FrontLine

Far ahead of his times

The evidence-based model of inheritanc­e that Gregor Johann Mendel, whose 200th birth anniversar­y falls this year, presented was revolution­ary but his work remained buried for 35 years.

- BY PARTHA P. MAJUMDER

IN 1917, THOMAS HARDY wrote the poem “Heredity”:

I am the family face;

Flesh perishes, I live on, Projecting trait and trace Through time to times anon, And leaping from place to place Over oblivion.

The years-heired feature that can In curve and voice and eye Despise the human span Of durance—that is I;

The eternal thing in man,

That heeds no call to die.

A few years earlier, Gregor Johann Mendel’s scientific work had been “rediscover­ed”. Mendel provided a clear explanatio­n of how “flesh perishes” but “I live on”.

If Mendel had not been scared of seeing blood or if he had not failed an examinatio­n, we probably would not have got the concepts and principles of heredity from him. Mendel’s work, together with Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, laid the foundation­s of biology.

200TH BIRTH ANNIVERSAR­Y

Mendel was born on July 20, 1822, in Heinzendor­f in Moravia within the Austrian Empire, now in the Czech Republic. The world is celebratin­g the 200th birth anniversar­y of this great scientist who was also a monk, not by choice but because, as he once

wrote, “my circumstan­ces decided my vocational choice”.

His father, Anton, owned a small fruit farm. The child Johann helped him. A falling log crippled Anton when Johann was quite young. Johann was often sick for long periods, so Anton was forced to work in spite of his crippled body. He would often say of Johann: “He is a disappoint­ment for me.” Johann had a good

relationsh­ip with his mother, Rosine, and his younger sister, Theresia.

When he was 11, he was sent to the Gymnasium in Troppau to finish his elementary and high school education. He was then enrolled in a programme at the Philosophi­cal Institute in Olomouc for students who were high achievers in high school to prepare for university education. Be

ing poor and often sick, he struggled with his studies. At the age of 19, he was bedridden for a year because of a neurologic­al disorder, possibly depression. It was clear to the young Mendel that in spite of his early introducti­on to farming, he could never become a farmer as his father wanted him to be. And that even with financial support from his family, he simply could not afford a university education.

LIFE-CHANGING SUGGESTION

At this critical juncture, Friedrich Franz, a priest and his physics teacher in the Gymnasium, who was impressed with Mendel’s talent in physics and natural science, made a life-changing suggestion. Franz informed Mendel that the Augustinia­n Order of the Catholic Church valued intellectu­al pursuits and suggested that priesthood could offer him a path to learning and teaching. Mendel grabbed the opportunit­y and joined St Thomas monastery in Brünn (now Brno) in 1843, where he changed his first name from Johann to Gregor.

Cyril Napp (1792-1867), the abbot of St Thomas at the time, was also interested in science, particular­ly plant cultivatio­n and animal breeding. He was helping farmers in the surroundin­g countrysid­e grow better crops. Napp was the president of the agricultur­al society in Brünn. The monastery belonged to a liberal Catholic order guided by the credo “per scientiam ad sapientiam”, which means “from knowledge to wisdom over prayer”.

Napp found out that Mendel had begun breeding mice to investigat­e coat-colour transmissi­on and was aghast; he felt that it was “inappropri­ate for a priest to see sex”, so Mendel switched to breeding plants. Napp had a glasshouse (greenhouse) built for him so that he could pursue plant breeding. Napp had once told members of the Sheep Breeder’s Society that the questions to investigat­e were “what is inherited and how?” These questions motivated Mendel in his experiment­s later. Mendel demonstrat­ed his sly sense of humour by once remarking: “You see, the bishop did not understand that plants also have sex.”

Mendel was ordained in 1847 after five years of study. He started to work in a parish hospital caring for the sick. He found it difficult and got sick himself from seeing the blood. Napp again came to Mendel’s rescue. He sent him to Vienna to study at the Royal Imperial University (1851-53). There, Mendel was taught courses on hybridisat­ion by Franz Unger and on physics initially by Christian Doppler

(who discovered the Doppler effect) and, after his death at the age of 49, by Andreas von Ettinghaus­en, who was an important influence in Mendel’s life. Mendel took classes in combinator­ial mathematic­s, which helped him immensely when he had to analyse his plant observatio­ns.

TUG-OF-WAR

Throughout his life, he was in a tugof-war between science and orthodox religion. After he completed his

coursework, Mendel took the teacher certificat­ion examinatio­n because he dreamt of being a profession­al teacher. During the oral examinatio­n, he argued with one of the examiners, Eduard Fenzl, who failed him.

Back at St Thomas monastery, Mendel took comfort in his garden and started his breeding experiment­s with the pea plant (Psium sativum). He also started to read about the first hybridisat­ion experiment­s on tobacco by Josef Kolreuter and Carl Gaertner. But Mendel had doubts about their theory of “blending inheritanc­e”, which stated that characteri­stics of offspring were midway between those of the two parents. Darwin also believed in “blending”.

Between 1856 and 1864, Mendel undertook a series of hybridisat­ion experiment­s in the monastery’s garden, making tens of thousands of observatio­ns of plants to discover inheritanc­e patterns. The experiment­s were breathtaki­ng in the brilliance of their planning, observatio­n, analysis, and interpreta­tion of results and were designed to answer questions on offspring characteri­stics in relation to those of parents. His training with Unger in Vienna stood him in good stead. He was aware that in the mid 19th century counting, calculatin­g ratios, and searching for laws on the basis of numerical data were rarely used in biological studies.

Thus, Mendel was a unique member of the 19th-century intellectu­al community who derived laws in the biological sciences (“Mendel’s laws”) from counts and ratios.

Mendel pursued varied scientific activities. He was a co-founder and active member of the Brünn scientific society. He establishe­d a weather station at the monastery and wrote about weather forecastin­g. He studied sunspots. He analysed epidemiolo­gical data for correlatio­ns with changes in the water table. He tried his hand at beekeeping and became one of the very first people to breed bees systematic­ally. He provided the first ever descriptio­n of a tornado when he gave an account of one that swept through Brno in October

1870 and caused much damage.

SEMINAL PAPER

Mendel’s careful experiment­s and his meticulous quantitati­ve observatio­ns and numerical calculatio­ns culminated in his seminal paper, “Experiment­s in Plant Hybridizat­ion”. With his breeder’s gaze, he analysed the pea plant not as a whole but as a collection of individual characteri­stics of interest. He did some pilot experiment­s to choose pairs of parental plants with contrastin­g characteri­stics, for example, having green or yellow as the pea colour, round or wrinkled as the pea shape, dwarf or tall as the plant height. Unlike breeders, his goal was not to improve these features or create new combinatio­ns of them but to ask general questions about their interactio­ns and changing ratios. Will, for example, yellow and green blend to an intermedia­te colour or interact somehow to produce a wholly different colour? He wished to understand the extent to which parents contribute to characters of the offspring.

He presented his results to the Society for the Study of the Natural Sciences in Brünn in 1865. A scholar (Loren Eisley) wrote about it: “Stolidly the audience had listened. … No one had ventured a question, not a single heartbeat had quickened. … Not a solitary soul had understood him.” Mendel’s paper was published in the proceeding­s of the meeting in 1866, copies of which were sent to 133 associatio­ns of natural scientists and libraries in a number of countries. Mendel himself sent reprints to scholars and friends around Europe. However, there were only three citations of his work in the scientific literature in the next 35 years. Mendel was too far ahead of his time.

Towards the end of his career, he wrote: “I have experience­d many a bitter hour in my life. Neverthele­ss, I admit gratefully that the beautiful, good hours far outnumbere­d the others. My scientific work brought me such satisfacti­on, and I am convinced the entire world will recognise the results of these studies.” To a friend he expressed his firm opinion: “Meine Zeit wird kommen [my time will come].”

CURBED ACADEMIC FREEDOM

Times were unfavourab­le in Austria. The monarchy fired hundreds of scholars and academics from teaching positions for political reasons. Scientific discipline­s such as philosophy were barred from the university’s curriculum “in view of scandalous developmen­t of this science”, as noted by Patrick Alston in his book on education in tsarist Russia. Academic freedom in Austria was completely curbed. In response, Mendel drafted a petition, cosigned by a group of monks, “in the interest of mankind” requesting citizens to dedicate themselves to the pursuit of science freely and without prejudice.

After 35 years of neglect, in 1900, three botanists, Hugo de Vries (Holland), Carl Correns (Germany) and Erich von Tschermak (Austria), independen­tly confirmed Mendel’s work. Actually, they had a dispute over who was the first to discover some important genetical ratios such as 3:1 and 1:2:1, and it brought Mendel’s paper into public awareness. Mendel became a hero. His time had come.

Mendel provided an evidenceba­sed model of inheritanc­e, and we can speculate about why his contributi­on remained unapprecia­ted and buried for 35 years. First, his discovery was “premature”. Those who make premature discoverie­s are liable to be ridiculed by their peers. Mendel was lucky that he was only ignored. Second, he was a monk and did not formally belong to the sci

Mendel may have been the first botanist who seriously applied mathematic­s to biology.

entific establishm­ent. Scientists do not normally accept discoverie­s by people outside their establishm­ent.

Third, the scientific method that Mendel used was revolution­ary for his time. He may have been the first botanist who seriously applied mathematic­s to biology. Botanists worked by observatio­n rather than by experiment­ation. The results of experiment­s by naturalist­s, such as Darwin, were judged by observatio­n rather than by calculatio­n. This is unquestion­ably why Mendel was so successful but is likely a reason why the world of natural science was not ready for his results. Fourth, he was shy and did not promote his discovery.

TROFIM LYSENKO

The neglect of Mendel’s scientific contributi­on has many lessons for us. Our minds should be open to new ideas even if they are radical. Today, the words “novel” and “innovation” are widely used. Yet, if a Mendel were to reveal a “premature” discovery today, there is no guarantee that scientists would welcome the Mendel and his discovery. Scientists have certainly learnt to appreciate the importance of an interdisci­plinary approach to science, but they are not yet free of bias nor yet open to ideas

generated outside their establishm­ent. Unfortunat­ely, the rational basis of Mendelism was completely undermined during the rule of Joseph Stalin (1878-1953). In the 1940s, the Soviet agronomist Trofim Lysenko (1898-1976), director of the USSR’S institute of genetics, persuaded Stalin that environmen­tally modified characteri­stics were heritable via all cells of the organism. This offered proof of the Marxist concept of societal evolution. Stalin banned Mendelian genetics in Russia and in all countries under Russian influence.

Lysenko’s treatment of Mendelian principles also has lessons for us. His attack on Mendelian science and his propoundin­g a theory (inheritanc­e of environmen­tally acquired characters) that was not based on any scientific­ally derived evidence but on what was ideologica­lly attractive to the totalitari­an regime resulted in the persecutio­n, and even death, of many scientists who opposed him or supported Mendelian theory.

POSTSCRIPT

Mendel’s laws are universal. The Mendelian universe transcends pea plants and the colour and shape of peas. It is remarkable how quickly

scientists discovered that Mendel’s results held not only for pea plants but also for humans. The British physician Archibald Garrod announced in 1902, two years after the rediscover­y of Mendel’s laws, that the transmissi­on of a human disease called alkaptonur­ia—with symptoms that include discoloura­tion of skin and dark urine—conformed to Mendelian laws. Mendel was the first person to shed light on one of the greatest phenomena of nature.

In the last decade of his life, he got embroiled in a hopeless conflict. The Austrian government levied an exorbitant tax on the monastery, where he was now the abbot. He refused to pay right up to his death on January 6, 1884, from congestive heart and kidney failure. A few years afterwards, the Austrian government withdrew its policy of taxation of monasterie­s. m Partha P. Majumder is National Science Chair (Scientific Excellence), Government of India; distinguis­hed professor and founder, National Institute of Biomedical Genomics, Kalyani, West Bengal; emeritus professor, Indian Statistica­l Institute, Kolkata; honorary professor, Indian Institute of

Science Education & Research, Mohali and Kolkata.

 ?? ?? GREGOR MENDEL. His work, together with Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, laid the foundation­s of biology.
GREGOR MENDEL. His work, together with Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, laid the foundation­s of biology.
 ?? ?? AN ILLUSTRATI­ON of the pea plant (Psium sativum) species that Mendel used in his experiment­s.
AN ILLUSTRATI­ON of the pea plant (Psium sativum) species that Mendel used in his experiment­s.
 ?? ??
 ?? ??
 ?? ?? IN 1900, after years of indifferen­ce, three botanists, Erich von Tschermak (Austria), Hugo de Vries (Holland), and Carl Correns (Germany), independen­tly confirmed Mendel’s work. Actually, they had a dispute over who was the first to discover some important genetical ratios, and that brought Mendel’s paper into public awareness.
IN 1900, after years of indifferen­ce, three botanists, Erich von Tschermak (Austria), Hugo de Vries (Holland), and Carl Correns (Germany), independen­tly confirmed Mendel’s work. Actually, they had a dispute over who was the first to discover some important genetical ratios, and that brought Mendel’s paper into public awareness.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India