NON TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION OF CHARLES
B. FENSTER’S RESEARCH AND TEACHING INTERESTS:
My research interests
focus
on understanding how evolution occurs. I use plants to study evolution because
they do not move and therefore it is easier to measure their survivorship and
reproduction (flower and fruit number), and thus their fitness, in a Darwinian
sense. The Darwinian paradigm of evolutionary process is that evolution
reflects natural selection acting on variation among individuals such that
those individuals that enjoy higher survivorship and reproduction will be
better represented in the gene pool the next generation than those individuals
that have lower survivorship and/or reproduction. Thus, if a given expression
of a trait, say larger flower size, provides greater reproductive success for
the individual manifesting relatively larger flowers, and genetic variation
is
at least in part responsible for the variation of the trait in the population,
then the population will evolve larger flowers from one generation to the next.
The marriage of the
Darwinian concept of natural selection with our modern understanding of
heredity (beginning with the rediscovery of Mendel’s principles) then
suggests two important approaches to quantifying how evolution occurs. First,
we need to understand how natural selection acts in natural populations. For
example, is it strong or weak, consistent or variable, and if variable, at
what
geographic or temporal scale? Second, we need to understand how genetic
variation dictates the way in which natural populations respond to natural
selection. For example, how much standing genetic variation is there in
populations, how quickly does mutation introduce new genetic variation, what
fraction of mutations are beneficial, and how large are the effects of new
mutations (very small to very large)? Furthermore, we would like to know the
complexity of genetic variation, for example, can variants at a particular
gene
or locus confer higher fitness by themselves or does selection reflect the
way
in which new variants interact with one another? One way to think about this
latter issue is to think of the way a bird’s beak might evolve. If
selection favors birds with larger beaks (perhaps to crack open larger nuts)
then the spread of genetic variants to increase the size of the upper beak
may
depend on the spread of genetic variants to increase the size of the lower
beak
as well. Thus a bird with a larger upper beak but with a normal lower beak
may
be at a disadvantage relative to a bird with both normal upper and lower beaks
because the overbite prevents it from picking up any fruit.
My research program uses
both of the above approaches, natural selection and genetic, to quantify just
how evolution occurs. My research is largely funded by public funds via various
national funding agencies, both here and abroad. My research relies on the
close collaboration between myself and other senior investigators, and most
importantly with postdoctoral fellows, graduate and undergraduate students,
and
even occasionally high school students. Thus my research helps build bridge
s at
the international level, and also serves as an important training vehicle by
way of mentoring for individuals at various levels of training.
My teaching program
reflects my research interests, in that I feel most comfortable teaching what I
know most about. Thus I teach a basic genetics class where I introduce students
to the foundations of genetics and my graduate level course introduces students
to just how genetic variation may dictate evolutionary process.
As a parting note, I
would
like explain to the general public why my research and teaching merits public
support. Our universities are the crowning achievement to our commitment to
education in the
Many of the technological
innovations that we take for granted today reflect a public investment into
curiosity driven research. Three examples: First, a basic understanding of
evolution (natural selection acting on variation which has a genetic basis)
led
to revolutionary changes in the practices of animal and crop breeding,
including recognition of the power of selection, and hybrid vigor. The second
example is the observation by microbiologists why certain viruses did not g
row
and destroy their bacteria hosts, when they normally do so. This led to the
discovery of restriction enzymes and the birth of recombinant DNA technique
s,
one of the foundations of the new gene-tech industry. Finally, and also in
the
context of the gene-tech industry, an important technique, PCR, is based on
the
observation that bacteria that can grow in hot springs. Other examples abound,
including the discovery of the laws of electricity (James Clerk Maxwell) and
Einstein’s contribution to our understanding of small matter physics
leading to the use of nuclear energy etc. Funding of basic research has about a
2:1 greater return on investment than funding on applied research. Both types
of funding approaches are needed.
Charles B.
Fenster