See page in:
1859
1860
1861
1866
1869
1872

Compare with:
1859
1860
1861
1866
1872

Comparison with 1860

the more important it becomes for classification. As an instance: Owen, in speaking of the dugong, says, "The generative organs being those which are most remotely related to the habits and food of an animal, I have always regarded as affording very clear indications of its true affinities. We are least likely in the modifications of these organs to mistake a merely adaptive for an essential character." So with plants, how remarkable it is that the organs of vegetation, on which their whole life depends, are of little signification, excepting in the first main divisions; whereas the organs of reproduction, with their product the seed, are of paramount importance!
Text in this page (from paragraph 400, sentence 1000 to paragraph 510, sentence S400, word 11) is not present in 1860
the more important it becomes for classification. As an instance: Owen, in speaking of the dugong, says, "The generative organs, being those which are most remotely related to the habits and food of an animal, I have always regarded as affording very clear indications of its true affinities. We are least likely in the modifications of these organs to mistake a merely adaptive for an essential character." .. With plants, how remarkable it is that the organs of vegetation, on which their nutrition and life depend, are of little signification; ... whereas the organs of reproduction, with their product the seed and embryo, are of paramount importance! So again in formerly discussing .. morphological differences which are not physiologically important, we have seen that they are often of the highest service in classification. This depends on their constancy throughout many allied groups; and the constancy depends chiefly on any slight deviations of structure in such parts not having been preserved and accumulated by natural selection, which acts only on useful characters.
That the mere physiological importance of an organ does not determine its classificatory value, is almost proved by the fact, that in allied groups, in which the same organ, as we have every reason to suppose, has nearly the same physiological value, its classificatory value is widely different. No naturalist can have worked at any group without being struck with this fact; and it has been fully acknowledged in the writings of almost every author. It will suffice to quote the highest authority, Robert Brown, who, in speaking of certain organs in the Proteaceæ, says their generic importance, "like that of all their parts, not only in this, but, as I apprehend, in every natural family, is very unequal, and in some cases seems to be entirely lost." Again, in another work he says, the genera of the Connaraceæ