324 THE ORCHID REVIEW. [NovEMBER, 1915 
series of fortunate survivals. ‘‘If, on the other hand, variations of any one 
part involve variations throughout the organism, then the preservation of 
favourable variations in any one organ would of necessity entail changes in 
other organs which for the most part would probably have no relation to 
utility.” pe ee 
. Darwin explained the term ‘‘ Correlated variation” as meaning that 
“the whole organisation is so tied together during its growth and develop- 
ment, that when slight variations in any one part occur, and are accumulated 
through natural selection, other parts become modified,” and we cannot 
improve on that. 
The following note comes in well in the connection, though it was 
extracted for another purpose :-— 
EvoLuTIon.—We may trace in organic nature long and_ finely 
graduated series leading upward from the lower to the higher forms, and 
we must believe that the wonderful adaptive manifestations of the more 
complex forms have been derived from simpler conditions through the 
progressive operation of natural causes. But . . . when the conserv- 
ing action of natural selection is in the fullest degree recognised . 
we are utterly ignorant of the manner in which the ideoplasm of the germ 
cell can so respond to the influence of the environment as to call forth an 
adaptive variation.— Wilson, The Cell in development and inheritance, p. 434: ° 
The note was not written with reference to Orchids, but is sufficiently 
appropriate, and the special point is that the responses are made, in spite of 
the profundity of our ignorance. 
A new view is urged in connection with our comments on the Law of 
Priority discussed last month. It is that for horticultural purposes it may 
be neglected, and a recent criticism is cited that ‘‘ For Scientific purposes 
a strictly scientific nomenclature is no doubt advisable, and certain 
international rules have been adopted at various quinquennial congresses.” 
And weare told that in Messrs. Sander’s List of Orchid Hybrids ‘« the hybrid 
between L. tenebrosa and C. aurea is recorded under the well-known name 
luminosa, instead of the unrecognised Truffautiana,” and ‘the hybrid 
between C. Mossiz and gigas is recorded as Enid, and not under the earlier 
name Adonis.” It is a safe rule to “ verify your references,” and had ouf 
correspondent done this he would have seen that no hybrids at all are 
enumerated under either C. aurea or C. gigas. We read “‘C. gigas, “ 
Warscewiczii,” and “C. aurea, see Dowiana.” The remark about theif 
popularity is not contested, for no names have to be so frequently altered 0 
reports. It is a good example of “ go-as-you-please nomenclature.” 
