Page images

The olfactory organs of Orthoptera: N. E. McINDOO, Bureau of Entomology, Washington, D. C.

General Physiology

The formation of buds "Tethya" buds in sponges of the genus Coppatias: W. J. CROZIER and BLANCHE B. CROZIER, Bermuda Biological Station for Research.

On the temporal relations of asexual propagation and gametic reproduction in Coscinasterias; with a note on the function of the Madreporite: W. J. CROZIER, University of Illinois, College of Medicine.

The olfactory sense of lepidopterous larvæ: N: E. MCINDOO, Bureau of Entomology, Washington, D. C.

Sensory reactions of Chromodoris zebra: W. J. CROZIER, Bermuda Biological Station, and L. B. AREY, Northwestern University Medical School. The relative stimulating efficiency of continuous and intermittent light upon Vanessa antiopa: WILLIAM L. DOLLEY, JR., Randolph-Macon College, Ashland, Va.

The rates of CO2 produced by starved and fed Paramecia and their possible relations to the rates of oxidation in the unfertilized and fertilized sea urchin egg: E. J. LUND, University of Minnesota.

The photoreactions of partially blinded whip-tail scorpions: BRADLEY M. PATTEN, Western Reserve University, School of Medicine.

Excretion crystals in ameba: A. A. SCHAEFFER, University of Tennessee.

[ocr errors]

The reactions and resistance of certain marine Ishes to H ions: V. E. SHELFORD, University of Illinois.

A simple method for measuring the CO2 produced by protozoa and other small organisms: E. J. LUND, University of Minnesota.

The effect of KCN on the rate of oxygen consumption of Planaria: GEORGE DELWIN ALLEN, University of Minnesota (introduced by E. J. Lund).

The influence of temperature and concentrations

on toxicity of salts to fish: EDWIN B. POWERS, Colorado College (introduced by V. E. Shelford).


Further contributions upon the natural history of Chromodoris zebra; the question of adaptive coloration: W. J. CROZIER, University of Illinois, College of Medicine.

The zoological significance of the functional fenestral plate in the ear capsule of caudate amphibia: H. D. REED, Cornell University. The coloration and habits of West Indian and Hawaiian reef fishes: W. H. LONGLEY, Goucher College.

Suggestions as to the climograph of deciduous forest invertebrates as illustrated by experimental data on the codling moth: V. E. SHELFORD, Illinois Natural History Survey.

On the nature and source of some adaptive features in the ethnology of Chiton: W. J. CROZIER, University of Illinois, College of Medicine.


The anlage of endoderm and mesoderm in the opossum: CARL HARTMAN, University of Texas. The astrous cycle in rats: J. A. LONG, University of California.

Results of extirpation both thyroid and pituitary glands in tadpoles of Bufo and Rana: BENNETT M. ALLEN, University of Kansas. Miscellaneous notes regarding experimental studies upon the endocrine glands of Rana and Bufo: BENNETT M. ALLEN, University of Kan


Effect of the extirpation of the thyroid gland upon the pituitary gland in Bufo: MARY ELIZABETH LARSON, University of Kansas (introduced by Bennet M. Allen).

Evolution and Genetics

The solitary and aggregated generations in Salpida: MAYNARD M. METCALF, Orchard Laboratory. Correlation of fertility and fecundity in an inbred stock: ROSCOE R. HYDE, Indiana State Normal School and Johns Hopkins University.

The extent of the occurrence of sex intergrades in Cladocera: ARTHUR M. BANTA, Station for Experimental Evolution.

Inheritance of color in the domestic turkey: W. R.
B. ROBERTSON, University of Kansas.
Nuclear reorganization and its relation to conjuga-
tion and inheritance in Arcella vulgaris: H. M.
MACCURDY, Alma College.

Several ways in which Gynandromorphs in Insects may arise: T. H. MORGAN, Columbia University. Duplication: C. R. BRIDGES, Columbia University (introduced by T. H. Morgan).


Demonstration of sex intergrades in Cladocera. A. M. Banta, Station for Experimental Evolution.

Models showing typical in the development of the human embryo. Department of Embryology, Carnegie Institution of Washington.

In addition to these papers the Ecological Society of America contributed the following papers to the joint program held on the evening of December 27:

The hydrogen ion concentration of the sea water of Puget Sound and the reactions of the herring (Clupea pallasii Cuvier) to hydrogen concentration in sea water: EDWIN B. POWERS, Colorado College.

The PH of Puget Sound in the vicinity of Friday Harbor varies with other conditions, tides, depths and locality. The herring reacts positively to a PH of 7.9 to 8.0. The reaction is positive to this PH concentration both from a lower and a higher PH.

Ecological investigations under the federal government: HARRY C. OBERHOLSER, National Mu


The most important ecological investigation under federal government auspices are carried on as a basis for other work, and are of far-reaching importance. The Fish Commission studies the relation of fishes to their environment; the Forest Service that of trees; the Bureau of Plant Industry of various other plants, particularly with regard to plant diseases and plant introductions; the Bureau of Animal Industry, the life history of internal animal parasites; the Bureau of Entomology, the life history of insects in their relation to economic problems; and the Biological Survey, the relations of animals, birds and other animals to their environment and to each other, for the determination of the life zones of distribution.

The distribution of the internal parasites of the fish and other aquatic vertebrates of Oneida Lake, New York: HENRY S. PRATT, Haverford College.

An important feature of the meeting was the conference between government and laboratory zoologists on Saturday afternoon. Subject: Methods of securing Better Cooperation between Government and Laboratory Zoologists in the Solution of Problems of General or National Importance; Professor C. E. McClung, presiding.

Papers on plans and problems of the Bureau of Entomology that can be furthered by cooperation with laboratory zoologists: Dr. L. O. Howard.

Discussion led by Professor J. C. Needham, Cornell University.

Paper from the Bureau of Fisheries: Dr. Hugh Smith.

Discussion led by Professor H. B. Ward, University of Illinois.

Paper from the Bureau of Animal Industry: Dr. B. H. Ransom.

Discussion led by Professor Herbert Osborn, Ohio State University.

Paper from the Biological Survey: Dr. E. W. Nelson.

Discussion led by Professor R. K. Nabours, Manhattan, Kansas.

Plans of National Research Council for advanc

ing American Research: Dr. J. C. Merriam, vicechairman, National Research Council.

Concluding discussion and proposal of definite plans: Professor C. E. McClung.

The proceedings of the conference will be published in full in a later issue of SCIENCE.


THE Convocation Week meetings of Section F were held in conjunction with those of The Society of American Zoologists at Baltimore, Maryland, December 26-28.

At the business session, Bennett M. Allen, Lawrence, Kansas, was elected member of the council; J. H. Gerould, Hanover, N. H., was chosen member of the General Committee; Herbert Osborn, Columbus, Ohio, was reelected member of Sectional Committee for five years, and W. M. Wheeler, Bussey Institution, was elected vice-president of the section for 1919.

In the absence of the secretary H. V. Neal in Y. M. C. A. service in Italy, the secretary of the zoologists, W. C. Allee, Lake Forest, Ill., acted as secretary for the meeting. W. C. ALLEE, Secretary

[blocks in formation]



[blocks in formation]



Ir is hardly necessary to remind you that the stress of recent months has not been very favorable for the production of an address worthy of this occasion. I shall present no apologies or excuses for the shortcomings of my effort but it may be fair to state that the subject selected has been determined in part by the conditions of world turmoil through which we have been passing and the thoughts almost inevitably prompted by the rapidly shifting viewpoints in almost every phase of human thought.

Since we are human beings as well as zoologists it is natural that we should be confronted with questions as to the status of our science in the world problems of the day; the effects that may follow the immensely critical movements in human adjustments and, perhaps above all as to the bearing of our zoological knowledge, philosophy and instruction upon the shaping of human activities and human activities and human progress.

To merely state these questions would involve more time and a more comprehensive grasp of human affairs than I can claim; to attempt answers to them would involve prophetic vision as well as broad knowledge, but nevertheless I shall venture to present a few, perhaps disjointed, suggestions, believing them to be of imperative importance and in the hope that they may stimulate further interest and discussion.

It will help to form a basis for these suggestions to consider for a moment the method by which the science of zoology has developed and reached its present status. As with other sciences and human knowledge in general it

1 Address of the retiring vice-president and chairman, Section F, Zoology, of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Baltimore, December 27, 1918.

has been a matter of very irregular growth, now one phase, now another forging ahead; the mistakes of one generation being corrected by a later one and the faulty interpretations of limited knowledge clarified with wider basis of fact. Often the progress of one branch has been definitely halted till the developments in other fields have given the data necessary for a clear comprehension and satisfactory solution of its problems.

The rapid advance of one phase may have resulted from individual taste or interest or again from some insistent demand from an associated or dependent field. Comparative anatomy has been pushed forward by the needs of human anatomy; in fact many phases of zoology particularly related to medicine have had their progress determined by the needs of this applied science. The medical importance of certain mosquitoes and flies has stimulated tremendously the interest in these groups and the amount of study devoted to them.

Extremely destructive insects, from a human standpoint, have been investigated with far greater assiduity than is true of most of the species devoid of economic interest. Attractive habits or a human interest perhaps accounts for the fact that birds have been much more studied and are far better known than the worms on which they feed, and that ants, bees and wasps with social habits have claimed attention to the neglect of less highly specialized forms.

Primitive observations of the character and habits of animals, stimulated no doubt by the needs for food and the domestication of available forms, has grown into definite knowledge concerning the habits and life histories and other general matter. The study of animal activities must have been closely coincident with that of the animal mechanism and these gradually differentiated into the now almost too widely separated branches of morphology and physiology, while passing further into the realm of the interactions with surrounding forces or interrelations with other organisms has developed into the ecology of modern times. Recognition of the succession of gen

erations of like animals laid the foundations for a knowledge of the main facts of heredity and these with later knowledge of the mechanism of inheritance gives us our modern conceptions of genetics.

Attempts to designate the various animals must have developed by slow degrees into the primitive recognition of species and quite naturally into the further association of groups of similar kinds such as birds, fishes, reptiles, etc., which were undoubtedly the beginnings of our systems of classification; systems whose complexities now sometimes become the despair of the initiated as well as of the amateur.

Comparison of the animals of different geographical regions involving the recognition of distribution, of adaptations to climate, topography and other natural features and to restriction of modes of life must have early entered into the realm of zoology. Curiosity as to the meaning of fossils grew with our sister science of geology into modern paleontology with all its significant contributions to the interpretation of life and its historic development.

Speculation as to the origin of animal life certainly came at an early date and the long tangle of conceptions of the processes of evolution which have culminated in our doctrine of descent was started on its devious path.

But it is not my purpose to trace in detail the growth of the different branches of zoological science. What I would like to emphasize just now is that we have a large number of quite distinct phases of our study and that these have become so specialized that the workers in one branch may have very little conception of the nature of the problems, the technique or the difficulties attending the advancement of knowledge in another branch.

In some cases this seems to have resulted in lack of sympathy or in misunderstandings that have served as a handicap to the progress of the science as a whole and a mutual recognition of the interdependence of all branches should be helpful in determining future progress. The truth is that there is no branch of zoology overworked or exhausted and there is

every reason for cordial recognition of the work being done in other fields than one's own specialty. Moreover, so dependent is one branch for its fullest development on the progress of related or supporting branches that any other attitude is to be deplored.

In a general way and for the purpose of my discussion we may separate zoological activities into two broad classes (1st) investigation, research or the accumulation of new knowledge and (2d) instruction or the distribution of this knowledge to the public at large.

In many ways the aims and methods of the two may differ and yet there is imperative need of the closest and most sympathetic contact between the two and among the workers in the different spheres. In many casesand I believe most fortunately-the two functions are combined, but often such separation exists as to result in loss of effort or even conflict of action.


It should go without saying that research must precede instruction at least as applied to any particular object although it would seem that this order is at times reversed.

We may sometimes discover quite munificent provision for education in a too narrow sense with little apparent recognition that the subjects covered are still little known or crudely assembled. Extended and careful investigation should be the first effort in order that accurate and useful knowledge may be available for instruction. Here too will arise the question as to the kind of research that should be given first and most insistent attention.

The point of view may be determined largely by the concept or ideal as to the ultimate goal of zoological effort. Have we a definite object or are we still, as in the early stages of our science, simply following attractive leads or the easiest trails to see whither they may carry us? Is it our greatest ambition to produce a zoological structure complete and perfect in itself as a scientific ideal or to give earliest and most effective service possible to all the agencies operating

for human progress and human welfare? Shall our immediate efforts be given to questions of most remote concern to present problems of life or shall we concentrate effort on those phases which by their relation to medicine or to industry have vital bearing on immediate human needs? Such questions must have come to many of us when searching our innermost thoughts for evidence as to what we could do to help "win the war." Such questions may well concern us in the history-making period that must now follow in the establishment of order and a new alignment of human relationships and activities and which must necessarily be of worldwide scope.

Perhaps we may reflect that these questions will be largely settled by the tastes and choice of the many individuals concerned and that the outcome will be a fairly well-balanced combination. Nevertheless it is evident that the question will come as an urgent one to many individuals and will affect their attitude both in research and instruction so that some sort of decision as to the direction of greatest emphasis will need to be made.

Admitting, however, that the final goal is economic advantage, the development of applied science for the betterment of human society, we may still inquire as to the route to the main objective. I would certainly be one of the first to accord a high place to all phases of science that have made and are making for human advancement. Human society is not only our greatest achievement so far but it offers the only basis we know for evolution and progress in conditions of world affairs that should make this earth the fittest place possible for human life.

But we must guard against a too narrow view of the values in scientific knowledge. That which is of the most immediate concern may be but temporary in its application and some of the most vital and enduring things may be less apparent.

It is fortunate therefore that along with the many agencies that are attacking the immediate problems of applied science we have numerous agencies interested in the explora

« PreviousContinue »