Some Assembly Required

Some Assembly Required Plot Summary

Introduction

In the frigid waters off Antarctica, microscopic algae float beneath a thin layer of ice. In the scorching heat of Australia's outback, hearty plants soak up the sun's rays. In laboratories worldwide, scientists study everything from the intricate dance of DNA to the fossils of creatures long extinct. Life on Earth has been evolving for nearly four billion years, creating an astounding diversity of species—but how did such complexity arise? This question has puzzled philosophers and scientists for generations. The story of life's evolution is not a simple, linear march of progress. Rather, it is a tale of creative repurposing, unexpected combinations, and remarkable innovations. Throughout this journey, we'll discover how fish fins transformed into human hands, how ancient viruses helped mammals develop placentas, and how bacteria merging with other cells led to the complex organisms we see today. This narrative challenges our intuitions about evolution, revealing that many crucial innovations didn't evolve for their current purposes at all. Instead, they were repurposed from existing structures through what Charles Darwin called "a change of function." Whether you're a biology enthusiast, a curious student, or simply someone fascinated by life's diversity, understanding these evolutionary mechanisms offers profound insights into our own existence and the magnificent tapestry of life surrounding us.

Chapter 1: Ancient Repurposing: The Origins of Evolutionary Transformations

About 375 million years ago, a creature lived in shallow streams in what is now the Canadian Arctic. Neither fully fish nor fully land animal, this transitional species—later discovered as Tiktaalik roseae—possessed both gills for breathing underwater and primitive lungs for gulping air. Its fins contained bones resembling those in human arms, including shoulder, elbow, and wrist joints. This discovery, made in 2004, exemplifies one of evolution's most powerful mechanisms: repurposing existing structures for new functions. The conventional view assumes that novel structures evolve for their current purposes. Many people believe lungs evolved specifically to help animals breathe on land, or that feathers developed to enable flight. These assumptions seem logical but are fundamentally incorrect. In reality, lungs first appeared in fish that lived entirely in water, where these organs supplemented their breathing through gills. Similarly, feathers adorned dinosaurs millions of years before any creature took to the sky—serving initially as insulation or colorful displays to attract mates, not as tools for flight. This phenomenon, what Darwin described as "a change of function," lies at the heart of evolution's creative power. When St. George Jackson Mivart, a critic of Darwin, questioned how complex structures like wings could evolve gradually (what use is 2% of a wing?), Darwin responded by pointing out that structures often evolve for one purpose and are later repurposed for another. This insight resolves what seems like an impossible puzzle: how could complex innovations requiring multiple coordinated changes ever arise through natural selection? The fossil record confirms this pattern repeatedly. Archaeopteryx, discovered in the 1860s, possessed both reptilian features (teeth, a bony tail) and avian ones (feathers, wings). Recent discoveries in China have revealed numerous feathered dinosaurs that couldn't fly, demonstrating that feathers predated flight by millions of years. Similarly, the bones in fish fins that would later form human arms, wrists, and fingers existed long before any animal walked on land. This principle of evolutionary repurposing explains how major transformations in life's history could occur without requiring simultaneous invention of multiple complex structures. Nature works not by creating entirely new features from scratch, but by modifying existing ones for new purposes. The poet Lillian Hellman unwittingly captured this truth when she wrote, "Nothing, of course, begins at the time you think it did." In evolution, innovations have deep roots that extend far earlier than their current functions would suggest—a revolutionary insight that transformed our understanding of life's four-billion-year journey.

Chapter 2: Embryonic Development: A Window Into Evolutionary Change

In 1864, French zoologist Auguste Duméril received a shipment of strange salamanders from Mexico. These axolotls had a peculiar feature: despite being fully grown adults, they retained juvenile characteristics like external gills and aquatic bodies. Duméril successfully bred them in his laboratory, but was stunned when some of their offspring metamorphosed into what appeared to be an entirely different species—losing their gills and developing lungs and limbs suitable for land. He had not witnessed the emergence of a new species, but rather a developmental phenomenon that would provide crucial insights into evolutionary change. This salamander mystery illustrates how changes in developmental timing can produce dramatic evolutionary transformations. The axolotl's ability to remain in a juvenile form while becoming sexually mature (a condition called neoteny) occurs because environmental factors can halt or trigger metamorphosis. By the early 20th century, scientists like Walter Garstang recognized that such alterations in developmental timing—termed heterochrony—represent a powerful evolutionary mechanism. If evolution can tinker with the timing of development, new body forms can emerge without requiring entirely new genetic material. Karl Ernst von Baer, one of the founders of modern embryology, made another crucial observation in the 1820s. Examining embryos of various vertebrate species, he noticed striking similarities in their early stages. All vertebrate embryos develop gill-like structures early in development, even those of mammals and birds that never breathe underwater. These similarities suggested deep connections between seemingly different animals. The German scientist Ernst Haeckel later proposed that "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny"—the controversial idea that embryonic development retraces evolutionary history. Though Haeckel's specific theory proved incorrect, the broader insight that embryos reveal evolutionary connections remained valid. The modern synthesis of embryology and evolution gained momentum when scientists discovered that fundamental similarities in embryonic development stem from shared genetic toolkits. In the mid-20th century, scientist Edward Lewis studied fruit flies with mutations that produced extra body segments or misplaced body parts. His work eventually revealed that a specific set of genes (later called Hox genes) controls the basic body organization of animals from flies to humans. These genes, arranged in the same order on chromosomes across diverse species, determine which body parts form in particular segments. By the 1990s, scientists were making remarkable discoveries about how small changes in these developmental genes could transform bodies. Research showed that deleting specific Hox genes in mice could transform vertebrae from one type to another or produce extra ribs extending to the tail. Similar genetic tweaks in crustaceans could move appendages from one body segment to another. These experiments demonstrated that major evolutionary changes don't necessarily require new genes—they can result from altering when and where existing genes are active during development. The study of embryonic development thus provides a powerful lens for understanding evolution. By revealing how complex structures form from simpler beginnings and how small changes in developmental processes can yield major anatomical innovations, it helps explain the mechanisms behind life's remarkable diversity. As Darwin himself recognized, embryology offers some of the strongest evidence for common descent and illuminates the pathways of evolutionary change.

Chapter 3: DNA Regulation: The Genome as a Dynamic Conductor

In 1953, Francis Crick and James Watson announced the discovery of DNA's double helix structure with characteristic British understatement, noting it had "novel features which are of considerable biological interest." This momentous finding revealed how genetic information could be stored and passed between generations. But it would take decades more to understand how this molecular blueprint actually builds bodies and drives evolutionary change. By the 1960s, scientists like Émile Zuckerkandl and Linus Pauling were using protein sequences to trace evolutionary relationships. Comparing hemoglobin molecules from different species, they found that humans and chimpanzees had nearly identical proteins, while both differed substantially from frog hemoglobin. This molecular evidence suggested that chimps and humans shared a much more recent common ancestor than either did with frogs. When Mary-Claire King and Allan Wilson compared forty different proteins between humans and chimps in the 1970s, they made a startling discovery: despite obvious anatomical differences, humans and chimps share about 99% of their protein-coding DNA. This raised a profound question: if not in the genes themselves, where do the differences between species lie? The answer emerged gradually through the study of genetic regulation. In 1961, François Jacob and Jacques Monod discovered that bacterial genomes contain not just genes that code for proteins, but also regulatory elements that control when those genes are active. These molecular switches turn genes on or off in response to specific conditions. We now know that complex organisms like humans have elaborate regulatory systems governing gene activity. While protein-coding genes make up just 2% of the human genome, regulatory elements occupy much of the remaining 98%. The importance of regulatory DNA became dramatically apparent through studies of development. In the 1990s, scientists discovered a genetic switch located nearly a million bases away from the Sonic hedgehog gene, which plays crucial roles in limb, brain, and organ development. Mutations in this distant regulatory element caused extra fingers in humans, cats, and mice without affecting the gene itself. This revealed a fundamental principle: changes in when and where genes are active—rather than changes to the genes themselves—can drive major evolutionary innovations while avoiding harmful effects on other body systems. This principle helps explain how complex new features evolve. When David Kingsley studied three-spined stickleback fish, he found that populations with only two fins differed from four-finned populations not in their genes, but in switches controlling gene activity. By manipulating these switches, he could restore the missing fins. Similarly, changes in regulatory DNA explain differences between human and chimpanzee brains, despite their similar genes. The gene NOTCH2NL, which promotes brain cell growth in humans but is absent in monkeys, arose through duplication and modification of an ancestral gene. The genome is far more dynamic than once imagined. DNA continually folds, loops, and contorts like an acrobatic conductor, bringing distant regulatory elements into contact with the genes they control. These molecular choreographies activate different combinations of genes in different cells, allowing a relatively small set of genes to build extraordinarily complex bodies. By altering these regulatory networks rather than the genes themselves, evolution can create dramatic innovations while preserving essential functions. This dynamic view of the genome has transformed our understanding of how species evolve and revealed that the path from genes to bodies is far more intricate than a simple one-way street.

Chapter 4: Genetic Duplication: Making New with Copies of the Old

In the 1930s, Calvin Bridges, working at T.H. Morgan's famous "Fly Room" at Columbia University, discovered a fruit fly with an unusual mutation: it had four wings instead of the normal two. Examining its chromosomes under a microscope, he noticed an extra-long chromosome with a duplicated segment. This seemingly minor observation would eventually reveal one of evolution's most powerful creative mechanisms: gene duplication. Three decades later, a quieter scientific figure, Susumu Ohno, developed an ingenious approach to studying chromosomes. He photographed the chromosomes of different mammal species, cut out the images, and weighed them as a crude measure of genetic material. Despite vast differences in chromosome numbers—from 17 pairs in voles to 84 in black rhinoceros—the total weights were remarkably similar across mammals. However, when he examined amphibians, he found that some salamander species had five to ten times more genetic material than others, despite looking nearly identical. Ohno concluded that much of this extra DNA was "junk"—duplicated genetic material with no obvious function. This insight led Ohno to propose a revolutionary idea: gene duplication serves as a major engine of evolutionary innovation. When a gene is duplicated, the original copy can continue performing its essential function while the extra copy is free to mutate and potentially develop new functions. This "duplicate and diversify" strategy creates genetic novelty without risking vital functions. Ohno's 1970 book, "Evolution by Gene Duplication," laid out this vision, though it would take decades for molecular evidence to fully validate his insights. Modern genomic science has confirmed Ohno's theory on a grand scale. Our bodies are built by proteins that are mostly modified duplicates of ancient ones. Hemoglobin, which carries oxygen in our blood, exists in several forms tailored to different life stages, all derived from a single ancestral gene. The keratin protein family, which gives structure to skin, hair, and nails, evolved through duplications of a common ancestor gene. Our color vision relies on three different opsin proteins, each tuned to different wavelengths of light, all evolved from a single ancestral opsin through duplication and diversification. Gene duplication even explains how humans developed our uniquely large brains. In 2018, scientists discovered that a gene called NOTCH2NL, which promotes brain cell growth, exists only in humans and our close relatives. It arose when an ancestral gene duplicated and the copy gained new functions. Remarkably, this region of the genome remains unstable—further duplications can lead to larger brains, while deletions can cause smaller ones, potentially explaining conditions like schizophrenia and autism. Recent studies suggest that almost all human genes arose through duplication processes. By some estimates, over two-thirds of our genome consists of duplicated sequences. Rather than inventing entirely new genes, evolution primarily works by copying and modifying existing ones—a process of genetic plagiarism that has driven biological innovation for billions of years. Like a musician creating endless variations on a theme, nature reuses and reimagines existing genetic material to compose the symphony of life.

Chapter 5: Genomic Warfare: Viruses, Jumping Genes, and Evolution

In the 1940s, a brilliant young scientist named Barbara McClintock began studying peculiar patterns in corn kernels. Using the multicolored kernels as a natural laboratory, she noticed that some genes seemed to move from one location to another in the genome, causing distinctive color patterns as they jumped. When she presented this radical idea of "jumping genes" at a scientific conference, the reaction was dismissive: "They thought I was crazy, absolutely mad." For decades, her work remained marginalized, even as she meticulously documented the phenomenon in thousands of corn plants. It wasn't until the 1970s that other researchers confirmed what McClintock had long known: genomes are not static archives but dynamic battlefields where genes can move, multiply, and wreak havoc. These transposable elements or "jumping genes" make copies of themselves and insert those copies elsewhere in the genome. Far from being rare oddities, they constitute a substantial portion of our DNA—about 70% of the human genome consists of jumping genes and their remnants. One sequence, called LINE1, is repeated hundreds of thousands of times and makes up 17% of our genome alone. This mobility creates a fundamental tension within genomes. Jumping genes exist primarily to make copies of themselves, behaving as genomic parasites. If left unchecked, they could potentially destroy the genome through excessive replication and insertion. To counter this threat, genomes have evolved sophisticated mechanisms to silence and control these elements. This internal genomic conflict—between selfish genetic elements seeking to proliferate and the genome's need to maintain order—has been raging for billions of years. Even more dramatic is the ongoing battle between genomes and viruses. When viruses infect cells, they insert their genetic material into the host's genome, using the cell's machinery to reproduce. About 8% of the human genome consists of viral fragments—the remnants of ancient infections that became permanently incorporated into our DNA. Most of these viral elements are now inactive, like fossilized imprints of past invasions. Remarkably, this conflict has sometimes led to evolutionary innovation. University of Chicago researcher Vincent Lynch discovered that the cells lining the uterus during pregnancy arose through a mutation in a jumping gene that spread across the genome. This single change equipped hundreds of genes with the ability to respond to pregnancy hormones simultaneously—an innovation that would have been virtually impossible through conventional mutation. Similarly, the protein syncytin, essential for forming the placenta, originated from a virus that infected our ancestors millions of years ago. The viral protein, originally used to fuse infected cells together, was repurposed to create the interface between mother and fetus. Perhaps most astonishing is the discovery that our ability to form memories also depends on ancient viral infections. In 2018, neuroscientist Jason Shepherd found that the Arc protein, crucial for memory formation, has the same molecular structure as HIV and other retroviruses. About 375 million years ago, a virus entered the genome of our fish ancestors, and its ability to transport material between cells was repurposed for neural communication. Our capacity to read, write, and remember emerged from this ancient viral gift. The genome thus reveals itself not as a pristine blueprint but as a battlefield scarred by ancient conflicts, littered with the remnants of past invaders, and shaped by an ongoing tension between cooperative and selfish elements. From this tumultuous history, novel features have repeatedly emerged—not through careful design but through the creative repurposing of the very conflicts that threatened to destroy the system. Evolution works not despite these genomic wars but through them, turning conflict into creation.

Chapter 6: Biological Convergence: Loaded Dice in Nature's Game

In the late 1980s, Stephen Jay Gould, the famed paleontologist, posed a provocative question to his Harvard students: What if an asteroid had not struck Earth 65 million years ago? Would dinosaurs still dominate, and would mammals—including humans—ever have risen to prominence? Gould argued that evolution is deeply contingent, shaped by countless random events. If we could "replay the tape of life," he suggested, the results would be dramatically different each time. Recent science, however, points toward a different conclusion. Throughout the living world, we see countless examples of different species independently evolving remarkably similar traits—a phenomenon known as convergent evolution. This pattern suggests that certain evolutionary outcomes are not merely possible but probable, perhaps even inevitable. Sir Ray Lankester, a Victorian-era zoologist, was among the first to document this phenomenon systematically. He observed that parasitic animals from different lineages tend to lose the same structures in predictable ways. Cave-dwelling creatures from entirely different evolutionary branches all evolve similar traits: they become colorless, lose their eyes, and develop enhanced non-visual senses. Similarly, snakes, legless lizards, and limbless amphibians have independently evolved elongated bodies without limbs despite having different ancestors. This pattern extends far beyond simple cases. University of California biologist David Wake spent decades studying salamanders, documenting how different species independently evolved nearly identical projectile tongues. These tongues can extend half the length of the salamander's body in less than two-thousandths of a second, allowing them to capture prey with astonishing speed. Wake discovered that salamanders from completely unrelated lineages, living thousands of miles apart, had evolved this complex mechanism in precisely the same way—modifying the same bones, losing the same muscles, and developing identical spring mechanisms. Similar patterns appear in Caribbean lizards studied by Jonathan Losos. On different islands, separate lizard populations independently adapted to similar ecological niches by evolving remarkably similar body forms. Lizards living in tree canopies all evolved large heads, saw-like crests, and deep green coloration; those living on tree trunks developed short limbs and triangular heads; those near the ground all evolved long legs and brown coloration. DNA analysis confirmed that these weren't closely related species spreading between islands—each island's lizards had evolved these traits independently from local ancestors. What explains this pervasive pattern of convergent evolution? The answer lies partly in the constraints of physics and environment—certain solutions simply work better than others for particular problems. Wings are effective for flying regardless of ancestry, which is why birds, bats, and extinct pterosaurs all evolved similar structures despite different evolutionary histories. More profoundly, the very way organisms develop biases the paths evolution can take. When my colleagues and I examined the limbs of thousands of salamanders that had frozen to death in a California cold snap, we discovered that variation in their digits and wrist bones wasn't random. The patterns matched precisely what we observed in salamander species worldwide: digits were lost in a specific sequence (fifth digit first, then fourth, and so on), and only certain wrist bones fused together. These patterns corresponded exactly to how the limbs developed in embryos—the last structures to form during development were the first to be lost in evolution. This predictability suggests that the dice of evolution are loaded. The pathways available for evolutionary change are constrained by development, genetics, and physics. While chance certainly plays a role, these constraints channel evolution along predictable paths. If we could replay the tape of life, certain outcomes—like eyes for seeing, wings for flying, and streamlined bodies for swimming—would likely appear again and again. The history of life is not wholly contingent but follows deep patterns that reflect the fundamental properties of living systems and the physical world they inhabit.

Chapter 7: Mergers and Combinations: When Species Join Forces

In the 1960s, a young scientist named Lynn Margulis submitted a radical paper suggesting that the complex cells of animals and plants originated when different microbes merged together. After being rejected by fifteen scientific journals, her theory was finally published in an obscure theoretical biology journal. For decades, Margulis faced skepticism and outright hostility from the scientific establishment, but she remained undeterred. "I don't consider my ideas controversial," she later reflected. "I consider them right." Time would prove her correct. Margulis had observed that organelles inside complex cells—particularly mitochondria (which generate energy) and chloroplasts (which perform photosynthesis in plants)—resemble bacteria in several crucial ways. Like bacteria, these organelles have their own circular DNA, reproduce by dividing, and are surrounded by membranes. She proposed that billions of years ago, one microbe engulfed another, and instead of digesting it, the host put its captive to work. The engulfed bacterium, which could process oxygen efficiently, became the mitochondrion—the powerhouse of modern cells. When DNA sequencing technology advanced in the 1980s, it confirmed Margulis's hypothesis. Mitochondrial DNA is more closely related to certain free-living bacteria than to the nuclear DNA of the cells they inhabit. Chloroplasts similarly derived from captured blue-green algae. This ancient merger created an entirely new kind of cell with dramatically enhanced capabilities—the foundation for all complex life on Earth, from mushrooms to maple trees to humans. This pattern of mergers creating new life forms extends beyond the cellular level. J. William Schopf's discovery of microscopic filaments in 3.5-billion-year-old rocks from Western Australia revealed that simple single-celled life dominated Earth for its first two billion years. The major transitions in life's history came when these simple individuals combined to form more complex wholes. When oxygen-consuming bacteria merged with other cells around two billion years ago, the resulting energized cells gained the capacity to develop new proteins and structures, eventually leading to multicellular life. The origin of multicellular organisms represents another revolutionary merger. Nicole King's research on choanoflagellates—single-celled organisms that are the closest living relatives of animals—revealed that the protein machinery needed to build animal bodies largely existed before the first true animals appeared. These single-celled creatures already possessed many of the adhesion and signaling proteins that animals use to form tissues. King discovered that when choanoflagellates encounter certain bacteria, they form colonial structures resembling primitive multicellular organisms. This suggests that interactions between different species may have triggered the transition to multicellularity. This principle of innovation through combination continues to shape life today. The human microbiome—the trillions of bacteria that live in and on our bodies—represents a contemporary merger of different species functioning as a cooperative whole. These microbes influence everything from our digestion to our immune systems and even our moods. We are not isolated individuals but complex ecosystems of human and bacterial cells working together. Even our technological future follows this ancient pattern. The revolutionary gene-editing technique CRISPR-Cas9, discovered by studying how bacteria defend themselves against viruses, represents humans appropriating a bacterial immune system for our own purposes. This technology allows precise editing of genomes and promises breakthroughs in medicine, agriculture, and conservation. Just as ancient mergers between different microbes created complex cells, we now borrow molecular machinery from bacteria to edit our own DNA. The history of life thus reveals a fundamental pattern: major innovations often arise not through the gradual modification of existing structures but through the novel combination of previously separate entities. From the origin of complex cells to the development of multicellular life, evolution has repeatedly fashioned new forms of life by bringing existing ones together in creative partnerships. Life advances not just through competition but through cooperation and combination—a lesson with profound implications for understanding both our biological past and our technological future.

Summary

Throughout four billion years of evolution, life has advanced not primarily through the creation of entirely new structures but through the creative repurposing of existing ones. This fundamental principle—that nothing begins when we think it did—appears at every level of biological organization. Feathers existed long before flight, lungs before land-dwelling, and the genetic toolkit for building bodies before complex animals evolved. Evolution operates less like an engineer designing from scratch and more like a tinkerer, constantly modifying and repurposing available materials. The genome itself reflects this process, as ancient viral infections become essential pregnancy proteins, jumping genes spread regulatory switches throughout the DNA, and gene duplications create new functions while preserving old ones. Life's history flows not in a straight line but as a braided river, with genes, cells, and species continually merging, diverging, and influencing one another. This evolutionary perspective offers profound insights for human innovation and problem-solving. Just as nature rarely invents wholly new structures but instead finds new uses for existing ones, human creativity often thrives through unexpected combinations and repurposing. The most revolutionary technologies frequently emerge not from starting with a blank slate but from seeing new potential in existing tools—just as bacterial defense mechanisms became gene-editing technology, or fish fins became human hands. Understanding evolution's creative mechanisms reminds us to look for solutions in unexpected places and to value diversity as a reservoir of potential innovations. Most importantly, it helps us appreciate our deep connection to all life on Earth. When we examine our genomes, cells, and bodies with an evolutionary lens, we see not only our unique human identity but also the legacy of four billion years of life's remarkable journey—a story written in every cell of every creature on our planet.

About Author

Loading...

Neil Shubin

Read more