118 Transformation of j^gilops into Wlieat. 



If ^gilops triticoides has preserved some of the characters of 

 j^gilops ovata, which should be the case, it is not therefore a ne- 

 cessary conclusion that these have the importance of characters 

 truly generic, and that our hybrid has preserved none of the 

 characters of Triticiim ; it is, in our eyes, perfectly intermediate 

 between the two species which have given birth to it. 



Hence I think myself authorized in maintaining the three 

 conclusions which I have deduced in my memoir on the fertiliza- 

 tion of j^^gilops by Triticum ; they express clearly what 1 desired 

 to demonstrate in this essay. 



I now arrive at ^gilops speltcpformis, which in my opinion is 

 only an accessory, an accident, in the question forming the object 

 of my anterior investigations of jEgilops triticoides. Whatever 

 opinion may be accepted as to the new species created by M. 

 Jordan, this opinion cannot in any way weaken the proofs of the 

 hybrid origin of y^gilops triticoides, a question which seems to 

 me now settled. 



According to M. Jordan, I have confounded j^gilops speltce- 

 formis with ^gilops triticoides, and also witli Triticum vulgaris, 

 whence, in virtue of the axiom that things which are equal to 

 the same thing are equal to one another, he concludes that I have 

 also confounded JEgilops triticoides with wheat. This is trying 

 to prove too much. I regret to say it, but both these assertions 

 are quite inexact. 



In the first place : is the question about y^gilops spelt cpf or mis, 

 cultivated for twelve years by M. Fabre, specimens of which 

 I have communicated to M. Jordan? Wliat I have said in my 

 last memoir on this suljject is, " The plant lias gradually acquired 

 a more elevated stature ; its glumes have lost one of the two axons 

 which distinguish j^jgilops triticoides ; in a word, this plant has 

 acquired, in part at least, the characters of wheat." 'J his pas- 

 sage has doubtless escaped M. Jordan ; at this time I having 

 nothing to add, and nothing to subtract from it. 



Is the question relative to the wild j^jgilops speltaformis? 

 Here confusion was impossible either with wheat or with 

 yEgilops triticoides. I have never seen yEgilops speltaformis in a 

 wild state, although I have investigated most carefully the species 

 of j^gilops which grow in the environs of Agde and Montpellier. 



On his side, M. Jordan nowhere says that he liiinseH has seen 

 wild specimens of this ])lant; he only remarks that M. Fabre 

 speaks of having found it wild in the neighbourhood of Agde, 

 confounding it in this state \\i\h j^gilops triticoides. I will take 

 the liberty to observe that M. Fabre merely affirms that he has 

 gathered ^gilops triticoides, that it has been reproduced with 

 two awns to each valve of the glume, in most of the specimens 

 during the first two years of cultivation, and that in the succeed- 



