Introduction

Abstract

A great deal of work has been done since Ewart despaired of the fragmentary nature of our knowledge on matters of seed viability and our lack of understanding of the causes of loss of viability; yet, although it was written at the turn of the century, one could be forgiven if it were thought that this is a contemporary quotation: there are still contradictions, errors, and differences of opinion, and the subject is still incomplete and fragmentary. But progress has been made : more fragments exist and some of them begin to tell a story. The main purpose of this book is to pick out the more significant of these and attempt to interpret them; and it is the main task of this chapter to survey the relevance of viability studies and to act as a guide to the book as a whole.

‘Probably few sections of human knowledge contain a larger percentage of contradictory, incorrect and misleading observations than prevail in the works dealing with this subject, and, although such fables as the supposed germination of mummy wheat have long since been exploded, equally erroneous records are still current in botanical physiology. In addition there are considerable differences of opinion as to the causes which determine the longevity of seeds in the soil or air. The works of Candolle, Duvel and Becquerel are the most accurate and comprehensive dealing with the question, and, in addition, Vilmorin has published very useful data in regard to the seeds of culinary vegetables. The subject is still, however, in an incomplete and fragmentary condition,’ — Alfred J. Ewart (1908). On the longevity of Seeds. Proc. Roy. Soc. Victoria, 21 (1), 1–210.