004 



in' my remarks in the Zool. Anz. 1885 (p. 222) I can find nothing to 

 shew that I tried to bring my views into harmony with those of 

 Prof. Marshall. 



The sum and substance of my remarks was that while Marshall 

 was probably right in regarding the olfactory nerve as a segmental 

 nerve, if a certain origin of the olfactory ganglion could be proved, 

 as I believed it could, then the nose „would have to be regarded 

 rather as the modified sense organ of a gill cleft — and in fact as 

 the most anterior of the segmental sense organs". 



It would be absurd to hold that, while the nose was the modified 

 sense organ of a gill cleft, it was also a gill cleft and such a notion 

 never entered my head. This same passage shows that I was fully 

 aware of what Prof. Froriep calls the typical position of those sense 

 organs — viz above the gill cleft, for how otherwise, could I call the 

 nose the modified sense organ of a cleft? — As a matter of fact the 

 passage in my note book from which I wrote that remark regarding 

 the nose still exists, and it reads „the nose is not a gill cleft 

 but the sense organ which sits above a cleft"^). 



As to using the name branchial sense organs for the title of my 

 paper and in the text of the full paper, I venture to suggest that I 

 had as much independent title to it as Prof. Froriep. If, in the prel. 

 note I regarded the nose as the (modified) sense organ of a gill cleft, 

 and at the same time as the most anterior of the segmental sense 

 organs, it requires little logic to deduce the conclusion that the other 

 segmental sense organs were also sense organs of gill clefts — in other 

 words of the same meaning branchial sense organs. Now I was also 

 aware that these organs were originally developed in the head alone, 

 hence my remarks on the relationship of spinal to cranial nerves, and 

 if I did not alter the name at once, it was because I hesitated to in- 

 troduce a new term 2). Prof. Froriep's paper determined the matter: 

 for, as he also recognized in these sense organs special organs of the 

 gill clefts, I thought I also might venture to call them branchial sense 

 organs. More especially as the English term „sense organs of the la- 

 teral line" was too cumbersome and not correct, for it referred more 

 to the lateral line of the trunk than to the sense organs of the head. 



1) Hence I had no need to give the assurance which Prof. Froeiep 

 incorrectly says I did — viz. that I arrived at the conclusion as to the 

 specific nature of the sense organs during the time which elapsed between 

 writing my „Vorläufige Mitteilung" and seeing his paper. 



2) See for example the happy confusion which exists by the creation 

 of such terms as parablast, mesenchym, desmohaematoblast, acroblast et 

 hoc genus omne for what after all is only mesoblast! 



