Rosalind Franklin

Rosalind Elsie Franklin was born on 25 July 1920 in Notting Hill, London, into an influential Jewish family. Her father, Ellis Arthur Franklin, was a merchant banker, and her uncle, Herbert Samuel, was a prominent Liberal politician. From an early age, Franklin excelled academically, particularly in science. She attended St Paul's Girls' School, where she demonstrated a marked aptitude for physics and chemistry, and later entered Newnham College, Cambridge, in 1938. There she studied physical chemistry and graduated in 1941, at a time when women were still barred from receiving degrees from the university, although they were permitted to take examinations.

After graduating, Franklin undertook wartime research at the British Coal Utilisation Research Association (BCURA), where she investigated the physical chemistry of coal and carbon. Her doctoral thesis, submitted to Cambridge in 1945, focused on the porosity and structure of coal and established her reputation as an expert in solid-state chemistry. The work was of both scientific and industrial significance, contributing to the development of better gas masks and fuel efficiency during the war.

In 1947, Franklin moved to Paris to work as a postdoctoral researcher in the laboratory of Jacques Mering at the Laboratoire Central des Services Chimiques de l'État. There she honed her skills in X-ray diffraction techniques, applying them to the study of carbonized materials and graphites. Her research yielded important insights into the microstructure of coals and the graphitization process, leading to several influential publications. This period was crucial in shaping her meticulous experimental approach and her deep understanding of crystallography.

In 1951, Franklin returned to England to join the Biophysics Unit at King's College London, led by John Randall. She was tasked with setting up an X-ray diffraction laboratory to study the structure of DNA. At the time, the unit housed another researcher, Maurice Wilkins, who had already begun work on DNA. A misunderstanding about their respective roles led to tension: Franklin believed she would have sole charge of the DNA project, while Wilkins considered her his assistant. This professional friction was exacerbated by their contrasting personalities and management styles.

Despite the strained atmosphere, Franklin made rapid progress. She improved the hydration and isolation of DNA fibres, capturing high-quality diffraction patterns that distinguished between the 'wet' B-form and the drier A-form. In May 1952, her PhD student Raymond Gosling, under her supervision, took an X-ray photograph of a B-DNA fibre—later known as Photo 51—that revealed the characteristic cross-shaped pattern indicative of a helical structure with a double chain. Franklin’s precise measurements from the image yielded critical parameters: the phosphate groups lay on the outside of the backbone, the distance between base pairs was 3.4 Å, and the molecule made a complete turn every 34 Å.

Unknown to Franklin, Wilkins showed Photo 51 to James Watson in January 1953, along with a summary of Franklin’s unpublished data contained in an MRC report. Watson and his colleague Francis Crick at the Cavendish Laboratory had been constructing molecular models of DNA but lacked accurate experimental constraints. Franklin’s data, especially the clear evidence of a double helix and the antiparallel nature of the strands, directly guided them to the correct model. Watson and Crick published their famous double-helix paper in Nature on 25 April 1953, accompanied by two papers from the King’s group: one by Wilkins and his collaborator Alex Stokes, and one by Franklin and Gosling. Franklin’s paper provided the experimental validation for the model, but at the time neither she nor the broader scientific community fully appreciated how much her data had contributed to Watson and Crick’s breakthrough.

Franklin left King’s College in early 1953 under strained circumstances and moved to Birkbeck College, London, where she joined the crystallography laboratory of John Desmond Bernal, a distinguished physicist and communist intellectual. There she shifted her focus to the structure of viruses, applying X-ray crystallography to the tobacco mosaic virus (TMV). Franklin’s work revealed that TMV was a hollow cylindrical structure with RNA embedded between protein subunits, fundamentally advancing the understanding of viral architecture. She collaborated with Aaron Klug and J.D. Bernal on a series of papers that established the structural basis of virus assembly and infection mechanisms. Her research on other plant viruses, such as the potato virus X and the turnip yellow mosaic virus, further demonstrated her skill in extracting detailed structural information from complex biological systems.

In 1956, during a trip to the United States, Franklin experienced abdominal pain and was subsequently diagnosed with ovarian cancer. She continued to work, publishing papers on virus structures and even submitting grant proposals during periods of treatment, but her health declined. Franklin died on 16 April 1958 at the age of 37 in Chelsea, London. Her death cut short a career that might have led to Nobel-level recognition for her later work on viruses.

Franklin’s legacy underwent a significant reassessment decades after her death. Initially remembered primarily as a victim of sexism whose data was misappropriated, she is now widely recognised as a brilliant scientist in her own right. The 1968 publication of Watson’s memoir, The Double Helix, depicted Franklin unflatteringly as ‘Rosy’—a nickname she never used—and created a lasting stereotype that subsequent scholarship has corrected. Brenda Maddox’s 2002 biography Rosalind Franklin: The Dark Lady of DNA and other historical works have illuminated her rigorous methodology, her deep knowledge of crystallography, and her independent path to structural discoveries. In the decades since, numerous institutions, awards, and buildings have been named in her honour, and she has become an icon for women in science. Her story highlights the importance of equitable recognition and the collaborative nature of scientific discovery.