| This book is about symbiosis and how prevalent it is. It is also about how politicized the concept has been historically. From the experience of nineteenth-century biologist and illustrator Beatrix Potter whose identification of lichen as symbionts went against the established dogma as filtered through the ideas of Pasteur, to "anti-communist" biology as practiced by some Western scientists who saw symbiosis as supporting the collective, it is amazing how purely political ideas successfully censored the scientific. Symbiosis has even been thought of as "feminine" and contrary to the noble interpretation of Darwinism as the survival of the fittest. But Wakeford is able (after a fashion) to go beyond the politics and demonstrate in a most convincing manner that the symbiotic way of life is vastly more important and enormously more widespread than is usually imagined. Most of us know that legumes work symbiotically with rhizobia bacteria to fix nitrogen in the soil so that it is available to the plant, but what surprised me is to learn that 90 percent of plants host mycorrhizal fungi (p. 167) and are therefore symbionts. As Wakeford asks on the same page, "Can we continue to simply call them plants without acknowledging their fungal dimension? Is a cow an animal or a microbial fermentation vessel, when without the microbes, the cow would not exist?" Good questions, and indeed, what about humans who have microbes in our guts that help us to digest our food? Are we in symbiosis with those microbes? Without the beneficial bacteria in our guts, the harmful bacteria would run rampant and we would be led to disease. Ants are not merely ants, they are farmers who harvest fungi gardens. They and the fungi are in symbiosis, living together, dependent upon one another for their survival. And what about termites, creatures who harbor microbes to digest the wood they eat? The broad, general message of this book is that cooperation between species is at least as important in evolution as is competition. Reading this made me think that perhaps the idea of competition in evolution is merely an anthropomorphic delusion. Certainly Wakeford shows that our notions about parasites and who is feeding on whom, may be in error. He writes, "Rather than discrete categories, the terms _mutualist_, _parasite_, and _pathogen_ are better seen as fuzzy points on a continuum, along the length of which an association between two organisms may fluctuate. For many associations, the point they occupy on this continuum is as difficult to assess as it is to say who gains more...in a marriage between two human partners." (p. 184) There is an old saying, that I got from somewhere years ago. It is, "Everything works toward a symbiosis." This book not only supports that idea, it even, taken further, supports the idea of Gaia, namely that all the living creatures on this planet form a single organism. I don't necessary believe this, the "strong" Gaia hypothesis, but I think the distinction between a planet that harbors organisms and a planet that is itself part organism, may be more a semantic distinction than anything else. Because of all we have learned about microbial life in recent decades, it is becoming clearer and clearer that no organism is an island, and indeed, all of life is in symbiosis with the microorganisms that constitute the largest, most viable life form on this planet. Realizing this while reading Wakeford's fascinating arguments, I had a thought: the little green men from outer space are probably symbionts themselves, but more fully realized ones, like lichen, part "animal" and part "plant," deriving their energy directly through photosynthesis. And suddenly I had a vision of beings all seated as in meditation, taking a break to open the top of their heads, filled not with brains, but with cells capable of turning light into nourishment. How primitive and clumsy we might appear by comparison! |
home
