ECOLOGICAL BACKGROUND AND GROWTH BEFORE 1900 



15 



U. Land animals, which may, however, in- 

 vade water 



Water-"inhaling" animals do not derive sub- 

 sistence from the land. Some of them live in 

 water and then change shape and hve on land. 

 Stationary animals hve only in water, where 

 they may be (a) attached or sessile; (b) 

 unattached but motionless. 



Means of locomotion of animals: swimming, 

 walking, flying, wriggling, creeping. 



No creature is able to move solely by flying 

 as fish move by swimming. 



Flocks of birds differ in power. 



Some birds are present at all times; others 

 are seasonal. 



Some are gregarious; others are solitary. 



Some gregarious animals are social. 



Some birds are gregarious, but none with 

 crooked talons have that habit. 



Many fish are gregarious. 



Social animals have a common object in 

 view. 



Some social animals have a ruler; some do 

 not. 



Animals may have a fixed home or be 

 nomadic. 



Diets differ: they may be (c) carnivorous, 

 (b) graminivorous, (c) omnivorous, or 

 (d) special, e.g., honey. 



Some animals have dwellings; some do not. 



Some are nocturnal, others diurnal. 



Some are tame, some wild; some wild ani- 

 mals are easily tamed, e.g., the elephant. 



Domesticated animals all have wild relatives. 



Some emit sounds; others are mute. 



All animals without exception exercise their 

 power of singing or chattering chiefly in 

 connection with intercourse of the sexes. 



Some five in fields; others on mountains; 

 some frequent abodes of men. 



Some are salacious, e.g., the cock; others are 

 inclined to chastity. 



Some marine animals hve in open sea, some 

 near shore, some on rocks. 



Animals differ in character: 



(a) Good-natured, sluggish 



(b) Quick-tempered, ferocious 



(c) Intelhgent, timid 



(d) Mean, treacherous 



(e) Noble, courageous 



(/) Thoroughbred, vdld, treacherous 

 (g) Crafty, mischievous 

 (h) Spirited, affectionate, fawning 

 ( i ) Easy-tempered 

 (/■) Jealous, self-conceited 

 Many animals have memory. 



Aristotle's observations on the breeding 

 behavior of animals are scattered through 

 his writings on zoology, which, in general, 

 are not so well organized as might appear 

 from the foregoing outlme. They are not 

 yet ecology. They do constitute good nat- 



ural history, for the first major attempt, and 

 they represent a part of the stuti from 

 which ecology has developed. It may be 

 remembered that natural history contains 

 elements of other phases of biology, of 

 anatomy and taxonomy, for example, as 

 well as much of ecological importance. 



i^amaley (1940) regards Theophrastus as 

 the first ecologist in history. Theophrastus 

 was a student and friend of Aristotle's 

 and succeeded him as leader of the Athen- 

 ian Lyceum. Ramaley says that Theophras- 

 tus wrote sensibly of the communities in 

 which plants are associated, of the relations 

 of plants to each other and to their nonhv- 

 ing environment. According to Greene 

 (1909, p. 125), Theophrastus definitely 

 forecast the natural associations of plants 

 in particular places. He distinguished (1) 

 marine aquatics, (2) marine httoral plants, 

 (3) plants of deep fresh water, (4) those 

 of shallow lake shores, (5) plants of wet 

 banks of streams, and (6) of marshes. He 

 wrote of trees that grow on exposed, sunny 

 mountain slopes, of those that flourish only 

 on northern exposures, and also of those 

 limited to the more frigid summits. 



As has been shown, Aristotle gave a 

 somewhat similar classification of animals 

 in relation to their habitats. In fact, Zeller 

 (1931, p. 202) states that the extant writ- 

 ings of Theophrastus on plants follow 

 Aristotle in their leading ideas. Theophras- 

 tus did found plant systematics, wrote on 

 plant geography, and developed a sort of 

 plant physiology. He also knew enough 

 about color changes in animals to show 

 that he had some grasp of the color adap- 

 tation of animals to their environment. 



Even the best of the Greeks did not have 

 all their facts straight and showed tenden- 

 cies toward accepting travelers' tales un- 

 critically, which some modems have at last 

 outgrown. They used anthropomorphisms 

 with plants and animals ahke about on a 

 level with those found in "nature study" 

 today. Aristotle, great as he was, appar- 

 ently was no greater genius than are our 

 best modern thinkers, and perhaps not less 

 great, either. It may be added that Aristotle 

 was probably no stronger in sheer mental 

 abihty than the best of the ancients who 

 lived 2500 years before him, though there 

 were more facts accumulated by his time 

 with which he could deal. We judge a 

 man or a group of men historically by the 

 end product they leave behind, and a good 



