Origin of Species Variorum

→ discussed under the last heading 1872

included in these remarks 1859 1860 1861 1866

included in the above remarks 1869

→ applied to our present subject. 1872

extended. 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

→ To explain by a simple example what is meant: if in a large genus of plants 1872

If some species in a large genus of plants 1859 1860 1861 1866

If in a large genus of plants some species 1869

→ some species had 1872

had 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

→ OMIT 1872

is not in this case applicable, 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

→ is not here applicable, namely, 1872

namely, 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

→ with respect to important characters, I 1872

I 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

→ is often 1872

has, also, been 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

→ the same 1872

some of the 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

→ anomalies in the individuals. 1872

anomalies. 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

→ often to find them still 1872

to find them still often 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

in this case the variability will seldom as yet have been fixed by the continued selection of the individuals varying in the required manner and degree, and by the continued rejection of those tending to revert to a former and

less-modified

less modified

condition.

Specific Characters more Variable than Generic

Characters .

....

The principle →discussed under the last heading may be →applied to our present subject. It is notorious that specific characters are more variable than generic.

explain

simple

example

what

meant.

→To explain by a simple example what is meant: if in a large genus of plants →some species had blue flowers and some had red, the colour would be only a specific character, and no one would be surprised at one of the blue species varying into red, or conversely; but if all the species had blue flowers, the colour would become a generic character, and its variation would be a more unusual circumstance. I have chosen this example because

the

explanation →OMIT which most naturalists would

advance,

advance

→is not here applicable, namely, that specific characters are more variable than generic, because they are taken from parts of less physiological importance than those commonly used for classing genera. I believe this explanation is partly, yet only indirectly, true; I shall, however, have to

re- turn

return

to this

subject

point

our

the

chapter on Classification. It would be almost superfluous to adduce evidence in support of the

above

....

statement, that

specific

ordinary specific

characters are more variable than generic; but →with respect to important characters, I have repeatedly noticed in works on natural history, that when an author

has

....

remarked

remarks

with surprise that some

important

important

organ or part, which is generally very constant throughout

large

a large

groups

group

of species,

has

....

differed

differs

considerably in

closely-allied

closely allied

species,

that

....

it →is often variable in the individuals of →the same species. And this fact shows that a character, which is generally of generic value, when it sinks in value and becomes only of specific value, often becomes variable, though its

phy- siological

physiological

importance may remain the same. Something of the same kind applies to monstrosities: at least Is. Geoffroy St. Hilaire

seems to

apparently

entertain

entertains

no doubt, that the more an organ normally differs in the different species of the same group, the more subject it is to

individual

....

→anomalies in the individuals.

On the ordinary view of each species having been independently created, why should that part of the structure, which differs from the same part in other independently-created species of the same genus, be more variable than those parts which are closely alike in the several species? I do not see that any

explana- tion

explanation

can be given. But on the view

that

species

being

are

only strongly marked and fixed varieties, we might

surely

....

expect →often to find them still