09.03.2013 Views

3 The New York Years (1931–1953)

3 The New York Years (1931–1953)

3 The New York Years (1931–1953)

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

A Modern Unified <strong>The</strong>ory of Evolution 199<br />

15 years and that I had read voluminously. Even though I did not maintain a ‘Notebook<br />

on Transmutation of Species,’ as Darwin did, I nevertheless had kept massive<br />

excerpts from the literature always with comments of my own. Unfortunately all<br />

this has now disappeared; I probably threw it out when I moved from <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong> to<br />

Cambridge.<br />

What is also evident to a careful student is that in various major issues I tended<br />

to diverge from both Simpson and Dobzhansky, as much as all three of us stood on<br />

the common ground of the Evolutionary Synthesis. My emphasis on populations<br />

and horizontal evolution is altogether absent in Simpson. My emphasis on the<br />

essential completion of the building-up of isolating mechanisms during geographical<br />

isolation is not shared by Dobzhansky. And there are various other differences.<br />

Even though I still express one or two reservations concerning the power of natural<br />

selection, I nevertheless was a far more consistent selectionist than Dobzhansky,<br />

who had been strongly influenced in his thinking by Sewall Wright.”<br />

<strong>The</strong> <strong>New</strong> Systematics<br />

E. Stresemann and B. Rensch, Mayr’s mentors at the Museum of Natural History<br />

of Berlin, pursued their work as biologists rather than as species cataloguers. Systematics<br />

had become in their hands truly a branch of evolutionary biology. Other<br />

scientific staff members in Berlin were also excellent. Three of the entomologists<br />

more or less acknowledged and practiced new systematics: W. A. Ramme, worked<br />

on orthopterans and introduced Mayr to the concept of sibling species; E.M. Hering,<br />

with butterflies and mining insects, and H. Bischoff, who prepared a major<br />

book on the biology of hymenoptera. None of them was just an alpha taxonomist.<br />

When Mayr came to the United States, he was appalled at the typological spirit<br />

dominating taxonomy. Each species was thought to have an essential nature, and<br />

species were defined by their degree of difference from one another (Mayr 1999k:<br />

XIX). He therefore decided to include in his book (1942e) a complete presentation<br />

of the European approach, one whose spirit Julian Huxley (1940) had captured in<br />

the phrase “new systematics” (although that book itself contained very little of this<br />

new approach). Mayr’s book (1942e) consists of two parts, (1) an introduction to<br />

the new systematics and (2) an analysis of species and speciation. Providing the first<br />

comprehensive treatment, after Rensch (1929, 1934), of modern systematics at the<br />

species level in English, Systematics and the Origin of Species became highly popular<br />

among taxonomists. Whereas the English-American literature made not much<br />

of a contribution to the evolutionary synthesis, central European and also Scandinavian<br />

systematics contributed massively to the synthesis by stress on population<br />

thinking, the biological nature of species, the study of geographical variation, and<br />

the clear understanding of geographical speciation in a wide variety of animals<br />

(besides birds also in mammals, reptiles, amphibians, fish as well as invertebrates).<br />

One of Mayr’s major achievements was to summarize and synthesize this scattered<br />

European literature which, for linguistic reasons, had remained unknown internationally.<br />

Among a total of 450 references, the bibliography includes 174 European,

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!