The natural history of fishes, amphibians, & reptiles, or monocardian animals . rformingthe office of teeth—if they all were eminently aquatic—and, lastly, if all their pectoral fins were formed as inordinary fishes—what possible characters wrould be leftby which to indicate their analogy also to the Amphibia,or frogs, which are as truly and confessedly analogousto the tortoises, as the tortoises are to the cheloniformfishes ? No such resemblances, that we know of, wouldremain, except their imperfect skeleton; or none, atleast, which would strike an ordinary observer; and weshould thus have no
The natural history of fishes, amphibians, & reptiles, or monocardian animals . rformingthe office of teeth—if they all were eminently aquatic—and, lastly, if all their pectoral fins were formed as inordinary fishes—what possible characters wrould be leftby which to indicate their analogy also to the Amphibia,or frogs, which are as truly and confessedly analogousto the tortoises, as the tortoises are to the cheloniformfishes ? No such resemblances, that we know of, wouldremain, except their imperfect skeleton; or none, atleast, which would strike an ordinary observer; and weshould thus have no apparent mark by which to conjecturethe relationship. But Nature has provided against this :has created such a diversity in the order Plectognathes,that, while one division immediately reminds us of thechelonian reptiles, another is an equally strong repre-sentation of the amphibious frogs. The Lophius pictaof Shaw (Jig. 6.) will convince the student we are notprone to exaggerate resemblances. We have only topoint to the Chironectidce in proof of this latter relation:. ANALOGIES OF THE ORDERS. 113 and thus, by the paucity of her analogical characters, relative to onegroup only, sheis enabled, as itwere, to dispersethe rest over anumber of others,but of which, each— as the inevi-table consequenceof this rule —can possess only one or two. (100.) The two comparisons which we shall nowinstitute, illustrate, and will tend to confirm, the aboveremarks : the first will be between the primary types,or orders of fishes, and those of the entire circle of theAnnulosa; the second will be between the fishes andthe primary groups of the reptiles. Primary Divisions .,,„,.„,?„, Primary Divisions of Fishes. analogies. of Verlebrata. Acanthopteryges. ? The most highly organised groups f Quadrupeds. 3 ™ their respective circles. \ Birds. Cartilagines. Mostly viviparous. Reptiles. „ C Semi-aquatic. No true teeth, or 7 ,.. Plectognathes. \ scales j Amphibians.
Size: 1945px × 1285px
Photo credit: © The Reading Room / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookcentury1800, booksubj, booksubjectfishes, booksubjectreptiles
