formal education in zoology or botany since many were physicians whose training at
the time was through internships and brief exposure at universities to human
anatomy and medical practices. Evolution concepts were generally not a part of
their education or interest. Consequently, though Darwin appears to have kept
abreast of developments in microbiology and encouraged some of its practitioners,
his impact on the development of this new field of science was limited. As the field
grew, it slowly abandoned him and largely ignored the principles of evolution that he
had laid out (O’Malley 2009).
As microbiology developed in the twentieth century, the fermentation and agricultural applied aspects took a back seat to the growing interest in research in
medical microbiology. Those interested in bacterial evolution lacked the ability to
use characters that easily showed evolutionary changes through related lineages.
They also lacked the ability to rationally identify the evolutionary relationships
among bacteria. Both of these features of their subjects were available to those
interested in the evolution of plants and animals. Without these, early bacterial
evolutionists were left without the means to base their work on generally accepted
principles and so hard data were impossible to generate. Interest in evolutionary
microbiology began to falter.
In mid-century, those who founded the area of molecular biology often started
their studies using bacteria, but those investigators were trained in a microbiological
tradition in which evolution studies were being dismissed as futile. Some came from
the biochemical sciences, typically seated in chemistry, and so had no background in
evolution science. Similarly, some of the molecular biology pioneers were physicists, disillusioned with the course of atomic sciences, who came to the new field
with no background in evolution. All these factors prevented development of a solid
examination of evolutionary questions for many decades and led to the “Dark Age”
of microbial evolution science.
Later, the ability to sequence macromolecules finally provided characters that
could be compared to generate phylogenies and show the course of evolution.
Genome sequences, both of cultured and non-cultured organisms, opened the door
much wider and now allowed a more comprehensive picture of microbial evolution
to be seen. These have also allowed detailed examinations of cultures undergoing
evolution in the laboratory and, to a lesser extent, so far, to populations evolving in
nature.
Theodosius Dobzhansky famously entitled a 1973 article, “Nothing in biology
makes sense except in the light of evolution” (Dobzhansky 1973). One would be
correct to rephrase this as “Nothing in microbiology makes sense except in the light
of evolution.” Many early microbiologists realized this and made their best efforts to
provide this basis for their new science. As Dobzhansky wrote in that article,
“Without that light it [biology] becomes a pile of sundry facts—some of them
interesting or curious but making no meaningful picture as a whole.” For nearly a
century, microbiology was just such a pile of sundry facts. Not until the work of
molecular evolutionists, Woese being the most important, was the light shone on the
microbial world. Since then we have found Darwin’s theories to be profoundly in
evidence there. Even more, we have found evolutionary processes that Darwin could
50
K. M. Noll
the time was through internships and brief exposure at universities to human
anatomy and medical practices. Evolution concepts were generally not a part of
their education or interest. Consequently, though Darwin appears to have kept
abreast of developments in microbiology and encouraged some of its practitioners,
his impact on the development of this new field of science was limited. As the field
grew, it slowly abandoned him and largely ignored the principles of evolution that he
had laid out (O’Malley 2009).
As microbiology developed in the twentieth century, the fermentation and agricultural applied aspects took a back seat to the growing interest in research in
medical microbiology. Those interested in bacterial evolution lacked the ability to
use characters that easily showed evolutionary changes through related lineages.
They also lacked the ability to rationally identify the evolutionary relationships
among bacteria. Both of these features of their subjects were available to those
interested in the evolution of plants and animals. Without these, early bacterial
evolutionists were left without the means to base their work on generally accepted
principles and so hard data were impossible to generate. Interest in evolutionary
microbiology began to falter.
In mid-century, those who founded the area of molecular biology often started
their studies using bacteria, but those investigators were trained in a microbiological
tradition in which evolution studies were being dismissed as futile. Some came from
the biochemical sciences, typically seated in chemistry, and so had no background in
evolution science. Similarly, some of the molecular biology pioneers were physicists, disillusioned with the course of atomic sciences, who came to the new field
with no background in evolution. All these factors prevented development of a solid
examination of evolutionary questions for many decades and led to the “Dark Age”
of microbial evolution science.
Later, the ability to sequence macromolecules finally provided characters that
could be compared to generate phylogenies and show the course of evolution.
Genome sequences, both of cultured and non-cultured organisms, opened the door
much wider and now allowed a more comprehensive picture of microbial evolution
to be seen. These have also allowed detailed examinations of cultures undergoing
evolution in the laboratory and, to a lesser extent, so far, to populations evolving in
nature.
Theodosius Dobzhansky famously entitled a 1973 article, “Nothing in biology
makes sense except in the light of evolution” (Dobzhansky 1973). One would be
correct to rephrase this as “Nothing in microbiology makes sense except in the light
of evolution.” Many early microbiologists realized this and made their best efforts to
provide this basis for their new science. As Dobzhansky wrote in that article,
“Without that light it [biology] becomes a pile of sundry facts—some of them
interesting or curious but making no meaningful picture as a whole.” For nearly a
century, microbiology was just such a pile of sundry facts. Not until the work of
molecular evolutionists, Woese being the most important, was the light shone on the
microbial world. Since then we have found Darwin’s theories to be profoundly in
evidence there. Even more, we have found evolutionary processes that Darwin could
50
K. M. Noll