JOURNAL OF NEMATOLOGY VOLUME 9 JANUARY 1977 NUMBER 1 Historical Development of Nematology in Russia~ S. G. MJUGE 2 Abstract: The development of Russian hematology is considered from the late nineteenth century to 1970. The dominant influences of I. N. Filipjev and A. A. Paramonov are discussed in the context of the persons whom they influenced and their ctmceptual approach to the problems posed hy nematodes. The advantages and disadvantages of the framework of Russian scientific administration are compared to those in the West. Key Words: Filipjev, Heterodera spp., Meloidogyne spp., Paratnonov. Science develops through the gradual popular agricultural journals such as accumulation of information and often Khozyain (The Landlord). Sometimes these changes direction with the development of consisted of complete translations of new ideas, or new approaches to old con- foreign articles, such as one by J. Kuhn cepts. In Russian nematology, conceptual (il). landmarks and scientific leadership were Also during this period, a considerable provided by I. N. Filipjev and A. A. amount of descriptive material was pub- Paramonov. The development of nema- lished outside of Russia. Bastian (I) tried tology in Russia is discussed with respect to summarize this information in a to the contrihutions of these great men. utonograph, an objective furthered by De Period before Filip]ev: Russian nema- Man (12). However, little synthesis or tology has always lagged behind that in the analysis was attempted in these monographs. West; it began later and in many technical After Charles Darwin's ideas began to gain aspects is still behind. The earliest pub- acceptance in biology on the eve of the 20th lished descriptions of nematodes go back Century, scientific thought required more only to the last decades of the last century. than descriptions. The nematodes that were first described 1. N. Filipiev period: The first part of were those visible to the naked eye or Filipjev's work was published in 1918, and those which caused striking pathological this was followed in 1921 by a second major changes in plants. For instance, in examin- contribution tinder the modest title of Free- ing grape vine roots for the presence of living Marine Nematodes in the Vicinity Philloxera, the Crimean Philloxera Com- of SebastopoI (4). In this paper, the author mittee (10) found root-knot nematodes. described 100 new species. If he had limited Similarly, in different areas, Heterodera was himself, as was usual at that time, to their found on beets by Tolpyguin (28), by description, or had even tried to classify Veinberg (30) in the Ukraine, and by and group them upon some morphological Tarniani (27) in Georgia. criteria, it is doubtful that his work would This was an age of the collection and have met with the enormous success that description of nature attd it lacked a unify- it did. Filipjev took a great conceptual ing conceptual framework. There were step by causally relating form and func- occasional zoological studies, such as that tion. In order to analyze the marine of Golovin (8) who examined the excretory nematodes that he had collected, he drew system, and articles began to appear in some upon the available literature on free-living, soil, microbivorous, and plant-parasitic Received for publication 29 July 1976. nematodes. i Invitational review. :lnstitute of Parasitology, Macdonald College of McGill He approached morphology on the basis University, Macdonald College, Province of Quebec, H0A of the total organism and not, as previous 1C0, Canada. I am grateful to Dr. Katherine Berdnikoff for essential help in translation and to Dr. Nell A. Croll, publications had done, on the basis of Director of the Institute of Parasitology, for providing separate organs. Thus he created the first me with laboratory facilities, eneouragemetn, and help with this manuscript. logical and comprehensive system of nema- The JOURNAL OF NEMATOLOGY for October (8: 277-358) was issued 3 November 1976. 2 Journal of Nematology, Volume 9, No. 1, .January 1977 FIG. 1-4. Early Russian biologisls. 1) Aleksei Nikolaevich Severtzev (1886-1936). 2) Ivan Nikolaevich Filipjev (1889-1940). 3) Ivan Ivanovich Schmalhausen (1884-1963). 4)Aleksander Alexsandrovich Paramonov (1891-1.~70). Russian Nematology: Mjuge 3 FIG. 5. Group of Nematologists at the USSR Academy of Science. Back row (left to right): K. I. Schpa- kovskay, A. A. Paramonov, E. S. Turlygina, T. V. Pioroyskay; Front row (left to right): T. A. Gluzhenko, N. I. Sumenkova. S. L. Lazarevskaya-Blinova, P. S. Krulov, S. G. Mjuge. todes which was based on scientific data. "an enemy of tile people." His published The translation of his work into foreign works were removed from many libraries languages drew considerable international and destroyed. According to official sources, attention (21). The previous unnatural I. N. Filipjev died in a concentration camp systems of Cobb (3) and Micoletzky (13) ill 1941; according to Kirjianova (9), he were overtaken. Micoletzky (14) renounced died oll October 22, 1940. Filipjev was his system of nematode classification and posthumously "rehabilitated" during the accepted that proposed by Filipjev. Khrushchev regime. In 1934, Filipjev enlarged and deep- The period between Filipjev and ened his ideas (5), and in the same year Paramonov: New ideas arose in Russian published a monumental volume--Nema- biology in the "post-Filipjev" era. A. N. todes that are Harrn[ul and Use[ul in Severtzev (24) found new methods of Agriculture (6). This publication became a relating form and function to habitat. basic text for Russian nematology and was Today, he would be called an ecologist. widely read in other countries. In 1941, Proceeding from the ideas of Darwin, he this work was reprinted in an enlarged laid a new foundation for evolutionary edition with I. H. Schuurmans-Stekhoven morphology which was a definite advance- (7), but Filipjev himself did not participate ment over the descriptive morphological in the final production. In the West, approach of Karl Gegenbaur (1826-1903) Filipjev was "reported as missing," while and tile comparative morphology of Ernst his Soviet colleagues were told that he was Haeckel. Important conceptual advances 4 Journal of Nematology, Volume 9, No. 1, January 1977 were proposed by I. I. Schmalhausen (25) years of age, he skied actively, rubbed who analyzed the mechanisms of evolution. himself with snow, and swam in ice holes! The theories of "prototypes" and "archi- He knew all that was then known about techtonics" were developed in 1944 by V. N. H. schachtii. He trained a few specialists in Beklemishev (2) who foresaw numerical pest control but left no "heir" to his area of taxonomy and phylogeny within the hematology, with the possible exception of higher taxa. B. I. Kulchitsky. Apparently, one nematode By 1936, nematology had been influ- species alone was too little to occupy two enced by the conceptual advances of generations of nematologists. evolutionary theory and by related develop- Another "species" of nematode, the ments in general biology. A new applied root-knot group, became the main object of science of helminthology had been defined study in the entire life of A. A. Ustinov of as "the study of worms and the diseases the University of Kharkov. I say "species," that they cause" (26) with its subdivision since Ustinov insisted to his dying day that "ptlytohelminthology" which concerned there was only one species of root-knot plant-parasitic nematodes and diseases nematode: Meloidogyne marioni (Cornu). caused by them. In contrast to I. I. Korab, however, Ustinov Following the demise of Filipjev in had much wider interests than just the Russian nematology, a large collection of systematics of root-knot nematodes. He also nematode specimens remained in the studied physiology and ecology. As a result Zoological Institute of the Academy of of his leadership, there remained after Sciences of the USSR. This collection was Ustinov's death a strong and versatile preserved and enlarged by Filipjev's group of plant nematologists: N. M. assistant, E. S. Kirjianova (9). She picked Ladygina (ecologist), V. G. Zinoviev up the baton from Filipjev and enriched (biochemist-physiologist), and Z. G. Volod- Russian nematology through her varied chenko (morphologist). research contributions and through training of additional nematologists. Among her In the 1930s, there was a drive to students are E. L. Krall, T. S. Ivanova, develop the rubber-bearing plant, Scorzonea A. T. Tulaganov, and many others; these iau-saghyz, because natural rubber was not are the "grandchildren" of Filipjev. available in Russia and the technology to Professor Tulaganov held the posts of synthesize rubber was not then known. Professor of Invertebrates in the Depart- The growth of S. tau-saghyz tubers was ment of Zoology at the University of often hampered by disease and nematodes. Tashkent; Rector of the University of As a result, the first specialized laboratory Samarkand; and Director, Institute of in phytonematology was opened in Moscow Parasitology, Uzbek, S.S.R. He trained in 1933 under the Directorship of N. M. many nematologists who worked on applied Sveshnikova. Sveshnikova soon became the problems but published little. Possibly leading authority on the chemical control even great-great grandchildren of Filipjev of soil nematodes in the Soviet Union. She can be derived from this tree of nema- trained L. A. Guskova, widely known in tological development. The main direction U.S.A., who is now Head of the Department of the Tulaganov school is systematics anti of Phytohelminthology of the All Union faunistic studies. Institute for the Protection of Plants in Soviet nematology has not been derived Leningrad. T. S. Skarbilovitch succeeded entirely from Filipjev and his school. In Sveshnikova in the tau-saghyz laboratory the Ukraine, in the early 1920s, I. I. Korab and later devoted much time to the study began working in the Agricultural Institute of the biology of Heterodera, especially of Bielaya Tserkov (White Church).