FRIDAY, JANUARY 31, 1919

ZOOLOGICAL AIMS AND OPPOR

TUNITIES

It is hardly necessary to remind you that the stress of recent months has not been very favorable for the production of an address worthy of this occasion. I shall present no apologies or excuses for the shortcomings of my effort but it may be fair to state that the subject selected has been determined in part by the conditions of world turmoil through which we have been passing and the thoughts almost inevitably prompted by the rapidly shifting viewpoints in almost every phase of human thought.

Since we are human beings as well as zoologists it is natural that we should be confronted with questions as to the status of our science in the world problems of the day; the effects that may follow the immensely critical movements in human adjustments and, perhaps above all as to the bearing of our zoological knowledge, philosophy and instruction upon the shaping of human activities and human activities and human progress.

To merely state these questions would involve more time and a more comprehensive grasp of human affairs than I can claim; to attempt answers to them would involve prophetic vision as well as broad knowledge, but nevertheless I shall venture to present a few, perhaps disjointed, suggestions, believing them to be of imperative importance and in the hope that they may stimulate further interest and discussion.

It will help to form a basis for these suggestions to consider for a moment the method by which the science of zoology has developed and reached its present status. As with other sciences and human knowledge in general it

1 Address of the retiring vice-president and chairman, Section F, Zoology, of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Baltimore, December 27, 1918.

has been a matter of very irregular growth, now one phase, now another forging ahead; the mistakes of one generation being corrected by a later one and the faulty interpretations of limited knowledge clarified with wider basis of fact. Often the progress of one branch has been definitely halted till the developments in other fields have given the data necessary for a clear comprehension and satisfactory solution of its problems.

The rapid advance of one phase may have resulted from individual taste or interest or again from some insistent demand from an associated or dependent field. Comparative anatomy has been pushed forward by the needs of human anatomy; in fact many phases of zoology particularly related to medicine have had their progress determined by

erations of like animals laid the foundations for a knowledge of the main facts of heredity and these with later knowledge of the mechanism of inheritance gives us our modern conceptions of genetics.

Attempts to designate the various animals must have developed by slow degrees into the primitive recognition of species and quite naturally into the further association of groups of similar kinds such as birds, fishes, reptiles, etc., which were undoubtedly the beginnings of our systems of classification; systems whose complexities now sometimes become the despair of the initiated as well as of the amateur.

Comparison of the animals of different geographical regions involving the recognition of distribution, of adaptations to climate, topography and other natural features and to re

Extremely destructive insects, from a human standpoint, have been investigated with far greater assiduity than is true of most of the species devoid of economic interest. Attractive habits or a human interest perhaps accounts for the fact that birds have been much more studied and are far better known than the worms on which they feed, and that ants, bees and wasps with social habits have claimed attention to the neglect of less highly specialized forms.

Primitive observations of the character and habits of animals, stimulated no doubt by the needs for food and the domestication of available forms, has grown into definite knowledge concerning the habits and life histories and other general matter. The study of animal activities must have been closely coincident with that of the animal mechanism and these gradually differentiated into the now almost too widely separated branches of morphology and physiology, while passing further into the realm of the interactions with surrounding forces or interrelations with other organisms has developed into the ecology of modern times. Recognition of the succession of gen

entered into the realm of zoology. Curiosity as to the meaning of fossils grew with our sister science of geology into modern paleontology with all its significant contributions to the interpretation of life and its historic development.

Speculation as to the origin of animal life certainly came at an early date and the long tangle of conceptions of the processes of evolution which have culminated in our doctrine of descent was started on its devious path.

But it is not my purpose to trace in detail the growth of the different branches of zoological science. What I would like to emphasize just now is that we have a large number of quite distinct phases of our study and that these have become so specialized that the workers in one branch may have very little conception of the nature of the problems, the technique or the difficulties attending the advancement of knowledge in another branch.

In some cases this seems to have resulted in lack of sympathy or in misunderstandings that have served as a handicap to the progress of the science as a whole and a mutual recognition of the interdependence of all branches should be helpful in determining future progress. The truth is that there is no branch of zoology overworked or exhausted and there is

every reason for cordial recognition of the work being done in other fields than one's own specialty. Moreover, so dependent is one branch for its fullest development on progress of related or supporting branches that any other attitude is to be deplored.

In a general way and for the purpose of my discussion we may separate zoological activities into two broad classes (1st) investigation, research or the accumulation of new knowledge and (2d) instruction or the distribution of this knowledge to the public at large.

In many ways the aims and methods of the two may differ and yet there is imperative need of the closest and most sympathetic contact between the two and among the workers in the different spheres. In many casesand I believe most fortunately-the two functions are combined, but often such separation exists as to result in loss of effort or even conflict of action.

ZOOLOGICAL RESEARCH

It should go without saying that research must precede instruction at least as applied to any particular object although it would seem that this order is at times reversed.

We may sometimes discover quite munificent provision for education in a too narrow sense with little apparent recognition that the subjects covered are still little known or crudely assembled. Extended and careful investigation should be the first effort in order that accurate and useful knowledge may be available for instruction. Here too will arise the question as to the kind of research that should be given first and most insistent attention.

The point of view may be determined largely by the concept or ideal as to the ultimate goal of zoological effort. Have we a definite object or are we still, as in the early stages of our science, simply following attractive leads or the easiest trails to see whither they may carry us? Is it our greatest ambition to produce a zoological structure complete and perfect in itself as a scientific ideal or to give earliest and most effective service possible to all the agencies operating

for human progress and human welfare? Shall our immediate efforts be given to questions of most remote concern to present problems of life or shall we concentrate effort on those phases which by their relation to medicine or to industry have vital bearing on immediate human needs? Such questions must have come to many of us when searching our innermost thoughts for evidence as to what we could do to help "win the war." Such questions may well concern us in the history-making period that must now follow in the establishment of order and a new alignment of human relationships and activities and which must necessarily be of worldwide scope.

Perhaps we may reflect that these questions will be largely settled by the tastes and choice of the many individuals concerned and that the outcome will be a fairly well-balanced combination. Nevertheless it is evident that the question will come as an urgent one to many individuals and will affect their attitude both in research and instruction so that some sort of decision as to the direction of greatest emphasis will need to be made.

Admitting, however, that the final goal is economic advantage, the development of applied science for the betterment of human society, we may still inquire as to the route to the main objective. I would certainly be one of the first to accord a high place to all phases of science that have made and are making for human advancement. Human society is not only our greatest achievement so far but it offers the only basis we know for evolution and progress in conditions of world affairs that should make this earth the fittest place possible for human life.

But we must guard against a too narrow view of the values in scientific knowledge. That which is of the most immediate concern may be but temporary in its application and some of the most vital and enduring things may be less apparent.

It is fortunate therefore that along with the many agencies that are attacking the immediate problems of applied science we have numerous agencies interested in the explora

tion and investigation of fields whose immediate contribution to human welfare may be difficult to discern. It is a well-known fact that many of our most important advances in applied zoology have been possible only with the basis of knowledge acquired in some field that seemed quite unrelated to human affairs. Instances will occur to all but such stock examples as the ecological relations of trichina, liver fluke and other parasites may serve to emphasize the point.

It may be suggested then that one of the great objectives for the immediate future is carrying forward our researches on all fronts, that we may secure cooperation and correlation in the various lines and that we aim at a more complete and perfect combination of fundamental knowledge, which may be accessible from all sides for the furtherance of such applications as may be needful in human progress.

Whatever our objective, it is interesting to inquire as to our conditions for progress, the lines of work that we may see most clearly ahead of us, the agencies through which we may press for their attainment and the helps or handicaps that are to be reckoned with in our efforts.

I feel sure no one will question the need of continuous effort in the line of structure both general and histological or of function and activities in the widest sense for tissues, organs and individuals. These constitute such an imperative basis for all work in embryology, life-history, activities and relationships that only the most superficial view would permit of a lessening of effort in these lines.

As we go further in economic lines we appreciate more and more that the control of organic nature for the advantage of man must be based on the most complete knowledge of the structures, functions, habits, responses and relationships of the organisms with which we must deal. Can we say of any animal that we know all about it, that needs to be taken into account, when we attempt to fix its place in nature or with reference to the organisms with which it may be associated?

Have we by any means exhaused the prob

lems of structure, the physical factors in animal symmetry or correlation of organs or of the activities of animals in many phases. What of the mechanics of flight or aerial locomotion as exhibited in various groups? How do certain insects hover or fly backward, as in many different families or even fly upside down as is claimed for certain tabanids. And once these questions are satisfactorily answered there will still arise the question as to how such complicated activities had their origin, what were the structural bases on which they were built and what the forces that have operated in their evolution. Even the ultimate problem as to the nature of life itself must be solved, if ever, on the basis of those organic forces which though possibly only combinations of simpler chemical or physical forces are so indissolubly linked with organic structure that this must be our base of attack.

To enter another field and one of recent important strides, consider the wealth of unsolved problems concerning the relations of animals to their environment and to each other. These present, especially for the biological factors, some wonderfully intricate associations and the determinations except for a given time and place, perhaps, an impossible task, since the various elements are in constant process of change. But many of the more constant factors may be determined with approximate accuracy and allowing for periodic variations may afford a basis for some valuable deductions, even possibly, for useful economic practises. To cite a particular instance let me mention the study of the shorttailed shrew by Shull. Here is a species seldom attracting attention but widely dispersed, occurring in great abundance and with a variety of food that includes a large number of species that we consider very injurious along with many that are innocuous or possibly even beneficial. Doubtless we would find a different bill of fare for the species for every month of the year and possibly for every field in which we might study it, but the total appears to be decidedly in the animals favor.