It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Paul Kammerer committed suicide in 1926 after being accused of fraud in his famous experiments of "inheritance of acquired traits" with the midwife toad. A new study shows how recent advances in molecular epigenetics and re-examination of his descriptions suggest the experiments were actually authentic.
The alleged scientific fraud by Paul Kammerer is perhaps one of the most controversial mysteries in the history of biology. …His experiments provided impressive evidence that environmental life experiences could have a direct, inheritable effect on progeny, as maintained by his intellectual predecessor Lamarck, and by Darwin himself. …
…Kammerer had a unique way of thinking for his time. While most of his contemporaries would split into opposite "Mendelian" and "Lamarckian" bands, he combined the experimental principles of both schools of thought. He was also unusual among Lamarckians in that he did not believe that the inheritance of acquired traits was necessarily progressive or beneficial, but could also produce neutral or detrimental traits. …
…these views started to change drastically since the 1990's, along with the progress in techniques to study molecular genetics. These uncovered several molecular mechanisms, such as DNA methylation, that could directly change inheritance in response to the environment. The modern field of epigenetics studies those changes in gene expression that do not involve a mutation, but are nevertheless inherited in absence of the signal or event that initiated the change.
His experiments provided impressive evidence that environmental life experiences could have a direct, inheritable effect on progeny, as maintained by his intellectual predecessor Lamarck, and by Darwin himself. …
originally posted by: intrptr
His experiments provided impressive evidence that environmental life experiences could have a direct, inheritable effect on progeny, as maintained by his intellectual predecessor Lamarck, and by Darwin himself. …
Which still proves either adaptation or evolution.
But since I don't see any man-bear-pigs in the 'environment'...
originally posted by: In4ormant
originally posted by: intrptr
His experiments provided impressive evidence that environmental life experiences could have a direct, inheritable effect on progeny, as maintained by his intellectual predecessor Lamarck, and by Darwin himself. …
Which still proves either adaptation or evolution.
But since I don't see any man-bear-pigs in the 'environment'...
Oh there is one my friend. There is one.
originally posted by: intrptr
originally posted by: In4ormant
originally posted by: intrptr
His experiments provided impressive evidence that environmental life experiences could have a direct, inheritable effect on progeny, as maintained by his intellectual predecessor Lamarck, and by Darwin himself. …
Which still proves either adaptation or evolution.
But since I don't see any man-bear-pigs in the 'environment'...
Oh there is one my friend. There is one.
Only one? There should be many mixed genetic species everywhere. Except thats unlikely since genetics doesn't favor interbreeding. Mutations are dead end, like Mules and ligers or whatever they are called.
Oh, and there is evidence of inter-species breeding producing viable offspring, Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis being the first that comes to mind.
originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: paradoxious
Oh, and there is evidence of inter-species breeding producing viable offspring, Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis being the first that comes to mind.
Mutations are degenerative not enhancing. The evidence supports adaptation anyway, not 'evolving'. Or are they interchangeable terms?
An Epigenetic Perspective on the Midwife Toad Experiments of Paul Kammerer (1880–1926)
Paul Kammerer was the most outstanding neo-Lamarckian experimentalist of the early 20th century. He reported spectacular results in the midwife toad, including crosses of environmentally modified toads with normal toads, where acquired traits were inherited in Mendelian fashion. Accusations of fraud generated a great scandal, ending with Kammerer's suicide. Controversy reignited in the 1970s, when journalist Arthur Koestler argued against these accusations. Since then, others have argued that Kammerer's results, even if real, were not groundbreaking and could be explained by somatic plasticity, inadvertent selection, or conventional genetics. More recently, epigenetics has uncovered mechanisms by which inheritance can respond directly to environmental change, inviting a reanalysis of Kammerer's descriptions. Previous arguments for mere somatic plasticity have ignored the description of experiments showing heritable germ line modification. Alleged inadvertent selection associated with egg mortality can be discarded, since mortality decreased in a single generation, upon repeated exposures. The challenging implications did not escape the attention of Kammerer's noted contemporary, William Bateson, but he reacted with disbelief, thus encouraging fraud accusations. Nowadays, formerly puzzling phenomena can be explained by epigenetic mechanisms. Importantly, Kammerer described parent-of-origin effects, an effect of parental sex on dominance. Epigenetic mechanisms underlie these effects in genomic imprinting and experiments of transgenerational epigenetic inheritance. In the early 20th century, researchers had no reason to link them with the inheritance of acquired traits. Thus, the parent-of-origin effects in Kammerer's experiments specifically suggest authenticity. Ultimate proof should come from renewed experimentation. To encourage further research, we present a model of possible epigenetic mechanisms.
originally posted by: soficrow
Paul Kammerer committed suicide in 1926 after being accused of fraud in his famous experiments of "inheritance of acquired traits" with the midwife toad. A new study shows how recent advances in molecular epigenetics and re-examination of his descriptions suggest the experiments were actually authentic.
The alleged scientific fraud by Paul Kammerer is perhaps one of the most controversial mysteries in the history of biology. …His experiments provided impressive evidence that environmental life experiences could have a direct, inheritable effect on progeny, as maintained by his intellectual predecessor Lamarck, and by Darwin himself. …
Re-examination suggests Paul Kammerer's scientific 'fraud' was a genuine discovery of epigenetic inheritance
A mystery finally solved, Kammerer’s reputation salvaged - and evidence he was framed. Great fodder for a documentary or true story drama.
The science is about “inheritance of acquired traits” - epigenetic inheritance - and accepting that “genetics” does not and cannot explain the whole inheritance picture. There be other forces in play. Even Darwin knew this.
…Kammerer had a unique way of thinking for his time. While most of his contemporaries would split into opposite "Mendelian" and "Lamarckian" bands, he combined the experimental principles of both schools of thought. He was also unusual among Lamarckians in that he did not believe that the inheritance of acquired traits was necessarily progressive or beneficial, but could also produce neutral or detrimental traits. …
A few hold-outs still argue that “no special mechanism exists by which environmental change can directly modify inheritance, and that every apparent case can be ultimately explained by indirect effects of natural selection and conventional genetics.” But …
…these views started to change drastically since the 1990's, along with the progress in techniques to study molecular genetics. These uncovered several molecular mechanisms, such as DNA methylation, that could directly change inheritance in response to the environment. The modern field of epigenetics studies those changes in gene expression that do not involve a mutation, but are nevertheless inherited in absence of the signal or event that initiated the change.
And I won’t even mention the role proteins and prions play, or the fact that amino acids code for proteins’ conformations and thus, their functions.
originally posted by: JuanDope
Genotype vs phenotype is potentiality vs actuality.
Old weed breeders know this. Nothing builds, identifiers are subtractions. Cheese comes from specific organic fungicides year after year. So does skunk. Strawberry Fields was grown in a strawberry field. It looks, and smells like Strawberries.
Humans arent much different from plants, if you disconnect the root from the mouth and turn it outside the body.