FOOTNOTES

[171] [The slight variability in the colour of this pupa, opens up

the interesting question of the photographic sensitiveness of this

and other species, which is stated to cause them to assimilate in

colour to the surface on which the larva undergoes its final ecdysis.

Some experiments upon this subject have been recorded by Mr. T. W.

Wood, Proc. Ent. Soc. 1867, p. xcix, but the field is still almost

unexplored. R.M.]

[172] “Über den Einfluss der Isolirung auf die Artbildung.” Leipzig,

1872, p. 20.

[173] In some instances _Deilephila Lineata_ has also been seen by day

hovering over flowers.

[174] It is true that I only reared one brood, but from this fifty

specimens were obtained. It would be interesting to know whether this

variety of the caterpillar is distributed over the whole of Southern

Europe.

[175] In this sense Lubbock says:--“It is evident that creatures which,

like the majority of insects, live during the successive periods

of their existence in very different circumstances, may undergo

considerable changes in their larval organization in consequence of

forces acting on them while in that condition; not, indeed, without

affecting, _but certainly without affecting to any corresponding

extent_, their ultimate form.”--“Origin and Metamorphoses of Insects,”

London, 1874, p. 39.

[176] “Grundzüge der Zoologie,” 1875.

[177] [Lepidopterists are of course aware that even these distinctions

are not absolute, as no single character can be named which does not

also appear in certain moths. The definition in this case, as in that

of most other groups of animals and plants, is only a general one.

See, for instance, Westwood’s “Introduction to the Classification of

Insects,” vol. ii. pp. 330-332. Also some remarks by C. V. Riley in his

“Eighth Annual Report” on the insects of Missouri, 1876, p. 170. With

reference to the antennæ as a distinguishing character, see Mr. A. G.

Butler’s article in “Science for All,” 1880, part xxvii. p. 65. R.M.]

[178] The genus of _Morphinæ, Discophora_, possesses hairs very similar

to those of the genus _Cnethocampa_ belonging to the _Bombycidæ_.

[179] [The larvæ of genera 14, _Phyciodes_, and 35, _Crenis_, are

likewise spiny. See Edwards’ “Butt. of N. Amer.” vol. ii. for figures

of the caterpillar of _Phyc. Tharos_: for notes on the larvæ of

_Crenis Natalensis_ and _C. Boisduvali_ see a paper by W. D. Gooch,

“Entomologist,” vol. xiv. p. 36. The larvæ of genus 55, _Ageronia_, are

also spiny. (See Burmeister’s figure of _A. Arethusa_, “Lép. Rép. Arg.”

Pl. V. Fig. 4). The larvæ of genus 98, _Aganisthos_, also appear to be

somewhat spiny (see Burmeister’s figure of _A. Orion_, _loc. cit._ Pl.

V. Fig. 6), and this raises the question as to whether the genus is

correctly located in its present position. The larvæ of the following

genera figured in Moore’s “Lepidoptera of Ceylon,” parts i. and ii.,

are all spiny:--6, _Cirrochroa_ (Pl. XXXII.); 7, _Cynthia_ (Pl. XXVI.);

27, _Kallima_ (Pl. XIX.); and 74, _Parthenos_ (Pl. XXIV.). Many species

of caterpillars which are spiny when adult appear to be spineless,

or only slightly hairy when young. See Edwards’ figures of _Melitæa

Phaeton_, _Argynnis Diana_, and _Phyc. Tharos_ (_loc. cit._) and his

description of the larva of _Arg. Cybele_, “Canad. Entom.” vol. xii. p.

141. The spiny covering thus appears to be a character acquired at a

comparatively recent period in the phyletic development. R.M.]

[180] [The larvæ of the 110th genus, _Paphia_, Fabr. (_Anæa_, Hübn.)

are also smoothed-skinned. See Edwards’ figure (_loc. cit._ vol. i. Pl.

XLVI.) of _P. Glycerium_. Also C. V. Riley’s “Second Annual Report” on

the insects of Missouri, 1870, p. 125. Burmeister figures the larva of

a species of _Prepona_ (genus 99) which is smooth (_P. Demophon_, _loc.

cit._ Pl. V. Fig. 1). The horns on the head of _Apatura_, &c., may

possibly be a survival from a former spiny condition. R.M.]

[181] “Synopsis of the described Lepidoptera of North America.”

Washington, 1862.

[182] “Catalog der Lepidopteren des Europäischen Faunengebietes.”

Dresden, 1871.

[183] This group of moths (“Schwärmer”) is regarded as of very

different extents by systematists; when I here comprise under it only

the _Sphingidæ_ proper and the _Sesiidæ_, I by no means ignore the

grounds which favour a greater extension of the group; the latter is

not rigidly limited. [The affinities of the _Sesiidæ_ (_Ægeriidæ_) are

by no means clearly made out: it appears probable that they are not

related to the _Sphingidæ_. See note 160, p. 370. R.M.]

[184] [For Mr. A. G. Butler’s observations on the genus _Acronycta_,

see “Trans. Ent. Soc.” 1879, p. 313; and note 68, p. 169, of the present

volume. R.M.]

[185] [The following characters are given in Stainton’s “Manual of

British Butterflies and Moths,” vol. i. p. 114:--“Larva of very

variable form: at one extreme we find the singular _Cerura_ larvæ,

with only fourteen legs, and two long projecting tails from the last

segment; at the other extreme we have larvæ with sixteen legs and no

peculiarity of form, such as _Chaonia_ and _Bucephala_; most have,

however, the peculiarity of holding the hind segment of the body erect

when in repose; generally quite naked, though downy in _Bucephala_ and

rather hairy in _Curtulu_; very frequently there are projections on the

back of the twelfth segment.” R.M.]

[186] Encyl. Meth. ix. p. 310.

[187] [The genus _Vanessa_ (in the wide sense) appears to be in a

remarkable condition of what may be called phyletic preservation.

Thus, the group of species allied to _V. C.-album_ passes by almost

insensible steps into the group of butterflies typified by our

“Tortoiseshells.” The following is a list of some of the intermediate

species in their transitional order:--_I.-album_, _V.-album_, _Faunus_,

_Comma_, _California_, _Dryas_, _Polychloros_, _Xanthomelas_,

_Cashmirensis_, _Urticæ_, _Milberti_, &c. Similarly, our _Atalanta_

and _Cardui_ are connected by a number of intermediate forms, showing

a complete transition from the one to the other. The following is the

order of the species so far as I am acquainted with them:--_Atalanta_,

_Dejeanii_, _Callirhoë_, _Tammeamea_, _Myrinna_, _Huntera_,

_Terpsichore_, _Carye_, _Kershawii_, and _Cardui_. R.M.]

[188] “Prodromus Systematis Lepidopterorum.” Regensburg, 1864.

[189] [The larva of _Acherontia Morta_, figured by Butler (see note 121,

p. 262), possesses the characteristically recurved horn; that of _Ach.

Medusa_ figured by the same author, does not appear to possess this

character in any marked degree. R.M.]

[190] [See note 97, p. 233. R.M.]

[191] _Loc. cit._ Pl. XXV. [This species is referred by Butler to the

genus _Paonias_, Hübn. R.M.]

[192] Abbot and Smith, Pl. XXIX. [Placed by Butler in the genus

_Cressonia_, Grote and Robinson. Abbot and Smith state that this

larva is sometimes green. According to Mr. Herman Strecker (Lepidop.

Rhopal. and Hetero, Reading, Pa. 1874, p. 54) it feeds upon black

walnut (_Juglans Nigra_), hickory (_Carya Alba_), and ironwood

(_Ostrya Virginica_). Of the North American species of _Smerinthus_,

the following, in addition to _Excæcatus_, closely resemble our

_Ocellatus_:--_S. (Calasymbolus) Geminatus_, Say; _(C.) Cerisii_,

Kirby; and _Ophthalmicus_, Boisd. In addition to _S. (Cressonia)

Juglandis_, _S. (Triptogon) Modesta_ much resembles our _Populi_. The

larva of _Geminatus_, according to Strecker, is “pale green, lightest

above, with yellow lateral granulated stripes; caudal horn violet;

stigmata red. It feeds on the willow.” R.M.]

[193] Cat. Brit. Mus.

[194] [This lengthening of the true legs is mimetic according to

Hermann Müller, and causes the anterior portion of the caterpillar to

resemble a spider. See note 129, p. 290. R.M.]

[195] [Certain butterflies appear to be crepuscular, if not nocturnal

in their habits. Thus in his “Notes on the Lepidoptera of Natal,” Mr.

W. D. Gooch states that he never saw _Melanitis_, _Leda_, or _Gnophodes

Parmeno_ on the wing by day, but generally during the hour after

sunset. He adds:--“My sugar always attracted them freely, even up to

10 or 11 p.m.” Many species of _Hesperidæ_ are also stated to be of

crepuscular habits by this same observer. See “Entomologist,” vol xvi.

pp. 38 and 40. R.M.]

[196] I only make this assumption for the sake of simplicity, and not

because I am convinced that the existing _Rhopalocera_ are actually the

oldest Lepidopterous group.

[197] Zeitschrift für wissenschaftl. Zoologie, vol. xx. p. 519.

[198] [See for instance Lubbock’s “Origin and Metamorphoses of

Insects,” chap. iii.; and F. M. Balfour’s “Comparative Embryology,”

vol. i., 1880, pp. 327--356. This last work contains an admirable

_résumé_ of our knowledge of the embryonic development of insects up to

the date of publication. R.M.]

[199] Are not the 4th, 11th, and 12th segments destitute of the

rudiments of legs as in the larvæ of all existing saw-flies? I might

almost infer this from Bütschli’s figures (see for instance Pl. XXV.,

Fig. 17A).

[200] [The grub-formed Hymenopterous larvæ, like the larvæ of all

other holometabolous insects, thus represent an acquired degenerative

stage in the development, _i.e._ an adaptation to the conditions of

life at that stage. Bearing in mind the above-quoted observations of

Bütschli and the caterpillar-like form of the Terebrantiate group of

Hymenopterous larvæ, the following remarks of Balfour’s (_loc. cit._ p.

353), appear highly suggestive:--“While in a general way it is clear

that the larval forms of insects cannot be expected to throw much light

on the nature of insect ancestors, it does nevertheless appear to me

probable that such forms as the caterpillars of the Lepidoptera are not

without a meaning in this respect. It is easy to conceive that even a

secondary larval form may have been produced by the prolongation of one

of the embryonic stages; and the general similarity of a caterpillar to

_Peripatus_, and the retention by it of post-thoracic appendages, are

facts which appear to favour this view of the origin of the caterpillar

form.” See also Sir John Lubbock, _loc. cit._, pp. 93 and 95. R.M.]

[201] [In the most recent works dealing with this order six

groups, based on the character of the imagines are recognized,

viz.:--_Tubulifera_, _Terebrantia_, _Pupivora_, _Heterogyna Fossores_,

and _Mellifera_. (See, for instance, F. P. Pascoe’s “Zoological

Classification,” 2nd ed. p. 147.) Of these groups the larvæ of the

_Terebrantia_ as thus restricted are all of the caterpillar type

(_Tenthredinidæ_ and _Siricidæ_), whilst those of the other groups are

maggot-shaped. For a description of the development of the remarkable

aberrant larva of _Platygaster_, see Ganin in Zeit. f. wissenschaftl.

Zool., vol. xix. 1869. R.M.]

[202] [For recent investigations on the structure of the thorax in

Diptera, see a paper by Mr. A. Hammond, in Journ. Linn. Soc., Zoology,

vol xv. p. 9. R.M.]

[203] I am familiar with the fact that the two sub-orders of true

Diptera, the short-horned (_Brachycera_), and the long-horned

(_Nemocera_), are not sharply limited; and I am likewise well

acquainted with the circumstance that there are forms which connect the

two larval types. The connecting forms of the imagines do not, however,

always coincide with the intermediate larval forms, so that there

here arises a second and very striking incongruence of morphological

relationship which depends only upon the circumstance that the one

stage has diverged in form more widely than the other through a greater

divergence in the conditions of life. The difficulty is in these cases

aggravated because an apparent is added to the true form-relationship

through convergence, so that without going into exact details the form

and genealogical relationships of the Diptera cannot be distinguished.

It would be of great interest for other reasons to make this

investigation, and I hope to be able to find leisure for this purpose

at some future period.

[204] “Entwicklung der Dipteren.” Leipzig, 1864.

[205] Lubbock concludes from the presence of thoracic legs in the

embryonic larva of bees that these have been derived from a larva of

the _Campodea_ type, but he overlooks the fact that the rudiments of

the abdominal legs are also present; _loc. cit._, p. 28.

[206] “Für Darwin,” Leipzig, 1864, p. 8.

[207] Mem. Peabody Acad. of Science, vol. i. No. 3.

[208] Verhandl. Wien. Zoolog. Botan. Gesellsch. 1869, p. 310.

[209] Über Ontogenie und Phylogenie der Insekten. Eine akademische

Preisschrift. Jen. Zeitschrift. Bd. x. Neue Folge, iii. Heft 2. 1876.

[Some remarks by F. M. Balfour on the origin of certain larval forms

have already been quoted in a previous note (p. 485). This author

further states:--“The fact that in a majority of instances it is

possible to trace an intimate connection between the surroundings

of a larva and its organization proves in the clearest way _that

the characters of the majority of existing larval forms of insects

have owed their origin to secondary adaptations_. A few instances

will illustrate this point:--In the simplest types of metamorphosis,

_e.g._ those of the Orthoptera genuina, the larva has precisely the

same habits as the adult. We find that a caterpillar form is assumed

by phytophagous larvæ amongst the Lepidoptera, Hymenoptera, and

Coleoptera. Where the larva has not to go in search of its nutriment

the grub-like apodous form is assumed. The existence of such an apodous

larva is especially striking in the Hymenoptera, in that rudiments

of thoracic and abdominal appendages are present in the embryo and

disappear again in the larva.... It follows from the above that the

development of such forms as the Orthoptera genuina is more primitive

than that of the holometabolous forms, &c.” Comparative Embryology,

vol. 1, p. 352. R.M.]

[210] [The _Aphaniptera_ are now recognized in this country as

a sub-order of Diptera. See, for instance, Huxley’s “Anatomy

of Invertebrated Animals,” p. 425, and Pascoe’s “Zoological

Classification,” 2nd ed. p. 122. R.M.]

[211] [This illustration of course only applies to the old arrangement

of the Hymenoptera into _Terebrantia_ and _Aculeata_. See also note 201,

p. 488. R.M.]

[212] [Eng. ed. This law is perhaps a little too restricted, inasmuch

as it is theoretically conceivable that the organism may be able

to adapt itself to similar conditions of life in different ways;

differences of form could thus depend sometimes upon differences of

adaptation and not upon differences in the conditions of life, or, as

I have formerly expressed it, it is not necessary to allow always only

_one_ best mode of adaptation.]

[213] [It must be understood that the word rendered here and elsewhere

throughout this work as “transformation” is not to be taken in the

narrow sense of metamorphosis, but as having the much broader meaning

of a change of any kind incurred by an organism. Metamorphosis is in

fact but one phase of transformation. R.M.]

[214] By the Editor.

[215] Mr. C. V. Riley in his excellent “Annual Reports” already

quoted in previous notes, states that the larvæ of _Agrotis Inermis_,

_Leucania Unipuncta_ (Army-worm), and _L. Albilinea_ are all loopers

when newly hatched. (See First Report, p. 73; Eighth Report, p. 184;

and Ninth Report, p. 53.)

[216] The following species not referred to in the previous part of

this work are figured by Semper (Beit. zur Entwicklungsgeschichte

einiger ostasiat. Schmet.; Verhandl. d. k.k. zoo. bot. Gesell. in Wien,

1867):--_Panacra Scapularis_, Walk.; _Chærocampa Clotho_, Drury; and

_Diludia (Macrosila) Discistriga_, Walk. The following are figured by

Boisduval and Guenée. (Spéc. Gén. 1874):--_Smerinthus Ophthalmicus_,

Boisd.; _Sphinx Jasminearum_, Boisd.; _S. (Hyloicus) Plebeia_, Fabr.;

_S. (Hyloicus) Cupressi_, Boisd.; _S. (Pseudosphinx) Catalpæ_, Boisd.;

_Philampelus Jussiuæ_, Hübn. (= _Sphinx Vitis_, Linn.?); and _Ceratomia

Amyntor_, Hübn. As the works of Abbot and Smith, and Horsfield and

Moore have been exhausted by Dr. Weismann, it is quite unnecessary

to extend this note by giving a list of the species figured by these

authors.

[217] The same inference has already been drawn with respect to

_Pterogon (Proserpinus) Œnotheræ_, see pp. 257, 258.

[218] This would of course be the _fourth_ segment if the head be

considered the first, as on the Continent.

[219] “Second Annual Report,” 1870, p. 78.

[220] “Entomologist,” vol. xiv. p. 7.

[221] With reference to the habits of _C. Capensis_ (p. 531), I have

since been informed by Mr. Trimen that this species does not conceal

itself by day, so that the dimorphism may be regarded as a character

retained from an earlier period and adapted to the present life

conditions.

[222] “Kosmos,” Dec. 1877, p. 218. The paper is here introduced chiefly

with a view to illustrate an important case of incongruence among

Lepidopterous pupæ.

[223] [Maracujá, the local name for the Passiflora. R.M.]

[224] See p. 448.

[225] Verhandl. Schweiz. Naturforsch. Gesellschaft. Einsiedeln, 1868.

[226] [Eng. ed. In 1878 Señor José M. Velasco published a paper

entitled “Description, metamorfosis. y costumbres de una especie nueva

del genero _Siredon_.” Memor. Sociedad Mexicana de Historia Natural,

December 26th. See Addendum to this essay.]

[227] Dana and Silliman’s Amer. Journ., 3rd series, i. p. 89. Annals

Nat. Hist. vii. p. 246.

[228] Proc. Zoo. Soc. 1870, p. 160.

[229] Compt. Rend., vol. lx. p. 765 (1865).

[230] Nouvelles Archives du Muséum d’Histoire Nat. Paris, 1866, vol.

ii. p. 268.

[231] Proc. Boston Soc., vol. xii. p. 97; Silliman’s Amer. Journ., vol.

xlvi. p. 364; reference given in “Troschel’s Jahresbericht” for 1868,

p. 37.

[232] Proc. Boston Soc., vol. xii. p. 97; Silliman’s Amer. Journ., vol.

xlvi. p. 364. I have not been able to get a copy of this paper, and

quote from a reference in “Troschel’s Jahresbericht.” See preceding

note.

[233] Dana and Silliman’s Amer. Journ. See note 3.

[234] Proc. Acad. Philadelph. xix. 1867, pp. 166-209.

[235] Mém. Acad. Petersb. vol. xvi.

[236] [Eng. ed. Seidlitz is an exception, since in his work on

Parthenogenesis (Leipzig, 1872, p. 13) he states that “In the Axolotl,

Pædogenesis, which is not in this case ... monogamous, but sexual, and

indeed gynækogenetic, has already become so far constant that it has

perhaps entirely superseded the orthogenetic reproduction.”]

[237] Über den Einfluss der Isolirung auf die Artbildung. Leipzig,

1872, p. 33.

[238] Duméril represents the teeth of the _vomer_ as separated from

those of the _os palatinum_ by a gap. This is probably accidental,

since Gegenbaur (Friedrich u. Gegenbaur, the skull of Axolotl,

Würzburg, 1849) figures the rows of teeth as passing over from the one

bone to the other without interruption. This was the case with the

Axolotls which I have been able to examine on this point; but this

small discrepancy is, however, quite immaterial to the question here

under consideration.

[239] See O. Hertwig “Über das Zahnsystem der Amphibien und seine

Bedeutung für die Genese des Skelets der Mundhöhle.” Archiv. für

microsc. Anat., vol. xi. Supplement, 1874.

[240] [Eng. ed. These Amblystomas have since died and have been

minutely described by Dr. Wiedersheim. See his memoir, “Zur Anatomie

des _Amblystoma Weismanni_,” in Zeit. für wiss. Zool., vol. xxxii. p.

216.]

[241] See Strauch, _loc. cit._ p. 10.

[242] See Part I. of this volume.

[243] [This is the principle of “Degeneration” recognized by Darwin

(see “Origin of Species,” 6th ed. p. 389, and “Descent of Man,” vol.

i. p. 206), and given fuller expression to by Dr. Anton Dohrn (see

his work entitled “Der Ursprung der Wirbelthiere und das Princip des

Functionswechsels.” Leipzig, 1875). A large number of cases have been

brought together by Prof. E. R. Lankester, in his recent interesting

work on “Degeneration, a Chapter in Darwinism.” Nature series, 1880.

R.M.]

[244] “Sulla Larva del _Triton Alpestris_.” Archivio per la Zoologia.

Genova e Torino, 1861, vol. i. pp. 206-211.

[245] See also Lubbock “On the Origin and Metamorphoses of Insects,”

London, 1874.

[246] See the first essay “On the Seasonal Dimorphism of Butterflies,”

p. 82.

[247] [Eng. ed. It has frequently been objected to me that the existing

Axolotl is not a form resulting from atavism, but a case of “arrested

growth.” The expression “atavism” is certainly to be here taken in

a somewhat different sense than, for example, in the case of the

reversion of the existing Axolotl to the Amblystoma form. Further on, I

have myself insisted that in the first case the phyletic stage in which

the reversion occurred is still completely preserved in the ontogeny

of each individual, whilst the Amblystoma stage has become lost in the

ontogeny of the Axolotl. If, therefore, we apply the term “atavism”

only to such characters or stages (_i.e._ complexes of characters) as

are no longer preserved in the ontogeny, we cannot thus designate the

present arrest of the Axolotl at the perennibranchiate stage. Such a

restriction of the word, however, appears to me but little desirable,

since the process is identical in both cases, _i.e._ it depends upon

the same law of heredity, in accordance with which a condition formerly

occurring as a phyletic stage suddenly reappears through purely

internal processes. It is true that the reversion is not _complete_,

_i.e._ the present sexually mature Axolotl does not correspond in all

details with its perennibranchiate ancestors. Since Wiedersheim has

shown that the existing Axolotl possesses an intermaxillary gland, this

can be safely asserted. This gland occurs only in _land_ Amphibians,

and therefore originated with the Amblystoma form, afterwards becoming

transferred secondarily to the larval stage. Nevertheless, the present

Axolotl must resemble its perennibranchiate ancestors in most other

characters, and we should be the more entitled to speak of a reversion

to the perennibranchiate stage as we speak also of the reversion of

single characters. To this must be added that the Axolotl does not

correspond exactly with an Amblystoma larva, since Wiedersheim has

shown that the space for the intermaxillary gland is present, but that

the gland itself is confined to a few tubes which do not by any means

fill up this space. (“Das Kopfskelet der Urodelen.” Morph. Jahrbuch,

vol. iii. p. 149). By the expression “arrested growth” not much is

said, if at the same time the cause of the arrest is left unstated. But

what can be the cause why the whole organization remains stationary at

the perennibranchiate stage, the sexual organs only undergoing further

development? Surely only that law or force of heredity known by its

effects, but obscure with respect to its causes, through which old

phyletic stages sometimes suddenly reappear, or in other words, that

power through which reversion takes place. It must not be forgotten

that all these cases of “larval reproduction” in Amphibians appear

suddenly. The present sexually mature form of the Axolotl has not

arisen by the sexual maturity gradually receding in the ontogeny from

generation to generation, but by the occurrence of single individuals

which were sexually mature in the perennibranchiate stage, these having

the advantage over the _Amblystomæ_ in the struggle for existence under

changed climatic conditions.

By admitting a reversion, we perfectly well explain why arrest at the

perennibranchiate stage can be associated with complete development of

the sexual organs; the assumption of an “arrested growth” leaves this

combination of characters completely unexplained. Moreover, I am of

opinion that the expressions “arrested growth” or “reversion” are of

but little importance so long as the matter itself is clear.]

[248] See Haeckel’s “Anthropogenie,” p. 449.

[249] “Der Ursprung der Wirbelthiere und das Princip des

Functionswechsels,” Leipzig, 1875.

[250] Bull. Soc. Neuchâtel. vol. viii. p. 192. Reference given in

“Troschel’s Jahresbericht” for 1869.

[251] Sitzungsberichte d. math. phys. Klasse der Akad. d. Wiss. zu

München, 1875. Heft i.

[252] Compt. Rend. vol. lxviii. pp. 938 and 939.

[253] Archiv f. Naturgeschichte, 1867.

[254] Compt. Rend. vol. v. 1870, p. 70.

[255] Bull. Soc. Neuchâtel. vol. viii. p. 192. Reference given in

“Troschel’s Jahresbericht” for 1869.

[256] [Eng. ed. It was mentioned in the German edition of this work

that in the spring of 1876 a female Amblystoma of the Jardin des

Plantes in Paris had laid eggs (see Blanchard in the Compt. Rend. 1876,

No. 13, p. 716). Whether these eggs were fertile, or whether they

developed was not then made known. Thus much was however at the time

clear, that even if this had been the case, the reproduction of this

Amblystoma would have been only an _exceptional_ occurrence. At that

time there were in the Jardin des Plantes Amblystomas which had been

kept for more than ten years, and only on one occasion was there a

deposition of eggs, and this by only one specimen. That I was correct

in speaking of the “sterility” of these Amblystomas in spite of this

one exception, is proved by the latest communication from the Jardin

des Plantes. We learn from this (Compt. Rend. No. 14, July, 1879, p.

108) that in the years 1877 and 1878 none of the Amblystomas laid any

more eggs, although all means were exerted to bring about propagation.

In April, 1879, eggs were again laid by one female, and by a second in

May. These eggs certainly developed, as did those of 1876, and produced

tadpoles. These Amblystomas are therefore not absolutely, but indeed

relatively sterile. Whilst the Axolotl propagates regularly and freely

every year, this occurs with the Amblystoma but rarely and sparsely.

The degree of their sterility can only be approximately established

when we know the number of Amblystomas that have since been kept in the

Jardin des Plantes. Unfortunately nothing has been said with respect to

this.]

[257] Origin of Species, 6th ed. p. 252.

[258] In plants also reversion forms show sterility in different

degrees. Mr. Darwin has called my attention to the fact that the

peloric (symmetrical) flowers which occasionally appear as atavistic

forms in _Corydalis solida_ are partly sterile and partly fertile.

That in other causes of sterility, and above all by bastardizing, the

reproductive power is lost in the most varying degrees, has been known

since the celebrated observations of Kölreuter and Gärtner. [Eng.

ed. An Orchid (_Catasetum tridentatum_) has the sexes separate, and

the male flowers (_Myanthus barbatus_) differ considerably from the

female (_Monachanthus viridis_); besides these, there occurs a form

with bisexual flowers which must be considered as a reversion (_Cat.

tridentatum_) and _this is always sterile_. Darwin, “Fertilization of

Orchids,” 2nd ed. p. 199.]

[259] As we do not know the origin of the “Paris Axolotl” I must

restrict myself in the following remarks to _Siredon Mexicanus_ (Shaw).

[260] Mühlenpfordt, “Versuch einer getreuen Schilderung der Republik

Mejico,” Hanover, 1844, vol. ii. p. 252.

[261] [The specific gravity of sea water (Atlantic), according to the

determinations of Mr. Buchanan on board the “Challenger,” at 15.56°

C. varies from 1.0278 to 1.0240. That of the water of the Dead Sea is

1.17205.--Watts’ “Dict. of Chemistry,” vol. v., table, p. 1017. R.M.]

[262] _Loc. cit._ p. 252.

[263] “Über die specifische Verschiedenheit des gefleckten und des

schwarzen Erdsalamanders oder Molchs, und der höchst merkwürdigen, ganz

eigenthümlichen Fortpflanzungsweise des Letzteren.” Isis, Jahrg. 1833,

p. 527.

[264] The experiments referred to have not been made known; I am

indebted for them to a written communication kindly furnished by an

esteemed colleague.

[265] See Mühlenpfordt’s work already quoted, vol. i.

[266] In the province of botany such a case has already been made

known by Fritz Müller (Botan. Zeitung, 1869, p. 226; 1870, p. 149). I

may be here permitted to quote a passage from the letter in which Dr.

Müller calls attention to this interesting discovery. “As a proof of

the possibility that a reversion form can again become a persistent

character in a species or in the allied form of a particular district,

I may refer you to an _Epidendrum_ of the island of Santa Catharina.

In all Orchids (with the exception of _Cypripedium_) only one anther

is developed; in very rare cases well-formed anthers appear as

reversions among the aborted lateral anthers of the inner whorl. In the

_Epidendrum_ mentioned, these are however _always present_.”

[267] [This species is interesting as being ovoviviparous, the young

passing through the branchiate stage within the body of the mother.

Some experiments, which were partially successful, were made by

Fräulein v. Chauvin with a view to solve the question whether the

branchiate stage could be prolonged by taking the larvæ directly from

the mother before birth and keeping them in water. See “Zeit. für

wissen. Zoo.” vol. xxix., p. 324. R.M.]

[268] See Fatiot, “Les Reptiles et les Batraciens de la haute

Engadine.” Geneva, 1873.

[269] I can remember at Upper Engadine a peculiar kind of preserved

beef, prepared by simply drying in the air; also the mummification of

entire human bodies by drying in the open air, as is practised at Great

St. Bernard.

[270] “Faune des Vertébrés de la Suisse,” vol. iii. “Histoire Naturelle

des Reptiles et des Batraciens.” Geneva, 1873.

[271] See Wiedersheim, “Versuch einer gleichenden Anatomie der

Salamandrinen.” Würzburg, 1875.

[272] See Gené, “Memorie della Reale Acad. di Torino,” vol. i.

[273] _Rana esculenta_ never reaches Alpine regions, this species not

having been found higher than 1100 meters. (Fatiot, _loc. cit._, p.

318.)

[274] See also the excellent work upon Mexico by Mühlenpfordt already

quoted, vol. i., pp. 69-76.

[275] “Essai politique sur le Royaume de la Nouvelle Espagne,” 1805, p.

291.

[276] [The expression made use of by the author, viz. “Diluvialzeit,”

would perhaps be more in harmony with the views of English geologists

if rendered as the “pluvial period,” thereby indicating the period of

excessive rainfall which, according to Mr. Alfred Tylor, succeeded

to and was a consequence of the thawing of the great glaciers which

accumulated during the last glacial epoch. There is abundant evidence

to show that during the latter period glacial action extended in North

America at least as far south as Nicaragua. See Belt on “The Glacial

Period in North America,” Trans. Nova Scotian Inst. of Nat. Sci. 1866,

p. 93, and “The Naturalist in Nicaragua,” pp. 259-265. R.M.]

[277] [Eng. ed. A memoir by Samuel Clarke has since been published upon

the embryonic development of _Amblystoma punctatum_, Baird. Baltimore,

1879.]

[278] [Eng. ed. See this author’s work, “Das Kopfskelet der Urodelen.”

Leipzig, 1877, p. 149.]

[279] [See preceding note 52. R.M.]

[280] See note 226, p. 566.

[281] [Prof. Semper also remarks (“Animal Life,” note 47, p. 430) with

reference to the Axolotl of Lake Como in the Rocky Mountains, which he

states always becomes transformed into _Amblystoma Mavortium_, that

this metamorphosis “takes place in the water, and the Amblystomas, so

long as they are little, actually live exclusively in the water, as I

know by my own experience. A young Amblystoma which I kept alive for a

long time, never went out of the water of its own free will, while one

nearly twice as large lives entirely on land and only takes a bath now

and then. It always goes into the water when the temperature of the

air in the cellar, in which my aquaria stand, falls below that of the

water--down to about 6° or 8° C.” This statement appears to suggest

that the effect of temperature may be a factor in some way concerned

in these interesting cases of transformation, and would in any case

be well worthy of experimental investigation. Some further details

concerning the _Siredon Lichenoides_ of Lake Como have been recently

published by Mr. W. E. Carlin (Proc. U.S. National Museum, June, 1881).

The lake, which is shallow, is fed by a constant stream of fresh water,

but the water of the lake is intensely saline. The Siredon never enter

the fresh water stream, but congregate in large numbers in the alkaline

waters of the lake. “When about one hundred and fifty were placed

in fresh water they seemed to suffer no inconvenience, but it had a

remarkable effect in hastening their metamorphosis into the Amblystoma

form. Of an equal number kept in fresh water and in the lake water,

quite a change occurred with the former after twenty-four hours, while

the latter showed no change after several days of captivity. Those that

were kept well fed in jars usually began to show a slight change in

from two to three weeks, and all of them completed the change into the

Amblystoma inside of six weeks, while in some kept, but not specially

fed, there were but three changes in three months.” (Nature, Aug. 25th,

1881, p. 388.) R.M.]

[282] [Some experiments on the transformation of the Crustacean

_Artemia Salina_ into _A. Milhausenii_ by gradually increasing the

saltness of the water, and conversely, the transformation of _A.

Milhausenii_ into _A. Salina_ by diminishing the saltness of the water,

have been made by Schmankewitsch (Zeitschrift f. wiss. Zool. xxv.

Suppl. 103 and xxix. 429), but the changes which occur here are much

less considerable than in the case of the Axolotl. R.M.]

[283] “Reden und kleinere Aufsätze, Th. II.: Studien aus dem Gebiete

der Naturwissenschaften.” St. Petersburg, 1876, p. 81.

[284] This obviously does not imply that the naturalist should not

investigate Nature’s processes, and not only correlate these, but also

work them up into a universal conception; this is indeed both desirable

and necessary if natural knowledge is to be regarded in its true value.

The naturalist by this means becomes a philosopher, and the vitality

of the so-called “natural philosopher” has been inspired, not by the

necessity for investigation, but by philosophy proper.

[285] [The discovery here referred to is the synthesis of urea by

Wöhler in 1828 (Pogg. Ann. xii., 253; xv. 619), by the molecular

transformation of ammonium cyanate. Since that period large numbers

of organic syntheses have been effected by chemists, and many of the

compounds formerly supposed to be essential products of life have been

built up in the laboratory from their inorganic elements. The division

of chemistry into “organic” and “inorganic” is thus purely artificial,

and is merely retained as a matter of convenience, the former division

of the science being defined as the chemistry of the carbon compounds.

R.M.]

[286] “Wahreit und Irrthum im Darwinismus.” Berlin, 1875.

[287] [Eng. ed. I have been reproached by competent authorities for

having clothed my ideas upon the theory of selection in the form of

a reply to Von Hartmann. I willingly admit that this author cannot

be considered as the leader of existing philosophical views upon the

theory of descent in Germany; Frederick Albert Lange has certainly a

much greater claim to this position. Lange does not however combat

this theory; he accepts and develops it most beautifully and lucidly

on a sound philosophical basis in such a manner as has never been

done before from this point of view (“Geschichte des Materialismus,”

3rd. ed., 1877, vol. ii. pp. 253-277). On most points I can but agree

with Lange. Von Hartmann, however, whose objections appeared to me to

be supported by a wide scientific knowledge, afforded me a suitable

opportunity of developing my own ideas upon some essential points

in the theory of selection. In this sense only have I attempted to

interfere with this author, the refutation of his views, as such,

having been with me a secondary consideration.] [The chief exponent

of the doctrine of organic evolution in this country is Mr. Herbert

Spencer, in whose “Principles of Biology,” vol. i. chap. xii., will be

found a masterly treatment of the theory of descent from a “mechanical”

point of view. R.M.]

[288] [The above views on the nature of variability, which were also

broadly expressed in the first essay “On the Seasonal Dimorphism of

Butterflies” (pp. 114, 115), are fully confirmed by Herbert Spencer

(_loc. cit._ chaps. ix. and x.), and more recently by A. R. Wallace in

an article on “The Origin of Species and Genera” (_Nineteenth Century_,

vol. vii., 1880, p. 93). See also some remarks by Oscar Schmidt in his

“Doctrine of Descent and Darwinism,” Internat. Scien. Ser. 3rd. ed.

1876, p. 173. R.M.]

[289] [This law has been beautifully applied by Herbert Spencer in

order to explain why, with an unlimited supply of food, an organism

does not indefinitely increase in size. “Principles of Biology,” vol.

i. p. 121-126. R.M.]

[290] [Eng. ed. This idea, formerly expressed by me, occurs also

in Lange (“Geschichte des Materialismus,” ii. 265), and is there

exemplified in a very beautiful manner by illustrations from modern

chemistry. Lange compares what I have termed above the “physical

constitution” of the organism to the chemical constitution of one of

those organic acids which by substitution of single elements may become

transformed into more complicated acids, but which, as it were, always

undergo “further development” in only one determined and narrowly

restricted course. Here, as with the organism, the number of possible

variations is very great, but is nevertheless limited, since “what

can or cannot arise is determined beforehand by certain hypothetical

properties of the molecule.”]

[291] “Origin of Species.” 4th German ed., p. 19; 5th English ed., p. 6.

[292] [Mr. A. R. Wallace, in his article last referred to, quotes some

most valuable measurements of mammals and birds, showing the amount of

variation of the different parts. These observations were published

by J. A. Allen, in a memoir “On the Mammals and Winter Birds of East

Florida,” &c. (Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard

College, Cambridge, Mass., vol. ii. No. 3.) R.M.]

[293] [See note 142, p. 310. R.M.]

[294] “Die Darwin’sche Theorie,” Dorpat, 1875.

[295] [A certain number of instances of mimicry are known to occur

between species both of which are apparently nauseous. A most able

discussion of this difficult problem is given by Fritz Müller, in the

case of the two butterflies _Ituna Ilione_ and _Thyridia Megisto_, in

a paper published in _Kosmos_, May, 1879 (p. 100). The author shows by

mathematical reasoning that such resemblances between protected species

can be accounted for by natural selection if we suppose that young

birds and other insect persecutors have to learn by experience which

species are distasteful and which can be safely devoured. See also

Proc. Ent. Soc. 1879, pp. xx-xxix. R.M.]

[296] See Haeckel’s “Generelle Morphologie,” ii. 107.

[297] “Über die Berechtigung der Darwin’schen Theorie,” Leipzig, 1868.

[298] “Populäre wissenschaftl. Vorträge,” vol. ii., Brunswick, 1871, p.

208.

[299] “Das Unbewusste vom Standpunkte der Physiologie u.

Descendenztheorie,” Berlin, 1872, p. 89. The second edition appeared in

1877, in Von Hartmann’s own name.

[300] “Über die Berechtigung,” &c., Leipzig, 1868. In this work will be

found briefly laid down the theoretical conception of variability here

propounded somewhat more broadly. [In the last edition of the “Origin

of Species” Darwin states, with respect to the direct action of the

conditions of life as producing variability, that in every case there

are two factors, “the nature of the organism and the nature of the

conditions.” 6th ed. p. 6. R.M.]

[301] [Although hardly necessary to the evolutionist, it may perhaps

be well to remind the general reader, that all experiments upon

spontaneous generation, or abiogenesis, have hitherto yielded negative

results; no life is produced when the proper precautions are taken for

excluding atmospheric germs. But although we have so far failed to

reproduce in our laboratories the peculiar combination of conditions

necessary to endow colloidal organic matter with the property of

“vitality,” the consistent evolutionist is bound to believe, from

the analogy of the whole of the processes of nature, that at some

period of the earth’s history the necessary physical and chemical

conditions obtained, and that some simple form or forms of life arose

“spontaneously,” _i.e._ by the operation of natural causes. R.M.]

[302] See Haeckel’s “Generelle Morphologie,” vol. ii. p. 203, and

Seidlitz, “Die Darwin’sche Theorie,” 1875, p. 92 _et seq._

[303] [In a recently published work by Dr. Wilhelm Roux this author has

attempted to work out the idea of an analogy between the struggle for

existence and survival of the fittest in individuals and species, and

the struggle for existence and survival of the parts in the individual

organism. See “Der Kampf der Theile im Organismus: ein Beitrag zur

Vervollständigung der mechanischen Zweckmässigkeitslehre,” Leipzig,

1881. R.M.]

[304] [Eng. ed. Meanwhile it has been shown by Oscar Schmidt that

Von Hartmann, under the name of “the Unconscious,” re-invests

the old vital force with some portion of its former power. “Die

naturwissenschaftlichen Grundlagen der Philosophie des Unbewussten,”

Leipzig, 1877, p. 41.]

[305] _Loc. cit._ p. 175.

[306] _Loc. cit._ p. 156.

[307] “Über die Cuninen-Knospenähren im Magen von Geryonien.” Reprint

from “Mittheil. des naturwiss. Vereines,” Graz, 1875.

[308] [See Darwin’s “Origin of Species,” 6th ed. pp. 33, 34, and

201-204. R.M.]

[309] [Eng. ed. See Kant’s “Allgemeine Naturgeschichte und Theorie des

Himmels.”]

[310] “Das Unbewusste vom Standpunke der Physiologie und

Descendenz-Theorie,” Berlin, 1872, p. 16.

[311] [Eng. ed. See Lotze’s “Mikrokosmos,” 1st ed., vol. iii. pp.

477-483.]

[312] See Helmholtz’s “Populäre wissenschaftl. Vorträge,” vol. ii.,

Brunswick, 1872.

[313] See also Fr. Vischer’s “Studien über den Traum. Beilage zur

Augsburger Allgem. Zeitung,” April 14th, 1876. Haeckel also includes

this idea in his recent essay already quoted, “Die Perigenesis der

Plastidule,” Berlin, 1876, p. 38 _et seq._

[314] See Von Hartmann, _loc. cit._ p. 158.

Studies in the Theory of Descent, Volume II · 第 45 / 73 题