THE CEANJAL NEEVE8 AND LATEEAL SENSE OEGANS OF FISHES. 141 



communis which, on emerging from its ganglion, unites with hyomandibularis VII., 

 separates as the R. mandibularis internus *, and innervates portions of the floor of tlic 

 pliarynx, especially the part in tlie tadpole near the site of the future tongue" (p. 186) ; 

 and (3) that the R. palatinus facialis corresponds to the great superficial petrosal t, tJie 

 latter being a visceral sensory and not a visceral motor nerve (cp. Turner, Jouru. i\.uat. & 

 Phys. vol. xxiii. p. 523, 1889). 



Kingsbury (1895, 113, and 1897, 114) states that the fasciculus communis system 

 arises from tliu dorsal columns of the medulla and tliat it is largely sensory in function, 

 whilst Allis (1897, 6) must be held to have completely established that the palatine and 

 prse-branchial fibres of the branchial nerves are composed of visceral sensory fibres and 

 the post-branchial nerves of visceral motor fibres. This is also borne out l\v his dissec- 

 tions and descriptions of the facial, glossopharyngeal, and vagus nerves, where the 

 fasciculus commimis fibres were traced on to the mucous memlirane % and the post- 

 branchial fibres into the branchial muscles. On p. 611, after a lengthy discussion of the 

 fasciculus communis system, he says : — " The fibres of the fasciculus communis tract thus 

 seem destined to form m part or in whole the prae-trematic and pharyngeal branches of the 

 nerves wdth which they are associated, and it is always in the regions which, whether on 

 the outside or the inside of the body, are, from tlieir relation to these nerves, presum- 

 ably innervated by them, that terminal buds are found. The fibres of the tract that join 

 and form -part of the facialis enter into, or form entirelij, the inferior and superior 

 branches of the i)alatinus facialis, and those two branches are respecticely the pretrematic 

 and pharyngeal branches of the nervus." (Italics mine.) On p. 012, after stating that he 

 considers it probable the terminal biuU arise in connection with the pretrematic rjanglia 

 and ectodermal thickenings, he concludes, "in short, the nerve fibres arising from tlie 

 fasciculus communis tract seem destined in large part, if not in whole, to the supply of 

 terminal buds, as Strong has suggested might be the case. The fibres so arising may 

 issue from the brain as a separate and distinct root, on which a separate and distinct 

 ganglion is found; they may issue in part as components of certain nerves with the 

 roots of those nerves, and in part as a separate root which becomes immediately more or 

 less fused, it and its ganglion, with other roots and ganglia ; or they may apparently, 

 issue entirely as components of certain nerves. To the fii'st category belongs, apparently 

 Protopterus ; to the second, yiw/r/, i2«;^«, and many other fishes and amphibia; to the 

 thii'd, birds, judging from Brandis' descriptions, for he finds the fibres of the 

 funiculus solitarius issuing from the facialis and glossopharyngeus, and possibly also 

 with the vagus, and the funiculus solitarius of higher vertebrates corresponds, according 

 to Strong, in every detail icith the fasciculus communis of fishes and amphibia" (Italics 

 mine.) Two points I must emphasize in connection with Allis's conclusions. Pirst, he 



* 1 have already shown (46, pp. (558 & C73-4) that this is a misnomer. See also later, p. 200. 

 t Cp. 46, p. G60. See also later, p. 144. 



i In his general summary he says (p. 747) : — " The ramus pharyngeus and ramus pra^trematicus traverse regions 

 where terminal huds are found." (Italics mine.) 



20* 



