49 
terus I have, as already stated, not fully investigated, and I shall not 
attempt to make more than cursory reference to it. According to 
PoLLARD the organ in the os terminale is innervated by a branch 
of the same nerve that supplies the organs of the supraorbital line. 
This I have controlled, as also the statement that the buccalis facialis 
innervated all the organs of the infraorbital canal from the organ in 
the ethmoid to the one in the postfrontal. My organ 10 infraorbital 
is innervated by a nerve that traverses a canal in the cartilage beneath 
this part of the lateral canal, and that is evidently the ramus oticus 
facialis. What is undoubtedly, this nerve is called by van WıyHE the 
oticus trigemini, and is said by him to probably innervate that part 
of the mucous canal that lies in the squamoso- parietal. POLLARD 
shows the nerve, without stating what it innervated. Organ No. 11 
is innervated by a nerve that pierces the squamoso- parietal imme- 
diately beneath the organ, and that is, evidently, from its general 
position, the dorsal branch of the glossopharyngeus that PoLLARD de- 
scribes, and of which he says, in a foot note: “It doubtless supplies 
one of the mucous canal organs”. The two organs of the supra- 
temporal commissure are supplied by branches of a nerve that runs 
inward close to the nerve that supplies organs 12 and 13 infraorbital, 
the position of the two nerves indicating that they are, in all prob- 
ability, branches of a nerve corresponding to the first, or supra- 
temporal, branch of my descriptions of the nervus lineae lateralis 
of Amia. 
The organs of the preoperculo-mandibular line are unquestionably 
all innervated by the ramus mandibularis externus facialis. I have 
traced the nerve proximally through about one half of its length, that 
is back nearly to where the branches for the preopercular organs should 
arise from it. 
The innervation of the body lines I have not yet traced at all. 
Summary. 
The lateral canals of Polypterus are thus seen to present a con- 
dition that represents a perfectly normal development, excepting only 
in the fusion, found in one of my specimens, of the fifth and sixth 
primary pores of the mandibular line to form a single pore. What 
should have led to this fusion in this particular individual was in no 
way evident. 
No primary pore in the entire lateral system of the fish has under- 
gone secondary subdivision, Polypterus presenting in this a much lower | 
stage of development than either Amia or Lepidosteus. 
Anat, Anz, XVII, Aufsätze, 29 
