
There’s a video interview with Richard Dawkins at Big Think in which he talks about the irrationality of sex – much as I do in 13 Things. The basic problem is that it involves sharing genes and reproducing half as fast as asexual species. Each of these halves the rate at which you pass on your genes, which is why John Maynard Smith called it the "fourfold cost of sex".
I can’t help wondering whether horizontal gene transfer seen in rotifers may have provided some of the answer since the book went to press, but Richard doesn't seem to mention that (hence my title!). There are still unanswered questions, of course. The importance of sexual vs social selection is one, and the role of parasites is another. Then there’s the issue of whether the shuffling of genes in sexual reproduction does give survival advantage in a changing environment. The literature is mixed on this, as I explain in 13 Things, but this recent piece of research, published in Nature, suggests it does help. Still an open question, I think – but maybe it’s closing. If only Maynard Smith were alive to see it.
As a postscript, I feel bound to mention that I live about a mile from where Maynard Smith lived. He once told me his neighbour was a creationist, and wouldn't talk to him because of his scientific take on existence. If God does exist, there's definitely a divine sense of humour. In the UK, such hard-line creationists are pretty rare. The idea that the greatest living exponent of evolution would be living right bang next door to one is too delicious...