Distinguishes two kinds of floral dimorphism: that affecting sexual organs and that affecting outer envelopes.
Wednesday | 23. Apr. 1862
Here are the flowers of Oxalis as requested. I do not perceive anything distinctly dimorphic.—
My examining of the plant had reference chiefly to the aestival small flowers: they are very remarkable.— I altered a little the ``definition'' of the two groups of dimorphism in the paper which you so kindly looked over (& tho't worth printing!).— Making one group with the Dimorphism manifest in, primarily, a separation more or less of the sexual organs, accompanied or not by alteration in the outer whorls.— (Thus including all wholly or partially diclinous plants,—Catasetum, Primula, &c) & the other group marked primarily by alteration primarily in envelopes of the flower without separation of the sexes.
Of course this is only the morpholog
After discussing their function &c. we may class them in corresponding group by other characters.
Very sincerely yours | Dan
- f1 3515.f1See letter to Daniel Oliver, 20 [April 1862] and n. 2. There are observational notes relating to these specimens, dated 24 April 1862, in DAR 109 (ser. 2): 5. CD subsequently concluded that Oxalis acetosella was not dimorphic (see Forms of flowers, pp. 181--3).
- f2 3515.f2[Oliver] 1862c. See letter to Daniel Oliver, 15 April .