Origin of Species Variorum

Comparison with 1859

Text in this page (from paragraph 900, sentence 600, word 24 to paragraph 900, sentence 600, word 48) is not present in 1859

We can see why characters derived from the embryo should be of equal importance with those derived from the adult, for our classifications of course include all ages of each species. But it is by no means obvious, on the ordinary view, why the structure of the embryo should be more important for this purpose than that of the adult, which alone plays its full part in the economy of nature. Yet it has been strongly urged by those great naturalists, Milne Edwards and Agassiz, that embryonic characters are the most important of any in the classification of animals; and this doctrine has very generally been admitted as true. ↑ The same fact holds good with flowering plants, of which the two main divisions have been founded on characters derived from the embryo,— on the number and position of the em- bryonic leaves or cotyledons, and on the mode of development of the plumule and radicle. In our discussion on embryology, we shall see why such characters are so valuable, on the view of classification tacitly including the idea of descent.

Our classifications are often plainly influenced by chains of affinities. Nothing can be easier than to define a number of characters common to all birds; but in the case of crustaceans, such definition has hitherto been found impossible. There are crustaceans at the opposite ends of the series, which have hardly a character in common; yet the species at both ends,

allied genera, namely Cypris and Cytherea, there is no such organ; one species of Cypridina has well-developed branchiæ, whilst another species is destitute of them.

We can see why characters derived from the embryo should be of equal importance with those derived from the adult, for our classification of course includes all ages of each species. But it is by no means obvious, on the ordinary view, why the structure of the embryo should be more important for this purpose than that of the adult, which alone plays its full part in the economy of nature. Yet it has been strongly urged by those great naturalists, Milne Edwards and Agassiz, that embryonic characters are the most important of any in the classification of animals; and this doctrine has very generally been admitted as true, though its importance has sometimes been exaggerated. Thus Fritz Müller has arranged the great class of crustaceans in accordance with their embryological differences, for the sake of showing that such an arrangement is not a natural one. The general fact of the importance of embryological characters holds good with flowering plants, of which the two main divisions have been founded on differences in the embryo,— on the number and position of the cotyledons, and on the mode of development of the plumule and radicle. ↑ In our discussion on embryology, we shall see why such characters are so valuable, on the view of classification tacitly including the idea of descent.