Am. J. Bot. Li-Cor Advertisement
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplemental Data
Right arrow An erratum has been published
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (9)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fairbanks, D. J.
Right arrow Articles by Rytting, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fairbanks, D. J.
Right arrow Articles by Rytting, B.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Fairbanks, D. J.
Right arrow Articles by Rytting, B.
(American Journal of Botany. 2001;88:737-752.)
© 2001 Botanical Society of America, Inc.

Mendelian controversies: a botanical and historical review1

Daniel J. Fairbanks 2, 4 and Bryce Rytting 3

2Department of Botany and Range Science and 3School of Music, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah 84602 USA

Gregor Mendel was a 19th century priest and botanist who developed the fundamental laws of inheritance. The year 2000 marked a century since the rediscovery of those laws and the beginning of genetics. Although Mendel is now recognized as the founder of genetics, significant controversy ensued about his work throughout the 20th century. In this paper, we review five of the most contentious issues by looking at the historical record through the lens of current botanical science: (1) Are Mendel's data too good to be true? (2) Is Mendel's description of his experiments fictitious? (3) Did Mendel articulate the laws of inheritance attributed to him? (4) Did Mendel detect but not mention linkage? (5) Did Mendel support or oppose Darwin?

A synthesis of botanical and historical evidence supports our conclusions: Mendel did not fabricate his data, his description of his experiments is literal, he articulated the laws of inheritance attributed to him insofar as was possible given the information he had, he did not detect linkage, and he neither strongly supported nor opposed Darwin.

Key Words: Darwin • fabrication of data • fictitious experiments • laws of inheritance • linkage • Mendel




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 GeneticsHome page
D. J. Fairbanks and G. B. Schaalje
The Tetrad-Pollen Model Fails to Explain the Bias in Mendel's Pea (Pisum sativum) Experiments
Genetics, December 1, 2007; 177(4): 2531 - 2534.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 GeneticsHome page
D. L. Hartl and D. J. Fairbanks
Mud Sticks: On the Alleged Falsification of Mendel's Data
Genetics, March 1, 2007; 175(3): 975 - 979.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J HeredHome page
D. Sandhu, K. G. Schallock, N. Rivera-Velez, P. Lundeen, S. Cianzio, and M. K. Bhattacharyya
Soybean Phytophthora Resistance Gene Rps8 Maps Closely to the Rps3 Region
J. Hered., September 1, 2005; 96(5): 536 - 541.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Bot.Home page
M. L. Christianson
Codon usage patterns distort phylogenies from or of DNA sequences
Am. J. Botany, August 1, 2005; 92(8): 1221 - 1233.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2001 by the Botanical Society of America, Inc.