186
BOOK REVIEWS
lively discussions when this book is used for graduatelevel seminars.
A major strength of the book is its comprehensive
review of the literature. I found several interesting references that I had missed in my own reading. The closest that I noticed to an omission was the absence of
any discussion of the possibility of osmotrophy by larvae and the complications that this potential feeding
mode presents for classifications of larval feeding
types (e.g., Manahan, 1991; Schilling, 1996).
I do not find major, serious weaknesses. I do find
some things troubling, such as an illustration of a flow
tank (Fig. 2.5) with sharp corners for the flow to turn,
whereas fluids abhor sharp turns to the extent of throwing themselves into petulant vortices upon such encounters. Flow separation of this sort defeats the underlying philosophy of using flumes to make simplified
flows. I would like to have found fewer illustrations
of flumes and more discussion of design principles or
at least more discussion of relative advantages and disadvantages of the specific designs that are illustrated.
My most violent negative reaction comes in response
to perpetuation of the inherently bad idea (p. 174) of
distinguishing biological from physical mechanisms of
particle capture. That current models do not yet incorporate the unsteady physics and chemistry of particle
sensing and animal response does not make the process
of encounter and capture any less physical. A more
minor annoyance is the large number of spelling errors. The manuscript obviously was spell-checked
thoroughly by computer, but it was not proofed for the
spellings of authors' names or for the presence of correctly spelled words with the wrong meanings, hence
"site" for "cite" (p. 9) and "Stokess law" (p. 171).
The book is aimed explicitly at researchers who are
newcomers to thefield.I would find it hard to set loose
one of my beginning graduate students with this text,
however, for several reasons. One is that while the review of each topic is reasonably exhaustive, I am left
hungry for integration and synthesis and-highlighting
of the most important pitfalls, issues and questions.
This criticism may seem particularly unfair in view of
the effort that the authors devote to issues of hypothesis testing in the introduction, and of their production
of tables in nearly every chapter explicitly listing null
and alternative hypotheses relevant to the chapter.
However, many of the purely mechanical null hypotheses (e.g., in Tables 3.3, 3.6 and 3.7)—set up with full
knowledge that they would not survive—died many
years ago and so stir little interest without refinement
or explicit incorporation of the mechanisms involved
in the alternatives. Further, I am reluctant to set students loose on poorly connected hypotheses without
articulation of the big ideas or theses that tie them
together (cf. criticisms of ad hoc explanations of type
3 as defined by Lakatos 1970). Most stimulating are
the hypotheses that are still untested (e.g., No. 2 in
Table 4.5, notably in the authors' own area of research).
The authors finish up with a provocative chapter on
future directions. They assess untapped potential by
several interesting means. One is by rank order of
abundance of number of hypotheses listed earlier in
the book on specific topics (Table 9.1), with the idea
that more is better. This approach risks the same criticism that Asimov made in his Foundation trilogy (later extended to six books) of the decaying Empire's
method of weighing amount rather than quality of scientific evidence. Lakatos (1970) gives good guidance
on how to evaluate the quality of hypotheses, and it
will be interesting to see how the rank ordering compares: The number of hypotheses per chapter topic listed in Table 9.1 ranks roughly inversely with the availability of explicit, quantitative, mechanistic theory,
running as it does from ecosystems to filtration mechanics. I also am surprised that no open hypotheses
at all are listed from hydrosol filtration theory (either
in their chapter or the last), whereas this theory can be
used to predict morphologies expected under particular
flow regimes and particle characteristics. It is safe to
predict that interesting results will arise when the
chemistry and physics of chemosensing are combined
with the fluid and solid mechanics of encounter and
capture. The remaining tables in this last chapter provide abundant fodder for thought and seminar discussions, and I expect to use this book very productively
with intermediate-level students in providing useful
background and priming the pump in seminar and tutorial settings for generating even more ideas. I am
very glad to have it on my shelf both as a reference
and as this sort of catalyst.
REFERENCES
Lakatos, I. 1970. Falsification and the methodology of
research programmes. In I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave (eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, pp. 91-196. Cambridge Univ. Press.
Manahan, D. T. 1991. Uptake of dissolved organic
matter from seawater by marine invertebrates: The
"Grover C. Stephen's era." Amer. Zool. 31:3A.
Schilling, F. M. 1996. Sources of energy for increased
metabolic demand during metamorphosis of the
abalone Haliotis rufescens (Mollusca). Biol. Bull.
Mar. Biol. Lab. Woods Hole 191(3):402-412.
PETER A. JUMARS
School of Oceanography, Campus Box 357940
University of Washington
Seattle, Washington 98195-3940
E-mail: jumars @ocean.washington.edu
Introduction to the Primates. DARIS R. SWINDLER. Uni-
versity of Washington Press, 1998, 336 pp.,
$22.00 paperback (ISBN 0-295-97704-8).
Primates are not particularly diverse, speciose, or
anatomically-specialized, yet nearly 200 books have
been written about them in the past decade alone. One
has to wonder what all the fuss is about. Upon reflection, it should come as no surprise that the clade that
contains ourselves (humans) excites so much interest
and evolutionary introspection. It was Darwin, in his
Descent of Man, whofirstrecognized that comparative
studies of our (as we now describe them) sister taxa
may offer insights into our own evolutionary origins.
Although it is questionable whether the obsession with
human origins is sufficient justification for the study
187
BOOK REVIEWS
of other primates, it nonetheless explains why primatology tends to capture the interest of biologists and
non-biologists alike.
Given this potential for multiple levels of interest
and readership, it is appropriate to ask for what audience is Swindler's book intended, and does it hit its
mark? As its title implies, the book is intended as a
starting point for anyone with a nascent interest in
primates, regardless of the reason. In Swindler's
words. "This book is meant as a beginning resource." Certainly, the book assumes very little about
the status of the reader's knowledge of biology. Each
chapter begins with a fundamental description of its
subject matter that even the most naive reader can
comprehend (e.g., DNA is the material of heredity;
bones are the hard structures that comprise skeletons). The 11 chapters cover a broad range of topics
with the intent of introducing the reader to any and
all biological disciplines as they relate to primatology. In order, the chapters are "Monkeys and Apes in
History," "Classification and Distribution of Living
Primates," "Blood Groups, Chromosomes and
DNA," "The Skull," "Teeth, Diet, and Digestion,"
"The Brain and Special Senses," "The Skeleton and
Locomotion," "Growth and Development," "Social
Groups and Primate Behavior," "Fossil Primates,"
and "Primate Conservation." Viewing this extensive
list of life-history subject matter, the undergraduate
instructor will perhaps rush to the conclusion that the
book might be ideal for an introductory course in
either primatology or mammalogy. Reluctantly, however, I must urge caution.
Introduction to the Primates has an unfortunate tendency to present primatology in a woefully antiquated
light. Any reader that comes to this book burdened
with remnants of the 19th-century perspective of the
Scala Naturae will find little to dissuade him. The
book is littered with the terms "lower" and "higher,"
"primitive" and "advanced," rather than terms that
we now find to be more informative and accurate such
as ancestral and derived. Swindler all too frequently
presents horizontal patterns (i.e., comparisons among
extant primates) as literal representations of history.
Trends toward the human condition are viewed in virtually all aspects of comparative primate biology (e.g.,
increased encephalization, more complex social behavior, increased orbital frontation, decreased olfaction)
and are presented as hallmarks of the primate evolutionary story. While this may be true if you are a human, looking lovingly back along the temporal sequence of your ancestors, the picture is quite different
if you are a mouse lemur. In other words, the power
of phylogenetic thinking seems to be missing from
Swindler's perspective—at least as presented in this
book. As evolutionary biologists, we know, and we
certainly wish to convey to our students, that all living
organisms are the product of long evolutionary history,
shared to varying degrees of recency. Thus, even
though the average lemur may retain a broader array
of shared ancestral features than do humans, these animals cannot be described as living representations of
a primitive stage along the long road to humanity.
Swindler also has a disturbing tendency to present
controversial theories as accepted dogma (e.g., evolu-
tion is irreversible; the primate brain evolved in response to a fruit-eating diet) and to play fast and loose
with matters of fact (e.g., 50 gram mouse lemurs eat
small birds—I don't think so!). Conversely, he misses
numerous opportunities to enliven his descriptions of
anatomical detail with adaptive interpretation. When
discussing the tapetum lucidum (the reflective membrane that lines the surface of the retina in most mammals) and its absence in nocturnal tarsiers and night
monkeys, Swindler doesn't even mention transient diurnal ancestry as a probable explanation for its loss.
Nor does he mention the significance that this feature
holds for interpretation of higher-level primate relationships. Among most phylogenetically inclined primatologists, lack of the tapetum lucidum in tarsiers is
seen as compelling evidence for a special relationship
to the anthropoid primates rather than to the toothcombed lemurs and lorises.
The book nonetheless has qualities to recommend it
to devoted primatologists, especially those who, like
Swindler, are primarily interested in the monkeys,
apes, and humans portion of the primate tree. Swindler
is a masterful anatomist, and chapters 4 though 7 are
rich in anatomical detail. For example, the chapter on
teeth and diet (chapter 5) devotes 14 pages to teeth
and only 2 to diet. Although this might leave the nonspecialist's head swimming in a sea of cuspules, it is
a nice resource for those who want quick access to this
information. Also, the book is, for the most part, clearly and engagingly written, with even the occasional
outburst of lively prose (e.g., "[the patas monkey] is
the prime speedster among primates"). By covering
such an ambitious breadth of primate biology, the book
ultimately gives the reader a good flavor for the diversity and specializations of primates relative to other
mammals. Throughout, it is clear that Swindler loves
his subject matter and that the romance has been lifelong. If for no other reason, it is worth having this
book on one's shelf as a classic example of organismal
devotion.
ANNE D. YODER
Department of Cell and Molecular Biology
Northwestern University Medical School
Chicago, Illinois 60611 and
Department of Zoology
Field Museum of Natural History
Roosevelt Road at Lake Shore Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60605
E-mail: [email protected]
Embryology: Constructing The Organism. S. F. GILBERT AND A. M. RAUNIO. Sinauer Associates, Inc.,
Sunderland, MA, 1997, 537 pp., $69.95 (ISBN 087893-237-2).
With recent renewed interest in comparative embryology and the focus of contemporary developmental
biologists almost exclusively on three model systems
("the fly," "the worm," and "the mouse"), the time
couldn't be better for a textbook on comparative animal embryology. In Embryology: Constructing The
Organism, Gilbert and Raunio set out to create a com-