. . mentary limbs,though necessarily repeating the type of thosepreviously developed in front of them, partake moreof the character of an integumental fold, like anAnnelidan parapodium, than do the anterior limbswith their developed shafts, claws, &c. (cf. Figs. 4, 5,and 10). (5) On placing a typical Phyllopodan limb by theside of a typical Annelidan parapodium, the homo-logies of some of the parts are very clear. As,however, the establishment of the homologies in detailis not so easy, we shall, in this place, have to contentourselve
. . mentary limbs,though necessarily repeating the type of thosepreviously developed in front of them, partake moreof the character of an integumental fold, like anAnnelidan parapodium, than do the anterior limbswith their developed shafts, claws, &c. (cf. Figs. 4, 5,and 10). (5) On placing a typical Phyllopodan limb by theside of a typical Annelidan parapodium, the homo-logies of some of the parts are very clear. As,however, the establishment of the homologies in detailis not so easy, we shall, in this place, have to contentourselves with merely stating our conclusions. Thereasons which led to these conclusions, apart from THE APODIDyE PART I those already given in the foregoing pages, will begradually gathered as we proceed, for we shall find itnecessary to return to the subject again and again inthe course of the following discussion. A comparison of a limb of Apus with an Annc-lidan parapodium such as is shown in Fig. 6 A,1 issufficient to enable us to homologise the shaft and its. cf
Size: 1489px × 1677px
Photo credit: © Reading Room 2020 / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookcentury1800, bookdecade1890, bookpublisherlondo, bookyear1892
