The Origin of Species
by Charles Darwin
Previous Chapter
Next Chapter
Chapter 6 - Difficulties on Theory
LONG before having arrived at this part of my work, a crowd of difficulties
will have occurred to the reader. Some of them are so grave that to
this day I can never reflect on them without being staggered; but,
to the best of my judgment, the greater number are only apparent,
and those that are real are not, I think, fatal to my theory.
These difficulties and objections may be classed under the following
heads:-Firstly, why, if species have descended from other species
by insensibly fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable
transitional forms? Why is not all nature in confusion instead of
the species being, as we see them, well defined?
Secondly, is it possible that an animal having, for instance, the
structure and habits of a bat, could have been formed by the modification
of some animal with wholly different habits? Can we believe that
natural selection could produce, on the one hand, organs of trifling
importance, such as the tail of a giraffe, which serves as a fly-flapper,
and, on the other hand, organs of such wonderful structure, as the
eye, of which we hardly as yet fully understand the inimitable perfection?
Thirdly, can instincts be acquired and modified through natural
selection? What shall we say to so marvellous an instinct as that
which leads the bee to make cells, which have practically anticipated
the discoveries of profound mathematicians?
Fourthly, how can we account for species, when crossed, being sterile
and producing sterile offspring, whereas, when varieties are crossed,
their fertility is unimpaired?
The two first heads shall be here discussed Instinct and Hybridism
in separate chapters.
On the absence or rarity of transitional varieties. As natural
selection acts solely by the preservation of profitable modifications,
each new form will tend in a fully-stocked country to take the place
of, and finally to exterminate, its own less improved parent or
other less-favoured forms with which it comes into competition.
Thus extinction and natural selection will, as we have seen, go
hand in hand. Hence, if we look at each species as descended from
some other unknown form, both the parent and all the transitional
varieties will generally have been exterminated by the very process
of formation and perfection of the new form.
But, as by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have
existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in
the crust of the earth? It will be much more convenient to discuss
this question in the chapter on the Imperfection of the geological
record; and I will here only state that I believe the answer mainly
lies in the record being incomparably less perfect than is generally
supposed; the imperfection of the record being chiefly due to organic
beings not inhabiting profound depths of the sea, and to their remains
being embedded and preserved to a future age only in masses of sediment
sufficiently thick and extensive to withstand an enormous amount
of future degradation; and such fossiliferous masses can be accumulated
only where much sediment is deposited on the shallow bed of the
sea, whilst it slowly subsides. These contingencies will concur
only rarely, and after enormously long intervals. Whilst the bed
of the sea is stationary or is rising, or when very little sediment
is being deposited, there will be blanks in our geological history.
The crust of the earth is a vast museum; but the natural collections
have been made only at intervals of time immensely remote.
But it may be urged that when several closely-allied species inhabit
the same territory we surely ought to find at the present time many
transitional forms. Let us take a simple case: in travelling from
north to south over a continent, we generally meet at successive
intervals with closely allied or representative species, evidently
filling nearly the same place in the natural economy of the land.
These representative species often meet and interlock; and as the
one becomes rarer and rarer, the other becomes more and more frequent,
till the one replaces the other. But if we compare these species
where they intermingle, they are generally as absolutely distinct
from each other in every detail of structure as are specimens taken
from the metropolis inhabited by each. By my theory these allied
species have descended from a common parent; and during the process
of modification, each has become adapted to the conditions of life
of its own region, and has supplanted and exterminated its original
parent and all the transitional varieties between its past and present
states. Hence we ought not to expect at the present time to meet
with numerous transitional varieties in each region, though they
must have existed there, and may be embedded there in a fossil condition.
But in the intermediate region, having intermediate conditions of
life, why do we not now find closely-linking intermediate varieties?
This difficulty for a long time quite confounded me. But I think
it can be in large part explained.
In the first place we should be extremely cautious in inferring,
because an area is now continuous, that it has been continuous during
a long period. Geology would lead us to believe that almost every
continent has been broken up into islands even during the later
tertiary periods; and in such islands distinct species might have
been separately formed without the possibility of intermediate varieties
existing in the intermediate zones. By changes in the form of the
land and of climate, marine areas now continuous must often have
existed within recent times in a far less continuous and uniform
condition than at present. But I will pass over this way of escaping
from the difficulty; for I believe that many perfectly defined species
have been formed on strictly continuous areas; though I do not doubt
that the formerly broken condition of areas now continuous has played
an important part in the formation of new species, more especially
with freely-crossing and wandering animals.
In looking at species as they are now distributed over a wide area,
we generally find them tolerably numerous over a large territory,
then becoming somewhat abruptly rarer and rarer on the confines,
and finally disappearing. Hence the neutral territory between two
representative species is generally narrow in comparison with the
territory proper to each. We see the same fact in ascending mountains,
and sometimes it is quite remarkable how abruptly, as Alph. De Candolle
has observed, a common alpine species disappears. The same fact
has been noticed by Forbes in sounding the depths of the sea with
the dredge. To those who look at climate and the physical conditions
of life as the all-important elements of distribution, these facts
ought to cause surprise, as climate and height or depth graduate
away insensibly. But when we bear in mind that almost every species,
even in its metropolis, would increase immensely in numbers, were
it not for other competing species; that nearly all either prey
on or serve as prey for others; in short, that each organic being
is either directly or indirectly related in the most important manner
to other organic beings, we must see that the range of the inhabitants
of any country by no means exclusively depends on insensibly changing
physical conditions, but in large part on the presence of other
species, on which it depends, or by which it is destroyed, or with
which it comes into competition; and as these species are already
defined objects (however they may have become so), not blending
one into another by insensible gradations, the range of any one
species, depending as it does on the range of others, will tend
to be sharply defined. Moreover, each species on the confines of
its range, where it exists in lessened numbers, will, during fluctuations
in the number of its enemies or of its prey, or in the seasons,
be extremely liable to utter extermination; and thus its geographical
range will come to be still more sharply defined.
If I am right in believing that allied or representative species,
when inhabiting a continuous area, are generally so distributed
that each has a wide range, with a comparatively narrow neutral
territory between them, in which they become rather suddenly rarer
and rarer; then, as varieties do not essentially differ from species,
the same rule will probably apply to both; and if we in imagination
adapt a varying species to a very large area, we shall have to adapt
two varieties to two large areas, and a third variety to a narrow
intermediate zone. The intermediate variety, consequently, will
exist in lesser numbers from inhabiting a narrow and lesser area;
and practically, as far as I can make out, this rule holds good
with varieties in a state of nature. I have met with striking instances
of the rule in the case of varieties intermediate between well-marked
varieties in the genus Balanus. And it would appear from information
given me by Mr Watson, Dr Asa Gray, and Mr Wollaston, that generally
when varieties intermediate between two other forms occur, they
are much rarer numerically than the forms which they connect. Now,
if we may trust these facts and inferences, and therefore conclude
that varieties linking two other varieties together have generally
existed in lesser numbers than the forms which they connect, then,
I think, we can understand why intermediate varieties should not
endure for very long periods; why as a general rule they should
be exterminated and disappear, sooner than the forms which they
originally linked together.
For any form existing in lesser numbers would, as already remarked,
run a greater chance of being exterminated than one existing in
large numbers; and in this particular case the intermediate form
would be eminently liable to the inroads of closely allied forms
existing on both sides of it. But a far more important consideration,
as I believe, is that, during the process of further modification,
by which two varieties are supposed on my theory to be converted
and perfected into two distinct species, the two which exist in
larger numbers from inhabiting larger areas, will have a great advantage
over the intermediate variety, which exists in smaller numbers in
a narrow and intermediate zone. For forms existing in larger numbers
will always have a better chance, within any given period, of presenting
further favourable variations for natural selection to seize on,
than will the rarer forms which exist in lesser numbers. Hence,
the more common forms, in the race for life, will tend to beat and
supplant the less common forms, for these will be more slowly modified
and improved. It is the same principle which, as I believe, accounts
for the common species in each country, as shown in the second chapter,
presenting on an average a greater number of well-marked varieties
than do the rarer species. I may illustrate what I mean by supposing
three varieties of sheep to be kept, one adapted to an extensive
mountainous region; a second to a comparatively narrow, hilly tract;
and a third to wide plains at the base; and that the inhabitants
are all trying with equal steadiness and skill to improve their
stocks by selection; the chances in this case will be strongly in
favour of the great holders on the mountains or on the plains improving
their breeds more quickly than the small holders on the intermediate
narrow, hilly tract; and consequently the improved mountain or plain
breed will soon take the place of the less improved hill breed;
and thus the two breeds, which originally existed in greater numbers,
will come into close contact with each other, without the interposition
of the supplanted, intermediate hill-variety.
To sum up, I believe that species come to be tolerably well-defined
objects, and do not at any one period present an inextricable chaos
of varying and intermediate links: firstly, because new varieties
are very slowly formed, for variation is a very slow process, and
natural selection can do nothing until favourable variations chance
to occur, and until a place in the natural polity of the country
can be better filled by some modification of some one or more of
its inhabitants. And such new places will depend on slow changes
of climate, or on the occasional immigration of new inhabitants,
and, probably, in a still more important degree, on some of the
old inhabitants becoming slowly modified, with the new forms thus
produced and the old ones acting and reacting on each other. So
that, in any one region and at any one time, we ought only to see
a few species presenting slight modifications of structure in some
degree permanent; and this assuredly we do see.
Secondly, areas now continuous must often have existed within the
recent period in isolated portions, in which many forms, more especially
amongst the classes which unite for each birth and wander much,
may have separately been rendered sufficiently distinct to rank
as representative species. In this case, intermediate varieties
between the several representative species and their common parent,
must formerly have existed in each broken portion of the land, but
these links will have been supplanted and exterminated during the
process of natural selection, so that they will no longer exist
in a living state.
Thirdly, when two or more varieties have been formed in different
portions of a strictly continuous area, intermediate varieties will,
it is probable, at first have been formed in the intermediate zones,
but they will generally have had a short duration. For these intermediate
varieties will, from reasons already assigned (namely from what
we know of the actual distribution of closely allied or representative
species, and likewise of acknowledged varieties), exist in the intermediate
zones in lesser numbers than the varieties which they tend to connect.
From this cause alone the intermediate varieties will be liable
to accidental extermination; and during the process of further modification
through natural selection, they will almost certainly be beaten
and supplanted by the forms which they connect; for these from existing
in greater numbers will, in the aggregate, present more variation,
and thus be further improved through natural selection and gain
further advantages.
Lastly, looking not to any one time, but to all time, if my theory
be true, numberless intermediate varieties, linking most closely
all the species of the same group together, must assuredly have
existed; but the very process of natural selection constantly tends,
as has been so often remarked, to exterminate the parent forms and
the intermediate links. Consequently evidence of their former existence
could be found only amongst fossil remains, which are preserved,
as we shall in a future chapter attempt to show, in an extremely
imperfect and intermittent record.
On the origin and transitions of organic beings with peculiar
habits and structure. It has been asked by the opponents of
such views as I hold, how, for instance, a land carnivorous animal
could have been converted into one with aquatic habits; for how
could the animal in its transitional state have subsisted? It would
be easy to show that within the same group carnivorous animals exist
having every intermediate grade between truly aquatic and strictly
terrestrial habits; and as each exists by a struggle for life, it
is clear that each is well adapted in its habits to its place in
nature. Look at the Mustela vison of North America, which has webbed
feet and which resembles an otter in its fur, short legs, and form
of tail; during summer this animal dives for and preys on fish,
but during the long winter it leaves the frozen waters, and preys
like other polecats on mice and land animals. If a different case
had been taken, and it had been asked how an insectivorous quadruped
could possibly have been converted into a flying bat, the question
would have been far more difficult, and I could have given no answer.
Yet I think such difficulties have very little weight.
Here, as on other occasions, I lie under a heavy disadvantage,
for out of the many striking cases which I have collected, I can
give only one or two instances of transitional habits and structures
in closely allied species of the same genus; and of diversified
habits, either constant or occasional, in the same species. And
it seems to me that nothing less than a long list of such cases
is sufficient to lessen the difficulty in any particular case like
that of the bat.
Look at the family of squirrels; here we have the finest gradation
from animals with their tails only slightly flattened, and from
others, as Sir J. Richardson has remarked, with the posterior part
of their bodies rather wide and with the skin on their flanks rather
full, to the so-called flying squirrels; and flying squirrels have
their limbs and even the base of the tail united by a broad expanse
of skin, which serves as a parachute and allows them to glide through
the air to an astonishing distance from tree to tree. We cannot
doubt that each structure is of use to each kind of squirrel in
its own country, by enabling it to escape birds or beasts of prey,
or to collect food more quickly, or, as there is reason to believe,
by lessening the danger from occasional falls. But it does not follow
from this fact that the structure of each squirrel is the best that
it is possible to conceive under all natural conditions. Let the
climate and vegetation change, let other competing rodents or new
beasts of prey immigrate, or old ones become modified, and all analogy
would lead us to believe that some at least of the squirrels would
decrease in numbers or become exterminated, unless they also became
modified and improved in structure in a corresponding manner. Therefore,
I can see no difficulty, more especially under changing conditions
of life, in the continued preservation of individuals with fuller
and fuller flank-membranes, each modification being useful, each
being propagated, until by the accumulated effects of this process
of natural selection, a perfect so-called flying squirrel was produced.
Now look at the Galeopithecus or flying lemur, which formerly was
falsely ranked amongst bats. It has an extremely wide flank-membrane,
stretching from the corners of the jaw to the tail, and including
the limbs and the elongated fingers: the flank membrane is, also,
furnished with an extensor muscle. Although no graduated links of
structure, fitted for gliding through the air, now connect the Galeopithecus
with the other Lemuridae, yet I can see no difficulty in supposing
that such links formerly existed, and that each had been formed
by the same steps as in the case of the less perfectly gliding squirrels;
and that each grade of structure had been useful to its possessor.
Nor can I see any insuperable difficulty in further believing it
possible that the membrane-connected fingers and fore-arm of the
Galeopithecus might be greatly lengthened by natural selection;
and this, as far as the organs of flight are concerned, would convert
it into a bat. In bats which have the wing-membrane extended from
the top of the shoulder to the tail, including the hind-legs, we
perhaps see traces of an apparatus originally constructed for gliding
through the air rather than for flight.
If about a dozen genera of birds had become extinct or were unknown,
who would have ventured to have surmised that birds might have existed
which used their wings solely as flappers, like the logger-headed
duck (Micropterus of Eyton); as fins in the water and front legs
on the land, like the penguin; as sails, like the ostrich; and functionally
for no purpose, like the Apteryx. Yet the structure of each of these
birds is good for it, under the conditions of life to which it is
exposed, for each has to live by a struggle; but it is not necessarily
the best possible under all possible conditions. It must not be
inferred from these remarks that any of the grades of wing-structure
here alluded to, which perhaps may all have resulted from disuse,
indicate the natural steps by which birds have acquired their perfect
power of flight; but they serve, at least, to show what diversified
means of transition are possible.
Seeing that a few members of such water-breathing classes as the
Crustacea and Mollusca are adapted to live on the land, and seeing
that we have flying birds and mammals, flying insects of the most
diversified types, and formerly had flying reptiles, it is conceivable
that flying-fish, which now glide far through the air, slightly
rising and turning by the aid of their fluttering fins, might have
been modified into perfectly winged animals. If early transitional
state they had been inhabitants of the open ocean, and had used
their incipient organs of flight exclusively, as far as we know,
to escape being devoured by other fish?
When we see any structure highly perfected for any particular habit,
as the wings of a bird for flight, we should bear in mind that animals
displaying early transitional grades of the structure will seldom
continue to exist to the present day, for they will have been supplanted
by the very process of perfection through natural selection. Furthermore,
we may conclude that transitional grades between structures fitted
for very different habits of life will rarely have been developed
at an early period in great numbers and under many subordinate forms.
Thus, to return to our imaginary illustration of the flying-fish,
it does not seem probable that fishes capable of true flight would
have been developed under many subordinate forms, for taking prey
of many kinds in many ways, on the land and in the water, until
their organs of flight had come to a high stage of perfection, so
as to have given them a decided advantage over other animals in
the battle for life. Hence the chance of discovering species with
transitional grades of structure in a fossil condition will always
be less, from their having existed in lesser numbers, than in the
case of species with fully developed structures.
I will now give two or three instances of diversified and of changed
habits in the individuals of the same species. When either case
occurs, it would be easy for natural selection to fit the animal,
by some modification of its structure, for its changed habits, or
exclusively for one of its several different habits. But it is difficult
to tell, and immaterial for us, whether habits generally change
first and structure afterwards; or whether slight modifications
of structure lead to changed habits; both probably often change
almost simultaneously. Of cases of changed habits it will suffice
merely to allude to that of the many British insects which now feed
on exotic plants, or exclusively on artificial substances. Of diversified
habits innumerable instances could be given: I have often watched
a tyrant flycatcher (Saurophagus sulphuratus) in South America,
hovering over one spot and then proceeding to another, like a kestrel,
and at other times standing stationary on the margin of water, and
then dashing like a kingfisher at a fish. In our own country the
larger titmouse (Parus major) may be seen climbing branches, almost
like a creeper; it often, like a shrike, kills small birds by blows
on the head; and I have many times seen and heard it hammering the
seeds of the yew on a branch, and thus breaking them like a nuthatch.
In North America the black bear was seen by Hearne swimming for
hours with widely open mouth, thus catching, like a whale, insects
in the water. Even in so extreme a case as this, if the supply of
insects were constant, and if better adapted competitors did not
already exist in the country, I can see no difficulty in a race
of bears being rendered, by natural selection, more and more aquatic
in their structure and habits, with larger and larger mouths, till
a creature was produced as monstrous as a whale.
As we sometimes see individuals of a species following habits widely
different from those both of their own species and of the other
species of the same genus, we might expect, on my theory, that such
individuals would occasionally have given rise to new species, having
anomalous habits, and with their structure either slightly or considerably
modified from that of their proper type. And such instances do occur
in nature. Can a more striking instance of adaptation be given than
that of a woodpecker for climbing trees and for seizing insects
in the chinks of the bark? Yet in North America there are woodpeckers
which feed largely on fruit, and others with elongated wings which
chase insects on the wing; and on the plains of La Plata, where
not a tree grows, there is a woodpecker, which in every essential
part of its organisation, even in its colouring, in the harsh tone
of its voice, and undulatory flight, told me plainly of its close
blood-relationship to our common species; yet it is a woodpecker
which never climbs a tree!
Petrels are the most aërial and oceanic of birds, yet in the
quiet Sounds of Tierra del Fuego, the Puffinuria berardi, in its
general habits, in its astonishing power of diving, its manner of
swimming, and of flying when unwillingly it takes flight, would
be mistaken by any one for an auk or grebe; nevertheless, it is
essentially a petrel, but with many parts of its organisation profoundly
modified. On the other hand, the acutest observer by examining the
dead body of the water-ouzel would never have suspected its sub-aquatic
habits; yet this anomalous member of the strictly terrestrial thrush
family wholly subsists by diving, grasping the stones with its feet
and using its wings under water.
He who believes that each being has been created as we now see
it, must occasionally have felt surprise when he has met with an
animal having habits and structure not at all in agreement. What
can be plainer than that the webbed feet of ducks and geese are
formed for swimming; yet there are upland geese with webbed feet
which rarely or never go near the water; and no one except Audubon
has seen the frigate-bird, which has all its four toes webbed, alight
on the surface of the sea. On the other hand, grebes and coots are
eminently aquatic, although their toes are only bordered by membrane.
What seems plainer than that the long toes of grallatores are formed
for walking over swamps and floating plants, yet the water-hen is
nearly as aquatic as the coot; and the landrail nearly as terrestrial
as the quail or partridge. In such cases, and many others could
be given, habits have changed without a corresponding change of
structure. The webbed feet of the upland goose may be said to have
become rudimentary in function, though not in structure. In the
frigate-bird, the deeply-scooped membrane between the toes shows
that structure has begun to change.
He who believes in separate and innumerable acts of creation will
say, that in these cases it has pleased the Creator to cause a being
of one type to take the place of one of another type; but this seems
to me only restating the fact in dignified language. He who believes
in the struggle for existence and in the principle of natural selection,
will acknowledge that every organic being is constantly endeavouring
to increase in numbers; and that if any one being vary ever so little,
either in habits or structure, and thus gain an advantage over some
other inhabitant of the country, it will seize on the place of that
inhabitant, however different it may be from its own place. Hence
it will cause him no surprise that there should be geese and frigate-birds
with webbed feet, either living on the dry land or most rarely alighting
on the water; that there should be long-toed corncrakes living in
meadows instead of in swamps; that there should be woodpeckers where
not a tree grows; that there should be diving thrushes, and petrels
with the habits of auks.
Organs of extreme perfection and complication. To suppose
that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting
the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts
of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration,
could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess,
absurd in the highest possible degree. Yet reason tells me, that
if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very
imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor,
can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly,
and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and
if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to
an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty
of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural
selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be
considered real. How a nerve comes to be sensitive to light, hardly
concerns us more than how life itself first originated; but I may
remark that several facts make me suspect that any sensitive nerve
may be rendered sensitive to light, and likewise to those coarser
vibrations of the air which produce sound.
In looking for the gradations by which an organ in any species
has been perfected, we ought to look exclusively to its lineal ancestors;
but this is scarcely ever possible, and we are forced in each case
to look to species of the same group, that is to the collateral
descendants from the same original parent-form, in order to see
what gradations are possible, and for the chance of some gradations
having been transmitted from the earlier stages of descent, in an
unaltered or little altered condition. Amongst existing Vertebrata,
we find but a small amount of gradation in the structure of the
eye, and from fossil species we can learn nothing on this head.
In this great class we should probably have to descend far beneath
the lowest known fossiliferous stratum to discover the earlier stages,
by which the eye has been perfected.
In the Articulata we can commence a series with an optic nerve
merely coated with pigment, and without any other mechanism; and
from this low stage, numerous gradations of structure, branching
off in two fundamentally different lines, can be shown to exist,
until we reach a moderately high stage of perfection. In certain
crustaceans, for instance, there is a double cornea, the inner one
divided into facets, within each of which there is a lens shaped
swelling. In other crustaceans the transparent cones which are coated
by pigment, and which properly act only by excluding lateral pencils
of light, are convex at their upper ends and must act by convergence;
and at their lower ends there seems to be an imperfect vitreous
substance. With these facts, here far too briefly and imperfectly
given, which show that there is much graduated diversity in the
eyes of living crustaceans, and bearing in mind how small the number
of living animals is in proportion to those which have become extinct,
I can see no very great difficulty (not more than in the case of
many other structures) in believing that natural selection has converted
the simple apparatus of an optic nerve merely coated with pigment
and invested by transparent membrane, into an optical instrument
as perfect as is possessed by any member of the great Articulate
class.
He who will go thus far, if he find on finishing this treatise
that large bodies of facts, otherwise inexplicable, can be explained
by the theory of descent, ought not to hesitate to go further, and
to admit that a structure even as perfect as the eye of an eagle
might be formed by natural selection, although in this case he does
not know any of the transitional grades. His reason ought to conquer
his imagination; though I have felt the difficulty far too keenly
to be surprised at any degree of hesitation in extending the principle
of natural selection to such startling lengths.
It is scarcely possible to avoid comparing the eye to a telescope.
We know that this instrument has been perfected by the long-continued
efforts of the highest human intellects; and we naturally infer
that the eye has been formed by a somewhat analogous process. But
may not this inference be presumptuous? Have we any right to assume
that the Creator works by intellectual powers like those of man?
If we must compare the eye to an optical instrument, we ought in
imagination to take a thick layer of transparent tissue, with a
nerve sensitive to light beneath, and then suppose every part of
this layer to be continually changing slowly in density, so as to
separate into layers of different densities and thicknesses, placed
at different distances from each other, and with the surfaces of
each layer slowly changing in form. Further we must suppose that
there is a power always intently watching each slight accidental
alteration in the transparent layers; and carefully selecting each
alteration which, under varied circumstances, may in any way, or
in any degree, tend to produce a distincter image. We must suppose
each new state of the instrument to be multiplied by the million;
and each to be preserved till a better be produced, and then the
old ones to be destroyed. In living bodies, variation will cause
the slight alterations, generation will multiply them almost infinitely,
and natural selection will pick out with unerring skill each improvement.
Let this process go on for millions on millions of years; and during
each year on millions of individuals of many kinds; and may we not
believe that a living optical instrument might thus be formed as
superior to one of glass, as the works of the Creator are to those
of man?
If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which
could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight
modifications, my theory would absolutely break down. But I can
find out no such case. No doubt many organs exist of which we do
not know the transitional grades, more especially if we look to
much-isolated species, round which, according to my theory, there
has been much extinction. Or again, if we look to an organ common
to all the members of a large class, for in this latter case the
organ must have been first formed at an extremely remote period,
since which all the many members of the class have been developed;
and in order to discover the early transitional grades through which
the organ has passed, we should have to look to very ancient ancestral
forms, long since become extinct.
We should be extremely cautious in concluding that an organ could
not have been formed by transitional gradations of some kind. Numerous
cases could be given amongst the lower animals of the same organ
performing at the same time wholly distinct functions; thus the
alimentary canal respires, digests, and excretes in the larva of
the dragon-fly and in the fish Cobites. In the Hydra, the animal
may be turned inside out, and the exterior surface will then digest
and the stomach respire. In such cases natural selection might easily
specialise, if any advantage were thus gained, a part or organ,
which had performed two functions, for one function alone, and thus
wholly change its nature by insensible steps. Two distinct organs
sometimes perform simultaneously the same function in the same individual;
to give one instance, there are fish with gills or branchiae that
breathe the air dissolved in the water, at the same time that they
breathe free air in their swimbladders, this latter organ having
a ductus pneumaticus for its supply, and being divided by highly
vascular partitions. In these cases, one of the two organs might
with ease be modified and perfected so as to perform all the work
by itself, being aided during the process of modification by the
other organ; and then this other organ might be modified for some
other and quite distinct purpose, or be quite obliterated.
The illustration of the swimbladder in fishes is a good one, because
it shows us clearly the highly important fact that an organ originally
constructed for one purpose, namely flotation, may be converted
into one for a wholly different purpose, namely respiration. The
swimbladder has, also, been worked in as an accessory to the auditory
organs of certain fish, or, for I do not know which view is now
generally held, a part of the auditory apparatus has been worked
in as a complement to the swimbladder. All physiologists admit that
the swimbladder is homologous, or 'ideally similar,' in position
and structure with the lungs of the higher vertebrate animals: hence
there seems to me to be no great difficulty in believing that natural
selection has actually converted a swimbladder into a lung, or organ
used exclusively for respiration.
I can, indeed, hardly doubt that all vertebrate animals having
true lungs have descended by ordinary generation from an ancient
prototype, of which we know nothing, furnished with a floating apparatus
or swimbladder. We can thus, as I infer from Professor Owen's interesting
description of these parts, understand the strange fact that every
particle of food and drink which we swallow has to pass over the
orifice of the trachea, with some risk of falling into the lungs,
notwithstanding the beautiful contrivance by which the glottis is
closed. In the higher Vertebrata the branchiae have wholly disappeared
the slits on the sides of the neck and the loop-like course of the
arteries still marking in the embryo their former position. But
it is conceivable that the now utterly lost branchiae might have
been gradually worked in by natural selection for some quite distinct
purpose: in the same manner as, on the view entertained by some
naturalists that the branchiae and dorsal scales of Annelids are
homologous with the wings and wing-covers of insects, it is probable
that organs which at a very ancient period served for respiration
have been actually converted into organs of flight.
In considering transitions of organs, it is so important to bear
in mind the probability of conversion from one function to another,
that I will give one more instance. Pedunculated cirripedes have
two minute folds of skin, called by me the ovigerous frena, which
serve, through the means of a sticky secretion, to retain the eggs
until they are hatched within the sack. These cirripedes have no
branchiae, the whole surface of the body and sack, including the
small frena, serving for respiration. The Balanidae or sessile cirripedes,
on the other hand, have no ovigerous frena, the eggs lying loose
at the bottom of the sack, in the well-enclosed shell; but they
have large folded branchiae. Now I think no one will dispute that
the ovigerous frena in the one family are strictly homologous with
the branchiae of the other family; indeed, they graduate into each
other. Therefore I do not doubt that little folds of skin, which
originally served as ovigerous frena, but which, likewise, very
slightly aided the act of respiration, have been gradually converted
by natural selection into branchiae, simply through an increase
in their size and the obliteration of their adhesive glands. If
all pedunculated cirripedes had become extinct, and they have already
suffered far more extinction than have sessile cirripedes, who would
ever have imagined that the branchiae in this latter family had
originally existed as organs for preventing the ova from being washed
out of the sack?
Although we must be extremely cautious in concluding that any organ
could not possibly have been produced by successive transitional
gradations, yet, undoubtedly, grave cases of difficulty occur, some
of which will be discussed in my future work.
One of the gravest is that of neuter insects, which are often very
differently constructed from either the males or fertile females;
but this case will be treated of in the next chapter. The electric
organs of fishes offer another case of special difficulty; it is
impossible to conceive by what steps these wondrous organs have
been produced; but, as Owen and others have remarked, their intimate
structure closely resembles that of common muscle; and as it has
lately been shown that Rays have an organ closely analogous to the
electric apparatus, and yet do not, as Matteuchi asserts, discharge
any electricity, we must own that we are far too ignorant to argue
that no transition of any kind is possible.
The electric organs offer another and even more serious difficulty;
for they occur in only about a dozen fishes, of which several are
widely remote in their affinities. Generally when the same organ
appears in several members of the same class, especially if in members
having very different habits of life, we may attribute its presence
to inheritance from a common ancestor; and its absence in some of
the members to its loss through disuse or natural selection. But
if the electric organs had been inherited from one ancient progenitor
thus provided, we might have expected that all electric fishes would
have been specially related to each other. Nor does geology at all
lead to the belief that formerly most fishes had electric organs,
which most of their modified descendants have lost. The presence
of luminous organs in a few insects, belonging to different families
and orders, offers a parallel case of difficulty. Other cases could
be given; for instance in plants, the very curious contrivance of
a mass of pollen-grains, borne on a foot-stalk with a sticky gland
at the end, is the same in Orchis and Asclepias, genera almost as
remote as possible amongst flowering plants. In all these cases
of two very distinct species furnished with apparently the same
anomalous organ, it should be observed that, although the general
appearance and function of the organ may be the same, yet some fundamental
difference can generally be detected. I am inclined to believe that
in nearly the same way as two men have sometimes independently hit
on the very same invention, so natural selection, working for the
good of each being and taking advantage of analogous variations,
has sometimes modified in very nearly the same manner two parts
in two organic beings, which owe but little of their structure in
common to inheritance from the same ancestor.
Although in many cases it is most difficult to conjecture by what
transitions an organ could have arrived at its present state; yet,
considering that the proportion of living and known forms to the
extinct and unknown is very small, I have been astonished how rarely
an organ can be named, towards which no transitional grade is known
to lead. The truth of this remark is indeed shown by that old canon
in natural history of 'Natura non facit saltum.' We meet with this
admission in the writings of almost every experienced naturalist;
or, as Milne Edwards has well expressed it, nature is prodigal in
variety, but niggard in innovation. Why, on the theory of Creation,
should this be so? Why should all the parts and organs of many independent
beings, each supposed to have been separately created for its proper
place in nature, be so invariably linked together by graduated steps?
Why should not Nature have taken a leap from structure to structure?
On the theory of natural selection, we can clearly understand why
she should not; for natural selection can act only by taking advantage
of slight successive variations; she can never take a leap, but
must advance by the shortest and slowest steps.
Organs of little apparent importance. As natural selection
acts by life and death, by the preservation of individuals with
any favourable variation, and by the destruction of those with any
unfavourable deviation of structure, I have sometimes felt much
difficulty in understanding the origin of simple parts, of which
the importance does not seem sufficient to cause the preservation
of successively varying individuals. I have sometimes felt as much
difficulty, though of a very different kind, on this head, as in
the case of an organ as perfect and complex as the eye.
In the first place, we are much too ignorant in regard to the whole
economy of any one organic being, to say what slight modifications
would be of importance or not. In a former chapter I have given
instances of most trifling characters, such as the down on fruit
and the colour of the flesh, which, from determining the attacks
of insects or from being correlated with constitutional differences,
might assuredly be acted on by natural selection. The tail of the
giraffe looks like an artificially constructed fly-flapper; and
it seems at first incredible that this could have been adapted for
its present purpose by successive slight modifications, each better
and better, for so trifling an object as driving away flies; yet
we should pause before being too positive even in this case, for
we know that the distribution and existence of cattle and other
animals in South America absolutely depends on their power of resisting
the attacks of insects: so that individuals which could by any means
defend themselves from these small enemies, would be able to range
into new pastures and thus gain a great advantage. It is not that
the larger quadrupeds are actually destroyed (except in some rare
cases) by the flies, but they are incessantly harassed and their
strength reduced, so that they are more subject to disease, or not
so well enabled in a coming dearth to search for food, or to escape
from beasts of prey.
Organs now of trifling importance have probably in some cases been
of high importance to an early progenitor, and, after having been
slowly perfected at a former period, have been transmitted in nearly
the same state, although now become of very slight use; and any
actually injurious deviations in their structure will always have
been checked by natural selection. Seeing how important an organ
of locomotion the tail is in most aquatic animals, its general presence
and use for many purposes in so many land animals, which in their
lungs or modified swim-bladders betray their aquatic origin, may
perhaps be thus accounted for. A well-developed tail having been
formed in an aquatic animal, it might subsequently come to be worked
in for all sorts of purposes, as a fly-flapper, an organ of prehension,
or as an aid in turning, as with the dog, though the aid must be
slight, for the hare, with hardly any tail, can double quickly enough.
In the second place, we may sometimes attribute importance to characters
which are really of very little importance, and which have originated
from quite secondary causes, independently of natural selection.
We should remember that climate, food, &c., probably have some
little direct influence on the organisation; that characters reappear
from the law of reversion;, that correlation of growth will have
had a most important influence in modifying various structures;
and finally, that sexual selection will often have largely modified
the external characters of animals having a will, to give one male
an advantage in fighting with another or in charming the females.
Moreover when a modification of structure has primarily arisen from
the above or other unknown causes, it may at first have been of
no advantage to the species, but may subsequently have been taken
advantage of by the descendants of the species under new conditions
of life and with newly acquired habits.
To give a few instances to illustrate these latter remarks. If
green woodpeckers alone had existed, and we did not know that there
were many black and pied kinds, I dare say that we should have thought
that the green colour was a beautiful adaptation to hide this tree-frequenting
bird from its enemies; and consequently that it was a character
of importance and might have been acquired through natural selection;
as it is, I have no doubt that the colour is due to some quite distinct
cause, probably to sexual selection. A trailing bamboo in the Malay
Archipelago climbs the loftiest trees by the aid of exquisitely
constructed hooks clustered around the ends of the branches, and
this contrivance, no doubt, is of the highest service to the plant;
but as we see nearly similar hooks on many trees which are not climbers
the hooks on the bamboo may have arisen from unknown laws of growth,
and have been subsequently taken advantage of by the plant undergoing
further modification and becoming a climber. The naked skin on the
head of a vulture is generally looked at as a direct adaptation
for wallowing in putridity; and so it may be, or it may possibly
be due to the direct action of putrid matter; but we should be very
cautious in drawing any such inference, when we see that the skin
on the head of the clean-feeding male turkey is likewise naked.
The sutures in the skulls of young mammals have been advanced as
a beautiful adaptation for aiding parturition, and no doubt they
facilitate, or may be indispensable for this act; but as sutures
occur in the skulls of young birds and reptiles, which have only
to escape from a broken egg, we may infer that this structure has
arisen from the laws of growth, and has been taken advantage of
in the parturition of the higher animals.
We are profoundly ignorant of the causes producing slight and unimportant
variations; and we are immediately made conscious of this by reflecting
on the differences in the breeds of our domesticated animals in
different countries, more especially in the less civilized countries
where there has been but little artificial selection. Careful observers
are convinced that a damp climate affects the growth of the hair,
and that with the hair the horns are correlated. Mountain breeds
always differ from lowland breeds; and a mountainous country would
probably affect the hind limbs from exercising them more, and possibly
even the form of the pelvis; and then by the law of homologous variation,
the front limbs and even the head would probably be affected. The
shape, also, of the pelvis might affect by pressure the shape of
the head of the young in the womb. The laborious breathing necessary
in high regions would, we have some reason to believe, increase
the size of the chest; and again correlation would come into play.
Animals kept by savages in different countries often have to struggle
for their own subsistence, and would be exposed to a certain extent
to natural selection, and individuals with slightly different constitutions
would succeed best under different climates; and there is reason
to believe that constitution and colour are correlated. A good observer,
also, states that in cattle susceptibility to the attacks of flies
is correlated with colour, as is the liability to be poisoned by
certain plants; so that colour would be thus subjected to the action
of natural selection. But we are far too ignorant to speculate on
the relative importance of the several known and unknown laws of
variation; and I have here alluded to them only to show that, if
we are unable to account for the characteristic differences of our
domestic breeds, which nevertheless we generally admit to have arisen
through ordinary generation, we ought not to lay too much stress
on our ignorance of the precise cause of the slight analogous differences
between species. I might have adduced for this same purpose the
differences between the races of man, which are so strongly marked;
I may add that some little light can apparently be thrown on the
origin of these differences, chiefly through sexual selection of
a particular kind, but without here entering on copious details
my reasoning would appear frivolous.
The foregoing remarks lead me to say a few words on the protest
lately made by some naturalists, against the utilitarian doctrine
that every detail of structure has been produced for the good of
its possessor. They believe that very many structures have been
created for beauty in the eyes of man, or for mere variety. This
doctrine, if true, would be absolutely fatal to my theory. Yet I
fully admit that many structures are of no direct use to their possessors.
Physical conditions probably have had some little effect on structure,
quite independently of any good thus gained. Correlation of growth
has no doubt played a most important part, and a useful modification
of one part will often have entailed on other parts diversified
changes of no direct use. So again characters which formerly were
useful, or which formerly had arisen from correlation of growth,
or from other unknown cause, may reappear from the law of reversion,
though now of no direct use. The effects of sexual selection, when
displayed in beauty to charm the females, can be called useful only
in rather a forced sense. But by far the most important consideration
is that the chief part of the organisation of every being is simply
due to inheritance; and consequently, though each being assuredly
is well fitted for its place in nature, many structures now have
no direct relation to the habits of life of each species. Thus,
we can hardly believe that the webbed feet of the upland goose or
of the frigate-bird are of special use to these birds; we cannot
believe that the same bones in the arm of the monkey, in the fore
leg of the horse, in the wing of the bat, and in the flipper of
the seal, are of special use to these animals. We may safely attribute
these structures to inheritance. But to the progenitor of the upland
goose and of the frigate-bird, webbed feet no doubt were as useful
as they now are to the most aquatic of existing birds. So we may
believe that the progenitor of the seal had not a flipper, but a
foot with five toes fitted for walking or grasping; and we may further
venture to believe that the several bones in the limbs of the monkey,
horse, and bat, which have been inherited from a common progenitor,
were formerly of more special use to that progenitor, or its progenitors,
than they now are to these animals having such widely diversified
habits. Therefore we may infer that these several bones might have
been acquired through natural selection, subjected formerly, as
now, to the several laws of inheritance, reversion, correlation
of growth, &c. Hence every detail of structure in every living
creature (making some little allowance for the direct action of
physical conditions) may be viewed, either as having been of special
use to some ancestral form, or as being now of special use to the
descendants of this form either directly, or indirectly through
the complex laws of growth.
Natural selection cannot possibly produce any modification in any
one species exclusively for the good of another species; though
throughout nature one species incessantly takes advantage of, and
profits by, the structure of another. But natural selection can
and does often produce structures for the direct injury of other
species, as we see in the fang of the adder, and in the ovipositor
of the ichneumon, by which its eggs are deposited in the living
bodies of other insects. If it could be proved that any part of
the structure of any one species had been formed for the exclusive
good of another species, it would annihilate my theory, for such
could not have been produced through natural selection. Although
many statements may be found in works on natural history to this
effect, I cannot find even one which seems to me of any weight.
It is admitted that the rattlesnake has a poison-fang for its own
defence and for the destruction of its prey; but some authors suppose
that at the same time this snake is furnished with a rattle for
its own injury, namely, to warn its prey to escape. I would almost
as soon believe that the cat curls the end of its tail when preparing
to spring, in order to warn the doomed mouse. But I have not space
here to enter on this and other such cases.
Natural selection will never produce in a being anything injurious
to itself, for natural selection acts solely by and for the good
of each. No organ will be formed, as Paley has remarked, for the
purpose of causing pain or for doing an injury to its possessor.
If a fair balance be struck between the good and evil caused by
each part, each will be found on the whole advantageous. After the
lapse of time, under changing conditions of life, if any part comes
to be injurious, it will be modified; or if it be not so, the being
will become extinct, as myriads have become extinct.
Natural selection tends only to make each organic being as perfect
as, or slightly more perfect than, the other inhabitants of the
same country with which it has to struggle for existence. And we
see that this is the degree of perfection attained under nature.
The endemic productions of New Zealand, for instance, are perfect
one compared with another; but they are now rapidly yielding before
the advancing legions of plants and animals introduced from Europe.
Natural selection will not produce absolute perfection, nor do we
always meet, as far as we can judge, with this high standard under
nature. The correction for the aberration of light is said, on high
authority, not to be perfect even in that most perfect organ, the
eye. If our reason leads us to admire with enthusiasm a multitude
of inimitable contrivances in nature, this same reason tells us,
though we may easily err on both sides, that some other contrivances
are less perfect. Can we consider the sting of the wasp or of the
bee as perfect, which, when used against many attacking animals,
cannot be withdrawn, owing to the backward serratures, and so inevitably
causes the death of the insect by tearing out its viscera?
If we look at the sting of the bee, as having originally existed
in a remote progenitor as a boring and serrated instrument, like
that in so many members of the same great order, and which has been
modified but not perfected for its present purpose, with the poison
originally adapted to cause galls subsequently intensified, we can
perhaps understand how it is that the use of the sting should so
often cause the insect's own death: for if on the whole the power
of stinging be useful to the community, it will fulfil all the requirements
of natural selection, though it may cause the death of some few
members. If we admire the truly wonderful power of scent by which
the males of many insects find their females, can we admire the
production for this single purpose of thousands of drones, which
are utterly useless to the community for any other end, and which
are ultimately slaughtered by their industrious and sterile sisters?
It may be difficult, but we ought to admire the savage instinctive
hatred of the queen-bee, which urges her instantly to destroy the
young queens her daughters as soon as born, or to perish herself
in the combat; for undoubtedly this is for the good of the community;
and maternal love or maternal hatred, though the latter fortunately
is most rare, is all the same to the inexorable principle of natural
selection. If we admire the several ingenious contrivances, by which
the flowers of the orchis and of many other plants are fertilised
through insect agency, can we consider as equally perfect the elaboration
by our fir-trees of dense clouds of pollen, in order that a few
granules may be wafted by a chance breeze on to the ovules?
Summary of Chapter. We have in this chapter discussed some
of the difficulties and objections which may be urged against my
theory. Many of them are very grave; but I think that in the discussion
light has been thrown on several facts, which on the theory of independent
acts of creation are utterly obscure. We have seen that species
at any one period are not indefinitely variable, and are not linked
together by a multitude of intermediate gradations, partly because
the process of natural selection will always be very slow, and will
act, at any one time, only on a very few forms; and partly because
the very process of natural selection almost implies the continual
supplanting and extinction of preceding and intermediate gradations.
Closely allied species, now living on a continuous area, must often
have been formed when the area was not continuous, and when the
conditions of life did not insensibly graduate away from one part
to another. When two varieties are formed in two districts of a
continuous area, an intermediate variety will often be formed, fitted
for an intermediate zone; but from reasons assigned, the intermediate
variety will usually exist in lesser numbers than the two forms
which it connects; consequently the two latter, during the course
of further modification, from existing in greater numbers, will
have a great advantage over the less numerous intermediate variety,
and will thus generally succeed in supplanting and exterminating
it.
We have seen in this chapter how cautious we should be in concluding
that the most different habits of life could not graduate into each
other; that a bat, for instance, could not have been formed by natural
selection from an animal which at first could only glide through
the air.
We have seen that a species may under new conditions of life change
its habits, or have diversified habits, with some habits very unlike
those of its nearest congeners. Hence we can understand bearing
in mind that each organic being is trying to live wherever it can
live, how it has arisen that there are upland geese with webbed
feet, ground woodpeckers, diving thrushes, and petrels with the
habits of auks.
Although the belief that an organ so perfect as the eye could have
been formed by natural selection, is more than enough to stagger
any one; yet in the case of any organ, if we know of a long series
of gradations in complexity, each good for its possessor, then,
under changing conditions of life, there is no logical impossibility
in the acquirement of any conceivable degree of perfection through
natural selection. In the cases in which we know of no intermediate
or transitional states, we should be very cautious in concluding
that none could have existed, for the homologies of many organs
and their intermediate states show that wonderful metamorphoses
in function are at least possible. For instance, a swim-bladder
has apparently been converted into an air-breathing lung. The same
organ having performed simultaneously very different functions,
and then having been specialised for one function; and two very
distinct organs having performed at the same time the same function,
the one having been perfected whilst aided by the other, must often
have largely facilitated transitions.
We are far too ignorant, in almost every case, to be enabled to
assert that any part or organ is so unimportant for the welfare
of a species, that modifications in its structure could not have
been slowly accumulated by means of natural selection. But we may
confidently believe that many modifications, wholly due to the laws
of growth, and at first in no way advantageous to a species, have
been subsequently taken advantage of by the still further modified
descendants of this species. We may, also, believe that a part formerly
of high importance has often been retained (as the tail of an aquatic
animal by its terrestrial descendants), though it has become of
such small importance that it could not, in its present state, have
been acquired by natural selection, a power which acts solely by
the preservation of profitable variations in the struggle for life.
Natural selection will produce nothing in one species for the exclusive
good or injury of another; though it may well produce parts, organs,
and excretions highly useful or even indispensable, or highly injurious
to another species, but in all cases at the same time useful to
the owner. Natural selection in each well-stocked country, must
act chiefly through the competition of the inhabitants one with
another, and consequently will produce perfection, or strength in
the battle for life, only according to the standard of that country.
Hence the inhabitants of one country, generally the smaller one,
will often yield, as we see they do yield, to the inhabitants of
another and generally larger country. For in the larger country
there will have existed more individuals, and more diversified forms,
and the competition will have been severer, and thus the standard
of perfection will have been rendered higher. Natural selection
will not necessarily produce absolute perfection; nor, as far as
we can judge by our limited faculties, can absolute perfection be
everywhere found.
On the theory of natural selection we can clearly understand the
full meaning of that old canon in natural history, 'Natura non facit
saltum.' This canon, if we look only to the present inhabitants
of the world, is not strictly correct, but if we include all those
of past times, it must by my theory be strictly true.
It is generally acknowledged that all organic beings have been
formed on two great laws Unity of Type, and the Conditions of Existence.
By unity of type is meant that fundamental agreement in structure,
which we see in organic beings of the same class, and which is quite
independent of their habits of life. On my theory, unity of type
is explained by unity of descent. The expression of conditions of
existence, so often insisted on by the illustrious Cuvier, is fully
embraced by the principle of natural selection. For natural selection
acts by either now adapting the varying parts of each being to its
organic and inorganic conditions of life; or by having adapted them
during long-past periods of time: the adaptations being aided in
some cases by use and disuse, being slightly affected by the direct
action of the external conditions of life, and being in all cases
subjected to the several laws of growth. Hence, in fact, the law
of the Conditions of Existence is the higher law; as it includes,
through the inheritance of former adaptations, that of Unity of
Type.
Previous Chapter
Next Chapter
|