38 



THE HISTORY OF ECOLOGY 



fisherman's oyster dredge and was first used 

 in biological research by the Italians, Mar- 

 siU and Donati, and after them by Soldani, 

 about the middle of the eighteenth century. 

 These men "sought to explain the arrange- 

 ment and disposition of organic remains in 

 the strata of their country by an examina- 

 tion of the distribution of Hving beings on 

 the bed of the Adriatic Sea." The dredge 

 was introduced in more northern waters by 

 a Dane, O. F. Miiller, in 1799 as a means 

 for general exploration of the sea bottom 

 (Herdman, 1923). 



Reports on the presence of animals in the 

 bottom deposits of the deeper waters of 

 the ocean appear to date from the records 

 of Sir John Ross (1819), who reported on 

 four deep-sea "soundings" made during his 

 voyage to Baffin's Bay in 1817-18. Samples 

 were obtained with a device of his own 

 invention that brought up a quantity of the 

 bottom deposits. Worms were taken at 

 depths of 6000 feet, and both worms and 

 other forms were secured from depths of 

 2700 feet and more. He also found a star- 

 fish attached to his line at least 2400 feet 

 below the surface. A few years later Risso 

 (1826) described a "bathybial" fish fauna 

 that extended to 350 fathoms (2100 feet) 

 in the Gulf of Genoa. Such information did 

 not become widely distributed, since the 

 announcement by James Clark Ross (1847) 

 of animals taken at a depth of 2400 feet 

 and even at 6000 feet during his Antarctic 

 expedition of 1839-40 was hailed as a new 

 and important discovery. 



In 1839 the British Association for the 

 Advancement of Science appointed a com- 

 mittee to encourage dredging operations. 

 Edward Forbes was a leading spirit. His 

 "provinces of depth" have already been 

 outlined (p. 34)). Among the other con- 

 clusions given by Forbes (1844), the fol- 

 lowing are pertinent here: 



"The number of species is much less in the 

 lower zones than in the upper. Vegetables dis- 

 appear below a certain depth, and the diminu- 

 tion in the number of animal species indicates 

 a zero not far distant. . . . 



"The greater part of the sea is far deeper 

 than the point zero; consequently, the greater 

 part of deposits forming, will be void of or- 

 ganic remains. 



"Animals having the greatest ranges in depth 

 have usually a great geographical, or else a 

 great geological range, or both." 



The conclusion concerning the existence 

 of a depth zero of Hfe became a matter of 

 controversy. Often the zero point was lo- 

 cated at about 300 fathoms (1800 feet), 

 and, as we have akeady seen, it was dis- 

 credited as a generahzation for animal hfe 

 before it was first announced. This did not 

 prevent the matter from becoming a focal 

 point for exploration of the deeper waters 

 of the oceans. Mistaken observations or in- 

 terpretations, if not overweighted with au- 

 thority, may be stimulating. A dramatic 

 history of scientific progress could be writ- 

 ten in terms of known human errors and 

 their final correction. The existence of a 

 universal azoic zone was not disproved until 

 the dredgings of the Challenger expedition 

 (1873-76) brought up bottom-dwelling ani- 

 mals from the greatest depths reached. For 

 plankton, as we shall see, the doctrine 

 lingered still longer. 



Many factors contributed to a strong 

 movement for oceanographic research from 

 the 1830's to 1900 and beyond. This was 

 the great era of oceanographic expeditions, 

 motivated in part by the kind of general 

 scientific curiosity that provides support for 

 astronomical observatories. A recurrent 

 specific curiosity that runs through much 

 of the history we are tracing focusses on the 

 relation between present day submarine de- 

 posits and the fossiliferous strata in ter- 

 restrial rocks. These more abstract interests 

 were reenforced by the need for practical 

 information in connection \vith laying and 

 maintaining transoceanic cables, by the 

 continued and gro\ving interest in fisheries, 

 and in the problems concerned with naviga- 

 tion. After certain initial success, there was 

 added the drive of strong nationalistic com- 

 petition, shared by most of the great mari- 

 time nations. 



Among the most prominent of the natu- 

 ralists closely connected with expeditions 

 wholly or in part concerned with oceanog- 

 raphv, we mav name Charles Darwin on 

 the Beasle (1831-36). J- D- Dana on the 

 Porpoise (1836-39), Joseph Hooker with 

 the Erehus and Terror (1839-43) and 

 T. H. Huxley on the Rattlesnake (1846- 

 50). This incomplete list serves to call at- 

 tenb'on to the high quality of men who, 

 early in their scientific careers, were ex- 

 posed to the opportunities for work and re- 

 flection afforded by such expeditions. Ex- 

 perience gained on these voyages left a 



