Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Regeneration: Thomas Hunt Morgan’s Window into Development

  • Published:
Journal of the History of Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Early in his career Thomas Hunt Morgan was interested in embryology and dedicated his research to studying organisms that could regenerate. Widely regarded as a regeneration expert, Morgan was invited to deliver a series of lectures on the topic that he developed into a book, Regeneration (1901). In addition to presenting experimental work that he had conducted and supervised, Morgan also synthesized and critiqued a great deal of work by his peers and predecessors. This essay probes into the history of regeneration studies by looking in depth at Regeneration and evaluating Morgan’s contribution. Although famous for his work with fruit fly genetics, studying Regeneration illuminates Morgan’s earlier scientific approach which emphasized the importance of studying a diversity of organisms. Surveying a broad range of regenerative phenomena allowed Morgan to institute a standard scientific terminology that continues to inform regeneration studies today. Most importantly, Morgan argued that regeneration was a fundamental aspect of the growth process and therefore should be accounted for within developmental theory. Establishing important similarities between regeneration and development allowed Morgan to make the case that regeneration could act as a model of development. The nature of the relationship between embryogenesis and regeneration remains an active area of research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allen, Garland E. 1968. ‹Thomas Hunt Morgan and the Problem of Natural Selection.’ Journal of the History of Biology 1: 113–139. 1968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, Garland E. 1969. ‹T. H. Morgan and the Emergence of a New American Biology.’ The Quarterly Review of Biology 44: 168–188. 1969.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, Garland E. 1975. Life Science in the Twentieth Century. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, Garland E. 1978. Thomas Hunt Morgan, The Man and his Science. Princeton:Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, Garland E. 1980. ‹The Evolutionary Synthesis: Morgan and Natural Selection Revisited.’ Ernst Mayr, William B Provine (eds.), The Evolutionary Synthesis: Perspectives on the Unification of Biology. Cambridge:Harvard University Press, pp. 356–382.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, Garland E. 1983. ‹T.H. Morgan and the Influence of Mechanistic Materialism on the Development of the Gene Concept 1910–1940.’ Integrative and Comparative Biology 23: 829–843.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ankeny, Rachel. 2000. ‹Fashioning Descriptive Models in Biology: Of Worms and Wiring Diagrams.’ Philosophy of Science 67: S260–S272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ankeny, Rachel. 2001. ‹Model Organisms as Models: Understanding the ‹Lingua Franca’ of the Human Genome Project.’ Philosophy of Science 68: S251–S261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benson, Keith. 1991. ‹Observation Versus Philosophical Commitment in Eighteenth-Century Ideas of Regeneration and Generation.’ Charles Dinsmore (ed.), A History of Regeneration Research: Milestones in the Evolution of a Science. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, pp. 91–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackstone, Neil W. 2005. ‹Charles Manning Child (1869–1954): The Past, Present, and Future of Metabolic Signaling.’ Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B: Molecular and Developmental Evolution 306B: 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolker, Jessica. 1995. ‹Model Systems in Developmental Biology.’ Bioessays 17: 451–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bosch, Thomas C G. 2007. ‹Why Polyps Regenerate and We Don’t: Towards a Cellular and Molecular Framework for Hydra Regeneration.’ Developmental Biology 303: 421–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brockes, Jeremy P, Kumar, A. 2005. ‹Appendage Regeneration in Adult Vertebrates and Implications for Regenerative Medicine.’ Science 310: 1919–1923.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, Bruce. 2007. Principles of Regeneration Biology. Burlington, Massachusetts:Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Child, Charles Manning. 1915a. Individuality in Organisms. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Child, Charles Manning. 1915b. Senescence and Rejuvenescence. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Child, Charles Manning. 1915c. A Dynamic Conception of the Organic Individual. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 1: 164–172.

  • Chiu, A, Hall, Z. 2006. ‹Stem Cell Research: The California Experience.’ The Journal of Neuroscience 26: 6661–6663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Churchill, Frederick B. 1970. ‹Hertwig, Weismann, and the Meaning of the Reduction Division circa 1890.’ Isis. 61: 429–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Churchill, Frederick B. 1987. ‹From Heredity to Vererbung: The Transmission Problem, 1850–1915.’ Isis 78: 337–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Churchill, Frederick B. 1997. ‹Life Before Model Systems: General Zoology at August Weismann’s Institute.’ American Zoologist 37: 260–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, A, Fujimura, J (eds.). 1992. The Right Tools for the Job: At Work in Twentieth Century Life Sciences. Princeton:Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, W. 1977. Biology in the Nineteenth Century: Problems of Form, Function, and Transformation. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creager, Angela. 2002. The Life of a Virus. Tobacco Mosaic Virus as an Experimental Model, 1930–1965. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daley, George. Goodell, Margaret, Snyder, Evan. 2003. ‹Realistic Prospects for Stem Cell Therapeutics.’ Hematotology 2003: 398–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, Virginia P. 1987. Nature’s Enigma the Problem of the Polyp in the Letters of Bonnet, Trembley and Reaumur. Philadelphia:American Philosophical Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Chadarevian, S, Hopwood, N (eds.). 2004. Models: The Third Dimension of Science. Stanford, CA:Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dinsmore, Charles E (ed.). 1991a. A History of Regeneration Research: Milestones in the Evolution of a Science. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dinsmore, Charles E. (ed.). 1991b. “Lazzaro Spallanzani: Concepts of Generation and Regeneration.” Charles E. Dinsmore (ed.), A History of Regeneration Research: Milestones in the Evolution of a Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 67–89.

  • Dinsmore, Charles E. (ed.). 1995. “Animal Regeneration: From Fact to Concept.” BioScience 45: 484–492.

  • Dolman, Claude E. 1970. ‹Spallanzani, Lazzaro.’ Dictionary of Scientific Biography 12: 553–567.

    Google Scholar 

  • Driesch, Hans. 1892. “Entwicklungsmechanische Studien. I. Der Werth der beiden ersten Furchungszellen in der Echinodermenentwicklung. Experimentelle Erzeugen von Theil-und Doppelbildung.” Zeitschrift für wissenschaftliche Zoologie 53: 160–178. Trans. as “The Potency of the First Two Cleavage Cells in Echinoderm Development. Experimental Production of Partial and Double Formations.” Benjamin Willier and Jane Oppenheimer (eds.), Foundations of Experimental Embryology. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. 1964, pp. 38–50.

  • Driesch, Hans, Morgan, Thomas Hunt. 1895. ‹Zur Analysis der ersten Entwickelungstadien des Ctenophoreneis. I. Von der Entwickelungeinzeluer Ctenophorenblastomeren.’ Arch. Entw. Mech. Org. 2: 204–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, RA, de Beer, GR. 1947. ‹Thomas Hunt Morgan, 1866–1945.’ Obituary Notices of Fellows of the Royal Society 5: 451–466.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gasking, Elizabeth. 1967. Investigations into Generation, 1651–1828. Baltimore:Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geison, Gerald L. 1978. Michael Foster and the Cambridge School of Physiology. Princeton:Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geison, Gerald L, Laubichler, Manfred. 2001. ‹The Varied Lives of Organisms: Variation in the Historiography of the Biological Sciences.’ Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 32: 1–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, Scott F. 1978. ‹The Embryological Origins of the Gene Theory.’ Journal of the History of Biology 11: 307–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goss, RJ. 1991. ‹The Natural History (and Mystery) of Regeneration.’ Charles E Dinsmore (ed.), A History of Regeneration Research: Milestones in the Evolution of a Science. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, pp. 7–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gurley, K, Rink, J, Sánchez Alvarado, A. 2007. ‹ß-Catenin Defines Head Versus Tail Indentity During Planarian Regeneration and Homeostasis.’ Science 319: 323–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hans Driesch-Thomas Hunt Morgan Collection, 1893–1933. 1 Reel of Microfilm. American Philosophical Society.

  • Keller, Evelyn. 2000. ‹Models of and Models for: Theory and Practice in Contemporary Biology.’ Philosophy of Science 67: S72–S86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohler, Robert E. 1994. Lords of the Fly: Drosophila Genetics and the Experimental Life. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korschelt, Eugen. 1990. Regeneration and Transplantation. Bruce M. Carlson (ed.); translated by Sabine Lichtner Ayed. Canton, MA: Watson Publishing Company.

  • Landecker, Hannah. 2007. Culturing Life: How Cells Became Technologies. Cambridge:Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laubichler, Manfred. 2000. Symposium “The Organism in Philosophical Focus”—An Introduction.” Philosophy of Science 67: S256–S259.

  • Laubichler, Manfred, Davidson, Eric. 2008. ‹Boveri’s Long Experiment: Sea Urchin merogones and the Establishment of the Role of Nuclear Chromosomes in Development.’ Developmental Biology 314: 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laubichler, Manfred, Wagner, Gunter P. 2000. ‹Organism and Character Decomposition: Steps Towards an Integrative Theory of Biology.’ Philosophy of Science 67: S289–S300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lenhoff, SG, Lenhoff, HM. 1986. Hydra and the Birth of Experimental Biology-1744. Abraham Trembley’s Memoirs Concerning the Natural History of a Type of Freshwater Polyp with Arms Shaped like Horns. Pacific Grove, CA:Boxwood Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenhoff, SG, Lenhoff, HM. 1991. ‹Abraham Trembley and the Origins of Research on Regeneration in Animals.’ Charles E Dinsmore (ed.), A History of Regeneration Research: Milestones in the Evolution of a Science. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, pp. 47–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lillie, Frank R. 1944. The Woods Hole Marine Biological Laboratory. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maxmen, Amy. 2008. ‹The Sea Spider’s Contribution to T. H. Morgan’s (1866–1945) Development.’ Journal of Experimental Zoology 310B: 203–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitman, Gregory, Fausto-Sterling, Anne. 1992. ‹Whatever Happened to Planaria? C.M. Child and the Physiology of Inheritance.’ Adele E Clarke, Joan Fujimura (eds.), The Right Tools for the Job: At Work in Twentieth Century Life Sciences. Princeton:Princeton University Press, pp. 172–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maienschein, Jane. 1984. ‹What Determines Sex? A Study of Converging Approaches, 1880–1916.’ Isis 75: 456–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maienschein, Jane. 1985. ‹Preformation of New Formation – or Neither or Both.’ Timothy Horder, JA Witkowski, CC Wylie (eds.), A History of Embryology. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, pp. 74–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maienschein, Jane. 1991a. ‹T.H. Morgan’s regeneration, epigenesis, and (w)holism.’ Charles E Dinsmore (ed.), A History of Regeneration Research: Milestones in the Evolution of a Science. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, pp. 133–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maienschein, Jane. 1991b. Transforming Traditions in American Biology, 1880–1915. Baltimore:The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maienschein, Jane. 1991c. ‹The Origins of Entwicklungsmechanik.’ Scott F Gilbert (ed.), A Conceptual History of Modern Embryology. Baltimore:The Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 43–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maienschein, Jane. 2003. Whose View of Life? Embyos, Cloning and Stem Cells. Cambridge:Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maienschein, Jane. 2009. ‹Regenerative Medicine in Historical Context.’ Medicine Studies 1: 33–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maienschein, Jane, Sunderland, Mary E, Rachel Ankeny, ME, Robert, Jason S. 2008. ‹The Ethos of Translational Research.’ American Journal of Bioethics 8: 43–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, Kathleen, Kaufman, Thomas C, Gelbart, William M. 2005. ‹Research Resources for Drosophila: The Expanding Universe.’ Nature Reviews Genetics 6: 179–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Metcalfe, Anthony D, Ferguson, Mark. 2007. ‹Tissue Engineering of Replacement Skin: The Crossroads of Biomaterials, Wound Healing, Embryonic Development, Stem Cells and Regeneration.’ Journal of the Royal Society 4: 413–437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miko, Ilona. 2008. “Thomas Hunt Morgan and Sex Linkage.” Nature Education 1(1).

  • Moore, John A. 1983. ‹Thomas Hunt Morgan – The Geneticist.’ American Zoologist 23: 855–865.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, Thomas Hunt. 1891. ‹A Contribution to the Embryology and Phylogeny of the Pycnogonids (Dissertation).’ Studies from the Biological Laboratory of the Johns Hopkins University 5: 1–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, Thomas Hunt. 1901a. Regeneration. Columbia University Biological Series, 3 vols. New York:The Macmillan Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, Thomas Hunt. 1901b. ‹Regeneration and Liability to Injury.’ Science 14: 235–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, Thomas Hunt. 1903. Evolution and Adaptation. New York:The Macmillan Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, Thomas Hunt. 1906. ‹The Physiology of Regeneration.’ The Journal of Experimental Zoology 3: 457–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, Thomas Hunt. 1909. ‹The Dynamic Factor in Regeneration.’ Biological Bulletin 16: 265–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, Thomas Hunt. 1910. “The Role of Irritability and Contractility as Dynamic Factors in Development and Regeneration.” Seventh International Congress of Zoology, Boston, 190J. Proceedings. Cambridge, Mass.: University Press, pp. 483–490.

  • Morgan, Thomas Hunt. 1923. ‹The Development of Asymmetry in the Fiddler Crab.’ American Naturalist 57: 269–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, Thomas Hunt. 1924. ‹The Artificial Induction of Symmetrical Claws in Male Fiddler Crabs.’ American Naturalist 58: 289–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, Thomas Hunt. 1934. Embryology and Genetics. New York:Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, Thomas Hunt, Stevens, Nettie Marie. 1904. ‹Experiments on Polarity in Tubularia.’ The Journal of Experimental Zoology 1: 559–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nyhart, Lynne K. 1995. Biology Takes Form: Animal Morphology and the German Universities 1800–1900. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppenheimer, Jane M. 1983. ‹Thomas Hunt Morgan as an Embryologist: The View From Bryn Mawr.’ American Zoologist 23: 845–854.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppenheimer, Jane M. 1970. ‹Hans Driesch.’ Dictionary of Scientific Biography 4: 186–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinto-Correia, Clara. 1997. The Ovary of Eve: Eggs and Sperm and Preformation. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rader, Karen. 2004. Making Mice: Standardizing Animals for American Biomedical Research, 1900-155. Princeton, New Jersey:Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rafii, S, Lyden, D. 2003. ‹Therapeutic Stem and Progenitor Cell Transplantation for Organ Vascularization and Regeneration.’ Nature Medicine 9: 702–712.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rainger, Ronald, Benson, Keith, Maienschein, Jane (eds.). 1988. The American Development of Biology. Philadelphia:University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reddien, Peter W, Bermange, Adam L, Murfitt, Kenneth J, Jennings, Joya R, Sánchez Alvarado, Alejandro. 2005. ‹Identification of Genes Needed for Regeneration, Stem Cell Function, and Tissue Homeostasis by Systematic Gene Perturbation in Planaria.’ Developmental Cell 8: 635–649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robert, Jason Scott. 2004. ‹Model Systems in Stem Cell Biology.’ Bioessays 26: 1005–1012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roux, Wilhelm. 1888. “Beiträge zur Entwickelungsmechanik des Embryo. Über die kÜnstliche Hervorbringung halber Embryonen durch Zerstörung einer der beiden ersten Furchungskugeln, sowie Über die Nachentwickelung (Postgeneration) der fehlenden Köperhälfte.” Virchows Archiv fÜr pathologisches Anatomie und Physiologie und klinische Medizin 114: 113–153. Trans. as “Contributions to the Developmental Mechanics of the Embryo. On the Artificial Production of Half-Embryos by Destruction of One of the First Two Blastomeres, and the Later Development (Postgeneration) of the Missing Half of the Body.” Benjamin Willier and Jane Oppenheimer (eds.), Foundations of Experimental Embryology. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. 1964, pp. 2–37.

  • Roe, Shirley. 1981. Matter, Life, and Generation: Eighteenth-Century Embryology and the Haller-Wolff Debate. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sánchez Alvarado, Alejandro. 2000a. ‹Regeneration in the Metazoans: Why Does it Happen?’ Bioessays 22: 578–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sánchez Alvarado, Alejandro. 2000b. ‹The Case for Comparative Regeneration: Learning from Simpler Organisms How to Make New Parts from Old.’ The Journal of Regenerative Medicine 1: 31–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sánchez Alvarado, Alejandro. 2006. ‹Planarian Regeneration: Its End is its Beginning.’ Cell 124: 241–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sánchez Alvarado, Alejandro and Panagiotis A. Tsonis, P.A. 2006. “Bridging the Regeneration Gap: Genetic Insights from Diverse Animal Models.” Nature Reviews Genetics 7: 873–884.

  • Sapp, Jan. 2003. Genesis: The Evolution of Biology. New York:Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaffner, Kenneth. 1993. Discovery and Explanation in Biology and Medicine. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singec, I, Jandial, R, Crain, A, Nikkhah, G, Snyder, E. 2007. ‹The Leading Edge of Stem Cell Therapeutics.’ Annual Review of Medicine 58: 313–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sturtevant, Alfred H. 1959. ‹Thomas Hunt Morgan.’ Biographical Memoirs of the National Academy of Science 33: 282–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sturtevant, Alfred H. 2001. ‹Perspectives: Reminiscences of T. H. Morgan.’ Genetics 159: 1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanaka, Elly M, Weidinger, Gilbert. 2008. ‹Heads or Tails: Can Wnt Tell Which One is Up?’ Nature Cell Biology 10: 122–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vartanian, Aram. 1950. ‹Trembley’s Polyp, La Mettrie, and Eighteenth-Century French Materialism.’ Journal of the History of Ideas 11: 259–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • W.E.C. 1903. ‹Morgan’s “Regeneration”.’ The American Naturalist 37: 71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weismann, August. 1893. “The Germ Plasm.” Translated by W. Newton Parker and Harriet Rönnfeldt. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

  • Weismann, August. 1904. The Evolution Theory, Vol. II. Translated by J. Arthur Thomson and Margaret R. Thomson. London: Edward Arnold.

  • Willier, Benjamin H, Oppenheimer, Jane M (eds.). 1964. Foundations of Experimental Embryology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolpert, Lewis. 1991. ‹Morgan’s Ambivalence: A History of Gradients and Regeneration.’ Charles E Dinsmore (ed.), A History of Regeneration Research: Milestones in the Evolution of a Science. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Office for History of Science and Technology, University of California, 543 Stephens Hall, Berkeley, CA, 94720-2350, USA

    Mary Evelyn Sunderland

Authors
  1. Mary Evelyn Sunderland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mary Evelyn Sunderland.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sunderland, M.E. Regeneration: Thomas Hunt Morgan’s Window into Development. J Hist Biol 43, 325–361 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10739-009-9203-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10739-009-9203-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation