Page images
PDF
EPUB

of this world. Still less do we know of the mutual relations of the innumerable inhabitants of the world during the many past geological epochs in its history. Although much remains obscure, and will long remain obscure, I can entertain no doubt, after the most deliberate study and dispassionate judgment of which I am capable, that the view which most naturalists entertain, and which I formerly entertained—namely, that each species has been independently created~is erroneous. I am fully convinced that species are not immutable; but that those belonging to what are called the same genera are lineal descendants of some other and generally extinct species, in the same manner as the acknowledged varieties of any one species are the descendants of that species. Furthermore,‘ I am convinced that Natural Selection has been the main but! not exclusive means of modification.

[graphic]

ON THE ORIGIN OF- SPECIES

CHAPTER I
VARIATION UNDER DOMESTICATION

Causes of Variability—Effects of Habit—Correlation of Growth— Inheritance—Character of Domestic Varieties—Difiiculty of distinguishing between Varieties and Species—Origin of Domestic Varieties from one or more Species—Domestic Pigeons, their Differences and Origin—Principle of Selection anciently followed, its Efiects—Methodical and Unconscious Selection—Unknown Origin of our Domestic Productions—Circumstances favourable to Man’s Power of Selection.

WHEN we look to the individuals of the same variety or sub-variety of our older cultivated plants and animals, one of the first points which strikes us, is, that they generally differ more from each other than do the individuals of any one species or variety in a state of nature. When we reflect on the vast diversity of the plants and animals which have been cultivated, and which have varied during all ages under the most different climates and treatment, I think we are driven to conclude that this great variability is simply due to our domestic productions having been raised under conditions of life not so uniform as, and somewhat different from, those to which the parent-species have been exposed under nature. There is also, I think, some probability in the view propounded by Andrew Knight, that this variability may be partly connected with excess of food. It seems pretty clear that organic beings must be exPosed during several generations to the new conditions of life to cause any appreciable amount of variation; and that when the organisation has once begun to vary, it generally continues to vary for many generations. N0 case is on record of a variable being ceasing to be variable under cultivation. Our oldest cultivated plants, such as wheat, still often yield new varieties: our oldest domesticated animals are still capable of rapid improvement or modification.

lit has been disputed at what period of life the causes 0i variability, whatever they may be, generally act; whether during the egrly or late period of development 0i the embryo, or at the instant of conception. Geoiiroy

19

[graphic]

St. Hilaire’s experiments show that unnatural treatment of the embryo causes monstrosities; and monstrosities cannot be separated b any clear line of distinction from mere variations. {But I am strongly inclined to suspect that the most frequent cause of variability may be attributed to the male and female reproductive elements having been affected prior to the act of conception. Several reasons make me believe in this; but the chief one is the remarkable efiect which confinement 0r cultivation has on the function of the reproductive system : (this system appearing to be far more susceptible than any other part of the organisation, to the action of any change in the conditions of life. Nothing is more easy than to tame an animal, and few things more difficult than to get it to breed freely under confinement, even in the many cases when the male and female unite. How many animals there are which will not breed, though living long under not very close confinement in their native country! This is "generally attributed to vitiated instincts ; but how many cultivated plants display the utmost vigour, and yet rarely or never seed! In some few such cases it has been discovered that very trifling changes, such as a little more or less water at some particular period of growth, will determine whether or not the plant sets a seed. I cannot here enter on the copious details which I have collected on this curious subject; but to show how singular the laws are which determine the reproduction of animals under confinement, I may just mention that carnivorous animals, even from the tropics, breed in this country pretty freely under confinement, with the exception of the plantigrades or bear family, which seldom produce young; whereas carnivorous birds, with the rarest exceptions, hardly ever lay fertile eggs. Manyv exotic plants have pollen utterly worthless, in the same exact condition as in the most sterile hybrids. When, onthe one hand, we see domesticated animals and plants, though often weak and sickly,‘yet breeding quite freely under confinement ; and when, on the other hand, we see individuals, though taken young from a state of nature, perfectly tamed, long-lived, and healthy (of which I could give numerous instances), yet having their reproductive system so seriously affected by unperceived causes as to fail in acting, .we need not be surprised at this system, when it does act under confinement, acting not quite regularl , and producing ofispring not perfectly like their parentsfi

Sterility has been said to be the bane of horticulture; but on this view we owe variability to the same cause which produces sterility; and variability is the source of all the- choicest productions of the garden. I may add, that as some organisms will breed freely under the most unnatural conditions (for instance, the rabbit and ferret kept in hutches), showing that their reproductive system has not been thus affected; so will some animals and plants withstand domestication or cultivation, and vary very slightly~perhaps hardly more than in a state of nature.

A long list could easily be given of “ sporting plants ; ” by this term gardeners mean a single bud or offset, which suddenly assumes a new and sometimes very different character from that of the rest of the plant. Such buds can be propagated by grafting, &c., and sometimes by seed. These “ sports ” are extremely rare under nature, but far from r'are under cultivation; and in this case we see that the treatment of the parent has affected a bud or offset, and not the ovules or pollen. But it is the opinion of most physiologists that there is no essential difference between a bud and an ovule in their earliest stages or formation; so that, in fact, “ sports ” support the view, thatfirariability may be largely attributed to the ovules or pollen, or to both, having been affected by the treatment of the parent prior to the act of conception] [These cases anyhow show that variation is not necessarily connected, as some authors have supposed, with the act of generation. ¢MV~MMJMI “1%” [Seedlings from the same fruit, and the young of the same litter, sometimes differ considerably from each other, though both the young and the parents, as Miiller has remarked, have apparently been exposed to exactly the same conditions of life; and this shows how unimportant the direct effects of the conditions of life are in comparison with the laws of reproduction, of growth, and of inheritancefl for had the action of the conditions been direct, it any of the young had varied, all would probably have varied in the same manner. To judge how much, in the case of any variation, we should attribute to the direct action of heat, moisture, light, food, &c., is most difficult; my impression is, that with animals such agencies have produced very little direct effect,

« PreviousContinue »