Abstracts of the History of Science Society 2004 Austin Meeting 18 ...

tions it raised were not resolved either by Galileo or by the court, and that they remain relevant to modern debates about the use of
both copyright and patents to protect intellectual property claims in scientific findings.
Christina Brandt, Max Planck Institute for the History of Science (brandt@mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de)
Friday, 19-Nov-04, 9:00 - 11:45 AM - Big Bend D & E
Between Fact and Fiction: Bioscientific Research and Early Debates About Cloning and Genetic Engineering in Germany
This paper analyzes scientific and cultural layers in the history of cloning. It addresses the relationship between bioscientific research,
popular representations and public debates that flourished around the figure of the “clone”. The focus will be on the life sciences in
Germany from the late 1960s to the early 1980s. This period can be characterized by two major scientific events: First, John Gurdon´s
(Oxford) success in cloning frogs in the early 1960s gave rise to fantastical representations around the figure of the “clone”. Second,
these popular debates about cloning experienced both their highpoint and a temporary halt in the early 1980s when Karl Illmensee
(Geneva) announced that he was able to clone mice but shortly afterwards his claims were disproved. In the first part of the paper, I
will follow scientific developments in German developmental biology by focussing on research at the Friedrich Miescher Laboratorium
of the Max Planck Society in Tuebingen. The second part will examine the public debates about cloning and genetic engineering in
Germany with attention given to the demarcation between scientific facts and popular fiction. By comparing these German developments
to those in the United States and Great Britain, the paper will try to specify at which level national peculiarities played a part in
an internationally organized scientific landscape building up in the second half of the 20th century.
Sabine Brauckmann, KLI (sabine.brauckmann@kli.ac.at)
Friday, 19-Nov-04, 1:30 - 3:10 PM - Texas Ballroom VI
‘’Cells Migrate and Shape’’: A Historical Sketch of Developmental Fate Maps
My talk presents a historical chapter of developmental physiology by focusing on Walter Vogt (1888-1941) and Sven Hörstadius (1898-
1996), two experimental biologists, and on two conceptions, namely the gastrea theory and the gradient notion. Further, I want to show
(1) how developmental physiology depicted the migration and shaping of cells during gastrulation in fate maps and (2)how the gradient
concept as formulated by Boveri was finally confirmed. The crucial issue comparative anatomy and embryology tried to solve around
1880 was how the mesoderm forms and whether it proceeds by invagination or delamination. However, it was difficult to reconstruct
these morphogenetic movements by observing whole or sectioned embryos alone. Besides an experimental turn, technical improvements
like micrometer, vital staining methods, and apochromatic objectives helped to label the cells of the three germ layers and to follow
their fate at successive intervals during gastrulation. By these new methods, the classical disciplines slowly overcame their descriptive
state and moved towards the more dynamical representation of developmental mechanics. In the 1920s Vogt perfected the staining
method and constructed more or less idealized fate maps of the toad Bombinator. For him, the results corroborated Haeckel’s gastrea
theory. Vogt’s research revolutionized comparative embryology and formed the basis for interpreting developmental physiology. A few
years later Hörstadius embarked on an experimental program with sea urchins hoping to solve the question of the temporal determination
of invagination. His main objective was to improve on the data of Morgan and Driesch who had estimated the invaginating material
by counting nuclei. With his technique of fine glass needles and Vogt’s staining method, Hörstadius could now trace the fate of the
various cell groups into the later larva at their exact temporal determination. His data corrected the old invagination explanation of gastrulation
and secured the gradient concept. Besides the narrative of developmental fate mapping, my main objective is to demonstrate
the conceptual difference in their research programs. For, Vogt’s work was firmly rooted in homology studies of the 19th century whereas
Hörstadius concentrated on embryonic cells and intercellular communication.
Richard Burkhardt, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign (burkhard@uiuc.edu)
Saturday, 20-Nov-04, 3:30 - 5:30 PM - Texas Ballroom VI
Ordering and Coordinating Naturalists’ Practices in Restoration France
The distinction between the naturalist voyager and the cabinet naturalist predates but does not map seamlessly onto the later contrast
between the field naturalist and the lab or museum worker. One reason for this is that the primary task of naturalist voyagers, at least
as conceived by those who most often sponsored their travels, was to collect specimens for study and display back in museums, not to
pursue field studies as such. In the years immediately after the Napoleonic Wars, the National Museum of Natural History in Paris made
special efforts to encourage the collecting efforts of travelers, colonial officials, sea captains, and, most notably, a select number of individuals
whom the Museum paid to be naturalist voyagers. The present paper looks at the naturalist voyagers on the Museum’s payroll
from 1815 to 1830, examining in particular the ways in which their own interests and their actual practices in the field corresponded to
or diverged from the aims of the institution that sponsored them.
D. Graham Burnett, Princeton University (dburnett@princeton.edu)
Saturday, 20-Nov-04, 9:00 - 11:45 AM - Texas Ballroom III
Whales and the Cold War: The First International Symposium on Cetacean Research
From the 15th to the 18th of August, 1963, more than fifty scientists from around the world gathered in the “John Glenn Suite” of the