FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   277   278   279   280   281   282   283   284   285   286   287   288   289   290   291   292  
293   294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309   310   311   312   313   314   315   316   317   >>   >|  
be paraphrased--"When you receive my book and read the second volume."), you will see why I think these two subjects so important. They have led me to form a hypothesis on the various forms of reproduction, development, inheritance, etc., which hypothesis, I believe, will ultimately be accepted, though how it will be now received I am very doubtful. Once again I congratulate you on your success. LETTER 207. TO J.D. HOOKER. Down, January 6th [1868]. Many thanks about names of plants, synonyms, and male flowers--all that I wanted. I have been glad to see Watson's letter, and am sorry he is a renegade about Natural Selection. It is, as you say, characteristic, with the final fling at you. His difficulty about the difference between the two genera of St. Helena Umbellifers is exactly the same as what Nageli has urged in an able pamphlet (207/1. "Ueber Entstehung und Begriff der naturhist. Art." "Sitz. der K. Bayer. Akad. Der Wiss. zu Munchen," 1865. Some of Nageli's points are discussed in the "Origin," Edition V., page 151.), and who in consequence maintains that there is some unknown innate tendency to progression in all organisms. I said in a letter to him that of course I could not in the least explain such cases; but that they did not seem to me of overwhelming force, as long as we are quite ignorant of the meaning of such structures, whether they are of any service to the plants, or inevitable consequences of modifications in other parts. I cannot understand what Watson means by the "counter-balance in nature" to divergent variation. There is the counterbalance of crossing, of which my present work daily leads me to see more and more the efficiency; but I suppose he means something very different. Further, I believe variation to be divergent solely because diversified forms can best subsist. But you will think me a bore. I enclose half a letter from F. Muller (which please return) for the chance of your liking to see it; though I have doubted much about sending it, as you are so overworked. I imagine the Solanum-like flower is curious. I heard yesterday to my joy that Dr. Hildebrand has been experimenting on the direct action of pollen on the mother-plant with success. He has also succeeded in making a true graft-hybrid between two varieties of potatoes, in which I failed. I look at this as splendid for pangenesis, as being strong evidence that bud-reproduction and seminal reproduction do not esse
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   277   278   279   280   281   282   283   284   285   286   287   288   289   290   291   292  
293   294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309   310   311   312   313   314   315   316   317   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
letter
 

reproduction

 

success

 

divergent

 

variation

 

Nageli

 

Watson

 

plants

 

hypothesis

 

solely


efficiency
 

diversified

 
ignorant
 

overwhelming

 

Further

 

meaning

 

suppose

 

counter

 

balance

 

inevitable


consequences

 
understand
 

nature

 

service

 
present
 

modifications

 

crossing

 
counterbalance
 

structures

 

chance


making

 

succeeded

 

hybrid

 

action

 

direct

 

pollen

 

mother

 

varieties

 

potatoes

 
evidence

seminal

 
strong
 
failed
 

splendid

 

pangenesis

 

experimenting

 

Hildebrand

 

Muller

 

return

 

explain