• 



1895.] LIW6S OF SlfAKES, ASIPHISB^NIDjE, ETC. 703 



sumption in favour of our finding the left lung the larger, so that 

 I should like to know that the statements to the contrary were 

 based on an inspection of the lungs m situ before considering the 

 point decided ^ 



V. On the Smaller Size of the Left Lukg in (1) ceetain 

 Sn-ake-like Lizards and Amphibians and (2) certain 

 Mammals. 



Having noticed that the Amphisbsenidse differed from Snakes in 

 having their right lung, and not their left, reduced or absent, I 

 was led to examine various other snake-like Lizards and Amphibians 

 to see whether they in this respect agreed with the AmphisbaenidaB 

 or with the Snakes. A reference to the list given (p. 706) shows 

 that 1 find that in all the lizards examined if one lung is smaller 

 it is the left, and the same is true of the Gymnophiona examined, 

 which is in accord with Wiedersheim's account based on more 

 extensive acquaintance with this group. 



Lastly, in many (according to some authorities in most^) mammals 

 the right lung is larger than the left, sometimes considerably 

 larger ^. 



With the exception of Snakes, certain snake-like Lizards, Gym- 

 nophiona, and some mammals, all vertebrates, I believe, have both 

 lungs well developed and either equal or differing but slightly in 

 size ; and the AmphisbEenidte appear to be the only animals in 

 which the right lung is rudimentary. 



^ Specimens of Chirotes being scarce, our knowledge of the soft anatomy is 

 probably derived chiefly from specimens which have been sacrificed to make 

 skeletons, such organs as the lungs being put up separately in spirit. Of course 

 descriptious based on such preparations would be unreliable as evidence on the 

 point in question. Flourens's figure is ostensibly drawn from such a prepara- 

 tion ; while that Meckel (and apparently Duvernoy also in one instance) has 

 made incorrect statements as to the right and left lungs of other animals I have 

 shown above (p. 694, and note 4 on p. 095). 



There is, it seems, no dissected specimen of Chirotes in London. I have 

 tried by writing to what seemed a likely quarter to ascertain whether there 

 exists in Paris any preparation showing the visceral anatomy of Chirotes, but 

 so far without success. It is to be hoped that anyone who is able to dissect this 

 rare form will sketch the organs in situ. 



^ Thus G. L. Duvernoy, ' Le9ons d'Anatomie comparee de Georges Cuvier,' 

 2nd ed. tom. vii. pp. 20, 24, 25 (Paris, 1840). 



H. Milne-Edwards, 'Le9on8 sur la Physiologie et I'Anatomie comparee de 

 rHomrne et des Animaus,' tom. ii. p. 334 (Paris, 1857). 



' Thus the pre23arations exhibited at the Royal College of Surgeons show 

 the right hiug markedly the larger in Talpa eiiropma, Mus decumcmiis, Kofo- 

 ryctcs typhlops, Hi/rax capensis, Synetheres {^Corcolahes) mexicanus, and leas 

 markedly so in various other mammals. 



45* 



