Biology Reference
In-Depth Information
I do not think that “Elemente” correspond well to “genes.” Here are several key
paragraphs where “Elemente” occurs in Mendel's paper.
This development proceeds in accord with a constant law based on the material composi-
tion and arrangement of the elements that attained a viable union in the cell. (Mendel 1966
[1866], p. 42)
In the formation of these cells all elements present participate in completely free and
uniform fashion, and only those that differ separate from each other. In this manner the
production of as many kinds of germinal and pollen cells would be possible as there are
combinations of potentially formative elements. (Mendel 1966 [1866], p. 43)
The distinguishing traits of two plants can, after all, be caused only by differences in the
composition and grouping of the elements existing in dynamic interaction in their primor-
dial cells. (Mendel 1966 [1866], p. 43)
Although these paragraphs can be interpreted easily in terms of the later
Mendelian theory of genetics, no occurrence of the word clearly indicates that
those elements are particulate genes or Mendelian factors . These statements prove
only that elements exist, work within cells, are responsible for traits of plants, and are
responsible for producing different types of germ cells. It is possible and plausible to
interpret Mendel's text as saying that many elements are jointly responsible for a
unitary trait. What is more, in Mendel's discussion about experiments on Phaseolus
at the end of his 1866 paper, the occurrence of signs A 1 and A 2 is puzzling and might
refer to multiple “elements” for one color or color range. 9 So Mendel's use of
“element” did not conclusively prove that he had an embryonic idea of the gene.
Darden ( 1991 ) reviewed some of the historical literature about Mendel's story,
concluding that “a complete consensus has not emerged among Mendel scholars.
A means of choosing among competing historical interpretations is often difficult,
because the extant historical evidence is insufficient and underdetermines any one
account” (Darden 1991 , p. 40). Regarding the issue we are concerned with, I think
that we could choose a historical account which is most coherent with Mendel's text
(see the next section).
In sum, the historical issues concerning Mendel's discovery can be expressed in
the following questions:
Q1. Did Mendel discover the two laws of heredity?
Q2. Did Mendel have an embryonic idea of what was later called a Mendelian
factor or gene?
Q3. Did Mendel play a key role in the research on heredity?
These questions are interrelated, but they can be answered separately. One will
get three affirmative answers according to the orthodox view. Scholars who agree
with the paradigm-based account will answer all questions in the negative. Some
9 In the discussion, Mendel said, “Were blossom color A composed of independent
traits
A 1 + A 2
, which produce the overall impression of crimson coloration, then, through fertilization
with the differing trait of white color a , hybrids associations A 1 a + A 2 a +
...
would have to be
formed” (Mendel 1966 , p. 35). This seems to mean that A 1 and A 2 correspond to different elements
responsible for one and the same characteristic A .
...
Search WWH ::




Custom Search