Dobzhansky Research Articles

A Sacred Evolutionary Cosmos: Philip Sherrard, Theodosius Dobzhansky, and the Theological Challenge of Climate Change

ABSTRACT Philip Sherrard and Theodosius Dobzhansky, both Eastern Orthodox intellectuals, would have agreed on little. While Sherrard rejected modern science, especially evolution, Dobzhansky was one of evolution’s leading figures. But Sherrard saw climate change coming and warned of it, whereas Dobzhansky was perhaps too easy in his liberal progressivism. Despite their major differences, however, Dobzhansky and Sherrard both shared a hostility towards reductionism and a mechanistic view of the universe. In studying their ideas and incorporating ecology into the conversation, we can consider different ways to view evolution and climate change.

A Study on Animal Cellular Organization

Cells are comprised of highly organized assemblies of macromolecules, which undergo continuous dynamic rearrangements. Our contributors in this issue of Current Opinion in Cell Biology review some of the most exciting recent advances in our understanding of how various such dynamic assemblies function at the molecular level. As (to use the much-quoted phrase of Theodosius Dobzhansky) “nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution”, Peroxisomes are vesicle-like packets containing specialized enzymes that rid cells of toxins and utilize fats as an energy source. They can be called into being or dismissed depending upon the metabolic needs of the cell, which may therefore have few or many peroxisomes at different times. Significant recent progress has been made in understanding peroxisomal biogenesis, and it turns out both fission and de novo assembly occur, depending on the cellular circumstances. The ER provides membranous materials for both processes, while the contents of the peroxisomes are imported by a long-mysterious mechanism that is only now being revealed. The coatomer family of vesicle coating complexes are shown to have significant structural relationships among themselves and, tellingly, to the nuclear pore complex; while the ESCRT system has been found to have a lineage that extends back into the Archea. Analyses of these factors indicate that a complex endomembrane system predates the initial radiation of eukaryotic lineages, and suggest new insights on the origins of eukaryotes. The biogenesis of cellular organelles represent another huge leap in complexity, generally involving either division of pre-existing organelles or de novo assembly from precursors generated by other organelles. With an insightful discussion of informational and algorithmic complexity, he argues persuasively that the problem is not as insurmountable as some had thought, and does not require the elaborate assumptions made by some previous theories. A mainstay of this review series has been the relentless and exciting progress made on the cytoskeleton. As several topics including septins, intermediate filaments, and the bacterial cytoskeleton were covered in excellent reviews in last year’s issue, this year we focused instead on recent progress on actin and microtubule function in cells.

TEODOSIJUS DOBŽANSKI I EVOLUCIJA ČOVEČANSTVA: JEDAN DRUGAČIJI PRISTUP

The text is a plausible presentation and review of the main work of Theodosius Dobzhansky (Theodosius Grigorievich Dobzhansky) - The Evolution of Humanity. He tries to show and prove that Dobzhansky tries, and largely succeeds, in offering a different, dialectical interpretation of the evolution of the human species, i.e. the evolution of humanity. In line with, but also in contrast to, traditional Darwinism, Dobžanski insists on the claim that evolution, primarily biological, is not over, but that it continues, despite human/cultural intervention, namely together with it, which tries to influence and change the directions of previous natural flows and processes. Biology and culture have become interdependent and interfering during the millennial history, thus, man imposes himself as the main and most responsible factor in the fate of the human race and the survival of the human community/species, but also the totality and entirety of planetary biodiversity, as necessary prerequisites for his own survival. In his research on the evolution of humanity, Dobzhansky starts from the inspiring views of some well-known predecessors, such as Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, however, we can argue that Dobžanski influenced many of his contemporaries, including Avram Noam Chomsky, especially when it comes to linguistic research into the genesis and origin of human language and the influence of transformational-generative grammar on the development of the human mind, equally so, human brain. At the same time, we can state that his researches correspond and coincide with the researches and ethical positions of some contemporary bioethicists, culturologists and philosophers of biology, as well as with the positions of many like-minded people and followers.

Dobzhansky and the Brazilians from his letters and reminiscences

Theodosius Dobzhansky (1900-1975) had an important role in the origin and development of evolutionary genetics in Brazil. Not only in 1943, when he had been here for the first time, about six months, but also in other moments, for more extended periods, he was responsible for the formation of the first generation of Drosophila geneticists with an emphasis on evolution, who later originated groups of research in evolutionary genetics in their respective states/countries. His relationship with three members of the 1943 group deserves special attention. Dobzhansky's relationship with André Dreyfus (1897-1952), at the time the head of the Department of General Biology at the University of São Paulo, was always respectful and friendly; with Crodowaldo Pavan (1919-2009), Dobzhansky was highly affectionate, although he was worried about the future of his most beloved disciple; Dobzhansky's relationship with Antonio Brito da Cunha (1925-2019) was one of admiration for his general culture and sophistication, however, it was less intense than with Pavan. Moreover, several members of his research team, from 1943 to 1956 deserved comments in his reminiscences (not always positive) for the Oral History of Columbia University, for more than 40 pages.

Correction to: Richard Lewontin and Theodosius Dobzhansky: Genetics, Race, and the Anxiety of Influence

Correction to: Richard Lewontin and Theodosius Dobzhansky: Genetics, Race, and the Anxiety of Influence

A substituição nua: o apoio de geneticistas e biotecnólogos à eugenia da Segunda Guerra Mundial ao Projeto Genoma Humano

ABSTRACT Using a combination of archival and secondary sources, this article argues that scientists and bioethicists after the Second World War advocated a wide variety of eugenic practices and strongly supported the development of eugenics, strengthened by advances in medicine, human genetics, and population genetics. I detail extensive research in both the Curt Stern and the American Eugenics Society Papers (American Philosophical Society in Philadelphia), uncovering novel defenses of eugenics and its integration in sciences after the Second World War by key figures such as Curt Stern and Theodosius Dobzhansky. Moreover, I relate to Richard Lewontin’s participation in a Princeton conference sponsored by the American Eugenics Society in 1965. This article is also the first to not only describe geneticists’ defense and development of eugenic ideas but also details bioethicists’ defense of this inhumane and unscientific ideology until the dawn of the Human Genome Project in the late 1980s.

The Russian Backdrop to Dobzhansky's Genetics and the Origin of Species.

Theodosius Dobzhansky was one of the principal 'founding fathers' of the modern 'synthetic theory of evolution' and the 'biological species' concept, first set forth in his classic book, Genetics and the Origin of Species (1937). Much of the discussion of Dobzhansky's work by historians has focused on English-accessible sources, and has emphasized the roles of the Morgan School, and figures such as Sewall Wright, and Leslie C. Dunn. This article uses Dobzhansky's Russian articles that are unknown to English-speaking readers, and his late 1920s to early 1930s correspondence with colleagues and friends in the Soviet Union, to clarify some of the Russian influences on Dobzhansky's evolving evolutionary views, particularly the development of his views on species and speciation. For Dobzhansky, as for Darwin, the problem of species and speciation was crucial for his theoretical explanation of evolution.

Special Issue “Feature Papers in Population and Evolutionary Genetics and Genomics”

Theodosius Dobzhansky famously wrote in 1973 that "nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution" [...].

The Return of the Geneticist: Theodosius Dobzhansky, Edward Chapin, and Museum Taxonomy.

In Fall 1939, as war engulfed Europe, the author of one of the most influential texts on genetics and evolution, Theodosius Dobzhansky, wrote a letter to curator of insects at the United States National Museum, Edward Albert Chapin. Dobzhansky wished to know what Chapin thought about his pursuing some taxonomic work on an old fascination of his: lady-bird beetles. This paper examines the resulting correspondence as a window into Dobzhansky's attitude toward taxonomy, the different pressures on geneticists and taxonomists when wrestling with how to name species, the relation between biological theory and taxonomic practice, and how claims regarding human races may have motivated Dobzhansky's continued interest in the work of beetle taxonomists. In doing so, this article builds on the work of Paul Farber and others to highlight the importance of including museums, taxonomy, and the naturalist tradition within the history of twentieth-century biology.

Connecting environmental and evolutionary microbiology for the development of new agrobiotechnological tools.

Connecting environmental and evolutionary microbiology for the development of new agrobiotechnological tools.

Meat-Eating is as Human as Apple Pie: We Evolved to Eat Meat; The World will Not Turn Vegan

“Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution,” the eminent geneticist Theodosius Dobzhansky wrote in 1973. That goes for the human diet.

The Magic School Bus Explores Human Evolution

It’s the longest field trip ever for Ms. Frizzle’s class! In the latest installment in the popular Magic School Bus series, a classroom activity involving the construction of family trees leads to a 3.5-billion-year excursion, tracing the human lineage from the primordial cell through the first vertebrates to mammals, primates, hominins, and, finally, Homo sapiens. “We may speak different languages, eat different food, make different art, and have different religions,” Ms. Frizzle observes toward the end of the journey. “But we are all human beings with the same family tree” (p. 45). (The message is reinforced by the inclusion on the field trip of a cousin of one of the students, visiting from China.) The students then work together to construct a “terrific”—and charming, if selective—phylogenetic chart.The approach of beginning with the familiar idea of a family tree and then introducing the idea of common ancestry is ideal for the intended readers, four through eight years old. The focus on following the human lineage is likely to reinforce the misconception that evolution is intrinsically progressive, which the occasional digression to highlight different lineages is not likely to be able to dispel, but the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. As in the Magic School Bus series in general, the pages (attractively illustrated by Bruce Degen) teem with corny jokes both verbal and visual, informative sidebars, and cameo appearances that invite further exploration—paleontology aficionados will particularly relish the opportunity to tell young readers about Pikaia, Tiktaalik, and gorgonopsids.The last few pages abandon the narrative approach for straightforward exposition, and here especially the young reader will need further information and explanation from a well-informed mentor. (It would have been nice for there to be a guide for teachers and parents to prepare them for these discussions.) The exposition begins with a sketch of the evidence for evolution, including the fossil record and its documentation of evolutionary transitions, anatomical homology (misleadingly labeled “body plans”), embryological homology, a gesture in the direction of molecular homology, and vestigial and rudimentary structures. It is particularly gratifying to see a reminder “Evolution is still at work!” with a brief treatment of the medical and agricultural relevance of evolution.Then natural selection is presented with a fictitious but realistic example. (The example involves adaptive melanism in a population of mice living on white and black sand beaches; a well-documented example of adaptive melanism involves a population of rock pocket mice, Chaetodipus intermedius, living inland on light substrate and dark lava.) The example is vivid and helpful, although it is awkward that the inheritability of the mice’s coloration is not initially mentioned: the reader is told only, “After a while, almost all the mice were light,” without any indication that the shift is generational (p. 52). The oversight is rectified on the following page—“nature selects, or chooses, which living things survive to pass on their traits to their babies” (p. 53)—but then it is necessary to reread the previous discussion.The discussion of natural selection is presented under the heading “How Does Evolution Work?” as if natural selection were the only process at work in evolution, which is inconsistent (since endosymbiosis is described earlier in the book) and inaccurate: describing natural selection as important would have been preferable. In any case, the discussion of natural selection is followed by a discussion of artificial selection. The order of explanation thus inverts that of the Origin, which introduces natural selection by first describing artificial selection, with which Darwin’s original readers were presumably more or less familiar. With increased urbanization, Cole and Degen’s readers are not so likely to be acquainted with artificial selection, so the point of discussing it (at the same length as natural selection) is obscure.Given the continuing popularity of the Magic School Bus franchise—including not only the books but also a number of video games, two television series, and, reportedly, a planned big-screen version with Elizabeth Banks as the beloved teacher—the book is sure to end up in the hands of children across the country. Wahoo! (as Ms. Frizzle would say). Asked in 2019 by PBS Newshour why she and Degen wanted to write a book about evolution, Cole replied, “A famous scientist [Theodosius Dobzhansky, writing in The American Biology Teacher] once said, ‘Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.’ That really means that evolution is the story of life on Earth.” For anyone wanting to share that story with young readers, The Magic School Bus Explores Human Evolution will be a splendid start.

Between Darwin and Dostoevsky: The Syntheses of Theodosius Dobzhansky

Theodosius Dobzhansky was one of the foremost evolutionary biologists of the twentieth century who spent a great deal of time pondering, studying, and writing about religion. A confessed Eastern Orthodox Christian, though one with an idiosyncratic take on the faith, Dobzhansky was interested in harmonising the different elements of his life—religious background, scientific knowledge, and political beliefs. Throughout his oeuvre, he made various attempts to do this, and his legacy therefore amounts to a great synthesis. His greatest scientific achievement is the fusion of genetics and natural selection, which constitutes the groundwork for modern evolutionary biology. He also worked to synthesise democratic politics with Christian ethics, and religion with science. Dobzhansky was worried that science could not provide a basis for morality, and believed that Dostoevsky definitively proved this. Accordingly, he undertook not only to make sense of his own life and beliefs, but to protect and secure science, religion, morality, and democracy as parts of a cohesive whole.

Honoring Gregor Mendel

This theme issue, devoted to genetics, acknowledges the centrality of that discipline, in conjunction with evolution, to our understanding of the history and nature of life on earth. Gregor Mendel and Charles Darwin, the recognized founders of their deeply intertwined fields, are—or should be—inseparable in biology education.Although Darwin’s work ultimately provided biology with its enduring conceptual basis—evolution by natural selection—he died unable to answer two central questions: Where does the biological variation central to differential selection reside, and how is it transmitted from one generation to the next? As James P. Evans details in his feature article in this issue, Mendel, whose 200th birthday occurs in July of this year, provided those answers, demonstrating the particulate nature of inheritance and the principles of segregation and independent assortment.Unfortunately, Mendel’s work escaped the attention of his contemporaries, including Darwin, attracting notice only with the rediscovery of his now-classic 1865 paper in 1900. The growth of genetics as a central biological discipline followed in short order, and the new field ultimately was joined to evolutionary biology by extensive mathematical formulations in population genetics. The resulting “modern synthesis of evolution” occurred in the 1930s and 1940s and continues to serve, with amendments, as a framework for research in biology and biomedicine. So central is that framework to the life sciences that in 1973 this journal published Theodosius Dobzhansky’s now-famous article declaring that “nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.” Genetics provides much of the integral supporting structure for evolution theory, including the mechanisms for the variation that is fuel for the fires of selection and for the smooth transmission of information that maintains biological continuity within species.Genetics is the study of inherited biological variation, though in some four decades of my asking diverse audiences—students, teachers, health professionals, the public—to define the subject, the concept of variation has arisen only rarely without prompting. Perhaps that lack of recognition is a function of the way we approach genetics in formal educational settings and in the media broadly defined. In those settings, the focus generally is structures and processes—chromosomes, meiosis, DNA, genes, replication, genomes, sequencing—all while failing to emphasize the underlying messages of the discipline.Recently, as the world has struggled to understand and control COVID-19, the concept of biological variation has come to the fore for the public in inescapable and often worrying updates on the variants of SARS CoV-2. In the September 2020 ABT Guest Commentary, Gordon Uno discussed the opportunities COVID-19 provides to address genetic variation and evolution in the classroom, as we track the evolution of this virus in real time. Uno’s observation is apt, and we have traversed about 120 years from the rediscovery of Mendel’s work on the “factors” carrying variation to the extraordinary ability to elaborate variation at the level of individual DNA bases, where it is encoded in a universal, digital information molecule. The recent literature carries the news that a large team of scientists has filled in the previously intractable gaps in the human genome and in the process has uncovered more than two million new indications of human genetic variation.Advances in sequencing technology also have generated the genomic sequences of many other species, and their individual and collective analyses affirm that, as Darwin demonstrated, all of life shares a single history and is related by descent with modification. The unity of life was long evident from previous work in fields such as comparative anatomy and embryology, but access to complete genetic sequences has made our understanding of the underlying relationships even more certain, in some cases even allowing revisions in systematics and taxonomy.As important as Mendelian genetics is, we have, unfortunately, allowed the venerable priest’s original formulations to become a bit of an impediment in our instruction, which often emphasizes single-gene disorders because they illustrate Mendelian inheritance. That focus ignores the reality that most human traits, including many of the world’s leading causes of morbidity and mortality, result from the interactions of multiple genes with environmental variables. Indeed, a 2009 article by Michael Dougherty in the American Journal of Human Genetics proposed that we begin genetics instruction with examples of complex, quantitative traits, rather than traditional single-gene characters.In any case, genetics encompasses much more than genetic disease, and the diverse articles in this special issue demonstrate the pervasive nature of genetics and the questions its concepts and tools allow scientists to pursue. The amount of genetics knowledge now available challenges us not to get lost in the ever-accumulating details as we teach. Darwin knew that variation is the rule, not the exception, in the living world. Mendel helped us to understand how variation is transmitted. We should constantly remind students that the structures and processes we describe as we teach genetics exist to harbor, preserve, and transmit biological variation, the lifeblood of any species.

Clarifying the use of Theodosius Dobzhansky's and E. O. Wilson's evolutionary maxims: A guide for psychologists

I argue that Theodosius Dobzhansky's (1973b, p. 125) famous claim that “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution” and E. O. Wilson’s (1978, p. 167) popular remark that “Genes hold culture on a leash” have come to function dogmatically as maxims. I examine the context of these statements and provide examples of how they have been used for rhetorical effect in evolutionary literatures in the behavioral sciences. Dobzhansky's maxim is simply the title of a brief article in a journal that specializes in the teaching of biology. Wilson's maxim appears in a book that addresses critiques of his sociobiology, and which discusses the problem of altruism. Despite the popularity of these maxims in evolutionary biology and psychology, neither Dobzhansky nor Wilson seem to mean these statements as unassailable general truths. I conclude with some remarks concerning the relevance of Dobzhansky and Wilson to contemporary evolutionary metatheory.

How Theodosius Dobzhansky Integrated Genetics With Evolution

In 1859, Charles Darwin proposed his theory of natural selection which acts on variations present in the populations and better varieties are produced in the course of time. Darwin’s theory of natural selection is important, and acts as the main guiding force of evolution. However, he lacked the knowledge of genetics and could not explain the basis of variations. It is only those variations which are important in evolution that have a genetic basis and are inheritable. This gap was filled by Theodosius Dobzhansky who provided the genetic basis of evolution through his book in which he explained various mechanisms of evolution having genetic basis. Dobzhansky also provided the experimental evidence in favour of evolution through his work on Drosophila. He was the first to provide the genetic basis of evolution showing the action of natural selection on genetic variability. He defined evolution as a change in genetic composition of a population. Further, he also contributed to the development of the modern synthetic theory of evolution. That is why the author says Dobzhansky integrated genetics with evolution.

In light of evolution. Making sense of biotech applications

Evolutionary biologist Theodosius Dobzhansky refl ected on the place held by evolutionary theory in modern biology in the title of his famous article: «Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution». Published in the early seventies, at the dawn of a revolution sparked by new genetic engineering techniques, his message still holds weight; perhaps even more so.

Evolutionary and narrative medicine: are they compatible?

Evolutionary medicine and narrative medicine are two powerful frameworks for approaching medical practice that have emerged in the past thirty years. One is based on biological science and the ideas...

“…this Brazilian venture…” A brief biography of Theodosius Dobzhansky before he arrived in Brazil

This paper describes life and career of Theodosius Dobzhansky (1900-1975) until he arrived in Brazil in 1943. During his years in Russia, Dobzhansky began his entomology studies and undertook research expeditions to Central Asia to study livestock, which focused on speciation biology. Once he arrived in the United States Dobzhansky began working with Drosophila melanogaster with Thomas Hunt Morgan (1866-1945) at Columbia University. Once Morgan relocated to the California Institute of Technology (Caltech), Dobzhansky started collaborating with his colleague, Alfred Henry Sturtevant (1891-1970), on studies of a wild cousin of Drosophila melanogaster, Drosophila pseudoobscura. Dobzhansky and Sturtevant’s friendship and collaboration suffered due to several factors, including most importantly, their differing approaches to Drosophila pseudoobscura as influenced by their different conceptions of the purpose of their work. While Sturtevant studied the flies using the same techniques as his studies of the domestic Drosophila melanogaster, Dobzhansky studied Drosophila pseudoobscura in the field considering his broader dictum that “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.”

Mast seeding: the devil (and the delight) is in the detail.

This article is a Commentary on Bogdziewicz et al. (2021), 229: 2357–2364.