The works of Francis Maitland Balfour, Volume 1 (of 4) : $b Separate memoirsBalfour, Francis M. (Francis Maitland)
Science
The works of Francis Maitland Balfour, Volume 1 (of 4) : $b Separate memoirs
Balfour, Francis M. (Francis Maitland)
Embryology; Zoology
This is due to the embryo (indicated in F II by a thickening of the cells)
lying in the centre and not at the edge of the blastoderm. A necessary
consequence of this is, that the epiblast does not, as in the previous
cases, become continuous with the hypoblast at the tail end of the embryo.
This continuity, being of no functional importance, could easily be
dispensed with, and the central position of the embryo may perhaps be
explained by supposing the process, by which in the Selachian egg the
blastopore ceases to correspond in position with the opening of the
alimentary slit or anus of Rusconi (vide E´), to occur quite early during
segmentation instead of at a late period of development. For the
possibility of such a change in the date of formation, the early appearance
of the nervous and epidermic layers in the Frog affords a parallel.
The epiblast in its growth round the yolk is only partially accompanied by
mesoblast, which, however, is thickened at its extreme edge as in the Frog.
Owing to the epiblast not becoming continuous with the hypoblast at the
tail end of the embryo, the alimentary slit is not open to the exterior.
The hypoblast is formed by some of the lower layer cells becoming
distinguished as a separate layer; the remainder of the lower layer cells
become the mesoblast.
The formation of the mesoblast and hypoblast out of the lower layer cells
has been accepted for the Bird by most observers, but has been disputed by
several, and recently by Kölliker. These have supposed that the mesoblast
is derived from the epiblast. I feel convinced that these observers are in
the wrong, and that the mesoblast is genuinely derived from the lower layer
cells.
The greater portion of the alimentary cavity consists of the original
segmentation cavity (vide diagrams). This feature of the segmentation
cavity of Birds sharply distinguishes it from any segmentation cavity of
other eggs, and renders it very doubtful whether the similarly named
cavities of the Bird and of other vertebrates are homologous. On the floor
of the cavity are still to be seen some of the formative cells, but
observers have not hitherto found that they take any share in forming the
ventral wall of the alimentary canal.
The features of the next stage are the necessary consequences of those of
the last.
The ventral wall of the alimentary canal is entirely formed by a folding-in
of the sheet of hypoblast.
The more rapid folding-in at the head still indicates the previous more
vigorous growth there, otherwise there is very little difference between
the forms of the fold at the head and tail. The alimentary canal does not
of course, at this or any period, communicate with the neural tube, since
the epiblast and hypoblast are never continuous. The other features, such
as the growth of the epiblast round the yolk-sac, are merely continuations
of what took place in the last stage.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account