Abstract
One of the defining features of the classical gene was its position (a band in the chromosome). In molecular genetics, positions are defined instead as nucleotide numbers and there is no clear correspondence with its classical counterpart. However, the classical gene position did not simply disappear with the development of the molecular approach, but survived in the lab associated to different genetic practices. The survival of classical gene position would illustrate Waters’ view about the practical persistence of the genetic approach beyond reductionism and anti-reductionist claims. We show instead that at the level of laboratory practices there are also reductive processes, operating through the rise and fall of different techniques. Molecular markers made the concept of classical gene position practically dispensable, leading us to rethink whether it had any causal role or was just a mere heuristic.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Code availability
Not applicable.
Notes
As a matter of fact, genes were the elements of recombination as this process would shuffle the linkage between alleles (Pierce 2013).
A reviewer objects that, at no point in our argument, “are bona fide molecular concepts of the gene introduced or discussed (e.g., open reading frames, transcription units, annotated genes)”. These are concepts that allow geneticists to reconstruct some classical gene properties in molecular terms. But we are going to focus on classical gene position, a concept for which no such reconstruction has been achieved. Therefore, those bona fide molecular concepts will not feature in our analysis.
We are grateful to Ken Waters and an anonymous reviewer for helping us to clarify this point.
We should bear in mind that cytogenetic techniques and experimental crossing provide different information on gene positions. While cytogenetics identifies chromosomes bands, experimental crosses inform about different genes being located nearby, in the same chromosomic region. Even though cytogenetic techniques dealt directly with the chromosome, classical genetics used experimental crosses to identify gene positions in the newly constructed linkage maps. As we will see later in “Molecular markers” section, the information provided by experimental crosses got into molecular genetics through molecular markers.
As Davide Vecchi (personal communication) observes, a token molecular position might be characterisable—independently of whether it iss epistemically accessible—as the gene location in the genome of a specific cell. But, as of today, there is no way to reduce token classical position to the latter entity. On the other hand, according to Weber (2004), the situation is equally complicated for reducing function, the fourth characteristic of the classical gene concept, although we’ll skip the discussion here.
We are, of course, simplifying our discussion of classical genetics. Following Ken Waters’ suggestion (personal communication), it may be argued that recombination maps may exhibit more continuity between classical and molecular approaches than our analysis claims. Recombination maps based on phenotypic markers were used to establish recombination distances between loci, and these distances were, in turn, related to distances between chromosomic positions. Molecular geneticists can now build recombination maps using genetic markers: with different data, they can calculate distances with statistical approaches similar enough to those of classical genetics. However, in our view, the relevant difference lies in the source data: unlike in classical genetics recombination maps are now build upon molecular information. The positions under discussion are also different, just as our general argument suggests.
Ken Waters (personal communication) objects that we are overlooking the role position played in the recombination of traits through transmission, a central role for the experimental practices of classical geneticists. Indeed, classical genetics were more successful in the study of recombination than in phenotype explanation (as compared to molecular genetics). Although crucial, position in the study of recombination is relative (as in “how separated are these two genes on the genome?”). It does not have the sort of causal impact attributed to position effects.
References
Amberger JS, Bocchini CA, Scott AF, Hamosh A (2018) OMIM.org: leveraging knowledge across phenotype–gene relationships. Nucl Acids Res 47:D1038–D1043
Andersson L et al (1994) Genetic mapping of quantitative trait loci for growth and fatness in pigs. Science 263:1771–1774
Baetu TM (2010) The referential convergence of gene concepts based on classical and molecular analyses. Int Stud Philos Sci 24:411–427
Balzer W, Lorenzano P (2000) The logical structure of classical genetics. J Gen Philos Sci 31:243–266
Balzer W, Moulines CU, Sneed JD (1987) An architectonic for science: the structuralist program. D. Reidel, Boston
Benzer S (1955) Fine structure of a genetic region in bacteriophage. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 41:344
Bhattacharyya MK, Smith AM, Ellis TN, Hedley C, Martin C (1990) The wrinkled-seed character of pea described by Mendel is caused by a transposon-like insertion in a gene encoding starch-branching enzyme. Cell 60:115–122
Bridges CB (1914) Direct proof through non-disjunction that the sex-linked genes of Drosophila are borne by the X-chromosome. Science 40:107–109
Carlson EA (1966) The gene: a critical history. Saunders, Philadelphia
Chakraborty P, Pankajam AV, Dutta A, Nishant KT (2018) Genome wide analysis of meiotic recombination in yeast: for a few SNPs more. IUBMB Life 70:743–752
Chang H (2007) Scientific progress: beyond foundationalism and coherentism. R Inst Philos Suppl 61:1–20
Darden L (2006) Reasoning in biological discoveries: essays on mechanisms, interfield relations, and anomaly resolution. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Falconer D (1962) Sombre (So) on LG XVIII. Mouse News Lett 27:30
Gabriel SB et al (2002) The structure of haplotype blocks in the human genome. Science 296:2225–2229
Gehring WJ, Klemenz R, Weber U, Kloter U (1984) Functional analysis of the white + gene of Drosophila by P-factor-mediated transformation. EMBO J 3:2077–2085
Goldschmidt R (1937) Spontaneous chromatin rearrangements in Drosophila. Nature 140:767
Green M (1959) Spatial and functional properties of pseudo-alleles at the white locus in Drosophila melanogaster. Heredity 13:303
Griffiths P, Stotz K (2013) Genetics and philosophy: an introduction. Cambridge introductions to philosophy and biology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Hoekstra H (2014) The secret of a natural blond. Nat Genet 46:660
Hull DL (1974) Philosophy of biological science. Prentice-Hall foundations of philosophy series. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs
Kaiser MI (2015) Reductive explanation in the biological sciences. Springer, Berlin
Kinghorn B, van der Werf J (2000) Identifying and incorporating genetic markers and major genes in animal breeding programs. Curso desarrollado Belo Horizonte 2000:31
Kitcher P (1984) 1953 and all that. A tale of two sciences. Philos Rev 93:335–373
Lenffer J et al (2006) OMIA (Online Mendelian Inheritance in Animals): an enhanced platform and integration into the Entrez search interface at NCBI. Nucl Acids Res 34:D599–D601
Levis R, O’Hare K, Rubin GM (1984) Effects of transposable element insertions on RNA encoded by the white gene of Drosophila. Cell 38:471–481
Lobo I, Shaw K (2008) Discovery and types of genetic linkage. Nat Educ 1:139
Morgan TH (1910) Sex limited inheritance in Drosophila. Science 32:120–122
Muller HJ (1932) Further studies on the nature and causes of gene mutations. In: Proceedings of the 6th international congress genetics, Ithaca, New York, USA, vol 1, pp 213–255
Muller HJ (1936) Bar duplication. Science 83:528–530
Muller HJ, Muller H (1930) Types of visible variations induced by X-rays in Drosophila. J Genet 22:299–334
Nickles T (1973) Two concepts of intertheoretic reduction. J Philos 70:181–201
O’Hare K, Murphy C, Levis R, Rubin GM (1984) DNA sequence of the white locus of Drosophila melanogaster. J Mol Biol 180:437–455
Paterson AH, Lander ES, Hewitt JD, Peterson S, Lincoln SE, Tanksley SD (1988) Resolution of quantitative traits into Mendelian factors by using a complete linkage map of restriction fragment length polymorphisms. Nature 335:721
Pierce BA (2013) Genetics essentials: concepts and connections, 2nd edn. W.H. Freeman and Company, New York
Robbins LS et al (1993) Pigmentation phenotypes of variant extension locus alleles result from point mutations that alter MSH receptor function. Cell 72:827–834
Rosenberg A (1985) The structure of biological science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Russo F, Williamson J (2007) Interpreting causality in the health sciences. Int Stud Philos Sci 21:157–170
Schaffner KF (1969) The Watson–Crick model and reductionism. Br J Philos Sci 20:325–348
Searle A (1968) An extension series in the mouse. J Hered 59:341–342
Sturtevant AH (1925) The effects of unequal crossing over at the bar locus in Drosophila. Genetics 10:117
Thompson DH (1931) The side-chain theory of the structure of the gene. Genetics 16:267
Waters CK (1994) Genes made. Mol Philos Sci 61:163–185
Waters CK (2008) Beyond theoretical reduction and layer-cake antireduction: how DNA retooled genetics and transformed biological practice. In: Ruse M (ed) The Oxford handbook of philosophy of biology. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 238–262
Waters CK (2014) Shifting attention from theory to practice in philosophy of biology. In: Galavotti MC, Dieks D, Gonzalez WJ, Hartmann S, Uebel T, Weber M (eds) New directions in the philosophy of science. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 121–139
Waters CK (2019) Presidential address. PSA 2016 Epistemol Sci Pract Philos Sci 86:585–611
Weber M (2004) Philosophy of experimental biology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Wimsatt WC (1976) Reductive Explanation: A Functional Account. In: Cohen RS, Hooker CA, Michalos AC, Van Evra JW (eds) PSA 1974. Boston studies in the philosophy of science, vol 32. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 671–710
Acknowledgements
José Díez, Pierre-Luc Germain, Javier González de Prado, Davide Vecchi and Ken Waters provided extensive comments on the manuscript. Every remaining mistake is ours.
Funding
Teira’s research has been funded by the Grant RTI2018-097709-B-I00 (Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades, Spain).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
Availability of data and materials
Not applicable.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Vidal, O., Teira, D. Has classical gene position been practically reduced?. Biol Philos 35, 51 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-020-09767-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-020-09767-x