Palaeontologia Electronica http://palaeo-electronica.org

The Paleobiological Revolution: Essays on the Growth of Modern Paleontology

Reviewed by Brian Switek

David Sepkoski and Michael Ruse (editors) belief that paleon- University of Chicago Press, 2009 tology was more 584 pp., $65.00 (hardcover) closely related to ISBN 978-0-226-74861-0 geology rein- By the middle of the 20th century a great forced the idea divide had opened within evolutionary biology. As that it had little to summarized by paleontologist George Gaylord contribute to the Simpson, many geneticists “said that paleontology life sciences. had no further contributions to make to biology”, Despite this wide- while paleontologists believed that the emerging spread reticence science of genetics “had no significance for the to treat paleontol- true biologist.” (Simpson, 1944). Simpson, for his ogy as an evolu- own part, attempted to bring the disciplines into tionary discipline, accord in his classic Tempo and Mode in Evolution, however, paleon- but despite his efforts genetics eventually out- tologists such as stripped paleontology as the evolutionary science G.G. Simpson and du jour. Paleontology, some evolutionary theorists Norman Newell believed, could only testify to the fact of evolution fostered paleobiological research through the while telling us nothing of how such changes actu- 1950’s and 1960’s, setting a long fuse that finally ally occurred. Fortunately, however, some paleon- exploded in the 1970’s. Thomas Schopf, Niles tologists were not satisfied with this blinkered view Eldredge, Stephen Jay Gould, Elisabeth Vrba, of their discipline, and they began what historians David Raup, James Valentine, Jack Sepkoski, and David Sepkoski and Michael Ruse have called The many others transformed paleontology from a rela- Paleobiological Revolution. tively passive consumer of evolutionary theory into The “Modern Evolutionary Synthesis” of the a producer of new theoretical ideas. Punctuated mid-20th century, in which natural selection was equilibrium, hierarchical levels of selection, and the reaffirmed as evolution’s primary driving force by a great controversies (many of which are still brew- confluence of new research from multiple biological ing) about mass extinctions; all of these stemmed disciplines, was a turning point for paleontology. from this revitalization of paleontology as a biologi- On the one hand the synthesis established the cal, evolutionary discipline. importance of selection and populations to ques- The Paleobiological Revolution is both an tions about evolution, but it also denigrated paleon- assessment and a celebration of these changes, tology as a kind of glorified stamp collecting. If you and much of the background information just wanted to determine the mechanisms of evolution recited is covered in the first section of the anthol- you studied genetics in the laboratory, and the ogy under the title “Major Innovations in Paleobiol-

Switek, Brian, 2010. [Review of The Paleobiological Revolution: Essays on the Growth of Modern Paleontology]. Palaeontologia Electronica Vol. 13, Issue 1, R1; 3pp.; http://palaeo-electronica.org/2010_1/index.html SWITEK: THE PALEOBIOLOGICAL REVOLUTION

ogy.” While David Sepkoski and Patricia And, as David Jablonski points out in his Pricehouse delve into the historical context of the excellent summary of current paleobiology, “many scientific shift, paleontologists such as Richard of the most vital research areas [in paleontology] Fortey, Jack Horner, and Tim White discuss how have lain, and will lie, at its intersection with other these changes in paleobiology have influenced the disciplines in the biological and physical sciences.” study of Paleozoic invertebrates, dinosaurs, and While geology and comparative anatomy will hominids, respectively. The essay “The Discovery always remain central to paleontology, many pale- of Conodont Anatomy and Its Importance for obiologists are crossing disciplinary boundaries to Understanding the Early History of Vertebrates” by bring in genetics, microbiology, and “evo-devo” into Richard Aldridge and Derek Briggs is particularly discussions of life’s history. It is not uncommon to noteworthy. Not only is it well-written enough to be see paleontologists discuss Hox genes, proteins, accessible to most general readers, but the story of molecular phylogenies, and other subjects more discovery is told from a personal perspective; a often associated with neontological approaches to rare treat in an academic volume. evolution. Paleontologists are no longer just docu- Part II, “The Historical and Conceptual Signifi- menting transitions, but are using techniques from cance of Recent Paleontology”, is a more varied other biological disciplines to figure out how those complement to Part I. Some essays, such as Derek transitions actually occurred. If anything, modern Turner’s discussion of “Cope’s Rule” and the run- paleobiology has emerged as a more synthetic dis- ning speed of Tyrannosaurus as testable paleonto- cipline, or one more welcoming to lines of evidence logical questions, focus on methods and from relevant fields, than genetics. techniques in paleobiology, while an essay in the All of this comes with a fair bit of hand-wring- form of a historical narrative by Susan Turner and ing, of course. In 1984 the evolutionary theorist David Oldroyd recount how Reg Sprigg discovered John Maynard Smith welcomed paleontologists South Australia’s Ediacaran fauna. The work of back to the “high table” of evolutionary theory Stephen Jay Gould is also scrutinized in this sec- based upon a lecture series delivered by Stephen tion, with David Sepkoski’s revaluation of just how Jay Gould. Despite this invitation, however, May- “radical” a notion punctuated equilibrium was and nard Smith (as well as intellectual allies Richard Joe Cain’s examination of why Gould committed Dawkins and Daniel Dennett) would later denigrate academic “patricide” against G.G. Simpson. Due to ideas such as punctuated equilibrium and hierar- his academic and popular influence Gould was the chical levels of selection in a public back-and-forth most prominent spokesman for paleobiology dur- with Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Eldredge. Per- ing the last three decades of the twentieth century, haps we are not as welcome at the “high table” and these contributions provide the social and sci- after all, some paleontologists lament, but this per- entific context for some of his most controversial spective does not allow us to properly take stock of ideas about evolution. modern paleontology. To fret over whether paleon- The last section of the book is called “Reflec- tology is at the scientific “high table” is to let an tions on Recent Paleobiology”, and where the pre- entirely separate discipline, one largely uncon- ceding essays centered around the question of cerned with the history of life, dictate how we “How did we get here?” the last entries take stock should value paleontology. This is not healthy. of where paleobiology is today (and where things Instead, as the contributors to The Paleobiological might be going). A disavowal of punctuated equilib- Revolution have done, we should look at how pale- rium by Arthur Boucot hits a sour note, but the ontology has changed during the past fifty years remaining essays by writers such as James Valen- and how it has affected research in other disci- tine, Rebecca German, and Michael Ruse confirm plines. Perhaps paleobiology is not as widely rec- that paleontology has undergone major changes ognized as it should be by modern evolutionary stirred by new approaches and perspectives. Dis- theorists, but the contributions to the new volume covering, excavating, cataloging, and comparing make it absolutely clear that paleontology has fossils is still a major part of what paleontologists been revitalized into a theory-producing science do, but the discipline is hardly restricted to these which is increasingly incorporating techniques and activities. As paleontologists add to our knowledge ideas from other biological disciplines to better of life’s history we can look back to detect what understand how life on earth has changed. Simpson called the “tempo and mode” of evolution- While each contribution to The Paleobiologi- ary change. cal Revolution must stand on its own, with some contributions being stronger than others, as a

2 PALAEO-ELECTRONICA.ORG whole the book is an excellent overview of the continues to this day, and I look forward to seeing recent renaissance in paleontology. It is a book that how paleontology will continue to evolve. belongs in the library of any working paleontologist who is at all concerned with evolution, and it also REFERENCE provides a solid base for historians of science to Simpson, G.G. (1944) Tempo and Mode in Evolution. understand how this scientific revolution came Columbia University Press, New York. about. Even better, the paleobiological revolution

3