Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-rkxrd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T11:47:38.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

XV.—The Structure and Relationships of Lamellibranchs possessing a Cruciform Muscle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2014

Alastair Graham
Alastair Graham
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, Birkbeck College, University of London
Get access

Extract

In the first decade of the present century Bloomer reported in a series of concise papers (for which see the list of references) the results of his investigations into the structure of the majority of the lamellibranchs which were then classified in the family Solenidæ. In addition to a general description of the external anatomy of these bivalves he paid especial attention to the details of the musculature, to the course of the alimentary canal and the structure of the stomach, while he gave rather generalised accounts of the nervous system and of the arrangement of the circulation, in which he almost entirely followed the previous work of Ménégaux (1890). Bloomer made little attempt to view as a whole the information which had been gathered together as a result of these years of work; the only papers which he published that can be regarded as dealing with his results from a general standpoint being a short one (1903b) on the classification of the British species of the genus Solen, and a second (1903c), equally brief, on the origin and function of the small fourth pallial aperture which is a marked feature of the anatomy of certain members of the family. This he proved to be a separated portion of the pedal gape, not homologous with the similar structure lying in a more posterior position in some of the Anatinacea and in Lutraria.

Type
Proceedings
Information
Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh , Volume 54 , 1935 , pp. 158 - 187
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1935

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References to Literature

Bernard, F., 1898. “Recherches ontogéniques et morphologiques sur la Coquille des Lamellibranches,” Ann. Sci. nat., Zool., 8th series, vol. viii, pp. 1–208.Google Scholar
Bloomer, H. H., 1901 a. “The Anatomy of the British Species of the Genus Solen. I,” Journ. Malacology, vol. viii, pp. 36–46.Google Scholar
Bloomer, H. H., 1901 b. “The Anatomy of the British Species of the Genus Solen. II,” Journ. Malacology, vol. viii, pp. 97–100.Google Scholar
Bloomer, H. H., 1902 a. “The Anatomy of the British Species of the Genus Solen. Ill,” Journ. Malacology, vol. ix, pp. 18–21.Google Scholar
Bloomer, H. H., 1902 b. “The Anatomy of the British Species of the Genus Solen. IV,” Journ. Malacology, vol. ix, pp. 133–135.Google Scholar
Bloomer, H. H., 1903 a. “The Anatomy of certain Species of Ceratisolen and Solecurtus,” Journ. Malacology, vol. x, pp. 31–40.Google Scholar
Bloomer, H. H., 1903 b. “The Classification of the British Species of the Genus Solen,” Journ. Malacology, vol. x, pp. 41–43.Google Scholar
Bloomer, H. H., 1903 c. “On the Origin and Function of the Fourth Aperture in some Pelecypoda,” Journ. Malacology, vol. x, pp. 43–45.Google Scholar
Bloomer, H. H., 1903 d. “The Anatomy of Pharella orientalis, Dunker, and Tagelus rufus, Spengler,” Journ. Malacology, vol. x, pp. 114–121.Google Scholar
Bloomer, H. H., 1905 a. “On the Anatomy of Ensis magnus, Schum.,” Journ. Malacology, vol. xii, pp. 76–77.Google Scholar
Bloomer, H. H., 1905 b. “On the Anatomy of certain Species of Solenidæ,” Journ. Malacology, vol. xii, pp. 78–85.Google Scholar
Bloomer, H. H., 1905 c. “Anatomy of various Species of Solenidæ: Addenda et Corrigenda,” Journ. Malacology, vol. xii, pp. 87–88.Google Scholar
Bloomer, H. H., 1905 d. “On the Anatomy of Species of Siliqua and Ensis,” Proc. Malacol. Soc. Lond., vol. vi, pp. 193–196.Google Scholar
Bloomer, H. H., 1906. “On the Anatomy of Ensis macha, Solen Fonesi and S. viridis,” Journ. Malacology, vol. vii, pp. 18–19.Google Scholar
Bloomer, H. H., 1907. “On the Anatomy of Tagelus gibbus and T. divisus,” Journ. Malacology, vol. vii, pp. 218–223.Google Scholar
Bloomer, H. H., 1911. “On the Anatomy of the British Species of the Genus Psammobia,” Journ. Malacology, vol. ix, pp. 231–239.Google Scholar
Bloomer, H. H., 1912. “On the Anatomy of Species of Cultellus and Azor,” Journ. Malacology, vol. x, pp. 5–10.Google Scholar
Carlson, A. J., 1905. “Comparative Physiology of the Invertebrate Heart. II. The Function of the Cardiac Nerves in Molluscs,” Amer. Journ. Physiol., vol. xiii, pp. 396–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghosh, E., 1920. “Taxonomic Studies on the Soft Parts of the Solenidæ,” Rec. Ind. Mus., vol. xix, pp. 47–78.Google Scholar
Graham, A., 1931. “On the Morphology, Feeding Mechanisms, and Digestion of Ensis siliqua (Schumacher),” Trans. Roy. Soc. Edin., vol. lvi, pp. 725–751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, A., 1934. “The Cruciform Muscle of Lamellibranchs,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Edin., vol. liv, pp. 17–30.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, F., 1914. “Beiträge zur Anatomie und Histologie von Tagelus dombeyi (Lamarck),” Jena Z. Naturw., vol. lii, pp. 521–566Google Scholar
Marine Biological Association, 1931. Plymouth Marine Fauna. Plymouth.Google Scholar
Menegaux, A., 1890. Recherches sur la Circulation des Lamellibranches marins. Besançon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pelseneer, P., 1906. “Mollusca, “ in Lankester: A Treatise on Zoology, vol. v. London.Google Scholar
Ridewood, W. G., 1903. “On the Structure of the Gills of the Lamellibranchia,” Phil. Trans., B, vol. cxcv, pp. 147–284.Google Scholar
Thiele, J., 1926. “Mollusca,” in Kükenthal: Handbuch der Zoologie, vol.v. Berlin.Google Scholar
Winckworth, R., 1932. “The British Marine Mollusca,” Journ. Conch. Lond., vol. xix, pp. 211–252.Google Scholar