Editing Lynn Margulis (section)

=== Metamorphosis theory ===
In 2009, via a then-standard publication-process known as "communicated submission" (which bypassed traditional [[peer review]]), she was instrumental in getting the ''[[Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences]]'' (''PNAS'') to publish a paper by [[Donald I. Williamson]] rejecting "the Darwinian assumption that larvae and their adults evolved from a single common ancestor."<ref name="Williamson-2009">{{cite journal|last1=Williamson|first1=D. I.|title=Caterpillars evolved from onychophorans by hybridogenesis|journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences|year=2009|volume=106|issue=47|pages=19901–19905|doi=10.1073/pnas.0908357106|pmid=19717430|pmc=2785264|bibcode=2009PNAS..10619901W|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name="SciAm">[http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2009/10/29/controversial-caterpillar-evolution-study-formally-rebutted/ Controversial caterpillar-evolution study formally rebutted], ''[[Scientific American]] Online''</ref> Williamson's paper provoked immediate response from the [[scientific community]], including a countering paper in ''PNAS''.<ref name="Williamson-2009"/> Conrad Labandeira of the [[Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History]] said, "If I was reviewing [Williamson's paper] I would probably opt to reject it," he says, "but I'm not saying it's a bad thing that this is published. What it may do is broaden the discussion on how metamorphosis works and [...] [on] the origin of these very radical life cycles." But [[Duke University]] insect developmental biologist [[Fred Nijhout]] said that the paper was better suited for the "''National Enquirer'' than the National Academy."<ref>{{cite magazine|last=Borrell |first=Brendan |url=http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=national-academy-as-national-enquirer |title=National Academy as National Enquirer ? PNAS Publishes Theory That Caterpillars Originated from Interspecies Sex |magazine=Scientific American |access-date=November 23, 2011}}</ref> In September it was announced that ''PNAS'' would eliminate communicated submissions in July 2010. ''PNAS'' stated that the decision had nothing to do with the Williamson controversy.<ref name="SciAm" />