Home › The Mastodon › The Mastodon: Lingula
The Mastodon: Lingula
The more uniform the surrounding conditions, and the simpler the animal, the smaller is the liability to change, and some animals that dwell in the depths of the ocean, where light and temperature vary little, if any, remain at a standstill for long periods of time. The genus Lingula, a small shell, traces its ancestry back nearly to the base of the Ordovician system of rocks, an almost inconceivable lapse of time, while one species of brachiopod shell endures unchanged from the Trenton Limestone to the Lower Carboniferous . In the first case one species has been replaced by another, so that the shell of to-day is not exactly like its very remote ancestor, but that the type of shell should have remained unchanged when so many other animals have arisen, flourished for a time, and perished, means that there was slight tendency to variation, and that the surrounding conditions were uniform. Says Professor Brooks, speaking of Lingula: "The everlasting hills are the type of venerable antiquity; but Lingula has seen the continents grow up, and has maintained its integrity unmoved by the convulsions which have given the crust of the earth its present form."
Many instances of sudden but local extermination might be adduced, but among them that of the tile-fish is perhaps the most striking. This fish, belonging to a tropical family having its headquarters in the Gulf of Mexico, was discovered in 1879 in moderately deep water to the southward of Massachusetts and on the on the edge of the Gulf Stream, where it was taken in considerable numbers. In the spring of 1882 vessels arriving at New York reported having passed through great numbers of dead and dying fishes, the water being thickly dotted with them for miles. From samples WHY DO ANIMALS BECOME EXTINCT? brought in, it was found that the majority of these were tile-fish, while from the reports of various vessels it was shown that the area covered by dead fish amounted to somewhere between 5,000 and 7,500 square miles, and the total number of dead was estimated at not far from a billion. This enormous and widespread destruction is believed to have been caused by an unwonted duration of northerly and easterly winds, which drove the cold arctic current inshore and southwards, chilling the warm belt in which the tile-fish resided and killing all in that locality. It was thought possible that the entire race might have been destroyed, but, while none were taken for many years, in 1899 and in 1900 a number were caught, showing that the species was beginning to reoccupy the waters from which it had been driven years before, and since then it has become relatively abundant. The effect of any great fall in temperature on animals specially adapted to a warm climate is also illustrated by the destruction of the Manatees in the Sebastian River, Florida, by the winter of 1894-95, which came very near exterminating this species. Readers may remember that this was the winter that wrought such havoc with the blue-birds, while in the vicinity of Washington, D. C., the fish-crows died by hundreds, if not by thousands.
Fishes may also be exterminated over large areas by outbursts of poisonous gases from submarine volcanoes, or more rarely by some vast lava flood pouring into the sea and actually cooking all living beings in the vicinity. And in the past these outbreaks took place on a much larger scale than now, and naturally wrought more widespread destruction.
A recent instance of local extermination is the total destruction of a humming-bird, Bellona ornata, peculiar to the island of St. Vincent, by the West Indian hurricane of 1898, but this is naturally extirpation on a very small scale.
Still, the problems of nature are so involved that while local destruction is ordinarily of little importance, or temporary in its effects, it may lead to the annihilation of a species by breaking a race of animals into isolated groups, thereby leading to inbreeding and slow decline. The European bison, now confined to a part of Lithuania and a portion of the Caucasus, seems to be slowly but surely approaching extinction in spite of all efforts to preserve the race, and no reason can be assigned for this save that the small size of the herds has led to in-breeding and general decadence.1 In other ways, too, local calamity may be sweeping in its effects, and that is by the destruction of animals that resort to one spot during the breeding season, like the fur-seals and some sea-birds, or pass the winter months in great flocks or herds, as do the ducks and elk. The supposed decimation of the Moas by severe winters has been already discussed, and the extermination of the great auk in European waters was indirectly due to natural causes. These birds bred on the small, almost inaccessible island of Eldey, off the coast of Iceland, and when, through volcanic disturbances, this islet sank into the sea, the few birds were forced to other quarters, and as these were, unfortunately, easily reached, the birds were slain to the last one.
From the great local abundance of their remains, it has been thought that the curious short-legged Pliocene rhinoceros, Teleoceras fossiger, was killed off in the West by blizzards when the animals were gathered in their It is reported to have been totally exterminated during the great war, partly for food, and partly to show that there was no longer any restraint on the people.
WHY DO ANIMALS BECOME EXTINCT? winter quarters, and other long-extinct animals, too, have been found under such conditions as to suggest a similar fate.
Among local catastrophes brought about by unusually prolonged cold may be cited the decimation of the furseal herds of the Pribilof Islands in 1834 and 1859, when the breeding seals were prevented from landing by the presence of ice-floes, and perished by thousands. Peculiar interest is attached to this case, because the restriction of the northern fur-seals to a few isolated, long undiscovered islands, is believed to have been brought about by their complete extermination in other localities by prehistoric man. Had these two seasons killed all the seals, it would have been a reversal of the customary extermination by man of a species reduced in numbers by nature.
In the case of large animals another element probably played a part. The larger the animal, the fewer young, as a rule, does it bring forth at a birth, the longer are the intervals between births, and the slower the growth of the young. The loss of two or three broods of sparrows or two or three litters of rabbits makes comparatively little difference, as the loss is soon supplied, but the death of the young of the larger and higher mammals is a more serious matter. A factor that has probably played an important rôle in the extinction of animals is the relation that exists between various animals, and the relations that also exist between animals and plants, so that the existence of one is dependent on that of another. Thus no group of living beings, plants or animals, can be affected without in some way affecting others, so that the injury or destruction of some plant may result in serious harm to some animal. In this connection it has been suggested that volcanic eruptions covering the earth for miles around with ashes, killing off the vegetation, may have brought about or hastened the extermination of some of our western mammals during Tertiary time. Nearly everyone is familiar with the classic example given by Darwin of the effect of cats on the growth of red clover. This plant is fertilized by bumble bees only, and if the field mice, which destroy the nests of the bees, were not kept in check by cats, or other small carnivores, their increase would lessen the numbers of the bees and this in turn would cause a dearth of clover.
The yuccas present a still more wonderful example of the dependence of plants on animals, for their existence hangs on that of a small moth whose peculiar structure and habits bring about the fertilization of the flower. The two probably developed side by side until their present state of inter-dependence was reached, when the extinction of the one would probably bring about that of the other.
It is this inter-dependence of living things that makes the outcome of any direct interference with the natural order of things more or less problematical, and sometimes brings about results quite different from what were expected or intended.
The gamekeepers on the grouse moors of Scotland systematically killed off all birds of prey because they caught some of the grouse, but this is believed to have caused far more harm than good through permitting weak and sickly birds, that would otherwise have fallen a prey to hawks, to live and disseminate the grouse distemper.
The destruction of sheep by coyotes led the State of California to place a bounty on the heads of these animals, with the result that in eighteen months the State was called upon to pay out $187,485. As a result of the war on coyotes the animals on which they fed, WHY DO ANIMALS BECOME EXTINCT? notably the rabbits, increased so enormously that in turn a bounty was put on rabbits, the damage these animals caused the fruit-growers being greater than the losses among sheep-owners from the depredations of coyotes. And so, says Dr. Palmer, "In this remarkable case of legislation a large bounty was offered by a county in the interest of fruit-growers to counteract the effects of a State bounty expended mainly for the benefit of sheepowners Professor Shaler, in noting the sudden disappearance of such trees as the gums, magnolias, and tulip poplars from the Miocene flora of Europe has suggested that this may have been due to the attacks, for a series of years, of some insect enemy like the gipsy moth, and the theory is worth considering, although it must be looked upon as a possibility rather than a probability. Still, anyone familiar with the ravages of the gipsy moth in Massachusetts, where the insect was introduced by accident, can readily imagine what might have been the effect of some sudden increase in the numbers of such a pest on the forests of the past. Trees might resist the attacks of enemies and the destruction of their leaves for two or three years, but would be destroyed by a few additional seasons of defoliation.
Ordinarily the abnormal increase of any insect is promptly followed by an increase in the number of its enemies; the pest is killed off, the destroyers die of starvation and nature's balance is struck. But if by some accident, such as two or three consecutive seasons of wet, drought, or cold, the natural increase of the enemies was checked, the balance of nature would be temporarily destroyed and serious harm done. That This state of things is still (1921) going on as may be seen by the reports of the Biological Survey, Department of Agriculture. such accidents may occur is familiar to us by the damage wrought in Florida and other Southern States by the unwonted severity of the winters of 1893, 1895, and 1899.
If any group of forest trees was destroyed in the manner suggested by Professor Shaler, the effects would be felt by various plants and animals. In the first place, the insects that fed on these trees would be forced to seek another source of food and would be brought into a silent struggle with forms already in possession, while the destruction of one set of plants would be to the advantage of those with which they came into competition and to the disadvantage of vegetation that was protected by the shade. Finally, these changed conditions would react in various ways on the smaller birds and mammals, the general effect being, to use a wellworn simile, that like of casting a stone into a quiet pool and setting in motion ripples that sooner or later reach to every part of the margin.
It is scarcely necessary to warn the reader that for the most part this is purely conjectural, for from the nature of the case it is bound to be so, as is the suggestion that the horse was exterminated in North America by the tsetse fly. But it is one of the characteristics of educated man that he wishes to know the why and wherefore of everything, and is in a condition of mental unhappiness until he has at least formulated some theory which seems to harmonize with the visible facts. And from the few glimpses we get of the extinction of animals from natural causes we must formulate a theory to fit the continued extermination that has been taking place ever since living beings came into the world and were pitted against one another and against their surroundings in the silent and ceaseless struggle for existence.
A RETROSPECT The twenty years that have elapsed since this book was issued have added much to our knowledge of Animals of the Past and have greatly increased our acquaintance with the structure of these creatures, big and little, and of the conditions under which they lived. And through our increased knowledge of animals, we gain a better knowledge of ancient geography, of the former extent of the continents and of the way in which the present distribution of land animals has been brought about. Exploration of the desert region of the Fayum, northeastern Africa, has led to the discovery of the ancestor of the elephant; and as the horse is descended from a four-toed ancestor no bigger than a collie dog, so the elephant, and his extinct gigantic relatives, the mammoth and mastodon, probably trace their pedigree back to a creature in size and appearance something between a pig and a tapir, with only good-sized canine teeth to suggest the future appearance of tusks: Moeritherium this animal has been called. In this same region lived a race of huge animals, curiously suggestive of the Titanotheres of our western Miocene. Here, too, have been found the forerunners of our modern sea cows, manatees and dugongs, very much like their modern relatives, but possessing as theoretically they shouldhind paddles as well as fore. The additions to our knowledge of those huge and ever-interesting reptiles, the Dinosaurs, have been many and important.
From the Cretaceous of Alberta comes Ankylosaurus clad in armor of bony plates from tip of nose to end of tail, a beast some 15 feet long aptly described by Lull as "the most ponderous animated citadel the world has ever seen." And yet he and his kindred have been swept out of existence as completely as if he were naked. From our west, too comes Tyrannosaurus, well-named tyrant lizard, for he was absolutely the most formidable creature that ever stalked the earth; a creature standing when erect 18 feet high, with talons fit to hold an ox, and double-edged dagger-like teeth two and three inches long set in a mouth with a yard wide gape. Seemingly nothing living could have withstood the attack of such a monster: and yet he, too, played his part and succumbed to the slow and insidious attacks of a changing climate and gradually progressing world of life.
Brontosaurus and Diplodocus no longer hold the record for size: discoveries in Central Africa and in our own western states have revealed the former existence of still more gigantic reptiles, peculiar in the great length of their fore legs, standing as high as a small house and with a body quite as large. An idea of their size may be gained from the fact that the thigh bone of one of these creatures, called Brachiosaurus, was 6 feet 9 inches long and a rib 9 feet in length.