A PINCH OF DUST

Greymouth Evening Star, 14 January 1933, Page 9

A PINCH OF DUST

FROM WHICH LIFE CAME A. new chapter of Ithe Book of Genesis, giving the ultra-modern version of. the story of creation, m the light of new knowledge gained by science during the past five years on the hidden forces that distinguish the animate from the inanimate, was presented in America before tne sixth n ternational Congress of Genetics by Dr. C. C. Hurst, pioneer genetist of Cambridge University. Dr Hurst desribed a hypothetical “missing link” somehow, in a manner as yet unknown, coming into existence as the very beginning of life, which bridged the gap between Ute and inanimate matter. This bridge he termed the “protogene.” the original Adam-like ancestor of the gene, the gene being, he said, not only the unit of heredity, but the “election of life” the inanimate unit of male matter. From tjiis genetic Aclain whs box n the “progene” living matter consisting of only one unit of life, which, m turn, engendered the sub-cellular bacteria, on through the living things made up of only one cell, to those made up of colonies of cells, upwards and upwards to the multi-cellular plants and animals, and finally the man. The living cell regarded at first as the unit of life is now known to be a complex structure involving, many genes and represents a definite impoi tant stage in creative evolution, says the “New York Times.” . Genetics has accumulated sufficient knowledge in the thirty years of its existence, since the re-discovery in 1900 of the original paper of Abbe Mendel, which had been collecting dust on a library shelf for thirty-five years, Dr. Hurst added, to furnish us with the means for creating a perfect race of men, physically and spiritually, if the peoples of the world only realised it and wanted it. In his own researches, Dr. Hurst said, he has worked out a definite genetic formula for producing musical geniuses of the calibre of Bach, and similar formulas could be worked out for mathematical geniuses, inventors, painters, philosophers, and other leaders among men.

THE TIME MAY COME While this could be done now, Dr. Hurst added, somewhat ruefully, the obstacles in the way of its immediate achievement are insuperable. But. while the outlook is dark for the present, the time may come, he said, when natural selection will be replaced by human selection. “Creative evolution,” Dr. Hurst said, “is a slow and gradual process, appearing to be continuous and often orthogenic as postulated by systematists, paleontologists, and embryologists, and yet in reality it is a discontinuous and particular process as postulated by the genetist. On the whole, creative evolution, although indeterminate, is progressive through an increasing complexity of genes and chromosomes (gene envelopes), whose effects are controlled in the direction of adaptation by natural selection. “The genes are the basis and the unit of life, and there is a steady evolutionary sequence from the half-alive autocatalist, or progene, on the borderland of the living and the non-living, which may be regarded as the missing link between matter and life, through the monogenic, unimolecular progenes into a single spiroid chromosome that marks an important and definite stage in. creative evolution. “After these come the unicellular protists, colonial unicellulars, and finally, the multi-cellular plants and animals, the whole being crowned by tho highest vertebrate, mammal, and primate, man, in whom the genes are so complex as to produce a conceptual mind.

“There are indications that the conceptual mind of man is evolving andprogressing rapidly in the direction of gaining more control over nature, matter, and life, and the time may come when natural selection will be replaced by human selection, and man, by the development of his conceptual mind, will himself organise, control, and guide creative evolution. “It is only during the past five years that science has learned to determine exactly the nature of. a species. Until then the term species was applied rather loosely, and Darwin himself had frankly admitted he did not know just hew to determine scientifically one species from another. Lately, how-

:ver, genetics has established that one pecies differs from another in the lumber of genes in each chromosome nd the number of chromosomes in : ach cell.

“Each particular species has a definite number of these genes and chromosomes in their cells, so that their number will determine to what species an animal, plant or lower form of life belongs.” To Dr. William K. Gregory, of the American Museum of Natural History, New York, Dr. Hurst gave the credit for finally establishing the true ancestor of man. Dr. Gregory has furnished definite evidence, generally accepted now, Dr. Hurst stated, that man’s direct ancestor was not the primate ape, but that both man and primate ape sprang from a common ancestor, a true “missing link” named dryopithecus, who inhabited the forests of Europe some 12.000,000 years ago.

A MAN-ABE. Dryopithecus was more man-ape than ape-man, and he was in turn a descendant of the monkey, which first emerged on the scale of evolution some 40,000,000 years ago, so that the monkey is the original stock descended in direct line through the dryopthe cus, after which the line of descent branched off, in inverted Y fashion, into man and the primate apes. While man kept evolving along his lines. Dr. Hurst added, in an “upward direction.” the monkeys and the primates have “gone down” the scale during the millions of years. But it must be remembered, Dr. Hurst pointed out, that the terms “up” and “down” in evolution, as in other instances, are only relative terms. The monkey and the ape have “retrogressed” only from the human point of view. Nature itself knows no superior or inferior.

'the primeval drop of “half-alive dust” out of which all life came was described by Dr. Hurst as somewhat in the nature of a cataclyst, known in chemistry. The cata/clyst possesses the mysterious power of bringing about unions between chemical elements which otherwise would not unite.

At, the beginnings of life, as Dr. Hurst pictured it. when atmospheric and other conditions become favourable, this “aulo-cataclyst” brought about a union between the oxygen and other elements then existing, and oui of the primeval dust in some antediluvian garden there arose the first living thing, the gene, electron of Ute. There might, have been many “protogenes” and genes horn at the.

'.same time, and millions of years passed before the first cell was born with a mechanism to reproduce itself. LIFE MECHANISTIC “Is the same process of spontaneous creation still goirfg on?’ Dr. Hurst was asked. “Possibly," he answered, “but we do not. know. If the original conditions still exist the answer would be ‘yes.’ But. we have no way of determining what the conditions for the spontaneous creation of life are.” Dr. Hurst agrees with Dr. Thomas H. Morgan, president of the congress and dean of American geneticists, that life, as far as the geneticist is concerned, is purely a matter of physics and chemistry, to be interpreted on purely mechanistic grounds. However, Dr. Hurst added he “prefers” to keep an open mind on the speculation that life may be something more than mere electrons aijd protons. The scientist, on the other hand, must not. allow this-' speculation to enter into his experimental work.

“Organic evolution,’* Dr. Hurst stated, “essentially consists of the transformation of an old species into a new species. At. least, four distinct processes and mechanisms are involved in the creative evolution of new genetical species—mutations, transmutations, sex, and natural selection.

“Mutations are due to changes in singles genes, which give rise to new characters and are therefore the basis of evolution, although not the immediate cause. They represent Darwin’s hereditary variations in all directions, and may be morphological, physiological, or psychological. They are random and indeterminate, as their experimental induction by X-rays proves. “Natural mutations are relatively rare, and the vast majority appear to be unfavourable. Some, however, seem to be potentially favourable, and can survive in a recessive state until new and favourable conditions arise when they can become dominant.

“Transmutations are due to transformations of chromosomes and their associated genes, giving rise to new character effects. On the whole they are more frequent than mutations, and since they involve more than one gene have usually a greater effect. “They include translocations, inversions, duplications, and deficiencies of sections or chromosomes, as well as additions or subtractions of whole chromosomes. More important still, thy include additions or subtractions of whole sets of chromosomes (genomes), the former of which give rise to polyploidy. “During the last decade twenty new genetical species and three new genetical genera of plants have been created experimentally. Like mutations, transmutations can be experimentally, induced by the application of X-rays, and are equally random and indeterminate.”