Hostname: page-component-68945f75b7-z7ghp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-05T14:25:08.546Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

3. A Re-Statement of the Cell Theory, with Applications to the Morphology, Classification, and Physiology of Protists, Plants, and Animals. Together with an Hypothesis of Cell-Structure, and an Hypothesis of Contractility*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2014

Patrick Geddes
Get access

Extract

Position and Importance of the Cell Theory in Morphology.—Vast though is the literature of vegetable and animal morphology, it becomes more readily grasped than that perhaps of any other science, when we classify it in relation to the few great works which initiated and for ever mark the successive waves of advance. Thus of the early pre-morphological or encyclopædic stage, when materials were being little more than heaped together, the works of Pliny or Gesner may be taken as types, to which the other encyclopædias of Natural History by Jonston, &c, furnish at first mere supplements. The Systema Naturæ of Linnæus closes the old and marks a new era, and initiates that systematic enumeration of the flora and fauna of the globe which has since made such vast progress. All subsequent systematic literature, no matter how important, no matter how much exceeding in quantity of new forms, involves no essential, no qualitative advance: thus the greater part of the proceedings of such Societies as the Zoological or the Linnean, such new and important faunistic literature as that contained in the magnificent volumes of the “Challenger” Expedition, or even the greatest systematic works, find their highest place not as superseding, but as supplementing the fundamental classic of Linnæus.

Type
Proceedings 1882-83
Information
Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh , Volume 12 , 1884 , pp. 266 - 292
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1884

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.)

References

note * page 267 Ency. Brit., xvi. p. 837; amended in German translation, Jenaische Zeitschr., 1884.Google Scholar

note * page 268 Essay on Classification.

note † page 268 “Morphology,” Ency. Brit., xvi. sec. 3, p. 840.

note ‡ page 268 Of this no better instance can be afforded than the introduction to the admirable Manual of Physiology of Dr Michael Foster.

note * page 270 Savile Kent, Manual of the Infusoria.

note ‡ page 270 Brandt, Monatsb. d. Berlin Akad., 1881.

note § page 270 Gruber, Zool. Anzeiger, No. 118, 1882.

note ║ page 270 Gabriel, “Z. Classif. d. Gregarinen,” Zool. Anzeiger, 1880.

note * page 272 The possession or non-possession of a nucleus is of course immaterial, so far as the form-history is concerned.

note † page 272 Treviranus, , Beitr. z. Pfl. Physiol., Gött. 1811, p. 78Google Scholar.

note ‡ page 272 Unger, , Die Pflanze in Momente d. Thierwendung, Wien, 1843Google Scholar. Siebold, , Dissert, de finibus int. reg. an. et reg. constit., Erlangen, 1844Google Scholar.

note * page 273 Mittheil. d. Zool. Stat. in Neapel, 1883.

note * page 274 Die Protisten.

note * page 275 Bergh, “D. Org. d. Cilio-flagellata,” Morph. Jahrb.. vii. 2; Abstract by T. J. Parker, N. Z. Jour. of Sci., October 1882.

note * page 276 Op. cit.

note * page 277 Manuel d'Histologie Pathologique, i. p. 11, Paris, 1881.

note * page 278 Geddes, “Observations s. 1, fluide périvisceral des Oursins,” Arch. Zool. Exp. VIII.

note † page 278 Comptes Rendus, t. lxxxii. No. 21.

note ‡ page 278 Geddes, “On the Coag. of Amœb. Cells into Plasmodia,” &c, Proc. Roy. Soc. Land., No. 202, 1880, and Trans. Roy. Phys. Soe. Edin., 1882.

note § page 278 Haddon, , “On Budding in Polyzoa,” Quart. Jour. Micros. Sci., 1883Google Scholar.

note * page 279 “On the Morphology and Physiol. of the Cell,” Trans. Boy. Phys. Soc. Edin., 1882Google ScholarPubMed.

note * page 280 A vivid confirmation of the preceding theory of the origin of the cellulose wall has been suggested to me since the reading of this paper by my friend Dr Milne Murray, who reminds me that a quiescent muscle, instead of evolving carbonic acid and water, produces an enormous store of muscle-sugar or inosite, and that this is an isomer of cellulose, C6H10O5. The same conception may throw light upon the physiological chemistry of other carbohydrates, such as glycogen, starch, &c,

note † page 280 Ann. Sci. Nat. Bot., 1877.

note * page 281 Krukenberg, Vergleich. Physiol. Studien, Bd. ii.

note † page 281 Ann. Sci. Nat. Bot., 1877.

note ‡ page 281 See figure of plasmodium of Echinus in author's papers in Arch. Zool. Exp. VIII.; Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond., 1880, or Trans. Roy. Phys. Soc. Edin.,1882.

note § page 281 Manual of Botany, 1st Eng. ed.

note ║ page 281 Ibid., 2nd ed., Appendix.

note * page 282 Gruber, Zool. Anzeiger, No. 118, 1882.

note † page 282 Op. cit., Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond., 1879.

note * page 283 This conception is somewhat developed in the subsequent paper.

note * page 284 Phénomènes de la vie communs aux an. et aux vég., Paris, 1879.

note † page 284 “Morphology,” Ency. Brit., ‘Rel. of Morphol. to Physiol.’

note ‡ page 284 Cf. Origin of Species.

note * page 286 Balfour, Embryology, vol. i.

note † page 286 Darwin, , Insectivorous Plants, London, 1875CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

note ‡ page 286 Quart. Jour. Micros. Science, xvi.

note * page 287 Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond., 1881.

note † page 287 Proc. Roy. Soc. Edin., 1883.

note * page 288 Cf. Author's Prel. Note in Zool. Anzeiger, No. 146, 1883.

note † page 288 Brass, Zool. Anzeiger, 120, 1882.

note ‡ page 288 Wagener, G., “Ueb. d. Entstehung. d. Querstreifen auf d. Muskeln,” Archiv f. Anat. u. Physiol., Anat. Abtheil, p. 543Google Scholar.

note * page 289 Frommann, , “Untersuch. ueb. Struktur, Lebenserscheinungen u. Reacttionen thier. u. pflanz. Zellen,” Jena Zeitschr., xvii. and sep. pub., Jena, 1884Google Scholar.

note † page 289 Cf. Author's paper in Jour. Pharmaceutical Soc. Lond., No. 714, 1884.