the stigma so well as I did in withdrawing them. As the margins of the cleft rostellum must be upturned before the discs adhere to a cylindrical body, during its withdrawal, the pollen-masses become affixed some little way from its base. The two discs did not always adhere at exactly opposite points. Now, when a moth with the pollinia adhering to the base of its proboscis, inserts it for a second time into the nectary, and exerts all its force so as to push down the rostellum as far as possible, the pollen-masses will generally rest on and adhere to the narrow, ledge-like stigma which projects beneath the rostellum. By acting in this manner with the pollinia attached to a cylindrical object, the pollen-masses were twice torn off and left glued to the stigmatic surface.
If the Angræcum in its native forests secretes more nectar than did the vigorous plants sent me by Mr. Bateman, so that the nectary ever becomes filled, small moths might obtain their share, but they would not benefit the plant. The pollinia would not be withdrawn until some huge moth, with a wonderfully long proboscis, tried to drain the last drop.[1] If such great moths were to become extinct in Madagascar, assuredly the Angræcum would become extinct. On the other hand, as the nectar, at least in the lower part of the nectary, is stored safe from the depredation of other insects, the extinction of the Angræcum would probably be a serious loss to these moths. We can thus understand how the astonishing length of the
- ↑ Mr. Belt suggests ('The Naturalist in Nicaragua,' 1874, p. 133) that the great length of the nectary of this plant serves to prevent other moths which are not well-adapted for the fertilisation of the flowers from sucking the nectar, and that its development can thus be accounted for. I have no doubt of the truth of this principle, but it is hardly applicable here, as the moth has to be compelled to drive its proboscis as deeply down as possible into the flower.
