THE HYBRIDIZATION WORK OF MENDEL, 102 YEARS AFTER STARTING THE CONTROVERSY

Revista Cientifica, FCV-LUZ 24 (1):38-46 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This research was carried out in order to verify by simulation Mendel’s laws and seek for the clarification, from the author’s point of view, the Mendel-Fisher controversy. It was demonstrated from: the experimental procedure and the first two steps of the Hardy-Weinberg law, that the null hypothesis in such experiments is absolutely and undeniably true. Consequently, repeating hybridizing experiments as those showed by Mendel, it makes sense to expect a highly coincidence between the observed and the expected cell frequencies. By simulation, 30 random samples were generated with size equal to the number of observations reported by Mendel for his single trait trial, in this case, seed shape; assuming complete dominance, with genes A and a; likewise, it was simulated the results for the experiment with two traits, segregating in separate chromosomes, in this case seed shape, as before, and albumen color, with genes B and b, both loci with complete dominance. In the case of a single trait, the data only showed evidence for rejecting the null hypothesis (Ho ) in 1/30 samples, with (P<0.05). In the case of the 30 samples of the two traits experiment, (Ho ) was rejected only on 3/30 times, when it was set a = 0.05. In both simulations there was a high correspondence between the observed and expected cell frequencies, which is simply due to the fact that (Ho ) is true, and under these conditions, that is what would to expect. It was concluded, that Mendel had no reason to manipulate his data in order to make them to coincide with his beliefs. Therefore, in experiment with a single trait, and in experiments with two traits assuming complete dominance, segregation ratios are 3:1; and 9:3:3:1, respectively. Consequently, Mendel’s laws, under the conditions as were described are absolutely valid and universal.

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Controversies in the Interpretation of Mendel's Discovery.Vítĕzslav Orel & Daniel L. Hartl - 1994 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 16 (3):423 - 464.
History of Plant Hybridization According to Mendel's Contemporary Rudolf Geschwind.Vítězslav Orel - 1986 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 8 (2):251 - 263.
The real objective of Mendel's paper.Floyd V. Monaghan & Alain F. Corcos - 1990 - Biology and Philosophy 5 (3):267-292.
What would have happened if Darwin had known Mendel (or Mendel's work)?Pablo Lorenzano - 2011 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 33 (1):3-48.
A Conceptual Ambiguity that Contributed to the Neglect of Mendel's Paper.Iris Sandler & Laurence Sandler - 1985 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 7 (1):3 - 70.
Mendel's experiments: A reinterpretation. [REVIEW]Federico Di Trocchio - 1991 - Journal of the History of Biology 24 (3):485-519.
Constant Hybrids in Mendel's Research.Vitěszslav Orel & Vitězslav Orel - 1998 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 20 (3):291 - 299.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-03-11

Downloads
465 (#39,141)

6 months
69 (#61,336)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references