Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Sexual Dimorphism

Abstract

THE theory of sexual selection never pretended to explain unisexual inheritance. Its author started with a fact:—“Inasmuch as peculiarities often appear under domestication in one sex and become hereditarily attached to that sex, so no doubt it will be under nature” (“Origin of Species,” 6th ed. p. 69).1 Neither does the theory of natural selection pretend to explain ordinary, i.e. bisexual, inheritance. But Mr. Cunningham pretends that his theory does explain unisexual inheritance, and having in spite of the statement contained in the concluding sentence of the above letter—given very full consideration to his views, I have come to the opposite conclusion. I repeat that his theory does not explain unisexual inheritance.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

MELDOLA, R. Sexual Dimorphism. Nature 63, 299 (1901). https://doi.org/10.1038/063299c0

Download citation

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/063299c0

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing