Over many years of his life, the British naturalist Alfred Russel Wallace (1823-1913) explored the tropical forests of Malaysia, collecting numerous specimens, including hundreds of birds, many of them new to science. Subsequently, Wallace published a series of papers on systematic ornithology, and discovered a new species on top of a volcano on Ternate, where he wrote, in 1858, his famous essay on natural selection. Based on this hands-on experience, and an analysis of an Archaeopteryx fossil, Wallace suggested that birds may have descended from dinosaurian ancestors. Here, we describe the "dinosaur-bird hypothesis" that originated with the work of Thomas H. Huxley (1825-1895). We present the strong evidence linking theropod dinosaurs to birds, and briefly outline the long and ongoing controversy around this concept. Dinosaurs preserving plumage, nesting sites and trace fossils provide overwhelming evidence for the dinosaurian origin of birds. Based on these recent findings of paleontological research, we conclude that extant birds indeed descended, with some modifications, from small, Mesozoic theropod dinosaurs. In the light of Wallace's view of bird origins, we critically evaluate recent opposing views to this idea, including Ernst Mayr's (1904-2005) arguments against the "dinosaur-bird hypothesis", and document that this famous ornithologist was not correct in his assessment of this important aspect of vertebrate evolution.
It is well known that the contribution of Alfred Russell Wallace (1823-1913) to the development of the "Darwinian" principle of natural selection has often been neglected. Here we focus on how the three anniversaries to celebrate the origin of the Darwin-Wallace theory in Germany in 1909, in 1959 in the divided country, as well as in 2009, have represented Charles Robert Darwin's and Alfred Russell Wallace's contributions. We have analyzed books and proceedings volumes related to these anniversaries, and the main result is that Wallace was almost always ignored, or only mentioned in passing. In 1909, Ernst Haeckel gave a talk in Jena, later published under the title The worldview of Darwin and Lamarck (Das Weltbild von Darwin und Lamarck), but not as the Darwin-Wallace concept. Haeckel mentions Wallace only once. In two important proceedings volumes from the 1959 anniversaries, Wallace was ignored. The only fair treatment of Wallace is given in another book, a collection of documents edited by Gerhard Heberer, for which the author selected nine key documents and reprinted excerpts (1959). Three of them were articles by Wallace, including the Sarawak- and Ternate-papers of 1855 and 1858, respectively. An analysis of the dominant themes during the celebrations of 2009 shows that none of the six topics had much to do with Wallace and his work. Thus, the tendency to exclude Alfred Russell Wallace is an international phenomenon, and largely attributable to the "Darwin industry".
Alfred Russel Wallace (1823-1913) and Charles Darwin (1809-1882) are honored as the founders of modern evolutionary biology. Accordingly, much attention has focused on their relationship, from their independent development of the principle of natural selection to the receipt by Darwin of Wallace's essay from Ternate in the spring of 1858, and the subsequent reading of the Wallace and Darwin papers at the Linnean Society on 1 July 1858. In the events of 1858 Wallace and Darwin are typically seen as central players, with Darwin's friends Charles Lyell (1797-1875) and Joseph Dalton Hooker (1817-1911) playing supporting roles. This narrative has resulted in an under-appreciation of a more central role for Charles Lyell as both Wallace's inspiration and foil. The extensive anti-transmutation arguments in Lyell's landmark Principles of Geology were taken as the definitive statement on the subject. Wallace, in his quest to solve the mystery of species origins, engaged with Lyell's arguments in his private field notebooks in a way that is concordant with his engagement with Lyell in the 1855 and 1858 papers. I show that Lyell was the object of Wallace's Sarawak Law and Ternate papers through a consideration of the circumstances that led Wallace to send his Ternate paper to Darwin, together with an analysis of the material that Wallace drew upon from the Principles. In this view Darwin was, ironically, intended for a supporting role in mediating Wallace's attempted dialog with Lyell.
The British naturalist Alfred Russel Wallace (1823-1913), who had to leave school aged 14 and never attended university, did extensive fieldwork, first in the Amazon River basin (1848-1852) and then in Southeast Asia (1854-1862). Based on this experience, and after reading the corresponding scientific literature, Wallace postulated that species were not created, but are modified descendants of pre-existing varieties (Sarawak Law paper, 1855). Evolution is brought about by a struggle for existence via natural selection, which results in the adaptation of those individuals in variable populations who survive and reproduce (Ternate essay, 1858). In his monograph Darwinism (1889), and in subsequent publications, Wallace extended the contents of Darwin's Origin of Species (1859) into the Neo-Darwinian theory of biological evolution, with reference to the work of August Weismann (1834-1914). Wallace also became the (co)-founder of biogeography, biodiversity research, astrobiology and evolutionary anthropology. Moreover, he envisioned what was later called the anthropocene (i.e., the age of human environmental destructiveness). However, since Wallace believed in atheistic spiritualism and mixed up scientific facts and supernatural speculations in some of his writings, he remains a controversial figure in the history of biology.
Over the past 50 years, a variety of surgical procedures have been advocated for the treatment of operable breast cancer, ranging from local excision to supraradical mastectomy. Today, the surgical treatment of breast cancer remains highly contentious. We review the historical development of breast cancer surgery and analyse the available evidence supporting conservative procedures. We also express our opinions on the treatment of early breast cancer and illustrate the changing patterns of surgery with our experience at National University Hospital.
Cholera has been in existence in Sarawak for many years and since 1873 many major epidemics have occurred. The epidemics usually occur during the dry months of May, June and July and the population affected are those in coastal areas. As in other outbreaks the areas affected were those which had poor environmental sanitation, poor water supply, poor refuse disposal and indiscriminate disposal of faeces. Malays are more affected as in Peninsular Malaysia outbreaks. The classical biotype was common prior to 1961. In later years the El Tor (biotype) has been responsible for most outbreaks.
The life of Lord Moynihan is briefly reviewed. Incidence of stones in Peninsular Malaysia appears to show the same trend as in other industrialised countries. Management of urinary calculi both prior to and after the introduction of ESWL in a personal series is discussed. More than 90% of urinary stones are now treated by ESWL threatening the place of surgery in Urology. The pattern of incorporating renal transplantation into the urological training programme as practised in the Institute of Urology and Nephrology in Malaysia is suggested as a way to assure a place for surgery in Urology.
This is an interesting piece of Colonial history, compiled, one presumes, from official reports. It cannot satisfactorily be summarized. The author deals with his subject under various heads: hospitals, health legislation, dangerous infectious diseases, prevailing diseases, beriberi, fever and malaria, dysentery, and diarrhoea, influenza and enteric fever. In a table are given the numbers of cases of smallpox, cholera, plague, beriberi, dysentery, diarfhoea and fevers reported each year from 1890 to 1939. The only one of these to show steady reduction is beriberi, which began to decline from figures over 2,000 per annum before the 1914-18 war to 69-444 per annum from 1930 to 1939. Plague was never common and neither cholera nor smallpox was responsible for large numbers of cases. The author does not give any systematic accounts of the outstanding investigations made during the period, but rather quotes opinions expressed by Government servants, medical or lay, in their reports. Charles Wilcocks.
Western-style medicine was introduced to Malaya by the Portuguese, Dutch and British between the 1500s and 1800s. Although the earliest pathology laboratories were developed within hospitals towards the end of the 19th Century, histopathology emerged much later than the biochemistry and bacteriology services. The University Departments of Pathology were the pioneers of the renal histopathology diagnostic services. The Department of Pathology, University of Malaya (UM) received its first renal biopsy on 19 May 1968. Hospital Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (HUKM) and Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia (HUSM) started their services in 1979 and 1987 respectively. It is notable that the early services in these University centres caterred for both the university hospitals and the Ministry of Health (MOH) until the mid-1990s when MOH began to develop its own services, pivoted on renal pathologists trained through Fellowship programmes. Currently, key centres in the MOH are Kuala Lumpur Hospital, Sultanah Aminah Hospital Johor Bahru and Malacca Hospital. With the inclusion of renal biopsy interpretation in the Master of Pathology programmes, basic renal histopathology services became widely available throughout the country from 2000. This subsequently filtered out to the private sector as more histopathologists embraced private practice. There is now active continuing professional development in renal histopathology through clinicopathological dicussions, seminars and workshops. Renal research on amyloid nephropathy, minimal change disease, IgA nephropathy, fibrillary glomerulonephritis, lupus nephritis and microwave technology have provided an insight into the patterns of renal pathology and changing criteria for biopsy. More recently, there has been increasing involvement of renal teams in clinical trials, particularly for lupus nephritis and renal transplant modulation.