Dr. Glinski isolated the orifices of the salivary glands in dogs with portions of the adjoining mucous membrane, brought them out of the oral cavity, and caused them to heal into the edges of the skin wounds. In his first animal the ducts of the submaxillary gland were thus led outwards. By means of a Mendeljeff’s clip, the wide end of a conical funnel of waterproof material was attached to the skin surrounding the orifice. To the narrow end a small test-tube, which served to collect the saliva, was attached by a wire. I now offer such an animal a piece of flesh, and, as you see, the tube fills up at once with saliva. I stop tempting the dog, hang on a new test-tube, and give it a few pieces of flesh to eat; once more a strong secretion of saliva results. A new tube is now attached to the funnel, the dog’s mouth is opened, and a pinch of fine sand thrown in; again there is a flow of saliva. Once more a new test-tube; and now I apply to the buccal mucous membrane, the plume of a feather dipped in acid solution, with the result that I obtain a strong flow of saliva. One may employ a number of substances in this way, when a similar effect is always produced. You see, in this, such a comprehensive excitability of the innervation apparatus of the salivary glands that you might readily interpret it as meaning the power of response to all and sundry forms of stimulation. We now proceed, however, to another dog, whose parotid duct has in a similar manner been diverted outwards. The saliva is collected in the same way. We tempt the dog with a piece of flesh, but to our astonishment no saliva flows, and yet the animal is most eager for the savoury meal offered. Now we give it some raw flesh to eat; again the secretion of saliva is as good as absent; only when I come near can I detect one or two drops of saliva running down the sides of the tube. Probably you will say there is something wrong, either with the method or with the glands of the animal. But wait a little. I now give the dog finely powdered dry flesh, and obtain at once an abundant secretion. Should any one happen to think that the variation in the result is dependent, not on a different specific activity of the glands, but on individual differences in the dogs, I respond that Dr. Glinski has had an animal with double parotid and submaxillary fistulæ, and was able to observe on one and the same dog, a like behaviour on the part of the glands to that which we have just seen in two different individuals. An analogous experiment with bread was also carried out by Dr. Glinski. The eating of fresh moist bread produced no secretion worth mentioning, while dry bread, on the other hand, caused the saliva to flow in large quantities. The results of this experiment permit us to draw extremely instructive conclusions. In the first place, the several salivary glands are, as a matter of fact, very sharply differentiated in the conditions necessary for their activity—that is to say, in respect to the agencies which excite their nervous mechanisms. Secondly, the innervation apparatus of the parotid manifests a very sharp selective power in the choice, so to speak, of an adequate stimulus. The mechanical effect of large pieces of flesh is naturally much greater than that of the finely powdered material, and yet it was precisely to the latter that the glands responded. The stimulus is, therefore, not due to the mechanical, but to some other property of the food. This other property is obviously the dryness of the material. Our example illustrates how that which we may term “purposiveness” comes into play in the working of our glands and also how erroneous is the opinion that the mechanical stimulus is all potent. Indeed, previous authors have already pointed out that dry substances cause a specially free secretion of saliva, and yet physiological opinion throughout the length and breadth of the land, as expressed in text-books, has chosen to recognise a universal instead of a specific excitability. Dr. Wulfson, who is at present carrying on the investigation of salivary secretion in our laboratory, has added a very interesting observation to the results of Dr. Glinski already related. The parotid gland, which is hardly, if at all, excited when one offers fresh meat to the animal, responds with a very active secretion, when dry food (bread or powdered meat) is offered. This phenomenon is all the more surprising since the desire of the animal for eating is much more strongly excited by flesh than by dry bread. I am quite convinced that an exact study of the exciting agencies of the three salivary glands will furnish a number of new data bearing upon the question in hand.

The second reagent which is poured out on the raw material in the digestive canal is the gastric juice. How, in the normal course of events, is the work of the gastric glands, which prepare this juice, called into play? With the first, and manifestly important factor, which has a relation thereto, you are already acquainted, and, indeed, have already seen. I refer to the production of gastric juice in the empty stomach, as a result merely of the swallowing of food in the so-called sham feeding of an œsophagotomised dog. When one takes into consideration the absolute independence of this factor, and the intensity of the effect, which makes itself evident in the secretion of a large quantity of juice of high digestive power, the exciting agency which brings about such secretion must be recognised as one of the most important and effective processes in gastric digestion. But in what does it consist? At first sight it appears—and when I previously drew your attention to the fact I expressed the opinion—that there is here a simple reflex effect from the cavity of the mouth upon the secretory nerves of the stomach, similar to the reflex excitation, e.g., of the parotid gland, by finely powdered flesh thrown into the mouth. Now, however, I assert quite emphatically that this is not the case. We have, it is true, in the activity of the salivary glands an analogous phenomenon to indicate—not, however, that of which we have just spoken. We might apply every conceivable form of stimulus which could possibly come into play in the act of eating, and yet would not obtain the slightest indication of secretory activity in the stomach. In this dog with a gastric fistula, and with also a divided œsophagus, I will try such an experiment, using the most effective chemical stimulus to the buccal mucous membrane, viz., acid solution.

The secretion of saliva begins at once, as you see; the acid is, therefore, effective. From the stomach, however, in spite of continued excitation, no secretion results, although the acid, mixed with the saliva, is swallowed and flows out again from the upper segment of the œsophagus—that is to say, passes along precisely the same path that the food takes in sham feeding.

We could experiment in the same way with a number of other substances: saline, bitters, pepper (strong local excitation), mustard, and so on, and always with the same results; a free secretion of saliva, but perfect quiescence of the gastric glands. We may even, with the same object, employ the soluble constituents of flesh in the form of a decoction, and likewise observe, in most cases at least, no sign of activity on the part of the gastric glands.

With the chemical we may also combine a mechanical stimulus. We can, for example, wipe out the mouth with a sponge soaked in the solution to be experimented with, but always with the same negative result. We may finally give such pieces of sponge, or even smooth stones of considerable size, to the dog to swallow, passing them back behind the anterior pillars of the fauces and allowing them to fall out again, from the upper portion of œsophagus. It may be added that a well-taught dog puts up with all these procedures without the slightest protest. You see that all the manipulations in this case are carried out with bare hands and without instrumental aid. One can easily train a dog to swallow stones which are placed in the anterior part of the buccal cavity. It simply makes a few chewing movements and swallows them down. The dog on which the acid experiment has just been made serves also for the swallowing of the stones. The attendant now places some pebbles in the front part of the mouth, when the animal rolls them round, as if chewing and gnawing them, and then swallows them. The stones fall out, as you see, from the œsophagus, and drop with an audible sound upon the table. This play with the stones has now lasted fifteen or twenty minutes (in the laboratory we have often kept it up for hours), and yet not a drop of gastric juice is to be seen.

In order to prove that the dog is perfectly healthy and normal, we lay aside the stones and proceed to our old experiment of sham feeding. As you see, the first drop of gastric juice makes its appearance precisely at the end of five minutes, and after a further five minutes we have collected more than 15 c.c. of the fluid; consequently there can be no doubt that in this dog both gastric glands and nerves are uninjured and function in normal manner. At one time we even had a dog which voluntarily took the stones out of one’s hand and swallowed them; the sagacious creature had seen our object in previous experiments and learned to perform it of its own accord! But in this case also the result was negative.

Clearly, therefore, neither chemical nor mechanical stimulation of the buccal mucous membrane is capable of reflexly exciting the nerves of the stomach. Further, it is obvious that the excitation of these nerves in sham feeding is not the result of a stimulation coincidently produced; that is to say, the excitement of the chewing and swallowing centres does not imply simultaneous action of the secretory centre of the gastric glands. In what, then, does this influence consist which is intrinsic to the sham feeding, but which we have not been able to reproduce in our analytical investigation? There is only one thing to think of, namely, the eager desire for food, and the feeling of satisfaction and contentment derived from its enjoyment.

It has, indeed, been known for forty years, thanks to the experiments of Bidder and Schmidt, that at times, the offering of food to a hungry dog, in other words, the excitement of a keen desire for it, is sufficient to cause a flow of gastric juice from the empty stomach. We shall presently have occasion to observe the force of this physiological factor. Here I bring before you another dog, likewise having a gastric fistula with divided œsophagus. The stomach has been washed out half an hour ago, and since then not a drop of gastric juice has escaped. We begin to get ready a meal of flesh and sausage before the animal as if we meant to feed it. We take the pieces of flesh from one place, chop them up, and lay them in another, passing them in front of the dog’s nose, and so on. The animal, as you see, manifests the liveliest interest in our proceedings, stretches and distends itself, endeavours to get out of its cage and come to the food, chatters its teeth together, swallows saliva, and so on. Precisely five minutes after we began to tease the animal in this way the first drops of gastric juice appear in the fistula The secretion grows ever stronger and stronger, till it flows in a considerable stream. After the lapse of a few minutes we can count the number of cubic centimetres by tens. The meaning of this experiment is so clear as to require no explanation; the passionate longing for food, and this alone, has called forth under our eyes a most intense activity of the gastric glands. If the experiment be frequently repeated, one can easily observe that the keener and more eager the desire on the part of the dog for the food, the more certain and intense is the secretory effect. In extreme cases there is even a quantitative relationship between this effect and that of the sham feeding.

Here is an experiment of Professor Ssanozki, in which the secretory effect of the mere tempting of the animal with the sight of food is compared with that of sham feeding. A few threads of alkaline mucus had just escaped from the stomach, and then the excitation of the dog with flesh was begun. After six minutes the secretion commenced and continued as follows:

Duration of the flow.Quantity of the juice.
minutesc.c.
810
410
410
1010
1010
810
810
1910
193