FINAL REMARKS.
The existence of plants which have been rendered heterostyled is a highly remarkable phenomenon, as the two or three forms of the same undoubted species differ not only in important points of structure, but in the nature of their reproductive powers. As far as structure is concerned, the two sexes of many animals and of some plants differ to an extreme degree; and in both kingdoms the same species may consist of males, females, and hermaphrodites. Certain hermaphrodite cirripedes are aided in their reproduction by a whole cluster of what I have called complemental males, which differ wonderfully from the ordinary hermaphrodite form. With ants we have males and females, and two or three castes of sterile females or workers. With Termites there are, as Fritz Muller has shown, both winged and wingless males and females, besides the workers. But in none of these cases is there any reason to believe that the several males or several females of the same species differ in their sexual powers, except in the atrophied condition of the reproductive organs in the workers of social insects. Many hermaphrodite animals must unite for reproduction, but the necessity of such union apparently depends solely on their structure. On the other hand, with heterostyled dimorphic species there are two females and two sets of males, and with trimorphic species three females and three sets of males, which differ essentially in their sexual powers. We shall, perhaps, best perceive the complex and extraordinary nature of the marriage arrangements of a trimorphic plant by the following illustration. Let us suppose that the individuals of the same species of ant always lived in triple communities; and that in one of these, a large-sized female (differing also in other characters) lived with six middle-sized and six small-sized males; in the second community a middle-sized female lived with six large- and six small-sized males; and in the third, a small-sized female lived with six large- and six middle-sized males. Each of these three females, though enabled to unite with any male, would be nearly sterile with her own two sets of males, and likewise with two other sets of males of the same size with her own which lived in the other two communities; but she would be fully fertile when paired with a male of her own size. Hence the thirty-six males, distributed by half-dozens in the three communities, would be divided into three sets of a dozen each; and these sets, as well as the three females, would differ from one another in their reproductive powers in exactly the same manner as do the distinct species of the same genus. But it is a still more remarkable fact that young ants raised from any one of the three female ants, illegitimately fertilised by a male of a different size would resemble in a whole series of relations the hybrid offspring from a cross between two distinct species of ants. They would be dwarfed in stature, and more or less, or even utterly barren. Naturalists are so much accustomed to behold great diversities of structure associated with the two sexes, that they feel no surprise at almost any amount of difference; but differences in sexual nature have been thought to be the very touchstone of specific distinction. We now see that such sexual differences—the greater or less power of fertilising and being fertilised—may characterise the co-existing individuals of the same species, in the same manner as they characterise and have kept separate those groups of individuals, produced during the lapse of ages, which we rank and denominate as distinct species.