Department of Mathematics, University of Vienna, Austria.
J Exp Zool B Mol Dev Evol. 2010 Dec 15;314(8):625-8. doi: 10.1002/jez.b.21376.
In a recent article in this journal, A. O. Vargas (2009. J Exp Zool B (Mol Dev Evol) 312:667-678) suggests to interpret the controversial midwife toad experiments of the early 20th century zoologist Paul Kammerer in the context of epigenetic inheritance. For information on Kammerer's work he resorts to a popular science book (Kammerer, '24. The Inheritance of Acquired Characteristics). However, the study of Kammerer's original publications reveals that there are substantial misunderstandings in Vargas' treatment of the subject. While Vargas' general idea-invoking epigenetic effects as an explanation of Kammerer's findings-remains attractive, at least two key aspects of his model need to be revised. Clarification of these issues is an important prerequisite for any experimental design with the aim to (dis)prove Kammerer and to establish a (potential) epigenetic basis of his observations about the mating behavior in midwife toads.
在最近的一篇期刊文章中,A. O. 巴尔加斯(2009. J Exp Zool B (Mol Dev Evol) 312:667-678)提出,将 20 世纪初动物学家保罗·卡默勒(Paul Kammerer)颇具争议的助产蟾蜍实验置于表观遗传学遗传的背景下进行解读。为了获取有关卡默勒工作的信息,他参考了一本通俗科学书籍(Kammerer,'24. The Inheritance of Acquired Characteristics)。然而,对卡默勒原始出版物的研究表明,巴尔加斯对该主题的处理存在严重误解。尽管巴尔加斯的总体思路——援引表观遗传效应作为对卡默勒发现的解释——仍然具有吸引力,但他的模型至少有两个关键方面需要修改。澄清这些问题是任何旨在(不)证明卡默勒以及确定其关于助产蟾蜍交配行为观察的(潜在)表观遗传基础的实验设计的重要前提。