isis) 
Nachdruck verboten. 
Note on the Structure of the Mammalian Taste-Bulb. 
By FREDERICK Tuckerman. 
The results of Professor v. LennosséK’s researches, by means of 
Goucr’s method, on the minute anatomy of the taste-bulbs, recently 
communicated to this Journal, awaken new interest in these organs. 
A short time prior to the appearance of LENHOSSEK’s paper Prof. 
SCHULZE of the Zoological Institute, Berlin, had kindly called my 
attention to the main conclusions contained in Prof. Rerzius’ some- 
what earlier and more extended contribution, covering essentially the 
same ground. The work itself, however, I have not seen. 
In 1867 independent inquirers at Stockholm and Bonn reported, 
almost simultaneously, the presence of sensory terminal organs in the 
lingual papillae of the Mammalia. Two years later, v. Wyss of Zurich 
and ENGELMANN of Utrecht, detected independently the gustatory 
bulbs in the papillae foliatae or lateral organs of taste. 
Now, after the lapse of a quarter of a century, the taste-bulbs 
have been carefully re-investigated at Stockholm by Rerzıus, and 
following close on the heels of his paper comes one from Basel by 
LEnHoss£X. The results of the last-named observers are destructive 
as well as constructive in their character, in that they are quite fatal 
to the generally accepted notions, touching not only the intrinsic 
anatomy of these organs, but also their relations to the subepithelial 
nerve elements. Both observers, it appears, employed similar methods, 
and both attained results that, in their main purport, appear to be in 
accord. Thus it may indeed be said with truth that history repeats itself. 
In this brief note it is the purpose of the writer to touch only 
upon that portion of Lenmosser’s research which relates to the 
mammalian taste-bulb. LennosshK describes and figures nerve 
terminal structures which he terms the “perigemmale” and the “inter- 
gemmale” Nervenendigung respectively. With the latter, I shall not 
now concern myself. The former, which for the present is of much 
greater moment, appears to be mainly an amplification of Fusarı and 
Panascr’s „reticoli nervosi peribulbari“, and is important in that it 
confirms the earlier work of those histologists. On the other hand, 
however, I gather from the author that this is the main point at 
issue between Rerzıus and himself, i. e. whether there exists a true 
“perigemmale” Nervenendigung, or, whether it is merely an 
