Punnett's square

The origin and development of Punnett's Square for the enumeration and display of genotypes arising in a cross in Mendelian genetics is described. Due to R. C. Punnett, the idea evolved through the work of the 'Cambridge geneticists', including Punnett's colleagues William Bateson, E. R. Saunders and R. H. Lock, soon after the rediscovery of Mendel's paper in 1900. These geneticists were thoroughly familiar with Mendel's paper, which itself contained a similar square diagram. A previously-unpublished three-factor diagram by Sir Francis Galton existing in the Bateson correspondence in Cambridge University Library is then described. Finally the connection between Punnett's Square and Venn Diagrams is emphasized, and it is pointed out that Punnett, Lock and John Venn overlapped as Fellows of Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge. Copious illustrations are given.     

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.     

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.     

‘Steps’ to Agency: Gregory Bateson,Perception, and Biosemantics

Gregory Bateson was welcomed into Biosemiotics as one of its precursors along with C. S. Peirce and Jacob von Uexküll He certainly endorsed Peirce pragmatic concern with learning as an essential characteristic of mammalian life, and also endorsed von Uexküll’s notion that the fundamental unit of animate existence is organism plus econiche. But he was at odds both with the subjectivism and with the cognitivism that connects Peirce to von Uexküll. Bateson rests his case on information theory which, he believes replaces many metaphysical notions that were the background to Peirce and von Uexküll’s approaches to ‘meaning.’ His idea of cybernetic ‘feedback’ in information circuits or networks yields a new understanding of recursiveness. Yet biofeedback in mammalian interaction had to be wrestled away from technical cybernetics and its thermodynamic rules about information, for the latter payed no attention to ‘meaning’ (“Bioentropy” section). Of the contrasts between Peirce and Bateson, the most significant is that Bateson regards ‘difference’ as primary to perception, while Peirce is concerned with continuity as primary from perception to cognition. This contrast is at the heart of Bateson’s Korzybski Lecture (see “On the Title of ‘Steps’” section), and shows how ‘difference’ in Learning develops orders and levels (see “Memory and Learning” section) leading to different categories of learning. With regard to perception, Bateson argues that the processes of perception do not bind perception to conscious awareness in any exclusive sense. Further, patterns of perception are not bounded by the skin for they include all external pathways along which information can travel. This recursive activity develops ‘agency’ (“Perception and Consciousness” section). We are ourselves interact with living mental ‘things’ but interactions with animate ‘creatura,’ is not the same as the objective interactions we purse in measuring inanimate material ‘things’ (pleroma) (“How Bioentropy Informs Bateson’s Notions of Pleroma and Creatura ” section). The grasping of context in communicative interaction, for example, is unique to creatura (“Context in Recursive Communication” section). Recognition of ‘difference’ occurs through communicative interactions and is meta-physical (without dimension). The pattern of interaction is the ‘thing,’ and ostensive aspects of communication are contextual, inclusive of all ‘external’ aspects vital for interpretation of ‘signals’ between initiators and responders to messages. Towards the end of his life, Bateson’s concerns with non-human conditions of ‘meaning’ and ‘mind’ in nature, resulted in his dropping several of the Peirce’s conditions of semiosis, as he looks at ‘meaning’ without language. He rests his method the propositional order of Peirce’s abduction rather than the latter’s full array of abduction, induction and deduction. Bateson is supported by the Biosemantics of Ruth Millikan, this paper will argue, who also believes that the derivation of meaning in animals through natural signs requires the stripping away of any ‘meaning rationalism’ (“Meaning Rationalism” section). Together they provide joint conclusions about as sign use in the ecosystems of creatura (“Conclusion” section).     

William Bateson, human genetics and medicine

The importance of human genetics in the work of William Bateson (1861–1926) and in his promotion of Mendelism in the decade following the 1900 rediscovery of Mendel’s work is described. Bateson had close contacts with clinicians interested in inherited disorders, notably Archibald Garrod, to whom he suggested the recessive inheritance of alkaptonuria, and the ophthalmologist Edward Nettleship, and he lectured extensively to medical groups. Bateson’s views on human inheritance were far sighted and cautious. Not only should he be regarded as one of the founders of human genetics, but human genetics itself should be seen as a key element of the foundations of mendelian inheritance, not simply a later development from knowledge gained by study of other species.     

李济先生与周口店研究：纪念李济先生诞辰100周年

李济先生是中国考古学的奠基人,中国第一位人类学家。他毕生从事考古学研究,著作等身,桃李满天下。他的功绩主要体现在安阳殷墟的发掘与研究上,考古学的其他方面亦建树甚丰。本文仅就李先生在中国旧石器考古草创时期,特别是在周口店本世纪３０年代初发掘方法改革中的贡献等方面作简要的介绍。以此纪念济先生诞辰１００周年。为使读者了解他取得巨大成就的历史背景,对其生平亦作点录。     

Two levels of information in DNA: relationship of Romanes' "intrinsic" variability of the reproductive system, and Bateson's "residue" to the species-dependent component of the base composition, (C+G)%.

In 1886 Charles Darwin's research associate George Romanes published a paper entitled "Physiological Selection: An Additional Suggestion on the Origin of Species". This was criticized by his Victorian contemporaries and largely ignored by those who followed. However, the recent recognition of two levels of information in DNA suggests that Romanes had solved the major problems with Darwin's theory. It was apparent from the outset that the form of reproductive isolation likely to apply most generally to initial species divergence (hybrid sterility), would depend on differences, not in "primary" information ("genic"), but in "secondary" information ("chromosomal"). This viewpoint, further elaborated by Bateson & Saunders (1902), White (1978), and King (1993), is criticized by the genic school (Coyne & Orr, 1998) because it requires visible differences between chromosomes, and appears not to explain Haldane's rule. However, chromosomal differentiation with respect to the species-dependent component of base composition [(C+G)%; Forsdyke, 1996] appears to resolve these problems. Because it explained so much, it was easy to believe that the genic viewpoint explained everything. Romanes and Bateson thought otherwise. We are only just beginning to recognize what they were trying to tell us.     

Bateson's two Toronto addresses, 1921: 2. Evolutionary faith

William Bateson's plenary address to the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in Toronto in 1921 was titled "Evolutionary Faith and Modern Doubts." In it he expressed his deep-seated skepticism about the causes of evolution (and in particular, his dissatisfaction with Darwinian natural selection) while reaffirming his belief in the reality of evolution itself. The address led to controversy at both the scientific and popular levels. Scientific criticism centered on Bateson's rejection of natural selection; popular controversy, as evidenced by contemporary newspaper clippings, was very widespread, not least because religious fundamentalists misrepresented Bateson in their campaign against evolution. I draw attention to the forgotten case of F.E. Dean, a superintendent of schools at Fort Sumner, New Mexico, who in 1922 was forced to resign his post for merely challenging a resolution of the local school board banning the teaching of evolution in schools. Dean deserves to be remembered, along with John T. Scopes, as an early hero of the continuing fight for the right to teach evolution in U.S. schools.     

纪念戴芳澜教授诞辰九十周年

戴芳澜教授(1893.5.4—1973.1.3)是我国真菌学的创始人,也是我国植物病理学的主要奠基人之一。他为祖国培养了大量人才。为纪念他的光辉业绩,值戴教授诞辰九十周年、逝世十周年之际,特发表他的一篇评论性论文;戴教授的主要著作目录;俞大绂、陈鸿逵、周家炽、裘维蕃、相望年等教授的怀念性文章和他一生中各时期的照片两版,以资纪念。     

Balfour, Garstang and de Beer: The First Century of Evolutionary Embryology

Evolution has been integrated with embryology during two greatperiods: the latter half of the 19th C as evolutionary morphology/embryology,and the latter third of the 20th C as evolutionary developmentalbiology. My mandate was to use the contributions of three embryologists/morphologists:Francis (Frank) Balfour (1851–1882), Walter Garstang (1868–1949)and Gavin de Beer (1899–1972) to discuss the foundationsof evolutionary embryology in the UK from 1870 (when "everyaspiring zoologist was an embryologist, and the one topic ofprofessional conversation was evolution," Bateson, 1922, p.56), through the 1920s ("ontogeny does not recapitulate phylogeny,it creates it," Garstang, 1922, p. 81) to the 1970s ("homologyof phenotypes does not imply similarity in genotypes," de Beer,1971, p. 15). Evolutionary embryology was driven by a comparativeembryological approach that sought homology of adult structuresin germ layers and ancestry in embryos, and sought to differentiatelarval adaptations from retained ancestral characters. An initialemphasis on a phylogenetic mechanism (recapitulation) slowlygave way to more mechanistic approaches that included heterochronyand the integration of embryology with physiological genetics.Germ layers, homology, larval evolution, larval origins of thevertebrates, paedomorphosis and heterochrony underpinned theorigins of evolutionary embryology, and so I discuss each ofthese topics.     

Greatness and tribulations of Zeiss and Leitz, two famous German optic companies III. Zeiss Ikon and elimination of Emanuel Goldberg

Gathering archival documents to trace the history of the Zeiss company presents no difficulty : they are abundant… except for a period from 1932 to 1945, systematically ignored, and that corresponds to the Nazi period. On the website Zeiss Historica, among the outstanding personalities of the Zeiss company, we note that, for Professor Emanuel Goldberg, the web page ? is still under development but an early picture of the professor is available. ?. But fortunately, Mickael Buckland, a Professor at the UC Berkeley School of Information brought the life and the work of Emanuel Goldberg to light. Thanks to him, his works and innovations, who had disappeared from our cultural and scientific heritage, return to light after being erased during fifty years. Goldberg had published dozens of articles, obtained patents, developed cameras, microdots, movie cameras, and he designed what he called a "Statistical Machine ", the first electronic document retrieval machine. In France, if this rediscovery was made known to the world of information science, it has not had the impact it deserved in the scientific world. Therefore it is time to reconstruct his career and his work, and to analyse the reasons why some attempted to erase definitively his name and memory.     

Mendelism: from hybrids and trade to a science

In this paper I explore the historical context in which news of the rediscovery of Mendel's laws was received in England. This exploration leads me to the Cambridge zoologist, William Bateson, to his exploitation of the prestige and support of the Royal Horticultural Society, and to his interaction with certain of the leading horticultural tradesmen prominent in that society. I argue that the policy of the RHS in the 1890s to promote hybridisation rather than plant collecting was of crucial importance in bringing about a productive symbiosis between Bateson and his circle and the horticultural community. I look for parallels between the aims of the horticulturists and the character of the Mendelian programme as it is represented in Bateson's foundational text: Mendel's Principles of Heredity (1909).     

遗传学第一个十年中的W.贝特森

在遗传学的第一个十年间,贝特森在捍卫、诠释、发展和推广孟德尔理论中作出了杰出贡献。他和孟德尔一样,是超越其时代的人。 Abstract：During the first decade of the history of genetics,B ateson made a notable contribution to the defending,interpreting,developing and spreading of Mendels laws.He,like Mendel,was ahead of his time.     

A new Bush-Shrike from Angola

M y friend Professor Erwin Stresemann, of Berlin, has generously asked me to describe this very beautiful new Bush-Shrike, thus securing the type for the British Museum, which, had he felt so disposed, could well have fallen to his lot to name. The specimen which I so designate, together with three others, two males and two females in all, reached the British Museum recently in the first batch of a collection which is being made in Angola on behalf of the British Museum by Herr R. H. Braun.     

Vegetation and soil studies of the enclosed heathlands of the Lizard Peninsula,Cornwall

Summary The heathland vegetation of the Lizard Peninsula, Cornwall, which had been formerly enclosed for agricultural purposes and allowed to revert to heathland, was compared with unenclosed areas. The enclosed vegetation tended to be more complex and intermediate between two of the main heath types found on the Lizard, Short and Tall Heath (sensu Coombe & Frost 1956a). The concentrations of exchangeable calcium, sodium and magnesium in the soils of the enclosed heaths were also intermediate between those of the two unenclosed vegetation types, whilst exchangeable potassium and total phosphorus concentrations were higher, perhaps a relic of past management. The enclosed heaths are therefore distinctive entities in their own right, although they are related to the unenclosed vegetation types. The relevance to healthland conservation on the Lizard Peninsula is discussed.Species nomenclature follows Clapham, Tutin & Warburg (1962) for higher plants and Watson (1968) for bryophytes.We would like to thank Drs. D.E. Coombe and L.C. Frost for considerable assistance throughout this work. Professor P. Bannister and Mr. M.O. Hill assisted with numerical analysis, and Dr. D.F. Chamberlain confirmed the identification of bryophytes. Professor A.D. Bradshaw kindly allowed one of us (R.H.M.) the facilities of his department to complete this work. N.E.R.C. are thanked for financial support.     

The Context of Ecosystem Theory

Arthur George Tansley's paper “The Temporal Genetic Series as a Means of Approach to Philosophy,” published here for the first time, provides the philosophical context for the development of his ecosystem theory. His rejection of idealist reasoning, his concern with ethics, and his long standing interest in Freudian psychology as well as mechanistic reasoning comprised the intellectual underpinnings for his thinking on systems and ecosystem theory.     

Counselling as death approaches: is the New Yorker really the best we can do?

An expert in palliative care has taken exception to a recent CMAJ article dealing with euthanasia. That column praised a magazine article in which a son explained why he and his family had helped their mother commit suicide in the face of a terminal illness. Dr. Balfour Mount says the article was misleading and offers no credible solutions to the issues surrounding palliative care.     

Mach's phenomenalism and the British reception of Mendelism

The assimilation of Mendel's paper into Britain took place in an Edwardian social context. This paper concentrates on the interplay of empirical and philosophical issues in this reception. A feature of the British reception of mendelism, not duplicated elsewhere, was the role of phenomenalist philosophies of science as developed by the physicist-mathematician and scientific methodologist Karl Pearson from the philosophical positions of Austrian physicist Ernst Mach and British mathematician William Clifford. Pearson's philosophy of science forms the background to his subsequent collaboration with the zoologist W.F.R. Weldon. In this collaborative work, Pearson developed powerful statistical techniques for analyzing Weldon's empirical data on organic variation. Pearson's statistical analysis of causation and his rejection of hidden entities and causes in the explanation of evolutionary change formed the philosophical component of this program. The arguments of Pearson and Weldon were first brought to bear against the pre-Mendel 'discontinuist' analyses of variation of William Bateson. The introduction of Mendel's paper into these empirical and methodological debates consequently resulted in mathematically sophisticated attacks on Mendel's claims by Pearson and Weldon. This paper summarizes this history and argues for the creative importance of this biometrical resistance to Mendelism.