806 ZOOLOGY Order 3. Tcstacea. Genera : () Multivalvia : Chiton, Lcpas, Pholas. (b) Bivalvia ( = Conchx) : Mya, Solen, Tellina, Cardium, Mactra, Donax, Venus, Spon- dylus, Chama, Area, Ostrca, Anomia, Mytilus, Pinna. (c) Univalvia spira regular! ( = Cochlea!) : Argo- nauta, Nautilus, Conus, Cyprsea, Bulla, Valuta, Buccinum, Strombus, Murex, Trochus, Turbo, Helix, Nerita, Haliotis. (d) Univalvia absque spira regulari : Patella, Dentalium, Serpula, Teredo, Sabella. ., 4. Lithophyta. Genera : Tubipora, Madrepora, Millcpora, Celle- pora. 5. Zoophyta. Genera : (a) Fixata : Isis, Gorgonia, Alcyonium, Spongia, Flustra, Tubularia, Corallina, Sertularia, Vorticella. (b) Locomotiva : Hydra, Pcnnatula, Ts&nia, Volvox, Furia, Chaos. The characters of the six classes are thus given by Linnaeus : Cor biloculare, biauritum ; Sanguine calido, rubro : Coruniloculare^iniauritum; 1 Sanguine frigido, rubro : Cor uniloculare, inauritum ; Sanie frigida, albida : viviparis, Mammalibus ; oviparis, Ambus. pulmone arbitrario, Amphibiis ; branchiis externis, Piscibus. antenna tis, Insectis ; tentaculatis, Vmnibus. From Between Linnaeus and Cuvier there are no very great Linnaeus names ; but under the stimulus given by the admirable Cuvier. method an( j S y S tem of Linnaeus observation and description of new forms from all parts of the world, both recent and fossil, accumulated. We can only cite the names of Charles Bonnet (1720-1793), the entomologist, who described the reproduction of Aphis ; Banks and Solander, who accom panied Captain Cook on his first voyage (1768-1771); Thomas Pennant (1726-1798), the describer of the English fauna; Peter Simon Pallas (1741-1811), who specially ex tended the knowledge of the Linnaean Vermes, and under the patronage of the empress Catherine explored Russia and Siberia ; De Geer (1720-1778), the entomologist ; Lyonnet (1707-1789), the author of the monograph of the anatomy of the caterpillar of Cossus ligniperdus; Cavolini (1756- 1810), the Neapolitan marine zoologist and forerunner of Delia Chiaje (fl. 1828); O. F. Miiller (1730-1784), the describer of freshwater Oligockseta ; Abraham Trembley (1700-1784), the student of Hydra; and Ledermiiller (1719- 1769), the inventor of the term Infusoria. The effect of the Linnsean system upon the general conceptions of zoolo gists was no less marked than were its results in the way of stimulating the accumulation of accurately observed de tails. The notion of a scala naturae, which had since the days of classical antiquity been a part of the general philo sophy of nature amongst those who occupied themselves with such conceptions, now took a more definite form in the minds of skilled zoologists. The species of Linnaeus were supposed to represent a series of steps in a scale of ascending complexity, and it was thought possible thus to arrange the animal kingdom in a single series, the orders within the classes succeeding one another in regular grada tion, and the classes succeeding one another in a similar La- rectilinear progression. LAMARCK (q.v.) represents most 1 completely, both by his development theory (to be further cation mentioned below) and by his scheme of classification, the high-water mark of the popular but fallacious conception of a scala naturae. His classification (1801 to 1812) is as follows : - 1 The anatomical error in reference to the auricles of Reptiles and Batrachians on the part of Linnaeus is extremely interesting, since it shows to what an extent the most patent facts may escape the observa tion of even the greatest observers, and what an amount of repeated dissection and unprejudiced attention has been necessary before the structure of the commonest animals has become known. Invertebrata. 1. Apathetic Animals Class I. INFUSORIA. Orders : Nuda, Append iculata. Class II. POLYPI. Orders : Ciliati (Rotifcra], Denudati (Hydroids), Va- ginati (Anthozoa and Polyzoa], Natantcs (Crinoids). Class III. RADIARIA. Orders : Mollia (Acalephse), Eeliinodcrma (including Actiniae,}. Class IV. TUNICATA. Orders : Bothryllaria, Ascidia. Class V. VERMES. Orders : Holies (Tape-Worms and Flukes), Rigiduli (Nematoids), Hispiduli (Nais, &c. ), Epizoariaz (Lernseans, &c. ). 2. Sensitive Animals. Class VI. INSECTA (Hexapoda). Orders : Aptera, Diptera, Ilemiptcra, Lepidoptera, Hymenoptcra, Ncuroptcra, Orthoptera, Coleoptera. Class VII. ARACHNIDA. Orders: Antennato- Trachcalia ( = Thysanura and Myriapoda), Exantennato- Trachealia, Exantennato- Branchialia. Class VIII. CRUSTACEA. Orders : Heterobranchia (Branehiopoda, Isopoda, Amphipoda, Stomapoda), Homobranchia (Dccapodd). Class IX. ANNELIDA. Orders : Apoda, Antennata, Sedentaria. Class X. CIRRIPEDIA. Orders : Sessilia, Pedunculata. Class XL CONCHIFERA. Orders : Dimyaria, Monomyaria. Class XII. MOLLUSCA. Orders : Pteropoda, Gasteropoda, Trachelipoda, Ce plialopoda, Heteropoda. Vertebrata. 3. Intelligent Animals. Class XIII. FISHES. Class XV. BIRDS. XIV. REPTILES. ,, XVI. MAMMALS. The enumeration of orders above given will enable the reader to form some conception of the progress of know ledge relating to the lower forms of life during the fifty years which intervened between Linnaeus and Lamarck. The number of genera recognized by Lamarck is more than ten times as great as that recorded by Linnaeus. We have mentioned Lamarck before his great contem porary Cuvier because, in spite of his valuable philosophical doctrine of development, he was, as compared with Cuvier and estimated as a systematic zoologist, a mere enlargement and logical outcome of Linnaeus. The distinctive merit of CUVIER (q.v.) is that he started Cuvier, a new view as to the relationships of animals, which he may be said in a large measure to have demonstrated as true by his own anatomical researches. He opposed the scala nature theory, and recognized four distinct and divergent branches or embranchemens, as he called them, in each of which he arranged a certain number of the Linnaean classes, or similar classes. The embranchemens were characterized each by a different type of anatomical structure. Cuvier thus laid the foundation of that branch ing tree -like arrangement of the classes and orders of animals which we now recognize as being the necessary result of attempts to represent what is practically a genea logical tree or pedigree. Apart from this, Cuvier was a keen-sighted and enthusiastic anatomist of great skill and industry. It is astonishing how many good observers it requires to dissect and draw and record over and over again the structure of an animal before an approximately correct account of it is obtained. Cuvier dissected many Molluscs and other animals which had not previously been anatomized ; of others he gave more correct accounts than had been given by earlier writers. Skilful as he was, his observations are very frequently erroneous. Great accuracy in work as well as great abundance of production has only distinguished one amongst all the great names
of zoology that of Johann Miiller. It certainly did not