On the relation between the quantity of brain and the size of the body in vertebrates / by Eugène Dubois ; [communicated by H. Zwaardemaker].

  • Dubois, Eugène, 1858-1940.
Date:
1914
Catalogue details

Licence: In copyright

Credit: On the relation between the quantity of brain and the size of the body in vertebrates / by Eugène Dubois ; [communicated by H. Zwaardemaker]. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    8/24 (page 6)
    ' S E k Average diameter oftheeye ball, in m.m. I. Monitor (Varanus niloticus) (1) 7500. G. 2,440 G. 0.0165 12.5 2. Little Gecko (Hemidactylus Brooki) (4) 4.7 0.043 0.0181 4.1 y. Emerald Lizard (Lacerta viridis) (aver.) 16.8 0.093 0.0191 5.8 4. Cobra (Naja melanoleuca) (1) 1770.0 0.646 0.0098 7.0 j. Common Viper (Vipera berus) (7) 64.2 0.105 0.0102 6. Common Lizard (Lacerta agilis) (2) 12.507 0.076 0.0185 7. Slow Worm (Anguis fragilis) 16.252 0.039 0.0082 n D tt » 18.9 0.037 0.0071 2.8 9. Greek Tortoise (Testudo graeca) 993.58 0.360 0.0075 llorevvith tlie t'olk)\vini>,' values lor r are obtainerl. Hy oomparisoii of 1 with 2:0.5470, of 1 with 2:0.5355, 4 with 5:0.5478. The avei'age for the exainiued Reptiles is 0.5436. .411 these values are apiiu so near to 0.55 . ., or 'Voj there is no doubt but the same ex[H)ue)d of coi'relatiou may be aece|)ted for the three highest classes of Vertebrates. Here already 1 |)oint to the low value of /■ both of the Slow Worm (Anguis fragilis) and of the Snakes in contradistinction to the Ijizards. Regarding Amphibia 1 have not been able to obtain entirely satis- factory data for the calcidation of r. The giants among these, as the American Bullfrog Huina mugieiis or Caiesbyana) and the Indian Tiger-spotted Frog (Rana ligrina), reach oidy 5 times the size of the nearest related s|)ecies to be coni[)ared with. For the Bullfrog I have calculated of Donaldson’s') d largest individuals the value of .y 244.4 G. and of e 0.204 G. A comparison of the latter with our Waterfrog (Rana esculenta), according to Lapkxjul’s averages for y and c, gives only an ex[)onent of correlation ot 0.3843. Compared with Lapicque’s Rana fusca (aver.) r becomes on the contrary = 0.5501. It seems that the Bullfrog, at least in the organisation of the nervous system, d’Anthrop 1. c. p. 263), willi s= 11.34 KGM affords, as not full-grown, probably too liigi; a /c (0.0268). For a “Crocodile” mentioned by Manouvrier (“SinT’interpre- tation de la quantite dans I’encepbale”. Meraoires de la Societe d’Anthropologie. Paris 1885. 2ine Serie, Tome 3, 2me fasc. p. 167) of about 70 KGM body weight, we find k = 0.0290. ’-) Decennial Publications. University of Chicago. Vol. X. (1902), p. 7 and Journal of Comparative Neurology. Vol. 8 (1898), p. 330.