98%
921
2 minutes
20
This paper revisits Fleeming Jenkin's anonymous review of Charles Darwin's Origin of Species, published in the North British Review in June 1867. This review is usually revered for its impact on Darwin's theory of descent with modification. Its classical interpretation states that Jenkin, a Professor of Engineering at the University of Edinburgh, made a compelling case against natural selection based on the fact of "blending inheritance" and the "swamping" of advantageous variations. Those themes, however, are strikingly absent from Jenkin's text. They were later read into Jenkin's text by scholars trying to explain how Darwinian selection was reconciled with Mendelian genes and the birth of the Modern Synthesis. While many scholars have tried to measure Jenkin's effect on Darwin, the value of the 1867 review remains unclear. This paper re-examines its content and concludes that Jenkin's "able review" was in fact written by an engineer whose competencies in biology were very low. Focusing on the figure of the shipwrecked white sailor isolated on an island inhabited by Black people, this paper also underlines the racial assumptions behind Jenkin's review. "Blending inheritance" is thus a theme linked to theoretical reworkings on the question of race and skin colors, taking its root in Galton's typology of heredity. Darwin was probably mostly unimpressed by Jenkin's review. The problems raised by the review were not so much "blending inheritance" and "swamping" but a conundrum of problems related to the effects of intercrossing on variation and reversion.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10739-024-09770-y | DOI Listing |
J Hist Biol
March 2024
Department of Philosophy, University Paris Nanterre, Paris, France.
This paper revisits Fleeming Jenkin's anonymous review of Charles Darwin's Origin of Species, published in the North British Review in June 1867. This review is usually revered for its impact on Darwin's theory of descent with modification. Its classical interpretation states that Jenkin, a Professor of Engineering at the University of Edinburgh, made a compelling case against natural selection based on the fact of "blending inheritance" and the "swamping" of advantageous variations.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFCurr Biol
June 2018
Centre for Ecology and Conservation, University of Exeter, Penryn Campus, Penryn, Cornwall TR10 9FE, UK. Electronic address:
Cultural inheritance, the transmission of socially learned information across generations, is a non-genetic, "second inheritance system" capable of shaping phenotypic variation in humans and many non-human animals [1-3]. Studies of wild animals show that conformity [4, 5] and biases toward copying particular individuals [6, 7] can result in the rapid spread of culturally transmitted behavioral traits and a consequent increase in behavioral homogeneity within groups and populations [8, 9]. These findings support classic models of cultural evolution [10, 11], which predict that many-to-one or one-to-many transmission erodes within-group variance in culturally inherited traits.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFProc Natl Acad Sci U S A
July 2017
Human Biological and Cultural Evolution Group, Department of Biosciences, University of Exeter, Penryn, Cornwall TR10 9FE, United Kingdom
In the past few decades, scholars from several disciplines have pursued the curious parallel noted by Darwin between the genetic evolution of species and the cultural evolution of beliefs, skills, knowledge, languages, institutions, and other forms of socially transmitted information. Here, I review current progress in the pursuit of an evolutionary science of culture that is grounded in both biological and evolutionary theory, but also treats culture as more than a proximate mechanism that is directly controlled by genes. Both genetic and cultural evolution can be described as systems of inherited variation that change over time in response to processes such as selection, migration, and drift.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFGenome
September 2015
Department of Biology, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1, Canada.
Mendel is credited for discovering Laws of Heredity, but his work has come under criticism on three grounds: for possible falsification of data to fit his expectations, for getting undue credit for the laws of heredity without having ideas of segregation and independent assortment, and for being interested in the development of hybrids rather than in the laws of heredity. I present a brief review of these criticisms and conclude that Mendel deserved to be called the father of genetics even if he may not, and most likely did not, have clear ideas of segregation and particulate determiners as we know them now. I argue that neither Mendel understood the evolutionary significance of his findings for the problem of genetic variation, nor would Darwin have understood their significance had he read Mendel's paper.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFStud Hist Philos Biol Biomed Sci
June 2014
Department of History, University of California, Los Angeles, United States. Electronic address:
For more than a century, geneticists have consistently identified the origins of their science with Gregor Mendel's experiments on peas. Mendelism, they have said, demonstrated at long last that biological inheritance was not, as had so often been supposed, "blending," but particulate. Many historians of biology continue to interpret the conflict of biometricians and Mendelians at the start of the twentieth century in these terms, identifying biometry with the (incorrect) blending mechanism.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF