按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
rkers was concerned： wings； ovarian tubes； receptaculum seminis； a number of the facets of the eye； perhaps even the whole eye。 As to the ovarian tubes it is possible that their degeneration was an advantage for the workers； in saving energy； and if so selection would favour the degeneration； but how could the presence of eyes diminish the usefulness of the workers to the colony？ or the minute receptaculum seminis； or even the wings？ These parts have therefore degenerated BECAUSE THEY WERE OF NO FURTHER VALUE TO THE INSECT。 But if selection did not influence the setting aside of these parts because they were neither of advantage nor of disadvantage to the species； then the Darwinian factor of selection is here confronted with a puzzle which it cannot solve alone； but which at once becomes clear when germinal selection is added。 For the determinants of organs that have no further value for the organism； must； as we have already explained； embark on a gradual course of retrograde development。
In ants the degeneration has gone so far that there are no wing…rudiments present in ANY species； as is the case with so many butterflies； flies； and locusts； but in the larvae the imaginal discs of the wings are still laid down。 With regard to the ovaries； degeneration has reached different levels in different species of ants； as has been shown by the researches of my former pupil； Elizabeth Bickford。 In many species there are twelve ovarian tubes； and they decrease from that number to one； indeed； in one species no ovarian tube at all is present。 So much at least is certain from what has been said； that in this case EVERYTHING depends on the fluctuations of the elements of the germ…plasm。 Germinal selection； here as elsewhere； presents the variations of the determinants； and personal selection favours or rejects these； or；if it be a question of organs which have become useless；it does not come into play at all； and allows the descending variation free course。
It is obvious that even the problem of COADAPTATION IN STERILE ANIMALS can thus be satisfactorily explained。 If the determinants are oscillating upwards and downwards in continual fluctuation； and varying more pronouncedly now in one direction now in the other； useful variations of every determinant will continually present themselves anew； and may； in the course of generations； be combined with one another in various ways。 But there is one character of the determinants that greatly facilitates this complex process of selection； that； after a certain limit has been reached； they go on varying in the same direction。 From this it follows that development along a path once struck out may proceed without the continual intervention of personal selection。 This factor only operates； so to speak； at the beginning； when it selects the determinants which are varying in the right direction； and again at the end； when it is necessary to put a check upon further variation。 In addition to this； enormously long periods have been available for all these adaptations； as the very gradual transition stages between females and workers in many species plainly show； and thus this process of transformation loses the marvellous and mysterious character that seemed at the first glance to invest it； and takes rank； without any straining； among the other processes of selection。 It seems to me that； from the facts that sterile animal forms can adapt themselves to new vital functions； their superfluous parts degenerate； and the parts more used adapt themselves in an ascending direction； those less used in a descending direction； we must draw the conclusion that harmonious adaptation here comes about WITHOUT THE COOPERATION OF THE LAMARCKIAN PRINCIPLE。 This conclusion once established； however； we have no reason to refer the thousands of cases of harmonious adaptation； which occur in exactly the same way among other animals or plants； to a principle； the ACTIVE INTERVENTION OF WHICH IN THE TRANSFORMATION OF SPECIES IS NOWHERE PROVED。 WE DO NOT REQUIRE IT TO EXPLAIN THE FACTS； AND THEREFORE WE MUST NOT ASSUME IT。
The fact of coadaptation； which was supposed to furnish the strongest argument against the principle of selection； in reality yields the clearest evidence in favour of it。 We MUST assume it； BECAUSE NO OTHER POSSIBILITY OF EXPLANATION IS OPEN TO US； AND BECAUSE THESE ADAPTATIONS ACTUALLY EXIST； THAT IS TO SAY； HAVE REALLY TAKEN PLACE。 With this conviction I attempted； as far back as 1894； when the idea of germinal selection had not yet occurred to me； to make 〃harmonious adaptation〃 （coadaptation） more easily intelligible in some way or other； and so I was led to the idea； which was subsequently expounded in detail by Baldwin； and Lloyd Morgan； and also by Osborn； and Gulick as ORGANIC SELECTION。 It seemed to me that it was not necessary that all the germinal variations required for secondary variations should have occurred SIMULTANEOUSLY； since； for instance； in the case of the stag； the bones； muscles； sinews； and nerves would be incited by the increasing heaviness of the antlers to greater activity in THE INDIVIDUAL LIFE； and so would be strengthened。 The antlers can only have increased in size by very slow degrees； so that the muscles and bones may have been able to keep pace with their growth in the individual life； until the requisite germinal variations presented themselves。 In this way a disharmony between the increasing weight of the antlers and the parts which support and move them would be avoided； since time would be given for the appropriate germinal variations to occur； and so to set agoing the HEREDITARY variation of the muscles； sinews； and bones。 （〃The Effect of External Influences upon Development〃； Romanes Lecture； Oxford； 1894。）
I still regard this idea as correct； but I attribute less importance to 〃organic selection〃 than I did at that time； in so far that I do not believe that it ALONE could effect complex harmonious adaptations。 Germinal selection now seems to me to play the chief part in bringing about such adaptations。 Something the same is true of the principle I have called 〃Panmixia〃。 As I became more and more convinced； in the course of years； that the LAMARCKIAN PRINCIPLE ought not to be called in to explain the dwindling of disused parts； I believed that this process might be simply explained as due to the cessation of the conservative effect of natural selection。 I said to myself that； from the moment in which a part ceases to be of use； natural selection withdraws its hand from it； and then it must inevitably fall from the height of its adaptiveness； because inferior variants would have as good a chance of persisting as better ones； since all grades of fitness of the part in question would be mingled with one another indiscriminately。 This is undoubtedly true； as Romanes pointed out ten years before I did； and this mingling of the bad with the good probably does bring about a deterioration of the part concerned。 But it cannot account for the steady diminution； which always occurs when a part is in process of becoming rudimentary； and which goes on until it ultimately disappears altogether。 The process of dwindling cannot therefore be