Origin of Species Variorum

→ seems to me certainly 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

certainly seems 1872

→ First let me remark that if any part in our domestic animals, or the whole animal, be neglected and no selection be applied, that part (for instance, the comb in the Dorking fowl) or the whole breed will cease to have a uniform character. 1869

In our domestic animals, if any part, or the whole animal, be neglected and no selection be applied, that part (for instance, the comb in the Dorking fowl) or the whole breed will cease to have a nearly uniform character. 1859 1860 1861

In our domestic animals, if any part, or the whole animals, be neglected and no selection be applied, that part (for instance, the comb in the Dorking fowl) or the whole breed will cease to have a nearly uniform character. 1866

First let me make some preliminary remarks. 1872

→ The 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

If, in our domestic animals, any part or the whole animal be neglected, and no selection be applied, that part (for instance, the comb in the Dorking fowl) or the whole 1872

→ then be said 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

cease 1872

→ degenerated. 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

a uniform character: and the breed may be said to be degenerating. 1872

→ those points in our domestic animals, 1869 1872

in our domestic animals those points, 1859 1860 1861 1866

→ pigeon; 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

same breed of the pigeon, and 1872

I have particularly attended to

them;

them,

and the rule →seems to me certainly to hold good in this class. I cannot make out that it applies to plants, and this would

have seriously

seriously have

shaken my belief in its truth, had not the great variability in plants made it particularly difficult to compare their relative degrees of variability.

When we see any part or organ developed in a remarkable degree or manner in

any

species, the fair presumption is that it is of high importance to that

species:

species;

nevertheless

the part

it is

in this case

....

eminently liable to variation. Why should this be so? On the view that each species has been independently created, with all its parts as we now see them, I can see no explanation. But on the view that groups of species

are

have

descended from

some other

other

species, and have been modified through natural selection, I think we can obtain some light. →First let me remark that if any part in our domestic animals, or the whole animal, be neglected and no selection be applied, that part (for instance, the comb in the Dorking fowl) or the whole breed will cease to have a uniform character. →The breed will →then be said to have →degenerated. In rudimentary organs, and in those which have been but little specialised for any particular purpose, and perhaps in polymorphic groups, we see a nearly parallel

~~natural~~

natural

case; for in such cases natural selection either has not or cannot

come

have come

into full play, and thus the

organization

organisation

is left in a fluctuating condition. But what here

more especially

more particularly

....

concerns us is, that →those points in our domestic animals, which at the present time are undergoing rapid change by continued selection, are also eminently liable to variation. Look at the

individuals

breeds

of the →pigeon; see what a prodigious amount of difference there is in the

beak

beaks

the different

....

tumblers, in the

beak

beaks

and wattle of

the different

....

carriers,