RECORDS. 623 



George S. Huntington, The Morphology and Phylogeny 

 OF THE Vertebrate Iliocolic Junction. 



Mr. Shearman described the chief branchial and cranial 

 features of the Chimaeroid ( Hydrolagiis collei ) and brought out 

 facts to show that the group Holocephali should be regarded as 

 a suborder of the Elasmobranchii instead of an order as is cus- 

 tomary at present. The paper was discussed by Professors Os- 

 born and Huntington. 



Mr. Weil described very briefly an abnormal course of the 

 trochlea nerve in a human embryo. 



Dr. Wortman substituted the paper as given above for the 

 one which he was announced to give, viz., " Notes on an Am- 

 phichelydian Tortoise from the Jurassic of Wyoming." 



Dr. Wortman showed that the formation of the Cannon-bone 

 of the camels, represented possibly in potential, in forms as early 

 as Protylopus of the Eocene, and in various stages of develop- 

 ment in Pcebrotlicrium, Pi'otolabis, Procamelis and AiicJicnia down 

 to the modern Caniclis. The various stages in the process 

 were described as follows : ist. There was a reduction of the 

 soft tissue between the metapodials and a flattening of the con- 

 tiguous sides with a consequent loss of motion of the bones upon 

 one another. 2nd. The articular surfaces were reduced and the 

 sides of the bones became roughened for the stronger attachment 

 of ligaments. 3rd. The bones became joined by the formation 

 of bony tissue at the line of union, a suture marking the place of 

 contact. 4th. The bones finally became firmly united in a large 

 part of their extent, even the suture disappearing at an early 

 period of development of the individual. 



Dr. Wortman considered these facts as evidence that the Can- 

 non-bone in its incipiency is the result of a senile change, i. e., 

 acquired with the age of the animal, and that, as evolution pro- 

 gressed, its formation was brought about earlier and earlier, until 

 in modern camels it is clearly an inter-uterine formation. This, 

 he maintained, is clearly an instance of the inheritance of an ac- 

 quired characteristic. 



In discussing the paper, Professor Osborn remarked that un- 

 doubtedly these changes were acquired characters, but the indue- 



