REVIEWS
“David Sepkoski’s book is the first to examine the rise of paleobiology and the emergence of macroevolution as a discipline in the 1970s. These advances shook the fields of biology, geology, and paleontology and established a cadre of major questions that have been pursued ever since. The subject is one of the three main advances in evolution in the twentieth century, the others being the rise of the ‘modern synthesis’ and the advent of ‘evo-devo.’ It is rare to be able to give such high marks for the treatment of both the science and the history, but this book deserves such praise. An essential for every evolutionist’s bookshelf.”
— Kevin Padian, University of California, Berkeley
“One measure of the greatness of a work is that the characters who play roles in the narrative feel its essential truth. As someone who is proud to have been there during much of the action David Sepkoski describes, I give his description and analysis of the history of paleobiology a five-star rating; to my mind, this actually was the way it was.”
— Niles Eldredge, American Museum of Natural History
“David Sepkoski’s narrative shows us how the science of paleontology was transformed in the later twentieth century by the energetic activities of a quite small group of talented individuals. Their journal, Paleobiology, gave their movement a name and an institutional identity, but also an outlet for their radical research program. Foreseeing at an early stage the huge potential of computers, they turned the analysis of the fossil record into a component of evolutionary theorizing that could no longer be ignored or marginalized by the dominant ‘modern synthesis.’ This is a book from which both evolutionary biologists and historians of twentieth-century science will have much to learn, and it is so readable that they should all enjoy the experience.”
— Martin J. S. Rudwick, author of Worlds Before Adam and Bursting the Limits of Time
“In the 1970s, a new kid on the block was shaking up palaeontology, geology and biology. Historian David Sepkoski charts the rise of palaeobiology from 1945 to 1985, driven by a small but illustrious band of palaeontologists including Stephen Jay Gould and David Raup, who grappled with how the geological record could produce evidence for evolution. The solution, as Sepkoski engagingly relates, lay in quantitative analysis of evolutionary patterns in fossils.”
— Nature
“[A] superb book. . . . For what it tells us about paleobiology in particular and about twentieth-century discipline building in general, Rereading the Fossil Record: The Growth of Paleobiology as an Evolutionary Discipline could hardly be bettered. It is lucid in explaining sometimes technical research, sympathetic in explaining why individuals did what they did, and deft in weaving together the intellectual and the personal strands of its story.”
— Gregory Radick, University of Leeds, Journal of the History of Biology
“This splendid book tells a fascinating tale; here we find the gentlemanly Norman Newell, the young tigers Niles Eldredge and Stephen Jay Gould, the brilliant, prickly Tom Schopf, the innovative David Raup, the late Jack Sepkoski (father of the author), Steven Stanley, James Valentine and many other extraordinary personalities. We read of their insights, interactions, disagreements, quarrels, personal lives and contributions.”
— Euan Clarkson, University of Edinburgh, Times Higher Education
“An exceptional book, Rereading the Fossil Record draws wisely and appreciatively on the work of fellow historians of science (to mention just a few: Ronald Rainger, Joe Cain, V. Betty Smocovitis, Michael Ruse, and Sharon Kingsland). But it stands on its own as a major contribution that will interest biologists, historians more generally (it’s not only good history, it’s about history), and philosophers alike."
— John Beatty, Science
“This book is a deliciously detailed account of the rise of paleobiology, built on archival records, correspondence, and interviews. . . . A valuable acquisition for all libraries with science and history of science collections. Highly recommended.”
— M. A. Wilson, College of Wooster, Choice
“[F]ascinating.”
— Lukas Rieppel, Endeavour
“David Sepkoski’s book is the one book that anyone interested in evolution should buy this year. And next year. And probably the year after. The reason is that, for the first time, the emergence of the modern science of macroevolution receives its due. . . . Waste no time, not merely adding this to your bookshelf, but in reading it and marveling how so few people revolutionized our view of the past in such a very few years.”
— Reports of the National Center for Science Education
“For those potential readers interested in the history of the diversification of life on Earth and/or those biologists interested in the impact of such paleontologically derived concepts such as punctuated equilibrium, mass extinctions, or species selection, this book is extremely important.”
— Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith
“A significant archival achievement. . . . By giving us the institutional, intellectual, and disciplinary developments that resulted in the emergence of palaeobiology as a new research agenda for palaeontology, Sepkoski has provided all scholars interested in the course of evolutionary theory with an invaluable history. . . . One can hardly help reading Sepkoski’s book and not have the desire to continue writing the story of evolution in the post-synthesis era. He has carved out an impressive story in the details of this group of palaeontologists, and made a significant contribution to histories of science concerned with the role of disciplinary formation in the shaping of theory and research agendas in the natural sciences.”
— Myrna Perez Sheldon, Harvard University, British Journal for the History of Science
“Rereading the Fossil Record is a good story, superbly well told. It should be of great interest to historians, philosophers, and scientists concerned with the biological and geological sciences. . . . This first book-length treatment of the paleobiology revolution provides a superb basis upon which to launch historical dissertations and should help redirect philosophers of science more strongly toward macroevolutionary and paleobiological dimensions of evolutionary biology.”
— James Griesemer, University of California, Davis, HOPOS
“This exercise in recent historiography is enormously valuable and welcome.”
— Michael J. Benton, University of Bristol, Trends in Ecology & Evolution
“Insightful and excellent. . . . A historian of science, Sepkoski has melded a historian’s detailed documentation with a clear description of the science itself and perceptive insights into the personalities of the key players. In addition to oral interviews, Sepkoski has taken full advantage of preserved personal correspondence, as well as the ar-chives of the Paleontological Society and its journals. These reveal the frank and not uncommonly acrimonious discussions among the major players. . . . This book should be on the shelf of every professional paleontologist. It should also be required reading for every student entering the field. They will gain insights not only into the science of paleobiology, but a far better understanding of how science as a discipline works.”
— Roy Plotnick, University of Illinois at Chicago, Priscum
“[Rereading the Fossil Record] will be read with interest and profit both by historians of twentieth-century science and evolutionary scientists.”
— Irina Podgorny, Metascience
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction Rereading the Fossil Record - David Sepkoski
DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226748580.003.0001
[fossil record, evolutionary theory, paleobiologists, analytical paleobiology, evolutionary biologists, history of life]
The fossil record was widely considered as an imperfect text for supporting evolutionary theory by evolutionary biologists, so paleobiologists came up with the strategy to “reread” that text in a manner that could produce reliable evolutionary insight to gain greater acceptance. This chapter identifies and discuses the three main approaches for “rereading” the fossil record that were developed by paleobiologists. The first approach, attempted by paleobiologists is a “literal reading” in which the fossil record, with all its renowned gaps and inconsistencies, was taken at face value as a reliable document. The second approach is known as “idealized rereading”, and here the physical particulars of the fossil record were ignored, and the history of life—the species, genera, families, etc., that make up the actual record—was modeled as a series of homogeneous data points. The final or third approach is known as a “generalized rereading”, this approach encompasses a combination of the other two approaches, and it ultimately became the dominant methodology in analytical paleobiology. (pages 1 - 8)
This chapter is available at:
https://academic.oup.com/chica...
Darwin's Dilemma - David Sepkoski
DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226748580.003.0002
[Charles Darwin, paleontology, fossil record, evolutionary theory, temporal evolutionary succession, fossil succession]
Paleontological and geological evidence played significantly important roles in establishing Charles Darwin's theory of evolution, which combined descent with modification. The historical evidence of the fossil record enabled Darwin to argue for the temporal evolutionary succession of past forms. In the first and successive editions of Origin, Darwin discussed the significance of fossil succession, in this edition it is clearly implied that paleontology formed a major pillar of his argument for evolution. Yet in what appears in retrospect a profound irony, even as Darwin elevated the significance of the evidentiary contribution of fossils, he also had a major hand in condemning paleontology. One of his greatest anxieties was that the “incompleteness” of the fossil record would be used to criticize his theory: that the apparent “gaps” in fossil succession could be cited as negative evidence, at the very least, for his proposal that all organisms have descended by minute and gradual modifications from a common ancestor. Darwin worried that at worst the record's imperfection would be used to argue for the kind of spontaneous, “special” creation of organic forms promoted by theologically-oriented naturalists whose theories he hoped to obviate. (pages 9 - 50)
This chapter is available at:
https://academic.oup.com/chica...
The Growth of Theoretical Paleontology - David Sepkoski
DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226748580.003.0003
[theoretical paleontology, fossil record, evolutionary theory, quantitative methods, statistical analysis]
This chapter describes the growth and transformation of theoretical paleontology over the years. There has been recently a major transformation in paleontological approaches to evolutionary theory and the fossil record. This shift involved several distinct but related aspects. First, paleontologists began to actively assess the institutional status of their discipline—asking whether paleontology “belonged,” for example, with geology, or with biology, or rather whether it constituted an independent discipline on its own. Second, paleontologists began more and more to connect explicitly their work with the evolutionary agenda of the modern synthesis, and to publish in outlets that were read by biologists and geneticists. Third, and perhaps most significantly, paleontology became quantitative. Earlier quantitative methods (measurements and statistical analysis) were absent from the work of paleontology, resulting in synthetic questions about the fossil record of a quantitative rigor and sophistication not previously seen in paleontological literature. (pages 51 - 76)
This chapter is available at:
https://academic.oup.com/chica...
The Rise of Quantitative Paleobiology - David Sepkoski
DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226748580.003.0004
[quantitative paleobiology, extinct organism, structure-function relations, multivariate analysis, paleontology, ecology]
Paleobiology has developed over time and it is now increasingly tending towards a reliance on quantification. Quantification became closely associated with theoretical work on evolution. Quantitative paleobiology is still on the rise, with more and more researchers using structure-function relations to infer the ecology and behavior of long extinct organisms. It is impossible to avoid the suspicion that paleontologists' desire for greater analytical rigor was motivated partially by the perception that biologists (and geneticists in particular) would only take paleontology seriously when its data could be expressed numerically. Quantitative thinking found unique outlets in paleobiology, particularly in addressing problems involving large data sets and requiring complex multivariate analysis. Unquestionably, this approach would not have reached fruition before digital computers with large data storage capacities and reasonably accessible user interfaces became available. (pages 77 - 112)
This chapter is available at:
https://academic.oup.com/chica...
From Paleoecology to Paleobiology - David Sepkoski
DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226748580.003.0005
[paleoecology, paleobiology movement, geological problem, fossil organisms, community structure, colonization, extinction, evolution, mathematical models, theoretical ecology, fossil assemblages]
This chapter argues that a crucial prerequisite to the modern paleobiological synthesis is the development and refinement of the field of paleoecology. Paleoecology itself is not a new field; paleontologists had been using the term for decades, and its subject matter—the relationship between fossil organisms and their environments—had been studied. But paleoecology went through its own revolution in which the subject was redefined and reconceptualized by a number of mostly younger paleontologists, many of whom would also become leaders in the paleobiology movement. The new approach to paleoecology emphasized two important conceptual revisions. First, rather than focusing on the physical parameters of the environment as a geological problem, the new paleoecology placed much greater emphasis on the biological aspects of populations of fossil organisms, and it often explicitly compared fossil assemblages to living counterparts. Second, the new paleoecology drew heavily on important work in theoretical ecology and biogeography that was having its own revolutionary impact on the broader study of ecology. Ecologists were opening new conceptual frontiers in ecology through the use of mathematical models designed to offer generalizations about community structure, colonization and extinction, and evolution. The new paleoecology was, in large part, an outgrowth of this movement in theoretical ecology. (pages 113 - 136)
This chapter is available at:
https://academic.oup.com/chica...
Punctuated Equilibria and the Rise of the New Paleobiology - David Sepkoski
DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226748580.003.0006
[punctuated equilibria, new paleobiology, evolutionary biology, quantitative analysis, ecological theory, biogeographical theory, Wrightian stochasticity, macroevolution, fossil record]
Paleobiology transformed from a loose movement with a fairly uncoordinated set of goals to a bonafide sub-discipline with an active institutional and intellectual agenda. The dynamics of this shift are complex, and involve theoretical, institutional, and pedagogical factors. One of the striking features of the history of paleobiology is the extent to which the movement came to be so closely associated with a few signature theories. Over the time paleobiology emerged as a fairly casual label used to describe a broad approach to an array of questions surrounding the application of fossil data to problems in evolutionary biology. There is a set of practices that can be associated with this approach (such as quantitative analysis, modeling, and ecological/biogeographical theory), there is no unifying theoretical basis for paleobiology, nor did the term “paleobiology” have a distinct disciplinary identity within paleontology. However, paleobiology became closely associated with a prominent theory—known as the theory of punctuated equilibria—and the study of macroevolution as a dominant conceptual framework. Punctuated equilibria have two important roles. First, its invocation of Wrightian stochasticity provided inspiration for a number of studies that more deeply probed the influence of random or nondirectional elements in evolution as seen in the fossil record. Second, it acted as a model of a typoe of paleontology that could break the grip of Darwin's dilemma and could offer a route to bringing paleontology into the mainstream of evolutionary biology. (pages 137 - 184)
This chapter is available at:
https://academic.oup.com/chica...
The Founding of a Research Journal - David Sepkoski
DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226748580.003.0007
[research journal, paleobiological research, Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, SEPM, Paleontological Society Journal, pedagogical practices]
This chapter discusses the absence of an outlet for paleobiological research and the establishment of an paleobiology research journal. There are a set of institutional constraints that prevented paleontologists from establishing and promoting the paleobiological agenda. These constraints included departmental organization, pedagogical practices, and the absence of an outlet for paleobiological research. The first two constraints have been and continue to be somewhat intractable; the last was solved with the establishment of the journal Paleobiology. The journal was established to fill a gap in the literature. It solely belongs to the Paleontological Society Journal (PS) and represents independence from the Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists (SEPM). Eventually Paleobiology would come to establish a new image for the paleontological society in a way that could never be done by simply by enlarging the Journal of Paleontology. Paleobiology is now the focal point for ecologists, evolutionary biologists, and other neontologists who are interested in the history of life. (pages 185 - 214)
This chapter is available at:
https://academic.oup.com/chica...
“Towards a Nomothetic Paleontology”: The MBL Model and Stochastic Paleontology - David Sepkoski
DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226748580.003.0008
[MBL model, nomothetic paleontology, fossil record, paleobiology, mass extinctions, paleobiological theory, history of life, survivorship, evolutionary dynamics, origination of taxa]
The study and modeling of the history of diversity over time motivated a methodological question: how reliable is the fossil record, and how can that reliability be tested? These problems became the core of analytical paleobiology, and represented a continuation and a consolidation of the themes examined thus far in the history of paleobiology. Ultimately, this focus led paleobiologists to ground-breaking quantitative studies of the interplay of rates of origination and extinction of taxa through time, the role of background and mass extinctions in the history of life, the survivorship of individual taxa, and the modeling of historical patterns of diversity. These questions became the central components of an emerging paleobiological theory of macroevolution. This chapter explores the early stages of this development in paleobiology by examining the emergence of a new, clearly-articulated agenda: the often-expressed desire to construct a “nomothetic paleontology.” This phrase originated first in an important sequence of papers that sought to develop a stochastic, equilibrial simulation of evolutionary dynamics over time—what came to be known as the MBL model—and quickly became a rallying cry for the new approach to paleobiology. The term “nomothetic” essentially means “law-producing”. The chapter also outlined some of the essential features of this approach. (pages 215 - 270)
This chapter is available at:
https://academic.oup.com/chica...
A “Natural History of Data”: The Rise of Taxic Paleobiology - David Sepkoski
DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226748580.003.0009
[natural history, taxic paleobiology, MBL model, fossil record, discrete taxa, punctuated equilibria, space and time distribution, biogeography, mathematical modeling, evolution, evolution]
This chapter explores the taxic approach as a dominant perspective in paleobiology, and its contribution to the solidification of what came to be known as the Chicago School of analytical paleontology. It also represented the culmination of a long tradition in paleobiology—of drawing statistical interpretations of patterns in the history of life from an otherwise imperfect fossil record. This approach, in many ways, represents the paleobiological tradition in the second half of the twentieth century. The term “taxic paleontology” is defined as follows: “Paleontologists have always had the option of looking at the fossil record, in either or both of two ways—first, distributions in space and time of discrete taxa, which differ among themselves to a greater or lesser extent, and second, distributions in space and time of different states of morphological character assumed to be evolving.” Punctuated equilibria and the MBL model helped prepare the path for a taxic view. In each case, species are considered to be discrete entities with clearly demarcated births and deaths. This was not, however, the essence of taxic paleobiology. The taxic approach is also implicitly an ecological view, since it understands evolution to consist “essentially of the origin, maintenance, and degradation of diversity”. This view is inspired by the mathematical modeling approach of the MacArthur-Wilson insular model of biogeography. However, it developed its own uniquely paleobiological perspective with the advent of massive fossil databases. (pages 271 - 322)
This chapter is available at:
https://academic.oup.com/chica...
The Dynamics of Mass Extinctions - David Sepkoski
DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226748580.003.0010
[dynamics of mass extinction, fossil record, MBL simulation, coherent theory, macroevolution]
This chapter focuses on the dynamics of mass extinction. The study of extinction helps the paleobiologists in rereading the fossil record. However, many of them during this time expressed frustration at the lack of a coherent theory that explained the role of mass extinctions in macroevolution. For example, it was clear that extinctions influenced the patterns of diversity, and even the MBL simulation project recognized extinction as an important variable in evolution. The chapter raises important questions about extinction—and especially mass extinction—persisted: How frequent were major episodes of extinction? What were their causes and mechanisms? How geographically widespread were the largest extinctions? How could major extinctions be reliably recognized—separated from background noise—in large fossil data sets? And, most broadly, what role did extinction have in determining the patterns of life's history? These questions were central to the project of rereading the fossil record. The chapter also discusses the revision of the traditional synthetic view of evolution that many paleobiologists were trying to establish. (pages 323 - 352)
This chapter is available at:
https://academic.oup.com/chica...
Toward a New Macroevolutionary Synthesis - David Sepkoski
DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226748580.003.0011
[macroevolutionary synthesis, paleobiological revolution, paleobiology, paleobiological reformers, evolutionary biology community, evolutionary synthesis, hierarchical features, macroevolution, species selection]
This chapter explores the mechanisms of macroevolutionary synthesis and paleobiological contributions to it. The paleobiological revolution is effectively completed, though in a qualified sense, if the main work of the revolution—establishing a theoretical and institutional platform for paleobiology—was coming to completion to establish paleobiology's place at the “high table” of evolutionary theory as part of a necessary reformulation of the modern evolutionary synthesis. This new synthesis is primarily a theoretical and ideological campaign, and it would create space for the study of hierarchical features of macroevolution, including species selection, punctuation, and mass extinction. It shows the completion of many of the programmatic goals of paleobiological reformers, but it did not necessarily ensure the complete acceptance of paleobiology by the rest of the evolutionary biology community (pages 353 - 384)
This chapter is available at:
https://academic.oup.com/chica...
Conclusion Paleontology at the High Table? - David Sepkoski
DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226748580.003.0012
[evolutionary biology, paleobiology, paleobiological movement, paleontology, theoretical ecology, paleontologists]
This chapter provides conclusion to the effort made by paleontologists to place paleobiology at the high table of evolutionary biology. This might be resolved, for example by counting the number of citations to paleobiological papers in biology journals, or by surveying geneticists and population biologists about their attitudes towards paleobiology. Mostly paleontologists, have lamented the extent to which the promise of the high table remains unfulfilled, or conversely have argued that it has been or will soon be achieved. This chaper first reflects upon whether the success of paleobiology genuinely depended on the opinion of scientists outside the discipline of paleontology. The Fruitful interactions is examined—in particular, the cross-fertilization of paleobiology and theoretical ecology, so it is concluded that paleontologists had increasing and profitable contact with biological disciplines. But outside recognition was only one—and not necessarily the most important—of the goals of the paleobiological movement. The major result of the paleobiological revolution, then, was not that it secured a place at anybody's table by the standards of any other discipline, but that it quite legitimately produced a subdiscipline of its own—paleobiology. (pages 385 - 394)
This chapter is available at:
https://academic.oup.com/chica...
Acknowledgments
Abbreviations
Works Cited
Index
