Comparison with 1872 |
|
Text in this page (from paragraph 2200, sentence 500, word 1 to paragraph 2200, sentence 500, word 29) is not present in 1872 |
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
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 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 to be
a strange arrangement. |
|
The foregoing rules and facts, on the other hand, appear
to me clearly to indicate that the sterility both of first crosses and of hybrids is simply incidental or
|
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
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 To 1861 1866 1869 1872 | to 1859 1860 |
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
....... 1869 1872 | to be 1859 1860 1861 1866 |
a strange arrangement. |
|
The foregoing rules and facts, on the other hand,
appear appear 1859 1866 1869 1872 | ap- pear 1860 1861 |
to me clearly to indicate that the sterility both of first crosses and of hybrids is simply incidental or
|