ArticleslgStudy

science

Liebig–Pasteur dispute

Liebig–Pasteur dispute is a science topic covered in the lgStudy science library. This page brings together a partial reference excerpt, illustrations, worked examples, real-world applications and a short study plan, so you can understand Liebig–Pasteur dispute rather than just read about it. In short: Liebig–Pasteur dispute is the dispute between Justus von Liebig and Louis Pasteur on the processes and causes of fermentation. Dispute overview Louis Pasteur a French chemist, supported the idea that fermentation was a biological process.

Key takeaways

  • Liebig–Pasteur dispute belongs to science; place it in that map before memorising details.
  • Learn the definition first, then one example that makes the definition concrete.
  • Connect Liebig–Pasteur dispute to a quantity you can measure, compute or draw — that is where exam questions come from.
  • Reproduce the core statement of Liebig–Pasteur dispute from memory before moving on to harder problems.

Reference excerpt

Liebig–Pasteur dispute is the dispute between Justus von Liebig and Louis Pasteur on the processes and causes of fermentation.

Dispute overview Louis Pasteur a French chemist, supported the idea that fermentation was a biological process. Justus von Liebig, a German chemist, supported the idea that fermentation was a mechanical process. Both chemists had different methods of experimentation, and they focused on different aspects of fermentation because they had different ideas about where the fermentation began in an organism. The Liebig–Pasteur feud started in 1857 when Pasteur said that fermentation can occur in the absence of oxygen. The two were aware of the other's works, but continued working with their own theories. The two mention each other, as well as other scientists, in articles and other publications about the processes and causes of fermentation.

Pasteur’s position Pasteur observed that fermentation does not require oxygen, but needs yeast, which is alive. Fermentation is a biological process, not a reduction and oxygen chemical process. He used two slender bottles. One of the bottles had a curved neck; this is called a swan neck. Pasteur poured liquid broth into the two bottles, and heated the bottom of the bottles. When the liquid boiled, he let them cool. Pasteur observed that the broth in the curved bottle stayed clear, except when the bottle was shaken. Pasteur explained that the two bottles were filled with air, but the curved bottle could stop most of the particles in the air, and it kept its nature. However, the liquid in the other bottle degenerated. Therefore, he concluded that fermentation does not require oxygen, but needs the yeast. When yeast is allowed to grow over time, the substance will spoil or rot. Pasteur's viewed fermentation as a type of vitalism. He observed that living organisms were responsible for the process of fermentation.

Liebig’s position Liebig formulated his own theory claiming that the production of alcohol was not a biological process but a chemical process, discrediting the idea that fermentation could occur due to microscopic organisms. He believed that vibrations emanating from the decomposition of organic matter would spread to the sugar resulting in the production of solely carbon dioxide and alcohol. The change was facilitated by ferment or yeast, which has the characters of a compound of nitrogen in the state of putrefaction. Given that the ferment's susceptibility to change, it is submitted to decomposition, by the action of air (from which oxygen is provided), water (from which moisture is obtained), and a favorable temperature. Prior to contact with oxygen, the constituents are arranged together without action on each other. Through the oxygen, the state of rest (or equilibrium) of the attractions that keep the elements together has been disturbed. As a consequence of this disturbance, a separation or new arrangement of the elements has been formed. Fermentation occurs due to the transference of molecular instability from the ferment (atoms in motion) to the sugar molecules, and continues as long as the decomposition of the ferment continues. Liebig's view of fermentation can be said to fall under a mechanism point of view. From his work, he saw that fermentation, as well as other catalysts happened by a chemical and mechanical process.

Liebig–Pasteur communications Pasteur responded to Liebig's works, often through his own writings, and using results from his own experiments to support his theories. For example, in 1858, Pasteur wrote a paper trying to disprove Liebig's theory that fermentation cannot be caused by the growth of the yeast when it takes place when yeast is added to pure sugar-water. Pasteur thought that in pure sugar-water, yeast was both growing and disintegrating, and developed experiments to support his theories. Liebig, however, was not convinced, and claimed that Pasteur was not solving the questions he had about the decomposition in fermentation. In 1869, Liebig responded to Pasteur's challenge, which he had made public ten years before. Liebig still held this ground, and mentioned that some of Pasteur's experiments were difficult to replicate and use effectively. Pasteur was furious, and suggested the Royal Academy hire a third scientist who would replicate his experiments and verify his results in order to support his theories. Neither Liebig nor the Academy responded. Later, Pasteur demanded a meeting with Liebig, but Liebig did not him receive cordially, and refused to discuss the topic of fermentation.

Eduard Büchner

Discovery of the active agent of fermentation The famous controversy between Pasteur and Liebig over the nature of alcoholic fermentation was uncovered by Eduard Büchner, a German chemist and zymologist. Influenced by his brother Hans, who became the famous bacteriologist, Büchner developed an interest in the fermentation process in which yeast breaks down sugar into alcohol and carbon dioxide. He published his first paper in 1885 which revealed that fermentation could occur in the presence of oxygen, a conclusion contrary to the view held by Louis Pasteur. By 1893, Büchner was fully involved in seeking the active agent of fermentation. He obtained pure samples of the inner fluid of yeast cells by pulverizing yeast within a mixture of sand and diatomaceous earth, then squeezing the mixture through a canvas filter. This process avoided using solvents and high temperatures which had foiled previous investigations. He assumed that the collected fluid was incapable of producing fermentation because the yeast cells were dead. However, when he attempted to preserve the fluid in concentrated sugar, he was startled to observe carbon dioxide being released, a sign that fermentation was taking place. Büchner hypothesized that the fermentation was caused by an enzyme which he named zymase. His findings that fermentation was the result of chemical process both inside and outside cells, were published in 1897.

… excerpt ends here. Continue reading the full article.

Worked examples

Example 1 — a first encounter with Liebig–Pasteur dispute

Start with the simplest possible case. Write down what Liebig–Pasteur dispute claims or describes in one sentence, then invent the smallest concrete situation in which that sentence is true. In science, the smallest case is usually a single object, a single equation or a single measurement. Check that every symbol or term in your sentence has a meaning in that case.

Example 2 — changing one variable

Take the situation from Example 1 and change exactly one quantity: double it, halve it, or set it to zero. Predict what should happen to Liebig–Pasteur dispute before you calculate. Comparing your prediction with the result is the fastest way to find out whether you understand the idea or only the words.

Example 3 — an exam-style question

Typical questions about Liebig–Pasteur dispute ask you to (a) state it precisely, (b) apply it to given data, and (c) explain a limitation. Practise writing all three answers in under five minutes; the third part is what separates a full-mark answer from an average one.

Applications of Liebig–Pasteur dispute

In research
Liebig–Pasteur dispute appears in science research whenever the underlying quantities have to be modelled precisely. Papers usually cite it as a starting assumption and then explore where it breaks down.
In technology and industry
Engineering practice reuses Liebig–Pasteur dispute in design rules, simulations and safety margins. Knowing the idea lets you read a specification sheet and understand why the numbers look the way they do.
In the classroom
Liebig–Pasteur dispute is common in secondary-school and first-year university syllabi. It links to neighbouring topics Fermentation, Justus von Liebig, Louis Pasteur, so understanding it makes those chapters shorter.
In everyday life
Look for Liebig–Pasteur dispute outside the textbook — in sport, cooking, traffic, electronics or the sky above you. An example you found yourself is remembered far longer than one you were given.
Ask Teacher Smith questions about this articleOpens your AI tutor with a question about “Liebig–Pasteur dispute” →

Affiliate

Preply — study more efficiently by working with a personal tutor. 50% off.

How to study Liebig–Pasteur dispute in 20 minutes

  1. Read the reference excerpt below once, without taking notes.
  2. Close the page and write down what Liebig–Pasteur dispute means in your own words.
  3. Compare your version with the excerpt and mark what you missed.
  4. Work through the three examples above with pen and paper.
  5. Explain Liebig–Pasteur dispute out loud to somebody else — or to Teacher Smith in the lgStudy chat.

Frequently asked questions

What is Liebig–Pasteur dispute in simple terms?

Liebig–Pasteur dispute is the dispute between Justus von Liebig and Louis Pasteur on the processes and causes of fermentation. Dispute overview Louis Pasteur a French chemist, supported the idea that fermentation was a biological process.

Why does Liebig–Pasteur dispute matter?

Because it connects several science ideas at once: it gives you a definition you can apply, a quantity you can calculate, and a way to check whether a result is plausible.

How should I study Liebig–Pasteur dispute?

Read the excerpt, restate it from memory, then work through the examples and applications listed on this page. The five-step study plan above takes about twenty minutes.

What does this page cover?

It gives you a compact reference excerpt plus original lgStudy explanations, examples, applications and study material on Liebig–Pasteur dispute.

Tags

  • Fermentation
  • Justus von Liebig
  • Louis Pasteur

Keep exploring