Origin of Species Variorum

Comparison with 1866

But why in numerous species, descended from a common parent-form, the reproductive system should in all have become more or less modified, leading to their mutual infertility, we do not know in the least; nor whether this has been effected directly, or in correlation with other structural and functional modifications. ↑

It is not surprising that the degree of difficulty in uniting two species, and the degree of sterility of their hybrid-offspring, should generally correspond, even if due to distinct causes; for both depend on the amount of difference of some kind between the species which are crossed. Nor is it surprising that the facility of effecting a first cross, and the fertility of the hybrids thus produced, and the capacity of being grafted together—though this latter capacity evidently depends on widely different circumstances—should all run, to a certain extent, parallel with the systematic affinity of the forms which are subjected to experiment; for systematic affinity attempts to express all kinds of resemblance between all species.

First crosses between forms known to be varieties, or sufficiently alike to be considered as varieties, and their mongrel offspring, are very generally, but not as is so often stated, universally fertile. Nor is this nearly general and perfect fertility surprising, when we remember how liable we are to argue in a circle with respect to varieties in a state of nature; and when we remember that the greater number of varieties have been produced under domesti- cation by the selection of mere external differences, and not of differences in the reproductive system. Nor should it be forgotten that long-continued domestication apparently tends to eliminate sterility, and is therefore little likely to induce this same quality.

Text in this page (from paragraph 5300, sentence 220 to paragraph 5300, sentence 220, word 37) is not present in 1866

But why, in the case of species, the sexual elements should so generally have become more or less modified, leading to their mutual infertility, we do not know. ... ↑

It is not surprising that the .. difficulty in crossing any two species, and the sterility of .. their hybrid-offspring, should in most cases correspond, even if due to distinct causes; for both depend on the amount of difference ... between the species which are crossed. Nor is it surprising that the facility of effecting a first cross, and the fertility of the hybrids thus produced, and the capacity of being grafted together—though this latter capacity evidently depends on widely different circumstances—should all run, to a certain extent, parallel with the systematic affinity of the forms .. subjected to experiment; for systematic affinity includes resemblances of all kinds. .. .. .. .. ..

First crosses between forms known to be varieties, or sufficiently alike to be considered as varieties, and their mongrel offspring, are very generally, but not, as is so often stated, invariably fertile. Nor is this almost universal and perfect fertility surprising, when we remember how liable we are to argue in a circle with respect to varieties in a state of nature; and when we remember that the greater number of varieties have been produced under domestication by the selection of mere external differences, and that they have not been long exposed to uniform conditions of life. It should also be especially kept in mind, that long-continued domestication .. tends to eliminate sterility, and is therefore little likely to induce this same quality. Independently of the question of fertility, in all other respects there is the closest general resemblance between hybrids and mongrels, in their variability, in their power of absorbing each other by repeated crosses, and in their inheritance