50 bulletin: museum of comparative zoology. 



nerves. Upon closer examination it is found to contain fibers of still 

 finer caliber and of lighter meduUation and also possibly some non- 

 meduUated fibers. The latter point is difficult to establish where 

 such fibers are relatively few and not grouped into a bundle. The 

 course of this nerve is directly cephalad to the orbit keeping to the 

 ventro-lateral side of all the eye muscles (Plates 3, 5, 6). Soon 

 after this nerve has begun its peripheral course its lightly medullated 

 fibers become grouped into a bundle on its ventral side. These leave 

 the main ramus about midway between the Gasserian ganglion and 

 the orbit, and form a communicating ramus (comn.), which joins 

 palatine VII a short distance cephalad of this point (Plate 3, figs. 6, 7; 

 Plate 5, figs. 14, 15). In the palatine nerve its identity is wholly lost, 

 although the nature of its union strongly indicates that it does not 

 form a recurrent bundle, but continues its course cephalad. 



Two very small but noteworthy twigs (Plate 3, figs. 6, 7, protru. oc.) 

 are given off from this communicating ramus to innervate the muscle 

 which has been described as the protrusor oculi. In the dissection 

 (Plate 3, fig. 7), where this was clearly worked out, it will be noticed 

 that one twig is given oft' from the rm. palpebralis inferior itself and 

 only one from the communicating ramus. The fibers innervating 

 this muscle are of the same character as those of the communicating 

 ramus and in distinct contrast to those remaining in the main motor 

 ramus, which, farther cephalad, innervate the depressor muscle of the 

 lower eyelid. A comparison with the opposite side of the head and 

 with other series of sections shows practically the same relation, al- 

 though on the opposite side in the same series a twig is given off 

 proximal to the communicating rami, as in Plate 3, fig. 7. It comes, 

 however, from the ventral lightly medullated bundle, which is as 

 clearly marked off as though it were a separate ramus. 



Although Fischer ('52) describes the innervation of the m. depressor 

 palpebrae inferioris by a ramus coming directly from the motor root, 

 As in Anolis, he makes no mention of a communicating ramus between 

 this nerve and palatine VII. The one mention of it met with is by 

 Watkinson (:06, p. 457, 463) in Varanus, where it is described as 

 a communicating ramus between palatine VII and the Gasserian 

 ganglion by way of this motor nerve. From dissections alone it would 

 appear to be mere assumption that it takes this course. From the 

 sections of Anolis it seems quite clear that the components of this 

 connecting ramus have a distal existence in the palatine. Such an 

 anastomosis between a pure motor ramus and the viscero-sensory is 

 not met with in Anolis in any other connection. No reference is made 



