T. Dobzhansky’s Input to Synthesis in Genetics

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Theodosius Dobzhansky was a famous geneticist and evolutionary biologist who made a significant contribution to modern synthesis. The latter is defined as the combination of ideas of genetics and evolution¹. Dobzhansky’s life, career, and scientific views are described in detail in the book The Evolution of Theodosius Dobzhansky: Essays on His Life and Thought in Russia and America by Mark Adams. One of the chapters titled “Dobzhansky, Waddington, and Schmalhausen: Embryology and the Modern Synthesis” discusses his views on the evolutionary theories of Schmalhausen and Waddington. Specifically, it explains why Dobzhansky preferred the perspective of the former over the latter. Dobzhansky believed that it is insufficient to use experimental data about molecules and population genetics to explain evolution; hence, the understanding of embryology should not be excluded.

Dobzhansky was a strong supporter of evolution because he had a deep understanding of molecular pathways, population genetics, and the embryology of different species. Indeed, he gave an excellent scientific explanation of the unity of life and evolutionary processes using the examples of universality and only slight difference in the genetic code². Furthermore, the scientist claimed that evolution was not a specific event that occurred several million years ago but a continuous process that had lasted for the past ten billion years³. It was evident from his article “Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution” that Dobzhansky preferred a holistic view of the origin and progress of life. Therefore, it is unsurprising that he supported Schmalhausen’s ideas more than Waddington’s. In fact, he believed that the former could synthesize the knowledge of embryology and population genetics well to explain evolutionary theories⁴. In contrast, the latter focused too much on finding specific genes which were essential but insufficient.

In summary, the selected chapter in Adam’s book explained why Dobzhansky supported Schmalhausen’s theories rather than Waddington’s. Dobzhansky, a famous and respected researcher in the field of genetics and evolution, was a strong supporter of modern synthesis. He believed it was critical to consider population genetics and embryology in explaining the evolutionary theory. Since Schmalhausen could assimilate knowledge from both fields in his works, Dobzhansky preferred his views over Waddington’s.

Bibliography

Dobzhansky, Theodosius. “Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution.” The American Biology Teacher 35 no. 3 (1973): 125–129.

Gilbert, Steven, F. “Dobzhansky, Waddington, and Schmalhausen: Embryology and the Modern Synthesis.” In The Evolution of Theodosius Dobzhansky: Essays on His Life and Thought in Russia and America, edited by Mark B. Adams, 143-154. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2014.

Footnotes

Gilbert, Steven, F. “Dobzhansky, Waddington, and Schmalhausen: Embryology and the Modern Synthesis.” In The Evolution of Theodosius Dobzhansky: Essays on His Life and Thought in Russia and America, edited by Mark B. Adams. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2014), 144.
Dobzhansky, Theodosius. 1973. “Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution.” The American Biology Teacher 35 no. 3 (1973): 126.
Dobzhansky, 129.
Gilbert, Steven, F. “Dobzhansky, Waddington, and Schmalhausen: Embryology and the Modern Synthesis.” In The Evolution of Theodosius Dobzhansky: Essays on His Life and Thought in Russia and America, edited by Mark B. Adams. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2014), 154.

Click Here To Order Now!

T. Dobzhansky’s Input to Synthesis in Genetics

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)