Aspects of the History of the Nerves: Bell’s Theory,the Bell-Magendie Law and Controversy,and Two Forgotten Works by P.W. Lund and D.F. Eschricht

The French physiologist François Magendie showed, in 1822, that the anterior roots of the spinal nerves are motor and the posterior sensory. The English anatomist Charles Bell claimed the discovery, but his claim was based on republications of papers in which the wording had been altered to be consistent with Magendie’s findings. Bell also appropriated Herbert Mayo’s discoveries of the functions of the fifth and seventh cranial nerves. Bell repeated his claims in a number of influential publications, supported by his brothers-in-law John and Alexander Shaw. And for a century and a half, Bell figured as the discoverer in most references to the subject. During this period, several reviewers did go back to Bell’s original papers, disclosing Bell’s falsifications in the republished texts. But Magendie was not definitely acknowledged as the discoverer of the function of the spinal nerve roots until Cranefield’s (1974) treatise. Cranefield, as did all other reviewers, overlooked accounts from 1825 by P.W. Lund and F.D. Eschricht. They critically reviewed Bell’s early publications and reached conclusions similar to those of Cranefield concerning the roles of Bell and Magendie in the discovery of the function of the spinal nerve roots.     

How the nerves reached the muscle: Bernard Katz,Stephen W. Kuffler,and John C. Eccles—Certain implications of exile for the development of twentieth-century neurophysiology

This article explores the work by Bernard Katz (1911–2003), Stephen W. Kuffler (1913–1980), and John C. Eccles (1903–1997) on the nerve–muscle junction as a milestone in twentieth-century neurophysiology with wider scientific implications. The historical question is approached from two perspectives: (a) an investigation of twentieth-century solutions to a longer physiological dispute and (b) an examination of a new kind of laboratory and academic cooperation. From this vantage point, the work pursued in Sydney by Sir John Carew Eccles’ team on the neuromuscular junction is particularly valuable, since it contributed a central functional element to modern physiological understanding regarding the function and structure of the human and animal nervous system. The reflex model of neuromuscular action had already been advanced by neuroanatomists such as Georg Prochaska (1749–1820) in Bohemia since the eighteenth century. It became a major component of neurophysiological theories during the nineteenth century, based on the law associated with the names of François Magendie (1783–1855) in France and Charles Bell (1774–1842) in Britain regarding the functional differences of the sensory and motor spinal nerves. Yet, it was not until the beginning of the twentieth century that both the histological and the neurophysiological understanding of the nerve–muscle connection became entirely understood and the chemical versus electrical transmission further elicited as the mechanisms of inhibition. John C. Eccles, Bernard Katz, and Stephen W. Kuffler helped to provide some of the missing links for modern neurophysiology. The current article explores several of their scientific contributions and investigates how the context of forced migration contributed to these interactions in contingently new ways.     

Brown-Séquard and his syndrome

The contributions of Charles Edouard Brown-Séquard (1817-1894) to the advancement of medical science included his emphasis on functional processes in the integrative action of the nervous system, his discovery of the vasomotor nerves, his experimental demonstration that the adrenal glands are esential to life, and his pioneering work on hormone replacement therapy. He is best remembered, however, for his work in delineating the sensory pathways in the spinal cord. His later work on the sensory function of the cord emphasized dynamic spinal mechanisms that may well have major implications for the rehabilitation of patients with cord injuries.     

Streptomycin, Schatz v. Waksman, and the balance of credit for discovery

A recent article in Nature, arguing that "the misallocation of credit is endemic in science," used Selman Waksman as an illustration, claiming that the true discoverer of streptomycin was one of his graduate students. The article received wide publicity and seriously damaged Waksman's great reputation. What actually happened was that the success of penicillin stimulated Merck to fund research by Waksman, a soil scientist, into the collection of actinomycetes that he had assembled over thirty years. He applied the systematic, uncreative testing techniques that had made the German pharmaceutical industry so successful to these, and streptomycin was discovered within a matter of months. Work in the Mayo Institute then showed that it was marvelously effective against tuberculosis, and Waksman received the Nobel Prize for it in 1952. The test that turned out to be the crucial one could have been carried out by any of several students, but the lucky one was Albert Schatz. He then sued the university for a share of the royalties payable by Merck and also petitioned the Nobel committee to include him in the award. Although he obtained a very substantial out-of-court settlement, this probably damaged his subsequent academic career, and he has never ceased to argue his case for recognition, of which the Nature article is a reflection. To claim that Waksman took credit properly due to Schatz is to fail to understand that once pharmaceutical research had become primarily a matter of large-scale, routine testing, little individual creativity was left in this work. Credit for any successful results must therefore be given to whoever is the originator or director of a particular program. Nature refused to publish evidence that this case could not be used as an example of misallocation of credit for discovery. This in itself illustrates that editors of scientific journals should be every bit as mindful of scientists' reputations as they are of scientific facts.     

Sir Edward Appleton and Joseph Priestley: two giants of electrical science

The life of Sir Edward Appleton is reviewed, in commemoration of the recent centenary of his birth. Appleton discovered the ionosphere and devoted much of his life to investigations of its properties, receiving the Nobel Prize for physics as a result. He became a senior government scientist in World War II and afterwards was appointed Vice-Chancellor of Edinburgh University. The influence of his roots in the city of Bradford is emphasized and compared with the case of Joseph Priestley, also born near Bradford some 160 yr earlier. Priestley was a major early investigator of electrical phenomena and compiled a comprehensive treatise on the electrical knowledge of his day. He was the first person to present an experimental proof of the inverse-square law of electrostatic force, although he is usually better remembered as the discoverer of oxygen.     

Jan Evangelista Purkyně (1787–1869) and his instruments for microscopic research in the field of neuroscience

The findings obtained by the famous nineteenth-century Czech scientist Jan Evangelista Purkyně (1787–1869) in the field of microscopic structure of animal and human tissues, including the brain, spinal cord, and nerves, have already been described in depth in a number of older and newer publications. The present article contains an overview of the instruments and tools that Purkyně and his assistants used for microscopic research of tissue histology. Some of these instruments were developed either by Purkyně alone, such as the microtomic compressor, or together with his assistant Adolph Oschatz, such as the microtome. A brief overview of the development of the cutting engines suggests that the first microtome, a prototype of modern sliding microtomes, was designed and constructed under the supervision of Purkyně at the Institute of Physiology in Wroc?aw. Purkyně and his assistants, thus, not only obtained important findings of animal and human nervous and other tissues but also substantially contributed to the development of instruments and tools for their study, a fact often forgotten today.     

Magendie and the chemists: the earliest chemical analyses of the cerebrospinal fluid

Having described the spinal fluid, Fran?ois Magendie (1783-1855) called upon a number of chemists in Paris to analyze the material, in the effort to decide if it was a special secretion of the nervous system or simply a filtrate of the blood. J.L. Lassaigne (1800-1859) and J.P. Couerbe (1805-1867) responded. Their results, and those of some earlier investigators, are described. In the ensuing years of the nineteenth century, other investigators similarly conducted analyses of spinal fluid, but these were usually of single constituents in poorly defined diagnostic conditions. In 1909-1912, William Mestrezat (1883-1928) took advantage of the recently introduced technique of lumbar puncture, which by now had become hospital routine, and introduced the modern era of systematic analysis of many components of the spinal fluid, correlated with specific disease states.     

Colgi, Cajal and the Neuron Doctrine

Camillo Golgi and Santiago Ramon y Cajal shared the Nobel Prize in 1906 for their work on the histology of the nerve cell, but both held diametrically opposed views about the Neuron Doctrine which emphasizes the structural, functional and developmental singularity of the nerve cell. Golgi's reticularist views remained entrenched and his work on the nervous system did not venture greatly into new territories after its original flowering, which had greater impact than is now commonly credited. Cajal, by contrast, by the time he was awarded the Nobel Prize, was already breaking new ground with a new staining technique in the field of peripheral nerve regeneration, seeing the reconstruction of a severed nerve by sprouting from the proximal stump as another manifestation of the Neuron Doctrine. Paradoxically, identical studies were going on simultaneously in Golgi's laboratory in the hands of Aldo Perroncito, but the findings did not seem to influence Golgi's thinking on the Neuron Doctrine.     

Golgi,Cajal and the Neuron Doctrine

Camillo Golgi and Santiago Ramón y Cajal shared the Nobel Prize in 1906 for their work on the histology of the nerve cell, but both held diametrically opposed views about the Neuron Doctrine which emphasizes the structural, functional and developmental singularity of the nerve cell. Golgi's reticularist views remained entrenched and his work on the nervous system did not venture greatly into new territories after its original flowering, which had greater impact than is now commonly credited. Cajal, by contrast, by the time he was awarded the Nobel Prize, was already breaking new ground with a new staining technique in the field of peripheral nerve regeneration, seeing the reconstruction of a severed nerve by sprouting from the proximal stump as another manifestation of the Neuron Doctrine. Paradoxically, identical studies were going on simultaneously in Golgi's laboratory in the hands of Aldo Perroncito, but the findings did not seem to influence Golgi's thinking on the Neuron Doctrine.     

Vesalius on the Anatomy and Function of the Recurrent Laryngeal Nerves: Medical Illustration and Reintroduction of a Physiological Demonstration from Galen

The purpose of this article is to review the anatomical illustrations and physiological demonstrations of sixteenth-century Flemish-born anatomist and physician Andreas Vesalius concerning the recurrent laryngeal nerves. Although Vesalius was primarily an anatomist, he also used vivisection as a pedagogical device to help his students understand the function of structures within the fabric of the body that they had previously studied in anatomical detail. Vesalius’s masterwork, De humani corporis fabrica or simply the Fabrica (1543, 1555), was ostensibly an anatomy text, but Vesalius included textual and figural references to his use of vivisection to explicate the function of specific structures. Even as he began to criticize the errors in Galen’s anatomical works, Vesalius nevertheless adopted some of Galen’s classic physiological demonstrations, in particular the ligation (and subsequent release) of the recurrent laryngeal nerves of a pig to demonstrate their role in generating the pig’s squeal. Vesalius’s illustrations concerning the recurrent laryngeal nerve in the Fabrica were of two types: elegant anatomical woodcut plates—unsurpassed for their clarity, accuracy, and detail — and the distinctly inelegant historiated initial Q, depicting a throng of putti busily engaged in vivisecting a pig. Vesalius’ anatomical plates were heavily plagiarized while the historiated initials, showing the rough work of an anatomist or surgeon, were largely ignored and remain little recognized today. While Vesalius’ anatomical illustrations of the recurrent laryngeal nerves contained some errors, they were a dramatic departure from prior meager efforts at medical illustration and indeed far surpassed all contemporary published illustrations by others. Vesalius was also influential in reviving Galen’s approach to vivisection, at least for pedagogical purposes, if not really then yet as a full-fledged investigative technique.     

C.S. Lewis: an Irish writer

This article examines the effect of C.S. Lewis's Irish background on his work. It attempts to contradict the assumption that this Belfast-born writer should be included in the English and not the Irish canon. It emphasises that Lewis saw himself as Irish, was seen by others as Irish, and that his Irish background, contrary to what some have written, was important to him throughout his lifetime. It goes on to demonstrate the ways in which his work was influenced by his youth in Ireland and by the Irish mythology that he loved. Furthermore, this article maintains that, as a child of pre-partition Ireland with roots throughout the island, Lewis was influenced by the country as a whole, not just his native Ulster. Finally, it attempts to understand why Lewis, a proud Irishman, did not do more to promote himself as an Irish writer.     

The Scientist in Literature: Images and Stereotypes – Their Importance

Abstract

Recent surveys of public attitudes to science and scientists have indicated that scientists are seen in highly stereotyped forms, most of them unfavourable. Before scientists can alter their public image, it is necessary for them to understand how it has arisen. One very important way is through the literary tradition – the manner in which scientists have been presented as fictional characters from the medieval alchemists to the computer experts and physicists of contemporary literature. These depictions of the scientist have not only reflected the writers' opinions of science and contemporary scientists, but have, in turn, influenced society's image of the scientist and the public response to science. There are five major stereotypes which recur with varying frequency throughout the history of Western literature: the evil alchemist; the stupid virtuoso or projector; the unfeeling researcher; the heroic adventurer, utopian or world saviour; the helpless discoverer unable to control his discovery. This review traces the emergence of these stereotypes, suggests why they arose and examines the effect they have had on contemporary attitudes to science.     

Instrument transfer as knowledge transfer in neurophysiology: François Magendie's (1783-1855) early attempts to measure cerebrospinal fluid pressure

Fran?ois Magendie's (1783-1855) experimental model for measuring blood pressure in animals, which he developed in 1838, had a major impact on French physiology in the nineteenth century, especially upon Etienne-Jules Marey (1830-1904) in Paris. In due course it was also adopted by other European investigators, such as the Leipzig physiologist Carl Ludwig (1816-1895), and by clinicians who developed it into a major measuring tool. Historians of science, however, have paid hardly any attention to Magendie's further laboratory investigations conducted with the assistance of Jean-Louis Marie Poiseuille's (1799-1869) sphygmomètre (blood pressure meter). After having used the apparatus to conduct his experiments on a variety of blood vessels, Magendie also applied the sphygmomètre in 1840 to the ventricular system of the brain in order to measure cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) pressure. But the scope of this new procedure had yet to be defined: the new measuring device invited many speculative interpretations about the meaning of CSF flow for the physiology of the ventricular system in healthy and diseased brain function. As such, Magendie's experiments produced phenomena in very heterogeneous knowledge areas, and CSF measurement was situated at the interface of quite disparate investigative spaces regarding the structure and function of the brain. In his textbook Le?ons sur les Fonctions et les Maladies du Système Nerveux (Lectures on the Functions and Diseases of the Nervous System), Magendie described extending application of the measuring "apparatus of Poiseuille" from blood vessels to parts of the brain. The instrument thus became something of a liquidodynamomètre (liquor dynamometer), that paved the way for later applications, including (after 1896) diagnostic intracranial pressure (ICP) measurement by Theodor Kocher (1841-1917) and Harvey Cushing (1869-1939). The current paper focuses on the experimental contingencies that prompted the instrument transfer in Magendie's laboratory and opened up new epistemological perspectives for research in neurophysiology.     

Without Faith,Tsar, and Fatherland

This book excerpt explores the impact of the February revolution on periodical publishing in wartime Russia. It briefly considers the publishing activities of various political parties, but the main focus is publications by and for the active-duty army. The new freedom of the press allowed for dozens of new publications produced by soldiers themselves. Numerous other entities, including the civil authorities and public and private organizations, also published papers intended for the army, often with a pro-war message. But worsening problems with transport and supplies made it difficult to satisfy soldiers’ deep desire for news.     

Mitchell's Influence on European Studies of Peripheral Nerve Injuries During World War I

Objective: Describe the influence of S. Weir Mitchell's (1829-1914) work, and in particular his ideas on causalgia, on European physicians who treated peripheral nerve injuries during World War I (WWI). Background: During the American Civil War (1861-1865), Mitchell studied peripheral nerve injuries with colleagues George Read Morehouse and William Williams Keen. Three monographs resulted from this work. All were important landmarks in the evolution of knowledge of peripheral nerve injuries. A subsequent occasion to improve knowledge came in WWI. Methods: The most important European monographs or series on peripheral nerve injuries from WWI were studied with special interest in references to causalgia and Mitchell's works on peripheral nerve injuries. We included works by Tinel, Athanassio-Bénisty, Purves-Stewart & Evans and Carter, Foerster and Oppenheim. Results: Tinel and Athanassio-Bénisty provided the most detailed information on peripheral nerve injuries and causalgia and often referred to Mitchell. Both mentioned a possible sympathetic origin. Athanassio-Bénisty described tremor and other movement disorders in relation to causalgia. Purves-Stewart and Evans mentioned Mitchell and causalgia in the second edition of their book. They advocated the term "thermalgia." Carter, who had access to data of many cases, concentrated his work on causalgia, referring to Mitchell. Foerster provided data of a great number of peripheral nerve injuries, but did not refer to Mitchell. However, he described the symptoms of causalgia cursorily, applying the term Reflexschmerz (reflexpain). Oppenheim was particularly interested in muscle innervation and referred to Mitchell with respect to hypertrichosis and glossy skin. Oppenheim did not use the term causalgia, although he described the syndrome in some of his patients. It wasn't until around 1920 that German physicians devoted significant attention to causalgia and began using the term. Conclusion: Knowledge of peripheral nerve injuries was greatly advanced during and after WWI. Mitchell's influence was mainly found in the French medical literature, where his findings provided the basis for further research on the origin of causalgia. In England, Mitchell and causalgia were also well-known. We found evidence to suggest that some of the English knowledge came from French physicians. German physicians described the symptoms of causalgia, but did not use the term, nor did they refer to Mitchell. This variation in Mitchell's influence by country probably reflects the fact that Mitchell's Injuries of nerves and their consequences was translated into French but not German.     

Ivane Beritashvili: founder of physiology and neuroscience in Georgia

This paper is dedicated to one of the outstanding scientists of the twentieth century--Ivane Beritashvili. He was a Georgian physiologist who graduated from St. Petersburg University and worked under the supervision of N. Wedensky. He founded the Department of Physiology and the Institute of Physiology at the University of Tbilisi, Georgia. Among his numerous contributions was the discovery of the rhythmical course of reciprocal inhibition in spinal reflexes, the first demonstration of the excitatory and inhibitory reactions in the brain stem neuropil. But Beritashvili's most significant contribution was the discovery of the mediation of animal psychoneural behavior by image-driven memory.     

Chasing Aleck: the story of a dorm

A student raised a hand in class and asked, "Why is this dorm named after Alexander Graham Bell?" On a deaf campus, this was a loaded question. Bell was an oralist, opposed to sign language. He was a eugenicist, opposed to deaf marriages. Indeed, the more I thought about it, the better this question got. Why did the school name a dormin after him? Unfortunately, I hadn't the foggiest idea. With apologies to that student, I offer this article as a belated answer.     

Ivane Beritashvili: Founder of Physiology and Neuroscience in Georgia

This paper is dedicated to one of the outstanding scientists of the twentieth century—Ivane Beritashvili. He was a Georgian physiologist who graduated from St. Petersburg University and worked under the supervision of N. Wedensky. He founded the Department of Physiology and the Institute of Physiology at the University of Tbilisi, Georgia. Among his numerous contributions was the discovery of the rhythmical course of reciprocal inhibition in spinal reflexes, the first demonstration of the excitatory and inhibitory reactions in the brain stem neuropil. But Beritashvili's most significant contribution was the discovery of the mediation of animal psychoneural behavior by image-driven memory.     

Neuro-anniversary 2001

Having described the spinal fluid, François Magendie (1783–1855) called upon a number of chemists in Paris to analyze the material, in the effort to decide if it was a special secretion of the nervous system or simply a filtrate of the blood. J.L. Lassaigne (1800–1859) and J.P. Couerbe (1805–1867) responded. Their results, and those of some earlier investigators, are described. In the ensuing years of the nineteenth century, other investigators similarly conducted analyses of spinal fluid, but these were usually of single constitutents in poorly defined diagnostic conditions. In 1909–1912, William Mestrezat (1883–1928) took advantage of the recently introduced technique of lumbar puncture, which by now had become hospital routine, and introduced the modern era of systematic analysis of many components of the spinal fluid, correlated with specific disease states.