• Peter von Sengbusch


“One can watch an object for years and never produce any observation of scientific interest. To produce a valuable observation, one has first to have an idea of what to observe, a preconception of what is possible. Scientific advances often come from uncovering a hitherto unseen aspect of things as a result, not so much of using some new instrument, but rather of looking at objects from a different angle. This look is necessarily guided by a certain idea of what the so-called reality might be. It always involves a certain conception about the unknown, that is, about what lies beyond that which one has logical or experimental reasons to believe.” Jacob, Evolution and Tinkering, 1977.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aristoteles: Tierkunde (dtsch. Übersetzung). Paderborn: Schöningh 1957Google Scholar
  2. Avery, O.T., MacLeod, C.M., McCarty, M.: Studies on the chemical nature of the substance inducing transformation of Pneumococcal types: Induction of transformation by a desoxyribonucleic acid fraction isolated from Pneumococcus type III. J. Exp. Med. 79, 137(1944)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beadle, G.W., Tatum, E.L.: Genetic control of biochemical reactions in Neurospora. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 27, 499 (1941)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Darwin, C.: The origin of species by means of natural selection or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle of life (1859). Deutsch: Die Entstehung der Arten. Stuttgart: Reclam 3071–3080, 1976Google Scholar
  5. Eigen, M.: Selforganization of matter and the evolution of biological macromolecules. Naturwissenschaften 58, 465 (1971)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Eigen, M., Schuster, P.: The Hypercycle. Naturwissenschaften 64, 541 (1977)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Eigen, M., Schuster, P.: The Hypercycle. Naturwissenschaften 65, 341 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Haeckel, E.: Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte (1868). 11. Aufl. Berlin: Reimer 1909Google Scholar
  9. Horowitz, N.H.: The one gene—one enzyme hypothesis. Genetics 33, 612 (1948)PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Jacob, F.: Evolution and tinkering. Science 196, 1161 (1977)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Mägdefrau, K.: Geschichte der Botanik. Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer 1973Google Scholar
  12. Mayr, E.: Evolution und die Vielfalt des Lebens. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer 1979CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mendel, G.: Versuche über Pflanzenhybriden. Brunn: Verhandlungen des naturforschenden Vereins, 1866. Photomech. Nachdruck. Weinheim: Engelmann, H.R. (Cramer, J.) 1960Google Scholar
  14. Schmucker, T.: Geschichte der Biologie. Göttingen: Vandenhoek und Ruprecht 1936Google Scholar
  15. Schwartz, R.M., Dayhoff, M.O.: Origins of prokary-otes, eukaryotes, mitochondria, and chloroplasts. Science 199, 395 (1978)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Watson, J.D.: Molecular biology of the gene, 3. Aufl. Menlo Park: Benjamin Inc. 1975Google Scholar
  17. Watson, J.D., Crick, F.H.C.: Molecular structure of nucleic acids. A structure for deoxyribose nucleic acid. Nature (London) 171, 737 (1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Weismann, A.: Vorträge über Deszendenztheorie, 2. Aufl. Jena: Gustavs Fischer 1904Google Scholar
  19. Woese, C.R., Fox, G.E.: The concept of cellular evolution. J.Mol. Evol. 10, 1 (1977)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1979

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter von Sengbusch
    • 1
  1. 1.Fakultät für BiologieUniversität BielefeldBielefeld 1Deutschland

Personalised recommendations