Letter icon
Letter 3828

Oliver, Daniel to Darwin, C. R.

25 Nov 1862

    Summary Add

  • +

    Informs CD of possible dimorphism of Epilobium angustifolium.


Royal Gardens Kew

25. XI. 62

My dear Sir

Two forms of Epilobium angustifolium are described in the English Floras—a short & long capsuled form.— But my attention was attracted to their possible dimorphism by a M.S. note of Mr. Babington's—in the herb. of the late Mr. Borrer.— Mr Babn. writes (in 1841) stating that he had received specimens of the E. macrocarpum described by Stephens (Ann. Nat. Hist. viii. 170) & that he thinks it is E. angustifolium producing seed for—he says ``I suspect that the `short turgid pods' of E. angustifolium do not ripen their seed''.—

More about these forms is written in the same vol. of the Annals.

I must look again at the paper on Strawberries in the Museum copy of the Technologist & if it seem worthwhile have it sent down to you along with the Gardens copy of Hooker's Journal containing the Linum paper.

I shewed your note to Dr. Hooker.

Very sincerely yours | Danl. Oliver

Chas. Darwin Esq

    Footnotes Add

  • +
    f1 3828.f1
    See letter from J. D. Hooker, [15 and] 20 November [1862], and letter to Daniel Oliver, 23 [November 1862].
  • +
    f2 3828.f2
    William Borrer died in January 1862, leaving his herbarium to the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew (DNB); the reference is to Charles Cardale Babington.
  • +
    f3 3828.f3
    Stephens 1841. There is an annotated copy of the volume of the Annals and Magazine of Natural History containing this paper in the Darwin Library--CUL.
  • +
    f4 3828.f4
    In his paper, Henry Oxley Stephens claimed that the name Epilobium angustifolium had been applied to two distinct species, the second of which he proposed to call E. macrocarpum. William Allport Leighton, who supported this identification, sent Borrer his descriptions for comment, before publishing an account in December 1841 (Leighton 1841). In a letter from Babington to Borrer of 12 November 1841, which is reproduced in A. M. Babington ed. 1897, pp. 284--5, Babington stated: From what you said in your letter I have again examined the Epilobium angustifolium, but am unable to see any real distinction between the two forms … I presume that Leighton is not prepared to separate the two plants, or we should have heard more about it before this time.
  • +
    f5 3828.f5
    Leighton 1841 and 1842. There is an annotated copy of the volume of the Annals and Magazine of Natural History containing this paper in the Darwin Library--CUL. See also letter to W. A. Leighton, 26 November [1862].
  • +
    f6 3828.f6
    Wray 1861a. See letter to Daniel Oliver, 23 [November 1862] and n. 8.
  • +
    f7 3828.f7
    Oliver refers to Planchon 1847--8, which appeared in volumes 6 and 7 of the London Journal of Botany; after 1848 the journal was called Hooker's Journal of Botany and Kew Garden Miscellany after its editor, William Jackson Hooker (BUCOP). See letter to Daniel Oliver, 23 [November 1862] and n. 10.
  • +
    f8 3828.f8
    Joseph Dalton Hooker. See letter to Daniel Oliver, 23 [November 1862].
  • +
    f9 3828.f9
    See letter from C. C. Babington, 17 January 1862, and letter to C. C. Babington, 20 January [1862].
  • +
    f10 3828.f10
    These are references to additional articles on Epilobium angustifolium in volume 8 of the Annals and Magazine of Natural History (see n. 3, above).
Maximized view Print letter