Summary

[Note forwarding 503.]

Lord Fitzwilliam’s gardener does not believe in hybrid ferns.

Summary

Has been writing a review of CD’s "Climbing plants" for Popular Science Review [5 (1866): 55–65].

Summary

Questions on breeding of plants: variation in established versus new varieties; predominance of wild species and old varieties when crossed with newer forms; predominance of males versus females; correlations between ease of hybridisation and tendency to vary and undergo cultivation; reversion; correlations between hybridisation and geographic distribution.

In WH’s Amaryllidaceae [1837], does he intend to say crossing is inimical to fertility?

[Sent via J. S. Henslow; note to amanuensis Syms Covington.]

Summary

CD is led to believe there are no true permanently inbreeding, sexually reproducing beings. Thanks for replies to breeding questions.

Asks for clarification of Hippeastrum crosses: is selfing or crossing with individual of same species intended and was increased fertility due to constitution of foreign parent or due to the pollen coming from another plant? Has WH known any hybrid or mongrel to revert or to vary in a manner unlikely to be effect of soil?

Sends Journal of researches.

Summary

Origin of Antarctic brash ice.

Further on case of Lycopodium: does JDH know any genera of plants whose species are variable in one continent but not in another? Discussion on variations between floras as regards species richness, and factors affecting geographical distribution. On species, CD expects "that I shall be able to show even to sound naturalists that there are two sides to the question of the immutability of species; – that facts can be viewed and grouped under the notion of allied species having descended from common stocks". Mentions books and papers for and against species mutability. CD believes past absurd ideas arose from no one’s having approached subject on side of variation under domestication.

Would like to see Clarke’s paper

and would welcome visit from JDH.

Summary

Rejects necessity of outbreeding and any general law of reversion.

Describes further experiments with Hippeastrum showing greater fertility with foreign pollen than with individual’s own pollen or with pollen from another individual of same species.

Does not believe CD’s questions about reversion can be answered in present state of knowledge.

Summary

Thanks Mr Beaton for his answer [to 3147].

Asks further questions on points raised in Beaton’s previous papers: whether crossing white and blue varieties of Anemone apennina produced many pale shades; whether the Mathiola incana and M. glabra which crossed freely were artificially or naturally crossed.

CD is delighted by Beaton’s assertion that "not a flower in a thousand is fertilised by its own immediate pollen".

Recounts his experiments with Leschenaultia formosa to show insect fertilisation.

Summary

Thanks for seeds. Feels "almost foiled" in his experiments on sea transport – has found few plants that float after more than a week’s immersion.

Sends a list of queries [see 1779] on hollyhocks to put to growers.

Summary

Asks correspondent whether, when growing hollyhocks, he finds it necessary to space out the different varieties to prevent crossing and thus to obtain true seed [see Variation 2: 108].

Summary

CD believes most strongly in reversion. J. G. Kölreuter’s, K. F. v Gärtner’s, and some of Charles Naudin’s cases leave no doubt in his mind. Forgets whether Herbert gave cases but in conversation he certainly believed in it. Thinks Gärtner is right to say reversion occurs only rarely in plant hybrids which have not been cultivated. [See 5120.]

Variation