Species and Varieties, Their Origin by Mutation Part 13

Such experiments however, have miscarried owing to the too stable nature of the unit-characters.

This stability and this absence of the splitting shown by varietal marks in the offspring of hybrids is one of the best proofs of unis.e.xual unions. It is often obscured by the accompanying varietal marks, or overlooked for this reason. Only in rare cases it is to be met with in a pure state and some examples are given of this below.

Before doing so, I must call your attention to another feature of the unbalanced unions. This is the diminution of the fertility, a phenomenon universally known as occurring in hybridizations. It has two phases.

First, the diminished chance of the crosses themselves of giving full crops of seed, as compared with the pure fertilization of either parent.

And, secondly, the fertility of the hybrids themselves. Seemingly, all grades of diminished fertility occur and the oldest authors on hybrids have pointed out that a very definite relation exists between the differences of the parents and the degree of sterility, both of the cross and of the hybrid offspring. In a broad sense these two factors are proportionate to each other, the sterility being the greater, the lesser the affinity between the parents. Many writers have [262] tried to trace this rule in the single cases, but have met with nearly unsurmountable difficulties, owing chiefly to our ignorance of the units which form the differences between the parents in the observed cases.

In the case of _Oenothera muricata x biennis_ the differentiating units reduce the fertility to a low degree, threatening the offspring with almost complete infertility and extinction. But then we do not know whether these characters are really units, or perhaps only seemingly so and are in reality composed of smaller ent.i.ties which as yet we are not able to segregate. And as long as we are devoid of empirical means of deciding such questions, it seems useless to go farther into the details of the question of the sterility. It should be stated here however, that pure varietal crosses, when not accompanied by unbalanced characters, have never showed any tendency to diminished fertility. Hence there can be little doubt that the unpaired units are the cause of this decrease in reproductive power.

The genus _Oenothera_ is to a large degree devoid of varietal characteristics, especially in the subgenus _Onagra_, to which _biennis_, _muricata_, _lamarckiana_ and some others belong. On the other hand it seems to be rich in elementary species, but an adequate study of [263] them has as yet not been made. Unfortunately many of the better systematists are in the habit of throwing all these interesting forms together, and of omitting their descriptive study. I have made a large number of crosses between such undescribed types and as a rule got constant hybrid races. Only one or two exceptions could be quoted, as for instance the _Oenothera brevistylis_, which in its crosses always behaves as a pure retrogressive variety. Instead of giving an exhaustive survey of hybrids, I simply cite my crosses between _lamarckiana_ and _biennis_, as having nearly the aspect of the last named species, and remaining true to this in the second generation without any sign of reversion or of splitting. I have crossed another elementary species, the _Oenothera hirtella_ with some of my new and with some older Linnean species, and got several constant hybrid races. Among these the offspring of a cross between _muricata_ and _hirtella_ is still in cultivation. The cross was made in the summer of 1897 and last year (1903) I grew the fourth generation of the hybrids. These had the characters of the _muricata_ in their narrow leaves, but the elongated spikes and relatively large flowers of the _hirtella_ parent, and remained true to this type, showing only slight fluctuations and never reverting or segregating [264] the mixed characters. Both parents bear large capsules with an abundance of seed, but in the hybrids the capsules remain narrow and weak, ripening not more than one-tenth the usual quant.i.ty of seed. Both parents are easily cultivated in annual generations and the same holds good for the hybrid. But whereas the hybrid of muricata and biennis is a stout plant, this type is weak with badly developed foliage, and very long strict spikes. Perhaps it was not able to withstand the bad weather of the last few years.

A goodly number of constant hybrids are described in literature, or cultivated in fields and gardens. In such cases the essential question is not whether they are now constant, but whether they have been so from the beginning, or whether they prove to be constant whenever the original cross is repeated. For constant hybrids may also be the issue of incipient splittings, as we shall soon see.

Among other examples we may begin with the hybrid alfalfa or hybrid lucerne (_Medicago media_). It often originates spontaneously between the common purple lucerne or alfalfa and its wild ally with yellow flowers and proc.u.mbent stems, the _Medicago falcata_. This hybrid is cultivated in some parts of Germany on a large scale, as it is more productive than [265] the ordinary lucerne. It always comes true from seed and may be seen in a wild state in parks and on lawns. It is one of the oldest hybrids with a pure and known lineage. The original cross has been repeated by Urban, who found the hybrid race to be constant from the beginning.

Another very notorious constant hybrid race is the _Aegilops speltaeformis_. It has been cultivated in botanic gardens for more than half a century, mostly in annual or biennial generations. It is sufficiently fertile and always comes true. Numerous records have been made of it, since formerly it was believed by Fabre and others to be a spontaneous transition from some wild species of gra.s.s to the ordinary wheat, not a cross. G.o.dron, however, showed that it can be produced artificially, and how it has probably sprung into existence wherever it is found wild. The hybrid between _Aegilops ovata_, a small weed, and the common wheat is of itself sterile, producing no good pollen. But it may be fertilized by the pollen of wheat and then gives rise to a secondary hybrid, which is no other than the _Aegilops speltaeformis_.

This remained constant in G.o.dron's experiments during a number of generations, and has been constant up to the present time.

[266] Constant hybrids have been raised by Millardet between several species of strawberries. He combined the old cultivated forms with newly discovered types from American localities. They ordinarily showed only the characteristics of one of their parents and did not exhibit any new combination of qualities, but they came true to this type in the second and later generations.

In the genus _Anemone_, Janczewski obtained the same results. Some characters of course may split, but others remain constant, and when only such are present, hybrid races result with new combinations of characters, which are as constant as the best species of the same genus.

The hybrids of Janczewski were quite fertile, and he points out that there is no good reason why they should not be considered as good new species. If they had not been produced artificially, but found in the wild state, their origin would have been unknown, and there can be no doubt that they would have been described by the best systematists as species of the same value as their parents. Such is especially the case with a hybrid between _Anemone magellanica_ and the common _Anemone sylvestris_.

Starting from similar considerations Kerner von Marilaun pointed out the fact long ago that many so-called species, of rare occurrence, [267]

standing between two allied types, may be considered to have originated by a cross. Surely a wide field for abuse is opened by such an a.s.sertion, and it is quite a common habit to consider intermediate forms as hybrids, on the grounds afforded by their external characters alone, and without any exact knowledge of their real origin and often without knowing anything as to their constancy from seed. All such apparent explanations are now slowly becoming antiquated and obsolete, but the cases adduced by Kerner seem to stand this test.

Kerner designates a willow, _Salix ehrhartiana_ as a constant hybrid between _Salix alba_ and _S. pentandra_. _Rhododendron intermedium_ is an intermediate form between the hairy and the rusty species from the Swiss Alps, _R. hirsutum_ and _R. ferrugineum_, the former growing on chalky, and the other on silicious soils. Wherever both these types of soil occur in the same valley and these two species approach one another, the hybrid _R. intermedium_ is produced, and is often seen to be propagating itself abundantly. As is indicated by the name, it combines the essential characters of both parents.

_Linaria italica_ is a hybrid toad-flax between _L. genistifolia_ and _L. vulgaris_, a cross which I have repeated in my garden. _Drosera obovata_ [268] is a hybrid sundew between _D. anglica_ and _D.

rotundifolia_. _Primula variabilis_ is a hybrid between the two common primroses, _P. officinalis_ and _P. grandiflora_. The willow-herb (_Epilobium_), the self-heal (_Brunella_) and the yellow pond-lilies (Nuphar) afford other instances of constant wild hybrids.

Macfarlane has discovered a natural hybrid between two species of sundew in the swamps near Atco, N.J. The parents, _D. intermedia_ and _D.

filiformis_, were growing abundantly all around, but of the hybrid only a group of eleven plants was found. A detailed comparison of the hybrid with its parents demonstrated a minute blending of the anatomical peculiarities of the parental species.

Luther Burbank of Santa Rosa, California, has produced a great many hybrid brambles, the qualities of which in many respects surpa.s.s those of the wild species. Most of them are only propagated by cuttings and layers, not being stable from seed. But some crosses between the blackberry and the raspberry (_R. fruticosus_ and _R. idaeus_) which bear good fruit and have become quite popular, are so fixed in their type as to reproduce their composite characters from seed with as much regularity as the species of _Rubus_ found in nature. Among them are the "Phenomenal" and the [269] "Primus." The latter is a cross between the Californian dewberry and the Siberian raspberry and is certainly to be regarded as a good stable species, artificially produced. Bell Salter crossed the willow-herbs _Epilobium tetragonum_ and _E. montanum_, and secured intermediate hybrids which remained true to their type during four successive generations.

Other instances might be given. Many of them are to be found in horticultural and botanical journals which describe their systematic and anatomical details. The question of stability is generally dealt with in an incidental manner, and in many cases it is difficult to reach conclusions from the facts given. Especially disturbing is the circ.u.mstance that from a horticultural point of view it is quite sufficient that a new type should repeat itself in some of its offspring to be called stable, and that for this reason absolute constancy is rarely proved.

The range of constant hybrids would be larger by far were it not for two facts. The first is the absolute sterility of so many beautiful hybrids, and the second is the common occurrence of retrogressive characters among cultivated plants. To describe the importance of both these groups of facts would take too much [270] time, and therefore it seems best to give some ill.u.s.trative examples instead.

Among the species of _Ribes_ or currant, which are cultivated in our gardens, the most beautiful are without doubt the Californian and the Missouri currant, or _Ribes sanguineum_ and _R. aureum_. A third form, often met with, is "Gordon's currant," which is considered to be a hybrid between the two. It has some peculiarities of both parents. The leaves have the general form of the Californian parent, but are as smooth as the Missouri species. The racemes or flower-spikes are densely flowered as in the red species, but the flowers themselves are of a yellow tinge, with only a flesh-red hue on the outer side of the calyx.

It grows vigorously and is easily multiplied by cuttings, but it never bears any fruit. Whether it would be constant, if fertile, is therefore impossible to decide. _Berberis ilicifolia_ is considered as a hybrid between the European barberry (_B. vulgaris_) and the cultivated shrub _Mahonia aquifolia_. The latter has pinnate leaves, the former undivided ones. The hybrid has undivided leaves which are more spiny than those of the European parent, and which are not deciduous like them, but persist during the winter, a peculiarity inherited from the _Mahonia_. As far as I [271] have been able to ascertain, this hybrid never produces seed.

Another instance of an absolutely sterile hybrid is the often quoted _Cytisus adami_. It is a cross between the common laburnum (_Cytisus Laburnum_) and another species of the same genus, _C. purpureus_, and has some traits of both. But since the number of differentiating marks is very great in this case, most of the organs have become intermediate.

It is absolutely sterile. But it has the curious peculiarity of splitting in a vegetative way. It has been multiplied on a large scale by grafting and was widely found in the parks and gardens of Europe during the last century. Nearly all these specimens reverted from time to time to the presumable parents. Not rarely a bud of Adam's laburnum a.s.sumed all the qualities of the common laburnum, its larger leaves, richer flowered racemes, large and brightly yellow flowers and its complete fertility. Other buds on the same tree reverted to the purple parent, with its solitary small flowers, its dense shrublike branches and very small leaves. These too are fertile, though not producing their seeds as abundantly as the _C. Laburnum_ reversions. Many a botanist has sown the seeds of the latter and obtained only pure common _C. Laburnum_ plants. I had a lot of nearly a hundred seedlings [272] myself, many of which have already flowered, bearing the leaves and flowers of the common species. Seeds of the purple reversions have also been sown, and also yielded the parental type only.

Why this most curious hybrid sports so regularly and why others always remain true to their type is as yet an open question.

But recalling our former consideration of this subject the supposition seems allowable that the tendency to revert is not connected with the type of the hybrid, but is apt to occur in some rare individuals of every type. But since most of the sterile hybrids are only known to us in a single individual and its vegetative offspring, this surmise offers an explanation of the rare occurrence of sports.

Finally, we must consider some of the so called hybrid races or strains of garden-plants. _Dahlia_, _Gladiolus_, _Amaryllis_, _Fuchsia_, _Pelargonium_ and many other common flowers afford the best known instances. Immeasurable variability seems here to be the result of crossing. But on a closer inspection the range of characters is not so very much wider in these hybrid races than in the groups of parent species which have contributed to the origin of the hybrids. Our tuberous begonias owe their variability to at least seven original parent species, [273] and to the almost incredible number of combinations which are possible between their characters. The first of these crosses was made in the nursery of Veitch and Sons near London by Seden, and the first hybrid is accordingly known as _Begonia sedeni_ and is still to be met with. It has been superseded by subsequent crosses between the _sedeni_ itself and the _Veitchi_ and _rosiflora_, the _davisii_, the _clarkii_ and others. Each of them contributed its advantageous qualities, such as round flowers, rosy color, erect flower stalks, elevation of the flowers above the foliage and others. New crosses are being made continuously, partly between the already existing hybrids and partly with newly introduced wild species. Only rarely is it possible to get pure seeds, and I have not yet been able to ascertain whether the hybrids would come true from seed. Specific and varietal characters may occur together in many of the several forms, but nothing is as yet accurately known as to their behavior in pure fertilizations.

Constancy and segregation are thrown together in such a manner that extreme variability results, and numerous beautiful types may be had, and others may be expected from further crosses. For a scientific a.n.a.lysis, however, the large range of recorded facts and the written history, which at first sight [274] seems to have no lacunae, are not sufficient. Most of the questions remain open and need investigation. It would be a capital idea to try to repeat the history of the begonias or any other hybrid race, making all the described crosses and then recording the results in a manner requisite for complete and careful scientific investigations.

Many large genera of hybrid garden-flowers owe their origin to species rich in varieties or in elementary subspecies. Such is the case with the gladiolus and the tulips. In other cases the original types have not been obtained from the wild state but from the cultures of other countries.

The dahlias were cultivated in Mexico when first discovered by Europeans, and the chrysanthemums have been introduced from the old gardens of j.a.pan. Both of them consisted of various types, which afterwards have been increased chiefly by repeated intercrossing.

The history of many hybrid races is obscure, or recorded by different authorities in a different way. Some have derived their evidence from one nursery, some from another, and the crosses evidently may have been different in different places. The early history of the gladiolus is an instance. The first crosses are recorded to have been made between _Gladiolus_ [275] _psittacinus_ and _G. cardinalis_, and between their hybrid, which is still known under the name of gandavensis_ and the _purpureo-auratus_. But other authors give other lines of descent. So it is with _Amaryllis_, which is said by De Graaff to owe its stripes to _A. vittata_, its fine form to _A. brasiliensis_, the large petals to _A. psittacina_, the giant flowers to _A. leopoldi_, and the piebald patterns to _A. pardina_. But here, too, other authors give other derivations.

Summarizing the results of our inquiry we see in the first place how very much remains to be done. Many old crosses must be repeated and studied anew, taking care of the purity of the cross as well as of the harvesting of the seeds. Many supposed facts will be shown to be of doubtful validity. New facts have to be gathered, and in doing so the distinction between specific and varietal marks must be taken strictly into account. The first have originated as progressive mutations; they give unbalanced crosses with a constant offspring, as far as experience now goes. The second are chiefly due to retrograde modifications, and will be the subject of the next lecture.

[276]

LECTURE X

MENDEL'S LAW OF BALANCED CROSSES

In the scientific study of the result of crosses, the most essential point is the distinction of the several characters of the parents in their combination in the hybrids and their offspring. From a theoretical point of view it would be best to choose parents which would differ only in a single point. The behavior of the differentiating character might then easily be seen.

Unfortunately, such simple cases do not readily occur. Most species, and even many elementary species are distinguished by more than one quality.

Varieties deviating only in one unit-character from the species, are more common. But a closer inspection often reveals some secondary characters which may be overlooked in comparative or descriptive studies, but which rea.s.sume their importance in experimental crossings.

In a former lecture we have dealt with the qualities which must be considered as being due to the acquisition of new characters. If we [277] compare the new form in this case with the type from which it has originated, it may be seen that the new character does not find its mate, or its opposite, and it will be unpaired in the hybrid.

In the case of retrogressive changes the visible modification is due, at least in the best known instances, to the reduction of an active quality to a state of inactivity or latency. Now if we make a cross between a species and its variety, the differentiating character will be due to the same internal unit, with no other difference than that it is active in the species and latent in the variety. In the hybrid these two corresponding units will make a pair. But while all other pairs in the same hybrid individuals consist of like antagonists, only this pair consists of slightly unlike opponents.

This conception of varietal crosses leads to three a.s.sertions, which seem justifiable by actual experience.

First, there is no reason for a diminution of the fertility, as all characters are paired in the hybrid, and no disturbance whatever ensues in its internal structure. Secondly, it is quite indifferent, how the two types are combined, or which of them is chosen as pistillate and which as staminate parent. The deviating pair will have the same const.i.tution in both cases, being [278] built up of one active and one dormant unit. Thirdly this deviating pair will exhibit the active unit which it contains, and the hybrid will show the aspect of the parent in which the character was active and not that of the parent in which it was dormant. Now the active quality was that of the species, and its latent state was found in the variety. Hence the inference that hybrids between a species and its retrograde variety will bear the aspect of the species. This attribute may be fully developed, and then the hybrid will not be distinguishable from the pure species in its outer appearance. Or the character may be incompletely evolved, owing to the failure of cooperation of the dormant unit. In this case the hybrid will be in some sense intermediate between its parents, but these instances are more rare than the alternate ones, though presumably they may play an important part in the variability of many hybrid garden-flowers.

All of these three rules are supported by a large amount of evidence.

The complete fertility of varietal hybrids is so universally acknowledged that it is not worth while to give special instances. With many prominent systematists it has become a test between species and varieties, and from our present point of view this a.s.sumption is correct. Only the test is of little use in practice, as fertility may be diminished [279] in unbalanced unions in all possible degrees, according to the amount of difference between the parents. If this amount is slight, if for instance, only one unit-character causes the difference, the injury to fertility may, be so small as to be practically nothing.

Hence we see that this test would not enable us to judge of the doubtful cases, although it is quite sufficient as a proof in cases of wider differences.

Our second a.s.sertion related to the reciprocal crosses. This is the name given to two s.e.xual combinations between the same parents, but with interchanged places as to which furnishes the pollen. In unbalanced crosses of the genus _Oenothera_ the hybrids of such reciprocal unions are often different, as we have previously shown. Sometimes both resemble the pollen parent more, in other instances the pistil-parent.

In varietal crosses no such divergence is as yet known. It would be quite superfluous to adduce single cases as proofs for this rule, which was formerly conceived to hold good for hybrids in general. The work of the older hybridists, such as Koelreuter and Gaertner affords numerous instances.

Our third rule is of a wholly different nature. Formerly the distinction between elementary species and varieties was not insisted upon, and the principle which stamps retrograde changes [280] as the true character of varieties is a new one. Therefore it is necessary to cite a considerable amount of evidence in order to prove the a.s.sertion that a hybrid bears the active character of its parent-species and not the inactive character of the variety chosen for the cross.

We may put this a.s.sertion in a briefer form, stating that the active character prevails in the hybrid over its dormant antagonist. Or as it is equally often put, the one dominates and the other is recessive. In this terminology the character of the species is dominant in the hybrid while that of the variety is recessive. Hence it follows that in the hybrid the latent or dormant unit is recessive, but it does not follow that these three terms have the same meaning, as we shall see presently.

The term recessive only applies to the peculiar state into which the latent character has come in the hybrid by its pairing with the antagonistic active unit.

In the first place it is of the highest importance to consider crosses between varieties of recorded origin and the species from which they have sprung. When dealing with mutations of celandine we shall see that the laciniated form originated from the common celandine in a garden at Heidelberg about the year 1590. Among my _Oenotheras_ one of the eldest of the recent productions is the _O. brevistylis_ or short [281] styled species which was seen for the first time in the year 1889. The third example offered is a hairless variety of the evening campion, _Lychnis vespertina_, found the same year, which hitherto had not been observed.

For these three cases I have made the crosses of the variety with the parent-species, and in each case the hybrid was like the species, and not like the variety. Nor was it intermediate. Here it is proved that the older character dominates the younger one.

In most cases of wild, and of garden-varieties, the relation between them and the parent-species rests upon comparative evidence. Often the variety is known to be younger, in other cases it may be only of local occurrence, but ordinarily the historic facts about its origin have never been known or have long since been forgotten.