Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Geography and postgenomics: how space and place are the new DNA

  • Published:
GeoJournal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

For many geographers, postgenomics is a relatively new perspective on biological causality. It is a non-dualistic way to conceptualize DNA, genes and environment. It also presents an opportunity for a broad critical engagement with biology through geography’s insights into socionature and the fallacies of spatial inference. In postgenomics, mapping of the spatial and temporal contexts and circumstances surrounding DNA, rather than DNA sequence alone, has become prioritized. Consequently, scientific and economic value in postgenomics accrues through the enclosure and mapping of the ‘omes’. These include the more familiar epigenome and microbiome, but also the interactome, the phenome, and the exposome among many others. The omes represent the cartographic translation of biological spatialities that modify the outcomes of DNA sequence from within as well as from outside of human bodies. In this article, we show how postgenomics leverages this omic ontologicalization of space and puts it to productive use. Drawing upon recent studies of the human microbiome, we illustrate how problematic geographies of difference arise through the way this omic mapping unfolds.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Used with permission (www.biocomicals.com, Alper Uzun, Ph.D.)

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ackerman, S. L., Darling, K. W., Lee, S. S.-J., Hiatt, R. A., & Shim, J. K. (2016). Accounting for complexity: Gene–environment interaction research and the moral economy of quantification. Science, Technology and Human Values, 41(2), 194–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, M. (2013). Big biology: The ‘omes’ puzzle. Nature, 494(7438), 416–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beauchamp, J. P. (2016). Genetic evidence for natural selection in humans in the contemporary United States. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(28), 7774–7779. doi:10.1073/pnas.1600398113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birch, K. (2009). The knowledge-space dynamic in the UK bioeconomy. Area, 41(3), 273–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birch, K., & Tyfield, D. (2013). Theorizing the bioeconomy biovalue, biocapital, bioeconomics or…what? Science, Technology and Human Values, 38(3), 299–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blaser, M. J., Dominguez-Bello, M. G., Contreras, M., Magris, M., Hidalgo, G., Estrada, I., et al. (2013). Distinct cutaneous bacterial assemblages in a sampling of South American Amerindians and US residents. The ISME Journal: Multidisciplinary Journal of Microbial Ecology, 7(1), 85–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borrell, B. (2011). Epidemiology: Every bite you take. Nature, 470(7334), 320–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braun, B. (2007). Biopolitics and the molecularization of life. Cultural Geographies, 14(1), 6–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braun, B. (2008). Environmental issues: Inventive life. Progress in Human Geography, 32(5), 667–679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braun, B. (2014). New materialisms and neoliberal natures. Antipode, 47(1), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bridge, G. (2008). Environmental economic geography: A sympathetic critique. Geoforum, 39(1), 76–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callaway, E. (2015). Microbiome privacy risk. Nature, 521(7551), 136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calvert, J. (2008). The commodification of emergence: Systems biology, synthetic biology and intellectual property. Biosocieties, 3(4), 383–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castree, N. (2003). Commodifying what nature? Progress in Human Geography, 27(3), 273–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castree, N. (2009). Who’s afraid of Charles Darwin? Geoforum, 40(6), 941–944.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, N. (2011). Inhuman nature: Sociable life on a dynamic planet. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clemente, J. C., Pehrsson, E. C., Blaser, M. J., Sandhu, K., Gao, Z., Wang, B., et al. (2015). The microbiome of uncontacted Amerindians. Science Advances, 1(3), e1500183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, M. (2008). Life as surplus: Biotechnology and capitalism in the neoliberal era. Seattle: University of Washington Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, M. (2012). The pharmacology of distributed experiment—User-generated drug innovation. Body & Society, 18(3–4), 18–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Correia, D. (2013). F** k Jared diamond. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 24(4), 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darling, K. W., Ackerman, S. L., Hiatt, R. H., Lee, S. S. J., & Shim, J. K. (2016). Enacting the molecular imperative: How gene–environment interaction research links bodies and environments in the post-genomic age. Social Science and Medicine, 155, 51–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • David, L. A., Materna, A. C., Friedman, J., Campos-Baptista, M. I., Blackburn, M. C., Perrotta, A., et al. (2014). Host lifestyle affects human microbiota on daily timescales. Genome Biology, 15(7), R89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, G. (2013). Arguably big biology: Sociology, spatiality and the knockout mouse project. Biosocieties, 8(4), 417–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, G., Frow, E., & Leonelli, S. (2013). Bigger, faster, better? Rhetorics and practices of large-scale research in contemporary bioscience. Biosocieties, 8(4), 386–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Vrieze, J. (2013). The promise of poop. Science, 341(6149), 954–957.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Vrieze, J. (2014). Gut instinct. Science, 343(6168), 241–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duster, T. (2015). A post-genomic surprise. The molecular reinscription of race in science, law and medicine. The British Journal of Sociology, 66(1), 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eades, G. L. (2012). Determining environmental determinism. Progress in Human Geography, 36(3), 423–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisen, J. (2012). Badomics words and the power and peril of the ome-meme. GigaScience, 1(1), 6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ettinger, G., Burton, J. P., & Reid, G. (2013). If microbial ecosystem therapy can change your life, what’s the problem? BioEssays, 35(6), 508–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraga, M. F., Ballestar, E., Paz, M. F., Ropero, S., Setien, F., Ballestar, M. L., et al. (2005). Epigenetic differences arise during the lifetime of monozygotic twins. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(30), 10604–10609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franklin, S. (2014). Analogic return: The reproductive life of conceptuality. Theory, Culture & Society, 31(2–3), 243–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franzosa, E. A., Huang, K., Meadow, J. F., Gevers, D., Lemon, K. P., Bohannan, B. J., et al. (2015). Identifying personal microbiomes using metagenomic codes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(22), 2930–2938.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fujimura, J. H. (2005). Postgenomic futures: Translations across the machine-nature border in systems biology. New Genetics and Society, 24(2), 195–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gewin, V. (2012). The sequencing machine. Nature, 487(7406), 156–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillings, M. R., & Stokes, H. W. (2012). Are humans increasing bacterial evolvability? Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 27(6), 346–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, A. D., & Landweber, L. F. (2016). What is a genome? PLoS Genetics, 12(7), e1006181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodchild, M. (2007). Citizens as sensors: The world of volunteered geography. GeoJournal, 69(4), 211–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gravlee, C. C. (2009). How race becomes biology: Embodiment of social inequality. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 139(1), 47–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenbaum, D., Luscombe, N. M., Jansen, R., Qian, J., & Gerstein, M. (2001). Interrelating different types of genomic data, from proteome to secretome: ‘oming in on function. Genome Research, 11(9), 1463–1468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, P. E., & Stotz, K. (2006). Genes in the postgenomic era. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 27(6), 499–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guthman, J. (2015). Binging and purging: Agrofood capitalism and the body as socioecological fix. Environment and Planning A, 47(12), 2522–2536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guthman, J., & Mansfield, B. (2012). The implications of environmental epigenetics: A new direction for geographic inquiry on health, space, and nature-society relations. Progress in Human Geography, 37(4), 486–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, E. (2003). Reading maps of the genes: Interpreting the spatiality of genetic knowledge. Health & Place, 9(2), 151–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, D. J. (1997). Modest witness at second millennium: Female man meets oncomouse: Feminism and technoscience. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, D. (1996). Justice, nature, and the geography of difference. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, D. (2001). Globalization and the spatial fix. Geographische Revue, 2(3), 23–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, A. K., & O’Doherty, K. C. (2011). Who owns your poop? Insights regarding the intersection of human microbiome research and the ELSI aspects of biobanking and related studies. BMC Medical Genomics, 4(1), 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawks, J., Wang, E. T., Cochran, G. M., Harpending, H. C., & Moyzis, R. K. (2007). Recent acceleration of human adaptive evolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(52), 20753–20758.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinchliffe, S., & Lavau, S. (2013). Differentiated circuits: The ecologies of knowing and securing life. Environment and Planning D-Society & Space, 31(2), 259–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hird, M. J. (2010). Meeting with the microcosmos. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 28(1), 36–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hird, M. (2017). Burial and resurrection in the Anthropocene: Infrastructures of waste. In P. Harvey, C. B. Jensen, & A. Morita (Eds.), Infrastructures and social complexity a companion. Oxford: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, C., Carlson, S. M., McDonald, F., Jones, M., & Graham, J. (2016). Exploring the post-genomic world: Differing explanatory and manipulatory functions of post-genomic sciences. New Genetics and Society, 35(1), 49–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huttenhower, C., Gevers, D., Knight, R., Abubucker, S., Badger, J. H., Chinwalla, A. T., et al. (2012). Structure, function and diversity of the healthy human microbiome. Nature, 486(7402), 207–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jablonka, E., & Lamb, M. J. (2005). Evolution in four dimensions: Genetic, epigenetic, behavioral, and symbolic variation in the history of life. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacquez, G. M., Sabel, C. E., & Shi, C. (2015). Genetic GIScience: Toward a place-based synthesis of the genome, exposome, and behavome. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 105(3), 454–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, J. (2012). Genetic influences on disease remain hidden. Science, 338(6110), 1016–1017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kell, D. B., & Oliver, S. G. (2004). Here is the evidence, now what is the hypothesis? The complementary roles of inductive and hypothesis-driven science in the post-genomic era. BioEssays, 26(1), 99–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, E. F. (2010). The mirage of a space between nature and nurture. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kitchin, R., & Dodge, M. (2007). Rethinking maps. Progress in Human Geography, 31(3), 331–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuzawa, C. W., & Sweet, E. (2009). Epigenetics and the embodiment of race: Developmental origins of US racial disparities in cardiovascular health. American Journal of Human Biology, 21(1), 2–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Labban, M. (2014). Deterritorializing extraction: Bioaccumulation and the planetary mine. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 104(3), 560–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landecker, H. (2011). Food as exposure: Nutritional epigenetics and the new metabolism. Biosocieties, 6(2), 167–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landecker, H., & Panofsky, A. (2013). From social structure to gene regulation, and back: A critical introduction to environmental epigenetics for sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 39, 333–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lederberg, J., & Mccray, A. (2001). Ome sweet omics—A genealogical treasury of words. The Scientist, 17(7), 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leonelli, S. (2014a). What difference does quantity make? On the epistemology of Big Data in biology. Big Data & Society, 1(1), 2053951714534395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonelli, S. (2014b). Data interpretation in the digital age. Perspectives on Science, 22(3), 397–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonelli, S., Diehl, A. D., Christie, K. R., Harris, M. A., & Lomax, J. (2011). How the gene ontology evolves. BMC Bioinformatics, 12(1), 325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin, N. (2014a). What’s being translated in translational research? Making and making sense of data between the laboratory and the clinic. Technoscienza: Italian Journal of Science & Technology Studies, 5(1), 91–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, N. (2014b). Making up “persons” in personalized medicine with metabolomics. Somatosphere. http://somatosphere.net/2014/02/making-up-persons-in-personalized-medicine-with-metabolomics.html. Accessed 17 March 2015.

  • Levin, N. (2014c). Multivariate statistics and the enactment of metabolic complexity. Social Studies of Science, 44(4), 555–578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levins, R., & Lewontin, R. (1985). The dialectical biologist. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, J. N. (2012). Matchmaking mechanisms: Collaborative arrangements in proteomics and bioinformatics. In J. N. Parker, B. Penders, & N. Vermeulen (Eds.), Collaboration in the new life sciences (pp. 180–199). Farnham: Ashgate Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lezaun, J. (2013). The escalating politics of ‘Big Biology’. Biosocieties, 8(4), 480–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lippman, A. (1992). Led (astray) by genetic maps: The cartography of the human genome and health care. Social Science and Medicine, 35(12), 1469–1476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lock, M. (2015). Comprehending the body in the era of the epigenome. Current Anthropology, 56(2), 151–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lorimer, J. (2016). Gut buddies: Multispecies studies and the microbiome. Environmental Humanities, 8(1), 57–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lozupone, C. A., Stombaugh, J. I., Gordon, J. I., Jansson, J. K., & Knight, R. (2012). Diversity, stability and resilience of the human gut microbiota. Nature, 489(7415), 220–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, B. (2012a). Environmental health as biosecurity: “Seafood choices,” risk, and the pregnant woman as threshold. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 102(5), 969–976.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, B. (2012b). Race and the new epigenetic biopolitics of environmental health. BioSocieties, 7(4), 352–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, B., & Guthman, J. (2014). Epigenetic life: Biological plasticity, abnormality, and new configurations of race and reproduction. Cultural Geographies, 22(1), 3–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Massey, D. (2005). For space. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • McAfee, K. (2003). Neoliberalism on the molecular scale. Economic and genetic reductionism in biotechnology battles. Geoforum, 34(2), 203–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, D., Vazquez-Baeza, Y., Walters, W. A., Caporaso, J. G., & Knight, R. (2013). From molecules to dynamic biological communities. Biology and Philosophy, 28(2), 241–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGuinness, D., McGlynn, L. M., Johnson, P. C., MacIntyre, A., Batty, D. G., Burns, H., et al. (2012). Socio-economic status is associated with epigenetic differences in the pSoBid cohort. International Journal of Epidemiology, 41(1), 151–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meloni, M. (2013). Biology without biologism: Social theory in a postgenomic age. Sociology, 48(4), 731–746.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meloni, M. (2015). Epigenetics for the social sciences: Justice, embodiment, and inheritance in the postgenomic age. New Genetics and Society, 34(2), 125–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millar, S. W., & Mitchell, D. (2015). The tight dialectic: The anthropocene and the capitalist production of nature. Antipode. doi:10.1111/anti.12188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morange, M. (2002). The relations between genetics and epigenetics. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 981(1), 50–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nash, C. (2012). Genetics, race, and relatedness: Human mobility and human diversity in the genographic project. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 102(3), 667–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nesse, R. M., Bergstrom, C. T., Ellison, P. T., Flier, J. S., Gluckman, P., Govindaraju, D. R., et al. (2010). Making evolutionary biology a basic science for medicine. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 1079(Suppl 1), 1800–1807.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niewöhner, J. (2011). Epigenetics: Embedded bodies and the molecularisation of biography and milieu. Biosocieties, 6(3), 279–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niewöhner, J. (2015). Epigenetics: Localizing biology through co-laboration. New Genetics and Society, 34(2), 219–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Sullivan, D., & Manson, S. M. (2015). Do physicists have geography envy? And what can geographers learn from it? Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 105(4), 704–722.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Obregon-Tito, A. J. (2013). Metagenomics and social inclusion in Peru. Norman: University of Oklahoma.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Malley, M. A., Calvert, J., & Dupre, J. (2007). The study of socioethical issues in systems biology. American Journal of Bioethics, 7(4), 67–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oyama, S. (2000). Evolution’s eye: A systems view of the biology-culture divide. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, W., Perkins, S. E., Harker, M., & Muehlenbein, M. P. (2012). A prescription for clinical immunology: The pills are available and ready for testing. A review. Current Medical Research and Opinion, 28(7), 1193–1202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parry, B. (2004). Trading the genome: Investigating the commodification of bio-information. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pavlopoulos, G. A., Malliarakis, D., Papanikolaou, N., Theodosiou, T., Enright, A. J., & Iliopoulos, I. (2015). Visualizing genome and systems biology: Technologies, tools, implementation techniques and trends, past, present and future. GigaScience, 4(1), 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paxson, H., & Helmreich, S. (2013). The perils and promises of microbial abundance: Novel natures and model ecosystems, from artisanal cheese to alien seas. Social Studies of Science, 44(2), 165–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pennisi, E. (2016). Tracking how humans evolve in real time. Science, 352(6288), 876–877.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pickersgill, M., Niewohner, J., Muller, R., Martin, P., & Cunningham-Burley, S. (2013). Mapping the new molecular landscape: Social dimensions of epigenetics. New Genetics and Society, 32(4), 429–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pilpel, Y., & Rechavi, O. (2015). The Lamarckian chicken and the Darwinian egg. Biology Direct, 10(1), 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollan, M. (2013). Say hello to the 100 trillion bacteria that make up your microbiome. The New York Times, May 15.

  • Radcliffe, S. A., Watson, E. E., Simmons, I., Fernández-Armesto, F., & Sluyter, A. (2010). Environmentalist thinking and/in geography. Progress in Human Geography, 34(1), 98–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rajan, S. K. (2006). Biocapital: The constitution of postgenomic life. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rajan, K. S. (2013). Questions of critique for big biology: Conjuncture, agency and the global postcolonial. Biosocieties, 8(4), 486–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rajan, K. S., & Leonelli, S. (2013). Introduction: biomedical trans-actions, postgenomics, and knowledge/value. Public Culture, 25(3), 463–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Relton, C. L., & Smith, G. D. (2012). Is epidemiology ready for epigenetics? International Journal of Epidemiology, 41(1), 5–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R., Gligorov, N., & Schwab, A. P. (2013). The human microbiome: Ethical, legal and social concerns. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, S. S., & Stevens, H. (2015). Postgenomics: Perspectives on biology after the genome. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, D. B., Volkow, N. D., Kwan, M. P., Kaplan, R. M., Goodchild, M. F., & Croyle, R. T. (2013). Spatial turn in health research. Science, 339(6126), 1390–1392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, M. (2011). Measurement and alienation: Making a world of ecosystem services. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 37(3), 386–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rook, G. A. W., Raison, C. L., & Lowry, C. A. (2014). Microbial “old friends”, immunoregulation and socio-economic status. Clinical and Experimental Immunology, 177(1), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, H., & Rose, S. P. R. (2012). Genes, cells, and brains: The promethean promises of the new biology. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saldanha, A. (2006). Reontologising race: The machinic geography of phenotype. Environment and Planning D, 24(1), 9–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santos, R. V., da Silva, G. O., & Gibbon, S. (2015). Pharmacogenomics, human genetic diversity and the incorporation and rejection of color/race in Brazil. Biosocieties., 10(1), 48–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schloissnig, S., Arumugam, M., Sunagawa, S., Mitreva, M., Tap, J., Zhu, A., et al. (2013). Genomic variation landscape of the human gut microbiome. Nature, 493(7430), 45–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuurman, N., & Leszczynski, A. (2008). Ontologies for Bioinformatics. Bioinformatics and Biology Insights, 2, 187–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sevilla-Buitrago, A. (2015). Capitalist formations of enclosure: Space and the extinction of the commons. Antipode. doi:10.1111/anti.12143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, J. A. (2009). Revisiting the central dogma in the 21st century. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1178(1), 6–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, I. G. R., Robbins, P. F., & Jones, J. P., III. (2010). A bug’s life and the spatial ontologies of mosquito management. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 100(2), 373–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shim, J. K., Darling, K. W., Lappe, M. D., Thomson, L. K., Lee, S. S.-J., Hiatt, R. A., et al. (2014). Homogeneity and heterogeneity as situational properties: Producing-and moving beyond?—Race in post-genomic science. Social Studies of Science, 44(4), 579–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slashinski, M. J., McCurdy, S. A., Achenbaum, L. S., Whitney, S. N., & McGuire, A. L. (2012). “Snake-oil,” “quack medicine,” and “industrially cultured organisms:” Biovalue and the commercialization of human microbiome research. BMC Medical Ethics, 13(1), 28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smillie, C. S., Smith, M. B., Friedman, J., Cordero, O. X., David, L. A., & Alm, E. J. (2011). Ecology drives a global network of gene exchange connecting the human microbiome. Nature, 480(7376), 241–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, N. (2009). Nature as accumulation strategy Socialist Register, 43. http://socialistregister.com/index.php/srv/article/view/5856#.UdJTB5y3a4Y.

  • Soja, E. W. (1989). Postmodern geographies: The reassertion of space in critical social theory. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stallins, J. A. (2012). Scale, causality, and the new organism–environment interaction. Geoforum, 43(3), 427–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stotz, K. C., Bostanci, A., & Griffiths, P. E. (2006). Tracking the shift to ‘postgenomics’. Public Health Genomics, 9(3), 190–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thrift, N. (2012). The insubstantial pageant: Producing an untoward land. Cultural Geographies, 19(2), 141–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tito, R. Y., Knights, D., Metcalf, J., Obregon-Tito, A. J., Cleeland, L., Najar, F., et al. (2012). Insights from characterizing extinct human gut microbiomes. PLoS ONE, 7(12), e51146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ursell, L. K., Van Treuren, W., Metcalf, J. L., Pirrung, M., Gewirtz, A., & Knight, R. (2013). Replenishing our defensive microbes. BioEssays, 35(9), 810–817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Velasquez-Manoff, M. (2012). An epidemic of absence: A new way of understanding allergies and autoimmune diseases. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddington, C. H. (1952). The epigenetics of birds. Cambridge England: University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waggoner, M. R., & Uller, T. (2015). Epigenetic determinism in science and society. New Genetics and Society, 34(2), 177–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waldby, C. (2009). Biobanking in Singapore: Post-developmental state, experimental population. New Genetics and Society, 28(3), 253–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, K. E., Sng, O., & Neuberg, S. L. (2016). Ecology-driven stereotypes override race stereotypes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(2), 310–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, S. M., Annas, G. J., & Elias, S. (2013). Patient autonomy and incidental findings in clinical genomics. Science, 340(6136), 1049–1050.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wyatt, S., Harris, A., Adams, S., & Kelly, S. E. (2013). Illness online: Self-reported data and questions of trust in medical and social research. Theory Culture & Society, 30(4), 131–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wynne, B. (2005). Reflexing complexity: Post-genomic knowledge and reductionist returns in public science. Theory Culture & Society, 22(5), 67–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yatsunenko, T., Rey, F. E., Manary, M. J., Trehan, I., Dominguez-Bello, M. G., Contreras, M., et al. (2012). Human gut microbiome viewed across age and geography. Nature, 486(7402), 222–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ziegelstein, R. C. (2015). Personomics. JAMA Internal Medicine, 175(6), 888–889.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuk, M. (2013). Paleofantasy: What evolution really tells us about sex, diet, and how we live. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zwart, N. H. (2007). Genomics and self-knowledge: Implications for societal research and debate. New Genetics and Society, 26(2), 181–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geography, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA

    J. Anthony Stallins, Derek M. Law, Sophia A. Strosberg & Jarius J. Rossi

Authors
  1. J. Anthony Stallins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Derek M. Law
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sophia A. Strosberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jarius J. Rossi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Anthony Stallins.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Stallins, J.A., Law, D.M., Strosberg, S.A. et al. Geography and postgenomics: how space and place are the new DNA. GeoJournal 83, 153–168 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-016-9763-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-016-9763-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation