Gregor Mendel
Pea Plants, Inheritance, and Thirty-Five Years of Being Ignored
- 10 chapters
- 20m
- Biology & Evolution
- Free · no sign-up
Mendel's paper went largely unnoticed for thirty-five years until three botanists—de Vries, Correns, and Tschermak—rediscovered his findings in 1900. Modern genetic analysis has since confirmed which specific genes control the traits Mendel observed in his pea plants. The book explores both the early reception of his work and the ongoing scientific debate about whether his statistical results were too perfect for their time.
This detailed examination covers Mendel's early life, academic career, experimental methods, and the complex legacy of his discoveries. Readers will discover how Mendel's meticulous garden experiments laid the foundation for modern genetics, even though he was largely ignored during his own lifetime. Anyone interested in the history of biology or genetic inheritance will find this account essential reading.
Listen
-
Read this chapter
Gregor Mendel was born in 1822 in Heinzendorf bei Odrau, in the Austrian Empire—now Hynčice, Czech Republic—to Anton and Rosine Mendel. He had an older sister, Veronika, and a younger sister, Theresia. His family owned a farm that had been in the Mendel line for at least 130 years, and Mendel himself worked as a gardener and studied beekeeping as a boy. He attended gymnasium in Troppau, but had to take four months off due to illness. From 1840 to 1843, he studied philosophy and physics at the Philosophical Institute of the University of Olomouc, again taking time off for health reasons. Financial struggles made his education difficult, so Theresia gave him her dowry. Later, he supported her three sons, two of whom became doctors.
Johann Mendel was born to a family of struggling farmers, and he became a monk partly to gain an education without the financial burden of paying for it himself. In his own words, the monastic life spared him the "perpetual anxiety about a means of livelihood." When he joined the Order of Saint Augustine, he took the name Gregor, which is "Řehoř" in Czech. This decision set the stage for his later scientific work, even though he was not yet known as the man who would revolutionize our understanding of heredity.
-
Read this chapter
Mendel began studies at the Faculty of Philosophy under Johann Karl Nestler, whose research focused on hereditary traits in plants and animals, especially sheep. With recommendation from physics teacher Friedrich Franz, he joined the Augustinian St Thomas's Abbey in Brno to train as a Catholic priest. He worked as substitute high school teacher, failing oral certification exams in 1850 and 1856. Abbot Cyril František Napp sponsored him to study at the University of Vienna, where Christian Doppler was his physics professor. Mendel returned to the abbey in 1853 as a physics teacher. In 1854, he met Aleksander Zawadzki, who encouraged his research in Brno. A group tour to Paris and London in summer 1862, where he visited the International Exhibition and scientific sites, may have shaped his later hybridisation work. In 1867, he succeeded Napp as abbot of the monastery.
After becoming abbot in 1868, Mendel’s scientific work came to an end as he was pulled into administrative duties, especially a battle with civil authorities over taxes on religious groups. He died on January 6, 1884, in Brno at age sixty-one. Czech composer Leoš Janáček played the organ at his funeral. The next abbot burned much of Mendel’s papers to settle tax disputes. In 2021, when his body was exhumed, it was revealed that he stood 168 centimeters tall, and genetic testing showed he was prone to heart problems.
-
Read this chapter
Mendel, known as the "father of modern genetics," began his groundbreaking work in the experimental garden of his monastery, a space of 2 hectares or about 4.9 acres. There, he studied how plants vary and inherit traits. He was assisted in his experimental design by Aleksander Zawadzki, but his superior abbot Napp wrote to discourage him. Napp reportedly said that the Bishop giggled when told about the detailed genealogies Mendel was creating for his pea plants.
After starting with early work on pea plants, Mendel chose to study seven specific traits that appeared to be passed down separately: seed shape, flower color, seed coat tint, pod shape, unripe pod color, flower location, and plant height. He began by focusing on seed shape, which was either angular or round. From 1856 to 1863, he grew and tested about 28,000 plants, mostly pea plants. His results showed that when true-breeding varieties were crossed—like tall plants fertilized by short ones—in the second generation, one in four plants had purebred recessive traits, two out of four were hybrids, and one out of four were purebred dominant. These findings led him to form two general rules: the Law of Segregation and the Law of Independent Assortment, later known as Mendel’s Laws of Inheritance.
-
Read this chapter
Mendel delivered his paper Versuche über Pflanzenhybriden ("Experiments on Plant Hybridization") at two meetings of the Natural History Society of Brno in Moravia, first on 8 February and again on 8 March 1865. Though a few local newspapers reported favorably on it, the broader scientific world paid no attention. The work was later published in 1866 in Verhandlungen des naturforschenden Vereines in Brünn, where it was understood mainly as a study of hybridization, not inheritance. It had little influence and was cited only about three times during the following thirty-five years. At the time, it faced criticism, yet today it’s recognized as a foundational text. Charles Darwin never read Mendel’s paper, though if he had, genetics might have developed much sooner. This story illustrates how original thinkers often go unnoticed until much later.
-
Read this chapter
About forty scientists heard Mendel give his two important lectures, but they seem to have missed what his work really meant. He also wrote to Carl Nägeli, one of the top biologists of his time, but Nägeli didn’t get it either. At times, Mendel must have wondered if anyone would ever understand him. Still, he held on to hope: “My time will come,” he reportedly told a friend, Gustav von Niessl.
While Mendel worked with pea plants, most biologists believed that traits from parents blended together in offspring, as if mixing paint. This idea, called blending inheritance, explained many traits we see today, though now we know those are often shaped by multiple genes working together. Charles Darwin attempted to describe how traits pass down through a theory he called pangenesis, but it didn’t fully explain what was happening. It wasn’t until the early 1900s that scientists began to understand just how important Mendel’s discoveries really were.
By 1900, researchers looking for an explanation of inheritance that didn’t rely on blending were independently reproducing Mendel’s results. Hugo de Vries and Carl Correns reached the same conclusions as Mendel, and both credited him with being first. It is thought that de Vries did not fully realize what he had discovered until after reading Mendel’s writings. Erich von Tschermak was originally given credit for rediscovery, but this is no longer accepted because he failed to grasp Mendel’s laws. Though de Vries eventually lost interest in Mendelism, other scientists began using these findings to develop the foundation of modern genetics. Each of the three men, from different countries, published their work within two months during the spring of 1900.
Mendel's findings were quickly confirmed by other scientists, and the idea of genetic linkage soon followed. Biologists embraced the theory even though it didn't yet explain everything. It offered a new genotypic view of heredity, which many felt was missing from earlier work that focused on observable traits. One major group, led by Karl Pearson and W. F. R. Weldon, studied variation using statistics—this was called the biometric school. William Bateson, who helped spread Mendel's ideas, was among the strongest critics of this approach. He coined the term "genetics" and pushed for a better biological understanding. This created a heated debate in the early 1900s between the biometricians, who emphasized math and stats, and the Mendelians, who believed their model explained biology more clearly. Later research showed that Mendelian inheritance is truly a biological process, even if not all of Mendel's genes are fully understood yet.
The fusion of Mendelian genetics and Darwin’s theory of natural selection began taking shape as early as 1918, thanks to the work of R. A. Fisher. It wasn’t until the following decades, in the 1930s and 1940s, that this combination fully took hold. This merging of ideas gave rise to what we now call the modern synthesis of evolutionary biology.
In two countries where scientific freedom was tightly controlled, Mendelian genetics was pushed aside in favor of a different theory called Lamarckism. This shift happened under a government policy known as Lysenkoism. As a result, scientists who supported Mendel’s work faced harsh consequences—imprisonment and even death. The rejection of proper genetic science contributed to widespread hunger and famine in those regions.
-
Read this chapter
Mendel believed seven "factors" controlled the traits he observed in pea plants, factors we now call genes. For over a century, scientists searched to identify these genes, and the final three were only pinpointed in 2025. The wrinkled seed shape comes from an insertion in the PsSBE1 gene; yellow seeds result from a mutation or insertion in PsSGR. White flowers stem from a deletion in PsbHLH, while the dwarf trait is caused by PsGA3ox1. Pod color is determined by PsChlG, and pod shape by PsCLE41, which leads to constricted or inflated results. The flower position—terminal or axial—is controlled by PsCIK2/3.
-
Read this chapter
Mendel also turned his attention to hawkweed, a group of plants that fascinated scientists of his time due to their variety. He published his findings, but the results differed sharply from what he'd seen with peas. The first generation was highly variable, and many offspring closely resembled the maternal parent. In letters to Carl Nägeli, Mendel shared his observations but couldn’t explain what he’d found. It wouldn’t be understood until late in the nineteenth century that many hawkweed species reproduce asexually, creating most of their seeds without sexual fusion.
Mendel kept bees at the monastery, breeding them in specially designed hives. His work with bees didn’t leave behind any detailed results, except for a brief note in the reports of the Moravian Apiculture Society. The only thing known for certain is that he used Cyprian and Carniolan bees, which were notably aggressive. Their behavior annoyed other monks and visitors so much that they were asked to get rid of them. Mendel, however, was fond of his bees and called them "my dearest little animals."
After Mendel died, his colleagues recalled that he had bred mice, crossing different-sized varieties, though Mendel himself left no record of such work. A story grew up that he switched to plant studies only after Napp declared it inappropriate for a celibate priest to observe rodent mating closely. In a 2022 biography, Daniel Fairbanks pointed out that Napp couldn’t have made such a comment, since Napp was the one who oversaw sheep breeding on the monastery’s large agricultural estate.
Mendel didn’t just work with pea plants—he also turned his attention to the skies and weather. In 1865, he helped found the Austrian Meteorological Society. Most of his published writings were about meteorology, showing how deeply he engaged with understanding the atmosphere and climate patterns of his time.
-
Read this chapter
In 1936, Ronald Fisher, a well-known statistician and population geneticist, took a close look at Mendel's experiments and reanalyzed the results from the F2 generation. He found that the ratios of dominant to recessive traits in the pea plants were suspiciously close to the expected 3 to 1 ratio. Fisher was shocked by what he saw, saying the data were "abominable," "shocking," and "cooked." He claimed that "the data of most, if not all, of the experiments have been falsified to agree closely with Mendel's expectations."
Some scientists have pointed out that Mendel’s results are suspiciously close to what we'd expect from chance alone. A. W. F. Edwards notes: “One can applaud the lucky gambler; but when he is lucky again tomorrow, and the next day, and the following day, one is entitled to become a little suspicious.” This skepticism is shared by others who say Mendel’s data are too perfect to be entirely reliable. Three additional lines of evidence support the idea that his results may not be as random as they appear.
Fisher's analysis led to what's called the Mendelian paradox: Mendel's results seem statistically too perfect to be real, yet everything we know about him points to someone who wouldn’t have deliberately cheated or unknowingly skewed his data. Several scholars have tried to solve this puzzle.
One attempted explanation for the unusual results involves confirmation bias. R.A. Fisher criticized Mendel's work, saying his experiments were "biased strongly in the direction of agreement with expectation [...] to give the theory the benefit of the doubt." In 2004, J.W. Porteous wrote that Mendel’s observations were indeed implausible. Another possible explanation, based on tetrad pollen, was proposed, but when the experiments were repeated, no evidence showed that the tetrad-pollen model accounted for any of the bias.
Another way to think about the Mendelian paradox suggests that a scientist might feel torn between telling the truth as observed and advancing knowledge in a way that avoids pushback. Mendel may have felt pressured “to simplify his data to meet real, or feared editorial objections.” This could be seen as morally justified if it helped science move forward. Like many lesser-known innovators of his time, Mendel, coming from a working-class background, had to break through the biases of his audience. If omitting or adjusting some of his findings made his work more acceptable and thus more likely to be heard, such actions might be defended on moral grounds.
In 2008, Daniel L. Hartl and Daniel J. Fairbanks, along with Allan Franklin and AWF Edwards, published a comprehensive book concluding there was no basis to claim Mendel had fabricated his results or that Fisher deliberately tried to undermine his legacy. They rejected Fisher’s statistical argument outright, suggesting instead that Mendel likely scored more than ten progeny and that his results aligned with expectations. They stated: “Fisher's allegation of deliberate falsification can finally be put to rest, because on closer analysis it has proved to be unsupported by convincing evidence.” Their reassessment also disproved the idea of confirmation bias in Mendel’s work.
-
Read this chapter
Overview
Mendelian inheritance, sometimes called Mendelism, follows principles first laid out by Gregor Mendel in 1865 and 1866. His work went largely unnoticed until it was rediscovered in 1900 by Hugo de Vries and Carl Correns, then promoted by William Bateson. The theory focuses on how traits are inherited through individual genes. At first, Mendel’s ideas faced resistance. It wasn’t until 1915, when his work merged with the Boveri–Sutton chromosome theory of inheritance, that it became central to classical genetics. Later, Ronald Fisher combined these concepts with the theory of natural selection, helping to establish population genetics and the modern evolutionary synthesis.
History
Gregor Johann Mendel, a nineteenth-century Moravian monk, discovered the principles of inheritance after years of breeding pea plants in his monastery garden. Between 1856 and 1863, he worked with some 28,000 plants, leading to two generalizations that became known as Mendel’s Principles of Heredity. He shared his findings in a paper titled Versuche über Pflanzen-Hybriden (Experiments on Plant Hybridization), presented to the Brünn Natural History Society in 1865 and published the following year. For decades, his work went largely unnoticed, even though it wasn’t completely unknown. It was “rediscovered” in 1900 by Hugo de Vries, Carl Correns, and Erich von Tschermak, though debate continues over how much each truly understood. William Bateson later championed Mendelism, coining terms like “genetics” and “allele,” while Thomas Hunt Morgan helped integrate it with the chromosome theory of inheritance, cementing Mendel’s legacy in science.
Punnett squares
Punnett squares are a genetics tool created by Reginald Punnett, an English geneticist, used to show all possible genotypes offspring might inherit from their parents. Each parent contributes one of two alleles, shown along the top and side of the square. The inner squares display how these alleles might combine. By using probabilities, you can figure out what genotypes parents can produce and how often. For example, when both parents are heterozygous, there's a 50% chance their child will also be heterozygous, and a 50% chance the child will be homozygous—split equally between dominant and recessive types.
-
Read this chapter
Overview
Evolution is how heritable traits in living things change over time through generations, driven by forces like natural selection and genetic drift. The idea was developed independently by Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace in the mid-19th century, with Darwin laying out his theory in On the Origin of Species. He explained that more offspring are produced than can survive, individuals vary in traits, some traits help survival and reproduction, and these traits are passed down. Later, in the early 20th century, evolution was merged with Mendelian inheritance and population genetics to form modern evolutionary theory, where DNA carries hereditary information. All life shares a last universal common ancestor from about 3.5 to 3.8 billion years ago, and the fossil record shows a progression from simple to complex organisms. Scientists continue studying evolution through observation, experimentation, and mathematical models, shaping not just biology but also agriculture, medicine, and computer science.
Heredity
Evolution occurs when heritable traits change in organisms over time. These traits, like eye color in humans, are passed down through DNA from parents to offspring. DNA consists of four types of bases arranged in specific sequences, much like letters forming sentences. Genes, sections of DNA controlling these traits, have locations called loci on chromosomes. When DNA at a locus differs between individuals, those variations are called alleles. Mutations create new alleles, sometimes changing trait appearance. While some traits depend on single genes, most are influenced by multiple genes working together. Observable traits—phenotypes—are shaped by genetic makeup and environmental factors. For example, a suntan isn't inherited, but ability to tan is controlled by genes. People with albinism lack this ability entirely due to their genotype. These heritable characteristics enable species to evolve across generations.
Sources of variation
Evolution happens when there’s genetic variation in a population, and that variation comes from mutations, sexual reproduction, and gene flow between groups. Even though new traits are constantly being introduced, most of a species’ genome stays the same across individuals. But small genetic differences can create big changes in how organisms look or function. An organism's traits result from both its genes and its environment. Evolution, according to the modern synthesis, is about changes in genetic variation over time—specifically, shifts in how common different versions of a gene become. When a new version of a gene spreads through a population, it can eventually replace the old one completely, which means that variation disappears.
Read
Free to download, keep and share. For general information only — not professional medical, legal or financial advice. Please consult a qualified professional.