or
hair-like extension of its substance. This type, however, which is
known as the Flagellate, may be derived from the next, which we will
take as the primitive and fundamental animal type. It is best seen
in the common and familiar Amoeba, a minute sac of liquid or viscid
plasm, often not more than a hundredth of an inch in diameter. As
its "skin" is merely a finer kind of the viscous plasm,
not an impenetrable membrane, it takes in food at any part of its
surface, makes little "stomachs," or temporary cavities,
round the food at any part of its interior, ejects the useless matter
at any point, and thrusts out any part of its body as temporary "arms"
or "feet."
Now it is plain that in an age of increasing microbic cannibalism
the toughening of the skin would be one of the first advantages to
secure survival, and this is, in point of fact, almost the second
leading principle in early development. Naturally, as the skin becomes
firmer, the animal can no longer, like the Amoeba, take food at, or
make limbs of, any part of it. There must be permanent pores in the
membrane to receive food or let out rays of the living substance to
act as oars or arms. Thus we get an immense variety amongst these
Protozoa, as the one-celled animals are called. Some (the Flagellates)
have one or two stout oars; some (the Ciliates) have numbers of fine
hairs (or cilia). Some have a definite mouth-funnel, but no stomach,
and cilia drawing the water into it. Some (Vorticella, etc.), shrinking
from the open battlefield, return to the plant-principle, live on
stalks, and have wreaths of cilia round the open mouth drawing the
water to them. Some (the Heliozoa) remain almost motionless, shooting
out sticky rays of their matter on every side to catch the food. Some
form tubes to live in; some (Coleps) develop horny plates for armour;
and others develop projectiles to pierce their prey (stinging threads).
This miniature world is full of evolutionary interest, but it is too
vast for detailed study here. We will take one group, which we know
to have been already developed in the Cambrian, and let a study of
its development stand for all. In every lecture or book on "the
beauties of the microscope" we find, and are generally greatly
puzzled by, minute shells of remarkable grace and beauty that are
formed by some of these very elementary animals They are the Radiolaria
(with flinty shells, as a rule) and the Thalamophora (with chalk frames).
Evolution furnishes a simple key to their remarkable structure.
As we saw, one of the early requirements to be fostered by natural
selection in the Archaean struggle for life was a "thick skin,"
and the thick skin had to be porous to let the animal shoot out its
viscid substance in rays and earn its living. This stage above the
Amoeba is beautifully illustrated in the sun-animalcules (Heliozoa).
Now the lowest types of Radiolaria are of this character. They have
no shell or framework at all. The next stage is for the little animal
to develop fine irregular threads of flint in its skin, a much better
security against the animal-eater. These animalcules, it must be recollected,
are bits of almost pure plasm, and, as they live in crowds, dividing
and subdividing, but never dying, make excellent mouthfuls for a small
feeder. Those with the more flint in their skins were the more apt
to survive and "breed." The threads of flint increase until
they form a sort of thorn-thicket round a little social group, or
a complete lattice round an individual body. Next, spikes or spines
jut out from the lattice, partly for additional protection, partly
to keep the little body afloat at the surface of the sea. In this
way we get a bewildering variety and increasing complexity of forms,
ascending in four divergent lines from the naked ancestral type to
the extreme grace and intricacy of the Calocyclas monumentum or the
Lychnaspis miranda. These, however, are rare specimens in the 4000
species of Radiolaria. I have hundreds of them, on microscopic slides,
which have no beauty and little regularity of form. We see a gradual
evolution, on utilitarian principles, as we run over the thousands
of forms; and, when we recollect the inconceivable numbers in which
these little animals have lived and struggled for life--passively--during
tens of millions of years, we are not surprised at the elaborate protective
frames of the higher types.
The Thalamophores, the sister-group of one-celled animals which largely
compose our chalk and much of our limestone, are developed on the
same principle. The earlier forms seem to have lived in a part of
the ocean where silica was scarce, and they absorbed and built their
protective frames of lime. In the simpler types the frame is not unlike
a wide-necked bottle, turned upside-down. In later forms it takes
the shape of a spirally coiled series of chambers, sometimes amounting
to several thousand. These wonderful little houses are not difficult
to understand. The original tiny animal covers itself with a coat
of lime. It feeds, grows, and bulges out of its chamber. The new part
of its flesh must have a fresh coat, and the process goes on until
scores, or hundreds, or even thousands, of these tiny chambers make
up the spiral shell of the morsel of living matter.
With this brief indication of the mechanical principles which have
directed the evolution of two of the most remarkable groups of the
one-celled animals we must be content, or the dimensions of this volume
will not enable us even to reach the higher and more interesting types.
We must advance at once to the larger animals, whose bodies are composed
of myriads of cells.
The social tendency which pervades the animal world, and the evident
use of that tendency, prepare us to understand that the primitive
microbes would naturally come in time to live in clusters. Union means
effectiveness in many ways, even when it does not mean strength. We
have still many loose associations of one-celled animals in nature,
illustrating the approach to a community life. Numbers of the Protozoa
are social; they live either in a common jelly-like matrix, or on
a common stalk. In fact, we have a singularly instructive illustration
of the process in the evolution of the sponges.
It is well known that the horny texture to which we commonly give
the name of sponge is the former tenement and shelter of a colony
of one-celled animals, which are the real Sponges. In other groups
the structure is of lime; in others, again, of flinty material. Now,
the Sponges, as we have them to-day, are so varied, and start from
so low a level, that no other group of animals "illustrates so
strikingly the theory of evolution," as Professor Minchin says.
We begin with colonies in which the individuals are (as in Proterospongia)
irregularly distributed in their jelly-like common bed, each animal
lashing the water, as stalked Flagellates do, and bringing the food
to it. Such a colony would be admirable food for an early carnivore,
and we soon find the protective principle making it less pleasant
for the devourer. The first stage may be--at least there are such
Sponges even now--that the common bed is strewn or sown with the cast
shells of Radiolaria. However that may be, the Sponges soon begin
to absorb the silica or lime of the sea-water, and deposit it in needles
or fragments in their bed. The deposit goes on until at last an elaborate
framework of thorny, or limy, or flinty material is constructed by
the one-celled citizens. In the higher types a system of pores or
canals lets the food-bearing water pass through, as the animals draw
it in with their lashes; in the highest types the animals come still
closer together, lining the walls of little chambers in the interior.
Here we have a very clear evolutionary transition from the solitary
microbe to a higher level, but, unfortunately, it does not take us
far. The Sponges are a side-issue, or cul de sac, from the Protozoic
world, and do not lead on to the higher. Each one-celled unit remains
an animal; it is a colony of unicellulars, not a many-celled body.
We may admire it as an instructive approach toward the formation of
a many-celled body, but we must look elsewhere for the true upward
advance.
The next stage is best illustrated in certain spherical colonies of
cells like the tiny green Volvox (now generally regarded as vegetal)
of our ponds, or Magosphoera. Here the constituent cells merge their
individuality in the common action. We have the first definite many-celled
body. It is the type to which a moving close colony of one-celled
microbes would soon come. The round surface is well adapted for rolling
or spinning along in the water, and, as each little cell earns its
own living, it must be at the surface, in contact with the water.
Thus a hollow, or fluid-filled, little sphere, like the Volvox, is
the natural connecting-link between the microbe and the many-celled
body, and may be taken to represent the first important stage in its
development.
The next important stage is also very clearly exhibited in nature,
and is more or less clearly reproduced in the embryonic development
of all animals. We may imagine that the age of microbes was succeeded
by an age of these many-celled larger bodies, and the struggle for
life entered upon a new phase. The great principle we have already
recognised came into play once more. Large numbers of the many-celled
bodies shrank from the field of battle, and adopted the method of
the plant. They rooted themselves to the floor of the ocean, and developed
long arms or lashes for creating a whirlpool movement in the water,
and thus bringing the food into their open mouths. Forfeiting mobility,
they have, like the plant, forfeited the greater possibilities of
progress, and they remain flowering to-day on the floors of our waters,
recalling the next phase in the evolution of early life. Such are
the hydra, the polyp, the coral, and the sea-anemone. It is not singular
that earlier observers could not detect that they were animals, and
they were long known in science as "animal-plants" (Zoophytes).
When we look to the common structure of these animals, to find the
ancestral type, we must ignore the nerve and muscle-cells which they
have developed in some degree. Fundamentally, their body consists
of a pouch, with an open mouth, the sides of the pouch consisting
of a double layer of cells. In this we have a clue to the next stage
of animal development. Take a soft india-rubber ball to represent
the first many-celled animal. Press in one half of the ball close
upon the other, narrow the mouth, and you have something like the
body-structure of the coral and hydra. As this is the course of embryonic
development, and as it is so well retained in the lowest groups of
the many-celled animals, we take it to be the next stage. The reason
for it will become clear on reflection. Division of labour naturally
takes place in a colony, and in that way certain cells in the primitive
body were confined to the work of digestion. It would be an obvious
advantage for these to retire into the interior, leaving the whole
external surface free for the adjustment of the animal's relations
to the outer world.
Again we must refrain from following in detail the development of
this new world of life which branches off in the Archaean ocean. The
evolution of the Corals alone would be a lengthy and interesting story.
But a word must be said about the jelly-fish, partly because the inexpert
will be puzzled at the inclusion of so active an animal, and partly
because its story admirably illustrates the principle we are studying.
The Medusa really descends from one of the plant-like animals of the
early Archaean period, but it has abandoned the ancestral stalk, turned
upside down, and developed muscular swimming organs. Its past is betrayed
in its embryonic development. As a rule the germ develops into a stalked
polyp, out of which the free-swimming Medusa is formed. This return
to active and free life must have occurred early, as we find casts
of large Medusae in the Cambrian beds. In complete harmony with the
principle we laid down, the jelly-fish has gained in nerve and sensitiveness
in proportion to its return to an active career.
But this principle is best illustrated in the other branch of the
early many-celled animals, which continued to move about in search
of food. Here, as will be expected, we have the main stem of the animal
world, and, although the successive stages of development are obscure,
certain broad lines that it followed are clear and interesting.
It is evident that in a swarming population of such animals the most
valuable qualities will be speed and perception. The sluggish Coral
needs only sensitiveness enough, and mobility enough, to shrink behind
its protecting scales at the approach of danger. In the open water
the most speedy and most sensitive will be apt to escape destruction,
and have the larger share in breeding the next generation. Imagine
a selection on this principle going on for millions of years, and
the general result can be conjectured. A very interesting analogy
is found in the evolution of the boat. From the clumsy hollowed tree
of Neolithic man natural selection, or the need of increasing speed,
has developed the elongated, evenly balanced modern boat, with its
distinct stem and stern. So in the Archaean ocean the struggle to
overtake food, or escape feeders, evolved an elongated two-sided body,
with head and tail, and with the oars (cilia) of the one- celled ancestor
spread thickly along its flanks. In other words, a body akin to that
of the lower water-worms would be the natural result; and this is,
in point of fact, the next stage we find in the hierarchy of living
nature.
Probably myriads of different types of this worm-like organisation
were developed, but such animals leave no trace in the rocks, and
we can only follow the development by broad analogies. The lowest
flat-worms of to-day may represent some of these early types, and
as we ascend the scale of what is loosely called "worm"
organisation, we get some instructive suggestions of the way in which
the various organs develop. Division of labour continues among the
colony of cells which make up the body, and we get distinct nerve-cells,
muscle-cells, and digestive cells. The nerve-cells are most useful
at the head of an organism which moves through the water, just as
the look-out peers from the head of the ship, and there they develop
most thickly. By a fresh division of labour some of these cells become
especially sensitive to light, some to the chemical qualities of matter,
some to movements of the water; we have the beginning of the eyes,
the nose, and the ears, as simple little depressions in the skin of
the head, lined with these sensitive cells. A muscular gullet arises
to protect the digestive tube; a simple drainage channel for waste
matter forms under the skin; other channels permit the passage of
the fluid food, become (in the higher worms) muscular blood-vessels,
and begin to contract--somewhat erratically at first-- and drive the
blood through the system.
Here, perhaps, are millions of years of development compressed into
a paragraph. But the purpose of this work is chiefly to describe the
material record of the advance of life in the earth's strata, and
show how it is related to great geological changes. We must therefore
abstain from endeavouring to trace the genealogy of the innumerable
types of animals which were, until recently, collected in zoology
under the heading "Worms." It is more pertinent to inquire
how the higher classes of animals, which we found in the Cambrian
seas, can have arisen from this primitive worm-like population.
The struggle for life in the Archaean ocean would become keener and
more exacting with the appearance of each new and more effective type.
That is a familiar principle in our industrial world to-day, and we
shall find it illustrated throughout our story. We therefore find
the various processes of evolution, which we have already seen, now
actively at work among the swarming Archaean population, and producing
several very distinct types. In some of these struggling organisms
speed is developed, together with offensive and defensive weapons,
and a line slowly ascends toward the fish, which we will consider
later. In others defensive armour is chiefly developed, and we get
the lines of the heavy sluggish shell-fish, the Molluscs and Brachiopods,
and, by a later compromise between speed and armour, the more active
tough-coated Arthropods. In others the plant-principle reappears;
the worm-like creature retires from the free-moving life, attaches
itself to a fixed base, and becomes the Bryozoan or the Echinoderm.
To trace the development of these types in any detail is impossible.
The early remains are not preserved. But some clues are found in nature
or in embryonic development, and, when the types do begin to be preserved
in the rocks, we find the process of evolution plainly at work in
them. We will therefore say a few words about the general evolution
of each type, and then return to the geological record in the Cambrian
rocks.
The starfish, the most familiar representative of the Echinoderms,
seems very far removed from the kind of worm-like ancestor we have
been imagining, but, fortunately, the very interesting story of the
starfish is easily learned from the geological chronicle. Reflect
on the flower-like expansion of its arms, and then imagine it mounted
on a stalk, mouth side upward, with those arms--more tapering than
they now are--waving round the mouth. That, apparently, was the past
of the starfish and its cousins. We shall see that the earliest Echinoderms
we know are cup-shaped structures on stalks, with a stiff, limy frame
and (as in all sessile animals) a number of waving arms round the
mouth. In the next geological age the stalk will become a long and
flexible arrangement of muscles and plates of chalk, the cup will
be more perfectly compacted of chalky plates, and the five arms will
taper and branch until they have an almost feathery appearance; and
the animal will be considered a "sea-lily" by the early
geologist.
The evidence suggests that both the free-moving and the stalked Echinoderms
descend from a common stalked Archaean ancestor. Some primitive animal
abandoned the worm-like habit, and attached itself, like a polyp,
to the floor. Like all such sessile animals, it developed a wreath
of arms round the open mouth. The "sea-cucumber" (Holothurian)
seems to be a type that left the stalk, retaining the little wreath
of arms, before the body was heavily protected and deformed. In the
others a strong limy skeleton was developed, and the nerves and other
organs were modified in adaptation to the bud-like or flower-like
structure. Another branch of the family then abandoned the stalk,
and, spreading its arms flat, and gradually developing in them numbers
of little "feet" (water-tubes), became the starfish. In
the living Comatula we find a star passing through the stalked stage
in its early development, when it looks like a tiny sea-lily. The
sea-urchin has evolved from the star by folding the arms into a ball.*
* See the section on Echinoderms, by Professor MacBride,
in the "Cambridge Natural History," I.
The Bryozoa (sea-mats, etc.) are another and lower branch of the primitive
active organisms which have adopted a sessile life. In the shell-fish,
on the other hand, the principle of armour-plating has its greatest
development. It is assuredly a long and obscure way that leads from
the ancestral type of animal we have been describing to the headless
and shapeless mussel or oyster. Such a degeneration is, however, precisely
what we should expect to find in the circumstances. Indeed, the larva,
of many of the headless Molluscs have a mouth and eyes, and there
is a very common type of larva--the trochosphere--in the Mollusc world
which approaches the earlier form of some of the higher worms. The
Molluscs, as we shall see, provide some admirable illustrations of
the process of evolution. In some of the later fossilised specimens
(Planorbis, Paludina, etc.) we can trace the animal as it gradually
passes from one species to another. The freshening of the Caspian
Sea, which was an outlying part of the Mediterranean quite late in
the geological record, seems to have evolved several new genera of
Molluscs.
Although, therefore, the remains are not preserved of those primitive
Molluscs in which we might see the protecting shell gradually thickening,
and deforming the worm-like body, we are not without indications of
the process. Two unequal branches of the early wormlike organisms
shrank into strong protective shells. The lower branch became the
Brachiopods; the more advanced branch the Molluscs. In the Mollusc
world, in turn, there are several early types developed. In the Pelecypods
(or Lamellibranchs--the mussel, oyster, etc.) the animal retires wholly
within its fortress, and degenerates. The Gastropods (snails, etc.)
compromise, and retain a certain amount of freedom, so that they degenerate
less. The highest group, the Cephalopods, "keep their heads,"
in the literal sense, and we shall find them advancing from form to
form until, in the octopus of a later age, they discard the ancestral
shell, and become the aristocrats of the Mollusc kingdom.
The last and most important line that led upward from the chaos of
Archaean worms is that of the Arthropods. Its early characteristic
was the acquisition of a chitinous coat over the body. Embryonic indications
show that this was at first a continuous shield, but a type arose
in which the coat broke into sections covering each segment of the
body, giving greater freedom of movement. The shield, in fact, became
a fine coat of mail. The Trilobite is an early and imperfect experiment
of the class, and the larva of the modern king-crab bears witness
that it has not perished without leaving descendants. How later Crustacea
increase the toughness of the coat by deposits of lime, and lead on
to the crab and lobster, and how one early branch invades the land,
develops air-breathing apparatus, and culminates in the spiders and
insects, will be considered later. We shall see that there is most
remarkable evidence connecting the highest of the Arthropods, the
insect, with a remote Annelid ancestor.
We are thus not entirely without clues to the origin of the more advanced
animals we find when the fuller geological record begins. Further
embryological study, and possibly the discovery of surviving primitive
forms, of which Central Africa may yet yield a number, may enlarge
our knowledge, but it is likely to remain very imperfect. The fossil
records of the long ages during which the Mollusc, the Crustacean,
and the Echinoderm slowly assumed their characteristic forms are hopelessly
lost. But we are now prepared to return to the record which survives,
and we shall find the remaining story of the earth a very ample and
interesting chronicle of evolution.
CHAPTER VII. THE PASSAGE TO THE LAND
Slender as our knowledge is of the earlier evolution of the Invertebrate
animals, we return to our Cambrian population with greater interest.
The uncouth Trilobite and its livelier cousins, the sluggish, skulking
Brachiopod and Mollusc, the squirming Annelids, and the plant-like
Cystids, Corals, and Sponges are the outcome of millions of years
of struggle. Just as men, when their culture and their warfare advanced,
clothed themselves with armour, and the most completely mailed survived
the battle, so, generation after generation, the thicker and harder-skinned
animals survived in the Archaean battlefield, and the Cambrian age
opened upon the various fashions of armour that we there described.
But, although half the story of life is over, organisation is still
imperfect and sluggish. We have now to see how it advances to higher
levels, and how the drama is transferred from the ocean to a new and
more stimulating environment.
The Cambrian age begins with a vigorous move on the part of the land.
The seas roll back from the shores of the "lost Atlantis,"
and vast regions are laid bare to the sun and the rains. In the bays
and hollows of the distant shores the animal survivors of the great
upheaval adapt themselves to their fresh homes and continue the struggle.
But the rivers and the waves are at work once more upon the land,
and, as the Cambrian age proceeds, the fringes of the continents are
sheared, and the shore-life steadily advances upon the low-lying land.
By the end of the Cambrian age a very large proportion of the land
is covered with a shallow sea, in which the debris of its surface
is deposited. The levelling continues through the next (Ordovician)
period. Before its close nearly the whole of the United States and
the greater part of Canada are under water, and the new land that
had appeared on the site of Europe is also for the most part submerged.
The present British Isles are almost reduced to a strip of north-eastern
Ireland, the northern extremity of Scotland, and large islands in
the south-west and centre of England.
We have already seen that these victories of the sea are just as stimulating,
in a different way, to animals as the victories of the land. American
geologists are tracing, in a very instructive way, the effect on that
early population of the encroachment of the sea. In each arm of the
sea is a distinctive fauna. Life is still very parochial; the great
cosmopolitans, the fishes, have not yet arrived. As the land is revelled,
the arms of the sea approach each other, and at last mingle their
waters and their populations, with stimulating effect. Provincial
characters are modified, and cosmopolitan characters increase in the
great central sea of America. The vast shallow waters provide a greatly
enlarged theatre for the life of the time, and it flourishes enormously.
Then, at the end of the Ordovician, the land begins to rise once more.
Whether it was due to a fresh shrinking of the crust, or to the simple
process we have described, or both, we need not attempt to determine;
but both in Europe and America there is a great emergence of land.
The shore-tracts and the shallow water are narrowed, the struggle
is intensified in them, and we pass into the Silurian age with a greatly
reduced number but more advanced variety of animals. In the Silurian
age the sea advances once more, and the shore-waters expand. There
is another great "expansive evolution" of life. But the
Silurian age closes with a fresh and very extensive emergence of the
land, and this time it will have the most important consequences.
For two new things have meantime appeared on the earth. The fish has
evolved in the waters, and the plant, at least, has found a footing
on the land.
These geological changes which we have summarised and which have been
too little noticed until recently in evolutionary studies, occupied
7,000,000 years, on the lowest estimate, and probably twice that period.
The impatient critic of evolutionary hypotheses is apt to forget the
length of these early periods. We shall see that in the last two or
three million years of the earth's story most extraordinary progress
has been made in plant and animal development, and can be very fairly
traced. How much advance should we allow for these seven or fourteen
million years of swarming life and changing environments?
We cannot nearly cover the whole ground of paleontology for the period,
and must be content to notice some of the more interesting advances,
and then deal more fully with the evolution of the fish, the forerunner
of the great land animals.
The Trilobite was the most arresting figure in the Cambrian sea, and
its fortunes deserve a paragraph. It reaches its climax in the Ordovician
sea, and then begins to decline, as more powerful animals come upon
the scene. At first (apparently) an eyeless organism, it gradually
develops compound eyes, and in some species the experts have calculated
that there were 15,000 facets to each eye. As time goes on, also,
the eye stands out from the head on a kind of stalk, giving a wider
range of vision. Some of the more sluggish species seem to have been
able to roll themselves up, like hedgehogs, in their shells, when
an enemy approached. But another branch of the same group (Crustacea)
has meantime advanced, and it gradually supersedes the dwindling Trilobites.
Toward the close of the Silurian great scorpion-like Crustaceans (Pterygotus,
Eurypterus, etc.) make their appearance. Their development is obscure,
but it must be remembered that the rocks only give the record of shore-life,
and only a part of that is as yet opened by geology. Some experts
think that they were developed in inland waters. Reaching sometimes
a length of five or six feet, with two large compound eyes and some
smaller eye-spots (ocelli), they must have been the giants of the
Silurian ocean until the great sharks and other fishes appeared.
The quaint stalked Echinoderm which also we noticed in the Cambrian
shallows has now evolved into a more handsome creature, the sea-lily.
The cup-shaped body is now composed of a large number of limy plates,
clothed with flesh; the arms are long, tapering, symmetrical, and
richly fringed; the stalk advances higher and higher, until the flower-like
animal sometimes waves its feathery arms from the top of a flexible
pedestal composed of millions of tiny chalk disks. Small forests of
these sea-lilies adorn the floor of the Silurian ocean, and their
broken and dead frames form whole beds of limestone. The primitive
Cystids dwindle and die out in the presence of such powerful competitors.
Of 250 species only a dozen linger in the Silurian strata, though
a new and more advanced type--the Blastoid--holds the field for a
time. It is the age of the Crinoids or sea-lilies. The starfish, which
has abandoned the stalk, does not seem to prosper as yet, and the
brittle-star appears. Their age will come later. No sea-urchins or
sea-cucumbers (which would hardly be preserved) are found as yet.
It is precisely the order of appearance which our theory of their
evolution demands.
The Brachiopods have passed into entirely new and more advanced species
in the many advances and retreats of the shores, but the Molluscs
show more interesting progress. The commanding group from the start
is that of the Molluscs which have "kept their head," the
Cephalopods, and their large shells show a most instructive evolution.
The first great representative of the tribe is a straight-shelled
Cephalopod, which becomes "the tyrant and scavenger of the Silurian
ocean" (Chamberlin). Its tapering, conical shell sometimes runs
to a length of fifteen feet, and a diameter of one foot. It would
of itself be an important evolutionary factor in the primitive seas,
and might explain more than one advance in protective armour or retreat
into heavy shells. As the period advances the shell begins to curve,
and at last it forms a close spiral coil. This would be so great an
advantage that we are not surprised to find the coiled type (Goniatites)
gain upon and gradually replace the straight-shelled types (Orthoceratites).
The Silurian ocean swarms with these great shelled Cephalopods, of
which the little Nautilus is now the only survivor.
We will not enlarge on the Sponges and Corals, which are slowly advancing
toward the higher modern types. Two new and very powerful organisms
have appeared, and merit the closest attention. One is the fish, the
remote ancestor of the birds and mammals that will one day rule the
earth. The other may be the ancestor of the fish itself, or it may
be one of the many abortive outcomes and unsuccessful experiments
of the stirring life of the time. And while these new types are themselves
a result of the great and stimulating changes which we have reviewed
and the incessant struggle for food and safety, they in turn enormously
quicken the pace of development. The Dreadnought appears in the primitive
seas; the effect on the fleets of the world of the evolution of our
latest type of battleship gives us a faint idea of the effect, on
all the moving population, of the coming of these monsters of the
deep. The age had not lacked incentives to progress; it now obtains
a more terrible and far-reaching stimulus.
To understand the situation let us see how the battle of land and
sea had proceeded. The Devonian Period had opened with a fresh emergence
of the land, especially in Europe, and great inland seas or lakes
were left in the hollows. The tincture of iron which gives a red colour
to our characteristic Devonian rocks, the Old Red Sandstone, shows
us that the sand was deposited in inland waters. The fish had already
been developed, and the Devonian rocks show it swarming, in great
numbers and variety, in the enclosed seas and round the fringe of
the continents.
The first generation was a group of strange creatures, half fish and
half Crustacean, which are known as the Ostracoderms. They had large
armour-plated heads, which recall the Trilobite, and suggest that
they too burrowed in the mud of the sea or (as many think) of the
inland lakes, making havoc among the shell-fish, worms, and small
Crustacea. The hind-part of their bodies was remarkably fish-like
in structure. But they had no backbone--though we cannot say whether
they may not have had a rod of cartilage along the back-- and no articulated
jaws like the fish. Some regard them as a connecting link between
the Crustacea and the fishes, but the general feeling is that they
were an abortive development in the direction of the fish. The sharks
and other large fishes, which have appeared in the Silurian, easily
displace these clumsy and poor-mouthed competitors One almost thinks
of the aeroplane superseding the navigable balloon.
Of the fishes the Arthrodirans dominated the inland seas (apparently),
while the sharks commanded the ocean. One of the Arthrodirans, the
Dinichthys ("terrible fish"), is the most formidable fish
known to science. It measured twenty feet from snout to tail. Its
monstrous head, three feet in width, was heavily armoured, and, instead
of teeth, its great jaws, two feet in length, were sharpened, and
closed over the victim like a gigantic pair of clippers. The strongly
plated heads of these fishes were commonly a foot or two feet in width.
Life in the waters became more exacting than ever. But the Arthrodirans
were unwieldy and sluggish, and had to give way before more progressive
types. The toothed shark gradually became the lord of the waters.
The early shark ate, amongst other things, quantities of Molluscs
and Brachiopods. Possibly he began with Crustacea; in any case the
practice of crunching shellfish led to a stronger and stronger development
of the hard plate which lined his mouth. The prickles of the plate
grew larger and harder, until--as may be seen to-day in the mouth
of a young shark--the cavity was lined with teeth. In the bulk of
the Devonian sharks these developed into what are significantly called
"pavement teeth." They were solid plates of enamel, an inch
or an inch and a half in width, with which the monster ground its
enormous meals of Molluscs, Crustacea, sea-weed, etc. A new and stimulating
element had come into the life of the invertebrate world. Other sharks
snapped larger victims, and developed the teeth on the edges of their
jaws, to the sacrifice of the others, until we find these teeth in
the course of time solid triangular masses of enamel, four or five
inches long, with saw-like edges. Imagine these terrible mouths--the
shears of the Arthrodiran, and the grindstones and terrible crescents
of the giant sharks--moving speedily amongst the crowded inhabitants
of the waters, and it is easy to see what a stimulus to the attainment
of speed and of protective devices was given to the whole world of
the time.
What was the origin of the fish? Here we are in much the same position
as we were in regard to the origin of the higher Invertebrates. Once
the fish plainly appears upon the scene it is found to be undergoing
a process of evolution like all other animals. The vast majority of
our fishes have bony frames (or are Teleosts); the fishes of the Devonian
age nearly all have frames of cartilage, and we know from embryonic
development that cartilage is the first stage in the formation of
bone. In the teeth and tails, also, we find a gradual evolution toward
the higher types. But the earlier record is, for reasons I have already
given, obscure; and as my purpose is rather to discover the agencies
of evolution than to strain slender evidence in drawing up pedigrees,
I need only make brief reference to the state of the problem.
Until comparatively recent times the animal world fell into two clearly
distinct halves, the Vertebrates and the Invertebrates. There were
several anatomical differences between the two provinces, but the
most conspicuous and most puzzling was the backbone. Nowhere in living
nature or in the rocks was any intermediate type known between the
backboned and the non-backboned animal. In the course of the nineteenth
century, however, several animals of an intermediate type were found.
The sea-squirt has in its early youth the line of cartilage through
the body which, in embryonic development, represents the first stage
of the backbone; the lancelet and the Appendicularia have a rod of
cartilage throughout life; the "acorn-headed worm" shows
traces of it. These are regarded as surviving specimens of various
groups of animals which, in early times, fell between the Invertebrate
and Vertebrate worlds, and illustrate the transition.
With their aid a genealogical tree was constructed for the fish. It
was assumed that some Cambrian or Silurian Annelid obtained this stiffening
rod of cartilage. The next advantage--we have seen it in many cases--
was to combine flexibility with support. The rod was divided into
connected sections (vertebrae), and hardened into bone. Besides stiffening
the body, it provided a valuable shelter for the spinal cord, and
its upper part expanded into a box to enclose the brain. The fins
were formed of folds of skin which were thrown off at the sides and
on the back, as the animal wriggled through the water. They were of
use in swimming, and sections of them were stiffened with rods of
cartilage, and became the pairs of fins. Gill slits (as in some of
the highest worms) appeared in the throat, the mouth was improved
by the formation of jaws, and--the worm culminated in the shark.
Some experts think, however, that the fish developed directly from
a Crustacean, and hold that the Ostracoderms are the connecting link.
A close discussion of the anatomical details would be out of place
here,* and the question remains open for the present. Directly or
indirectly, the fish is a descendant of some Archaean Annelid. It
is most probable that the shark was the first true fish-type. There
are unrecognisable fragments of fishes in the Ordovician and Silurian
rocks, but the first complete skeletons (Lanarkia, etc.) are of small
shark-like creatures, and the low organisation of the group to which
the shark belongs, the Elasmobranchs, makes it probable that they
are the most primitive. Other remains (Palaeospondylus) show that
the fish-like lampreys had already developed.
* See, especially, Dr. Gaskell's "Origin of
Vertebrates" (1908).
Two groups were developed from the primitive fish, which have great
interest for us. Our next step, in fact, is to trace the passage of
the fish from the water to the land, one of the most momentous chapters
in the story of life. To that incident or accident of primitive life
we owe our own existence and the whole development of the higher types
of animals. The advance of natural history in modern times has made
this passage to the land easy to understand. Not only does every frog
reenact it in the course of its development, but we know many fishes
that can live out of water. There is an Indian perch--called the "climbing
perch," but it has only once been seen by a European to climb
a tree--which crosses the fields in search of another pool, when its
own pool is evaporating. An Indian marine fish (Periophthalmus) remains
hunting on the shore when the tide goes out. More important still,
several fishes have lungs as well as gills. The Ceratodus of certain
Queensland rivers has one lung; though, I was told by the experts
in Queensland, it is not a "mud-fish," and never lives in
dry mud. However, the Protopterus of Africa and the Lepidosiren of
South America have two lungs, as well as gills, and can live either
in water or, in the dry season, on land.
When the skeletons of fishes of the Ceratodus type were discovered
in the Devonian rocks, it was felt that we had found the fish-ancestor
of the land Vertebrates, but a closer anatomical examination has made
this doubtful. The Devonian lung-fish has characters which do not
seem to lead on to the Amphibia. The same general cause probably led
many groups to leave the water, or adapt themselves to living on land
as well as in water, and the abundant Dipoi or Dipneusts ("double-breathers")
of the Devonian lakes are one of the chief of these groups, which
have luckily left descendants to our time. The ancestors of the Amphibia
are generally sought amongst the Crossopterygii, a very large group
of fishes in Devonian times, with very few representatives to-day.
It is more profitable to investigate the process itself than to make
a precarious search for the actual fish, and, fortunately, this inquiry
is more hopeful. The remains that we find make it probable that the
fish left the water about the beginning of the Devonian or the end
of the Silurian. Now this period coincides with two circumstances
which throw a complete light on the step; one is the great rise of
the land, catching myriads of fishes in enclosed inland seas, and
the other is the appearance of formidable carnivores in the waters.
As the seas evaporated* and the great carnage proceeded, the land,
which was already covered with plants and inhabited by insects, offered
a safe retreat for such as could adopt it. Emigration to the land
had been going on for ages, as we shall see. Curious as it must seem
to the inexpert, the fishes, or some of them, were better prepared
than most other animals to leave the water. The chief requirement
was a lung, or interior bag, by which the air could be brought into
close contact with the absorbing blood vessels. Such a bag, broadly
speaking, most of the fishes possess in their floating-bladder: a
bag of gas, by compressing or expanding which they alter their specific
gravity in the water. In some fishes it is double; in some it is supplied
with blood-vessels; in some it is connected by a tube with the gullet,
and therefore with the atmosphere.
* It is now usually thought that the inland seas
were the theatre of the passage to land. I must point out, however,
that the wide distribution of our Dipneusts, in Australia, tropical
Africa, and South America, suggests that they were marine though they
now live in fresh water. But we shall see that a continent united
the three regions at one time, and it may afford some explanation.
Thus we get very clear suggestions of the transition from water to
land. We must, of course, conceive it as a slow and gradual adaptation.
At first there may have been a rough contrivance for deriving oxygen
directly and partially from the atmosphere, as the water of the lake
became impure. So important an advantage would be fostered, and, as
the inland sea became smaller, or its population larger or fiercer,
the fishes with a sufficiently developed air-breathing apparatus passed
to the land, where, as yet, they would find no serious enemy. The
fact is beyond dispute; the theory of how it occurred is plausible
enough; the consequences were momentous. Great changes were preparing
on the land, and in a comparatively short time we shall find its new
inhabitant subjected to a fierce test of circumstances that will carry
it to an enormously higher level than life had yet reached.
I have said that the fact of this transition to the land is beyond
dispute. The evidence is very varied, but need not all be enlarged
upon here. The widespread Dipneust fishes of the Devonian rocks bear
strong witness to it, and the appearance of the Amphibian immediately
afterwards makes it certain. The development of the frog is a reminiscence
of it, on the lines of the embryonic law which we saw earlier. An
animal, in its individual development, more or less reproduces the
past phases of its ancestry. So the free-swimming jelly-fish begins
life as a fixed polyp; a kind of star-fish (Comatula) opens its career
as a stalked sea-lily; the gorgeous dragon-fly is at first an uncouth
aquatic animal, and the ethereal butterfly a worm-like creature. But
the most singular and instructive of all these embryonic reminiscences
of the past is found in the fact that all the higher land-animals
of to-day clearly reproduce a fish-stage in their embryonic development.
In the third and fourth weeks of development the human embryo shows
four (closed) slits under the head, with corresponding arches. The
bird, the dog, the horse--all the higher land animals, in a word,
pass through the same phase. The suggestion has been made that these
structures do not recall the gill-slits and gill-arches of the fish,
but are folds due to the packing of the embryo in the womb. In point
of fact, they appear just at the time when the human embryo is only
a fifth of an inch long, and there is no such compression. But all
doubt as to their interpretation is dispelled when we remove the skin
and examine the heart and blood-vessels. The heart is up in the throat,
as in the fish, and has only two chambers, as in the fish (not four,
as in the bird and mammal); and the arteries rise in five pairs of
arches over the swellings in the throat, as they do in the lower fish,
but do not in the bird and mammal. The arrangement is purely temporary--lasting
only a couple of weeks in the human embryo--and purposeless. Half
these arteries will disappear again. They quite plainly exist to supply
fine blood-vessels for breathing at the gill-clefts, and are never
used, for the embryo does not breathe, except through the mother.
They are a most instructive reminder of the Devonian fish which quitted
its element and became the ancestor of all the birds and mammals of
a later age.
Several other features of man's embryonic development--the budding
of the hind limbs high up, instead of at the base of, the vertebral
column, the development of the ears, the nose, the jaws, etc.--have
the same lesson, but the one detailed illustration will suffice. The
millions of years of stimulating change and struggle which we have
summarised have resulted in the production of a fish which walks on
four limbs (as the South American mud-fish does to-day), and breathes
the atmosphere.
We have been quite unable to follow the vast changes which have meantime
taken place in its organisation. The eyes, which were mere pits in
the skin, lined with pigment cells, in the early worm, now have a
crystalline lens to concentrate the light and define objects on the
nerve. The ears, which were at first similar sensitive pits in the
skin, on which lay a little stone whose movements gave the animal
some sense of direction, are now closed vesicles in the skull, and
begin to be sensitive to waves of sound. The nose, which was at first
two blind, sensitive pits in the skin of the head, now consists of
two nostrils opening into the mouth, with an olfactory nerve spreading
richly over the passages. The brain, which was a mere clump of nerve-cells
connecting the rough sense-impressions, is now a large and intricate
structure, and already exhibits a little of that important region
(the cerebrum) in which the varied images of the outside world are
combined. The heart, which was formerly was a mere swelling of a part
of one of the blood-vessels, now has two chambers.
We cannot pursue these detailed improvements of the mechanism, as
we might, through the ascending types of animals. Enough if we see
more or less clearly how the changes in the face of the earth and
the rise of its successive dynasties of carnivores have stimulated
living things to higher and higher levels in the primitive ocean.
We pass to the clearer and far more important story of life on land,
pursuing the fish through its continuous adaptations to new conditions
until, throwing out side-branches as it progresses, it reaches the
height of bird and mammal life.
CHAPTER VIII. THE COAL-FOREST
With the beginning of life on land we open a new and more important
volume of the story of life, and we may take the opportunity to make
clearer certain principles or processes of development which we may
seem hitherto to have taken for granted. The evolutionary work is
too often a mere superficial description of the strange and advancing
classes of plants and animals which cross the stage of geology. Why
they change and advance is not explained. I have endeavoured to supply
this explanation by putting the successive populations of the earth
in their respective environments, and showing the continuous and stimulating
effect on them of changes in those environments. We have thus learned
to decipher some lines of the decalogue of living nature. "Thou
shalt have a thick armour," "Thou shalt be speedy,"
"Thou shalt shelter from the more powerful," are some of
the laws of primeval life. The appearance of each higher and more
destructive type enforces them with more severity; and in their observance
animals branch outward and upward into myriads of temporary or permanent
forms.
But there is no consciousness of law and no idea of evading danger.
There is not even some mysterious instinct "telling" the
animal, as it used to be said, to do certain things. It is, in fact,
not strictly accurate to say that a certain change in the environment
stimulates animals to advance. Generally speaking, it does not act
on the advancing at all, but on the non-advancing, which it exterminates.
The procedure is simple, tangible, and unconscious. Two invading arms
of the sea meet and pour together their different waters and populations.
The habits, the foods, and the enemies of many types of animals are
changed; the less fit for the new environment die first, the more
fit survive longest and breed most of the new generation. It is so
with men when they migrate to a more exacting environment, whether
a dangerous trade or a foreign clime. Again, take the case of the
introduction of a giant Cephalopod or fish amongst a population of
Molluscs and Crustacea. The toughest, the speediest, the most alert,
the most retiring, or the least conspicuous, will be the most apt
to survive and breed. In hundreds or thousands of generations there
will be an enormous improvement in the armour, the speed, the sensitiveness,
the hiding practices, and the protective colours, of the animals which
are devoured. The "natural selection of the fittest" really
means the "natural destruction of the less fit."
The only point assumed in this is that the young of an animal or plant
tend to differ from each other and from their parents. Darwin was
content to take this as a fact of common observation, as it obviously
is, but later science has thrown some light on the causes of these
variations. In the first place, the germs in the parent's body may
themselves be subject to struggle and natural selection, and not share
equally in the food-supply. Then, in the case of the higher animals
(or the majority of animals), there is a clear source of variation
in the fact that the mature germ is formed of certain elements from
two different parents, four grandparents, and so on. In the case of
the lower animals the germs and larvae float independently in the
water, and are exposed to many influences. Modern embryologists have
found, by experiment, that an alteration of the temperature or the
chemical considerable effect on eggs and larvae. Some recent experiments
have shown that such changes may even affect the eggs in the mother's
ovary. These discoveries are very important and suggestive, because
the geological changes which we are studying are especially apt to
bring about changes of temperature and changes in the freshness or
saltiness of water.
Evolution is, therefore, not a "mere description" of the
procession of living things; it is to a great extent an explanation
of the procession. When, however, we come to apply these general principles
to certain aspects of the advance in organisation we find fundamental
differences of opinion among biologists, which must be noted. As Sir
E. Ray Lankester recently said, it is not at all true that Darwinism
is questioned in zoology to-day. It is true only that Darwin was not
omniscient or infallible, and some of his opinions are disputed.
Let me introduce the subject with a particular instance of evolution,
the flat-fish. This animal has been fitted to survive the terrible
struggle in the seas by acquiring such a form that it can lie almost
unseen upon the floor of the ocean. The eye on the under side of the
body would thus be useless, but a glance at a sole or plaice in a
fishmonger's shop will show that this eye has worked upward to the
top of the head. Was the eye shifted by the effort and straining of
the fish, inherited and increased slightly in each generation? Is
the explanation rather that those fishes in each generation survived
and bred which happened from birth to have a slight variation in that
direction, though they did not inherit the effect of the parent's
effort to strain the eye? Or ought we to regard this change of structure
as brought about by a few abrupt and considerable variations on the
part of the young? There you have the three great schools which divide
modern evolutionists: Lamarckism, Weismannism, and Mendelism (or Mutationism).
All are Darwinians. No one doubts that the flat-fish was evolved from
an ordinary fish--the flat-fish is an ordinary fish in its youth--or
that natural selection (enemies) killed off the old and transitional
types and overlooked (and so favoured) the new. It will be seen that
the language used in this volume is not the particular language of
any one of these schools. This is partly because I wish to leave seriously
controverted questions open, and partly from a feeling of compromise,
which I may explain.*
* Of recent years another compromise has been proposed
between the Lamarckians and Weismannists. It would say that the efforts
of the parent and their effect on the position of the eye--in our
case--are not inherited, but might be of use in sheltering an embryonic
variation in the direction of a displaced eye.
First, the plain issue between the Mendelians and the other two schools--whether
the passage from species to species is brought about by a series of
small variations during a long period or by a few large variations
(or "mutations") in a short period--is open to an obvious
compromise. It is quite possible that both views are correct, in different
cases, and quite impossible to find the proportion of each class of
cases. We shall see later that in certain instances where the conditions
of preservation were good we can sometimes trace a perfectly gradual
advance from species to species. Several shellfish have been traced
in this way, and a sea-urchin in the chalk has been followed, quite
gradually, from one end of a genus to the other. It is significant
that the advance of research is multiplying these cases. There is
no reason why we may not assume most of the changes of species we
have yet seen to have occurred in this way. In fact, in some of the
lower branches of the animal world (Radiolaria, Sponges, etc.) there
is often no sharp division of species at all, but a gradual series
of living varieties.
On the other hand we know many instances of very considerable sudden
changes. The cases quoted by Mendelists generally belong to the plant
world, but instances are not unknown in the animal world. A shrimp
(Artemia) was made to undergo considerable modification, by altering
the proportion of salt in the water in which it was kept. Butterflies
have been made to produce young quite different from their normal
young by subjecting them to abnormal temperature, electric currents,
and so on; and, as I said, the most remarkable effects have been produced
on eggs and embryos by altering the chemical and physical conditions.
Rats--I was informed by the engineer in charge of the refrigerating
room on an Australian liner--very quickly became adapted to the freezing
temperature by developing long hair. All that we have seen of the
past changes in the environment of animals makes it probable that
these larger variations often occur. I would conclude, therefore,
that evolution has proceeded continuously (though by no means universally)
through the ages, but there were at times periods of more acute change
with correspondingly larger changes in the animal and plant worlds.
In regard to the issue between the Lamarckians and Weismannists--whether
changes acquired by the parent are inherited by the young--recent
experiments again suggest something of a compromise. Weismann says
that the body of the parent is but the case containing the germ-plasm,
so that all modifications of the living parent body perish with it,
and do not affect the germ, which builds the next generation. Certainly,
when we reflect that the 70,000 ova in the human mother's ovary seem
to have been all formed in the first year of her life, it is difficult
to see how modifications of her muscles or nerves can affect them.
Thus we cannot hope to learn anything, either way, by cutting off
the tails of cows, and experiments of that kind. But it is acknowledged
that certain diseases in the blood, which nourishes the germs, may
affect them, and recent experimenters have found that they can reach
and affect the germs in the body by other agencies, and so produce
inherited modifications in the parent.* If this claim is sustained
and enlarged, it may be concluded that the greater changes of environment
which we find in the geological chronicle may have had a considerable
influence of this kind.
* See a paper read by Professor Bourne to the Zoological Section of
the British Association, 1910. It must be understood that when I speak
of Weismannism I do not refer to this whole theory of heredity, which,
he acknowledges, has few supporters. The Lamarckian view is represented
in Britain by Sir W. Turner and Professor Darwin. In other countries
it has a larger proportion of distinguished supporters. On the whole
subject see Professor J. A. Thomson's "Heredity" (1909),
Dewar and Finn's "Making of Species" (1909--a Mendelian
work), and, for essays by the leaders of each school, "Darwinism
and Modern Science" (1909).
The general issue, however, must remain open. The Lamarckian and Weismannist
theories are rival interpretations of past events, and we shall not
find it necessary to press either. When the fish comes to live on
land, for instance, it develops a bony limb out of its fin. The Lamarckian
says that the throwing of the weight of the body on the main stem
of the fin strengthens it, as practice strengthens the boxer's arm,
and the effect is inherited and increased in each generation, until
at last the useless paddle of the fin dies away and the main stem
has become a stout, bony column. Weismann says that the individual
modification, by use in walking, is not inherited, but those young
are favoured which have at birth a variation in the strength of the
stem of the fin. As each of these interpretations is, and must remain,
purely theoretical, we will be content to tell the facts in such cases.
But these brief remarks will enable the reader to understand in what
precise sense the facts we record are open to controversy.
Let us return to the chronicle of the earth. We had reached the Devonian
age, when large continents, with great inland seas, existed in North
America, north-west Europe, and north Asia, probably connected by
a continent across the North Atlantic and the Arctic region. South
America and South Africa were emerging, and a continent was preparing
to stretch from Brazil, through South Africa and the Antarctic, to
Australia and India. The expanse of land was, with many oscillations,
gaining on the water, and there was much emigration to it from the
over-populated seas. When the fish went on land in the Devonian, it
must have found a diet (insects, etc.) there, and the insects must
have been preceded by a plant population. We have first, therefore,
to consider the evolution of the plant, and see how it increases in
form and number until it covers the earth with the luxuriant forests
of the Carboniferous period.
The plant world, we saw, starts, like the animal world, with a great
kingdom of one-celled microscopic representatives, and the same principles
of development, to a great extent, shape it into a large variety of
forms. Armour-plating has a widespread influence among them. The graceful
Diatom is a morsel of plasm enclosed in a flinty box, often with a
very pretty arrangement of the pores and markings. The Desmid has
a coat of cellulose, and a less graceful coat of cellulose encloses
the Peridinean. Many of these minute plants develop locomotion and
a degree of sensitiveness (Diatoms, Peridinea, Euglena, etc.). Some
(Bacteria) adopt animal diet, and rise in power of movement and sensitiveness
until it is impossible to make any satisfactory distinction between
them and animals. Then the social principle enters. First we have
loose associations of one-celled plants in a common bed, then closer
clusters or many-celled bodies. In some cases (Volvox) the cluster,
or the compound plant, is round and moves briskly in the water, closely
resembling an animal. In most cases, the cells are connected in chains,
and we begin to see the vague outline of the larger plant.
When we had reached this stage in the development of animal life,
we found great difficulty in imagining how the chief lines of the
higher Invertebrates took their rise from the Archaean chaos of early
many-celled forms. We have an even greater difficulty here, as plant
remains are not preserved at all until the Devonian period. We can
only conclude, from the later facts, that these primitive many-celled
plants branched out in several different directions. One section (at
a quite unknown date) adopted an organic diet, and became the Fungi;
and a later co-operation, or life-partnership, between a Fungus and
a one-celled Alga led to the Lichens. Others remained at the Alga-level,
and grew in great thickets along the sea bottoms, no doubt rivalling
or surpassing the giant sea-weeds, sometimes 400 feet long, off the
American coast to-day. Other lines which start from the level of the
primitive many-celled Algae develop into the Mosses (Bryophyta), Ferns
(Pteridophyta), Horsetails (Equisetalia), and Club-mosses (Lycopodiales).
The mosses, the lowest group, are not preserved in the rocks; from
the other three classes will come the great forests of the Carboniferous
period.
The early record of plant-life is so poor that it is useless to speculate
when the plant first left the water. We have somewhat obscure and
disputed traces of ferns in the Ordovician, and, as they and the Horsetails
and Club-mosses are well developed in the Devonian, we may assume
that some of the sea-weeds had become adapted to life on land, and
evolved into the early forms of the ferns, at least in the Cambrian
period. From that time they begin to weave a mantle of sombre green
over the exposed land, and to play a most important part in the economy
of nature.
We saw that at the beginning of the Devonian there was a considerable
rise of the land both in America and Europe, but especially in Europe.
A distant spectator at that time would have observed the rise of a
chain of mountains in Scotland and a general emergence of land north-western
Europe. A continent stretched from Ireland to Scandinavia and North
Russia, while most of the rest of Europe, except large areas of Russia,
France, Germany, and Turkey, was under the sea. Where we now find
our Alps and Pyrenees towering up to the snow-line there were then
level stretches of ocean. Even the north-western continent was scooped
into great inland seas or lagoons, which stretched from Ireland to
Scandinavia, and, as we saw, fostered the development of the fishes.
As the Devonian period progressed the sea gained on the land, and
must have restricted the growth of vegetation, but as the lake deposits
now preserve the remains of the plants which grow down to their shores,
or are washed into them, we are enabled to restore the complexion
of the landscape. Ferns, generally of a primitive and generalised
character, abound, and include the ferns such as we find in warm countries
to-day. Horsetails and Club-mosses already grow into forest-trees.
There are even seed-bearing ferns, which give promise of the higher
plants to come, but as yet nothing approaching our flower and fruit-bearing
trees has appeared. There is as yet no certain indication of the presence
of Conifers. It is a sombre and monotonous vegetation, unlike any
to be found in any climate to-day.
We will look more closely into its nature presently. First let us
see how these primitive types of plants come to form the immense forests
which are recorded in our coal-beds. Dr. Russel Wallace has lately
represented these forests, which have, we shall see, had a most important
influence on the development of life, as somewhat mysterious in their
origin. If, however, we again consult the geologist as to the changes
which were taking place in the distribution of land and water, we
find a quite natural explanation. Indeed, there are now distinguished
geologists (e.g. Professor Chamberlin) who doubt if the Coal-forests
were so exceptionally luxuriant as is generally believed. They think
that the vegetation may not have been more dense than in some other
ages, but that there may have been exceptionally good conditions for
preserving the dead trees. We shall see that there were; but, on the
whole, it seems probable that during some hundreds of thousands of
years remarkably dense forests covered enormous stretches of the earth's
surface, from the Arctic to the Antarctic.
The Devonian period had opened with a rise of the land, but the sea
eat steadily into it once more, and, with some inconsiderable oscillations
of the land, regained its territory. The latter part of the Devonian
and earlier part of the Carboniferous were remarkable for their great
expanses of shallow water and low-lying land. Except the recent chain
of hills in Scotland we know of no mountains. Professor Chamberlin
calculates that 20,000,000, or 30,000,000 square miles of the present
continental surface of Europe and America were covered with a shallow
sea. In the deeper and clearer of these waters the earliest Carboniferous
rocks, of limestone, were deposited. The "millstone grit,"
which succeeds the "limestone," indicates shallower water,
which is being rapidly filled up with the debris of the land. In a
word, all the indications suggest the early and middle Carboniferous
as an age of vast swamps, of enormous stretches of land just above
or below the sea-level, and changing repeatedly from one to the other.
Further, the climate was at the time--we will consider the general
question of climate later--moist and warm all over the earth, on account
of the great proportion of sea-surface and the absence of high land
(not to speak of more disputable causes).
These were ideal conditions for the primitive vegetation, and it spread
over the swamps with great vigour. To say that the Coal-forests were
masses of Ferns, Horsetails, and Club-mosses is a lifeless and misleading
expression. The Club-mosses, or Lycopodiales, were massive trees,
rising sometimes to a height of 120 feet, and probably averaging about
fifty feet in height and one or two feet in diameter. The largest
and most abundant of them, the Sigillaria, sent up a scarred and fluted
trunk to a height of seventy or a hundred feet, without a branch,
and was crowned with a bunch of its long, tapering leaves. The Lepidodendron,
its fellow monarch of the forest, branched at the summit, and terminated
in clusters of its stiff, needle-like leaves, six' or seven inches
long, like enormous exaggerations of the little cones at the ends
of our Club-mosses to-day. The Horsetails, which linger in their dwarfed
descendants by our streams to-day, and at their exceptional best (in
a part of South America) form slender stems about thirty feet high,
were then forest-trees, four to six feet in circumference and sometimes
ninety feet in height. These Calamites probably rose in dense thickets
from the borders of the lakes, their stumpy leaves spreading in whorls
at every joint in their hollow stems. Another extinct tree, the Cordaites,
rivalled the Horsetails and Club-mosses in height, and its showers
of long and extraordinary leaves, six feet long and six inches in
width, pointed to the higher plant world that was to come. Between
these gaunt towering trunks the graceful tree-ferns spread their canopies
at heights of twenty, forty, and even sixty feet from the ground,
and at the base was a dense undergrowth of ferns and fern-like seed-plants.
Mosses may have carpeted the moist ground, but nothing in the nature
of grass or flowers had yet appeared.
Imagine this dense assemblage of dull, flowerless trees pervaded by
a hot, dank atmosphere, with no change of seasons, with no movement
but the flying of large and primitive insects among the trees and
the stirring of the ferns below by some passing giant salamander,
with no song of bird and no single streak of white or red or blue
drawn across the changeless sombre green, and you have some idea of
the character of the forests that are compressed into our seams of
coal. Imagine these forests spread from Spitzbergen to Australia and
even, according to the south polar expeditions, to the Antarctic,
and from the United States to Europe, to Siberia, and to China, and
prolonged during some hundreds of thousands of years, and you begin
to realise that the Carboniferous period prepared the land for the
coming dynasties of animals. Let some vast and terrible devastation
fall upon this luxuriant world, entombing the great multitude of its
imperfect forms and selecting the higher types for freer life, and
the earth will pass into a new age.
But before we describe the animal inhabitants of these forests, the
part that the forests play in the story of life, and the great cataclysm
which selects the higher types from the myriads of forms which the
warm womb of the earth has poured out, we must at least glance at
the evolutionary position of the Carboniferous plants themselves.
Do they point downward to lower forms, and upward to higher forms,
as the theory of evolution requires? A close inquiry into this would
lead us deep into the problems of the modern botanist, but we may
borrow from him a few of the results of the great labour he has expended
on the subject within the last decade.
Just as the animal world is primarily divided into Invertebrates and
Vertebrates, the plant world is primarily divided into a lower kingdom
of spore-bearing plants (the Cryptogams) and an upper kingdom of seed-bearing
plants (the Phanerogams). Again, just as the first half of the earth's
story is the age of Invertebrate animals, so it is the age of Cryptogamous
plants. So far evolution was always justified in the plant record.
But there is a third parallel, of much greater interest. We saw that
at one time the evolutionist was puzzled by the clean division of
animals into Invertebrate and Vertebrate, and the sudden appearance
of the backbone in the chronicle: he was just as much puzzled by the
sharp division of our plants into Cryptogams and Phanerogams, and
the sudden appearance of the latter on the earth during the Coal-forest
period. And the issue has been a fresh and recent triumph for evolution.
Plants are so well preserved in the coal that many years of microscopic
study of the remains, and patient putting-together of the crushed
and scattered fragments, have shown the Carboniferous plants in quite
a new light. Instead of the Coal-forest being a vast assemblage of
Cryptogams, upon which the higher type of the Phanerogam is going
suddenly to descend from the clouds, it is, to a very great extent,
a world of plants that are struggling upward, along many paths, to
the higher level. The characters of the Cryptogam and Phanerogam are
so mixed up in it that, although the special lines of development
are difficult to trace, it is one massive testimony to the evolution
of the higher from the lower. The reproductive bodies of the great
Lepidodendra are sometimes more like seeds than spores, while both
the wood and the leaves of the Sigillaria have features which properly
belong to the Phanerogam. In another group (called the Sphenophyllales)
the characters of these giant Club-mosses are blended with the characters
of the giant Horsetails, and there is ground to think that the three
groups have descended from an earlier common ancestor.
Further, it is now believed that a large part of what were believed
to be Conifers, suddenly entering from the unknown, are not Conifers
at all, but Cordaites. The Cordaites is a very remarkable combination
of features that are otherwise scattered among the Cryptogams, Cycads,
and Conifers. On the other hand, a very large part of what the geologist
had hitherto called "Ferns" have turned out to be seed-bearing
plants, half Cycad and half Fern. Numbers of specimens of this interesting
group--the Cycadofilices (cycad-ferns) or Pteridosperms (seed-ferns)--have
been beautifully restored by our botanists.* They have afforded a
new and very plausible ancestor for the higher trees which come on
the scene toward the close of the Coal-forests, while their fern-like
characters dispose botanists to think that they and the Ferns may
be traced to a common ancestor. This earlier stage is lost in those
primitive ages from which not a single leaf has survived in the rocks.
We can only say that it is probable that the Mosses, Ferns, Lycopods,
etc., arose independently from the primitive level. But the higher
and more important development is now much clearer. The Coal-forest
is not simply a kingdom of Cryptogams. It is a world of aspiring and
mingled types. Let it be subjected to some searching test, some tremendous
spell of adversity, and we shall understand the emergence of the higher
types out of the luxuriant profusion and confusion of forms.
* See, especially, D. H. Scott, "Studies of
Fossil Botany" (2nd ed., 1908), and "The Evolution of Plants"
(1910--small popular manual).
CHAPTER IX. THE ANIMALS OF THE COAL-FOREST
We have next to see that when this period of searching adversity comes--as
it will in the next chapter --the animal world also offers a luxuriant
variety of forms from which the higher types may be selected. This,
it need hardly be said, is just what we find in the geological record.
The fruitful, steaming, rich-laden earth now offered tens of millions
of square miles of pasture to vegetal feeders; the waters, on the
other hand, teemed with gigantic sharks, huge Cephalopods, large scorpion-like
and lobster-like animals, and shoals of armour-plated, hard-toothed
fishes. Successive swarms of vegetarians--Worms, Molluscs, etc.--
followed the plant on to the land; and swarms of carnivores followed
the vegetarians, and assumed strange, new forms in adaptation to land-life.
The migration had probably proceeded throughout the Devonian period,
especially from the calmer shores of the inland seas. By the middle
of the Coal-forest period there was a very large and varied animal
population on the land. Like the plants, moreover, these animals were
of an intermediate and advancing nature. No bird or butterfly yet
flits from tree to tree; no mammal rears its young in the shelter
of the ferns. But among the swarming population are many types that
show a beginning of higher organisation, and there is a rich and varied
material provided for the coming selection.
The monarch of the Carboniferous forest is the Amphibian. In that
age of spreading swamps and "dim, watery woodlands," the
stupid and sluggish Amphibian finds his golden age, and, except perhaps
the scorpion, there is no other land animal competent to dispute his
rule. Even the scorpion, moreover, would not find the Carboniferous
Amphibian very vulnerable. We must not think of the smooth-skinned
frogs and toads and innocent newts which to-day represent the fallen
race of the Amphibia. They were then heavily armoured, powerfully
armed, and sometimes as large as alligators or young crocodiles. It
is a characteristic of advancing life that a new type of organism
has its period of triumph, grows to enormous proportions, and spreads
into many different types, until the next higher stage of life is
reached, and it is dethroned by the new-comers.
The first indication--apart from certain disputed impressions in the
Devonian--of the land-vertebrate is the footprint of an Amphibian
on an early Carboniferous mud-flat. Hardened by the sun, and then
covered with a fresh deposit when it sank beneath the waters, it remains
to-day to witness the arrival of the five-toed quadruped who was to
rule the earth. As the period proceeds, remains are found in great
abundance, and we see that there must have been a vast and varied
population of the Amphibia on the shores of the Carboniferous lagoons
and swamps. There were at least twenty genera of them living in what
is now the island of Britain, and was then part of the British-Scandinavian
continent. Some of them were short and stumpy creatures, a few inches
long, with weak limbs and short tails, and broad, crescent-shaped
heads, their bodies clothed in the fine scaly armour of their fish-ancestor
(the Branchiosaurs). Some (the Aistopods) were long, snake-like creatures,
with shrunken limbs and bodies drawn out until, in some cases, the
backbone had 150 vertebrae. They seem to have taken to the thickets,
in the growing competition, as the serpents did later, and lost the
use of their limbs, which would be merely an encumbrance in winding
among the roots and branches. Some (the Microsaurs) were agile little
salamander-like organisms, with strong, bony frames and relatively
long and useful legs; they look as if they may even have climbed the
trees in pursuit of snails and insects. A fourth and more formidable
sub-order, the Labyrinthodonts--which take their name from the labyrinthine
folds of the enamel in their strong teeth--were commonly several feet
in length. Some of them attained a length of seven or eight feet,
and had plates of bone over their heads and bellies, while the jaws
in their enormous heads were loaded with their strong, labyrinthine
teeth. Life on land was becoming as eventful and stimulating as life
in the waters.
The general characteristic of these early Amphibia is that they very
clearly retain the marks of their fish ancestry. All of them have
tails; all of them have either scales or (like many of the fishes)
plates of bone protecting the body. In some of the younger specimens
the gills can still be clearly traced, but no doubt they were mainly
lung-animals. We have seen how the fish
Continua
>>>>>
|