Fertilisation of Viola tricolor and V. cornuta

Abstract

ALLOW me to thank Mr. Kitchener for his correction of my spelling. What I object to in the word “be-pollen” is the harsh combination of syllables, which I should have thought would be offensive to any ears, whether scientific or not. The word “pollen,” used as a verb, would be free from this fault, and would be objectionable chiefly from the possibility of confusion arising from the novelty of its use in this sense. Neither of these objections could apply to Mr. Kitchener's term “be-dust,” but why coin a new word when a simpler one exists ready-made? Does not the ordinary English verb “to dust” equally give the exact meaning of bestauben? I cannot, however, agree with Mr. Kitchener that it would be more expressive than “pollinate,” as, unlike the Germans, we do not habitually use the word “dust” as a synonym for “pollen.” I have no wish to dispute Mr. Bennett's conclusion that Viola tricolor is very commonly fertilised by “very minute insects of the Thrips kind,” but only to point out that in its whole structure the flower seems rather adapted for cross-impregnation by larger insects, and that at least some varieties are attractive to humble-bees. On this view, the opening between the two lower anthers, described by Mr. Kitchener, is necessary for the escape of the pollen, which falls, according to Hildebrand, without the help of insects, into the groove beneath, where it is held by the lining hairs until removed by insects. Besides humble-bees, I have seen the small cabbage butterfly (Pieris rapae) sucking the flowers of a cultivated pansy.