| Title |
Muriel Wheldale Onslow and Early Biochemical Genetics
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of the History of Biology, July 2007
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10739-007-9134-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marsha L. Richmond |
| Abstract |
Muriel Whedale, a distinguished graduate of Newnham College, Cambridge, was a member of William Bateson's school of genetics at Cambridge University from 1903. Her investigation of flower color inheritance in snapdragons (Antirrhinum), a topic of particular interest to botanists, contributed to establishing Mendelism as a powerful new tool in studying heredity. Her understanding of the genetics of pigment formation led her to do cutting-edge work in biochemistry, culminating in the publication of her landmark work, The Anthocyanin Pigments of Plants (1916). In 1915, she joined Frederick Gowland Hopkin's Department of Biochemistry as assistant and in 1926 became one of the first women to be appointed university lecturer. In 1919 she married the biochemist Huia Onslow, with whom she collaborated until his death in 1922. This paper examines Whedale's work in genetics and especially focuses on the early linkage of Mendelian methodology with new techniques in biochemistry that eventually led to the founding of biochemical genetics. It highlights significant issues in the early history of women in genetics, including the critical role of mentors, funding opportunities, and career strategies. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 7 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Professor | 2 | 25% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 1 | 13% |
| Other | 1 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 13% |
| Other | 2 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 25% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 25% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 13% |
| Philosophy | 1 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 13% |
| Other | 1 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 June 2019.
All research outputs
#8,515,480
of 25,388,229 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the History of Biology
#192
of 508 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,370
of 78,148 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the History of Biology
#5
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,388,229 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 508 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 78,148 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.