HARDWICKE'S SCIENCE-GOSSIP. 



i 2 S 



race of blue from white, yellow, or red flowers. 

 And if, as Miiller asserts, "they require differentia- 

 tion in colour " to enable them " on their journeys to 

 keep to a single species of flower," how can their 

 visits have produced that differentiation ? 



Another quotation will perhaps help to show that 

 I have not made any unfair use of an isolated 

 passage: " Anthophilous insects are not guided by 

 hereditary instinct to particular flowers. " * 



Since, then, my argument did not depend at all on 

 the absence of the words "in general;" and that 

 "anthophilous insects," although not synonymous 

 with bees, yet includes them, I think it stands 

 untouched. If, however, Mr. Tansley still thinks it 

 falls to pieces before his logic, I shall feel obliged if 

 he will point out more definitely the exact point 

 where it breaks down. 



As to the curious fact that I should write nine 

 columns of reply to a series of facts and arguments 

 which I thought did not really oppose my views, I 

 can only say that it required nine to show that this 

 was so. 



With regard to the question of bees visiting un- 

 opened and fading flowers, it is a matter of fact that 

 they occasionally do so ; Miiller records instances of 

 the former, and I have myself noticed the latter, and 

 have, moreover, seen them on flowers which had lost 

 all their petals. But of course such visits are com- 

 paratively rare ; I quite agree that bees are too 

 intelligent — whatever that word may mean when 

 applied to insects — to persevere in such visits ; 

 although it seems as if they had to learn by indi- 

 vidual experience. And if the new colours appeared 

 first at such times the bees would not learn to select 

 them, and so it is clear that the new colours " could 

 not be evolved from colours appearing after fertiliza- 

 tion." 



Bearing in mind the very widespread tendency of 

 white flowers to be red or pink before or after ex- 

 pansion, the only inference seems to be that at the 

 time when flowers had not got beyond the white 

 stage, bees would in general learn to avoid red. 

 But, as a matter of fact, I never assumed that bees 

 were so unintelligent as to visit pink buds and fading 

 blossoms. I simply pointed out that if they were 

 attracted by the red colour in the same, they would, 

 on the educational theory, learn to distrust red from 

 finding less to reward them. 



In conclusion, Mr. Tansley asserts that the general 

 principle of the theory of colour development re- 

 mains untouched. I shall leave readers of Science- 

 Gossip to judge whether this is so or not. 



I may add a word here on Mr. Tansley's criticism 

 of my fragment, " The Bee and the Willow " 

 (Science-Gossip, June, 1889). In the quotation 

 at the beginning of my paper, Grant Allen, in 

 speaking of " fertilizing insects," evidently means 



* "Fertilization of Flowers, 1 ' p. 571. 



bees. This is clear when we take the passage 

 in full. "Among them the bees are busy already, 

 for you hardly ever see a willow-catkin in full bloom 

 without a bevy of its attendant fertilising insects."* 

 I certainly did think at the time that in this Grant 

 Allen was only expressing the usually received 

 opinion; but' I assumed nothing except that it was 

 his own. But on consulting Midler's account, I find 

 that he considers the willow z'«.«r/-fertilized ; and a 

 glance at his list of species indicates at once that 

 bees play the chief part. Of the eighty-six species of 

 insects forty-six are bees, and they, from their superior 

 industry, pay more frequent visits than the others. I 

 I do not think the fact that a great variety of other 

 insects visit the willow alters the case much ; there 

 seems no doubt that the chief visitors are bees. At 

 least it is so in my experience, for though I have 

 frequently seen bees in thousands on every willow- 

 bush I passed, I have never noticed any other 

 insects. 



Midler's facts, as stated by Mr. Tansley, are not 

 sufficient to show that the willow is regularly cross- 

 fertilized by insects. Of the forty-two species which 

 come for honey alone, none, of course, will fertilize 

 at all ; and if the thirty-eight which come for both 

 gather their complete load of pollen and then go for 

 honey, they will only fertilize a few of the female 

 flowers they visit first, but if they complete their load 

 of honey first they will again effect no fertilization. 

 Only in the case of frequent passing from male to 

 female blossoms can insect-fertilization be accom- 

 plished at all regularly. 



The point then to be settled is, do the bees thus 

 flit backwards and forwards from bush to bush — the 

 male bush, it is to be noted, is frequently at some 

 little distance from the female — or do they get a 

 complete load off the one before going to the other ? 

 Another interesting point is, do they usually load 

 honey or pollen first ? Perhaps some readers of 

 Science-Gossip can settle these questions. I 

 drew particular attention to the former in my paper, 

 and I do not think Mr. Tansley has thrown any 

 fresh light upon it, nor do Muller's observations 

 settle it. And the fact remains that the willows 

 have been persistently visited by myriads of bees for 

 hundreds of years without developing a blue variety. 

 How then — if they really fertilize the plant— can it 

 be believed that bees select flowers showing a ten- 

 dency to blue, and by their persistent choice through 

 many generations are able to differentiate and per- 

 petuate a race of blue flowers ? And, according to 

 Grant Allen, the willow is descended from ancestors 

 with brightly- coloured petals through wind-fertilized 

 forms ! 



The Noctuse, by the way, described by Mr. Tansley 

 as visiting the willow, being honey-suckers, will not 

 effect fertilization. 



* " Knowledge," February 23rd, 1883, p. 112. 



