Evelyn M. Witkin (1921-2023)

Pioneer of cell mutagenesis and DNA repair research.

"Batesonian Mendelism" and "Pearsonian biometry": shedding new light on the controversy between William Bateson and Karl Pearson

This paper contributes to the ongoing reassessment of the controversy between William Bateson and Karl Pearson by characterising what we call "Batesonian Mendelism" and "Pearsonian biometry" as coherent and competing scientific outlooks. Contrary to the thesis that such a controversy stemmed from diverging theoretical commitments on the nature of heredity and evolution, we argue that Pearson's and Bateson's alternative views on those processes ultimately relied on different appraisals of the methodological value of the statistical apparatus developed by Francis Galton. Accordingly, we contend that Bateson's belief in the primacy of cross-breeding experiments over statistical analysis constituted a minimal methodological unifying condition ensuring the internal coherence of Batesonian Mendelism. Moreover, this same belief implied a view of the study of heredity and evolution as an experimental endeavour and a conception of heredity and evolution as fundamentally discontinuous processes. Similarly, we identify a minimal methodological unifying condition for Pearsonian biometry, which we characterise as the view that experimental methods had to be subordinate to statistical analysis, according to methodological standards set by biometrical research. This other methodological commitment entailed conceiving the study of heredity and evolution as subsumable under biometry and primed Pearson to regard discontinuous hereditary and evolutionary processes as exceptions to a statistical norm. Finally, we conclude that Batesonian Mendelism and Pearsonian biometry represented two potential versions of a single genetics-based evolutionary synthesis since the methodological principles and the phenomena that played a central role in the former were also acknowledged by the latter-albeit as fringe cases-and conversely.

Mimush Sheep and the Spectre of Inbreeding: Historical Background for Festetics's Organic and Genetic Laws Four Decades Before Mendel's Experiments in Peas

The upheavals of late eighteenth century Europe encouraged people to demand greater liberties, including the freedom to explore the natural world, individually or as part of investigative associations. The Moravian Agricultural and Natural Science Society, organized by Christian Carl André, was one such group of keen practitioners of theoretical and applied scientific disciplines. Headquartered in the "Moravian Manchester" Brünn (nowadays Brno), the centre of the textile industry, society members debated the improvement of sheep wool to fulfil the needs of the Habsburg armies fighting in the Napoleonic Wars. Wool, as the raw material of soldiers' clothing, could influence the war's outcome. During the early nineteenth century, wool united politics, economics, and science in Brno, where breeders and natural scientists investigated the possibilities of increasing wool production. They regularly discussed how "climate" or "seed" characteristics influenced wool quality and quantity. Breeders and academics put their knowledge into immediate practice to create sheep with better wool traits through consanguineous matching of animals and artificial selection. This apparent disregard for the incest taboo, however, was viewed as violating natural laws and cultural norms. The debate intensified between 1817 and 1820, when a Hungarian veteran soldier, sheep breeder, and self-taught natural scientist, Imre (Emmerich) Festetics, displayed his inbred Mimush sheep, which yielded wool extremely well suited for the fabrication of light but strong garments. Members of the Society questioned whether such "bastard sheep" would be prone to climatic degeneration, should be regarded as freaks of nature, or could be explained by natural laws. The exploration of inbreeding in sheep began to be distilled into hereditary principles that culminated in 1819 with Festetics's "laws of organic functions" and "genetic laws of nature," four decades before Gregor Johann Mendel's seminal work on heredity in peas.

Gregor Johann Mendel: From peasant to priest, pedagogue, and prelate

Gregor Mendel was an Augustinian priest in the Monastery of St. Thomas in Brünn (Brno, Czech Republic) as well as a civilian employee who taught natural history and physics in the Brünn Modern School. The monastery's secular function was to provide teachers for the public schools across Moravia. It was a cultural, educational, and artistic center with an elite core of friar-teachers with a well-stocked library and other amenities including a gourmet kitchen. It was wealthy, with far-flung holdings yielding income from agricultural productions. Mendel had failed his tryout as a parish priest and did not complete his examination for teaching certification despite 2 y of study at the University of Vienna. In addition to his teaching and religious obligations, Mendel carried out daily meteorological and astronomical observations, cared for the monastery's fruit orchard and beehives, and tended plants in the greenhouse and small outdoor gardens. In the years 1856 to 1863, he carried out experiments on heredity of traits in garden peas regarded as revolutionary today but not widely recognized during his lifetime and until 16 y after his death. In 1868 he was elected abbot of the monastery, a significantly elevated position in the ecclesiastical and civil hierarchy. While he had hoped to be elected, and was honored to accept, he severely underestimated its administrative responsibilities and gradually had to abandon his scientific interests. The last decade of his life was marred by an ugly dispute with civil authorities over monastery taxation.

Mendel the fraud? A social history of truth in genetics

Two things about Gregor Mendel are common knowledge: first, that he was the "monk in the garden" whose experiments with peas in mid-nineteenth-century Moravia became the starting point for genetics; second, that, despite that exalted status, there is something fishy, maybe even fraudulent, about the data that Mendel reported. Although the notion that Mendel's numbers were, in statistical terms, too good to be true was well understood almost immediately after the famous "rediscovery" of his work in 1900, the problem became widely discussed and agonized over only from the 1960s, for reasons having as much to do with Cold War geopolitics as with traditional concerns about the objectivity of science. Appreciating the historical origins of the problem as we have inherited it can be a helpful step in shifting the discussion in more productive directions, scientific as well as historiographic.

Transitions in development - an interview with Tom Nowakowski

Tom Nowakowski is an Assistant Professor at University of California San Francisco (UCSF), where he uses single-cell sequencing technologies to study neurodevelopment. He is also a Chan Zuckerberg Biohub Investigator and a Next Generation Leader at the Allen Institute for Brain Science. We met with Tom over Zoom to hear more about his career, his transition to becoming a group leader and his plans for the future.

Beyond Mendelism and Biometry

Historiographical analyses of the development of genetics in the first decade of the 20th century have been to a great extent framed in the context of the Mendelian-Biometrician controversy. Much has been discussed on the nature, origin, development, and legacy of the controversy. However, such a framework is becoming less useful and fruitful. This paper challenges the traditional historiography framed by the Mendelian-Biometrician distinction. It argues that the Mendelian-Biometrician distinction fails to reflect the theoretical and methodological diversity in the controversy. It also argues that the Mendelian-Biometrician distinction is not helpful to make a full understanding of the development of genetics in the first decade of the twentieth century.

Dosage compensation in Drosophila in the 1960s: a personal historical perspective

Early genetic studies with Drosophila revealed similar mutant phenotypes for many X-linked genes, in males with one and in females with two copies of the mutant allele following the XY/XX mode of sex determination. These observations led to evocation of the phenomenon of dosage compensation. By the 1960s, contrasting theories were advanced by H. J. Muller and R. B. Goldschmidt to explain the equalized expression of many X-linked genes despite their dosage difference in male and female flies. Evidence from genetic studies led Muller to propose existence of many modifiers whose action on individual X-linked genes resulted, through a 'piecemeal' regulation, in equalized expression of the dosage compensated X-linked genes, while Goldschmidt believed that invocation of multiple modifiers or compensators was unnecessary since dosage compensation was a direct outcome of the sex-specific physiologies of male and female flies. Muller did not agree with some cytological studies that suggested that the single X-chromosome in male cells works twice as hard as each of the two X-chromosomes in female cells (hyperactive male X model), but preferred partial repression of each X-chromosome in female flies. This historical perspective relates these divergent theories with my own doctoral work in A. S. Mukherjee's laboratory at Calcutta University, which, while ruling out Golschmidt's sex-physiology theory, established cell-autonomous regulation of the earlier proposed hyperactivity of the single X in male Drosophila in a piecemeal manner.

John W. (Jan) Drake: A Biochemical View of a Geneticist Par Excellence

John W. Drake died 02-02-2020, a mathematical palindrome, which he would have enjoyed, given his love of "word play and logic," as stated in his obituary and echoed by his family, friends, students, and colleagues. Many aspects of Jan's career have been reviewed previously, including his early years as a Caltech graduate student, and when he was editor-in-chief, with the devoted assistance of his wife Pam, of this journal for 15 impactful years. During his editorship, he raised the profile of GENETICS as the flagship journal of the Genetics Society of America and inspired and contributed to the creation of the Perspectives column, coedited by Jim Crow and William Dove. At the same time, Jan was building from scratch the Laboratory of Molecular Genetics on the newly established Research Triangle Park campus of the National Institute of Environmental Health Science, which he headed for 30 years. This commentary offers a unique perspective on Jan's legacy; we showcase Jan's 1969 benchmark discovery of antimutagenic T4 DNA polymerases and the research by three generations (and counting) of scientists whose research stems from that groundbreaking discovery. This is followed by a brief discussion of Jan's passion: his overriding interest in analyzing mutation rates across species. Several anecdotal stories are included to bring alive one of Jan's favorite phrases, "to think like a geneticist." We feature Jan's genetical approach to mutation studies, along with the biochemistry of DNA polymerase function, our area of expertise. But in the end, we acknowledge, as Jan did, that genetics, also known as in vivo biochemistry, prevails.

A perspective on the early days of RAS research

The name of the oncogene, ras, has its origin in studies of murine leukemia viruses in the 1960s by Jenny Harvey (H-ras) and by Werner Kirsten (K-ras) which, at high doses, produced sarcomas in rats. Transforming retroviruses were isolated, and its oncogene was named ras after rat sarcoma. From 1979, cellular ras sequences with transforming properties were identified by transfection of tumor DNA initially by Robert Weinberg from rodent tumors, and the isolation of homologous oncogenes from human tumors soon followed, including HRAS and KRAS, and a new member of the family named NRAS. I review these discoveries, placing emphasis on the pioneering research of Christopher Marshall and Alan Hall, who subsequently made immense contributions to our understanding of the functions of RAS and related small GTPases to signal transduction pathways, cell structure, and the behavior of normal and malignant cells.

Subversive affinities: Embracing soviet science in late 1940s Romania

This article discusses the appropriation of Soviet science in Romania during the late 1940s. To achieve this, I discuss various publications on biology, anthropology, heredity and genetics. In a climate of major political change, following the end of the Second World War, all scientific fields in Romania were gradually subjected to political pressures to adapt and change according to a new ideological context. Yet the adoption of Soviet science during the late 1940s was not a straightforward process of scientific acculturation. Whilst the deference to Soviet authors remained consistent through most of Romanian scientific literature at the time, what is perhaps less visible is the attempt to refashion Romanian science itself in order to serve the country's new political imaginary and social transformation. Some Romanian biologists and physicians embraced Soviet scientific theories as a demonstration of their loyalty to the newly established regime. Others, however, were remained committed to local and Western scientific traditions they deemed essential to the survival of their discipline. A critical reassessment of the late 1940s is essential to an understanding of these dissensions as well as of the overall political and institutional constraints shaping the development of a new politics of science in communist Romania.

Perspective: Linkage Maps, Communities of Geneticists, and Genome Databases

The Thomas Hunt Morgan Medal recognizes lifetime contributions to the field of genetics. The 2020 recipient is David Botstein of Calico Labs and Princeton University, recognizing his multiple contributions to genetics, including the collaborative development of methods for defining genetic pathways, mapping genomes, and analyzing gene expression.

Friedrich Miescher's Discovery in the Historiography of Genetics: From Contamination to Confusion, from Nuclein to DNA

In 1869, Johann Friedrich Miescher discovered a new substance in the nucleus of living cells. The substance, which he called nuclein, is now known as DNA, yet both Miescher's name and his theoretical ideas about nuclein are all but forgotten. This paper traces the trajectory of Miescher's reception in the historiography of genetics. To his critics, Miescher was a "contaminator," whose preparations were impure. Modern historians portrayed him as a "confuser," whose misunderstandings delayed the development of molecular biology. Each of these portrayals reflects the disciplinary context in which Miescher's work was evaluated. Using archival sources to unearth Miescher's unpublished speculations-including an analogy between the hereditary material and language, and a speculation that a series of asymmetric carbon atoms could account for hereditary variation-this paper clarifies the ways in which the past was judged through the lens of contemporary concerns. It also shows how organization, structure, function, and information were already being considered when nuclein was first discovered nearly 150 years ago.

Soviet genetics and the communist party: was it all bad and wrong, or none at all?

The history of genetics and the evolutionary theory in the USSR is multidimensional. Only in the 1920s after the October Revolution, and due in large part to that Revolution, the science of genetics arose in Soviet Russia. Genetics was limited, but not obliterated in the second half of the 1950s, and was restored in the late 1960s, after the resignation of Nikita S. Khrushchev. In the subsequent period, Soviet genetics experienced a resurgence, though one not as successful as geneticists would have liked. The Communist party bodies interfered constantly, but with different consequences for the development of genetics than when the earlier periods. The main troubles for Soviet genetics occurred during the unique, well-known, most contradictory, and tragic Stalinist period. The start date for the defeat of genetics is also known-August, 1948. In the social history of science and especially in the history of evolutionary biology (including genetics) it is natural, necessary, and even expected to adopt an evolutionary approach. In particular, historians of science need to consider and explain the evolution and dependence of Soviet science in regards to the evolution of Soviet society, the Soviet state, and the Communist party. This evolutionary perspective reflects the standards of evolutionary biology, evolutionary macrosociology, and also the history of science.

Illuminating Genetic Mysteries of the Dead Sea Scrolls

The discovery of the 2,000-year-old Dead Sea Scrolls had an incomparable impact on the historical understanding of Judaism and Christianity. "Piecing together" scroll fragments is like solving jigsaw puzzles with an unknown number of missing parts. We used the fact that most scrolls are made from animal skins to "fingerprint" pieces based on DNA sequences. Genetic sorting of the scrolls illuminates their textual relationship and historical significance. Disambiguating the contested relationship between Jeremiah fragments supplies evidence that some scrolls were brought to the Qumran caves from elsewhere; significantly, they demonstrate that divergent versions of Jeremiah circulated in parallel throughout Israel (ancient Judea). Similarly, patterns discovered in non-biblical scrolls, particularly the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice, suggest that the Qumran scrolls represent the broader cultural milieu of the period. Finally, genetic analysis divorces debated fragments from the Qumran scrolls. Our study demonstrates that interdisciplinary approaches enrich the scholar's toolkit.

From Biochemistry to Genetics in a Flash of Light

The Genetics Society of America (GSA) Medal recognizes researchers who have made outstanding contributions to the field of genetics in the past 15 years. The 2019 GSA Medal is awarded to Bonnie L. Bassler of Princeton University and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute in recognition of her groundbreaking studies of bacterial chemical communication and regulation of group behaviors.

Before Watson and Crick in 1953 Came Friedrich Miescher in 1869

In 1869, the young Swiss biochemist Friedrich Miescher discovered the molecule we now refer to as DNA, developing techniques for its extraction. In this paper we explain why his name is all but forgotten, and his role in the history of genetics is mostly overlooked. We focus on the role of national rivalries and disciplinary turf wars in shaping historical memory, and on how the story we tell shapes our understanding of the science. We highlight that Miescher could just as correctly be portrayed as the person who understood the chemical nature of chromatin (before the term existed), and the first to suggest how stereochemistry might serve as the basis for the transmission of hereditary variation.

Genetics without genes? The centrality of genetic markers in livestock genetics and genomics

In this paper, rather than focusing on genes as an organising concept around which historical considerations of theory and practice in genetics are elucidated, we place genetic markers at the heart of our analysis. This reflects their central role in the subject of our account, livestock genetics concerning the domesticated pig, Sus scrofa. We define a genetic marker as a (usually material) element existing in different forms in the genome, that can be identified and mapped using a variety (and often combination) of quantitative, classical and molecular genetic techniques. The conjugation of pig genome researchers around the common object of the marker from the early-1990s allowed the distinctive theories and approaches of quantitative and molecular genetics concerning the size and distribution of gene effects to align (but never fully integrate) in projects to populate genome maps. Critical to this was the nature of markers as ontologically inert, internally heterogeneous and relational. Though genes as an organising and categorising principle remained important, the particular concatenation of limitations, opportunities, and intended research goals of the pig genetics community, meant that a progressively stronger focus on the identification and mapping of markers rather than genes per se became a hallmark of the community. We therefore detail a different way of doing genetics to more gene-centred accounts. By doing so, we reveal the presence of practices, concepts and communities that would otherwise be hidden.

E Pluribus Unum: The Fungal Kingdom as a Rosetta Stone for Biology and Medicine

THE Genetics Society of America's (GSA's) Edward Novitski Prize recognizes a single experimental accomplishment or a body of work in which an exceptional level of creativity, and intellectual ingenuity, has been used to design and execute scientific experiments to solve a difficult problem in genetics. The 2019 recipient is Joseph Heitman, who is recognized for his work on fungal pathogens of humans and for ingenious experiments using yeast to identify the molecular targets of widely used immunosuppressive drugs. The latter work, part of Heitman's postdoctoral research, proved to be a seminal contribution to the discovery of the conserved Target of Rapamycin (TOR) pathway. In his own research group, a recurring theme has been the linking of fundamental insights in fungal biology to medically important problems. His studies have included defining fungal mating-type loci, including their evolution and links to virulence, and illustrating convergent transitions from outcrossing to inbreeding in fungal pathogens of plants and animals. He has led efforts to establish new genetic and genomic methods for studying pathogenesis in Cryptococcus species. Heitman's group also discovered unisexual reproduction, a novel mode of fungal reproduction with implications for pathogen evolution and the origins of sexual reproduction.

The Summer Institute in Statistical Genetics

The Elizabeth W. Jones Award for Excellence in Education recognizes an individual or group that has had significant, sustained impact on genetics education at any level, from K-12 through graduate school and beyond. Bruce Weir (University of Washington) is the 2019 recipient in recognition of his work training thousands of researchers in the rigorous use of statistical analysis methods for genetic and genomic data. His contributions fall into three categories: the acclaimed Summer Institute in Statistical Genetics, which has been held continuously for 23 years and has trained > 10,000 researchers worldwide; the popular graduate-level textbook Genetic Data Analysis; and the training of a growing number of forensic geneticists during the rise of DNA evidence in courts around the world.

Seeing nature as a 'universal store of genes': How biological diversity became 'genetic resources', 1890-1940

Till late in the 20th century, biological diversity has been understood and addressed in terms of "genetic resources". This paper proposes a history of this "genetic resources" concept and the biopolitical practices it was related to. A semantic history of the 'resource' idiom first sheds light on how, in the age of empires and fossil industrialism, the Earth came to be considered as a stock of static mineral and living reserves. Then we follow how the gene became the unit of this "resourcist" view of biological diversity as static stocks of entities open to prospection, harnessing and "conservation". Erwin Baur, Nikolai I. Vavilov, Aleksandr S. Serebrovsky and Hermann J. Muller were key biologists who introduced a spatial turn to the gene concept. Beyond the space-time of Neo-mendelian and Morganian laboratory genetics, genes became understood though a geographical gaze at a planetary scale. The world became a "universal store of genes" (Vavilov, 1929). From 1926 to World War 2, this advent of genes as new global epistemic objects went hand in hand with genes' new modes of existence as geopolitical objects. The article documents Interwar years' scramble for genes as well as first collaborative international efforts to conserve and exchange genetic material (which prefigured post WW2 initiatives), and situates the rise of the 'genetic resources' category within mid 20th century's imperialism, high-modernism, agricultural modernization and biopolitics.

Sex and the Single Fly: A Perspective on the Career of Bruce S. Baker

Bruce Baker, a preeminent Drosophila geneticist who made fundamental contributions to our understanding of the molecular genetic basis of sex differences, passed away July 1, 2018 at the age of 72. Members of Bruce's laboratory remember him as an intensely dedicated, rigorous, creative, deep-thinking, and fearless scientist. His trainees also remember his strong commitment to teaching students at every level. Bruce's career studying sex differences had three major epochs, where the laboratory was focused on: (1) sex determination and dosage compensation, (2) the development of sex-specific structures, and (3) the molecular genetic basis for sex differences in behavior. Several members of the Baker laboratory have come together to honor Bruce by highlighting some of the laboratory's major scientific contributions in these areas.

The emergence of genetics from Festetics' sheep through Mendel's peas to Bateson's chickens

It is now common knowledge-but also a misbelief-that in 1905 William Bateson coined the term 'genetics' for the first time in his letter to Adam Sedgwick. This important term was already formulated 81 years ago in a paper written by a sheepbreeding noble called Imre (Emmerich) Festetics, who still remains somewhat mysterious even today. The articles written by Festetics summarized the results of a series of lasting and elegant breeding experiments he had conducted on his own property. Selecting the best rams, Festetics had painstakingly crossed and backcrossed his best sheep to reach better wool quality. These experiments later turned out to reveal a better understanding of inheritance outlining genetics as a new branch of natural sciences.

From R.A. Fisher's 1918 Paper to GWAS a Century Later

The genetics and evolution of complex traits, including quantitative traits and disease, have been hotly debated ever since Darwin. A century ago, a paper from R.A. Fisher reconciled Mendelian and biometrical genetics in a landmark contribution that is now accepted as the main foundation stone of the field of quantitative genetics. Here, we give our perspective on Fisher's 1918 paper in the context of how and why it is relevant in today's genome era. We mostly focus on human trait variation, in part because Fisher did so too, but the conclusions are general and extend to other natural populations, and to populations undergoing artificial selection.

Eugenic concerns, scientific practices: international relations in the establishment of psychiatric genetics in Germany, Britain, the USA and Scandinavia, c.1910-60

The article describes the emergence of research programmes, institutions and activities of the early protagonists in the field of psychiatric genetics: Ernst Rüdin in Munich, Eliot Slater in London, Franz Kallmann in New York and Erik Essen-Möller in Lund. During the 1930s and well into the Nazi period, the last three had been research fellows at the German Research Institute for Psychiatry in Munich. It is documented that there was a continuous mutual exchange of scientific ideas and practices between these actors, and that in all four contexts there were intrinsic relations between eugenic motivations and genetic research, but with specific national adaptations.

Mariana Wolfner: 2018 Genetics Society of America Medal

The Genetics Society of America (GSA) Medal recognizes researchers who have made outstanding contributions to the field of genetics in the past 15 years. The 2018 GSA Medal has been awarded to Mariana Wolfner of Cornell University for her work on reproductive processes that occur around the time of fertilization. This includes characterization of seminal proteins in Drosophila melanogaster, which has uncovered a wealth of information about sexual conflict in evolution.

[The development of genetics teaching in China in the last four decades and its future prospect]

Chinese genetics educators have carried out a comprehensive and systematic exploration and reform since 1978. With the guidance and help of the Genetics Society of China, they have made significant strides in the fields of genetics teaching system, publication of genetics textbooks, content of genetics teaching, workshop on genetics teaching, experimental teaching, application of advanced techniques, etc. These efforts have made remarkable achievements and promoted the vitality of genetics. The comprehensive development of education and teaching has trained a large number of excellent genetic talents for the development of China's economy and society. Here, we sum up the overall achievements of the teaching reform and propose some suggestions on the future development of genetics teaching in China, hoping that the quality of genetics teaching in China will take a new step in the new era.

James Cossar Ewart and the Origins of the Animal Breeding Research Department in Edinburgh, 1895-1920

In 1919 the Animal Breeding Research Department was established in Edinburgh. This Department, later renamed the Institute of Animal Genetics, forged an international reputation, eventually becoming the centrepiece of a cluster of new genetics research units and institutions in Edinburgh after the Second World War. Yet despite its significance for institutionalising animal genetics research in the UK, the origins and development of the Department have not received as much scholarly attention as its importance warrants. This paper sheds new light on Edinburgh's place in early British genetics by drawing upon recently catalogued archival sources including the papers of James Cossar Ewart, Regius Professor of Natural History at the University of Edinburgh between 1882 and 1927. Although presently a marginal figure in genetics historiography, Ewart established two sites for experimental animal breeding work between 1895 and 1911 and played a central role in the founding of Britain's first genetics lectureship, also in 1911. These early efforts helped to secure government funding in 1913. However, a combination of the First World War, bureaucratic problems and Ewart's personal ambitions delayed the creation of the Department and the appointment of its director by another six years. This paper charts the institutionalisation of animal breeding and genetics research in Edinburgh within the wider contexts of British genetics and agriculture in the early twentieth century.

[The Dawn of Modernity: Giovanni Boccaccio's "The Decameron" and the Tradition of Genetic Understanding]

"The Decameron" by Giovanni Boccaccio is a work which stands between the Middle Ages and Modernity. There are theories which postulate that concepts of identity and individuality, which arose with the dawn of Modernity, have an influence on mental illness. We chose a hermeneutic approach towards "The Decameron" to analyse the depiction of a changing society, of love, mental suffering and the role of therapeutic interventions. We conclude that Boccaccio showed an interest in intrapsychic mechanisms, an idea pertaining to Modernity, and discuss this idea in light of today's psychiatry and Karl Jaspers' concept of "genetic understanding".

Thomas Hunt Morgan and the invisible gene: the right tool for the job

The paper analyzes the early theory building process of Thomas Hunt Morgan (1866-1945) from the 1910s to the 1930s and the introduction of the invisible gene as a main explanatory unit of heredity. Morgan's work marks the transition between two different styles of thought. In the early 1900s, he shifted from an embryological study of the development of the organism to a study of the mechanism of genetic inheritance and gene action. According to his contemporaries as well as to historiography, Morgan separated genetics from embryology, and the gene from the whole organism. Other scholars identified an underlying embryological focus in Morgan's work throughout his career. Our paper aims to clarify the debate by concentrating on Morgan's theory building-characterized by his confidence in the power of experimental methods, and carefully avoiding any ontological commitment towards the gene-and on the continuity of the questions to be addressed by both embryology and genetics.

J. B. S. Haldane's passage to India: reconfiguring science

In 1957, John Burdon Sanderson (JBS) Haldane (1892-1964), the world's leading population geneticist, committed political radical and one of the three 'founders' of neo-Darwinian 'Modern Synthesis' of twentieth century biology (Sarkar 1995; Haldane 1932; Cain 2009; Smocovitis 1996), ostentatiously renounced both his British citizenship and his prestigious chair at University College London. In a decisively and very public anti-imperial gesture, ostensibly played out as a reaction to the Suez crisis (although his discontent was simmering for quite some time), Haldane, and his partner, geneticistHelen Spurway (1917-1977), turned their backs on Britain and set off to India to offer their considerable scientific prestige, their inexhaustible organisational abilities, along with their leading Journal of Genetics, behind the efforts to build a 'modern', democratic India emerging out of the ashes of colonial rule. Haldane's support of independent India was a major triumph for the new state, itself in the midst of negotiating a fine balance between rapid modernization through science and technology and an postcolonial respect for traditional 'non-Western' values. Although his time in India was short, Haldane's few years in India were marked by a frenzied engagement with the new India, its science, its government and its culture (Rao 2013).