In favour of this hypothesis, Professor Koelliker adduces the well-known
facts of Agamogenesis, or "alternate generation;" the extreme
dissimilarity of the males and females of many animals; and of the
males, females, and neuters of those insects which live in colonies: and
he defines its relations to the Darwinian theory as follows:--
"It is obvious that my hypothesis is apparently very similar to
Darwin's, inasmuch as I also consider that the various forms of
animals have proceeded directly from one another. My hypothesis of
the creation of organisms by heterogeneous generation, however, is
distinguished very essentially from Darwin's by the entire absence
of the principle of useful variations and their natural selection;
and my fundamental conception is this, that a great plan of
development lies at the foundation of the origin of the whole
organic world, impelling the simpler forms to more and more complex
developments. How this law operates, what influences determine the
development of the eggs and germs, and impel them to assume
constantly new forms, I naturally cannot pretend to say; but I can
at least adduce the great analogy of the alternation of
generations. If a _Bipinnaria_, a _Brachialaria_, a _Pluteus_, is
competent to produce the Echinoderm, which is so widely different
from it; if a hydroid polype can produce the higher Medusa; if the
vermiform Trematode 'nurse' can develop within itself the very
unlike _Cercaria_, it will not appear impossible that the egg, or
ciliated embryo, of a sponge, for once, under special conditions,
might become a hydroid polype, or the embryo of a Medusa, an
Echinoderm."
It is obvious, from these extracts, that Professor Koelliker's hypothesis
is based upon the supposed existence of a close analogy between the
phaenomena of Agamogenesis and the production of new species from
pre-existing ones. But is the analogy a real one? We think that it is
not, and, by the hypothesis, cannot be.
For what are the phaenomena of Agamogenesis, stated generally? An
impregnated egg develops into an asexual form, A; this gives rise,
asexually, to a second form or forms, B, more or less different from A.
B may multiply asexually again; in the simpler cases, however, it does
not, but, acquiring sexual characters, produces impregnated eggs from
whence A once more arises.
No case of Agamogenesis is known in which, _when A differs widely from
B_, it is itself capable of sexual propagation. No case whatever is
known in which the progeny of B, by sexual generation, is other than a
reproduction of A.
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