The Geographical Journal (Journal of the Royal Geographical Society): Volume XII, No. 2 [‎270v] (43/154)

134 THE ANNUAL RANGE OF TEMPERATURE IN THE SURFACE WATERS OF THE
Dr. Gunther says the most striking character in the distribution of
the shore-fishes of the southern temperate zone is the reappearance ot
types inhabiting the corresponding latitudes of the northern hemisphere,
and not found in the intervening tropical zone. This interruption of
the continuity in the geographical distribution of shore-fishes is exem
plified by species as well as genera; for instance, Chimeera monstrosa,
Galeus cants, AcantJtias vulgaris, Acanthias blainvillii, Tihina squatina, Zeus
faber, Loph ins piscatorius, Cenlriseus scolopax, Engraulis encrasicholus,
Clupea sprattus, Conger vulgaris. Instances of genera are still more
numerous : Cestracion, Spinax, Pristiophorus, Baja; Callianthias, Polyprion,
Histiopterus, Cantltarus, Box, Girella, Pagellus, Chilodactylus, Sebastes,
Aploactis, Agonus, Lepidopus, Cyttus, Psychrolutidse, Notacanthus; Lycodes,
Merluccius, Lotella, Phycis, Motella ; Aid opus; Urocampus, Solenognathus
Myxine.
Many hypotheses have been advanced to account for this bipolarity
in the distribution of marine organisms, and altogether the subject is
a most interesting one, which will be discussed with greater detail
in another communication.
Before the reading of the paper, the President said : I have to welcome here
again Dr. John Murray. I may as well mention that the Koyal Society last week
had a very important meeting, when Dr. Murray read another most interesting
paper on the Importance of the Besults of Antarctic Exploration, and it was followed
by a discussion of great importance and considerable weight, judging from the
positions of those who took part in it, and which I believe and hope will have
some effect on public opinion. I am sure the meeting will also welcome very
heartily the presence this evening of a gallant companion of Dr. Nansen, Lieut.
Johansen. He is only here for a few days amongst us, and we are delighted to
see him.
After the reading of the paper, the following discussion took place:—
Admiral Sir Wh. Wharton: I suppose the President has called upon me
because I have to do with the sea ; but my line of investigation is very consider
ably different from that of Dr. Murray. What Dr. Murray does he does very well,
Jahrbiichern, Abth. f. Syst., etc., Bd. ix. p. 585, 1896). Henderson, in his report on.
the Challenger Anomura, in describing Lithodes murrayi from the Kerguelen region,
says it “ is apparently most closely allied to Lithodes maia ” (from the North Atlantic),
“ but the latter species is of large size, and the spines on the carapace are more numerous
and more uniformly equal in size” (Henderson, Zool. Chall. Exp., pt. 69, p. 44).
Henderson writes me that these very slight differences were the only ones he could
detect, and it seems evident that had the two specimens been taken from the same
haul of the trawl, or from the same locality, they would never have been erected into
two distinct species. Henderson writes me further that throughout the entire range
of Crustacea there is no better illustration of bipolarity than that furnished by the
Lithodidse. See Chun, ‘ Die Beziehungen zwischen dem arktisehen und antark-
tischen Plankton.’ Stuttgart: 1897. Ortmann,‘Grundziige der marinen Tiergeo^raphie.’
Jena: 1896. Pfeffer, ‘Die niedere Thierwelt des antarktischen Ufergebietes,’ Die
Deutschen Expeditionen und ihre Ergebnisse (Die International Polarforschung),.
Bd. ii. p. 455. Berlin: 1890. Murray, Summary of Remits Ghall. Exp, p. 1459i
1894.