Watson biography briefly. American biologist James Watson: biography, personal life, contribution to science

James Dewey Watson - American biochemist. Born April 6, 1928 in Chicago, Illinois. He was the only child of businessman James D. Watson and Jean (Mitchell) Watson. IN hometown the boy received primary and secondary education. It soon became apparent that James was an unusually gifted child, and he was invited to appear on the radio program “Quizzes for Children.” After only two years of studying at high school, Watson received a scholarship in 1943 to attend an experimental four-year college at the University of Chicago, where he developed an interest in studying ornithology. Having graduated from the university in 1947 with a bachelor's degree natural sciences, he then continued his education at Indiana University Bloomington.

Born in Chicago, Illinois. At the age of 15 he entered the University of Chicago, graduating four years later. In 1950, they received their doctorate from Indiana University for their study of viruses. By this time, Watson had become interested in genetics and began studying in Indiana under the guidance of a specialist in this field, G.D. Meller and bacteriologist S. Luria. In 1950, the young scientist received his Ph.D. for a dissertation on the influence of x-rays for the reproduction of bacteriophages (viruses that infect bacteria). A grant from the National Research Society allowed him to continue his research on bacteriophages at the University of Copenhagen in Denmark. There he studied the biochemical properties of bacteriophage DNA. However, as he later recalled, experiments with the bacteriophage began to weigh on him; he wanted to learn more about the true structure of DNA molecules, which geneticists were so enthusiastically talking about. His visit to the Cavendish Laboratory in 1951 led to a collaboration with Francis Crick that culminated in the discovery of the structure of DNA.

In October 1951, the scientist went to the Cavendish Laboratory Cambridge University to study the spatial structure of proteins together with D.K. Kendrew. There he met Crick, a physicist who was interested in biology and was writing his doctoral dissertation at that time.

“It was intellectual love at first sight,” says one historian of science. – Their scientific views and interests are the most important problem, which must be solved if you are a biologist.” Despite their common interests, outlook on life and style of thinking, Watson and Crick mercilessly, although politely, criticized each other. Their roles in this intellectual duet were different. “Francis was the brain and I was the feeling,” says Watson.

Beginning in 1952, building on early research by Chargaff, Wilkins, and Franklin, Crick and Watson decided to try to determine chemical structure DNA.

Recalling the attitude of the vast majority of biologists of those days to DNA, Watson wrote: “After Avery’s experiments, it seemed that DNA was the main genetic material. So finding out chemical structure DNA could be an important step towards understanding how genes are reproduced. But unlike proteins, there was very little chemical information that was precisely established about DNA. Few chemists had worked on it, and except for the fact that nucleic acids are very large molecules built from smaller building blocks called nucleotides, there was nothing known about their chemistry that a geneticist could grasp. Moreover, organic chemists who worked with DNA were almost never interested in genetics.”

American scientists have tried to bring together all the previously available information about DNA, both physicochemical and biological. As V.N. writes Soifer: “Watson and Crick analyzed the data from X-ray diffraction analysis of DNA and compared them with the results chemical research the ratio of nucleotides in DNA (Chargaff’s rules) and applied L. Pauling’s idea about the possibility of the existence of helical polymers, which he expressed in relation to proteins, to DNA. As a result, they were able to propose a hypothesis about the structure of DNA, according to which DNA was composed of two polynucleotide strands connected by hydrogen bonds and mutually twisted relative to each other. The Watson and Crick hypothesis so simply explained most of the mysteries about the functioning of DNA as a genetic matrix that it was literally immediately accepted by geneticists and was experimentally proven in a short time.”

Based on this, Watson and Crick proposed the following DNA model:

1. Two strands in the DNA structure are twisted around one another and form a right-handed helix.

2. Each chain is composed of regularly repeating residues phosphoric acid and deoxyribose sugars. Nitrogenous bases are attached to sugar residues (one for each sugar residue).

3. The chains are fixed relative to each other by hydrogen bonds connecting pairs of nitrogenous bases. As a result, it turns out that phosphorus and carbohydrate residues are located on the outside of the helix, and the bases are contained inside it. The bases are perpendicular to the axis of the chains.

4. There is a selection rule for pairing bases. A purine base can combine with a pyrimidine base, and, moreover, thymine can only combine with adenine, and guanine with cytosine...

5. You can swap: a) the participants of this pair; b) any pair to another pair, and this will not lead to a violation of the structure, although decisively will affect its biological activity.

“Our structure,” wrote Watson and Crick, “thus consists of two chains, each complementary to the other.”

In February 1953, Crick and Watson reported the structure of DNA. A month later, they created a three-dimensional model of the DNA molecule, made from beads, pieces of cardboard and wire.

Watson wrote about the discovery to his boss Delbrück, who wrote to Niels Bohr: “Amazing things are happening in biology. I think Jim Watson has made a discovery comparable to what Rutherford made in 1911." It is worth recalling that in 1911 Rutherford discovered the atomic nucleus.

The model allowed other researchers to clearly visualize DNA replication. The two chains of the molecule separate at points hydrogen bonds like opening a zipper, after which a new one is synthesized on each half of the old DNA molecule. The sequence of bases acts as a template, or template, for a new molecule.

The DNA structure proposed by Watson and Crick perfectly satisfied the main criterion, the fulfillment of which was necessary for a molecule claiming to be a repository of hereditary information. “The backbone of our model is highly ordered, and base pair sequence is the only property that can mediate the transmission of genetic information,” they wrote.

Crick and Watson completed the DNA model in 1953, and nine years later, together with Wilkins, they received the 1962 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine "for their discoveries concerning molecular structure nucleic acids and their implications for the transmission of information in living systems.” Maurice Wilkins - His experiments with X-ray diffraction helped establish the double-stranded structure of DNA. Rosalind Franklin (1920–58), whose contribution to the discovery of the structure of DNA was considered by many to be very significant, was not awarded the Nobel Prize because she did not live to see that time.

Having summarized data on physical and chemical properties DNA and after analyzing the results of M. Wilkins and R. Franklin on the scattering of X-rays on DNA crystals, J. Watson and F. Crick in 1953 built a model of the three-dimensional structure of this molecule. The principle of complementarity of chains in a double-stranded molecule that they proposed was of utmost importance. J. Watson has a hypothesis about a semi-conservative mechanism of DNA replication. In 1958-1959 J. Watson and A. Tissier conducted studies of bacterial ribosomes that became classic. The scientist’s work on studying the structure of viruses is also known. In 1989-1992 J. Watson headed the international scientific program "Human Genome".

Watson and Crick discovered the structure of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), a substance that contains all hereditary information.

By the fifties, it was known that DNA is a large molecule that consists of thousands of small molecules of four different types connected to each other in a line - nucleotides. Scientists also knew that it was DNA that was responsible for storing and inheriting genetic information, similar to text written in a four-letter alphabet. The spatial structure of this molecule and the mechanisms by which DNA is inherited from cell to cell and from organism to organism remained unknown.

In 1948, Linus Pauling discovered the spatial structure of other macromolecules—proteins—and created a model of the structure called the “alpha helix.”

Pauling also believed that DNA is a helix, moreover, consisting of three strands. However, he could not explain either the nature of such a structure or the mechanisms of DNA self-duplication for transmission to daughter cells.

The discovery of the double-stranded structure occurred after Maurice Wilkins secretly showed Watson and Crick an X-ray of a DNA molecule taken by his collaborator Rosalind Franklin. In this image, they clearly recognized the signs of a spiral and headed to the laboratory to check everything on a three-dimensional model.

In the laboratory, it turned out that the workshop had not supplied the metal plates necessary for the stereo model, and Watson cut out four types of nucleotide models from cardboard - guanine (G), cytosine (C), thymine (T) and adenine (A) - and began to lay them out on the table . And then he discovered that adenine combines with thymine, and guanine with cytosine according to the “key-lock” principle. This is exactly how the two strands of the DNA helix are connected to each other, that is, opposite the thymine from one strand there will always be adenine from the other, and nothing else.

This arrangement made it possible to explain the mechanisms of DNA copying: two strands of the helix diverge, and to each of them an exact copy of its former “partner” in the helix is ​​added from nucleotides. Using the same principle as printing a positive from a negative in a photograph.

Although Franklin did not support the hypothesis of the helical structure of DNA, it was her photographs that played a decisive role in the discovery of Watson and Crick. Rosalind did not live to see the prize that Wilkins, Watson and Crick received.

It is obvious that the discovery of the spatial structure of DNA revolutionized the world of science and entailed whole line new discoveries, without which it is impossible to imagine not only modern science, but also modern life generally

In the sixties of the last century, Watson and Crick's assumption about the mechanism of DNA replication (doubling) was completely confirmed. In addition, it was shown that a special protein, DNA polymerase, takes part in this process.

Around the same time, another thing was done important discovery – genetic code. As mentioned above, DNA contains information about everything that is inherited, including linear structure every protein in the body. Proteins, like DNA, are long molecular chains of amino acids. There are 20 of these amino acids. Accordingly, it was unclear how the “language” of DNA, consisting of a four-letter alphabet, is translated into the “language” of proteins, where 20 “letters” are used.

It turned out that the combination of three DNA nucleotides clearly corresponds to one of the 20 amino acids. And thus, what is “written” on DNA is unambiguously translated into protein.

In the seventies two more appeared the most important methods, based on the discovery of Watson and Crick. This is sequencing and obtaining recombinant DNA. Sequencing allows you to “read” the sequence of nucleotides in DNA. It is on this method that the entire Human Genome program is based.

Obtaining recombinant DNA is otherwise called molecular cloning. The essence of this method is that a fragment containing a specific gene is inserted into a DNA molecule. In this way, for example, bacteria are obtained that contain the gene for human insulin. Insulin obtained in this way is called recombinant. All “genetically modified products” are created using the same method.

Paradoxically, reproductive cloning, which everyone is talking about now, appeared before the structure of DNA was discovered. It is clear that now scientists conducting such experiments are actively using the results of the discovery of Watson and Crick. But, initially, the method was not based on it.

The next important step in science was the development of the polymerase chain reaction in the eighties. This technology is used to quickly “reproduce” the desired DNA fragment and has already found many applications in science, medicine and technology. In medicine, PCR is used to quickly and accurately diagnose viral diseases. If the DNA mass obtained from the patient's analysis, even in minimum quantity If there are genes brought by the virus, then using PCR you can achieve their “reproduction” and then easily identify them.

A.V. Engström of the Karolinska Institutet said at the prize ceremony: “The discovery of the spatial molecular structure ... DNA is extremely important because it outlines the possibility of understanding in great detail the general and individual characteristics of all living things.” Engström noted that “unraveling the double helix structure of deoxyribonucleic acid with its specific pairing of nitrogenous bases opens up fantastic possibilities for unraveling the details of the control and transmission of genetic information.”



James Watson is one of the most smart people in the world. Already from the very early childhood His parents noticed his abilities, which predicted a bright future for the child. However, we learn from our article about how James pursued his dream and what obstacles he overcame on the path to fame.

Childhood, youth

James Dewey Watson was born on April 6, 1928 in Chicago. He grew up in love and joy. As soon as the boy sat down at the school desk, the teachers were already talking about how little James was smart beyond his years.

After graduating from the 3rd grade of high school, he went to the radio to take part in intellectual quiz for children. The boy demonstrated simply amazing abilities. After some time, James was invited to study at the four-year University of Chicago. There he shows a genuine interest in ornithology. Having received a bachelor's degree in science, James goes to continue his studies at Indiana University Bloomington.

Interest in science

While studying at the university, James Watson became seriously interested in genetics. The famous geneticist Hermann J. Möller, as well as bacteriologist Salvador Lauria, drew attention to his abilities. Scientists invite him to work together. After some time, James wrote a dissertation on the topic “The influence of X-rays on the spread of viruses that infect bacteria (bacteriophages).” Thanks to this, the young scientist receives a Doctor of Philosophy degree.

After this, James Watson continues his research on bacteriophages at the University of Copenhagen, in distant Denmark. Within the walls of the institution he studies the properties of DNA. However, the scientist quickly gets bored with all this. He wants to study not just the properties of bacteriophages, but the very structure of the DNA molecule, which geneticists are so zealously studying.

Advances in science

In May 1951, at a symposium in Italy (Naples), James met with the English scientist Maurice Wilkins. As it turns out, he and his colleague, Rosalyn Franklin, are conducting a DNA analysis. Scientists' studies have shown that the cell is a double spiral, which resembles a spiral staircase.

After this data, James Watson decides to carry out chemical analysis nucleic acids. Having received a research grant, he began working with physicist Francis Crick. Already in 1953, scientists reported on the structure of DNA, and a year later they created an enlarged model of the molecule.

After the research was made public, Crick and Watson parted ways. James is appointed to the position of senior member of the biology department at California State University. Institute of Technology. After some time, Watson is offered a job as a professor (1961).

Prizes and awards

James Watson and received the Nobel Prize in Medicine or Physiology. This was an award “For discovery in the field of the molecular structure of nucleic acids.”

Since 1969, James Watson's theory has been tested by all geneticists in the world. In the same year, the scientist took the position of director of the laboratory molecular biology in Long Island. It should be noted that he refuses to work there. Watson has devoted many years to studying neurobiology, the role of DNA and viruses in the development of cancer.

By the way, Watson was awarded the Albert Lasker Award (1971), the Presidential Medal of Freedom (1977), and the John D. Carty Medal. It's worth saying that James is a member National Academy Sciences, American Society of Biochemists, American Cancer Society, Danish Academy of Arts and Sciences, American Philosophical Society, Harvard University Council.

Personal life

In 1968, Watson married Elizabeth Levy. A girl in the laboratory where James himself once worked. The couple had two sons in their marriage.

There were active rumors that James's daughter was Emma Watson. And by the way, he fell into the category of the scientist’s children allegedly born out of wedlock. Although, most likely, this is not true.

James Watson on race

Watson argued that people with black skin have more low level intelligence, in contrast to a person with white skin. For this theory, the famous microbiologist Watson wanted to be put on trial. It should be noted that this is not the first time that the scientist allowed himself to express such an opinion. He used to say exactly the same thing about women.

Such statements generated a lot of discussions around, similar to those that the book by Watson and Murray generated in the 90s. In it, scientists examined the differences between the intelligences of different races. This work was then called an apology for scientific racism.

It is difficult to say whether the famous scientist will be punished. On this moment It is known that the American Commission on Racial Equality noted that this unpleasant incident will not be ignored.

By the way, Watson probably lost his position as director of the Long Island laboratory precisely because of this statement.

Accusing a scientist of political incorrectness

James Watson is known for his provocative and scandalous statements. For example, a scientist, despite everything, believes that foolish people are sick, and that 10% of them need urgent treatment.

Another statement concerns female beauty. Watson is confident that it is with the help genetic engineering You can make all women truly attractive and charming.

In the same context, he spoke about people with gay. James maintains to this day that if it were possible to create a gene responsible for sexual orientation, he would immediately begin to study and correct it.

After such dislike for homosexuals and other non-traditional cultures, Watson was subject to condemnation from not only representatives of these cultures, but also from the authorities.

His judgment about overweight people also came into focus. Watson claims that he would never hire a “fat person” because he considers him intellectually undeveloped.

Well, everyone has their own opinion! And we will watch further research and statements by a famous scientist.

At the end of June - beginning of July by invitation Russian Academy Sciences and with the support of the Dynasty Foundation, an outstanding biologist visited Moscow, Nobel laureate James Watson, one of the discoverers of the structure of DNA. His visit was dedicated to the 55th anniversary of this discovery and the 80th anniversary of the scientist himself.

During his few days in Moscow, James Watson gave two lectures - a lecture for scientists and students “Can DNA show us how to cure cancer in our lifetime?” at the Institute of Molecular Biology of the Russian Academy of Sciences and public lecture“DNA and the brain. In Search of Genes for Mental Diseases" in the House of Scientists, visited the Zvenigorod Biological Station of Moscow State University, and then Moscow University itself, where he was awarded a commemorative medal and a diploma of an honorary professor of Moscow State University, and, of course, gave countless interview. On behalf of “Elements” questions were asked to the legendary scientist Elena Naimark And Alexander Markov.

- Last year you published an autobiographical book “Avoid boring people”. It describes the story of your life from childhood. What would you like to draw the attention of Russian readers to, because we hope that the book will be translated into Russian.

I really began the description of my life from the very early years and further led him until I was forty-eight years old, when I left teaching in Harvard University and became director of the Cold Spring Harbor Institute, and continued through the years of directorship. I spent my childhood in Chicago, surrounded by books that were highly respected in my family. My parents diligently encouraged my love of reading and sent me to university early. They taught evolution at the University of Chicago, so I got a real education and got into science very early, when I was only 20 years old. And at the age of 24 I had already graduated from university.

It so happened for me that the structure of DNA was discovered in 1953, although it could well have been discovered in 1952, the discovery waited a little for me. But if I had entered university at the right age, the discovery would have gone to someone else. So my advice is to get an education as early as possible, at the age of 20 we are already ready for independent decisions. In general, the tips that I wrote in my book have been tested by me personally, and I don’t know how suitable they are for other people. But it seems that these tips do not correspond one hundred percent to people's ideas about how they should behave. True, if I had always behaved in accordance with these ideas, I am afraid that I would not have achieved such success.

- Your education at the University of Chicago was based on evolutionary teaching. It is sometimes suggested that human evolution has stopped and natural selection no longer has power over our body and mind.

I don't think that's entirely true. Along the way, new genetic variations arise all the time. But this can only really be noticed if you read the genetic sequences of parents and their children. Then it becomes clear what changes have appeared. But there are no such studies yet. Some friends of mine in Houston, Texas, who had been working on my personal genetic sequence, suggested that they research the genetic sequences of my two sons and my wife. But the cost of the project is too high - this is the main reason why we do not do this. Although the cost of reading a genetic sequence is now rapidly decreasing.

- But they have already deciphered your genome?

Deciphered. But we don’t know if there are changes there, and what kind of changes they are, there’s nothing to compare with. Each newborn appears to have 200–500 newborns in genes that are absent in the parents. Most of them are located in those regions of the genome that do not have of great importance. Only 5% of the genome is responsible for anything important. So the child has about 25 changes that will somehow affect his life. Some changes have a slight effect, some have a strong effect. It is a new area of ​​research to understand how new genetic variations arise.

There is a simple method, which was developed, including by employees of the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, which allows you to determine the number of copies of various parts of the genome. That is, the entire DNA sequence is not considered, but only the number of copies of one specific DNA fragment is counted, and this number is compared with the library standard. Sometimes three copies are found instead of two, or five instead of two, or one is found instead of two, and sometimes there are no copies at all. In that the latter case it can be assumed that this DNA fragment is not needed at all. If there are many copies, then perhaps we are dealing with an important section of DNA.

This work has been going on for 4 years now, and progress is obvious. Previously, cytologists worked with chromosomes and, recording major changes - duplication or loss of a piece of chromosome - associated them mainly with diseases. For example, a change in the 22nd chromosome is known, which affects a region of 15 genes at once. Now we can move on to recording smaller changes, the disappearance or appearance of one gene. It is clear that these small changes can lead to important events in organism.

We can evaluate not only the quality, but also the quantity of changes. Approximately half of the mutations in the body are due to an increase or decrease in the number of copies of DNA fragments, and half are due to point changes in bases in the nucleotide sequence. The estimates came from analysis of bacterial sequences. We are trying to associate changes in the number of gene copies with various diseases.

- What other methods are there for studying the course of human evolution?

You can also analyze genetic changes in different parts planets, among different peoples. We detect some variations equally often everywhere, while others in one place or another have an increased frequency or do not occur at all. Similar studies are united by the large international project HapMap and are associated with the analysis of so-called SNP markers (single nucleotide polymorphism, replacement of one nucleotide with another in the nucleotide sequence). The Chinese and Japanese, for example, may have one frequency of occurrence of a particular nucleotide substitution, that is, a SNP marker, while Africans may have a different frequency.

Hypothetically, such a difference indicates evolution that occurs from the moment of geographical separation of one part of the population from another. Adaptation to certain conditions varies greatly among residents in different parts of the planet. Maybe the inhabitants of the north have some kind of genetic modifications that allow them to survive in a cold climate? We do not know. For example, when I find myself in the tropics, I can’t function normally, but local residents They cope quite well. Why is that? Maybe it has to do with genetics, or maybe it has to do with cultural traditions.

It seems that a lot has been done by American left-wing scientists erroneous statements that human evolution has stopped. Now the opinion on this issue has changed. I can tell an Irish girl from a Scottish girl by her face. But these populations separated no more than 500 years ago. Isn't this evidence of ongoing evolution? It is possible that selection acts not only on morphology, but also on character traits. Under communism, calmer individuals will survive. I believe, human nature is largely determined by genes.

- Is there a genetic component to thinking, behavior and emotions?

A study of identical twins provides some answer to this question. We know from experience that parents sometimes cannot control the development of their children's character. This does not mean that character traits are entirely dependent on genes, but it also does not mean that character traits are the result of upbringing and cultural traditions. A cheerful person or a gloomy one - what is it, genes or upbringing? We do not know. I want to emphasize - Bye we don't know. In the next 20 years, we will be able to read the genomes of cheerful people and gloomy people, compare these sequences and find the key difference. We might even be able to study the patterns of lifelong smokers who are still healthy. Maybe there is a genetic explanation for this too. But this, of course, is a matter of the future, when the cost of reading the genome will further decrease. So far in a year it has dropped from a million dollars to about a hundred thousand.

But for us, geneticists, studying people’s happiness is not yet relevant; we are still dealing with misfortunes. The causes of schizophrenia and autism are more serious and important for us.

We know that among us there are people with explosive temperaments. We call them “rambunctious heads.” So, is this trait the result of stress or genes? Hopefully this will become clear in the next 20 years. It is important for us that there is a fundamental possibility for this. Exactly the same question with schizophrenia - is it culture or genes? About 15 years ago, I argued with a left-wing colleague about whether schizophrenia was caused by genes or cultural pressure. He believed that in our capitalist society, schizophrenia is caused by stress. Society as a whole is determined to accept the concept of stress - that is, that schizophrenia is the result of stress and that if we improve the social environment, the incidence of schizophrenia will decrease. But modern science is already able to detect genetic changes in patients with schizophrenia.

I am, of course, not saying that the environment has no influence on the onset of schizophrenia. Stress is never welcome, but if the genetics are in order, then stress will not have a serious effect on the body. There is something specific about schizophrenia that makes some people exceptionally susceptible to any influence. That is, now there is every reason to talk about a genetic predisposition to schizophrenia.

The greatest attention of behavioral scientists is now given to the study of painful deviations. We know that schizophrenia causes mental decline. And now genes have been found whose damage negatively affects the intellectual level. Intellectual level determined using various tests. There is nothing surprising in the connection between genetic damage and decreased mental abilities: a damaged gene causes a disruption in the functioning of nerve synapses, the work neural network gets confused, resulting in dullness. It's really very serious problem: We have drugs that bring a person out of psychosis, but there are no drugs that increase mental abilities. This is one of the reasons why severe forms of schizophrenia are not treated in any way.

- Please tell us about the most interesting and important achievements your Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory.

I will talk about what interests me personally. This applies to the problem of cancer. Just as in the study of mental illness, DNA sequence analysis is used to study cancer. Developed for studying cancer cells special techniques. On modern stage we can only be amazed at how complex a cancer cell is, how many genetic tumors it contains.

Moreover, as the disease progresses, these neoplasms constantly change. If there is a cancerous tumor, then one side of it may be completely different from the other. Therefore, a prescribed medicine may work on one part of the tumor, but may not work on another. For this reason, treatment is not always effective. Of course, this was known before, but now we can look at detailed changes in the functioning of the genetic apparatus.

- Biological science is developing at an unprecedented rate and has achieved remarkable success. But despite this, the confrontation between science and society is intensifying. For example, many people deny evolution, although a colossal number of facts, including from the field of genetics, speak of its reality.

Yes, evolution is an undeniable fact. But most people are unable to understand the facts. And one should not expect people to cast aside their religiosity and vote for science. People don't understand science, it's too complicated. A person needs answers to why certain things happen. But in the religious consciousness such answers exist. We are brought up in a religious tradition, God is sometimes on our side, sometimes against us, we pray to him, and this specifically changes our perception. But if your child has cancer, then if you do not accept science and medicine, prayers will not help.

In general, the problem of the conflict between science and society is that science is becoming more and more complex, and it is becoming more and more difficult to understand it. Even scientists can't cope. And the brain, as it was, remains so. However, a society that denies evolution will cease to develop, and will even be thrown back. The Catholic Church does not deny evolution, although it costs it a lot of trouble. After all Catholic Church holds medical schools, and whether you like it or not, you can’t do without evolution. Those who deny evolution, for example religious gurus, have nothing to do with medicine and generally distance themselves from areas related to knowledge. If they dealt with knowledge, they would have to... well, die to continue denying evolution.

In this regard, there are concerns about whether America can remain a great and powerful country if many people in the country are uneducated. Look at Sweden, everyone there is educated, but in the States there is a minority of educated people.

- But in China, most people do not reject evolution, although there are many uneducated people there.

Indeed, this is so, but the Chinese are not held back by religious prohibitions regarding evolution. In general, we cannot live outside of cultural traditions. I consider myself a non-believing Christian. In the sense that my upbringing is based on Christian culture. I always openly declare that I do not believe in God, but when I die, they will bury me in the church, because I respect my culture and traditions.

The culture of Russia has been associated with the Orthodox tradition for many hundreds of years. How many beautiful churches have been built and works of art created. I have visited many churches and cathedrals in Moscow, including the newly rebuilt Cathedral of Christ the Savior - they are magnificent, and I am very glad that I can join Russian history, even though I am not a believer. There is no point in abandoning your own history. The communists, I remember, tried to do this. And what? Nothing good came of it.

In addition, the church is traditionally the place where morality is discussed. And if you destroy churches, then where do you learn morality, where do you find out where good and evil are? However, not only religious figures, but also scientists should join the discussion of where is good and where is evil. My scientific colleagues and friends are all non-believers, but they do not want to speak out on the topic of what is good and what is bad, simply for fear of hurting someone's religious feelings. It is believed that scientists do not respect traditions. But that's not true. I have approximately the same values ​​as religious people, they just come from a different source. We all try to help the unfortunate, not just those whom Jesus commanded to be merciful. Therefore, I do not want to fight with the church.

My friend Francis Crick, he was an irreconcilable fighter against the church. And no one listened to him. And he couldn’t convince anyone that you need to believe in DNA, and not in God, except, of course, those who didn’t believe in God anyway. I think it would be very naive on a rational level to try to turn people away from religion. This cannot happen in any country, in any religion - to make efforts in this direction would be great stupidity. But maybe our children will give up religion, we just need to give them this opportunity - make it a matter of free choice. In the United States, can a politician who wants to win an election declare that he does not believe in God? Of course not. But the situation is not the same everywhere: for example, in most countries Western Europe people trust facts more, and they would rather give Sunday to football than to church.

- Many people these days are afraid of scientists, they fear that they will invent, for example, some kind of killer virus or that genetically modified foods will have a bad effect on health. What to do with this, because technology cannot stand still?

This is all irrational fears. After all, humanity has been engaged in genetic modification since the very beginning of agricultural history, for 10 thousand years, and at the present stage we are only trying to speed up this process through targeted changes in DNA. And this technology works. China will be among the leading producers of GM products, Australia may also move to the forefront, because there is quite a strong Agriculture. Europe is somewhat poorer because it does not produce genetically modified products.

The situation in Russia cannot be called anything other than stupidity. Firstly, in Russia there was a powerful school of genetics and selection, founded at the beginning of the century by Vavilov. Then Lysenko completely destroyed it. But this was a school on genetic modification technologies. And a country where these technologies do not develop rolls back. Secondly, there is a problem with patents. The American company Monsanto wants to own all patents on GMOs. By offering Russia more equal cooperation in this area, they would benefit more. It is clear that no one wants to be under the control of foreign companies.

Another reason for the opposition to GMOs is the green movement. Moreover, many participants in the movement do not get to the bottom of the truth; they prefer to be content with dogmas, sometimes of a communist nature. Many supporters of the left wing (and not necessarily the left) speak under the slogans of defense environment from industrial pressure. But these people do not protect nature so much as they dislike business as such. Therefore, you need to understand that in the case of calls against GMOs we're talking about about left-wing ideology.

I started to feel downright bad about this policy when it started opposing DNA research. It was believed that if you are truly leftist, then you cannot support GM technologies and GM products and DNA research in general, because this is a capitalist business, and capitalist business is to blame for all the world’s misfortunes.

However, I don't think that business and GMOs are such a big disaster. Diseases are a misfortune. But what can we do, man is a contradictory creature, we are both kind and selfish. Our brain is extremely complex, this is the reason for imperfection human life. Therefore, we should not expect that our life will ever become ideal.

- A few words about ethical issues faced modern biology. For example, some people oppose the use of animals in experiments. What is your opinion?

For me, my wife is more important than my dog. So it's just a matter of choice. If we ban experiments with animals, the development of medicine will stop. You can't do without experiments. People tend to forget that in nature someone always eats someone, there are predators and prey, and people in former times survived thanks to hunting. This is how nature works, the death of one means the survival of another. Some, however, believe that the life of a dog is more important than the life of a person. For me, let them think as they wish, it is important that they do not refuse to take medications if necessary. Dedicating your life to dogs may not be a bad thing, no one claims that dogs are bad, on the contrary, they are very nice, but at some point you just have to make a meaningful choice.

In my opinion, the main problem is that people have stopped viewing themselves as a product of evolution. Darwin made a great discovery; his theory, without exaggeration, turned the world upside down. We consider the existence of one animal in relation to others; all animals have some degree of common origin. And in the Darwinian worldview there is not much room left for God. Some people, I know, manage to combine these two categories, but I don’t understand how they do it. The scheme is simple: a change in DNA improves or worsens the organism; if it worsens, it will be supplanted; if it improves, then it is likely to spread. But again, accepting this scheme does not mean denying morality. And here it is important that attention is directed more to the person than to the animal.

- Is there any share of politics in the ethical problems of biology?

Don't think. Here, however, purely human preferences are more manifested. Some people adore animals, others are indifferent to them. Or maybe my wife is obsessed with babies... ( in a whisper) but they are not interesting to me. ( Everyone laughs.) Does this mean that I bad person or good? This is not the criterion by which we will evaluate a person. Many men are not interested in small children, that's the nature of men, and I don't feel guilty about not paying attention to newborns.

- This is a very honest statement.

In general, I believe that honesty is useful to this world, it makes the world work more efficiently .

James Watson is a pioneer of molecular biology who, along with Francis Crick and Maurice Wilkins, is considered the discoverer of the DNA double helix. In 1962, they received the Nobel Prize in Medicine for their work.

James Watson: biography

Born in Chicago, USA, April 6, 1928. He attended Horace Mann School and then South Shore High School. At the age of 15 he entered the University of Chicago pilot program scholarships for gifted children. An interest in bird life led James Watson to study biology, and in 1947 he was awarded a Bachelor of Science degree in zoology. After reading Erwin Schrödinger's landmark book What is Life? he switched to genetics.

After being rejected by Caltech and Harvard, James Watson won a scholarship to graduate school at Indiana University. In 1950 for work on the impact x-ray radiation for the reproduction of bacteriophage viruses, he was awarded a doctorate in zoology. From Indiana, Watson moved to Copenhagen and continued studying viruses as a fellow at the National Research Council.

Unravel DNA!

After visiting the New York laboratory at Cold Spring Harbor, where he reviewed the results of Hershey and Chase's research, Watson became convinced that DNA was the molecule responsible for transmitting genetic information. He became fascinated by the idea that if he understood its structure, he could figure out how data was transferred between cells. Virus research no longer interested him as much as this new direction.

In the spring of 1951, at a conference in Naples, he met Maurice Wilkins. The latter demonstrated the results of the first attempts to use X-ray diffraction to image a DNA molecule. Watson, excited by Wilkins' data, arrived in Britain in the autumn. He got a job at the Cavendish Laboratory, where he began collaborating with Francis Crick.

First attempts

In an attempt to unravel molecular structure DNA James Watson and Francis Crick decided to use a model-based approach. Both were convinced that the solution to its structure would play a key role in understanding the transfer of genetic information from parent to daughter cells. Biologists realized that the discovery of the structure of DNA would be a major scientific breakthrough. At the same time, they were aware of the existence of competitors among other scientists, such as Linus Pauling.

Crick and James Watson modeled DNA with great difficulty. None of them had chemical education so they used standard chemistry textbooks to cut out cardboard configurations chemical bonds. A visiting graduate student noted that, according to new data not in the books, one of his cardboard chemical bonds was used in reverse direction. Around the same time, Watson attended a lecture by Rosalind Franklin at nearby King's College. Apparently he wasn't listening very carefully.

Unforgivable mistake

As a result of the error, scientists' first attempt to build a DNA model failed. James Watson and Francis Crick constructed a triple helix with nitrogen bases on outside structures. When they presented the model to their colleagues, Rosalind Franklin harshly criticized it. The results of her research clearly demonstrated the existence of two forms of DNA. The wetter one matched the one Watson and Crick were trying to build, but they created a DNA model without the water present. Franklin noted that if her work were interpreted correctly, the nitrogen bases would be located inside the molecule. Feeling embarrassed by such a public failure, the director of the Cavendish Laboratory recommended that the researchers abandon their approach. Scientists officially moved on to other areas, but privately continued to think about the DNA problem.

Spy discovery

Wilkins, who worked at King's College with Franklin, was with her in personal conflict. Rosalind was so unhappy that she decided to move her research elsewhere. It is not clear how, but Wilkins obtained one of her best X-ray images of a DNA molecule. She might even have given it to him herself when she was cleaning out her office. But it is certain that he took the image out of the laboratory without Franklin's permission and showed it to his friend Watson in Cavendish. Subsequently, in his book “The Double Helix,” he wrote that the moment he saw the photograph, his jaw dropped and his pulse quickened. Everything was incredibly simpler than the A-form obtained earlier. Moreover, the black cross of reflections that dominated the photo could only have arisen from a spiral structure.

Nobel Prize Laureate

Biologists used new data to create a double-stranded helix model with nitrogenous bases in pairs A-T and C-G in the center. This pairing immediately suggested to Crick that one side of the molecule could serve as a template for precisely repeating DNA sequences to carry genetic information during cell division. This second, successful model was presented in February 1951. In April 1953, they published their findings in the journal Nature. The article caused a sensation. Watson and Crick discovered that DNA has the shape of a double helix, or “spiral staircase.” Two chains in it were disconnected, like a “lightning”, and reproduced the missing parts. Thus, each deoxyribonucleic acid molecule is capable of creating two identical copies.

The abbreviation DNA and the elegant double helix model became known throughout the world. Watson and Crick also became famous. Their discovery revolutionized the study of biology and genetics, making possible the genetic engineering techniques used in modern biotechnology.

The Nature paper led to the Nobel Prize being awarded to them and Wilkins in 1962. Swedish Academy rules allow no more than three scientists to be awarded. Rosalind Franklin died of ovarian cancer in 1958. Wilkins mentioned her in passing.

The year he received the Nobel Prize, Watson married Elizabeth Lewis. They had two sons: Rufus and Duncan.

Continued work

James Watson continued to work with many other scientists throughout the 1950s. His genius was his ability to coordinate work different people and combine their results for new conclusions. In 1952, he used a rotating X-ray anode to demonstrate the helical structure of the tobacco mosaic virus. From 1953 to 1955 Watson collaborated with scientists at the California Institute of Technology to model the structure of RNA. From 1955 to 1956 he again worked with Crick to discover the principles of the structure of viruses. In 1956 he moved to Harvard, where he researched RNA and protein synthesis.

Scandalous chronicle

In 1968, a controversial book about DNA was published, authored by James Watson. "The Double Helix" was full of derogatory comments and vindictive descriptions of many of the people involved in the discovery, especially Rosalind Franklin. Because of this, Harvard Press refused to publish the book. Nevertheless, the work was published and had big success. In a later edition, Watson apologized for his treatment of Franklin, saying that he was unaware of the pressures she faced as a female researcher in the 1950s. He received the greatest profit from the publication of two textbooks - “Molecular Biology of the Gene” (1965) and “Molecular Biology of the Cell and Recombinant DNA” (updated edition 2002), which are still out of print. In 2007, he published his autobiography, Avoid boring people. Life lessons in science."

James Watson: contributions to science

In 1968, he became director of the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory. At the time, the institute was experiencing financial difficulties, but Watson was very successful in finding donors. The institution he headed has become a world leader in the level of work in the field of molecular biology. Its employees uncovered the nature of cancer and discovered its genes for the first time. More than 4,000 scientists from around the world come to Cold Spring Harbor each year, such is the profound influence of the Institute for International Genetic Research.

In 1990, Watson was appointed director of the National Institutes of Health's Human Genome Project. He used his fundraising abilities to lead this project until 1992. He left due to a conflict over patenting genetic information. James Watson believed that this would only hinder the research of scientists working on the project.

Controversial statements

His stay at Cold Harbor ended abruptly. On October 14, 2007, on the way to a conference in London, he was asked about world events. James Watson, a world-renowned scientist, responded that he was gloomy about Africa's prospects. According to him, all modern social policy is based on the fact that the intelligence of its inhabitants is the same as that of others, but test results indicate that this is not so. He continued his thought with the idea that progress in Africa was hampered by poor genetic material. Public outcry against this remark forced Cold Spring Harbor to ask for his resignation. The scientist later apologized and retracted his remarks, saying that “there is no scientific basis for this.” In his farewell speech, he expressed his vision that " final victory(over cancer and mental illness) is within our reach."

Despite these failures, geneticist James Watson continues to make controversial claims today. In September 2013, at a meeting on brain science at the Allen Institute in Seattle, he again made a controversial statement about his belief that an increase in the diagnosis of hereditary diseases may be associated with later childbearing. “The older you get, the more likely you are to have defective genes,” Watson said, also suggesting that genetic material should be collected from people under 15 years of age for future conception through in vitro fertilization. In his opinion, this would reduce the chances that parents' lives would be ruined by the birth of a child with physical or mental disabilities.

James Dewey Watson (born April 6, 1928, Chicago, Illinois) is an American biologist. Winner of the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1962 - jointly with Francis Crick and Maurice H. F. Wilkins for the discovery of the structure of the DNA molecule.

Since childhood, thanks to his father, James was fascinated by observations of the life of birds. At the age of 12, Watson participated in Quiz Kids, a popular radio quiz show for intelligent young people. Thanks to the liberal policies of University of Chicago President Robert Hutchins, he entered the university at the age of 15. After reading Erwin Schrödinger's book What Is Life According to Physics?, Watson changed his professional interests from studying ornithology to studying genetics. In 1947, he received a bachelor's degree in zoology from the University of Chicago.
In 1951 he entered the Cavendish Laboratory at the University of Cambridge, where he studied the structure of proteins. There he met the physicist Francis Crick, who was interested in biology.

In 1952, Watson and Crick began working on modeling the structure of DNA. Using Chargaff's Rules and the X-ray photographs of Rosalind Franklin and Maurice Wilkins, a double-helical model was constructed. The results of the work were published on May 30, 1953 in the journal Nature. For 25 years he directed the Cold Spring Harbor Scientific Institute, where he conducted research into cancer genetics. From 1989 to 1992 - organizer and leader of the Human Genome project to decipher the sequence human DNA, at the same time heads secret project"Faust".
In 2007, he spoke out in favor of the fact that representatives of different races have different intellectual abilities, which is genetically determined. Due to the violation of political correctness, a public apology was demanded from him, and in October 2007, Watson officially resigned as head of the laboratory where he worked. At the same time, he continues to lead research in the same laboratory.

According to the Independent, DNA testing of James Watson himself has revealed high concentration African and, to a lesser extent, Asian genes. It was later suggested that the genome analysis contained significant errors.
Currently working on finding genes for mental illness.