 |
| Top page > Greeting from the Director |
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
Keiko Nakamura has been studying the relationship between biological sciences and society for over 25 years.
Biohistory,” a term coined by Nakamura, refers to the creation of a comprehensive intellect based upon biology and new perspectives on the relationship between science and society.
|
|
In Quest of Universality -Discovery of Genes in Natural Science
The natural science born in the17th century introduced a strong quest for universality in natural history. This movement, which developed mainly in physics starting with Newton, began to affect biology in the 19th century. Three discoveries were largely responsible for this development in biology. One was the cell theory, which was derived from microscopic observations: it revealed that every living organism is composed of cells, and that cells are not only the units of structure, but also of function, in the organism. The second was the theory of evolution: symbolized by Darwin's “Origin of Species,” which considered every organism on earth, despite astonishing variety, as descending from common ancestors. The third factor was Mendel's theory of heredity, proposing the existence of elements, afterward referred to as “genes.”
In the 20th century, by the application of techniques from chemistry and physics, various substances essential for life were identified and their functions clarified. Following the discovery of enzymes (proteins), it was found that the entity of genes was DNA, which has a beautiful double helical structure. Molecular biology made astonishing progress, revealing that all organisms use DNA as genes. The transmission of genetic information from parent to offspring was explained as DNA replication. Vital processes in the body were explained as functions of proteins which were synthesized under instructions from DNA. The pursuit of universality in living organisms proceeded steadily. |
Pursuit of Diversity Again -From Genes to Genomes
In the 1960s, many researchers believed that study of genes via DNA analyses would reveal every living phenomenon and allow us to understand what life is, as embodied by the saying “If you understand Escherichia coli, you will understand elephant.”
I enjoyed molecular biology research during this time, but in the 1970s, I switched my field to that of considering the relationship between life sciences and society. I was quite fascinated by DNA research, but at the same time, I was troubled by the problem of its separation from daily life. The emergence of recombinant DNA technology made even clearer the issues to be considered. The development of this technique made it possible to study multicellular organisms. many “gwonders of living organisms” were beginning to be clarified in rapid succession, such as how cells communicate with each other to form an individual, or how the immune system is able to process such a diverse range of foreign substances. How fascinating! This was the honest feeling among researchers. The outside world of non-specialists, however, considered recombinant DNA technology as a “God-challenging technique, manipulating life.” The usefulness of the technique was recognized in the form of biotechnology, but the public was unaware that many marvelous discoveries concerning “living creatures” were being made in biology by means of this technique, due to lack of communication. Society in general, regarded scientists as those who do not see living creatures as living creatures, but rather, reduce them into more inanimate objects such as genes. It was indeed true that, due to the fascination with DNA, actual living organisms were disappearing from the minds and laboratories of many researchers. I, however, felt that one should know what life is. Therefore I searched for a way to unite the interests of researchers with those of laymen, who, I believed, both have a love for living things and curiosity to understand life.
The situation in research gradually changed during the early 80s due to new discoveries clarifying many life processes. This change can be summarized in short by saying that the interest in diversity returned. It became possible to examine complex vital processes such as immunity, development and the workings of the nervous system. As a result, we can ask such questions as to what extent, for example, the fly and mouse are identical to each other and in what ways they differ from one another. At the same time, it became clear that life cannot be reduced to genes. Therefore genetic determinism and reductionism began to disappear from the minds of molecular biologists.
These new movements gave me a hint as to how to solve the problems of DNA research and build a new relationship between research and society. I realized that the “genome” could have a great potential to unite universality diversity. |
Pursuit of Diversity Again -From Genes to Genomes
In the 1960s, many researchers believed that study of genes via DNA analyses would reveal every living phenomenon and allow us to understand what life is, as embodied by the saying “If you understand Escherichia coli, you will understand elephant.”
I enjoyed molecular biology research during this time, but in the 1970s, I switched my field to that of considering the relationship between life sciences and society. I was quite fascinated by DNA research, but at the same time, I was troubled by the problem of its separation from daily life. The emergence of recombinant DNA technology made even clearer the issues to be considered. The development of this technique made it possible to study multicellular organisms. many “gwonders of living organisms” were beginning to be clarified in rapid succession, such as how cells communicate with each other to form an individual, or how the immune system is able to process such a diverse range of foreign substances. How fascinating! This was the honest feeling among researchers. The outside world of non-specialists, however, considered recombinant DNA technology as a “God-challenging technique, manipulating life.” The usefulness of the technique was recognized in the form of biotechnology, but the public was unaware that many marvelous discoveries concerning “living creatures” were being made in biology by means of this technique, due to lack of communication. Society in general, regarded scientists as those who do not see living creatures as living creatures, but rather, reduce them into more inanimate objects such as genes. It was indeed true that, due to the fascination with DNA, actual living organisms were disappearing from the minds and laboratories of many researchers. I, however, felt that one should know what life is. Therefore I searched for a way to unite the interests of researchers with those of laymen, who, I believed, both have a love for living things and curiosity to understand life.
The situation in research gradually changed during the early 80s due to new discoveries clarifying many life processes. This change can be summarized in short by saying that the interest in diversity returned. It became possible to examine complex vital processes such as immunity, development and the workings of the nervous system. As a result, we can ask such questions as to what extent, for example, the fly and mouse are identical to each other and in what ways they differ from one another. At the same time, it became clear that life cannot be reduced to genes. Therefore genetic determinism and reductionism began to disappear from the minds of molecular biologists.
These new movements gave me a hint as to how to solve the problems of DNA research and build a new relationship between research and society. I realized that the “genome” could have a great potential to unite universality diversity. |
Bringing Science to Everyday Life by Bringing Universality and Diversity
The genome is “DNA in its entirety present in the nucleus of a cell” and contains all the genetic information needed to form an individual. Each human cell contains a human genome and each mouse cell a mouse genome. When I noticed these multiple aspects of genome, the thought occurred to me that it could be a powerful tool to understand life. First, “genome” has the face of universality because its DNA constituent is present in every living thing, and at the same time, it has the face of diversity because it differs from organism to organism. Second, genome can symbolize life from the levels of molecules, cells, individuals and species. The genome is made up of DNA molecules and the information contained in the genome can form cells and individuals. Moreover, genome symbolizes species.
Using the genome, we can regain a close watch on living creatures which were forgotten during the early years of DNA research. To promote research in this direction, it is necessary to clarify what the “genome” is. The genome of a given living organism is passed from its parent or parents (in the case of asexual reproduction, the genome of the parent is passed intact, and in the case of sexual reproduction, each parent contributes one half of its genome). When traced back in this manner, the origins of the genomes of all living organisms should lead back to the origin of life. When genomes are analyzed, we can reveal, for example, how humans became human and how Escherichia coli became Escherichia coli. Moreover, both similarity and difference between humans and Escherichia coli will be found. In this way, we will be able to see the history of life and the relationship of all living creatures on the earth.
There are two ways by which one can examine the history of life and the relationships of living creatures through genome analysis. One is to elucidate the process of evolution and the other is to examine the process of development. To examine the history of living organisms (evolution) and the process of forming individuals (development) is to see living organisms in their entirety and to pay attention to their diversity. At the same time, it places great significance on the concept of “time,” which has largely been neglected in science that was based on reductionism and determinism. We named this field of research into the history of organisms,“biohistory.” Although biohistory relies on modern biological techniques such as DNA analysis, it is not restricted to “science” in a narrow sense. In biohistory, we emphasize broad aspects of biology, such as the art contained within it. One can find many interesting “stories” of life in biology. To reconstruct these fascinating stories using research results is one of the most important activities of biohistory. Fortunately, in the front ranks of biological research, investigation into the function of genes in developmental processes (including apoptosis), cell division, signaling, etc. is becoming popular. As such studies continue to advance and to reveal the involvement of genome activity in more phenomena of life, we will get closer to elucidation of the magnificent history of all living creatures. |
What We Will Learn from Biohistory
Almost eight years have passed since we started the field of biohistory (the Biohistory Research Hall was opened in 1993). During this time, many biologists have demonstrated their support and cooperation. Strong interest was shown by specialists in other fields of science and the arts, and by the general public. Many stated “I am thinking the same thing.” Biohistory is a comprehensive approach to the questions of life, such as what we are and why such diversity exists among living creatures. The constant support we have received has given us the confidence to continue pursuing the young field of biohistory.
In the society of the future, the understanding of “gwhat is life” will become more important than ever. To ensure quality of life, we must solve many problems concerning environment, population, food, medicine, and education, among others. Finding solutions will require a solid understanding of the meaning of “life.”
One the basis of the results of science which originated from the dualism of Descartes and has been strictly observing the basic principles of objectivity, logic, universality, analysis and reduction, biohistory attempts to establish a way of thought that comprehends “life.” in its entirety. We hope that biohistory will take root and contribute to the formation of the future society.
From our experiences over these past four years at the Biohistory Research Hall, we are convinced that biohistory has the potential to unite science and humanities, involving both academic and lay persons. |
|
|
 |
| Keiko Nakamura is Deputy Director General of the Biohistory Research Hall (1993-2001). She graduated from the University of Tokyo and obtained her Ph.D. in molecular biology. In 1971, she became Chief of the Laboratory for Social Life Science and in 1981, became Director of the Department of Natural and Social Environmental Science at the Mitsubishi-Kasei Institute of Life Sciences. She became a professor at the School of Human Science, Waseda University in 1989. She was a visiting professor at the Center for the Advanced Research in Science and Technology of the University of Tokyo (1995-96), and now is at Osaka University (1996-). She is the author of many books and also well-known for her translations of such important books as the Double Helix and Molecular Biology of the Cell into Japanese. |
|
| |
 Keiko Nakamura with the drawing “Biohistory,”in which the history and diversity of life on earth are illustrated. It is an attempt to show a phylogenetic tree in an artistic way. (Original idea by Keiko Nakamura with consultation of Marina Dan, Osaka City University. Drawing by Ritsuko Hashimoto.)
(Photo:Yoshiki Geka) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director General 
