To Daniel Oliver 7 December 1
Down. | Bromley. | Kent. S.E.
My dear Sir
I am extremely much obliged for your two letters.— The quasi-ovules in Acropera certainly were not in least dried & always differed widely from those in the orchids, young & old, (not fertilised) of all the main divisions; so I must trust to my own judgment, & make the statement exclusively on my own authority.—2
Your former letter explained everything most clearly; I thought it worth while just to ask you the meaning of the spines.— I supposed that Brown was a much higher authority than Lindley & Link; & the subject does not concern me; I asked out of mere curiosity.3 I have been interested by making out from state of ovules (according to my judgment) & of pollen, that Catasetum tridentatum is male Monacanthus viridis—female Myanthus barbatus—Hermaphrodite & you know they have been produced on same plants.—4 I forgot to say in my last note, that the existence of perfect ovules in males of Lychnis dioica, well agrees with some observations which I made several years ago (but not carefully enough made for publication)5 (I see that my facts are too doubtful to give even in letter)
Pray believe that I am truly grateful to you, so busy as you are, giving up so much time to me, & I remain | Yours very sincerely | C. Darwin
Trusts DO’s opinion on Acropera ovules.
Please cite as
Darwin Correspondence Project, “Letter no. 3340,” accessed on 11 December 2016, http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/DCP-LETT-3340