Chapter 44

page 307.) These facts, and innumerable others which could be added, indicate that a change of almost any kind in the conditions of life suffices to cause variability--different changes acting on different organisms.

Andrew Knight (22/6. 'Treatise on the Culture of the Apple' etc. page 3.) attributed the variation of both animals and plants to a more abundant supply of nourishment, or to a more favourable climate, than that natural to the species. A more genial climate, however, is far from necessary; the kidney- bean, which is often injured by our spring frosts, and peaches, which require the protection of a wall, have varied much in England, as has the orange-tree in northern Italy, where it is barely able to exist. (22/7. Gallesio 'Teoria della Riproduzione Veg.' page 125.) Nor can we overlook the fact, though not immediately connected with our present subject, that the plants and shells of the Arctic regions are eminently variable. (22/8. See Dr. Hooker's Memoir on Arctic Plants in 'Linn. Transact.' volume 23 part 2. Mr. Woodward, and a higher authority cannot be quoted, speaks of the Arctic mollusca in his 'Rudimentary Treatise' 1856 page 355 as remarkably subject to variation.) Moreover, it does not appear that a change of climate, whether more or less genial, is one of the most potent causes of variability; for in regard to plants Alph. De Candolle, in his 'Geographie Botanique' repeatedly shows that the native country of a plant, where in most cases it has been longest cultivated, is that where it has yielded the greatest number of varieties.

It is doubtful whether a change in the nature of the food is a potent cause of variability. Scarcely any domesticated animal has varied more than the pigeon or the fowl, but their food, especially that of highly-bred pigeons, is generally the same. Nor can our cattle and sheep have been subjected to any great change in this respect. But in all these cases the food probably is much less varied in kind than that which was consumed by the species in its natural state. (22/9. Bechstein in his 'Naturgeschichte der Stubenvogel' 1840 s. 238, has some good remarks on this subject. He states that his canary-birds varied in colour, though kept on uniform food.)

Of all the causes which induce variability, excess of food, whether or not changed in nature, is probably the most powerful. This view was held with regard to plants by Andrew Knight, and is now held by Schleiden, more especially in reference to the inorganic elements of the food. (22/10. 'The Plant' by Schleiden translated by Henfrey 1848 page 169. See also Alex. Braun in 'Bot. Memoirs' Ray Soc. 1853 page 313.) In order to give a plant more food it suffices in most cases to grow it separately, and thus prevent other plants robbing its roots. It is surprising, as I have often seen, how vigorously our common wild species flourish when planted by themselves, though not in highly manured land; separate growth is, in fact, the first step in cultivation. We see the converse of the belief that excess of food induces variability in the following statement by a great raiser of seeds of all kinds (22/11. Messrs. Hardy and Son of Maldon in 'Gardener's Chronicle' 1856 page 458. Carriere 'Production et Fixation des Varietes' 1865 page 31.): "It is a rule invariably with us, when we desire to keep a true stock of any one kind of seed, to grow it on poor land without dung; but when we grow for quantity, we act contrary, and sometimes have dearly to repent of it." According also to Carriere, who has had great experience with flower-garden seeds, "On remarque en general les plantes de vigeur moyenne sont celles qui conservent le mieux leurs caracteres."

In the case of animals the want of a proper amount of exercise, as Bechstein remarked, has perhaps played, independently of the direct effects of the disuse of any particular organ, an important part in causing variability. We can see in a vague manner that, when the organised and nutrient fluids of the body are not used during growth, or by the wear and tear of the tissues, they will be in excess; and as growth, nutrition, and reproduction are intimately allied processes, this superfluity might disturb the due and proper action of the reproductive organs, and consequently affect the character of the future offspring. But it may be argued that neither an excess of food nor a superfluity in the organised fluids of the body necessarily induces variability. The goose and the turkey have been well fed for many generations, yet have varied very little. Our fruit-trees and culinary plants, which are so variable, have been cultivated from an ancient period, and, though they probably still receive more nutriment than in their natural state, yet they must have received during many generations nearly the same amount; and it might be thought that they would have become habituated to the excess. Nevertheless, on the whole, Knight's view, that excess of food is one of the most potent causes of variability, appears, as far as I can judge, probable.

Whether or not our various cultivated plants have received nutriment in excess, all have been exposed to changes of various kinds. Fruit-trees are grafted on different stocks, and grown in various soils. The seeds of culinary and agricultural plants are carried from place to place; and during the last century the rotation of our crops and the manures used have been greatly changed.

Slight changes of treatment often suffice to induce variability. The simple fact of almost all our cultivated plants and domesticated animals having varied in all places and at all times, leads to this conclusion. Seeds taken from common English forest-trees, grown under their native climate, not highly manured or otherwise artificially treated, yield seedlings which vary much, as may be seen in every extensive seed-bed. I have shown in a former chapter what a number of well-marked and singular varieties the thorn (Crataegus oxycantha) has produced: yet this tree has been subjected to hardly any cultivation. In Staffordshire I carefully examined a large number of two British plants, namely Geranium phaeum and pyrenaicum, which have never been highly cultivated. These plants had spread spontaneously by seed from a common garden into an open plantation; and the seedlings varied in almost every single character, both in their flower and foliage, to a degree which I have never seen exceeded; yet they could not have been exposed to any great change in their conditions.

With respect to animals, Azara has remarked with much surprise (22/12. 'Quadrupedes du Paraguay' 1801 tome 2 page 319.) that, whilst the feral horses on the Pampas are always of one of three colours, and the cattle always of a uniform colour, yet these animals, when bred on the unenclosed estancias, though kept in a state which can hardly be called domesticated, and apparently exposed to almost identically the same conditions as when they are feral, nevertheless display a great diversity of colour. So again in India several species of fresh-water fish are only so far treated artificially, that they are reared in great tanks; but this small change is sufficient to induce much variability. (22/13. M'Clelland on Indian Cyprinidae 'Asiatic Researches'