EVOLUTION AND ADAPTATION". 



163 



be a larger, far more vigorous plant, with no spines, but branches and 

 leaves in abundance. Nevertheless, the former grows and persists for 

 years, though, comparatively speaking, it cannot be said to thrive ; but 

 it may put on a number of adaptive structures such as hair, a thick 

 cuticle, a secretion of wax, sunken stomata, water-storing tissues, kc, 

 all of which are strictly adaptive to the climate. 



Here again induction and experimental proof are now far too great 

 to be ignored ; so that the sole interpretation is that plants vary 

 " definitely," as Darwin said, in direct response to the new conditions 

 of life. Whatever the number of seedlings may be, they all vary alike, 

 so that there is no selection in the Darwinian application, though not 

 5 per cent, may survive, because of the struggle for life. This is natural 

 selection in the Malthusian sense, and only results in the distribution of 

 species and never their origin. 



It may be more difficult to see how animals vary in response to 

 the conditions of life, but the problem can easily be solved with plants ; 

 not only is it far easier to grow them than make experiments with animals, 

 but Nature's own experiments are so abundant that he who runs may 

 read. 



Present-day Ecologists, who are now working in the field, are fast 

 coming to Neo-Lamarckian views and abandoning Darwinism. 



In conclusion, there is one point I should like to repeat and emphasise. 

 Both in Darwin's and Dr. Morgan's theories it is maintained that varia- 

 tions arise without any correlation to the environment being provided for. 

 Hence chance has to settle the matter of survival in both cases. 



In the Xeo-Lamarckian view, the variation does not arise unless the 

 new conditions of lif e excite the variability of the organism. This aroused, 

 the plant, i.e. the seedling as it grows, develops new structures in response 

 to the new conditions. Hence there is a natural laic connecting the 

 variation with the environment, and chance has no place in the process. 



Lastly, while Darwin's and Morgan's views are both unproven 

 hypotheses, ;> adaptation by response " is based upon an infinite amount 

 of actual proofs, both in nature and cultivation. 



