Alexander Selkirk - III

Daniel Defoe was a failed businessman. At the time accounts of Selkirk's adventures came out in 1712 and 1713, he was in his early fifties. Short of money, he was trying to pay off debts, support a wife and children, and maintain a big house by writing books, pamphlets, and newspaper articles. Defoe had a sharp tongue and his political stories annoyed powerful men in the church and government. One of his pamphlets charged some members of Parliament with disrespect for the rights of Englishmen. They did not appreciate his views. A £50 reward was offered for his capture.

He was betrayed by an informer and was charged with sedition. Defoe was fined £135 and spent the next six months in prison. Even though he wrote a lot, by his sixtieth year Defoe was broke, partly because he made unwise investments in business ventures that didn't turn profits. He desperately needed a money-spinner. He remembered the accounts of Selkirk's marooning that he had read. The story of a man surviving alone on an uninhabited island was one that he could use.

In the early eighteenth century almost all books published were nonfiction. Histories, biographies, and travel books were popular subjects. Novels rarely appeared. Defoe spoke with his printer who  agreed that a book about a marooned seaman on a tropical island might sell, but only if it read like nonfiction. In order to achieve this, Defoe decided to write in such a way that it would seem that the hero was writing the book himself, make the story appear as though it had really happened.

In April 1719 the new book appeared in the shops of London booksellers. Defoe's name did not appear as author. The title page read: "The Life and Strange Surprizing Adventures of Robinson Crusoe, of York, Mariner. Written by Himself. It became the most famous adventure story ever told, the tale of the shipwrecked mariner who survived twenty-eight years on an island off Brazil. The book is still available today in bookstores and libraries almost three hundred years after it was first published.

Readers believed Crusoe's story was true. In the Preface, Defoe noted that the book was "a just history of fact; neither is there any appearance of fiction in it." The book was so popular that it was reprinted a month after its first print run of 1500 copies and thrice more by the end of the year. The story was serialized in The Original London Post for sixty-five weeks, an astonishing run. Defoe never named Selkirk as the model for his hero. 

But in a new edition of his novel he wrote: "There is a man alive, and well known too, the actions of whose life are [my] subject, and to whom all or most part of the story alludes: this may be depended upon for the truth, and to this I set my name. Defoe's notes for his story, still preserved in the Guildhall Library in London, read in part: "Goats plenty. Fish: abundance, split and salt.... The fat of young seals good as olive oil."

There is also mention of a visit with a Captain Thomas Bowry of the East India Company, a shipping firm who showed Defoe maps of Juan Fernández. Ten years after it was published, Defoe's story appeared in French, and by 1760 in German, Dutch, and Russian. Translations appear today in nearly all the world's languages. After the success of the first Crusoe story, Defoe wrote two more: "Further Adventures of Robinson Crusoe in 1719 and "Serious Reflections of Robinson Crusoe" the next year. 

In his lifetime, Defoe turned out an awesome amount of writing but only Crusoe and Moll Flanders (1722) remains in print today. Although he wrote a lot, Defoe never seemed to earn enough money to support his wife and seven children. In April 1731, he was hiding from people he owed money to in a shabby house in London where he died, some twelve years after his famous novel first appeared in which he created one of the most enduring characters in all fiction.

Did Selkirk ever read the story? Possibly. In April 1719, when the novel appeared, he was on leave from H.M.S. Enterprise and in London. On daily walks about the city he sometimes visited bookstores. At the end of his famous story, Defoe arranged for Crusoe to return to the island on which he had lived for twenty-eight years. But we know that was only fiction. Alexander Selkirk, the real-life Robinson Crusoe, never visited his island home again.

Alexander Selkirk - II

As he grew to know his island, he felt more comfortable. But there were days when the island's quiet grew heavy. He had no living soul to talk to. Moody and dispirited, he wondered what God had in mind, imprisoning him on this remote island. These melancholy periods, however, came about less and less as the weeks passed and his contentment continued to grow. He found his temper moderating. His angry outbursts at trees and sky for the injustice of his lot ceased. By the end of his second year on Juan Fernández, Selkirk was living comfortably. 

His life on Juan Fernández had become a daily joy, his days aboard ship and his home in Largo increasingly remote. The hut was warm, food plentiful. He was never bored. Knowledge of the island had replaced fear and ignorance. He had a sense of complete freedom, of fulfillment, of safe harbor. There was the solitude to endure, of course, and the lack of a mate or two to enjoy a drink and a chat. But in this he had no choice. He came to a decision. If fate decreed, he would be content to spend the rest of his days on his island kingdom, master of his own life and destiny.

(My reactions after becoming locked-in also followed a similar trajectory. When Time has done enough work, you find ways to deal with the new reality and eventually you get used to it. As soon as an imagined experience becomes an actual experience that cannot be changed, the brain looks for ways to analyse and explain it in a way that allows us to appreciate it. This happens even for regular, everyday events rather than just for terrible events like becoming a quadriplegic. Most people don’t realize how quickly the human mind gets adapted to new situations.)

One day he saw two ships heading for Juan Fernández. He saw their flags through his spyglass: English! Eight seamen came ashore and were bewildered by the sight of disheveled man who could only grunt and mutter words that sounded like "marooned ... marooned." One of the officers recognized Selkirk — "the best man on the Cinque Ports," he stated. Learning that Selkirk had been sailing master of the Cinque Ports and a veteran seaman "of great skill and conduct" he was appointed second mate of the ship.

On the way back home he had unexpected news about the crew of the Cinque Ports - it had run onto an underwater shelf, broke apart, and sank. Almost all the crew drowned, but the captain and six seamen made shore in a boat and were captured by waiting Spanish soldiers. Selkirk was stunned. What if he had not gone ashore on Juan Fernández? He might have drowned or still be wasting away in a Spanish prison. By choosing the island, he had escaped a dreadful fate.

Selkirk finally reached London on October 14,1711 eight years after he left. There had been days on a faraway island when he had expected never to see England again. Life must have seemed very good. Sometime in 1712, the captain of the ship published a book. Sections told about the rescue of Selkirk. The book became the most popular travel book of the year and was reprinted in French, Dutch, and German. Selkirk, the man who had survived four years alone on an island, became a celebrity. He was introduced to rich friends and invited to dinner parties. 

But he could never get used to this luxurious lifestyle. An article said, "[He] frequently bewailed his return to the world which could not ... with all its enjoyments, restore him to the tranquility of his solitude" on his island. He is quoted as saying, "I am now worth 800 pounds but shall never be so happy as when I was not worth a farthing." In late 1716 or early 1717 he enlisted in the Royal Navy. 

Sometime in November or December 1721, when in Africa, Selkirk became ill. Medicine at the time knew little about treating tropical diseases. He died a few days later. At a spot called Selkirk's Lookout on Juan Fernández today stands a bronze tablet placed in 1863. It reads:

In memory of Alexander Selkirk, mariner, a native of Largo, in the county of Fife, Scotland, who lived on this island in complete solitude for four years and four months. He was landed from the Cinque Ports galley, 96 tons, A.D. 1704, was taken off in the Duke, privateer, 12th Feb., 1709. He died Lieutenant of H.M.S. Weymouth A.D. 1728, aged 47 years.

The last date was incorrect. The Weymouth's logbook in the Public Records Office in London gives 1721 as the year of his passing. He was 41. Still, the tablet, erected nearly a century and a half after Selkirk's death, recognized the Scottish mariner's magnificent adventure — a salute to a fellow seaman who had survived four years alone on a remote island.

And by the time he died, he had become the role model for one of the most famous characters in fiction - Robinson Crusoe. 

Alexander Selkirk - I

Selkirk was a veteran seaman. At fifteen years of age, he had run away from home, the seaside village of Largo, Scotland. He sailed on merchant ships between the West Indies and England and learned navigation, which enabled him to become a ship's officer. He joined an English ship called the Cinque Ports. As sailing master in 1703, he had piloted the Cinque Ports from England south through the Atlantic Ocean, around stormy Cape Horn. 

The Cinque Ports reached the remote Spanish island of Juan Fernández off the West coast of South America. The island lies 360 miles due west of Valparaiso, Chile. Because England and Spain were at war, the island was not a safe place for an English ship. He knew from charts that the island was about twelve miles long and four miles wide. He was twenty-seven years old and strongly built. He also possessed a quick temper.

The island was the only anchorage and watering place that could be chanced along the Spanish-held South American coast. While water casks were being refilled from freshwater streams on shore and trees cut for the woodbin, Selkirk inspected the ship. After its long passage from England to Juan Fernández, many repairs were needed.

The captain, though, would hear none of it. Repairs could take days. Spanish warships could appear any time. He was determined that as soon as water and wood came aboard, they would leave. Selkirk argued that the captain was being overly cautious but the latter refused to yield. Selkirk stubbornly refused to accept the decision. Now his well-known temper began to rise. The captain decided to call Selkirk's bluff. He left Selkirk alone on the island and left. 

As the night came on, it's unlikely that he was deeply distressed. He believed that the whole episode had been an unfortunate fit of temper on both their parts. His marooning on the island would be temporary — maybe a day, a week, and the Cinque Ports would come back. He was navigator, the one man able to sail the poorly charted ocean and find the way back to England. He would just have to make the best of it until the ship returned.

He considered building a fire but decided against it. Savages might see the flames. He had heard of flesh eaters on South Pacific islands. His sea chest held a few linen shirts and wool stockings, flint and steel for making fire, cooking pot, brass spyglass, hatchet, knife, and his books on navigation and geometry. As the days went by, his hopes of the ship returning diminished. He found crabs, mussels, and clams for food. He managed to build a fire and used water from a stream. 

After weeks on the beach, Selkirk shifted to a cave whose hollow entrance offered an advantage: a high lookout over the bay, a place to watch for a ship. He slept whole days away. Sleep was his only escape. Awake, he whistled Scottish folk tunes, a human sound in the island's stillness. Sometime in May or June of 1705, after eight or nine months on the beach and in the cave, Selkirk admitted a hard truth - the Cinque Ports would not be returning to the island. It was possible that he would stay here for years, perhaps for the rest of his days.

He discovered waterfalls and streams and marveled at the island birds—hawks, owls, petrels, puffins, blackbirds, and hummingbirds. In one valley he came upon a field of turnips and stands of fig trees. He found patches of oats, pumpkins, radishes, parsnips, and parsley growing wild. Selkirk gathered the crops gratefully, but how they came to grow there he didn't know. (In 1591 Spanish settlers from the South American mainland had planted crops and grazed goats during a brief but unsuccessful attempt to farm and build homes on the island.)

He stacked dry grass and branches, ready to set on fire. The smoke would signal a passing ship. But a signal fire also meant taking a fearful risk. The waters between Juan Fernández and the coast of South America were patrolled by Spanish and French warships. A smoke signal might bring one or the other.  "[The Spanish] would murder him," he feared, "or make a slave of him in the [silver] mines." Despite his daily watch, no ship arrived to rescue him. He was alone, both master of the island and its prisoner.

Selkirk's days followed a regular routine. After a reading in the Bible, he prepared a light breakfast — fruit, a cabbage leaf, a drink of fresh water. Next a bath in the nearby stream, scrubbing himself with pumice, a soft volcanic stone. He mashed charcoal from the fire pit into powder, placed a line on a finger, scrubbed his teeth, then rinsed his mouth in the stream. A walk on the beach might reward him with the capture of a sea turtle. Sometimes he fished for snapper, bonito, sea bass, and yellowtails. 

The impact hypothesis - III

The Alvarezes wrote up the results from their tests and sent them, along with their proposed explanation, to Science. Their paper, “Extraterrestrial Cause for the Cretaceous-Tertiary Extinction,” was published in June 1980. An asteroid six miles wide collided with the earth sixty-five million years ago. (The date was later revised to 66 mya.) Exploding on contact, it released energy of more than a million of the most powerful H-bombs ever tested. Debris, including iridium from the pulverized asteroid, spread around the globe. 

Sunlight disappeared and temperatures plunged and a mass extinction ensued. The Alvarezes proposed that the main cause of the K-T mass extinction was not the impact itself or even the immediate aftermath. The truly catastrophic effect of the asteroid was the dust which spread around the globe and shut out the sunlight and blocked photosynthesis in plants. In the intervening decades, this account has been subjected to numerous refinements. 

It generated lots of excitement, much of it beyond the bounds of paleontology. In the context of “hard-core uniformitarianism,” the impact hypothesis was worse than wrong — it couldn’t have happened. A few years later, an informal survey was conducted among paleontologists. A majority thought some sort of cosmic collision might have taken place. But only one in twenty thought it had anything to do with the extinction of the dinosaurs. Among professional paleontologists, the Alvarezes’ idea and in many cases the Alvarezes themselves were reviled.

But evidence for the hypothesis continued to accumulate. First was tiny grains of rock known as “shocked quartz.” Under high magnification, shocked quartz exhibits what look like scratch marks caused by high pressure that deform the crystal structure. Shocked quartz was first noted at nuclear test sites and later found near impact craters. In 1984, grains of shocked quartz were discovered in a layer of clay from the K-T boundary in eastern Montana. 

It occurred to Walter Alvarez that if there had been a giant, impact-induced tsunami, it would have left behind a distinctive "fingerprint" in the sedimentary record. He scanned the records of thousands of sediment cores that had been drilled in the oceans, and found such a "fingerprint" in cores from the Gulf of Mexico (oops! Gulf of America). Finally, a hundred-mile-wide crater was discovered beneath the Yucatán Peninsula buried under half a mile of newer sediment. 

This crater had shown up in gravity surveys taken in the nineteen-fifties by Mexico’s state-run oil company. When Walter located the cores in 1991 and examined them, they were found to contain a layer of glass—rock that had melted, then rapidly cooled at the K-T boundary. To the Alvarez camp, this

was the conclusive proof that they required about there having been an asteroid impact.  It was enough to move many uncommitted scientists to support the impact hypothesis. By this time, Luis Alvarez had died of complications from esophageal cancer. The crater became more widely known, after the nearest town, as the Chicxulub crater.

When the Alvarezes had published their hypothesis, they knew of only three sites where the iridium layer was exposed. In the decades since, dozens more have been located. The confirmation of the impact hypothesis was a challenge to a uniformitarian viewpoint that basically every geologist and paleontologist had been trained in. 

On land, every animal larger than a cat seems to have died out. The event’s most famous victims, the dinosaurs — or, to be more precise, the non-avian dinosaurs — suffered a hundred percent losses. Around two-thirds of the mammalian families living at the end of the Cretaceous disappear at the boundary. Everything (and everyone) alive today is descended from an organism that somehow survived the impact. 

Change one detail, and we can imagine a completely different world. If the asteroid had hit a moment earlier or later, it would have hit deep ocean instead of shallow seas, releasing far less toxic gas, and killing many fewer species. If the asteroid had been delayed by just one minute, it might have missed Earth entirely. An astrophysicist has proposed that tiny oscillations of the sun's orbit flung the asteroid from the distant Oort cloud toward our planet. But for one small vibration in an unfathomably distant reach of deep space, dinosaurs might have survived — and humans might never have existed. 

Natural Selection is often presented as a relentless improvement from worse to better. Richard Dawkins once said that “Nature is a miserly accountant, grudging the pennies, watching the clock, punishing the smallest extravagance." But evolution at times proceeds in an unpredictable fashion. This is obvious when you consider that the evolution of mammals only happened because of an asteroid strike. But we mostly hear about survival of the fittest not survival of the luckiest. 

The impact hypothesis - II

Enter Walter Alvarez. He came from a long line of distinguished scientists. His great-grandfather and grandfather were both noted physicians, and his father, Luis, was a physicist at the University of California-Berkeley. Walter attended graduate school at Princeton and took up geology. In the early 70s, he got a research post at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory. Alvarez decided to try to figure out, on the basis of plate tectonics, how the Italian peninsula had formed.

In this quest, he found himself working in a hill town of Gubbio, about a hundred miles north of Rome, with an Italian geologist who was an expert on foraminifera or “forams” for short. They are the tiny marine creatures that create little calcite shells which drift down to the ocean floor once the animal inside has died. They can only be seen with microscopes. The geologist drew Alvarez's attention to a curious sequence. 

In one centimeter of clay separating two limestone layers, there were no fossils at all. In the older layer that lay below the clay, the forams were much larger than in the younger layer above the clay. The same of distribution of forams above and below the clay layer was present everywhere he looked. What had caused such a change in the forams? How fast did it happen? These were the questions that puzzled Walter. The pursuit of these questions led him to one of the biggest discoveries about one of the most important days in the history of life.

First a brief description of Deep Time. The history of life is divided into three chapters called "eras". The first is called the Paleozoic (“ancient life”), the second the Mesozoic (“middle life”), and the third the Cenozoic (“new life”). Each era comprises several “periods”; the Mesozoic, for example, spans the Triassic, the Jurassic, and the Cretaceous. The next period is the Tertiary (now renamed the Paleogene).

               Geological Time Scale 

The boundary between the Cretaceous and Tertiary layers, where the clay layer is found is called the K-T boundary. K is used as the abbreviation for Cretaceous because C was already taken by an earlier geological period known as the Carboniferous; today, the border is formally known as the Cretaceous-Paleogene, or K-Pg, boundary. It is a line that definitively marks the end-Cretaceous mass extinction everywhere in the world where the right aged rocks are preserved. It happened 66 mya (million years ago). 

                                                             KT (or KPg) boundary 

 Alvarez had been used to believing in uniformitarianism. He had learned that the disappearance of any group of organisms had to be a gradual process, with one species slowly dying out, then another, then a third, and so on. But the sequence in the Gubbio limestone gave him a different picture. The many species of forams in the lower layer seemed to disappear suddenly and all more or less at the same time. He also realized another thing. These forams appeared to vanish right around the point the last of the dinosaurs were known to have disappeared.

In 1977, Alvarez got a job at Berkeley, where his father, Luis, was working. He brought with him to California his samples from Gubbio. While Walter had been studying plate tectonics, Luis was busy winning the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1968. He’d also developed the first linear proton accelerator, invented a new kind of bubble chamber, designed several innovative radar systems, and codiscovered tritium.  In 2007 the American Journal of Physics commented, "Luis Alvarez was one of the most brilliant and productive experimental physicists of the twentieth century."

Luis Alvarez was interested in all sorts of riddles. An example was whether there were treasure-filled chambers inside Egypt’s second-largest pyramid. He would often come up with innovative ideas to approach the problem. When Walter told his father about the puzzling fossil distribution in Gubbio, Luis was fascinated. He came up with the wild idea of clocking the clay using the element iridium which is extremely rare on the surface of the earth. But Luis knew that it was much more common in meteorites. 

On earth, the tiny amounts of iridium come from bits of meteorites that are constantly raining down on the planet. Luis reasoned that the longer it had taken the clay layer to accumulate, the more cosmic dust would have fallen; thus the more iridium it would contain. By this technique he would be able to find out what length of time the clay layer represented. Walter gave him some limestone from above the clay layer, some from below it, and some of the clay itself. 

When the results came from the lab, it was puzzling. The amount of iridium that was present in the layers above and below the clay layer was what was normally present on earth. But the amount of iridium in the clay layer in the middle was 30 times higher. No one knew what to make of this. Was it a weird anomaly, or something more significant? Something very unusual, and very bad, had happened at the K-T boundary. The forams, the clay, the iridium, the dinosaurs, were all signs — but of what?

Two other sites having sediments dated to 66 mya when the Dinosaurs disappeared were found - one in  Denmark and another in New Zealand. They had the same pattern as the ones at Gubbio - a thin clay layer between earlier and later layers. They too showed an iridium “spike” in the clay layer. The Alvarezes knew they were onto something and started thinking up theories that would fit the available data. Finally, after almost a year’s worth of dead ends, they arrived at the impact hypothesis. 

The impact hypothesis - I

More than 99 percent all species that have ever lived on Earth have become extinct. For many people, when they think about extinction, they think about dinosaurs. The dinosaurs were huge terrestrial animals that lived during the period about 240 to 66 million years ago (called the Mesozoic Era). They had rich varieties in body size, shape and way of life. They ruled the Earth for more than 100 million years, till somehow they suddenly vanished on the Earth more than 65 million years ago. 

The mystery of the extinction of the Dinosaurs has been the focus of research and debate for long. Many different theories have been put forth as explanations. Some of the well-known ones include invoking climate change to which the dinosaurs could not adapt; continental drift causing climate change; flipping of earth’s magnetic poles leading to the dramatic changes of natural environment; acid rain leaching away important micronutrients; rodents eating dinosaur eggs as food; etc. 

The most commonly accepted explanation is that a meteor struck the earth 66 million years ago leading to a nuclear winter that led to the extinction of the non-avian dinosaurs (birds are accepted as having evolved from a branch of the dinosaurs). The rock slammed into the Yucatán Peninsula moving at something like forty-five thousand miles per hour. The asteroid blasted into the air more than fifty times its own mass in pulverized rock.

The resulting huge cloud of very hot vapor and debris raced over the North American continent incinerating anything in its path. Owing to the composition of the Yucatán Peninsula, the dust thrown up was rich in sulfur and particularly effective at blocking sunlight. After the initial heat pulse, the world experienced a multi-season “impact winter.” Forests were decimated. Marine ecosystems collapsed. And the non-avian dinosaurs died out. 

The interesting question is: how did scientists find out about a meteor-strike that happened all that long ago? Before that story, one needs to know about a clash between two schools of thought in evolutionary biology: uniformitarianism and catastrophism. 

In the opinion of uniformitarians like Darwin, the emergence and disappearance of species are the outcomes of natural evolution. When there is change in natural environment, the species is no longer able to adapt to the new environment and if there are no other proper places for migration, the population of the species will diminish till it becomes extinct. They believe that the emergence and disappearance of species is the effect of slow natural selection. The uniformitarian view denied sudden or sweeping change of any kind.

On the other hand, catastrophists believe that sudden, short-lived, and violent events lead to the extinction of many organisms. The leading scientific proponent of catastrophism in the early nineteenth century was the French anatomist and paleontologist Georges Cuvier. He believed that the history of life on earth indicated that there had been several of these revolutions, like earthquakes and floods, which he viewed as recurring natural events, amid long intervals of stability. 

The more that was learned about the fossil record, the more difficult it was to explain the sudden disappearance and appearance of large numbers of species, which, according to Uniformitarians, should take millions of years. The Uniformitarians said that maybe the losses shown in the fossil record did constitute a “mass extinction.” But mass extinctions were not to be confused with “catastrophes.” They maintained that the fossil record was incomplete and the missing spans of time would eventually be found. 

In the war of words between the two groups, Uniformitarians held the upper hand for many decades. The feeling between the two groups was so bitter that Uniformitarians described catastrophism as 'evolution by jerks'. In retaliation, Catastrophists described Uniformitarianism as 'evolution by creeps'. Who said academics don’t have a sense of humour?

Vavilov and his astonishing botanists - IV

What happened to Vavilov? It took many years for that story to emerge. After he was taken from Ukraine, he was subjected to brutal interrogation. Then he was put on a trial and found guilty of spying for the British, which was not true, and he was sentenced to death. So by the time of the German invasion of the Soviet Union, Vavilov was no longer on the scene, he was in prison, awaiting execution. 

It's only because of the dedicated work of a Russian academic called Mark Popovsky in the 1960s that we even know that story. He managed to get access to the NKVD papers against all the odds, managed to write a book and smuggle it out of the Soviet Union. Popovsky became the first outsider to learn the story of how and why the security services arrested Vavilov, who informed on him, what sentence he received, and how and where he died. 

He recorded in detail how Vavilov had to face innumerable interrogations until the botanist agreed to collude in the fictional version of events that had been prepared for his confession. Then Popovsky began giving lectures, one of which he delivered at the seed bank itself.  The informers whom he mentioned by name jumped up and left the hall to the hissing and jeers of their colleagues. Then he published an article in which he described the three years leading up to Vavilov's arrest, and Trofim Lysenko’s role in these events. 

This mild provocation made the state issue a two-year ban on the publication of Popovsky’s writing. By 1967, attitudes toward Vavilov and his rival Lysenko had sufficiently shifted that the Institute was named the N. I. Vavilov All-Russian Institute of Plant Genetic Resources. While publicly engaged in the restoration of Vavilov’s reputation, the Soviet Union sought to suppress details about his demise. It did not want the world to know that the state had murdered a famous scientist. 

A KGB agent visited Popovsky and issued a stern warning to the writer not to communicate in conversation, lecture, or publication, the information he had obtained about Vavilov. On June 3, 1977, the KGB searched Popovsky’s apartment for his notes but they did not find them. He had already photographed his notes and distributed them among friends and colleagues both within and outside Russia revealing Vavilov's story. 

In the years that followed, Vavilov's colleague Nikolai Ivanov worked tirelessly to revive and honor his friend and teacher’s work. He worked closely with Vavilov’s widow, Yelena, to locate and collect Vavilov’s unpublished manuscripts. With this material Ivanov published three major books detailing Vavilov's account of his specimen-gathering expeditions around the world. Ivanov edited two editions of Vavilov’s biography, and two articles that recentered his research in the arena of Soviet science. 

Vavilov laid the foundations of modern plant breeding. His vision for preserving plant biodiversity was ahead of its time. These are the same principles that are being used to give us the wheat, that gives us the bread that we eat every week today. He was also motivated by the idea of trying to build up a library of seeds and plants in the event that habitat was lost. This kind of work involving the preservation of threatened types of plants was extremely important and is what so many botanical scientists and banks are involved in today. 

Varieties of wheat collected by Vavilov from Spain, Japan, Italy, and Argentina and saved by the staff of his institution were crossbred to create the winter variety Bezostaya 1,  used across the world for its high yield. Samples of a rare and disease-resistant variety of wheat collected by Vavilov in the mountain valleys of Dagestan were used by British and Australian plant breeders to develop a new, high-yielding variety. 

By 1967 a hundred million acres of Russian agricultural land had been planted with seeds derived from the Institute’s collection. By 1979 that area had almost doubled to a third of all Russia’s arable land. Today the seed bank in St. Petersburg holds more than 320,000 separate samples, a collection that has proven invaluable in ensuring food security in Russia, with more than 4,500 new and unique types of plants bred from original samples collected by Vavilov and his teams. Ninety percent of the seeds and planted crops held in the St. Petersburg collection are found in no other scientific collections in the world. 

Around the world, people continue to benefit from the sacrifice of the scientists who gave their lives during the siege of Leningrad. This story is well known to plant scientists, people who work at seed banks but outside of that small community, it's not well known at all.