DOCSLIB.ORG

The Problem of the Gene

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Problem of the Gene Dartmouth College Dartmouth Digital Commons Open Dartmouth: Published works by Dartmouth faculty Faculty Work 1-1-2000 The problem of the gene Michael Dietrich Dartmouth College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.dartmouth.edu/facoa Part of the Biology Commons Dartmouth Digital Commons Citation Dietrich, Michael, "The problem of the gene" (2000). Open Dartmouth: Published works by Dartmouth faculty. 27. https://digitalcommons.dartmouth.edu/facoa/27 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Work at Dartmouth Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Open Dartmouth: Published works by Dartmouth faculty by an authorized administrator of Dartmouth Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris, Sciences de la vie / Life Sciences 323 (2000) 1139–1146 © 2000 Académie des sciences/Éditions scientifiques et médicales Elsevier SAS. Tous droits réservés S0764446900012579/FLA The problem of the gene Michael R. Dietrich* Department of Biological Sciences, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755, USA Abstract – During the early 20th century the diverse practices of genetics were unified by the concept of the gene. This classical gene was simultaneously a unit of structure, function, mutation, and recombination. Starting in the 1940s, however, the classical gene began to fragment. Today when we speak of a gene for some malady, a regulatory gene, a structural gene, or a gene frequency, it is entirely possible that we are deploying different gene concepts even though we are using the same term. The problem of the gene addresses the fragmentation of the classical gene concept by asking to what extent a comprehensive and unifying gene concept is possible or desirable. Fully comprehen- sive gene concepts seem untenable today, but, within different disciplinary domains, unifying, but non-comprehensive, gene concepts can be epistemically worthwhile. The problem of the gene persists, however, not because of its epistemic value, but because of its political value. Using both the arguments for newly proposed gene concepts and the historical dispute over the classical gene, I argue that the desirability of gene concepts rests in part on the political ramifications of their deployment and contestation. © 2000 Académie des sciences/Éditions scientifiques et médicales Elsevier SAS Résumé – La problématique du gène. Au début du XXe siècle, les diverses pratiques de la génétique furent unifiées grâce au concept de gène. Le gène « classique » était à la fois une unité de structure, de fonction, de mutation et de recombinaison. À partir de 1940, le gène classique a commencé à se fragmenter. Aujourd’hui, lorsque nous parlons d’un gène impliqué dans une maladie, d’un gène régulateur, d’un gène structural ou de fréquences de gènes, il est tout à fait possible que, sous le même terme, nous fassions référence à différents concepts de gène. En quelle mesure un concept global et unificateur du gène est-il possible ou désirable? Il semble impossible aujourd’hui de proposer un concept global, mais la recherche, à l’intérieur des différents domaines disciplinaires, de concepts unificateurs peut être importante. Que la notion de gène reste un problème ne vient pas des ambiguïtés de son usage scientifique, mais des enjeux politiques qui y sont liés. En se basant à la fois sur les arguments qui ont été utilisés pour justifier une nouvelle définition du gène, et sur les controverses qui ont agité la génétique classique, je conclus que la nécessité de proposer de nouvelles définitions du gène vient surtout des conséquences politiques de son utilisation ou de sa critique. © 2000 Académie des sciences/Éditions scientifiques et médicales Elsevier SAS 1. Introduction the classical gene which had once unified structure, func- tion, recombination, and mutation had been fragmented. At the 100th anniversary of the publication of Gregor Perhaps because his own work on mutability had reluc- Mendel’s paper, Milislav Demerec noted that during the tantly contributed to the dissolution of the classical gene first half of the 20th century the gene had been regarded as concept, Demerec’s commemorative essay makes its frag- ‘a unit of a genetic system, an indivisible entity in the mentation an historical inevitability. Beginning with De processes of recombination, self-reproduction and muta- Vries and Correns, Demerec argued that supposedly ’Men- tion’ [1]. Writing as he was in 1965, Demerec knew that delian’ characters in plants were not always so well * Correspondence and reprints. E-mail address: [email protected] (Michael R. Dietrich). 1139 M.R. Dietrich / C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris, Sciences de la vie / Life Sciences 323 (2000) 1139–1146 behaved. Citing later work on variegation in plants, includ- desirability of gene concepts rests in part on the political ing his own research, as well as research on step-allelism, ramifications of their deployment and contestation. Demerec documented the genetics community’s growing doubts about the indivisibility of the gene. Of course, to 2. Unifying the gene Demerec’s list of work undermining the classical gene, we could add H.J. Muller’s work on the position effect and Part of the allure of the classical gene lay in its ability to distribution of scute alleles, Richard Goldschmidt’s attacks unify significant aspects of the theory and practice of on the gene, and E.B. Lewis’s work on pseudo-alleles such genetics in the early 20th century. In Thomas Hunt Mor- as the star, asteroid system [2–5]. In the intervening gan’s The Theory of the Gene, for instance, genes are 35 years since Demerec wrote his essay, the classical gene assumed to be stable, paired elements in the germinal concept has been buried in a proliferation of molecular material which follow Mendel’s laws, exist in a linear genetic structures and processes. Phenomena such as the order on the chromosome, and remain in tact during various kinds of regulatory elements, different forms of crossing over [10]. As such Morgan’s gene becomes a RNA splicing, satellite DNA, and pseudogenes seem to common object for practices of determining patterns of guarantee that we cannot return to a comprehensive gene transmission, inferring linkage, and mapping. Later, concept [6–8]. Nevertheless, gene concepts still prove H.J. Muller and L.J. Stadler would make the gene the irresistible to biologists and philosophers of biology. object of the study of mutation as well [11, 12]. Accepting The problem of the gene is rooted in the fragmentation the classical gene as a common object of research meant of the classical gene concept and asks to what extent a accepting that different aspects of genetics were in fact comprehensive and unifying gene concept is possible or dealing with the same phenomena. In the eyes of philoso- desirable. Hans-Jörg Rheinberger recently posed the prob- phers such as Michael Friedman this is what makes unifi- lem of the gene as this question, ‘Do molecular biologists cation valuable. need a unified and generalized gene concept?’ [6]. Although philosophers of science have typically dis- Molecular biology is understood by Rheinberger as a cussed unification in conjunction with issues of explana- hybrid array of experimental systems ranging from bio- tion, Friedman motivates his theory of explanatory unifi- physics and biochemistry to evolutionary genetics and cation by appealing to phenomena. According to developmental genetics which produce a corresponding Friedman, ‘science increases our understanding of the array of gene concepts. From his perspective, it is not world by reducing the total number of independent phe- ‘necessary or even desirable to have a unified concept of nomena that we have to accept as ultimate or given. A the gene in order to tie all of these disciplinary specializa- world with fewer independent phenomena is, other things tions together and to develop them in a coordinated being equal, more comprehensible than one with more’ fashion’. In fact he argues that ‘an attempt to do so today [13]. The key to Friedman’s claim lies in defining what would produce nothing more than an exercise in rhetoric’ counts as independent phenomena. Being an analytic [6]. From a conceptual perspective, Rheinberger is cor- philosopher, Friedman quickly translates ’independent rect. A single comprehensive gene concept is not needed phenomena’ into ’logically independent lawlike sentences’ by molecular biologists or biologists in general. More and proceeds with his argument. We can resist the urge to specific gene concepts, such as a developmental gene axiomatize, however, and allow that for practical pur- concept or an evolutionary gene concept, are not valued poses whether phenomena are independent or not because they are fully comprehensive. Nevertheless, they depends on whether they are the common objects of provide a means to unify or systematize circumscribed different scientific practices or not. Scientific practices are disciplinary domains. When considering the problem of operations involving theoretical and/or experimental sys- the gene then we must drive a wedge between the scien- tems. They can be individuated by noting differences in tific values of generality and unification. The problem of operations (constructing a model, running a simulation, the gene should be decomposed into two problems: Is it performing an experiment) or in experimental systems necessary or desirable to have a comprehensive or gener- (Drosophila population cages versus bacterial chemostats, alized concept of the gene? and Is it necessary or desirable for instance). Phenomena that form the common object of to have a unifying concept of the gene? Rheinberger and many different scientific practices offer the opportunity to others have convincingly argued that we do not need a find interconnections that will allow scientists to unify or comprehensive gene concept. The case against generality systematize their beliefs more readily than if no such does not extend to unification, however. Within different phenomena existed. disciplinary domains unifying, but non-comprehensive, Consider a molecular gene concept recently proposed gene concepts can be epistemically worthwhile.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ERNST CASPARI and CURT STERN2 University of Rochester, Rochester, N
    THE INFLUENCE OF CHRONlC IRRADIATION WITH GAMMA- RAYS AT LOW DOSAGES ON THE MUTATION RATE IN DROSOPHILA MELANOGASTER‘ ERNST CASPARI AND CURT STERN2 University of Rochester, Rochester, N. Y. Received November 25, 1947 HE influence of radiation of short wave length on the mutation rate in TDrosophila has been measured repeatedly since the pioneer work of MUL- LER (1927). As a general rule it was found that the mutation rate is directly proportional to the dose of radiation, as expressed in r units. This linear pro- portionality between radiation dose and mutation rate applies to all dosages of X-rays tested to the present time except for the highest dosages, in which a “saturation effect” comes into play. At the low end of the curve, SPENCER and STERN(1948) found the proportionalitv maintained down to a dose of 25 r. It was furthermore found that at high and medium dosages the mutation rate was independent of the intensity, that is, of the time over which the ap- plication of a certain number of r units was spread. This was established by PATTERSON(1931) and OLIVER(1932) and others for X-rays, and by HANSON and HEYS(1929, 1932) and KAYCHAUDHURI(1939) for gamma-rays. TIMO- F~EFF-RESSOVSKYand ZrMMER (1935) have calculated that in all experiments a dose of about 3600 r would result in a mutation rate of ten sex-linked reces- sive lethals per IOO treated sperms. The experiments reported in this paper have been undertaken in order to examine the question of whether or not the rule that the mutation rate is independent of the time of irradiation also holds for low dosages.
    [Show full text]
  • A Correlation of Cytological and Genetical Crossing-Over in Zea Mays. PNAS 17:492–497
    A CORRELATION OF CYTOLOGICAL AND GENETICAL CROSSING-OVER IN ZEA MAYS HARRIET B. CREIGHTON BARBARA MCCLINTOCK Botany Department Cornell University Ithaca, New York Creighton, H., and McClintock, B. 1931 A correlation of cytological and genetical crossing-over in Zea mays. PNAS 17:492–497. E S P Electronic Scholarly Publishing http://www.esp.org Electronic Scholarly Publishing Project Foundations Series –– Classical Genetics Series Editor: Robert J. Robbins The ESP Foundations of Classical Genetics project has received support from the ELSI component of the United States Department of Energy Human Genome Project. ESP also welcomes help from volunteers and collaborators, who recommend works for publication, provide access to original materials, and assist with technical and production work. If you are interested in volunteering, or are otherwise interested in the project, contact the series editor: [email protected]. Bibliographical Note This ESP edition, first electronically published in 2003 and subsequently revised in 2018, is a newly typeset, unabridged version, based on the 1931 edition published by The National Academy of Sciences. Unless explicitly noted, all footnotes and endnotes are as they appeared in the original work. Some of the graphics have been redone for this electronic version. Production Credits Scanning of originals: ESP staff OCRing of originals: ESP staff Typesetting: ESP staff Proofreading/Copyediting: ESP staff Graphics work: ESP staff Copyfitting/Final production: ESP staff © 2003, 2018 Electronic Scholarly Publishing Project http://www.esp.org This electronic edition is made freely available for educational or scholarly purposes, provided that this copyright notice is included. The manuscript may not be reprinted or redistributed for commercial purposes without permission.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction and Historical Perspective
    Chapter 1 Introduction and Historical Perspective “ Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution. ” modified by the developmental history of the organism, Theodosius Dobzhansky its physiology – from cellular to systems levels – and by the social and physical environment. Finally, behaviors are shaped through evolutionary forces of natural selection OVERVIEW that optimize survival and reproduction ( Figure 1.1 ). Truly, the study of behavior provides us with a window through Behavioral genetics aims to understand the genetic which we can view much of biology. mechanisms that enable the nervous system to direct Understanding behaviors requires a multidisciplinary appropriate interactions between organisms and their perspective, with regulation of gene expression at its core. social and physical environments. Early scientific The emerging field of behavioral genetics is still taking explorations of animal behavior defined the fields shape and its boundaries are still being defined. Behavioral of experimental psychology and classical ethology. genetics has evolved through the merger of experimental Behavioral genetics has emerged as an interdisciplin- psychology and classical ethology with evolutionary biol- ary science at the interface of experimental psychology, ogy and genetics, and also incorporates aspects of neuro- classical ethology, genetics, and neuroscience. This science ( Figure 1.2 ). To gain a perspective on the current chapter provides a brief overview of the emergence of definition of this field, it is helpful
    [Show full text]
  • Barbara Mcclintock's World
    Barbara McClintock’s World Timeline adapted from Dolan DNA Learning Center exhibition 1902-1908 Barbara McClintock is born in Hartford, Connecticut, the third of four children of Sarah and Thomas Henry McClintock, a physician. She spends periods of her childhood in Massachusetts with her paternal aunt and uncle. Barbara at about age five. This prim and proper picture betrays the fact that she was, in fact, a self-reliant tomboy. Barbara’s individualism and self-sufficiency was apparent even in infancy. When Barbara was four months old, her parents changed her birth name, Eleanor, which they considered too delicate and feminine for such a rugged child. In grade school, Barbara persuaded her mother to have matching bloomers (shorts) made for her dresses – so she could more easily join her brother Tom in tree climbing, baseball, volleyball, My father tells me that at the and football. age of five I asked for a set of tools. He My mother used to did not get me the tools that you get for an adult; he put a pillow on the floor and give got me tools that would fit in my hands, and I didn’t me one toy and just leave me there. think they were adequate. Though I didn’t want to tell She said I didn’t cry, didn’t call for him that, they were not the tools I wanted. I wanted anything. real tools not tools for children. 1908-1918 McClintock’s family moves to Brooklyn in 1908, where she attends elementary and secondary school. In 1918, she graduates one semester early from Erasmus Hall High School in Brooklyn.
    [Show full text]
  • Perspectives
    Copyright Ó 2006 by the Genetics Society of America Perspectives Anecdotal, Historical and Critical Commentaries on Genetics Edited by James F. Crow and William F. Dove Edward Novitski: Drosophila Virtuoso James F. Crow,*,1 Dan Lindsley† and John Lucchesi‡ *Genetics Laboratory, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin 53706, †Section of Cell and Developmental Biology, University of California, San Diego, California 92093, and ‡Department of Biology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia 30322 DWARD Novitski, 1918–2006, was the acknowledged attempts to extricate himself make an amusing story. E master of that special art of manipulating chro- The second part of Ed’s book is the story of his own life. mosomes during what Lucchesi (1994) called ‘‘the age The third is his account of the rift between Alfred of Drosophila chromosome mechanics.’’ Following the Sturtevant and Theodosius Dobzhansky. Novitski had Sturtevant tradition, his guiding principle was to derive the unique vantage point of having been successively a as much information as possible from breeding experi- student of each of them, and he is clearly in Sturtevant’s ments with minimum use of direct cytological examina- corner. The fourth part is titled ‘‘The Pleasure of Find- tion. Nobody could perform this kind of chromosome ing Things Out.’’ It recounts some of his most interest- manipulation as well as Ed and he relished new chal- ing intellectual challenges. The book is as idiosyncratic lenges. (Novitski’s closest friends and relatives, especially as Ed himself, a mixture of deep science, anecdotes, in later years, called him Eddie, a name he seems to have intellectual depth, and whimsy.
    [Show full text]
  • Chromosomal Theory and Genetic Linkage
    362 Chapter 13 | Modern Understandings of Inheritance 13.1 | Chromosomal Theory and Genetic Linkage By the end of this section, you will be able to do the following: • Discuss Sutton’s Chromosomal Theory of Inheritance • Describe genetic linkage • Explain the process of homologous recombination, or crossing over • Describe chromosome creation • Calculate the distances between three genes on a chromosome using a three-point test cross Long before scientists visualized chromosomes under a microscope, the father of modern genetics, Gregor Mendel, began studying heredity in 1843. With improved microscopic techniques during the late 1800s, cell biologists could stain and visualize subcellular structures with dyes and observe their actions during cell division and meiosis. With each mitotic division, chromosomes replicated, condensed from an amorphous (no constant shape) nuclear mass into distinct X-shaped bodies (pairs of identical sister chromatids), and migrated to separate cellular poles. Chromosomal Theory of Inheritance The speculation that chromosomes might be the key to understanding heredity led several scientists to examine Mendel’s publications and reevaluate his model in terms of chromosome behavior during mitosis and meiosis. In 1902, Theodor Boveri observed that proper sea urchin embryonic development does not occur unless chromosomes are present. That same year, Walter Sutton observed chromosome separation into daughter cells during meiosis (Figure 13.2). Together, these observations led to the Chromosomal Theory of Inheritance, which identified chromosomes as the genetic material responsible for Mendelian inheritance. Figure 13.2 (a) Walter Sutton and (b) Theodor Boveri developed the Chromosomal Theory of Inheritance, which states that chromosomes carry the unit of heredity (genes).
    [Show full text]
  • Alfred Henry Sturtevant (1891–1970) [1]
    Published on The Embryo Project Encyclopedia (https://embryo.asu.edu) Alfred Henry Sturtevant (1891–1970) [1] By: Gleason, Kevin Keywords: Thomas Hunt Morgan [2] Drosophila [3] Alfred Henry Sturtevant studied heredity in fruit flies in the US throughout the twentieth century. From 1910 to 1928, Sturtevant worked in Thomas Hunt Morgan’s research lab in New York City, New York. Sturtevant, Morgan, and other researchers established that chromosomes play a role in the inheritance of traits. In 1913, as an undergraduate, Sturtevant created one of the earliest genetic maps of a fruit fly chromosome, which showed the relative positions of genes [4] along the chromosome. At the California Institute of Technology [5] in Pasadena, California, he later created one of the firstf ate maps [6], which tracks embryonic cells throughout their development into an adult organism. Sturtevant’s contributions helped scientists explain genetic and cellular processes that affect early organismal development. Sturtevant was born 21 November 1891 in Jacksonville, Illinois, to Harriet Evelyn Morse and Alfred Henry Sturtevant. Sturtevant was the youngest of six children. During Sturtevant’s early childhood, his father taught mathematics at Illinois College in Jacksonville. However, his father left that job to pursue farming, eventually relocating seven-year-old Sturtevant and his family to Mobile, Alabama. In Mobile, Sturtevant attended a single room schoolhouse until he entered a public high school. In 1908, Sturtevant entered Columbia University [7] in New York City, New York. As a sophomore, Sturtevant took an introductory biology course taught by Morgan, who was researching how organisms transfer observable characteristics, such as eye color, to their offspring.
    [Show full text]
  • Vigor. Balanced Polymorphism. in Other Words, the Population Fails To
    VOL. 46, 1960 GENETICS: DOBZHANSKY AND PAVLOVSKY 41 28 Wakil, S. J., E. B. Titchener, and D. M. Gibson, Biochim. et Biophys. Acta, 29, 225 (1958). 29 Lynen, F., J. Knappe, E. Lorch, G. Jutting, and E. Ringelmann, Angew. Chem., 71, 481 (1959). 30 Flavin, M., P. J. Ortiz, and S. Ochoa, Nature, 176, 823 (1955). 31 Smith, R. M., and K. J. Monty, Biochem. Biophys. Research Communications, 1, 105 (1959). 32 Barker, H. A., H. Weissbach, and R. D. Smyth, these PROCEEDINGS, 44, 1093 (1958). 33 Lipmann, F., and L. C. Tuttle, J. Biol. Chem., 159, 21 (1945). 34 Delwiche, E. A., E. F. Phares, and S. F. Carson, J. Bact., 71, 598 (1956). 36 Wakil, S. J., J. Am. Chem, Soc., 80, 6465 (1958). 36 Formica, J. V., and R. 0. Brady, J. Am. Chem Soc., 81, 752 (1959). 37 Stern, J. R., D. L. Friedman, and G. K. K. Menon, Biochim. et Biophys. Acta; 36, 299 (1959). 38 Tietz, A., and S. Ochoa, J. Biol. Chem., 234, 1394 (1959). 39 Ochoa, S., Personal communication. 40 Swick, R. W., and H. G. Wood (unpublished data). 41 Swick, R. W., and J. R. Stern (unpublished data)). HOW STABLE IS BALANCED POLYMORPHISM?* BY THEODOSIUS DOBZHANSKY AND OLGA PAVLOVSKY DEPARTMENT OF ZOOLOGY, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY Communicated November 24, 1959 Natural populations of many species of organisms are polymorphic, i.e., are composed of two or more distinct kinds of individuals. Several genetic mecha- nisms may participate in the maintenance of polymorphism in populations. -5 One of the most widespread and interesting ones is balanced polymorphism.
    [Show full text]
  • Sriram, a 2016.Pdf
    A mitochondrial ROS signal activates mitochondrial turnover and represses TOR during stress Ashwin Sriram Thesis submitted to the Newcastle University in candidature for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Newcastle University Faculty of Medical Sciences Institute of Cellular and Molecular Biosciences 1 DECLARATION I certify that this thesis is my own work and I have correctly acknowledged the work of collaborators. I also declare that this thesis has not been previously submitted for a degree or any other qualification at this or any other university. Ashwin Sriram July 2016 2 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This research work was carried out at the Institute for Cell and Molecular Biosciences and the Institute for Ageing, Newcastle University, Campus for Ageing and Vitality, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom under the supervision of Dr. Alberto Sanz. I owe my deepest of gratitude to my supervisor Dr. Alberto Sanz for giving me an opportunity to carry out this research project in his lab under his esteemed guidance. I am deeply indebted to him especially for the confidence that he always placed in me, his encouragement and support throughout the work. He has contributed a lot to my development as a scientist. A special thanks for all the conversations regarding how science “works”. I would also like to thank him for teaching me most of the techniques that have been implemented in this thesis. I am very grateful to Dr. Filippo Scialo for all his support and help with many experiments that are a part of this thesis. I thank him for all the long discussions in the office and during coffee breaks.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetics-PDF.Pdf
    Second Edition Karvita B. Ahluwalia Formerly ProfessorProfessor Cell Biology and Electron Microscope Section Department of Biophysics All India Institute of Medical Sciences New Delhi, India Copyright © 2009, 1985, New Age International (P) Ltd., Publishers Published by New Age International (P) Ltd., Publishers All rights reserved. No part of this ebook may be reproduced in any form, by photostat, microfilm, xerography, or any other means, or incorporated into any information retrieval system, electronic or mechanical, without the written permission of the publisher. All inquiries should be emailed to [email protected] ISBN (13) : 978-81-224-2880-3 PUBLISHING FOR ONE WORLD NEW AGE INTERNATIONAL (P) LIMITED, PUBLISHERS 4835/24, Ansari Road, Daryaganj, New Delhi - 110002 Visit us at www.newagepublishers.com Dedicated to My Parents This page intentionally left blank Preface to the Second Edition In view of the dramatic advances in this rapidly progressing field, Genetics has been updated to present the most current information available. About 22 years ago when the first edition was printed, recombinant DNA technology was an emerging field, beginning to find its way into molecular biology laboratories. Over the years, the invention of new technologies have expanded recombinant DNA technology significantly. The sequencing of whole genomes, not only of prokaryotes and eukaryotes, even humans has been achieved successfully. In the scenario that now exists, sophisticated techniques have become more and more routine and available in many research laboratories. Bioinformatics has made inroads into, and become an integral component of molecular biology research. It is now time to develop new approaches for elucidating gene function and processes involved in running the metabolic machinery of the whole cell.
    [Show full text]
  • Nabokov's Evolution
    Nabokov's Evolution JAMES MALLET Nabokov: The highest enjoyment is when I stand among rare butterfiies and their food plants. This is ecstasy, a sense of oneness with sun and stone. Interviewer: Is there any connection [of lepidoptery J with your writing? Nabokov: There is in a general way because I think that in a work of art there is a kind of merging between the two things, between the precision of poetry and the excitement of pure science. - Emma Boswell, How Do You Solve a Problem Like Lolita? Much has been written on Nabokov's views on evolution, the origin of species, and, es­ pecially, mimicry in nature. Nabokov scholars hold a diversity of opinions, veering from defending Nabokov's heterodox beliefs about evolution to criticizing him for not fully ac­ cepting the modern evolutionary synthesis developed in the i93os and i94os in Europe and North America. Nabokov the scientist was maybe a little old-fashioned in his methodology, even for his time, concerned mainly with morphological systematics. He evinced a profound dislike for applying statistics to his science. Nabokov furiously rejected a statistical criticism by F. Martin Brown of his work on "scale rows," a method he invented for the study of ple­ bejine butterflies.1 His lack of appreciation of applied mathematical theories of evolution probably ensured that he could not form a strong opinion about the works of Ronald Fisher, J. B. S. Haldane, and Sewall Wright, the founders of the modern synthesis of Mendelian ge­ netics and Darwinian natural selection. However, Nabokov would certainly not have been alone among biologists of his time in his contempt for the modernization of biological sci­ ence and, in particular, of mathematical or genetic approaches to systematics.2 Nabokov certainly understood much better the later part of the modern synthesis on species concepts and speciation, beginning in 1937 and continuing in the early i94os largely by another triumvirate.
    [Show full text]
  • Molecular Biology Primer
    An Introduction to Bioinformatics Algorithms www.bioalgorithms.info Molecular Biology Primer Angela Brooks, Raymond Brown, Calvin Chen, Mike Daly, Hoa Dinh, Erinn Hama, Robert Hinman, Julio Ng, Michael Sneddon, Hoa Troung, Jerry Wang, Che Fung Yung An Introduction to Bioinformatics Algorithms www.bioalgorithms.info Outline 0. A Brief History of Molecular Biology 1. The Fabric of Life 2. What Is Genetic Material? 3. What Do Genes Do? 4. What Molecule Codes For Genes? 5. What Is the Structure Of DNA? 6. Information Transfer Between DNA and Proteins 7. How are Proteins Made? An Introduction to Bioinformatics Algorithms www.bioalgorithms.info Outline 8. How Can We Analyze DNA? 1. Copying DNA 2. Cutting and Pasting DNA 3. Measuring DNA Length 4. Probing DNA 9. How Do Individuals of a Species Differ? 10. How Do Species Differ? 1. Molecular Evolution 2. Comparative Genomics 3. Genome Rearrangement 11. Why Bioinformatics? An Introduction to Bioinformatics Algorithms www.bioalgorithms.info Section 0: A Brief History of Molecular Biology An Introduction to Bioinformatics Algorithms www.bioalgorithms.info A Brief History of Molecular Biology • 1665: Robert Hooke (1635-1703) discovers organisms are made up of cells. Robert Hooke • 1830s: Matthias Schleiden (1804-1881) and Theodor Schwann (1810-1882) further expanded the study of cells. Matthias Schleiden Theodor Schwann An Introduction to Bioinformatics Algorithms www.bioalgorithms.info A Brief History of Molecular Biology • 1865: Gregor Mendel discovers the basic rules of heredity for the garden pea. • An individual organism has two alternative heredity units for a given Mendel: The Father of Genetics trait (dominant trait vs. recessive trait).
    [Show full text]