R&D Magazine Blogs

Rdmag.com - Blogs

Was Mendel Darwin’s Missed Opportunity?

(Paul Livingstone) Permanent link

Paul Headshot with Name and TitleThe editors at Wired Magazine have pointed out that today is the anniversary of Gregor Mendel's presentation of a painstakingly produced paper about his breeding experiments on some 28,000 pea plants. It happened to be the classic paper that quietly introduced the world to the basic laws of heredity. These laws would help explain and substantiate the theories of Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace.

But a missed connection would help guarantee the obscurity of this work for years to come. Mendel, who tended his plants while living as an Augustinian monk in what is now the Czech Republic, lived a very different life than traveler, lecturer, and science celebrity Darwin. But they do have a shocking connection, pointed out by Randy Alfred’s post in Wired: Mendel had actually sent a copy of his first paper to Darwin in 1866, who is believed to have never read the priceless work because the pages had never been cut.

Of course, Darwin could have cracked open the pages during his many bed-ridden hours in these years, read Mendel’s work, which was first presented in 1865, and not gleaned useful information. But that seems hardly possible—Darwin was conducting his own similar research on orchids and climbing plants during the 1860s. And later heredity researchers often found themselves duplicating the work of the monk who died in 1884. His Law of Segregation and Law of Independent Assortment are now standard high school biology class fare.

I believe Darwin may have shelved the work intentionally. By 1865, the theorist, in a state of nearly constant illness, had already received a lifetime’s worth of praise and criticism for his ideas. Many of the jabs stemmed from those who wished to unite theories of natural selection with faith—namely Christian faith. He was in a constant battle with his peers over questions of faith, and later a target of ridicule by the public for his perceived attacks on it.

Darwin may also have assumed Mendel was a potential rival. The competitive Englishman had had his fill of those already. A letter from Alfred Russel Wallace, who concurrently (or maybe previously) pioneered the tenets of natural selection, had several years earlier forced Darwin to publish some of his “Natural Selection” work before he was finished writing it. And we all know the ghost of Wallace would haunt Darwin’s legacy long after his death.

Sensitive to the issue of intellectual property, Darwin may not have wanted to cloud his own individual effort to explain heredity by discovering someone else had all of the answers. Or even some of the answers.

It’s a shame—it would have been a treat to learn what the so-called “father of evolution” thought of the work of the “father of genetics”. And vice versa.

Ironically, of course, Mendel—not often called the father of genetics—was uninterested in fame or accolades. And it would not be the last injustice suffered by Mendel’s work. Embroiled in a dispute over taxes on religious institutions, he abandoned scientific work and his experiments with bees. After his death the succeeding abbott burned all of Mendel’s papers to mark an end to the tax dispute.

He, like Wallace, would have to be rediscovered.

 


Dear Paul,

Excellent article and I can really relate to your alternative schemes. Did you know about Charles Darwin's grandfather, Erasmus Darwin? He was a naturalist and an evolutionist before Charles's birth. I think it is possible that Charles may have got some ideas from him.
Charles Darwin has been an icon for me. Both what you wrote about his ignored link with Mendel and what I recently discovered about Erasmus Darwin have put a few tiny dents in his image. However, I still think the world owes a debt of gratitude to Darwin III for opening our minds to some alternative to direct creation and appreciate that standing up for his convictions was a courageous act of Darwin's.

Hans van Leeuwen
Posted by: Leeuwen at 2/8/2010 5:40 PM


Paul,
You're way off-base. Go and read 'Journey of the Beagle', or Darwin's biography (e.g., the one written by his son, Sir Francis Darwin). In both books, you'll also learn a lot about his father and grandfather (both physicians, as I recall).

Darwin did indeed seek recognition by his peers for his work, as do all scientists, but he was very far from the kind of person you suggested. When Wallace sent him a draft of his paper about the mutability of species asking his opinion about his ideas, Darwin had already spent 20 years assembling his research and writing his own thesis about the origin of species. The problem was that to publish his thesis/theory at that time in mid-Victorian England (mid 1800s), when the Church of England controlled much of daily life and thought, would have been heresy.

It's a strong testament to his honesty and character, that, as soon as he received Wallace's letter, Darwin went to his life-long mentor, John Henslow, and said, essentially, well, I guess I'm scooped and I cannot now publish my thesis. But Henslow convinced him to publish his work, saying that he owed as much to the effort he had already put into the research. Julian Huxley had a part in arranging for Wallace and Darwin to present their findings and theories together to a meeting of the Linnean Society.
Here's the relevant link:
http://www.linnean.org/index.php?id=380
Read paragraph III, in particular

As for dissing Mendel's efforts, Darwin loved nothing more than to discuss science with others with open minds. At the time of Mendel's publication, Darwin was agonized by all the negative opinion his (and Wallace's) theory had provoked. I bet he was a bit busy... besides, as you point out, he was a very sick man at that stage (probably the result of contracting Chagas from the beetles he experimented with 30 years earlier on the Beagle) and would have had little time for much other than trying to write up the various papers he published in the 10-15 years before his death.
Posted by: nquigley at 2/11/2010 2:11 PM


RE: Hans
Thanks for reading! I regret that this came across as critical of Darwin. Whether or not you subscribe to his theories (as I do), the impact of his work was monumental and nothing can diminish it. I was merely trying to understand why he overlooked this critical bit of research, and tried to imagine his thinking at the time. Failing an unwillingness to review the work, I can only guess that he overlooked it, perhaps for some of the reasons I suggested.
Posted by: Paul Livingstone at 2/12/2010 10:30 AM


RE: nquigley
I have read two of Darwin's published works, but very little in detail about his life, so I will absolutely pick up these books you recommended and learn more about him. I'm glad to hear you believe he would not diss Mendel knowingly. I tend to agree, but I wanted feedback from others more knowledgeable than I. I honestly think he didn't know what he had in Mendel's research and I am finding that the 1860s were a tumultuous time in his life.
Posted by: Paul Livingstone at 2/12/2010 10:38 AM


Register or log in to comment on this blog!

New To Market

more

P2i showcases liquid repellent nano-coating for hearing aids
P2i showcases liquid repellent nano-coating for hearing aids

At the AudiologyNOW! 2010 show in San Diego next month, UK-based coatings company P2i will display their relatively new Aridion liquid-repellant nano-coating. Designed for exposure to humidity or sweat, the polymer layer is applied by a pulsed ion gas process that lower’s the hearing aid’s surface energy, coaxing water away from delicate components.

Submersible FlowCAM catches particle images and data in-situ and real-time

Fluid Imaging Technologies recently introduced its Submersible FlowCAM particle and cell imaging and analysis system at Ocean Sciences 2010 in Portland, Ore. The remote sensing platform can be used for continuous, unattended monitoring tethered to research vessels or autonomous submersibles.

Tools & Technology

more

Benchtop NMR analyzer
Benchtop NMR analyzer

Oxford Instruments America, Inc.’s Magnetic Resonance Group released the second generation of its MQC analyzers.

Software solution for microarray image analysis

BioDiscovery Inc. released ImaGene 9.0 for microarray image analysis. The new features include improved memory performance for the latest high density arrays, streamlined processing pipeline focused on image quantification and intensity extraction, and new modular design with options to add modules for analysis of gene/miRNA expression or CGH data.

Advertisement

Advertisement