What do you think?
Rate this book
The Making of a Fly: The Genetics of Animal Design
Understanding how a multicellular animal develops from a single cell (the fertilized egg) poses one of the greatest challenges in biology today. Development from egg to adult involves the sequential expression of virtually the whole of an organism's genetic instructions both in the mother as she lays down developmental cues in the egg, and in the embryo itself. Most of our present information on the role of genes in development comes from the invertebrate fruit fly, "Drosophila." The two authors of this text (amongst the foremost authorities in the world) follow the developmental process from fertilization through the primitive structural development of the body plan of the fly after cleavage into the differentiation of the variety of tissues, organs and body parts that together define the fly. The developmental processes are fully explained throughout the text in the modern language of molecular biology and genetics. This text represents the vital synthesis of the subject that many have been waiting for and it will enable many specific courses in developmental biology and molecular genetics to focus on it. It will appeali to 2nd and 3rd year students in these disciplines as well as in biochemistry, neurobiology and zoology. It will also have widespread appeal among researchers.
Authored by one of the foremost authorities in the world.
A unique synthesis of the developmental cycle of "Drosophila" - our major source of information on the role of genes in development.
Designed to provide the basis of new courses in developmental biology and molecular genetics at senior undergraduate level.
A lucid explanation in the modern language of the science.
Authored by one of the foremost authorities in the world.
A unique synthesis of the developmental cycle of "Drosophila" - our major source of information on the role of genes in development.
Designed to provide the basis of new courses in developmental biology and molecular genetics at senior undergraduate level.
A lucid explanation in the modern language of the science.
- GenresScienceBiologyNonfiction
219 pages, Paperback
First published April 15, 1992
2 people are currently reading
136 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
December 14, 2014
Although this book is a bit dated, it is a good introduction to the genetics of development. Lawrence clearly explains the experimental work that shaped what was then (1992)current understanding of Drosophila development and implications. He addds a few short pieces on the history of some of the work such as the discovery of homeobox genes at the end. Lots of references adn additional raeding for each chapter. I recommend the book for students of genetics, development, and insects (some good stuff on cuticle, muscle, and nerves). I also recommend this book for those interested in the history ond philosophy of science, scientiic methodology, and who are just insanely curious.
August 9, 2024
I'd heard this book praised on a certain science podcast, and I hoped it would prove to be one of those classics of biological literature written for the layman, on the order of James D Watson's The Double Helix, or Hans Zinsser's Rats, Lice, and History. Peter A Lawrence's 1992 book The Making of a Fly: The Genetics of Animal Design, purports to be something of an overview of what we'd learned about the developmental embryology of the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster by the time of its publication. Having myself just finished reading a very complicated book about immunology, I was eager to zoom out on broader-scale issues in biology, which I expected to come as a relief.
Near the end (p195) of his book, Lawrence acknowledges that "embryologists and geneticists never used to see eye to eye," but he might better contrast the points of view of embryologists and molecular biologists. All these many schools of understanding have changed radically over the last many decades, with ever-increasing emphasis on molecular biology. The concern of the developmental biologist has been to try to account for the emergence of symmetry and patterns in a developing embryo, which might then suggest the emergence of asymmetric yet reproducible organ systems: consider, for example, the external symmetry of the human body in stark contrast to some (but not all) of the arrangement of internal structures. But traditionally developmental biologists have focused more (but not exclusively!) on metaphor than on mechanism, as Lawrence very much does in his book. One problem with The Making of a Fly is that such thinking now seems not simply out of fashion, as Lawrence asserts, but positively out of date. Except as a history of a relatively small group of investigators, the value of the book seems prohibitively and narrowly restricted indeed. At issue is not changing fads in science as Lawrence insists (although that is a true enough phenomenon too seldom acknowledged), but that teasing out molecular mechanisms now lies at the heart of biological science: this is the necessary scale at which organismic biology must be explored, no matter how difficult that makes laboratory experimentation. The metaphors cry out for molecular models featuring signaling pathways and genetic control systems, but this knowledge generally (but not entirely!) postdates Lawrence's story, and its absence here leaves a hollow space at the book's core. A distinctive spurning of molecular science prevails. In the end, without precise mechanisms, the models and metaphors around which Lawrence's whole book revolves tend to collapse into the naïve speculations of an earlier age.
Another important shortcoming of this book is its structure. Lawrence is aware of this, telling us in the preface of the "need to understand other things and these cannot always have been described previously." I certainly learned about this when tangled up in the aforementioned immunology book, and I was willing to accept this kind of approach in an admittedly technical book. Lawrence concluded: "By keeping it short, I hope the reader will be able to soldier through it without giving up." But the true problem is not the one Lawrence mentions: the true problem is that he has forgone any pretense of effort at creating a coherent, linear narrative so that the reader might acquire useful information and vocabulary that build steadily and lead to increasing understanding as he or she proceeds. Conveying meaning is perhaps the most critical job of any author. How easy, and at what reward, it would have been for Lawrence to have made the effort to provide definitions for complicated vocabulary as it first appeared. This is no book for the layman, but who is it for? It is for, I conclude, that relatively small group of investigators who had taken the same journey with Lawrence, and who already understood the vocabulary and concepts. Lawrence concerned himself very little with any helpful elucidation for the rest of us.
Also, when I took embryology in college, we spent a lot more time on the structured narrative that carried us from zygote to adult. Fruit flies pass from egg to larva to pupa to adult, and almost all of Lawrence's book is set in the egg, with a little in the early larva. There is no mention of pupation. Strange choices, given the book's title.
On another level, for various reasons, including the cloying scent of faddiness, I've been growing increasingly skeptical of our generally accepted conception of stem cell biology with its branching lineages of differentiation progressing forward in one direction. It seems to me that problems of regenerative biology and the relatively recent development of induced pluripotent stem cells ought to be causing more scientists to question the predominating stem cell dogma. Reading certain parts of this book reinforced some of my doubts. In a nutshell, regenerative organisms seem to survive quite nicely without adhering to the one-way stem cell catechism.
The Making of a Fly is perhaps best considered as a portrait of the mind of a certain kind of scientist who is, alas, not very proficient at conveying his knowledge and insights beyond a small cortège of peers.
Near the end (p195) of his book, Lawrence acknowledges that "embryologists and geneticists never used to see eye to eye," but he might better contrast the points of view of embryologists and molecular biologists. All these many schools of understanding have changed radically over the last many decades, with ever-increasing emphasis on molecular biology. The concern of the developmental biologist has been to try to account for the emergence of symmetry and patterns in a developing embryo, which might then suggest the emergence of asymmetric yet reproducible organ systems: consider, for example, the external symmetry of the human body in stark contrast to some (but not all) of the arrangement of internal structures. But traditionally developmental biologists have focused more (but not exclusively!) on metaphor than on mechanism, as Lawrence very much does in his book. One problem with The Making of a Fly is that such thinking now seems not simply out of fashion, as Lawrence asserts, but positively out of date. Except as a history of a relatively small group of investigators, the value of the book seems prohibitively and narrowly restricted indeed. At issue is not changing fads in science as Lawrence insists (although that is a true enough phenomenon too seldom acknowledged), but that teasing out molecular mechanisms now lies at the heart of biological science: this is the necessary scale at which organismic biology must be explored, no matter how difficult that makes laboratory experimentation. The metaphors cry out for molecular models featuring signaling pathways and genetic control systems, but this knowledge generally (but not entirely!) postdates Lawrence's story, and its absence here leaves a hollow space at the book's core. A distinctive spurning of molecular science prevails. In the end, without precise mechanisms, the models and metaphors around which Lawrence's whole book revolves tend to collapse into the naïve speculations of an earlier age.
Another important shortcoming of this book is its structure. Lawrence is aware of this, telling us in the preface of the "need to understand other things and these cannot always have been described previously." I certainly learned about this when tangled up in the aforementioned immunology book, and I was willing to accept this kind of approach in an admittedly technical book. Lawrence concluded: "By keeping it short, I hope the reader will be able to soldier through it without giving up." But the true problem is not the one Lawrence mentions: the true problem is that he has forgone any pretense of effort at creating a coherent, linear narrative so that the reader might acquire useful information and vocabulary that build steadily and lead to increasing understanding as he or she proceeds. Conveying meaning is perhaps the most critical job of any author. How easy, and at what reward, it would have been for Lawrence to have made the effort to provide definitions for complicated vocabulary as it first appeared. This is no book for the layman, but who is it for? It is for, I conclude, that relatively small group of investigators who had taken the same journey with Lawrence, and who already understood the vocabulary and concepts. Lawrence concerned himself very little with any helpful elucidation for the rest of us.
Also, when I took embryology in college, we spent a lot more time on the structured narrative that carried us from zygote to adult. Fruit flies pass from egg to larva to pupa to adult, and almost all of Lawrence's book is set in the egg, with a little in the early larva. There is no mention of pupation. Strange choices, given the book's title.
On another level, for various reasons, including the cloying scent of faddiness, I've been growing increasingly skeptical of our generally accepted conception of stem cell biology with its branching lineages of differentiation progressing forward in one direction. It seems to me that problems of regenerative biology and the relatively recent development of induced pluripotent stem cells ought to be causing more scientists to question the predominating stem cell dogma. Reading certain parts of this book reinforced some of my doubts. In a nutshell, regenerative organisms seem to survive quite nicely without adhering to the one-way stem cell catechism.
The Making of a Fly is perhaps best considered as a portrait of the mind of a certain kind of scientist who is, alas, not very proficient at conveying his knowledge and insights beyond a small cortège of peers.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews