Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education
Region VIII – Eastern Visayas
Schools Division of Calbayog City
CALBAYOG CITY NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
SCHOOL ID: 313801
P2 Brgy. Hamorawon, Calbayog City, Western Samar 6710 . Tel Nos. PLDT-(055) 209-1535
Email: calbayogcitynhs@yahoo.com, calbayogcitynhs@gmail.com

GENERAL BIOLOGY 1

Module 1 Foundation of Life

At the end this module, you will be able to:

 Determine the events that led to the cell theory.
 Explain the postulates of the cell theory.
 Describe how the cell theory disproved the belief of spontaneous generation.
 Trace the events that led to the invention of the first microscopes.
 Relate the invention of the first microscopes with the discovery of the cell.

The CELL is the basic unit of life. All living things are made up of one or more cells. Living things
that are made up of one cell only, such as bacteria and protozoa, are called unicellular organisms,
whereas those that are made up of many cells, such as plants and animals, are called multicellular
organisms.

Multicellular organisms are macroscopic, which means they can be seen by the unaided eye.
Unicellular organisms, on the other hand, are microscopic, which means they are so small that you
cannot see them with unaided eyes. You have to use a microscope to see them. The microscope is an
instrument used to view objects that cannot be seen by the unaided eye. It can magnify the size of very
small objects.

BIG IDEA

The cell is the basic unit of life. All organisms are made up of cells.
 Fig. 1.1 (a) Streptococcus pneumonia, a bacterium, is a unicellular organism that can be seen with the aid of the
microscope. It causes pneumonia, respiratory disease. (b) Tilapia is a multicellular organism.
Sources: http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/20/123220-004-FD0933B2.jpg;
http://www.globalfoodtrading.com/tilapia.ph

THE INVENTION OF THE MICROSCOPE AND DISSEVER OF THE CELL

Before the microscope was invented, the Romans had already invented and experimented with
glasses during the first century. One of these glass samples involved a piece that had thick middle and
thin edges. They discovered that small objects become larger when viewed through this glass sample.
This became the earliest fem; of a lens. (The word lens is derived from the Latin word lentil, because it
closely resembled the shape of the lentil bean.) These lenses were not fully utilized until the 13th
century, when they were finally used in eyeglass production. These lenses can magnify objects only at
6x-10x.

Around 1595, the first compound microscope was invented by Zacharias Janssen (1580-1638). It is
believed that Zacharias probably had help from his father, Hans, because he was still young at that time.
They made these microscopes by placing several lenses together, and discovered that objects were
further enlarged upon viewing.

In 1665, Robert Hooke (1635-1703) examined a thin slice of cork under the microscope that he built. He
was able to see and observe small compartments of the cork. He initially named the small
compartments CELLULA because they reminded him of the “little rooms” in the monastery. These
eventually became known as cells. A few years later, Anton van Leeuwenhoek (1632-1723) created a
microscope with a much higher magnification than the microscope that Hooke used. Leeuwenhoek used
his microscope to observe specimens such as bacteria, blood cells, and protists.

Fig. 1.2 (a) The First compound microscope created by Janssen; (b) an image of the cork cells observed by Hooke;
(c) an image of Vorticella, a protest, as seen by Leeuwenhoek
Sources: http://www.cerebromente.org.br/n17/history/jansen-micro.JPG;
http://www.ucmp.berkely.edu/history/images/hookecork.jpg;
http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/protista/ciliata/vorticella.gif

THE CELL THEORY

These century passed before several improvements on the microscope were made latest microscopes
were used by Matthias Jakob Schlerden and Theodor Schwann. Schleiden was a professor of botany at
the University Of Jena, Germany. Schwann was a professor of physiology at the University of Louvain,
Belgium.

Fig. 1.3 (a) Matthias Jakob Schleiden (1804-1881) and

(b) Theodor Schwann (1810-1882)

Schleiden published his research in 1838, which

was based on several years of studying different
types of plants under the microscope. Schwann published the research a year later based on his study of
several slides of animal cells. Their researches became the bases of the first two postulates of the cell
theory:

1. All organisms are made up of cells.

2. The basic unit of life is the cell.

BIG IDEA

Advancements in cell biology may also affect, or may stem from, other researches in fields such as
agriculture, genetics, biochemistry, immunology, and developmental biology. These advancements
made several contributions to improving our standard of living, such as increasing the immunity of
several crops and treating diseases that were once untreatable.

The first two postulates support the idea that the cell is the foundation of life. All organisms
have one or more cells. No organism can exist without a cell that will support its body processes that it
needs to survive.

The last postulate was eventually proven by Rudolf Ludwig Karl Virchow in 1858. Virchow, upon
studying how cells played a role in body diseases at that time, noticed that the existence of diseases in
the organs and tissues come from affected cells. From this, he stated Omnis cellula e cellula, which
means that all cells arise from preexisting cells. It was believed, however, that this discovery was initially
made by Robert Remak, a Jewish scientist, in 1855, when he tried to prove the idea of cell division by
hardening the cell membrane.
 Fig. 1.4 (a) Rudolf Ludwig Karl Virchow (1821-1902)
and (b) Robert Remak (1815-1865)

THE THEORY OF SPONTANEOUS GENERATION

The cell theory had greatly disproved the theory

of spontaneous generation, which states that
organisms we come from nonliving sources. The
theory of spontaneous generation was generally
accepted until the 19th century. The cell
theory’s third postulate directly contradicts the theory of spontaneous generation. Aside from the
experiments conducted by Virchow and Remak, prior studies were initially done to test the validity of
the spontaneous generation theory.

In 1668, Francesco Redi (1626-1697) experimented on fresh meat in jars. One jar with fresh
meat was left open, while the other jar with fresh meat was covered with gauze. Another are with fresh
meat was sealed airtight. The open jar eventually had maggots feeding on the meat, while there were
no maggots on the meat in the covered Jar. However, some maggots were present on the cloth cover of
the other jar. Thus, Redi concluded that maggots can only come from something alive. He was one of
the scientists to disprove the theory of spontaneous generation

Fig. 1.5 Francisco Redi’s experiment. (a) The jar was left open; later, maggots were observed crawling on the meat.
(b) The jar was sealed airtight with the cork cover; no maggots were observed on the meat. (c) The jar was covered
with gauze; later, some maggots were found on the gauze.
Adapted from http://www.livebinders.com/play/play?id=747311

In 1745, John Needham (l 713-1781) also made a test to check the validity of spontaneous
generation. During that time, people already believed that boiling could kill microorganisms. In
Needham’s experiment, he boiled the chicken broth in a container, and then sealed it. Days later,
microorganisms still grew on the surface of the Chicken broth. He presented this as a piece of evidence
that supported the theory of spontaneous generation because there was no other source of life other
than the broth.

Fig. 1.6 Needham’s experiment. (a) The chicken broth was boiled in a container. (b) The container was sealed. (c)
After a few days, microorganisms grew on the surface of the chicken broth.
Adapted from http://image.slidesharecdn.com/1-2howscientistswork-140918082022-phpapp01/95/12-how-
scientists-work-8-638.jpg?cb=1411028471

Lazzaro Spallanzani (1729-1799) was not convinced by the experiment of Needham. He thought
that microorganisms may have entered the broth from the air between the time after the broth has
cooled and before the jar was sealed. He set out to do another experiment to test his hypothesis. In his
experiment, he sealed the flask and then boiled the chicken broth in it. After a few days, no
microorganisms were observed in the flask. He subjected another flask with chicken broth to the same
conditions, except that the flask was not sealed. Microorganisms grew in this flask. He saw his results as
proof that the theory of spontaneous generation could not be true.

Fig. 1.7. Spallanzani’s experiment. (a) The flask was kept open,
and the chicken broth was boiled and then left to cool; after a
few days, microorganisms were present in the uncovered chicken
broth. (b) The flask was sealed, and the chicken broth was
heated until it boiled; no organisms were present after a few
days.
Sources:http://spontaneousgeneration.weebly.com/lazzar
o-spallanzani.html

Those who believed in the theory of spontaneous generation contested that air was prevented
to enter the flask of Spallanzani, resulting in the absence of microorganisms. In 1859, Louis Pasteur
(1822--1895) also did some tests to check the truth behind the theory of spontaneous generation. In
Pasteur’s experiment, he put the meat broth in two separate S-shaped flasks without a seal, and then he
boiled the broth to kill any existing microbes. He broke the swan neck from the first S-shaped flask,
while retaining the swan neck in the other. Dust particles eventually fell on the broth in the first flask,
whereas the dust particles only got through the bottom bend of the swan neck in the second flask,
keeping the broth sterile.

The broth in the first flask quickly became cloudy, a sign that microorganisms had entered the
broth. However, in the second flask, only the bottom bend of the swan neck had darkened, keeping the
broth sterile. Hence, it became clear to Pasteur that microorganisms were introduced through the dust
particles, and that these microorganisms did not arise from the broth itself: This finally proved that the
theory of spontaneous generation was flawed.

Fig. 1.8 This part of Pasteur’s experiment shows the results in the second flask. The microorganisms were not able
to reach the meat broth because they were trapped in the tube’s bend.
Source:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/FhzwpfpJIF4/UYqCpixDlmlAAAAAAAAAiQ/VMkxw5OR1QI/s1600/Pasteur+swan.png

Prepared by:

EMMA RUTH D. LABRO, RN,LPT

Subject Teacher