The works of Francis Maitland Balfour, Volume 2 (of 4) : $b A treatise on comparative embryology: InvertebrataBalfour, Francis M. (Francis Maitland)
Science
The works of Francis Maitland Balfour, Volume 2 (of 4) : $b A treatise on comparative embryology: Invertebrata
Balfour, Francis M. (Francis Maitland)
Embryology; Zoology
My view amounts to the following, viz. that after the formation of the
polar cells the remainder of the germinal vesicle within the ovum (the
female pronucleus) is incapable of further development without the
addition of the nuclear part of the male element (spermatozoon), and
that if polar cells were not formed parthenogenesis might normally
occur. A strong support for this hypothesis would be afforded were it
to be definitely established that a polar body is not formed in the
Arthropoda and Rotifera; since the normal occurrence of
parthenogenesis is confined to these two groups. It is certainly a
remarkable coincidence that they are the only two groups in which
polar bodies have not so far been satisfactorily observed.
It is perhaps possible that the part removed in the formation of the
polar cells is not absolutely essential; and this seems at first sight
to follow from the fact of parthenogenesis being possible in instances
where impregnation is the normal occurrence. The genuineness of the
observations on this head is too long a subject to enter into
here[32], but after admitting, as we probably must, that there
are genuine cases of such parthenogenesis, it cannot be taken for
granted without more extended observation that the occurrence of
development in these rare instances may not be due to the polar cells
not having been formed as usual, and that when the polar cells are
formed the development without impregnation is impossible.
[32] The instances quoted by Siebold, _Parthenogenesis d.
Arthropoden_, are not quite satisfactory. In Hensen's case, p.
234, impregnation would have been possible if we can suppose the
spermatozoa to be capable of passing into the body cavity through
the open end of the uninjured oviduct; and though Oellacher's
instances are more valuable, yet sufficient care seems hardly to
have been taken, especially when it is not certain for what
length of time spermatozoa may be able to live in the oviduct.
For Oellacher's precautions, vide _Zeit. für Wiss. Zool._,
Bd. xxii., p. 202. A better instance is that of a sow given by
Bischoff, _Ann. Sci. Nat._, series 3, Vol. II.,
1844. The unimpregnated eggs were found divided into segments,
but the segments did not contain the usual nucleus, and were
perhaps nothing else than the parts of an ovum in a state of
disruption.
Selenka found in the case of _Purpura lapillus_ that no polar
body was formed in the eggs which did not develop, but in the case of
Neritina, Bütschli has found that this does not hold good.
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