6.0 KiB
| title | chunk | source | category | tags | date_saved | instance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fertilisation of Orchids | 6/9 | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids | reference | science, encyclopedia | 2026-05-05T08:30:38.882356+00:00 | kb-cron |
=== Final chapter === Darwin noted that the essential nectar, secreted to attract insects, seemed also in some cases to act as an excretion: "It is in perfect accordance with the scheme of nature, as worked out by natural selection, that matter excreted to free the system from superfluous or injuring substances should be utilised for purposes of the highest importance." Homologies of the flowers of orchids showed them all to be based on "fifteen groups of vessels, arranged three within three, in alternating order". He disparaged the idea that this was an "ideal type" fixed by the Omnipotent Creator, but attributed it instead to its "descent from some monocotyledonous plant, which, like so many other plants of the same division, possessed fifteen organs, arranged alternately three within three in five whorls; and that the now wonderfully changed structure of the flower is due to a long course of slow modification,—each modification having been preserved which was useful to each plant, during the incessant changes to which the organic and the inorganic world has been exposed". Describing the final end state of the whole flower cycle as the production of seed, he set out a simple experiment in which he took a ripe seed capsule and arranged the seeds in a line, then counted the seeds in one-tenth of an inch (2.5 mm). By multiplication he found that each plant produced enough seeds to plant 1-acre (4,000 m2) of ground, and the great-grandchildren of a single plant could "carpet the entire surface of the land throughout the globe" if unchecked. In conclusion, he felt that the book had "shown that Orchids exhibit an almost endless diversity of beautiful adaptations. When this or that part has been spoken of as contrived for some special purpose, it must not be supposed that it was originally always formed for this sole purpose. The regular course of events seems to be, that a part which originally served for one purpose, by slow changes becomes adapted for widely different purposes." He was almost exasperated by the inventiveness of forms in nature; "In my examination of Orchids, hardly any fact has so much struck me as the endless diversity of structure,—the prodigality of resources,—for gaining the very same end, namely, the fertilisation of one flower by the pollen of another." His focus on detail was justified, as "The use of each trifling detail of structure is far from a barren search to those who believe in natural selection." The "contrivances and beautiful adaptations" slowly acquired through slight variations, subjected to natural selection "under the complex and ever-varying conditions of life", far transcended the most fertile imagination. The mechanisms to transport the pollen of one flower or of one plant to another flower or plant underlined the importance of cross-fertilisation: "For may we not further infer as probable, in accordance with the belief of the vast majority of the breeders of our domestic productions, that marriage between near relatives is likewise in some way injurious,—that some unknown great good is derived from the union of individuals which have been kept distinct for many generations?"
== Reception ==
Botanists responded favourably to the book immediately on its publication. Hooker told Darwin that the book showed him to be "out of sight the best Physiological observer & experimenter that Botany ever saw", and was glad to note that two leading traditional botanists had accepted the concept of evolution; "Bentham & Oliver are quite struck up in a heap with your book & delighted beyond expression". Daniel Oliver thought it "very extraordinary", and even Darwin's old beetle-hunting rival Charles Babington, by then professor of botany at the University of Cambridge and inclined to oppose natural selection, called it "exceedingly interesting and valuable ... highly satisfactory in all respects. The results are most curious and the skill shown in discovering them equally so." George Bentham praised its value in opening "a new field for observing the wonderful provisions of Nature ... a new and unexpected track to guide us in the explanation of phenomena which had before that appeared so irreconcilable with the ordinary prevision and method shown in the organised world." The book's success in botanical circles was enhanced following Bentham's public endorsement. In his presidential address to the Linnean Society on 24 May 1862, Bentham praised the book as exemplifying the biological method, and said that it had nearly overcome his opposition to the Origin. In his address in 1863 he stated that "Mr Darwin has shown how changes may take place", and described it as "an unimpeachable example of a legitimate hypothesis" in compliance with John Stuart Mill's scientific method. This endorsement favourably influenced Miles Joseph Berkeley, Charles Victor Naudin, Alphonse Pyramus de Candolle, Jean Louis Quatrefages, and Charles Daubeny. In June 1862, Darwin welcomed favourable reviews in the press and wrote to Hooker; "Well my orchis-book is a success (but I do not know whether it sells) after cursing my folly in writing it". He told his publisher, "The Botanists praise my Orchid-book to the skies", and to Asa Gray he said, "I am fairly astonished at the success of my book with botanists." Darwin's geologist friend Charles Lyell gave it enthusiastic praise: "next to the Origin, as the most valuable of all Darwin's works." However, the book attracted little attention from the general public, and in September Darwin told his cousin Fox, "Hardly any one not a botanist, except yourself, as far as I know, has cared for it." The book baffled a general public more interested in controversy over gorillas and cavemen. There were some reviews in gardening magazines, but few natural philosophers or zoologists noticed the book, and hardly any learned appraisals appeared.
=== Theological responses ===