outcome is controlled by an early event (feeding pattern) which sets a phenotype that is maintained throughout the rest of life. This is a scenario that just shrieks epigenetics at us, and in the last few years scientists

where Dnmt3 had been knocked down were like those of the normal royal jelly-induced queens. This is what we would expect given the similar phenotypes in the two groups. The gene expression patterns in the normal queens and the Dnmt3-knockdown queens were also very similar. The authors concluded

by epigenetic alterations in DNA and its accompanying proteins if one or both of the following conditions are met: Two things are genetically identical, but phenotypically variable; An organism continues to be influenced by an event long after this initiating event has occurred. We always have to apply a common sense

we forget how much we can learn just by looking thoughtfully. For example, we don’t always need sophisticated laboratory equipment to determine if two phenotypically different things are genetically identical. Here are a couple of examples with which we are all familiar. Maggots turn into flies and caterpillars turn into

In mammals, there’s usually a clear genetic reason why males are males and females are females. A functional Y chromosome leads to the male phenotype. In lots of reptile species, including crocodiles and alligators, the two sexes are genetically identical. You can’t predict the sex of a crocodile

of the embryo . Chromatin DNA in combination with its associated proteins, especially histone proteins. Concordance The degree to which two genetically identical individuals are identical phenotypically. CpG A cytosine nucleotide followed by a guanine nucleotide in DNA. CpG motifs can undergo methylation on the C. Discordance The degree to which two

genetically identical individuals are non-identical phenotypically. DNA replication Copying DNA to create new DNA molecules which are identical to the original. DNMT DNA methyltransferase. An enzyme that can add methyl groups

one brain cell that acts on another brain cell to alter its behaviour. Nucleosome Combination of eight specific histone molecules with DNA wrapped around them. Phenotype The observable characteristics or traits of an organism. Pluripotency The ability of a cell to give rise to most other cell types. Typically, pluripotent mammalian

to give rise to all cells of the body and the placenta. Transcription Copying DNA to create RNA molecules. Transgenerational inheritance The phenomenon in which phenotypic changes in one generation are passed on to the next, without any alteration in the genetic code. Uniparental disomy A situation where both members of

The Selfish Gene

by Richard Dawkins  · 1 Jan 1976  · 365pp  · 117,713 words

a gene's-eye view of nature. It is a different way of seeing, not a different theory. In the opening pages of The Extended Phenotype, I explained this using the metaphor of the Necker cube. This is a two-dimensional pattern of ink on paper, but it is perceived as

years: Robert Axelrod's The Evolution of Cooperation, because it seems to offer some sort of hope for our future; and my own The Extended Phenotype because for me it dominated those years and because-for what that is worth-it is probably the finest thing I shall ever write. The

shall we resolve this paradox of the two ways of looking at life? My own attempt to do so is spelled out in The Extended Phenotype, the book that, more than anything else I have achieved in my professional life, is my pride and joy. This chapter is a brief distillation

of a few of the themes in that book, but really I'd almost rather you stopped reading now and switched to The Extended Phenotype! On any sensible view of the matter Darwinian selection does not work on genes directly. DNA is cocooned in protein, swaddled in membranes, shielded from

likely to develop into a successful adult, an adult likely to reproduce and pass those very same genes on to future generations. The technical word Phenotype is used for the bodily manifestation of a gene, the effect that a gene, in comparison with its alleles, has on the body, via development

. The phenotypic effect of some particular gene might be, say, green eye colour. In practice most genes have more than one phenotypic effect, say green eye colour and curly hair. Natural selection favours some genes rather than others

not because of the nature of the genes themselves, but because of their consequences-their phenotypic effects. Darwinians have usually chosen to discuss genes whose

phenotypic effects benefit, or penalize, the survival and reproduction of whole bodies. They have tended not to consider benefits to the

passed on. Here the paradox conveniently disappears because what is good for one gene is good for all. But what if a gene exerted a phenotypic effect that was good for itself but bad for the rest of the genes in the body? This is not a flight of fancy. Cases

question. The instrument with which we shall purge our minds is the idea that I call the extended phenotype. It is to this, and what it means, that I now turn. The phenotypic effects of a gene are normally seen as all the effects that it has on the body in which

it sits. This is the conventional definition. But we shall now see that the phenotypic effects of a gene need to be thought of as all the effects that it has on the world. It may be that a gene

as a matter of fact. It will not be something that ought to be part of our very definition. In all this, remember that the phenotypic effects of a gene are the tools by which it levers itself into the next generation. All that I am going to add is that

the tools may reach outside the individual body wall. What might it mean in practice to speak of a gene as having an extended phenotypic effect on the world outside the body in which it sits? Examples that spring to mind are artefacts like beaver dams, bird nests and caddis

cellular wiring up of the nervous system. The caddis house is only a further extension of this kind of sequence. Stone hardness is an extended phenotypic effect of the caddis's genes. If it is legitimate to speak of a gene as affecting the wrinkliness of a pea or the nervous

, isn't it? Yet the reasoning is inescapable. We are ready for the next step in the argument: genes in one organism can have extended phenotypic effects on the body of another organism. Caddis houses helped us take the previous step; snail shells will help us take this one. The shell

shell is a fluke adaptation. If it is, it has to have come about by Darwinian selection of fluke genes. We have demonstrated that the phenotypic effects of a gene can extend, not only to inanimate objects like stones, but to 'other' living bodies too. The story of the snails and

the weight of a normal adult. No good for propagating beetle genes, but a cornucopia for Nosema parasites. Giantism in beetle larvae is an extended phenotypic effect of protozoan genes. And here is a case history to provoke even more Freudian anxiety than the Peter Pan beetles-parasitic castration! Crabs are

, if we accept that they are Darwinian adaptations for the benefit of the parasite, must be seen as extended phenotypic effects of parasite genes. Genes, then, reach outside their 'own' body to influence phenotypes in other bodies. To quite a large extent the interests of parasite genes and host genes may coincide

methods that they use, there is no reason why these should be any different from the machinations-all too predictable to a selfish gene/extended phenotype theorist-of viruses. When we have a cold or a cough, we normally think of the symptoms as annoying byproducts of the virus's activities

far discussed have lived inside their hosts. The genes, then, are physically close to their extended phenotypic effects, as close as genes ordinarily are to their conventional phenotypes. But genes can act at a distance; extended phenotypes can extend a long way. One of the longest that I can think of spans a

and eighteenth-century coal merchants used canals. Whatever its benefits, a beaver lake is a conspicuous and characteristic feature of the landscape. It is a phenotype, no less than the beaver's teeth and tail, and it has evolved under the influence of Darwinian selection. Darwinian selection has to have genetic

beaver genes that made good lakes for transporting trees, just as it favoured genes that made good teeth for felling them. Beaver lakes are extended phenotypic effects of beaver genes, and they can extend over several hundreds of yards. A long reach indeed! Parasites, too, don't have to live inside

, yet we have no hesitation in labelling them as parasites. Cuckoo adaptations to manipulate the behaviour of foster-parents can be looked upon as extended phenotypic action at a distance by cuckoo genes. It is easy to empathize with foster parents duped into incubating the cuckoo's eggs. Human egg collectors

about flukes and snails we accustomed ourselves to the idea that a parasite's genes could have phenotypic effects on the host's body, in exactly the same way as any animal's genes have phenotypic effects on its 'own' body. We showed that the very idea of an 'own' body was

any internal drug or hormone. As in the case of internal parasites, we should now rephrase the whole matter in terms of genes and extended phenotypes. In the evolutionary arms race between cuckoos and hosts, advances on each side took the form of genetic mutations arising and being favoured by natural

the besotted host. In exactly the same sense as we may speak of cuckoo genes having (phenotypic)effects on the colour and shape of cuckoo gapes, so we may speak of cuckoo genes having (extended phenotypic) effects on host behaviour. Parasite genes can have effects on host bodies, not just when the

has been reinvented so often. Some examples that we'll look at have gone beyond familiar cuckooism to fulfil the wildest fantasies that The Extended Phenotype might have inspired. A bird cuckoo deposits her egg and disappears. Some ant cuckoo females make their presence felt in more dramatic fashion. I don

is an act of special genetic madness and formidable indeed must be the drug that drives them to it. In the world of the extended phenotype, ask not how an animal's behaviour benefits its genes; ask instead whose genes it is benefiting. It is hardly surprising that ants are exploited

species. In all cases in which natural selection has favoured genes for manipulation, it is legitimate to speak of those same genes as having (extended phenotypic) effects on the body of the manipulated organism. It doesn't matter in which body a gene physically sits. The target of its manipulation may

favours those genes that manipulate the world to ensure their own propagation. This leads to what I have called the Central Theorem of the Extended Phenotype: An animals behaviour tends to maximize the survival of the genes 'for' that behaviour, whether or not those genes happen to be in the body

purpose of the body of an individual lion, wolf, or deer. That this is true is now widely accepted, but why is it true? Extended phenotypes and parasites can again help us. We saw that when the genes of a parasite work together with each other, but in opposition to the

that life, as a matter of fact, is bundled into discrete, individually purposeful vehicles like wolves and bee-hives. But the doctrine of the extended phenotype has taught us that it needn't have been so. Fundamentally, all that we have a right to expect from our theory is a battleground

of replicators, jostling, jockeying, fighting for a future in the genetic hereafter. The weapons in the fight are phenotypic effects, initially direct chemical effects in cells but eventually feathers and fangs and even more remote effects. It undeniably happens to be the case that

these phenotypic effects have largely become bundled up into discrete vehicles, each with its genes disciplined and ordered by the prospect of a shared bottleneck of sperms

with a single genetic exit route? Why did genes choose to gang up and make large bodies for themselves to live in? In The Extended Phenotype I attempt to work out an answer to this difficult problem. Here I can sketch only a part of that answer-although, as might be

other. The two are mutually enhancing, like the spiralling feelings of a woman and a man during the progress of a love affair. The Extended Phenotype is a long book and its argument cannot easily be crammed into one chapter. I have been obliged to adopt here a condensed, rather intuitive

I have succeeded in conveying the flavour of the argument. Let me end with a brief manifesto, a summary of the entire selfish gene/extended phenotype view of life. It is a view, I maintain, that applies to living things everywhere in the universe. The fundamental unit, the prime mover of

the replicators come first, in importance as well as in history. One way to remind ourselves is to reflect that, even today, not all the phenotypic effects of a gene are bound up in the individual body in which it sits. Certainly in principle, and also in fact, the gene reaches

a long way away. With only a little imagination we can see the gene as sitting at the centre of a radiating web of extended phenotypic power. And an object in the world is the centre of a converging web of influences from many genes sitting in many organisms. The long

reach of the gene knows no obvious boundaries. The whole world is criss-crossed with causal arrows joining genes to phenotypic effects, far and near. It is an additional fact, too important in practice to be called incidental but not necessary enough in theory to be

these causal arrows have become bundled up. Replicators are no longer peppered freely through the sea; they are packaged in huge colonies-individual bodies. And phenotypic consequences, instead of being evenly distributed throughout the world, have in many cases congealed into those same bodies. But the individual body, so familiar to

Richard Dawkins: How a Scientist Changed the Way We Think

by Alan Grafen; Mark Ridley  · 1 Jan 2006  · 286pp  · 90,530 words

to fame, went on to display the range and depth of his analytical skills and literary abilities in a string of best-sellers: The Extended Phenotype (intended primarily for fellow biologists), The Blind Watchmaker, River Out of Eden, Climbing Mount Improbable, Unweaving the Rainbow, and The Ancestor’s Tale. A

my staunchest guide. Here was a Darwinian world that was gene-centred, adaptationist; this had to be how natural selection worked. That, and The Extended Phenotype, introduced me to fundamental questions of evolutionary theory. And they taught me how, holding steadily to a gene-centred view, I could find the way

metre centipede-like creature (Arthro-pleura). We know this from fossil footprints preserved in sandstone on the Isle of Arran. Are these footprints an extended phenotype? If so, it might appear that any grass blade bent by a passing beetle would deserve the name but consequently dilute the concept. The Extended

or, as I should say, on the frequency of alleles linked to footprint creation. Consequently, there seems no merit in calling the footprints an extended phenotype. The Surrey puma question can now be answered: the scratch marks (even allowing for media misrepresentation) were not themselves a puma or for that matter

a dog. They were certainly the phenotypic expression of genes for scratching behaviour. Yet, in the absence of any evidence that they affect the survival of scratch-generating genes, they do not

vigorous thrashing movements of its body. Manipulated by the parasites, the caterpillar has become their protector, even as it dies. Notice here that the extended phenotype is the collective outcome of genes dispersed among several parasites, emphasizing the difficulty of regarding the individual as the unit of selection. For me this

about how cooperatively-built structures, such as social insect nests, might evolve. This question is addressed with great insight by Richard Dawkins in The Extended Phenotype but, as a preliminary to describing this, it may help to know something about the village of Lavenham in Suffolk. Tourists flock to the heart

in human-built structures it is possible for design and technology to change independent of one another. What still startles me on rereading The Extended Phenotype is how clearly Richard Dawkins already understood this in 1982 and realized that it had important implications for nest building by social insects. A mature

in material technology compared to design. It is surprising that these important speculations, and indeed others relating to animal building behaviour, arising from The Extended Phenotype have not yet stimulated the research effort they deserve. It is a book that particularly speaks to researchers; there is valuable detail in its message

nature of the gametes is not determined by the personal qualities of the parents or ancestors in question.’ Thus, Johannsen made a crucial distinction between phenotype (observable traits) and genotype (heritable factors). In Johannsen’s view, the mistaken notion of the inheritance of personal qualities was reinforced by the persistence of

in all cases where new or revised conceptions are being developed... . Therefore I have proposed the terms “gene” and “genotype” and some further terms, as “phenotype” and “biotype”, to be used in the science of genetics. The “gene” is nothing but a very applicable little word, easily combined with others, and

” or “allelomorphs” in the gametes, demonstrated by modern Mendelian researches.’ From this beginning, Johannsen’s gene has had an illustrious history (as have ‘genotype’ and ‘phenotype’, but not ‘biotype’). But ‘gene’ itself conveys little information, consisting as it does of only four letters and a single syllable when spoken. The factors

demonstrate “genotypical” differences or accordances... . genotypes can be examined only by the qualities and reactions of the organisms in question.’ Genes are known by their phenotypic effects. Johannsen was dismissive of attempts to localize genes. ‘The question of chromosomes as the presumed “bearers of hereditary qualities” seems to be an idle

of the unit of inheritance.) Supporters of the chromosomal theory, however, continued to define the gene operationally as that which was responsible for a heritable phenotypic difference. A. H. Sturtevant, one of the first to map genes to chromosomes, commented in 1915: ‘We can ... in no sense identify a given

many other genes’.3 Much of twentieth-century experimental genetics was engaged in making inferences about the physical nature of genes from observations of their phenotypic effects (i.e., by observations of differences in an organism’s physical characteristics). These studies led to a definition of the gene as a

defined chemical properties. Now, the existence of a gene is often inferred from properties of a DNA sequence without any information about the gene’s phenotypic effects and without the observation of differences among sequences. But the definition of the gene as a protein-encoding stretch of DNA is more recent

than its definition as that which is responsible for a phenotypic difference, and it is not surprising that the modern molecular definition has not fully supplanted the older operational definition. Experimental geneticists invoke genes to

explain observed phenotypic differences. A pink-eyed fly differs from a red-eyed fly because the former possesses a gene for pink eyes inherited from both parents whereas

the latter has inherited at least one gene for red eyes. In a similar way, evolutionary biologists often invoke genes to explain hypothetical phenotypic differences in an attempt to understand the nature of adaptation by natural selection. An ornithologist might wish to understand why males of some species help

The extent of the strategic gene is determined by the number of replication cycles that separate the material genes responsible for the expression of a phenotypic effect from the material genes that thereby have an increased probability of being copied. Thus, the strategic gene is not a fixed entity but can

passed on had accumulated in many steps over the course of memetic transmission. Johanssen invented the ‘gene’ to clarify the distinction between genotype (gene) and phenotype (trait). Can a similar distinction be made for a science of memetics? There are two principal kinds of things we observe that provide evidence about

relation seems to be reversed for memetics. Memes are observed, rather than inferred from their effects, whereas their effects are in large part hidden. The phenotype/genotype distinction works fairly well for genes, but there are many unresolved problems in its application to memes. For example, let’s suppose that there

different, overlapping ways in which a chromosome could be divided into genes. Could the same approach work for memes? Dawkins’ principal interest was in the phenotypes of organisms rather than of genes. Just as he failed to specify precisely how to divide a chromosome into genes, he did not specify how

18 R. L. Trivers and H. Hare, ‘Haplodiploidy and the evolution of the social insects’, Science, 191 (1976): 249-263. 19 R. Dawkins, The Extended Phenotype (Oxford: W. H. Freeman, 1982). 20 See Grafen, ‘A first formal link between the Price Equation and an optimization program’ (2002) and ‘The optimisation of

John Maynard Smith). At the same time, the controversy began increasingly to address important issues in evolutionary theory (without losing its political underpinnings). The Extended Phenotype, Dawkins’ second book,28 was one huge attempt to catch and respond to general accusations and misperceptions when it came to such things as adaptation

often implies a particular balance of gene frequencies. 22 Segerstråle, Defenders of the Truth (2000), Chapter 10. 23 See e.g. Richard Dawkins, The Extended Phenotype (Oxford and San Francisco: W H. Freeman, 1982), 10. 24 See e.g. Ullica Segerstråle, ‘Reductionism, “Bad Science” and Politics: A Critique of Anti-

(adaptive) function. Dawkins, just like Hamilton and Wilson, decided to concentrate on the last of Tinbergen’s famous ‘four questions’. 28 Richard Dawkins, The Extended Phenotype: The Gene as Unit of Selection (Oxford and San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1982). 29 Richard Dawkins, ‘Twelve misunderstandings of kin selection’, Zeitschrift fur Tierpsychologie

defence of selfish genes’, Philosophy, October (i98ia): 562-579. 31 Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker (New York: W. W Norton, 1987). 32 Dawkins, The Extended Phenotype (1982), 19. 33 Richard C. Lewontin, Steven Rose, and Leon Kamin, Not in Our Genes (New York: Pantheon Books, 1984). 34 Richard Dawkins, ‘Sociobiology: The

the philosophical methods and the very considerable philosophical substance of that work. Why is a philosopher writing an Afterword for this book? Is The Extended Phenotype science or philosophy? It is both; it is science, certainly, but it is also what philosophy should be, and only intermittently is: a scrupulously

‘Evolution: The Pleasures of Pluralism’, New York Review of Books (26 June 1997), 47-52. 10 Daniel C. Dennett, ‘Afterword’, in Richard Dawkins, The Extended Phenotype (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999). 11 For a detailed analysis of Skinner’s position, see Daniel C. Dennett, ‘Skinner Skinned’, in Brainstorms (Cambridge, MA: MIT

for his fellow scientists and for informed nonspecialists: his more popular books certainly cannot be considered ‘popularization’, nor is his most technical book, The Extended Phenotype, restricted to specialists. This is an example I try to emulate. A second major theme in Dawkins’ writings on life that has important parallels in

be made by neural circuitry programming the next iteration of the movement. In the case of the evolution of genes, the actions would be extended phenotypes, the effects would be sensed as differential mortality and fecundity, and the adjustment would be made in terms of the number of descendants resulting in

Universe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003). 36 Conway Morris, Life’s Solution: Inevitable Humans in a Lonely Universe (2003), 196. 37 R. Dawkins, The Extended Phenotype: The Gene as the Unit of Selection (Oxford: W. H. Freeman, 1982). 38 Dawkins and Krebs, ‘Arms races between and within species’ (1979), 490. 39

otherwise asked. Some aspects of the environment may be stable for a very long time and yet are crucial for the expression of an adaptive phenotype. Many important writers have suggested that changes in those environmental factors can produce dramatic alterations in the characteristics of an organism. This thought lay behind

one is available.” And that reminds me to say that Laland [one of the commentators in the Biology and Philosophy issue devoted to The Extended Phenotype] has missed the irony in my apparent espousal of Bateson’s “Great Nexus of complex causal factors interacting in development”.’8 The mischievous attribution directed

54. 5 P. Bateson [P.G.], ‘Book Review: The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins’, Animal Behaviour, 26 (1978): 316-318. 6 R. Dawkins, The Extended Phenotype (Oxford: W. H. Freeman, 1982). 7 M. Mameli, ‘Nongenetic selection and nongenetic inheritance’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 55 (2004): 35-71. 8

R. Dawkins, ‘Extended phenotype—but not too extended. A reply to Laland, Turner and Jablonka’, Biology and Philosophy, 19 (2004), 377-396. What's the matter with memes? Robert

and values which distinguish one culture from another are in people’s heads. Presumably for reasons like this, Dawkins, in his second book, The Extended Phenotype, restricted a meme to being ‘a unit of information residing in the brain’.13 But we still have a conceptual problem: if replicators are restricted

Philosophy (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/replication/; 2001). 11 Hull and Wilson, ‘Replication’ (2001). 12 Aunger, The Electric Meme (2002). 13 Richard Dawkins, The Extended Phenotype (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982). 14 Aunger, The Electric Meme (2002). 15 Dan Sperber, ‘An objection to the memetic approach to culture’, in Robert Aunger

modeling cognition and culture: Why replicators are not necessary to cultural evolution’, Journal of Cognition and Culture, 2 (2002): 87-112. 22 Dawkins, The Extended Phenotype (1982). 23 Richard Dawkins, ‘Universal Darwinism’, in D. S. Bendall (ed.), Evolution from Molecules to Men (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), 403-425. 24 Marshall

. Because there are unlikely to be circumstantial cues by which a female squirrel could make this distinction, the researchers inferred that she uses ‘self-referential phenotype matching’, that is, that she compares each sister to herself with respect to some genetically complex trait or traits (probably odours) and adjusts her responses

from dubious implicit or explicit assumptions about a pre-existing, stable repertoire of paternal responses to resemblance. In a more realistic model, the baby’s phenotypic expression of potential paternity cues, the father’s perception of those cues, and the father’s reaction to those perceptions (not to mention the responses

been psychology and linguistics. (Physics was too damned hard.) But in 1983, at the urging of the philosopher Peter Godfrey-Smith, I read The Extended Phenotype—a truly great book—and was hooked on evolutionary biology. My copy disappeared under successive waves of marginal annotations as my career irrevocably changed course

the “levels of selection” debate away from the individual animal as the unit of evolution to the genes, and what he has called their extended phenotypes’. Simultaneously, the award description continues, Dawkins ‘applied a Darwinian view to culture through the concept of memes as replicators of culture’. Finally, ‘Dr Dawkins’ contribution

and make them clear even for the non-scientist. I think, for example, of his recent discussion on Radio four with Jonathan Miller on extended phenotypes. Of many examples in his writings I refer to his explanation of ‘intermediates’ and why creationists are confused in calling for evidence that, by definition

tend to think he has ‘just’ written a popular book. It is no secret that Dawkins, despite the complexity of the arguments in The Extended Phenotype, stood accused of being a scientific lightweight among his professional colleagues for having written in an accessible style. An unexpected effect of the success of

Science in the Soul: Selected Writings of a Passionate Rationalist

by Richard Dawkins  · 15 Mar 2017  · 420pp  · 130,714 words

of the book. Editor’s introduction RICHARD DAWKINS has always defied categorization. One eminent biologist of mathematical bent reviewing The Selfish Gene and The Extended Phenotype was startled to find scientific work apparently free of logical errors and yet containing not a single line of mathematics; he could come to no

can be said to have values in the same sense. John Maynard Smith said: ‘If there were no constraints on what is possible, the best phenotype would live for ever, would be impregnable to predators, would lay eggs at an infinite rate, and so on.’ Nicholas Humphrey continues the argument with

, and I didn’t blame her for wearily changing the subject rather than pursuing the argument. *9 I felt it necessary to begin The Extended Phenotype by admitting that it was a work of ‘unabashed advocacy’. The fact that I needed to use a word like ‘unabashed’ speaks to my point

is epigenetic, as it is on our planet, instructive evolution cannot work. Briefly, if acquired characters are to be inherited, embryonic processes must be reversible: phenotypic change has to be read back into the genes (or equivalent). If embryology is preformationistic – the genes are a true blueprint – then it may indeed

a cake than a blueprint for a house, it is irreversible. There is no one-to-one mapping between bits of genome and bits of phenotype, any more than there is mapping between crumbs of cake and words of recipe. The recipe is not a blueprint that can be reconstructed from

. Theory 6. Direction (order) imposed on random variation by natural selection Darwinism – the non-random selection of randomly varying replication entities by reason of their ‘phenotypic’ effects – is the only force I know that can, in principle, guide evolution in the direction of adaptive complexity. It works on this planet. It

efficacy throughout the universe. The ingredients in a general recipe for Darwinian evolution are replicating entities of some kind, exerting phenotypic ‘power’ of some kind over their replication success. In The Extended Phenotype I referred to these necessary entities as ‘active germ-line replicators’ or ‘optimons’. It is important to keep their

replication conceptually separate from their phenotypic effects, even though, on some planets, there may be a blurring in practice. Phenotypic adaptations can be seen as tools of replicator propagation. Gould disparages the replicator’s-eye view of evolution as

happy one: it is easy to see the genetic changes that accompany evolution as book-keeping entries, mere accountant’s records of the really interesting phenotypic events going on in the outside world. Deeper consideration, however, shows that the truth is almost the exact opposite. It is central and essential to

Darwinian (as opposed to Lamarckian) evolution that there shall be causal arrows flowing from genotype to phenotype, but not in the reverse direction. Changes in gene frequencies are not passive book-keeping records of

phenotypic changes: it is precisely because (and to the extent that) they actively cause phenotypic changes that evolution of the phenotype can occur. Serious errors flow, both from a failure to understand the importance of this one

is, I believe, the force underlying all adaptive complexity. Other topics for a future science of Universal Darwinism Active germ-line replicators together with their phenotypic consequences, then, constitute the general recipe for life; but the form of the system may vary greatly from planet to planet, both with respect to

the replicating entities themselves, and with respect to the ‘phenotypic’ means by which they ensure their survival. Indeed, as Leslie Orgel has pointed out to me, the very distinction between ‘genotype’ and

phenotype’ may be blurred. The replicating entities do not have to be DNA or RNA. They do not have to be organic molecules at all. Even

analogue, as opposed to digital codes, similar to the theoretical problems that would be raised by a purely analogue nervous system.*20 As for the phenotypic levers of power by which replicators influence their survival, we are so used to their being bound up into discrete organisms or ‘vehicles’ that we

forget the possibility of a more diffuse extra-corporeal or ‘extended’ phenotype. Even on this Earth a large amount of interesting adaptation can be interpreted as part of the extended phenotype. There is, however, a general theoretical case that can be made in favour of the discrete

with selection allows greater perfection of adaptation than selection on its own. An excellent and brilliant suggestion. *18 The one-way flow from genotype to phenotype – from genes to bodies – becomes obvious when you contrast the effect of a gene mutation (bodies change in future generations) with a purely bodily ‘mutation

for treating the gene as special in this list of levels was clearly presented by Williams in 1966: The natural selection of phenotypes cannot in itself produce cumulative change, because phenotypes are extremely temporary manifestations. The same argument holds for genotypes…Socrates’ genes may be with us yet, but not his genotype

neo-Darwinian ‘individual selection’. Nor did I, when I reiterated and extended the same argument a decade later in The Selfish Gene and The Extended Phenotype. We thought we were just clarifying what orthodox neo-Darwinism really meant. Yet both critics and supporters misunderstood our view as an attack on the

of its class. An individual organism, such as a clonally reproducing aphid or stick insect, would be a true replicator only if blemishes in the phenotype – say an amputated leg – were reproduced in the next generation. And of course they are not. Note that a blemish in the genotype – a mutation

– is reproduced in the next generation. Of course it may then show itself in the phenotype too, but it is not the phenotypic blemish itself which is copied. This is no more than the familiar principle of the non-inheritance of acquired characteristics, or – its

, which implies that blemished replicators may be less proficient, or more proficient, than the original (in practice because of what we are accustomed to calling ‘phenotypic effects’). The true unit of selection in any Darwinian process, on any planet, is an active germ-line replicator. On this planet, it happens to

plants ‘figure out’ the formula of chlorophyll? Enough, let us be constructive. Natural selection chooses genes rather than their alleles,*9 because of those genes’ phenotypic effects. In the case of behaviour, the genes presumably influence the state of the nervous system, which in turn influences the behaviour. Whether it is

behaviour, physiology or anatomy, a complex phenotype may require sophisticated mathematical description if we are to understand it. This does not, of course, mean that the animals themselves have to be mathematicians

results from a misunderstanding about what it means to speak of a gene ‘for’ behaviour. No geneticist has ever imagined that a gene ‘for’ some phenotypic character such as microcephaly, or brown eyes, is responsible, alone and unaided, for the manufacture of the organ that it affects. A microcephalic head is

new gene of interest simply gave this existing complex process a crude kick, the end result of which was a crucial change in the complex phenotypic effect. What had been complex maternal care, say, became complex sibling care. The shift from maternal to sibling care was a simple one, even if

creatures, natural selection can be seen as competition between alleles in the gene pool for that slot. The weapons of their competition are normally the ‘phenotypic’ effects that they have on bodies. *10 See also the footnote on this page. *11 ‘Evolutionarily stable strategy’ or ESS is John Maynard Smith’s

in which a group phenomenon could be subject to genetic variation. You might contrive it via some version of what I have called the ‘extended phenotype’, but I am too sceptical to accompany you on that theoretical journey. My point, of course, is that the phenomenon of religion may be like

is a gene: not the physical molecule of DNA but the information it carries. Biological codices, or genes, are carried around inside bodies whose qualities – phenotypes – they helped to influence. The death of the body entails the destruction of any codices that it contains, unless they have previously been passed on

(London, Bantam, 2015) Dawkins, Richard, Climbing Mount Improbable (London, Viking, 1996) Dawkins, Richard, A Devil’s Chaplain (London, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2003) Dawkins, Richard, The Extended Phenotype (London, Oxford University Press, 1982) Dawkins, Richard, The God Delusion (London, Bantam, 2006; 10th anniversary edn, London, Black Swan, 2016) Dawkins, Richard, The Greatest Show

Story of God: a personal journey into the world of science and religion (London, Bantam, 2005) Also by Richard Dawkins The Selfish Gene The Extended Phenotype The Blind Watchmaker River Out of Eden Climbing Mount Improbable Unweaving the Rainbow A Devil’s Chaplain The Ancestor’s Tale The God Delusion The

Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origins of a Good Society

by Nicholas A. Christakis  · 26 Mar 2019

that genes shape human behavior. The study of genetics and heredity began with how genotypes (genes and their variants) shape phenotypes (an organism’s physical appearance and function). But phenotypes eventually came to be seen as any manifestations of genes, moving beyond physical appearance to include the way the brain works

analyzing tiny variations in DNA, behavior geneticists have explored whether the genome as a whole and also certain genes in particular help to explain complex phenotypes like neuroticism, decision-making, and friendliness. So broad and powerful is the impact of genes on behavior that, in 2000, psychologist Eric Turkheimer formulated

people manifest numerous traits, from religiosity to risk aversion. Still, figuring out which genes really matter for a given complex behavioral trait (or any phenotype) can be difficult. It can be like trying to learn what makes a car run if you have never seen one before. You might discover

is the “cause” of the car’s operation. There are many parts in a car that must work together to make it move. Some phenotypes are indeed simple, however. You might remember from high-school biology that different variants of the hemoglobin gene encode the production of different kinds of

not like a simple computer program that runs exactly the same in every computer. There is rarely a one-to-one relationship between genotype and phenotype. Instead, genes yield particular behaviors more than others on average—just like smoking cigarettes substantially increases your chance of getting lung cancer on average

another, a crucial idea regarding inter-individual genetic effects to which we shall return. There may also be associations between vasopressin-receptor expression and other phenotypes in humans as varied as age at first sexual intercourse, autism, and even, intriguingly, altruism.40 This further supports the idea that the evolution

Ronald A. Fisher and Sewall Wright separately proposed the idea that if spouses resembled each other superficially (that is, phenotypically), they would also resemble each other genetically.47 Since most phenotypes arise from the actions of many genes working together, assortative (or disassortative) mating could result in genetic correlations between

reared apart sometimes report an overwhelming (and usually terribly unwelcome) physical attraction when they meet as adults.86 In addition to location and individual identity, phenotype matching is another and even more complex possible mechanism for kin detection. Here, an organism evaluates how similar others are to itself. For instance,

to have someone very different from you to help you with your math homework. Friends may resemble one another in subtle ways short of overt phenotypes. An important study by psychologist Thalia Wheatley and her colleagues Carolyn Parkinson and Adam Kleinbaum examined the brain responses of a group of forty-

the pattern of blood flow in their brains in response to this sample of clips! Friends may resemble one another on a genotypic, not just phenotypic, level.32 There are four reasons for this. First, similar genotypes may simply reflect that friends often come from the same place. If Greeks

when that ability is beneficial. The features animals use to identify others can be categorized into two types: cues and signals. Identity cues are phenotypic traits that make it possible to tell one individual from another but that do not themselves confer a survival advantage. In humans, fingerprints are unique

.18 Fingerprints, like the unique pattern of small blood vessels in everyone’s eyes, are therefore merely a possible cue. Identity signals, however, are phenotypic traits that facilitate individual recognition while also assisting an animal’s survival. If you do not want others to mistakenly attack you, neglect to repay

as their offspring, then you need some way to indicate This is me, not someone else.19 In order to achieve this, the relevant phenotypic trait should have a lot of variation so that it can be noticeably distinctive and memorable. As we would therefore expect, facial traits show more

the details of human faces should be combinable into endless configurations (see figure 9.3).21 Variation in human faces is so important that rare phenotypes that help individuals appear special should be favored by natural selection. Consequently, there is indeed a lot of variation in the genes that code for

be understood at many different levels, often reflecting scientists’ arbitrary interests. Biochemists might call it a day after studying how genes affect cells and observing phenotypes at the very first stage, in which genes are translated into their corresponding proteins. But why stop there? Medical geneticists may ignore the effect

study how different genes affect muscle function or brain structure or disease symptoms. Zoologists interested in whole animals may do breeding manipulations to study a phenotype they are interested in, such as the coat color of foxes or the monogamy behavior of voles. Behavior geneticists may ignore these intermediate levels

of social groups, an exophenotype.6 This type of idea was first advanced by evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins in his profound 1982 book The Extended Phenotype. Dawkins made a case that it should theoretically be possible “to free the selfish gene from the individual organism which has been its conceptual

perspective, a beaver may be wired to make a useful dam just as it is wired to have a functional pancreas. Dawkins speaks of extended phenotypes, but I prefer to use the term exophenotype, by which I mean the nonincidental, genetically guided changes that an organism makes to its surroundings

, then these genes have a downstream effect on other people, and it might be this indirect effect outside the body that is making the phenotype advantageous. A skunk warding off predators or a flower attracting bees is changing the behavior of other organisms in order to improve its own fitness

should encode the specific exophenotypes and that these encoded exophenotypes should affect reproduction or survival. Dawkins notes that the buildings people construct are not extended phenotypes, because humans do not, in fact, have genes that affect the propensity to build dwellings or genes that encode for whether those dwellings will

in contact with. Third, and perhaps most remarkable, genes can influence organisms at a distance. The genotype of one living thing can affect the phenotype (including the behavior) of another member of its own species or of a different species without ever coming into physical contact with it. If human

. Animal Artifacts Animal artifacts are material objects created by animals as a deliberate result of their actions; bird bowers are an example. Like any phenotype whose variation is influenced by a genotype, artifacts can help or hurt the chances that the organism will survive and reproduce and that the relevant

a spider evolved to have bigger mouth parts at the front of its body to more easily catch prey, it would be seen as a phenotypic trait arising from genotypic change that affects its survival. But the web a spider places outside its body is really no different; by using

on living tissue surrounding them rather than on inanimate matter. Snails infested with a certain kind of parasitic fluke have thicker shells. The shell phenotype is clearly influenced by the snail’s own physiology and genes. But the change in the host’s morphology may also be seen, at

a parasite evolves to induce anatomical changes in its host in ways that enhance the parasite’s prospects for survival, we can say that the phenotype of the host is under the control of the genotype of the parasite. From the conventional point of view of the host, the modifications

the latter into a spore-delivery platform. We know from fossilized leaves showing telltale marks of ant bites on their veins that this fungal phenotype is tens of millions of years old.28 Is it possible that some human traits and behaviors may actually be the genetic by-product of

of my children observed, although in less clinical language).35 How can we focus our scientific gaze? A crucial consideration is this: for a phenotype to be relevant, it must result in the differential propagation of the underlying genes. Variants of genes can increase or decrease in frequency in a

population as a consequence of their phenotypic effects, but some phenotypic effects may be incidental and not have any impact on the frequency of alleles in the next generation. To illustrate this point, consider

for food and a safer route to swim from place to place. This pond can thus be seen as an exophenotype, different than bodily phenotypes like the size or shape of the beaver’s teeth. By modifying the size and depth of the pond, the beaver can create selection

As a result, the capacity to build dams (an exophenotype) and the possession of bodily features that allow a beaver to swim far (a conventional phenotype) may coevolve. Regulating One Another’s Genes Something similar to beaver dams, I think, applies to the social structures humans create. If gene variants predispose

can help us understand indirect genetic effects and hence such social, action-at-a-distance exophenotypes. The feather condition of a chicken is clearly a phenotype, with genes playing a role in a bird’s plumage. Environmental factors, including the chicken’s diet and light exposure, are relevant too, of

going bald). If one gene changes, it may have an effect on the action of other genes, and hence on the expression of the attendant phenotypes. As we have just seen with the chickens, however, such effects can also occur between individuals. I call this social epistasis, since the impact

especially if the groups espousing them are in competition with groups espousing less advantageous ideas. Culture can also manifest convergent evolution, just like genetically based phenotypes in animals, as we saw earlier. Consider the form of fishhooks, which have been independently invented by humans more than once. There are several

a physical object made by an animal that has a structure specified by the animal’s genes. Plate 8: A “Zombie” Ant The extended phenotype of the fungus Ophiocordyceps unilateralis is manifested in the Asian ant Polyrhachis armata. The fungus controls the ant’s behavior, prompting it to climb a

. 40. Z. M. Prichard, A. J. Mackinnon, A. F. Jorm, and S. Easteal, “AVPR1A and OXTR Polymorphisms Are Associated with Sexual and Reproductive Behavioral Phenotypes in Humans,” Human Mutation 28 (2007): 1150; T. H. Wassink et al., “Examination of AVPR1a as an Autism Susceptibility Gene,” Molecular Psychiatry 9 (2004): 968

Ethology and Sociobiology 6 (1985): 183–187. 51. T. Antal, H. Ohtsuki, J. Wakeley, P. D. Taylor, and M. A. Nowak, “Evolution of Cooperation by Phenotypic Similarity,” PNAS: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106 (2009): 8597–8600; M. A. Nowak, “Five Rules for the Evolution of Cooperation,” Science 314

al., “Effects of Experience on Fetal Voice Recognition,” Psychological Science 14 (2003): 220–224. 86. M. Greenberg and R. Littlewood, “Post-Adoption Incest and Phenotypic Matching: Experience, Personal Meanings and Biosocial Implications,” British Journal of Medical Psychology 68 (1995): 29–44. For a collection of reports of this phenomenon in

Specialized Skills of Social Cognition: The Cultural Intelligence Hypothesis,” Science 317 (2007): 1360–1366. 41. Such an effect would especially speed up the evolution of phenotypes that are intrinsically synergistic, and this may help shed light on the observation that evolution in humans is accelerating. J. Hawks, E. T. Wang,

Signatures of Convergent Evolution in Echolocating Mammals,” Nature 502 (2013): 228–231. In the case of echolocation, we know that genes used for the convergent phenotypes may be similar across widely divergent taxa, such as bats and dolphins. 9. S. C. Morris, Life’s Solution: Inevitable Humans in a Lonely

Male Distinctiveness?,” Journal of Comparative Psychology 124 (2010): 343–350; C. Almstrom and M. Knight, “Using a Paired-Associate Learning Task to Assess Parent-Child Phenotypic Similarity,” Psychology Reports 97 (2005): 129–137. 31. K. McComb, C. Moss, S. M. Durant, L. Baker, and S. Sayialel, “Matriarchs as Repositories of

behaviors. B. John and K. R. Lewis, “Chromosome Variability and Geographic Distribution in Insects,” Science 152 (1966): 711–721. 7. R. Dawkins, The Extended Phenotype: The Long Reach of the Gene (Oxford: W. H. Freeman, 1982), p. vi. 8. Writing in 1982, Dawkins noted that there was scant evidence for

that you are not the first one to have a particular idea. 9. Ibid. Dawkins returned to this topic twenty years later. R. Dawkins, “Extended Phenotype—But Not Too Extended: A Reply to Laland, Turner, and Jablonka,” Biology and Philosophy 19 (2004): 377–396. 10. H. Eiberg et al., “

study. K. Kleisner, L. Priplatova, P. Frost, and J. Flegr, “Trustworthy-Looking Face Meets Brown Eyes,” PLOS ONE 8 (2013): e53285. 16. Dawkins, “Extended Phenotype.” 17. Housing architecture belongs to the realm of culture; however, architecture might affect our evolution by other means, a process known as gene-culture coevolution

, while species with colorful plumage tend to build less impressive bowers, as if some species over time have shifted from emphasizing physical phenotypes to emphasizing behavioral exophenotypes. Dawkins, Extended Phenotype, p. 199. 22. J. N. Weber, B. K. Peterson, and H. E. Hoekstra, “Discrete Genetic Modules Are Responsible for Complex

Burrow Evolution in Peromyscus Mice,” Nature 493 (2013): 402–405. 23. D. P. Hughes, “On the Origins of Parasite Extended Phenotypes,” Integrative and Comparative Biology 54 (2014): 210–217. 24. W. M. Ingram, L. M. Goodrich, E. A. Robey, and M. B. Eisen, “Mice Infected

becoming more fertile in a way that was beneficial to the organism, then, yes, this would be seen as an exophenotypic effect. 36. Dawkins, Extended Phenotype, pp. 206–207. 37. L. Glowacki, A. Isakov, R. W. Wrangham, R. McDermott, J. H. Fowler, and N. A. Christakis, “Formation of Raiding Parties

, “Across-Line SNP Association Study for Direct and Associative Effect on Feather Damage in Laying Hens,” Behavior Genetics 40 (2010): 715–727. 39. Dawkins, Extended Phenotype, p. 230. 40. P. Lieberman, “The Evolution of Human Speech,” Current Anthropology 48 (2007): 39–66; D. Ploog, “The Neural Basis of Vocalization,” in

2929–2933. 56. Y. Itan, B. L. Jones, C. J. E. Ingram, D. M. Swallow, and M. G. Thomas, “A Worldwide Correlation of Lactase Persistence Phenotype and Genotype,” BMC Evolutionary Biology 10 (2019): 36. 57. S. A. Tishkoff et al., “Convergent Adaptation of Human Lactase Persistence in Africa and Europe,” Nature

Epigenetics: How Environment Shapes Our Genes

by Richard C. Francis  · 14 May 2012

had to take a much more indirect route. He could only identify a gene through a mutation that caused some observable change in the appearance (phenotype) of his subjects. If this mutation was correlated with a different trait, he could assume that the genes for the two traits were located on

a result of epigenetic processes. The same may be true of obesity and its associated disorders in people like Paradorn. From Thrifty Genes to Thrifty Phenotypes Of course, our genes affect our weight. At issue is whether, in coming to grips with the obesity epidemic, our research dollars are best spent

Barker proposed that when the fetus receives insufficient nutrition through the placenta, it becomes programmed in the womb for a thrifty phenotype.9 As was proposed for the thrifty-genes hypothesis, those with a thrifty phenotype have a more efficient metabolism than babies born at a normal birth weight. But the thrifty

phenotype can result from diverse genetic backgrounds and without the aid of specific obesity genes. It is, rather, simply a function of the

intrauterine environment. The thrifty phenotype works out well in traditional non-Western cultures where the postnatal environment is often one of scarcity. In those cases, the prenatal environment predicts the

in an adaptive way. Problems arise, however, if the postnatal environment is enriched food-wise relative to the prenatal environment. When this mismatch occurs, thrifty phenotypes result in obesity and its consequences. The Barker hypothesis nicely accounts for the correlation between low birth weight and adult obesity and has been bolstered

? Barker himself has little interest in the mechanism through which this effect of the uterine environment occurs. Others, though, have pursued mechanistic investigations of thrifty phenotypes, and, as is usually the case, the initial studies have been conducted on nonhuman mammals—especially mice, rats, and sheep. For studies of this sort

color, and hence epigenetic state, of the mother. Female mice with the yellow coat color tend to produce yellow offspring, never offspring with the pseudoagouti phenotype. Mothers with the pseudoagouti coloration produce few yellow offspring and more pseudoagoutis.10 Moreover, a grandmother’s coloration also influences the coat coloration of her

The Mule Page, http://www.phudpucker.com/mules/mule.htm. 2. The Reivers (1962). 3. There is a characteristic cognitive deficit known as Turner neurocognitive phenotype (Ross, Roeltgen, et al. 2006), which is primarily restricted to spatial and mathematical reasoning. Turner syndrome is also associated with autism. 4. Parent-of-origin

passed into disuse, as a suitable name for the branch of biology which studies the causal interactions between genes and their products which bring the phenotype into being” (Waddington 1968). 30. In essence, Waddington’s goal was a synthesis of what was then known as “embryology” and genetics; we now call

). “Epigenetic mutations of the imprinted IGF2-H19 domain in Silver-Russell syndrome (SRS): Results from a large cohort of patients with SRS and SRS-like phenotypes.” J Med Genet 46(3): 192–197. Beadle, G. W., and E. L. Tatum (1941). “Genetic control of biochemical reactions in Neurospora.” Proc Natl Acad

inactivation.” Trends Genet 19: 432–438. Burdge, G. C., M. A. Hanson, et al. (2007). “Epigenetic regulation of transcription: A mechanism for inducing variations in phenotype (fetal programming) by differences in nutrition during early life?” Br J Nutr 97(6): 1036–1046. Burmeister, S. S., V. Kailasanath, et al. (2007). “Social

–617. Costa, F. F. (2008). “Non-coding RNAs, epigenetics and complexity.” Gene 410(1): 9–17. Coventry, W. L., S. E. Medland, et al. (2009). “Phenotypic and discordant-monozygotic analyses of stress and perceived social support as antecedents to or sequelae of risk for depression.” Twin Res Hum Genet 12(5

., and D. A. Melton (2008). “Nuclear reprogramming in cells.” Science 322(5909): 1811–1815. Hales, C. N., and D. J. P. Barker (2001). “The thrifty phenotype hypothesis: Type 2 diabetes.” Br Med Bull 60(1): 5–20. Hamelin, C. E., G. Anglin, et al. (2006). “Genomic imprinting in Turner syndrome: Effects

): 588–595. Hayashi, T., A. G. Motulsky, et al. (1999). “Position of a ‘green-red’ hybrid gene in the visual pigment array determines colour-vision phenotype.” Nat Genet 22(1): 90–93. Hayes, T. B., A. A. Stuart, et al. (2006). “Characterization of atrazine-induced gonadal malformations in African clawed frogs

‘vitalism.’” Cell 100(1): 79–88. Ko, J. M., J. M. Kim, et al. (2010). “Influence of parental origin of the X chromosome on physical phenotypes and GH responsiveness of patients with Turner syndrome.” Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 73(1): 66–71. Kochanska, G., R. A. Barry, et al. (2009). “Early attachment

321(7276): 1609–1612. Kulesa, P. M., J. C. Kasemeier-Kulesa, et al. (2006). “Reprogramming metastatic melanoma cells to assume a neural crest cell-like phenotype in an embryonic microenvironment.” Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103(10): 3752–3757. Lanctot, C., T. Cheutin, et al. (2007). “Dynamic genome architecture in the

D. Ugarkovic (2008). “Role of non-coding RNA and heterochromatin in aneuploidy and cancer.” Semin Cancer Biol 18(2): 123–130. Pigliucci, M. (2010). “Genotype-phenotype mapping and the end of the ‘genes as blueprint’ metaphor.” Phil Trans Royal Soc B 365(1540): 557–566. Pollard, K. S., S. R. Salama

.” Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 6(4): 369–375. Szyf, M., I. C. Weaver, et al. (2005). “Maternal programming of steroid receptor expression and phenotype through DNA methylation in the rat.” Front Neuroendocrinol 26(3–4): 139–162. Taft, R. J., M. Pheasant, et al. (2007). “The relationship between non

radiata) and pigtail (Macaca nemestrina) macaques is related to early maternal experiences.” Am J Primatol 62(4): 243–259. Weaver, I. C. (2009). “Shaping adult phenotypes through early life environments.” Birth Defects Res C Embryo Today 87(4): 314–326. Weaver, I. C., N. Cervoni, et al. (2004). “Epigenetic programming by

77(3): 151–158. Wolfram, S. (2002). A new kind of science. Champagn, IL: Wolfram Media. Wong, A. H., Gottesman, I. I., et al. (2005). “Phenotypic differences in genetically identical organisms: The epigenetic perspective.” Hum Mol Genet 14(Spec 1): R11–R18. Wright, S. (1916). “An intensive study of the inheritance

Parent Bonding Instrument (PBI) parenting see also mothering parent-of-origin effect see also imprinting, genomic paternal care pathogen defense, growth vs. Petchburi Province, Thailand phenotypes thrifty pheromones pituitary placenta, imprinting in plants, epigenetic inheritance in pleiotropy pluripotent cells polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) population genetics postnatal environment, mismatch between fetal environment and

, Edward teratocarcinoma cells testes endocrine disruptors and steroid abuse and shrinkage of testosterone competitive interactions and Thailand, diet and obesity in “thrifty genes” hypothesis thrifty phenotype thymine tigons tissue-based theory of cancer Toguchi, Audrey Toronto zoo totipotent cells traits: genes as linked to sex-linked transcription transcription factors transdifferentiation transgenerational

epigenetic processes translation translocation tumor suppressor genes Turner neurocognitive phenotype Turner syndrome unipotent cells viable yellow (Avy) agouti allele Vietnam Veterans Memorial Vietnam War vinclozolin Vindicated (Canseco) violence, steroid use and vision, color, see color

The Barbell Prescription: Strength Training for Life After 40

by Jonathon Sullivan and Andy Baker  · 2 Dec 2016  · 742pp  · 166,595 words

The Gene: An Intimate History

by Siddhartha Mukherjee  · 16 May 2016  · 824pp  · 218,333 words

Darwin's Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meanings of Life

by Daniel C. Dennett  · 15 Jan 1995  · 846pp  · 232,630 words

A Devil's Chaplain: Selected Writings

by Richard Dawkins  · 1 Jan 2004  · 460pp  · 107,712 words

Evil Genes: Why Rome Fell, Hitler Rose, Enron Failed, and My Sister Stole My Mother's Boyfriend

by Barbara Oakley Phd  · 20 Oct 2008

Autism: A Very Short Introduction

by Uta Frith  · 22 Oct 2008  · 127pp  · 36,853 words

A Hunter-Gatherer's Guide to the 21st Century: Evolution and the Challenges of Modern Life

by Heather Heying and Bret Weinstein  · 14 Sep 2021  · 384pp  · 105,110 words

Life as We Made It: How 50,000 Years of Human Innovation Refined--And Redefined--Nature

by Beth Shapiro  · 15 Dec 2021  · 338pp  · 105,112 words

Longevity: To the Limits and Beyond (Research and Perspectives in Longevity)

by Jean-Marie Robine, James W. Vaupel, Bernard Jeune and Michel Allard  · 2 Jan 1997

A Culture of Growth: The Origins of the Modern Economy

by Joel Mokyr  · 8 Jan 2016  · 687pp  · 189,243 words

Food Allergy: Adverse Reactions to Foods and Food Additives

by Dean D. Metcalfe  · 15 Dec 2008  · 623pp  · 448,848 words

Practical Manual of Thyroid and Parathyroid Disease

by Asit Arora, Neil Tolley and R. Michael Tuttle  · 2 Jan 2009  · 228pp  · 119,593 words

The Ancestor's Tale: A Pilgrimage to the Dawn of Evolution

by Richard Dawkins  · 1 Jan 2004  · 734pp  · 244,010 words

Overdiagnosed: Making People Sick in the Pursuit of Health

by H. Gilbert Welch, Lisa M. Schwartz and Steven Woloshin  · 18 Jan 2011  · 302pp  · 92,546 words

Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst

by Robert M. Sapolsky  · 1 May 2017  · 1,261pp  · 294,715 words

Entangled Life: How Fungi Make Our Worlds, Change Our Minds & Shape Our Futures

by Merlin Sheldrake  · 11 May 2020

The Impact of Early Life Trauma on Health and Disease

by Lanius, Ruth A.; Vermetten, Eric; Pain, Clare  · 11 Jan 2011

A Brief History of Everyone Who Ever Lived

by Adam Rutherford  · 7 Sep 2016

The Patient Will See You Now: The Future of Medicine Is in Your Hands

by Eric Topol  · 6 Jan 2015  · 588pp  · 131,025 words

Darwin Among the Machines

by George Dyson  · 28 Mar 2012  · 463pp  · 118,936 words

Genesis: The Deep Origin of Societies

by Edward O. Wilson  · 19 Mar 2019

The Blind Watchmaker; Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design

by Richard Dawkins  · 1 Jan 1986  · 420pp  · 143,881 words

The Future of the Brain: Essays by the World's Leading Neuroscientists

by Gary Marcus and Jeremy Freeman  · 1 Nov 2014  · 336pp  · 93,672 words

Mycelium Running: How Mushrooms Can Help Save the World

by Paul Stamets  · 14 Apr 2005  · 732pp  · 151,889 words

The God Delusion

by Richard Dawkins  · 12 Sep 2006  · 478pp  · 142,608 words

Deep Medicine: How Artificial Intelligence Can Make Healthcare Human Again

by Eric Topol  · 1 Jan 2019  · 424pp  · 114,905 words

The Ape That Understood the Universe: How the Mind and Culture Evolve

by Steve Stewart-Williams  · 12 Sep 2018  · 1,132pp  · 156,379 words

Safe Haven: Investing for Financial Storms

by Mark Spitznagel  · 9 Aug 2021  · 231pp  · 64,734 words

River Out of Eden: A Darwinian View of Life

by Richard Dawkins  · 28 Feb 1995  · 141pp  · 46,879 words

Complexity: A Guided Tour

by Melanie Mitchell  · 31 Mar 2009  · 524pp  · 120,182 words

Autistic Community and the Neurodiversity Movement: Stories From the Frontline

by Steven K. Kapp  · 19 Nov 2019

The Information: A History, a Theory, a Flood

by James Gleick  · 1 Mar 2011  · 855pp  · 178,507 words

Never Bet Against Occam: Mast Cell Activation Disease and the Modern Epidemics of Chronic Illness and Medical Complexity

by Lawrence B. Afrin M. D., Kendra Neilsen Myles and Kristi Posival  · 15 Jan 2016

Immortality, Inc.

by Chip Walter  · 7 Jan 2020  · 232pp  · 72,483 words

Why Information Grows: The Evolution of Order, From Atoms to Economies

by Cesar Hidalgo  · 1 Jun 2015  · 242pp  · 68,019 words

The Origins of the British

by Stephen Oppenheimer  · 1 Jul 2007  · 852pp  · 157,181 words

Artificial Whiteness

by Yarden Katz

From Bacteria to Bach and Back: The Evolution of Minds

by Daniel C. Dennett  · 7 Feb 2017  · 573pp  · 157,767 words

Life's Greatest Secret: The Race to Crack the Genetic Code

by Matthew Cobb  · 6 Jul 2015  · 608pp  · 150,324 words

Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution

by Francis Fukuyama  · 1 Jan 2002  · 350pp  · 96,803 words

Junk DNA: A Journey Through the Dark Matter of the Genome

by Nessa Carey  · 5 Mar 2015  · 357pp  · 98,853 words

The Secret of Our Success: How Culture Is Driving Human Evolution, Domesticating Our Species, and Making Us Smarter

by Joseph Henrich  · 27 Oct 2015  · 631pp  · 177,227 words

Accelerando

by Stross, Charles  · 22 Jan 2005  · 489pp  · 148,885 words

The Book of Woe: The DSM and the Unmaking of Psychiatry

by Gary Greenberg  · 1 May 2013  · 480pp  · 138,041 words

The Pot Book: A Complete Guide to Cannabis

by Julie Holland  · 22 Sep 2010  · 694pp  · 197,804 words

A World on the Wing: The Global Odyssey of Migratory Birds

by Scott Weidensaul  · 29 Mar 2021  · 415pp  · 136,343 words

Turing's Cathedral

by George Dyson  · 6 Mar 2012

Ageless: The New Science of Getting Older Without Getting Old

by Andrew Steele  · 24 Dec 2020  · 399pp  · 118,576 words

Humankind: Solidarity With Non-Human People

by Timothy Morton  · 14 Oct 2017  · 225pp  · 70,180 words

Upgrade

by Blake Crouch  · 6 Jul 2022  · 396pp  · 96,049 words

Psychopathy: An Introduction to Biological Findings and Their Implications

by Andrea L. Glenn and Adrian Raine  · 7 Mar 2014

The Science of Language

by Noam Chomsky  · 24 Feb 2012

Global Catastrophic Risks

by Nick Bostrom and Milan M. Cirkovic  · 2 Jul 2008

The Hidden Half: How the World Conceals Its Secrets

by Michael Blastland  · 3 Apr 2019  · 290pp  · 82,871 words

The Spirit Level: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger

by Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett  · 1 Jan 2009  · 309pp  · 86,909 words

Cognitive Gadgets: The Cultural Evolution of Thinking

by Cecilia Heyes  · 15 Apr 2018

The Demon in the Machine: How Hidden Webs of Information Are Finally Solving the Mystery of Life

by Paul Davies  · 31 Jan 2019  · 253pp  · 83,473 words

Exercised: The Science of Physical Activity, Rest and Health

by Daniel Lieberman  · 2 Sep 2020  · 687pp  · 165,457 words

What Kind of Creatures Are We? (Columbia Themes in Philosophy)

by Noam Chomsky  · 7 Dec 2015

Brief Peeks Beyond: Critical Essays on Metaphysics, Neuroscience, Free Will, Skepticism and Culture

by Bernardo Kastrup  · 28 May 2015  · 244pp  · 73,966 words

Survival of the Friendliest: Understanding Our Origins and Rediscovering Our Common Humanity

by Brian Hare and Vanessa Woods  · 13 Jul 2020

The Biology of Belief: Unleashing the Power of Consciousness, Matter & Miracles

by Bruce H. Lipton  · 1 Jan 2005  · 220pp  · 66,518 words

Information: A Very Short Introduction

by Luciano Floridi  · 25 Feb 2010  · 137pp  · 36,231 words

A Natural History of Beer

by Rob DeSalle  · 14 Jun 2019

Power, Sex, Suicide: Mitochondria and the Meaning of Life

by Nick Lane  · 14 Oct 2005  · 369pp  · 153,018 words

Emergence

by Steven Johnson  · 329pp  · 88,954 words

Brain Energy: A Revolutionary Breakthrough in Understanding Mental Health--And Improving Treatment for Anxiety, Depression, OCD, PTSD, and More

by Christopher M. Palmer Md  · 15 Nov 2022  · 402pp  · 107,908 words

Four Battlegrounds

by Paul Scharre  · 18 Jan 2023

Beyond Bigger Leaner Stronger: The Advanced Guide to Building Muscle, Staying Lean, and Getting Strong

by Michael Matthews  · 15 Jun 2014

The Psychopath Inside: A Neuroscientist's Personal Journey Into the Dark Side of the Brain

by James Fallon  · 30 Oct 2013

The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution

by Richard Dawkins  · 21 Sep 2009

What Technology Wants

by Kevin Kelly  · 14 Jul 2010  · 476pp  · 132,042 words

Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies

by Nick Bostrom  · 3 Jun 2014  · 574pp  · 164,509 words

Unmasking Autism: Discovering the New Faces of Neurodiversity

by Devon Price  · 4 Apr 2022  · 456pp  · 101,959 words

When Computers Can Think: The Artificial Intelligence Singularity

by Anthony Berglas, William Black, Samantha Thalind, Max Scratchmann and Michelle Estes  · 28 Feb 2015

Iron Sunrise

by Stross, Charles  · 28 Oct 2004  · 462pp  · 142,240 words

A Dominant Character

by Samanth Subramanian  · 27 Apr 2020

Good Calories, Bad Calories: Challenging the Conventional Wisdom on Diet, Weight Control, and Disease

by Gary Taubes  · 25 Sep 2007  · 936pp  · 252,313 words

The Human Age: The World Shaped by Us

by Diane Ackerman  · 9 Sep 2014  · 380pp  · 104,841 words

A Crack in Creation: Gene Editing and the Unthinkable Power to Control Evolution

by Jennifer A. Doudna and Samuel H. Sternberg  · 15 Mar 2017

Neurodiversity at Work: Drive Innovation, Performance and Productivity With a Neurodiverse Workforce

by Amanda Kirby and Theo Smith  · 2 Aug 2021  · 424pp  · 114,820 words

The Vanishing Face of Gaia: A Final Warning

by James E. Lovelock  · 1 Jan 2009  · 239pp  · 68,598 words

Ask Me About My Uterus: A Quest to Make Doctors Believe in Women's Pain

by Abby Norman  · 6 Mar 2018  · 323pp  · 107,963 words

The Human Swarm: How Our Societies Arise, Thrive, and Fall

by Mark W. Moffett  · 31 Mar 2019  · 692pp  · 189,065 words

The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature

by Steven Pinker  · 1 Jan 2002  · 901pp  · 234,905 words

She Has Her Mother's Laugh

by Carl Zimmer  · 29 May 2018

Climbing Mount Improbable

by Richard Dawkins and Lalla Ward  · 1 Jan 1996  · 309pp  · 101,190 words

The Master Algorithm: How the Quest for the Ultimate Learning Machine Will Remake Our World

by Pedro Domingos  · 21 Sep 2015  · 396pp  · 117,149 words

Whiteshift: Populism, Immigration and the Future of White Majorities

by Eric Kaufmann  · 24 Oct 2018  · 691pp  · 203,236 words

Unweaving the Rainbow

by Richard Dawkins  · 7 Aug 2011  · 339pp  · 112,979 words

Green Mars

by Kim Stanley Robinson  · 23 Oct 1993  · 746pp  · 239,969 words

2312

by Kim Stanley Robinson  · 22 May 2012  · 561pp  · 167,631 words

Just Keep Buying: Proven Ways to Save Money and Build Your Wealth

by Nick Maggiulli  · 15 May 2022  · 287pp  · 62,824 words

Spectrum Women: Walking to the Beat of Autism

by Barb Cook and Samantha Craft  · 20 Aug 2018  · 335pp  · 94,578 words

The Big Fat Surprise: Why Butter, Meat and Cheese Belong in a Healthy Diet

by Nina Teicholz  · 12 May 2014  · 743pp  · 189,512 words

Seveneves

by Neal Stephenson  · 19 May 2015  · 945pp  · 292,893 words

Glasshouse

by Charles Stross  · 14 Jun 2006  · 443pp  · 123,526 words

Singularity Sky

by Stross, Charles  · 28 Oct 2003  · 448pp  · 116,962 words

The Stack: On Software and Sovereignty

by Benjamin H. Bratton  · 19 Feb 2016  · 903pp  · 235,753 words

In Pursuit of Memory: The Fight Against Alzheimer's

by Joseph Jebelli  · 30 Oct 2017  · 294pp  · 87,429 words

The End of Medicine: How Silicon Valley (And Naked Mice) Will Reboot Your Doctor

by Andy Kessler  · 12 Oct 2009  · 361pp  · 86,921 words

Stamping Butterflies

by Jon Courtenay Grimwood  · 1 Jan 2004  · 508pp  · 137,199 words

T: The Story of Testosterone, the Hormone That Dominates and Divides Us

by Carole Hooven  · 12 Jul 2021  · 372pp  · 117,038 words

1491

by Charles C. Mann  · 8 Aug 2005  · 666pp  · 189,883 words

Culture Warlords: My Journey Into the Dark Web of White Supremacy

by Talia Lavin  · 14 Jul 2020  · 231pp  · 71,299 words

The Fabric of Reality

by David Deutsch  · 31 Mar 2012  · 511pp  · 139,108 words

The Pattern Seekers: How Autism Drives Human Invention

by Simon Baron-Cohen  · 14 Aug 2020

Architects of Intelligence

by Martin Ford  · 16 Nov 2018  · 586pp  · 186,548 words

The Goodness Paradox: The Strange Relationship Between Virtue and Violence in Human Evolution

by Richard Wrangham  · 29 Jan 2019  · 473pp  · 130,141 words

Sex Power Money

by Sara Pascoe  · 26 Aug 2019  · 287pp  · 92,194 words

The Code of Capital: How the Law Creates Wealth and Inequality

by Katharina Pistor  · 27 May 2019  · 316pp  · 117,228 words

CRISPR People: The Science and Ethics of Editing Humans

by Henry T. Greely  · 22 Jan 2021

Immigration and Ethnic Formation in a Deeply Divided Society: The Case of the 1990s Immigrants From the Former Soviet Union in Israel

by Majid Al Haj  · 20 Nov 2003

In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts: Close Encounters With Addiction

by Gabor Mate and Peter A. Levine  · 5 Jan 2010  · 504pp  · 147,660 words

Virus of the Mind

by Richard Brodie  · 4 Jun 2009  · 289pp  · 22,394 words

Visual Thinking: The Hidden Gifts of People Who Think in Pictures, Patterns, and Abstractions

by Temple Grandin, Ph.d.  · 11 Oct 2022

The Transhumanist Reader

by Max More and Natasha Vita-More  · 4 Mar 2013  · 798pp  · 240,182 words

Rewired: The Post-Cyberpunk Anthology

by James Patrick Kelly and John Kessel  · 30 Sep 2007  · 571pp  · 162,958 words

The Red Queen: Sex and the Evolution of Human Nature

by Matt Ridley  · 14 Aug 1993  · 474pp  · 136,787 words

Beggars in Spain

by Nancy Kress  · 23 Nov 2004

The Telomere Effect: A Revolutionary Approach to Living Younger, Healthier, Longer

by Dr. Elizabeth Blackburn and Dr. Elissa Epel  · 3 Jan 2017  · 381pp  · 111,629 words

The Autistic Brain: Thinking Across the Spectrum

by Temple Grandin and Richard Panek  · 15 Feb 2013

Thinking in Bets

by Annie Duke  · 6 Feb 2018  · 288pp  · 81,253 words

The Coming Plague: Newly Emerging Diseases in a World Out of Balance

by Laurie Garrett  · 31 Oct 1994  · 1,293pp  · 357,735 words

Wilding: The Return of Nature to a British Farm

by Isabella Tree  · 2 May 2018  · 473pp  · 124,861 words

Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything About Race, Gender, and Identity―and Why This Harms Everybody

by Helen Pluckrose and James A. Lindsay  · 14 Jul 2020  · 378pp  · 107,957 words

Science Fictions: How Fraud, Bias, Negligence, and Hype Undermine the Search for Truth

by Stuart Ritchie  · 20 Jul 2020

How Emotions Are Made: The New Science of the Mind and Brain

by Lisa Feldman Barrett  · 6 Mar 2017

The Journey of Humanity: The Origins of Wealth and Inequality

by Oded Galor  · 22 Mar 2022  · 426pp  · 83,128 words

The Perfect Police State: An Undercover Odyssey Into China's Terrifying Surveillance Dystopia of the Future

by Geoffrey Cain  · 28 Jun 2021  · 340pp  · 90,674 words

Editing Humanity: The CRISPR Revolution and the New Era of Genome Editing

by Kevin Davies  · 5 Oct 2020  · 741pp  · 164,057 words

Lifespan: Why We Age—and Why We Don't Have To

by David A. Sinclair and Matthew D. Laplante  · 9 Sep 2019

Life at the Speed of Light: From the Double Helix to the Dawn of Digital Life

by J. Craig Venter  · 16 Oct 2013  · 285pp  · 78,180 words

50 Future Ideas You Really Need to Know

by Richard Watson  · 5 Nov 2013  · 219pp  · 63,495 words

Saturn's Children

by Charles Stross  · 30 Jun 2008  · 360pp  · 110,929 words

Wireless

by Charles Stross  · 7 Jul 2009

Data Mining: Concepts and Techniques: Concepts and Techniques

by Jiawei Han, Micheline Kamber and Jian Pei  · 21 Jun 2011

Beyond: Our Future in Space

by Chris Impey  · 12 Apr 2015  · 370pp  · 97,138 words

The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion

by Jonathan Haidt  · 13 Mar 2012  · 539pp  · 139,378 words

Who We Are and How We Got Here: Ancient DNA and the New Science of the Human Past

by David Reich  · 22 Mar 2018  · 372pp  · 110,208 words

Palo Alto: A History of California, Capitalism, and the World

by Malcolm Harris  · 14 Feb 2023  · 864pp  · 272,918 words

The Cult of Smart: How Our Broken Education System Perpetuates Social Injustice

by Fredrik Deboer  · 3 Aug 2020  · 236pp  · 77,546 words

Data Mining: Concepts, Models, Methods, and Algorithms

by Mehmed Kantardzić  · 2 Jan 2003  · 721pp  · 197,134 words

Water: A Biography

by Giulio Boccaletti  · 13 Sep 2021  · 485pp  · 133,655 words

Data Source Handbook

by Pete Warden  · 15 Feb 2011  · 39pp  · 4,665 words

Kiln People

by David Brin  · 15 Jan 2002  · 625pp  · 167,097 words

Political Ponerology (A Science on the Nature of Evil Adjusted for Political Purposes)

by Andrew M. Lobaczewski  · 1 Jan 2006  · 396pp  · 116,332 words

Who Are We—And Should It Matter in the 21st Century?

by Gary Younge  · 27 Jun 2011  · 298pp  · 89,287 words

Bread, Wine, Chocolate: The Slow Loss of Foods We Love

by Simran Sethi  · 10 Nov 2015  · 396pp  · 112,832 words

The New Nomads: How the Migration Revolution Is Making the World a Better Place

by Felix Marquardt  · 7 Jul 2021  · 250pp  · 75,151 words

Wasps: The Splendors and Miseries of an American Aristocracy

by Michael Knox Beran  · 2 Aug 2021  · 800pp  · 240,175 words

The Story of Work: A New History of Humankind

by Jan Lucassen  · 26 Jul 2021  · 869pp  · 239,167 words

The Lucky Years: How to Thrive in the Brave New World of Health

by David B. Agus  · 29 Dec 2015  · 346pp  · 92,984 words

The Case Against Sugar

by Gary Taubes  · 27 Dec 2016  · 406pp  · 115,719 words

Protocol: how control exists after decentralization

by Alexander R. Galloway  · 1 Apr 2004  · 287pp  · 86,919 words

The Diet Myth: The Real Science Behind What We Eat

by Tim Spector  · 13 May 2015  · 382pp  · 115,172 words

The Sovereign Individual: How to Survive and Thrive During the Collapse of the Welfare State

by James Dale Davidson and William Rees-Mogg  · 3 Feb 1997  · 582pp  · 160,693 words

The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology

by Ray Kurzweil  · 14 Jul 2005  · 761pp  · 231,902 words

Immigration worldwide: policies, practices, and trends

by Uma Anand Segal, Doreen Elliott and Nazneen S. Mayadas  · 19 Jan 2010  · 492pp  · 70,082 words

Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking

by Malcolm Gladwell  · 1 Jan 2005  · 264pp  · 90,379 words

Caliban's War

by James S. A. Corey  · 6 Jun 2012  · 630pp  · 174,171 words

Never Enough: The Neuroscience and Experience of Addiction

by Judith Grisel  · 15 Feb 2019  · 213pp  · 68,363 words

Grain Brain: The Surprising Truth About Wheat, Carbs, and Sugar--Your Brain's Silent Killers

by David Perlmutter and Kristin Loberg  · 17 Sep 2013

Mind Wide Open: Your Brain and the Neuroscience of Everyday Life

by Steven Johnson  · 2 Jan 1999  · 294pp  · 86,601 words

Tools of Titans: The Tactics, Routines, and Habits of Billionaires, Icons, and World-Class Performers

by Timothy Ferriss  · 6 Dec 2016  · 669pp  · 210,153 words

The Evolution of Everything: How New Ideas Emerge

by Matt Ridley  · 395pp  · 116,675 words

Seeds of Hope: Wisdom and Wonder From the World of Plants

by Jane Goodall  · 1 Apr 2013  · 452pp  · 135,790 words

Innovation and Its Enemies

by Calestous Juma  · 20 Mar 2017

The Zero Marginal Cost Society: The Internet of Things, the Collaborative Commons, and the Eclipse of Capitalism

by Jeremy Rifkin  · 31 Mar 2014  · 565pp  · 151,129 words

We Were Eight Years in Power: An American Tragedy

by Ta-Nehisi Coates  · 2 Oct 2017  · 349pp  · 114,914 words

The End of Pain: How Nutrition and Diet Can Fight Chronic Inflammatory Disease

by Jacqueline Lagace  · 7 Mar 2014

The Rapture of the Nerds

by Cory Doctorow and Charles Stross  · 3 Sep 2012  · 311pp  · 94,732 words

Testosterone Rex: Myths of Sex, Science, and Society

by Cordelia Fine  · 13 Jan 2017  · 312pp  · 83,998 words

Permafrost

by Alastair Reynolds  · 19 Mar 2019  · 137pp  · 37,066 words

Green Philosophy: How to Think Seriously About the Planet

by Roger Scruton  · 30 Apr 2014  · 426pp  · 118,913 words

How to Survive a Pandemic

by Michael Greger, M.D., FACLM  · 1,072pp  · 237,186 words

Transcend: The New Science of Self-Actualization

by Scott Barry Kaufman  · 6 Apr 2020  · 678pp  · 148,827 words

The Hype Machine: How Social Media Disrupts Our Elections, Our Economy, and Our Health--And How We Must Adapt

by Sinan Aral  · 14 Sep 2020  · 475pp  · 134,707 words

Empire of Ants: The Hidden Worlds and Extraordinary Lives of Earth's Tiny Conquerors

by Susanne Foitzik and Olaf Fritsche  · 5 Apr 2021  · 335pp  · 86,900 words

User Stories Applied: For Agile Software Development

by Mike Cohn  · 1 Mar 2004  · 270pp  · 75,626 words

Diverse Bodies, Diverse Practices: Toward an Inclusive Somatics

by Don Hanlon Johnson  · 10 Sep 2018  · 358pp  · 106,951 words

Explaining Humans: What Science Can Teach Us About Life, Love and Relationships

by Camilla Pang  · 12 Mar 2020  · 256pp  · 67,563 words

On the Edge: The Art of Risking Everything

by Nate Silver  · 12 Aug 2024  · 848pp  · 227,015 words

Everything Is Predictable: How Bayesian Statistics Explain Our World

by Tom Chivers  · 6 May 2024  · 283pp  · 102,484 words

Why Machines Learn: The Elegant Math Behind Modern AI

by Anil Ananthaswamy  · 15 Jul 2024  · 416pp  · 118,522 words

Nexus: A Brief History of Information Networks From the Stone Age to AI

by Yuval Noah Harari  · 9 Sep 2024  · 566pp  · 169,013 words

The Rational Optimist: How Prosperity Evolves

by Matt Ridley  · 17 May 2010  · 462pp  · 150,129 words

Nerds on Wall Street: Math, Machines and Wired Markets

by David J. Leinweber  · 31 Dec 2008  · 402pp  · 110,972 words

10% Human: How Your Body's Microbes Hold the Key to Health and Happiness

by Alanna Collen  · 4 May 2015  · 372pp  · 111,573 words

Skyfaring: A Journey With a Pilot

by Mark Vanhoenacker  · 1 Jun 2015  · 319pp  · 105,949 words

The End of Doom: Environmental Renewal in the Twenty-First Century

by Ronald Bailey  · 20 Jul 2015  · 417pp  · 109,367 words

Origins: How Earth's History Shaped Human History

by Lewis Dartnell  · 13 May 2019  · 424pp  · 108,768 words

Super Thinking: The Big Book of Mental Models

by Gabriel Weinberg and Lauren McCann  · 17 Jun 2019

Giving the Devil His Due: Reflections of a Scientific Humanist

by Michael Shermer  · 8 Apr 2020  · 677pp  · 121,255 words

Why We Run: A Natural History

by Bernd Heinrich  · 6 May 2002  · 306pp  · 86,242 words

We're Not Broken: Changing the Autism Conversation

by Eric Garcia  · 2 Aug 2021  · 398pp  · 96,909 words

The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer

by Siddhartha Mukherjee  · 16 Nov 2010  · 1,294pp  · 210,361 words

The Driver in the Driverless Car: How Our Technology Choices Will Create the Future

by Vivek Wadhwa and Alex Salkever  · 2 Apr 2017  · 181pp  · 52,147 words

How the Mind Works

by Steven Pinker  · 1 Jan 1997  · 913pp  · 265,787 words

Singularity Rising: Surviving and Thriving in a Smarter, Richer, and More Dangerous World

by James D. Miller  · 14 Jun 2012  · 377pp  · 97,144 words

The Magic of Reality: How We Know What's Really True

by Richard Dawkins  · 3 Oct 2011  · 208pp  · 67,288 words

Why the West Rules--For Now: The Patterns of History, and What They Reveal About the Future

by Ian Morris  · 11 Oct 2010  · 1,152pp  · 266,246 words

How to Be Black

by Baratunde Thurston  · 31 Jan 2012

Sacred Economics: Money, Gift, and Society in the Age of Transition

by Charles Eisenstein  · 11 Jul 2011  · 448pp  · 142,946 words

The Rise and Fall of the Third Chimpanzee

by Jared Diamond  · 2 Jan 1991  · 436pp  · 140,256 words

Half Empty

by David Rakoff  · 20 Sep 2010  · 181pp  · 62,775 words

Seventeen Contradictions and the End of Capitalism

by David Harvey  · 3 Apr 2014  · 464pp  · 116,945 words

The Organized Mind: Thinking Straight in the Age of Information Overload

by Daniel J. Levitin  · 18 Aug 2014  · 685pp  · 203,949 words

Forty Signs of Rain

by Kim Stanley Robinson  · 29 May 2004  · 362pp  · 104,308 words

Blue Mars

by Kim Stanley Robinson  · 23 Oct 2010  · 824pp  · 268,880 words

Alpha Girls: The Women Upstarts Who Took on Silicon Valley's Male Culture and Made the Deals of a Lifetime

by Julian Guthrie  · 15 Nov 2019

Betrayal of Trust: The Collapse of Global Public Health

by Laurie Garrett  · 15 Feb 2000

The Four Horsemen

by Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett  · 19 Mar 2019  · 114pp  · 30,715 words

The Portable Atheist: Essential Readings for the Nonbeliever

by Christopher Hitchens  · 14 Jun 2007  · 740pp  · 236,681 words

Adventures in the Anthropocene: A Journey to the Heart of the Planet We Made

by Gaia Vince  · 19 Oct 2014  · 505pp  · 147,916 words

Model Thinker: What You Need to Know to Make Data Work for You

by Scott E. Page  · 27 Nov 2018  · 543pp  · 153,550 words

Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism

by Safiya Umoja Noble  · 8 Jan 2018  · 290pp  · 73,000 words

The Mutant Project: Inside the Global Race to Genetically Modify Humans

by Eben Kirksey  · 10 Nov 2020  · 599pp  · 98,564 words

Decoding the World: A Roadmap for the Questioner

by Po Bronson  · 14 Jul 2020  · 320pp  · 95,629 words

Been There, Done That: A Rousing History of Sex

by Rachel Feltman  · 14 May 2022  · 306pp  · 88,545 words

Jellyfish Age Backwards: Nature's Secrets to Longevity

by Nicklas Brendborg  · 17 Jan 2023  · 222pp  · 68,595 words

Your Face Belongs to Us: A Secretive Startup's Quest to End Privacy as We Know It

by Kashmir Hill  · 19 Sep 2023  · 487pp  · 124,008 words

The Quiet Coup: Neoliberalism and the Looting of America

by Mehrsa Baradaran  · 7 May 2024  · 470pp  · 158,007 words

Everyday Utopia: What 2,000 Years of Wild Experiments Can Teach Us About the Good Life

by Kristen R. Ghodsee  · 16 May 2023  · 302pp  · 112,390 words

A Brief History of Neoliberalism

by David Harvey  · 2 Jan 1995  · 318pp  · 85,824 words

What to Think About Machines That Think: Today's Leading Thinkers on the Age of Machine Intelligence

by John Brockman  · 5 Oct 2015  · 481pp  · 125,946 words

The Age of the Infovore: Succeeding in the Information Economy

by Tyler Cowen  · 25 May 2010  · 254pp  · 72,929 words

Life on the Edge: The Coming of Age of Quantum Biology

by Johnjoe McFadden and Jim Al-Khalili  · 14 Oct 2014  · 476pp  · 120,892 words

Growth: From Microorganisms to Megacities

by Vaclav Smil  · 23 Sep 2019

Toast

by Stross, Charles  · 1 Jan 2002

Scratch Monkey

by Stross, Charles  · 1 Jan 2011

Year's Best SF 15

by David G. Hartwell; Kathryn Cramer  · 15 Aug 2010  · 573pp  · 163,302 words

Everything Is Obvious: *Once You Know the Answer

by Duncan J. Watts  · 28 Mar 2011  · 327pp  · 103,336 words

The Age of Spiritual Machines: When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence

by Ray Kurzweil  · 31 Dec 1998  · 696pp  · 143,736 words

The Best of Best New SF

by Gardner R. Dozois  · 1 Jan 2005  · 1,280pp  · 384,105 words

Anathem

by Neal Stephenson  · 25 Aug 2009  · 1,087pp  · 325,295 words

Atlas Obscura: An Explorer's Guide to the World's Hidden Wonders

by Joshua Foer, Dylan Thuras and Ella Morton  · 19 Sep 2016  · 1,048pp  · 187,324 words

Doing Harm: The Truth About How Bad Medicine and Lazy Science Leave Women Dismissed, Misdiagnosed, and Sick

by Maya Dusenbery  · 6 Mar 2018  · 504pp  · 147,722 words

The Nocturnal Brain: Nightmares, Neuroscience, and the Secret World of Sleep

by Dr. Guy Leschziner  · 22 Jul 2019  · 307pp  · 102,477 words

The Serengeti Rules: The Quest to Discover How Life Works and Why It Matters

by Sean B. Carroll  · 16 Feb 2016  · 314pp  · 77,409 words

The Great Experiment: Why Diverse Democracies Fall Apart and How They Can Endure

by Yascha Mounk  · 19 Apr 2022  · 442pp  · 112,155 words

Doppelganger: A Trip Into the Mirror World

by Naomi Klein  · 11 Sep 2023

Deep Nutrition: Why Your Genes Need Traditional Food

by Catherine Shanahan M. D.  · 2 Jan 2017  · 659pp  · 190,874 words

A New History of the Future in 100 Objects: A Fiction

by Adrian Hon  · 5 Oct 2020  · 340pp  · 101,675 words

Energy and Civilization: A History

by Vaclav Smil  · 11 May 2017

Software Design for Flexibility

by Chris Hanson and Gerald Sussman  · 17 Feb 2021

The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language

by Steven Pinker  · 1 Jan 1994  · 661pp  · 187,613 words

The Cancer Chronicles: Unlocking Medicine's Deepest Mystery

by George Johnson  · 26 Aug 2013  · 465pp  · 103,303 words

Overcoming Adrenal Fatigue: How to Restore Hormonal Balance and Feel Renewed, Energized, and Stress Free

by Kathryn Simpson  · 1 May 2011  · 158pp  · 46,760 words

Liars and Outliers: How Security Holds Society Together

by Bruce Schneier  · 14 Feb 2012  · 503pp  · 131,064 words

Clock of the Long Now

by Stewart Brand  · 1 Jan 1999  · 194pp  · 49,310 words

Language and Mind

by Noam Chomsky  · 1 Jan 1968

The Body Keeps the Score: Brain, Mind, and Body in the Healing of Trauma

by Bessel van Der Kolk M. D.  · 7 Sep 2015  · 600pp  · 174,620 words

Top Dog: The Science of Winning and Losing

by Po Bronson and Ashley Merryman  · 19 Feb 2013  · 407pp  · 109,653 words

The Willpower Instinct: How Self-Control Works, Why It Matters, and What You Can Doto Get More of It

by Kelly McGonigal  · 1 Dec 2011  · 354pp  · 91,875 words

Robot Futures

by Illah Reza Nourbakhsh  · 1 Mar 2013

The Bend of the World: A Novel

by Jacob Bacharach  · 13 Apr 2014  · 266pp  · 77,045 words

Warnings

by Richard A. Clarke  · 10 Apr 2017  · 428pp  · 121,717 words

Invisible Women

by Caroline Criado Perez  · 12 Mar 2019  · 480pp  · 119,407 words

Merchants of Truth: The Business of News and the Fight for Facts

by Jill Abramson  · 5 Feb 2019  · 788pp  · 223,004 words

The Estrogen Fix: The Breakthrough Guide to Being Healthy, Energized, and Hormonally Balanced

by Mache Seibel  · 18 Sep 2017  · 290pp  · 86,718 words

Chasing My Cure: A Doctor's Race to Turn Hope Into Action; A Memoir

by David Fajgenbaum  · 9 Sep 2019

The Climate Book: The Facts and the Solutions

by Greta Thunberg  · 14 Feb 2023  · 651pp  · 162,060 words

Built to Move: The Ten Essential Habits to Help You Move Freely and Live Fully

by Kelly Starrett and Juliet Starrett  · 3 Apr 2023  · 341pp  · 99,495 words

Ultra-Processed People: The Science Behind Food That Isn't Food

by Chris van Tulleken  · 26 Jun 2023  · 448pp  · 123,273 words

Empireland: How Imperialism Has Shaped Modern Britain

by Sathnam Sanghera  · 28 Jan 2021  · 430pp  · 111,038 words

The Thinking Machine: Jensen Huang, Nvidia, and the World's Most Coveted Microchip

by Stephen Witt  · 8 Apr 2025  · 260pp  · 82,629 words

Summer of Our Discontent: The Age of Certainty and the Demise of Discourse

by Thomas Chatterton Williams  · 4 Aug 2025  · 242pp  · 76,315 words

These Strange New Minds: How AI Learned to Talk and What It Means

by Christopher Summerfield  · 11 Mar 2025  · 412pp  · 122,298 words