4. Where varietal divergence has begun in the absence of cross-infertility, such divergence seems, as a general rule, to have been incapable of attaining to a specific value. 5. Therefore, in the vast majority of such cases, it must have been those varietal changes of structure, size, colour, &c., which happened to have afterwards been assisted by the reproductive change that were on this account _selected_ as successful candidates for specific differentiation. 6. It follows, that it makes no difference to the general theory of physiological selection in what proportion of cases the physiological change has been the initial change; for, whether prior or subsequent to the varietal changes with which it becomes associated, its presence has been equally important as a condition to specific divergence. 7. When physiological isolation becomes associated with natural selection, or any other form of homogamy, the segregative power of both is augmented. Moreover, so great is the augmentation that even very moderate degrees of physiological isolation--themselves capable of effecting little or nothing--become very powerful when associated with moderate degrees of any other kind of homogamy, and vice versa. 8. The theory of physiological selection effectually explains the divergent evolution of specific types and the cross-infertility of such types when evolved. * * * * * To prevent, if possible, the continuance of certain misunderstandings with regard to my original statement of the new theory, let me here disclaim some views which have been assigned to me. They are: 1. That the theory of physiological selection is opposed to the theory of natural selection. Far from this being so, it is--at all events in my own opinion--a very important aid to it, in preventing free intercrossing on a common area, and thus allowing divergent evolution to occur within that area. 2. That, in advancing the theory of physiological selection as "an additional suggestion on the origin of species," I wish to represent it as being the originating cause of _all_ species. What I hold is, that all species must have owed their origin to _isolation_, in some form or other; but that as physiological selection is only one among many other forms of isolation (including natural selection), and as it can only act on common areas, a large number of species must have been formed without its aid. 3. That I imagine physiological varieties always to arise "sporadically," or as merely individual "sports" of the reproductive system. On the contrary, I expressly stated that this is _not_ the way in which I suppose the "physiological variation" to arise, when giving origin to a new species; but that it arises, whenever it is effectual, as a "collective variation" affecting a number of individuals simultaneously, and therefore characterizing "a whole race, or strain."