Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30868431›Full record

ArticleTheory in biosciences = Theorie in den Biowissenschaften2019

Russian editions of E. Haeckel's works and the evolution of their perception.

Eduard I Kolchinsky

Abstract readHistorical ArticlePortrait
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Theory in biosciences = Theorie in den Biowissenschaften, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Eduard I KolchinskySaint Petersburg Branch of the Institute for the History of Science and Technology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Universitetskaia nab. 5, St. Petersburg, Russia, 199037. ekolchinsky@yandex.ru.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The article aims to clarify the dynamics of the publication of E. Haeckel's works in Russia, and the evolution of their perception by the authorities, various social groups and scientists in a rapidly changing sociocultural context and in relation to the various stages of the evolutionary synthesis. It is shown that his works were reprinted nearly 50 times. Until the beginning of twentieth century, the translations of his works to some extent reflected the evolution of Haeckel's interests. His scientific ideas and concepts freely spread in the Russian-speaking world and predetermined phylogenetic studies. They define many specific features of the evolutionary synthesis in the Russian-speaking world. At the same time, Russian translations of Haeckel's philosophical and paradigmatic works, many of which were used by radicals in their ideological and political struggle and in anti-religious propaganda, were banned by the tsarist authorities and criticized by conservatives. After the 1917 revolution, numerous attempts were made in Russia to use Haeckel's monism for the dialectization of natural science, to defend the principle of inheritance of acquired characteristics and to substantiate Lysenkoism. Nevertheless, his works in Russian have not been published and have never been a subject of any serious historical or scientific research for almost 80 years.

Indexed as

LanguageAnimalsBiological EvolutionDevelopmental BiologyHistory, 19th CenturyHistory, 20th CenturyHumansPhylogenyRussiaCensorshipHaeckelLysenkoismMonismPhylogeny

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.