Hostname: page-component-784d4fb959-jtjl6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-15T22:36:21.571Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

XIV.—On Intestinal Respiration in Annelids; with Considerations on the Origin and Evolution of the Vascular System in that Group.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 July 2012

J. Stephenson
J. Stephenson
Affiliation:
Major, Indian Medical Service, Professor of Biology,Government College, Lahore.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The investigations recorded in the present paper have been carried out at various times during the last six years. A number of the observations on aquatic Oligochæta were made some time ago in India, and, along with some of the theoretical conclusions, formed Part IV. of a Thesis (“Studies on the Aquatic Oligochæta of the Punjab”) presented in 1909 for the D.Sc. degree of the London University. This division of the paper has been considerably extended as a result of further investigations on Indian freshwater forms, and on the littoral Oligochæta of the Clyde, the latter carried out at Millport in 1909. The portion of the present paper which is concerned with the Polychæta and smaller groups represents work done in 1909 at Millport, and in 1912, during my occupancy of the London University table, at the Plymouth Laboratory.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of The Royal Society of Edinburgh , Volume 49 , Issue 3 , 1913 , pp. 735 - 829
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1913

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

References to Literature

(1)Annandale, N., “Notes on an Indian Worm of the genus Chætogaster,’ Journ. and Proc. Asiatic Soc. of Bengal, N.S., vol. i., No. 4, 1905.Google Scholar
(2)Annandale, N., “Some Animals found associated with Spongilla carteri in Calcutta,” Journ. and Proc. Asiatic Soc. of Bengal, vol. ii., No. 5, 1906.Google Scholar
(3)Beddard, F., A Monograph of the Order of Oligochæta, Oxford, 1895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(3a)Beddard, F., “A new branchiate Oligochæte (Branchiura Sowerbyi),” Quart. Journ. Microsc. Sci., N.S., vol. xxxiii., 1892.Google Scholar
(4)Benham, W. B., Art. “Polychæta,” in Cambridge Natural History, vol. ii., London, 1896.Google Scholar
(5)Bounhiol, J. P., “Recherches expérimentales sur la respiration des Annélides,” C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, t. cxxxii., 1901.Google Scholar
(6)Bounhiol, J.P., “Recherches biologiques expérimentales sur la respiration des Annélides polychètes,” Ann. Sci. Nat. (8), t. xvi., 1902.Google Scholar
(7)Bounhiol, J.P., Short papers in C. R. Soc. Biol. Paris, t. lv., 1903.Google Scholar
(8)Bourne, A.G., “Notes on the Naidiform Oligochæta, etc.,” Quart. Journ. Microsc. Sci., N.S., vol. xxxii., 1891.Google Scholar
(9)Bousfield, E.C., “The Natural History of the genus Dero,” Journ. Linn. Soc. (Zool.), vol. xx., 1890.Google Scholar
(10)Bretscher, K., “Beobachtungen über die Oligochæten der Schweiz,” Rev. Suisse Zool., t. x., No. 1, 1902.Google Scholar
(11)Carlgren, O., “Ueber die Bedeutung der Flimmerbewegung für den Nahrungstransport bei den Actiniarien und Madreporarien,” Biol. Centralbl., Bd. xxv., 1905.Google Scholar
(12)Cerruti, A., Abstract in Zool. Jahresb., 1907: “Vermes,” p. 67.Google Scholar
(13)Darboux, G., “Sur le rôle physiologique des cæcums intestinaux des Aphroditiens,” Bull. Soc. Nîmes, t. xxvii., 1899.Google Scholar
(14)de St Joseph, M. le Baron, “Les annélides polychètes des côtes de Dinard,” Ann. Sci. Nat. (Zool.) (7), t. i., 1886.Google Scholar
(15)de St Joseph, M. le Baron, “Les annélides polychètes des côtes de Dinard,” Ann. Sci. Nat. (Zool.) (7), t. v., 1888.Google Scholar
(16)Eisig, H., “Ueber das Vorkommen eines schwimmblasenähnlichen Organs bei Anneliden,” Mitth. Zool. Stat. Neapel, Bd. ii. Hft. iii., 1881.Google Scholar
(17)Eisig, H., “Die Capitelliden,” Fauna und Flora des Golfes von Neapel, xvi. Monographie, Berlin, 1887.Google Scholar
(18)Freudweiler, Hedwig, “Studien über das Gefässsystern niederer Oligochäten,” Jena. Zeitschr. f. Naturw., Bd. xl., 1905.Google Scholar
(19)Fuchs, K., “Die Topographie des Blutgefässsystems der Chätopoden,” Jena. Zeitschr. f. Naturw., Bd. xlii., 1907.Google Scholar
(20)Gamble, F.W., and Ashworth, J.H., “The Anatomy and Classification of the Arenicolidæ, with some observations on their post-larval stages,” Quart. Journ. Microsc. Sci., N.S., vol. xliii., 1900.Google Scholar
(20A)Gamble, F.W., “The Habits and Structure of Arenicola marina,”Quart. Journ. Microsc. Sci., vol. xli., 1898.Google Scholar
(21)Gegenbaur, C., Elements of Comparative Anatomy, trans. Bell, F. Jeffrey, London, 1878.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(22)Goodrich, E.S., “Nerilla an Archiannelid,” Quart. Journ. Microsc. Sci., N.S., vol. lvii., 1912.Google Scholar
(23)Harmer, S.F., Art. “Polyzoa,” in Cambridge Natural History, vol. ii., London, 1896.Google Scholar
(24)Hesse, R., Tierbau und Tierleben in ihrem Zusammenhang betrachtet: i. Bd., Der Tierkörper als selbständigen Organismus, Leipzig and Berlin, 1910.Google Scholar
(25)Johnstone, J., Conditions of Life in the Sea (Camb. Biological Series), Cambridge, 1908.Google Scholar
(26)Jordan, H., “Die physiologische Morphologie der Verdauungsorgane bei Aphrodite aculeata,” Zeitsch. f. wiss. Zool., Bd. lxxviii., 1904.Google Scholar
(27)Lang, A., “Der Bau von Gunda segmentata und die Verwandtschaft der Plathelminthen mit Cœlenteraten und Hirudineen,” Mitth. Zool. Stat. Neapel, vol. iii., 1882.Google Scholar
(28)Lang, A., “Die Polycladen,” Fauna und Flora des Golfes von Neapel, xi. Monographie, Berlin, 1884.Google Scholar
(29)Lang, A., “Beiträge zu einer Trophocöltheorie,” Jena. Zeitschr. f. Naturw., Bd. xxxviii., N.F. xxxi., 1903.Google Scholar
(30)Malaquin, A., “Recherches sur les Syllidiens,” Mém. Soc. des Sciences de l'Agriculture et des Arts de Lille, 4 sér., t. xviii., 1893.Google Scholar
(31)Meyer, E., “Die Abstammung der Anneliden,” Biol. Centralblatt, vol. x., 1890.Google Scholar
(32)Michaelsen, W., Untersuchungen über Enchytræus möbii und andere Enchyträiden, Dissertation, Kiel, 1886.Google Scholar
(33)Michaelsen, W., “The Oligochæta of India, Nepaul, Ceylon, Burma, and the Andaman Islands,” Mem. Ind. Mus., vol. i., No. 3, 1909.Google Scholar
(34)Pütter, A., Die Ernährung der Wassertiere und der Stoffhaushalt der Gewässer, Jena, 1909.Google Scholar
(35)Pütter, A., “Die Ernährung der Fische,” Zeitschr. f. allg. Physiol., Bd. ix., Hft. i., 1909.Google Scholar
(36)Pütter, A., “Die Ernährung der Wassertiere durch gelöste organische Verbindungen,” Arch. f. die ges. Physiol., Bd. cxxxvii., 1911.Google Scholar
(37)Quatrefages, A. de, “La respiration des Annélides,” Ann. Sci. Nat. (3), t. xiv., 1850.Google Scholar
(38)Quatrefages, A. De, Histoire naturelle des Annélés marins et d'eau douce: Annélides et Gephyriens, Paris, 1865.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(39)Rathke, H., Beiträge zur Fauna Norwegens, 1840.Google Scholar
(39A)Rauther, M., “Morphologie und Verwandtschaftsbeziehungen der Nematoden,” Ergeb. u. Fortschritte der Zoologie, vol. i., 1909.Google Scholar
(40)Salensky, W., “Ueber den Bau und die Entwicklung der Schlundtaschen der Spioniden,” Bull. Acad. Sci. St Pétersbourg (6), t. ii., 1908.Google Scholar
(41)Schaeppi, T., “Das Chloragogen von Ophelia radiata,” Jena. Zeitschr. f. Naturw., Bd. xxviii., N.F. xxi., 1893.Google Scholar
(42)Schneider, C. C., Lehrbuch der vergleichenden Histologie der Tiere, Jena, 1902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(43)Sedgwick, A., “On the Origin of Metamerie Segmentation, and some othe Morphological Questions,” Quart. Journ. Microsc. Sci., N.S., vol. xxiv., 1884.Google Scholar
(44)Setti, E., Abstr. in Zool. Jahresb., 1900: “Vermes,” p. 61.Google Scholar
(45)Stephenson, J., “Description of an Oligochæte Worm allied to Chætogaster,” Rec. Indian Mus., vol. i. pt. ii., 1907.Google Scholar
(46)Stephenson, J., “Description of two freshwater Oligochæte Worms from the Punjab,” Rec. Indian Mus., vol. i., pt. iii., 1907.Google Scholar
(47)Stephenson, J., “The Anatomy of some aquatic Oligochæta from the Punjab,” Mem. Indian Mus., vol. i. No. 3, 1909.Google Scholar
(48)Stephenson, J., “Studies on the aquatic Oligochæta of the Punjab,” Rec. Indian Mus., vol. v. pt. i., 1910.Google Scholar
(48A)Stephenson, J., “On some aquatic Oligochæte Worms commensal in Spongilla carteri,” Rec. Indian Mus., vol. v. pt. iv., 1910.Google Scholar
(49)Stephenson, J., “On some aquatic Oligochæta in the collection of the Indian Museum,” Rec. Indian Mus., vol. vi. pt. iv., 1911.Google Scholar
(50)Stephenson, J., “On the littoral Oligochæta of the Clyde,” Trans. Roy. Soc. Edin., vol. xlviii, pt. i., 1911.Google Scholar
(51)Stephenson, J., “On Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard, and on a new species of Limnodrilus with distinctive characters,” Trans. Roy. Soc. Edin., vol. xlviii, pt. ii., 1912.Google Scholar
(51A)Stephenson, J., “On a new species of Branchiodrilus and certain other aquatic Oligochæta, with remarks on cephalisation in the Naididæ,” Rec. Indian Mus., vol. vii. pt. iii., 1912.Google Scholar
(52)Sterling, S., “Das Blutgefässsystem der Oligochäten,” Jena. Zeitschr. f. Naturw., Bd. xliv., 1909.Google Scholar
(53)Vejdovsky, F., Beiträge zur vergleichenden Morphologie der Anneliden: I., Monographie der Enchyträiden, Prag, 1879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(54)Vejdovsky, F., System und Morphologie der Oligochäten, Prag, 1884.Google Scholar
(55)Vejdovsky, F., “Zur Hämocöltheorie,” Zeitschr. f. wiss. Zool., vol. lxxxii., 1905.Google Scholar
(56)Vejdovsky, F., “Zweiter Beitrag zur Hämocöltheorie,” Zeitschr. f. wiss. Zool., vol. lxxxv., 1906.Google Scholar
(57)Willey, A., Convergence in Evolution, London, 1911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar