22 COMMUNITY FUNCTIONS— DYNAMICS OF BIOTIC FORMATION 



making this distinction clearer, Tansley has employed the term 

 "quasi-organism" (1920:123) and Wheeler speaks of "real organisms" 

 (1910) and later of "super-organism" (1923) (cf. Clements, Weaver 

 and Hanson, 1929:314). 



Moreover, significant support for the concept of the complex or- 

 ganism has been afforded by investigators in other fields. In a vague 

 form, this view now seems to have long been held by foresters, espe- 

 cially by Rossmiissler (1863), but it was not definitely formulated 

 in the idea of a "forest organism" until Morozov (1912), and Moller 

 (1922); cf. also Jaczoski (1926), Glinka (1927), and Thatchenko 

 (1930). In a somewhat similar fashion, the life of the soil has been 

 regarded as a distinct entity by Harshberger (1911) and by France 

 (1913), but this is obviously true only in the sense of a layer com- 

 munity. More definite is the view of Forbes (1887; cf. Chapter 1) 

 and of Thienemann (1925), the latter agreeing essentially with the 

 former, as the following excerpts indicate: "Each lake constitutes a 

 life-entity, the parts of which stand in intimate connection. It is a 

 microcosm, an organism of higher rank, the organs of which stand 

 in the closest relation." In its general form, this concept has been 

 followed by a number of hydrobiologists. It is readily seen that the 

 definite limits of a lake lend themselves to a concrete application, 

 though with erroneous implications as to the biome, and also afford 

 some apparent warrant for including the habitat itself in the complex 

 organism. Quite apart from the fact that this carries synthesis to 

 the extreme, the mention of "biological" lake types indicates that 

 Thienemann hardly intends to go so far. 



As would be expected, the appreciation of the concept of the com- 

 plex organism has been keenest among students of the social insects, 

 notably Wheeler (1910, 1911, 1923), and of group organization in 

 animals, such as Ferriere (1915), Borradaile (1923), Child (1924), 

 Alverdes (1927), and Allee (1931). Under the title, "The Ant-colony 

 as an Organism," AVheeler (1910) says: "We then have left the fol- 

 lowing series: first, the protozoon or protophyte, second the simple 

 or non-metameric person, third the metameric person, fourth the col- 

 ony of the nutritive type, fifth the family, or colony of the repro- 

 ductive type, sixth the coenobiose, and seventh the true, or human 

 society. Closer inspection shows that these are sufficiently heterogene- 

 ous when compared with one another and with the personal organism, 

 which is the prototype of the series, but I believe, nevertheless, that 

 all of these are real organisms and not merely conceptual construc- 

 tions or analogies." 



Equally penetrating is the statement by Child in "Physiological 



