show this much intelligence, should persevere in visiting flower after flower of the above-named Orchids, and in keeping their proboscides in constant movement for some time within the nectaries, in the hope of obtaining nectar which is never present? This, as I have said, seems to me utterly incredible.
It has been shown how numerous and beautiful are the contrivances for the fertilisation of Orchids. We know that it is of the highest importance that the pollinia, when attached to the head or proboscis of an insect, should be fixed symmetrically, so as not to fall either sideways or backwards. We know that in the species as yet described the viscid matter of the disc sets hard in a few minutes when exposed to the air, so that it would be a great advantage to the plant if insects were delayed in sucking the nectar, time being thus allowed for the disc to become immovably affixed. It is manifest that insects must be delayed by having to bore through several points of the inner membrane of the nectary, and to suck the nectar from the intercellular spaces; and we can thus understand why the nectaries of the above-named species of Orchis do not contain free nectar, but secrete it internally between the two membranes.
The following singular relation supports this view in a striking manner. I have found free nectar within the nectaries of only five British species of Ophreæ, namely, in Gymnadenia conopsea and albida, in Habenaria bifolia and chlorantha, and in Peristylus (or Habenaria) viridis. The first four of these species have the viscid surfaces of the discs of their pollinia naked or not enclosed within pouches, and the viscid matter does not rapidly set hard when exposed to the air, as if it did, it would immediately have been rendered useless; and this shows that it must differ in chemical
