Mendel and the Path to Genetics: Portraying Science as a Social Process

Science and Education

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 293-324

  Kampourakis, Kostas ^a  

^a Geitonas School   (Greece)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84874104895     PISSN: 09267220     EISSN: 15731901     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11191-010-9323-2     Document Type: Article

References (98)

1. Allchin, D. (2003). Scientific myth-conceptions. Science Education, 87, 329-351.
2. Allen, G. (1975). Life science in the twentieth century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3. Audesirk, T., Audesirk, G., & Byers, B. E. (2002). Biology: Life on earth (6th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
4. Bateson, W. (1902). Mendel's principles of heredity: A defence. London: Cambridge University Press (available at www. esp. org).
5. Bowler, P. J. (1989). The Mendelian revolution: The emergence of hereditarian concepts in modern science and society. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
6. Bowler, P. J., & Morus, I. R. (2005). Making modern science: A historical survey. Chicago and New York: The University of Chicago Press.
7. Brannigan, A. (1979). The reification of Mendel. Social Studies of Science, 9(4), 423-454.
8. Brooks, W. K. (1883). The law of heredity: A study of the cause of variation and the origin of living organisms (2nd ed.). Baltimore and New York: John Murphy & Co., Publishers.
9. Bulmer, M. (1999). The development of Francis Galton's ideas on the mechanism of heredity. Journal of the History of Biology, 32, 263-292.
10. Burian, R. M. (2000). On the internal dynamics of Mendelian genetics. Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences Series III Sciences de la Vie, 323, 1127-1137.
11. Callender, L. A. (1988). Gregor Mendel: An opponent of descent with modification. History of Science, 26, 41-75.
12. Churchill, F. B. (1970). Hertwig, Weismann, and the meaning of reduction division circa 1890. Isis, 61(4), 428-457.
13. Churchill, F. B. (1987). From heredity theory to Vererbung: The transmission problem, 1850-1915. Isis, 78(3), 336-364.
14. Cobb, M. (2006). Heredity before genetics: A history. Nature Reviews Genetics, 7, 953-958.
15. Correns, C. (1950). [1900] G. Mendel's law concerning the behavior of progeny of varietal hybrids. Genetics, 35, 33-41.
16. Darden, L. (1976). Reasoning in scientific change: Charles Darwin, Hugo de Vries and the discovery of segregation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 7, 127-169.
17. Darden, L. (1985). Hugo de Vries's lecture plates and the discovery of segregation. Annals of Science, 42(3), 233-242.
18. Darwin, C. (1859). On the origin of species by means of natural selection, 1st edn. London: John Murray (available at http://darwin-online. org. uk).
19. Darwin, C. (1868). The variation of animals and plants under domestication, 1st edn. London: John Murray (available at http://darwin-online. org. uk).
20. Darwin, C. (1871). Pangenesis. Nature, 3, 502-503 (available at http://darwin-online. org. uk).
21. de Marrais, R. (1974). The double-edged effect of Sir Francis Galton: A search for the motives in the Biometrician-Mendelian debate. Journal of the History of Biology, 7(1), 141-174.
22. de Vries, H. (1910). [1889] Intracellular pangenesis. Chicago: The Open Court Publishing Co (available at www. esp. org).
23. de Vries, H. (1950). [1900] Concerning the law of segregation of hybrids. Genetics, 35, 30-32.
24. Dunn, L. C. (1991) [1965]. A short history of genetics. Ames Iowa: Iowa State University Press.
25. Endersby, J. (2007). A guinea pig's history of biology. Cambridge Massachusetts and London England: Harvard University Press.
26. Endersby, J. (2009). Darwin on generation, pangenesis and sexual selection. In J. Hodge & G. Radick (Eds.), Cambridge companion to Darwin (2nd ed., pp. 73-95). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27. Fairbanks, D. J., & Rytting, B. (2001). Mendelian controversies: A botanical and historical review. American Journal of Botany, 88(5), 737-752.
28. Falk, R. (2006). Mendel's impact. Science in Context, 19(2), 215-236.
29. Falk, R. (2009). Genetic analysis: A history of genetic thinking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
30. Falk, R., & Sarkar, S. (1991). The real objective of Mendel's paper: A response to Monaghan and Corcos. Biology and Philosophy, 6, 447-451.
31. Fisher, R. A. (1936). Has Mendel's work been rediscovered? Annals of Science, 1, 115-137.
32. Franklin, A., Edwards, A. W. F., Fairbanks, D. J., Hartl, D. L., & Seidenfeld, T. (2008). Ending the Mendel-Fisher controversy. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
33. Galton, F. (1865). Hereditary talent and character. Macmillan's Mag., 12, 157-166, 318-327 (available at http://galton. org).
34. Galton, F. (1871a). Experiments in pangenesis, by breeding from rabbits of a pure variety, into whose circulation blood taken from other varieties had previously been largely transfused. Proceedings of the Royal Society, 19, 393-410 (available at http://galton. org).
35. Galton, F. (1871b). Pangenesis. Nature, 4, 5-6. (available at http://galton. org).
36. Galton, F. (1876). A theory of heredity. Journal of the Anthropological Institute, 5, 329-348 (available at http://galton. org).
37. Galton, F. (1889). Natural inheritance. London: Macmillan (available at http://galton. org).
38. Gasking, E. B. (1959). Why was Mendel's work ignored? Journal of the History of Ideas, 20(1), 60-84.
39. Gayon, J. (1998). Darwinism's struggle for survival: Heredity and the hypothesis of natural selection. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
40. Gillham, N. W. (2001a). A life of Sir Francis Galton: From African explorations to the birth of eugenics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
41. Gillham, N. W. (2001b). Evolution by jumps: Francis Galton and William Bateson and the mechanism of evolutionary change. Genetics, 159, 1383-1392.
42. Gribbin, J. (2003). Science: A history. London: Penguin Books.
43. Griffiths, A. J. F., Gelbart, W. M., Miller, J. H., & Lewontin, R. C. (1999). Modern genetic analysis. New York: WH Freeman and Company.
44. Hartl, D. L., & Orel, V. (1992). What Did Gregor Mendel think he discovered? Genetics, 131, 245-253.
45. Henig, R. M. (2000). The monk in the garden: The lost and found genius of Gregor Mendel. Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin.
46. Hodge, M. J. S. (1985). Darwin as a lifelong generation theorist. In D. Kohn (Ed.), The Darwinian heritage (pp. 207-243). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
47. Hull, D. L. (1988). Science as a process: An evolutionary account of the social and conceptual development of science. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
48. Kampourakis, K., & McComas, W. F. (2010). Charles Darwin and evolution: Illustrating human aspects of science. Science & Education, 19(6-8), 637-654.
49. Kampourakis, K., & Zogza, V. (2007). Students' preconceptions about evolution: How accurate is the characterization as "Lamarckian" when considering the history of evolutionary thought? Science & Education, 16(3-5), 393-422.
50. Kitcher, P. (1993). The advancement of science: Science without legend, objectivity without illusions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
51. Lenay, C. (2000). Hugo De Vries: From the theory of intracellular pangenesis to the rediscovery of Mendel. Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences Series III Sciences de la Vie, 323, 1053-1060.
52. López-Beltrán, C. (2007). The medical origins of heredity. In S. Müller-Wille & H. J. Rheinberger (Eds.), Heredity produced: At the crossroads of biology, politics, and culture, 1500-1870 (pp. 105-132). Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
53. Mader, S. S. (2004). Biology (8th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
54. Mayr, E. (1982). The growth of biological thought: Diversity, evolution and inheritance. Cambridge, Massachussetts and London, England: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
55. Mendel, G. (1950). Gregor Mendel's letters to Carl Nägeli. 1866-1873. Genetics, 35, 1-29.
56. Mendelsohn, E. (1964). The biological sciences in the nineteenth century: Some problems and sources. History of Science, 3, 39-59.
57. Monaghan, F., & Corcos, A. (1990). The real objective of Mendel's paper. Biology and Philosophy, 5, 267-292.
58. Moore, R. (2001). The "rediscovery" of Mendel's work. Biosciene, 27(2), 13-24.
59. Müller-Wille, S., & Orel, V. (2007). From Linnaean species to Mendelian factors: Elements of hybridism, 1751-1870. Annals of Science, 64(2), 171-215.
60. Müller-Wille, S., & Rheinberger, H. J. (2007). Heredity: The formation of an epistemic space. In S. Müller-Wille & H. J. Rheinberger (Eds.), Heredity produced: At the Crossroads of biology, politics, and culture, 1500-1870 (pp. 3-34). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
61. Nägeli von, C. (1898/1884). A mechanico-physiological theory of organic evolution. Chicago: The Open Court Publishing Co.
62. Nogler, G. A. (2006). The lesser-known Mendel: His experiments on Hieracium. Genetics, 172(1), 1-6.
63. Nyhart, L. (2009). Modern nature: The rise of the biological perspective in Germany. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
64. Olby, R. C. (1966). Origins of Mendelism. New York: Schocken Books.
65. Olby, R. C. (1979). Mendel no Mendelian? History of Science, 17, 53-72.
66. Olby, R. C. (1985). Origins of Mendelism (2nd ed.). Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
67. Olby, R. C. (2000a). Horticulture: The font for the baptism of Genetics. Nature Reviews Genetics, 1, 65-70.
68. Olby, R. C. (2000b). Mendelism: From hybrids and trade to a science. Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences Series III Sciences de la Vie, 323, 1043-1051.
69. Olby, R. (2009). Variation and Inheritance. In M. Ruse & R. J. Richards (Eds.), Cambridge companion to the 'Origin of Species' (pp. 30-46). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
70. Olby, R. & Gautrey, P. (1968). Eleven references to Mendel before 1900. Annals of Science, 24(1), 7-20.
71. Orel, V. (1996). Gregor Mendel: The first geneticist. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
72. Orel, V. (2003). Gregor Mendel: A počátky genetiky. Praha: Academia.
73. Orel, V. (2009). The "useful questions of heredity" before Mendel. Journal of Heredity, 100(4), 421-423.
74. Orel, V., & Hartl, D. L. (1994). Controversies in the interpretation of Mendel's discovery. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, 16, 423-464.
75. Orel, V., & Peaslee, M. H. (2008). The echo of Darwin in Mendel's Brno. In E. M. Engels & T. F. Glick (Eds.), The reception of Charles Darwin in Europe (pp. 259-268). London and New York: Continuum.
76. Orel, V., & Wood, R. J. (1998). Empirical genetic laws published in Brno before Mendel was born. Journal of Heredity, 89, 79-82.
77. Orel, V., & Wood, R. J. (2000). Essence and origin of Mendel's discovery. Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences Series III Sciences de la Vie, 323, 1037-1041.
78. Peterson, E. L. (2008). William Bateson from Balanoglossus to Materials for the Study of Variation: The transatlantic roots of discontinuity and the (un)naturalness of selection. Journal of the History of Biology, 41, 267-305.
79. Raven, P. H., Johnson, G. B., Losos, J. B., Mason, K. A., & Singer, S. R. (2008). Biology (8th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
80. Rheinberger, H. J. (2000). Mendelian inheritance in Germany between 1900 and 1910: The case of Carl Correns (1864-1933). Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences Series III Sciences de la Vie, 323, 1089-1096.
81. Rheinberger, H. J. (2008). Heredity and its entities around 1900. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 39, 370-374.
82. Roberts, H. F. (1929). Plant hybridisation before Mendel. Princeton: Princeton University Press (available at http://www. archive. org/details/planthybridizati00robe).
83. Roll-Hansen, N. (1978). The genotype theory of Wilhelm Johannsen and its relation to plant breeding and the study of evolution. Centaurus, 22(3), 201-235.
84. Rudge, D. W., & Howe, E. M. (2009). An explicit and reflective approach to the use of history to promote understanding of the nature of science. Science & Education, 18(5), 561-580.
85. Sandler, I. (2000). Development: Mendel's legacy to Genetics. Genetics, 154, 7-11.
86. Spencer, H. (1864). Principles of biology. London and Edinburgh: Williams and Norgate (available at http://www. google. com/books?id=3yYCAAAAQAAJ&hl=el).
87. Stamhuis, I. H. (2003). The reactions on Hugo de Vries's Intracellular Pangenesis; the discussion with August Weismann. Journal of the History of Biology, 36, 119-152.
88. Sturtevant, A. H. (2001). [1965]. A history of genetics. New York: Electronic Scholarly Publishing project & Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press (available at www. esp. org).
89. Theunissen, B. (1994). Closing the door on Hugo de Vries' Mendelism. Annals of Science, 5, 225-248.
90. Tschermak, E. (1950). [1900]. Concerning artificial crossing in Pisum sativum. Genetics, 35, 42-47.
91. Weismann, A. (1889a). [1885]. The continuity of the Germ-plasm as the foundation of a theory of heredity. In E. Poulton et al. (ed.), Essays upon heredity and kindred biological problems, Oxford (available at www. esp. org).
92. Weismann A (1889b). [1883]. On heredity. In E. Poulton et al. (ed.), Essays upon heredity and kindred biological problems, Oxford (available at www. esp. org).
93. Weismann A (1893). [1892]. The germ-plasm: A theory of heredity. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons (available at www. esp. org).
94. Westerlund, J., & Fairbanks, D. (2004). Gregor Mendel and "myth-conceptions". Science Education, 88(5), 754-758.
95. Winther, R. (2000). Darwin on variation and heredity. Journal of the History of Biology, 33, 425-455.
96. Winther, R. (2001). August Weismann on germ-plasm variation. Journal of the History of Biology, 34, 517-555.
97. Wood, R. J., & Orel, V. (2001). Genetic prehistory in selective breeding: A prelude to Mendel. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
98. Wood, R. J., & Orel, V. (2005). Scientific breeding in Central Europe during the early nineteenth century: background to Mendel's later work. Journal of the History of Biology, 38, 239-272.