Herrick, Werves of Stluroid Fishes. 183 
usual order of description, we shall trace the root outward 
from the brain. 
Just before emerging from the oblongata it receives the 
motor V root (Fig. 8) and runs out dorsally of the communis 
root, internal to the dorsal lateralis root and ventrally of that 
portion of the geniculate ganglion from which the r. lateralis 
accessorius arises, all of these being crowded as close together 
as possible (Fig. 7). The root becomes ganglionated at once, 
the cells first appearing dorsally at the root of the general cu- 
taneous component of the ramus oticus and ventrally between 
the dorsal and ventral lateralis roots and laterally of the com- 
munis root and geniculate ganglion (Fig. 2). 
The cells of the Gasserian ganglion are mainly large, with 
many small ones among them, while those of the geniculate 
ganglion are all small, so that the general relations of the two 
ganglia can be determined in spite of their intimate fusion. 
Nevertheless the middle portions of the ganglia are so closely 
joined together that the actual boundary between them cannot 
be acurately fixed, though the general cutaneous component 
throughout clearly forms the dorso-lateral portion of the com- 
plex and the communis component the ventro-mesial and when 
the nerve trunks are made up peripherally the same relations 
prevail. Thus, the chief nerves derived from this complex are 
those of the infra-orbital trunk and these, excluding the r. buc- 
calis, go out in two bundles which Wricut termed the ‘‘supero- 
lateral strand” and the ‘‘infero-medial strand,’’ of which the 
former is apparently wholly derived from the trigeminus roots 
(sensory and motor) and the latter from the communis root of 
the facialis. On account of the fusion of the ganglia just re- 
ferred to it is impossible to demonstrate with certainty that 
these strands are purely trigeminal and facial respectively and 
that there is no admixture of their fibers, though the appear- 
ances certainly favor this and the peripheral distribution confirms 
it. In any case the number of mixed fibers must be small and the 
strands may, in my opinion, be regarded as practically pure as 
they leave the ganglionic complex, though Wricut’s dissections 
led him to regard them as more or less mixed (84a, p. 358.) 
