Next in the ascending order we have the largest group of trilobites in the Cambrian, of which the greatest part is formed by the Olenidæ. A facial ridge different in shape and different in development from that in the former group characterizes them. Unlike the semilunate ridge of the Olenellidæ it issues mostly from the front of the first segment of the glabella and goes generally backwards till it meets the facial suture. It is narrow and fine as a thread, but for the rest assumes a great variety of forms. It may be curved as a circle segment as in Sao, Liostracus, it may be long and straight, standing out in a right angle to the glabella as in Eurycare, it may be short and straight in an acute angle to the glabella as in Parabolina and so forth. In the same genus, as for instance Olenus, straight and curved ridges occur in the various species, and consequently the form of this sort of ridge cannot be used as a generic character. It moreover differs from the ridge in the Olenellidæ and the Paradoxidæ in having the posterior extremity widened as a tubercle or node, which commonly has been called the »palpebral lobe», while in the older groups the ridge is only at the most a little pointed in both ends or of equal thickness.
Some persistent archaic genera as Conocoryphe and Elyx inform us how this ridge has originated and how widely different it is from that in the Olenellidæ. On the surface of their head shield no ridge is visible, but on the interior side of it we behold, as the figures show ([Pl. VI, figs. 43 & 44]) on each side of the glabella a ramifying system as of the most minute vessels, which spread and cover the whole surface of the cheeks. This reticulation issues from a main trunk that goes nearly straight in an oblique direction from the foremost segment of the glabella and emits narrow branches forwards and backwards on its both sides. And these branches go on dividing till they occupy the entire interior surface of the fixed cheeks. The figures representing this are taken from Elyx laticeps [fig. 43], and an almost similar image has been obtained from a species of Conocoryphe [fig. 44].
Now the question may be asked, what does this network of branching canals mean? I think we cannot gain a more plausible answer than that given us through the inspection of the soft parts that lie hidden behind the glabella of Limulus and its fixed cheeks, the only living crustacean which offers the greatest homologies with the head shield of the trilobites. Next below the shell of the glabella and the cheeks of Limulus there is a complicated stratum of muscles and behind this the heart and the great central circulatory system spreading from that centrum towards the sides of the head shield, the vessels being the more fine and minute, the more they are elongated from the centre. I now suppose that likewise in these trilobites the narrow and prominent glabella has been the receptacle not only of a strong mass of muscles, but also for the central part of the circulation. This centre has there sent out two relatively strong ducts or canals, one on each side of the glabella feeding all soft tissues inside and near the cheeks and probably also other important parts of the body. It is also clearly seen in Elyx how the orifice of the main trunc opens in the hollow of the glabellar apex.
In all crustaceans, as far as is now known, their more or less hard calcareous or chitinous skeleton is moulded by the subjacent tissues and glands. The sculpture of the surface consequently is an outcome of the fashioning procedures showing what has been going on below and what is still going on. If we then on the exterior surface of the head shield of the trilobites see the radiating lines in relief we must conclude that they are due to a subjacent system of almost capillary vessels causing hollow impressions on the inside and elevated ridges exteriorly. In Elyx the vessels have made no strong impression as to be visible on the outside. In a couple of American Conocoryphæ again (C. reticulata and C. trilineata) the main trunc of the vessels has formed a short faintly elevated ridge. In Solenopleura ([Pl. VI, f. 45]) the facial ridge has been fully developed, and by the casts of the inside it is clearly seen that the main trunc of the vessels makes the inside of the ridge and has been much incrassated. On the other hand the smaller branches issuing from it have been reduced in size and number, but are still visible. Thus, if I am right, the two, the facial ridge and the main trunc, are in causal connection and the former has been moulded by the later, when it had gained in size sufficiently, and when a richer affluxion of nutritive fluid was directed backwards towards the point where the eye at last originated. The further changes in this ridge thus are related to the development of the eye. As far as I am aware, there are as yet no data to tell us whether the appendages or pleura of the glabella in the larval (or primordial) Olenellidæ have the same origin as the ridge of the Olenidæ or are homologous with it. Perhaps it may be so in respect to the foremost one, which also is persisting. It is, however, not known how the pleura in the olenellid glabella have been developed, whereas it is well ascertained by the growth of the glabella in Sao, Liostracus and others that such pleura never have been developed in them.
What the phylogenetic evolution has taught us concerning the formation of the facial ridge is confirmed by the ontogenetic development of individuals of some species as for instance Sao hirsuta Barr., Liostracus sp. Brög. and others.
This development can be followed in detail through the excellent figures of the larval stages of Sao hirsuta which Barrande has given in his magnificent work, vol. I, pl. 7. In the first stage figured (figs. 1 d-e) the whole animal consists only of the head shield which is completely smooth, the glabella scarcely segmented, no facial ridge, no facial suture. In the second stage, according to me (figs. 2-4 a), the glabella has become distinctly segmented, and the pygidium and partly the thorax have been added. In the third stage, 4 c, d-9, one small narrow string exits from each side of the front of the glabella, making the first faint beginning of the facial ridge. They form a right angle with the glabella. In continued growth they become by degrees a little more curved (figs. 5 c, 6 b) and the lengthened ridge bends parallel to the outer lateral margin of the head (fig. 9 b). In fig. 9 d it has become so far complete that it reaches nearly back to the posterior cephalic margin, but is still of the same narrowness all along. In the fourth stage, in a specimen (fig. 10 a) of 3 mm. in length, the facial suture makes its first appearance, setting in from the posterior margin of the head and meeting in its forward progress the posterior extremity of the facial ridge which now begins to swell out. It seems that both have a mutual influence on each other, the suture being deviated from a straight course[21] to take a bend outside the ridge, and the extremity of the ridge again at this contact to increase in size so as to form the elongated tubercle, often called palpebral lobe (fig. 14 b). This now augments in the same rate as the whole body. The characters of the four stages of the development of the larva consequently are: 1:o The archaic stage, only head shield with ridgelike glabella. 2:o The coming and growth of the pygidium and the complete segmentation of the glabella. 3:o The coming and growth of the facial ridge. 4:o The coming and development of the facial suture.
[21] In Trinucleus and Ampyx where there is no facial ridge, the suture has a straight direction along the lateral margins.
Barrande regards the whole ridge as a prolongation of the eye and the tubercle at its posterior extremity as the eye itself.[22] But, again, in page 399 he says »Sa surface (of the eye) est toujours mal conservée, pour nous permettre de voir si elle était réticulée.» And he also confounds the ridge, »filet» as he names it, with the eye itself, and the first faint beginnings of this ridge in his fourth stage he considers as the eye.[23] By a partly schematical figure of the free cheek (fig. 25) he places the eye on this cheek, and in the same manner in fig. 29, »restaurée d'après divers fragments» he figures a reticulated surface of the eye on the free cheek, outside the tubercle. I have sought for a reticulated surface on sufficiently good specimens, but never found any, and I must consider Sao as one of the blind genera. Barrande himself also in the table on the eyes of the trilobites places Sao in the group with »Surface visuelle inconnue», p. 131.
[22] Page 383 »l'œil argue est prolongé par un filet en relief, vers le front de la glabelle».
[23] p. 389.