It is, however, not only the immediate ancestors, that is to say,
the parents, that have to be taken account of in this mingling of
hereditary contributions, but also those more remote. Not a few
characters in the child do not occur in either parent, but were present
in the grandparents, and their reappearance is called 'atavism' or
'reversion.' Let us consider this phenomenon in more detail, and try
to find out whether and how far it can be interpreted by means of our
theory.
The simplest and clearest cases are again found among plant-hybrids.
It may happen, for instance, that a hybrid between two species, when
dusted with its own pollen, gives rise to descendants, some of which
resemble only one of the ancestral forms: thus we have reversion to
one of the grandparents. The explanation of this lies in the different
modes in which the reducing divisions are effected; if they take place
in such a manner that all the paternal ids of the hybrid are separated
from the maternal ids, then the result is germ-cells which are like
those of the grandparents, that is, those of the parent species, and
these, if they happen to combine in amphimixis, must give rise to a
pure seedling of one or other of the two ancestral species. This case
occurs less rarely than was formerly supposed, and than it could do if
absolutely free combination of the idants took place at reduction. If
combination were quite unrestricted, all other possible combinations
would be likely to occur as frequently as these. But recent experiments
have shown that, in many plant-hybrids, the germ-cells of the hybrids
which are fertilized by their own pollen are either purely paternal or
purely maternal. There cannot, therefore, be free combination of the
idants at the reducing divisions; the idants of the two parent-forms
separate from one another and do not combine. It is doubtful, however,
whether the same thing occurs within a race, for instance, in the case
of reproduction within a human race.
In Man reversion to a grandparent occurs not infrequently, and we
may explain it thus: the id-group which controlled the type of the
grandfather was also contained in the germ-cell which gave rise to
the existence of the father, but it did not dominate the type in
that case because a more powerful id-group was opposed to it in the
germ-cell of the grandmother. When, later on, at the reducing divisions
of the germ-cells of the father, this id-group again arrived in the
sperm-cells of the father, it would predominately control the type of
the child, that is, of the third generation, provided that the egg-cell
with which it combined contained a weaker id-group.
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