Skip to main contentU.S. National Library of MedicineU.S. National Library of Medicine

Profiles in Science
Pinterest badge Follow Profiles in Science on Pinterest!

The Barbara McClintock Papers

Letter from Barbara McClintock to Charles R. Burnham pdf (138,419 Bytes) transcript of pdf
Letter from Barbara McClintock to Charles R. Burnham
McClintock referred to this note as an "appendix" to the letter to Burnham dated July 30, 1931.
Item is handwritten. Item is a photocopy.
Number of Image Pages:
2 (138,419 Bytes)
1931-08-08 (August 8, 1931)
McClintock, Barbara
Burnham, Charles R.
Original Repository: University of Minnesota, University Archives. Charles Burnham Papers
Reproduced with permission of the University of Minnesota, University Archives. Charles Burnham Papers
Medical Subject Headings (MeSH):
Zea mays
Metadata Record Letter from Barbara McClintock to Charles R. Burnham (July 30, 1931) pdf (424,901 Bytes) transcript of pdf
Box Number: 3
Folder Number: 4
Unique Identifier:
Document Type:
Letters (correspondence)
Physical Condition:
August 8
Dear Charlie --
This is just an appendix to my last. I have a correction to make in one case. I wrote you about a case of AB Pl female and pl male which had been x rayed in early embryo and had given rise to a plant which looked ABpl (all other plants in culture were distinctly purple) and therefore indicated that pl had been lost. I also wrote that examinations showed no visible change in the satellite chromosomes. When the plants tasseled the anthers were distinctly purple -- the plant, therefore, was probably ABwPl probably or AbPl. There had been, therefore, no loss of Pl and no change was expected, then, in the satellite chromosome. There are no cases which we have examined, true, that show a "mutation" of one of the known genes that has'nt [sic] shown a visible change in some way -- Correction completed!
The pl deficiency involving an interchange between the satellite chr. at the region of Pl with another chr. is not going to pull thru, I believe. The plant is nearly 90 percent sterile. I have been working on it and find one very interesting feature. In the chromosome other than the satellite which is involved the insertion regions do not correspond [diagram along left side of page] -- In one chromosome (do not know whether it is the interchange or the "normal") its insertion region is nearer the cross. In the other it is farther away. The slides are very clear on this point. One of the chrs. may have an inverted section. There is an occasional looping at this region in the chromosome but I can't make out details. I have made the diagram as a close cross, however, this probably doesn't occur and hasn't been noticed -- it shouldn't be expected, either, if there has been some loss at this region. I believe this non-correspondence of insertion regions will be found in species crosses. It may explain why morphologies vary in nearly related forms where number is constant.
Am anxious to see if this is not true.
This is a long correction --
Metadata Last Modified Date:
Linked Data:
RDF/XML     JSON     JSON-LD     N3/Turtle     N-Triples