James Dewey Watson (born April 6, 1928) is an American
molecular biologist, best known as one of the co-discoverers of the structure of
DNA. Watson, Francis Crick, and Maurice Wilkins were awarded the 1962 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine "for their discoveries concerning the
molecular structure of nucleic acids and its significance for information transfer in
living material".[1]
Early life
Born in Chicago, Illinois, on April 6
1928, Watson was fascinated with bird watching, a hobby he shared with his father. At the age of
12, Watson starred on Quiz Kids, a popular radio show that challenged precocious youngsters to
answer questions. Thanks to the liberal policy of University president Robert Hutchins,
he enrolled at the University of Chicago at the age of 15. After reading
Erwin Schrödinger's book What Is
Life? in 1946, Watson changed his professional ambitions from the study of ornithology to genetics. He earned his B.S. in Zoology from the University of Chicago in 1947.
He was attracted to the work of Salvador Luria. Luria eventually shared a Nobel Prize
for his work on the Luria-Delbrück experiment, which concerned the nature of
genetic mutations. Luria was part of a distributed group of researchers who were making use of
the viruses that infect bacteria, called
bacteriophages. Luria and Max Delbrück were among
the leaders of this new "Phage Group", an important movement of geneticists from
experimental systems such as Drosophila towards microbial genetics. Early in 1948 Watson
began his Ph.D. research in Luria's laboratory at Indiana University and that spring he got to meet Delbrück in Luria's apartment
and again that summer during Watson's first trip to the Cold Spring Harbor
Laboratory (CSHL). The Phage Group was the intellectual medium within which Watson became a working scientist.
Importantly, the members of the Phage Group had a sense that they were on the path to discovering the physical nature of the
gene. In 1949 Watson took a course with Felix Haurowitz that included the conventional view of that
time: that proteins were genes and able to replicate themselves. The other major molecular
component of chromosomes, DNA, was thought by many to be a "stupid tetranucleotide", serving
only a structural role to support the proteins. However, even at this early time, Watson, under the influence of the Phage Group,
was aware of the work of Oswald Avery which suggested that DNA was the genetic molecule.
Watson's research project involved using X-rays to inactivate bacterial viruses ("phage").[2] He gained his Ph.D. in
Zoology at Indiana University in 1950.
Watson then went to Europe for postdoctoral research, first heading to the laboratory of biochemist Herman Kalckar in Copenhagen who was interested in nucleic acids and had developed an
interest in phage as an experimental system. Watson's time in Copenhagen had one favorable consequence. He was able to do some
experiments with Ole Maaloe (a member of the Phage Group) that were consistent with DNA being the genetic molecule. Watson had
learned about these kinds of experiments the previous summer at Cold Spring Harbor. The experiments involved radioactive
phosphate as a tracer and attempted to determine what molecular components of phage particles actually infect the target bacteria
during viral infection. Watson never developed a constructive interaction with Kalckar, but he did accompany Kalckar to a meeting
in Italy where Watson saw Maurice Wilkins talk about his X-ray diffraction data for DNA. Watson was now certain that DNA had a
definite molecular structure that could be solved.[3] A
detailed finding guide to Watson's experimental research conducted at Indiana University, Statens seruminstitute (Denmark),
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, and Harvard University is available online.
In 1951 the chemist Linus Pauling published his model of the protein alpha helix, a result that grew out of Pauling's relentless efforts in X-ray crystallography and molecular
model building. Watson now had the desire to learn to perform X-ray diffraction experiments so that he could work to determine
the structure of DNA. That summer, Luria met John Kendrew and arranged for a new
postdoctoral research project for Watson in England.
Structure of DNA
In October 1951, James Watson moved to Clare College, Cambridge and started
at the Cavendish Laboratory, the physics department of the University of Cambridge, with a fellowship from the National Foundation of Infantile Paralysis.
Here he shared an office with Francis Crick where they found they had similar scientific
interests and initiated a collaboration to discover the structure of DNA. Crick soon solved the mathematical equations that
govern helical diffraction theory; Watson knew all of the key DNA results of the Phage Group.[4]
In late 1951 Crick and Watson began a series of informal exchanges with Maurice Wilkins during which some of Franklin's
findings were given to Watson and Crick by Wilkins without Franklin's permission or knowledge. In November, Watson attended a
seminar by Rosalind Franklin. She spoke about the X-ray diffraction data she had
collected with Raymond Gosling. The data indicated that DNA was a helix of some sort.
Soon after this seminar, Watson and Crick constructed an incorrect molecular model of DNA in which the phosphate backbones were
on the inside of the structure. Franklin asserted that the phosphates almost certainly were on the outside, not the inside.
Watson and Crick eventually came to see that she was right and used this information in their final determination of the helical
structure. In 1952, the final details of the chemical structure of the DNA backbone were determined by biochemists like
Alexander Todd.
During 1952, Crick and Watson had been asked not to work on making molecular models of the structure of DNA.[5] Instead, Watson's official assignment was to
perform X-ray diffraction experiments on tobacco mosaic virus. Tobacco mosaic virus
was the first virus to be identified (1886) and purified (1935). Since electron
microscopy revealed that virus crystals form inside infected plants, it made sense to isolate this virus for study by
X-ray crystallography. Early X-ray diffraction images for tobacco mosaic virus had
been collected before World War II. By 1954, Watson had deduced from his X-ray diffraction images that the tobacco mosaic virus
had a helical structure.[6] Despite his official
assignment, the lure of solving the puzzle of DNA structure continued to tantalize Watson; with his friend Crick, he continued to
think about how to determine the structure of DNA.
In April 1952, Watson's PhD research adviser, Luria, was to speak at a meeting
in England. However, Luria was not allowed to travel due to cold war fears over his Marxist leanings. Watson used Luria's
speaking slot to talk about his own work with radioactive DNA and the results of others in the Phage Group that indicated the
genetic material of phages was DNA. It has been recorded that during this meeting Watson was discussing with others prior
discoveries by other researchers such as the calculated width of the B-form DNA molecule as
determined by X-ray diffraction studies. By 1952 estimates from X-ray data and electron microscopy agreed that the diameter of
DNA was about 2 nanometers.
Watson and Crick benefited from two travel-related strokes of luck in 1952. First, Erwin
Chargaff visited England in 1952 and inspired Watson and Crick to learn more about nucleotide biochemistry. There are four nucleobases: guanine (G), cytosine (C), adenine (A) and
thymine (T) in DNA. The so-called Chargaff ratios
experimental results indicated that the amount of G is equal to C and the amount of A is equal to T. Jerry Donohue explained to Watson and Crick the correct structures of the four bases. The second
travel-related event was that Linus Pauling's plans to visit England were disrupted. His planned visit was canceled for political
reasons and he never gained access to the King's College X-ray diffraction data for DNA until it was published in 1953.
In 1953, Crick and Watson were given permission by their lab director and Wilkins to again try to make a structural model of
DNA. At this time, Crick and Watson became aware of a research progress report containing some of Franklin's findings. This
report contained the data that she had previously discussed in her research seminar of November 1951. Crick and Watson continued
to make use of Franklin's results in their thinking about the structure of DNA.
Breakthrough
Watson's key contribution was in discovering the nucleotide base pairs that are the key to
the structure and function of DNA. This key discovery was made in the Pauling "tradition", by playing with molecular models.
Since he would have to wait for the Cavendish machine shop to make tin models of the four
nucleobases, Watson, on February 21, 1953 made a molecule
model of each using a straight edge, an exacto knife, white cardboard and paste. These molecules are all flat in their ring
structures, so Watson could slide the cardboard models around on a table and examine how they might interact and fit together.
After looking at the possible arrangements of his cardboard molecule models, Watson soon realized that the larger two-ring A and
G nucleobases (technically referred to as purines) could be paired with the smaller one-ring T
and C nucleobases, known as pyrimidines. Watson examined the possibility of hydrogen bonds between the pairs of purines and pyrimidines. After moving the A and T molecules around on
the table he sat at, he brought together the distal (relative to its five-member ring) nitrogen of the A and the correct
nitrogen-based hydrogen of T. Fortunately, the A and T were lying on the table both "face up" in that they were in the
orientation as they occur in DNA and Watson then noticed the possibility of the second hydrogen bond involving an oxygen atom. He
quickly saw that the other pair, C's nitrogen and G's nitrogen-based hydrogen had a similar relationship and that those two
molecules formed three such bonds. As the accompanying diagram indicates, all five hydrogens involved have a covalent bond to a nitrogen (which has no "double" bond) and form the weaker hydrogen bond with either a
nitrogen or an oxygen that each have one double valence bond to a carbon atom.
Watson then saw that the two pairs could be superimposed on each other with similar overall structure. In particular, the
hexagonal rings were equidistant and the relative orientations of the five-member rings of the "big" molecules, A and G were the
same. The nitrogens with the "squiggly" lines are the ones that attach, as "ladder rungs", to the helical backbone and that these
nitrogen atoms are equidistant and also superimpose in the two pairs, allowing the helical structure to be smooth. Watson sensed
that too many pieces were falling into place for this to be anything but the answer. He was correct. The base pairs discovered by
Watson were consistent with the biochemical data Chargaff had already published.
Nobel Prize
Diagram showing the key structural components in the chemical structure of DNA. The actual 3D structure is shown at
DNA.
Watson and Crick proceeded to deduce the double helix structure of DNA which they
submitted to the journal Nature and was subsequently published on
April 25 1953.[7] Watson, Crick, and Wilkins were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1962 for their
research on the structure of nucleic acids.[8] Some regret
that Franklin did not live long enough to share in the Nobel Prize.[9]
The Double Helix
In 1968 Watson wrote The Double Helix, one of the Modern Library's 100 best non-fiction books. The account is the sometimes painful story of not only the
discovery of the structure of DNA, but the personalities, conflicts and controversy surrounding their work. It was originally to
be published by Harvard University Press, but after objections from both
Francis Crick and Maurice Wilkins, among others,
Watson's home university where he had been a member of the biology faculty since 1955, dropped the book and it was instead
published by a commercial publisher, an incident which caused some scandal. Watson's original title was to have been "Honest
Jim," in part to raise the ethical questions of bypassing Franklin to gain access to her X-ray diffraction data before they were
published. Watson seems to have never been particularly bothered by the way things turned out. If all that mattered was beating
Pauling to the structure of DNA, then Franklin's cautious approach to analysis of the X-ray data was simply an obstacle that
Watson needed to run around. Wilkins and others were there at the right time to help Watson and Crick do so. Also in 1968, Watson
married Elizabeth Lewis and became the Director of Cold Spring Harbor
Laboratory. Between 1970 and 1972 Watson's two sons were born and by 1974 the young family made CSHL their permanent
residence.
The Double Helix changed the way the public viewed scientists and the way they work.[10] In the same way, Watson's first textbook, The Molecular Biology of the
Gene, set a new standard for textbooks, particularly through the use of concept heads—brief declarative subheadings. Its
style has been emulated by almost all succeeding textbooks. His next great success was Molecular Biology of the Cell,
although here his role was more that of coordinator of an outstanding group of scientist-writers. His third textbook was
Recombinant DNA, which used the ways in which genetic engineering has brought
us so much new information about how organisms function. All the textbooks are still in print.
Genome project
In 1988, Watson's achievement and success led to his appointment as the Head of the Human Genome Project at the National Institutes of
Health, a position he held until 1992. Watson left the Genome Project after conflicts with the new NIH Director, Bernadine Healy. Watson was opposed
to Healy's attempts to acquire patents on gene sequences, and any ownership of the "laws of nature." Two years before stepping
down from the Genome Project, he had stated his opinion on this long and ongoing controversy which he saw as an illogical barrier
to research; he said, "The nations of the world must see that the human genome belongs to the world's people, as opposed to its
nations." He left within weeks of the 1992 announcement that the NIH would be applying for patents on brain-specific
cDNAs.[11] In 1994, Watson became President
of CSHL. Dr. Francis Collins took
over the role as Director of the Human Genome Project. Watson currently serves as Chancellor of Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in Cold Spring Harbor, New York. He became the second person
to publish his fully sequenced genomeonline,
after it was presented to him on May 31, 2007 by 454 Life Sciences Corporation in collaboration with scientists at the Human
Genome Sequencing Center, Baylor College of Medicine. "I am putting my genome sequence on line to encourage the development of an
era of personalized medicine, in which information contained our genomes can be used to identify and prevent disease and to
create individualized medical therapies," said CSHL Chancellor Watson.[12]
Awards
- Albert Lasker Prize
- Benjamin Franklin Medal for Distinguished Achievement in the Sciences
- Charles A. Dana Award
- Copley Medal of the Royal Society
- Eli Lilly Award in Biochemistry
- Fellow of the New York Academy of Sciences
- Gairdner Award
- Heald Award
- Honorary Knight of the British Empire
- John Collins Warren Prize of the Massachusetts General Hospital
- John J. Carty Gold Medal of the National Academy of Sciences
- Kaul Foundation Award for Excellence
- Liberty Medal
|
- Lomonosov Medal
- Lotos Club Medal of Merit
- Mendel Medal
- National Biotechnology Venture Award
- National Medal of Science
- New York Academy of Medicine Award
- Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine
- Othmer Medal
- Presidential Medal of Freedom
- Research Corporation Prize
- University of Chicago Medal
- University College London Prize
- University Medal at SUNY Stony Brook
|
Positions
Allen Institute for Brain Science
Dr. Watson is now the Institute advisor for the newly-formed Allen Institute for Brain
Science. The Institute, located in Seattle, Washington, was founded in 2003 by Philanthropists Paul G. Allen
and Jody Allen Patton as a nonprofit corporation (501(c) (3)) and medical research organization. A multidisciplinary group of
neuroscientists, molecular biologists, informaticists, engineers, mathematicians, statisticians, and computational biologists
have been brought together to form the scientific core of the Allen Institute. Utilizing the mouse model system, these fields
have joined together to investigate expression of 20,000 genes in the adult mouse brain and to map gene expression to a cellular
level beyond neuroanatomic boundaries. The data generated from this joint effort is contained in the publicly available Allen
Brain Atlas application located at www.brain-map.org. Upon completion of the Allen Brain Atlas, this consortium of scientists
will pursue additional questions to further our understanding of neuronal circuitry and the neuroanatomic framework that defines
the functionality of the brain.
Champalimaud Foundation
In January 2007, Dr. Watson accepted the invitation of Leonor Beleza, president of the
Champalimaud Foundation, to become the head of the foundation's scientific
council, an advisory organ. He will be in charge of selecting the remaining council members.[13]
Controversies
James Watson (February, 2003)
Use of King's College results
-
An enduring controversy has been generated by Watson and Crick's use of DNA X-ray diffraction
data collected by Rosalind Franklin and Raymond Gosling. The controversy arose from the fact that some of Franklin's unpublished data was used
by Watson and Crick in their construction of the double helix model of DNA.[14] Franklin's experimental results provided estimates of the water content of DNA crystals and
these results were consistent with the two sugar-phosphate backbones being on the outside of the molecule. Franklin personally
told Crick and Watson that the backbones had to be on the outside. Her identification of the space
group for DNA crystals revealed to Crick that the two DNA strands were antiparallel. The X-ray diffraction images collected by Gosling and Franklin provided the
best evidence for the helical nature of DNA. Franklin's superb experimental work thus proved crucial in Watson and Crick's
discovery. Watson and Crick had three sources for Franklin's unpublished data: 1) her 1951 seminar, attended by Watson, 2)
discussions with Wilkins, who worked in the same laboratory with Franklin, 3) a research progress report that was intended to
promote coordination of Medical Research Council-supported laboratories.
Watson, Crick, Wilkins and Franklin all worked in MRC laboratories.
Prior to publication of the double helix structure, Watson and Crick had little interaction with Franklin. Crick and Watson
felt that they had benefited from collaborating with Wilkins. They offered him a co-authorship on the article that first
described the double helix structure of DNA. Wilkins turned down the offer, a fact that may have led to the terse character of
the acknowledgment of experimental work done at King's College in the eventual published paper. Rather than make any of the DNA
researchers at King's College co-authors on the Watson and Crick double helix article, the solution that was arrived at was to
publish two additional papers from King's College along with the helix paper. Biographer Brenda
Maddox suggested that because of the importance of her work to Watson and Crick's model building, Franklin should have had
her name on the original Watson and Crick manuscript.[15] Franklin may have never known the extent to which her unpublished data had helped in the double
helix discovery. According to one critic, unprotected by libel laws, Watson's portrayal of
Franklin in The Double Helix was negative, giving the appearance that she was Wilkins' assistant and was unable to
interpret her own DNA data.[16].
In his book The Double Helix, Watson described being intimidated by Franklin
and that they were unable to establish constructive scientific interactions during the time period when Franklin was doing DNA
research. However a review of the handwritten correspondence from Franklin to Watson, located in the archives at Cold Spring
Harbor Laboratory, reveals that the two scientists later had exchanges of constructive scientific correspondence. In fact,
Franklin consulted with Watson on her Tobacco Mosaic Virus RNA research. Franklin's letters begin on friendly terms with "Dear
Jim", and conclude with equally benevolent and respectful sentiments like "Best Wishes, Yours, Rosalind". As is typical with
scientific research, each of the scientists published their own unique contributions to the discovery of the structure of DNA in
separate articles, and all of the contributors published their findings in the same volume of Nature. These classic
molecular biology papers are identified as: Watson J.D. and Crick F.H.C. "A Structure for Deoxyribose Nucleic Acid" Nature
171, 737-738 (1953).[17] Wilkins M.H.F., A.R. Stokes A.R.
& Wilson, H.R."Molecular Structure of Deoxypentose Nucleic Acids" Nature 171, 738-740 (1953).[18] Franklin R. and Gosling R.G. "Molecular Configuration in Sodium
Thymonucleate" Nature 171, 740-741 (1953).[19]
Franklin did not receive a Nobel Prize for her important contribution because the Nobel Prize is not awarded
posthumously.[20]
The wording on the DNA sculpture outside Clare College's Thirkill Court, Cambridge, England is:
On the base:
- "These strands unravel during cell reproduction. Genes are encoded in the sequence of bases."
- "The double helix model was supported by the work of Rosalind Franklin and Maurice Wilkins."
On the helices:
- "The structure of DNA was discovered in 1953 by Francis Crick and James Watson while Watson lived here at Clare."
- "The molecule of DNA has two helical strands that are linked by base pairs Adenine - Thymine or Guanine - Cytosine."
Controversial statements
[[Category:Current events as of {{#time:F Y|October 2007}}]]
Watson was quoted in an article for the Sunday Times
Magazine published on October 14, 2007, that he is
"inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa" because "all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence
is the same as ours – whereas all the testing says not really." He claims to hope that everyone is equal, but he counters that
"people who have to deal with black employees find this not true." He says that you should not discriminate on the basis of
colour, because "there are many people of colour who are very talented, but don’t promote them when they haven’t succeeded at the
lower level."[21]
"There is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution
should prove to have evolved identically," he writes. "Our wanting to reserve equal powers of reason as some universal heritage
of humanity will not be enough to make it so."[22]
As a result the London Science Museum cancelled a talk that Watson was
scheduled to give on 19 October 2007. The museum spokesperson
stated that "We feel Dr. Watson has gone beyond the point of acceptable debate and we are, as a result, cancelling his
talk."[23]
Additionally, the Board of Trustees of Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory suspended Dr. Watson's administrative responsibilities in
response to the comments, according to a public statement posted on the laboratory's website. The University of Edinburgh also withdrew the invitation to Dr Watson to the "DNA, Dolly and Other
Dangerous Ideas: The Destiny of 21st Century Science" Enlightenment Lecture on October 22
2007. [24]
Watson later apologized "unreservedly" and was quoted as being "mortified"[25] for the comments attributed to him, stating "I cannot understand how I could have said what I am
quoted as having said. I can certainly understand why people, reading those words, have reacted in the ways they have," he said.
"To all those who have drawn the inference from my words that Africa, as a continent, is somehow genetically inferior, I can only
apologize unreservedly. That is not what I meant. More importantly from my point of view, there is no scientific basis for such a
belief".[26][27]
After the apology he added: "[28]
"Right now, at my institute in the US we are working on gene-caused failures in brain development that frequently lead to
autism and schizophrenia. We may also find that differences in these respective brain development genes also lead to differences
in our abilities to carry out different mental tasks."
On October 19th, In an attempt to clarify his position Watson is featured in an article in
The Independent
"We do not yet adequately understand the way in which the different environments in the world have selected over time the
genes which determine our capacity to do different things," he is quoted as saying. "The overwhelming desire of society today is
to assume that equal powers of reason are a universal heritage of humanity."
"It may well be. But simply wanting this to be the case is not enough. This is not science. To question this is not to give in to
racism. This is not a discussion about superiority or inferiority, it is about seeking to understand differences, about why some
of us are great musicians and others great engineers."
Hunt-Grubbe also reports that Watson has suggested a link between skin colour and sex drive, hypothesizing that dark-skinned
people have stronger libidos.[21][29] In 2000 Watson shocked an audience at the
University of California, Berkeley, when he advanced his theory about
a link between skin color and sex drive. His lecture, complete with slides of bikini-clad women, argued that extracts of melanin
— which give skin its color — had been found to boost subjects' sex drive.
"That's why you have Latin lovers," he said, according to people who attended the lecture. "You've never heard of an English
lover. Only an English patient."[30]
Watson has repeatedly supported genetic screening and genetic engineering in public lectures and interviews, arguing that stupidity is a disease and the
"really stupid" bottom 10% of people should be cured.[31] He has also suggested that beauty could be genetically engineered, saying "People say it
would be terrible if we made all girls pretty. I think it would be great."[31]
He has been quoted in The Sunday Telegraph as stating: "If you could find
the gene which determines sexuality and a woman decides she doesn't want a homosexual child, well, let her."[32] The biologist Richard Dawkins
wrote a letter to The Independent claiming that Watson's position was
misrepresented by The Sunday Telegraph article and that Watson also
considered the possibility of having a heterosexual child to be just as valid as any other reason for abortion.[33]
On the issue of obesity, Watson has also been quoted as saying: "Whenever you interview fat people, you feel bad, because you
know you're not going to hire them."[34]
According to Watson at the 2003 conference,[35] "DNA:
50 years of the Double Helix," held in Cambridge, England, "Now perhaps it's a pretty well kept secret that one of the most
uninspiring acts of Cambridge University over this past century was to turn down Francis
Crick when he applied to be the Professor of Genetics, in 1958. Now there may have been a series of arguments which led
them to reject Francis. But it really was stupid. It was really saying, Don't push us to the frontier. That's what it was
saying."
Watson also had quite a few disagreements with Craig Venter regarding his use of
EST fragments while Venter worked at NIH. Venter went on to found Celera genomics and
continued his feud with Watson through the privately funded venture. Watson was even quoted as calling Venter "Hitler."[36]
References
- ^ The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1962. Nobel Prize Site for Nobel Prize in Physiology
or Medicine 1962.
- ^ "The properties of x-ray inactivated bacteriophage. I. Inactivation by
direct effect." by J. D. Watson in Journal of Bacteriology (1950) volume 60 page 697-718. The full text of
this article is available for download in PDF format.
- ^ Judson, H. F. (1979) The
Eighth Day of Creation. Makers of the Revolution in Biology. New York: Simon and Schuster. ISBN 0-6712-2540-5. See chapter
2.
- ^ Most of the biographical account comes from Watson's 1968 autobiographical
account, The Double Helix: A Personal Account of the Discovery of the Structure of
DNA. The book was very controversial when it came out, though, as many of the participants still living disputed its
account, especially of the role and personality of Franklin. In fact, the originally intended publisher, Harvard University
Press, turned the manuscript down. For an edition which contains critical responses, book reviews, and copies of the original
scientific papers, see James D. Watson, The Double Helix: A Personal Account of the Discovery of the Structure of DNA,
Norton Critical Edition, Gunther Stent, ed. (New York: Norton, 1980).
- ^ Bragg's
decision near the end of 1951 that Watson and Crick should not work on DNA structure is described on page 128 of The Eighth
Day of Creation: Makers of the Revolution in Biology by Horace Freeland Judson published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
Press (1996) ISBN 0-87969-478-5. Bragg gave Watson permission to start DNA model work again in January 1953 (see page 162).
- ^ "The structure of tobacco mosaic virus. I. X-ray evidence of a helical
arrangement of sub-units around the longitudinal axis" by J. D. Watson in Biochim Biophys Acta. (1954) volume 13 pages
10-19. Entrez PubMed 13140277
- ^ Molecular
structure of Nucleic Acids by James D. Watson and Francis H. Crick. Nature
171, 737–738 (1953).
- ^ The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1962. Nobel Prize citation for Crick, Watson and
Wilkins.
- ^ Judson, Horace. "No Nobel Prize for Whining", New York Times, 2003-10-20. Retrieved on
2007-08-03.
- ^ The Norton Critical Edition of Watson's The Double Helix". The Preface
by Gunther Stent describes the impact and wide readership of Watson's book. ISBN 0-393-95075-1.
- ^ Robert Pollack (1994). Signs of Life: The Language and Meanings of DNA.
Houghton Mifflin Company, 95.
- ^ "Watson Genotype Viewer Now On
Line", Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, 2003-6-28. Retrieved on 2007-9-16.
- ^ Teresa Firmino. "Nobel James Watson vai
presidir ao conselho científico da Fundação Champalimaud", Público, 2007-03-20. Retrieved on
2007-03-22. (Portuguese)
- ^ Chapter 3 of The Eighth Day of Creation: Makers of the
Revolution in Biology by Horace Freeland Judson published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press (1996) ISBN
0-87969-478-5.
- ^ Rosalind Franklin: The Dark Lady of DNA by Brenda
Maddox. (2002) ISBN 0-06-018407-8.
- ^ http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-56/iss-3/p42.html
- ^ http://www.nature.com/nature/dna50/watsoncrick.pdf
- ^ http://www.nature.com/nature/dna50/wilkins.pdf
- ^ http://www.nature.com/nature/dna50/franklingosling.pdf
- ^ Statutes of the Nobel Foundation, § 4
- ^ a b Charlotte Hunt-Grubbe, The elementary DNA of dear Dr Watson, Times Online, October 14,
2007
- ^ DNA Discoverer: Blacks Less Intelligent Than Whites, foxnews.com, October 18 2007
- ^ Museum drops race row scientist
bbc
- ^ http://www.cshl.edu/public/releases/07_statement2.html
- ^ http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/10/18/nobel.apology/index.html
- ^ http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article2687364.ece
- ^ http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7052416.stm
- ^ James Watson: To
question genetic intelligence is not racism, Independent, October 19,
2007
- ^
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/321/7252/12
- ^ http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071018/ap_on_re_eu/britain_controversial_scientist
- ^ a b Shaoni Bhattacharya. "Stupidity should be cured, says DNA
discoverer", NewScientist.com news service, 2003-02-28. Retrieved on 2007-06-24.
- ^ [1], The Telegraph
- ^ [2]
- ^ [3]
- ^ Conference transcript.
- ^ (The Genome War, J. Shreeve)
Further reading
- Chadarevian, S. (2002) Designs For Life: Molecular Biology After World War II. Cambridge University Press ISBN
0-521-57078-6
- Chargaff, E. (1978) Heraclitean Fire. New York: Rockefeller Press.
- Chomet, S., ed., (1994) D.N.A.: Genesis of a Discovery London: Newman-Hemisphere Press.
- Crick, Francis (1988) What Mad Pursuit: A Personal View of Scientific Discovery (Basic
Books reprint edition, 1990) ISBN 0-465-09138-5
- Friedburg, Errol C. 2005) "The Writing Life of James D. Watson". "Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press" ISBN
0879697008
- Hunter, G. (2004) Light Is A Messenger: the life and science of William Lawrence Bragg. Oxford University Press. ISBN
0-19-852921-X
- Inglis, J., Sambrook, J. & Witkowski, J. A. (eds.) Inspiring Science: Jim Watson and the Age of DNA. Cold Spring
Harbor Laboratory Press. 2003. ISBN 978-087969698-6.
- Judson, H. F. (1996). The Eighth Day of Creation: Makers of the Revolution in Biology, Expanded edition. Cold Spring
Harbor Laboratory Press. ISBN 0879694785
- Maddox, B. (2003). Rosalind Franklin: The Dark Lady of DNA. Harper Perennial. ISBN 0060985089
- Robert Olby; 1974) The Path to The Double Helix: Discovery of DNA. London:
MacMillan. ISBN 0-486-68117-3; Definitive DNA textbook, with foreword by Francis Crick, revised in 1994 with a 9 page
postscript.
- Robert Olby; (2003) "Quiet debut for the double helix" Nature 421 (January 23): 402-405.
- R