Abstract
In Landscapes and Labscapes Robert Kohler emphasized the separation between laboratory and field cultures and the creation of new “hybrid” or mixed practices as field sciences matured in the early twentieth century. This article explores related changes in laboratory practices, especially novel designs for the analysis of organism–environment relations in the mid-twentieth century. American ecologist Victor Shelford argued in 1929 that technological improvements and indoor climate control should be applied to ecological laboratories, but his recommendations were too ambitious for the time. In the postwar period Frits W. Went, plant physiologist at the California Institute of Technology, created a new high-tech laboratory, dubbed a “phytotron”, in the hope that it would transform plant sciences by allowing for unprecedented control of environmental variables. Went’s aspirations, the research conducted in his laboratory, and its impact in initiating an international movement, are considered. Went’s laboratory can be seen as a “hybrid culture” evolving in the laboratory, complementing and intersecting with some of the field practices that Kohler describes. It was also a countercultural movement against the reductionist trends of molecular biology in the 1950s and 1960s. By considering the history of the laboratory in relation to field sciences, we can explore how new funding sources and cross-disciplinary relations affected the development of field sciences, especially in the postwar period.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allard, Harry A. 1932. ‹Length of Day in Relation to the Natural and Artificial Distribution of Plants.’ Ecology 13: 221–234.
Allen, John. 1991. Biosphere 2: The Human Experiment. New York:Viking Penguin.
Anonymous. 1925. “Purposes of the Institute.” Contributions from Boyce Thompson Institute for Plant Research 1: 9–24.
Appel, Toby A. 2000. Shaping Biology: The National Science Foundation and American Biological Research, 1945–1975. Baltimore and London:Johns Hopkins University Press.
Bocking, Stephen. 1997. Ecologists and Environmental Politics: A History of Contemporary Ecology. New Haven:Yale University Press.
Bonner, James. 1980. Interview by Graham Berry. Pasadena, CA:Archives of California Institute of Technology.
Butler, W.L., Wadleigh, Cecil H. 1987. ‹Sterling Brown Hendricks.’ Biographical Memoirs of the National Academy of Sciences of the U.S.A. 56: 180–212.
Cittadino, Eugene. 1990. Nature as the Laboratory: Darwinian Plant Ecology in the German Empire, 1880–1990. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Clausen, Jens, Keck, David D. and Hiesey, William H. 1948. Experimental Studies on the Nature of Species. III. Environmental Responses of Climatic Races in Achillea. Washington, DC: Carnegie Institution of Washington, publication no. 581.
Cold Spring Harbor Symposia. 1961. Biological Clocks, vol. 25. New York, Cold Spring Harbor.
Cook, William C. 1930. ‹Review of Laboratory and Field Ecology, by Victor E. Shelford.’ Ecology 11: 611–614.
Cooper, Gail. 1998. Air-Conditioning America: Engineers and the Controlled Environment, 1900–1960. Baltimore and London:Johns Hopkins University Press.
Crocker, William. 1925. ‹Aim of Boyce Thompson Research Institute for Plant Research.’ Contributions from Boyce Thompson Institute for Plant Research 1: 28–34.
Crocker, William. 1948. Growth of Plants: Twenty Years’ Research at Boyce Thompson Institute. New York:Reinhold Publishing Corp.
Croker, Robert A. 1991. Pioneer Ecologist: The Life and Work of Victor Ernest Shelford, 1877–1968. Washington and London:Smithsonian Institution Press.
Downs, Robert J. 1980. ‹Phytotrons.’ The Botanical Review 46: 447–489.
Elton, Charles. 1931. ‹Review of Victor E. Shelford, Laboratory and Field Ecology.’ Journal of Ecology 19: 216–217.
Evans, Lloyd T. (ed.). 1963a. Environmental Control of Plant Growth. New York and London:Academic Press.
Evans, Lloyd T. 1963b. ‹Extrapolation from Controlled Environments to the Field.’ LT Evans (ed.), Environmental Control of Plant Growth. New York and London:Academic Press, pp. 421–437.
Evans, Lloyd T. 2003. ‹Conjectures, Refutations, and Extrapolations.’ Annual Review of Plant Biology 54: 1–21.
Garner, W.W., Allard, H.A. 1920. ‹Effect of the Relative Length of Day and Night and Other Factors of the Environment on Growth and Reproduction in Plants.’ Journal of Agricultural Research 18: 553–606.
Garner, W.W., Allard, H.A. 1922. ‹Photoperiodism, the Response of the Plant to Relative Length of Day and Night.’ Science 55: 582–583.
Griesbach, Robert J. 2003. ‹Orchids Emerge as Major World Floral Crop.’ Chronica Horticulturae 43(3): 6–9.
Hagedorn, Hermann. 1935. The Magnate: William Boyce Thompson and His Times (1869–1930). New York:Reynal and Hitchcock.
Hagen, Joel B. 1984. ‹Experimentalists and Naturalists in Twentieth-Century Botany: Experimental Taxonomy, 1920–1950.’ Journal of the History of Biology 17: 249–270.
Hendricks, Sterling B. 1970. ‹The Passing Scene.’ Annual Review of Plant Physiology 21: 1–10.
Hendricks, Sterling B., Went, F.W. 1958. ‹Controlled-Climate Facilities for Biologists.’ Science 128: 510–512.
Hiesey, William M. 1951. ‹Growth Studies Under Controlled Temperatures.’ Carnegie Institution of Washington Yearbook 50: 99–105.
Hiesey, William M. 1952. ‹Comparative Physiology of Ecologic Races.’ Carnegie Institution of Washington Yearbook 51: 131–132.
Hiesey, William M. 1957. ‹Grasses.’ F.W. Went (ed.), The Experimental Control of Plant Growth. Waltham, MA:Chronica Botanica, pp. 153–163.
Kellerman, K.F. 1926. ‹A Review of the Discovery of Photoperiodism: The Influence of the Length of Daily Light Periods upon the Growth of Plants.’ Quarterly Review of Biology 1: 87–94.
Kofoid, Charles A. 1930. ‹Review of Laboratory and Field Ecology, by Victor E. Shelford.’ Ecology 11: 609–611.
Kohler, Robert E. 2002. Landscapes & Labscapes: Exploring the Lab-Field Border in Biology. Chicago and London:University of Chicago Press.
Kramer, P.J., Hellmers, H., Downs, R.J. 1970. ‹SEPEL: New Phytotrons for Environmental Research.’ BioScience 20: 1201–1208.
Kwa, Chunglin. 1993. ‹Radiation Ecology, Systems Ecology and the Management of the Environment.’ Michael Shortland (ed.), Science and Nature: Essays in the History of the Environmental Sciences. Stanford-in-the-Vale, England:British Society for the History of Science, pp. 213–249.
Lang, Anton. 1980. ‹Some Recollections and Reflections.’ Annual Review of Plant Physiology 31: 1–28.
Leonelli, Sabina. 2007. ‹Arabidopsis, the Botanical Drosophila: From Mouse Cress to Model Organism.’ Endeavour 31(1): 34–38.
Metcalfe, C.R. 1958. ‹Review of The Experimental Control of Plant Growth, by Frits W. Went.’ Kew Bulletin 13(2): 228–230.
Moore, Barrington. 1920. ‹The Relative Length of Day and Night.’ Ecology 1: 234–237.
Parker, Marion W., Borthwick, H.A. 1949. ‹Growth and Composition of Biloxi Soybean Grown in a Controlled Environment with Radiation from Different Carbon-Arc Sources.’ Plant Physiology 24: 345–358.
Parker, M.W., Hendricks, S.B., Borthwick, H.A., Went, F.W. 1949. ‹Spectral Sensitivities for Leaf and Stem Growth of Etiolated Pea Seedlings and Their Similarity to Action Spectra for Photoperiodism.’ American Journal of Botany 36: 194–204.
Pauly, Philip J. 2007. Fruits and Plains: The Horticultural Transformation of America. Cambridge, MA and London:Harvard University Press.
Sage, Linda C. 1992. Pigment of the Imagination: A History of Phytochrome Research. San Diego:Academic Press.
Schimper, Andreas. 1903. Plant-Geography upon a Physiological Basis, trans. William R. Fisher, 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Shelford, Victor E. 1929. Laboratory and Field Ecology: The Responses of Animals as Indicators of Correct Working Methods. Baltimore:Williams and Wilkins.
Shelford, Victor E. 1953. ‹An Experimental Approach to the Study of Plant and Animal Reproductivity and Population with a Life Science Building Plan.’ Ecology 32: 422–426.
Thimann, Kenneth V. 1958. ‹Review of The Experimental Control of Plant Growth, by Frits W. Went.’ Quarterly Review of Biology 33: 262–263.
Went, Friedrich A. F. C. 1928a. ‹The International Union of Biological Sciences.’ Science 68: 545–547.
Went, Frits W. 1928b. ‹Wuchsstoff und Wachstum.’ Recueil des Travaux Botaniques Néerlandais 25: 1–116.
Went, Frits W. 1943. ‹Plant Growth Under Controlled Conditions. I. The Air-Conditioned Greenhouses at the California Institute of Technology.’ American Journal of Botany 30: 157–163.
Went, Frits W. 1946. “Report on a survey of botanical facilities in the United States”. Unpublished typed summary of trip made from March 10 to April 26, 1946. In file 24.7, “Earhart Laboratories for Plant Research, 1945–1948, 1950”, Robert A. Millikan papers, California Institute of Technology Archives, Pasadena, California.
Went, Frits W. 1950. ‹The Earhart Plant Research Laboratory.’ Chronica Botanica 12(3): 89–108.
Went, Frits W. 1956. Some Aspects of Plant Research in Australia: A Report on a Visit to Australia. Melbourne:Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization.
Went, Frits W. 1957a. The Experimental Control of Plant Growth. Waltham, MA:Chronica Botanica.
Went, Frits W. 1957b. ‹Climate and Agriculture.’ Scientific American 196(6): 82–94.
Went, Frits W. 1962. “Phytotronics,” Proceedings of Plant Science Symposium. Camden, New Jersey: Campbell Soup Company, pp. 149–161.
Went, Frits W. 1974. ‹Reflections and Speculations.’ Annual Review of Plant Physiology 25: 1–26.
Went, Frits W. 1990. ‹Orchids in My Life.’ Joseph Arditti (ed.), Orchid Biology: Reviews and Perspectives, 5 vols. Portland, Oregon:Timber Press, pp. 21–36.
Went, Friedrich A. F. C., Went, F.W. 1945. ‹A Short History of General Botany in the Netherlands Indies.’ Pieter Honig, Frans Verdoorn (eds.), Science and Scientists in the Netherlands Indies. New York:Board for the Netherlands Indies, pp. 390–402.
White, Edward A. 1942. American Orchid Culture. New York:A. T. DeLaMare Co.
Whyte, Robert O. 1949. Crop Production and Environment. London:Faber and Faber.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kingsland, S.E. Frits Went’s Atomic Age Greenhouse: The Changing Labscape on the Lab-Field Border. J Hist Biol 42, 289–324 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10739-009-9179-y
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10739-009-9179-y