DOES WHEAT TUEN TO CHESS? 43 



fails to reproduce itself, reverting -when planted to 

 one or both of its parents, generally to the wild 

 state. It therefore furnishes no proof of the trans- 

 mutation of either species into the other. 



Another scientific error may be mentioned which 

 was made by a botanist, and immediately corrected 

 by another botanist. 



Prof. Buckman ' " believed that he had proved 

 that in the course of cultivation I'oa aquatica and 

 Glyceria fluitans, two widely distinct species, lost 

 their characters and became identical; that the 

 same thing happened between the Fesques called 

 loUacea and pratensis." 



Prof. Decaisne, of Paris, at once requested spe- 

 cimens in corroboration of such remarkable results, 

 and when they arrived they were, in both instances 

 Poa sudetica, an already known species different 

 from either of those named. 



No better way of proving the impossibility of the 

 conversion of wheat into chess exists than to show 

 the distinct botanical differences between the two 

 kinds of grain, together with some of the causes by 

 which plants may be modified, and the limits be- 

 yond which such changes cannot go. To almost 

 every one who studies plants as the botanist does, 

 the different species, such as corn, oats, wheat, rye, 

 etc., come to be seen as realities which can no more 

 JCouutry Geutleman, 1861, p. 3:;l (From Gardeners' Chronicle), 



