Herrick, Zerminal Buds of Fishes. — 135 
spectively. If we must seek for equivalents of selachian ampul- 
lary organs, they may be found in these small pit organs, for the 
two sets of organs agree in all essential points of structure and 
innervation, save that in the adult the teleostean organs do not 
sink down into deep tubes and become massed at their inner 
ends into dense clusters, but retain more nearly the embryonic 
condition of the selachian organs. A careful review of all of 
the known facts will show that the two types of sense organs 
(terminal buds and lateral line organs of various types) 
may appear or vanish quite independently of each other. 
In Autis’ last paper (02, p. 663) he rebuts JOHNSTON’s 
criticisms in the following language. I have numbered the 
items in the passage quoted for ease of reference. 
*¢ (1) That end-buds are all innervated by fibers that ‘find their 
central endings in the lobus vagi;’ (2) that all other forms of cutaneous 
sense organs are innervated by fibers that ‘have their central ending in 
the nucleus funiculi, tuberculum acusticum, or the cerebellum;’ (3) 
that the respective centers for the lateral line and end-bud fibers are so 
separate and stable ‘that it is utterly impossible for fibers or centers to 
‘undergo modification” of any sort such as I understand ALLIs to 
mean ;’ (4) that ‘It is impossible that these organs [end-buds and lat- 
eral line or pit organs] should ever resemble one another in any other 
than a superficial way ;’ (5) and that end-buds are organs ‘with visceral 
function (e.g. taste),’ while all other sense organs are organs ‘with a 
somatic function (e.g. touch, &c.)’, are certainly nothing more nor less 
than deductions from the theory he seeks to establish in his several 
works instead of established facts on which to base that theory.” 
Now, nothing could be further from my desire than to en- 
ter into this controversy in a spirit of captious criticism, yet I 
think it can clearly be shown that there is a solid foundation in 
fact for nearly every one of the contentions taken by JOHNSTON 
in the passage quoted. And it should be clearly born in 
mind that many of the most decisive facts to which I refer have 
been brought to light since Mr. AtLtis first formulated his 
theory of the genetic relationship between ampullary organs 
and terminal buds. : 
Now taking up the abuve points in serial order: (1) 
We have accurate observations on this point in Acipenser 
(JoHNSsToN, ’O1), Petromyzon (JouNsTon, 02), Gadus (HEr- 
RICK, 00) and Ameiurus (HerRRICK, OI, the lobus faciali 
