FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   277   278   279   280   281   282   283   284   285   286  
287   288   289   290   291   292   293   294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309   310   311   >>   >|  
e." On Lagerstroemia as comparable with the Melastomads see Letter 689.) Fritz Muller's theory with regard to the Melastomads and a number of analogous cases in other genera are discussed in H. Muller's article in "Kosmos" (620/3. "Kosmos," XIII., 1883, page 241.), where the literature is given. F. Muller's theory is that in Heeria the yellow anthers serve merely as a means of attracting pollen-collecting bees, while the longer stamens with purple or crimson anthers supply pollen for fertilising purposes. If Muller is right the pollen from the yellow anthers would not normally reach the stigma. The increased vigour observed in the seedlings from the yellow anthers would seem to resemble the good effect of a cross between different individuals of the same species as worked out in "Cross and Self Fertilisation," for it is difficult to believe that the pollen of the purple anthers has become, by adaptation, less effective than that of the yellow anthers. In the letters here given there is some contradiction between the statements as to the position of the two sets of stamens in relation to the sepals. According to Eichler ("Bluthendiagramme, II., page 482) the longer stamens may be either epipetalous or episepalous in this family. The work on the Melastomads is of such intrinsic importance that we have thought it right to give the correspondence in considerable detail; we have done so in spite of the fact that Darwin arrived at no definite conclusion, and in spite of an element of confusion and unsatisfactoriness in the series of letters. This applies also to Letter 629, written after Darwin had learned Fritz Muller's theory, which is obscured by some errors or slips of the pen.) LETTER 620. TO G. BENTHAM. Down, February 3rd [1862?] As you so kindly helped me before on dimorphism, will you forgive me begging for a little further information, if in your power to give it? The case is that of the Melastomads with eight stamens, on which I have been experimenting. I am perplexed by opposed statements: Lindley says the stamens which face the petals are sterile; Wallich says in Oxyspora paniculata that the stamens which face the sepals are destitute of pollen; I find plenty of apparently good pollen in both sets of stamens in Heterocentron [Heeria], Monochoetum, and Centradenia. Can you throw any light on this? But there is another point on which I am more anxious for information. Please look at the enclosed miserable dia
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   277   278   279   280   281   282   283   284   285   286  
287   288   289   290   291   292   293   294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309   310   311   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

stamens

 

anthers

 

pollen

 

Muller

 
yellow
 

Melastomads

 

theory

 

purple

 
Darwin
 

information


statements
 
longer
 

letters

 

sepals

 

Letter

 

Heeria

 

Kosmos

 

BENTHAM

 

February

 

kindly


forgive
 

begging

 

dimorphism

 

helped

 

confusion

 

unsatisfactoriness

 
series
 
element
 

definite

 
conclusion

applies

 

obscured

 
errors
 

learned

 

written

 
LETTER
 
Centradenia
 

Monochoetum

 

Heterocentron

 

plenty


apparently

 

enclosed

 

miserable

 
Please
 

anxious

 
destitute
 

comparable

 

experimenting

 

Lagerstroemia

 
regard