7

This is a great question as it touches on the history-in-the-making, a revolution in molecular biology taking place in our lifetime. In the last two decades the "central dogma" of molecular biology, formulated by Watson and Crick after the discovery of DNA in 1952-1958, has been overthrown. The neat picture of genes, exclusive containers of hereditary ...


6

Elizabeth B Gasking summarised the reasons in 1959, but you're not reading it without a Jstor account. Sometimes a paper is overlooked because we think about its relevance from the wrong perspective. It seems even Mendel didn't realise what he'd uncovered. The laws of inheritance that now bear his name, insofar as he formulated them in something close to ...


4

The Spinal Muscular Atrophy volume gives some historical information on the disease and its treatment in the opening sections. Their timeline and attribution of credit is rather different from that of KEI, especially where Kaspar is concerned. Gene therapy for SMA was made possible by identifying the responsible gene in 1990 by Gilliam’s group in New York ...


4

This is a supplement to J.G.'s useful answer: there is a good deal of illuminating source material in William Bateson's (1909) "Mendel's principles of heredity", available at (https://archive.org/details/mendelsprinciple00bate), which was cited by the Gasking 1959 paper. Bateson gave translations of both of Mendel's major papers. Some points from Gasking's (...


4

The story is told in the Wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregor_Mendel#Rediscovery_of_Mendel.27s_work Mendel's work was not "forgotten" but rather "ignored" because it did not fit in the mainstream science of that time. But some people go to the libraries, and read old papers. So when discoveries which were "much ahead of its time" are ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible