1045 



GLOIOCLADIE^E. 



GLOSSOPETRA. 



1018 



the cells either separable or inseparable, 1-seeded, membranous; seed 

 solitary, pendulous ; embryo in the axis of a little fleshy albumen ; 

 radicle superior. The chief part of this order comes from the Cape 

 of Good Hope. The species are of but little importance. Some are 

 sweet scented. Globularia Alyssum is a bitter drastic purgative, once 

 supposed to be the A\iniov of Dioscorides, and hence called Frutex 

 terribilis. G. vulgaris has similar properties. Both are emetic. 



A twig of Globularia longifvlia, in flower. 



1, the calyx, corolla, and Siemens in their natural position; 2, a corolla, 

 separate, with the stamens and style ; 3, the ovary enclosed in the calyx, half 

 of which is cut away to expose it. All magnified. 



GLOIOCLADIE^E, a sub-order of Sea-Weeds belonging to the 

 natural order Cryptonemiacea. The fronds are loosely gelatinous, the 

 filament* of which they are composed lying apart from one another, 

 surrounded by a copious gelatine. The favellidia are immersed 

 among the filaments of the periphery. It embraces the following 

 genera : 



Cruoria. Frond crustaceous, skin-like. 



Nafcaria. Frond filiform, solid, cellular ; the ramuli only composed 

 of radiating free filaments. 



Gloiotiphonia. Frond tubular, hollow, the walls of the tube com- 

 posed of radiating filaments. 



A^makon. Frond filiform, solid, elastic, filamentous; the axis com- 

 posed of closely packed filaments, the periphery of moniliform free 

 filaments. 



Dudremala. Frond filiform, solid, gelatinous, filamentous, the 

 axis composed of a net-work of anastomosing filaments ; the periphery 

 of moniliform free filaments. 



Crouania. Frond filiform, consisting of a pointed filament, whorled 

 at the points, with minute multifid gelatinous ramuli. 



(Harvey, British Sea- Weeds.) 



GLOMERID^E, a sub-family of Insects belonging to the family 

 Chilopoda and the order Myriopoda. 



GLORIO'SA, a genus of Plants belonging to the natural order 

 Hliacea, tribe Tulipace.ee, so named from the splendid appearance of 

 its flowers. One species, G. superba, is indigenous in most parts of 

 India, with a species, or variety, G. simplex, at moderate elevations on 

 the Himalayas, while G. virescens is a native of Senegambia. The 

 root is fleshy, the stem climbing, the leaves lanceolate, undulated, 

 and terminating in a tendril serving to support the plaut. The six 

 petals are undulated and reflexed, but pendent before flowering. The 

 nearly horizontal stamens and declinate and oblique style give the 

 flowers a very peculiar appearance, while their large size and the red 

 and yellow colour of those of G. superba make it worthy of cultivation. 

 Tfcis is successfully effected in hothouses. The fleshy root has a 

 bitter and acrid disagreeable taste, and by some is said to be poisonous, 

 but probably without sufficient foundation. 



GLOSSOI'ETRA (y\uaaa, a tongue, and ireVpa, rock), the name by 

 which many early inquirers into the history of organic remains 

 designated a great number of fossil teeth of fishes allied to the shark, 

 which are found abundantly in the upper secondary and tertiary 

 strata of England, France, Germany, Italy, &c. They were also called 

 Lamiodontts, Odontopetrce, &c. 



Amidst the difficulties which embarrassed the naturalists of the 

 16th century in their attempts to establish the true nature and origin 

 of the organic remains of plants and animals found in the enrth 

 [GEOLOOYJ, the obvious resemblance between the fossil and recent 

 teeth of fishes WC3 a valuable and powerful argument. Fabio Colonna 

 (' De Glossopetris Diss.,' 1627) and Agostino Scilla (' La vana Specu- 

 lazione,' &c., 1670) pointed out the close agreement, in several cases, 



between the fossil teeth of Malta, Calabria, &c., and the teeth of living 

 sharks ; and the argument from similarity of form was made complete 

 by considerations of the peculiar polish, hardness, chemical quality, 

 and even colour of the fossil specimens. Scilla's figures are excellent. 

 Ray, in a letter to Dr. Robinson (1684), makes the same use of the 

 Glossopetrce. 



" Some other bodies besides shells, commonly esteemed stones, 

 there are found in the earth, resembling the teeth and other bones of 

 fishes, which are so manifestly the very things they are thought only to 

 resemble, that it seems to me great weakness in any man to deny it 

 Such are the Glossopetne dug up in Malta in such quantities that you 

 may buy them by measure and not by tale ; and also the vertebres of 

 thornbacks or other cartilaginous fishes there found, and sold for 

 stones, among the Glos8opetr&, which have no greater dissimilitude to 

 the teeth of a living shark, or the vertebres of a quick thornback, 

 than lying so long in the earth, as they must needs have done, will 

 necessarily induce. Now in this same Isle of Malta we found also 

 many shell-like stones, which why we should not esteem to have been 

 originally the shells of fishes I see no reason ; for if in one and the 

 same place we find many teeth and bones of fishes entire and unpetri- 

 fied, and likewise stones exactly imitating the shells of other fishes, a 

 great presumption to me it is that these were originally the things 

 whose shape only they now seem to bear. Neither are these Glosso- 

 petra found only in Malta, but also in many places of Germany, far 

 remote from the sea ; in a hill near Aken, in so great plenty, that 

 Goropius makes it an argument they could not be the teeth of sharks. 

 ' In collo illo (saith he) qui Aquis-grano imminet, tantum id genus 

 fuisse piscium quis crederet quantum de Glossopetrarum copii con- 

 jectari deberet ? ' " 



Llwyd (1698), whose opinions on the real nature and origin of 

 organic fossils were turned in a wrong channel by the apparent impos- 

 sibility of understanding how the various animal and vegetable 

 exuvia) could be placed in their subterranean repositories by the 

 Noachian flood, a proposition which his judgment rejected, describes 

 a considerable number of fish teeth according to the following 

 method : 



Ichthyodontes cuspidati (considered to be incisor teeth of fishes 

 Such of these as are triangular in figure (sagittati), flat with keen 

 and often serrated edges, are called Glossopetrce, 



Others which are more nearly round, elongated and pointed, he 

 calls Plectronitce. (Tr\iiKTpov, a cock's spur). 



Ichthyodontes scutellati (supposed to be molar teeth of fishes). Of 

 these such as were round, umbonate, or scaphoid, were termed 

 Hufonitce, 



The angular ones were called Rhombiscus. 



The flattened pod-shaped teeth were called Siliquastra. 



In Helwing's curious work, ' Lithographia Angerburgica' (1717), 

 the state of knowledge on the subject in Germany appears little 

 advanced, since he takes the trouble to reject the supposition that 

 the Glostopetne were serpents' tongues. He describes several species 

 of sharks' teeth under the titles of Glossopelra and Odontopetra. 



Until a very recent period there was little progress made in the 

 study of the parts of fossil fishes beyond the views of Llwyd. Neither 

 the Glossopetra: nor the Bufonites were at all better understood in 

 England, till the successful researches of Mantell in Sussex re- 

 awakened the zeal of collectors ; and Cuvier, besides renovating the 

 whole subject of recent ichthyology, announced his intention of com- 

 posing a systematic history of fossil fishes. The drawings which that 

 great man had collected for the purpose were put into the hands of 

 M. Agassiz, whose extraordinary zeal and success have made a new 

 era in fossil ichthyology. According to the views of this distinguished 

 naturalist, all, or nearly all, the fish teeth known to the early collectors 

 as Glossopetra; belong to the family of sharks, which must formerly 

 have been more numerous and included more various structures than 

 the living races. The Siliyuastra and other of the scutellate ichthyo- 

 dontes of Llwyd are likewise teeth of sharks. 



The following short synopsis may be convenient to collectors (see 

 also Dr. Buckland's ' Bridgewater Treatise') : 



Family of Sharks. Group 1, Cestracionts. (Siliquastra, Rhombiscua, 

 &c. of Llwyd.) Teeth having a broad grinding surface. 



2, Hybodonts. (Plectronitos and Glossopelrcs of Llwyd.) Teeth 

 pointed, striated on both sides. 



3, True Sharks. (Glossopetrce df Scilla, Llwyd, &c.) Teeth 

 triangular, striated on one side only. 



Many of the Bvfonitce of old writers belong to the extinct genera 

 Pymodus and Gyrodus of Agassiz ; though they have often been com- 

 pared to the teeth of Ancm-hicas lupus, from which, according to 

 Cuvier, they differ essentially in structure. (' RSgne Animal.') 



The geological distribution of these fish teeth is curious. Llwyd 

 mentions that scutellate ichthyodontes had not occurred to him in 

 the maritime regions of England, but were found not le ti plentifully 

 than the cuspidate kinds in the interior counties, as Oxford, North- 

 ampton, Gloucester, Berks, Bucks, &c. This is in agreement with 

 conclusions of later date, for M. Agassiz has found that the whole 

 group of Cestracionts is confined to strata of the transition and secon- 

 dary series ; while only one of the race (Ceslracion Philippi, or Port 

 Jackson Shark), is now living. 



