Anatomy of the Cat

Part 1

Produced by deaurider, Harry Lamé and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive)

Transcriber’s Notes

Text printed in italics in the source document has been transcribed between underscores, text printed in bold face =between equal signs=. Small capitals have been transcribed as ALL CAPITALS.

More Transcriber’s Notes may be found at the end of this text.

ANATOMY OF THE CAT

JACOB REIGHARD Professor of Zoology in the University of Michigan

AND

H. S. JENNINGS Instructor in Zoology in the University of Michigan

WITH ONE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY-THREE ORIGINAL FIGURES DRAWN BY LOUISE BURRIDGE JENNINGS

NEW YORK HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY 1901

ROBERT DRUMMOND, PRINTER, NEW YORK.

PREFACE.

Although the cat has long been in common use for the practical study of mammalian anatomy, a clear, correct, not too voluminous account of its structure, such as should be in the hands of students in the laboratory, has remained a desideratum. A number of works have been published on the cat, some of them of much value, yet there is none which fulfils exactly the conditions mentioned. The books which have appeared on this subject are the following:

1. Strauss-Durckheim, H. Anatomie descriptive et comparative du Chat. 2 vols. Paris, 1845.

2. Mivart, St. George. The Cat: an Introduction to the Study of Back-boned Animals, especially Mammals. New York, 1881.

3. Wilder, Burt G., and Gage, Simon H. Anatomical Technology as applied to the Domestic Cat. New York, 1882.

4. Gorham, F. P., and Tower, R. W. A Laboratory Guide for the Dissection of the Cat. New York, 1895.

5. Jayne, H. Mammalian Anatomy. Vol. I. Philadelphia, 1898.

The first of these works treats only of the muscles and bones, and is not available for American students. Its excellent plates (or Williams’s outline reproductions of the same) should be in every laboratory.

The second book named is written in such general terms that its descriptions are not readily applicable to the actual structures found in the dissection of the cat, and experience has shown that it is not fitted for a laboratory handbook. It contains, in addition to a general account of the anatomy of the cat, also a discussion of its embryology, psychology, palæontology, and classification.

The book by Wilder and Gage professedly uses the cat as a means of illustrating technical methods and a special system of nomenclature. While of much value in many ways, it does not undertake to give a complete account of the anatomy of the animal.

The fourth work is a brief laboratory guide.

The elaborate treatise by Jayne, now in course of publication, is a monumental work, which will be invaluable for reference, but is too voluminous to place in the hands of students. At present only the volume on the bones has been published.

As appears from the above brief characterization, none of these books gives a complete description of the anatomy of the cat in moderate volume and without extraneous matter. This is what the present work aims to do.

In the year 1891-92, Professor Reighard prepared a partial account of the anatomy of the cat, which has since been in use, in typewritten form, in University of Michigan classes. It has been used also at the Universities of Illinois, Nebraska, and West Virginia, and in Dartmouth College, and has proven so useful for college work in Mammalian Anatomy that it was decided to complete it and prepare it for publication. This has been done by Dr. Jennings.

The figures, which are throughout original, are direct reproductions of ink drawings, made under the direction of Dr. Jennings by Mrs. Jennings.

The book is limited to a description of the normal anatomy of the cat. The direct linear action of each muscle taken alone has been given in the description of muscles; other matters belonging to the realm of physiology, as well as all histological matter, have been excluded. It was felt that the monumental work of Jayne on the anatomy of the cat, now in course of publication, forms the best repository for a description of variations and abnormalities, so that these have been mentioned in the present volume only when they are so frequent as to be of much practical importance.

Except where the contrary is stated, the descriptions are based throughout on our own dissections and observations and are in no sense a compilation. For this reason we have not thought it necessary to collect the scattered references to the anatomy of the cat that may occur in the literature. A collection of such references may be found in Wilder and Gage’s Anatomical Technology. In addition to the works already referred to, we have of course made use of the standard works on human and veterinary anatomy. Among these should be mentioned as especially useful the Anatomie des Hundes by Ellenberger and Baum. Other publications which have been of service in the preparation of the work are Windle and Parson’s paper On the Myology of the Terrestrial Carnivora, in the Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London for 1897 and 1898, T. B. Stowell’s papers on the nervous system of the cat in the Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society (1881, 1886, 1888) and in the Journal of Comparative Neurology (vol. I.), and F. Clasen’s Die Muskeln und Nerven des proximalen Abschnitts der vorderen Extremität der Katze, in Nova Acta der Ksl. Leop.-Carol. Deutschen Akademie der Naturforscher, Bd. 64.

Part 2

Nomenclature.--The question of nomenclature has been one of difficulty. What is desired is a uniform set of anatomical names,--a system that shall be generally used by anatomists. At present the greatest diversity prevails as to the names to be applied to the different structures of the body. The only set of terms which at the present time seems to have any chance of general acceptance is that proposed by the German Anatomical Society at their meeting in Basel in 1895, and generally designated by the abbreviation BNA. This system has therefore been adopted, in its main features, for use in the present work. It seems impossible at the present time, however, to impose any one set of terms absolutely upon anatomists of all nations, and we have felt it necessary to use for certain familiar structures, in place of the BNA terms, names that have come to have a fixed place in English anatomy, and may almost be considered component parts of the English language. The German anatomists have expressly recognized the fact that this would be to a greater or less degree necessary among anatomists of different nations, and have characterized their list as for the present tentative, and capable of farther development. The only purpose of a name is that it shall furnish a key to a common understanding; where the BNA name does not furnish such a key to English readers, and where there is a term in established English usage that does serve this purpose and seems unlikely to be supplanted, we have used the latter. But we have endeavored to make the number of these exceptions as small as possible, and in such cases we have usually cited at the same time the term proposed by the German society, followed by the abbreviation BNA. When, on the other hand, we have adopted a BNA term for which there is also a commonly used English equivalent, the latter has likewise usually been cited in parenthesis.

In deciding whether or not to use in a given case the BNA term many difficult cases arose. Will the common English name innominate bone (os innominatum) be replaced by the BNA term os coxæ or coxal bone? We have held this to be highly improbable, and have therefore used the term innominate bone, merely citing os coxæ (BNA) as a synonym. In the same way we have used centrum as a designation of a part of a vertebra, in place of corpus (BNA); premaxillary bone or premaxilla in place of os incisivum (BNA); malar bone in place of os zygomaticum (BNA); trapezoid as a name of one of the bones of the carpus, in place of os multangulum minus (BNA), etc. In other cases where it has seemed probable that the BNA term would come into common use, though now unfamiliar, this and the more common English expression are both used or used alternatively; such has been the case, for example, with the Gasserian ganglion or semilunar ganglion (BNA). In naming the cerebral sulci and gyri the system in use for man is not well fitted for bringing out the plan of those in the brain of the cat, so that it was necessary to reject the BNA names for these structures.

As to the use of the Latin terms and their equivalents in English form, we have made a practice of employing in the text sometimes one, sometimes the other; this has the advantage of giving variety, and of impressing the interchangeability of the Latin and English forms on the mind of the student. Where a given structure is called by two equally well-known names, we have used both, holding that the student should become familiar with each and recognize their identity of meaning.

Continue reading Anatomy of the Cat free in the Wunder reader →