"The action of carbonate of ammonia on chlorophyll-bodies" Journal of the Linnean Society of London (Botany) (read 6 March 1882) volume 19, pages 262-284, at page 262 http://darwin-online.org.uk/content/frameset?pageseq=1&itemID=F1801&viewtype=text
Detractors sometimes claim Darwin thought that the cell was an undifferentiated mass of protoplasm. Anyone reading this paper will realize that Darwin thought no such thing.
Other letters, notebooks, journal articles, recollected statements
“… cell of a tentacle, showing the various forms successively assumed by the aggregated masses of protoplasm.”
Detractors sometimes claim Darwin thought that the cell was an undifferentiated mass of protoplasm. Anyone reading the passage above will realize that Darwin thought no such thing.
Source: Insectivorous Plants (1875), chapter III: "Aggregation of the Protoplasm within the Cells of the Tentacles", page 40 http://darwin-online.org.uk/content/frameset?pageseq=55&itemID=F1217&viewtype=image
Help us to complete the source, original and additional information
Charles Darwin 161
British naturalist, author of "On the origin of species, by… 1809–1882Related quotes
Microcosmos: Four Billion Years of Evolution from Our Microbial Ancestors (1986)
“Greatness of individuality is inversely proportional to the mass of the social aggregate.”
The Source and Aim of Human Progress (1919)
Quarterly Review, 156, 1883, p. 570
1880s
volume II, chapter XXVII: "Provisional Hypothesis of Pangenesis", page 374 http://darwin-online.org.uk/content/frameset?pageseq=389&itemID=F877.2&viewtype=image
It is sometimes claimed that modern biologist are dogmatic "Darwinists" who uncritically accept all of Darwin's ideas. This is false: No one today accepts Darwin's hypothesis of gemmules and pangenesis.
The Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication (1868)
Red Giants and White Dwarfs : Man's Descent from the Stars (1971), p. 249.
The Temple of Nature (1802).