Monaghan F V, Corcos A F
J Hered. 1987 May-Jun;78(3):208-10. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.jhered.a110361.
An examination of Tschermak's two papers of 1900 not only reinforces our conclusion cited in our first paper on Tschermak that he was not a rediscoverer of Mendelism, but also he did not understand Mendel when he had read it. His concept of dominance differed from that of Mendel, and his use of his own concept is inconsistent and contradictory. His discussion of his backcross data indicated that he had no idea of the nature of Mendelian ratios. Nowhere did he develop the ideas of segregation and independent assortment.
对切尔马克1900年的两篇论文进行审视,不仅强化了我们在关于切尔马克的第一篇论文中所引用的结论,即他不是孟德尔遗传学说的重新发现者,而且还表明他在阅读孟德尔的著作时并未理解其内容。他对显性的概念与孟德尔的不同,并且他对自己概念的运用既不一致又相互矛盾。他对回交数据的讨论表明他对孟德尔比率的本质一无所知。他在任何地方都没有阐述分离和独立分配的概念。