CHAPTER X

EFFECTS OF CHANGED CONDITIONS CONTINUED

THE CAUSES OF GENETIC VARIATION

In the last chapter we examined some of the evidence offered in support

of the belief that adaptation in highly organised forms is a consequence

of the inheritance of adaptative changes induced by the influence of

external conditions. The state of knowledge of this whole subject is, as

I have said, most unsatisfactory, chiefly for the reason that in none of

the cases which are alleged to show a positive result have two observers

been over the same ground, or as yet confirmed each other. In the wider

consideration respecting the causes of variation at large we find

ourselves still in the same difficulty. The study has thus far proved

sadly unfruitful. In spite of the considerable efforts lately made by

many observers to induce genetic variation in highly organised plants

or animals, and though successes have occasionally been announced, I

do not know a single case which has been established and confirmed in

such a way that we could with confidence expect to witness the alleged

phenomena if we were to repeat the experiment. Abundant illustrations

are available in which individuals exposed to novel conditions manifest

considerable changes in characters or properties, but as yet there is

no certain means of determining that germ-cells of a new type shall be

formed.

Of the direct effect of conditions the lower organisms, especially

bacteria, offer the best examples, the alterations of virulence which

can be produced in so many distinct ways being the most striking

and familiar. That attenuation of virulence can be produced by high

temperatures or by exposure to chemical agents, and that this diminution

in virulence may remain permanent is, from our point of view, not

surprising; but the fact that in many cases the full virulence can by

suitable cultivation be restored is difficult to understand. Similar

variations have been observed in power of pigment production and other

properties.

These phenomena naturally raise the question whether any cases of

apparent loss of factors in higher forms may be comparable.

The subject of variations in the lower organisms and their dependence on

conditions is a highly special one, and I have no knowledge which can

justify me in offering any discussion of them, but I understand that

hitherto little beyond empirical recognition of the phenomena has been

attempted. A useful summary of observations made by many investigators

was lately published by Hans Pringsheim,[1] who enumerates the different

agencies which have been observed to produce modifications, and the

various ways in which these changes are manifested. One of the most

comprehensive studies of the subject from the genetic point of view is

that made by F. Wolf.[2] In his extensive cultivations of _Bacillus

prodigiosus_, _Staphylococcus pyogenes_ and _Myxococcus_ he succeeded

in producing many strains with modified properties. In most of these

the modifications arose in consequence of the application of high or

low temperatures or of the addition of various chemical substances

to the culture-media. Some of the variations, which are for the most

part in the powers of pigment-formation, persisted when the strains

were returned to normal conditions, and others did not. In reference

especially to the variations witnessed in the Cocci the reader should

consult the critical account of variation in that group published by

the Winslows,[3] where much information on the subject is to be found.

The authors attempted to determine the systematic relationships of the

several forms, as far as possible, by the application of statistical

methods. The result is interesting as showing that the problem of

species in its main features is presented by these organisms in a form

identical with that which we know so well in the higher animals and

plants, whatever properties be selected as the diagnostic characters.

There are many types perfectly distinct and others which intergrade.

Some of the types change greatly with conditions while others do not.

This is exactly what we encounter whenever we study the problem of

species on an extended scale among the higher forms of life.

There is now practically complete agreement among bacteriologists

that the observations made first by Massini on the change in color of

_Bacterium coli mutabile_ grown in Endo's medium, associated with the

acquisition of the power to ferment lactose, are perfectly reliable

and free from possibilities of mistake. The work has been extended and

confirmed by many workers, especially R. Müller, who finds that this

bacterium can similarly acquire and maintain the power to ferment other

sugars. A careful account of the whole subject written by Müller for the

information of biologists will be found in _Zts. für Abstammungsl._,

VIII, 1912. After discussing the biological significance of the facts,

he concludes with a caution to the effect that bacteria are so different

from all other living things that generalizations from their behavior

must not be indiscriminately applied to animals and plants.

In all work with this class of material there is obviously danger of

error through foreign infection of the cultures, but there can be no

doubt that though some of the "mutations" recorded may be due to this

cause, the majority of the instances observed under stringent conditions

are genuine.

Another and equally serious difficulty besetting work with bacteria

and fungi cultivated from spores is that the appearance of variation

may in reality be due to the selection of a special strain previously

living masked among other strains. This possibility must be remembered

especially in those instances which are claimed as exemplifying the

effects of acclimatisation. Manifestly this consideration can be urged

with most force when the strain which gave rise to the novelty was

not raised from a single individual spore. Moreover, when once the

possibility of spontaneous variation is admitted, it must be difficult

to be quite confident that any given variation observed is in reality

due to the novel conditions applied, and as I understand the evidence,

the appearance of the mutational forms does not with any regularity

follow upon the application of the changed conditions.

Researches into the variation of these lower forms will, no doubt, be

continued on a comprehensive scale. So long as the instances recorded

are each isolated examples it is impossible to know what value they

possess. If they could be coordinated in such a way as to provide some

general conception of the types of variation in properties to which

bacteria, or any considerable group of them, are habitually liable, the

knowledge might greatly advance the elucidation of genetic problems.

Of mutational changes directly produced with regularity in

micro-organisms by treatment, the experiments with trypanosomes provide

some of the clearest examples. A summary of the evidence was lately

published by Dobell,[4] from which the present account is taken. The

most definite fact of this kind established is that certain dyes

introduced into the blood of the host have the effect of destroying

the small organ known as the "kinetonucleus" in the trypanosomes. The

trypanosomes thus altered continue to breed, and give rise to races

destitute of kinetonuclei. This observation was originally made by

Werbitzki and has been confirmed by several observers. The exact way

in which this alteration is effected in the trypanosomes is not quite

definitely made out, but there is good reason for supposing that

the dyes have a direct and specific action upon the kinetonucleus

itself, and circumstances make it improbable that in some division a

daughter-organism without that body is produced, or that any selection

of a pre-existing defective variety occurs.

Ehrlich has suggested with great probability that the dyes which possess

this action owe it to the fact that they have the particular chemical

linkage which he calls "ortho-quinoid." In outward respects, such as

motility and general appearance, the modified organisms are unchanged,

but their virulence is diminished. As regards the possibility of the

defective strain reacquiring the kinetonucleus, Werbitzki states

that in one case passage through 50 animals and treatment with dyes

left the strain unaltered; but that in another case at the sixteenth

passage 7 per cent. of the trypanosomes were found to have re-acquired

the organ, and in subsequent passages the percentage increased, until

at the twenty-seventh passage practically all had re-acquired it.

Kudicke, however, in similar experiments did not succeed in causing

re-acquisition by transplantation.

By the action of various drugs and anti-bodies races of trypanosomes

resistant to those substances have been obtained. These breed true, at

least when kept in the same species of animal in which the resistance

was acquired. As to whether change of virulence is produced by passage

through certain animals or not, there is as yet no general agreement.

Other changes, especially in size and some points of structure, are said

to occur when certain trypanosomes proper to mammals are passed through

cold-blooded vertebrates (Wendelstadt and Fellmer), and it is stated

that these changes persist, but the observations have not yet been

confirmed.

Experiments lately conducted by Woltereck with _Daphnia_ are interesting

as having given a definite positive result, in so far, at least, as the

ova were affected by conditions before leaving the bodies of the parent

individuals. The observations relate to the offspring resulting from

_parthenogenetic_ eggs. Females bearing ephippia (fertilised eggs) were

isolated until the ephippia were dropped, and in this way the offspring

of fertilisation were excluded. Males, of course, appeared from time

to time in the cultures, but as fertilised eggs were rejected, their

presence did not disturb the result. The most remarkable observations

related to _Daphnia longispina_.

This species as found in the lower lake at Lunz had the front end of

the body blunt and nearly round in profile; but on being cultivated in

a warm temperature and with abundant nourishment the front end of the

body became produced into an elongated "helmet," as Woltereck calls it.

Experiment showed that the change was primarily due to the abundance of

food, and owing to temperature in a subordinate degree.

This distinction arose as soon as the species was taken into the

hothouse, but when the modified individuals were put back into the

original conditions, a lower temperature and scanty food-supply,

the next generation returned to their original form. After being

cultivated for two years and about 40 generations in the more favourable

conditions, when similarly put back into the lower temperature with

scanty food the _first generation_ born in these conditions was helmeted

like the modified parents. Woltereck is of opinion that the ova were

still unformed at the time the parents were put back, and the influence

of the favourable conditions upon the unformed ova he speaks of as a

"prae-induction." The effect never extended beyond the one generation,

after which the strain returned to its original state.

The fact that the influence on the offspring was not manifested at

first led Woltereck to expect that by more prolonged cultivation in the

favourable conditions a further extension of this influence would be

produced, but this expectation was never fulfilled, though the attempt

was made again and again.

Similar experiments were made with _Hyalodaphnia cucullata_, which is

far more sensitive to cultural influences, and in nature manifests

a considerable elongation of the helmet as a seasonal modification,

but the results were essentially the same as in the preceding case,

no modification extending beyond the first generation born after the

restoration to _normal conditions_.[5]

The only criticism of these extremely interesting results which suggests

itself is that perhaps the original appearance of the modification was

not in reality due to an _accumulated_ effect of the conditions, but

to some change in the conditions themselves which was not noticed. It

is difficult to see how length of time or even the lapse of several

generations could have so specific an effect on the race. It is no

doubt often vaguely supposed by many that a long period of time may be

necessary for the effect of climate or of other environmental conditions

to be produced in an organism which does not thus respond at first. I

have never been able to see any reason for this opinion nor how it is

to be translated into terms of physiological fact, and I imagine that

in those cases in which the lapse of time is really required for the

production of an effect, the influence of the prolongation is rather

on the conditions than on the organisms. The response of the organisms

thus probably indicates not that the creature is at length feeling the

effects because of their accumulated action on itself, but that the

conditions have at length ripened.

As this sheet is passing through the press Agar has published[6] an

abstract of evidence as to another comparable case in a parthenogenetic

strain in the daphnid, _Simocephalus vetulus_. When fed on certain

abnormal foods the shape of the body is changed, the edges of the

carapace being rolled backwards so as to expose the appendages. The

offspring of animals thus modified showed similar modification in the

first, and to a very slight degree, in the second generation, though the

original mothers were removed to normal conditions before their eggs

were laid. In the third generation there was "a very pronounced reaction

in the opposite direction." Agar suggests that the change may be due to

some toxin-like substances, carried on passively by the egg into the

next generation, against which the protoplasm eventually produces an

anti-body.

The experiments which have been in recent years regarded by evolutionary

writers as the most conclusive proof that direct environmental action

may produce germinal variation are those of Professor W. L. Tower, of

Chicago, on _Leptinotarsa_, the potato beetles. This work has attained

considerable celebrity and has been generally accepted as making a

definite extension of knowledge. After frequently reading Tower's papers

and after having been privileged to see some of the experiments in

progress (in 1907) I am still in doubt as to the weight which should be

assigned to this contribution.

The work is described in two chief publications, the first of which

appeared in 1906.[7] This treatise contains a vast amount of information

about numerous species and varieties of these beetles which the author

has observed and bred in many parts of their distribution throughout

the United States, Mexico and Central America. The part of the book

which has naturally excited the greatest interest is that in which Tower

states that by subjecting the beetles to change in temperature and

moisture, he caused them to produce offspring quite unlike themselves,

which in several cases bred true.

It is much to be regretted that the author did not happen to become

acquainted with Mendelian analysis at an earlier stage in the

investigation. The evidence might then have been handled in a much more

orderly and comprehensive way, and a watch would have been kept for

several possibilities of error.

The headquarters of the genus is evidently as Tower states, in Mexico

and the adjoining countries. In this region there is a great profusion

of forms, some very local, some as for instance the well-known

_decemlineata_,[8] more widely spread. The distinctions are almost all

found in peculiarities of colour and pattern, and the limits of species

are even more indefinable than is usual in multiform animals. Tower

arranges the various types into seven groups of which the one most

studied is that which he calls the _lineata_ group. To this group belong

all the forms to which reference is here made, and, as I understand,

they differ among themselves entirely in size, colour and pattern.

There is no suggestion of infertility in the crosses made between the

several forms of the _lineata_ group; in fact they present, like many

Chrysomelidae, a good example of what most of us would now call a

polymorphic species, consisting of many types, some found existing in

the same locality, others being geographically isolated.

A series of experiments was devoted to the attempt to fix strains

corresponding to the extremes of continuous variations. For example,

those with most black pigment and those with least black taken from

a population continuously varying in this respect, were separately

bred; but almost always the selection led to no sensible change in the

position of the mean of the population. The variations in these cases

were evidently fluctuational. In some instances, however, real genetic

differences were met with, and strains exhibiting them were, as usual,

rapidly fixed.

Tower points out that several of the varieties (or species, as he

prefers to call them) were obviously recessive to _decemlineata_. This

is most clearly demonstrated in the case of the form called _pallida_,

which is a pale depauperated-looking creature, with the orange of

the thorax almost white and the eyes devoid of pigment.[9] This form

behaved as an ordinary Mendelian recessive, breeding true whenever it

appeared in the cultures, or when individuals found wild were studied

in captivity. A black form which Tower names _melanicum_ was similarly

shown to be a Mendelian recessive. Wild specimens of this variety of

opposite sexes were not found simultaneously in nature, and there was

thus no opportunity of breeding them together, but the hereditary

behaviour was seen in the F_{2} generation from a _melanicum_ found

coupled with _decemlineata_. Experiments also occurred giving indication

that a variety with the stripes anastomosing in pairs (_tortuosa_), was

another recessive, and that a variety--called "_rubri-vittata_"--gave an

intermediate F_{1} with subsequent segregation. All these are forms of

_decemlineata_ Stål.

Similar observations were made regarding forms recessive to

_multitaeniata_ Stål. Of these two were thrown by _multitaeniata_

itself, namely a form named by Stål _melanothorax_, and regarded by him

as a species, and one which Tower names _rubicunda_ n. sp. The facts

proving the recessive behaviour of their several forms will be found in

the following places in Tower's book:

_pallida_, pp. 273-278.

_melanicum_, p. 279.

_tortuosa_, p. 280.

_rubrivittata_, pp. 280-281.

_melanothorax_ and _rubicunda_, pp. 283-285.

Following this evidence of recessive nature of the six forms

enumerated, Tower describes experiments showing, as he believes, that

some of them may be caused to appear by applying special treatment

to the parents during the "growth and fertilisation" (p. 287) of the

eggs. The most striking example is that in which 4 males and 4 females

of _decemlineata_ were kept very hot (average 35° C.) and dry, and at

low atmospheric pressure (19-21 inches). The eggs laid were restored

to natural conditions. These gave 506 larvae, from which emerged 14

normal, 82 _pallida_ and 2 "_immaculothorax_," viz., without pigment

on the pronotum. The account of the rest of the experiment is somewhat

involved, but I understand that the _pallida_, of which two only

survived, behaved as normal recessives when bred to the type: also that

the parents, after having laid the eggs whose history has been given,

were restored to normal conditions and laid 319 eggs which gave 61

normals.

In another case normal parents laid 409 eggs in the hot and dry

conditions, and on restoration to normal conditions, the same parents

laid 840 eggs. Then 409 eggs gave 64 adults as follows:

_Males_ _Females_

_decemlineata_ 12 8

_pallida_ 10 13

_immaculothorax_ 2 3

_albida_ 9 7

--- ---

33 31

The 840 eggs laid in normal conditions gave 123 normal _decemlineata_.

Similar experiments were made with _multitaeniata_ and gave comparable

results, the two recessives (_melanothorax_, _rubicunda_) being produced

in large numbers when the parents were subjected to heat, but in this

case the atmosphere was kept _saturated_ with moisture, instead of dry,

as in the previous instance. The same parents transferred to normal

conditions gave normals only.

Lastly the form _undecimlineata_ was exposed "to an extreme stimulus of

high temperature, 10° C. above the average," and a dry atmosphere, with

the result that from 190 eggs there emerged 11 beetles, all of the form

_angustovittata_ Jacoby, which subsequently bred true to that type (see

p. 295).

In the results of these experiments, as described, there is one feature

which I regard as quite unaccountable. Tower makes no comment upon

it. Indeed, from the general tenour of the paper, I infer, not only

that he does not perceive that he is recounting anything contrary to

usual experience, but rather that he regards the result as conforming

to expectations previously formed. The point in question is the

genetic behaviour of the dominant normals produced under the abnormal

conditions. These normals were the result of the breeding of parents

declared to be at the same time giving off many recessive gametes. Some

of these normals must be expected therefore to be heterozygous unless

some selective fertilisation occurs. Nevertheless in every case they and

their offspring are reported to have continually bred true. I allude

especially to the tables given on pp. 288, 289, 292, and 293. Tower does

not mention any misgiving about this result, and I think he regards

himself as recounting phenomena in general harmony with the ideas of

mutation expressed by De Vries. This they may be; but to anyone familiar

with analytical breeding the course of these experiments must seem so

surprising as to call for most careful, independent confirmation.

In 1910[10] Tower published an account of further experiments with

_Leptinotarsa_. The work described related to two subjects. Crosses

were made between three forms, _undecimlineata_ Stål, _signaticollis_

Stål and "_diversa_" named by Tower as a new species. The distinctions

between these three depend partly on characters of the adults and

partly on those of the larvae. The adults of _undecimlineata_ and

_diversa_ have the elytra striped, but the elytra of _signaticollis_

are unstriped. The larvae of _signaticollis_ and of _diversa_ are

yellow, but those of _undecimlineata_ are white.[11] Moreover, in

_signaticollis_ and _diversa_ the black increases in the third

stage of the larvae to form transverse bands which are absent in

_undecimlineata_. The general course of the experiments shows that these

differences may be approximately represented as due to the action of

three factors, any of which may be independently present or absent. The

stripings of the elytra and of the larvae are each due to a separate

factor. As regards the distinction between the yellow and the white

larvae the evidence does not prove that there is decided dominance of

either colour and I infer that the heterozygotes are often intermediate.

The chief contribution which this new paper claims to make relates to

differences in the results which ensue from crosses effected between

these three types at different average temperatures.

We are first concerned with four experiments which I number (1), (2),

(3), (4):

1. _Signaticollis_ [F] × _diversa_ [M] bred at an average temperature

of 80º F. by day and 75° F. by night, gave two groups in about equal

numbers. The first (49) was pure _signaticollis_ and bred true. The

second (53) was of an intermediate type, which on being bred together

gave the typical Mendelian result--1 _sig._: 2 _intermediate_: 1 _div_.

2. Next, as the account originally stood in the published paper, we

are told that _sig_ [F] × _div_ [M] bred together at a day-temp.

average 75° F. and night average 50° F. gave an _intermediate_ only,

which subsequently produced a normal 1:2:1 ratio. The two crosses were

repeated eleven times with identical results.

In a further experiment (3) _signaticollis_ [F] × _diversa_ [M] were

bred under the same conditions as those used in expt. (1). They again

gave _sig._ and intermediates as before in fairly equal numbers. The

_sig._ as before bred true, and the intermediate gave 1:2:1, all exactly

as in expt. (1).

In expt. (4) _the same parents used_ in (3) were again mated under

conditions of expt. (2) at the lower temperature, and this time gave

_signaticollis_ exclusively, which bred true for four generations. This

experiment was repeated seven times with uniform results.

Diagrams are given representing all these histories in graphic fashion.

From these observations, Tower concludes that the determination of

dominance, and the ensuing type of behaviour, is clearly a function of

the conditions incident upon the combining germ plasms.

It will be observed that expts. (1) and (3) gave identical results

but (2) and (4), though much the same conditions were applied, are

at variance, for (2) gave all intermediates, while (4) gave all

_signaticollis_. In _Amer. Nat._, XLIV, 1910, p. 747, Professor T.

D. A. Cockerell commented on this paper of Tower's and pointed out

that there must be an error somewhere, for when he discusses these

experiments Tower speaks of (2) and (4) as confirming each other. To

this Tower replied[12] that there had been a mistake. He states that

in preparing the paper "certain minor experiments were taken from

a larger series and combined to illustrate a general point in the

behaviour of alternative characters in inheritance," and that expt. (2)

was introduced inadvertently in place of another which he desires to

substitute. In this, which I number (5), _signaticollis_ [F] × _diversa_

[M] from exactly the same stocks as those used in (1), were mated at the

lower temperatures specified for (2), day average 75° F., night average

50° F. These gave all of the _signaticollis_ type with a narrow range of

variability, which bred true, in some cases to F_{6}. Tower says he has

repeated this experiment six times with identical results.

Nevertheless he proceeds to say that the description of expt. (2), which

was repeated eleven times with identical results, was correct "as far as

given." That experiment was "from a second series of cultures parallel

to the one given, but in which there are other factors involved, which

in H. 410 [my (2)] are productive of a typical Mendelian behaviour." He

adds he does "not care at this time to make any statement of what these

factors are, nor of their relations to the behaviours given in the H.

409, H. 411, H. 409/11 series [my (1), (5) and (3)--(4)] which are the

simplest and most easily presented series obtained in the crossing of

_signaticollis_ and _diversa_."

Professor Cockerell's intervention has thus elicited the fact that

we have as yet only a small selected part of the evidence before us,

even as concerning the effect of temperature on the cross between

_signaticollis_ [F] × _diversa_ [M]. We learn that at the lower

temperatures the result was eleven times the expected one, and six times

an unexpected one; further, that we owe it to the author's inadvertence

that we have come to hear of the expected result at all, and that though

he knows the factors which determine the discrepancy, he declines for

the present to name them. In these circumstances we can scarcely venture

as yet to estimate the significance of these records.

The paper goes on to recount somewhat comparable, but more complex

instances in which the descent of the colour of adults and of larvae

was affected by temperature in crosses between _undecimlineata_ and

_signaticollis_. As they stand the results are very striking and

unexpected, but I think, in view of what has been admitted respecting

the former part of the paper, full discussion may be postponed till

confirmation is forthcoming.

One feature, however, calls for remark. This second paper is written

apparently without any reference to the discoveries related by Tower in

his previous book, to which no allusion is made. This is most noticeable

in the case of an experiment in which (p. 296, H. 700A) _undecimlineata_

[F] (the dominant) was mated to _signaticollis_ [M] with the result

that all the offspring were _undecimlineata_ and bred true to that

type (Parthenogenesis was tested for, but never found to occur). This

experiment was made at a temperature averaging 95° F. ± 3.5° by day

and 89° F. ± 4.8° by night, and in a humidity given as 84 per cent. by

day and 100 per cent. by night; but in the previous book (p. 294) we

are told that pure _undecimlineata_ bred together "under an extreme

stimulus of high temperature, 10° C. above the average" and a relative

humidity of 40 per cent. gave 11 beetles only, all _angustovittata_.

But reference to the Plate 16, Fig. 2, shows that _angustovittata_

must be exceedingly like _signaticollis_, having, like it, the elytral

stripes obsolete, and if there is any marked difference at all, it can

only be in the larvae. It seems strange that if _undecimlineata_ really

gives off ova of this recessive type at high temperatures, the fact

should not be alluded to in connection with expt. H. 700A, where, as

the father was _signaticollis_, having the same recessive character,

their appearance might have been expected not to pass unobserved. The

temperature in the older experiment is, of course, not given with the

great accuracy used in the second, and it may have been higher still.

The humidity also was widely different. Still, in discussing the

phenomena we should expect some reference to the very remarkable and

closely cognate discovery which Tower himself had previously reported in

regard to the same species.[13]

The hesitation which I had come to feel respecting these two

publications of Tower's has been, I confess, increased by the appearance

of a destructive criticism by Gortner[14] who has examined the parts

of Chapter III of Tower's book, in which he discusses at some length

the chemistry of the pigments in _Leptinotarsa_ and other animals. As

Gortner has shown, this discussion, though offered with every show of

confidence, exhibits such elementary ignorance, both of the special

subject and of chemistry in general, that it cannot be taken into

serious consideration.

Some observations made by Dr. W. T. Macdougal[15] have also been

interpreted as showing the actual causation of genetic variation by

chemical treatment. Of these perhaps the least open to objection

were the experiments with _Raimannia odorata_, a Patagonian plant

closely allied to _Oenothera_. The ovaries were injected with various

substances and from some of the seeds which subsequently formed in them

a remarkable new variety was raised. This varying or mutational form

was strikingly different from the parental type, with which it was not

connected by any intergradational forms, and it bred true. It made

no rosette, growing to a much smaller size than the parent, and was

totally glabrous instead of being very hairy as the parental type is.

I was shown specimens of these plants by the kindness of Dr. Britton

in the Bronx Park Botanic Garden in 1907 and can testify to their very

remarkable peculiarities. They had a somewhat weakly look, and might

at first sight be thought to be a pathological product, but they had

bred true for several generations. From the evidence, however, I am by

no means satisfied that their original appearance was a consequence

of the treatment applied. This treatment was of a most miscellaneous

description. Two of the mutants came from an ovary which had been

treated with a ten per cent. sugar solution. Ten came from one into

which a 0.1 per cent. solution of calcium nitrate had been injected. One

was from a capsule which "had been exposed to the action of a radium

pencil." Macdougal speaks of these results as decisive, but clearly

before such evidence can be admitted even for consideration it must be

shown by control experiments that the individual plants which threw

the mutant were themselves breeding true in ordinary circumstances.

Nothing is more likely than that the mutant was an ordinary recessive.

I may add that Mr. R. H. Compton made a number of experiments with

_Raimannia odorata_, raised from seeds kindly given me by Dr. Britton,

injecting the ovaries with a variety of substances, including those

named by Macdougal; but though a numerous progeny was raised from the

ovaries treated, all were normal. Macdougal relates also that some

mutational forms came from ovaries of _Oenothera Lamarckiana_ exposed

to radium pencils, and also from _Oenothera biennis_ injected with

zinc sulphate a peculiar mutant was raised, but taking into account

the frequency of these occurrences in those species, he very properly

regarded this evidence as of doubtful application. In a later paper,[16]

however, he has returned to the subject and affirms his conviction that

the appearance of a mutant among seedlings raised from an ovary of

_Oenothera biennis_ treated with zinc sulphate was really a consequence

of the injection, saying that the variation previously observed in

the species was afterwards shown to be due to fungoid disease. The

circumstances to which he mainly points in support of his view is

that the mutation bred true, but this is only evidence of its genetic

distinctness, which may, of course, be admitted by those who remain

unconvinced as to the original cause of its appearance. He adds that he

is making similar experiments with some twenty genera; but what is more

urgently needed is repeated confirmation of the original observation.

When it has been shown that this mutation can be produced with any

regularity from a plant which does not otherwise produce it on normal

self-fertilisation, the enquiry may be profitably extended to other

plants.

A curious and novel experiment, which however, led ultimately to a

negative result, was made by F. Payne. Many discussions have been held

respecting the blindness of cave animals. The phenomenon is one of the

well-known difficulties, and most of us would admit that the theory of

evolution by the natural selection of small differences does not offer a

really satisfying account of it. Those who believe in the causation of

such modifications by environmental influences and in their hereditary

transmission make, of course, the simple suggestion that the darkness

is the cause of the loss of sight, and that disuse has led to the

reduction of the visual organs. Payne bred _Drosophila ampelophila_,

the pomace-fly (which is easy to keep in confinement, fed on fermenting

bananas), for sixty-nine generations in darkness. At the end of that

period there was no perceptible change in the structure of the eyes, or

in any other respect. The number of generations may possibly be regarded

as insufficient to prove anything, but comparing them, as he does, with

the generations of mankind, we see that they correspond with a period of

about two thousand years, an interval far longer than those which many

writers in particular cases have deemed sufficient.

In his first paper Payne states that, though no structural difference

could be perceived, the flies which had been bred in the dark reacted

less readily to light than those which had been reared under normal

conditions, and he inclined to think that the treatment had thus

produced a definite effect. After more careful tests, however, he

withdrew this opinion. It proved that both individual flies and

individual groups of flies, both of those bred in the light and of

those bred in the dark, differed greatly in their reactions, which were

measured by counting the time that it took for a fly to travel to the

light end of a covered tube, various sources of error being eliminated.

He found further that these differences of behaviour were not inherited

in any simple way, but he is disposed to attribute them to accidental

differences in the nature of the food, an account which seems probable

enough.[17]

In several recent publications Blaringhem[18] has described the origin

of many abnormal forms of plants, especially of maize, which he

attributes to various mutilations practised upon the parents. Respecting

these the same difficulty which has been expressed in other cases

reappears, that before drawing any conclusion as to the value of such

evidence we require to know that the plants treated belong to a really

pure line, which if left to nature in the ordinary circumstances of its

life in that locality would have had normal offspring. Abnormalities

abound in the experience of everyone who examines pans of seedlings

of almost any species of plant, and in maize they are well known to

be exceptionally common. Some of those which we meet with when we

attempt to ripen maize in this country are very similar to those which

Blaringhem describes, consisting in irregularities in the distribution

of the sexes, in the shapes of the panicles, etc. Many of these are

doubtless imperfections of development, due to the dullness of our

climate, but others are presumably genetic and would recur in the

offspring however treated. If some one working in a climate where maize

could be raised in perfection would repeat these experiments, and show

that a strain which was thoroughly reliable and normal in its genetic

behaviour did, after mutilation, throw the miscellaneous types observed

by Blaringhem, that would be evidence at least that the development of

the seed could be so influenced by injury to the parental tissues that

its properties were changed. Such evidence could be used for what it is

worth; but pending an inquiry of this kind I am disposed to regard these

observations of variation following on parental injury as suggestive

rather than convincing.

Some evidence of a remarkably interesting kind has been collected by

J. H. Powers[19] respecting the structure and habits of _Amblystoma

tigrinum_, which led him to the conclusion that striking differences

in the form, anatomy, and developmental processes could be effected

directly by change in the conditions of life. It is well known that

a profusion of forms, distinct in various degrees, is grouped round

_Amblystoma tigrinum_. Some of these are believed to be geographically

isolated, others occur together in the same waters, and, as usual,

authorities have differed greatly as to the number of names to be given.

These forms were studied in detail by Cope who described them in the

_Batrachia of North America_. The view which he inclined to take was

that the individual variations of _Amblystoma tigrinum_ resulted from

variations in the time and completeness of the metamorphosis, and these

were regarded as due to external causes, such as differences in season,

temperature, and geographical conditions. Powers, however, states that

collecting within a radius of six or eight miles he found almost if

not quite the whole "gamut of recorded variation in this species."

Some, however, as he states, occurred rarely except under experimental

conditions, but considerable differences in temperature were not found

necessary in producing them. Every year, he says, he has been able to

add to the number of peculiar types found in the same small area in

nature, until the amount of natural variation at least equals that seen

by Cope in the collections of the National Museum and those of the

Philadelphia Academy.

Powers states that his observations by no means confirm Cope's view

that these differences are in the main referable to variation in

the completeness of metamorphosis, and on the contrary, he regards

metamorphosis as on the whole a levelling process, tending to obliterate

diversity. The enormous differences in size and proportions which he

describes can only be appreciated by reference to his figures. They

affect almost all features of bodily organisation. These striking

differences he looks upon as brought about by differences in nutrition,

"diversities in habitual locomotion," and diversity in the age at which

metamorphosis occurs, and to sexual difference. Apart from sexual

difference he regards the chief distinctions, in brief, as "acquired

variations of the larva."

As an example he gives the great elongation of some of the forms as

"due first to slow growth, second to the free-swimming habit, third

to the prolongation of larval life, and finally to the assumption of

sexual maturity as males," either in the branchiate or non-branchiate

condition. He describes the rapid growth of some and the slow growth

of others. A larva of intermediate type may grow about a centimeter a

month, but a rapidly growing specimen may grow more than four times

as much. The slower rate of growth may, he says, be induced by winter

feeding, and other treatment.[20]

When, however, he goes on to describe the influences which he regards

as exerted by the habit of freely swimming, I am led to wonder whether

after all in most of these illustrations, the primary distinctions

are not in reality genetic. "Specimens raised in the same aquarium or

in similar aquaria, side by side with all conditions as uniform as it

is possible to make them, seldom fail to furnish striking examples of

broad-headed, short-bodied, and short-tailed types which are habitually

found at the bottom, while others, slender and elongated, are free

swimmers, and maintain themselves in almost as continual suspension

and motion as does a gold fish." Later, again, he writes, "Yet despite

the uniformity of these favourable conditions, the larvae soon began

to split up into two noticeably distinct groups, the one of unusually

compact proportions, the other of uniform intermediate build, such

is most commonly met with." It is to my mind scarcely possible to

resist the inference that, though there may be definite responses

to certain conditions, yet the chief distinctions are genetic, and

that it is these distinctions which confer the power to respond. The

parts respectively played by cause and effect are always difficult to

assign; but when it is stated that "a weak-limbed, long-bodied and

long-tailed animal becomes well nigh perforce an undulatory swimmer,

while the strong-limbed, short-tailed, heavy-bodied specimen, when

these characteristics are rapidly forced upon it, is, under certain

circumstances, just as forcibly induced to become a crawler," we feel

how erroneous any estimates of causation are likely to be.

One of the most remarkable and interesting sections of Powers' paper

is that in which he describes the differences in bodily structure and

habits which he attributes to cannibalism, and the whole account of the

phenomena should be read in the original. It appears that there are

two extremely distinct types of larvae, those with narrow heads and

slender bodies which live for the most part on small Crustacea such

as _Daphnias_, and those with huge mouths and very wide heads, which

disregard such small animals altogether and live on amphibian larvae,

whether of their own or other species. As the illustrations show, the

differences between these two types are very great, and the differences

in instinct and behaviour are no less. The cannibals take no heed of the

pelagic crustacea, lying sluggishly at the bottom, rousing themselves

immediately to a violent attack on the larger living things which

approach them. Nothing but the most incontrovertible evidence based on

abundant control experiments should convince us that such differences

are not primarily genetic, and in the present state of knowledge I

incline to think that the families really consist of individuals which

are ready to assume the cannibal habit if opportunity offers, and

others which are congenitally incapable of it. It may readily be that

if all chance of cannibal diet be excluded, the full development of the

wide head and mouth, or the other peculiarities, would never become

pronounced, but I doubt whether such change could be induced in any

individual taken at random.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Pringsheim, H., _Die Variabilität niederer Organismen_, Berlin, 1910.

[2] F. Wolf, Modifikationen u. Mutationen von Bakterien, _Zts. F.

indukt. Abstam. u. Vererbungslehre_, II, 1909, p. 90.

[3] Winslow, C. E. A. and A. R., _Systematic Relationships of the

Coccaceae_. New York. 1909.

[4] C. C. Dobell, _Jour. Genetics_, 1912, II, p. 201, where full

references are given.

Still more recently the same author has contributed an excellent summary

of the evidence relating to bacteria (_ibid._, II. 1913, p. 325).

[5] See Woltereck, _Verh. d. Deut. Zool. Ges._, 1909, p. 110; and 1911,

p. 142. This is a subject which can only be properly appreciated on

reference to the original papers. Several complications are involved to

which I have not here alluded.

[6] _Proc. Roy. Soc._, B, Vol. 86, 1913, p. 113.

[7] _An Investigation of Evolution in Chrysomelid Beetles of the Genus

Leptinotarsa_, Carnegie Publications, 1906, No. 48.

[8] This is the famous Colorado beetle or potato-bug, which has caused

such serious destruction in potato crops. There seems to be no doubt

that this insect, formerly unknown in the eastern States, made its way

east along the mining trails when the west was opened up.

[9] This is indicated in the coloured plate, but I have not found any

explicit statement to this effect in the text, and am not sure if the

absence of pigment was regarded as complete.

[10] _Biol. Bull._, XVIII, 1910, p. 285.

[11] This description does not quite agree with the representation of

the larvae in Pl. 17 of the book _Evolution in the Genus Leptinotarsa_

for there the larva of _undecimlineata_ is shown as white in the second

stage, but yellowish in the third stage; perhaps there is an error in

printing.

[12] _Biol. Bull._, XX, 1910, p. 67.

[13] As to the interrelations of these three forms, Tower states (1906,

p. 18) that _angustovittata_, which he reared from _undecimlineata_, is

intermediate between it and _signaticollis_. Compare Stål, "_Monogr.

des Chrysomélides_," 1862, p. 163; and Jacoby, _Biol. Centr. Amer.

Celeopt._, vi, Pt. 1, p. 234, Pl. xiii, fig. 20; Tab. 41, fig. 15;

_ibid._, Suppl., p. 253. All these forms are evidently very closely

related, and the delimitation of species is quite arbitrary. Jacoby

indeed suggests that _undecimlineata_ may be a variety of _decemlineata_.

[14] Gortner, _Amer. Nat._, Dec., 1911, XLV, p. 743.

[15] _Mutations, Variations, and Relationships of the Oenotheras_,

Carnegie Institution Publication No. 81, 1907, pp. 61-64.

[16] Macdougal, D. T., "Alterations in Heredity induced by Ovarial

Treatments", _Bot. Gaz._, vol. 51, 1911, p. 241.

[17] Payne, Fernandus, _Biol. Bull._, XVIII, 1910, p. 188, and _ibid._,

XXI, 1911, p. 297.

[18] See especially, _Mutation et Traumatismes_, Paris, Felix Alcan,

1908.

[19] J. H. Powers, "Morphological Variation and its Causes in

_Amblystoma tigrinum_." _Studies from the Zoological Laboratory. _ The

University of Nebraska, No. 71, 1907.

[20] In connexion with this case I would refer the reader to some

remarkable observations of Dr. T. A. Chapman on various types of larvae

which he reared from the moth _Arctia caja_ (_Ent. Rec._, IV, 1893,

p. 265, and following parts). From a single mother he raised a great

diversity of forms, some which fed up rapidly and passed through their

development without assuming certain stages, and others which were, as

he called them, "laggards," moulting more times than their brethren and

developing at a much slower rate. It is greatly to be hoped that such a

case may be critically investigated by analytical breeding.

Problems of Genetics · 第 10 / 11 章