Search results
People also ask
Who was Carl Correns?
Why is Carl Correns important?
Was Carl Correns a re-discoverer of Mendel's laws?
Who is Carl Franz Joseph Erich Correns?
Dec 6, 2016 · Carl Correns (1900), one of the three “rediscoverers” of Mendel’s work, clearly acknowledged Mendel’s contribution. Correns was a student of Nägeli’s and (after Nägeli’s death) was married to his niece.
- Peter J van Dijk, T H Noel Ellis
- 10.1534/genetics.116.196626
- 2016
- Genetics. 2016 Dec; 204(4): 1327-1336.
His work then went largely unnoticed for the next 34 years before its rediscovery by three independent researchers—Hugo de Vries, Carl Correns, and Erich von Tschermak—in 1900 (Bateson 1900). However, as soon as the work was rediscovered, it created controversy (e.g., Weldon 1902). The closeness of Mendel’s experimental observations to ...
- James B. Reid, John J. Ross
- 2011
Carl Franz Joseph Erich Correns. 1864-1933. German Geneticist and Botanist. Carl Correns was one of three scientists who simultaneously rediscovered the work of Gregor Mendel (1822-1884). Correns investigated and confirmed the validity of many Mendelian laws and showed a deep understanding of Mendelian genetics.
- Abstract
- Correspondence Between Mendel and Nägeli
- Mendel’s Research Interests Were Broad
- Hieracium
- Concluding Remarks
- Acknowledgments
“THESE [seedlings] have rooted well, and should flower next year. Whether they will retain the characteristics of the hybrid, or whether they will show variations, will be determined by next year’s observations” (our emphasis). These lines about the progeny of his first artificial hawkweed (Hieracium) hybrid were written by Gregor Mendel on Novembe...
Carl Nägeli
Carl Nägeli was one of the most important botanists of the 19th century (Junker 2011). His research interests were on natural hybrids, an area where he was recognized as the leading researcher; and Hieracium, where again he was the leading authority. Nägeli was the person who could best see the relevance of Mendel’s pea results and Mendel also wanted his advice as a Hieracium expert (Section 2, File S1).
Mendel’s letters to Nägeli
Carl Correns (1900), one of the three “rediscoverers” of Mendel’s work, clearly acknowledged Mendel’s contribution. Correns was a student of Nägeli’s and (after Nägeli’s death) was married to his niece. From Mendel’s Hieracium note and from conversations with Nägeli in the past, Correns knew that Mendel and Nägeli had collaborated closely, so he asked the Nägeli family whether they had any letters from Mendel. Correns published the 10 letters that were discovered (Correns 1905), labeling them...
Mendel’s Hieracium work has been misunderstood as a frustrating failure to replicate his Pisum work
The traditional interpretation of Mendel’s motivation for studying Hieracium is expressed by Hartl and Orel (1992): Mendel’s “studies of Hieracium and other species were undertaken to verify, with other plants, the result obtained with Pisum,” and “the experiments with Hieracium, as recounted in the letters to Nägeli, were one long chronicle of failure and frustration.” In 2006 the journal GENETICS marked the 140-year jubilee of Mendel’s Pisum article. Crow and Dove (in Nogler 2006) commented...
Mendel’s hypothesis about the germ cells of constant vs. variable hybrids
In the concluding remarks of the Pisum article, Mendel stressed the importance of the “essential difference” between variable and constant hybrids; between hybrids like those of pea, which produced variable offspring; and hybrids that produced constant offspring. He also mentioned that “For the history of the evolution of plants this circumstance is of special importance, since constant hybrids acquire the status of new species” (Mendel’s emphasis, Stern and Sherwood 1966, p. 41). By “new spe...
Mendel’s interest in Hieracium, Cirsium, and Geum
As he neared the completion of his Pisum experiments, Mendel had started looking for species for new crossing experiments. In 1864 he had made crosses between Verbascum and Campanula species and some of his artificial hybrids were shown at the June 14, 1865 meeting of the Natural Science Society (Naturforschender Verein) of Brünn. The Verbascum hybrids, however, were completely sterile (Letter III, Stern and Sherwood 1966, p. 77). The timing shows that Mendel’s interest in variable hybrids co...
Two phases of Mendel’s Hieracium research
Mendel’s letters to Nägeli give a unique insight into his character, showing the evolution of his views, his openness and honesty, and his admission that some of his earlier expectations were incorrect. In some places the letters are witty and self-deprecating. Also striking, and contrary to what is often claimed, the correspondence between Mendel and Nägeli is friendly: Nägeli was not arrogant or controlling toward Mendel (Schwartz, 2008, and see salutations and signings Table S1). Although...
In this article we have argued that Mendel’s Hieracium experiments, and the reasons underlying them, have been misunderstood for more than a century. We propose that this misunderstanding rests on the obscurity of the originals of his written letters and that a missing page (or pages) in his first letter to Nägeli would explain the common misreadin...
The idea for this article sprouted from the “Research in Plant Genetics” Conference on September 7–10, 2015, organized by the Mendel Museum of the Masaryk University at Brno, Czech Republic. We thank Bengt Olle Bengtsson, Julie Hofer, and John Parker for critically reading and commenting on draft versions of the manuscript. We are grateful to Brigi...
- Peter J van Dijk, T H Noel Ellis
- 2016
Correns was active in genetic research in Germany, and was modest enough to never have a problem with scientific credit or recognition. He believed that his other work was more important, and the rediscovery of Mendel's laws only helped him with his other work.
Jul 11, 2022 · The publications by Hugo De Vries, Carl Correns and Erich von Tschermak in 1900 mark the beginning of the broad appreciation of Mendel’s work.
Carl Erich Correns (1864–1933) is remembered in the annals of science as one of the three botanists who re-discovered Mendel’s laws. He can also, however, be regarded as one of the founding figures of classical genetics in Germany.
