Calabrese Edward J
Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Morrill I, N344, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, 01003, USA.
Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2018 Oct 19;13(1):15. doi: 10.1186/s13010-018-0066-z.
This paper assesses possible reasons why Hermann J. Muller avoided peer-review of data that became the basis of his Nobel Prize award for producing gene mutations in male Drosophila by X-rays.
Extensive correspondence between Muller and close associates and other materials were obtained from preserved papers to compliment extensive publications by and about Muller in the open literature. These were evaluated for potential historical insights that clarify why he avoided peer-review of his Nobel Prize findings.
This paper clarifies the basis of Muller's (Muller HJ, Sci 66 84-87, 1927c) belief that he produced X-ray induced "gene" mutations in Drosophila. It then shows his belief was contemporaneously challenged by his longtime friend/confidant and Drosophila geneticist, Edgar Altenburg. Altenburg insisted that Muller may have simply poked large holes in chromosomes with massive doses of X-rays, and needed to provide proof of gene "point" mutations. Given the daunting and uncertain task to experimentally address this criticism, especially within the context of trying to become first to produce gene mutations, it is proposed that Muller purposely avoided peer-review while rushing to publish his paper in Science to claim discovery primacy without showing any data. The present paper also explores ethical issues surrounding these actions, including those of the editor of Science, James McKeen Catell and Altenburg, and their subsequent impact on the scientific and regulatory communities.
This historical analysis suggests that Muller deliberately avoided peer-review on his most significant findings because he was extremely troubled by the insightful and serious criticism of Altenburg, which suggested he had not produced gene mutations as he claimed. Nonetheless, Muller manipulated this situation (i.e., publishing a discussion within Science with no data, publishing a poorly written non-peer reviewed conference proceedings with no methods and materials, and no references) due to both the widespread euphoria over his claim of gene mutation and confidence that Altenburg would not publically challenge him. This situation permitted Muller to achieve his goal to be the first to produce gene mutations while buying him time to later try to experimentally address Altenburg's criticisms, and a possible way to avoid discovery of his questionable actions.
本文评估了赫尔曼·J·穆勒(Hermann J. Muller)避免对那些成为其因用X射线在雄性果蝇中产生基因突变而获得诺贝尔奖依据的数据进行同行评审的可能原因。
从留存的文件中获取了穆勒与其亲密同事之间的大量通信及其他资料,以补充公开文献中关于穆勒及其相关的大量出版物。对这些资料进行评估,以获取可能的历史见解,从而阐明他为何避免对其诺贝尔奖研究结果进行同行评审。
本文阐明了穆勒(Muller HJ, Sci 66 84 - 87, 1927c)认为自己在果蝇中产生了X射线诱导的“基因”突变这一观点的依据。接着表明他的这一观点在当时受到了其长期的朋友/知己、果蝇遗传学家埃德加·阿尔滕堡(Edgar Altenburg)的质疑。阿尔滕堡坚持认为穆勒可能只是用大剂量X射线在染色体上造成了大的空洞,并且需要提供基因“点”突变的证据。鉴于在实验上回应这一批评的艰巨且不确定的任务,尤其是在试图成为首个产生基因突变的背景下,有人提出穆勒故意避免同行评审,同时急于在《科学》杂志上发表他的论文,以在不展示任何数据的情况下宣称发现优先权。本文还探讨了围绕这些行为的伦理问题,包括《科学》杂志编辑詹姆斯·麦基恩·卡特尔(James McKeen Catell)和阿尔滕堡的行为,以及它们随后对科学界和监管界的影响。
这一历史分析表明,穆勒故意避免对其最重要的研究结果进行同行评审,因为他被阿尔滕堡有见地且严肃的批评深深困扰,该批评表明他并未如他所宣称的那样产生基因突变。尽管如此,穆勒操纵了这种情况(即在《科学》杂志上发表一篇没有数据的讨论文章,发表一篇没有方法和材料且未经过同行评审、写得很差的会议论文集,也没有参考文献),这既是因为对他声称的基因突变存在普遍的兴奋情绪,也是因为他相信阿尔滕堡不会公开挑战他。这种情况使穆勒得以实现他成为首个产生基因突变的目标,同时为他赢得时间,以便日后尝试从实验上回应阿尔滕堡的批评,并且这可能是一种避免其可疑行为被发现 的方式。