Returning to the inheritance of acquired characters, Professor Weismann
says that this has never been proved either by means of direct
observation or by experiment. "It must be admitted," he writes, "that
there are in existence numerous descriptions of cases which tend to prove
that such mutilations as the loss of fingers, the scars of wounds, &c.,
are inherited by the offspring, but in these descriptions the previous
history is invariably obscure, and hence the evidence loses all
scientific value."
The experiments of M. Brown-Sequard throw so much light upon the
question at issue that I will quote at some length from the summary given
by Mr. Darwin in his "Variation of Animals and Plants under
Domestication." {34} Mr. Darwin writes:--
"With respect to the inheritance of structures mutilated by injuries or
altered by disease, it was until lately difficult to come to any definite
conclusion." [Then follow several cases in which mutilations practised
for many generations are not found to be transmitted.] "Notwithstanding,"
continues Mr. Darwin, "the above several negative cases, we now possess
conclusive evidence that the effects of operations are sometimes
inherited. Dr. Brown-Sequard gives the following summary of his
observations on guinea-pigs, and this summary is so important that I will
quote the whole:--
"'1st. Appearance of epilepsy in animals born of parents having been
rendered epileptic by an injury to the spinal cord.
"'2nd. Appearance of epilepsy also in animals born of parents having
been rendered epileptic by the section of the sciatic nerve.
"'3rd. A change in the shape of the ear in animals born of parents in
which such a change was the effect of a division of the cervical
sympathetic nerve.
"'4th. Partial closure of the eyelids in animals born of parents in
which that state of the eyelids had been caused either by the section of
the cervical sympathetic nerve or the removal of the superior cervical
ganglion.
"'5th. Exophthalmia in animals born of parents in which an injury to the
restiform body had produced that protrusion of the eyeball. This
interesting fact I have witnessed a good many times, and I have seen the
transmission of the morbid state of the eye continue through four
generations. In these animals modified by heredity, the two eyes
generally protruded, although in the parents usually only one showed
exophthalmia, the lesion having been made in most cases only on one of
the corpora restiformia.
"'6th. Haematoma and dry gangrene of the ears in animals born of parents
in which these ear-alterations had been caused by an injury to the
restiform body near the nib of the calamus.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account