64 ME. SWALE VINCENT ON THE 



but Beard goes on: " It is a significant fact, hitherto, I believe, unnoticed, that suprarenals 

 are fomid only in those forms in which a reduction in number of ripe sexual elements 

 required has taken 'place " ^. In regard to this 1 can only state that suprarenals (one 

 or both parts) are probably universally present throughout Elasmobranchs, Ganoids, 

 and Teleosts. Further, this writer observes : " In the present state of our knowledge 

 of these bodies, I do not wish to lay too much stress on the point of existence or non- 

 existence of suprarenals in any order of Vertebrates." But he adds : " If Eabl's ' tree ' 

 be correct in respect of the ancestry of Ganoids from Sharks ..... I can conceive 

 that the non-existence of sicpirarenals in the former group ^ would be a fact vfhich our 

 author might find difficulty in accounting for — unless he ignored it entirely ! " 



Suprarenals non-existent in Ganoids ! Either Beard has quite overlooked their 

 presence in the Sturgeon, or he has some view of his own as to the significance of those 

 yellow bodies which are scattered throughout the kidney. If the latter were the case 

 one would have surely expected him, in dealing with the subject, to note the fact. 



Further on in the same paper our author gives a " tree," in which it is stated that 

 suprarenals are totalhj absent not only in Ganoids and Mai'sipjobranchs, but also in 

 Teleosts -. It would be interesting to know what he calls those little bodies I have 

 repi-esented in my plates. Later on he says : " It would doubtless be interesting to find 

 some traces of suprarenal bodies in the Dipnoi." It will be seen from what I say on 

 this subject under the head of histology, that I am decidedly of the opinion that in all 

 probability there are suprarenals of some sort in the Dipnoi ^. 



With regard to the occurrence of suprarenals in Teleosts, in addition to the species 

 in which I have described them above, there are mentioned many other species in 

 which other writers have found them. Thus Stannius and Ecker, also Hyrtl, state that 

 they are present in several species I have not been able to obtain. M'Kenzie, too (15)5 

 describes them in Amiurus catus. So that, although of course I cannot affirm from my 

 own observations that these bodies are universally present in this order, I should, from 

 a joint consideration of my own and previous researches, consider this to be more than 

 probable. If suprarenals are not present in all Teleosts, in which species are they absent 1 



V. Histology. 

 1. ELASMOBRANCHII. 



My results in tliis department appear to differ in many respects from those of Leydig, 

 Semper, and Balfour. They agree fairly well in some respects with those of Chevrel, 

 but there are important points of difference, and, besides, Chevrel's histological drawings 

 are so imperfect that little can be learnt from them. 



' The italics are mine. — S. V. 



^ This is not stated in so majiy words, but the " tree " has inscribed upon it, " Suprarenals totaOy absent on 

 this side " ; and " this side " includes the orders named above. 



^ [These hare since been discovered by Petitt {he. cit.).—S. V., 10. 1. 97.] 



