Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Funny, I read that same section two weeks ago. Dawkins’ definition is not what geneticists typical consider a gene. His “gene” is more like what I would call a haplotype in that he divorces “gene” from “protein-coding” region. But he has a good point and I like this section. But he wrote it in the genetic dark ages and we now know quite precisely where and how often recombinations occurs, and for how long haplotypes are preserved as a function of generation numbers.

Highly recommend David Reich’s book for are good overview of the math of recombination in humans.

https://www.amazon.com/Who-Are-How-Got-Here/dp/1101873469




Thanks for the recommendation! I’ll have to check it out.

I got into Dawkins’ books initially from The God Delusion (as I suspect many laypeople), and heard about The Selfish Gene from there, so evolutionary biology is not my area.

It makes sense that TSG is considered the dark ages as it’s such an old book. I was always curious to read more about the topic from other — and hopefully more recent — biologists, since Dawkins sometimes feels like he’s more of a communicator than a practicing biologist (and one with a particularly anti-religious chip on his shoulder, not that he’s wrong.)




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: