Abstract
THE article on my recent little book on “Mutations and Evolution” in NATURE of July 14, p. 636, shows such insight in the exposition of some of the views there set forth that it may seem ungrateful of me to venture to reply to anything the reviewer has written. Nevertheless, there is one important point in which I feel that my argument has been missed. My conceptions of the relation between recapitulatory and mutational characters are not easy to state clearly in a brief space, and I am willing to admit obscurity in certain passages, as evidenced by your reviewer's failure to grasp my meaning, but I am not willing to plead guilty to the more serious charge of obscurantism.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
GATES, R. Mutations and Evolution. Nature 107, 714–715 (1921). https://doi.org/10.1038/107714c0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/107714c0
This article is cited by
-
Mutation
Nature (1925)
-
The law of homologous series in variation
Journal of Genetics (1922)
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.
