Search: 1860-1869 in date 
Henslow, George in addressee 
Sorted by:

Showing 15 of 5 items

From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
George Henslow
Date:
[2–5 Nov 1865]
Source of text:
Journal of the Linnean Society ( Botany ) 9 (1867): 328 n.
Summary:

Reports the results of an experiment to compare the weight of seeds produced in plants of [Medicago sativa] by self-pollination and by insect pollination.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
George Henslow
Date:
16 Apr [1866]
Source of text:
Linnean Society of London, C451: Opuscula
Summary:

F. Hildebrand, in his recent article [Bot. Ztg. 10 (1866): 73–8], describes what GH showed CD about Indigofera’s irritability.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
George Henslow
Date:
[before 19 Apr 1866]
Source of text:
Journal of the Linnean Society ( Botany ) 9 (1867): 358
Summary:

Describes the pollination of broom by bees.

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
George Henslow
Date:
12 June [1866]
Source of text:
Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge (GEN/D/DARWIN (C)/9)
Summary:

Returns proofs of GH’s paper ["On hybridization among plants", Pop. Sci. Rev. 5 (1866): 304–13] with his criticisms. Prefers that GH not state that CD has read the proofs.

Does C. V. Naudin really say that ovules (not seed) of hybrid Luffa and Cucumis are imperfect?

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project
From:
Charles Robert Darwin
To:
George Henslow
Date:
15 [June 1866]
Source of text:
DAR Library: tipped into George Henslow’s copy of Variation
Summary:

CD believes most strongly in reversion. J. G. Kölreuter’s, K. F. v Gärtner’s, and some of Charles Naudin’s cases leave no doubt in his mind. Forgets whether Herbert gave cases but in conversation he certainly believed in it. Thinks Gärtner is right to say reversion occurs only rarely in plant hybrids which have not been cultivated. [See 5120.]

Variation

Contributor:
Darwin Correspondence Project