Facts and Arguments for Darwin by Fritz Muller
page 91 of 127 (71%)
page 91 of 127 (71%)
![]() | ![]() |
|
|
FIGURE 67. With a naked opercular peduncle, Serpula-stage.) One of the simplest examples is furnished by the development of the Tubicolar Annelids; but from its very simplicity it appears well adapted to open the eyes of many who, perhaps, would rather not see, and it may therefore find a place here. Three years ago I found on the walls of one of my glasses some small worm-tubes (Figure 65), the inhabitants of which bore three pairs of barbate branchial filaments, and had no operculum. According to this we should have been obliged to refer them to the genus Protula. A few days afterwards one of the branchial filaments had become thickened at the extremity into a clavate operculum (Figure 66), when the animals reminded me, by the barbate opercular peduncle, of the genus Filograna, only that the latter possesses two opercula. In three days more, during which a new pair of branchial filaments had sprouted forth, the opercular peduncle had lost its lateral filaments (Figure 67), and the worms had become Serpulae. Here the supposition at once presents itself that the primitive tubicolar worm was a Protula,--that some of its descendants, which had already become developed into perfect Protulae, subsequently improved themselves by the formation of an operculum which might protect their tubes from inimical intruders,--and that subsequent descendants of these latter finally lost the lateral filaments of the opercular peduncle, which they, like their ancestors, had developed. What say the schools to this case? Whence and for what purpose, if the Serpulae were produced or created as ready-formed species, these lateral filaments of the opercular peduncle? To allow them to sprout forth merely for the sake of an invariable plan of structure, even when they must be immediately retracted again as superfluous, would certainly be |
|


