48 ME. SWALE VINCENT ON THE 



(if with either) of these two bodies the suprarenal bodies of the higher vertebrates are 

 homologous. He does not decide the question definitely, but inclines to the view that 

 the paired bodies of Scyllium are homologous with the suprarenals of Mammalia l . 



The only recent account of the suprarenals in a Teleost which I have found is that 

 of M'Kenzie (15), written in 1884, who gives a description of the suprarenals of 

 Amiurus catus, with drawings of their histological appearances. They are, according 

 to M'Kenzie, sometimes entirely concealed by the kidney-substance. This is note- 

 worthy as being decidedly rare in this order. He describes alveoli containing large 

 and small granular cells, the longest of them reaching from wall to wall of an alveolus. 

 These two kinds of cells bear no constant relation to each other. This author does 

 not believe that the bodies have anything to do with the elaboration of the blood, 

 and is opposed to Weldon's view that the suprarenals are metamorphosed parts of 

 the kidney just as the head-kidney is. This fish, he states, has a well-developed 

 (lymphatic X) head-kidney in addition to the undoubted suprarenals. The interest and 

 importance of this will be seen later on. 



Chevrel (3) appears to be the last author who has written upon this subject 2 . He, 

 like Leydig, Semper, and Balfour, has discussed the subject in Elasmobranchs, and 

 chiefly from the standpoint of the sympathetic nervous system. He has picked out the 

 nerve-fibrils and suprarenal bodies with osmic acid. In this excellent memoir he gives 

 a very good historical account, and carefully reviews Balfour's work on the subject. 

 Chevrel states that the interrenal body is situated between the inferior surface of the 

 dorsal aorta and the superior surface of what he calls the " interrenal vein." He 

 describes also small detached parts of the interrenal on the superior and posterior 

 parts of the kidneys. 



In the case of the paired bodies, Chevrel denies Balfour's division into cortex and 

 medulla, and explains the appearance obtained by the latter observer as due to the 

 action of reagents. As will be seen below, this view is entirely corroborated by my 

 own researches. Chevrel got no appearances anything like Balfour described. He 

 says, " On ne voit ni cellules columnaires a la peripheric, ni cellules polygonales au 

 centre ; il n'y a que des apparences. Et ces apparences sont dues vraisemblablement 



1 [E. Fusari (" Contribuzione alio Studio dello Sviluppo delle Capsule surrenali e del Simpatico nel Polio e 

 nei ITammiferi," Arch, per le Scienze med., Torino, 1892, vol. xvi. no. 14, pp. 249-301, tav. iv.-vii.), from 

 investigations on mammals, maintains that the interrenal bod}' is not homologous with any part of the supra- 

 renal capsule, but with a certain adipose tissue found round the suprarenals in some mammals. 



On the other hand, M. Braun (" Bau und Entwickelung der Nebennieren bei Eeptilien," Arbeit, a. d. zool.- 

 zoot. Inst.Wiirz., Band v. pp. 1-30, Taf. i., ii., 1882), E. Semon (" Studien iiber den Bauplan des Urogenital- 

 systems der "Wirbelthiere (IchtiopJiis), Jena. Zeitschr., 1891, Band xxvi. pp. 89-203), and E. van W}iie (" Ueber 

 Mesodermsegmente des Eumpfes und die Entwickelung des Excretionsystems bei Selachiern," Arch. f. mikr. 

 Anat. Band xxxiii. 1889, pp. 461-516, Taf. xxx.-xxxii.) favour Balfour's views. 



Valenti (Atti della Soe. Toscana di Scienze nat. 1889, Pisa, vol. x. tav. x) believed the suprarenal capsule to 

 be a rudimentary organ. — S. V., 10. 1. 97.] 2 See footnote to p. 49. 



