who proposed the term prokaryotic and eukaryotic cell
Answers
Answered by
0
In the debate among American biologists, especially Carl R. Woese, Ernst Mayr, and Lynn Margulis, whether there are two or three superkingdoms, domains, or empires of all life-forms – either only Prokarya (bacteria) and Eukarya (symbiosis-derived nucleated organisms), or Archaea, Bacteria (or Eubacteria), and Eukarya – all agree that it was the French protistologist Edouard Chatton (1883- 1947) who in the 1930’s divided life into two primary categories: prokaryotes and eukaryotes. (About Chatton’s life see four obituaries: Caullery 1947; Lwoff 1947, 1947-1948; Roubaud 1947). And all quote the same reference: “Chatton E. (1937 or 1938) Titres et Travaux Scientifiques [Titles and Scientific Works] (1906-1937). E. Sottano [the printer], Ste, France [sometimes wrongly Italy]”. However, no one recites the wording of the passage, nor gives the page of the book where the two fundamental terms are introduced.
This is namely one of the cases where most authors copy a footnote from another without having seen the original source. The book is extremely rare in public libraries, and it seems that in the USA, there is only one print copy and one microfilm copy, both in the Bioscience Library of the University of California in Berkeley. Probably, they are the only ones outside France. In the online catalogue of 22 of the largest university libraries in the UK plus the British Library (COPAC), you find only two other works of Chatton. And even in France, the Bibliothque Nationale does not possess the book nor is it to be found in the collective library catalogue of France or in the Pasteur Institute. Only an individual email inquiry brought two private (one in France, one in the USA), and four library copies to light, two in the small French sea coast places where Chatton had worked (Banyuls and Ste), and two in Paris: one in the library of the Acadmie des Sciences of which Chatton was a Correspondent, and one in the Central Library of the Musum National d’Histoire Naturelle.
The book has 407 pages. On the title page the professions of the author are stated, and the year of publication is 1937. However, after page 60, there is a second title page with the new position of Chatton which had changed in the meantime, and the year is 1938. (There are also copies only with the title page of 1938 at the beginning.) The one and only mention of the terms Eucaryote and Procaryote is on page 50. Here, for the first time, the French text and an English translation of the relevant paragraph is published:
Les protistologues s’accordent, aujourd’hui, considrer les Flagells autotrophes, comme les plus primitifs des Protozoaires noyau vrai, des Eucaryotes (ensemble qui embrasse aussi les Vgtaux et les Mtazoaires), parce qu’ils sont les seuls pouvoir faire la synthse totale de leur protoplasme partir du milieu minral. Les organismes htrotrophes sont donc subordonns leur existence, ainsi qu’ celle des Procaryotes chimiotrophes et autotrophes (Bactries nitrifiantes et sulfureuses, Cyanophyces).
The protistologists accord today to consider the autotrophic flagellates, being the most primitives of the protozoa with a true nucleus, Eucaryotes (assemblage that embraces also the plants and the metazoa [animals]) because they are the only ones capable to make the total synthesis of their protoplasm beginning from the mineral environment. The heterotrophic organisms are thus subordinated to their existence as well as to that of the chemotrophic and autotrophic Procaryotes (nitrifying and sulphurous bacteria, cyanophyceae [cyanobacteria]).
Chatton’s huge biological work was almost exclusively on protozoa. He was a specialist, not a generalist. Therefore, he probably was not aware of creating a fundamental dichotomy of the whole living world as was attributed to him in the scientific literature. Time was not yet ripe. Moreover, he had used the two terms already 12 years before.
This is namely one of the cases where most authors copy a footnote from another without having seen the original source. The book is extremely rare in public libraries, and it seems that in the USA, there is only one print copy and one microfilm copy, both in the Bioscience Library of the University of California in Berkeley. Probably, they are the only ones outside France. In the online catalogue of 22 of the largest university libraries in the UK plus the British Library (COPAC), you find only two other works of Chatton. And even in France, the Bibliothque Nationale does not possess the book nor is it to be found in the collective library catalogue of France or in the Pasteur Institute. Only an individual email inquiry brought two private (one in France, one in the USA), and four library copies to light, two in the small French sea coast places where Chatton had worked (Banyuls and Ste), and two in Paris: one in the library of the Acadmie des Sciences of which Chatton was a Correspondent, and one in the Central Library of the Musum National d’Histoire Naturelle.
The book has 407 pages. On the title page the professions of the author are stated, and the year of publication is 1937. However, after page 60, there is a second title page with the new position of Chatton which had changed in the meantime, and the year is 1938. (There are also copies only with the title page of 1938 at the beginning.) The one and only mention of the terms Eucaryote and Procaryote is on page 50. Here, for the first time, the French text and an English translation of the relevant paragraph is published:
Les protistologues s’accordent, aujourd’hui, considrer les Flagells autotrophes, comme les plus primitifs des Protozoaires noyau vrai, des Eucaryotes (ensemble qui embrasse aussi les Vgtaux et les Mtazoaires), parce qu’ils sont les seuls pouvoir faire la synthse totale de leur protoplasme partir du milieu minral. Les organismes htrotrophes sont donc subordonns leur existence, ainsi qu’ celle des Procaryotes chimiotrophes et autotrophes (Bactries nitrifiantes et sulfureuses, Cyanophyces).
The protistologists accord today to consider the autotrophic flagellates, being the most primitives of the protozoa with a true nucleus, Eucaryotes (assemblage that embraces also the plants and the metazoa [animals]) because they are the only ones capable to make the total synthesis of their protoplasm beginning from the mineral environment. The heterotrophic organisms are thus subordinated to their existence as well as to that of the chemotrophic and autotrophic Procaryotes (nitrifying and sulphurous bacteria, cyanophyceae [cyanobacteria]).
Chatton’s huge biological work was almost exclusively on protozoa. He was a specialist, not a generalist. Therefore, he probably was not aware of creating a fundamental dichotomy of the whole living world as was attributed to him in the scientific literature. Time was not yet ripe. Moreover, he had used the two terms already 12 years before.
Ironma:
I guess it is proposed by whittaker
Similar questions