Practice and Politics in Japanese Science: Hitoshi Kihara and the Formation of a Genetics Discipline

This paper examines the history of Japanese genetics in the 1920s to 1950s as seen through the work of Hitoshi Kihara, a prominent wheat geneticist as well as a leader in the development of the discipline in Japan. As Kihara’s career illustrates, Japanese genetics developed quickly in the early twentieth century through interactions with biologists outside Japan. The interactions, however, ceased due to the war in the late 1930s, and Japanese geneticists were mostly isolated from outside information until the late 1940s. During the isolation in wartime and under the postwar U.S. Occupation, Kihara adapted to political changes. During wartime, he developed a research institute focusing on applied biology of various crops, which conformed to the national need to address food scarcity. After the war, he led the campaign for the establishment of a national institute of genetics and negotiated with American Occupation officers. The Americans viewed this Japanese effort with suspicion because of the rising popularity of the controversial theory of the Russian agronomist, Trofim Lysenko, in Japan. The institute was approved in 1949 partly because Kihara was able to bridge the gap between the American and Japanese sides. With Kihara’s flexible and generous leadership, Japanese genetics steadily developed, survived the wartime, and recovered quickly in the postwar period. The article discusses Kihara’s interest in cytoplasmic inheritance and his synthetic approach to genetics in this political context, and draws attention to the relation between Kihara’s genetics and agricultural practice in Japan.     

Muriel Wheldale Onslow and Early Biochemical Genetics

Muriel Wheldale, a distinguished graduate of Newnham College, Cambridge, was a member of William Bateson’s school of genetics at Cambridge University from 1903. Her investigation of flower color inheritance in snapdragons (Antirrhinum), a topic of particular interest to botanists, contributed to establishing Mendelism as a powerful new tool in studying heredity. Her understanding of the genetics of pigment formation led her to do cutting-edge work in biochemistry, culminating in the publication of her landmark work, The Anthocyanin Pigments of Plants (1916). In 1915, she joined Frederick Gowland Hopkin’s Department of Biochemistry as assistant and in 1926 became one of the first women to be appointed university lecturer. In 1919 she married the biochemist Huia Onslow, with whom she collaborated until his death in 1922. This paper examines Wheldale’s work in genetics and especially focuses on the early linkage of Mendelian methodology with new techniques in biochemistry that eventually led to the founding of biochemical genetics. It highlights significant issues in the early history of women in genetics, including the critical role of mentors, funding opportunities, and career strategies.     

Toyama Kametaro and Vernon Kellogg: Silkworm Inheritance Experiments in Japan,Siam, and the United States, 1900–1912

Japanese agricultural scientist Toyama Kametaro’s report about the Mendelian inheritance of silkworm cocoon color in Studies on the Hybridology of Insects (1906) spurred changes in Japanese silk production and thrust Toyama and his work into a scholarly exchange with American entomologist Vernon Kellogg. Toyama’s work, based on research conducted in Japan and Siam, came under international scrutiny at a time when analyses of inheritance flourished after the “rediscovery” of Mendel’s laws of heredity in 1900. The hybrid silkworm studies in Asia attracted the attention of Kellogg, who was concerned with how experimental biology would be used to study the causes of natural selection. He challenged Toyama’s conclusions that Mendelism alone could explain the inheritance patterns of silkworm characters such as cocoon color because they had been subject to hundreds of years of artificial selection, or breeding. This examination of the intersection of Japanese sericulture and American entomology probes how practical differences in scientific interests, societal responsibilities, and silkworm materiality were negotiated throughout the processes of legitimating Mendelian genetics on opposite sides of the Pacific. The ways in which Toyama and Kellogg assigned importance to certain silkworm properties show how conflicting intellectual orientations arose in studies of the same organism. Contestation about Mendelism took place not just on a theoretical level, but the debate was fashioned through each scientist’s rationale about the categorization of silkworm breeds and races and what counted as “natural.” This further mediated the acceptability of the silkworm not as an experimental organism, but as an appropriately “natural” insect with which to demonstrate laws of inheritance. All these shed light on the challenges that came along with the use of agricultural animals to convincingly articulate new biological principles.     

William Bateson from <Emphasis Type="Italic">Balanoglossus</Emphasis> to <Emphasis Type="Italic">Materials for the Study of Variation</Emphasis>: The Transatlantic Roots of Discontinuity and the (un)naturalness of Selection

William Bateson (1861–1926) has long occupied a controversial role in the history of biology at the turn of the twentieth century. For the most part, Bateson has been situated as the British translator of Mendel or as the outspoken antagonist of W.␣F. R. Weldon and Karl Pearson’s biometrics program. Less has been made of Bateson’s transition from embryologist to advocate for discontinuous variation, and the precise role of British and American influences in that transition, in the years leading up to the publication of his massive Materials for the Study of Variation (1894). In this paper, I first attempt to trace Bateson’s development in his early career before turning to search for the development of the moniker “anti-Darwinist” that has been attached to Bateson in well-known histories of the neo-Darwinian Synthesis.     

Scientific Discrimination and the Activist Scientist: L.C. Dunn and the Professionalization of Genetics and Human Genetics in the United States

During the 1920s and 1930s geneticist L.C. Dunn of Columbia University cautioned Americans against endorsing eugenic policies and called attention to eugenicists’ less than rigorous practices. Then, from the mid-1940s to early 1950s he attacked scientific racism and Nazi Rassenhygiene by co-authoring Heredity, Race and Society with Theodosius Dobzhansky and collaborating with members of UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization) on their international campaign against racism. Even though shaking the foundations of scientific discrimination was Dunn’s primary concern during the interwar and post-World War II years, his campaigns had ancillary consequences for the discipline. He contributed to the professionalization of genetics during the 1920s and 1930s and sought respectability for human genetics in the 1940s and 1950s. My article aims to elucidate the activist scientist’s role in undermining scientific discrimination by exploring aspects of Dunn’s scientific work and political activism from the 1920s to 1950s. Definitions are provided for scientific discrimination and activist scientist.     

<Emphasis Type="BoldItalic">Regeneration</Emphasis>: Thomas Hunt Morgan’s Window into Development

Early in his career Thomas Hunt Morgan was interested in embryology and dedicated his research to studying organisms that could regenerate. Widely regarded as a regeneration expert, Morgan was invited to deliver a series of lectures on the topic that he developed into a book, Regeneration (1901). In addition to presenting experimental work that he had conducted and supervised, Morgan also synthesized and critiqued a great deal of work by his peers and predecessors. This essay probes into the history of regeneration studies by looking in depth at Regeneration and evaluating Morgan’s contribution. Although famous for his work with fruit fly genetics, studying Regeneration illuminates Morgan’s earlier scientific approach which emphasized the importance of studying a diversity of organisms. Surveying a broad range of regenerative phenomena allowed Morgan to institute a standard scientific terminology that continues to inform regeneration studies today. Most importantly, Morgan argued that regeneration was a fundamental aspect of the growth process and therefore should be accounted for within developmental theory. Establishing important similarities between regeneration and development allowed Morgan to make the case that regeneration could act as a model of development. The nature of the relationship between embryogenesis and regeneration remains an active area of research.     

Method as a Function of “Disciplinary Landscape”: C.D. Darlington and Cytology, Genetics and Evolution, 1932–1950

This article considers the reception of British cytogeneticist C.D. Darlington’s controversial 1932 book, Recent Advances in Cytology. Darlington’s cytogenetic work, and the manner in which he made it relevant to evolutionary biology, marked an abrupt shift in the status and role of cytology in the life sciences. By focusing on Darlington’s scientific method – a stark departure from anti-theoretical, empirical reasoning to a theoretical and speculative approach based on deduction from genetic first principles – the article characterises the relationships defining the “disciplinary landscape” of the life sciences of the time, namely those between cytology, genetics, and evolutionary theory.     

Human mate choice and the wedding ring effect

Individuals are often restricted to indirect cues when assessing the mate value of a potential partner. Females of some species have been shown to copy each other’s choice; in other words, the probability of a female choosing a particular male increases if he has already been chosen by other females. Recently it has been suggested that mate-choice copying could be an important aspect of human mate choice as well. We tested one of the hypotheses, the so-called wedding ring effect—that women would prefer men who are already engaged or married—in a series of live interactions between men and women. The results show that women do not find men signaling engagement, or being perceived as having a partner, more attractive or higher in socioeconomic status. Furthermore, signs of engagement did not influence the women’s reported willingness to engage in short-term or long-term relationships with the men. Thus, this study casts doubt on some simplified theories of human mate-choice copying, and alternative, more complex scenarios are outlined and discussed. Tobias Uller works on broad issues in evolutionary biology, such as life-history evolution and evolutionary genetics. Christoffer Johansson recently received his Ph.D. with a dissertation on biomechanics of swimming birds. Their collaborative work on humans is focused on mate choice.     

Honeybees, Communicative Order, and the Collapse of Ecosystems

The paper examines the sudden disappearance in the United States of millions of honeybees in managed bee colonies. The major research undertaken in the U.S. concentrates on finding the pathogens responsible. This paper suggests an alternative avenue of research a) that as a result of global warming there is a disjunction between bees pollinating cycles and the life cycle of plants b) that understanding changes in “timing cycles” as a result of global warming is the key to understanding the disappearance of the bees. It notes that Gregory Bateson argued that any condition of ecosystem collapse would be characterized first by a collapse in its communicative order rather, than from changed physical states. The collapse of bee colonies and demise of other pollinators is a seeming confirmation of Gregory Bateson argument. Honeybees are ‘go betweens’ in ecosystemic order. It also argues that an appropriate topology of timing cycles and their recursions would enable better visual comprehension of the heterarchical ‘pattern which connects’, in Bateson’s phrase, and prompt awareness of possible catastrophe in human food supplies.

Nucleotide Frequencies in Human Genome and Fibonacci Numbers

This work presents a mathematical model that establishes an interesting connection between nucleotide frequencies in human single-stranded DNA and the famous Fibonacci’s numbers. The model relies on two assumptions. First, Chargaff’s second parity rule should be valid, and second, the nucleotide frequencies should approach limit values when the number of bases is sufficiently large. Under these two hypotheses, it is possible to predict the human nucleotide frequencies with accuracy. This result may be used as evidence to the Fibonacci string model that was proposed to the sequence growth of DNA repetitive sequences. It is noteworthy that the predicted values are solutions of an optimization problem, which is commonplace in many of nature’s phenomena.     

Overheated Rats,Race, and the Double Gland: Paul Kammerer,Endocrinology and the Problem of Somatic Induction

In 1920, Eugen Steinach and Paul Kammerer reported experiments showing that exposure to high temperatures altered the structure of the gonad and produced hyper-sexuality in “heat rats,” presumably as a result of the increased production of sex hormones. Using Steinach’s evidence that the gonad is a double gland with distinct sexual and generative functions, they used their findings to explain “racial” differences in the sexuality of indigenous tropical peoples and Europeans. The authors also reported that heat induced anatomical changes in the interstitial cells of the gonad were inherited by the heat rats’ descendants. Kammerer used this finding to link endocrinology to his long-standing interest in the inheritance of acquired characteristics. The heat rats supported his hypothesis that the interstitial cells of the double gland were the mechanism of somatic induction in the inheritance of acquired characteristics. The Steinach–Kammerer collaboration, Kammerer’s use of Steinach’s “puberty gland” to explain somatic induction, and his endocrine analysis of symbiosis reveal Paul Kammerer’s late career attempt to integrate endocrinology and genetics with the political ideals of Austrian socialism. With them he developed a bioethics that challenged the growing reliance on race in eugenics and instead promoted cooperation over competition in evolution. I relate his attempt to the controversies surrounding the interstitial cells, to the status of extra-nuclear theories of heredity, and to Kammerer’s commitment to Austromarxist social reforms during the interwar period. I am very grateful for the help of several archivists, including Valerie-Ann Lutz, Roy Goodman and Robert Cox at the American Philosophical Society Library, Arlene Shaner at the New York Academy of Medicine, Shawn Wilson at the Kinsey Institute Library, the staff at the Archives of the University of Vienna, and Yukiko Sakabe at the Austrian Academy of Sciences. Thanks are also due to Andreas Lixl, who gave very helpful advice on German language and to many colleagues, including three anonymous reviewers, Paul Silvia, Alyce Miller, and the late Gilbert Gottlieb, who provided valuable comments as readers of earlier drafts. My discussions with Veronika Hofer have been especially rewarding. The research was funded by National Science Foundation grant #0240151.     

The Case of Paul Kammerer: Evolution and Experimentation in the Early 20th Century

To some, a misguided Lamarckian and a fraud, to others a martyr in the fight against Darwinism, the Viennese zoologist Paul Kammerer (1880–1926) remains one of the most controversial scientists of the early 20th century. Here his work is reconsidered in light of turn-of-the-century problems in evolutionary theory and experimental methodology, as seen from Kammerer’s perspective in Vienna. Kammerer emerges not as an opponent of Darwinism, but as one would-be modernizer of the 19th-century theory, which had included a role for the inheritance of acquired characteristics. Kammerer attempted a synthesis of Darwinism with genetics and the chromosome theory, while retaining the modifying effects of the environment as the main source of favorable variation, and he developed his program of experimentation to support it. Kammerer never had a regular university position, but worked at a private experimental laboratory, with sidelines as a teacher and a popular writer and lecturer. On the lecture circuit he held forth on the significance of his science for understanding and furthering cultural evolution and he satisfied his passion for the arts and performance. In his dual career as researcher and popularizer, he did not always follow academic convention. In the contentious and rapidly changing fields of heredity and evolution, some of his stances and practices, as well as his outsider status and part-Jewish background, aroused suspicion and set the stage for the scandal that ended his career and prompted his suicide.     

The foundation of extranuclear inheritance: plastid and mitochondrial genetics

In 1909 two papers by Correns and by Baur published in volume 1 of Zeitschrift für induktive Abstammungs- und Vererbungslehre (now Molecular Genetics and Genomics) reported on the non-Mendelian inheritance of chlorophyll deficiencies. These papers, reporting the very first cases of extranuclear inheritance, laid the foundation for a new field: non-Mendelian or extranuclear genetics. Correns observed a purely maternal inheritance (in Mirabilis), whereas Baur found a biparental inheritance (in Pelargonium). Correns suspected the non-Mendelian factors in the cytoplasm, while Baur believed that the plastids carry these extranuclear factors. In the following years, Baur’s hypothesis was proved to be correct. Baur subsequently developed the theory of plastid inheritance. In many genera the plastids are transmitted only uniparentally by the mother, while in a few genera there is a biparental plastid inheritance. Commonly there is random sorting of plastids during ontogenetic development. Renner and Schwemmle as well as geneticists in other countries added additional details to this theory. Pioneering studies on mitochondrial inheritance in yeast started in 1949 in the group of Ephrussi and Slonimski; respiration-deficient cells (petites in yeast, poky in Neurospora) were demonstrated to be due to mitochondrial mutations. Electron microscopical and biochemical studies (1962–1964) showed that plastids and mitochondria contain organelle-specific DNA molecules. These findings laid the molecular basis for the two branches of extranuclear inheritance: plastid and mitochondrial genetics.     

Darwin’s contributions to genetics

Darwin’s contributions to evolutionary biology are well known, but his contributions to genetics are much less known. His main contribution was the collection of a tremendous amount of genetic data, and an attempt to provide a theoretical framework for its interpretation. Darwin clearly described almost all genetic phenomena of fundamental importance, such as prepotency (Mendelian inheritance), bud variation (mutation), heterosis, reversion (atavism), graft hybridization (Michurinian inheritance), sex-limited inheritance, the direct action of the male element on the female (xenia and telegony), the effect of use and disuse, the inheritance of acquired characters (Lamarckian inheritance), and many other observations pertaining to variation, heredity and development. To explain all these observations, Darwin formulated a developmental theory of heredity — Pangenesis — which not only greatly influenced many subsequent theories, but also is supported by recent evidence.     

Freud’s Lamarckism’ and the Politics of Racial Science

This article re-contextualizes Sigmund Freud’s interest in the idea of the inheritance of acquired characteristics in terms of the socio-political connotations of Lamarckism and Darwinism in the 1930s and 1950s. Many scholars have speculated as to why Freud continued to insist on a supposedly outmoded theory of evolution in the 1930s even as he was aware that it was no longer tenable. While Freud’s initial interest in the inheritance of phylogenetic memory was not necessarily politically motivated, his refusal to abandon this theory in the 1930s must be understood in terms of wider debates, especially regarding the position of the Jewish people in Germany and Austria. Freud became uneasy about the inheritance of memory not because it was scientifically disproven, but because it had become politically charged and suspiciously regarded by the Nazis as Bolshevik and Jewish. Where Freud seemed to use the idea of inherited memory as a way of universalizing his theory beyond the individual cultural milieu of his mostly Jewish patients, such a notion of universal science itself became politically charged and identified as particularly Jewish. The vexed and speculative interpretations of Freud’s Lamarckism are situated as part of a larger post-War cultural reaction against Communism on the one hand (particularly in the 1950s when Lamarckism was associated with the failures of Lysenko), and on the other hand, against any scientific concepts of race in the wake of World War II.     

Mary Lyon and the hypothesis of random X chromosome inactivation

The 50th anniversary of Mary Lyon’s 1961 Nature paper, proposing random inactivation in early embryonic life of one of the two X chromosomes in the cells of mammalian females, provides an opportunity to remember and celebrate the work of those involved. While the hypothesis was initially put forward by Lyon based on findings in the mouse, it was founded on earlier studies, notably the work of Susumu Ohno; it was also suggested independently by Beutler and colleagues using experimental evidence from a human X-linked disorder, glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency, and has proved to be of as great importance for human and medical genetics as it has for general mammalian genetics. Alongside the hypothesis itself, previous cytological studies of mouse and human chromosomes, and the observations on X-linked mutants in both species deserve recognition for their essential role in underpinning the hypothesis of random X-inactivation, while subsequent research on the X-inactivation centre and the molecular mechanisms underlying the inactivation process represent some of the most outstanding contributions to human and wider mammalian genetics over the past 50 years.     

Mutant Bacteriophages,Frank Macfarlane Burnet,and the Changing Nature of “Genespeak” in the 1930s

In 1936, Frank Macfarlane Burnet published a paper entitled “Induced lysogenicity and the mutation of bacteriophage within lysogenic bacteria,” in which he demonstrated that the introduction of a specific bacteriophage into a bacterial strain consistently and repeatedly imparted a specific property – namely the resistance to a different phage – to the bacterial strain that was originally susceptible to lysis by that second phage. Burnet’s explanation for this change was that the first phage was causing a mutation in the bacterium which rendered it and its successive generations of offspring resistant to lysogenicity. At the time, this idea was a novel one that needed compelling evidence to be accepted. While it is difficult for us today to conceive of mutations and genes outside the context of DNA as the physico-chemical basis of genes, in the mid 1930s, when this paper was published, DNA’s role as the carrier of hereditary information had not yet been discovered and genes and mutations were yet to acquire physical and chemical forms. Also, during that time genes were considered to exist only in organisms capable of sexual modes of replication and the status of bacteria and viruses as organisms capable of containing genes and manifesting mutations was still in question. Burnet’s paper counts among those pieces of work that helped dispel the notion that genes, inheritance and mutations were tied to an organism’s sexual status. In this paper, I analyze the implications of Burnet’s paper for the understanding of various concepts – such as “mutation,” and “gene,” – at the time it was published, and how those understandings shaped the development of the meanings of these terms and our modern conceptions thereof.     

What Bateson had in Mind About ‘Mind’?

G. Bateson believed that the scientific school of the future would be ‘ecology of mind’. The first aim of this paper is to understand what he meant by ‘mind’, and the other is to understand how this concept emerged in his thought, i.e., how its meaning would become more flexible throughout his life and work. Furthermore, we will approach the epistemological implications of ecology of mind for scientific education in the West. Bateson’s concept of mind emerged when he became aware (in 1926) of his own way of thinking, i.e., of his immense abductive capacity. This led him to search for patterns of similarity and difference between organisms (like in homology). Later, he identified this thought process as being abstract and formal, relating not just facts but also ideas. Afterwards, Bateson developed criteria for us to consider a system as being mental, with special emphasis on living and cybernetic systems.     

Scherrer and Jost’s symposium: the gene concept in 2008

Reconsideration of the term “gene” should take into account (a) the potential clash between hierarchical levels of information discussed in the 1970s by Gregory Bateson, (b) the contrast between conventional and genome phenotypes discussed in the 1980s by Richard Grantham, and (c) the emergence in the 1990s of a new science—Evolutionary Bioinformatics—that views genomes as channels conveying multiple forms of information through the generations. From this perspective, there is conceptual continuity between the functional “gene” of Mendel and today’s GenBank sequences. If the function attributed to a gene can change specifically as the result of a DNA mutation, then the mutated part of DNA can be considered as part of the gene. Conversely, even if appearing to locate within a gene, a mutation that does not change the specific function is not part of the gene, although it may change some other function to which the DNA sequence contributes. This strict definition is impractical, but serves as a guide to more workable, context-dependent, definitions. The gene is either (1) The DNA sequence that is transcribed, (2) The latter plus the immediate 5′ and 3′ sequences that, when mutated, specifically affect the function, (3) The latter two, plus any remote sequences that, when mutated, specifically affect the function. Attempts, such as that of Scherrer and Jost, to redefine Mendel’s “gene,” may be too narrowly focused on regulation to the exclusion of other important themes.     

Three puzzles and eight gaps: what heritability studies and critical commentaries have not paid enough attention to

This article examines eight “gaps” in order to clarify why the quantitative genetics methods of partitioning variation of a trait into heritability and other components has very limited power to show anything clear and useful about genetic and environmental influences, especially for human behaviors and other traits. The first two gaps should be kept open; the others should be bridged or the difficulty of doing so should be acknowledged: 1. Key terms have multiple meanings that are distinct; 2. Statistical patterns are distinct from measurable underlying factors; 3. Translation from statistical analyses to hypotheses about measurable factors is difficult; 4. Predictions based on extrapolations from existing patterns of variation may not match outcomes; 5. The partitioning of variation in human studies does not reliably estimate the intended quantities; 6. Translation from statistical analyses to hypotheses about the measurable factors is even more difficult in light of the possible heterogeneity of underlying genetic or environmental factors; 7. Many steps lie between the analysis of observed traits and interventions based on well-founded claims about the causal influence of genetic or environmental factors; 8. Explanation of variation within groups does not translate to explanation of differences among groups. At the start, I engage readers’ attention with three puzzles that have not been resolved by past debates. The puzzles concern generational increases in IQ test scores, the possibility of underlying heterogeneity, and the translation of methods from selective breeding into human genetics. After discussing the gaps, I present each puzzle in a new light and point to several new puzzles that invite attention from analysts of variation in quantitative genetics and in social science more generally. The article’s critical perspectives on agricultural, laboratory, and human heritability studies are intended to elicit further contributions from readers across the fields of history, philosophy, sociology, and politics of biology and in the sciences.