Search: Scott, John in correspondent 
Sorted by:

Showing 120 of 95 items

From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
John Scott
Date:
1 July 1876
Source of text:
American Philosophical Society (Mss.B.D25.)
Summary:

CD has read the two reports on culture of poppies with interest and has planted seeds.

Suggests an experiment for evidence on whether plants, thought merely varieties, are like species and fail to intercross, despite insect pollination.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
John Scott
Date:
15 Dec 1876
Source of text:
Transactions of the Hawick Archæological Society (1908): 70
Summary:

CD is eager for further information about Lagerstroemia, which is sterile with its own pollen. Does the collection of dried plants reveal more than one form? Plans to republish papers on dimorphism.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
John Scott
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
24 Feb 1877
Source of text:
DAR 177: 122
Summary:

Thanks for Cross and self-fertilisation.

His work on poppy varieties confirms increased vigour with crossing.

JS is carrying out opium poppy experiments CD suggested. He is busy with opium duties. Observing many fields of poppies, day and night, JS finds them remarkably free of insects. Believes they are wind-pollinated and that varieties have prepotent pollen since he has shown they do not cross naturally.

Plans to send a paper on Cyclosis to Linnean Society.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
John Scott
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
12 Apr 1877
Source of text:
DAR 47: 207–9
Summary:

Comments on various species of Lagerstroemia.

In the series of opium poppy intercrosses made at CD’s suggestion, JS has learned that the reason they failed to intercross was the absence of insects at the period of their flowering.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
John Scott
Date:
8 Jan [1864]
Source of text:
American Philosophical Society (Mss.B.D25.)
Summary:

Glad correspondent’s paper went well.

Poor health and much work forces CD to be brief.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
John Scott
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
11 Nov 1862
Source of text:
DAR 177: 77
Summary:

CD is mistaken in considering Acropera unisexual, with only male flowers [Orchids, pp. 203–10]. JS has successfully fertilised two A. loddigesii flowers. One is ripening. Dissection of the other shows the pollen accomplishes fertilisation without contacting any stigmatic surface. Abortive ovules found in flowers that did not become fertilised when pollinated. JS suggests Acropera has both unisexual male and hermaphrodite flowers.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
John Scott
Date:
12 Nov [1862]
Source of text:
DAR 93: B7–10
Summary:

Discusses whether or not "male" Acropera bear fruit. JS’s interpretation of Acropera pollination is ingenious. Pollen-tubes of some cleistogamous flowers germinate in the anthers.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
John Scott
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
15 Nov [1862]
Source of text:
DAR 177: 78
Summary:

Appreciates CD’s acknowledging his letter and his comments on Acropera. Will send CD the Acropera capsule which is now maturing.

Experimenting on vegetable parthenogenesis.

Structure of Acropera.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
John Scott
Date:
19 Nov [1862]
Source of text:
DAR 93: B11–B14, DAR 147: 431
Summary:

Praises JS’s experimenting.

Has he ever studied the relative fertility of varieties? CD very interested in this subject.

Discusses Acropera.

Wants to quote JS on Zea [Variation 1: 321].

CD sends his Primula paper [Collected papers 2: 45–63].

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
John Scott
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
[20 Nov – 2 Dec 1862]
Source of text:
DAR 177: 79
Summary:

JS does not fully accept natural selection.

Has never raised oxlips from cowslips or primroses; reports of such must be cases of crossing.

Discusses relative fertility of varieties, self-fertility of hybrids, and plans for experiments on enhanced hybrid fertility.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
John Scott
Date:
3 Dec [1862]
Source of text:
DAR 93: B60–3
Summary:

JS’s facts on Primula are new to CD.

In Linum CD has also found dimorphic and non-dimorphic species.

Plans to publish next autumn on successive homomorphic generations in Primula.

"Fluctuating forms" due to culture.

Urges JS to publish.

Lobelia functionally monoecious.

Where did JS publish on Clivia hybrids? Did he count parent and cross seeds, as Gärtner shows is necessary?

CD has done large experiments on artificially fertilised cowslips. They never resemble oxlips.

Would welcome detailed criticism of natural selection by a careful observer like JS. Most criticism worthless. Expects a great deal from Lyell’s reaction.

Suggests JS do orchid experiment to see if rostellum can be penetrated by pollen.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
John Scott
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
6 Dec [1862]
Source of text:
DAR 108: 182a–d
Summary:

JS not ready to publish on Primula.

Some of his objections to natural selection are based on belief that plants with separate sexes are less variable than those in which sexes are confluent (as in ferns).

Sends his paper on fern varieties [Edinburgh New Philos. J. 2d ser. 16 (1862): 209–27].

Will soon read paper on Drosera irritability [Edinburgh New Philos. J. 2d ser. 17 (1863): 317–18].

How does CD explain capricious distribution of irritability among plants?

P. scotica’s non-dimorphism is native.

Beginning Laelia experiments shortly.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
John Scott
Date:
11 Dec [1862]
Source of text:
DAR 93: B37, B49–52
Summary:

Criticises style of JS’s fern paper [Edinburgh New Philos. J. 2d ser. 16 (1862): 209–27].

JS’s remark on "the two sexes counteracting variability in the product of the one" is new to CD.

Does the female [fern?] plant always produce female by parthenogenesis?

They seem to work on same subjects; CD has much material on Drosera.

Does not understand JS’s objections to natural selection.

Offers to suggest experiments.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
John Scott
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
17 Dec [1862]
Source of text:
DAR 177: 80
Summary:

Thanks for Journal of researches and Origin.

Thanks CD for comments on his fern paper [see 3847 and 3853]; has great difficulty in expressing his ideas.

Discusses inheritance and variation.

Asks CD for an account of the experiments he would like JS to perform.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
John Scott
Date:
19 Dec [1862]
Source of text:
DAR 93: B35–6, B64–5, B80
Summary:

JS should be proud of his paper ["Nature of the fern-spore", Edinburgh New. Philos. J. 2d ser. 16 (1862): 209–27].

CD has just found that JS’s observations on the confluence of two sexes causing variability were independently confirmed by Huxley.

CD has always suspected a fundamental difference between buds and ovules.

Asks for examples of "bud-variation" or "sports".

Asks JS to test germination of pollen on rostellum of Laelia.

Offers JS money for experimental supplies, e.g., netting, to keep insects out of flowers.

Encloses an outline of crossing experiments with Lythraceae, Primula, Pelargonium, and others, which he feels would be valuable.

Note on melastomids.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
John Scott
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
6 Jan 1863
Source of text:
DAR 177: 81, 83
Summary:

Sends Primula scotica and P. farinosa.

So far cannot fertilise Gongora atropurpurea although it is similar to Acropera luteola.

Experimenting on intergeneric hybrids to test CD’s view that sterility is not a special endowment.

Scott’s personal history.

Acropera capsule grows.

Plans for experiments CD has suggested on Primula, peloric Antirrhinum, and Verbascum.

Asks about Gärtner’s experiments on maize.

Aware of Anderson-Henry’s failures.

Through kindness of J. H. Balfour and James McNab, enjoys facilities for research. JS is in charge of the propagating department. Balfour almost engaged him to be superintendent of the Madras Horticultural Garden.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
John Scott
Date:
8 Jan [1863]
Source of text:
Transactions of the Hawick Archæological Society (1908): 67
Summary:

CD’s respect for JS’s indomitable work and interesting experiments increases steadily.

His gratitude for the primulas and the astonishing Gongora specimen.

Asks JS’s opinion about crossing a primrose with the pollen of a wild cowslip and of a cultivated polyanthus.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
John Scott
To:
Charles Robert Darwin
Date:
16 Jan 1863
Source of text:
DAR 177: 82
Summary:

Experiments to cut Laelia stigma from rostellum and then to fertilise rostellum are baffled by "a latent instinctive power". Somehow the pollen-tubes find their way to the style.

Suggests CD study variation in ferns.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
John Scott
Date:
21 Jan [1863]
Source of text:
DAR 93: B56–7, B75–6
Summary:

Urges JS to publish on orchid pollen-tubes.

Suggests comparing stigmatic tissue of sterile hybrids and fertile parent; he would expect hybrid plant’s cell contents not to be coagulated after 24 hours in spirits of wine.

Suggests JS coat orchid stigmas with plaster of Paris for his work on rostellar germination.

Asks for list of "bud-variation" cases; CD has devoted a chapter to the subject.

Inquiries about I. Anderson-Henry’s observational competence.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
John Scott
Date:
16 Feb [1863]
Source of text:
DAR 93: B55, B81–2
Summary:

Tells JS Acropera capsule should be left to grow.

JS was correct on "bud-variation" in fern frond.

Does not believe Primula structure necessarily related to dioecism, but the difference in fertility of the two forms forced him to admit the possibility.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
thumbnail