john hawks weblog

paleoanthropology, genetics and evolution

profile

  • Cynthia Kenyon profile

    Sun, 2013-03-17 15:37 -- John Hawks

    The Guardian has a profile interview with aging researcher Cynthia Kenyon: "Cynthia Kenyon: 'The idea that ageing was subject to control was completely unexpected'".

    This finding built on her earlier research, but to the rest of the scientific community, "the idea that ageing was subject to control was completely unexpected," Kenyon says, before struggling to find the words to describe how she felt when she realised the magnitude of the discovery. "It was very profound because you look at these worms, and the normal worms are dying, and the worms in this other culture dish are young. And you think: 'Oh my God, they should be dead.' It was like finding something that shouldn't be. It makes your hair stand up." Then came a second realisation: "You just think, 'Wow. Maybe I could be that long-lived worm.'"

    Kenyon's story is a great one, because it illustrates how a productive research path can depend on one serendipitous observation.

  • Pardis Sabeti profile

    Tue, 2012-11-20 20:46 -- John Hawks

    Smithsonian is running a profile of geneticist Pardis Sabeti, written by Seth Mnookin: "Pardis Sabeti, the Rollerblading Rock Star Scientist of Harvard".

    It was a radical approach: Instead of using existing tools to analyze new data, she was trying to develop new tools to use on available data. When she was at Oxford, “Everybody thought what I was trying to look for was dumb,” Sabeti says. “It seemed as if I was just going to go nowhere. I know everyone has a hard time at some point when they’re in graduate school, but I was on the higher end of the hard time early on in my PhD.”

    Sabeti's work identifying recent positive selection on genetic data served as an essential foundation to much later work, including our own work on the Holocene acceleration of these positively selected variants.

    Tags: 
  • Tomoko Ohta profile

    Thu, 2012-08-23 01:16 -- John Hawks

    Current Biology has published an interview of the esteemed Japanese population geneticist Tomoko Ohta [1].

    But, you chose not to stay in the US? I was a Fulbright student, and four years was the maximum time students were allowed to stay in the US. So, in 1966, after finishing my PhD, I went back to Japan. I asked Dr Motoo Kimura at the National Institute of Genetics, Mishima, if I could do research in his laboratory, simply because he was the only theoretical population geneticist in Japan at that time. At first, he was skeptical to let me do research in his field, but he finally accepted me as a postdoctoral fellow. Kimura was a typical Japanese man of his time, who regarded women's scientific activities as insignificant. After two years or so, I had convinced him that I should continue to do research.

    I think that if we plotted biologists on two axes, (1) Scientific Value, and (2) Public Awareness of Their Work, Kimura and Ohta would be outliers with high value and unusually low awareness.

    (via Sandwalk)


    References

    1. Ohta T. Tomoko Ohta. Current Biology. 2012;22(16):R618 - R619.
  • Into the belly of the whale

    Mon, 2012-02-06 22:21 -- John Hawks

    Carl Zimmer profiles anatomist Joy Reidenberg, who has scored a coup for public communication of science on the BBC show, Inside Nature's Giants: "From Inside Lions and Leviathans, Anatomist Builds a Following". Joy is well-known in paleoanthropology circles:

    For her Ph.D., she came to Mount Sinai Medical School to work with Jeffrey T. Laitman, an expert on the anatomy of the head and neck.

    Since the 1970s, Dr. Laitman has been looking for anatomical clues to the evolution of human speech. Dr. Reidenberg expanded the scope of his work to look at the vocal anatomy of mammals, from moose to rabbits. In 1983, she began teaching at Mount Sinai, and she has focused much of her research on the most remarkable of all mammal voices: those of whales and dolphins."

    Can't wait until the show gets going here.

  • James F. Crow, 1916-2012

    Wed, 2012-01-04 23:23 -- John Hawks

    I received today the sad news that my friend and colleague James F. Crow has died, at the age of 95. Jim was a legend in the field of population genetics, who remained active until his final year.

    James F. Crow

    Jim was always extraordinarily gracious and generous with his time, and was kind to me throughout the ten years I have known him. At our last meeting, before I went to Siberia last summer, Jim told me the story of his meeting Dmitry Belyaev, early in the days of his famous fox experiment. I was eager to see the foxes and I conveyed Jim's greetings and reminiscences to the researchers in Novosibirisk. Again and again during the years, I found Jim to be a rich source of information about topics in population genetics. Even as my work brought me to consider fundamentals often outside the current mainstream, Jim invariably had encountered similar problems and given them deep thought long before I arrived on the scene.

    During the last 25 years, Jim took on a role as unofficial historian for the field of genetics. He coedited the Perspectives feature in the journal Genetics, and for many of those years wrote the lion's share of them. He was proud to note that his birth coincided with the first issue of the journal (January,1916), but although he arrived on schedule, the first issue of the journal was mailed two months late! Reviewing the major figures in the history of genetics, Jim gave a narrative history of the science often from his own memories.

    During the next few months, the journal Genetics will be running a series of perspectives in Jim's honor, reviewing aspects of his extraordinary career. I recommend the introduction to the series, printed in the December 2011 issue [1], and the first entry written by Daniel Hartl about Jim as a teacher and advisor [2]. From the editorial introduction by Michael Turelli and Charles Langley:

    Jim Crow is a living link between our generations and the founders of population genetics. Jim was Sewall Wright's colleague at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, for decades (1955–1988); Jim initiated a friendship with Ronald Fisher over an impromptu champagne tête-à-tête in the 1940s; and he hosted J. B. S. Haldane for a memorable lecture visit to Madison in the early 1960s (after learning from the New York Times that North Carolina had just canceled a public lecture by this famous Communist). There are few population geneticists who do not owe Jim a significant intellectual debt; none are unaware of his mastery of our field and of human interactions. For many of us, Crow and Kimura (1970) was an inspiring and elegant introduction to the mathematical models that form the foundation of population genetics theory. Crow instantiates the ideal of a cherished era when manners and dress were a sign of gentility. And no one who meets Jim is surprised to learn that he is an accomplished violist.

    And from Hartl's contribution:

    Professor Crow ran his laboratory on the principles of bringing smart people together to pursue their passions and encouraging interaction, mutual respect and support, constructive criticism, and the free sharing of ideas and resources. There were no formal group meetings or reports, as there was so much daily interaction that group meetings would have been superfluous. He would advise, suggest, and encourage, but never direct or cajole. The standard of mutual respect was set by Professor Crow himself and extended not only to members of the lab but also to everyone in the field. I never heard him utter an unkind word about anyone. He also treated everyone in the lab as a colleague. One day he came to me and said, “Dan, there’s a matter on which I’d like your advice.” He must have seen how flattered I was at being asked because he quickly added, “That doesn’t mean I’ll take it. It only means I want to hear it.”

    Hartl gives some of the flavor of Crow's laboratory in the 1960's, when he was already one of the most prominent geneticists in the world, and was a frequent host to the field's legends and advisor to some of the brightest students. I can only wish that someday I will be so lucky.

    Several years ago, colleagues from several departments here at the University of Wisconsin-Madison succeeded in a long-time ambition of Jim's to found an Institute for the Study of Evolution. He had envisioned that the institute should be named for Sewall Wright, who had been important to Jim himself and forms a major part of the legacy of genetics and evolution. But the future institute's members insisted instead to name the new entity in honor of Jim. It is a fitting legacy for a great evolutionary geneticist.


    References

    Synopsis: 
    In memory of a friend and colleague, one of the most prominent figures in the history of genetics
  • Making a Hawking

    Sun, 2010-08-15 08:30 -- John Hawks

    Cosmos posts a long biographical retrospective from Stephen Hawking about his life and work. A lot of it will be review for people well-read on the history of cosmology -- but I hadn't realized this:

    However, two Russians, Lifshitz and Khalatnikov, had claimed to have proved that a general contraction without exact symmetry would always lead to a bounce, with the density remaining finite.

    This result was very convenient for Marxist-Leninist dialectical materialism because it avoided awkward questions about the creation of the universe. It therefore became an article of faith for Soviet scientists.

  • Computer composer

    Thu, 2010-02-25 11:40 -- John Hawks

    An article about classical composer David Cope and the AI programs he wrote to make original music. It's not new news, but a nice profile with many "what does it mean to be creative?" moments.

    Cope had taken an unconventional approach. Many artificial creativity programs use a more sophisticated version of the method Cope first tried with Bach. It’s called intelligent misuse — they program sets of rules, and then let the computer introduce randomness. Cope, however, had stumbled upon a different way of understanding creativity.

    In his view, all music — and, really, any creative pursuit — is largely based on previously created works. Call it standing on the shoulders of giants; call it plagiarism. Everything we create is just a product of recombination.

    I'd call it "culture". The long-term direction may look random, but "styles" cohere over time because people take from each other. The article's leitmotif is Cope's near-Quixotic quest to write a truly life-changing piece of music. It's ironic that he discovers how to make music that humans can't tell from yesterday's classics, but tomorrow's classics will be determined by those very same human arbitrers of taste.

  • Seed interviews Richard Wrangham

    Thu, 2009-06-11 12:00 -- John Hawks

    I've been reading Richard Wrangham's book, and I'll report on it when I've finished it. Meanwhile, SEED gives us another Wrangham interview. Wrangham points out that the measured calories in food from a bomb calorimeter are not what the body gets from digestion; and that less processed or raw foods are less bioavailable. Then Seed asks:

    Seed: It’s ironic, then, that dieting supplements are some of the most processed foods out there—ground soy protein, shakes, etc.

    RW: It’s exactly the opposite of what it should be! All those liquid protein diets…I mean, it’s hilarious. I’d be fascinated the find out the extent to which the proteins have been denatured and made even more calorie-rich by the addition of chemicals as well.

    That's important, I think. I'm really enjoying the parts of the book that discuss the raw foodists.

    (via Razib)

  • Freeman Dyson profile

    Wed, 2009-03-25 20:47 -- John Hawks

    In my book, what it takes to be a rockin' physicist is coming up with something that forms the basis of entire series of sci-fi novels. So Freeman Dyson qualifies. The NY Times Magazine profiles him, focusing on his recent skepticism about climate change, but broadly covering his quirky career and blend of science and political advocacy.

    Dyson is well aware that “most consider me wrong about global warming.” That educated Americans tend to agree with the conclusion about global warming reached earlier this month at the International Scientific Conference on Climate Change in Copenhagen (“inaction is inexcusable”) only increases Dyson’s resistance. Dyson may be an Obama-loving, Bush-loathing liberal who has spent his life opposing American wars and fighting for the protection of natural resources, but he brooks no ideology and has a withering aversion to scientific consensus. The Nobel physics laureate Steven Weinberg admires Dyson’s physics — he says he thinks the Nobel committee fleeced him by not awarding his work on quantum electrodynamics with the prize — but Weinberg parts ways with his sensibility: “I have the sense that when consensus is forming like ice hardening on a lake, Dyson will do his best to chip at the ice.”

    "Ice hardening on a lake" -- quite a metaphor. I think you may do lots of good science as you help the lake crystallize, but it's only the ice-chippers that have a chance of making a splash. Or falling in.

    Anyway, it's got lots of stuff on Dyson's life story and work; I found it a very interesting read.

    Tags: 
Subscribe to profile

Neandertals

For years, I've worked on their bones. Now I'm working on their genes. Read more about the science studying these ancient people.

Denisova

From a finger bone of an ancient human came the record of a completely unexpected population. My lab is working on the science of the Denisova genome.

Acceleration

The advent of agriculture caused natural selection to speed up greatly in humans. We're uncovering some of the ways that populations have rapidly changed during the last 10,000 years.

Malapa

Just outside Johannesburg, the Malapa site is producing some of the most exciting finds in human evolution. This site is the headquarters of the Malapa Soft Tissue Project.