xv GENERAL ADAPTATIONS 307 



in damaging the pollen or the stigmas, as beautifully shown 

 in Kerner's very interesting volume on Flowers and their 

 Unbidden Guests a book that forms an admirable sequel 

 to Darwin's works, and is equally instructive and interesting. 



Of late years writers who are very imperfectly acquainted 

 with the facts proclaim loudly that Darwin's views are dis- 

 proved, on account of some apparent exceptions to the 

 general conclusions he has reached. Two of these may be 

 here noticed as illustrative of the kind of opposition to which 

 Darwinism is exposed. The bee - orchis of our chalky 

 downs, though conspicuously coloured and with a fully- 

 developed labellum, like the majority of its allies which are 

 cross-fertilised by insects, yet fertilises itself and is never 

 visited by insects. This has been held to show that Darwin's 

 views must be erroneous, notwithstanding the enormous mass 

 of evidence on which they are founded. But a further 

 consideration of the facts shows that they are all in his 

 favour. In the south of Europe, while the bee - orchis is 

 self-fertilised as in England, several allied species are insect- 

 fertilised, but they rarely produce so many seed-capsules as 

 ours ; but, strange to say, an allied species (Ophrys scolopax] 

 is in one district fertilised by insects only, while in another 

 it is self-fertilised. Again, in Portugal, where many species 

 of Ophrys are found, very few of the flowers are fertilised 

 and very few ripe seed-capsules are produced. But owing 

 to the great number of seeds in a capsule, and their easy 

 dispersal by wind, the plants are abundant. These and 

 many other facts show that for some unknown cause, orchises 

 which are exclusively insect-fertilised, are liable to remain 

 unfertilised, and when that is the case it becomes advantageous 

 to the species to be able to fertilise itself, and this has 

 occurred, partially in many species, and completely in our 

 bee-orchis. 



I may remark here that the name " bee-orchis " is mis- 

 leading, as the flower does not resemble any of our bees. But 

 the very closely allied " spider orchises " resemble spiders 

 much more closely. It occurs to me, therefore, that the 

 general resemblance to bee or spider may occasionally prevent 

 the flowers being eaten off by sheep or lambs, to whom 

 even spiders on their noses or lips would be disagreeable. 



