Evolution of the Genie Material 487 



cules for which we have known chemical models and, in addition, 

 actually see the result in the known chromosomal patterns. Thus the 

 classic theory of the gene seems to lead into a blind alley in regard 

 to the possibihties of explaining evolution. 



Though these difficulties have been realized occasionally by 

 others (e.g., Mather, 1953fl), I am aware of only one proposal that 

 was intended to overcome them within the classical theory of the 

 gene. Weir (1953) notes that there is a lack of correlation between 

 chromatin content of the nucleus and complexity of the species, which 

 is the same point given in our former ( 1940 ) and present discussions. 

 Thus evolutionary progress apparently does not depend on an increase 

 in gene number. Hence the question arises, How can an organism 

 acquire new functions without an increase in gene number? Ordinary 

 mutation and recombination do not create new variations, and there 

 is no knowledge of an essential gene mutating to new functions. For 

 these and other reasons, a species is faced with the problem either 

 of acquiring additional gene loci, which are not restricted from the 

 standpoint of their immediate usefulness, or of sparing existing genes 

 from their essential roles. According to Weir, "neutral genes" bridge 

 this gap. The action of such "neutral genes" is not necessary, because, 

 for example, their products are already supplied from outside (hke 

 vitamins contributed by food). A neutral gene is a spare gene, avail- 

 able as potential material for future evolution. Genes for bristle 

 pattern are mentioned as examples of such "frivolous" genes, which 

 can be present because the yeast supplies important gene products in 

 the food. Neutral genes, then, can acquire new essential functions, 

 perhaps working in a completely new reaction chain. 



I am unable to see that these ideas help us to understand the 

 origin of new genes within the classic concept of the gene (with the 

 addition of the one gene — one action idea). The neutral genes in this 

 concept play the same role as the duplicated genes in the one dis- 

 cussed before, and we still do not know why a gene, contrary to all 

 knowledge, starts doing something quite new. 



All these diflBculties disappear when we accept the theory of the 

 genie material which dispenses with the corpuscular gene and re- 

 places it by the hierarchy of organizational (molecular) patterns in 

 the chromosome. If small changes of pattern underlie the origin of the 

 typical mutations, any degree of repatterning of the chromosomal 

 material on the level of any of the segments of the hierarchy is 

 possible, leading to different grades of change of the hierarchical 

 pattern, which may increase in complication in numerous different 



