Rocky Mountain husbandman. [volume] (Diamond City, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1877-08-23
LIVE ST0 CK.
INFLUENCE OF PREVIOUS IMPREGNA:
Tr0N t# - t...

In my last paper l tried to show that the
facts, so far produced, could hardly be nc
ccpted as proving so important a point as
the influence of a previous impregnation on
a subsequent one. Still these facts have
been accepted as a sufficient demonstration
by most scientific men and breeders, and
they will probably continue to believe in
this influence, and will explain Its action by
one of the several theories which have been
mains for me to indicate the one which IS
mostin accordance with accepted pisysio-
logical principles.
It may be ven Here to call attention to
the tact that DIR. Ohapins and others have
given eases of this influence iii pigeons about
as satisfactory as any reported with animals,
and these added to those with poultry, NELL
toned iu the article bygM., on page 27O,
make q very respectable list or such cases,
which can no longer DC rejected by those
who accept similar ones with animals. Any
theory, then, to be perfectly acceptable in
the present state Of our knowledge, should
apply to birds as we'll q mammals, and
ElONka " III StASU CIS ~ IA
ut in a previous article, that the influences
of the two sexes on the offspring are. about
eql6a!.gaf 93E35 efU I&1G aVA0 &N
The first of these theories considers that
the influence is due to All effect on the moth
er, productivity tlfea' close attachment and
freely intercommunicating blood vessels"
between her and the embryo. This ny
pothesis il based upon supposed anatomi-
cal Arrangement which does not exist in re-
atty /. for there are no freely lntcrcommu-
nicatihgr blood vessels, between the mother
and embryo, the same blood does not circu-
late ihIattcm both, and the nutriment re-
ccivcd BY the latter as well. AS the etfete
produces B ivan on must pass across The walls
of capillaries iii the same manner as moist
tire is given of in our lungs, or the blood
~tlasnla passes through the capillary walls
to supply nutriment to our Tissues. .',<t..'o
Another idea is that it is due to the in
Auence OF the first embryo on ova then in
the process of development; but this GER
tainly is not applicable to birds, and, be-
sides, 1t is very difficult to see how the in
taielce nould operate NJ this way. 4a
Prot. Law has lately p%ropounded q theo-
ry, which he, clearly explains as follows:
"Itis a welllknowii pathological fact that
adjacent cells gtepd to engrattl their plastic
" formative powers upon each other. l
prick my skin with a needle. Immediately
the injured cells and nuclei undergo a rapid
increase in size and numbers, but the effect
does not end there those ADJACENT take on
Il similar action, and the extent Of the, result
ing inflammation is only limited by that OF
the. injury and the susceptibility OF the parts.
Again, in placing a slice OF epidcrmis Ia the
middle of II raw sore, we inoculate the cells
oftlic aa,djoininlgs gfrAninlafi o,ia and empower
them to develop epidermic structure. How
then, CAN We avoid tlie conclusion that the
impregnated oyam itipresses its W char
Acters ON the mass OF the decidua, and
throngh, this OF the maternal placenta. and
that this, In Its turn impresses Its characters
.onstl,e decidua and embryo Of the next suc-'
cecding conceptiony" IHercditary Entail
ments, pg l5.) This Isl In many respects a
very plausible, theory. and there are a hum
Der Of good arguments III favor Of it; but
we eau, hardly inragine such al influence to
exist without being constuf1t, In which case
it would certainly cause the female tolshaye
u very much greater Influence on the char
hcters ofsthu offspring than the cniale,s Again
it is not applicable to birds.
Mr.. narwll's theory is not open to these
objections, and is worthy of being studied
by every one interested in the subject. He
supposes every organism (%ahifial or plant)