EFFECTS OF CROSSING FLOWERS ON THE SAME PLANT.
In the discussion on the results of a cross with a fresh stock, given under Table 7/C in the last chapter, it was shown that the mere act of crossing by itself does no good; but that the advantages thus derived depend on the plants which are crossed, either consisting of distinct varieties which will almost certainly differ somewhat in constitution, or on the progenitors of the plants which are crossed, though identical in every external character, having been subjected to somewhat different conditions and having thus acquired some slight difference in constitution. All the flowers produced by the same plant have been developed from the same seed; those which expand at the same time have been exposed to exactly the same climatic influences; and the stems have all been nourished by the same roots. Therefore in accordance with the conclusion just referred to, no good ought to result from crossing flowers on the same plant. (8/1. It is, however, possible that the stamens which differ in length or construction in the same flower may produce pollen differing in nature, and in this manner a cross might be made effective between the several flowers on the same plant. Mr. Macnab states in a communication to M. Verlot ‘La Production des Varietes’ 1865 page 42, that seedlings raised from the shorter and longer stamens of rhododendron differ in character; but the shorter stamens apparently are becoming rudimentary, and the seedlings are dwarfs, so that the result may be simply due to a want of fertilising power in the pollen, as in the case of the dwarfed plants of Mirabilis raised by Naudin by the use of too few pollen-grains. Analogous statements have been made with respect to the stamens of Pelargonium. With some of the Melastomaceae, seedlings raised by me from flowers fertilised by pollen from the shorter stamens, certainly differed in appearance from those raised from the longer stamens, with differently coloured anthers; but here, again, there is some reason for believing that the shorter stamens are tending towards abortion. In the very different case of trimorphic heterostyled plants, the two sets of stamens in the same flower have widely different fertilising powers.) In opposition to this conclusion is the fact that a bud is in one sense a distinct individual, and is capable of occasionally or even not rarely assuming new external characters, as well as new constitutional peculiarities. Plants raised from buds which have thus varied may be propagated for a great length of time by grafts, cuttings, etc., and sometimes even by seminal generation. (8/2. I have given numerous cases of such bud-variations in my ‘Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication’ chapter 11 2nd edition volume 1 page 448.) There exist also numerous species in which the flowers on the same plant differ from one another,—as in the sexual organs of monoecious and polygamous plants,—in the structure of the circumferential flowers in many Compositae, Umbelliferae, etc.,—in the structure of the central flower in some plants,—in the two kinds of flowers produced by cleistogene species,—and in several other such cases. These instances clearly prove that the flowers on the same plant have often varied independently of one another in many important respects, such variations having been fixed, like those on distinct plants during the development of species.
It was therefore necessary to ascertain by experiment what would be the effect of intercrossing flowers on the same plant, in comparison with fertilising them with their own pollen or crossing them with pollen from a distinct plant. Trials were carefully made on five genera belonging to four families; and in only one case, namely, Digitalis, did the offspring from a cross between the flowers on the same plant receive any benefit, and the benefit here was small compared with that derived from a cross between distinct plants. In the chapter on Fertility, when we consider the effects of cross-fertilisation and self-fertilisation on the productiveness of the parent-plants we shall arrive at nearly the same result, namely, that a cross between the flowers on the same plant does not at all increase the number of the seeds, or only occasionally and to a slight degree. I will now give an abstract of the results of the five trials which were made.
1. Digitalis purpurea.
Seedlings raised from intercrossed flowers on the same plant, and others from flowers fertilised with their own pollen, were grown in the usual manner in competition with one another on the opposite sides of ten pots. In this and the four following cases, the details may be found under the head of each species. In eight pots, in which the plants did not grow much crowded, the flower-stems on sixteen intercrossed plants were in height to those on sixteen self-fertilised plants, as 100 to 94. In the two other pots on which the plants grew much crowded, the flower-stems on nine intercrossed plants were in height to those on nine self-fertilised plants, as 100 to 90. That the intercrossed plants in these two latter pots had a real advantage over their self-fertilised opponents, was well shown by their relative weights when cut down, which was as 100 to 78. The mean height of the flower-stems on the twenty-five intercrossed plants in the ten pots taken together, was to that of the flower-stems on the twenty-five self-fertilised plants, as 100 to 92. Thus the intercrossed plants were certainly superior to the self-fertilised in some degree; but their superiority was small compared with that of the offspring from a cross between distinct plants over the self-fertilised, this being in the ratio of 100 to 70 in height. Nor does this latter ratio show at all fairly the great superiority of the plants derived from a cross between distinct individuals over the self-fertilised, as the former produced more than twice as many flower-stems as the latter, and were much less liable to premature death.
2. Ipomoea purpurea.
Thirty-one intercrossed plants raised from a cross between flowers on the same plants were grown in ten pots in competition with the same number of self-fertilised plants, and the former were to the latter in height as 100 to 105. So that the self-fertilised plants were a little taller than the intercrossed; and in eight out of the ten pots a self-fertilised plant flowered before any one of the crossed plants in the same pots. The plants which were not greatly crowded in nine of the pots (and these offer the fairest standard of comparison) were cut down and weighed; and the weight of the twenty-seven intercrossed plants was to that of the twenty-seven self-fertilised as 100 to 124; so that by this test the superiority of the self-fertilised was strongly marked. To this subject of the superiority of the self-fertilised plants in certain cases, I shall have to recur in a future chapter. If we now turn to the offspring from a cross between distinct plants when put into competition with self-fertilised plants, we find that the mean height of seventy-three such crossed plants, in the course of ten generations, was to that of the same number of self-fertilised plants as 100 to 77; and in the case of the plants of the tenth generation in weight as 100 to 44. Thus the contrast between the effects of crossing flowers on the same plant, and of crossing flowers on distinct plants, is wonderfully great.
3. Mimulus luteus.
Twenty-two plants raised by crossing flowers on the same plant were grown in competition with the same number of self-fertilised plants; and the former were to the latter in height as 100 to 105, and in weight as 100 to 103. Moreover, in seven out of the eight pots a self-fertilised plant flowered before any of the intercrossed plants. So that here again the self-fertilised exhibit a slight superiority over the intercrossed plants. For the sake of comparison, I may add that seedlings raised during three generations from a cross between distinct plants were to the self-fertilised plants in height as 100 to 65.
4. Pelargonium zonale.
Two plants growing in separate pots, which had been propagated by cuttings from the same plant, and therefore formed in fact parts of the same individual, were intercrossed, and other flowers on one of these plants were self-fertilised; but the seedlings obtained by the two processes did not differ in height. When, on the other hand, flowers on one of the above plants were crossed with pollen taken from a distinct seedling, and other flowers were self-fertilised, the crossed offspring thus obtained were to the self-fertilised in height as 100 to 74.
5. Origanum vulgare.
A plant which had been long cultivated in my kitchen garden, had spread by stolons so as to form a large bed or clump. Seedlings raised by intercrossing flowers on these plants, which strictly consisted of the same plant, and other seedlings raised from self-fertilised flowers, were carefully compared from their earliest youth to maturity; and they did not differ at all in height or in constitutional vigour. Some flowers on these seedlings were then crossed with pollen taken from a distinct seedling, and other flowers were self-fertilised; two fresh lots of seedlings being thus raised, which were the grandchildren of the plant that had spread by stolons and formed a large clump in my garden. These differed much in height, the crossed plants being to the self-fertilised as 100 to 86. They differed, also, to a wonderful degree in constitutional vigour. The crossed plants flowered first, and produced exactly twice as many flower-stems; and they afterwards increased by stolons to such an extent as almost to overwhelm the self-fertilised plants.
Reviewing these five cases, we see that in four of them, the effect of a cross between flowers on the same plant (even on offsets of the same plant growing on separate roots, as with the Pelargonium and Origanum) does not differ from that of the strictest self-fertilisation. Indeed, in two of the cases the self-fertilised plants were superior to such intercrossed plants. With Digitalis a cross between the flowers on the same plant certainly did do some good, yet very slight compared with that from a cross between distinct plants. On the whole the results here arrived at, if we bear in mind that the flower-buds are to a certain extent distinct individuals and occasionally vary independently of one another, agree well with our general conclusion, that the advantages of a cross depend on the progenitors of the crossed plants possessing somewhat different constitutions, either from having been exposed to different conditions, or to their having varied from unknown causes in a manner which we in our ignorance are forced to speak of as spontaneous. Hereafter I shall have to recur to this subject of the inefficiency of a cross between the flowers on the same plant, when we consider the part which insects play in the cross-fertilisation of flowers.
ON THE TRANSMISSION OF THE GOOD EFFECTS FROM A CROSS AND OF THE EVIL EFFECTS FROM SELF-FERTILISATION.
We have seen that seedlings from a cross between distinct plants almost always exceed their self-fertilised opponents in height, weight, and constitutional vigour, and, as will hereafter be shown, often in fertility. To ascertain whether this superiority would be transmitted beyond the first generation, seedlings were raised on three occasions from crossed and self-fertilised plants, both sets being fertilised in the same manner, and therefore not as in the many cases given in Tables 7/A, 7/B, 7/C, in which the crossed plants were again crossed and the self-fertilised again self-fertilised.
Firstly, seedlings were raised from self-fertilised seeds produced under a net by crossed and self-fertilised plants of Nemophila insignis; and the latter were to the former in height as 133 to 100. But these seedlings became very unhealthy early in life, and grew so unequally that some of them in both lots were five times as tall as the others. Therefore this experiment was quite worthless; but I have felt bound to give it, as opposed to my general conclusion. I should state that in this and the two following trials, both sets of plants were grown on the opposite sides of the same pots, and treated in all respects alike. The details of the experiments may be found under the head of each species.
Secondly, a crossed and a self-fertilised plant of Heartsease (Viola tricolor) grew near together in the open ground and near to other plants of heartsease; and as both produced an abundance of very fine capsules, the flowers on both were certainly cross-fertilised by insects. Seeds were collected from both plants, and seedlings raised from them. Those from the crossed plants flowered in all three pots before those from the self-fertilised plants; and when fully grown the former were to the latter in height as 100 to 82. As both sets of plants were the product of cross-fertilisation, the difference in their growth and period of flowering was clearly due to their parents having been of crossed and self-fertilised parentage; and it is equally clear that they transmitted different constitutional powers to their offspring, the grandchildren of the plants which were originally crossed and self-fertilised.
Thirdly, the Sweet Pea (Lathyrus odoratus) habitually fertilises itself in this country. As I possessed plants, the parents and grandparents of which had been artificially crossed and other plants descended from the same parents which had been self-fertilised for many previous generations, these two lots of plants were allowed to fertilise themselves under a net, and their self-fertilised seeds saved. The seedlings thus raised were grown in competition with each other in the usual manner, and differed in their powers of growth. Those from the self-fertilised plants which had been crossed during the two previous generations were to those from the plants self-fertilised during many previous generations in height as 100 to 90. These two lots of seeds were likewise tried by being sown under very unfavourable conditions in poor exhausted soil, and the plants whose grandparents and great-grandparents had been crossed showed in an unmistakable manner their superior constitutional vigour. In this case, as in that of the heartsease, there could be no doubt that the advantage derived from a cross between two plants was not confined to the offspring of the first generation. That constitutional vigour due to cross-parentage is transmitted for many generations may also be inferred as highly probable, from some of Andrew Knight’s varieties of the common pea, which were raised by crossing distinct varieties, after which time they no doubt fertilised themselves in each succeeding generation. These varieties lasted for upwards of sixty years, “but their glory is now departed.” (8/3. See the evidence on this head in my ‘Variation under Domestication’ chapter 9 volume 1 2nd edition page 397.) On the other hand, most of the varieties of the common pea, which there is no reason to suppose owe their origin to a cross, have had a much shorter existence. Some also of Mr. Laxton’s varieties produced by artificial crosses have retained their astonishing vigour and luxuriance for a considerable number of generations; but as Mr. Laxton informs me, his experience does not extend beyond twelve generations, within which period he has never perceived any diminution of vigour in his plants.
An allied point may be here noticed. As the force of inheritance is strong with plants (of which abundant evidence could be given), it is almost certain that seedlings from the same capsule or from the same plant would tend to inherit nearly the same constitution; and as the advantage from a cross depends on the plants which are crossed differing somewhat in constitution, it may be inferred as probable that under similar conditions a cross between the nearest relations would not benefit the offspring so much as one between non-related plants. In support of this conclusion we have some evidence, as Fritz Muller has shown by his valuable experiments on hybrid Abutilons, that the union of brothers and sisters, parents and children, and of other near relations is highly injurious to the fertility of the offspring. In one case, moreover, seedlings from such near relations possessed very weak constitutions. (8/4. ‘Jenaische Zeitschrift fur Naturw.’ B. 7 pages 22 and 45 1872 and 1873 pages 441-450.) This same observer also found three plants of a Bignonia growing near together. (8/5. ‘Botanische Zeitung’ 1868 page 626.) He fertilised twenty-nine flowers on one of them with their own pollen, and they did not set a single capsule. Thirty flowers were then fertilised with pollen from a distinct plant, one of the three growing together, and they yielded only two capsules. Lastly, five flowers were fertilised with pollen from a fourth plant growing at a distance, and all five produced capsules. It seems therefore probable, as Fritz Muller suggests, that the three plants growing near together were seedlings from the same parent, and that from being closely related they had little power of fertilising one another. (8/6. Some remarkable cases are given in my ‘Variation under Domestication’ chapter 17 2nd edition volume 2 page 121, of hybrids of Gladiolus and Cistus, any one of which could be fertilised by pollen from any other, but not by its own pollen.)
Lastly, the fact of the intercrossed plants in Table 7/A not exceeding in height the self-fertilised plants in a greater and greater degree in the later generations, is probably the result of their having become more and more closely inter-related.
UNIFORM COLOUR OF THE FLOWERS ON PLANTS, SELF-FERTILISED AND GROWN UNDER SIMILAR CONDITIONS FOR SEVERAL GENERATIONS.
At the commencement of my experiments, the parent-plants of Mimulus luteus, Ipomoea purpurea, Dianthus caryophyllus, and Petunia violacea, raised from purchased seeds, varied greatly in the colour of their flowers. This occurs with many plants which have been long cultivated as an ornament for the flower-garden, and which have been propagated by seeds. The colour of the flowers was a point to which I did not at first in the least attend, and no selection whatever was practised. Nevertheless, the flowers produced by the self-fertilised plants of the above four species became absolutely uniform in tint, or very nearly so, after they had been grown for some generations under closely similar conditions. The intercrossed plants, which were more or less closely inter-related in the later generations, and which had been likewise cultivated all the time under similar conditions, became more uniform in the colour of their flowers than were the original parent-plants, but much less so than the self-fertilised plants. When self-fertilised plants of one of the later generations were crossed with a fresh stock, and seedlings thus raised, these presented a wonderful contrast in the diversified tints of their flowers compared with those of the self-fertilised seedlings. As such cases of flowers becoming uniformly coloured without any aid from selection seem to me curious, I will give a full abstract of my observations.
Mimulus luteus.
A tall variety, bearing large, almost white flowers blotched with crimson, appeared amongst the intercrossed and self-fertilised plants of the third and fourth generations. This variety increased so rapidly, that in the sixth generation of self-fertilised plants every single one consisted of it. So it was with all the many plants which were raised, up to the last or ninth self-fertilised generation. Although this variety first appeared amongst the intercrossed plants, yet from their offspring being intercrossed in each succeeding generation, it never prevailed amongst them; and the flowers on the several intercrossed plants of the ninth generation differed considerably in colour. On the other hand, the uniformity in colour of the flowers on the plants of all the later self-fertilised generations was quite surprising; on a casual inspection they might have been said to be quite alike, but the crimson blotches were not of exactly the same shape, or in exactly the same position. Both my gardener and myself believe that this variety did not appear amongst the parent-plants, raised from purchased seeds, but from its appearance amongst both the crossed and self-fertilised plants of the third and fourth generations; and from what I have seen of the variation of this species on other occasions, it is probable that it would occasionally appear under any circumstances. We learn, however, from the present case that under the peculiar conditions to which my plants were subjected, this particular variety, remarkable for its colouring, largeness of the corolla, and increased height of the whole plant, prevailed in the sixth and all the succeeding self-fertilised generations to the complete exclusion of every other variety.
Ipomoea purpurea.
My attention was first drawn to the present subject by observing that the flowers on all the plants of the seventh self-fertilised generation were of a uniform, remarkably rich, dark purple tint. The many plants which were raised during the three succeeding generations, up to the last or tenth, all produced flowers coloured in the same manner. They were absolutely uniform in tint, like those of a constant species living in a state of nature; and the self-fertilised plants might have been distinguished with certainty, as my gardener remarked, without the aid of labels, from the intercrossed plants of the later generations. These, however, had more uniformly coloured flowers than those which were first raised from the purchased seeds. This dark purple variety did not appear, as far as my gardener and myself could recollect, before the fifth or sixth self-fertilised generation. However this may have been, it became, through continued self-fertilisation and the cultivation of the plants under uniform conditions, perfectly constant, to the exclusion of every other variety.
Dianthus caryophyllus.
The self-fertilised plants of the third generation all bore flowers of exactly the same pale rose-colour; and in this respect they differed quite remarkably from the plants growing in a large bed close by and raised from seeds purchased from the same nursery garden. In this case it is not improbable that some of the parent-plants which were first self-fertilised may have borne flowers thus coloured; but as several plants were self-fertilised in the first generation, it is extremely improbable that all bore flowers of exactly the same tint as those of the self-fertilised plants of the third generation. The intercrossed plants of the third generation likewise produced flowers almost, though not quite so uniform in tint as those of the self-fertilised plants.
Petunia violacea.
In this case I happened to record in my notes that the flowers on the parent-plant which was first self-fertilised were of a “dingy purple colour.” In the fifth self-fertilised generation, every one of the twenty-one self-fertilised plants growing in pots, and all the many plants in a long row out of doors, produced flowers of absolutely the same tint, namely, of a dull, rather peculiar and ugly flesh colour; therefore, considerably unlike those on the parent-plant. I believe that this change of colour supervened quite gradually; but I kept no record, as the point did not interest me until I was struck with the uniform tint of the flowers on the self-fertilised plants of the fifth generation. The flowers on the intercrossed plants of the corresponding generation were mostly of the same dull flesh colour, but not nearly so uniform as those on the self-fertilised plants, some few being very pale, almost white. The self-fertilised plants which grew in a long row in the open ground were also remarkable for their uniformity in height, as were the intercrossed plants in a less degree, both lots being compared with a large number of plants raised at the same time under similar conditions from the self-fertilised plants of the fourth generation crossed by a fresh stock. I regret that I did not attend to the uniformity in height of the self-fertilised seedlings in the later generations of the other species.
These few cases seem to me to possess much interest. We learn from them that new and slight shades of colour may be quickly and firmly fixed, independently of any selection, if the conditions are kept as nearly uniform as is possible, and no intercrossing be permitted. With Mimulus, not only a grotesque style of colouring, but a larger corolla and increased height of the whole plant were thus fixed; whereas with most plants which have been long cultivated for the flower-garden, no character is more variable than that of colour, excepting perhaps that of height. From the consideration of these cases we may infer that the variability of cultivated plants in the above respects is due, firstly, to their being subjected to somewhat diversified conditions, and, secondly, to their being often intercrossed, as would follow from the free access of insects. I do not see how this inference can be avoided, as when the above plants were cultivated for several generations under closely similar conditions, and were intercrossed in each generation, the colour of their flowers tended in some degree to change and to become uniform. When no intercrossing with other plants of the same stock was allowed,—that is, when the flowers were fertilised with their own pollen in each generation—their colour in the later generations became as uniform as that of plants growing in a state of nature, accompanied at least in one instance by much uniformity in the height of the plants. But in saying that the diversified tints of the flowers on cultivated plants treated in the ordinary manner are due to differences in the soil, climate, etc., to which they are exposed, I do not wish to imply that such variations are caused by these agencies in any more direct manner than that in which the most diversified illnesses, as colds, inflammation of the lungs or pleura, rheumatism, etc., may be said to be caused by exposure to cold. In both cases the constitution of the being which is acted on is of preponderant importance.
CHAPTER IX. THE EFFECTS OF CROSS-FERTILISATION AND SELF-FERTILISATION ON THE PRODUCTION OF SEEDS.
Fertility of plants of crossed and self-fertilised parentage, both lots
being fertilised in the same manner.
Fertility of the parent-plants when first crossed and self-fertilised,
and of their crossed and self-fertilised offspring when again crossed
and self-fertilised.
Comparison of the fertility of flowers fertilised with their own pollen
and with that from other flowers on the same plant.
Self-sterile plants.
Causes of self-sterility.
The appearance of highly self-fertile varieties.
Self-fertilisation apparently in some respects beneficial, independently
of the assured production of seeds.
Relative weights and rates of germination of seeds from crossed and
self-fertilised flowers.
The present chapter is devoted to the Fertility of plants, as influenced by cross-fertilisation and self-fertilisation. The subject consists of two distinct branches; firstly, the relative productiveness or fertility of flowers crossed with pollen from a distinct plant and with their own pollen, as shown by the proportional number of capsules which they produce, together with the number of the contained seeds. Secondly, the degree of innate fertility or sterility of the seedlings raised from crossed and self-fertilised seeds; such seedlings being of the same age, grown under the same conditions, and fertilised in the same manner. These two branches of the subject correspond with the two which have to be considered by any one treating of hybrid plants; namely, in the first place the comparative productiveness of a species when fertilised with pollen from a distinct species and with its own pollen; and in the second place, the fertility of its hybrid offspring. These two classes of cases do not always run parallel; thus some plants, as Gartner has shown, can be crossed with great ease, but yield excessively sterile hybrids; while others are crossed with extreme difficulty, but yield fairly fertile hybrids.
The natural order to follow in this chapter would have been first to consider the effects on the fertility of the parent-plants of crossing them, and of fertilising them with their own pollen; but as we have discussed in the two last chapters the relative height, weight, and constitutional vigour of crossed and self-fertilised plants—that is, of plants raised from crossed and self-fertilised seeds—it will be convenient here first to consider their relative fertility. The cases observed by me are given in Table 9/D, in which plants of crossed and self-fertilised parentage were left to fertilise themselves, being either crossed by insects or spontaneously self-fertilised. It should be observed that the results cannot be considered as fully trustworthy, for the fertility of a plant is a most variable element, depending on its age, health, nature of the soil, amount of water given, and temperature to which it is exposed. The number of the capsules produced and the number of the contained seeds, ought to have been ascertained on a large number of crossed and self-fertilised plants of the same age and treated in every respect alike. In these two latter respects my observations may be trusted, but a sufficient number of capsules were counted only in a few instances. The fertility, or as it may perhaps better be called the productiveness, of a plant depends on the number of capsules produced, and on the number of seeds which these contain. But from various causes, chiefly from the want of time, I was often compelled to rely on the number of the capsules alone. Nevertheless, in the more interesting cases, the seeds were also counted or weighed. The average number of seeds per capsule is a more valuable criterion of fertility than the number of capsules produced. This latter circumstance depends partly on the size of the plant; and we know that crossed plants are generally taller and heavier than the self-fertilised; but the difference in this respect is rarely sufficient to account for the difference in the number of the capsules produced. It need hardly be added that in Table 9/D the same number of crossed and self-fertilised plants are always compared. Subject to the foregoing sources of doubt I will now give the table, in which the parentage of the plants experimented on, and the manner of determining their fertility are explained. Fuller details may be found in the previous part of this work, under the head of each species.
TABLE 9/D.—RELATIVE FERTILITY OF PLANTS OF CROSSED AND SELF-FERTILISED PARENTAGE, BOTH SETS BEING FERTILISED IN THE SAME MANNER. FERTILITY JUDGED OF BY VARIOUS STANDARDS. THAT OF THE CROSSED PLANTS TAKEN AS 100.
Column 1: Name of plant and feature observed.
Column 2: x, in the expression, as 100 to x.
Ipomoea purpurea—first generation: seeds per capsule on crossed and self-fertilised plants, not growing much crowded, spontaneously self-fertilised under a net, in number: 99.
Ipomoea purpurea—seeds per capsule on crossed and self-fertilised plants from the same parents as in the last case, but growing much crowded, spontaneously self-fertilised under a net, in number: 93.
Ipomoea purpurea—productiveness of the same plants, as judged by the number of capsules produced, and average number of seeds per capsule: 45.
Ipomoea purpurea—third generation: seeds per capsule on crossed and self-fertilised plants, spontaneously self-fertilised under a net, in number: 94.
Ipomoea purpurea—productiveness of the same plants, as judged by the number of capsules produced, and the average number of seeds per capsule: 35.
Ipomoea purpurea—fifth generation: seeds per capsule on crossed and self-fertilised plants, left uncovered in the hothouse, and spontaneously fertilised: 89.
Ipomoea purpurea—ninth generation: number of capsules on crossed plants to those on self-fertilised plants, spontaneously self-fertilised under a net: 26.
Mimulus luteus—an equal number of capsules on plants descended from self-fertilised plants of the 8th generation crossed by a fresh stock, and on plants of the 9th self-fertilised generation, both sets having been left uncovered and spontaneously fertilised, contained seeds, by weight: 30.
Mimulus luteus—productiveness of the same plants, as judged by the number of capsules produced, and the average weight of seeds per capsule: 3.
Vandellia nummularifolia—seeds per capsule from cleistogene flowers on the crossed and self-fertilised plants, in number: 106.
Salvia coccinea—crossed plants, compared with self-fertilised plants, produced flowers, in number: 57.
Iberis umbellata—plants left uncovered in greenhouse; intercrossed plants of the 3rd generation, compared with self-fertilised plants of the 3rd generation, yielded seeds, in number: 75.
Iberis umbellata—plants from a cross between two varieties, compared with self-fertilised plants of the 3rd generation, yielded seeds, by weight : 75.
Papaver vagum—crossed and self-fertilised plants, left uncovered, produced capsules, in number: 99.
Eschscholtzia californica—Brazilian stock; plants left uncovered and cross-fertilised by bees; capsules on intercrossed plants of the 2nd generation, compared with capsules on self-fertilised plants of 2nd generation, contained seeds, in number: 78.
Eschscholtzia californica—productiveness of the same plants, as judged by the number of capsules produced, and the average number of seeds per capsule: 89.
Eschscholtzia californica—plants left uncovered and cross-fertilised by bees; capsules on plants derived from intercrossed plants of the 2nd generation of the Brazilian stock crossed by English stock, compared with capsules on self-fertilised plants of 2nd generation, contained seeds, in number: 63.
Eschscholtzia californica—productiveness of the same plants, as judged by the number of capsules produced, and the average number of seeds per capsule: 40.
Reseda odorata—crossed and self-fertilised plants, left uncovered and cross-fertilised by bees; produced capsules in number (about): 100.
Viola tricolor—crossed and self-fertilised plants, left uncovered and cross-fertilised by bees, produced capsules in number: 10.
Delphinium consolida—crossed and self-fertilised plants, left uncovered in the greenhouse, produced capsules in number: 56.
Viscaria oculata—crossed and self-fertilised plants, left uncovered in the greenhouse, produced capsules in number: 77.
Dianthus caryophyllus—plants spontaneously self-fertilised under a net; capsules on intercrossed and self-fertilised plants of the 3rd generation contained seeds in number: 125.
Dianthus caryophyllus—plants left uncovered and cross-fertilised by insects: offspring from plants self-fertilised for three generations and then crossed by an intercrossed plant of the same stock, compared with plants of the 4th self-fertilised generation, produced seeds by weight: 73.
Dianthus caryophyllus—plants left uncovered and cross-fertilised by insects: offspring from plants self-fertilised for three generations and then crossed by a fresh stock, compared with plants of the 4th self-fertilised generation, produced seeds by weight: 33.
Tropaeolum minus—crossed and self-fertilised plants, left uncovered in the greenhouse, produced seeds in number: 64.
Limnanthes douglasii—crossed and self-fertilised plants, left uncovered in the greenhouse, produced capsules in number (about): 100.
Lupinus luteus—crossed and self-fertilised plants of the 2nd generation, left uncovered in the greenhouse, produced seeds in number (judged from only a few pods): 88.
Phaseolus multiflorus—crossed and self-fertilised plants, left uncovered in the greenhouse, produced seeds in number (about): 100.
Lathyrus odoratus—crossed and self-fertilised plants of the 2nd generation, left uncovered in the greenhouse, but certainly self-fertilised, produced pods in number: 91.
Clarkia elegans—crossed and self-fertilised plants, left uncovered in the greenhouse, produced capsules in number: 60.
Nemophila insignis—crossed and self-fertilised plants, covered by a net and spontaneously self-fertilised in the greenhouse, produced capsules in number: 29.
Petunia violacea—left uncovered and cross-fertilised by insects: plants of the 5th intercrossed and self-fertilised generations produced seeds, as judged by the weight of an equal number of capsules: 86.
Petunia violacea—left uncovered as above: offspring of plants self-fertilised for four generations and then crossed by a fresh stock, compared with plants of the 5th self-fertilised generation, produced seeds, as judged by the weight of an equal number of capsules: 46.
Cyclamen persicum—crossed and self-fertilised plants, left uncovered in the greenhouse, produced capsules in number: 12.
Anagallis collina—crossed and self-fertilised plants, left uncovered in the greenhouse, produced capsules in number: 8.
Primula veris—left uncovered in open ground and cross-fertilised by insects: offspring from plants of the 3rd illegitimate generation crossed by a fresh stock, compared with plants of the 4th illegitimate and self-fertilised generation, produced capsules in number: 5.
Same plants in the following year: 3.5.
Primula veris—(equal-styled variety): left uncovered in open ground and cross-fertilised by insects: offspring from plants self-fertilised for two generations and then crossed by another variety, compared with plants of the 3rd self-fertilised generation, produced capsules in number: 15.
Primula veris—(equal-styled variety) same plants; average number of seeds per capsule: 71.
Primula veris—(equal-styled variety) productiveness of the same plants, as judged by the number of capsules produced and the average number of seeds per capsule: 11.
This table includes thirty-three cases relating to twenty-three species, and shows the degree of innate fertility of plants of crossed parentage in comparison with those of self-fertilised parentage; both lots being fertilised in the same manner. With several of the species, as with Eschscholtzia, Reseda, Viola, Dianthus, Petunia, and Primula, both lots were certainly cross-fertilised by insects, and so it probably was with several of the others; but in some of the species, as with Nemophila, and in some of the trials with Ipomoea and Dianthus, the plants were covered up, and both lots were spontaneously self-fertilised. This also was necessarily the case with the capsules produced by the cleistogene flowers of Vandellia.
The fertility of the crossed plants is represented in Table 9/D by 100, and that of the self-fertilised by the other figures. There are five cases in which the fertility of the self-fertilised plants is approximately equal to that of the crossed; nevertheless, in four of these cases the crossed plants were plainly taller, and in the fifth somewhat taller than the self-fertilised. But I should state that in some of these five cases the fertility of the two lots was not strictly ascertained, as the capsules were not actually counted, from appearing equal in number and from all apparently containing a full complement of seeds. In only two instances in the table, namely, with Vandellia and in the third generation of Dianthus, the capsules on the self-fertilised plants contained more seed than those on the crossed plants. With Dianthus the ratio between the number of seeds contained in the self-fertilised and crossed capsules was as 125 to 100; both sets of plants were left to fertilise themselves under a net; and it is almost certain that the greater fertility of the self-fertilised plants was here due merely to their having varied and become less strictly dichogamous, so as to mature their anthers and stigmas more nearly at the same time than is proper to the species. Excluding the seven cases now referred to, there remain twenty-six in which the crossed plants were manifestly much more fertile, sometimes to an extraordinary degree, than the self-fertilised with which they grew in competition. The most striking instances are those in which plants derived from a cross with a fresh stock are compared with plants of one of the later self-fertilised generations; yet there are some striking cases, as that of Viola, between the intercrossed plants of the same stock and the self-fertilised, even in the first generation. The results most to be trusted are those in which the productiveness of the plants was ascertained by the number of capsules produced by an equal number of plants, together with the actual or average number of seeds in each capsule. Of such cases there are twelve in the table, and the mean of their mean fertility is as 100 for the crossed plants, to 59 for the self-fertilised plants. The Primulaceae seem eminently liable to suffer in fertility from self-fertilisation.
The following short table, Table 9/E, includes four cases which have already been partly given in the last table.
TABLE 9/E.—INNATE FERTILITY OF PLANTS FROM A CROSS WITH A FRESH STOCK, COMPARED WITH THAT OF INTERCROSSED PLANTS OF THE SAME STOCK, AND WITH THAT OF SELF-FERTILISED PLANTS, ALL OF THE CORRESPONDING GENERATION. FERTILITY JUDGED OF BY THE NUMBER OR WEIGHT OF SEEDS PRODUCED BY AN EQUAL NUMBER OF PLANTS.
Column 1: Name of plant and feature observed.
Column 2: Plants from a cross with a fresh stock.
Column 3: Intercrossed plants of the same stock.
Column 4: Self-fertilised plants.
Mimulus luteus—the intercrossed plants are derived from a cross between two plants of the 8th self-fertilised generation. The self-fertilised plants belong to the 9th generation: 100 : 4 : 3.
Eschscholtzia californica—the intercrossed and self-fertilised plants belong to the 2nd generation: 100 : 45 : 40.
Dianthus caryophyllus—the intercrossed plants are derived from self-fertilised of the 3rd generation, crossed by intercrossed plants of the 3rd generation. The self-fertilised plants belong to the 4th generation: 100 : 45 : 33.
Petunia violacea—the intercrossed and self-fertilised plants belong to the 5th generation: 100 : 54 : 46.
NB.—In the above cases, excepting in that of Eschscholtzia, the plants derived from a cross with a fresh stock belong on the mother-side to the same stock with the intercrossed and self-fertilised plants, and to the corresponding generation.
These cases show us how greatly superior in innate fertility the seedlings from plants self-fertilised or intercrossed for several generations and then crossed by a fresh stock are, in comparison with the seedlings from plants of the old stock, either intercrossed or self-fertilised for the same number of generations. The three lots of plants in each case were left freely exposed to the visits of insects, and their flowers without doubt were cross-fertilised by them.
Table 9/E further shows us that in all four cases the intercrossed plants of the same stock still have a decided though small advantage in fertility over the self-fertilised plants.
With respect to the state of the reproductive organs in the self-fertilised plants of Tables 9/D and 9/E, only a few observations were made. In the seventh and eighth generation of Ipomoea, the anthers in the flowers of the self-fertilised plants were plainly smaller than those in the flowers of the intercrossed plants. The tendency to sterility in these same plants was also shown by the first-formed flowers, after they had been carefully fertilised, often dropping off, in the same manner as frequently occurs with hybrids. The flowers likewise tended to be monstrous. In the fourth generation of Petunia, the pollen produced by the self-fertilised and intercrossed plants was compared, and they were far more empty and shrivelled grains in the former.
RELATIVE FERTILITY OF FLOWERS CROSSED WITH POLLEN FROM A DISTINCT PLANT AND WITH THEIR OWN POLLEN. THIS HEADING INCLUDES FLOWERS ON THE PARENT-PLANTS, AND ON THE CROSSED AND SELF-FERTILISED SEEDLINGS OF THE FIRST OR A SUCCEEDING GENERATION.
I will first treat of the parent-plants, which were raised from seeds purchased from nursery-gardens, or taken from plants growing in my garden, or growing wild, and surrounded in every case by many individuals of the same species. Plants thus circumstanced will commonly have been intercrossed by insects; so that the seedlings which were first experimented on will generally have been the product of a cross. Consequently any difference in the fertility of their flowers, when crossed and self-fertilised, will have been caused by the nature of the pollen employed; that is, whether it was taken from a distinct plant or from the same flower. The degrees of fertility shown in Table 9/F, were determined in each case by the average number of seeds per capsule, ascertained either by counting or weighing.
Another element ought properly to have been taken into account, namely, the proportion of flowers which yielded capsules when they were crossed and self-fertilised; and as crossed flowers generally produce a larger proportion of capsules, their superiority in fertility, if this element had been taken into account, would have been much more strongly marked than appears in Table 9/F. But had I thus acted, there would have been greater liability to error, as pollen applied to the stigma at the wrong time fails to produce any effect, independently of its greater or less potency. A good illustration of the great difference in the results which sometimes follows, if the number of capsules produced relatively to the number of flowers fertilised be included in the calculation, was afforded by Nolana prostrata. Thirty flowers on some plants of this species were crossed and produced twenty-seven capsules, each containing five seeds; thirty-two flowers on the same plants were self-fertilised and produced only six capsules, each containing five seeds. As the number of seeds per capsule is here the same, the fertility of the crossed and self-fertilised flowers is given in Table 9/F as equal, or as 100 to 100. But if the flowers which failed to produce capsules be included, the crossed flowers yielded on an average 4.50 seeds, whilst the self-fertilised flowers yielded only 0.94 seeds, so that their relative fertility would have been as 100 to 21. I should here state that it has been found convenient to reserve for separate discussion the cases of flowers which are usually quite sterile with their own pollen.
TABLE 9/f.—relative fertility of the flowers on the parent-plants used in my experiments, when fertilised with pollen from a distinct plant and with their own pollen. Fertility judged of by the average number of seeds per capsule. Fertility of crossed flowers taken as 100.
Column 1: Name of plant and feature observed.
Column 2: x, in the expression 100 to x.
Ipomoea purpurea—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as (about): 100.
Mimulus luteus—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as (by weight): 79.
Linaria vulgaris—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as: 14.
Vandellia nummularifolia—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as: 67?
Gesneria pendulina—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as (by weight): 100.
Salvia coccinea—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as (about): 100.
Brassica oleracea—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as: 25.
Eschscholtzia californica—(English stock) crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as (by weight): 71.
Eschscholtzia californica—(Brazilian stock grown in England) crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds (by weight) as (about): 15.
Delphinium consolida—crossed and self-fertilised flowers (self-fertilised capsules spontaneously produced, but result supported by other evidence) yielded seeds as: 59.
Viscaria oculata—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as (by weight): 38.
Viscaria oculata—crossed and self-fertilised flowers (crossed capsules compared on following year with spontaneously self-fertilised capsules) yielded seeds as : 58.
Dianthus caryophyllus—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as: 92.
Tropaeolum minus—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as: 92.
Tropaeolum tricolorum—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as: 115. (9/1. Tropaeolum tricolorum and Cuphea purpurea have been introduced into this table, although seedlings were not raised from them; but of the Cuphea only six crossed and six self-fertilised capsules, and of the Tropaeolum only six crossed and eleven self-fertilised capsules, were compared. A larger proportion of the self-fertilised than of the crossed flowers of the Tropaeolum produced fruit.)
Limnanthes douglasii—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as (about): 100.
Sarothamnus scoparius—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as: 41.
Ononis minutissima—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as: 65.
Cuphea purpurea—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as: 113.
Passiflora gracilis—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as: 85.
Specularia speculum—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as: 72.
Lobelia fulgens—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as (about): 100.
Nemophila insignis—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as (by weight): 69.
Borago officinalis—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as: 60.
Nolana prostrata—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as: 100.
Petunia violacea—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as (by weight): 67.
Nicotiana tabacum—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as (by weight): 150.
Cyclamen persicum—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as: 38.
Anagallis collina—crossed and self-fertilised flowers yielded seeds as: 96.
Canna warscewiczi—crossed and self-fertilised flowers (on three generations of crossed and self-fertilised plants taken all together) yielded seeds as: 85.
Table 9/G gives the relative fertility of flowers on crossed plants again cross-fertilised, and of flowers on self-fertilised plants again self-fertilised, either in the first or in a later generation. Here two causes combine to diminish the fertility of the self-fertilised flowers; namely, the lesser efficacy of pollen from the same flower, and the innate lessened fertility of plants derived from self-fertilised seeds, which as we have seen in the previous Table 9/D is strongly marked. The fertility was determined in the same manner as in Table 9/F, that is, by the average number of seeds per capsule; and the same remarks as before, with respect to the different proportion of flowers which set capsules when they are cross-fertilised and self-fertilised, are here likewise applicable.
TABLE 9/G.—RELATIVE FERTILITY OF FLOWERS ON CROSSED AND SELF-FERTILISED PLANTS OF THE FIRST OR SOME SUCCEEDING GENERATION; THE FORMER BEING AGAIN FERTILISED WITH POLLEN FROM A DISTINCT PLANT, AND THE LATTER AGAIN WITH THEIR OWN POLLEN. FERTILITY JUDGED OF BY THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF SEEDS PER CAPSULE. FERTILITY OF CROSSED FLOWERS TAKEN AS 100.
Column 1: Name of plant and feature observed.
Column 2: x, in the expression, 100 to x.
Ipomoea purpurea—crossed and self-fertilised flowers on the crossed and self-fertilised plants of the first generation yielded seeds as: 93.
Ipomoea purpurea—crossed and self-fertilised flowers on the crossed and self-fertilised plants of the 3rd generation yielded seeds as: 94.
Ipomoea purpurea—crossed and self-fertilised flowers on the crossed and self-fertilised plants of the 4th generation yielded seeds as: 94.
Ipomoea purpurea—crossed and self-fertilised flowers on the crossed and self-fertilised plants of the 5th generation yielded seeds as: 107.
Mimulus luteus—crossed and self-fertilised flowers on the crossed and self-fertilised plants of the 3rd generation yielded seeds as (by weight): 65.
Mimulus luteus—same plants of the 3rd generation treated in the same manner on the following year yielded seeds as (by weight): 34.
Mimulus luteus—crossed and self-fertilised flowers on the crossed and self-fertilised plants of the 4th generation yielded seeds as (by weight): 40.
Viola tricolor—crossed and self-fertilised flowers on the crossed and self-fertilised plants of the 1st generation yielded seeds as: 69.
Dianthus caryophyllus—crossed and self-fertilised flowers on the crossed and self-fertilised plants of the 1st generation yielded seeds as: 65.
Dianthus caryophyllus—flowers on self-fertilised plants of the 3rd generation crossed by intercrossed plants, and other flowers again self-fertilised yielded seeds as: 97.
Dianthus caryophyllus—flowers on self-fertilised plants of the 3rd generation crossed by a fresh stock, and other flowers again self-fertilised yielded seeds as: 127.
Lathytus odoratus—crossed and self-fertilised flowers on the crossed and self-fertilised plants of the 1st generation yielded seeds as: 65.
Lobelia ramosa—crossed and self-fertilised flowers on the crossed and self-fertilised plants of the 1st generation yielded seeds as (by weight): 60.
Petunia violacea—crossed and self-fertilised flowers on the crossed and self-fertilised plants of the 1st generation yielded seeds as (by weight): 68.
Petunia violacea—crossed and self-fertilised flowers on the crossed and self-fertilised plants of the 4th generation yielded seeds as (by weight): 72.
Petunia violacea—flowers on self-fertilised plants of the 4th generation crossed by a fresh stock, and other flowers again self-fertilised yielded seeds as (by weight): 48.
Nicotiana tabacum—crossed and self-fertilised flowers on the crossed and self-fertilised plants of the 1st generation yielded seeds as (by weight): 97.
Nicotiana tabacum—flowers on self-fertilised plants of the 2nd generation crossed by intercrossed plants, and other flowers again self-fertilised yielded seeds as (by estimation): 110.
Nicotiana tabacum—flowers on self-fertilised plants of the 3rd generation crossed by a fresh stock, and other flowers again self-fertilised yielded seeds as (by estimation): 110.
Anagallis collina—flowers on red variety crossed by a blue variety, and other flowers on the red variety self-fertilised yielded seeds as: 48.
Canna warscewiczi—crossed and self-fertilised flowers on the crossed and self-fertilised plants of three generations taken together yielded seeds as: 85.
As both these tables relate to the fertility of flowers fertilised by pollen from another plant and by their own pollen, they may be considered together. The difference between them consists in the self-fertilised flowers in Table 9/G, being produced by self-fertilised parents, and the crossed flowers by crossed parents, which in the later generations had become somewhat closely inter-related, and had been subjected all the time to nearly the same conditions. These two tables include fifty cases relating to thirty-two species. The flowers on many other species were crossed and self-fertilised, but as only a few were thus treated, the results cannot be trusted, as far as fertility is concerned, and are not here given. Some other cases have been rejected, as the plants were in an unhealthy condition. If we look to the figures in the two tables expressing the ratios between the mean relative fertility of the crossed and self-fertilised flowers, we see that in a majority of cases (i.e., in thirty-five out of fifty) flowers fertilised by pollen from a distinct plant yield more, sometimes many more, seeds than flowers fertilised with their own pollen; and they commonly set a larger proportion of capsules. The degree of infertility of the self-fertilised flowers differs extremely in the different species, and even, as we shall see in the section on self-sterile plants, in the individuals of the same species, as well as under slightly changed conditions of life. Their fertility ranges from zero to fertility equalling that of the crossed flowers; and of this fact no explanation can be offered. There are fifteen cases in the two tables in which the number of seeds per capsule produced by the self-fertilised flowers equals or even exceeds that yielded by the crossed flowers. Some few of these cases are, I believe, accidental; that is, would not recur on a second trial. This was apparently the case with the plants of the fifth generation of Ipomoea, and in one of the experiments with Dianthus. Nicotiana offers the most anomalous case of any, as the self-fertilised flowers on the parent-plants, and on their descendants of the second and third generations, produced more seeds than did the crossed flowers; but we shall recur to this case when we treat of highly self-fertile varieties.
It might have been expected that the difference in fertility between the crossed and self-fertilised flowers would have been more strongly marked in Table 9/G, in which the plants of one set were derived from self-fertilised parents, than in Table 9/F, in which flowers on the parent-plants were self-fertilised for the first time. But this is not the case, as far as my scanty materials allow of any judgment. There is therefore no evidence at present, that the fertility of plants goes on diminishing in successive self-fertilised generations, although there is some rather weak evidence that this does occur with respect to their height or growth. But we should bear in mind that in the later generations the crossed plants had become more or less closely inter-related, and had been subjected all the time to nearly uniform conditions.
It is remarkable that there is no close correspondence, either in the parent-plants or in the successive generations, between the relative number of seeds produced by the crossed and self-fertilised flowers, and the relative powers of growth of the seedlings raised from such seeds. Thus, the crossed and self-fertilised flowers on the parent-plants of Ipomoea, Gesneria, Salvia, Limnanthes, Lobelia fulgens, and Nolana produced a nearly equal number of seeds, yet the plants raised from the crossed seeds exceeded considerably in height those raised from the self-fertilised seeds. The crossed flowers of Linaria and Viscaria yielded far more seeds than the self-fertilised flowers; and although the plants raised from the former were taller than those from the latter, they were not so in any corresponding degree. With Nicotiana the flowers fertilised with their own pollen were more productive than those crossed with pollen from a slightly different variety; yet the plants raised from the latter seeds were much taller, heavier, and more hardy than those raised from the self-fertilised seeds. On the other hand, the crossed seedlings of Eschscholtzia were neither taller nor heavier than the self-fertilised, although the crossed flowers were far more productive than the self-fertilised. But the best evidence of a want of correspondence between the number of seeds produced by crossed and self-fertilised flowers, and the vigour of the offspring raised from them, is afforded by the plants of the Brazilian and European stocks of Eschscholtzia, and likewise by certain individual plants of Reseda odorata; for it might have been expected that the seedlings from plants, the flowers of which were excessively self-sterile, would have profited in a greater degree by a cross, than the seedlings from plants which were moderately or fully self-fertile, and therefore apparently had no need to be crossed. But no such result followed in either case: for instance, the crossed and self-fertilised offspring from a highly self-fertile plant of Reseda odorata were in average height to each other as 100 to 82; whereas the similar offspring from an excessively self-sterile plant were as 100 to 92 in average height.
With respect to the innate fertility of the plants of crossed and self-fertilised parentage, given in the previous Table 9/D—that is, the number of seeds produced by both lots when their flowers were fertilised in the same manner,—nearly the same remarks are applicable, in reference to the absence of any close correspondence between their fertility and powers of growth, as in the case of the plants in the Tables 9/F and 9/G, just considered. Thus the crossed and self-fertilised plants of Ipomoea, Papaver, Reseda odorata, and Limnanthes were almost equally fertile, yet the former exceeded considerably in height the self-fertilised plants. On the other hand, the crossed and self-fertilised plants of Mimulus and Primula differed to an extreme degree in innate fertility, but by no means to a corresponding degree in height or vigour.
In all the cases of self-fertilised flowers included in Tables 9/E, 9/F, and 9/G, these were fertilised with their own pollen; but there is another form of self-fertilisation, namely, by pollen from other flowers on the same plant; but this latter method made no difference in comparison with the former in the number of seeds produced, or only a slight difference. Neither with Digitalis nor Dianthus were more seeds produced by the one method than by the other, to any trustworthy degree. With Ipomoea rather more seeds, in the proportion of 100 to 91, were produced from a crossed between flowers on the same plant than from strictly self-fertilised flowers; but I have reason to suspect that the result was accidental. With Origanum vulgare, however, a cross between flowers on plants propagated by stolons from the same stock certainly increased slightly their fertility. This likewise occurred, as we shall see in the next section, with Eschscholtzia, perhaps with Corydalis cava and Oncidium; but not so with Bignonia, Abutilon, Tabernaemontana, Senecio, and apparently Reseda odorata.