Now, however, it seems as if the fundamental proposition of this theory
of flowers will have to be rejected. Not only do the cleistogamous
flowers just mentioned exhibit a great fertility, not at all less
than that of the open flowers of the same species which are adapted
for cross-fertilization, but there is a small number of plants which
produce seeds by _self-fertilization alone_. Thus in _Myrmecodia_
cross-fertilization is absolutely prevented by the fact that the
flowers never open, and according to Charles Darwin _Ophrys apifera_
also reproduces by self-fertilization alone, and is nevertheless a
thoroughly vigorous plant. There are several other cases of this sort,
and particularly among the orchids, though the whole of the structure
of their flowers is specially adapted for pollination by insects.
Many of them are only rarely visited by insects, some not at all, we
know not why, but it is readily intelligible that in such cases they
should have adapted themselves to self-fertilization wherever that was
possible. For this _no great_ variation was necessary; it was enough
that the pollinia, which formerly only became detached from their
attachment at a touch or a push from an insect, should free themselves
spontaneously. And this, according to Darwin, is what happens,
for instance, in _Ophrys scolopax_, which at Cannes is frequently
self-fertilizing. For the development of seed, however, it is not
enough that the pollen should reach the stigma; the pollen-grain has
to send out its tube and penetrate into the ovary, and in many orchids
this does not happen; they are infertile with their own pollen. Various
other plants are also non-fertile with their own pollen, for instance
the common corydalis, _Corydalis cava_, or the meadow cuckoo-flower,
_Cardamine pratensis_ (Hildebrand).
How are we to reconcile these apparently absolutely contradictory
facts? On the one hand, the innumerable devices for securing crossing
lead us to conclude that it is necessary, or at least advantageous,
and on the other we find a small number of plants which reproduce
continually by self-fertilization and yet remain strong and vigorous.
And again there are many plants which yield seed when fertilized with
their own pollen, and others which remain absolutely sterile in the
same circumstances, yielding no seed or very little, and there is
indeed one on which its own pollen has the effect of a poison, for if
it reaches the stigma the flower dies. If there is anything injurious
in self-fertilization (Darwin), we can understand that it will be
avoided, but how can it be continued so long in many cases, and even
become in others the exclusive method of fertilization without visible
evil results?
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