UNNATURAL CONSTRUCTIONS - Making Sense of Nature - page 125

of the world, and these can then become the focus of debate - as if what
they signify depends only on the debaters' values not on the process of numbering
itself .
However, seen from the perspective of 'post-genomic' biology, repre-
senting genes like 'natural numbers' conceals a number of contestable
epistemological judgements. Because numeric symbols and mathematical
procedures have an abstract, formalistic quality they serve to decontextualise
the things they are made to refer to and stand for. The human genome 'map'
unveiled a decade or so ago was produced by a highly elaborate process of
'shredding and reassembly'. Gaps in the map were filled and smoothed by
HGP and Celera biologists, and 'separate' genes identified out of the con-
tinuous (but decomposed and reconstructed) 'terrain' of the genome. Thus,
genes were not, and are not, like separate beads on a continuous piece of
string, at least from the perspective of post-genomic biology. Numbering
them can be seen to conceal complex guesswork about where, in the human
genome, 'coding regions' lie, how their boundaries are identified and what
their chemical composition is.
In addition, numbering human genes (absolute quantity and relative
species share) casts another complicated issue into darkness. Strictly speak-
ing, 'the human genome' is the entire genetic content of every single person
on the planet. Because it is, practically speaking, impossible to collect and
'read' the DNA of 7 billion people, sampling and selection was clearly nec-
essary for HGP and Celera Genomics to undertake their mapping exercises.
This means that the issue of a 'representative sample' of genetic material
arose. How, prior to reading different people's DNA, would one know who
to select for the full range of genetic differences so that a complete compos-
ite map could be created? The answer is, one wouldn't. In the event, what
was called 'the human genome' by the HGP and Celera was, in fact, genetic
information pertaining to a very small number of anonymous donors. Far
from being a 'representative genome', it is better understood as a refer-
ence genome against which further and future genetic mapping projects can
be compared. Yet these important and complex issues are made invisible
when 'the' human genome is represented as both an absolute and relative
number. 14
Homo pluralis: dividing DNA
If the attempt to map the human genome focussed squarely on homo sapi-
ens' biological similarities, the search is now on for what we might call
'human biodiversity'. These are patterns of physical difference only visible
'under the skin', but which manifest themselves phenoltypically. 15 These
inner differences are known as polymorphisms, sections thereof micro-
satellites, and groups thereof are sometimes called haplotypes. But can
human DNA really be differentiated meaningfully, on an individual and/or
group basis? By what criteria does one identify 'meaningful biological