Abstract
The comparison between natural evolution and the action of a tinkerer has become highly popular since its reintroduction by François Jacob at the end of the 1970s. It has been used as a weapon against the existence of an “intelligent design” as well as a way for synthetic biologists to promote their ambitious projects. I will describe the complex history of this metaphor, and examine its pertinence. Whereas Darwin considered it as a way to describe how evolution proceeded, Jacob linked it with a description of the imperfections of organisms, while Stephen Jay Gould and Richard Lewontin criticized what they called the “Panglossian” vision of most evolutionary biologists. The distinction between the work of engineers and that of tinkerers is not obvious. There are limits to the process of evolution, but their alleged description so far reflects the limits of knowledge on the part of evolutionary biologists more than the existence of true barriers to the evolutionary process. And, in their work, synthetic biologists crucially need the optimizing action of natural selection. To give a definition of synthetic biology is no easy task; the false distinction drawn between the work of synthetic biologists and the action of evolution is of no help.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abzhanov A, Kuo WP, Hartmann C, Grant BR, Grant PR, Tabin CJ (2006) The calmodulin pathway and evolution of elongated beak morphology in Darwin’s finches. Nature 442:563–567
Agnati LF, Guidolin D, Ciruela F, Carone C, Vallelunga A, Escuela DO, Genedani S, Fuxe K (2013) A new interpretative paradigm for conformational protein diseases. Curr Protein Pept Sci 14:141–160
Alberch P (1980) Ontogenesis and morphological diversification. Am Zool 20:653–667
Alon U (2003) Biological networks: the tinkerer as an engineer. Science 301:1866–1867
Beatty J (1994) The proximal/ultimate distinction in the multiple careers of Ernst Mayr. Biol and Philos 9:333–356
Darwin C (1886) On the various contrivances by which British and foreign orchids are fertilized by insects and on the good effects of intercrossing. John Murray, London
Duboule D, Wilkins AS (1998) The evolution of ‘bricolage.’ Trends Genet 14:54–59
Erwin DH, Davidson EH (2009) The evolution of hierarchical gene regulatory networks. Nat Rev/Genetics 10:141–148
Gould SJ (1990) Wonderful life: the Burgess shale and the nature of history. Norton, New York
Gould SJ, Lewontin R (1979) The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: a critique of the adaptationist programme. Proc Roy Soc London B 205:581–598
Haseltine EL, Arnold FH (2007) Synthetic gene circuits: design with directed evolution. Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct 36:1–19
Jacob F (1977) Evolution and tinkering. Science 196:1161–1166
Jacob F (1983) Molecular tinkering in evolution. In: Bendall DS (ed) Evolution from molecules to men. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 131–144
Keller EF (1995) Refiguring life: metaphors of twentieth-century biology. Columbia University Press, New York
Koder RL, Anderson JLR, Solomon LA, Reddy KS, Moser CC, Dutton PL (2009) Design and engineering of an O2 transport protein. Nature 458:305–309
Lynch M (2007) The origins of genome architecture. Sinauer, Sunderland
Mayr E (1961) Cause and effect in biology. Science 134:1501–1506
Morange M (2009) A new revolution? The place of systems biology and synthetic biology in the history of biology. EMBO Rep 10:50–53
Nandagopal N, Elowitz MB (2011) Synthetic biology: integrated gene circuits. Science 333:1244–1248
O’Malley MA (2009) Making knowledge in synthetic biology: design meets kludge. Biol Theory 4:378–389
Shapiro JA (2011) Evolution: a view from the 21st century. FT Press, Upper Saddle River
Tcherkez GGB, Farquhar GD, Andrews TJ (2006) Despite slow catalysis and confused substrate specificity, all ribulose bisphosphate carboxylases may be nearly perfectly optimized. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:7246–7251
Thompson DW (1917) On growth and form. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Tokuriki N, Tawfik DS (2009) Chaperonin overexpression promotes genetic variation and enzyme evolution. Nature 459:668–673
Wright S (1968–1978) Evolution and the genetics of population, vol 4. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Acknowledgments
I am indebted to David Marsh for critical reading of the manuscript, and to Mark Bedau and Ulrich Krohs for their very useful advice.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Morange, M. Comparison Between the Work of Synthetic Biologists and the Action of Evolution: Engineering Versus Tinkering. Biol Theory 8, 318–323 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13752-013-0134-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13752-013-0134-y