[168] v. Sachs, J., “Physiologische Notizen,” vi., Flora, 1893.

[169] Ibid., ix., 425, Flora, 1895.

[170] Morgan, T. H., Arch. f. Entwcklngsmech., 1895, ii., 81; 1901, xiii., 416; 1903, xvi., 117.

[171] Driesch, H., Arch. f. Entwcklngsmech., 1898, vi., 198; 1900, x., 361.

[172] Delage, Y., Arch. Zoöl. expér., 1899, vii., 383.

[173] Driesch, H., Arch. f. Entwcklngsmech., 1905, xix., 648.

[174] Loeb, Leo, Arch. f. Entwcklngsmech., 1898, vi., 297.

[175] Spain, K. C., and Loeb, Leo, Jour. Exper. Med., 1916, xxiii., 107; Loeb, L., and Addison, W. H. F., Arch. f. Entwcklngsmech., 1911, xxxii., 44; 1913, xxxvii., 635.

[176] The excessive forma­tion of epithelial cells in the healing of wounds has led the older pathologists to the generaliza­tion that if something is removed in the body an excessive compensa­tion will take place. The forma­tion of antibodies has even been explained on this basis by Weiggert and Ehrlich in their side-chain theory. As a matter of fact, this generaliza­tion is entirely incorrect and in regenera­tion of starfish, actinians, flatworms, annelids, and possibly in all forms the reverse is true; e. g., if we cut off the anterior half of the body in Cerianthus less is reproduced than was cut away namely only tentacles and the mouth, but not the missing piece of the body. Weiggert’s concep­tion of regenera­tion was probably based on the phenomenon of the healing of wounds, but the excessive epithelium forma­tion in this case is not the expression of a general law of regenera­tion but of the peculiar mechanical condi­tions which lead to mitoses. It would be a very strange coincidence indeed if a theory of antibody forma­tion based on such an erroneous generaliza­tion should be correct.

[177] Loeb, Arch. f. Entwcklngsmech., 1914, xxxviii., 277.