tion after generation under different environments when the lines of descent are kept pure. A marked illustration of this is afforded by Mr. Evans’s studies on pure lines of Stellaria reported at this meeting. The segregation of such characters in hybridization would be exceedingly difficult to recognize if it did occur. Again the occurrence of such small mutants, if we may so designate them, within a breed under selection, if not recognized and isolated, would be crossed with fluctuations and cause variations which would be recognized as regressions in the highly selected strain.
I think it will have become clear from the above discussion that in the present state of our knowledge of selection we can only advocate that practical breeders continue their selections as in the past. This is particularly true in the cases where it is the idea to maintain the race or breed at its highest efficiency. In the case of plant breeders working to produce new races, the mutation theory introduces a new element and leads the breeder to search for a mutant possessing desirable characters which he can isolate and which he may expect will reproduce its characters as soon as he has purified the type from mixtures derived through hybridization with other types. He will select the type to purify it rather than to augment its good qualities.
Returning again to the question of new characters, we may profitably question more definitely where such new characters come from, if they are not produced by selection. Clearly, no problem is of more importance to the breeder than to be able to definitely produce or cause such new characters to appear. If the breeder must await the pleasure of nature to secure the changes he desires, the waiting may be long and tedious. If he must watch thousands of plants of a certain race or species every year in order to find the apparently accidental variation or mutation in the direction of the improvement he has in mind which may rarely or never be found, the process will be so hazardous that we should have to await the accidental discovery of any new characters. Indeed, up to the present time we have had practically no other recourse than to await the accidental discovery of such new characters. We, however, have had many theorists and investigators who believed that changed environment would stimulate the production of variations in the direction of better fitting the organism to its environment. Lamarck and his followers have strongly maintained this hypothesis and many scientists even to-day believe in the effectiveness of environment in developing adaptive changes. Breeders have carried this principle so far as frequently to advocate the growing of plants in the environment most likely to produce the change desired, as, for instance, cultivating tall plants like twining beans in the north or at high altitudes if it is desired to produce a dwarf type or, vice versa, breeding the plants in the south and at a low altitude if a giant or tall type is desired. Weismann and his school of followers have apparently exploded this idea by demonstrating that characters acquired as a result of changed environment are merely physiological changes and are not inherited. The question, however, is by no means settled and we must await further evidence.
Knight believed that increased food supply caused an increase in the range of variation and that it was important for breeders to manure their plants heavily. De Vries, on the contrary, would have us believe that such variations are fluctuations and non-heritable. The studies of Weisse, Reinhold, MacLeod, Tammes and Love have given us many instances where
