. Journal of comparative neurology . weenfigures 32 and 33 and figure 5, in that figures 32 and 33 show a gill contact overlap-ping the preceding lateral line primordium, while in figure 5, for instance, thefirst lateral line primordium does not overlap the second gill contact. This ap-parent discrepancy is due to the fact that in figure 5, as in all reconstructions(figs. 1-6) gill contacts are not shown on the plot unless there is a noticeable thick-ening of the ectoderm in the region of contact. The contacts { and )on figures 32 and 33 are contacts simply with no thickening of the
. Journal of comparative neurology . weenfigures 32 and 33 and figure 5, in that figures 32 and 33 show a gill contact overlap-ping the preceding lateral line primordium, while in figure 5, for instance, thefirst lateral line primordium does not overlap the second gill contact. This ap-parent discrepancy is due to the fact that in figure 5, as in all reconstructions(figs. 1-6) gill contacts are not shown on the plot unless there is a noticeable thick-ening of the ectoderm in the region of contact. The contacts { and )on figures 32 and 33 are contacts simply with no thickening of the ectoderm. X 75. 34 Stage XXI, age 120^ hours. Camera outline taken at posterior end oflateralis X ganglion and behind the fourth gill contact of figure 5. This sectionlies near the posterior end of the thickening extending back from the fourth gillcontact and, since the fifth gill contact is not yet found, is labelled angular thick-ening. X 75. 632 LATERAL LINE PRIMORDL^. LV LEPIDOSTEUS OSSEUS F. L. LANDACRE AND A. C. CONGER PLATE 8. 29
Size: 1763px × 1417px
Photo credit: © Reading Room 2020 / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookcentury1900, bookdecade1910, booksubjectmedicine, bookyear191
