Enumeratio plantarum annis 1888, 1889,1890 et 1891 in Macedoniâ australi collectarum

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

Die langgeschw?nzte Elster,Pica caudata Ray

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

Schlosseria heterophylla Vukot

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

Die Mauser der junnge Raub-V?gel und der Uebergang ihres Jugendkleides in das ausgef?rbte

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

Der Monte Penegal

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

Note on Lepidosiren annectens,Owen.

Refeering to Prof. Owen's paper on Lepidosiren in the 18th volume of the Society's “Transactions,” the author states that the conclusion at which that gentleman has arrived, that the animal in question is a Pish, although controverted by some of our best naturalists, appears to him to receive confirmation from one or two points in its structure on which no great stress has hitherto been laid. The first of these relates to the mode in which the gill is covered, having only a single small external opening, in which respect Lepidosiren makes a very near approach to Muræna. Secondly, the two peculiar anterior teeth in the upper jaw 80 closely resemble those of some Fishes, that the vignette representing these teeth in Echiodon Drummondii, given in Mr. Yarrell's “History of British Fishes,” might serve as well for the front teeth of Lepidosiren. Thirdly, the continuous dorsal, caudal and anal fin, and the absence of pectorals and ventrals, are common characters among Murænidæ. And fourthly, the true Fish-scales, together with the lateral line extending from the gill to the extremity of the tail, are characters peculiar to Fishes, and not to be found among Amphibian Beptiles. Assuming then that Lepidosiren is unquestionably a Fish, and not either a Reptile or an osculant between Fishes and Reptiles, Mr. Newman regards it as completely obliterating the boundary set up by Cuvier between the two great subclasses of Fishes, the Osseous and the Cartilaginous. In support of this opinion he quotes several passages from Prof. Owen's paper, and concludes by stating his conviction that it is “equally impossible to place it in either the Cartilaginous or Osseous series; and we are compelled either to establish an intermediate series, consisting of but three species or perhaps genera, or to break up those great divisions, which have received the almost universal approbation of naturalists. The first course seems most undesirable in an age in which we are exerting ourselves to find associates and allies for every abnormal form, however apparently isolated. The alternative, the mingling of cartilaginous and osseous fishes, seems inevitable.”     

Ph?nogenetische Fragestellungen im Bereich der Erbpsychologie

Ohne ZusammenfassungVorgetragen auf der Versammlung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Vererbungslehre in Würzburg am 24. 9. 38.Mit 13 Textfiguren