Morton, S.G. 1839. Crania americana. Philadelphia: John Pennington.
Oken, L. 1847. Elements of physiophilosophy (translation by A. Tulk of Oken’s Lehrbuch der Naturphilosophie). London: Ray Society.
Ornstein, L. 1982. A biologist looks at the numbers. Physics Today, March, pp. 27–31.
Parthasarathy, A. 1983. The symbolism of Hindu gods and rituals. Bombay: Shailesh Printers.
Perkins, H.F. 1908. Note on the occurrence of Cassiopea xamachana and Polyclonia frondosa at the Tortugas. Papers from the Tortugas Laboratories 1: 150–55.
Policansky, D. 1981. Sex choice and the size advantage model in jack-in-the-pulpit (Arisaema triphyllum). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 78: 1306–08.
Polis, G.A., and R.D. Farley. 1979. Behavior and ecology of mating in the cannibalistic scorpion, Paruroctonus mesaensis Stahnke (Scorpionida: Vaejovidae). Journal of Arahnology 7: 33–46.
Purcell, J.E. 1980. Influence of siphonophore behavior upon their natural diets: Evidence for aggressive mimicry. Science 209: 1045–47.
Raup, D.M., and J.J. Sepkoski, Jr. 1984. Periodicity of extinctions in the geologic past. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 81: 801–05.
Reichler, J.L. 1981. Fabulous baseball facts, feats and figures. New York: Collier.
Reichler, J.L. 1982. The baseball encyclopedia. New York: MacMillan.
Roeder, K.D. 1935. An experimental analysis of the sexual behavior of the praying mantis (Mantis religiosa L.). Biological Bulletin 69: 203–20.
Ross, K., and R.L. Smith. 1979. Aspects of the courtship behavior of the black widow spider, Laterodectus hesperus (Araneae: Theridiidae), with evidence for the existence of a contact sex pheromone. Journal of Arachnology 7: 69–77.
Sagan, C. 1983. Nuclear war and climatic catastrophe: Some policy implications. Foreign Affairs, Winter 1983/84, pp. 257–92.
Schrödinger, E. 1944. What is life? Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Seilacher, A. 1984. Late Precambrian and early Cambrian Metazoa: Preservational or real extinctions. In Patterns of change in Earth evolution; ed. H.D. Holland and A.R. Trendall, pp. 159–68. Berlin: Springer Verlag.
Sepkoski, J.J.; R.K. Bambach; D.M. Raup; and J.W. Valentine. 1981. Phanerozoic marine diversity and the fossil record. Nature 293: 435.
Serres, E.R.A. 1833. Recherches d’anatomie transcendante et pathéologique. Théorie des formations et des déformations organiques, appliquée à l’anatomie de Ritta Christina, et de la duplicité monstrueuse. Mémoires de l’Académie Royale des Sciences 11: 583–895.
Shapiro, D.Y. 1981. Sequence of coloration changes during sex reversal in the tropical marine fish Anthias squamipinnis. Bulletin of Marine Sciences 31: 383–98.
Siegel, R., quoted by J. Greenberg. 1983. Natural highs in natural habitats. Science News, November 5, pp. 300–01.
Simpson, G.G. 1964. The nonprevalence of humanoids. In This view of life, Essay 13, pp. 253–71. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.
Sterba, G. 1973. Freshwater fishes of the world. Hong Kong TFH Publications, 2 vols.
Sulloway, F.J. 1982. Darwin and his finches: The evolution of a legend. Journal of the History of Biology 15: 1–53.
Sulloway, F.J. 1982. Darwin’s conversion: The Beagle voyage and its aftermath. Journal of the History of Biology 15: 325–96.
Swainson, W. 1835. On the natural history and classification of quadrupeds. London: Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown, Green and Longman.
Thomson, W. (later Lord Kelvin). 1866. The “doctrine of uniformity” in geology briefly refuted. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh 5: 512–13.
Tipler, F.J. 1981. Extraterrestrial intelligent beings do not exist. Physics Today, April, pp. 9, 70–71.
Tipler, F.J. 1982. We are alone in our galaxy. New Scientist 96 (October 7), pp. 33–35.
Tyson, E. 1699. Orang-Outang, sive Homo sylvestris; or, the anatomy of a pygmie compared with that of a monkey, an ape, and a man. London: Thomas Bennet.
Van Valen, L. 1974. A new evolutionary law. Evolutionary Theory 1: 1–30.
Wallace, A.R. 1870. The measurement of geological time. Nature 1: 399–401, 452–55.
Wallace, A.R. 1903. Man’s place in the universe: A study of the results of scientific research in relation to the unity or plurality of worlds. New York: McClure Phillips and Company.
Wells, W.C. 1818. Account of a female of the white race of mankind, part of whose skin resembles that of a Negro. In Two Essays: One upon single vision with two eyes, the other on dew. London: Archibald Constable and Company.
White, C. 1799. An account of the regular gradation in man, and in different animals and vegetables. London: C. Dilly.
Whitmire, D.P., and A.A. Jackson IV. 1984. Are periodic mass extinctions driven by a distant solar companion? Nature 308: 713–15.
* I have since learned that the story is not disappointing and one-directional (ostensible sense to coincidence) as I had concluded when I wrote the essay. Linguistic history has provided a back formation from morphological arches to sex. In A Browser’s Dictionary (Harper and Row, 1980), John Ciardi reports (p. 137): “…because the Romans used…arched brickwork in the underground parts of great buildings, and because the poor and the prostitutes of Rome lived in such undergrounds…early Christian writers evolved the verb fornicari, to frequent brothels. The whores of Pompeii worked in similar stone cribs.”
*One reader suggested the obvious and elegant solution to this dilemma of the ages—jacks-in-pulpits. How incredibly stupid of me not to have thought of it myself.
*I am tempted to revise this sentence, and assert a universality transcending time, in the light of two back-to-back stories from the New York Times of November 23, 1984—first, that the heirs of Barney Clark (the deceased first recipient of a mechanical heart) have filed a $2 million lawsuit against Reader’s Digest for breaking their contract to publish a book on the case by Mr. Clark’s widow; second, that Baby Fae’s parents (she of the baboon heart transplant) have sold exclusive rights for their story to People Magazine.
*I gave a lecture on this essay soon after its publication and drilled into my eager students the key phrase—“you thought a Portuguese man-of-war was a jellyfish, but it ain’t.” Later in the semester a student reported to my horror that she had lost a game of “Trivial Pursuit” by giving the correct answer to the question: “What is a Portuguese man-of-war?” Would you believe that the Solons of pop culture have officially proclaimed this colony a jellyfish—right on the little blue card, so it must be so. But it still ain’t!
*Since botanists face this dilemma more often than zoologists, they have devised a terminology for these ambiguous cases—“genet” for the entire aggregation and “ramet” for each iterated set of parts. This new terminology is no solution, but simply a formal recognition that the issue cannot be resolved with our usual concepts of individuality.
*Dr. S.I. Joseph has since told me that he saw the same lady at a fruit stand later that day. She was asking about the price of grapefruit. “Two for thirty-five cents” she learned. “How much for one,” she asked. “Twenty cents” came the reply. “Fine,” she said, “I’ll take the other.”
* This is the fourth volume of essays compiled from my monthly column in Natural History magazine. I marked ten years of work, and never a deadline missed (I won’t tell you about the numerous close calls), with this act of self-indulgence as my treat to myself for the one hundredth effort.
*I wrote this essay in November, 1983—just after the meeting here described.
*See essay 30 for further, and rather remarkable, developments.
*D.J. Boorstin’s wonderful book, The Discoverers (New York, Random House, 1983), has been published since this essay appeared. It continues the unfortunate tradition of praising Tyson as a courageous modernist and harbinger of evolution, not realizing that his discovery of intermediacy did not foment a revolution, but rather solved a problem in the standard “chain of being” theory as unde
rstood in Tyson’s own time. Boorstin writes (p. 461): “Just as Copernicus displaced the earth from the center of the universe, so Tyson removed man from his unique role above and apart from all the rest of Creation…. Never before had there been so circumstantial or so public a demonstration of man’s physical kinship with the animals…. The implication was plain that here was the ‘missing link’ between man and the whole ‘lower’ animal creation…. Just as the heliocentric vista once seen could not be forgotten, so, after reading Tyson, who could believe that man was an isolate from the rest of nature.”
*Iltis’s unconventional theory quickly unleashed the expected volley of criticism from defenders of the more traditional views. Readers wishing to pursue the controversy further might begin with the critiques of two “grand old men” of corn studies (Walton C. Galinat and Paul C. Mangelsdorf) and Iltis’s response, all published in Science, September 14, 1984, pp. 1093–1096, soon after this essay originally appeared. Mangelsdorf’s book Corn (Harvard University Press, 1974) contains a wealth of detail on our hemisphere’s greatest contribution to human nutrition.
*I wrote this essay in 1983, for the centenary of Just’s birth.
*This quirky connection so tickles my fancy that I break my own strict rule about eliminating redundancies from these essays and end both this and the next piece with this prod to thought and action.
*Now up to one-and-a-half years between composition and book—an impossibly long time for an exciting area in science.
The Flamingo’s Smile Page 41