Chapter 1.15). It is very probable that the urinary bladder of the

Dipneusts is the first structure of the allantois. We find in these a

urinary bladder that proceeds from the lower wall of the hind end of

the gut, and serves as receptacle for the renal secretions. This organ

has been transmitted to the Amphibia, as we can see in the frog.

The formation of the amnion and the allantois and the complete

disappearance of the gills are the chief characteristics that

distinguish the Amniotes from the lower Vertebrates we have hitherto

considered. To these we may add several subordinate features that are

transmitted to all the Amniotes, and are found in these only. One

striking embryonic character of the Amniotes is the great curve of the

head and neck in the embryo. We also find an advance in the structure

of several of the internal organs of the Amniotes which raises them

above the highest of the anamnia. In particular, a partition is formed

in the simple ventricle of the heart, dividing into right and left

chambers. In connection with the complete metamorphosis of the

gill-arches we find a further development of the auscultory organs.

Also, there is a great advance in the structure of the brain,

skeleton, muscular system, and other parts. Finally, one of the most

important changes is the reconstruction of the kidneys. In all the

earlier Vertebrates we have found the primitive kidneys as excretory

organs, and these appear at an early stage in the embryos of all the

higher Vertebrates up to man. But in the Amniotes these primitive

kidneys cease to act at an early stage of embryonic life, and their

function is taken up by the permanent or secondary kidneys, which

develop from the terminal section of the prorenal ducts.

(FIGURE 2.264. The lizard (Hatteria punctata = Sphenodon punctatus) of

New Zealand. The sole surviving proreptile. (From Brehm.))

Taking all these peculiarities of the Amniotes together, it is

impossible to doubt that all the animals of this group--all reptiles,

birds, and mammals--have a common origin, and form a single

blood-related stem. Our own race belongs to this stem. Man is, in

every feature of his organisation and embryonic development, a true

Amniote, and has descended from the Protamniote with all the other

Amniotes. Though they appeared at the end (possibly even in the

middle) of the Paleozoic age, the Amniotes only reached their full

development during the Mesozoic age. The birds and mammals made their

first appearance during this period. Even the reptiles show their

greatest growth at this time, so that it is called "the reptile age."

The extinct Protamniote, the ancestor of the whole group, belongs in

its whole organisation to the reptile class.

The genealogical tree of the amniote group is clearly indicated in its

chief lines by their paleontology, comparative anatomy, and ontogeny.

The group succeeding the Protamniote divided into two branches. The

branch that will claim our whole interest is the class of the Mammals.

The other branch, which developed in a totally different direction,

and only comes in contact with the Mammals at its root, is the

combined group of the reptiles and birds; these two classes may, with

Huxley, be conveniently grouped together as the Sauropsida. Their

common stem-form is an extinct lizard-like reptile of the order of the

Rhyncocephalia. From this have been developed in various directions

the serpents, crocodiles, tortoises, etc.--in a word, all the members

of the reptile class. But the remarkable class of the birds has also

been evolved directly from a branch of the reptile group, as is now

established beyond question. The embryos of the reptiles and birds are

identical until a very late stage, and have an astonishing resemblance

even later. Their whole structure agrees so much that no anatomist now

questions the descent of the birds from the reptiles. On the other

hand, the mammal line has descended from the group of the

Sauromammalia, a different branch of the Proreptilia. It is connected

at its deepest roots with the reptile line, but it then diverges

completely from it and follows a distinctive development. Man is the

highest outcome of this class, the "crown of creation." The hypothesis

that the three higher Vertebrate classes represent a single

Amniote-stem, and that the common root of this stem is to be found in

the amphibian class, is now generally admitted.

(FIGURE 2.265. Homoeosaurus pulchellus, a Jurassic proreptile from

Kehlheim. (From Zittel.))

The instructive group of the Permian Tocosauria, the common root from

which the divergent stems of the Sauropsids and mammals have issued,

merits our particular attention as the stem-group of all the Amniotes.

Fortunately a living representative of this extinct ancestral group

has been preserved to our day; this is the remarkable lizard of New

Zealand, Hatteria punctata (Figure 2.264). Externally it differs

little from the ordinary lizard; but in many important points of

internal structure, especially in the primitive construction of the

vertebral column, the skull, and the limbs, it occupies a much lower

position, and approaches its amphibian ancestors, the Stegocephala.

Hence Hatteria is the phylogenetically oldest of all living reptiles,

an isolated survivor from the Permian period, closely resembling the

common ancestor of the Amniotes. It must differ so little from this

extinct form, our hypothetical Protamniote, that we put it next to the

Proreptilia. The remarkable Permian Palaehatteria, that Credner

discovered in the Plauen terrain at Dresden in 1888, belongs to the

same group (Figure 2.266). The Jurassic genus Homoeosaurus (Figure

2.265), of which well-preserved skeletons are found in the Solenhofen

schists, is perhaps still more closely related to them.

Unfortunately, the numerous fossil remains of Permian and Triassic

Tocosauria that we have found in the last two decades are, for the

most part, very imperfectly preserved. Very often we can make only

precarious inferences from these skeletal fragments as to the anatomic

characters of the soft parts that went with the bony skeleton of the

extinct Tocosauria. Hence it has not yet been possible to arrange

these important fossils with any confidence in the ancestral series

that descend from the Protamniotes to the Sauropsids on the one side

and the Mammals on the other. Opinions are particularly divided as to

the place in classification and the phylogenetic significance of the

remarkable Theromorpha. Cope gives this name to a very interesting and

extensive group of extinct terrestrial reptiles, of which we have only

fossil remains from the Permian and Triassic strata. Forty years ago

some of these Therosauria (fresh-water animals) were described by Owen

as Anomodontia. But during the last twenty years the distinguished

American paleontologists, Cope and Osborn, have greatly increased our

knowledge of them, and have claimed that the stem-forms of the Mammals

must be sought in this order. As a matter of fact, the Theromorpha are

nearer to the Mammals in the chief points of structure than any other

reptiles. This is especially true of the Thereodontia, to which the

Pureosauria and Pelycosauria belong (Figure 2.267). The whole

structure of their pelvis and hind-feet has attained the same form as

in the Monotremes, the lowest Mammals. The formation of the scapula

and the quadrate bone shows an approach to the Mammals such as we find

in no other group of reptiles. The teeth also are already divided into

incisors, canines, and molars. Nevertheless, it is very doubtful

whether the Theromorpha really are in the ancestral line of the

Sauromammals, or lead direct from the Tocosauria to the earliest

Mammals. Other experts on this group believe that it is an independent

legion of the reptiles, connected, perhaps, at its lowest root, with

the Sauromammals, but developed quite independently of the

Mammals--though parallel to them in many ways.

One of the most important of the zoological facts that we rely on in

our investigation of the genealogy of the human race is the position

of man in the Mammal class. However different the views of zoologists

may have been as to this position in detail, and as to his relations

to the apes, no scientist has ever doubted that man is a true mammal

in his whole organisation and development. Linne drew attention to

this fact in the first edition of his famous Systema Naturae (1735).

As will be seen in any museum of anatomy or any manual of comparative

anatomy; the human frame has all the characteristics that are common

to the Mammals and distinguish them conspicuously from all other

animals.

(FIGURE 2.266. Skull of a Permian lizard (Palaehatteria longicaudata).

(From Credner.) n nasal bone, pf frontal bone, l lachrymal bone, po

postorbital bone, sq covering bone, i cheek-bone, vo vomer, im

inter-maxillary.)

If we examine this undoubted fact from the point of view of phylogeny,

in the light of the theory of descent, it follows at once that man is

of a common stem with all the other Mammals, and comes from the same

root as they. But the various features in which the Mammals agree and

by which they are distinguished are of such a character as to make a

polyphyletic hypothesis quite inadmissible. It is impossible to

entertain the idea that all the living and extinct Mammals come from a

number of separate roots. If we accept the general theory of

evolution, we are bound to admit the monophyletic hypothesis of the

descent of all the Mammals (including man) from a single mammalian

stem-form. We may call this long-extinct root-form and its earliest

descendants (a few genera of one family) "primitive mammals" or

"stem-mammals" (Promammalia). As we have already seen, this root-form

developed from the primitive Proreptile stem in a totally different

direction from the birds, and soon separated from the main stem of the

reptiles. The differences between the Mammals and the reptiles and

birds are so important and characteristic that we can assume with

complete confidence this division of the vertebrate stem at the

commencement of the development of the Amniotes. The reptiles and

birds, which we group together as the Sauropsids, generally agree in

the characteristic structure of the skull and brain, and this is

notably different from that of the Mammals. In most of the reptiles

and birds the skull is connected with the first cervical vertebra (the

atlas) by a single, and in the Mammals (and Amphibia) by a double,

condyle at the back of the head. In the former the lower jaw is

composed of several pieces, and connected with the skull so that it

can move by a special maxillary bone (the quadratum); in the Mammals

the lower jaw consists of one pair of bony pieces, which articulate

directly with the temporal bone. Further, in the Sauropsids the skin

is clothed with scales or feathers; in the Mammals with hair. The red

blood-cells of the former have a nucleus; those of the latter have

not. In fine, two quite characteristic features of the Mammals, which

distinguish them not only from the birds and reptiles, but from all

other animals, are the possession of a complete diaphragm and of

mammary glands that produce the milk for the nutrition of the young.

It is only in the Mammals that the diaphragm forms a transverse

partition of the body-cavity, completely separating the pectoral from

the abdominal cavity. It is only in the mammals that the mother

suckles its young, and this rightly gives the name to the whole class

(mamma = breast).

(FIGURE 2.267. Skull of a Triassic theromorphum (Galesaurus

planiceps), from the Karoo formation in South Africa. (From Owen.) a

from the right, b from below, c from above, d tricuspid tooth. N

nostrils, NA nasal bone, Mx upper jaw, Prf prefrontal, Fr frontal

bone, A eye-pits, S temple-pits. Pa Parietal eye, Bo joint at back of

head, Pt pterygoid-bone, Md lower jaw.)

From these pregnant facts of comparative anatomy and ontogeny it

follows absolutely that the whole of the Mammals belong to a single

natural stem, which branched off at an early date from the

reptile-root. It follows further with the same absolute certainty that

the human race is also a branch of this stem. Man shares all the

characteristics I have described with all the Mammals, and differs in

them from all other animals. Finally, from these facts we deduce with

the same confidence those advances in the vertebrate organisation by

which one branch of the Sauromammals was converted into the stem-form

of the Mammals. Of these advances the chief were: (1) The

characteristic modification of the skull and the brain; (2) the

development of a hairy coat; (3) the complete formation of the

diaphragm; and (4) the construction of the mammary glands and

adaptation to suckling. Other important changes of structure proceeded

step by step with these.

The epoch at which these important advances were made, and the

foundation of the Mammal class was laid, may be put with great

probability in the first section of the Mesozoic or secondary age--the

Triassic period. The oldest fossil remains of mammals that we know

were found in strata that belong to the earliest Triassic period--the

upper Kueper. One of the earliest forms is the genus Dromatherium,

from the North American Triassic (Figure 2.268). Their teeth still

strikingly recall those of the Pelycosauria. Hence we may assume that

this small and probably insectivorous mammal belonged to the

stem-group of the Promammals. We do not find any positive trace of the

third and most advanced division of the Mammals--the Placentals. These

(including man) are much younger, and we do not find indisputable

fossil remains of them until the Cenozoic age, or the Tertiary period.

This paleontological fact is very important, because it fully

harmonises with the evolutionary succession of the Mammal orders that

is deduced from their comparative anatomy and ontogeny.

The latter science teaches us that the whole Mammal class divides into

three main groups or sub-classes, which correspond to three successive

phylogenetic stages. These three stages, which also represent three

important stages in our human genealogy, were first distinguished in

1816 by the eminent French zoologist, Blainville, and received the

names of Ornithodelphia, Didelphia, and Monodelphia, according to the

construction of the female organs (delphys = uterus or womb). Huxley

afterwards gave them the names of Prototheria, Metatheria, and

Epitheria. But the three sub-classes differ so widely from each other,

not only in the construction of the sexual organs, but in many other

respects also, that we may confidently draw up the following important

phylogenetic thesis: The Monodelphia or Placentals descend from the

Didelphia or Marsupials; and the latter, in turn, are descended from

the Monotremes or Ornithodelphia.

Thus we must regard as the twenty-first stage in our genealogical tree

the earliest and lowest chief group of the Mammals--the sub-class of

the Monotremes ("cloaca-animals," Ornithodelphia, or Prototheria,

Figures 2.269 and 2.270). They take their name from the cloaca which

they share with all the lower Vertebrates. This cloaca is the common

outlet for the passage of the excrements, the urine, and the sexual

products. The urinary ducts and sexual canals open into the hindmost

part of the gut, while in all the other Mammals they are separated

from the rectum and anus. The latter have a special uro-genital outlet

(porus urogenitalis). The bladder also opens into the cloaca in the

Monotremes, and, indeed, apart from the two urinary ducts; in all the

other Mammals the latter open directly into the bladder. It was proved

by Haacke and Caldwell in 1884 that the Monotremes lay large eggs like

the reptiles, while all the other Mammals are viviparous. In 1894

Richard Semon further proved that these large eggs, rich in food-yelk,

have a partial segmentation and discoid gastrulation, as I had

hypothetically assumed in 1879; here again they resemble their

reptilian ancestors. The construction of the mammary gland is also

peculiar in the Monotremes. In them the glands have no teats for the

young animal to suck, but there is a special part of the breast

pierced with holes like a sieve, from which the milk issues, and the

young Monotreme must lick it off. Further, the brain of the Monotremes

is very little advanced. It is feebler than that of any of the other

Mammals. The fore-brain or cerebrum, in particular, is so small that

it does not cover the cerebellum. In the skeleton (Figure 2.270) the

formation of the scapula among other parts is curious; it is quite

different from that of the other Mammals, and rather agrees with that

of the reptiles and Amphibia. Like these, the Monotremes have a

strongly developed caracoideum. From these and other less prominent

characteristics it follows absolutely that the Monotremes occupy the

lowest place among the Mammals, and represent a transitional group

between the Tocosauria and the rest of the Mammals. All these

remarkable reptilian characters must have been possessed by the

stem-form of the whole mammal class, the Promammal of the Triassic

period, and have been inherited from the Proreptiles.

(FIGURE 2.268. Lower jaw of a Primitive Mammal or Promammal

(Dromatherium silvestre) from the North American Triassic. i incisors,

c canine, p premolars, m molars. (From Doderlein.))

During the Triassic and Jurassic periods the sub-class of the

Monotremes was represented by a number of different stem-mammals.

Numerous fossil remains of them have lately been discovered in the

Mesozoic strata of Europe, Africa, and America. To-day there are only

two surviving specimens of the group, which we place together in the

family of the duck-bills, Ornithostoma. They are confined to Australia

and the neighbouring island of Van Diemen's Land (or Tasmania); they

become scarcer every year, and will soon, like their blood-relatives,

be counted among the extinct animals. One form lives in the rivers,

and builds subterraneous dwellings on the banks; this is the

Ornithorhyncus paradoxus, with webbed feet, a thick soft fur, and

broad flat jaws, which look very much like the bill of a duck (Figures

2.269 and 2.270). The other form, the land duck-bill, or spiny

ant-eater (Echidna hystrix), is very much like the anteaters in its

habits and the peculiar construction of its thin snout and very long

tongue; it is covered with needles, and can roll itself up like a

hedgehog. A cognate form (Parechidna Bruyni) has lately been found in

New Guinea.

These modern Ornithostoma are the scattered survivors of the vast

Mesozoic group of Monotremes; hence they have the same interest in

connection with the stem history of the Mammals as the living

stem-reptiles (Hatteria) for that of the reptiles, and the isolated

Acrania (Amphioxus) for the phylogeny of the Vertebrate stem.

The Australian duck-bills are distinguished externally by a toothless

bird-like beak or snout. This absence of real bony teeth is a late

result of adaptation, as in the toothless Placentals (Edentata,

armadillos and ant-eaters). The extinct Monotremes, to which the

Promammalia belonged, must have had developed teeth, inherited from

the reptiles. Lately small rudiments of real molars have been

discovered in the young of the Ornithorhyncus, which has horny plates

in the jaws instead of real teeth.

(FIGURE 2.269. The Ornithorhyncus or Duck-mole. (Ornithorhyncus

paradoxus).

FIGURE 2.270. Skeleton of the Ornithorhyncus.)

The living Ornithostoma and the stem-forms of the Marsupials (or

Didelphia) must be regarded as two widely diverging lines from the

Promammals. This second sub-class of the Mammals is very interesting

as a perfect intermediate stage between the other two. While the

Marsupials retain a great part of the characteristics of the

Monotremes, they have also acquired some of the chief features of the

Placentals. Some features are also peculiar to the Marsupials, such as

the construction of the male and female sexual organs and the form of

the lower jaw. The Marsupials are distinguished by a peculiar

hook-like bony process that bends from the corner of the lower jaw and

points inwards. As most of the Placentals have not this process, we

can, with some probability, recognise the Marsupial from this feature

alone. Most of the mammal remains that we have from the Jurassic and

Cretaceous deposits are merely lower jaws, and most of the jaws found

in the Jurassic deposits at Stonesfield and Purbeck have the peculiar

hook-like process that characterises the lower jaw of the Marsupial.

On the strength of this paleontological fact, we may suppose that they

belonged to Marsupials. Placentals do not seem to have existed at the

middle of the Mesozoic age--not until towards its close (in the

Cretaceous period). At all events, we have no fossil remains of

indubitable Placentals from that period.

The existing Marsupials, of which the plant-eating kangaroo and the

carnivorous opossum (Figure 2.272) are the best known, differ a good

deal in structure, shape, and size, and correspond in many respects to

the various orders of Placentals. Most of them live in Australia, and

a small part of the Australian and East Malayan islands. There is now

not a single living Marsupial on the mainland of Europe, Asia, or

Africa. It was very different during the Mesozoic and even during the

Cenozoic age. The sedimentary deposits of these periods contain a

great number and variety of marsupial remains, sometimes of a colossal

size, in various parts of the earth, and even in Europe. We may infer

from this that the existing Marsupials are the remnant of an extensive

earlier group that was distributed all over the earth. It had to give

way in the struggle for life to the more powerful Placentals during

the Tertiary period. The survivors of the group were able to keep

alive in Australia and South America because the one was completely

separated from the other parts of the earth during the whole of the

Tertiary period, and the other during the greater part of it.

(FIGURE 2.271. Lower jaw of a Promammal (Dryolestes priscus), from the

Jurassic of the Felsen strata. (From Marsh.))

From the comparative anatomy and ontogeny of the existing Marsupials

we may draw very interesting conclusions as to their intermediate

position between the earlier Monotremes and the later Placentals. The

defective development of the brain (especially the cerebrum), the

possession of marsupial bones, and the simple construction of the

allantois (without any placenta as yet) were inherited by the

Marsupials, with many other features, from the Monotremes, and

preserved. On the other hand, they have lost the independent bone

(caracoideum) at the shoulder-blade. But we have a more important

advance in the disappearance of the cloaca; the rectum and anus are

separated by a partition from the uro-genital opening (sinus

urogenitalis). Moreover, all the Marsupials have teats on the mammary

glands, at which the new-born animal sucks. The teats pass into the

cavity of a pouch or pocket on the ventral side of the mother, and

this is supported by a couple of marsupial bones. The young are born

in a very imperfect condition, and carried by the mother for some time

longer in her pouch, until they are fully developed (Figure 2.272). In

the giant kangaroo, which is as tall as a man, the embryo only

develops for a month in the uterus, is then born in a very imperfect

state, and finishes its growth in the mother's pouch (marsupium); it

remains in this about nine months, and at first hangs continually on

to the teat of the mammary gland.

(FIGURE 2.272. The crab-eating Opossum (Philander cancrivorus). The

female has three young in the pouch. (From Brehm.)

From these and other characteristics (especially the peculiar

construction of the internal and external sexual organs in male and

female) it is clear that we must conceive the whole sub-class of the

Marsupials as one stem group, which has been developed from the

Promammalia. From one branch of these Marsupials (possibly from more

than one) the stem-forms of the higher Mammals, the Placentals, were

afterwards evolved. Of the existing forms of the Marsupials, which

have undergone various modifications through adaptation to different

environments, the family of the opossums (Didelphida or Pedimana)

seems to be the oldest and nearest to the common stem-form of the

whole class. To this family belong the crab-eating opossum of Brazil

(Figure 2.272) and the opossum of Virginia, on the embryology of which

Selenka has given us a valuable work (cf. Figures 1.63 to 1.67 and

1.131 to 1.135). These Didelphida climb trees like the apes, grasping

the branches with their hand-shaped hind feet. We may conclude from

this that the stem-forms of the Primates, which we must regard as the

earliest Lemurs, were evolved directly from the opossum. We must not

forget, however, that the conversion of the five-toed foot into a

prehensile hand is polyphyletic. By the same adaptation to climbing

trees the habit of grasping their branches with the feet has in many

different cases brought about that opposition of the thumb or great

toe to the other toes which makes the hand prehensile. We see this in

the climbing lizards (chameleon), the birds, and the tree-dwelling

mammals of various orders.

Some zoologists have lately advanced the opposite opinion, that the

Marsupials represent a completely independent sub-class of the

Mammals, with no direct relation to the Placentals, and developing

independently of them from the Monotremes. But this opinion is

untenable if we examine carefully the whole organisation of the three

sub-classes, and do not lay the chief stress on incidental features

and secondary adaptations (such as the formation of the marsupium). It

is then clear that the Marsupials--viviparous Mammals without

placenta--are a necessary transition from the oviparous Monotremes to

the higher Placentals with chorion-villi. In this sense the Marsupial

class certainly contains some of man's ancestors.

The Evolution of Man — Volume 2 · 第 23 / 32 章