From George Bentham 10 July 1864
25, Wilton Place, | S.W.
July 10/64
My dear Darwin
I enclose flowers of the two forms of two species of Ægiphila1 (Verbenaceæ never referred by me to Labiatæ)2 the long stamened marked ♂ the short stamened ♀—the two forms always on different specimens and often made two species of although admitted to differ in no other particular Thus the long and short stamened Æ mollis are both figured by H. B. K. the former as Æ Mutisia, the latter as Æ mollis3
I have often observed long and short stamened forms of different plants as I believe I have frequently mentioned to you4 and the circumstance is so generally familiar that I do not well recollect precise instances where it is or is not. In Trichonemas which I suppose you could get seeds or bulbs of from any friends in Italy or other Mediterranean countries I have often observed it and it is (as I said in the article) made a specific character5 I believe there is something of the same kind in the allied genus Crocus. There are great differences in the styles and stamens in some species of Boronia as well as I could make out from dried specimens— especially I soaked a considerable number of the pinnata (Bth Fl. Austral. 1. 318)6 which is I believe in our gardens. Long and short stamens and styles occur I believe in several Pavettas Stylocorynas and other Rubiaceæ which A Gray also has somewhere pointed out.—7 There is a dimorphism in many Veronicas though I do not know whether it extends beyond the size & colour of the flowers Many species have a form with larger blue, and another with smaller more pinkish flowers which have on that account alone been made two species of as V. fruticulosa. I have also seen it in V. teucrium, V. chamædrys and others.
I have just been doing the Australian Droseras8 where the forms of style are infinitely varied but generally constant in the same species—and yet there is something farther to learn for in a few cases species can only or almost only be distinguished by the style as in D. Burmanni & D. spathulata D. filicaulis and D. Menziesii, D. penicilloris and D. Huegelii.— Unfortunately I cannot have so many flowers at command to examine as I could of Boronia and they are very difficult to examine dry. Another character in some species is unaccompanied by other distinctions that is the seed either linear with the nucleus occupying the middle only or ovoid the testa not produced beyond the nucleus as between D. peltata & D. auriculata— these characters are also relied on for our own Droseras which are I believe otherwise good species.
Yours ever sincerely | George Bentham
CD annotations
Footnotes
Bibliography
Bentham, George and Mueller, Ferdinand von. 1863–78. Flora Australiensis: a description of the plants of the Australian territory. 7 vols. London: Lovell Reeve and Company.
Correspondence: The correspondence of Charles Darwin. Edited by Frederick Burkhardt et al. 29 vols to date. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1985–.
Forms of flowers: The different forms of flowers on plants of the same species. By Charles Darwin. London: John Murray. 1877.
Summary
Sends specimens of two species of Aegiphila [see Forms of flowers, p. 123]. Discusses similar forms in other plants.
Letter details
- Letter no.
- DCP-LETT-4556
- From
- George Bentham
- To
- Charles Robert Darwin
- Sent from
- London, Wilton Place, 25
- Source of text
- DAR 110: B107–9
- Physical description
- ALS 4pp †
Please cite as
Darwin Correspondence Project, “Letter no. 4556,” accessed on 20 April 2024, https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/letter/?docId=letters/DCP-LETT-4556.xml
Also published in The Correspondence of Charles Darwin, vol. 12