DOCSLIB.ORG

Choosing the Problem

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Is the Blueprint the Building? Studies on the Use of Social Representation Theory, Information Theory, Folkscience, Metaphor and Language to Understand Student Comprehension of Metaphors in the Domain of Gene Expression DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Andrea Michele Graytock Graduate Program in Education The Ohio State University 2011 Dissertation Committee: David L. Haury, Advisor Antoinette Errante Laura Wagner Copyrighted by Andrea Michele Graytock 2011 Abstract Learning about gene expression can be hampered by the multiple steps of the process as well as the technical terms used to represent the process. Technical terms and explanations are based on the metaphors of language, code, containers, gift-giving, computer programs, and construction. The effective use of metaphor depends on the background of the audience and their familiarity with base concepts of the metaphors in use. Inappropriate metaphors also interfere with new information projection from the metaphor to new information. A series of three qualitative studies was carried out to determine non-science students‘ interpretation of commonly-used theory constitutive metaphors. For Study 1students were asked to interpret the metaphors DNA IS A LANGUAGE, DNA IS A CODE, DNA IS A CARRIER OF INFORMATION, and DNA IS A COMPUTER PROGRAM. Using Corbin & Strauss‘s Grounded Theory, similar action/interactional strategies from interpretations of participants were grouped to form concepts and consequences of those concepts were noted. Concepts that reflected a similar theme were combined to form categories. These categories reflected the conceptual understanding of each metaphor. For Study 2, students were asked to explain the meaning of the base concepts language and code and the target DNA. Then they were asked to explain the meaning of the metaphors that use those concepts; DNA IS A CODE and DNA IS A LANGUAGE. The same coding procedure from Study 1 was used. For Study 3, students were asked to provide the base for a self-generated metaphor using ―DNA‖, ―RNA‖, ii ―Proteins‖, ―Transcription‖, ―Translation‖, and ―Ribosome‖ as the targets. Additionally, they were asked to provide an explanation of their metaphors. Bases were coded for concepts and explanations were coded for action/interactional strategies and consequences from which concepts and categories were developed. Using categories developed from action/interactional strategy concepts from Study 1, students, when they conceptualized DNA as a language, wrote of DNA as involved in internal dialogue with cells, molecules, or the body either as a participant in communication or used as a medium of communication between cells or body parts; DNA as a private language that one or a very few individuals could understand; requires experts to understand it or translate it; and, like language, is made up of smaller components that can be combined. As a code, DNA was made up of individual components in a particular sequence was the most common interpretation. When asked to define both the base and target before being asked to interpret the metaphor, students used the features associated with the base. The most important features for language were that it was a means of interpersonal communication and there are different languages and one must know the language to understand it. These features were used to interpret the DNA IS A LANGUAGE metaphor. The categories and concepts were similar to those of Study 1 but the interpersonal feature was most common. Codes were defined by their components and the sequence. These features were used in the interpretation of the metaphor. Similar categories and concepts were developed from interpretations of both studies. Most interpretations, for all of the metaphors interpreted, were not the features used in the development of the code, language, carrier, and computer program metaphors. It was suggested that there are key iii features used to interpret scientific metaphors, especially theory-constitutive metaphors, and suggest the concept ―Keystone Concepts‖ to highlight this fact. Students also used these ―one-dimensional metaphors‖ to explain two and three dimensional processes and structures. iv I would like to thank my sister, Kathleen, and my parents, Andrew and Marie. There constant support, emotionally and financially over the years has made my academic pursuits possible. It is to them that I dedicate this dissertation. v Acknowledgments I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. David Haury, for his enthusiasm, support, insightful conversations, and willingness to let me explore uncharted territory for this dissertation project. I would also like to thank my committee members, Dr. Antoinette Errante and Dr. Laura Wagner for their expertise and discussions of my work-in-progress and for their enthusiasm and support in my explorations of metaphor interpretation and use of qualitative methods. I would like to thank my brother, Andy, for our discussion about computing, computer programs and computers that aided in my understanding and analysis of DNA IS A COMPUTER PROGRAM and computer-related explanations from Study 3. I would like to also thank all of my colleagues and students over the years for their discussions about science teaching and where the problems may lie. I would like to thank The Ohio State University Biology Department and Dr. John Cogan for allowing me to ask his Biology 101 class to participate in this research project. I would like to thank all of the Biology 101 students who gave of their time to help me with this research. Finally, I would like to thank Michael Gee for his technical expertise in uploading the studies onto Carmen. vi Vita 1986…………………………………………..B.S. Chemistry, Marywood College 1992…………………………………………..M.S. Toxicology, St. John‘s University 1992 to 1999………………………………….Keystone College/Keystone Junior College Professional Tutor 1994 to 1999…………………………………..Keystone (Junior) College Adjunct Instructor, Allied Health, Sciences, and Math Division 1996 to1997 ………………………………….Scranton Preparatory School, Biology Teacher 1999 to 2001…………………………………..The Ohio State University College of Biological Sciences, Molecular, Cellular, Developmental Biology Program 2002 to Present………………………………..The Ohio State University, College of Education and Human Ecology, Department of Teaching and Learning September 2002 to Present……………………Otterbein (College) University Senior Lecturer, Department of Biology and Earth Science, Department of Education vii September 2002 to Present…………………….Columbus State Community College Instructor, Biological Sciences Publications: Jones, C.B., McIntosh, J., Hustig, H., Graytock, A., & Hoyt, D.G. (2001). Regulation of Bleomycin-induced DNA Breakage and Chromatin Structure in Lung Epithelial Cells by Integrins and Poly (ADP-Ribose) Polymerase. Molecular Pharmacology, 59, 69-75. Graytock, A.M., & Grove, T.L. (2008). Microbiology for Nursing Students. 1st Edition, Kearney, NE. Graytock, A.M., & Grove, T.L. (2009). Microbiology for Nursing Students. 2nd Edition, Kearney, NE. Fields of Study Major Field: Education Focus: Science viii Table of Contents Abstract .......................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................... vi Vita .............................................................................................................................. vii List of Tables................................................................................................................. xi List of Figures .............................................................................................................. xii Chapter 1: The Problem ..................................................................................................1 Chapter 2: Literature Review ......................................................................................... 27 Chapter 3: Design and Method ..................................................................................... 92 Research Purpose and Hypotheses…………………………………………………92 Study Rationale and theoretical Framework ............................................................ 94 Design and Procedures ........................................................................................... 98 Sampling ..................................................................................................................... 103 Chapter 4: Analysis ..................................................................................................... 106 Chapter 5: Study 1 ....................................................................................................... 121 Chapter 6: Conclusions for Study 1.............................................................................. 173 Chapter 7: Study 2. ……………………………………………………………………191 ix Chapter 8: Conclusions for Study 2……………………………………………………247 Chapter 9: Conclusions for Study 1 and Study 2………………………………………253 Chapter 10: Study 3……………………………………………………………………258 Chapter 11: Conclusions for Study 3…………………………………………………..278 Chapter 12: General Conclusions……………………………………………………...287 References……………………………………………………………………………..313 Appendix A: Metaphors as part of Misconception…………………………………….324 Appendix B: A list of base concepts provided for Study 3……………………………328 x List of Tables
Recommended publications
  • Francois Jacob Memorial

    Francois Jacob Memorial

    RETROSPECTIVE RETROSPECTIVE Francois Jacob memorial Arthur B. Pardee1 Department of Adult Oncology, Dana-Farber Institute, Boston, MA 02115 Dr. Francois Jacob is one of a handful of the DNA would integrate into the bacterial chro- 20th century’smostdistinguishedlifescien- mosome and remain dormant or, at other tists. His research with Dr. Jacques Monod, times, would kill the cell. like that of Watson and Crick, provided the Jacob’s next major contribution, in collab- foundations for understanding mechanisms oration with Dr. Jacques Monod, was to in- of genetic regulation of life processes such vestigate how a gene is regulated. Remark- as cell differentiation and defects in diseases. ably, native E. coli synthesize β-galactosidase Jacob joined the College de France in 1964 only when lactose is available. Some mutated and shared the Nobel Prize in Physiology bacteria can make the enzyme in the absence or Medicine 1965 with Jacques Monod of inducer. Monod’s initial idea was that and Andre Lwoff. He was elected to the these constitutive bacteria activate the gene National Academy of Sciences (NAS) USA by synthesizing an intracellular lactose-like in 1969. inducer molecule. Jacob was born in 1920 in a French Jewish To investigate this model, interrupted family; his grandfather was a four-star gen- mating was applied to bring the β-galactosi- eral. He began to study medicine before dase gene of a donor bacterium into a consti- World War II, in which he served as a mil- tutive receptor. According to the induction itary officer in the Free French Army and was model, the mated cell should produce en- badly wounded in an air raid.
  • Quiet Debut'' of the Double Helix: a Bibliometric and Methodological

    Quiet Debut'' of the Double Helix: a Bibliometric and Methodological

    Journal of the History of Biology Ó Springer 2009 DOI 10.1007/s10739-009-9183-2 Revisiting the ‘‘Quiet Debut’’ of the Double Helix: A Bibliometric and Methodological note on the ‘‘Impact’’ of Scientific Publications YVES GINGRAS De´partement d’histoire Universite´ du Que´bec a` Montre´al C.P. 8888, Suc. Centre-Ville Montreal, QC H3C-3P8 Canada E-mail: [email protected] Abstract. The object of this paper is two-fold: first, to show that contrary to what seem to have become a widely accepted view among historians of biology, the famous 1953 first Nature paper of Watson and Crick on the structure of DNA was widely cited – as compared to the average paper of the time – on a continuous basis from the very year of its publication and over the period 1953–1970 and that the citations came from a wide array of scientific journals. A systematic analysis of the bibliometric data thus shows that Watson’s and Crick’s paper did in fact have immediate and long term impact if we define ‘‘impact’’ in terms of comparative citations with other papers of the time. In this precise sense it did not fall into ‘‘relative oblivion’’ in the scientific community. The second aim of this paper is to show, using the case of the reception of the Watson–Crick and Jacob–Monod papers as concrete examples, how large scale bibliometric data can be used in a sophisticated manner to provide information about the dynamic of the scientific field as a whole instead of limiting the analysis to a few major actors and generalizing the result to the whole community without further ado.
  • MCDB 5220 Methods and Logics April 21 2015 Marcelo Bassalo

    MCDB 5220 Methods and Logics April 21 2015 Marcelo Bassalo

    Cracking the Genetic Code MCDB 5220 Methods and Logics April 21 2015 Marcelo Bassalo The DNA Saga… so far Important contributions for cracking the genetic code: • The “transforming principle” (1928) Frederick Griffith The DNA Saga… so far Important contributions for cracking the genetic code: • The “transforming principle” (1928) • The nature of the transforming principle: DNA (1944 - 1952) Oswald Avery Alfred Hershey Martha Chase The DNA Saga… so far Important contributions for cracking the genetic code: • The “transforming principle” (1928) • The nature of the transforming principle: DNA (1944 - 1952) • X-ray diffraction and the structure of proteins (1951) Linus Carl Pauling The DNA Saga… so far Important contributions for cracking the genetic code: • The “transforming principle” (1928) • The nature of the transforming principle: DNA (1944 - 1952) • X-ray diffraction and the structure of proteins (1951) • The structure of DNA (1953) James Watson and Francis Crick The DNA Saga… so far Important contributions for cracking the genetic code: • The “transforming principle” (1928) • The nature of the transforming principle: DNA (1944 - 1952) • X-ray diffraction and the structure of proteins (1951) • The structure of DNA (1953) How is DNA (4 nucleotides) the genetic material while proteins (20 amino acids) are the building blocks? ? DNA Protein ? The Coding Craze ? DNA Protein What was already known? • DNA resides inside the nucleus - DNA is not the carrier • Protein synthesis occur in the cytoplasm through ribosomes {• Only RNA is associated with ribosomes (no DNA) - rRNA is not the carrier { • Ribosomal RNA (rRNA) was a homogeneous population The “messenger RNA” hypothesis François Jacob Jacques Monod The Coding Craze ? DNA RNA Protein RNA Tie Club Table from Wikipedia The Coding Craze Who won the race Marshall Nirenberg J.
  • The Eighth Day of Creation”: Looking Back Across 40 Years to the Birth of Molecular Biology and the Roots of Modern Cell Biology

    The Eighth Day of Creation”: Looking Back Across 40 Years to the Birth of Molecular Biology and the Roots of Modern Cell Biology

    “The Eighth Day of Creation”: looking back across 40 years to the birth of molecular biology and the roots of modern cell biology Mark Peifer1 1 Department of Biology and Curriculum in Genetics and Molecular Biology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, CB#3280, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3280, USA * To whom correspondence should be addressed Email: [email protected] Phone: (919) 962-2272 1 Forty years ago, Horace Judson’s “The Eight Day of Creation” was published, a book vividly recounting the foundations of modern biology, the molecular biology revolution. This book inspired many in my generation. The anniversary provides a chance for a new generation to take a look back, to see how science has changed and hasn’t changed. Many central players in the book, including Sydney Brenner, Seymour Benzer and Francois Jacob, would go on to be among the founders of modern cell, developmental, and neurobiology. These players come alive via their own words, as complex individuals, both heroes and anti-heroes. The technologies and experimental approaches they pioneered, ranging from cell fractionation to immunoprecipitation to structural biology, and the multidisciplinary approaches they took continue to power and inspire our work today. In the process, Judson brings out of the shadows the central roles played by women in many of the era’s discoveries. He provides us with a vision of how science and scientists have changed, of how many things about our endeavor never change, and how some new ideas are perhaps not as new as we’d like to think. 2 In 1979 Horace Judson completed a ten-year project about cell and molecular biology’s foundations, unveiling “The Eighth Day of Creation”, a book I view as one of the most masterful evocations of a scientific revolution (Judson, 1979).
  • New Issues in Genetic Counseling of Hereditary Colon Cancer Patrick M

    New Issues in Genetic Counseling of Hereditary Colon Cancer Patrick M

    New Issues in Genetic Counseling of Hereditary Colon Cancer Patrick M. Lynch Abstract Clinicians face significant challenges in the diagnosis and management of familial colorectal cancer predisposition. Many of the challenges concern the rarity of individual conditions and their unfamiliarity to most clinicians, even those in the subspecialty areas of gastroenterology, colorec- tal surgery, and medical oncology. Because the World Wide Web now offers a wealth of informa- tion, familiarity with available online resources should be a minimal expectation of clinicians. Notably, these same resources are available to the lay public, so a more informed group of patients can be expected and is already being encountered.The web sites noted throughout this article are merely early examples of what should become an opportunity for instant access to the most up-to-date knowledge of rare familial colorectal cancers and their clinical features, molecular diagnostics, and clinical management and prevention. Many professional organizations have pro- duced guidelines (in print and online) for use by practitioners in various specialties.The consisten- cy, growing evidence base, and ready availability of these guidelines to providers and patients alike will likely foster greater recognition of the need to be in compliance with them. Finally, as investigators make progress with the genetics of these rare diseases, one can anticipate a ‘‘coop- erative group’’approach to clinical trials. Identification of inherited susceptibility to colon cancer is now protein expression, which is followed by mutational testing readily possible, with genes identified for familial adenomatous when MSI and/or immunohistochemical screens are informa- polyposis (FAP) and its variants (1–3), hereditary nonpoly- tive.
  • In 1953 in England James Watson and Francis Crick Discovered the Structure of DNA in the Now-Famous Scientific Narrative Known As the “Race Towards the Double Helix”

    In 1953 in England James Watson and Francis Crick Discovered the Structure of DNA in the Now-Famous Scientific Narrative Known As the “Race Towards the Double Helix”

    THE NARRATIVES OF SCIENCE: LITERARY THEORY AND DISCOVERY IN MOLECULAR BIOLOGY PRIYA VENKATESAN In 1953 in England James Watson and Francis Crick discovered the structure of DNA in the now-famous scientific narrative known as the “race towards the double helix”. Meanwhile in France, Roland Barthes published his first book, Writing Degree Zero, on literary theory, which became the intellectual precursor for the new human sciences that were developing based on Saussurean linguistics. The discovery by Watson and Crick of the double helix marked a definitive turning point in the development of the life sciences, paving the way for the articulation of the genetic code and the emergence of molecular biology. The publication by Barthes was no less significant, since it served as an exemplar for elucidating how literary narratives are structured and for formulating how textual material is constructed. As Françoise Dosse notes, Writing Degree Zero “received unanimous acclaim and quickly became a symptom of new literary demands, a break with tradition”.1 Both the work of Roland Barthes and Watson and Crick served as paradigms in their respective fields. Semiotics, the field of textual analysis as developed by Barthes in Writing Degree Zero, offered a new direction in the structuring of narrative whereby each distinct unit in a story formed a “code” or “isotopy” that categorizes the formal elements of the story. The historical concurrence of the discovery of the double helix and the publication of Writing Degree Zero may be mere coincidence, but this essay is an exploration of the intellectual influence that both events may have had on each other, since both the discovery of the double helix and Barthes’ publication gave expression to the new forms of knowledge 1 Françoise Dosse, History of Structuralism: The Rising Sign, 1945-1966, trans.
  • Cover June 2011

    Cover June 2011

    z NOBEL LAUREATES IN Qui DNA RESEARCH n u SANGRAM KESHARI LENKA & CHINMOYEE MAHARANA F 1. Who got the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1933) for discovering the famous concept that says chromosomes carry genes? a. Gregor Johann Mendel b. Thomas Hunt Morgan c. Aristotle d. Charles Darwin 5. Name the Nobel laureate (1959) for his discovery of the mechanisms in the biological 2. The concept of Mutations synthesis of ribonucleic acid and are changes in genetic deoxyribonucleic acid? information” awarded him a. Arthur Kornberg b. Har Gobind Khorana the Nobel Prize in 1946: c. Roger D. Kornberg d. James D. Watson a. Hermann Muller b. M.F. Perutz c. James D. Watson 6. Discovery of the DNA double helix fetched them d. Har Gobind Khorana the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine (1962). a. Francis Crick, James Watson, Rosalind Elsie Franklin b. Francis Crick, James Watson and Maurice Willkins c. James Watson, Maurice Willkins, Rosalind Elsie Franklin 3. Identify the discoverer and d. Maurice Willkins, Rosalind Elsie Franklin and Francis Crick Nobel laureate of 1958 who found DNA in bacteria and viruses. a. Louis Pasteur b. Alexander Fleming c. Joshua Lederberg d. Roger D. Kornberg 4. A direct link between genes and enzymatic reactions, known as the famous “one gene, one enzyme” hypothesis, was put forth by these 7. They developed the theory of genetic regulatory scientists who shared the Nobel Prize in mechanisms, showing how, on a molecular level, Physiology or Medicine, 1958. certain genes are activated and suppressed. Name a. George Wells Beadle and Edward Lawrie Tatum these famous Nobel laureates of 1965.
  • Balcomk41251.Pdf (558.9Kb)

    Balcomk41251.Pdf (558.9Kb)

    Copyright by Karen Suzanne Balcom 2005 The Dissertation Committee for Karen Suzanne Balcom Certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Discovery and Information Use Patterns of Nobel Laureates in Physiology or Medicine Committee: E. Glynn Harmon, Supervisor Julie Hallmark Billie Grace Herring James D. Legler Brooke E. Sheldon Discovery and Information Use Patterns of Nobel Laureates in Physiology or Medicine by Karen Suzanne Balcom, B.A., M.L.S. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin August, 2005 Dedication I dedicate this dissertation to my first teachers: my father, George Sheldon Balcom, who passed away before this task was begun, and to my mother, Marian Dyer Balcom, who passed away before it was completed. I also dedicate it to my dissertation committee members: Drs. Billie Grace Herring, Brooke Sheldon, Julie Hallmark and to my supervisor, Dr. Glynn Harmon. They were all teachers, mentors, and friends who lifted me up when I was down. Acknowledgements I would first like to thank my committee: Julie Hallmark, Billie Grace Herring, Jim Legler, M.D., Brooke E. Sheldon, and Glynn Harmon for their encouragement, patience and support during the nine years that this investigation was a work in progress. I could not have had a better committee. They are my enduring friends and I hope I prove worthy of the faith they have always showed in me. I am grateful to Dr.
  • The Search for the Elusive Link Between Genome Structure and Gene Function Michel Morange

    The Search for the Elusive Link Between Genome Structure and Gene Function Michel Morange

    Pseudoalleles and gene complexes: the search for the elusive link between genome structure and gene function Michel Morange To cite this version: Michel Morange. Pseudoalleles and gene complexes: the search for the elusive link between genome structure and gene function. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, Johns Hopkins University Press, 2016, 58 (2), pp.196-204. 10.1353/pbm.2015.0027. hal-01347725 HAL Id: hal-01347725 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01347725 Submitted on 21 Jul 2016 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial - NoDerivatives| 4.0 International License 1 Pseudoalleles and gene complexes: the search for the elusive link between genome structure and gene function Michel Morange, Centre Cavaillès, République des savoirs: Lettres, sciences, philosophie USR3608, Ecole normale supérieure, 29 rue d’Ulm, 75230 Paris Cedex 05, France E-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT After their discovery in the first decades of the XXth century, pseudoalleles generated much interest among geneticists: they apparently violated the conception of the genome as a collection of independent genes elaborated by Thomas Morgan’s group. Their history is rich, complex, and deserves more than one short contribution.
  • Molecular Genetics of Alzheimer's Disease

    Molecular Genetics of Alzheimer's Disease

    DkYb[_Y7Y_ZiWdZCeb[YkbWh8_ebe]o 23 I[h_[i;Z_jeh >$@$=heii Institut für Biochemie Biozentrum Am Hubland 97074 Würzburg Germany Dieter B. Wildenauer (Ed.) Molecular Biology of Neuropsychiatric Disorders With 15 Figures and 8 Tables Editor Dieter B. Wildenauer Graylands Hospital Center for Clinical Research in Neuropsychiatry (CCRN) Claremont WA 6910 Australia ISBN 978-3-540-85382-4 e-ISBN 978-3-540-85383-1 ISSN 0933-1891 Library of Congress Control Number: 2008933566 © 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilm or in any other way, and storage in data banks. Duplication of this publication or parts thereof is permitted only under the provisions of the German Copyright Law of September 9, 1965, in its current version, and permission for use must always be obtained from Springer. Violations are liable to prosecution under the German Copyright Law. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. Cover design: Boekhorst Design BV, The Netherlands Printed on acid-free paper 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 springer.com Preface The intention of this book is to give an overview about ongoing research into molecular causes for disorders that affect the human brain. These disorders afflict mainly human behavior and are, since borders between “normal” and “abnormal” behaviors are continuous and hard to define, not always easy to diagnose.
  • Alfred Henry Sturtevant

    Alfred Henry Sturtevant

    NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES A LFRED HENRY S TURTEVANT 1891—1970 A Biographical Memoir by E D WA R D B . L E W IS Any opinions expressed in this memoir are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Academy of Sciences. Biographical Memoir COPYRIGHT 1998 NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS WASHINGTON D.C. CourtesyoftheInstituteArchives,CaliforniaInstitueofTechnology,Pasadena ALFREDHENRYSTURTEVANT November21,1891—April5,1970 BYEDWARDB.LEWIS TURTEVANTWASTHEyoungestofsixchildrenofAlfred SHenrySturtevantandHarrietEvelynMorse.Hisgrand- fatherJulianM.SturtevantgraduatedfromYaleDivinity SchoolandwasafounderandlaterpresidentofIllinois College.Sturtevant’sfathertaughtmathematicsforatime atIllinoisCollegebutsubsequentlyturnedtofarming,first inIllinoisandlaterinsouthernAlabama,wherethefamily movedwhenSturtevantwasseven.Hisearlyeducationwas inAlabamainaone-roomcountryschool,butforthelast threeyearsofhighschoolhewenttoapublicschoolin Mobile. Inthefallof1908SturtevantenteredColumbiaUniver- sity.Thechoice,acrucialone,wasmadebecauseSturtevant’s oldestbrother,Edgar,wasthenteachingLatinandGreek atBarnardCollege;Edgarandhiswifemadeitpossible forSturtevanttoattendtheuniversitybytakinghiminto theirhome.SturtevantwasgreatlyinfluencedbyEdgar, fromwhomhelearnedtheaimsandstandardsofscholar- shipandresearch. AsaboySturtevanthaddrawnupthepedigreesofhis father’shorsesandofhisownfamily.Hepursuedthisinter- ReprintedwithpermissionfromDictionaryofScientificBiography,vol.13,pp.133-38. NewYork:Chas.Scribner’sSons,1976. 3 4 BIOGRAPHICALMEMOIRS
  • ERIC F. WIESCHAUS Investigator Howard Hughes Medical Institute

    ERIC F. WIESCHAUS Investigator Howard Hughes Medical Institute

    ERIC F. WIESCHAUS Investigator Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Research Laboratories Professor, Department of Molecular Biology Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544 Telephone # (609) 258-5383 Fax # (609) 258-1547 [email protected] Date of Birth: June 8, 1947 EDUCATION University of Notre Dame, Indiana B.S. (Biology) 1969 Yale University Ph.D (Walter Gehring) 1974 University of Zurich, Switzerland Postdoctoral training (Rolf Nöthiger) 1975 ACADEMIC EMPLOYMENT 1975-1978 Postdoctoral Fellow, Zoologisches Institut der Universität Zurich, with Dr. Rolf Nöthiger. 1976 EMBO short-term fellowship to the laboratory of Mme. Gans, Laboratoire de Genetique Moleculaire, C.N.R.S., Gif-sur-Yvette, France. 1977 Visiting Researcher, laboratory of Peter Bryant, Center of Pathobiology, U. of CA, Irvine. 1978-1981 Group Leader, European Molecular Biology Laboratory, Heidelberg, West Germany. 1981-1983 Assistant Professor of Biology, Princeton University. 1983-1987 Associate Professor of Biology, Princeton University. 1987-Present Professor, Department of Molecular Biology, Princeton University. 1997-Present Investigator, Howard Hughes Medical Institute. 1997-Present Adjunct Professor of Biochemistry at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School. HONORS, AWARDS and PROFESSIONAL RECOGNITION 1969 Graduated Magna cum laude, University of Notre Dame, South Bend, Indiana 1974 John Spangler Niclaus Prize for the outstanding dissertation, Yale University 1989-1999 NIHHD Merit Award 1993 Appointed Squibb Professor