Dissertation Research: The International Cambium Controversy: An Examination of the Development of Paleobotany, 1804-1895

论文研究：国际形成层争议：古植物学发展的考察，1804-1895

• 批准号: 0451534
• 负责人: David Kohn
• 金额: $ 0.79万
• 依托单位: Drew University
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2004
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2004-12-15 至 2006-11-30
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=0451534&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Dissertation; Research; International; Cambium; Controversy

This Science and Technology Studies Dissertation Research Improvement Grant will explore the history of paleobotany during the nineteenth century and will focus on the controversy over the cambium. a scientific debate that defined this nascent science from the 1830s to the 1890s. Natural history during the nineteenth century saw many controversies. Besides the wide-ranging Darwinian controversy, a good number hinged on the interpretation of specific sets of scientific evidence (e.g., the Devonian controversy and the Huxley/Owen debate). It is into this category of practice-oriented debate that the conflict in paleobotany falls. The controversy over the cambium illustrates how social, theoretical and technological factors influenced the practice of paleobotany. Two individuals defined the poles of the debate, Adolphe Theodore Brongniart (1801-1876) of the Museum d'Histoire Naturelle in Paris and William Crawford Williamson (1816-1895) of Owens College, Manchester. Brongniart attained international acclaim for his paleobotanical researches through his connection to the museum and his mentor, Georges Cuvier. Williamson began his paleobotanical career illustrating Lindley and Hutton's Fossil Flora, but gained notoriety in paleobotany as a result of the cambium debate. The graduate student investigator will tease out the spheres of interaction for both Brongniart and Williamson, in order to understand how other paleobotanists viewed the cambium debate and how theoretical biases and social networks influenced positions on either side of the controversy. Following David C. Oldroyd's lead, not only will written sources be studied, but also non-written sources (plant fossil specimens; thin section microscope slides) will be used to unearth the ways that paleobotanists observed and interpreted their collections. The student has completed some of her archival research on Williamson and Brongniart with the assistance of funding from Drew University in Spring 2003. With the funds from the National Science Foundation, the student will travel to London, Paris, Berlin and Prague to complete the remainder of her research on the international ramifications of the cambium controversy. This project will consider not only scientific achievements, but also how social ties, nationalism and evolutionary theory played a role in the practice of paleobotany during its development. Since the cambium controversy occurred during the period that established the fundamental framework of knowledge which created the modern science of paleobotany, careful study of this debate is a keystone for reconstructing the history of the discipline. Thus, the deeper goal of this research project is to ground the conceptual foundations of paleobotany in their historical context. Paleobotany today, as the Botanical Society of America urges in its mission statement, is essential for testing models and theories of global climate change, patterns of plant phylogeny, and the antecedents of current patterns of biodiversity. These are complex scientific issues with broad cultural significance. A historical understanding of paleobotany's development will foster the public understanding of what has become a pivotal environmental science.

这篇科学和技术研究论文研究改进补助金将探索19世纪古植物学的历史，并将重点放在关于形成层的争论上。从19世纪30年代到19世纪90年代定义这门新兴科学的一场科学辩论。十九世纪的自然历史有很多争议。除了范围广泛的达尔文论战外，许多论据还取决于对具体科学证据的解释(例如，泥盆纪的论战和赫胥黎/欧文的论战)。正是在这种以实践为导向的辩论中，古植物学中的冲突才会发生。关于形成层的争论说明了社会、理论和技术因素是如何影响古植物学实践的。两个人定义了这场辩论的两极，巴黎自然历史博物馆的阿道夫·西奥多·勃朗尼亚(Adolphe Theodore Brongniart，1801-1876)和曼彻斯特欧文斯学院的威廉·克劳福德·威廉姆森(William Crawford Williamson，1816-1895)。通过与博物馆和他的导师乔治·居维耶的联系，布朗尼亚特的古植物学研究获得了国际赞誉。威廉姆森开始了他的古植物学生涯，绘制了林德利和赫顿的化石植物群，但由于形成层的辩论，他在古植物学方面声名狼藉。这位研究生研究员将梳理出Brongniart和Williamson的互动领域，以了解其他古植物学家如何看待形成层辩论，以及理论偏见和社交网络如何影响争议双方的立场。在David C.Oldroyd的带领下，不仅将研究书面来源，而且将使用非书面来源(植物化石标本；薄片显微镜玻片)来挖掘古植物学家观察和解释其收藏的方式。2003年春天，在德鲁大学的资助下，这名学生完成了对威廉姆森和勃朗尼亚特的一些档案研究。在国家科学基金会的资助下，这名学生将前往伦敦、巴黎、柏林和布拉格，完成她对形成层争议的国际影响的剩余研究。这个项目不仅将考虑科学成就，还将考虑社会关系、民族主义和进化论在古植物学发展过程中如何在实践中发挥作用。由于形成层之争发生在创立了现代古植物学的基本知识框架的时期，因此认真研究这场争论是重建该学科历史的基石。因此，这项研究项目的更深层次的目标是在其历史背景下奠定古植物学的概念基础。正如美国植物学会在其使命声明中敦促的那样，今天的古植物学对于测试全球气候变化的模型和理论、植物系统发育模式以及当前生物多样性模式的前因性至关重要。这些都是复杂的科学问题，具有广泛的文化意义。对古植物学发展的历史理解将促进公众对已成为关键环境科学的理解。