GM FOOD IN INDIA: GREAT EXPECTATIONS?

Expectations were great towards a humble vegetable that was about to make a ‘secret entry’ to the food markets in India, amidst the well networked out-cry and campaigns from anti-GM protestors that make it an event watchful among the greenish think-tanks of the world. The much expected guest was a genetically engineered food crop, being the first, to be introduced into India- the much proclaimed Bt-brinjal. However with the Union Government's declaration on 10th of this month, everything subsided. It is not the first time that a genetically manipulated agricultural product grabs an attic highlight in the ardent public media in India, the nettles of Bt. Cotton are already there. But, what is more disturbing is that, Bt. Brinjal is a food crop, and once it is in the slanting panoplies of our nearby market, we can’t say which one is gene-pulled and which one is not. The Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Company-Mahyco which has developed this “magic-wand” for the farmers of India says that it is enough catering an equal stand up with conventional brinjal fruits. A labeling intending to distinguish the gene-modified was mandatory as per the consumerists.


GM- The Science
The ‘GM’ stands for ‘Genetically Modified’ and ‘GMO’ for the ‘genetically modified organism’,both coming from the biotech industry through the ingenious application of ‘GE’ which is ‘Genetic Engineering’. Thanks to Henry Harris and John Watkins of Oxford who found that viruses can fuse cells of different kinds into hybrid forms, in 1965, though not knowing that they were watching the prelude of a future revolution (Anonymous, 1989). When they tried to re-do this with dead and live viruses, they got ‘cellular hybrids’. And to be more surprisingly they found that the coalesceing cells need not be from single species, there can be interspecific hybrids also. Later, this technique became more perfected, in the sense that specific genes could be transferred. It occurred to scientists that even the evolutionary Fathoms could be crossed, passage of genes from bacteria to higher organisms being possible. Historically, we Indians can be proud that Har Gobind Ghorana dramatized the situation by creating the first artificial gene from different tethered genetic segments. He then introduced the new genetic make up into a bacterium called E. coli, showing that it is easy to produce multiple copies of a manipulated gene. In the early 90s, the genetic techniques became more ‘crazy’ than omnipotent, that Pam Dunsmuir and her colleagues at DNA Plant Technology Corporation, a biotech company in California, put a fish gene into a tomato! Though a fish was never ‘smuggled’ into a
vegetarians table top, it unleashed a possibility- the wizardry offered by the trans-gene technology. However, as the techniques stumbled out from the laboratories to industry, it lost its many faces. Since the intentions were purely profitdriven, they cared little for the environment,little for the humans and least for the harmony between. Thus the dark ages began in the field of GM-research which often muffled the truth or baffled the masses with mantled field trial reports.


Bacillus thuringiensis


Bacillus thuringiensis is a soilbacterium, the name of which is usually abbreviated as ‘Bt’. It is a gram-positive bacterium which was first identified in Japan by Ishiwata in 1901. The insecticidal activity of Bt was first discovered in 1911, by Ernst Berliner, a German scientist. In 2000, a team of microbiologists from University of Oslo proposed that Bascillus thuringiensis is closely related to two species of the genus Bacillus, such as Bacillus cereus and Bacillus anthracis. Bacillus cereus is the common cause of food poisoning and Bacillus anthracis is the causative organism of the fatal disease called Anthrax. The only difference between Btand the other two is that Bacillusanthracis and Bacillus creus are an extra ring of DNA called plasmid that produces a toxic protein called cryprotein. The gene that enables Bt toproduce the cry protein is called the crygene. The cry-proteins are toxic to insects belonging to the orders such as Lepidoptera (Moths and Butterflies),Coleoptera (Beetles) and Diptera (Flies and Mosquitoes).


The Wild and the Sown
The first genetically engineered whole food to reach the market was ‘Flavr-Savr’ transgenic tomato brought out by Calgene, an American company in 1994. Actually, the term‘transgenic’ would be a misnomer, as the plant contained no foreign gene, but a silenced gene for fruit-ripening. The Polygalactouranase Gene or the ‘PG’ as it is usually mentioned was in fact flipped by the researchers and put in the reverse order. This resulted in delayed ripening in the ‘Flavr-Savr’ tomatoes, making it a suitable commodity for distant delivery. As per Belinda Martineau, who wrote the book: “First Fruit: The Creation of the Flavr Savr Tomato and the Birth of Genetically Engineered Food”, the increased shelf-life made ‘Flavr-Savr’ to be sold out as hot
cakes(Martineu, 2001). There were even a waiting list of grocers wanting to stock the GMtomato.
Unfortunately, the Calgene had incorporated a ‘marker gene’ enabling easy identification of modified samples, in their laboratory and this was an antibiotic-resistant gene segment. The resistance conferred was for Kanamycin, a mild antibiotic, but it was proposed that there was a risk of new bacterial strains emerging which are resistant to other major antibiotics also. Since it raised an issue of future impact on public health, the ‘Food and Drug Administration’ (FDA) reconsidered the approval of Flavr Savr, eventually leading to the bankruptcy of Calgene. It is interesting to note that Calgene was literally absorbed by Monsanto, the biotech giant which is now licenced with Mahyco, on the release of Bt-Brinjal. The same Kanamycin-resistant gene is there as marker-tag in the Bt-Brinjal also.


Bt-Brinjal
It is the first genetically modified food crop to be cultivated in India, but don’t be confused that it is not the first genetically modified agricultural crop in varieties cultivated in Tamil Nadu and six varieties cultivated in Maharashtra. Since these 6 M-varieties will be subjected to specific pricing earlier, the farmers are believed to get them at competitive rates. The second controversial GM crop introduced was ‘Round up Ready Soybeans’ tactfully marketed by Monsanto among the soybean-growing belts of American states. It was counter-product intended to protect the market sustained by a weedicide by name ‘Roundup’, topped by one billion dollars in worldwide sales. Round up, discovered by the Monsanto chemist John Franz was patented by them in early seventies and was the most popular weed-killer in the world, ever since its inception. It was a broad spectrum herbicide but, leaving no discrimination over weeds and crop plants. Roundup’s action was through the blockage of the amino acid metabolism, affecting respiration and killing the plant within a week or two (Funke, et. al,2006). So, it caused great problem for the farmers though they didn’t complain, as there was no efficient alternative to it. Fearing a rival from other biotechs, Monsanto was eagerly researching to make Round up more specific but largely in vain. India, it is Bt-Cotton, which was permitted to be commercially cultivated in Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu in 2002. Both Bt-Cotton and Bt- Brinjal were introduced into India by the Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Company, popularly known as the Mahyco, the Indian arm of the American multinational, Monsanto. Bt-Brinjal is inserted, with a gene taken from the soil bacterium called Bacillus thuriengiensis,which is denoted by the singular - Bt. This gene is supposed to give resistance to the brinjal plant against the fruit and shoot-borer pests. Presently the gene has been incorporated into four conventional
the test results by hiring some research laboratories in US, such as the ‘Industrial Biotest Laboratories’ and the ‘Craven Labs (Schneider, 1983). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of the United State referred to the study reports of these private labs as “routine salsification of data” for which one of the companies was fined by 15.5 million dollars and its chairman, five years imprisonment.


The Bt Controversy
GM crops were in the central spot of discussion during the late ninetees, with a wide variety of ‘Bt-crops’ enviably spreading the world. ‘Bt’ refers to a bacterium Bacillusthuringiensis, from which a particular ‘cry-gene’ was incorporated into the crops. The gene could produce a protein which when ate by the insects could paralyse their digestive system and kill them. The protein can trigger a series of chemical changes only in the high-alkaline pH,customary to the insect midguts alone and sono possible threats to other animal life was anticipated (Betz et. al., 2000). Though the first Bt gene was reported to be cloned to bacteria in early eighties, the real ‘Bt-s’ in the form of Genetically Modified Crops appeared only in 1990s. (The first attempt was done by theBelgian company- Plant Genetic Systems which produced Bt-tobacco in 1985). Bt-com first went on sale in 1996, followed by the Bt-cotton which within a daring span of ten years spread to
281,500 km2 in the world. Bt-varieties were sold by Monsanto mainly, but also by Syngenta,
 Aventis, Mycogen and DuPont. Using the Environmental Impact Quotient-EIQ, it was shown that, over this ten year period, the use of insecticides was reduced by 24.4%. Another study showed that the insecticide use on corn It was then they thought about making the crops tolerant to Roundup and by the end of 1988 they succeeded in developing Roundup tolerant soybeans, primarily with the help of Ganesh Kishore an youngster working in Monsanto lab. The gene was from a familiar bacterium- Agrobacterium and a series of
Roundup Ready crops resulted - AlFalFa, Canola,Cotton, Corn, Lettuce, Potato, Strawberry, Sugarcane and Wheat apart from Roundup soybean. Following the same technology, they developed yet another series by name ‘Liberty’ which could tolerate another herbicide based on a compound called Glufosinate. Canola, Chicory, Corn, Cotton, Rice, Soybean, Sugar beet, Tomato and Wheat were modified to beGlufosinate-tolerant.
It was double benefit for Monsanto which derived dual profit from selling the weedicides much better than before and making the farmers bound to buy the tolerant varieties. Monsanto was claiming that, since theweedicides affect the metabolism of three amino acids specifically such as Phenylalanine, Tyrosine and Tryptophan - which are synthesized by plants alone, animals are spared from its deadly action. However, later research showed that the weedicide chemical can affect other plant enzymes and enzymatic pathways in animals. In 1996, Monsanto was accused of false advertising by presenting ‘Roundup’ as ‘biodegradable’ and leaving the soil unaffected after use. In January 2007, Monsanto was convicted of this crime and the environmental compaigners succeeded in making European Union to declare ‘Roundup’ to be classified under “dangerous for the environment”. On the other hand, Monsanto was trying to falsify and cotton during this ten year period was reduced by 35.6 million kilograms which is roughly equal to the amount of total insecticide usage in European Union, in an year. These initial years of Bt, however, was not free from protests. Within the same year of the introduction of Bt-corn, in May 1999, Nature magazine published a one-page letter from John Losey and two colleagues in the Entomology Department of Cornell University, stating that the pollen from Bt-corn could kill the larvae of the Monarch butterflies (Losey et. al., 1999). The letter was inflaming, creating wide media response across the world because Monarch butterflies are considered as the ‘Fluttering Pandas of the insect world”. Apart from their peculiar defense mechanism towards the bird, predators, they were considered a “national emblem” for undertaking a heroic migration,
each year, from Canada and the United Statesto a patch of forest in Mexico where they cluster in brilliant colours of orange and bright black. Losey’s letter led to a multiple of follow up studies and it was found that the risk comes when the Bt-corn pollen falls over a Milkweed leaf which is the natural food of the Monarch butterflies. Milkweed was a common weed among the corn fields and the hazard, pointed out by Losey was a damn possibility. So, it really mattered a question when “Friends of the Earth” asked: “If these deadly toxins that kill butterflies are introduced into your food, what effects these toxins would have in you and on your family?”. This was being answered by many instances, as the 2007. Greenpeace study which suggested the possibility of liver damage in rats fed with Bt-food. In 2008, an Australian study reported reduced fertility in mice fed on Bt-treated corn food. However, there is still a fraction in the scientific community which believes that these are overstatements of the cases concerned.


Another debate that received a rather sensationalized publicity on GM-food around the world was the ‘Starlink corn controversy’, StartLinkcom’ was a Bt-maize that was genetically engineered against the insect pest called European Corn Borer. It was patented by ‘Aventis Crop Sciences’, headquartered in France
and received the approval by US regulatory authorities in 1997- to be commercialized as an animal feed. It was modified with a Cry9C gene, producing a protein that was suspected to be a potential allergen (Chilutt & Tabahnik, 2004). The company wanted to popularize the brand as animal feed first, then upgrading as human food. However, the farmers who brought them to fields, were not properly informed about the forage grade of that crop and so they sold it along with normal corns to industrial firms, making corn flakes and other corn-based items of food. It is not clear whether the company wanted an “unintentional” human trial, but soon after ‘Washington Post’ reported the contamination of corn-food with Starlink corn, many complaints on allergic reactions were submitted before the ‘Centers of Disease Control’, in US. Meanwhile, the southern parts of the US had planted the greatest amount of StarLink corn and the company claimed that it had asked the farmers to plant a 660-foot “buffer strip” by another crop, other than corn to avoid genetic contamination. It was an argument to render the farmers as the soulculprits,but the State Attorneys of the 17 states representing the farmers argued it, favouring a negotiation of reimbursement to farmers.Aventis offered to purchase all the StarLink harvest, but there was a massive outcry again when the food-aid sent to Central African nations by the UN and US was found to contain the StarLink allergens. The nations involved refused to accept the aid also. Aventis Crop Sciences voluntarily cancelled the StarLink registration and the cancellation came to effect from 20th February, 2001.


Are they safe to eat?
On August 10, 1998, Arpad Pusztai, a protein scientist from Rowett Research Institute, Scotland, was interviewed on a popular British Television show by name - “World in Action”.In his 35 years at Rowett, Pusztai had studied ‘lectins’- a sugar-binding protein found in plants. Because of his expertise, he had been asked to test the safety of a potato variety, genetically engineered to produce ‘lectin’ as a pesticide. The lectin gene was taken from another plant, the snowdrop. In the television interview, Pusztai told the audience that while he fed the genetically modified potatoes to rats, they showed stunted growth and damage totheir immune system. He said that if he was given a GM-potato, he won’t eat it and stated that “it is very,very unfair to use our fellow citizens as guinea pigs”. The interview made headlines around the world and shortly after the broadcast, the Director of Rowett Institute, Philip James, received devoid of two phone calls. One was from Monsanto, the world’s largest producer of GM crops and the second from the office of Tony Blair, the then British Prime Minister. It is said that Bill Clinton, the then president of US telephoned Blair and Blair’s office ringed Philip James. The initial reaction of Rowett Institute was that it was not doing any research on 6 M-crops, and Pusztai was suspended from his job, his data was confiscated and all the experimental potatoes were destroyed. Pusztai was forbidden from talking to press and he was legally gagged, along with his wife and colleague, Susan Bardocz. And, Pusztai’s whole work was put under investigation by a committee, but it was bizarre that it was an Audit Committee! Irrespective of all these pressures, Pusztai published his findings along with another researcher, Stanley Ewen, in the journal ‘The Lancet,(Ewen & Pusztai, 1999). This paper still remains as an unquestionable evidence of the health hazards of GM-food.


Bt Coming to India
We can wonder that irrespective of these tarnished chronologies, Bt-technology got a whole hearted welcome to the farm fields in India. The Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Company got the permission from Department of Biotechnology, Government of India on 27th July, 1998, for Field trials of Bt-cotton in 25 locations in India and approval for a second set of trials at 15 locations was granted on 5th August, the same year. In May 2000, the company got permission from the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC), the supreme statutory body regarding GMOs in India, to plant Bt-cotton in 85 hectares and seed production in 150 hectares as part of large scale field trials. Approval for the commercial release of Bt-cotton was granted by the 32nd meeting of the GEAC, on 5th April 2002, resulting in Bt-cotton plantings in Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu (Zora, 2006). food. However, the farmers who brought them to fields, were not properly informed about the forage grade of that crop and so they sold it along with normal corns to industrial firms, making corn flakes and other corn-based items of food. It is not clear whether the company wanted an “unintentional” human trial, but soon after ‘Washington Post’ reported the contamination of corn-food with Starlink corn, many complaints on allergic reactions were submitted before the ‘Centers of Disease Control’, in US. Meanwhile, the southern parts of the US had planted the greatest amount of StarLink corn and the company claimed that it had asked the farmers to plant a 660-foot “buffer strip” by another crop, other than corn to avoid genetic contamination. It was an argument to render the farmers as the soulculprits, but the State Attorneys of the 17 states representing the farmers argued it, favouring a negotiation of reimbursement to farmers. During the harvestseason of 2003-04, an i n d e p e n d e n t initiative called ‘Deccan Development society’ undertookthe first ever performance study of Bt-cotton in three districts of Andhra Pradesh. They found
that the Bt-seeds costs 230% more than the non-Bt cotton seeds while the net profit from Bt-cotton was 9% less compared to the conventional farming practices. Mahyco and Monsanto had claimed 15 quintals (1500 kilos) yield per hectare, but it was found to be 4 quintals, in subsequent years also. A Cost-Benefit Analysis carried out by an NGO (Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology-RFSTE) found that the Bt-cotton farmers were incurring losses of Rs.6400/- per acre, on an average. Hence, it was so natural that the farmers in the Vidharbha region of Maharashtra preferred suicide to life at the rate of two to three per day, since June 2005. Though other reasons were cited later on, Vidharbha lingers in public consciousness as an icon of theunacceptable Face of GM technology.


GM Biosafety Regulation in India
India is among the first countries to formulate a legislation towards research, manufacture, release and use of genetically Modified Organisms. It is notified under the Environmental Protection Act of December 1989, issued by the Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India. The rules under the act order statutory clearances and safeguards through the following authorities, defined in section 4 of it.


1) Review Committee on Genetic Modification (RCGM) - considers applications asking for permission towards field-trials of genetically modified crops.


2) Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC) - assesses the field trials and decides
whether to commercialize the genetically modified crop.


3) Monitoring and Evaluation Committee (MEC) - monitors field trials, assesses the biosafety and evaluates the cropyield.


Apart from this, the Biotechnology Department has made a proposal for a National Biotechnology Regulatory Authority (NBRA) in 2008. Besides, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare has accepted the recommendation of the Indian Council of Medical Research, to amend Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules of 1955, asking for separately labeling the GM-food/crops in the market.


The Brinjal Story
Bt-Brinjal in India was cleared for field trials by Genetic Engineering Approval Committee(GEAC) in 2006. After field trails by the manufacturer of this GM-crops, original licencee Mahyco from Monsanto, filed the results before GEAC for formal approval, demanding commercial release. At that time, some environmental NGOs in the country asked for a copy of the field trail report submitted before the GEAC, through the “Right to Information Act”. GEAC, refused the request, arguing that companies are entitled to protect their intellectual property. The NGOs, however, went to court and in March 2008, the Delhi High Court ruled that GEAC should provide the details of Bt-Brinjal Fieldtrials to them. The NGOs sent the results to several scientists around the world and got back two responses. The first report was from an NGO in France - ‘Committee for Independent Research and Information on Genetic Engineering’, authored by Gilles-Eric Seralini, its biochemist, describing the serious health risks posed by Bt-Brinjal on man and other life-forms. The second response was from Judy Cormen, The Director of the ‘Institute of Health and Environmental Research’ another NGO, which found errors in Mahyco’s research methodology. In addition to these, research done by Indian NGO groups found that Bt-Brinjal could induce liver damage in goats, anemia in rabbits, increased blood glucose in chicken and liver-weight decrease in rats. In Mahyco’s research, the  longest period of toxicity test was 90 days and so the possibility of long term effects such as tumours and cancers were not considered. These findings, along with the Seralini and Carmen Reports were submitted to 6 EAC when hey met on January 14, 2009 to give the final nod to Bt-Brinjal to India. The decision was to suspend the release, enabling a sub-committee of GEAC to evaluate the reports. Now everything has come to an end, it seems. But, Union Minister for Environment and Forests, Mr. Jairam Ramesh has said that it was indeed a hasty decision. Still we dont know what will be the plight of GM Food in our country.

References


1. Anonymous (1989) - Special Issue, The New Harvest:Genetically Engineered Species, Science 244: 1275-1325.


2. Betz. F.S. et. al. (2000) - Safety and Advantages of Bacillus thruringiensis - protected plants to control insect pests,Regulatory Toxicol. & Pharmacol. 32:156-173.


3.Chilcutt, C.F and B.E. Tabahnik (2004) - Contamination of refuges by Bacillus thuringiensis toxin genes from ransgenic maize. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 98: 11937-11942.


4. Ewen, S.W. and A. Pusztai (1999) -Effects of diet ontaining genetically modified potatoes expressing alanthus nivalis lectin on rat small intestine, Lancet 354:1353-1354.


5. Funke, T. et. a.l (2006) - Molecular basis for the herbicide esistance of Roundup Ready Crops”, PNAS 103: 13010- 3015.


6. Losey, J.E. et al. (1999) - Transgenic Pollen Harms Mnarch Larvae. Nature 399:214


7. Martineau, B. (2001) - First Fruit: The Creation of the Favr-Savr Tomato and the Birth of the GeneticallyEngineered Food, McGraw-Hill, New York.


8. Schneider, K. (1983) - Faking it: The Case againstIndustrial Bio-Test Laboratories, The Amicus J. 14-26.


9. Zora, P. (2006) - Vidarbha Farmers in the Press - extractsfrom article. Shiva, Vandana (Dr.) (2006), “Farmers Suicide and the Vidarbha Package”-letter to the Prime Minister, BIJA, Monsoon 2006.

KEW GARDENS TURNS 250

MILLENNIUM BLOOMS AT KEW


It is summer time for the Britons, but for the Dandelions and Daffodils of Kew, it is not. The Royal Garden is turning 250 this year. With the fairies of the mid-summer still on veil, Kew is one of the best loved gardens in the world, from the time of imperial botany to the present. Beyond the stunning crocus carpet that catches the eye, there is an unique collection of plants from all over the world, relics of an Empire that never let the sun to set on its fleets. The land and its lush greenery has just remained the same, though the wild Cinerarias once used to poison-arrows now lie on the desks of the Jodrell Laboratory here. The science at Kew has long diverted from classical botany to cytogenetics and molecular biology. Seven million plant specimens form the permanent record in the Herbarium here, being the largest depository of botanical information and authentic reference for systematists world over. And ofcourse for amazement, the authority of the gardens hold a forensic section, advising the Sherlock Holmes from all over the world. Forensic horticulture is one among the most arcane activities of the Royal Garden. The library also will be the best in the world, with its archive of over 7,50,000 books and manuscripts on botanical literature. The fragrance of the Madagascar Jasmine is still there from the Arboretum- tree land of great variety. Even while you will be eager to find the Pharoah’s Palm, your techno-friend will be fascinated by the colossal frames of the Palmhouse built in 1840s, the first of its kind by wrought iron in the world. It is a perfect blend of the medieval and modern virtues with the school children coming for the Great Plant Hunt-Britain’s biggest School Science Project which invites kids to be a part in the exploration programmes. On the other edge, there is the Millennium Seed Bank Partnership that seeks international co-operation on conservation efforts for the endangered green-folks. With an ambitious team of 200 scientists from over 100 countries, this is not a gardner’s game, but an Armageddon against the upcoming adders of global environmental change.


Kew-the Beginning
Let’s leave Kew, for a while, both in time and place to the beginning decades of the 17th Century, the legendary era of English revolution in crop-improvement and agriculture. Here comes the man in armour, who has just returned from a punitive military expedition to the North African Barbary Coast to confront the Pirates. His name is John Tradescant, a naturalist and plant explorer, and the most influential political figures in the emerging British Empire. This is in 1620, that we are seeing him and he has carried something to furnish his grace, they are a few varieties of the Apricot! It was infact the part of an early strategy for systematically improving the crop and to analyse the natural wealth from the newly discovered/ conquered islands and places. Winning the favour of Lord Salisbury and Duke of Buckingham, Tradescant is known to exhort the British merchants: “procure all manner of curiosities abroad… all manner of beasts and fowells… seeds, plants, trees or shrubs…”1 Everybody was to collect something, any potentially useful specimens of plant or animal life. His follower, John Tradescant-the Younger also, introduced many American plants into the Europe, including the Magnolias, Bald Cypresses and Asters. However, as said by Tradescant himself, these explorations were reliant upon the whims of the high society rather than scientific or botanical. It was only in the eighteenth century that these collections were viewed in an utilitarian way, especially in the context of the reinvented Babylonian botanical concepts.
During the mid-eighteenth century, there was an explosion in the nurturing of botanical interest in the highest social circles of Europe. Dozens of crops were transplanted from one continent to another for a wide range of purposes and there was much intercourse between the various patrons of such breeding ventures. Such links helped the nourishment of the Anglo-French alliance, encouraged especially by Henrietta Maria, queen to Charles I and sister to the French King, Louis XIII. At first, the botanic gardens were of no commercial value and they remained only as the sites for seed multiplication or trial cultivation of crops from overseas. The systematic and state-sponsored botanical ventures were undertaken by the Dutch East India and West India Companies, for the first time in history, through the establishment of a series of formal botanic gardens in their tropical colonies. It also marked the beginning of the economic botany, not as a branch of science, but as a basis for a lucrative commercial opportunity. The promotion of applied plant-sciences soon became an integral part of the government policy in Netherland too. The Britain couldn’t wait anymore as botany and colonial power were getting into a nexus and earnestly in 1759, it initiated the beginning of the Royal Botanic Gardens at Kew.2


Evidently, the first botanic garden established in the United Kingdom was not Kew (It was the University of Oxford Botanic Garden, started in 1621) and there were many versions of the same site by the Hanoverian monarchs in the early 1720s and 40s. However, an enduring establishment culminating nearly to the present form was largely due to the efforts of Augusta, Princess of Wales and John Stuart, the 3rd Earl of Bute. Stuart was a student of Linnaeus, who had travelled to Leiden in Holland to study botany. By 1754 he based himself in a house on Kew that opened directly onto the garden itself, with an extensive botanical library that formed part of the house. Widely known as the finest botanist in England, it was John Stuart’s earnest desire to have garden which would contain “all the plants known on earth”. It was he who recommended William Chambers, the young energetic architect to princess Augusta, who had a new plan of design phases. Another key figure that shaped the Royal Garden was Joseph Banks who was the president of the Royal Society from 1788 to 1820. He was part of Captain James Cook’s First Circumnavigation Expedition during 1768 to 1771, returning with no fewer than 1300 new species of plants. Bank and Cook were welcomed back as heroes and the former was more praised by being nominated as Kew’s scientific advisor. Joseph Banks’ first concern was to out do the Jardin des Plantes, the French competent of the Kew Gardens. It was flourishing as the main botanic garden and research centre at France under the coveted naturalist Comte de Buffon. It is notworthy that these collections helped the next generations of naturalists including the evolutionist Jean Baptiste Lamarck on the French side and Charles Darwin, with Kew as reference, on the English side.


Garden Getting the Shape
“I spend money on war because it is necessary, but to spend it on science, that is pleasant to me-3spake George III, the son of Princess Augusta who was in throne at the time of Britain’s industrialisation. Apart from this, the history was taking a harsh turn with the French farmers who experienced widespread crop failures. Famine was on the way with chronic grain shortages all over the French land and by June 1789, its government was forced to appeal for a shipment of wheat from Britain.4 It was refused and the famished French populace exploded into a rebellion, the Great French Revolution. Within weeks, the French monarchy, the hitherto strongest power in Europe was overthrown and a Republic was declared with much bloodshed. For the British, it was a lesson of future state-craft with botany and agriculture as a weapons of power. For the Kew also it was a period of revolution, the gardens of Richmond and earlier Kew were physically joined for the first time in history. Many previous constructions of non-botanical interest were demolished while others seriously mended. Joseph Banks competed vigorously to display all the new specimens from the expanding colonies of the British, with over 800 new species of trees and shrubs. A glass house was separately built for the African plants alone, later came to be known as the Botany Bay and a Hot House was built for tropical and Australian plants. King George III was particular about the adoption of many private gardens and in 1794, he purchased Rev. Thomas Methold’s garden collections. The two men, Joseph Banks and King George along with Queen Charlotte were especially enthusiastic to make it an explicit emblem of imperial growth. This added impetus to botanize the empire is well demonstrated by Erasmus Darwin, grandfather of Charles Darwin, in a poem entitled The Botanic Garden.

The death of Joseph Banks coinciding with that of George III undermined the garden’s progress in all respects. Underfunding and the lack of botanic vision caused the garden to decline under the reigns of George IV and William IV. There was even a time of considerable public opinion demanding the garden to be shutdown, viewing it as an imperial extravaganza. However, the spring was not far behind. In 1840, the Treasury was forced to transfer the funding to the Kew to the Office of the Woods and Forests and it was declared as a National Botanic Garden. And for the first time an official director was appointed for the garden separately, Sir William Hooker. He was for the infrastructure improvement and under his benign directorship (1841-1865), the garden saw a renaissance with many iconic physical structures. He built the Palm House, redesigning the landscape and founding the Herbarium. He was followed by his son, Joseph Dalton Hooker who laid out the National Arboretum and built the Temperate House. His period (1865-1885) was also marked by the redevelopment of the colonial links between Malaysian and Indian economies and also with the West Indies. Queen Victoria’s patronage was generous but the Boer War and then two World Wars caused the down fall of the Britain’s wealth and resources had to be cut down inevitably


The Modern Kew
Post-War Britain was a lion without mane, with the projects and grants coming to an end, atleast for a while. It was during this period that there was a mission change also, rather than becoming “the Eden on Earth”, the Royal Garden turned towards conservation biology. However, economic hardship prevented reformation and development for years and years. The rejuvenation came again during the bicentennial time, in 1959, with the restoration and re-opening of the Palm House with reorganization of the Rock Garden, Azalaea Garden and Rose Pagola. The Jordell Laboratory was an eventful addition of 1963, that expanded the garden’s research base. An expansion followed again in 1965 when the garden took the management of Wakehurst Place in Sussex, to become Kew’s sister estate in the country. This provided a new sprouting ground for the seeds less adapted to the Kew soil and changing climate. The momentum of development was gained once again when Princess of Wales Conservatory was founded in 1984 followed by the Sir Joseph Banks Centre for Economic Botany in 1985. Through the 80s and 90s, another great organization also came to join hands with the Kew, the links between IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) and the garden became strong and influential. There had been an urge for the study of fungi also during last decades leading to the establishment of the Mycological Institute, finally acquired by Kew in 1994. And with all its proud heritage the Kew Gardens has now entered the 21st century as a millennium organization. Being so nice and so nan, everything at Kew still holds this simple maxim:- “All life depends on plants”.


BOTANIC GARDENS IN HISTORY
The history of botanic gardens dates back to over 3000 years. The Assyrian King Tiglath-Pileser III (BC 745-727) started his career as a gardener and ended as one of the greatest rulers of the Assyrian Empire. He was the follower of Tiglath-Pileser I, one of the first monarchs who established a botanic garden. In his capital city of Nineveh, he planted hundreds of plant specimens, collected during his military campaigns.
The Neo-Assyrian King, Sennacherib rebuilt the Nineveh gardens and they remained as the precursor for the most famous ‘Hanging Gardens of Babylon’, one of the seven wonders of the ancient world. It is believed that King Nebuchadnezzar II (605-561BC) built them to console his malden wife Amytis, who was from a montane homeland. The gravity-defying chain pumps that continuously raised water from ground level to these roof-gardens still remains as an engineering mystery.
The Persians who conquered the Babylon in 539 BC continued the tradition of their botanic gardens. King Xerxes was a keen botanist who tried to establish gardens as practical centres of plant cultivation, throughout his Empire. The Persians called their gardens “Paradaida”. A few centuries later, when the Greeks came, they used the word “Paradeisos” (to what we refer to day as “Paradise” today !) Such was the eternal bliss the gardens possessed.
Botanic experimental gardens were widespread in the Islamic world from Eighth Century AD. They were staffed by expert agronomists and botanists, who collected exotic plants and even developed new crop varieties. The earliest botanic gardens in Europe were in the southern part of Italy which was under the Muslim rulers for many years. The first of its kind is believed to be in Salerno by Sylaticus in 1310 and in Venice by Gualterius in 1330.
After the Renaissance, botanic gardens became a novel practice, forming part of cities and universities. Gardens of botanical interest were set up in Pisa in 1543, Padua, Parma and Florence in 1545, Bologna in 1568, Leyden in 1577, Leipzlg in 1580, Konigsberg in 1581, Paris in 1590 and Oxford in 1621. The list is too large to comprehended and the latest is the Botanic Garden in Oman, in the desert (!) which is going to be one of the largest botanic gardens in the world.


A POEM ON KEW GARDEN
There is a poem Kew, written in 1784 by Erasmus Darwin, the most celebrated scientists in the late eighteenth century. The poem is entitled ‘The Botanic Garden’ which eulogizes George III and Queen Charlotte of England who rescued the garden from the ephemeral fashion trends towards an instrument of state-power. Though seeming bombastic to the modern reader, it is full of all allegorical expressions revealing the emerging imperial might of the British Empire. Here is an extract:

So sites enthron’d in vegetable pride
Imperial Kew by Thame’s glittering side
Obedient sails from realms unfurrow’d bring
For her the unnam’d progeny of spring…
Delighted Thames through tropic umbrage glides
And flowers Antaratic, bending O’er his tides;
Drinks the new tints, the sweets unknown inhales
And calls the sons of science to this vales.
In one bright point admiring Nature eyes
The fruits and foliage of discordant skies,
Twines the gay floret with the fragrant bough
And bends the wreath round George’s royal bow…
With beauty blossom’d, and with virtue blaz’d,
Mark the fair scions, that themselves have rais’d;
Sweet blooms the Rose, the towering Oak expands,
The Grace and Guard of Britain’s golden land.


BOOK ON KEW
“The Gardens at Kew” is the first major historical review of the Royal Botanic Garden. Written by Allen Paterson, it describes the evolution of Kew from a private pleasure ground to the light house of botanical information. The book is well illustrated with photographs of the garden today and much valued archive drawings from Kew’s collection. The book has many curious descriptions such as the “Old Lions” in Kew, the few remaining trees with oldest date of planting, as old as 1762. They were the Maidenhair Tree- Ginkgo biloba, Pagoda Tree – Sophora japonica, etc. The book is worth useful for a botanist as well as a general reader. It is published by Frances Lincoln in association with the Kew Gardens.


THE KEW HERBARIUM
With a profound collection of 7 million specimens, the Kew Herbarium simply hails itself as the largest herbarium in the world. It is a replica of the biodiversity on earth in terms of its vast collections from all the parts of the world, from tropic to temporate and montane to riverine. Eversince its foundation in 1853, the herbarium collections grew through the amalgamation of several formerely private collections such as Sir William Hooker’s and George Benthams. Surprisingly, it include the botanical collections of Charles Darwin too. The Kew herbarium is housed in a building originally known as the ‘Hunter House’ from the 18th century. The central building was occupied by King of Hanover until his death and with the addition of William Hooker’s collections, the first wing was added followed by three more additions. The Herbarium is not open to the public, until now, but with the recently started ‘digitisation programme’, virtual visitors can analyse the specimens, if they wish. Kew has also implemented an electronic catalogue, known as the ‘Herbcat’. It is interesting as well as informatory, with each specimen holding a specific barcode, giving details about its collection, history and form. The herbarium also holds over 800,000 specimens of fungi, including those from the classical Mycological Herbarium of M.J. Berkeley. The Mycological collections of Kew are growing at the rate of three thousand to four thousand specimens in a year.


EDUCATION AT KEW
Kew has established a series of international diploma courses for students and people working in botanic gardens and other plant conservation organizations. The Royal Garden considers it as a contribution towards the implementation of the GSPC- the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation. As per the official sources, the Diploma Course offers the following:
 Opportunity for the best exposure, participating in the activities of other international organizations also.
 Freedom to chose issues that one is particularly interested, though specialized options for project work.
 Entry to a forum for exchanging ideas, problems and solutions.
 Forming a part of an international network, working towards plant biodiversity conservation.


CAREER AT KEW
Job opportunities at Kew will be announced time to time through the website of the garden. However, there are always a welcome for the volunteers. There are mainly three kind of volunteers, such as Discovery Volunteers, Information Volunteers and Horticultural Volunteers. Discovery Volunteers for assisting the Discovery Programme by Kew, aiming to work joyfully with the elderly and disabled people, with an ability to convey the knowledge top people of mixed abilities. The Information Volunteers form a small team based at the Information Desk at Victoria Plaza where they answer visitor’s questions. There are also opportunities for those who wish to process Friend Memberships through internet. Horticultural Volunteers support the work of horticulturists in outdoors and glass houses. Anybody who is interested in the future vacancies can contact the volunteer page, through internet and by checking it regularly, may know their status.


ATTRACTIONS AT KEW
Rhododendron Dell : Originally known as the Hollow Walk, this was carved out of the Thames Flood Plain. By the time of William Aiton, the gardener, the place was reshaped from its previous form with Rhododendrons. These were sent by Joseph Dalton Hooker from Sikkim and they rated the finest in display, in the entire United Kingdom. There are over 700 specimens planted in the Dell, with some unique hybrids found only here.


The Queen’s Garden : The Queen’s Garden, as the name explains includes those plants exclusively grown in Britain before and during the 17th century. A specialty is that, here the labeling of plants differs from the Kew’s norm by including the common names from the 17th century, a virtue or quotation from the herbal books and authors from the past.


Minka House : The form of the traditional Japanese building was built in the Bamboo Garden, in 2001. It is used as a space for workshops, displays and other events. The location, the Bamboo garden contains 135 species of bamboos, brought mainly from India and Japan.


BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES


JAMES COOK (1728-1779)
British explorer, navigator and castrographer. Cook was the first to map NewFoundland, prior to making three voyages to the Pacific Ocean. He achieved the first European contact with the eastern coastline of Australia and the Hawaiian Islands. He was a courageous explorer, who went to dangerous locations to confirm the facts. For example, he was involved in the exploration of the Great Barrier Reef, in the Freezing Antarctic Circle. He was with Joseph Banks in his first voyage and contributed about 1300 species of plants to the Kew. Cook was killed in Hawaii during his third expedition.


WILLIAM AITON (1731-1793)
English gardener. William Aitons’ name is associated with the beginning of the Kew Garden, since, it was he whom princess Augusta appointed in 1759, to develop her botanic garden. William Aiton was born is Scotland and was trained as a gardener from childhood. In 1783, Aiton gained control over the garden and six years later published his ‘Hortus Kewnensis’, a catalogue of plants at Kew. He was followed by his son William Townsend Aiton. He preceded the first director of Kew, William Jackson Hooker.


COMTE DE BUFFORN (1707-1788)French naturalist, mathematician and cosmologist. Buffon was the Director of the Jardin du Roi (now called the jardin des Plantes), the French equivalent of the Kew Gardens. It is still the main botanical garden in France. The garden was originally Planted by Guyde La Brosse, Louis XIII’s Physician, in 1626, as a medicinal herb garden. Joseph Banks at Kew tried to compete with this tradition and it led to the improvement of the Kew a lot. So, Bufforn is still respected as a motive force for the modern Kew.

Reference
1. Tradescant J. (1925). Letter to E. Nicholas, 31st July 1625, The Tradescants: their Plants, Gardens and Museum, 1570-1662, M. Joseph, London, UK.
2. Chaplin J. (2003) The Natural History of British Imperialism, Journal of British Studies 42, 127-131.
3. Gregory R.A. (1916). Discovery or the Spirit and Service of Science, Macmillan, London, UK.
4. Fagan B.M. (2001). The Little Ice Age: Climate Made History, 1300-1850, Basic Books, New York, USA.
5. Kew Botanic Garden Website: http://www.kew.org/

ROYAL SOCIETY TURNS 350

1660, London. It is the weeknight in November with a little dampened cobblestones in the narrow, twisting streets. Hansome cabs are on urgent errands, rumbling past the elegant tenements and majestic houses, all wrapped in misty swaths of illuminated fog. A few learned man in silver heads have gathered in the ‘Gresham college’. A conspicuously young man in his twenties, is giving a lecture on astronomy. It was well beyond their horizons, delimited by the barriers of their wisdom, rendering a bewildered audience. And as they listened to him speak, they thought that it would be a good idea to create a society to share the vastly accumulating knowledge of science. With that the Royal Society of London was born. Since its inception, the Royal Society has pioneered in scientific discovery and exploration and this oldest among the scientific academies in existence is turning 350 this year. Truly international in its outlook, the society is celebrating its momentous history and achievements through an yearlong ‘festival of science’ in 2010.


“Nullius in Verba”


It is for that the society exists – ‘nullius in verba” signifying the motto meaning in Latin- “take nobody’s word fo it.” It demands its members to be free from any controls and clans with a determination to establish the truth through wide experiments. Being engraved on its ‘coat of arms’, it has remained as a gladiator reflecting the scientific endeavour of the society, shapening the world as we live in today. Garbed as official, with a canton of the armes of England, it has now become the ‘United Kingdom’s Academy of Sciences’ advising Her Majesty’s Government on matters of science. Safeguarding the science policy and prophesies of the public, it has been so, since the middle of the 18th century. Through the outstanding stand of its fellows it has also been the advisor of the European Commission and United Nations, upon controversies involving the materialization of precarious science. The gusto of the society is always there, untampered through the gusts of the time, the prestige cladding to its lifelong fiances. Celebrities of eminence like Issac Newton, Charles Darwin and Albert Einstein up to Stephan Hawking have been there as fellows the fellowship remaining its backbone and global hallmark. So, the anniversary will be a great event with its re-drained, trails of traditions with a rare chance of impetus for an inspired admirer or student of science.
The medieval relics are still there on the premises of Carlton House Terrace, which is hosting a grand exhibition on the society’s rich heritage dating back to the rampages of absolute ecclesiastical authority. The despotic defence of the mystical theology was much rampant, compelling everything to bow before it, including the philosophical thought. It was an offence to reject the reason of the religion, throughout the long interval, from the overthrow of the Roman Empire to the fourteenth century. Gloomy gannets of superstitions and deep ignorance hung over the clouds of Europe, except for the noble aspirations of the Italians, representing a silver line. Italy was, no doubt, the fair land on which rose the intellectual sun preluding an intrepid pursuit of truth and substance. The wealthy inhabitants of the principal Italian cities became the ardent cultivators of literature and philosophy ransacking much of the intellectuals from Europe.
No fewer than 171 Academies and Societies were there in Italy at that time instituted in the form of independent universities. It is interesting to note that Galileo was a member of one of such Societies, known by the name, the ‘Lyncean’. However, the much celebrated among them was the Academy founded in Florence in 1582 which was for purifying the national tongue, publishing a well-known dictionary in 1612. Upto this period, there was no Academy or institution of similar kind either in France or in Germany. The inception and proposal for such an Academy in England was first made by Edmond Bolton in 1616, an eminent scholar and antiquary of that period. King James I was on the throne and so Bolton proposed its title to be “King James His Academe of Honour” to attract his favour. But, the death of the king in 1625 put an end to everything novel, including this ambitious dream.


The “Invisible College”
The ‘Minerva’s Museum’ came next, under the patronage of Charles I, but rather than for spreading the knowledge, it was intended for fencing it for the noble youth. The aristocratic tendency of it was too obvious in demanding anybody to be admitted to submit a testimonial of his arms and gentry. On the other side, France was moving at length to follow the stirring example of Italy, forming a private society of learned men in Paris, deliberately chosing the name the “French Academy”. It was established in 1629 with no equivalent across the English Channel, a disgrace for the learned Britons. Academic gatherings were not uncommon in England during that time, but none for the discussion of scientific subjects. The vacuum prevailed for decades, until a group of natural philosophers formed an “invisible college” without waiting for a royal decree. Samuel Hartlib was the pioneer of this, extended through Robert Boyle, John Wilkins, Robert Hooke, William Petty, Christopher Wren and some others. Alchemists, Astronomers and Mathematicians were among them, but the purpose theme was common- “acquiring knowledge through experimental investigation”.
Records of the “invisible college” commence from 1646 and there was no University in London at that time except for the ‘Gresham College’ which remained an “unusual institution of higher learning”. It was founded in 1597 under the will of Sir Thomas Gresham, forming a platform for the public for the frequent voicing of their novel ideas. It granted no degrees, nor enrolled any students, but played a major role in the medieval enlightment of the English people. Some members of the “invisible College” were there in Gresham College as professors, such as Christopher Wren lecturing on Astronomy and Robert Hooke on natural philosophy. The specialty of the Gresham College was that it acted as a precursor for the invisible college, attracting more members to it. Everything was in an air of friendliness, enacting no rules or boundaries, enabling a wide and enriching correspondence even from Johannes Kepler, Tycho Brahe and other eminent scientists.


The Royal Charter
In the past, the ‘invisible college’ remained truly “ invisible” in the sense that it had no official building of its own, the members meeting in a variety of locations, including their own houses and sometimes at the Gresham College. At first, they were twelve, but the membership expanded over time, eventually splitting into two factions such as the ‘London Society’ and the ‘Oxford Society’, in 1638 due to the traveling inconvenience of its members. Among these, the Oxford Society was more active to an extent remarkable for that period, in an attempt to overlay the heavy network of theologic dogmatism. Initially they had no rules at the “invisible college”, but the Oxford faction thought that they need some to orient themselves more systematically. “The Philosophical Society of Oxford” was the result, as a separate institution, but still maintaining links with their companions at Gresham College which had turned to be the regular meeting place of the London group. The need for a permanent “college” was much felt during that period, following their survival through the infamous English Civil War of 1658.
The proposal for a structured society was first made by John Evelyn, in a letter to Robert Boyle dated 3 September 1659, who wanted it to be a learning centre for advanced research and discussion on the emerging “new science”. Suggestions were also there from other members like Abraham Cowley and Bengt Skytte raising a common expression. Accordingly, a “College for the promotion of Physico- Mathematical Experimental Learning” was decided to be formed in a meeting at the Gresham College on 28 November 1660. It had to meet on all weeks and at the second meeting it was announced that king Charles II had approved their gathering through a Royal Charter signed on 15 July 1662. Thus the “Royal Society of London” was created, with Lord Brouncker as the first president. With a second Royal Charter signed on 23 April 1663, the “coat of arms” was granted to the President and to the fellows of the Society along with their successors.


The Society
The Royal Charters designated the King as the founder of the Royal Society, which was for the “improvement of the natural knowledge”. The appointment of the members of the society was authorised in the second Charter, designating them as the “fellow of the Royal Society”. In the beginning, there were 98 fellows, now known as the “Original Fellows”. The Society was governed by its council, which was chaired by the president of the society. The members of the council and the president were elected from the fellows by the fellows. The fellows had the right to elect new Fellows (still followed as a custom today) and also a responsibility of financially sustaining the society. Eventhough the king was supposed to be the patron, the society could not rely on his financial assistance and so the favour of wealthy nobles was necessary for the survival of the society, in its earlier times. So, many of the early fellows of the society were not scientists or eminent intellectuals and this inevitable practice continued until the financial security of the society became more certain. In May 1846, a committee recommended the selection of fellows purely on scientific achievement, delimiting the members exclusively as scientific personalities.
The fellows of the Royal Society are elected for life, based on their “substantial contribution to the improvement of natural knowledge, including Mathematics, Engineering and Medical Science”. Fourtyfour fellows are elected each year and currently there are 1,314 in total. The fellows gain the right to use the ‘FRS’ title after their name, as a prestigious icon, rather than a statutory bearing. The society also elects other three kinds of fellows known as the ‘Royal fellows’, ‘Honorary fellows’ and ‘Foreign Members’. The Royal Fellows are from the Monarchy of the United Kingdom. People who are ineligible to be elected as fellows, but “whose election would significantly benefit the society” from the Honorary fellows. Foreign members are scientists from non-commonwealth nations “who are eminent for their scientific discoveries and attainments”. They also are elected for life, but their postnominal title is ‘For MemRs’, not ‘FRS’. The elected fellows of the society include famous scientists such as Issac Newton, Charles Darwin, Ernest Rutherford, Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking.


The Indian Links
India has a long occupied prominent place in the activities of the Royal Society, as evident from the historical collections of the society. In the Register Book of 1663, there is a report on how the natives of Coromandel vivified their drinks by exposing them to the sun and wind. The Brahmin observatory in Benares was visited by Sir Robert Baker FRS in 1774, revealing the geometrical tables used by the astronomers there, for predicting eclipses of the Sun and the Moon. Joseph Dalton Hooker during his tenure as President to the Royal Society in the 19th century came to study the great equinoctical ‘Sun-dial’ there, but only to find it in a sad state of disrepair. A reference meridian to British Indian was established by William Petrie FRS who made it possible through his own instruments equipped in an observatory at his residence in Madras. It was that which became “India’s equivalent of Greenwich”, playing a prominent role in astronomical aids to navigation throughout the 19th century.
The East India Company strengthened its hold on India following the British colonial adventures, during the 18th century. Better means of transport and telecommunication such as railways and electric telegraph was coming to India demanding accurate physical surveys, the first of its kind in the subcontinent. The ‘Survey of India’ was established by the East India Company in 1767, which initiated the ‘Great Trigonometrical Survey (675)’ of India, under the guidance of William Lambton FRS. Modern mapping methodologies and scientific surveying methods were adopted making it a grand technological victory. The name of George Everest also worth mentioning, who joined the project as Chief Assistant Surveyor in 1818, rising to become the superintendent of the GTS, retiring as the Surveyor General of India. He had led the project to the northern parts of India, but his successors while continuing it to the foothills of the Himalayas, attributed the ‘Peak XV’ to his name, in an honour. Thus that peak came to be known as the ‘Everest’- the highest mountain peak in the world. The renaming was done in 1856.


Decoding the Biome
India was a land of natural novelties to the British, inspiring pioneers like Warren Hastings FRS to employ the European scientific observation analysis into the myriad of its diversity. Specimens of everything that seemed new from the natural world were sent to Britain for scientific classification and nomenclature. Many of them came to the British Museum, leading to their artistic renderings and publication. An early production was ‘Indian Zoology’ by Thomas Pennant FRS which came out in 1790. The next was ‘Century of Birds from the Himalaya Mountains’ by John Gould FRS, one of Britain’s foremost ornithologists. It was with beautiful hand-coloured lithographs which appeared in huge imperial folio volumes. Originally it was the catalogue of specimens sent from Nepal and northern India to the museum of the Zoological Society, where Gould was the official bird-stuffer. Study of Indian flora was done under the direction of Sir Joseph Banks, the then president of the Royal Society, mainly by William Roxburgh which was extended by Nathaniel Wallich FRS. His work ‘Plantae Asiaticae Rariores’ published during 1830-32, is still considered as an authetic reference on Indian plants.


Leaving the Trail
Everything in pre-independent India was casted out from imperial British moulds with preserved elegance in those basic patterns. The Indian National Science Academy set up in 1935 was no exception with an emblazoned Royal Society in its featured amulets. Apart from these distant engravings, a ‘true friend of India’ was there at the Royal Society, helping the country during its formative years of independence. It was Patrick Blackett, who was the fellow of the Royal Society from 1933 and president during 1965-70. He was met by Shanti Swarup Bhatnagar FRS at the Empire Scientific Conference in London in 1946, leading to an invitation to attend the Indian Science Congress which was due on January 1947. Nehru was there at the Congress and it was the beginning of an years-long friendship. Blackett went on to stay for several extended visits to Nehru’s Prime Ministerial residence in Delhi serving as an advisor on military and scientific matters. He was there to shapen our economic growth, education and development of atomic energy. In 1972, an agreement was made between Indian National Science Academy and Royal Society enabling a large number of collaborative activities between UK and India. Even today the relationship continue to flourish with a real impact on issues of global concern.


INDIAN FELLOWS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY
Contrary to the popular belief, the first Indian fellow to the Royal Society was not Srinivasa Ramanujan, the mathematical genius. The distinction goes to Ardaseer Cursetjee, India’s first modern engineer bringing industrial revolution to the gateways of India. He was elected as fellow on 27 May 1841. Ramanujan came second in 1918 followed by J.C. Bose in 1920. It is to the credit of the Royal Society that C.V. Raman was elected as its fellow before he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics. Meghnad Saha, Bribal Sahni, K. S. Krishnan, Homi J. Bhabha, Shanti Swarup Bhatnagar, Subrahmanya Chandrasekhar, P. Maheshwari and M.S Swaminathan are the prominent among the many who have represented the wisdom of India there in the society.


CAREER AT ROYAL SOCIETY
The Royal Society is assisted by a number of full time, paid staff. Vacancies will be advertised on the website of the society. Knowledge, Experience and skill as per job specifications form the criteria for selection. Details can be obtained from the website.


FUNDING SCHEMES OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY
The Royal Society runs nineteen funding schemes intended for students and researchers. Only the relevant ones suitable for overseas aspirants are listed here. Full list can be found on the Society’s website.
1. Dorothy Hodgkin Fellowships – for early-career scientists.
2. Newton International Fellowships – for the best early- career scientists.
3. University Research Fellowships-for outstanding scientists.
4. Paul Instrument fund – for design of scientific equipments.
5. Wolfson Laboratory Refurbishment Grant – for lab renovation.
6. Enterprise fund – for business emerging from science base.


PUBLICATIONS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY
The Royal Society publishes a number of journals of which “Philosophical Transactions” is the longest running scientific journal in the world. It was first published in 1665. Presently it is divided into two parts: -A, which deals with Mathematics and Physical Sciences and -B, dealing with Biological Sciences. As part of the 350th Anniversary, special issues are there for these which are free to read online. “Proceedings of the Royal Society” consists of abstracts from articles published in -‘A’ and -‘B’. “Biology Letters” was started in 2005 to publish short opinion pieces on Biology. Others include “Interface”, “Notes and Records” and “Biographical Memoirs”.

Reference


1. Weld, Charles Richard (1848) “A History of the Royal Society” John W. parker, West Strand, London. pp 1-29, 31-35.
2. Kochar, Rajeesh (2001) “Indian Fellows of the Royal Society, London (1841-2000)” Current Science, Vol 80, No.6 (Correspondence).
3. Magner, Lois N (2002) “A History of the Life Sciences” Marcel Dekker, New York. pp 119-120.
4. Royal Society of London website

THE SCIENCE OF SHERLOCK HOLMES

“How are you?” he said cordially, gripping my hand with a strength for which I should hardly have given him credit. “You have been in Afghanistan, I perceive.”
“How on earth did you know that?” I asked in astonishment.


That was Sherlock Holmes, the legendary consulting detective of all time, created by the Scottish author and physician Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. This conversation arises when Holme’s chronicler and life-long friend Dr. Watson meets him for the first time, more emphatically, in a chemical laboratory. Watson is a medical man well talented and well read but until he had this startling acquaintance with Holmes he didn’t believe in this ‘inductive method reasoning’ employed by the master detective. At first he was reluctant to accept that ‘the science of deduction’ can carry a person from present to the past, from present effect to an absent cause. For the bewildered Watson, Holmes explains that “From a drop of water… a logician could infer the possibility of an Atlantic or a Niagra without having seen or heard of one or the other.” Sherlock Holmes first makes his appearance in ‘A Study in Scarlet’ published in 1881, modeled against Inspector Duplin of Edgar Allan Poe, who is only an ‘illusion’ of the scientific method as per Doyle. Largely making Duplin an icon of the Scotland Yard, Doyle believed that he had succeeded where Poe had failed. That’s why he made Watson to remark that “Holmes has brought criminal investigation as near an exact science as it will ever brought into the world.”


The Veil of History
It is true that the icon of Holmes was moulded out from certain relics of forensics, but contrary to the common view, rather than being responsible for the invention of the forensic science, the creation of Holmes was influenced by the early development of it. In the Victorian world, forensic science was largely a function of the medical profession, frequently referred to as ‘Medical Jurisprudence.’ At the beginning of the eighteenth century, the great Italian physician Giovanni Battista Morgagni began to match the changes in the cadaver to the clinical symptoms of the disease reported before death. In Lyon, Dr. Alexandre Lacassagne had made notes on rigor mortis - the way in which the muscles stiffen after death and also the livor mortis - the discolouration of body due to death. He also observed that algor mortis - the cooling of the body after death can also be a tool in estimating the time of death. The post-mortem technique was perfected by Karl Rokitansky in Vienna triggering a new wave of medical evidences across the continent.
However, across the English Channel, things remained very different from the rest of the continent. A mixture of religious beliefs and superstitions hindered the dissection practice of human body for long. The public mind began to change only in the mid-nineteenth century when Alfred Swaine Taylor published a book on human anatomy, pathology and toxicology, the first of its kind in English language. Taylor was a pathologist trained in Paris who came to teach ‘legal medicine’ in London. It was his book which appeared in the title “A Manual of Medical Jurisprudence” that became an inspiration for Conan Doyle in creating the plot of many of Sherlockian stories. A part of it reads like this: “A medical man, when he sees a dead body, should notice everything. He should observe everything which could throw a light on the production of wounds or other injuries found on it…” The same words are echoed in Dr. Watson’s description of Holmes examining a body in “A Study in Scarlet”; “His nimble fingers were flying here, there, and everywhere, feeling, pressing, unbuttoning, examining…” We could say Sherlock Holmes is fictional, but what we learn from his is really ‘real’.


The Method of Holmes
Conan Doyle himself had said that the inspiration for Sherlock Holmes was his teacher Joseph Bell, while he was studying medicine in Edinburgh. In an interview made towards the end of his life, Doyle explains that “I thought I would try writing a story where the hero would treat crime as Dr. Bell treated disease.” Dr. Bell’s demonstrations of the power of observation and deduction were famous among the students which he used to establish the non-medical aspects of the patients. He could reconstruct the past history and profession of his patients from their dress, accent, habit and symptoms. Once, Dr. Bell is reported to diagnose a patient as a recently discharged non-commissioned officer from a Highland regiment stationed in Barbados. Upon asking, he explained to his students, “You see, gentlemen, the man was respectful, but he did not remove his hat, because they don’t do it in the army and if he would have been long discharged, he would have learned those civilian ways! The complaint was Elephantiasis, which is West Indian, Barbados and not British.” The same reasoning is demonstrated by Holmes while he concludes that Watson was from Afghanistan when they first meet in “A Study in Scarlet.”
Holmes uses ‘eliminative method of induction’ for reaching a conclusion which is often repeated as he claims in “The Adventure of the Beryl Coronet” that “when you have excluded the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.” The eliminative method is also evident in “The Adventure of the Blanched Soldier” where Holmes uses it to solve the mystery of the incarceration of Godfrey Emsworth by his family. More scientifically Holmesian method has an allusion to the methodology of the fossil scientists also. They often make retrospective prophesies that may enable them for the reconstruction of entire animals, even from a tooth or a fragment of bone. More recently, the comparative anatomist Richard Owen had been celebrated for reconstructing an extinct bird from a six-inch long piece of bone. Similar approach is used by Holmes who treats Dr. Mortimer’s walking stick in “The Hound of Baskervilles” as a kind of fossil remain to reconstruct the ‘absent’ man! Homles has clearly stated in “The Five Orange Pips”: “...the observer who has thoroughly understood one link in a series of incidents should be able to accurately state all the other ones, both before and after.”


The Lab of the Detective
Holmes was experimenting on blood-stains when Dr. Watson first met him and there was an amazing event witnessed by him. “I’ve found it! I’ve found it”, he shouted to my companion, running towards us with a test-tube in his hand. “I have found a reagent which in precipitated by hemoglobin, and by nothing else... It is the most practical medico-legal discovery for years... The day Guaiacum test was very clumsy and uncertain...” Truly there was enough reason for Holme’s excitement. Determining whether a stain was blood was an old and difficult problem in criminal investigation. Ever since the early nineteenth century, all sorts of attempts had been made to establish a reliable test. The Guaiacum test, which Holmes criticizes is based on the fact that the resin of the West Indian Guaiacum Tree turns the deep blue colour of the contents when oxidised. This change in colour will result as well if a mixture of blood and hydrogen peroxide is added to the Guaiacum. The drawback of this test lies in the fact that a number of substances besides blood can give positive results including bile, saliva and red wine. There was also a microscopic test in use, described by Charles Meymott Tidy in 1882, but that too was not conclusive.
Modern chemists report that the method Holmes describes would need an acid to increase the oxidation state, as well as a material to be oxidised. By examining the possibilities for the ‘few white crystals’ and the ‘drop of transparent fluid’ that Holmes uses, the chemists suggest that ‘the Holmesian test’ would probably have had a sensitivity similar to Guaiacum test, but not better than it. It is also being suggested that if Doyle had been a little more careful, he could have found the spectroscopic method for blood identification developed in 1989, prior to the publication of the ‘A Study in Scarlet.’ It was by Robert Wilhelm von Bunsen, the very man credited with the invention of the ‘Bunsen Burner’ who attached a spectroscope to the microscope, developing the most accurate method for detecting hemoglobin. The spectral analysis was highly sensitive and could detect blood in stains that were years old. However, differentiating human and animal blood remained a problem. A solution to this problem did not arise until the ‘Anti-serum method’ was developed by Paul Ublenhuth, in Germany. And Holme’s words finally touched their soul: “Had this test been invented, there are hundreds of men now walking the earth would long ago have paid the penalty for their crimes.”


Evidence in Traces
Holmes had been bending over a low-power microscope for long time. Now he straightened himself up and looked around at me in triumph. “It is glue, Watson” said he. “Unquestionably it is glue. Have a look at these scattered objects in the field!” This is an excerpt from “The Adventure of Shoscombe old Place” when Dr. Watson was invited to take part in a microscopic examination conducted by Holmes. In “The Sign of Four”, he is telling Watson: “Here too is a curious little work upon the influence of a trade upon the forms of the hand, with lithotypes of the hands of slaters, sailors, cork-cutters, compositors, weavers and diamond-polishers.” Holmes was absolutely to the point. During the very period in which Doyle was framing the Holmes stories, ‘trace evidence’ was becoming a vital part of the criminalistics. Every crevice and fissure in the human body was considered a possible hiding place for ‘trace evidence’. In 1893, three years after the publication of “The Sign of Four”, a book was published stressing the importance of the ‘trace evidence’ and its micro-chemical analysis. Thus Holme’s fanciful documentations of tobacco ashes, soil types, hair samples and fibre-kinds were getting into real life. Strangely enough, in 1916, a research paper appeared in the journal Police Microscopy, stating the importance of vacuum cleaner, as a perfect device for collecting dust particles!
In “The Adventure of the Norwood Builder”, Holmes says to Inspector Lestrade, “I pay a good deal of attention to matters of detail, as you may have observed. Indeed, he was a man who made the “mute witnesses” to speak. There was one real incident where the innovative method of enquiry was adopted. In October 1904, a strangled body of a woman was found lying in a bean field in Germany. Searching the area, the Police found only a heavily soiled hand kerchief as a probable evidence. The police sought the help of Dr. Georg Popp, a chemist who owned a laboratory in Frankfurt. Dr. Popp observed the hand kerchief through the microscope and found tiny crystals of sand, coal, snuff and a mineral known as hornblende. The police was suspicious of a man called Karl Laubach who worked at varied places. He was also in habit of using snuff. also. Laubach’s fingernail - scraps were examined under microscope and it revealed the same items such as sand, coal and hornblende. Traces of vegetation that clung to the garment also matched to those from the crime scene. Bits of scarf-fibres also were traced from his nail-scraps which was used for strangulation. Thus everything ended well as envisaged by Holmes who is seen advising in “The Adventure of the Creeping Man: “Always look at the hands first, Watson. Then cuffs, trouser-knees and boots.”


Evidences in Letters
Holmes’s ability to trace out evidence provided by handwriting is well placed. Forgery with its old and dishonorable history is evaluated in wonderful way by Holmes in many of his stories. His penetrating eye of detail can be seen in “The Man with the Twisted Lip” When he says: “This man has written the name, and there has then been a pause before be wrote the address, which can only mean that he was not Familiar with it. It is, of course, a trifle, but there is nothing so important as trifles”. Holmes also had a clever look on the use of blotting paper upon writing letters which leaves a change in the shade of letters, but towards the end of the nineteenth century there was a challenge for him, with the popular use of typewriters. The forgers were happy to use it as a new device to serve their disguise. However, Holmes was also there to state his part. In 1891, when “A case of Identity” was published, Doyle spoke through Holmes: “It is a curious thing..... that a type writer has really quite as much individuality as a man’s hand writing. Unless they are quite new, no two of them write exactly alike. Some letters get more worn than others, and some wear only on one side”.
Yes! That was an exceedingly clever observation and until “A Case of Identity” was published nobody had ever thought of such a possibility! The imagination of Doyle triggered the minds of document examiners in police laboratories and they found that typewriters, even when spanking new, showed enough individual variations to firmly establish identity. However, as Astrology, sometimes these practices can also lead to the realm of pseudoscience. We could say that Sherlock Holmes was sometimes a bit overly enthusiastic. Contrary to the popular belief, even a highly trained document examiner cannot reliably tell gender, age or psychological traits from handwriting. An interesting incident occurred when some doodles were found on the desk of the British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, attending the Davos World Economic Forum. Reuters reported that he was not concentrating and was “not a natural leader.” It was a great shame for Blair and so graphologists were invited, to analyse the scribbling. And to the great surprise those were that of Bill Gates who shared the table with him at the summit! As Holmes has aptly put it “The press, Watson, is a most valuable institution, if you only know how to use it.”


A Biological Weapon
It seems possible that Doyle was personifying himself through Dr. Watson who is stated to have graduated with an MD form the University of London, in 1878. Doyle took his graduation from Edinburgh University in 1881 and incidently it was the golden age of microbiology, with landmark discoveries by Robert Koch, Paul Ehrlich and Louis Pasteur amongst others. It is not surprising that the Holmes stories contain numerous references to infectious diseases, the extreme of it being a case of bioweapon. In ‘The Adventure of the Dying Defective’ a Fatal disease called “The Tapanuli Fever” is used as a homicide weapon by a criminal called Culverton Smith. Smith cultured the bacteria on gelatin, brought them to London and infected his nephew, who died within four days. He also attempted to infect Holmes, but Holmes anticipatingly avoids the trap. According to Holmes, Smith was a resident of Sumatra where there was an outbreak of this disease among his plantation workers. He denotes it to be “highly contagious by touch”. Several candidates have been proposed for this ‘deadly Asiatic infection’ such as Scrub Typhus, Typhoid, Anthrax and Septicaemic Plague as attractive possibilities, but the most accurate diagnostic finding is Melioidosis which is also known as Whitmore’s disease.6
It can be assumed that Doyle during his medical career and travel as a ship’s doctor to the West coast Africa might have experienced many diseases of uncertain etiology. Tapanuli is referred to have fever, anorexia, sweating and sever fatigue as its marking symptoms to which Melioidosis deplorably fits with the clinical standards. It was first reported from Burma by Whitmore and Krishnaswami in 1912. In 1987, Meliodosis was responsible for 20% of all cases of epidemics in Thailand, which is geographically similar to Sumatra, Indonesia. It is caused by Berkholderia pseudomallei, which commonly affects rice paddy farmers during the monsoon months of July to September. Even with the availability of potent antibiotics of the eighties, mortality from Melioidosis was very high, ranging up to 68%. As a strange coincidence, Berkholderia pseudomallei is culturable in gelatin agar and the septic shock can cause fatigue, cold sweats and anorexia. Death can occur within 48 hours which has earned it the name the “Vietnamese Time Bomb”. Recently, the US centers for Disease Control have identified it as a potential agent for bioterrorism, following the “Anthrax letters” to America. Culverton Smith’s postal delivery also has new become a fearful fancy.


His Last Bow
Holmes has also been credited for inventing methods of studying poisons, stains, foot prints, traces of wheels, the shape and position of wounds, but how much appealing this claim might be to the fans of Sherlock Holmes, it seems that there is little evidence to support it. Although the science of forensics was still relatively young by the time the Holmes stories were written, many of the procedures and methods that are often attributed, to the imagination of Conan Doyle had already been in practice. Ironically, it was the famous criminal, turned detective Eugene Francois Vidocq who first made plaster casts of foot prints on a crime scene. He was also responsible for studying the shape assumed by blood stains as they fall on a surface. The shape and position of wounds were detailed in Lacassagne’s Precis de medicine’ that appeared, in 1878. A system of fingerprint identification was established in Scotland Yard from 1901, ie, five years before Holmes used a forged thumbprint in the plot of “The Norwood Builder”. Thus, rather than inventing anything novel, Doyle through Holmes did more than any other person to portray science as a valuable tool in criminal detection.5 He didn’t claim anything, as he says while acknowledging an error in “The Yellow Face:” “Watson, if it should ever strike you that I am getting a little over-confident in my powers..... kindly whisper ‘Nor bury’ in my ear, and I shall be indefinitely obliged to you.”


ARTHUR CONAN DOYLE
Sir Arthur Ignatius Conan Doyle was born on 22nd May 1859 in Edinburgh, Scotland. At the age of nine, he was sent to the Roman Catholic Jesuit preparatory school at Stonyhurst. He then went to Stonyhurst College and by the time he had rejected Christianity to become an agnostic. From 1876 to 1881, he studied medicine at the University of Edinburgh. While studying he also began writing short stories, the first being published, before he was 20. Following his term at University, he served as a ship’s doctor on a voyage to the West African coast. He completed his doctorate in 1885. His medical practice was not very successful and so while waiting for patients, he began writing stories. His first significant work was ‘A study in Scarlet,” a novel, that he wrote at the age of 27. It appeared in Beeton’s Christmas Annual, in 1887, featuring the first appearance of Sherlock Holmes. Future short stories featuring Sherlock Holmes were published in the Strand Magazine. Holmes, ultimately appeared in a total of 56 short stories and four novels by him. Conan Doyle was friend for a time with the American magician Harry Houdini. The autobiographical work of Doyle also reveals his fidelity to magic which is entitled “Through the Magic Door”. Doyle married twice and he maintained a platonic lover towards his second wife. When he died of heart attack, at the age of 71 his last words were directed towards his wife:” You are wonderful”.


THE CASE OF THOMAS SMETHURST
Unlike many of the cases dealt with by Sherlock Holmes, this is not fiction. The Smethurst Case was particularly important because during its trial a leading toxicologist was forced to admit that his earlier conclusions were wrong. But the confession was not enough as it has lead to a death sentence for the alleged murderer. An independent body of specialists later recommended the release of the condemned, creating a long standing suspicion by the British public towards forensic techniques. The case was that Dr. Thomas Smethurst, a hydro therapist, killed a wealthy woman, whom he befriended, through Arsenic poisoning. The testing was done by a renowned toxicologist Alfred Swaine Taylor, who adopted the recently developed test for Arsenic by Hugo Reinsch of Germany. The test was positive, but the autopsy revealed, no trace of Arsenic. Then Taylor had to confess that the apparatus he used for testing was already contaminated with Arsenic. But, the Judge was reluctant to admit it and a death sentence was decreeded creating much public outcry. The trial catched everyday media attention and the verdit was finally overturned through an emotional plea for mercy to queen Voictoria. Dr. Smethurst received only an year of imprisonment and upon release he sued for the wealthy woman’s property, won the case, pocketed the money and disappeared from public view. It was during these times (1859) Connan Doyle was born and brought up. Whether Dr. Smethurst was too wise in poisoning to trick the police? Anyway, Doyle had to give the Victorian public a scientific detective they could trust, and he won in that.


AMAZING FACTS ON SHERLOCK HOLMES
 Sherlock Holmes was inducted as an honorary fellow of the Royal Society of Chemistry on 16th October 2002. Holmes is the only fictional character honored in such way.
 Sherlock Holmes holds the permanent address of “221 B, Baker Street, London.” Though fictional, the address is now real, used by the Holmes Museum.
 Holmes Museum in London has a re-created sitting room and as variety of Holmes memorabilia. Another Holmes Museum there in is Switzerland also.
 According to the Guinness Book of World Records, Sherlock Holmes is the most portrayed fictional character in film, 75 actors playing him in 211 movies.
 The latest movie on Sherlock Holmes was released in Hollywood under the same title in late 2009. It will be in Indian theaters in the coming months.


DO YOU KNOW!
Included within Holmes stories, there are references to 68 diseases, 32 medical terms, 38 doctors, 22 drugs, 12 medical specialties, 3 medical journals and 2 medical schools.7


Reference
1. Synder, L J (2004) Sherlock Holmes: Scientific Detective. Endeaver 28, 104-108.
2. Rupke, NA (1994) Richard Owen, Victorian Naturalist, Yale University Press pp. 346-344.
3. Liebow, E (1982) Dr Joe Bell, Model of Sherlock Holmes. Bowling Green University Popular Press.
4. Gerber, SM (1983) Chemistry and Crime: From Sherlock Holmes to Today’s Courtroom. Americal Chemical Society, pp 31-35.
5. Smyth, F (1980) Cause of Death: The Story of Forensic Science, Van Nostrand Reinbold, p 146 and p 184.
6. Vora, Sethu K.(2002) Sherlock Holmes and a Biological Weapon. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 95, 101-103.
7. Reed, James (2001) A Medical Perspective on the Adventures of Sherlock Holmes, Medical Humanities, 27, 76-81.