“An animal floating about in the sea,” writes Beddard, “perfectly
transparent, but decked with dense black patches, of the size of saucers,
would betray its whereabouts even to the least observant; if the observer
were stimulated by hunger or fear, the conspicuousness would not be
lessened. . . . Besides the internecine warfare which is continually
going on amongst the smaller surface organisms, they are devoured
wholesale by the larger pelagic fish, and by whales and other Cetacea. A
whale, rushing through the water with open mouth and gulping down all
before him, is not the least inconvenienced by the invisibility of the
organisms devoured in such enormous quantities; nor do a solid phalanx of
herring or mackerel stop to look carefully for their food: they take what
comes in their way, and get plenty in spite of ‘protective absence of
colouration.’
“If the transparency of the pelagic organisms be due entirely to natural
selection, it is remarkable that there is so little modification in this
direction among the species inhabiting the bottom at such depths as are
accessible to the sun’s rays; the advantage gained by this transparency
and consequent invisibility would be equally great. And yet this is not
the case; the bulk of the bottom fauna of the coasts are brilliantly
coloured animals, and those that show any protective colouring at all
appear to be coloured so as to resemble stones or sea-weeds.”[7]
Before leaving the subject of marine animals, we may point out that the
majority of the creatures that live in the everlasting blackness of the
depths of the ocean display exceedingly conspicuous colouring, and this
colouring seems to be constant. In such cases the colouring cannot be
useful as such to its possessors. The same may be said of the colour of
blood, or of the colouring of the internal tissues of all organisms. We
must not lose sight of the fact that every organism, and every component
part thereof, must of necessity be either of some colour or perfectly
transparent. It seems to us that since the appearance of _The Origin of
Species_ zoologists have tended to exaggerate the importance of colouring
to organisms; they frequently speak of it as though it were the one and
only factor in the struggle for existence. It is on this account that
they feel it incumbent upon them to find ingenious explanations for every
piece of colouring displayed by every plant or animal.
Unimportance of Colour
The tendency to exaggerate the importance to an animal of its colouring
is doubtless in large part due to the fact that many zoologists are
content to study nature in museums rather than in the open. Some of those
who observe organisms in their natural surroundings, especially in such
favourable localities as the tropics, seem to be of opinion that natural
selection has but little influence on the colouration of organisms.
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