"Resistance leads to self-destruction": how an (a)political strategy helped Karl von Frisch succeed during the Nazi era.

Karl von Frisch, one of the leading zoologists of the twentieth century and co-founder of the Journal of Comparative Physiology A, has been frequently portrayed as an opponent of the Nazi regime because he, as a 'quarter-Jew,' faced the threat of forced retirement from his position as a professor at the University of Munich during the Third Reich. However, doubts about an active opposition role have surfaced in recent years. A litmus test for assessing the validity of this notion is provided by our discovery that four of the six core members of the anti-Nazi resistance group 'White Rose'-Sophie Scholl, Hans Scholl, Christoph Probst, and Alexander Schmorell-were his students. When they were arrested, sentenced to death, and executed, he seemed to ignore this historic event, both during and after World War II-in line with his belief that resistance leads to self-destruction, and research can flourish only by ignoring what happens around oneself. On the other hand, this seemingly apolitical attitude did not prevent him from making use of politics when it served his interests. Such actions included his (pseudo-)scientific justification of forced sterilization of people suffering from hereditary disorders during the Third Reich and his praise of the Nazi government's efforts to "keep races pure." As unsettling as these and some other political views and actions of Karl von Frisch are, they enabled him to carry out several critical pieces of his research agenda during the Third Reich, which three decades later earned him a Nobel Prize.

On Growth and Form in context - an interview with Matthew Jarron.

D'Arcy Thompson was born in 1860, trained in Edinburgh and Cambridge, and held positions in Dundee and St Andrews, where he worked until his death in 1948. On Growth and Form, his classic work on the mathematical patterns and physical rules underlying biological forms, was first published in 1917. To learn more about the book's context, we met Matthew Jarron, Curator of Museum Services at the University of Dundee, in the University's D'Arcy Thompson Zoology Museum. Surrounded by specimens, many of which were collected by Thompson himself, we discussed the legacy of On Growth and Form and the life of the man behind it.

Of elephants and errors: naming and identity in Linnaean taxonomy.

What is it to make an error in the identification of a named taxonomic group? In this article we argue that the conditions for being in error about the identity of taxonomic groups through their names have a history, and that the possibility of committing such errors is contingent on the regime of institutions and conventions governing taxonomy and nomenclature at any given point in time. More specifically, we claim that taxonomists today can be in error about the identity of taxonomic groups in a way that Carl Linnaeus (1707-1778), who is routinely cited as the "founder" of modern taxonomy and nomenclature, simply could not be. Starting from a remarkable recent study into Linnaeus's naming of Elephas maximus that led to the (putative) discovery of a (putative) nomenclatural error by him, we reconsider what it could mean to discover that Linnaeus misidentified a biological taxon in applying his taxon names. Through a further case study in Linnaean botany, we show that his practices of (re)applying names in taxonomic revisions reveal a take on determining "which taxon is which" that is strikingly different from that of contemporary taxonomists. Linnaeus, we argue, adopted a practice-based, hands-on concept of taxa as "nominal spaces" that could continue to represent the same taxon even if all its former members had been reallocated to other taxa.

The impacts of assumptions on theories of tooth development and evolution at the turn of the nineteenth century.

Throughout the last quarter of the nineteenth century, researchers became increasingly interested in explaining the ways in which mammalian teeth, especially molars, and their complex arrangements of cusps arose along both developmental and evolutionary timescales. By the 1890s, two theories garnered special prominence; the tritubercular theory and the concrescence theory. The tritubercular theory was proposed by Edward Drinker Cope in 1883, and later expanded by Henry Fairfield Osborn in 1888, while the concrescence theory was developed by Carl Röse in 1892. Reviews concerning the evolution of mammalian molar teeth tended to paint the two theories as occupying opposing sides, and debates arose between their main proponents; however, their tenets do not seem logically incompatible. Throughout this paper, I argue that the conflict that arose was due not to the content of the theories, but to a diverse array of commitments Cope, Osborn, and Röse held, which turned into background assumptions within the setting of these theories. This history traces the context in which Cope, Osborn, and Röse developed the tritubercular and concrescence theories, and the ways in which the assumptions that these investigators held influenced their perceptions of their theories.

Series of forms, visual techniques, and quantitative devices: ordering the world between the end of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.

In this paper, I investigate the variety and richness of the taxonomical practices between the end of the nineteenth and the early twentieth centuries. During these decades, zoologists and paleontologists came up with different quantitative practices in order to classify their data in line with the new biological principles introduced by Charles Darwin. Specifically, I will investigate Florentino Ameghino's mathematization of mammalian dentition and the quantitative practices and visualizations of several German-speaking paleontologists at the beginning of the twentieth century. In so doing, this paper will call attention to the visual and quantitative language of early twentieth-century systematics. My analysis will therefore contribute to a prehistory of the statistical frame of mind in biology, a study which has yet to be written in full. Second, my work highlights the productive intertwinement between biological practices and philosophical frameworks at the turn of the nineteenth century. Deeply rooted in Kantian bio-philosophy, several biologists sought to find rules in order to apply ordering principles to chaotic taxonomic information. This implies the necessity to investigate the neglected role of Kantian and Romantic bio-philosophy in the unfolding of twentieth-century biology.

A Space of One's Own: Barbosa du Bocage, the Foundation of the National Museum of Lisbon, and the Construction of a Career in Zoology (1851-1907).

This paper discusses the life and scientific work of José Vicente Barbosa du Bocage (1823-1907), a nineteenth-century Portuguese naturalist who carved a new place for zoological research in Portugal and built up a prestigious scientific career by securing appropriate physical and institutional spaces to the discipline. Although he was appointed professor of zoology at the Lisbon Polytechnic School, an institution mainly devoted to the preparatory training of military officers and engineers, he succeeded in creating the conditions that allowed him to develop consistent research in zoology at this institution. Taking advantage of the reconstruction and further improvement of the building of the Lisbon Polytechnic, following a violent fire in 1843, Bocage transferred a natural history museum formerly located at the Academy of Sciences of Lisbon to his institution, where he conquered a more prestigious place for zoology. Although successive governments were unwilling to meet Bocage's ambitions for the Zoological Section of the newly created National Museum of Lisbon, the collaborators he found in different parts of the Portuguese continental territory and colonial empire supplied him the specimens he needed to make a career as a naturalist. Bocage ultimately became a renowned specialist in Southwestern African fauna thanks to José de Anchieta, his finest collaborator. Travels to foreign museums, and the establishment of links with the international community of zoologists, proved fundamental to build up Bocage's national and international scientific reputation, as it will be exemplified by the discussion of his discovery of Hyalonema, a specimen with a controversial identity collected off the Portuguese coast.

Professor Robert McNeill Alexander CBE FRS (1934-2016).

Robert McNeill Alexander, known to friends and colleagues as 'Neill', was a zoologist with an engineer's eye for how animals work. He used mathematical models to show how evolution has produced optimal designs. His skill was to choose appropriate models: realistic enough to contain the essence of a problem and yet simple enough to be tractable. He wrote fluently and easily: 23 books, 280 papers and a CD-ROM entitled How Animals Move.

Postcolonial Ecologies of Parasite and Host: Making Parasitism Cosmopolitan.

The interest of F. Macfarlane Burnet in host-parasite interactions grew through the 1920s and 1930s, culminating in his book, Biological Aspects of Infectious Disease (1940), often regarded as the founding text of disease ecology. Our knowledge of the influences on Burnet's ecological thinking is still incomplete. Burnet later attributed much of his conceptual development to his reading of British theoretical biology, especially the work of Julian Huxley and Charles Elton, and regretted he did not study Theobald Smith's Parasitism and Disease (1934) until after he had formulated his ideas. Scholars also have adduced Burnet's fascination with natural history and the clinical and public health demands on his research effort, among other influences. I want to consider here additional contributions to Burnet's ecological thinking, focusing on his intellectual milieu, placing his research in a settler society with exceptional expertise in environmental studies and pest management. In part, an ''ecological turn'' in Australian science in the 1930s, derived to a degree from British colonial scientific investments, shaped Burnet's conceptual development. This raises the question of whether we might characterize, in postcolonial fashion, disease ecology, and other studies of parasitism, as successful settler colonial or dominion science.

"Enfant Terrible": Lancelot Hogben's Life and Work in the 1920s.

Until recently the British zoologist Lancelot Hogben (1895-1975) has usually appeared as a campaigning socialist, an anti-eugenicist or a popularizer of science in the literature. The focus has mainly been on Hogben after he became a professor of social biology at the London School of Economics in 1930. This paper focuses on Hogben's life in the 1920s. Early in the decade, while based in London, he focused on cytology, but in 1922, after moving to Edinburgh, he turned his focus on experimental zoology, first concentrating on vertebrate endocrinology and later moving over to the comparative physiology of invertebrate muscle. In the early 1920s Hogben played an active role in the development of experimental zoology in Britain. As such he was a fearless critic of evolutionary and metaphysical speculations. But in this period Hogben's career prospects were seriously hampered by his confrontational nature and serious depression. As a result he was forced to leave Britain in 1925. He first accepted a position in Canada and in the period 1927-1930 he was a professor of zoology in South Africa. This paper will also add crucial new material to James Tabery's recent discussion of the history behind Hogben's ideas about the interaction of heredity and environment in individual development. In addition a previously unknown Lamarckian controversy will be discussed.

Heredity, evolution and development in their (epistemic) environment at the turn of the nineteenth century.

During the early 1870s a young zoologist who worked as a Privatdozent delivering lectures at different Prussian universities invested much of his family wealth and solicited his fellows' contributions to establish a research facility by the sea. The young zoologist happened to be called Anton Dohrn. From the time it opened its doors, the Anton Dohrn Zoological Station - or Naples Zoological Station, as it was originally called - played a crucial role in shaping life sciences as it facilitated research aimed at explaining the mechanics of inheritance. During the last quarter of the nineteenth century and the first decades of the twentieth, zoologists attempted to explain how evolutionary changes occur within a population and become stabilized. In so doing, they looked at developmental processes as well as environmental pressure, coming up with different hypotheses to explain inheritance. In some cases, their research was highly speculative, whereas in other cases they conducted cytological observations to identify the material basis of heredity. Research on evolution and development has been carried out in different places, and zoological stations like the one in Naples have played a major role in this story. However, numerous biological institutions active at the turn of the twentieth century have not received much attention from historians.