Effects of Cross and Self Fertilisation in the Vegetable Kingdom eBook

This eBook from the Gutenberg Project consists of approximately 516 pages of information about Effects of Cross and Self Fertilisation in the Vegetable Kingdom.

Effects of Cross and Self Fertilisation in the Vegetable Kingdom eBook

This eBook from the Gutenberg Project consists of approximately 516 pages of information about Effects of Cross and Self Fertilisation in the Vegetable Kingdom.

In the early part of the summer of 1857 I was led to observe during some weeks several rows of the scarlet kidney-bean (Phaseolus multiflorus), whilst attending to the fertilisation of this plant, and daily saw humble- and hive-bees sucking at the mouths of the flowers.  But one day I found several humble-bees employed in cutting holes in flower after flower; and on the next day every single hive-bee, without exception, instead of alighting on the left wing-petal and sucking the flower in the proper manner, flew straight without the least hesitation to the calyx, and sucked through the holes which had been made only the day before by the humble-bees; and they continued this habit for many following days. (11/16.  ‘Gardeners’ Chronicle’ 1857 page 725.) Mr. Belt has communicated to me (July 28th, 1874) a similar case, with the sole difference that less than half of the flowers had been perforated by the humble-bees; nevertheless, all the hive-bees gave up sucking at the mouths of the flowers and visited exclusively the bitten ones.  Now how did the hive-bees find out so quickly that holes had been made?  Instinct seems to be out of the question, as the plant is an exotic.  The holes cannot be seen by bees whilst standing on the wing-petals, where they had always previously alighted.  From the ease with which bees were deceived when the petals of Lobelia erinus were cut off, it was clear that in this case they were not guided to the nectar by its smell; and it may be doubted whether they were attracted to the holes in the flowers of the Phaseolus by the odour emitted from them.  Did they perceive the holes by the sense of touch in their proboscides, whilst sucking the flowers in the proper manner, and then reason that it would save them time to alight on the outside of the flowers and use the holes?  This seems almost too abstruse an act of reason for bees; and it is more probable that they saw the humble-bees at work, and understanding what they were about, imitated them and took advantage of the shorter path to the nectar.  Even with animals high in the scale, such as monkeys, we should be surprised at hearing that all the individuals of one species within the space of twenty-four hours understood an act performed by a distinct species, and profited by it.

I have repeatedly observed with various kinds of flowers that all the hive and humble-bees which were sucking through the perforations, flew to them, whether on the upper or under side of the corolla, without the least hesitation; and this shows how quickly all the individuals within the district had acquired the same knowledge.  Yet habit comes into play to a certain extent, as in so many of the other operations of bees.  Dr. Ogle, Messrs. Farrer and Belt have observed in the case of Phaseolus multiflorus that certain individuals went exclusively to the perforations, while others of the same species visited only the mouths of the flowers. (11/17.  Dr. Ogle ‘Pop.  Science Review’ April 1870 page 167.  Mr. Farrer

Copyrights
Project Gutenberg
Effects of Cross and Self Fertilisation in the Vegetable Kingdom from Project Gutenberg. Public domain.