The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex Volume I Part 11

In the following chapters, I shall treat of the secondary s.e.xual characters in animals of all cla.s.ses, and shall endeavour in each case to apply the principles explained in the present chapter. The lowest cla.s.ses will detain us for a very short time, but the higher animals, especially birds, must be treated at considerable length. It should be borne in mind that for reasons already a.s.signed, I intend to give only a few ill.u.s.trative instances of the innumerable structures by the aid of which the male finds the female, or, when found, holds her. On the other hand, all structures and instincts by which the male conquers other males, and by which he allures or excites the female, will be fully discussed, as these are in many ways the most interesting.

_Supplement on the proportional numbers of the two s.e.xes in animals belonging to various cla.s.ses._

As no one, as far as I can discover, has paid attention to the relative numbers of the two s.e.xes throughout the animal kingdom, I will here give such materials as I have been able to collect, although they are extremely imperfect. They consist in only a few instances of actual enumeration, and the numbers are not very large. As the proportions are known with certainty on a large scale in the case of man alone, I will first give them, as a standard of comparison.

_Man._-In England during ten years (from 1857 to 1866) 707,120 children on an annual average have been born alive, in the proportion of 104.5 males to 100 females. But in 1857 the male births throughout England were as 105.2, and in 1865 as 104.0 to 100. Looking to separate districts, in Buckinghamshire (where on an average 5000 children are annually born) the _mean_ proportion of male to female births, during the whole period of the above ten years, was as 102.8 to 100; whilst in N. Wales (where the average annual births are 12,873) it was as high as 106.2 to 100. Taking a still smaller district, viz., Rutlandshire (where the annual births average only 739), in 1864 the male births were as 114.6, and in 1862 as 97.0 to 100; but even in this small district the average of the 7385 births during the whole ten years was as 104.5 to 100; that is in the same ratio as throughout England.[367] The proportions are sometimes slightly disturbed by unknown causes; thus Prof. Faye states "that in some districts of Norway there has been during a decennial period a steady deficiency of boys, whilst in others the opposite condition has existed." In France during forty-four years the male to the female births have been as 106.2 to 100; but during this period it has occurred five times in one department, and six times in another, that the female births have exceeded the males. In Russia the average proportion is as high as 108.9 to 100.[368] It is a singular fact that with Jews the proportion of male births is decidedly larger than with Christians: thus in Prussia the proportion is as 113, in Breslau as 114, and in Livonia as 120 to 100; the Christian births in these countries being the same as usual, for instance, in Livonia as 104 to 100.[369] It is a still more singular fact that in different nations, under different conditions and climates, in Naples, Prussia, Westphalia, France and England, the excess of male over female births is less when they are illegitimate than when legitimate.[370]

In various parts of Europe, according to Prof. Faye and other authors, "a still greater preponderance of males would be met with, if death struck both s.e.xes in equal proportion in the womb and during birth. But the fact is, that for every 100 still-born females, we have in several countries from 134.6 to 144.9 still-born males." Moreover during the first four or five years of life more male children die than females; "for example in England, during the first year, 126 boys die for every 100 girls,-a proportion which in France is still more unfavourable."[371] As a consequence of this excess in the death-rate of male children, and of the exposure of men when adult to various dangers, and of their tendency to emigrate, the females in all old-settled countries, where statistical records have been kept,[372] are found to preponderate considerably over the males.

It has often been supposed that the relative ages of the parents determine the s.e.x of the offspring; and Prof. Leuckart[373] has advanced what he considers sufficient evidence, with respect to man and certain domesticated animals, to shew that this is one important factor in the result. So again the period of impregnation has been thought to be the efficient cause; but recent observations discountenance this belief.

Again, with mankind polygamy has been supposed to lead to the birth of a greater proportion of female infants; but Dr. J. Campbell[374] carefully attended to this subject in the harems of Siam, and he concludes that the proportion of male to female births is the same as from monogamous unions. Hardly any animal has been rendered so highly polygamous as our English race-horses, and we shall immediately see that their male and female offspring are almost exactly equal in number.

_Horses._-Mr. Tegetmeier has been so kind as to tabulate for me from the 'Racing Calendar' the births of race-horses during a period of twenty-one years, viz. from 1846 to 1867; 1849 being omitted, as no returns were that year published. The total births have been 25,560,[375] consisting of 12,763 males and 12,797 females, or in the proportion of 99.7 males to 100 females. As these numbers are tolerably large, and as they are drawn from all parts of England, during several years, we may with much confidence conclude that with the domestic horse, or at least with the race-horse, the two s.e.xes are produced in almost equal numbers. The fluctuations in the proportions during successive years are closely like those which occur with mankind, when a small and thinly-populated area is considered: thus in 1856 the male horses were as 107.1, and in 1867 as only 92.6 to 100 females. In the tabulated returns the proportions vary in cycles, for the males exceeded the females during six successive years; and the females exceeded the males during two periods each of four years: this, however, may be accidental; at least I can detect nothing of the kind with man in the decennial table in the Registrar's Report for 1866. I may add that certain, mares, and this holds good with certain cows and with women, tend to produce more of one s.e.x than of the other; Mr. Wright of Yeldersley House, informs me that one of his Arab mares, though put seven times to different horses, produced seven fillies.

_Dogs._-During a period of twelve years, from 1857 to 1868, the births of a large number of greyhounds, throughout England, have been sent to the 'Field' newspaper; and I am again indebted to Mr. Tegetmeier for carefully tabulating the results. The recorded, births have been 6878, consisting of 3605 males and 3273 females, that is, in the proportion of 110.1 males to 100 females. The greatest fluctuations occurred in 1864, when the proportion was as 95.3 males, and in 1867, as 116.3 males to 100 females. The above average proportion of 110.1 to 100 is probably nearly correct in the case of the greyhound, but whether it would hold with other domesticated breeds is in some degree doubtful. Mr. Cupples has enquired from several great breeders of dogs, and finds that all without exception believe that females are produced in excess; he suggests that this belief may have arisen from females being less valued and the consequent disappointment producing a stronger impression on the mind.

_Sheep._-The s.e.xes of sheep are not ascertained by agriculturists until several months after birth, at the period when the males are castrated; so that the following returns do not give the proportions at birth. Moreover, I find that several great breeders in Scotland, who annually raise some thousand sheep, are firmly convinced that a larger proportion of males than of females die during the first one or two years; therefore the proportion of males would be somewhat greater at birth than at the age of castration. This is a remarkable coincidence with what occurs, as we have seen, with mankind, and both cases probably depend on some common cause. I have received returns from four gentlemen in England who have bred lowland sheep, chiefly Leicesters, during the last ten or sixteen years; they amount altogether to 8965 births, consisting of 4407 males and 4558 females; that is in the proportion of 96.7 males to 100 females. With respect to Cheviot and black-faced sheep bred in Scotland, I have received returns from six breeders, two of them on a large scale, chiefly for the years 1867-1869, but some of the returns extending back to 1862. The total number recorded amounts to 50,685, consisting of 25,071 males and 25,614 females, or in the proportion of 97.9 males to 100 females. If we take the English and Scotch returns together, the total number amounts to 59,650, consisting of 29,478 males and 30,172 females, or as 977 to 100. So that with sheep at the age of castration the females are certainly in excess of the males; but whether this would hold good at birth is doubtful, owing to the greater liability in the males to early death.[376]

Of _Cattle_ I have received returns from nine gentlemen of 982 births, too few to be trusted; these consisted of 477 bull-calves and 505 cow-calves; _i.e._ in the proportion of 944 males to 100 females. The Rev. W. D. Fox informs me that in 1867 out of 34 calves born on a farm in Derbyshire only one was a bull. Mr. Harrison Weir writes to me that he has enquired from several breeders of _Pigs_, and most of them estimate the male to the female births as about 7 to 6. This same gentleman has bred _Rabbits_ for many years, and has noticed that a far greater number of bucks are produced than does.

Of mammalia in a state of nature I have been able to learn very little. In regard to the common rat, I have received conflicting statements. Mr. R. Elliot of Laighwood, informs me that a rat-catcher a.s.sured him that he had always found the males in great excess, even with the young in the nest. In consequence of this, Mr. Elliot himself subsequently examined some hundred old ones, and found the statement true. Mr. F.

Buckland has bred a large number of white rats, and he also believes that the males greatly exceed the females. In regard to Moles, it is said that "the males are much more numerous than the females;"[377] and as the catching of these animals is a special occupation, the statement may perhaps be trusted. Sir A. Smith, in describing an antelope of S. Africa[378] (_Kobus ellipsiprymnus_), remarks, that in the herds of this and other species, the males are few in number compared with the females: the natives believe that they are born in this proportion; others believe that the younger males are expelled from the herds, and Sir A. Smith says, that though he has himself never seen herds consisting of young males alone, others affirm that this does occur. It appears probable that the young males when expelled from the herd, would be likely to fell a prey to the many beasts of prey of the country.

BIRDS.

With respect to the _Fowl_, I have received only one account, namely, that out of 1001 chickens of a highly-bred stock of Cochins, reared during eight years by Mr. Stretch, 487 proved males and 514 females: _i.e._ as 94.7 to 100. In regard to domestic pigeons there is good evidence that the males are produced in excess, or that their lives are longer; for these birds invariably pair, and single males, as Mr. Tegetmeier informs me, can always be purchased cheaper than females.

Usually the two birds reared from the two eggs laid in the same nest consist of a male and female; but Mr. Harrison Weir, who has been so large a breeder, says that he has often bred two c.o.c.ks from the same nest, and seldom two hens; moreover the hen is generally the weaker of the two, and more liable to perish.

With respect to birds in a state of nature, Mr. Gould and others[379] are convinced that the males are generally the more numerous; and as the young males of many species resemble the females, the latter would naturally appear to be the most numerous. Large numbers of pheasants are reared by Mr. Baker of Leadenhall from eggs laid by wild birds, and he informs Mr.

Jenner Weir that four or five males to one female are generally produced. An experienced observer remarks[380] that in Scandinavia the broods of the capercailzie and black-c.o.c.k contain more males than females; and that with the Dal-ripa (a kind of ptarmigan) more males than females attend the _leks_ or places of courtship; but this latter circ.u.mstance is accounted for by some observers by a greater number of hen birds being killed by vermin. From various facts given by White of Selbourne,[381] it seems clear that the males of the partridge must be in considerable excess in the south of England; and I have been a.s.sured that this is the case in Scotland. Mr. Weir on enquiring from the dealers who receive at certain seasons large numbers of ruffs (_Machetes pugnax_) was told that the males are much the most numerous. This same naturalist has also enquired for me from the bird-catchers, who annually catch an astonishing number of various small species alive for the London market, and he was unhesitatingly answered by an old and trustworthy man, that with the chaffinch the males are in large excess; he thought as high as 2 males to 1 female, or at least as high as 5 to 3.[382] The males of the blackbird, he likewise maintained, were by far the most numerous, whether caught by traps or by netting at night. These statements may apparently be trusted, because the same man said that the s.e.xes are about equal with the lark, the twite (_Linaria montana_), and goldfinch. On the other hand he is certain that with the common linnet, the females preponderate greatly, but unequally during different years; during some years he has found the females to the males as four to one. It should, however, be borne in mind, that the chief season for catching birds does not begin till September, so that with some species partial migrations may have begun, and the flocks at this period often consist of hens alone. Mr. Salvin paid particular attention to the s.e.xes of the humming-birds in Central America, and he is convinced that with most of the species the males are in excess; thus one year he procured 204 specimens belonging to ten species, and these consisted of 166 males and of 38 females. With two other species the females were in excess: but the proportions apparently vary either during different seasons or in different localities; for on one occasion the males of _Campylopterus hemileucurus_ were to the females as five to two, and on another occasion[383] in exactly the reversed ratio. As bearing on this latter point, I may add, that Mr. Powys found in Corfu and Epirus the s.e.xes of the chaffinch keeping apart, and "the females by far the most numerous;" whilst in Palestine Mr.

Tristram found "the male flocks appearing greatly to exceed the female in number."[384] So again with the _Quiscalus major_, Mr. G. Taylor[385] says, that in Florida there were "very few females in proportion to the males," whilst in Honduras the proportion was the other way, the species there having the character of a polygamist.

FISH.

With Fish the proportional numbers of the s.e.xes can be ascertained only by catching them in the adult or nearly adult state; and there are many difficulties in arriving at any just conclusion.[386] Infertile females might readily be mistaken for males, as Dr. Gunther has remarked to me in regard to trout. With some species the males are believed to die soon after fertilising the ova. With many species the males are of much smaller size than the females, so that a large number of males would escape from the same net by which the females were caught. M. Carbonnier,[387] who has especially attended to the natural history of the pike (_Esox lucius_) states that many males, owing to their small size, are devoured by the larger females; and he believes that the males of almost all fish are exposed from the same cause to greater danger than the females.

Nevertheless in the few cases in which the proportional numbers have been actually observed, the males appear to be largely in excess. Thus Mr. R. Buist, the superintendent of the Stormontfield experiments, says that in 1865, out of 70 salmon first landed for the purpose of obtaining the ova, upwards of 60 were males. In 1867 he again "calls attention to the vast disproportion of the males to the females. We had at the outset at least ten males to one female." Afterwards sufficient females for obtaining ova were procured. He adds, "from the great proportion of the males, they are constantly fighting and tearing each other on the sp.a.w.ning-beds."[388] This disproportion, no doubt, can be accounted for in part, but whether wholly is very doubtful, by the males ascending the rivers before the females. Mr. F. Buckland remarks in regard to trout, that "it is a curious fact that the males preponderate very largely in number over the females. It _invariably_ happens that when the first rush of fish is made to the net, there will be at least seven or eight males to one female found captive. I cannot quite account for this; either the males are more numerous than the females, or the latter seek safety by concealment rather than flight." He then adds, that by carefully searching the banks, sufficient females for obtaining ova can be found.[389] Mr. H. Lee informs me that out of 212 trout, taken for this purpose in Lord Portsmouth's park, 150 were males and 62 females.

With the Cyprinidae the males likewise seem to be in excess; but several members of this Family, viz., the carp, tench, bream and minnow, appear regularly to follow the practice, rare in the animal kingdom, of polyandry; for the female whilst sp.a.w.ning is always attended by two males, one on each side, and in the case of the bream by three or four males. This fact is so well known, that it is always recommended to stock a pond with two male tenches to one female, or at least with three males to two females. With the minnow, an excellent observer states, that on the sp.a.w.ning-beds the males are ten times as numerous as the females; when a female comes amongst the males, "she is immediately pressed closely by a male on each side; and when they have been in that situation for a time, are superseded by other two males."[390]

INSECTS.

In this cla.s.s, the Lepidoptera alone afford the means of judging of the proportional numbers of the s.e.xes; for they have been collected with special care by many good observers, and have been largely bred from the egg or caterpillar state. I had hoped that some breeders of silk-moths might have kept an exact record, but after writing to France and Italy, and consulting various treatises, I cannot find that this has ever been done.

The general opinion appears to be that the s.e.xes are nearly equal, but in Italy as I hear from Professor Canestrini, many breeders are convinced that the females are produced in excess.

The same naturalist, however, informs me, that in the two yearly broods of the Ailanthus silk-moth (_Bombyx cynthia_), the males greatly preponderate in the first, whilst in the second the two s.e.xes are nearly equal, or the females rather in excess.

In regard to b.u.t.terflies in a state of nature, several observers have been much struck by the apparently enormous preponderance of the males.[391] Thus Mr. Bates,[392] in speaking of the species, no less than about a hundred in number, which inhabit the Upper Amazons, says that the males are much more numerous than the females, even in the proportion of a hundred to one. In North America, Edwards, who had great experience, estimates in the genus Papilio the males to the females as four to one; and Mr. Walsh, who informed me of this statement, says that with _P. turnus_ this is certainly the case. In South Africa, Mr. R. Trimen found the males in excess in 19 species;[393] and in one of these, which swarms in open places, he estimated the number of males as fifty to one female. With another species, in which the males are numerous in certain localities, he collected during seven years only five females. In the island of Bourbon, M. Maillard states that the males of one species of Papilio are twenty times as numerous as the females.[394] Mr. Trimen informs me that as far as he has himself seen, or heard from others, it is rare for the females of any b.u.t.terfly to exceed in number the males; but this is perhaps the case with three South African species. Mr.

Wallace[395] states that the females of _Ornithoptera crsus_, in the Malay archipelago, are more common and more easily caught than the males; but this is a rare b.u.t.terfly. I may here add, that in Hyperythra, a genus of moths, Guenee says, that from four to five females are sent in collections from India for one male.

When this subject of the proportional numbers of the s.e.xes of insects was brought before the Entomological Society,[396] it was generally admitted that the males of most Lepidoptera, in the adult or imago state, are caught in greater numbers than the females; but this fact was attributed by various observers to the more retiring habits of the females, and to the males emerging earlier from the coc.o.o.n. This latter circ.u.mstance is well known to occur with most Lepidoptera, as well as with other insects. So that, as M. Personnat remarks, the males of the domesticated _Bombyx yamamai_, are lost at the beginning of the season, and the females at the end, from the want of mates.[397] I cannot however persuade myself that these causes suffice to explain the great excess of males in the cases, above given, of b.u.t.terflies which are extremely common in their native countries. Mr. Stainton, who has paid such close attention during many years to the smaller moths, informs me that when he collected them in the imago state, he thought that the males were ten times as numerous as the females, but that since he has reared them on a large scale from the caterpillar state, he is convinced that the females are the most numerous.

Several entomologists concur in this view. Mr. Doubleday, however, and some others, take an opposite view, and are convinced that they have reared from the egg and caterpillar states a larger proportion of males than of females.

Besides the more active habits of the males, their earlier emergence from the coc.o.o.n, and their frequenting in some cases more open stations, other causes may be a.s.signed for an apparent or real difference in the proportional numbers of the s.e.xes of Lepidoptera, when captured in the imago state, and when reared from the egg or caterpillar state. It is believed by many breeders in Italy, as I hear from Professor Canestrini, that the female caterpillar of the silk-moth suffers more from the recent disease than the male; and Dr. Staudinger informs me that in rearing Lepidoptera more females die in the coc.o.o.n than males. With many species the female caterpillar is larger than the male, and a collector would naturally choose the finest specimens, and thus unintentionally collect a larger number of females. Three collectors have told me that this was their practice; but Dr. Wallace is sure that most collectors take all the specimens which they can find of the rarer kinds, which alone are worth the trouble of rearing. Birds when surrounded by caterpillars would probably devour the largest; and Professor Canestrini informs me that in Italy some breeders believe, though on insufficient evidence, that in the first brood of the Ailanthus silk-moth, the wasps destroy a larger number of the female than of the male caterpillars. Dr. Wallace further remarks that female caterpillars, from being larger than the males, require more time for their development and consume more food and moisture; and thus they would be exposed during a longer time to danger from ichneumons, birds, &c., and in times of scarcity would perish in greater numbers. Hence it appears quite possible that, in a state of nature, fewer female Lepidoptera may reach maturity than males; and for our special object we are concerned with the numbers at maturity, when the s.e.xes are ready to propagate their kind.

The manner in which the males of certain moths congregate in extraordinary numbers round a single female, apparently indicates a great excess of males, though this fact may perhaps be accounted for by the earlier emergence of the males from their coc.o.o.ns. Mr. Stainton informs me that from twelve to twenty males may often be seen congregated round a female _Elachista rufocinerea_. It is well known that if a virgin _Lasiocampa quercus_ or _Saturnia carpini_ be exposed in a cage, vast numbers of males collect round her, and if confined in a room will even come down the chimney to her. Mr.

Doubleday believes that he has seen from fifty to a hundred males of both these species attracted in the course of a single day by a female under confinement. Mr. Trimen exposed in the Isle of Wight a box in which a female of the Lasiocampa had been confined on the previous day, and five males soon endeavoured to gain admittance. M. Verreaux, in Australia, having placed the female of a small Bombyx in a box in his pocket, was followed by a crowd of males, so that about 200 entered the house with him.[398]

Mr. Doubleday has called my attention to Dr. Staudinger's[399]

list of Lepidoptera, which gives the prices of the males and females of 300 species or well-marked varieties of (Rhopalocera) b.u.t.terflies. The prices for both s.e.xes of the very common species are of course the same; but with 114 of the rarer species they differ; the males being in all cases, excepting one, the cheapest. On an average of the prices of the 113 species, the price of the male to that of the female is as 100 to 149; and this apparently indicates that inversely the males exceed the females in number in the same proportion.

About 2000 species or varieties of moths (Heterocera) are catalogued, those with wingless females being here excluded on account of the difference in habits of the two s.e.xes: of these 2000 species, 141 differ in price according to s.e.x, the males of 130 being cheaper, and the males of only 11 being dearer than the females. The average price of the males of the 130 species, to that of the females, is as 100 to 143. With respect to the b.u.t.terflies in this priced list, Mr. Doubleday thinks (and no man in England has had more experience), that there is nothing in the habits of the species which can account for the difference in the prices of the two s.e.xes, and that it can be accounted for only by an excess in the numbers of the males.

But I am bound to add that Dr. Staudinger himself, as he informs me, is of a different opinion. He thinks that the less active habits of the females and the earlier emergence of the males will account for his collectors securing a larger number of males than of females, and consequently for the lower prices of the former With respect to specimens reared from the caterpillar-state, Dr. Staudinger believes, as previously stated, that a greater number of females than of males die under confinement in the coc.o.o.ns. He adds that with certain species one s.e.x seems to preponderate over the other during certain years.

Of direct observations on the s.e.xes of Lepidoptera, reared either from eggs or caterpillars, I have received only the few following cases:-

------------------------------------------------------------------- Males. | Females.

The Rev. J. h.e.l.lins[400] of Exeter reared, during | 1868, imagos of 73 species, which consisted of 153 | 137 | Mr. Albert Jones of Eltham reared, during 1868, | imagos of 9 species, which, consisted of 159 | 126 | During 1869 he reared imagos from 4 species, | consisting of 114 | 112 | Mr. Buckler of Emsworth, Hants, during 1869, | reared imagos from 74 species, consisting of 180 | 169 | Dr. Wallace of Colchester reared from one brood | of Bombyx cynthia 52 | 48 | Dr. Wallace raised, from coc.o.o.ns of Bombyx | Pernyi sent from China, during 1869 224 | 123 | Dr. Wallace raised, during 1868 and 1869, | from two lots of coc.o.o.ns of Bombyx yamamai 52 | 46 -------+------ Total 934 | 761 ---------------------------------------------------------+---------

So that in these eight lots of coc.o.o.ns and eggs, males were produced in excess. Taken together the proportion of males is as 122.7 to 100 females. But the numbers are hardly large enough to be trustworthy.

On the whole, from the above various sources of evidence, all pointing to the same direction, I infer that with most species of Lepidoptera, the males in the imago state generally exceed the females in number, whatever the proportions may be at their first emergence from the egg.

With reference to the other Orders of insects, I have been able to collect very little reliable information. With the stag-beetle (_Luca.n.u.s cervus_) "the males appear to be much more numerous than the females;" but when, as Cornelius remarked during 1867, an unusual number of these beetles appeared in one part of Germany, the females appeared to exceed the males as six so one. With one of the Elateridae, the males are said to be much more numerous than the females, and "two or three are often found united with one female;"[401] so that here polyandry seems to prevail. With Siagonium (Staphylinidae), in which the males are furnished with horns, "the females are far more numerous than the opposite s.e.x." Mr. Janson stated at the Entomological Society that the females of the bark-feeding _Tomicus villosus_ are so common as to be a plague, whilst the males are so rare as to be hardly known. In other Orders, from unknown causes, but apparently in some instances owing to parthenogenesis, the males of certain species have never been discovered or are excessively rare, as with several of the Cynipidae.[402] In all the gall-making Cynipidae known to Mr.

Walsh, the females are four or five times as numerous as the males; and so it is, as he informs me, with the gall-making Cecidomyiiae (Diptera). With some common species of Saw-flies (Tenthredinae) Mr. F. Smith has reared hundreds of specimens from larvae of all sizes, but has never reared a single male: on the other hand Curtis says,[403] that with certain species (Athalia), bred by him, the males to the females were as six to one; whilst exactly the reverse occurred with the mature insects of the same species caught in the fields. With the Neuroptera, Mr. Walsh states that in many, but by no means in all, the species of the Odonatous groups (Ephemerina), there is a great overplus of males: in the genus Hetaerina, also, the males are generally at least four times as numerous as the females. In certain species in the genus Gomphus the males are equally numerous, whilst in two other species, the females are twice or thrice as numerous as the males. In some European species of Psocus thousands of females may be collected without a single male, whilst with other species of the same genus both s.e.xes are common.[404] In England, Mr. MacLachlan has captured hundreds of the female _Apatania muliebris_, but has never seen the male; and of _Boreus hyemalis_ only four or five males have been here seen.[405] With most of these species (excepting, as I have heard, with the Tenthredinae) there is no reason to suppose that the females are subject to parthenogenesis; and thus we see how ignorant we are on the causes of the apparent discrepancy in the proportional numbers of the two s.e.xes.

In the other Cla.s.ses of the Articulata I have been able to collect still less information. With Spiders, Mr. Blackwall, who has carefully attended to this cla.s.s during many years, writes to me that the males from their more erratic habits are more commonly seen, and therefore appear to be the more numerous. This is actually the case with a few species; but he mentions several species in six genera, in which the females appear to be much more numerous than the males.[406] The small size of the males in comparison with the females, which is sometimes carried to an extreme degree, and their widely different appearance, may account in some instances for their rarity in collections.[407]

Some of the lower Crustaceans are able to propagate their kind as.e.xually, and this will account for the extreme rarity of the males. With some other forms (as with Tanais and Cypris) there is reason to believe, as Fritz Muller informs me, that the male is much shorter-lived than the female, which, supposing the two s.e.xes to be at first equal in number, would explain the scarcity of the males. On the other hand this same naturalist has invariably taken, on the sh.o.r.es of Brazil, far more males than females of the Diastylidae and of Cypridina; thus with a species in the latter genus, 63 specimens caught the same day, included 57 males; but he suggests that this preponderance may be due to some unknown difference in the habits of the two s.e.xes. With one of the higher Brazilian crabs, namely a Gelasimus, Fritz Muller found the males to be more numerous than the females. The reverse seems to be the case, according to the large experience of Mr. C. Spence Bate, with six common British crabs, the names of which he has given me.

_On the Power of Natural Selection to regulate the proportional Numbers of the s.e.xes, and General Fertility._-In some peculiar cases, an excess in the number of one s.e.x over the other might be a great advantage to a species, as with the sterile females of social insects, or with those animals in which more than one male is requisite to fertilise the female, as with certain cirripedes and perhaps certain fishes. An inequality between the s.e.xes in these cases might have been acquired through natural selection, but from their rarity they need not here be further considered. In all ordinary cases an inequality would be no advantage or disadvantage to certain individuals more than to others; and therefore it could hardly have resulted from natural selection. We must attribute the inequality to the direct action of those unknown conditions, which with mankind lead to the males being born in a somewhat larger excess in certain countries than in others, or which cause the proportion between the s.e.xes to differ slightly in legitimate and illegitimate births.

Let us now take the case of a species producing from the unknown causes just alluded to, an excess of one s.e.x-we will say of males-these being superfluous and useless, or nearly useless. Could the s.e.xes be equalised through natural selection? We may feel sure, from all characters being variable, that certain pairs would produce a somewhat less excess of males over females than other pairs. The former, supposing the actual number of the offspring to remain constant, would necessarily produce more females, and would therefore be more productive. On the doctrine of chances a greater number of the offspring of the more productive pairs would survive; and these would inherit a tendency to procreate fewer males and more females. Thus a tendency towards the equalisation of the s.e.xes would be brought about. But our supposed species would by this process be rendered, as just remarked, more productive; and this would in many cases be far from an advantage; for whenever the limit to the numbers which exist, depends, not on destruction by enemies, but on the amount of food, increased fertility will lead to severer compet.i.tion and to most of the survivors being badly fed. In this case, if the s.e.xes were equalised by an increase in the number of the females, a simultaneous decrease in the total number of the offspring would be beneficial, or even necessary, for the existence of the species; and this, I believe, could be effected through natural selection in the manner hereafter to be described. The same train of reasoning is applicable in the above, as well as in the following case, if we a.s.sume that females instead of males are produced in excess, for such females from not uniting with males would be superfluous and useless. So it would be with polygamous species, if we a.s.sume the excess of females to be inordinately great.

An excess of either s.e.x, we will again say of the males, could, however, apparently be eliminated through natural selection in another and indirect manner, namely by an actual diminution of the males, without any increase of the females, and consequently without any increase in the productiveness of the species. From the variability of all characters, we may feel a.s.sured that some pairs, inhabiting any locality, would produce a rather smaller excess of superfluous males, but an equal number of productive females. When the offspring from the more and the less male-productive parents were all mingled together, none would have any direct advantage over the others; but those that produced few superfluous males would have one great indirect advantage, namely that their ova or embryos would probably be larger and finer, or their young better nurtured in the womb and afterwards. We see this principle ill.u.s.trated with plants; as those which bear a vast number of seed produce small ones; whilst those which bear comparatively few seeds, often produce large ones well-stocked with nutriment for the use of the seedlings.[408] Hence the offspring of the parents which had wasted least force in producing superfluous males would be the most likely to survive, and would inherit the same tendency not to produce superfluous males, whilst retaining their full fertility in the production of females. So it would be with the converse case of the female s.e.x. Any slight excess, however, of either s.e.x could hardly be checked in so indirect a manner. Nor indeed has a considerable inequality between the s.e.xes been always prevented, as we have seen in some of the cases given in the previous discussion. In these cases the unknown causes which determine the s.e.x of the embryo, and which under certain conditions lead to the production of one s.e.x in excess over the other, have not been mastered by the survival of those varieties which were subjected to the least waste of organised matter and force by the production of superfluous individuals of either s.e.x. Nevertheless we may conclude that natural selection will always tend, though sometimes inefficiently, to equalise the relative numbers of the two s.e.xes.

Having said this much on the equalisation of the s.e.xes, it may be well to add a few remarks on the regulation through natural selection of the ordinary fertility of species. Mr. Herbert Spencer has shewn in an able discussion[409] that with all organisms a ratio exists between what he calls individuation and genesis; whence it follows that beings which consume much matter or force in their growth, complicated structure or activity, or which produce ova and embryos of large size, or which expend much energy in nurturing their young, cannot be so productive as beings of an opposite nature. Mr. Spencer further shews that minor differences in fertility will be regulated through natural selection.

Thus the fertility of each species will tend to increase, from the more fertile pairs producing a larger number of offspring, and these from their mere number will have the best chance of surviving, and will transmit their tendency to greater fertility. The only check to a continued augmentation of fertility in each organism seems to be either the expenditure of more power and the greater risks run by the parents that produce a more numerous progeny, or the contingency of very numerous eggs and young being produced of smaller size, or less vigorous, or subsequently not so well nurtured. To strike a balance in any case between the disadvantages which follow from the production of a numerous progeny, and the advantages (such as the escape of at least some individuals from various dangers) is quite beyond our power of judgment.

When an organism has once been rendered extremely fertile, how its fertility can be reduced through natural selection is not so clear as how this capacity was first acquired. Yet it is obvious that if individuals of a species, from a decrease of their natural enemies, were habitually reared in larger numbers than could be supported, all the members would suffer. Nevertheless the offspring from the less fertile parents would have no direct advantage over the offspring from the more fertile parents, when all were mingled together in the same district.

All the individuals would mutually tend to starve each other. The offspring indeed of the less fertile parents would lie under one great disadvantage, for from the simple fact of being produced in smaller numbers, they would be the most liable to extermination. Indirectly, however, they would partake of one great advantage; for under the supposed condition of severe compet.i.tion, when all were pressed for food, it is extremely probable that those individuals which from some variation in their const.i.tution produced fewer eggs or young, would produce them of greater size or vigour; and the adults reared from such eggs or young would manifestly have the best chance of surviving, and would inherit a tendency towards lessened fertility. The parents, moreover, which had to nourish or provide for fewer offspring would themselves be exposed to a less severe strain in the struggle for existence, and would have a better chance of surviving. By these steps, and by no others as far as I can see, natural selection under the above conditions of severe compet.i.tion for food, would lead to the formation of a new race less fertile, but better adapted for survival, than the parent-race.