^7-8 



NATURE 



[Dec. 20, 1888 



and in the text cf the osteological part of the book. Table 

 xxxvii. contains the length of the humerus in units of 

 dorsal vertebrae. 



Pp. 1042-47 form a condensed essay on the pelvis. 

 The difficulties of homologizing its constituent parts 

 with those of other Vertebrata are pointed out, but they 

 are not solved. The pelvis, as a whole, has never been 

 tested sufficiently as to its taxonomic value, and the 

 adaptability of the limbs, both anterior and posterior, 

 warns us not to lay too much stress upon these parts 

 either. 



Pp. 1053-66. — Fuerbringer points out which muscles 

 are of systematic importance, also how far and in which 

 groups of birds he found them to be so. 



The results yielded by the most extensive examination 

 of the brachial plexus (pp. 232-80, Plates 8-10) are 

 morphological only, but of no taxonomic value. 



In his treatment of the sense-organs, the digestive, vas- 

 cular, excretory, and reproductive systems, he gives only a 

 more or less cursory review of the work of other anatom- 

 ists. The organs of voice and respiration receive more 

 attention. The author distinguishes between (i) syrinx 

 trachealis, possessed by the Passeres tracheophonae, and in 

 a less finished degree by certain Pelargi ; (2) s. tracheo- 

 bronchialis (Psittaci, Passeres, Pseudoscines = Menura 

 and Atrichia) ; (3) s. bronchialis, many Cuculidae, Capri- 

 mulgidae, Strigidae, &c. 



Concerning the ontogenetic development of birds, 

 Fuerbringer has been struck with the extraordinary re- 

 semblance which the embryos of certain families exhibit 

 to each other before the divergence of the final formation 

 of beak and feet has been fixed. Thus, Laridse and 

 Limicolae, Pici and Passeres, Striges and Caprimulgidae, 

 indicate in these stages close relationship. 



Remarkable, although rather short (pp. 1 107-19) are 

 the chapters on palaeontological development nnd on 

 geographical distribution. The hypothetical division of 

 the world into Arcto- and Neogsea is not favoured, whilst 

 Lemuria is justly re-established. Explanations of the 

 present distribution of the Ratitae, Spheniscidae, Rasores, 

 Passeres, and other principal orders are attempted, and 

 if not always successfully solved, are at least partly 

 cleared up by the allusion to fossil intermediate forms. 



The cradle of the Passeres is very old, of Cretaceous 

 age, and existed probably in the Oriental region ; the 

 EurylKemidae still exist as the last and least modified 

 descendants of the primaeval Passeres. Thence they 

 spread all over the globe. About the beginning of the 

 Miocene age one stock branched off", likewise in the 

 Oriental region, as the seine type, the numbers of which 

 conquered the world, with the exception of the Neotropical 

 region, which they reached last, and found already fully 

 occupied by their older but highly developed relatives 

 the Oligomyodi and Tracheophones. 



The outcome of all this work is a most elaborate 

 systematic arrangement of birds, recent and extinct. 

 This occupies pp. 1136-1591. 



Family after family is discussed as to its characters, 

 affinities, distribution, first fossil occurrence, and the 

 position it held in the opinion of previous ornithologists 

 and anatomists. 



Fuerbringer's system of birds is almost entirely new, 

 less striking in the arrangement of the families and 

 the placement of odd or solitary genera than in the 

 disposal of the whole host of birds into a few large 

 orders. Such a grouping together has been a long-felt 

 desideratum, because the close adherence to the principle 

 ''Divide et impera" has led to a splitting up of the 

 birds into an ever-increasing number of groups, whilst 

 their combination into greater phyla was in danger of 

 being lost sight of. 



This want of generalization made us hail the terms 

 Schizo-, Desmo-, ^githo-gnatha; ; but they were hardly 

 established as household words amongst ornithologists 



before Schizorhinai and Holorhinic, Homalogonat;e and 

 AnomalogonatEC, went through their short-lived existence, 

 and in their turn gave way to other principles of classi- 

 fication by Garrod and Forbes, which will easily be 

 detected in the system now before us. The class Aves 

 is divided into two sub-classes, eight orders, twenty- 

 four sub-orders, forty-five gentes, and ninety families. 

 The orders, especially the four into which the Carinata^ 

 are divided, represent such centres or phyla as we 

 have been longing for, and around them are arranged 

 other, mostly aberrant or much specialized, groups as 

 "intermediary sub-orders." The orders end each in 

 -orniihcs, the sub-orders throughout in -fo7-mes (see table 

 on next page). 



This system of birds is graphically illustrated by twa 

 side views of an elaborate "ancestral tree," on Plates 

 276^, 28, and by three more plates which represent three 

 horizontal sections through this ideal tree. The author 

 justly insists upon the necessity of constructing such 

 ancestral pedigrees in the three dimensions, and he has 

 himself taken care to indicate isomorphism, eg. Gypo- 

 geranus and Cariama, Procellariida" and Steganopodes, 

 by the convergence of the branches. 



It is, of course, beyond the scope of this review to 

 enter into many of Fuerbringer's ideas on the affinities 

 of all the families of birds. Only those of general 

 interest can here be dealt with. 



The old group of the Odontornithes has properly 

 been discarded ; their constituent members have been 

 distributed amongst the other birds. Probably all birds 

 possessed teeth during the Cretaceous epoch. 



Arch^eopteryx belongs to the primitive Carinate flying 

 birds or Proto-Ptenornithes. It cannot be decided 

 whether it is a direct ancestor of living Carinate birds ; 

 but there are no valid reasons why it should be looked 

 upon as an intercalary type between reptiles and 

 birds. 



We learn more about the Ratitee. They are Deuter- 

 Aptenornithes, i e. they are descendants of Ptenornithes, 

 but have lost their power of flight. The differences 

 between the various forms which are generally recog- 

 nized under the name of Ratitas are so great, that these 

 birds cannot collectively be opposed to the Carinatae. 

 Struthio, Rhea, and Drom^us Casuarius are each re- 

 presentatives of separate orders. Fuerbringer approaches 

 the views of Sir Richard Owen, who more than twenty 

 years ago suggested that the various Ratite birds are the 

 descendants of several groups of the Carinatae, but that 

 they have become modified in similar directions : their 

 Ratite characters are cases of analogy, and do not indicate 

 near relationship. The separation from the common 

 Carinate stock took place very early, certiinly as early 

 as the Cretaceous epoch. The root of the Struthior- 

 nithes perhaps contains fibres of the later Pelargornithes, 

 whilst the Rheornithes and Hippalectryornithes have also 

 some traces in common with the primitive or dawning 

 Charadriornithes and Alectorornithes. Lastly, the New 

 Zealand Ratitae, Apteryx, and Dinornis resemble the 

 Carinata in so many features that they form only the sub- 

 order Apterygiformes of the order Alectorornithes. The 

 affinities of Apteryx with the Crypturi and Fulicaria- are 

 even greater than those with the other Ratitee 



For Carinatae the synonym AcrocoracoidecC has been 

 invented, but the author does not see his way to accepting 

 them as a separate sub-class, since he had to break up the 

 Ratitae. 



The most primitive forms amongst the Ornithurje are 

 the American Cretaceous I:hthyornis and Apatornis. 

 They differ from recent Cnrinate birds in degree only, 

 viz. by their tormodont teeth and amphiccelous .vertebras. 

 They stand nearest to the Laridae, with touches of the 

 Procellariidae and Ciconiiformes. 



Hcsperornis\\2.%TViO%1 probablylost the keel of its sternum, 

 and in correlation with this loss has also acquired platy- 



