EP e OTe eee. CLV Es Vee Ree eae eS 
SEE ET ei elk Sy Std WR EO Se ae G 
1894.] Whence Came the Cultivated Strau berry ? 301 
tors” There is not only no evidence in favor of a hybrid 
origin, but there is very much against it; and I have no hesi- 
tation in discarding the hypothesis in favor of a simpler and 
more philosophical one. 
2. Is the Pine strawberry a direct development of the Chili 
strawberry? Every feature of the Pine strawberry suggests 
the Chilian species. It differs chiefly in its greater size and 
sometimes by aslight loss of hairiness, but the relative sizes of 
the parts remain much the same as in the wild type. It is 
now well known that variation induced by changed conditions 
of life and augmented by subsequent selection, is the common 
and potent means of the evolution and amelioration of plants. 
Hybridization rarely effects a permanent evolution of types. 
To suppose that the Chilian strawberry should have varied 
into the type of the common strawberry is in accord with all 
the methods of nature. But there are two considerations 
which convince me beyond all question that cultivated straw- 
berries belong to Fragaria Chiloensis: (a) Their botanical 
characters, which I shall discuss more fully in the next para- 
graph, (3), and (b) direct experiment. The experiment which I 
_ now record I consider to be of great importance. In 1890, I 
sent to Oregon for wild plants of Fragaria Chiloensis. The 
strawberries which I secured were short, stocky, thick-leaved, 
hairy, evergreen plants, at once distinguishable from the gar- 
den sorts. They were planted in a spot convenient for obser- 
vation. I pressed one of the original plants and have taken 
specimens from time to time since. A specimen taken in May, 
1891, is scarcely distinguishable from the wild plants set the 
year before, but specimens secured in July of the same year, 
show the longer stalkes and larger leaves of garden strawber- 
ries; while an average specimen taken in June, 1892, is indis- 
tinguishable from common cultivated varieties in botanical 
features! Here, then, isa change in two years, and not by 
seeds, either, but in the same original plants or their offshoots. 
This change, while remarkable, is still not unintelligible, for 
I have seen many cases of as great modification in plants 
i “For a general discussion of the theory of hybridity, consult Bailey, Cross-Breed- 
‘ng and Hybridizing, 1892. 
