THE STUDY OF ENVIRONMEN'^' 



WILDER D. BANCROFT 

 (Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y.) 



It may be asked why a chemist should speak on such a subject 

 as this, One reason is that it is really a chemical problem, and the 

 biological chemist can, or should, handle it better than the straight 

 biologist. Another reason is that the biologists and naturalists 

 know too many facts and are swamped by them. A hypothesis 

 has no chance of developing into a theory because it will be crushed 

 at once by an overwhelming mass of apparent contradictions. Con- 

 sequently the biologist is forced, in self-defense, to go on collecting 

 more facts and burying himself deeper. The chemist does not 

 know as many facts as he should; but he knows the Theorem of 

 Le Chatelier, that a System tends to change so as to minimize an 

 external disturbance.^ Knowing this is a universal law, he has a 

 definite basis from which to Start. Of course the chemist may mis- 

 apply the law and he may, in his ignorance, overlook disturbing 

 factors which ought to be taken into account; but a poor working 

 hypothesis is better than none, and a good one is invaluable. 



The first question that the chemist asks himself is whether the 

 study of the effect of environment has been carried on in a satis- 

 factory way, and my object is to call your attention to the way in 

 which I think that one should study the effect of environment, and 

 also to the reasons why I think so. 



When studying the effect of environment, we should distinguish 

 sharply between : the direct effect of external conditions involving 

 no adaptation; the adaptation of an organism, during its lifetime, 

 to new external conditions; and the possible inheritance of adapta- 

 tions. In most cases the biologist has not kept these things sepa- 

 rate. A few illustrations will make clear what I mean. We will 

 begin with the effect of external conditions where there is no adapta- 

 tion. A blow with an axe may cut off a brauch. In this case we 

 get the direct result and no adaptation. If we deprive a man of 



^Abstract of an address delivered at a meeting of the Columbia University 

 Biochemical Association, in Rumford Hall of the New York Chemists' Club, 

 March 15, 1912. 



' Bancroft : Jour. Am. Chem. Soc, 33, 91 (1911). 



382 



