572 REPORT OP COMMISSIONER OF FISH AND FISHERIES. 



Academy gave, from tlie income of tlie Humboldt fund, 24,600 marts, 

 and by further contributions the entire sum at the disposal of the ex- 

 l^edition was raised to 105,600 marks — a sum never before made avail- 

 able in Germany for a biological expedition. The new steamer Na- 

 tional, of Kiel, was chartered for three mouths, and was fitted out " with 

 all the admirable contrivances for obtaining i)lankton, for deep-sea 

 fishing, and for sounding." Besides the leader of the expedition. Prof. 

 Hensen, five other naturalists participated: the zoologists Brandt and 

 Dahl: the botanist Schlitt; the bacteriologist Fischer; the geographer 

 Kriimniel; and the marine artist Eichard Eschke. The voyage of 

 the National lasted 93 days (July 7 to November 15). The course was 

 westward through the north Atlantic (Gulf Stream, Sargasso Sea), 

 then southward (Bermudas, Cape Verde, Ascension) to Brazil, and 

 eastward back by the Azores. JDuring this voyage 400 casts were 

 made, 140 with the plankton nets, 260 with other nets. 



Our German navy has been but little used for scientific, still less 

 for biological, investigations; much less than the navies of England, 

 France, Italy, Austria, and the United States. The remarkable serv- 

 ices which many distinguished German zoologists have rendered in the 

 last half century for the advancement of marine biology have been car- 

 ried on almost entirely without government aid. The German govern- 

 ment has hitherto had very little means available for this branch of 

 science. Therefore, great was the satisfaction when, by the libei-al en- 

 dowment of the plankton expedition of Kiel, the first step was taken 

 for the more extensive investigation, with better apparatus, of the biol- 

 ogy of the ocean, and for emulation of the results which the English 

 Challenger and the Italian Ycttor Pisani had latelj' obtained in this 

 region. 



Accounts have been published of the results of the plankton expedi- 

 tion of Kiel, by Victor Hensen (22), Karl Brandt (23), E. du Bois Eey- 

 mond (21), and Kriinimel. The essential details of these accounts have 

 been repeatedly published in the German newspapers, to the general 

 effect that the i)roposed goal was reached and the most important 

 question of the plankton was happily solved. I very greatly regret 

 that I can not agree with this favorable verdict. (1) The most impor- 

 tant generalizations which the plankton expedition of Kiel obtained on 

 the composition and distribution of the X)lankton in the ocean stand in 

 sharp contradiction to all previous experience; one or the other is 

 wrong. (2) It seems to me that Hensen has incautiously founded a 

 number of far-reaching erroneous conclusions on very insutticient prem- 

 ises. Finally, I am convinced that the whole method employed by 

 Hensen for determining the plankton is utterly worthless, and that tlie 

 general results obtained thereby are not only false, but also throw a 

 very incorrect light on the most important problems of pelagic biology. 

 Before I establish this dissenting opinion let me give an account of my 

 own i)lanktonic studies and their results. 



