Fasten, Partheno gene tic Data. 
61 
DATA FROM EXPERIMENTS ON PARTHENOGENETIC 
ANIMALS. 
By Nathan Fasten. 
A. Historical. 
B. Natural Parthenogenesis. 
1. Parthenogenesis among Vertebrates. 
2. Parthenogenesis among Invertebrates. 
a. Rotifers. 
b. Crustaceans. 
c. Insects. 
(1) Bees and Ants. 
(2) Aphids and Phylloxera. 
3. Variation among Parthenogenetic Forms. 
C. Artificial Parthenogenesis. 
D. Parthenogenesis and Sex. 
A. HISTORICAL 
The problem of parthenogenesis has long puzzled the minds 
of naturalists. The Greeks, with their wonderful insight and phi¬ 
losophical bent of mind, early turned their attention to nature, 
and were the first to record cases of such development among 
animals. Aristotle, in his “Historia animalium,” and “De Gen- 
eratione animalium,” tells us of parthenogenetic reproduction 
amongst the insects. In the “De Generatione animalium,” he 
speaks of the development of the honey bee in the following way: 
“The drones develop in a queenless stock,” and further on he 
adds, “The bees produce drones without copulation.”—Apparently 
this was overlooked for many centuries. 
The Renaissance brought a flood of oriental culture to the 
European continent. The philosophy of Aristotle now began to 
influence the minds of thinking men. Interest in nature was 
renewed, and in the seventeenth century, the facts concerning 
parthenogenesis were brought to light again. 
Goedart, in 1667, published his observations on the partheno¬ 
genetic development of “Orgyia gonastigma” Immediately, the 
attention of naturalists was aroused, and very shortly after this 
we find such students as Leeuwenhoek (1695), Blanchard (1696), 
Albrecht (1706) and Reaumur (1737) all working along similar 
lines. 
