NKW AND IJTTLK KNOWN 1 ‘ALEOZOIC 
... -I- ..IV.T iiMtiidv of liis sijeciiuen, decliircs that it “is 
Tl.«cl.. r .iimI J the paired fins, at present so popular 
“ utinm'-i rJsts-" n c I) 83) Dr. Smith Woodward' adopts 
-rill. -imlofiiiM- and emhrvolo-,sts; (I. c. j). i 
wilii 
lailli of tin* «|.|»o»iiif.' views. 
d.-riviiijr the modern fin, like (le-renlninr, from an 
::Lr.;T;'^n;;:rnn;.:i.Tivi„« ..... -,..1..... n...... ti,e ....... ...i r,..,. ic. 
I l.,.Ll .•n-cll.-.l .. Plych,/,lrnfnm. Tlii» is base,. .... a of tl.c 
Cl., I a. .I.c' '-aae ,.l' tl.o low..,- .■a,.b..,,,fc.mo„n 
ln*l in»iii iin* ' i* _ , -.1 T X i\ \r 1 
H,io.„a...e.l hs N\.«l,.rry <:/./.W«i/v/r''/Vand C. herzerii. Acconlingd. Dr.Uood- 
iranl aii'l Mr. D-aii.- wlio eoiilirms the ol.servation, the pectoral fin in these 
1. -iii.p.rMl l.v fiasal ossifications, wliiidi issue in nearly parallel relation 
fnaii llie l«sh Willi. Dr WiMsIwanl d.H-s not refer to the e.xistence of any skeletal 
..|...,i..,il n. r. iMsal support to I I.ese hiusal rays ; but Dr. Otto JaekeP asserts that 
llicn- iin- l.a-iil plat-s coiiiparal.le to the metapteryfriuin of the modern sharks, and 
li.-a.'.- infers the la.Hlcrii elianieter of the fin. He e.xpresses this opinion after an 
l•\nilliMnli■>ll Itf »«Miie of the s|a*eiiiieiis studieil liy Dr. Woodward and Mr. Dean. 
|>. W.rsiwiinl -ays "ihe si-jfiiieiitatioii of the rays” (of the pectoral fin of 
"VLtUInt /K/r-r//'i. tin* persisUMiee of one of the middle rays, with theconcoiiii- 
laiil pirliiil fuMion of the still further eiiiwded and reduced horderi up: rays, would 
iHHNi. ill the writer's opinion. i*esiilt in the aridiipterygium of (legenhanr. It is 
iiionsiiiT aigiiilieaiit that the anti rior (preaxial) rays are much more rohust than 
till’ ptaterior (ptstiiMall rays, exactly as in all known examples of the “arcliip- 
ti-rtitiiiiii Ml W'issiward also admits the possibility' <>f the single basis (mesop- 
tery aiiiiii I «»f th*’ andiipterygium, having iH'sidted from a fusion of .several hasal 
eliMii-ut*. «i« •iipiMixsl hy Dr. Aiitiui Krit.sch. as in the dorsal fin of Hhipidoptery- 
tfiaii li■h•‘s 
‘file h-swiii iiiii);||| |,\ the s|MM'iiiieii of Syntinoriuvi renifortne is as follows : 
I he iiietaptery uiiiiii is Hot funiied by the enlargement and segmentation of a median 
ray. or hnsilar. hut already exists as a plate or .series of plates probably enclosed in 
till' Usiy Mali or in its primitive fold. This metupterygial fold Ijecame siibse- 
•pK'iitly fns* |ststeriorly from the ImkIv wall. The arehipterygiiim is then formed 
froiii the pty ehopterygiuiii hv the addition of basilars to its po.ster()internal face; 
while the tri. Hiid plurilaisal liiis of niiMlern Khismobranchs and Teleostomi ai-e the 
n-iilt of enhinPMiient. nshietion and fusion of the proximal radials. Thus the fin- 
«tni< tim* 111-00% ensi hy I nu|nair. contrary to his .supposition, supports the 
ptyrhopt.-ryinuin tla-ory. and the in.Hlern fin is not derived from the archiptery- 
gnim. hut Iroin the ptyrhopterygiuin. From this we conclude that the Ichthv- 
oto„,M|.,p 1 , j the reverse; a resultwhich 
'• ' * n pa i>oiH«dogie sneeessioii. The converse supposition Avhich 1 have 
'-"''-i'l'’ "itli this onior, ,18 lcl.tl.v„u..i.i aw 
_ ; ^iMri.l Srymor. \tw, |.. tsiri i. m 
• s..o.oi^.' Jci;. 
