- THIS ARTICLE
- Full Text
- Full Text (PDF)
- Alert me when this article is cited
- Alert me if a correction is posted
- SERVICES
- Email this article to a friend
- Related articles in Genetics
- Similar articles in this journal
- Similar articles in PubMed
- Alert me to new issues of the journal
- Download to citation manager
- Reprints & Permissions
- CITING ARTICLES
- Citing Articles via Google Scholar
- GOOGLE SCHOLAR
- Articles by Fairbanks, D. J.
- Articles by Schaalje, G. B.
- Search for Related Content
- PUBMED
- PubMed Citation
- Articles by Fairbanks, D. J.
- Articles by Schaalje, G. B.
Genetics, Vol. 177, 2531-2534, December 2007, Copyright © 2007
doi:10.1534/genetics.107.079970
The Tetrad-Pollen Model Fails to Explain the Bias in Mendel's Pea (Pisum sativum) Experiments
Daniel J. Fairbanks*,1 and
G. Bruce Schaalje
* Department of Plant and Wildlife Sciences and Department of Statistics, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah 84602
1 Corresponding author: Department of Plant and Wildlife Sciences, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602.
E-mail: daniel_fairbanks{at}byu.edu
For >40 years, geneticists and science historians have appealed to the tetrad-pollen model as an explanation of the bias toward expectation in Mendel's data, albeit without experimental support. Our experiments demonstrate that pollen sampling during self-pollination in pea conforms to the binomial distribution with no evidence of a tetrad-pollen effect.
Related articles in Genetics:
ISSUE HIGHLIGHTS
Genetics 2007 177: NP.
 |