From Daniel Oliver 20 July 1863
Richmond, S.W.
20.VII./63
My dear Sir
I have been reading Dr. Hildebrand’s paper & I think it scarcely suited to N.H.R.—1 It may seem odd to talk of anything as scarcely suited when readers find we admit all manner of things suitable & unsuitable,—but we botanists have been for some time grumbling abt. the admission of papers wh. might suitably be read before Societies, &c. & we must consequently aim at least at some minimum of inconsistency. I believe Dr. Hooker to whom I have shewn the paper quite agrees.2
The subject is a very curious one.— I think Schacht in his Lehrbuch (ii. 373)3 points out that some months elapse in the Hazel (Corylus) between the application of the pollen & formation of the ovules, & this may be likely to obtain in other Corylaceae some of which are slow in their reproduction work. I must refer to his book when I return to the Herbarium in the morning.4
I do not see that you need be so fearful about yr. Catasetum.5
I shd. think Naudin would be a likely man to suggest a few good Cucurbitaceae for yr. tendril-experiments.6
very sincerely yours | Danl. Oliver
Schacht says, l.c.7
“In vielen Fällen wird der obere Theil des Pollenschlauches, wenn das untere Ende sein Ziel erreicht hat, nicht mehr ernährt, er vertrocknet alsdann mit der Narbe; man findet in solchem Falle wohl in der Fruchtknotenhöhle oder im Staubwegcanal die Schläuche, aber man vermisst den Zusammenhang derselben mit dem Pollenkorn, dem sie vormals entsprungen sind, wodurch sich Rob. Brown8 täuschen liess, indem er die Pollen-schläuche der Orchideen für Zellen des leitenden Gewebes erklärte. Dies gilt namentlich für diejenigen Pflanzen, bei welchen die Bestäubung & die Befruchtung der Zeit nach weit auseinander fallen, z.B. für die Haselnuss, Hainbuche & Erle, die im ersten Fruhjahr (die Haselnuss im Februar) bestäubt werden, zu einer Zeit, wo die beiden Samenknospen noch nicht vorhanden sind und erst im Sommer (die Haselnuss gegen Ende des Juni) zur Befruchtung kommen—”
If Hildebrand be going, as he says, to write about this in Bot. Zeit.9 I really doubt the propriety of having this paper printed in England. Nothing is made clear as to specific action of pollen-tubes &c in causing swelling of ovary. Dr. Hooker tells me Mr. Smith10 used to say—he caused some such swelling by rubbing them externally with sand!— D O.
CD annotations
Footnotes
Bibliography
Chambers: The Chambers dictionary. Edinburgh: Chambers Harrap Publishers. 1998.
Desmond, Ray. 1994. Dictionary of British and Irish botanists and horticulturists including plant collectors, flower painters and garden designers. New edition, revised with the assistance of Christine Ellwood. London: Taylor & Francis and the Natural History Museum. Bristol, Pa.: Taylor & Francis.
List of the Linnean Society of London. London: [Linnean Society of London]. 1805–1939.
Schacht, Hermann. 1856–9. Lehrbuch der Anatomie und Physiologie der Gewächse. 2 vols. Berlin: G. W. F. Müller.
Summary
Hildebrand’s paper is unsuitable for the Natural History Review.
Letter details
- Letter no.
- DCP-LETT-4247
- From
- Daniel Oliver
- To
- Charles Robert Darwin
- Sent from
- Richmond
- Source of text
- DAR 173: 22
- Physical description
- ALS 4pp
Please cite as
Darwin Correspondence Project, “Letter no. 4247,” accessed on 26 September 2022, https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/letter/?docId=letters/DCP-LETT-4247.xml
Also published in The Correspondence of Charles Darwin, vol. 11