Comparison with 1872 |
|
zero to perfect fertility, or even to fertility under certain conditions in
excess; excess; 1872 | excess. 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869 |
that that 1872 | That 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869 |
their fertility, besides being eminently susceptible to favourable and unfavourable conditions, is innately
variable; variable; 1872 | variable. 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869 |
that that 1872 | That 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869 |
it is by no means always the same in degree in the first cross and in the hybrids produced from this
cross; that the fertility of hybrids is not related to the degree in which they resemble in external appearance either parent; and lastly, cross; that the fertility of hybrids is not related to the degree in which they resemble in external appearance either parent; and lastly, 1872 |
cross. 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869 |
that that 1872 | That 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869 |
the
facility facility 1872 | fertility 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869 |
of
making a first cross between any two species making a first cross between any two species 1872 |
hybrids 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869 |
is not
always governed by their systematic affinity or degree of resemblance to each other. always governed by their systematic affinity or degree of resemblance to each other. 1872 |
related to the degree in which they resemble in external appearance either parent. 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869 |
↑1 blocks not present in 1872; present in 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869 | And lastly, that the facility of making a first cross between any two species is not always governed by their systematic affinity or degree of resemblance to each other.
|
This latter statement is clearly proved by reciprocal
crosses between the same two species, for
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
of a of a 1859 1860 1861 1869 1872 | of a 1866 |
reciprocal cross between the same two species? Why, it may even be asked, has the production of hybrids been permitted? to
grant to species the special power of
|
zero to perfect fertility, or even to fertility under certain conditions in
excess. excess. 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869 | excess; 1872 |
That That 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869 | that 1872 |
their fertility, besides being eminently susceptible to favourable and unfavourable conditions, is innately
variable. variable. 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869 | variable; 1872 |
That That 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869 | that 1872 |
it is by no means always the same in degree in the first cross and in the hybrids produced from this
cross. cross. 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869 |
cross; that the fertility of hybrids is not related to the degree in which they resemble in external appearance either parent; and lastly, 1872 |
That That 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869 | that 1872 |
the
fertility fertility 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869 | facility 1872 |
of
hybrids hybrids 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869 |
making a first cross between any two species 1872 |
is not
related to the degree in which they resemble in external appearance either parent. related to the degree in which they resemble in external appearance either parent. 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869 |
always governed by their systematic affinity or degree of resemblance to each other. 1872 |
And lastly, that the facility of making a first cross between any two species is not always governed by their systematic affinity or degree of resemblance to each other. This latter statement is clearly proved by
the difference in the result of reciprocal the difference in the result of reciprocal 1861 1866 1869 1872 |
reciprocal 1859 1860 |
crosses between the same two species,
for, for, 1866 1869 1872 | for 1859 1860 1861 |
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
....... 1866 | of a 1859 1860 1861 1869 1872 |
reciprocal cross between the same two species? Why, it may even be asked, has the production of hybrids been permitted?
To To 1861 1866 1869 1872 | to 1859 1860 |
grant to species the special power of
|