FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178  
179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   >>   >|  
tural dissimilarity necessarily going together, except indirectly and by no means strictly. Look at the case of pigeons, fowls, and cabbages. I overlooked the advantage of the half-sterility of reciprocal crosses; yet, perhaps from novelty, I do not feel inclined to admit the probability of Natural Selection having done its work so clearly. I will not discuss the second case of utter sterility; but your assumptions in par. 13 seem to me much too complicated. I cannot believe so universal an attribute as utter sterility between remote species was acquired in so complex a manner. I do not agree with your rejoinder on grafting; I fully admit that it is not so closely restricted as crossing; but this does not seem to me to weaken the case as one of analogy. The incapacity of grafting is likewise an invariable attribute of plants sufficiently remote from each other, and sometimes of plants pretty closely allied. The difficulty of increasing the sterility, through Natural Selection, of two already sterile species seems to me best brought home by considering an actual case. The cowslip and primrose are moderately sterile, yet occasionally produce hybrids: now these hybrids, two or three or a dozen in a whole parish, occupy ground which _might_ have been occupied by either pure species, and no doubt the latter suffer to this small extent. But can you conceive that any individual plants of the primrose and cowslip, which happened to be mutually rather more sterile (i.e. which when crossed yielded a few less seeds) than usual, would profit to such a degree as to increase in number to the ultimate exclusion of the present primrose and cowslip? I cannot. My son, I am sorry to say, cannot see the full force of your rejoinder in regard to the second head of continually augmented sterility. You speak in this rejoinder, and in par. 5, of all the individuals becoming in some slight degree sterile in certain districts; if you were to admit that by continued exposure to these same conditions the sterility would inevitably increase, there would be no need of Natural Selection. But I suspect that the sterility is not caused so much by any particular conditions, as by long habituation to conditions of any kind. To speak according to pangenesis, the gemmules of hybrids are not injured, for hybrids propagate freely by buds; but their reproductive organs are somehow affected, so that they cannot accumulate the proper gemmules, in nearly
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178  
179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

sterility

 

hybrids

 

sterile

 

cowslip

 

Natural

 

Selection

 
primrose
 

rejoinder

 
species
 
plants

conditions

 
increase
 
remote
 

attribute

 
degree
 

gemmules

 
closely
 

grafting

 
number
 

suffer


ultimate

 
exclusion
 

present

 

extent

 

happened

 

yielded

 

crossed

 

individual

 

profit

 

conceive


mutually

 

pangenesis

 

injured

 
habituation
 
suspect
 

caused

 

propagate

 

freely

 

accumulate

 

proper


affected

 

reproductive

 
organs
 

augmented

 
continually
 
regard
 

individuals

 
continued
 
exposure
 

inevitably