skip to content

Darwin Correspondence Project

To S. H. Vines   15 November 1881

Down, | Beckenham, Kent. | (Railway Station | Orpington. S.E.R.)

November 15. 1881

My dear Mr. Vines,

I hope that you will excuse me troubling you once again about the roots of Euphorbia peplus.1 I can see my way a little & but a very little way clearer, for by examining the radicles of germinating seeds I have learnt the appearance of the milk-tubes, & beautiful objects they are. Now in the rootlets of mature plants of Euphorbia peplus these tubes are absent, & I remember that De Bary says that he could not succeed in seeing them in the finer roots of Euphorbia, but I must hunt up the passage.2 The usually alternate rows of cells with brown granular matter near the surface & those in the Endoderm, I imagine replace by their contents the contents of the true milk-tubes; though I must own that the contents are not chemically the same, as Caustic potash does not act on the aggregated granular masses in the milk-tubes, whereas it causes the disappearance of the granular matter which is precipitated by C. of Ammonia & other salts, in the cells.— If you ever look at the roots of E. peplus, I shd. very much like to hear what you think about them. With Euphorbia myrsinites,3 there are no regular rows of cells with granular matter after Ammonia, & only here & there one, or two or three cells in a row with the granular matter; & in the mature rootlets of this species only a few milk-tubes are present; but I must look to other species of Euphorbia.—

I remain | Yours very sincerely | Ch. Darwin

P.S. | I remember telling you about Wiesners vivisection of me, & I was pleased yesterday by receiving a letter from Pfeffer, who has been retrying some of my experiments & differs from Wiesner.4 But Pfeffer differs vehemently on other points from me; so I am in fine hot water.

Footnotes

See letter to S. H. Vines, 4 November 1881. CD was studying the response of root cells of Euphorbia (spurge) to different chemicals. Euphorbia peplus is petty spurge.
Anton de Bary discussed the milk tubes in Euphorbia and other plants in Bary 1877, pp. 191–209. See letter to S. H. Vines, 4 November 1881 and n. 6.
Euphorbia myrsinites is myrtle spurge. On the different chemicals CD used to study aggregation, and the dissolving effect of caustic potash, see the letter to S. H. Vines, 1 November 1881 and nn. 2 and 3.
Wilhelm Pfeffer’s letter of 6 November 1881 contained criticism of Julius Wiesner’s recent book (Wiesner 1881); however, Pfeffer disagreed with CD’s view that all movement was a form of modified circumnutation.

Bibliography

Bary, Anton de. 1877. Vergleichende Anatomie der Vegetationsorgane der Phanerogamen und Farne. Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann.

Wiesner, Julius. 1881. Das Bewegungsvermögen der Pflanzen. Eine kritische Studie über das gleichnamige Werk von Charles Darwin nebst neuen Untersuchungen. Vienna: Alfred Hölder.

Summary

More observations of the radicles of germinating seeds of Euphorbia peplus for appearance of milk-tubes.

Comments on J. v. Wiesner’s and W. F. P. Pfeffer’s views and criticism of his experiments.

Letter details

Letter no.
DCP-LETT-13486A
From
Charles Robert Darwin
To
Sydney Howard Vines
Sent from
Down
Source of text
DAR 185: 77
Physical description
ALS 4pp

Please cite as

Darwin Correspondence Project, “Letter no. 13486A,” accessed on 23 April 2024, https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/letter/?docId=letters/DCP-LETT-13486A.xml

letter