→ reciprocal 1859 1860 |
the difference in the result of reciprocal 1861 1866 1869 1872 |
|
degree of resemblance to each other. This latter statement is clearly proved by
→reciprocal
crosses between the same two species,
according as the one species or the other is used as the father or the mother, there is generally some difference, and occasionally the widest possible difference, in the facility of effecting an union. The hybrids, moreover, produced from reciprocal crosses often differ in fertility. |
|
Now do these complex and singular rules indicate that species have been endowed with sterility simply to prevent their becoming confounded in nature? I think not. For why should the sterility be so extremely different in degree, when various species are crossed, all of which we must suppose it would be equally important to keep from blending together? Why should the degree of sterility be innately variable in the individuals of the same species? Why should some species cross with facility, and yet produce very sterile hybrids; and other species cross with extreme difficulty, and yet produce fairly fertile hybrids? Why should there often be so great a difference in the result
reciprocal cross between the same two species? Why, it may even be asked, has the production of hybrids been permitted?
grant to species the special power of producing hybrids, and then to stop their further propagation by different degrees of sterility, not strictly related to the facility of the first union between their parents, seems
a strange arrangement. |
|
The foregoing rules and facts, on the other hand,
to me clearly to indicate that the sterility both of first crosses and of hybrids is simply incidental or dependent on unknown
in
reproductive
differences being of so peculiar and limited a nature,
|