416 



AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY 



Evolution — Cont'd. 



The origin of fresh-water faunas. Gill, 

 T. N. 1905.12; Palacky, J. 1891.1; 



Sollas, W. J. 1884.1. 



Quadrate and squamosal as progenitors of 

 mammalian temporal. Albrecht, P. 1883.1. 



Homologies of the opercular elements of 

 fishes with the auditory ossicles of mammals. 

 Baraldi, G. 1877.1. 



Evolution as illustrated by egg-cases of 

 Chimceridoe. Dean, B. 1904.1, .2, 1912.6. 



Polymorphism and evidence of mutation 

 in Malthopsis. Lloyd, R. E. 1909.1, 

 1912.1. 



General treatises on Evolution 



In the following works, references to 

 the evolution of fishes are usually inci- 

 dental. 



TextinEnglish. •Darwin, C. R. 1871.1 

 1883.1; Lloyd, R.E. 1912.1; •Morgan 

 T. H. 1916.1; •Osborn, H. F. 1894.1 

 1916.1; Phillips, J. 1860.1; Cunningham 

 J. T. Add. 1898.1. 



Text in French. Perrier, J. O. 1884.1 

 Vialleton, L. 1908.1. 



Text in German. •Abel, O. 1912.1 

 Haacke, J. W. 1893.2; •Haeckel, E. H 

 1895.1; Keibel, F. 1898.1; Rosa, D 

 1903.1; Simroth, H. R. 1891.1, 1902.1 

 Wagner, M. F. 1889.1. 



Evolution and Falseontology 



The geological succession of life in time 

 being the history of fishes as traced on the 

 older rocks, especially in America. Agassiz, 

 J. L. 1835.3, 1843.2,.4, 1846.4; Case, E.G. 

 1898.1; Cope, E. D. 1874.7; Marsh, O. 

 C. 1877.1; Meek, S. E. 1900.2; New- 

 berry, J. S. 1873.3; Phillips, J. 1860.1; 

 Pohlig, H. 1909.1, 1914.1. 



Palmohislological data on the origin of 

 teleosts. Reis, O. M. 1895.3. 



Palasontological evidence for the evolution 

 of fishes. •Traquair, R. H. 1898.1, 

 1900.1,.2. 



The imperfection of the geological record. 

 Woodward, A. S. 1898.2. 



Evolution of vertebrate animals in time, 

 an address. Woodward, H. 1904.1. 



Palceontology and the biogenetic law. 

 Zittel, K. A. 1895.2. 



The probable derivation of the Amphibia 

 from the Crossopterygian ganoids. Gregory, 

 W. K. 1913.2, 1915.1; Jaekel, O. 1911.1; 

 Moodie, R. L. 1915.1,.3; Pollard, H. B. 

 1891.1. 



Dipnoi considered related to Amphibia 

 but excluded from the direct ancestry be- 

 cause of specializations in skull and denti- 

 tion. Semon, R. W. 1901.4. 



Hypotheses of the ancestry 

 of the vertebrates 



Practically all hypotheses on the origin 

 of vertebrates are reviewed in Delage, M. Y. 

 & H(§rouard, E. 1898.1, pp. 345-355. 



In addition to the following chief hypoth- 

 eses, a number additional are mentioned by 

 Perrier, J. O. 1898.1. 



Annelidan view of the derivation of verte- 

 brates from worm-like ancestors. Various 



papers discussing suggested annelidan af- 

 finities, especially in the nervous system. 

 Beard, J. 1889.4; Bernard, H. M. 1898.1; 

 Dohrn, A. 1876.2; Kovalevskii, A. O. 

 1877.1; Ryder, J. A. 1885.1; Delsman, 

 H. C. Add. 1913.1; Semper, C. Add. 

 1875.1. 



Arachnid hypothesis of vertebrate ancestry, 

 based on supposed resemblances, especially 

 in appendages of the horseshoe crab Limulus 

 and the Ostracoderms. •Patten, W. 1890.1, 



1902.1, 1906.1, 1912.1. — Remarks on 

 these views. Eastmann, C. R. 1902.5, 



1903.2, 1904.4. 



Arthropod hypothesis, or Gaskell's view of 

 Crustacea as ancestors of the vertebrates. 

 •Gaskell, W. H. 1889.1-1908.1. — Re- 

 marks on these views. Bordage, E. 1892.1; 

 Dean, B. 1909.3; Jaekel, O. 1909.2; 

 Kerr, J. G. 1910.2; Patten, W. 1899.1. 



Concerning Gaskell's hypothesis, the 

 arthropod resemblances are ascribed to 

 parallelisms in Dollo, L. 1909.4. 



Cephalic homologies, in relation to the 

 determination of the ancestry of vertebrates. 

 Minot, C. S. 1897.1. 



Ostracoderms as forerunners of vertebrates. 

 Woodward, A. S. 1892.5. 



Protochordate origin of the vertebrates. 

 " Amphioxus and the ancestry of the verte- 

 brates." Willey, A. 1894.1. 



Of morphologists of the highest order, few 

 have been more productive of speculations on 

 the origin of the vertebrates than Anton 

 Dohrn. For these views published inGerman, 

 see •Dohrn, A. 1882.2. For critical re- 

 marks on these views, see Cunningham, J. 

 T. 1884.1, 1887.1. For summaries in Eng- 

 lish of Dohrn's theories, see •Qcharff, R. 

 F. 1888.2. 



Unclassified papers. Goette, A. 1895.1; 

 Jenkins, S. 1897.1; Lillie, R. S. 1896.1. 



Origin of species 



Origin of species through isolation. Jor- 

 dan, D. S. 1905.5,.6. 



Coregonus fera sancti-benedicti arising 

 from C. fera of Bodensee, after 40 years 

 isolation in Laachersee, Prussia. Thiene- 

 mann, A. 1911.2, 1912.5, 1914.1. 



PHYLOGENESIS OF LIMBS 



Hypotheses of the origin of the paired 

 limbs of gnathostomes based primarily on 

 the study of the structure of the fins of 

 fishes. 



The paired fins of fishes (Ichthyoptery- 

 gia) are universally accepted as the pro- 

 genitors of the limbs (Chiropterygia) of 

 the other classes of vertebrates or tetra- 

 pods. 



For an excellent, popular risumi of the 

 three prevalent views listed below, see 

 •Jordan, D. S. 1902.9. This is reprinted 

 as chapter v in his 1905.1. 



A shorter resume largely quoted by Jordan 

 is that o/^Kerr, J. G. 1900.2. Another {in 

 German) is that of Jaekel, 0. 1909.2. 



For a learned summary of the gill-arch 

 and the lateral fold hypotheses with a bibli- 

 ography, see •Goodrich, E. S. 1906.1. 



