Chapter I: Part 1

PEARLS AND PARASITES

PEARLS & PARASITES

BY ARTHUR E. SHIPLEY
OF CHRIST’S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE; M.A., HON. D.SC., F.R.S.

WITH ILLUSTRATIONS

LONDON
JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET, W.
1908

TO MY SISTER

E. D. H.

PREFACE

Most of the following essays have appeared in the pages of the _Quarterly Review_, and I am greatly indebted to the editor and to the proprietor of that periodical for permission to reprint them. The article on ‘The Infinite Torment of Flies’ is an address I delivered before the British Association at Pretoria in 1905, and the eighth essay appeared in _Science Progress_.

As far as possible I have tried to avoid the use of long words, and thus escape the censure of recent critics in the _Times_; but I fear I have not altogether succeeded, and my excuse must be that with new discoveries new conceptions arise, and these conceptions require new names, or we cannot talk or write about them with any precision.

The essay dealing with zebras and hybrids was the first to be written, and appeared before the rediscovery of Mendel’s remarkable work, and must be regarded as a pre-Mendelian contribution to a subject which has recently, in connexion with the Deceased Wife’s Sister Bill, again aroused attention. Had it been written later the language and the attitude taken would have been modified by recent research.

In the inquiry into the aims and finance of Cambridge University--the only essay which does not deal with questions of economic zoology--I have had the great advantage of the collaboration of Mr. H. A. Roberts, the Secretary of the Cambridge University Association. But for his help I fear I should have lost my way in the intricate mazes of the University accounts.

For the care he has taken in making the Index, I owe thanks to Mr. G. W. Webb, of the University Library.

A. E. S.

CHRIST’S COLLEGE,

CAMBRIDGE.

_March 10, 1908._

CONTENTS

PAGE

PEARLS AND PARASITES 1

THE DEPTHS OF THE SEA 16

BRITISH SEA-FISHERIES 42

ZEBRAS, HORSES, AND HYBRIDS 73

PASTEUR 101

MALARIA 129

‘INFINITE TORMENT OF FLIES’ 155

THE DANGER OF FLIES 174

CAMBRIDGE 183

INDEX 217

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

FACING PAGE

MATOPO 84

TUNDRA (AN ICELAND PONY), HER FOAL, CIRCUS GIRL (BORN 1898), AND HER HYBRID-FOAL, SIR JOHN (BY MATOPO), WHEN A MONTH OLD (BORN 1899) 86

ROMULUS 92

MATOPO 92

ROMULUS 96

FIG. 1.--THE PARASITE OF TERTIAN FEVER, HÆMAMŒBA VIVAX (ROSS). HIGHLY MAGNIFIED 136

FIG. 2.--VARIOUS STAGES WHICH THE PARASITE OF THE ÆSTIVO-AUTUMNAL FEVER, HÆMOMENAS PRÆCOX(ROSS), PASSES THROUGH IN THE BODY OF THE MOSQUITO ANOPHELES. MAGNIFIED 2,000 TIMES. AFTER ROSS AND FIELDING-OULD 136

FIG. 3.--FORMATION OF THE BLASTS OF HÆMOMENAS PRÆCOX (ROSS) WITHIN THE BODY OF THE MOSQUITO ANOPHELES. MAGNIFIED 2,000 TIMES. AFTER ROSS AND FIELDING-OULD 144

_ANOPHELES MACULIPENNIS._ MALE, IN CHARACTERISTIC ATTITUDE 146

_ANOPHELES MACULIPENNIS._ FEMALE 146

BIBLIOGRAPHY

‘Report to the Government of Ceylon on the Pearl-Oyster Fisheries of the Gulf of Manaar.’ By W. A. Herdman, F.R.S. Parts I. and II. Published by the Royal Society. London, 1904.

‘On the Origin of Pearls.’ By H. Lyster Jameson. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, 1902.

‘Aus den Tiefen des Weltmeeres.’ By C. Chun. Jena: Gustav Fischer, 1900.

‘Tierleben der Tiefsee.’ By O. Seeliger. Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann, 1901.

‘Report of the Scientific Results of the Voyage of H.M.S. _Challenger_.’ Edited by the late Sir C. Wyville Thomson and John Murray. A Summary of the Scientific Results. Published by Order of Her Majesty’s Government, 1885.

‘La Vie au Fond des Mers.’ By H. Filhol. Paris: G. Masson, 1885.

‘The Fauna of the Deep Sea.’ By Sydney J. Hickson. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner and Co., 1894.

‘British Fisheries: their Administration and their Problems.’ By James Johnstone. London: Williams and Norgate, 1905.

‘An Examination of the Present State of the Grimsby Trawl Fishery, with Especial Reference to the Destruction of Immature Fish.’ By E. W. L. Holt. _Journal of the Marine Biological Association_, vol. iii. Plymouth, 1895.

_Journals of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom_, vols. i.-vii. Plymouth.

‘Conseil Permanent International pour l’Exploration de la Mer. Rapports et Procès Verbaux,’ vol. iii. Copenhagen.

‘Fishery Board for Scotland. Report on the Fishery and Hydrographical Investigations in the North Sea and Adjacent Waters, 1902-1903.’ [Cd. 2612.] London, 1905.

‘Marine Biological Association. First Report on the Fishery and Hydrographical Investigations in the North Sea and Adjacent Waters (Southern Area), 1902-1903.’ [Cd. 2670.] London, 1905.

‘Annual Reports of the Inspectors of Sea-Fisheries for England and Wales.’ London, 1886-1905.

‘The Penycuik Experiments.’ By J. C. Ewart. London and Edinburgh: A. and C. Black, 1899.

‘Experimental Investigations on Telegony.’ A paper read before the Royal Society, London, June 1, 1899. By Professor J. C. Ewart.

‘La Vie de Pasteur.’ Par René Vallery-Radot. Paris: Hachette, 1900.

‘Pasteur.’ By Percy Frankland and Mrs. Percy Frankland. (Century Science Series.) London: Cassell, 1898.

‘The Soluble Ferments and Fermentation.’ By J. Reynolds Green. (Cambridge Natural Science Manuals.) Cambridge University Press, 1899.

‘Micro-organisms and Fermentation.’ By Alfred Jörgensen. Translated by A. K. Miller and A. E. Lennholm. Third edition. London: Macmillan, 1900.

‘Lectures on the Malarial Fevers.’ By William Sydney Thayer, M.D. London: Henry Kimpton, 1899.

‘On the Rôle of Insects, Arachnids, and Myriapods as Carriers in the Spread of Bacterial and Parasitic Diseases of Man and Animals. A Critical and Historical Study.’ By George H. F. Nuttall, M.D., Ph.D. ‘Johns Hopkins Hospital Reports,’ vol. viii.

‘Instructions for the Prevention of Malarial Fever.’ Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine. Memoir I. Liverpool: University Press, 1899.

‘Report of the Malaria Expedition of the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine and Medical Parasitology.’ By Ronald Ross, D.P.H., M.R.C.S.; H. E. Annett, M.D., D.P.H.; and E. E. Austen. Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine. Memoir II. Liverpool: University Press, 1900.

‘A System of Medicine, by many Writers.’ Edited by Thomas Clifford Allbutt, M.A., M.D., LL.D., vol. ii., 1897; vol. iii., 1897. London: Macmillan and Co.

‘A Handbook of the Gnats and Mosquitoes.’ By Major George M. Giles, I.M.S., M.B., F.R.C.S. London: John Bale, Sons, and Danielsson, Limited, 1900.

‘Reports to the Malaria Committee, Royal Society, 1899 and 1900.’ By various authors. London: Harrison and Sons, 1900.

Proceedings of the Boston Society of Natural History, vol. xvi., 1874.

U.S.A. Department of Agriculture, Division of Entomology, Bulletin 4, new series.

‘Manchester Memoirs,’ vol. li., 1906, p. 1; _Quarterly Journal of Microscopical Science_, vol. li., 1907, p. 395.

‘Endowments of the University of Cambridge.’ Edited by John Willis Clark, M.A., Registrar of the University of Cambridge. Cambridge: University Press, 1904.

‘Report of a Meeting held at Devonshire House on January 31, 1899, to inaugurate the Cambridge University Association.’ Cambridge: University Press, 1899.

‘Statements of the Needs of the University.’ Cambridge: University Press, 1904.

‘University Accounts for the Year ended December 31, 1904.’ _Cambridge University Reporter_, March 17, 1905.

‘Abstracts of the Accounts of the Colleges.’ _Cambridge University Reporter_, February 10, 1905.

PEARLS AND PARASITES

_Know you, perchance, how that poor formless wretch--_
_The Oyster--gems his shallow moon-lit chalice?_
SIR EDWIN ARNOLD.

Certain Eastern peoples believe that pearls are due to raindrops falling into the oyster-shells which conveniently gape to receive them.

‘Precious the tear as that rain from the sky
Which turns into pearls as it falls on the sea,’

as the poet Moore writes. This belief is of ancient origin, and is probably derived from classical sources, since Pliny tells us that the view prevalent in his time was that pearls arise from certain secretions formed by the oyster around drops of rain which have somehow effected an entrance into the mantle cavity of the mollusc. Probably this theory of the origin of pearls has ceased to be held for many centuries except in the East, where tradition has always received more credit than experiment. In the West it has long been known that pearls are formed as a pathological secretion of the mineral arragonite, combined with a certain amount of organic material, formed by the oyster or other mollusc around some foreign body, whose presence forms the irritant which stimulates the secretion. This secretion is of the same chemical and mineralogical nature as the mother-of-pearl which gives the inside of the shell of so many molluscs a beautiful iridescent sheen.

An oyster-shell consists of three layers, the outermost termed the _periostracum_, the middle the _prismatic layer_, and the innermost the _nacreous layer_. Everywhere the shell is lined by the mantle, consisting of a right and left fold or flap of the skin, which is in contact with the nacreous layer all over the inside of the shell. The edge of the mantle is thickened and forms a ridge or margin; and it is this edge which secretes the two outer layers. This permits the shell to grow at its edge whilst the rest of the mantle secretes all over its surface the nacreous or pearly layer. The relative thickness of these three layers varies very greatly. In the fresh-water mussel (_Unio_) the nacreous layer is many times thicker than the two outer layers put together; and such nacreous shells are usually associated with molluscs which are known to represent very ancient or ancestral species. It is also the layer which disappears most readily as the specimens become fossilized; and in fossil Mollusca it is often represented by mere casts, which fill the position it once occupied.

The fact that the nacre is deposited by the whole surface of the mantle has been appreciated by the Chinese. By inserting little flattened leaden images of Buddha between the mantle and the shell, and leaving the oyster at rest for some time, the image becomes coated with mother-of-pearl and incorporated in the substance of the shell; and in this way certain little joss figures are produced. This industry is said to support a large population in some coast districts of Siam.

The nacre, then, is produced by the outermost layer of the mantle or fleshy flap that lines the shell--the external epithelium; and, if a foreign body gets between this epithelium and the shell, the mantle will, in order to protect itself, secrete a pearly coat around it. But valuable pearls are not those which are partially or wholly fused with the shell, but those which lie deep in the tissues of the body; and they are probably formed in the following manner: The intrusive, irritant body forms a pit in the outer surface of the mantle; this pit deepens, and at first remains connected with the outside by a pore; ultimately the pore closes, and the bottom of the pit becomes separated as a small sac free from all connexion with the outside. The sac now sinks into the tissues of the oyster, enclosing in it the foreign body. It will be noticed that the inside of the sac is lined by and is derived from the same tissue or epithelium as covers the outside of the mantle. Now this epithelium continues to do what it has always been in the habit of doing; that is, it secretes a nacreous substance all round the intrusive particle. Layer after layer of this nacre is deposited, and thus a pearl is formed. At first the layers will conform roughly to the outline of the embedded body, but later layers will smooth over any irregularities of the nucleus around which they are deposited, and a spheroidal or spherical pearl is produced. If the irregularities are too pronounced, an irregular pearl is formed; and such pearls, on merely æsthetic grounds, command a lower price.

It is thus clear that pearls are formed around intrusive foreign bodies; and until comparatively recently these bodies were thought to be inorganic particles, such as grains of sand. Recent research has, however, shown that this is seldom the case, and that as a rule the nucleus, which must be present if a pearl is to be formed, is the larva of some highly-organized parasite whose life-history is certainly complicated but as yet is not completely known. The knowledge, however, which we already possess enables us to do much to ensure steady success in a very speculative industry; and with complete knowledge there is no reason why pearl fisheries should not be under as good control as oyster fisheries now are.

It was about fifty years ago (1857-1859) that the problem of the Ceylon pearl-oyster fishery was first attacked in a thoroughly scientific spirit by a certain Dr. Kelaart. His reports to the Government of the island contain the following suggestive sentences:

‘I shall merely mention here that M. Humbert, a Swiss zoologist,
has, by his own observations at the last pearl fishery,
corroborated all I have stated about the ovaria or genital glands
and their contents; and that he has discovered, in addition to the
Filaria and Circaria (_sic_), three other parasitical worms
infesting the viscera and other parts of the pearl-oyster. We both
agree that these worms play an important part in the formation of
pearls; and it may be found possible to infect oysters in other
beds with these worms, and thus increase the quantity of these
gems. The nucleus of an American pearl drawn by Möbius is nearly of
the same form as the Circaria found in the pearl-oysters of Ceylon.
It will be curious to ascertain if the oysters in the Tinnevelly
banks have the same species of worms as those found in the oysters
on the banks off Arripo.’

Unfortunately Dr. Kelaart died shortly after making this report, leaving his investigations incomplete.

Some seven years before, in 1852, Filippi had shown that the pearls in our fresh-water mussel (_Anodonta_) were formed by the larvæ of a fluke (a trematode), to which he gave the name of _Distomum duplicatum_. Many students of elementary biology, as they painfully try to unravel the mystery of molluscan morphology, must have come across small pearls in the tissues of the fresh-water mussels (_Unio_ or _Anodonta_); but these are said to have less lustre and to be more opaque than the sea pearl; so the pearl fisheries of the Welsh and Scotch rivers are falling into disuse. Our ancestors, however, thought otherwise. Less than fifty years ago the Scotch fisheries brought in some £12,000 a year; and a writer of the early part of the eighteenth century describes Scotch pearls as ‘finer, more hard and transparent than any Oriental.’ British pearls were highly thought of by the Romans. Pliny and Tacitus mention them; and Julius Caæsar is said to have dedicated a breastplate ornamented with British pearls to Venus Genitrix. Fresh-water pearls are still ‘fished’ with profit in Central Europe; but the Governments of Bavaria, Saxony, and Bohemia watch over the industry and only grant a licence to fish any stretch of water about once in twelve years--a restriction which, had it been imposed on our fisheries, might have saved a vanishing industry.

In 1871 Garner showed that the pearls in the edible mussel (_Mytilus edulis_), which is largely used for bait upon our coasts, were formed round the larvæ of a fluke, a remote ally of the liver-fluke that causes such loss to our sheep-breeders. This origin of pearls has been more completely followed out by Mr. Lyster Jameson. Nor must we forget to mention the researches of Giard (1897) and Dubois (1901) in the same subject. We know the life-history of the organism forming pearls in this edible mussel more completely than we do that of any other pearl-forming parasite; and, before returning to the Ceylon pearls, we will briefly consider it.

Mr. Lyster Jameson finds that the pearls of the _Mytilus_ are formed around the cercaria or larval form of a fluke which, in its adult stages, resides in the intestine of the scoter (_Œdemia nigra_), and was originally described from the eider-duck (_Somateria mollissima_) in Greenland and named _Leucithodendrium somateriæ_, after its first known host. The cercaria larvæ of these flukes form the last stage in a complex series of larval forms which occur in the life-history of a trematode or fluke, and they differ from the adult in two points--their generative organs are not fully developed, and they usually have a tail; but this organ is wanting in our pearl-forming cercaria, called a cercariæum by Mr. Jameson. Such a larva has only to be swallowed by a scoter to grow up quickly into the adult trematode capable of laying eggs. Now this bird, called by the French fishermen the ‘cane moulière,’ is the greatest enemy to the mussel-beds; it is not only common around the French mussel-beds of Billiers (Morbihan), but occurs in numbers at the mouth of the Barrow channel, close to our English pearl-bearing mussel-beds. With its diving habits it destroys and eats large quantities of the mollusc. Those cercariæ which are already entombed in a pearl cannot, of course, grow up into adults, even if they gain entrance to the alimentary canal of the scoter; but those that are not ensheathed may do so. Further, the fluke may possibly live in other hosts where no pearl is formed. At any rate, there seems no lack of larvæ successful in their struggle to attain maturity, for it has been calculated that the alimentary canal of an apparently healthy scoter may harbour as many as six thousand adult flukes.

Thus there are two courses open to the cercaria when it has once found its way into the mussel; it either forms the nucleus of a pearl and perishes, or it is swallowed by a scoter, becomes adult, and prepares to carry on the race. But how do the cercariæ make their way into the mussel, and whence do they come? At present their birth, like that of Mr. Yellowplush, is ‘wrapped up in a mistry.’ We may presume that the eggs make their way out of the scoter into the sea-water, and that there they hatch out a free-swimming larva, which, after the manner of trematodes, swims about looking for a suitable host. Within this host it would come to rest and begin budding off numerous secondary larvæ, in which stage it may assume considerable size and becomes known as a _sporocyst_. No one, however, has seen the eggs hatch, or the free-swimming larva; but Mr. Jameson produces evidence to show that the sporocyst stage occurs in two other common molluscs--viz., in a clam (_Tapes decussatus_) and in the common cockle (_Cardium edule_). The former mollusc abounds in the black gravelly clay which forms the bottom of the mussel-beds at Billiers; and every specimen out of nearly two hundred examples investigated by Mr. Jameson was found to be infested with sporocysts containing larvæ closely resembling those which act as pearl-nuclei in the edible mussel. Exactly similar sporocysts were found in about fifty per cent. of the common cockles examined in the Barrow channel, where the species _Tapes decussatus_ does not occur.

Within the sporocyst certain secondary larvæ are formed, as is habitual with the flukes. These secondary larvæ are the cercariæ; and it is in this stage that the animal makes its way into the pearl-mussel and ultimately forms the nucleus of a pearl. Precisely how it leaves the sporocyst and the first host--_i.e._, the _Tapes_ or _Cardium_--is not known. Certain experiments made by Jameson, who placed mussels which he thought were free from parasites in a tank with some infected _Tapes_, are not quite conclusive, and have been ably criticized by Professor Herdman. It is true that, when examined later, the mussels were well infected; but it was not definitely shown that they were not infected at the start; and further, the numbers used were too small to justify a very positive conclusion. Still, on the whole, it may safely be said that life-history of the organism which forms the pearls in _Mytilus edulis_ probably involves three hosts: the scoter, which contains the mature form; the _Tapes_ or _Cardium_, which contains the first larval stage; and the mussel, which contains the second larval stage, which forms the pearl.

Recently Professor Dubois has been investigating the origin of pearls in another species of _Mytilus_ (_M. galloprovincialis_) which lives on the French Mediterranean littoral. The nucleus of this pearl is also a trematode, but of a species different from that which infests the edible mussel. The interest of Professor Dubois’ work, however, lies in the fact that he claims to have infected true Oriental pearl-oysters by putting them to live with his Mediterranean mussels. He fetched his oysters, termed ‘Pintadin,’ from the Gulf of Gabes in Southern Tunis, where they are almost pearlless--one must open twelve to fifteen hundred of these to find a single pearl--and brought them up amongst the mussels. After some time had elapsed they became so infected that three oysters opened consecutively yielded a couple of pearls each. These observations, however, require confirmation, and have been adversely criticized by Professor Giard.

To return to the Ceylon pearls. The celebrated fisheries lie to the north-west of the island, where the shallow plateaux of the Gulf of Manaar afford a fine breeding-place for the pearl-oyster. The pearl-oyster is not really an oyster, but an allied mollusc known as _Margaritifera vulgaris_. It lives on rocky bottoms known locally as paars. The fisheries are very ancient and have been worked for at least 2,500, perhaps for 3,000 years. Pliny mentions them, but he is, comparatively speaking, a modern. The Cingalese records go much farther back. In 550 B.C. we find King Vijaya sending his Indian father-in-law pearls of great price; and there are other early records. From the eighth to the eleventh century of our era the trade seems to have been chiefly in the hands of the Arabs and Persians; and many references to it occur in their literature. Marco Polo (1291) mentions the pearls of the kings of Ceylon; and in 1330 a friar, one Jordanus, describes 8,000 boats as taking part in the fishery. Two centuries later, a Venetian trader named Cæsar Frederick, crossed from India to the west coast of Ceylon to observe the fishery; and his description might almost serve for the present day, so little do habits alter in the East.

The records of the Dutch and English fisheries are naturally more complete than those of their predecessors. The last Dutch fishery was in 1768, and the first English was in 1796, before the fall of Colombo. The fishery is not held every year, but at irregular intervals; and sometimes these intervals have been long. For instance, the oysters failed between 1732 and 1746, and again between 1768 and 1796, under the Dutch régime, and from 1837 to 1854 under the English. On the other hand, the fishing is sometimes annual; recently, it took place with great success in 1887 and the four following years, culminating in the record year 1891, when the Government’s share of the spoil amounted to close upon one million rupees. After this there was a pause till 1903, when the fishery became annual.

The Lieutenant-Governor, Sir Everard im Thurn, now Governor of Fiji, has given a lively account of the fishing scene. He tells us that every year, in November, a Government official visits the oyster-beds, takes up a certain number of oysters, examines them for pearls, and submits his results to certain Government experts. If, as they have done recently, these experts pronounce that there will be a fishing, this information is at once made known; and, partly by advertisement, but probably more by passing the word from man to man, the news rapidly spreads throughout India, up the Persian Gulf, and to Europe. In the meantime preparations on a large scale have to be made.

‘On land, which is at the moment a desert, an elaborate set of
temporary Government buildings have to be erected for receiving and
dealing with many millions of oysters and their valuable if minute
contents. Court-houses, prisons, barracks, revenue offices,
markets, residences for the officials, streets of houses and shops
for perhaps thirty thousand inhabitants, and a water-supply for
drinking and bathing for these same people, have to be arranged
for. Lastly, but, in view of the dreadful possibility of the
outbreak of plague and cholera, not least, there are elaborate
hospitals to be provided.’

By March or April some hundreds of large fishing vessels have assembled at Manaar; and a population which varies during the next two months between 25,000 and 40,000 souls has gathered together.

The fishing-boats leave early in the morning for their respective stations; and, on reaching them, the Arab and Indian divers descend, staying under water from fifty to eighty seconds, and eagerly scooping up the oysters and depositing them in baskets slung round their necks. By midday the divers are worn out; and at noon a gun is fired from the master-attendant’s vessel as a signal for return. The run home may take some hours, according to the distance and the wind; and it is during this time that a considerable number of pearls are said to be abstracted. The men on the boats are occupied with the sorting of the oysters and cleaning them of useless stones, seaweed, and other objects which are gathered with them. The finest pearls lie just within the shell, embedded in the edge of the mantle; and these readily slip out and are concealed about the person of the finder. The Government does what it can to check peculation and keep a guard on each boat; but, in spite of all its efforts, there seems no doubt that many of the ‘finest, roundest, and best-coloured pearls’ pass into the possession of those who have no right to them.

On reaching the shore the oysters are carried to the Government building or ‘Kottus,’ a vast rectangular shed, where they are divided into three heaps; two of these fall to the Government, and the third belongs to the divers. This latter share the divers sell as soon as they quit the ‘Kottus,’ sometimes parting with dozens to one buyer, and sometimes selling as few as two or one. In the meantime the Government’s two-thirds have been counted and are left for the night. At nine o’clock in the evening these oysters are put up to auction. The Government agent states how many oysters there are to dispose of, and then sells them in lots of one thousand. Some rich syndicates will perhaps buy as many as 50,000 at prices which fluctuate unaccountably during the evening. Within a short time the price will inexplicably drop from thirty-five rupees to twenty-two rupees a thousand, and may then rise again as suddenly and inexplicably as it sank. Early in the morning each purchaser removes his shells to his own private shed, where for a week they are allowed to rot in old canoes and other receptacles for water, and are then searched for pearls. For a couple of months this great traffic goes on, until the divers are thoroughly exhausted, and the camp melts away.

Owing to the continuous failure of the fishery for ten years from 1891, the Government determined to call in the aid of experts. In the spring of 1901 Professor Herdman of Liverpool was asked by the Colonial Office, then under the direction of Mr. Chamberlain, to visit Ceylon and to report upon the state of the fishery. He reached Colombo early in 1902. He was fortunate in taking out an exceptionally well qualified assistant in Mr. J. Hornell. After a thorough examination of the fishing-grounds, Professor Herdman reported to the Government of Ceylon as follows:

‘The oysters we met with seemed, on the whole, to be very healthy.
There is no evidence of any epidemic or of much disease of any
kind. A considerable number of parasites, both external and
internal, both protozoan and vermean, were met with; but that is
not unusual in molluscs, and we do not regard it as affecting
seriously the oyster population.

‘Many of the larger oysters were reproducing actively. We found
large quantities of minute “spat” in several places. We also found
enormous quantities of young oysters a few months old on many of
the paars. On the Periya paar the number of these probably amounted
to over a hundred thousand million.

‘A very large number of these young oysters never arrive at
maturity. There are several causes for this. They have many natural
enemies, some of which we have determined. Some are smothered in
sand. Some grounds are much more suitable than others for feeding
the young oysters, and so conducing to life and growth. Probably
the majority are killed by overcrowding.

‘They should therefore be thinned out and transplanted. This can be
easily and speedily done, on a large scale, by dredging from a
steamer at the proper time of the year, when the young oysters are
at the best age for transplanting.

‘Finally, there is no reason for any despondency in regard to the
future of the pearl-oyster fisheries if they are treated
scientifically. The adult oysters are plentiful on some of the
paars, and seem for the most part healthy and vigorous; while young
oysters in their first year, and masses of minute spat just
deposited, are very abundant in many places.’

The chief causes of the failure of the fisheries, at any rate the chief causes which can be dealt with by man, are overcrowding and over-fishing. It might be supposed that these factors would counteract each other; but it must be remembered that they become effective at the two opposite poles of the oyster’s existence, which is thought to cover five, six, or seven years. The overcrowding takes place when the oyster is quite young and hardly fixed on the submerged reefs, whilst the over-fishing takes place when the animal is fully matured and perhaps growing old. The fact that Professor Herdman and Mr. Hornell conveyed the young oysters from Manaar in the north of the island by boat to Colombo and then on by train to Galle in the south, and there succeeded in rearing them, shows that there would be little difficulty in artificially rearing oysters in convenient localities and then transplanting them to such fishing-grounds as show danger of depletion. With regard to over-fishing, if the grounds are under the charge of a trained zoologist there is no reason why this should go on.

When Professor Herdman was called in to advise the Government, he saw at once that it was the oyster that had failed in the last ten years, not the pearls within the oysters. Microscopic examination of thin sections made through decalcified pearls showed that they are almost in all cases deposited around a minute larval cestode or tapeworm. These larvæ make their way into the oyster, and the irritation they set up induces the formation of the pearl, just as was the case with the cercaria-formed pearls of the mussel. Where do these larvæ come from? We cannot say with absolute certainty. Older specimens of tapeworms belonging to the new species, _Tetrarhynchus unionifactor_, also live in the oyster; and it may be that, were a larva to escape entombment in a pearl, it would grow up into one of these. But even these never become mature in the oyster; to attain sexual maturity they must be swallowed by a second host. What is the second host of the pearl-forming cestode? This question we are only recently able to answer, and here, again, without absolute certainty. I have recently described the adult form of _T. unionifactor_ from a large ray, _Rhinoptera javanica_. In this fish, which feeds largely on oysters, the cestodes exist in swarms in the stomach, and the eggs make their way from the fish into the oysters, and there some of them grow up, but most of them perish in their pearly casket. If, as I believe, this is the history of the pearl-forming organism, we must regard the _Rhinoptera_ as a friend to the industry, and not, as hitherto, an enemy which helps to destroy the oyster-beds.

The discovery of the cestode larva as a real cause of pearl-formation received an interesting confirmation shortly after it had made it. M. G. Seurat, working independently at Rikitea on the island of Mangareva, in the Gambier group, discovered a very similar larva in the local pearl-oyster around which pearls are formed; this larva, if we may judge from pictures, is almost certainly the same as the one from Ceylon. Professor Giard regards it as belonging to a tapeworm of the genus _Acrobothrium_; and, if he be right, then Professor Herdman’s larva is an _Acrobothrium_ too. We have so little knowledge of the early forms of cestodes that we cannot accept this attribution as final. We may, however, hope for further information, for a French zoologist, M. Boutan, started some little time ago for the East to work at the problem; Mr. Hornell is still at work in Ceylon; and Mr. C. Crossland, who has had much experience in marine work in the tropics, has been appointed, at the request of the Soudan Government, to investigate the pearl-oyster beds of the Red Sea. Finally Dr. Willey, of the Colombo Museum, has recently described similar larvæ in the pearls of the ‘window-pane’ oyster, _Placuna placenta_, from the eastern shores of Ceylon.

In 1904 it was again found possible to hold a fishery in Ceylon. It was held at a place called Marichikaddi, also on the north-west coast. In the course of thirty-eight days over 41,000,000 oysters were taken. The trade was very brisk; the prices paid were unprecedented. The 1905 fishery, which began on February 18, promised to beat all records. On February 22 the catch was nearly 4,500,000 oysters; and the Government’s share for that day was £9,000. Since this date each year has yielded a bountiful harvest, and in financial circles the London Syndicate, who have obtained a ‘concession’ of the oyster-beds for twenty years from the Ceylon Government, are understood to be ‘doing very well.’

It is perhaps too soon to attribute this success to the efforts of Professor Herdman and Mr. Hornell, the latter of whom, we understand, has been permanently retained as biologist to the syndicate; but we have no doubt that, acting under their advice, the oyster-bed may be made a steady, in place of a most intermittent, source of revenue. In this connexion it may be mentioned that radiography is now being used, and by its means the oysters containing large pearls can be separated from those that do not, and the latter returned to the sea. Besides their valuable work in solving this particular problem, Professor Herdman and his colleague have made a rich collection of marine animals, which are being examined by a number of specialists. The results of their labours have appeared in a handsome series of volumes published under the auspices of the Royal Society; and it is from the first of these that many of the facts contained in this article are derived. The memoirs included in the volumes contain many important additions to our knowledge; but no result is more interesting or more economically important than the confirmation of the fact that, as M. Dubois puts it, ‘La plus belle perle n’est donc, en définitive, que le brillant sarcophage d’un ver.’

THE DEPTHS OF THE SEA

_Here in the womb of the world--here on the tie-ribs of earth._
RUDYARD KIPLING.

The first recorded attempt to sound the depths of the ocean was made early in the year 1521, in the South Pacific, by Ferdinand Magellan. He had traversed the dangerous straits destined to bear his name during the previous November, and emerged on the 28th of that month into the open ocean. For three months he sailed across the Pacific, and in the middle of March, 1521, came to anchor off the islands now known as the Philippines. Here Magellan was killed in a conflict with the natives. The records of his wonderful feat were brought to Spain during the following year by one of his ships, the _Victoria_; and amidst the profound sensation caused by the news of this voyage, which has been called ‘the greatest event in the most remarkable period of the world’s history,’ it is probable that his modest attempt to sound the ocean failed to attract the attention it deserved. Magellan’s sounding-lines were at most some two hundred fathoms in length, and he failed to touch bottom; from which he ‘somewhat naïvely concluded that he had reached the deepest part of the ocean.’

It was more than two hundred years later that the first serious study of the bed of the sea was undertaken by the French geographer Philippe Buache, who first introduced the use of isobathic curves in a map which he published in 1737. His view, that the depths of the ocean are simply prolongations of the conditions existing in the neighbouring sea-coasts, though too wide in its generalization, has been shown to be true as regards the sea-bottom in the immediate vicinity of Continental coasts and islands; and undoubtedly it helped to attract attention to the problem of what is taking place at the bottom of the sea.

Actual experiment, however, advanced but slowly. So early as the fifteenth century, an ingenious Cardinal, one Nicolaus Cusanus (1401-1464), had devised an apparatus consisting of two bodies, one heavier and one lighter than water, which were so connected that when the heavier touched the bottom the lighter was released. By calculating the time which the latter took in ascending, attempts were made to arrive at the depths of the sea. A century later Puehler made similar experiments; and after another interval of a hundred years, in 1667 we find the Englishman Robert Hooke continuing on the same lines various bathymetric observations; but the results thus obtained were fallacious, and the experiments added little or nothing to our knowledge of the nature of the bottom of the ocean. In the eighteenth century Count Marsigli attacked many of the problems of the deep sea. He collected and sifted information which he derived from the coral-fishers; he investigated the deposits brought up from below, and was one of the earliest to test the temperature of the sea at different depths. In 1749 Captain Ellis found that a thermometer, lowered on separate occasions to depths of 650 fathoms and 891 fathoms respectively, recorded, on reaching the surface, the same temperature--namely, 53°. His thermometer was lowered in a bucket ingeniously devised so as to open as it descended and close as it was drawn up. The mechanism of this instrument was invented by the Rev. Stephen Hales, D.D., of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, the friend of Pope, and perpetual curate at Teddington Church. Dr. Hales was a man of many inventions, and, amongst others, he is said to have suggested the use of the inverted cup placed in the centre of a fruit-pie in which the juice accumulates as the pie cools. His device of the closed bucket with two connected valves was the forerunner of the numerous contrivances which have since been used for bringing up sea-water from great depths.

These were amongst the first efforts made to obtain a knowledge of deep-sea temperatures. About the same time experiments were being made by Bouguer and others on the transparency of sea-water. It was soon recognized that this factor varies in different seas; and an early estimate of the depth of average sea-water sufficient to cut off all light placed it at 656 feet. The colour of the sea and its salinity were also receiving attention, notably at the hands of the distinguished chemist Robert Boyle, and of the Italian, Marsigli, mentioned above. To the latter, and to Donati, a fellow-countryman, is due the honour of first using the dredge for purposes of scientific inquiry. They employed the ordinary oyster-dredge of the local fishermen to obtain animals from the bottom.

The invention of the self-registering thermometer by Cavendish, in 1757, provided another instrument essential to the investigation of the condition of things at great depths; and it was used in Lord Mulgrave’s expedition to the Arctic Sea in 1773. On this voyage attempts at deep-sea soundings were made, and a depth of 683 fathoms was registered. During Sir James Ross’s Antarctic Expedition (1839-1843) the temperature of the water was constantly observed to depths of 2,000 fathoms. His uncle, Sir John Ross, had twenty years previously, on his voyage to Baffin’s Bay, made some classical soundings. One, two miles from the coast, reached a depth of 2,700 feet, and brought up a collection of gravel and two living crustaceans; another, 3,900 feet in depth, yielded pebbles, clay, some worms, crustacea, and corallines. Two other dredgings, one at 6,000 feet, the other at 6,300 feet, also brought up living creatures; and thus, though the results were not at first accepted, the existence of animal life at great depths was demonstrated.

With Sir James Ross’s expedition we may be said to have reached modern times: his most distinguished companion, Sir Joseph Hooker, is still living. It is impossible to do more than briefly refer to the numerous expeditions which have taken part in deep-sea exploration during our own times. The United States of America sent out, about the time of Ross’s Antarctic voyage, an expedition under Captain Wilkes, with Dana on board as naturalist. Professor Edward Forbes, who ‘did more than any of his contemporaries to advance marine zoology,’ joined the surveying ship _Beacon_ in 1840, and made more than one hundred dredgings in the Ægean Sea. Lovén was working in the Scandinavian waters. Mr. H. Goodsir sailed on the _Erebus_ with Sir John Franklin’s ill-fated Polar Expedition; and such notes of his as were recovered bear evidence of the value of the work he did. The Norwegians, Michael Sars and his son, G. O. Sars, had by the year 1864 increased their list of species living at a depth of between 200 and 300 fathoms, from nineteen to ninety-two. Much good work was done by the United States navy and by surveying ships under the auspices of Bache, Bailey, Maury, and de Pourtalès. The Austrian frigate _Novara_, with a full scientific staff, circumnavigated the world in 1857-1859. In 1868 the Admiralty placed the surveying ship _Lightning_ at the disposal of Professor Wyville Thomson and Dr. W. B. Carpenter for a six weeks’ dredging trip in the North Atlantic; and in the following year the _Porcupine_, by permission of the Admiralty, made three trips under the guidance of Dr. W. B. Carpenter and Mr. Gwyn Jeffreys.

Towards the end of 1872 H.M.S. _Challenger_ left England to spend the following three years and a half in traversing all the waters of the globe. This was the most completely equipped expedition which has left any land for the investigation of the sea, and its results were correspondingly rich. They have been worked out by naturalists of all nations, and form the most complete record of the fauna and flora, and of the physical and chemical conditions of the deep, which has yet been published. It is from Sir John Murray’s summary of the results of the voyage that many of these facts are taken. Since the return of the _Challenger_ there have been many expeditions from various lands, but none so complete in its conception or its execution as the British Expedition of 1872-1875. The U.S.S. _Blake_, under the direction of A. Agassiz, has explored the Caribbean Sea; and the _Albatross_, of the same navy, has sounded the Western Atlantic. Numerous observations made by the German ships _Gazelle_ and _Drache_, and Plankton Expedition, the Norwegian North Atlantic Expedition, the Italian ship _Washington_, the French ships _Travailleur_ and _Talisman_, the Prince of Monaco’s yachts, _Hirondelle_ and _Princesse Alice_, under his own direction, the Austrian ‘Pola’ Expedition, the Russian investigations in the Black Sea, and lastly, by the ships of our own navy, have, during the last five-and-twenty years, enormously increased our knowledge of the seas and of all that in them is. This knowledge is still being added to. At the present time the collections of the German ship _Valdivia_ and of the Dutch _Siboga_ Expedition are being worked out, and are impatiently awaited by zoologists and geographers of every country. The _Discovery_ and the _Gauss_, although primarily fitted for ice-work, have added much to what is known of the sea-bottom of the Antarctic; and amongst men of science there is no abatement of interest and curiosity as to that _terra incognita_.

Before we attempt to describe the conditions which prevail at great depths of the ocean, a few words should be said as to the part played by cable-laying in the investigation of the subaqueous crust of the earth. This part, though undoubtedly important, is sometimes exaggerated; and we have seen how large an array of facts has been accumulated by expeditions made mainly in the interest of pure science. The laying of the Atlantic cable was preceded, in 1856, by a careful survey of a submerged plateau, extending from the British Isles to Newfoundland, by Lieutenant Berryman of the _Arctic_. He brought back samples of the bottom from thirty-four stations between Valentia and St. John’s. In the following year Captain Pullen, of H.M.S. _Cyclops_, surveyed a parallel line slightly to the north. His specimens were examined by Huxley, and from them he derived the _Bathybius_, a primeval slime which was thought to occur widely spread over the sea-bottom. The interest in this ‘Urschleim’ has, however, become merely historic, since John Y. Buchanan, of the _Challenger_, showed that it is only a gelatinous form of sulphate of lime thrown down from the sea-water by the alcohol used in preserving the organisms found in the deep-sea deposits.

The important generalizations of Dr. Wallich, who was on board H.M.S. _Bulldog_, which, in 1860, again traversed the Atlantic to survey a route for the cable, largely helped to elucidate the problems of the deep. He noticed that no _algæ_ live at a depth greater than 200 fathoms; he collected animals from great depths, and showed that they utilize in many ways organisms which fall down from the surface of the water; he noted that the conditions are such that, whilst dead animals sink from the surface to the bottom, they do not rise from the bottom to the surface; and he brought evidence forward in support of the view that the deep-sea fauna is directly derived from shallow-water forms. In the same year in which Wallich traversed the Atlantic, the telegraph cable between Sardinia and Bona, on the African coast, snapped. Under the superintendence of Fleeming Jenkin, some forty miles of the cable, part of it from a depth of 1,200 fathoms, was recovered. Numerous animals, sponges, corals, polyzoa, molluscs, and worms were brought to the surface, adhering to the cable. These were examined and reported upon by Professor Allman, and subsequently by Professor A. Milne Edwards; and, as the former reports, we ‘must therefore regard this observation of Mr. Fleeming Jenkin as having afforded the first absolute proof of the existence of highly organized animals living at a depth of upwards of 1,000 fathoms.’ The investigation of the animals thus brought to the surface revealed another fact of great interest, namely, that some of the specimens were identical with forms hitherto known only as fossils. It was thus demonstrated that species hitherto regarded as extinct are still living at great depths of the ocean.

During the first half of the last century an exaggerated idea of the depth of the sea prevailed, due in a large measure to the defective sounding apparatus of the time. Thus Captain Durham, in 1852, recorded a depth of 7,730 fathoms in the South Atlantic, and Lieutenant Parker mentions one of 8,212 fathoms--depths which the _Challenger_ and the _Gazelle_ corrected to 2,412 and 2,905 fathoms respectively. The deepest parts of the sea, as revealed by recent research, do not lie, as many have thought, in or near the centres of the great oceans, but in the neighbourhood of, or at no great distance from, the mainland, or in the vicinity of volcanic islands. One of the deepest ‘pockets’ yet found is probably that sounded by the American expedition on board the _Tuscarora_ (1873-1875) east of Japan, when bottom was only reached at a depth of 4,612 fathoms. More recently, soundings of 5,035 fathoms have been recorded in the Pacific, in the neighbourhood of the Friendly Islands, and south of these again, one of 5,113 fathoms; but the deepest of all lies north of the Carolines, and attains a depth of 5,287 fathoms. It thus appears that there are ‘pockets’ or pits in the sea whose depth below the surface of the water is about equal to the height of the highest mountains taken from the sea-level. Both are insignificant in comparison with the mass of the globe; and it is sometimes said that, were the seas gathered up, and the earth shrunk to the size of an orange, the mountain ranges and abysmal depths would not be more striking than are the small elevations and intervening depressions on the skin of the fruit.

But it is not with these exceptional abysses that we have to do; they are as rare and as widely scattered as great mountain-ranges on land. It is with the deep sea, as opposed to shoal water and the surface layers, that this article is concerned; but the depth at which the sea becomes ‘deep’ is to some extent a matter of opinion. Numerous attempts, headed by that of Edward Forbes, have been made to divide the sea into zones or strata; and, just as the geological strata are characterized by peculiar species, so, in the main, the various deep-sea zones have their peculiar fauna. These zones, however, are not universally recognized; and their limits, like those of the zoogeographical regions on land, whilst serving for some groups of animals, break down altogether as regards others. There are, however, two fairly definite regions in the sea; and the limit between them is the very one for our purpose. This limit separates the surface waters, which are permeable by the light of the sun and in which owing to this life-giving light, _algæ_ and vegetable organisms can live, from the deeper waters which the sun’s rays cannot reach, and in which no plant can live. The regions pass imperceptibly into one another; there is no sudden transition. The conditions of life gradually change, and the precise level at which vegetable life becomes impossible varies with differing conditions. With strong sunlight and a smooth sea, the rays penetrate further than if the light be weak and the waters troubled.

Speaking generally, we may place the dividing-line between the surface layer and the deep sea at 300 fathoms. Below this no light or heat from the sun penetrates; and it is the absence of these factors that gives rise to most of the peculiarities of the deep sea. It is a commonplace, which every schoolboy now knows, that all animal life is ultimately dependent on the food-stuffs stored up by green plants; and that the power which such plants possess of fixing the carbonic acid of the surrounding medium, and building it up into more complex food-stuffs, depends upon the presence of their green colouring matter (chlorophyll), and is exercised only in the presence of sunlight. But, as we have pointed out, ‘the sun’s perpendicular rays’ do not ‘illumine the depths of the sea’; they hardly penetrate 300 fathoms. This absence of sunlight below a certain limit, and the consequent failure of vegetable life, gave rise at one time to the belief that the abysses of the ocean were uninhabited and uninhabitable; but, as we have already seen, this view has long been given up.

The inhabitants of the deep sea cannot, any more than other creatures, be self-supporting. They prey on one another, it is true; but this must have a limit, or very soon there would be nothing left to prey upon. Like the inhabitants of great cities, the denizens of the deep must have an outside food-supply, and this they must ultimately derive from the surface layer.

The careful investigation of life in the sea has shown that not only the surface layer, but all the intermediate zones teem with life. Nowhere is there a layer of water in which animals are not found. But, as we have seen, the _algæ_ upon which the life of marine animals ultimately depends, live only in the upper waters; below 100 fathoms they begin to be rare, and below 200 fathoms they are absent. Thus it is evident that those animals which live in the surface layers have, like an agricultural population, their food-supply at hand, while those that live in the depths must, like dwellers in towns, obtain it from afar. Many of the inhabitants of what may be termed the middle regions are active swimmers, and these undoubtedly from time to time visit the more densely peopled upper strata. They also visit the depths and afford an indefinite food-supply to the deep-sea dwellers.