102 



REPORT OF COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 



with the normal ones. Twenty-four measurements of the chehpeds 

 were taken. Sixteen measurements were made at the first moult, 

 seven were continued through the second and one through the third 

 moult. With one exception the chelipeds failed to obtain the nor- 

 mal length. In this one exceptional case the chehped had grown to 

 its normal size, but only after the third moult, as is shown by the 

 following data: 



Data on Lobster No. 10. 



Stage.) Appendage.. Mutilation... 



(5)* R. oheliped.. 

 L. cheliped: 



Removed. 

 July 25... 



Moult. . . I Length . Moult 



Aug. 5.. I 10 mm.. I Aug. 19. 

 (6) j 12 mm..! (7) 



Length . Moult... Length. 



13* mm.' Aug. 27.1 18 mm. 

 15 mm.. I (8) 18 mm. 



*Moulted to fifth stage July 24. 



Although in this instance the right cheliped did attain normal 

 length in three moults, it is not certain that the limbs will always 

 generate to the normal size in that time. 



Thus it appears that no definite statement can be made as to the 

 time reciuired for an appendage to be restored to its normal size. 



IV. Effect upon the Repeated Removal of the Same Ap- 

 pendage. 



Curiosity might raise the question: How often could a lobster 

 restore such a complex mechanism as a cheliped, or, in other words, 

 Avhat would be the effect of the repeated removal of a given limb? 

 But the question also draws some interest from theoretical con- 

 siderations. In a previous sketch of the theories of regeneration 

 attention was called to Reamur's "egg-germs" and Weismann's 

 "determinants." In considering such theories the query might 

 naturally arise whether it would be possible to exhaust the "egg- 

 germs," "determinants," or whatever the latent forces may be- 



