Millardet Rec. Sep. 24 Ans. St Louis Oct 12 



Baynerer-de- Bigorre August 22, I879 



Sir, 



Yesterday I received your letter of Juty 30. After a smalt delay because of a voyage of a 

 few days, I am responding immediately. I have been engaged in a very pleasurable 

 occupation in the most beautiful thermal locations in the Pyrénées. 



I begin by reassuring you that your critique gives me the greatest pleasure as it is made 

 with the greatest good wilt. I thank you for it as it is very useful. Thèse critiques are for 

 me a guaranty that they are not meant personally. I will try to respond. 



I recognize that it is possible that I give to much importance to certain characteristics 

 because of the small number of variations that I see with my own eyes. The thickness of 

 the seeds, for example, is such a case. It is possible that they vary in much narrower 

 limits than those that I have mentioned; the seeds of the Vitis rupestris that you sent 

 me are proof of this. A longer study would be the only way to investigate the variables of 

 this gender. I studied not only the dorsal side of the seed but also the ventral one. I 

 really could not find any différent characteristic. 



Finally, it has been a long time since I noticed that the number of seeds that are found in 

 one fruit has an important influence in the thickness and the configuration of the seeds. 

 The reproductions show its constant and its accidentai characteristics. 



It is certain, as you have pointed out, that thèse species that are geographically so 

 spread out, as the Vitis riparia, must présent many variations. For example their shine, 

 width, the thickness of their seeds, the serrations of the leaves, etc. However I believe, 

 that as we make a comparison between two types that are quite characteristic and that 

 can be considered as species, there will be certain intermediary forms that will be 

 distinguished by an association of the most important and distinguishable characters. 

 Thèse two species will be intermediary and should be considered as hybrid. This 

 probability becomes a certainty if we consider that in this gender, the hybrids are easily 

 formed. Therefore hybridization is the only reason why there is such a divergence in the 

 classification and why there is such a diversity of forms. You are more familiar than I 

 with the two previous points, because you have seen thèse plants in their natural habitat 

 and not in collections or herbariums. The samples from Wafinergue and from Lewinte 

 are not available to me as yet. 



You admit that there is hybdridization in the absence of direct and intentional human 

 actions, but you recoil in front of the possibility of hybridization in the wild. However there 

 is no essential différence between one and the other. The différence during the periods 

 of blooming would not be an invincible obstacle for hybridization. I really do not think that 

 it is very important because in a cultivated environment we find hybrids among the 

 riparia and the labrusca (Chiton, Taylor, Elvira, etc),and between labrusca and 

 aestivalis 



6 7 8 9 10 

 copyright reserved 



