The further points of comparison between the Selachian and the bird are very simple. The Müllerian duct in its later stages behaves in the higher vertebrates precisely as in the lower. It becomes in fact the oviduct in the female and atrophies in the male. The behaviour of the Wolffian duct is also exactly that of the duct which I have called the Wolffian duct in Ichthyopsida, and in the tubules of the Wolffian body uniting with the tubuli seminiferi we have represented the junction of the segmental tubes with the testis in Selachians and Amphibians. It is probably this junction of two independent organs which led Waldeyer to the erroneous view that the tubuli seminiferi were developed from the tubules of the Wolffian body.
With the bird I conclude the history of the origin of the urinogenital system of vertebrates. I have attempted, and I hope succeeded, in tracing out by the aid of comparative anatomy and embryology the steps by which a series of independent and simple segmental organs like those of Annelids have become converted into the complicated series of glands and ducts which constitute the urinogenital system of the higher vertebrates. There are no doubt some points which require further elucidation amongst the Ganoid and Osseous fishes. The most important points which appear to me still to need further research, both embryological and anatomical, are the abdominal pores of fishes, the generative ducts of Ganoids, especially Lepidosteus, and the generative ducts of Osseous fishes.
The only further point which requires discussion is the embryonic layer from which these organs are derived.
I have shewn beyond a doubt (loc. cit.) that in Selachians these organs are formed from the mesoblast. The unanimous testimony of all the recent investigators of Amphibians leads to the same conclusion. In birds, on the other hand, various investigators have attempted to prove that these organs are derived from the epiblast. The proof they give is the following: the epiblast and mesoblast appear fused in the region of the axis cord. From this some investigators have been led to the conclusion that the whole of the mesoblast is derived from the upper of the two primitive embryonic layers. To these it may be replied that, even granting their view to be correct, it is no proof of the derivation of the urinogenital organs from the epiblast, since it is not till the complete formation of the three layers that any one of them can be said to exist. Others look upon the fusion of the two layers as a proof of the passage of cells from the epiblast into the mesoblast. An assumption in itself, which however is followed by the further assumption that it is from these epiblast cells that the urinogenital system is derived! Whatever may have been the primitive origin of the system, its mesoblastic origin in vertebrates cannot in my opinion be denied.
Kowalewsky (Embryo. Stud. an Vermen u. Arthropoda, Mem. Akad. St Petersbourg, 1871) finds that the segmental tubes of Annelids develop from the mesoblast. We must therefore look upon the mesoblastic origin of the excretory system as having an antiquity greater even than that of vertebrates.
[26] From the Journal of Anatomy and Physiology, Vol. X. 1875.
[27] The more important of these are:—
Semper—Ueber die Stammverwandtschaft der Wirbelthiere u. Anneliden. Centralblatt f. Med. Wiss. 1874, No. 35.
Semper—Segmentalorgane bei ausgewachsenen Haien. Centralblatt f. Med. Wiss. 1874, No. 52.
Semper—Das Urogenitalsystem der höheren Wirbelthiere. Centralblatt f. Med. Wiss. 1874, No. 59.