422 



O.V SUPPOSED BOTANICAL PROOFS OF 



[VII. 



But it was not always the case that the double flowers con- 

 tinued to appear after they had been once produced. In Papaver 

 alpinuDU which Hoffmann has cultivated in successive genera- 

 tions since 1862, other changes in addition to the doubling of 

 the flowers first appeared in 1882, viz. a slight variability in 

 the form of the leaf, and a greater variability in the colours of 

 the flowers. The production of double flowers appeared to be 

 favoured by poor nutrition caused by crowding the plants. The 

 results as regards the number of double flowers produced in 

 this species b}' close sowing, from 1882-1886, have been as 

 follows : — 



Although in these and some other series of generations the 

 double flowers again disappeared in the later generations, yet 

 there can be hardly any doubt that their first appearance was 

 due to the abnormal conditions of nutrition. This conclusion 

 is also unaffected by the fact that double flowers appeared in 

 nearly the same proportions in consequence of cultivation 

 in ordinary garden soil. The plants which were crowded in 

 pots produced 2879 normal flowers, and 256 ( = 8-8 per cent.) 

 abnormal and mostly double ones, while 867 normal and 62 

 ( = 7-0 percent.) abnormal ones were produced on garden beds. 

 Hofimann will not indeed admit that such a comparison can be 

 fairly made, for the plants in the garden beds were raised from 

 seed which was in part taken from the double flowers, and was 

 therefore, he believed, under a strong hereditary influence. But 

 this latter assumption is not supported by the results of his 

 own experiments. 



Thus experiment XVIII, conducted upon Papaver alpimini, 

 is described in these words : ' Seeds yielded b}'^ double flowers 

 from experiment XI (1883) were sown in pots, and the resulting 



arise. Since the characters of which Hoffmann speaks are hereditary, 

 the term cannot be rightly apph'cd to them, and I shall prove later on 

 that they cannot be regarded as acquired characters in the sense required 

 by the theory of descent. 



