In the history of vegetation, the 1970s represent a period of advancement in human awareness of nature, with increasing concern for environmental protection and conservation. In 1970, the first Earth Day was celebrated, inspiring millions of people around the world to raise their voice for environmental protection. This inspiration led to the establishment of government agencies to protect the environment, such as the formation of the United States Environmental Protection Agency in 1970 and Greenpeace in 1971. However, the decade also brought serious environmental crises, notably the oil spills from the SS Torrey Canyon in 1976 and the Amoco Cadiz in 1978 that damaged marine ecology. Additionally, climate change began to be recognized as an important global issue by the first World Climate Conference in 1979. Despite these challenges, the 1970s laid the foundation for greater environmental awareness and activism that influences conservation efforts to this day.
The decade beginning in the 1970s marked a transitional period for natural prosperity, marked with successes and adversities. In the early part of the decade, the magazine made a bold attempt to split into three separate publications, perhaps reflecting a foregrounding-driven approach that ultimately proved premature for the time. However, this divergence was short-lived, as it became clear that the division was inconsistent. David ‘Die’ Davis assumed the role of sixth editor in 1973, reuniting the magazine, effectively ending the early Maddox era. This period also saw the death of Arthur Gale, an important figure in the history of Natural Richness, who had served as coeditor from 1939 to 1961, his death in 1978 leaving a void in the Nature community.
Despite the challenges, the 1970s were a meaningful moment for significant achievements and celebrations for nature. This victory led to the establishment of a modest annual base in America, which proved both scientifically and commercially fruitful. The decision to establish an office in Washington, DC, although initially confined to a modest-sized room in the national press building, had important consequences. Under the leadership of John Maddux and Mary Sheehan, the main objectives of the office were to promote Nature’s presence in the American market, increase subscription rates, and facilitate a strong influx of human books from American laboratories. This strategic move not only increased the magazine’s visibility but also potentially expanded its influence, as noted in the August 31 issue of Time Magazine. In one prominent example, Nature was credited with playing a role in the resignation of Lee DuBridge, Richard Nixon’s science advisor, attesting to its influence on the scientific and political landscape of the decade.
During this expansion and consolidation, Nature saw its global reach and scientific contributions greatly increase. Embracing its identity as an international journal, Nature received human rights texts from different corners of the country, creating a rich fabric of scientific exploration and collaboration. The influx of submissions from various fields culminated in recognition of major research, including the receipt of at least three Nobel Prizes, which identified studies published in the journal. This internationalization not only confirms nature’s importance to the mainstream scientific discussion, but also highlights its important role in advancing scientific discovery and recognition on a global scale.
Consideration of the organizing activities of Nature magazine in the early 1970s provides insight into its evolving structure and staff structure. At the beginning of the decade, the magazine had a staff of about 12, with scientific expertise being of particular importance, with half of the staff being scientists. This interdisciplinary structure replicated Nature’s sensitivity to maintaining rigorous editorial standards, while fostering a culture of scientific excellence. Further maintenance, such as a short relocation to Canberra House on Maltravers Street in 1972 followed by a return to Little Essex Street, Nature’s unwavering support for the standard of cleanliness remained temporarily in place.
For Vansoutis the 1970s were a decade of contradictory experiences for nature, marked with many courageous initiatives, significant achievements, and tragic losses. While the experiment of splitting into three publications was short-lived, the decade saw important milestones, such as the establishment of the first US office, global expansion, and electronic recognition through the Nobel Prize. These developments speak to nature’s enduring legacy as an inspiration for scientific publishing, shaping the conversation and impact of scientific publishing globally.
1970: Initial attempt to split into three publications.
1970: Establishment of first US office.
1970s–80s: A time of global expansion.
1970s: Attainment of prestige by Nobel Prize in the field of scientific publications.
In the field of molecular biology, Francis Crick’s ‘central dogma’ stood as a fundamental principle for ten years. This concept expanded the flow of genetic information coming into cells, postulating that DNA serves as a template for RNA, which then synthesizes proteins, thereby governing the processes of life. However, it often happens in biology that established rules are presented as challenges. One such exception arose when it was discovered that RNA viruses could reverse the flow of genetic information by converting RNA into DNA. This impressive revelation resulted from the timely efforts of Howard Temin and Satoshi Mizutani, as well as David Baltimore. His founding papers, published in Nature in 1970, created a watershed moment in molecular biology. The enzyme responsible for this reverse transcription process, later known as reverse transcriptase, was identified not within the infected cell, but in particles of the tumor-forming virus. Temin, in particular, found support for his forecast in 1964, yet faced skepticism and ridicule at the time. His tenacity and foresight, as well as his contributions to Baltimore, ultimately earned him the shared recognition of the 1975 Nobel Prize, marking the impact his research had on both scientific knowledge and drug development.
Amid the growth of scientific research worldwide and increasing expertise in the field, in January 1971 the journal Nature launched a bold initiative. Faced with the changing landscape of scientific research, Nature was divided into three different types of publications: Nature Physical Science, Nature New Biology, and Nature, which were available on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. The division was intended to serve the diverse interests and specialist focus areas of the scientific community, while maintaining the hallmark journalism excellence associated with Nature. Editor John Maddux envisioned a future where Nature would emulate the format of a daily newspaper, with each edition providing expert coverage on a variety of scientific topics, with a strong news sense throughout. Maddux’s ambitious vision reflected his steadfast commitment to scientific debate and dissemination. However, despite initial optimism surrounding this effort, its success has remained elusive.
The use of testing in a variety of Nature publications has been considered for a very short time, as practical challenges and editorial considerations have prompted a revision of the strategy. About two years after the split, Nature underwent significant restructuring, with Maddox stepping down from his editorial role. The decision to reorganize the various publications, effective from the first issue of 1974, was timed to coincide with Maddox’s ouster and appointment of a new editor, signaling a critical moment in the magazine’s path. The timing of this reunion, along with Maddox’s departure and the arrival of his successor, highlighted the flirtations and movements in Nature’s editorial leadership. While the journal’s offerings did not yield the desired results, it nevertheless exemplifies Nature’s steadfast determination to never lose its dedication to the continuous innovation and adaptation of scientific publishing.
On August 20, 1973, John Maddox Davies took over as editor for Nature as correspondent in the natural sciences, becoming only the sixth person in its history in more than a century. His appointment was greeted with curiosity and some skepticism, as his background was in geophysics rather than a traditional editor. Nevertheless, Davies quickly demonstrated his aptitude for the role. In his initial editorial article “Nature in the Future”, which he published the same year, Davies countered potential concerns for his sudden editorialism by quoting his predecessor Maddox, who emphasized the importance of looking into the future rather than the communicator’s traditional views. were considered negative. He outlined his vision for the journal, in which he particularly highlighted the power of a Nature paper to offer some fresh perspective, looking at the world through a new and improved window. It marked the beginning of Davies’s tenure, describing his distinctive editorial style and vision.
Prior to his appointment as Editor, Davies led the Seismic Discrimination Group at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, in the United States. Here, he became involved in research related to the exploration of seismic weapons testing, which would later influence his approach to publishing. Davies’s background in geophysics and nuclear exploration gives him unique insight into scientific and geopolitical issues, which he skillfully blends into the editorial content of this magazine. His expertise in this area would prove to be an absolute necessity as he boldly entered the complex scene of nuclear conservation and arms control during his editorship.
Under Davies’ leadership, Nature underwent significant structural and content-related changes to make the journal modern and more relevant. He began consolidating the magazine into a single entity, simplifying its organization and content presentation. Davies gave priority to timely and effective topics, especially those related to nuclear weapons and energy. In particular, his editorial article “Nuclear Conservation: The Need for Debate” highlighted the importance of open discussion on nuclear-related issues, which set the tone for the dialogue within the scientific community and beyond.
Davies’s editing of the omnibus included improvements in format and presentation in addition to a thematic focus. He reconsidered the layout of the magazine, introducing new sections such as Correspondence and Brief News, while removing less important features such as book reviews. Additionally, Davies implemented stylized improvements such as newspaper-style sketch cartoons and review articles, adding depth and variety to the magazine’s content. Similarly, he raised the quality of Nature’s front covers, which he considered important in attracting readers and conveying the essence of the journal.
During his tenure, John Maddux Davies left an indelible mark on Nature, shaping its editorial direction and improving its status as a scientific publication. His strategic approach, combining his scientific expertise and editorial prowess, ensures that Nature remains at the forefront of scientific discussion, addressing pressing issues and promoting intellectual exchange within the global scientific community.
Naturalization in North America proved to be a profitable investment by the late 1970s, with the bulk of voyages and drafts coming from this country. At this time, the Washington DC office had expanded to accommodate a staff of three: David Dixon as news reporter, Sandy Grimwade as biology editor, and Mary Wade managing the office. In February 1978, Nature made its initial appearance in the American scientific community by reducing its fixed individual subscription rate from $98 to $48, strengthening its presence and readership. This strategic decision was aimed at contributing to its continued success in the region.
Scientific discoveries in the 1970s ushered in the Golden Age of Biology, which produced spectacular achievements, including several Nobel Prize-winning Nature authors in the physiology or medicine category. One of these achievements was extremely important, in 1974, when details of how the body’s T cells functioned to kill virus-infected cells were revealed, earning Peter Doherty and Rolf Zinkernagel the Nobel Prize in 1996. Additionally, the use of molecular biology in medicine saw a significant boost, including the development of the first monoclonal antibodies in 1975. These target-specific “magic bullets”, generated by cloned immune cells, were particularly important in controversial medical applications against diseases such as cancer. The profound impact of such advances was appropriately recognized when the creators were awarded the Nobel Prize in 1984.
In 1976, groundbreaking work furthering our understanding of cellular biology based on functionality shed light on ion channels, in which ions travel through cellular membranes. This important research, acknowledged with the Nobel Prize in 1991, provided important insights into fundamental cellular processes that have wide utility in fields as diverse as neuroscience to cardiology. Over time, the diagnostic capabilities of medicine changed drastically and with the advent of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in 1973. MRI became indispensable in clinical settings offering non-invasive and detailed images of internal structures, providing accurate diagnosis and guiding treatment strategies.
The 1970s concluded with another milestone in the field of genetics when the complete DNA of a bacteriophage was sequenced in 1978. This achievement ushered in a new era in which the entire genetic map for life became a real possibility. The sequencing of the genome of a bacteriophage not only demonstrated that such efforts were feasible, but also promoted the idea that the genomes of more complex organisms, including humans, might eventually be sequenced. This impressive achievement gave a mathematical boost to the pace of genetic research and increased anticipation of the possibility of solving the genetic complexities of higher organisms.
The late 1970s were characterized by a growing scientific landscape in the field, due to the number of studies and technological advancements being published in a period of remarkable discovery and technological advancement in the country. With Nature coinciding with this progressive era in the United States as the prestigious platform that featured Nobel Prize-winning contributions from Nature authors and groundbreaking publications in fields ranging from immunology to genetics, the decade marked strides forward in scientific understanding and innovation.
The scientific journal ‘Nature’ saw the rise of regularly named columnists in the 1970s, leading to a significant change in its editorial approach. Among these prominent contributors was Thomas H. Jewkes, a British-American biochemist, who began his column in 1975 and continued until 1980. Jukes distinguished himself through his educated style and a skeptical attitude against the misconceptions popular at the time. One of his famous articles, “Funk Therapy,” published in 1975, in which he excavated the cyclical nature of vitamins. In this analysis, Jukes humorously commented, “Vitamins experience a period of fashion…Vitamin B12 is popular, probably because it is often injected and is red.” Through such viewpoints, Jukes explained the public’s overriding views on nutritional yoga contact.
Jukes applied his biochemical expertise to a variety of environmental issues, going beyond nutrition trends, and offering a nuanced perspective. From his research on the effects of antibiotics in his cattle’s feed, he particularly investigated the use of equipment related to cow growth. In addition, they also discussed emergency concerns such as the risks of ozone-depleting aerosol spray cans, and the environmental effects of pesticides such as DDT. Jukes’ columns served as a bridge between scientific research and public discussion, clarifying complex scientific matters for a large audience.
A recurring theme in Jukes’ columns was his criticism of health fads and questionable scientific claims. He opposed Nobel laureate Linus Pauling’s promotion of megadoses of vitamin C, citing a lack of evidence base. Furthermore, Jukes refuted notions that the consumption of khurmak apples was a partial source of what he claimed was the anticancer agent laetrile. He addressed the social danger in this practice, explaining that khurmak metabolizes the apple’s main compound, amygdalin, into cyanide – a potent poison.
Thomas H. Jewkes’ tenure as a writer at Nature in the 1970s left an immediate impact on scientific discussion and public understanding of science. Through his sharp-eyed analysis and rigorous scrutiny, he continues to challenge well-known pseudo-scientific notions, while articulating complex scientific concepts with clarity and precision. His contributions echoed outside the scientific community, changing public discussion in a positive direction and consistently engaging with scientific issues in a more informed way.