Correspondence DNA: archives reveal Nobel nominations Recently released letters shed light on the Nobel prize nominations PASTEUR INSTITUT for the discovery of the DNA double helix 60 years ago. On 31 December 1961, Francis Crick sent Jacques Monod, at Monod’s request, a nine-page account of the discovery of the structure of DNA (see D. T. Zallen Nature 425, 15; 2003). Crick laid out what was known before work on the structure began in 1950, detailed his and James Watson’s (see letter, pictured). In the Creation CSHL Press, 1996). DNA: twin strands contributions and summarized event, the 1962 chemistry prize The earliest nomination solved the structure work confirming that their model went to Max Perutz and John mentioning the DNA was correct. Crick wrote, “I hope Kendrew for their determination structure was from British Today is the 60th anniversary of it [the account] is not far from the of the structures of haemoglobin virologist Michael Stoker, the publication in Nature of three sort of thing you wanted. It really and myoglobin. who recommended Crick and papers on the structure of DNA, is most kind of you to take all this The fact that the double helix Watson for the 1960 physiology by James Watson and Francis trouble on our behalf” (source: was the subject of nominations or medicine prize. This was Crick, and by teams led by my Wellcome Library, London). for both prizes must have followed by three nominations late father, Maurice Wilkins, and This has been taken to mean presented a dilemma for the two for the 1961 prize and two for the Rosalind Franklin (Nature 171, that Monod was preparing to committees. This was highlighted 1962 prize (see table). The first 737–738; 738–740 and 740–741; nominate Watson and Crick for by a letter from Nobel laureate chemistry nominations (from 1953). It is easy to forget that, in the Nobel Prize in Physiology George Beadle (who had won Jacques Monod, Peter Campbell, April 1953, the few scientists who or Medicine, which they won the medicine prize himself in William Stein, Harold Urey, had even heard of DNA mostly in 1962 with Maurice Wilkins. 1958) nominating Crick, Watson John Cockroft and Stanford dismissed it as unimportant. Watson, in his 2007 book Avoid and Wilkins for the 1961 prize. Moore) were for the 1962 prize. My father wrote to Watson Boring People (Knopf) wrote: After agreeing that the structure (Information from the Nobel and Crick at the time: “There is “Jacques Monod […] could not deserved recognition through the Archives, The Royal Swedish no good grousing — I think it’s keep secret from Francis Crick chemistry prize, he went on: “But Academy of Sciences.) a very exciting notion and who that a member of the Karolinska I also feel — and most strongly — Crick’s letter to Monod the hell got it isn’t what matters.” Institutet in Stockholm had asked that it is so important for biology acknowledges the importance I doubt that anyone connected him to nominate us in January that it should be recognized by of Rosalind Franklin’s X-ray with that letter would have for the 1962 Nobel Prize in the Prize in Physiol. & Med. data for certain features of the believed how much “grousing” Physiology or Medicine.” if the chemists do not do so.” structure. Franklin died in 1958 about ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ the We were therefore surprised Perhaps, as science historian and, because the Nobel prize is next 60 years would bring. not to find Monod’s nomination Horace Judson put it, “The Nobel not awarded posthumously, she The structure of the DNA letter among those released by the committees, with a lightness could not have been considered double helix emerged from the Nobel Committee for Physiology of touch they had not been in 1962, nor indeed at the time of twin strands of the University of or Medicine. We found it instead known to possess, had gotten any of the earlier nominations. Cambridge’s conceptual model in the archives of the Pasteur together to give prizes for the Alexander Gann, Jan and King’s College London’s Institute in Paris, and, contrary to two discoveries […] made in the A. Witkowski Cold Spring Harbor experimental rigour. Both received wisdom, the nomination Cavendish Laboratory in 1953.” Laboratory, New York, USA. contributions were vital to its was for the prize in chemistry (H. F. Judson The Eighth Day of [email protected] precision and validation. The four different figures in the ‘race for DNA’ shared a NOMINATIONS FOR THE NOBEL PRIZE IN PHYSIOLOGY OR MEDICINE common concern about the Nominator Nomination submitted Prize year Nominees effect of science, including their Michael Stoker 22 January 1960 1960 Francis Crick and James Watson own, on humankind. None could have expected that their work George Beadle 19 November 1960 1961 Crick and Watson; also suggested Maurice Wilkins would have such an impact. Let’s Albert Szent-Györgyi 6 December 1960 1961 Crick and Watson hope the end result of this “very Gilbert Mudge 23 February 1961 1961 Crick and Watson exciting notion”, 60 years young, is Charles Stuart-Harris 6 November 1961 1962 Crick, Watson and Wilkins that we’ll all be the winners. George Wilkins London, UK. George Beadle 7 November 1961 1962 Crick and Watson; also suggested Wilkins [email protected] 434 | NATURE | VOL 496 | 25 APRIL 2013 © 2013 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved.