IAG 150 Years Proceedings of the IAG

Scientific Assembly in Postdam

Germany 2013 1st Edition Chris Rizos
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/iag-150-years-proceedings-of-the-iag-scientific-asse
mbly-in-postdam-germany-2013-1st-edition-chris-rizos/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

International Symposium on Advancing Geodesy in a

Changing World Proceedings of the IAG Scientific
Assembly Kobe Japan July 30 August 4 2017 Jeffrey T.
Freymueller
https://textbookfull.com/product/international-symposium-on-
advancing-geodesy-in-a-changing-world-proceedings-of-the-iag-
scientific-assembly-kobe-japan-july-30-august-4-2017-jeffrey-t-
freymueller/

Annals of Scientific Society for Assembly Handling and

Industrial Robotics Thorsten Schüppstuhl

https://textbookfull.com/product/annals-of-scientific-society-
for-assembly-handling-and-industrial-robotics-thorsten-
schuppstuhl/

Advances in Systems Science Proceedings of the

International Conference on Systems Science 2013 ICSS
2013 1st Edition Tadeusz Kaczorek (Auth.)

https://textbookfull.com/product/advances-in-systems-science-
proceedings-of-the-international-conference-on-systems-
science-2013-icss-2013-1st-edition-tadeusz-kaczorek-auth/

Enabling Manufacturing Competitiveness and Economic

Sustainability Proceedings of the 5th International
Conference on Changeable Agile Reconfigurable and
Virtual Production CARV 2013 Munich Germany October 6th
9th 2013 1st Edition Hoda A. Elmaraghy
https://textbookfull.com/product/enabling-manufacturing-
competitiveness-and-economic-sustainability-proceedings-of-
the-5th-international-conference-on-changeable-agile-
Advances in Mathematics and Applications Celebrating 50
years of the Institute of Mathematics Statistics and
Scientific Computing University of Campinas Carlile
Lavor
https://textbookfull.com/product/advances-in-mathematics-and-
applications-celebrating-50-years-of-the-institute-of-
mathematics-statistics-and-scientific-computing-university-of-
campinas-carlile-lavor/

Advances in Computer Entertainment 10th International

Conference ACE 2013 Boekelo The Netherlands November 12
15 2013 Proceedings 1st Edition Mathew Burns

https://textbookfull.com/product/advances-in-computer-
entertainment-10th-international-conference-ace-2013-boekelo-the-
netherlands-november-12-15-2013-proceedings-1st-edition-mathew-
burns/

Machine Learning in Medical Imaging 4th International

Workshop MLMI 2013 Held in Conjunction with MICCAI 2013
Nagoya Japan September 22 2013 Proceedings 1st Edition
Minjeong Kim
https://textbookfull.com/product/machine-learning-in-medical-
imaging-4th-international-workshop-mlmi-2013-held-in-conjunction-
with-miccai-2013-nagoya-japan-september-22-2013-proceedings-1st-
edition-minjeong-kim/

Ultrafast Magnetism I Proceedings of the International

Conference UMC 2013 Strasbourg France October 28th
November 1st 2013 1st Edition Jean-Yves Bigot

https://textbookfull.com/product/ultrafast-magnetism-i-
proceedings-of-the-international-conference-umc-2013-strasbourg-
france-october-28th-november-1st-2013-1st-edition-jean-yves-
bigot/

Proceedings of the 2013 National Conference on Advances

in Environmental Science and Technology 1st Edition
Godfrey A. Uzochukwu

https://textbookfull.com/product/proceedings-of-
the-2013-national-conference-on-advances-in-environmental-
science-and-technology-1st-edition-godfrey-a-uzochukwu/
International Association of Geodesy Symposia

143

Chris Rizos
Pascal Willis Editors

IAG 150 Years

Proceedings of the 2013 IAG Scientific Assembly, Postdam,
Germany, 1–6 September, 2013
 International Association
of Geodesy Symposia
Chris Rizos, Series Editor
Pascal Willis, Series Associate Editor
 International Association
of Geodesy Symposia
Chris Rizos, Series Editor
Pascal Willis, Series Associate Editor

Symposium 101: Global and Regional Geodynamics

Symposium 102: Global Positioning System: An Overview
Symposium 103: Gravity, Gradiometry, and Gravimetry
Symposium 104: Sea SurfaceTopography and the Geoid
Symposium 105: Earth Rotation and Coordinate Reference Frames
Symposium 106: Determination of the Geoid: Present and Future
Symposium 107: Kinematic Systems in Geodesy, Surveying, and Remote Sensing
Symposium 108: Application of Geodesy to Engineering
Symposium 109: Permanent Satellite Tracking Networks for Geodesy and Geodynamics
Symposium 110: From Mars to Greenland: Charting Gravity with Space and Airborne Instruments
Symposium 111: Recent Geodetic and Gravimetric Research in Latin America
Symposium 112: Geodesy and Physics of the Earth: Geodetic Contributions to Geodynamics
Symposium 113: Gravity and Geoid
Symposium 114: Geodetic Theory Today
Symposium 115: GPS Trends in Precise Terrestrial, Airborne, and Spaceborne Applications
Symposium 116: Global Gravity Field and Its Temporal Variations
Symposium 117: Gravity, Geoid and Marine Geodesy
Symposium 118: Advances in Positioning and Reference Frames
Symposium 119: Geodesy on the Move
Symposium 120: Towards an Integrated Global Geodetic Observation System (IGGOS)
Symposium 121: Geodesy Beyond 2000: The Challenges of the First Decade
Symposium 122: IV Hotine-Marussi Symposium on Mathematical Geodesy
Symposium 123: Gravity, Geoid and Geodynamics 2000
Symposium 124: Vertical Reference Systems
Symposium 125: Vistas for Geodesy in the New Millennium
Symposium 126: Satellite Altimetry for Geodesy, Geophysics and Oceanography
Symposium 127: V Hotine Marussi Symposium on Mathematical Geodesy
Symposium 128: A Window on the Future of Geodesy
Symposium 129: Gravity, Geoid and Space Missions
Symposium 130: Dynamic Planet - Monitoring and Understanding . . .
Symposium 131: Geodetic Deformation Monitoring: From Geophysical to Engineering Roles
Symposium 132: VI Hotine-Marussi Symposium on Theoretical and Computational Geodesy
Symposium 133: Observing our Changing Earth
Symposium 134: Geodetic Reference Frames
Symposium 135: Gravity, Geoid and Earth Observation
Symposium 136: Geodesy for Planet Earth
Symposium 137: VII Hotine-Marussi Symposium on Mathematical Geodesy
Symposium 138: Reference Frames for Applications in Geosciences
Symposium 139: Earth on the Edge: Science for a sustainable Planet
Symposium 140: The 1st International Workshop on the Quality of Geodetic
Observation and Monitoring Systems (GuQOMS’11)
Symposium 141: Gravity, Geoid and Height systems (GGHS2012)
Symposium 142: VIII Hotine-Marussi Symposium on Mathematical Geodesy

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/1345

 IAG 150 Years
Proceedings of the 2013 IAG Scientific Assembly, Postdam,
Germany, 1–6 September, 2013

Edited by

Chris Rizos
Pascal Willis

123
Volume Editors Series Editor
Chris Rizos Chris Rizos
School of Civil & Environmental Engineering School of Civil & Environmental Engineering
University of New South Wales University of New South Wales
Sydney Sydney
Australia Australia

Pascal Willis Associate Editor

Institut national de l’Information Pascal Willis
géographique et forestière Institut national de l’Information
Direction de la Recherche géographique et forestière
et de l’Enseignement Direction de la Recherche
Marne-la-Vallée et de l’Enseignement
France Marne-la-Vallée
France

ISSN 0939-9585 ISSN 2197-9359 (electronic)

International Association of Geodesy Symposia
ISBN 978-3-319-24603-1 ISBN 978-3-319-30895-1 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-30895-1

Library of Congress Control Number: 2016939265

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the
material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting,
reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval,
electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not
imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and
regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed
to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty,
express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been
made.

Printed on acid-free paper

This Springer imprint is published by Springer Nature

The registered company is Springer International Publishing AG Switzerland
Preface

In 1862, the Prussian General Johann Jacob Baeyer initiated the Central European Arc Mea-
surement (“Mitteleuropäische Gradmessung”) project. By the end of that year, 15 countries had
affirmed their participation, and in 1864, the first General Conference was held in Berlin. This
was a great success and the start of an organised international collaboration in geodesy. The
IAG counts this international scientific initiative, and the organisation it spawned, as its origin.
The IAG celebrated its 150th anniversary with a Scientific Assembly in Potsdam, Germany,
2–6 September 2013.
This volume contains the proceedings of selected papers from sessions organised under the
six themes listed below (with the names of their associate editors):
Theme 1: Definition, Implementation and Scientific Applications of Reference Frames
Main Editor: Tonie van Dam
Associate Editors: Zuheir Altamimi, Joao Torres
Theme 2: Gravity Field Determination and Applications
Main Editor: Urs Marti
Associate Editors: Hussein Abd-Elmotaal, Xiaoli Deng, Annette Eicker, Jianliang
Huang, Roland Pail, Laura Sanchez
Theme 3: Observing, Understanding and Assessing Earth Hazards
Main Editor: Manabu Hashimoto
Associate Editor: Jeff Freymueller
Theme 4: Science and Applications of Earth Rotation and Dynamics
Main Editor: Richard Gross
Theme 5: Observation Systems and Services
Main Editor: Hansjörg Kutterer
Associate Editor: Urs Hugentobler
Theme 6: Imaging and Positioning Techniques and Applications
Main Editor: Dorot Grejner-Brzenzinska
Associate Editors: Allison Kealy, Pawel Wielgosz
The symposium was a tremendous success, attracting 533 delegates from 46 countries and
13 national and international sponsors. There were 241 oral papers and 234 posters presented
over the 5 days of the symposium. From the presentations and the papers accepted for these
proceedings, a number of observations can be made:
• The most popular theme was Gravity Field Determination and Applications. The recent
gravity field mapping satellites (first CHAMP and then the GRACE and GOCE missions)
continue to produce exciting results in support of a wide range of geoscience applications,
including geoid determination, physical oceanography, hydrology and geophysical and
atmospheric sciences. The gravimetric community waits eagerly for the GRACE follow-on
mission.
• On the other hand, the value of reference frames to the broader navigation, geospatial and
global change communities continues to rise. The International Terrestrial Reference Frame
(ITRF) is a highly valued product of modern geodesy. The ITRF is increasingly recognised

v
vi Preface

as the fundamental datum for national and regional mapping, as well as global change
studies. The current ITRF2008 will be superseded by ITRF2014.
• The Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) continues to be the workhorse of geodesy;
not only is it the quintessential 3D (and also 4D) geodetic positioning technology, but it
also provides invaluable measurement data for the determination and maintenance of the
ITRF and easy connection to the ITRF and supports precise orbit determination for many
Earth observation satellite missions. High-precision GNSS is by far the most advanced, and
accessible, geodetic tool ever developed.
• Modern geodesy is very dependent on the satellite missions launched by a handful of
space agencies. In addition to GNSS and gravity field mapping missions, there are many
Earth observation satellites including those for magnetic field mapping; topographic, sea
and ice surface mapping; timing; relativity probes; and Earth imaging. The challenge is to
“operationalise” what are often once-off science missions, so as to ensure long time series
of observations of many Earth system parameters.
• The IAG is fortunate to have launched a range of services in the 1990s and is now reaping
the reward in terms of increased accuracy and resolution in the geometric and gravimetric
mapping of the dynamic Earth. The challenge for the IAG in the coming decade is the
realisation of an integrated Global Geodetic Observing System (GGOS). Such a synoptic
observing system will contribute to unified measurement modelling and analysis – that will
deliver a quantum increase in accuracy and stability for the time, gravitational and spatial
reference frames underpinning today’s geodetic enterprises.
• The International GNSS Service (IGS) is the most visible of the IAG services because its
products and expertise support the ever-growing range of GNSS applications in science and
engineering. In 2014, the IGS celebrated the 20t h anniversary of its founding.
Pascal Willis, the IAG Symposium Series associate editor, guided the reviews of the submitted
papers, communicated with the symposium editors and the paper reviewers and finally
accepted the papers that comprise this volume. I am personally indebted to him, for I could
not have put this volume together without his invaluable assistance and extraordinary tenacity.
I wish to also acknowledge the generous support of the Helmholtz Centre Potsdam – GFZ
German Research Centre for Geosciences. It is very fitting that the 150th anniversary of the
founding of the IAG’s forerunner is celebrated in Potsdam. In 1864, a “Central Bureau of
European Arc Measurement” was established under Baeyer’s presidency in Berlin. During the
following years, the maturing association developed into the European (1867) and later into
the International (1886) Arc Measurement. The significant role of Berlin and Potsdam in the
history of geodesy is further marked by the foundation of the Royal Prussian Geodetic Institute,
which was established upon Baeyer’s proposal in Berlin in 1870. The institute moved into its
own new building on the site of the Royal Prussian Observatories on the Telegraph Hill in
Potsdam in 1891. To this day, the building is the domicile of the Department of “Geodesy and
Remote Sensing” of the German Research Centre for Geosciences.
Last, but definitively not least, I wish to thank all participating scientists, and those who
made oral and poster presentations, who came to Potsdam and made our Scientific Assembly
a great success. International geodesy has come a long way in 150 years, and we can proudly
claim that “geodesy matters, now more than ever”. We all wish the IAG a long and productive
future.

Sydney, NSW, Australia Chris Rizos

18 November 2014
Contents

Part I History Session

From a Regional Project to an International Organization: The

“Baeyer-Helmert-Era” of the International Association of Geodesy 1862–1916 . . . . 3
Wolfgang Torge
IAG History: The Years of World Wars and Aftermath (1917–1959) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Claude Boucher and Pascal Willis

Part II Definition, Implementation and Scientific Applications of Reference

Frames

Epoch Reference Frames as Short-Term Realizations of the ITRS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Mathis Bloßfeld, Manuela Seitz, and Detlef Angermann
Status of the IGS-TIGA Tide Gauge Data Reprocessing at GFZ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Zhiguo Deng, Gerd Gendt, and Tilo Schöne
On the Impact of Correlation Information on the Orientation Parameters Between
Celestial Reference Frame Realizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Yulia Sokolova and Zinovy Malkin
Quality Evaluation of the Weekly Vertical Loading Effects Induced from
Continental Water Storage Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Z. Li, T. van Dam, X. Collilieux, Z. Altamimi, P. Rebischung, and S. Nahmani
Impact of Time Variable Gravity on Annual Sea Level Variability from
Altimetry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Saskia Esselborn, Tilo Schöne, and Sergei Rudenko
Development of a Combination Procedure for Celestial Reference Frame
Determination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
A. Iddink, T. Artz, and A. Nothnagel
Improved Parameter Estimation of Zenith Wet Delays Using an Inequality
Constrained Least Squares Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Sebastian Halsig, Lutz Roese-Koerner, Thomas Artz, Axel Nothnagel,
and Wolf-Dieter Schuh
The Realization of a Semi-Kinematic Datum in Greece Including a New Velocity
Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Miltiadis Chatzinikos, Aristeidis Fotiou, Christos Pikridas,
and Dimitrios Rossikopoulos

vii
viii Contents

Simulated VLBI Satellite Tracking of the GNSS Constellation: Observing

Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Lucia Plank, Johannes Böhm, and Harald Schuh
On the Development and Implementation of a Semi-Dynamic Datum
for Indonesia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Hasanuddin Z. Abidin, Susilo Susilo, Irwan Meilano, Cecep Subarya, Kosasih Prijatna,
M. Arief Syafi’i, Edwin Hendrayana, Joni Effendi, and Dodi Sukmayadi
Regional Model to Estimate Vertical Deformations Due to Loading Seasonal
Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Romina Galván, Mauricio Gende, and Claudio Brunini
Expression of the Local GPS Solution in the Regional Reference Frame
ETRF2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
Violeta Vasilić and Dragan Blagojević
Impact of Antenna Phase Centre Calibrations on Position Time Series:
Preliminary Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
D. Sidorov and F.N. Teferle
Optimized Parameterization of VLBI Auxiliary Parameters in Least-Squares
Adjustment: Preliminary Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
Emine Tanır Kayıkçı, Robert Heinkelmann, Maria Karbon, Tobias Nilsson,
Virginia Raposo-Pulido, Benedikt Soja, and Harald Schuh
The Antarctic Regional GPS Network Densification: Status and Results . . . . . . . . . . 133
Axel Rülke, Reinhard Dietrich, Alessandro Capra, Jan Cisak, E. Dongchen,
Trond Eiken, Adrian Fox, Larry D. Hothem, Gary Johnston, E.C. Malaimani,
Alexey J. Matveev, Gennadi Milinevsky, Hans-Werner Schenke, Kazuo Shibuya,
Lars E. Sjöberg, Andrés Zakrajsek, Mathias Fritsche, Andreas Groh, Christoph Knöfel,
and Mirko Scheinert
Impact of Celestial Datum Definition on EOP Estimation and CRF Orientation
in the Global VLBI Session IYA09 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
V. Raposo-Pulido, R. Heinkelmann, T. Nilsson, M. Karbon, B. Soja,
E. Tanir Kayikci, C. Lu, J. Mora-Diaz, and H. Schuh
A High-Precision Deformation Model to Support Geodetic Datum Modernisation
in Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
R. Stanaway and C. Roberts
Interaction Between Subdaily Earth Rotation Parameters and GPS Orbits . . . . . . . 159
Natalia Panafidina, Urs Hugentobler, and Manuela Seitz
A Geocenter Time Series from a Combination of LAGEOS and GRACE
Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
Rolf König, Christoph Dahle, Margarita Vei, and Karl-Hans Neumayer
DPOD2008: A DORIS-Oriented Terrestrial Reference Frame for Precise Orbit
Determination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
Pascal Willis, Nikita P. Zelensky, John Ries, Laurent Soudarin, Luca Cerri,
Guilhem Moreaux, Frank G. Lemoine, Michiel Otten, Donald F. Argus,
and Michael B. Heflin
SIRGAS Core Network Stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
L. Sánchez, H. Drewes, C. Brunini, M.V. Mackern, and W. Martínez-Díaz
Contents ix

Part III Gravity Field Determination and Applications

Numerical Computation of Point Values, Derivatives, and Integrals of Associated

Legendre Function of the First Kind and Point Values and Derivatives of Oblate
Spheroidal Harmonics of the Second Kind of High Degree and Order . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
Toshio Fukushima
Developments in the Implementation and Use of Least-Squares Collocation . . . . . . . 199
C.C. Tscherning
The Impact of Using Jason-1 and Cryosat-2 Geodetic Mission Altimetry for Gravity
Field Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
Ole Baltazar Andersen, Maulik Jain, and Per Knudsen
Mohorovicic Discontinuity Depth Analysis Beneath North Patagonian Massif . . . . . 211
María Laura Gómez Dacal, Claudia Tocho, and Eugenio Aragón
The A10 Gravimeter Total Uncertainty Budget Estimation: A Case Study Using
the A10-020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
P. Dykowski, J. Krynski, and M. S˛ekowski
Analysis of the Discrepancies Between the Brazilian Vertical Reference Frame
and GOCE-Based Geopotential Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
Vagner G. Ferreira, Sílvio R.C. de Freitas, and Bernhard Heck
Regional Gravity Field Modeling by Radially Optimized Point Masses: Case
Studies with Synthetic Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
Miao Lin, Heiner Denker, and Jürgen Müller
Covariance Analysis and Sensitivity Studies for GRACE Assimilation
into WGHM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241
Maike Schumacher, Annette Eicker, Jürgen Kusche, Hannes Müller Schmied,
and Petra Döll
Accuracy Estimation of the IfE Gravimeters Micro-g LaCoste gPhone-98 and ZLS
Burris Gravity Meter B-64 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
Manuel Schilling and Olga Gitlein
Least-Squares Prediction of Runoff Over Ungauged Basins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257
Mohammad J. Tourian, Robin Thor, and Nico Sneeuw
Improving and Validating Gravity Data Over Ice-Covered Marine Areas . . . . . . . . . 263
S. Märdla, T. Oja, A. Ellmann, and H. Jürgenson
Estimation of the Geopotential Value W0 for the Local Vertical Datum
of Argentina Using EGM2008 and GPS/Levelling Data W LVD 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271
C. Tocho and G.S. Vergos
A Feasibility Study on the Unification of the Italian Height Systems Using
GNSS-Leveling Data and Global Satellite Gravity Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
R. Barzaghi, D. Carrion, M. Reguzzoni, and G. Venuti
Analysis of the Discrepancies Between the Vertical Reference Frames of Argentina
and Brazil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289
M.E. Gomez, R.A.D. Pereira, V.G. Ferreira, D. Del Cogliano, R.T. Luz,
S.R.C. de Freitas, C. Farias, R. Perdomo, C. Tocho, E. Lauria, and S. Cimbaro
Validation of GOCE/GRACE Satellite Only and Combined Global Geopotential
Models Over Greece in the Frame of the GOCESeaComb Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297
I.N. Tziavos, G.S. Vergos, V.N. Grigoriadis, E.A. Tzanou, and D.A. Natsiopoulos
x Contents

Height System Unification Based on the Fixed GBVP Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305

Thomas Grombein, Kurt Seitz, and Bernhard Heck
Airborne and Shipborne Gravimetry at GFZ with Emphasis on the GEOHALO
Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313
Svetozar Petrovic, Franz Barthelmes, and Hartmut Pflug
A Comparison of the Performance of Medium- and High-Quality Inertial Systems
Grades for Strapdown Airborne Gravimetry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323
Richard Deurloo, Wenlin Yan, Machiel Bos, Diogo Ayres-Sampaio,
Américo Magalhães, Matthias Becker, David Becker, and Luisa Bastos
Assessment of the Recently Released GOCE-Based Models in Terms of Spectral
and Spatial Resolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331
Konstantinos Patlakis and Dimitrios Tsoulis
Assessment of GOCE Models Over Mexico and Canada and Impact of Omission
Errors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339
M.C. Santos, D. Avalos, T. Peet, M. Sheng, D. Kim, and J. Huang
Verifying the Accuracy of Recent Global Geopotential Models in North-West
Mozambique . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347
M.S. Bos, R.M.S. Fernandes, P.G. Almeida, M. Cordeiro, and W. Coetzee
Impact of Numerical Weather Models on Gravity Field Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355
Maria Karbon, Johannes Böhm, Elisa Fagiolini, Frank Flechtner, and Harald Schuh
Practical Aspects of the Unification of Height System Realizations in Europe . . . . . . 367
Axel Rülke, Gunter Liebsch, Martina Sacher, Uwe Schäfer, Johannes Ihde,
and Philip L. Woodworth
Towards a Consistent Estimation of the Earth’s Gravity Field by Combining
Normal Equation Matrices from GRACE and SLR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 375
Christoph Haberkorn, Mathis Bloßfeld, Johannes Bouman, Martin Fuchs,
and Michael Schmidt
Tailored Reference Geopotential Model for Africa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 383
Hussein A. Abd-Elmotaal, Kurt Seitz, Mostafa Abd-Elbaky, and Bernhard Heck
Towards an Alternative Geoid Fitting Technique . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 391
Norbert Kühtreiber and Hussein Abd-Elmotaal

Part IV Observing, Understanding and Assessing Earth Hazards

Geodetic Imaging by Airborne LiDAR: A Golden Age in Geodesy – A Bonanza

for Related Sciences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 399
William E. Carter, Craig L. Glennie, and Ramesh L. Shrestha
Analysis of Precipitable Water Estimates Using Permanent GPS Station Data
During the Athens Heavy Rainfall on February 22th 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407
Symeon Katsougiannopoulos, Christos Pikridas, Nicholas Zinas, Miltiadis Chatzinikos,
and Stylianos Bitharis
Airborne LiDAR Data as a Base for the Open Space 3D Model Construction . . . . . . 415
Eimuntas Paršeliūnas and Dominykas Šlikas
Contents xi

An Inventory of Surface Movements in the Upper Rhine Graben Area, Southwest

Germany, from SAR-Interferometry, GNSS and Precise Levelling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 419
Thomas Fuhrmann, Andreas Knöpfler, Michael Mayer, Andreas Schenk,
Malte Westerhaus, Karl Zippelt, and Bernhard Heck
On the Use of Bistatic TanDEM-X Images to Quantify Volumetric Changes
of Active Lava Domes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 427
Julia Kubanek, Malte Westerhaus, and Bernhard Heck
On Integration of Geodetic Observation Results for Assessment of Land
Subsidence Hazard Risk in Urban Areas of Indonesia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 435
Hasanuddin Z. Abidin, Heri Andreas, Irwan Gumilar, Bambang D. Yuwono,
Dodid Murdohardono, and S. Supriyadi
Observation of Triggering Factors and Development of Landslides by Borehole
Tiltmeters on the High Bank of the River Danube in Dunaszekcső, Hungary:
A Case Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 443
Gyula Mentes
Coastal Sea Level Monitoring in Indonesia: Connecting the Tide Gauge Zero
to Leveling Benchmarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 451
Julia Illigner, Ibnu Sofian, Hasanuddin Z. Abidin, M. Arief Syafi’i, and Tilo Schöne
Investigation on the Postseismic Deformation Associated with the 2011 Tohoku
Earthquake Based on Terrestrial and Seafloor Geodetic Observations: To
Evaluate the Further Seismic Hazard Potential on the Plate Interface Beneath
the Northeastern Japanese Islands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 459
Takeshi Iinuma, Ryota Hino, Motoyuki Kido, Yukihito Osada, Daisuke Inazu,
Yoshihiro Ito, Syuichi Suzuki, Yusaku Ohta, and Hiromi Fujimoto
Rapid Coseismic Fault Determination of Consecutive Large Interplate
Earthquakes: The 2011 Tohoku-Oki Sequence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 467
Yusaku Ohta, Tatsuya Kobayashi, Ryota Hino, Tomotsugu Demachi, and Satoshi Miura
GRACE Gravity Data to Enhance the Modeling of Coseismic Slip Distribution
for the 2011 Tohoku-Oki Earthquake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477
M.J. Fuchs, T. Broerse, A. Hooper, J. Pietrzak, and J. Bouman
Local-Scale Precipitable Water Vapor Retrieval from High-Elevation Slant
Tropospheric Delays Using a Dense Network of GNSS Receivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 485
Eugenio Realini, Kazutoshi Sato, Toshitaka Tsuda, Masanori Oigawa,
Yuya Iwaki, Yoshinori Shoji, and Hiromu Seko
Observing and Modelling the High Water Level from Satellite Radar Altimetry
During Tropical Cyclones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 491
Xiaoli Deng, Zahra Gharineiat, Ole B. Andersen, and Mark G. Stewart

Part V Science and Applications of Earth Rotation and Dynamics

Outline of the Chronology of the Developments of Geodynamic Investigations

Connected with Earth Rotation Studies in the Twentieth Century: Authors’
Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 503
Barbara Kolaczek and Jolanta Nastula
Hydrological Excitations of Polar Motion from GRACE Gravity Field
Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 513
J. Nastula, D.A. Salstein, and W. Popiński
xii Contents

Rapid UT1 Estimation by Combining VLBI Intensives with GNSS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 521

Tobias Nilsson, Maria Karbon, Benedikt Soja, Virginia Raposo-Pulido,
Robert Heinkelmann, Julian Mora Diaz, Cuixian Lu, Li Liu, and Harald Schuh
Reference Frame-Induced Errors in VLBI Earth Orientation Determinations . . . . 527
Robert Heinkelmann, Maria Karbon, Tobias Nilsson, Virginia Raposo-Pulido,
Benedikt Soja, and Harald Schuh
The New IAU/IAG Joint Working Group on Theory of Earth Rotation . . . . . . . . . . . 533
José M. Ferrándiz and Richard S. Gross

Part VI Observation Systems and Services

Satellite Laser Ranging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 541

Mathis Bloßfeld, Vojtěch Štefka, Horst Müller, and Michael Gerstl
PositioNZ-PP: An Online GPS Processing Application for New Zealand . . . . . . . . . . 549
Chris Pearson, Chris Crook, Aaron Jordan, and Paul Denys
Geodetic Monitoring Networks: GNSS-Derived Glacier Surface Velocities
at the Global Change Observatory Inylchek (Kyrgyzstan) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 557
Cornelia Zech, Tilo Schöne, Julia Neelmeijer, Alexander Zubovich, and Roman Galas
Scheduling Scenarios for VLBI Observations of Satellites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 565
Thomas Artz, Judith Leek, Laura La Porta, and Axel Nothnagel
GGOS Bureau of Products and Standards Inventory of Standards
and Conventions for Geodesy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 571
D. Angermann, M. Gerstl, L. Sánchez, T. Gruber, U. Hugentobler, P. Steigenberger,
and R. Heinkelmann
Monitoring of Antenna Changes at IGS Stations in Iceland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 579
Peter Steigenberger, Urs Hugentobler, Uwe Hessels, Klaus Röttcher, Simon Lutz,
and Rolf Dach
The Status of GNSS Data Processing Systems to Estimate Integrated Water
Vapour for Use in Numerical Weather Prediction Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 587
F. Ahmed, F.N. Teferle, R.M. Bingley, and D. Laurichesse
GOP-TropDB Developments for Tropospheric Product Evaluation
and Monitoring: Design, Functionality and Initial Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 595
Gabriel Gyori and Jan Dousa
BCAL/UFPR: The GNSS Antenna Calibration Service of Latin America . . . . . . . . . 603
S.C. Movio Huinca, C. Pereira Krueger, B. Heck, M. Mayer, and A. Knöpfler
Solar Corona Electron Densities from VLBI and GIM Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 611
Benedikt Soja, Robert Heinkelmann, and Harald Schuh
Status of TIGA Activities at the British Isles Continuous GNSS Facility
and the University of Luxembourg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 617
A. Hunegnaw, F.N. Teferle, R.M. Bingley, and D.N. Hansen
The King Edward Point Geodetic Observatory, South Georgia, South Atlantic
Ocean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 625
F.N. Teferle, A. Hunegnaw, F. Ahmed, D. Sidorov, P.L. Woodworth, P.R. Foden,
and S.D.P. Williams
Contents xiii

The International DORIS Service (IDS): Recent Developments in Preparation

for ITRF2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 631
Pascal Willis, Frank G. Lemoine, Guilhem Moreaux, Laurent Soudarin,
Pascale Ferrage, John Ries, Michiel Otten, Jerome Saunier, Carey Noll,
Richard Biancale, and Brian Luzum

Part VII Imaging & Positioning Techniques and Applications

Combined GPS, BeiDou, Galileo, and QZSS Single-Epoch, Single-Frequency RTK

Performance Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 643
Robert Odolinski, Peter J.G. Teunissen, and Dennis Odijk
Metrology for Long Distance Surveying: A Joint Attempt to Improve Traceability
of Long Distance Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 651
F. Pollinger, M. Astrua, A. Bauch, S. Bergstrand, B. Görres, J. Jokela, U. Kallio,
H. Koivula, H. Kuhlmann, V. Kupko, K. Meiners-Hagen, M. Merimaa, W. Niemeier,
P. Neyezhmakov, M. Poutanen, F. Saraiva, S. Schön, S.A. van den Berg, J.-P. Wallerand,
and M. Zucco
On the Handling of Outliers in the GNSS Time Series by Means of the Noise
and Probability Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 657
Anna Klos, Janusz Bogusz, Mariusz Figurski, and Wieslaw Kosek
Real-Time Precise Point Positioning Using BeiDou . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 665
Javier Tegedor, Kees de Jong, Xianglin Liu, Erik Vigen, and Ola Øvstedal
GFZ Global Multi-GNSS Network and Data Processing Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 673
Maik Uhlemann, Gerd Gendt, Markus Ramatschi, and Zhiguo Deng
A Conditional Equation for Minimizing the GDOP of Multi-GNSS Constellation
and Its Boundary Solution with Geostationary Satellites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 681
Shuqiang Xue, Yuanxi Yang, Yamin Dang, and Wu Chen
Near Real-Time Coordinate Estimation from Double-Difference GNSS Data . . . . . . 691
Daniel Arnold, Simon Lutz, Rolf Dach, Adrian Jäggi, and Jens Steinborn
Analyzing the Variation of Precipitable Water Vapor with Ground-Based GPS
Over Taiwan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 699
Ta-Kang Yeh, Chuan-Sheng Wang, Jing-Shan Hong, and Tung-Yuan Hsiao
Predicting and Correcting Scale Induced Biases Resulting from the Application
of Regional Orbit and Clock Corrections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 703
Lennard Huisman and Peter J.G. Teunissen
Determination of Optimal Trajectories for an Inland Water Traffic Manoeuvre
Guidance System Based on Sensor-Fused PNT-Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 711
Iván Herrera-Pinzón and Alexander Born
Application-Driven Critical Values for GNSS Ambiguity Acceptance Testing . . . . . 719
Sandra Verhagen, Peter J.G. Teunissen, and Jingyu Zhang
An Innovative Method to Predict and to Detect the False Fixing of the GNSS
Ambiguity Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 727
Paolo Dabove and Ambrogio M. Manzino
GNSS Antenna Impact on the Resulting Multipath Effects in Carrier-Phase
and Signal Amplitude . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 735
M. Smyrnaios and S. Schön
xiv Contents

Attitude Determination and Relative Positioning for LEO Satellites Using Arrays
of GNSS Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 743
Nandakumaran Nadarajah, Peter J.G. Teunissen, and Sandra Verhagen
Combination of Ground- and Space-Based GPS Data for the Determination
of a Multi-scale Regional 4-D Ionosphere Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 751
Wenjing Liang, Marco Limberger, Michael Schmidt, Denise Dettmering,
and Urs Hugentobler
The Evaluation of Ground-Based GNSS Tropospheric Products at Geodetic
Observatory Pecný . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 759
Jan Dousa and Pavel Vaclavovic
The CODE MGEX Orbit and Clock Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 767
Lars Prange, Rolf Dach, Simon Lutz, Stefan Schaer, and Adrian Jäggi
G-Nut/Anubis: Open-Source Tool for Multi-GNSS Data Monitoring
with a Multipath Detection for New Signals, Frequencies and Constellations . . . . . . 775
Pavel Vaclavovic and Jan Dousa
Precise Point Positioning with Partial Ambiguity Fixing and Optimal Subset
Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 783
Zhibo Wen, Patrick Henkel, and Christoph Günther

List of Reviewers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 791

Author Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 795

 Part I
History Session
 From a Regional Project to an International
Organization: The “Baeyer-Helmert-Era”
of the International Association of Geodesy
1862–1916

Wolfgang Torge

Abstract
The following paper describes the first epoch of organized international collaboration
in geodesy, which started about 150 years ago and finally led to today’s “International
Association of Geodesy”. This development may be regarded as a consequence of the
refined definition of the figure of the Earth, originating at the end of the seventeenth
century and leading from the rotational ellipsoid to the equipotential surfaces of the
gravity field, close to mean sea level. An increasing number of geodetic enterprises based
on astronomic, geodetic and gravimetric measurements followed until the middle of the
nineteenth century, in order to determine the curvature of the Earth’s figure at different
regions of the world. The arc measurement based on triangulation played a special role
at these endeavours, because this method was now increasingly used as the basis for
national mapping. In 1861, the retired Prussian General Johann Jacob Baeyer took up
earlier ideas from Schumacher, Gauss, Bessel, Struve and others, and proposed an arc
measurement project for central Europe in order to systematically study the figure of
the Earth in this region. The proposed network ranged from southern Italy to Norway,
and from France to Poland, and its survey and evaluation naturally required international
cooperation. Baeyer’s initiative immediately got the support from the Prussian government,
and the enthusiastic collaboration of the European countries soon reached far beyond the
original project. Consequently, the name of this “governmental” scientific organization
changed from “Mitteleuropäische Gradmessung” to “Europäische Gradmessung”, and
the scientific program widened significantly by including levelling, mean sea level
investigations, standardization of length and time measures, and gravity observations.
Baeyer remained the dominating person of the “European Arc Measurement” until his
death (1885), keeping a strong position as the President of the Association’s Central
Bureau hosted at the newly established Prussian Geodetic Institute. The following epoch
is governed by Friedrich Robert Helmert, well-known by a fundamental monograph on
“Higher Geodesy”, who became appointed Director of the Geodetic Institute and the
Central Bureau in 1886. The regional organization immediately extended to the global
“Internationale Erdmessung” (“Association Géodésique Internationale”), and the scientific
program was enlarged significantly, with strong accent on physical geodesy and geophysics
including investigations on temporal variations. This epoch ended due to the First World

W. Torge ()
Institut für Erdmessung, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Schneiderberg
50, 30167 Hannover, Germany
e-mail: torge@ife.uni-hannover.de

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015 3

C. Rizos, P. Willis (eds.), IAG 150 Years, International Association of Geodesy Symposia 143,
DOI 10.1007/1345_2015_42
4 W. Torge

War, when the governmental convention on the Association was not extended. Although a
reduced association among neutral nations succeeded in keeping the Latitude Service alive,
the next era of international cooperation in geodesy only followed in 1922, within the frame
of the non-governmental “International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics”.

Keywords
Arc measurements • Baeyer • Figure of the Earth • Geodetic Institute Potsdam • Helmert •
History of geodesy • International Association of Geodesy • Internationale Erdmessung •
Mitteleuropäische Gradmessung

1 The “Figure of the Earth”: A Challenge

for Modern Geodesy

Since the time of Aristotle (384–322 B.C.), at the latest, the

sphere had been generally accepted as the “Figure of the
Earth”. The Earth’s radius as the sphere’s parameter was
first provided by Eratosthenes (276–195 B.C.), introducing
the arc measurement as a combination of astronomic and
geodetic observations. At the beginning of the modern age,
the reviving interest in the Earth’s dimension led to new
determinations of the Earth’s radius, which benefited from
improved technology and the introduction of triangulation as
an efficient geodetic method. For the history of geodesy we
refer to Perrier (1939) and Bialas (1982), short introductions
can be found in geodetic textbooks, e.g. Torge and Müller
(2012).
A revolution for geodesy occurred in the last decades
of the seventeenth century, when a new definition of the
Earth’s figure arose from physics and astronomy. The helio-
centric world system with the annual revolution of the Earth
around the Sun and the daily rotation of the Earth had been
accepted at that time, Jean-Dominique Cassini had observed
the polar flattening of Jupiter (1666), and Richer had found
the latitude-dependence of gravity by pendulum measure- Fig. 1 Pierre–Louis Moreau de Maupertuis “flattens the Earth”.
ments (1672/1673). These observations supported the new Engraving by R. de Tournières, from Perrier (1939)
Earth model based on the theory of hydrostatic equilibrium
for a rotating fluid, which postulated the Earth’s figure to be
flattened at the poles (I. Newton 1687: “Philosophiae Natu- organized by the French Academy of Sciences (Fig. 1).
ralis Principia Mathematica”, C. Huygens 1690: “Discours Other arc measurements at different latitudes followed, as
de la Cause de la Pesanteur”). This was a great challenge for the repeated measurement along the Paris meridian. Started
geodesy: to prove the polar flattening by geometric methods by Jean Picard in 1669/1670, these measurements are since
and to determine the parameters of such an Earth model! 1683 about one century connected with the Cassini family,
For a rotational ellipsoid, e.g., these parameters would be which over four generations provided the director of the Paris
the semi-major axis and the flattening. After lengthy disputes observatory. The connection to the Greenwich observatory in
on the results of more recent arc measurements, the problem 1787 and the following triangulation of Great Britain carried
of the flattened Earth was finally solved by the famous arc out by General W. Roy and others finally completed an arc
measurements in Lapland (1736/1737, Maupertuis et al.) running from Spain to the Shetland Islands. Great importance
and in the Spanish Vice-Kingdom of Peru (today Ecuador; for the determination of the figure of the Earth and as a
1735–1744, LaCondamine, Bouguer, Godin, and the Spanish basis for national mapping also obtained “The Great Arc”
officers Jorge Juan and Antonio de Ulloa), initiated and and other triangulation chains in India (Lambdon, Everest,
International Association of Geodesy: Baeyer-Helmert-Era
Fig. 2 Wilhelm Struve. Portrait by Eduard Hau (1837, https://
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wilhelm_Struve._1837.jpg)
1803–1850), and the “Struve-Arc” (since 2005 included in
the UNESCO world heritage list) running along the 27ı East
meridian from northern Norway through Russia until the
Black Sea (W. Struve, Director of Tartu Observatory, Estonia,
General Tenner, and Prof. Hansteen, Director of Christiana
Observatory), to mention just a few of these large enterprises
(Fig. 2). The combination of different arcs revealed a large
scattering of the ellipsoidal parameters, around 1800 the
flattening values, e.g., varied between 1/144 and 1/352.
There were even attempts to derive the flattening from the
gravimetric method, according to the theorem which Clairaut
had derived already in 1743. Although values like 1/321 and
1/336, derived in 1799 by Laplace from only 15 pendulum
measurements, fitted into the broad range of the astrogeode-
tic results, this did not contribute to its explanation. After
lengthy discussions, a new definition of the “Figure of the
Earth” was accepted finally, taking the actual gravity field of
the Earth into account. Following Gauss (1828) and Bessel
(1837), the mathematical surface of the Earth is defined now
as the equilibrium surface of the gravity field coinciding with
mean sea level, and continued below the continents, i. e. the
level surface which we call “geoid” today.
Compared with the large-scale triangulation chains estab-
lished in western and eastern Europe, in India and else-
where, the situation in central Europe is less favourable in
the first half of the nineteenth century. This is due to the
strong separation into local territorial units, which is espe-
cially pronounced in Germany (for the history of geodesy in
Germany we refer to Torge 2009). Nevertheless, a number of
high quality triangulations are carried out as a contribution
for determining the figure of the Earth and for local or
national mapping (e.g. Torge 2012). An early impetus for
solving the geodetic problem for central Europe came from
the astronomer Franz Xaver von Zach, who – at the turn
5
Fig. 3 (a) Heinrich Christian Schumacher. Lithography by
Otto Speckter (1853, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:
Heinrich_Christian_Schumacher,_von_Otto_Speckter_1853.jpg). (b)
Carl Friedrich Gauss. Oil-painting by Gottlieb Biermann (1887), after
an original portrait by Christian Albrecht Jensen. Copy Göttinger
Universitätssternwarte, Gauß-Gesellschaft Göttingen
from the eighteenth to the nineteenth century – developed
the Gotha Observatory to a centre of scientific exchange in
astronomy and geodesy (Brosche 2001). Although – with the
revival of the war between France and Germany – his plan of
an arc measurement in the centre of Germany abruptly ended
in 1806, Zach’s ideas and first measurements influenced –
among others – Gauss and the Prussian General von Müf-
fling. The latter one started in 1814 a systematic triangulation
of Prussia, connected to the French geodetic system and
directed by the General Staff (Torge 2002). Here, Johann
Jacob Baeyer (at that time Lieutenant) appears the first time,
as a scientific collaborator of Müffling. More important –
from the scientific point of view – becomes the Hannover
arc measurement (1821–1823) of Carl Friedrich Gauss, con-
necting the astronomical observatories of Altona close to
Hamburg, and Göttingen where Gauss holds the chair for
astronomy since 1807. This project is initiated by the Danish
astronomer Heinrich Christian Schumacher, Director of the
Altona Observatory and in charge of a new triangulation of
Denmark, based on a north-south directed arc measurement
(Fig. 3). In 1816, Schumacher suggests to Gauss to extend the
Danish arc through the Kingdom of Hannover and possibly
via Hesse and Bavaria until Italy, and Gauss immediately
responds very positively. The subsequent arc measurement
through Hannover is carried out by Gauss himself, and –
together with the following triangulation of the whole king-
dom – considered by him as part of a future trigonometric
network covering Europe, connecting the existing astronom-
ical observatories (Gauss 1828; Großmann 1955). Another
local, but outstanding geodetic contribution from central
Europe is due to Friedrich Wilhelm Bessel, Professor at the
University of Königsberg in Eastern Prussia and Director
6 W. Torge
Fig. 4 Friedrich Wilhelm Bessel. Portrait by Christian
Albrecht Jensen (1839, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:
Friedrich_Wilhelm_Bessel_(1839_painting).jpg)
of the astronomical observatory. He widens the Russian
proposal (1829) to connect the triangulation in the Baltic
provinces with the triangulation of the Prussian General
Staff, to a proper arc measurement (1831–1836), which sets
new standards for triangulation (Bessel and Baeyer 1838).
Like Gauss, Bessel clearly states the idea of a European
contribution to the determination of the figure of the Earth,
considering his arc measurement as part of it (Fig. 4). It is the
arc measurement in Eastern Prussia where we meet Baeyer
(now Captain) again (see below Baeyer’s course of life). As
an experienced observer detached from the Prussian General
Staff, he learns from the ingenious astronomer and geodesist
Bessel, and high quality triangulation and the figure of the
Earth problem decisively coin the following 50 years of his
life (Hamel and Buschmann 1996).
2 The “Central European Arc
Measurement” – Idea and Realization:
The Baeyer-Epoch” 1861–1885
It is the (now) General Baeyer, who in 1861 takes up the
manifold ideas for a central European contribution to the
determination of the figure of the Earth, by defining and real-
izing a corresponding project, which from the very beginning
is based on a scientific program and an efficient organization.
The program immediately expands from the original regional
project to a more general research enterprise covering all
kind of available geodetic methods and triggering new ones.
Based on the enthusiasm of the participating persons, the
Fig. 5 Johann Jacob Baeyer, founder of the “Mitteleuropäische
Gradmessung”. Oil painting by P. Stankiewicz, Deutsches Geo-
forschungszentrum, Potsdam, from Buschmann (1994)
well organized program soon extends over the whole of
Europe, and becomes attractive overseas. Over 25 years,
Baeyer is the leading person at this new international geode-
tic organization, which requires to remember some stations
of Baeyer’s curriculum vitae (Buschmann 1994).
Johann Jacob Baeyer was born 1794 in the village of
Müggelheim close to Köpenick, now part of Berlin. Spon-
sored by the local parson, the peasant’s son receives a thor-
ough secondary education. In 1813, with the beginning of
the war against Napoleon, he voluntarily enters the Prussian
army, and decides to start a military career. Having graduated
from the military academy, he enters the Topographical
Bureau directed by General Müffling, where he gets first
experiences in topographic and trigonometric measurements,
as well as in geodetic computations. Detached to the Prussian
General Staff in 1820, his career in the Trigonometric Bureau
(since 1822) leads him from Prime Lieutenant to Major Gen-
eral (1852), directing that bureau from 1843 until his retire-
ment (1857), Fig. 5. His geodetic abilities are acknowledged
soon, for example by Alexander von Humboldt, the famous
naturalist, to whom he is introduced in 1823. Humboldt even
proposes Baeyer’s participation in his planned expedition
to central Russia and Siberia. Although this cooperation
does not come off, Humboldt continues to observe Baeyer’s
career. In a letter directed to the King of Prussia in 1837,
e.g., Humboldt characterizes Baeyer as one of the most
experienced officers who could be found in any army. Mean-
while, Baeyer’s collaboration with Bessel at the famous arc
International Association of Geodesy: Baeyer-Helmert-Era
measurement in Eastern Prussia (see above) has significantly
improved and widened Baeyer’s geodetic background. This
is well documented by the final publication, where we find
the above mentioned statement on the geodetic connection
of the astronomic observatories in Europe. The following
two decades are characterized by a number of outstanding
geodetic projects carried out or directed by Baeyer. New
triangulation chains are spread out over Prussia following the
high standards set by Bessel, and connected to neighbouring
countries like Denmark and Russia. Additional baselines
improve the scale of the Prussian triangulations, and scale
comparisons between Prussian and Russian baselines as
well as studies on the mean sea level of the Baltic Sea
already indicate focal points of the later “Mitteleuropäische
Gradmessung”. A trigonometric height transfer from the
Baltic Sea level to Berlin is suggested by Humboldt and
carried out by Baeyer in 1835, in order to correctly reduce
Bessel’s absolute pendulum measurements to mean sea level,
and herewith connected studies of atmospheric refraction
also continue to keep Baeyer’s interest over the next 20 years.
In 1857, a break occurs in Baeyer’s career. Having
advanced until the rank of a Major General, he was supposed
to stand back to the practical military service, and take
the leadership of a brigade. Supported by Humboldt (“the
King of Prussia owned sufficient officers for commanding
a brigade, but only one Baeyer”) he asks the King to allow
the continuation of his scientific work by setting him in an
adequate position. A rather unpleasant development follows,
which can be traced back until 1851. In that year, Baeyer
had proposed a radical reorganization of the surveying and
mapping activities in Prussia, on a higher technical level
and with a centralized organization, where a large-scale map
should be based on a state-wide geodetic survey, and serve
civilian and military purposes. This proposal is strongly
attacked by the responsible authorities and not successful.
A short-lived construction finally answers Baeyer’s petition,
but does not end his quarrel with the General Staff, which
since 1857 is led by Helmuth von Moltke. Baeyer now
becomes “characterized” (i. e. obtaining the corresponding
rank but remaining with the wages of the previous position)
as Lieutenant-General and put to the disposition of the Chief
of the General Staff. He is charged with the Prussian part
of an international arc measurement project along the 52ı N
parallel, again initiated by Wilhelm Struve, now Director of
the recently established Pulkovo Observatory (Dick 1996).
Unfortunately, the support from the General Staff for this
project is rather weak, and this is accompanied by conflicts
with the much younger Otto Struve who follows his father in
Pulkovo. About 1860, Baeyer probably reflects the first time
upon an arc measurement in central Europe. This becomes
visible, e.g., through a dedicated voyage to Munich, where
he meets an obvious interest at the Bavarian General Staff
7
and the cadastral administration, the idea of a memorandum
for realizing such a project originates here (Pieper 1996).
In April 1861, Baeyer presents the “Entwurf zu einer
Mitteleuropäischen Gradmessung” to the Prussian Minister
of War (Fig. 6a). The objective of this project is the determi-
nation of the deflections of the vertical – and thus the relative
structure of the geoid – in central Europe. This shall be
achieved by exploiting the available triangulations and astro-
nomic observations, and by performing new measurements
if necessary. High quality standards are set for the data to
be included into the corresponding computations – this will
later lead to severe dispute with the Prussian General Staff.
A memorandum (Baeyer 1861) explains the project in detail
and provides a thorough scientific foundation. The project
contains more than 30 astronomic observatories, covering an
area of about 16ı of difference in longitude and 22ı differ-
ence in latitude, ranging from Brussels to Warsaw and from
Palermo to Christiana (now Oslo), respectively (Fig. 6b). The
main objective – determination of the curvature anomalies of
the Earth’s figure – is extended by including the interpre-
tation of the results. This is specified by examples, as the
effect of the Alps on the deflections of the vertical, and an
eventually anomalous gravity field behaviour at the European
border seas: the geophysical-geological interpretation of the
geodetic results is already a component part of the project!
On 20th June 1861 – only 2 months after presenting his
memorandum! – Baeyer’s plan is approved by order of the
Prussian Royal Cabinet, and the Prussian Foreign Ministry
asks the governments of the other central European states or
countries for collaboration (Laitko 1996). Already in April
1862, first negotiations between representatives of Prussia,
Austria and Saxony take place in Berlin, with the follow-
ing participants: Johann Jacob Baeyer, Lieutenant-General
z.D., Prussia; August von Fligely, Major-General and Direc-
tor of the Military-Geographic Institute Vienna, Austria;
Carl von Littrow, Director of the Astronomic Observatory
Vienna, Austria; Josef Herr, Professor for Spherical Astron-
omy and Higher Geodesy, Polytechnical School Vienna,
Austria; Julius Ludwig Weisbach, Professor for Mathemat-
ics at the Royal Montanistic Academy Freiberg, Saxony;
Christian August Nagel, Professor of Geodesy, Polytechnic
School Dresden, Saxony; Carl Christian Bruhns, Professor
of Astronomy, University of Leipzig, Saxony.
At the end of 1862, Baeyer presents a General Report on
the state of the “Mitteleuropäische Gradmessung” (“Central
European Arc Measurement”), with 16 states or countries
having declared their participation (Sadebeck 1883; Leval-
lois 1980; Torge 2005). These are the seven German states
(Germany is not yet united!) Baden, Bavaria, Hannover,
Mecklenburg, Prussia, Saxony and Saxony-Gotha, as well as
Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France (allows the use of data
necessary for the project), Italy, The Netherlands, Poland
8 W. Torge

Fig. 6 Baeyer (1861): Memorandum for the foundation of a “Mitteleuropäische Gradmessung”, Deutsches Geoforschungszentrum. (a) Frontpage,
(b) network sketch: astronomical observatories and geodesics to be computed from triangulations

(through Russia), Sweden and Norway (in personal union),
and Switzerland. This is a great success: an international col-
laboration for a scientific project reaching far beyond central
Europe has been approved by the respective governments,
and is carried by leading representatives of science and
military geography. The next step to be taken comprises the
formation of an effective organization and a more specified
definition of the problems to be attacked. In 1864, the first
General Conference of the Representatives to the “Central
European Arc Measurement” takes place in Berlin. The
conference fixes the administrative structure as well as the
research program of this “governmental” scientific organiza-
tion, following Baeyer’s suggestions in his General Report.
The organization includes the Permanent Commission, meet-
ing annually and responsible for the scientific management,
the Central Bureau as an executive, and General Conferences
meeting at 3-year intervals. The scientific program includes
the examination of existing triangulations including base-
lines, the execution of new triangulations and connections
between neighbouring countries, the introduction of a uni-
form reference ellipsoid, the comparison of length units and
the definition of a common standard, first order levelling and
mean sea level determination, pendulum measurements, and
the development of accuracy standards.
The membership list of the first General Conference
naturally shows the predominance of the representatives of
the German states, and until the 1880s the German influence
is also visible in the location of the General Conferences
(Berlin 1864 and 1867, Vienna 1871, Dresden 1874, Stuttgart
1877, Munich 1880, Rome 1883). But already in 1867,
after Portugal, Spain and Russia had joined the project,
the name of the organization is changed to “Europäische
Gradmessung”. The Central Bureau is located in Berlin and
starts work in 1866, with Baeyer as president. He is assisted
International Association of Geodesy: Baeyer-Helmert-Era
Fig. 7 Presidents of the Permanent Commission 1864–1886. (a)
Peter Andreas Hansen. Photography around 1865 (https://commons.
wikimedia.org/wiki/File:P.A.Hansen.jpg), (b) General August von
by Wilhelm Foerster, Director of the Berlin Observatory, but
further support is rather low. This situation changes radically
in 1870, when the Prussian Geodetic Institute is established,
following a “Promemoria” prepared by Baeyer and Foerster
in 1867, and a further (1869) memorandum, where Baeyer
drastically describes the situation of the Central Bureau
and the benefit of a national scientific institute for geodesy.
Consequently, the new institute (until 1891 located in Berlin)
is entrusted with the Prussian part of the Arc Measurement
program, on the one hand, and with the operation of the
Central Bureau, on the other; Baeyer becomes its Director
with the title “President”. The presidents of the Permanent
Commission naturally also play an important role during
this first epoch of organized international cooperation, these
were as follows: Peter Andreas Hansen, Director of the
Gotha Observatory, Thuringia (1864–1868, Fig. 7a); General
August von Fligely, Vienna (1869–1874, Fig. 7b), already
known from the first meeting in Berlin (see above); General
Carlos Ibáñez e Ibáñez de Ibero, Director of the Geographical
and Statistical Institute, Madrid, Spain (1874–1886, Fig. 7c).
It is remarkable that the “Arc Measurement” organization
developed so rapidly in the 1860s and 1870s, even though
this period is characterized by a number of wars in central
Europe. There was the Italian war of unification in the
1850s, with participation of France and Austria, the war
of Prussia and Austria against Denmark in 1864, the war
between Prussia and Austria in 1866, with smaller German
states mainly on the side of Austria and Italy on the side
of Prussia, and the war of Prussia and the other German
states against France in 1870/1871, which finally led to the
unification of Germany and a German empire under Prussian
leadership. The Permanent Commission, for instance, met
1867 in Vienna and 1875 in Paris, i. e. only a relatively short
time after military actions. This fact clearly indicates the
9
Fligely. Bundesamt für Eich- und Vermessungswesen, Wien (Drewes
2013), (c) General Carlos Ibáñez e Ibáñez de Ibero. Instituto Geográfico
Nacional, Madrid (Drewes 2013)
scientific interest in the geodetic problems attacked by the
Arc Measurement organization, but also the understanding
of the countries’ administration for solid geodetic fundamen-
tals, required for mapping and planning, with the military
demands playing a special role. In addition, the conflict
of the Prussian General Baeyer with the Prussian General
Staff (see below) might have brought this dominating per-
son of the “Arc Measurement” some additional sympathy,
especially from the military representatives of several neigh-
bouring countries, where the Prussian army was not too
popular.
We now shortly describe some of the major achievements
of this first epoch of the Association (Torge 2005, 2012).
Following the original project definition, triangulation is
progressing rapidly in the European countries. The number
of first order trigonometric points increased, e.g., from 2010
in the year 1862 to more than 3500 in 1880, and reached
more than 5500 in 1912 (Fig. 8). The number of baselines
available grew from 57 to 109, between 1862 and 1889.
The quality of the triangulation improves significantly, where
General Annibale Ferrero, Director of the Istituto Geografico
Militare in Florence, plays an important role. Outstanding
examples are the first order triangulation of the Kingdom of
Saxony (1867–1878) directed by Professor Nagel (Fig. 9a),
and the new triangulation of Prussia (1875–1895). The latter
one is characterized by the radical improvements introduced
by the (later) General Oscar Schreiber (Fig. 9b), since 1875
leading the Trigonometric Department of the newly estab-
lished “Königlich Preußische Landesaufnahme”, and since
1888 chief of that institution which is under the direct respon-
sibility of the General Staff. A remarkable enterprise is the
connection of the Spanish triangulation with Algeria (1879),
where triangles with a maximum side length of 270 km
are observed from mountain stations, under the direction of
10 W. Torge

Fig. 8 State of the triangulation in Europe 1911, Verhandlungen der 17. Allgemeinen Conferenz der Internationalen Erdmessung, II. Theil. Georg
Reimer, Berlin 1914

General Ibáñez and Major François Perrier from the Geodetic

Fig. 9 (a) Professor Christian August Nagel. (b) Oil painting (private
collection). General Oscar Schreiber (Torge 2009)
Section of the French General Staff.
In Prussia, curiously enough, severe problems arise at
realizing the high standards set by the Arc Measurement for
triangulation. This is due to the fact, that with the founda-
tion of the Prussian Geodetic Institute two different state
agencies exist for triangulation and levelling. The General
Staff is responsible for providing the geodetic fundamentals
for mapping the country, while the geodetic Institute collects
and examines existing data for use at the Arc Measurement
project, and carries out own measurements if necessary.
In this connection, Baeyer declares that all measurements
of the General Staff carried out since 1858 (Baeyer had
retired in 1857!) did not satisfy the scientific demands of
the project. The following confrontation between Baeyer and
the General Staff involves several members of the Permanent
International Association of Geodesy: Baeyer-Helmert-Era
Commission, and lasts until Baeyer’s death (Pieper 1996).
The conflict is settled finally by an agreement between
Baeyer’s successor Helmert and Schreiber, with the exclu-
sive responsibility of the “Landesaufnahme” for first order
triangulation and levelling.
The comparison of the length units used in different
countries finally led to a decision which reached far beyond
geodesy. While the General Conference in 1864 still pro-
posed the Bessel toise as a uniform length standard for the
Arc Measurement, the meter was recommended in 1867, and
the establishment of an international bureau recommended
for the realization of a corresponding prototype. An Interna-
tional Meter Convention was signed 1875 in Paris, and the
new International Bureau for Weights and Measures (Bureau
International des Poids et Mesures, BIPM) in Sèvres close
to Paris became responsible for constructing a stable meter
standard and distributing copies to the countries that had
signed the convention.
A remarkable step forward also occurred at the survey
of the third dimension. First order geometric levelling now
started in most European countries, based on the experi-
ence from France and Switzerland. With the “Nivellement
général de la France” (NGF), a first countrywide levelling
network had been established (1857–1864), under the direc-
tion of Paul-Adrien Bordalouë. Remarkable improvements
including error investigations are due to Charles Lallemand
responsible for the NGF since 1884. Following this example,
about 64000 km first order levelling lines were surveyed
in central, western and southern Europe until 1880, with
proper junctions between the countries. A larger number of
connections to mean sea level (MSL) as derived from tide
gauges (with recording mareographs at many places) allowed
first investigations on the relation of MSL to a gravity field
equipotential surface. An important conclusion followed in
1890, namely to not yet introduce a common sea-level
related height datum for Europe. This decision was based on
the comparison of levelling results with MSL observations
around Europe, revealing differences of 10–30 cm between
levelling and MSL, which could be due to real discrepancies
between MSL and a level surface of the gravity field, but also
to systematic errors inherent in levelling over large distances.
The original project’s definition also required a suffi-
cient number of astronomic latitude, longitude and azimuth
determinations. This was attacked with different intenseness,
where longitude determinations played a special role, with
time differences transferred through telegraphy introduced
since the 1850s. Adjustments of a Central European Lon-
gitude Network started in the 1870s by Theodor Albrecht
at the Geodetic Institute Potsdam, and a final adjustment
including 80 stations was presented by him in 1905. It was
11
the longitude problem which again was of high interest for
the public in general, especially through the increasing global
traffic and commerce. In 1882, the Senate and the Geo-
graphic Society of the city of Hamburg asked the Permanent
Commission to deal with the unification of the geographic
longitudes by selecting one zero meridian and to suggest
a corresponding decision. This question was discussed at
the General Conference in Rome 1883, which was also
attended by observers from Great Britain and the United
States as countries extremely interested in this problem. The
Conference decided to select the Greenwich meridian as the
zero meridian for longitude, with the Universal Time referred
to it. At the 1884 Meridian Conference in Washington, a
general agreement on this definition was obtained, and grad-
ually all countries referred their longitudes to the Greenwich
meridian.
With the inclusion of gravity measurements into the pro-
gramme of the “Arc Measurement” this physical tool again
came into the focus of geodesy, after the world-wide activi-
ties along geodetic arcs and at ship-borne expeditions during
the first three decades of the century. The Repsold workshop
in Hamburg was asked to construct a transportable reversible
pendulum. A limited number of gravity measurements was
carried out until about 1900, but the results were not satisfac-
tory. This was due – among other reasons – to the effects of
co-oscillation (detected by C. S. Peirce from the U.S. Coast
and Geodetic Survey) between the pendulum, its support and
the ground, and led to a multitude of investigations on the
theory of the reversible pendulum. A real progress in gravity
measurement techniques only happened in the following
epoch of the Association (see below).
The 1880s may be regarded also a certain closing at the
development of modern geodesy as a proper science, with
a clearly defined objective, an established research program,
and dedicated university educational programs. Geodesy is
now not only lectured from astronomers, mathematicians,
and at military academies, but also at Institutes of Tech-
nology, outstanding examples being the early chairs for
geodesy at the Polytechnic Schools in Dresden/Saxony (Pro-
fessor Nagel, since 1852) and in Aachen/Prussia (Professor
Helmert, since 1870). Among the fundamental literature
of that time we have the two volumes monograph “Die
mathematischen und physikalischen Theorieen der höheren
Geodäsie” by Helmert (1880/1884, Fig. 10a) and the wide-
spread textbook “Geodesy” by Colonel A. R. Clarke (first
edition 1880). A remarkable step towards the combined vista
of geometrical and physical geodesy is due to Heinrich
Bruns, Professor of Mathematics at the University of Berlin.
Triggered by the geodetic activities of the European Arc
Measurement, he publishes a study on the fundamental
12
Fig. 10 (a) Frontpage of F. R. Helmert: Die mathematischen und physikalischen Theorieen der höheren Geodäsie. II. Teil, Leipzig 1884 and (b)
frontpage of H. Bruns: Die Figur der Erde, Berlin 1878
problem of geodesy which looks far into the future and
contains conclusions for the scientific programme of the
organization (Bruns 1878, Fig. 10b).
The death (1885) of Baeyer finishes the first epoch of
organized international collaboration in scientific geodesy.
Among the many honours which Baeyer has obtained we
especially mention the gold medal given to him (and in
absentia accepted by Helmholtz) by the Italian Arc Mea-
surement Commission, at the General Conference in Rome
1883. It is here, where a first step to observing the Earth
as a dynamic system in space can be recognized. The Ital-
ian astronomer Emmanuele Fergola, Director of the Naples
Observatory, proposes to monitor the Earth’s rotational axis
with respect to the solid Earth by astronomic latitude obser-
vations on the same parallel. Friedrich Küstner from the
Berlin observatory observes the predicted latitude changes
in 1884/1885, and this leads us to the organized polar motion
observations, starting in the next epoch of the international
cooperation in geodesy.
W. Torge
3 The “International Geodetic
Association” – Global Extension
and Deepening: The “Helmert-Epoch”
1886–1916
The first General Conference of the “European Arc Measure-
ment” after the death of Baeyer was held in Berlin in 1886,
with the astronomer Wilhelm Foerster as Chairman. The con-
ference brought a new convention on the organization, which
was now called “Internationale Erdmessung” (“Association
Géodésique Internationale” in French, and translated into
English “International Geodetic Association”). Until 1899,
the United States of America, Mexico, Chile, Argentine and
Japan agreed with the new convention, and Great Britain
joined the Association in 1898. The General Conference,
composed of the delegates from the membership coun-
tries, remained the leading structure of the Association. It
became strengthened at the General Conference 1895, where
International Association of Geodesy: Baeyer-Helmert-Era
Fig. 11 Presidents of the Permanent Commission 1892–1916. (a)
Hervè Faye (Drewes 2013), (b) General Jean Bassot (Drewes 2013)
the Permanent Commission’s responsibility was reduced to
administrative matters. An annual financial contribution from
the countries stabilized the Association, and the performance
of the Association’s work was improved by the strong posi-
tions of the Director of the Central Bureau and a newly
established Permanent Secretary. Voting at the General Con-
ferences now followed the principle of one voice per country,
which reduced the overwhelming influence of the German
states. The more international character of the Association
can be seen also from the locations of the General Confer-
ences: Paris (1889), Brussels (1892), Berlin (1895), Stuttgart
(1898), Paris (1900), Copenhagen (1903), Budapest (1906),
London and Cambridge (1909), and Hamburg (1912).
Under the new conventions, the elected Presidents of
the Permanent Commission and the Association, resp.,
were as follows: General Ibáñez de Ibero (1887–1891),
Hervè Faye (Fig. 11a), President of the Bureau des
Longitudes, Paris (1892–1902), and General Jean Bassot
(Fig. 11b), Chief Geodetic Section, Service Geographique
de l’Armeè/Director Nice Observatory (1903–1916). As
Permanent Secretaries we have Adolphe Hirsch, Director
of the Neuchatel Observatory, Switzerland (1886–1900)
and H. G. van de Sande Bakhuizen, Director of the Leiden
Observatory, The Netherlands (1900–1916). Director of the
Central Bureau becomes F. R. Helmert, and it is he who –
as the President of the Prussian Geodetic Institute hosting
the Central Bureau – especially stamps the “Internationale
Erdmessung” between 1886 and 1916 (Helmert 1913a,b).
Friedrich Robert Helmert was born in 1843 in
Freiberg/Saxony, as the son of a foundation cashier.
He studied surveying engineering and geodesy at the
Polytechnic School Dresden (1859–1863); with Professor
Nagel as the main teacher. During the next 3 years he
assisted Prof. Nagel, enlarging his own knowledge and
deepening his understanding for geodesy, including the
13
Fig. 12 Friedrich Robert Helmert with relative pendulum apparatus.
Geoforschungszentrum Potsdam (Helmert 1993, p. 36)
participation at the new triangulation of the Kingdom (see
above). An additional study of mathematics and astronomy
(1866/1867) followed at the University of Leipzig, where he
was promoted with the degree of a Dr.phil. in 1868. After
different employments (geodesist at the state triangulation,
secondary school teacher for mathematics, observer at
the Hamburg astronomical observatory) he was appointed
teacher (1870) and full professor (1872) at the newly
established Polytechnic School in Aachen/Prussia. It was
here where he published the fundamental monograph on
the mathematical and physical theories of higher geodesy
(see above), but also a leading textbook on least squares
adjustment and a number of papers on different topics in
geodesy and surveying engineering. He held the chair of
geodesy until 1886, when he was appointed Director of the
Prussian Geodetic Institute and simultaneously Professor of
Higher Geodesy at the University of Berlin (Fig. 12). He
systematically develops the Institute and extends the range
of the scientific research, especially with respect to physical
geodesy and geophysics (Buschmann 1993). This attracts
a number of talented scientists, and is of extreme benefit
for the Geodetic Association, as an overwhelming part of
the research work is related to the demands of the Central
Bureau. A remarkable step forward occurs in 1892, when
the Institute can move to a new central building and related
observation sites on the Telegraphenberg Potsdam (Fig. 13),
leaving its previous seat at different private houses in Berlin.
Helmert himself is strongly engaged in the planning of
the Institute’s facilities, examples being the temperature-
stabilized pendulum room in the main building and the
“Helmert”-tower for angular measurements (Löschner 1970;
Wolf 1970, 1993).
14
Fig. 13 Central Building,
Prussian Geodetic Institute,
Potsdam Telegraphenberg,
Geoforschungszentrum Potsdam
Among the main achievements of the Helmert epoch
naturally we have the continuing collection of horizontal
control data, documented, e.g., by more than 9200 first order
trigonometric points worldwide in the member countries of
the Association. This is followed by network adjustments
and the calculation of geodetic lines between the increasing
number of astronomic control points. Arc measurements
along meridians and parallel circles were carried out either
as part of national geodetic surveys or/and as contribution
to the determination of the figure of the Earth. We mention
the completion of the 52ı parallel, initiated in the 1850s
by W. Struve (see above), the remeasurement of the Paris
meridian arc (Bassot, Defforges, Perrier) from the 1870s
to the 1890s, with connections to Great Britain, Spain,
and Algeria (see above), and the remeasurement of the
classical “Peru-arc” (1899–1906) through French officers
including Georges Perrier from the “Service géographique
de l’Armée”. A remarkable enterprise is the African 30ı
meridian arc measurement between the Cape and Cairo,
finished only in the 1950s. It is initiated in 1883 by Sir David
Gill, Her Majesty’s Astronomer at the Royal Observatory at
the Cape of Good Hope, in connection with the geodetic
survey of South Africa. Triangulation chains reach Lake
Tanganyika in 1907, and simultaneously triangulation starts
in Egypt and in Uganda. The triangulation of the United
States of America (carried out by the Coast and Geodetic
Survey, directed from 1900 to 1915 by Otto H. Tittmann, and
since 1898 with John F. Hayford as Inspector of Geodetic
Work and Chief of Computing Division, followed in 1909
by William Bowie) becomes an outstanding example for
the sophisticated treatment of a geodetic network of large
W. Torge
dimensions. Based on several extended geodetic arcs and a
number of more local triangulations, a common adjustment is
carried out and referred to one fundamental station and a sin-
gle reference ellipsoid; a multitude of observed astronomical
latitudes, longitudes, and azimuths is also available around
1900. A minimum condition applied on the deflections of the
vertical then leads to a datum shift and a best-fitting ellipsoid,
where topographic-isostatic reductions of the deflections of
the vertical play an essential role (see below).
The growing number of observed deflections of the verti-
cal leads to an increased discussion on the magnitude and
behaviour of these gravity field quantities, which contain
local and regional disturbances, resulting from topography
and isostasy. Gradually it becomes obvious that these local
data, available only at larger distances on the continents,
can not deliver a unique global result with respect to the
figure of the Earth (gravity field, ellipsoid). Nevertheless,
the computation of reference ellipsoids from triangulation
results continues, an important result being the Hayford-
Ellipsoid of 1909. It is calculated from topographic-isostatic
reduced vertical deflections in the United States of America,
and will be later recommended by the Geodetic Association
as “International Ellipsoid 1924”. There are, on the other
hand, first attempts to get more detailed insight into the
local gravity field structure. This is achieved by a dense
vertical deflection survey, with station distances of about
10 km or less. Astronomic levelling, as proposed by A. J.
Yvon-Villarceau 1871/1875 and by Helmert in 1884, then
allows to determine the local geoid structures, as demon-
strated by Galle in the Harz mountains in central Germany.
A sophisticated step forward towards a local gravity field
International Association of Geodesy: Baeyer-Helmert-Era
survey is due to the Hungarian professor Loránd Eötvös, who
since 1890 develops and continuously improves a torsion
balance to be used in the field. As demonstrated at the
General Conference in 1906, this instrument delivers the
geoid curvature and the horizontal gravity gradient; in the
1920s it gained great importance for oil exploration. First
investigations on the global structure of the geoid again
are carried out by Helmert. He first estimates the geoid
heights from continental topography to be not larger than
400 m, but reducing to a mean variation of ˙27 m at isostatic
compensation. He also risks a first geoid estimate based
on the gravimetric method, as derived by Georges Gabriel
Stokes in 1849. As the insufficient coverage of the Earth
with gravity data at that time does not allow a more detailed
evaluation of Stokes’s surface integral, Helmert assumes a
mean variation of ˙35 mGal for the gravity anomalies and
thus obtains ˙50 m for the geoid variation, a rather realistic
estimate.
Gravity measurements, from local to global scale, expe-
rience a great progress in the Helmert epoch. This devel-
opment is driven by the geodetic possibilities inherent in
the gravimetric method (see above), but also by the geo-
physical information provided by the gravity field, where
the isostatic behaviour of the different parts of the Earth
receives special interest. In 1887, Colonel Robert von Ster-
neck from the Military Geographic Institute Vienna presents
a transportable relative pendulum apparatus delivering an
accuracy of a few mGal. This leads to a rapid increase
in the number of relative gravity stations and the problem
of connecting them to the few and less accurate absolute
stations. The problem is solved in several steps, starting
with a new absolute determination with several reversible
pendulums in the Potsdam Geodetic Institute, carried out
by Kühnen and Furtwängler between 1898 and 1904. This
is followed by worldwide ties between twenty fundamental
stations and Potsdam. A subsequent adjustment is carried out
by Borrass and references all available relative data (about
2400) to the Potsdam value. The 1909 General Conference
introduces this “Potsdam Gravity System” as international
gravity standard, which remains valid until a new definition
in 1971. Sponsored by the Association, first world-wide
gravity measurements on sea are carried out between 1901
and 1909 by Oscar Hecker from the Geodetic Institute.
Gravity is derived from the differences between the results
of several mercury barometers and hypsometers, at ship-
borne expeditions on the Atlantic, the Indian and the Pacific
Oceans, and the Black Sea. Although the accuracy is limited
(˙30 mGal), the results confirm the theory that the oceans in
general are isostatically compensated, with the exception of
tectonically disturbed areas. These surveys are also used for
investigating the “Eötvös-effect”, due to the movement of the
gravity sensor on the rotating Earth.
15
The geodetic contribution to geodynamic research is
recognized more and more during this epoch. Recent crustal
movements produced by an earthquake are investigated
by the US Coast and Geodetic Survey, by reobserving a
selected triangulation network in the area of the 1906 San
Francisco earthquake. The results of repeated levelling are
also discussed early with respect to vertical movements.
Significant changes were observed after the 1891 No-Bi
earthquake in Japan, while the isostatically caused land uplift
in Fennoscandia was first derived from sea level records. The
development of a horizontal pendulum by E. v. Rebeur-
Paschwitz allowed the first observations of Earth tides
(1889–1893), with more regular measurements carried out
in Potsdam by Hecker (since 1910). It is here where W.
Schweydar in 1914 also observes the gravimetric Earth
tides, and there are even first attempts (1909) to establish a
global observing system for studies of crustal movements,
jointly with the International Association for Earthquake
Research.
A successful story is the determination of polar motion,
following the first proposals and observations made in the
early 1880s (see above). An international service for a
continuous astronomic monitoring of polar motion is pro-
posed by W. J. Foerster in 1888, and simultaneous obser-
vations in Berlin, Potsdam and Prague (1889–1890) clearly
show the “Chandler” period of about 427 days, detected
by S. C. Chandler in 1891. This result is strengthened by
an expedition to Honolulu (A. Marcuse, 1891–1892), with
parallel observations in Berlin and other places (Fig. 14).
The International Latitude Service (ILS) is now established
by the Association and starts regular observations in 1899,
at Mizusawa, Japan (Director H. Kimura), Carloforte, Italy,
Gaithersburg and Ukiah, USA, all located on the 39ı 080
parallel and equipped with specially designed zenith tele-
scopes. The service is later joined by the observatories at
Tschardjui (later moved to Kitab, Russia, now Uzbekistan)
and Cincinatti, USA, and more observatories follow during
the next decades. The evaluation of the observations is
performed at the Central Bureau in Potsdam, and continued
throughout and after the First World War (see below).
4 End and Survival of the
“Internationale Erdmessung”: The
Transition Time 1917–1922
The convention of the “Internationale Erdmessung” expired
at the end of 1916, and was not extended due to the First
World War. The situation was rendered more difficult through
the dead of some of the leading officers of the Association,
among them the President, Bassot, from France (1917), the
Vice-President, O. Backlund, from Russia (1916), and the
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
found numerously within 100 miles of it. They adhere to stones in
rapid water, and differ from the Melaniidae of the Old World and of S.
America in the absence of a fringe to the mantle and in being
oviparous. They do not occur north of the St. Lawrence River, or
north of U.S. territory in the west, or in New England. Three-quarters
of all the known species inhabit the rough square formed by the
Tennessee River, the Mississippi, the Chattahoochee River, and the
Gulf of Mexico. The Mississippi is a formidable barrier to their
extension, and a whole section (Trypanostoma, with the four genera
Io, Pleurocera, Angitrema, and Lithasia) does not occur west of that
river. The Viviparidae are also very largely developed, the genera
Melantho, Lioplax, and Tulotoma being peculiar. The Pulmonata are
also abundant, while the richness of the Unionidae may be gathered
from the fact that Wetherby states[377] that in 1874 no less than 832
species in all had been described.
The entire Mississippi basin is inhabited by a common
assemblage of Unionidae, and a considerable number of the species
are distributed over the whole of this area, Texas, and parts of E.
Mexico. Some species have spread out of this area into Michigan,
Canada, the Red River, and Hudson’s Bay district, and even into
streams in New York which drain into the Atlantic. An entirely
different set of forms occupy the great majority of the rivers falling
into the Atlantic, the Appalachian Mountains acting as an effective
barrier between the two groups of species, which appear to mingle
below the southern end of the range. In many cases Unionidae seem
to have no difficulty in migrating from river to river, if the distance is
not extreme; they probably are carried across overflowed districts in
time of flood.[378]
 Fig. 227.—Helix (Arionta)
fidelis Gray, Oregon.
(2) The Californian Sub-region is markedly distinct from the rest
of N. America. The characteristic sombre Helices of the Eastern
States are almost entirely wanting, and are replaced by Arionta (20
sp.), a larger and more varied group, which may have some affinity
to Chinese forms. Glyptostoma (1 sp.) is also peculiar. Selenites
here has its metropolis, and Pristiolma is a remarkable group of
small Hyalinia (Zonites), but the larger forms of the Eastern States
are wanting. Several remarkable and quite peculiar forms of slug
occur, namely, Ariolimax (whose nearest relation is Arion),
Prophysaon, Hemphillia, and Binneya. There are no land
operculates.
Not more than 15 to 20 species of the Pleuroceridae (sect.
Goniobasis) occur west of the Rocky Mountains, and only a single
Unio, 5 Anodonta, and 1 Margaritana, which is common to New
England. Pompholyx is a very remarkable ultra-dextral form of
Limnaea, apparently akin to the Choanomphalus of L. Baikal.
Bithynia, absent from the Eastern States, is represented by two
species. The general indications are in favour of the Californian
fauna having migrated from an Old World source after the upheaval
of the Sierras; the American fauna, on the other hand, is purely
indigenous, with no recent Old World influence at all.
Land Mollusca of the Nearctic Region
Glandina 4
Selenites 6
Limax 4
Vitrina 4
 Vitrinozonites 1
Mesomphix 15
Hyalinia 22
Conulus 1
Gastrodonta 9
Pristiloma 2
Tebennophorus 4
Ariolimax 6
Prophysaon 2
Hemphillia 1
Binneya 1
Patula 18
Punctum 2
Arionta 20
Praticola 2
Glyptostoma 1
Mesodon 27
Stenotrema 11
Triodopsis 21
Polygyra 23
Polygyrella 2
Gonostoma 1
Vallonia 1
Strobila 2
Pupa 18
Vertigo 8
Holospira 2
Cionella 1
Bulimulus 6
Macroceramus 1
Succinea 21
Vaginulus 1
Helicina 2

F. The Neotropical Region

The land Mollusca of the Neotropical Region stand in complete
contrast to those of the Nearctic. Instead of being scanty, they are
exceedingly abundant; instead of being small and obscure, they are
among the largest in size, most brilliant in colour, and most singular
in shape that are known to exist. At the same time they are, as a
whole, isolated in type, and exhibit but little relation with the Mollusca
of any other region.
The most marked feature is the predominance of the peculiar
genera Bulimus and Bulimulus, the centre of whose development
appears to lie in Peru, Ecuador, and Bolivia, but which diminish, both
in numbers and variety of form, in the eastern portion of the region.
In the forests of Central America, Venezuela, and Ecuador, and, to a
lesser degree, in those of Peru and Brazil, occurs the genus
Orthalicus, whose tree-climbing habits recall the Cochlostyla of the
Philippines. These three groups of bulimoid forms constitute, as far
as the mainland is concerned, the preponderating mass of the land
Mollusca. Helix proper is most strongly developed in the Greater
Antilles, which possess several peculiar groups of great beauty. In
Central America Helix is comparatively scarce, but in the northern
portions of the continent several fine genera (Labyrinthus, Isomeria,
Solaropsis) occur, which disappear altogether towards the south.
Carnivorous land Mollusca are, so far as Central America is
concerned, more highly developed than in any other quarter of the
world, particularly in the genera Glandina and Streptostyla. These
genera also penetrate the northern portions of the continent,
Glandina reaching as far as Ecuador, and Streptostyla as far as
Peru. The Greater Antilles have also characteristic forms of these
genera. Streptaxis is tolerably abundant all over tropical South
America, and is the one pulmonate genus which shows any affinity
with the African fauna.
The slugs are exceedingly scarce. Vaginula occurs throughout,
and is the only genus in any sense characteristic.
Clausilia, in the sub-genus Nenia, occurs along the Andean chain
from the extreme north (but not in Central America) as far south as
Bolivia. It has in all probability made its way into S. America in
exceedingly remote ages from its headquarters in Eastern Asia. No
species survives in N. America, and a single straggler is found in
Porto Rico. The genera Macroceramus, Cylindrella, and Strophia,
are characteristic West Indian forms, which are only slightly
represented on the mainland. Homalonyx, a curious form akin to
Succinea, is peculiar to the region.

Fig. 228.—Homalonyx unguis Fér.,

Demerara. sh, Shell (shown also
separate); p.o, pulmonary orifice.
Land operculates attain a most extraordinary development in the
Greater Antilles, and constitute, in some cases, nearly one-half of the
whole Molluscan fauna. Several groups of the Cyclostomatidae find
their headquarters here, and some spread no farther. On the
mainland this prominence does not continue. West Indian influence
is felt in Central America and on the northern coast district, and
some Antillean genera make their way as far as Ecuador. The whole
group entirely disappears in Chili and Argentina, becoming scarce
even in Brazil.
Among the fresh-water operculates, Ampullaria is abundant, and
widely distributed. Vivipara, so characteristic of N. America, is
entirely absent. Chilina, a remarkable fresh-water pulmonate, akin to
Limnaea, is peculiar to Chili, Patagonia, and Southern Brazil, but is
not found in the tropical portion of the continent. Of the fresh-water
Pelecypoda Mycetopus, Hyria, Castalia, Leila, and Mülleria are
peculiar forms, akin to the Unionidae.
(1) The Antillean Sub-region surpasses all other districts in the
world in respect of (1) extraordinary abundance of species, (2) sharp
definition of limits as a whole, (3) extreme localisation of the fauna of
the separate islands. The sub-region includes the whole of the half-
circle of islands from the Bahamas to Grenada, together with the
extreme southern end of the peninsula of Florida, which was once,
no doubt, a number of small islands like the Bahamas. Trinidad, and
probably Tobago, although containing an Antillean element, belong
to the mainland of S. America, from which they are only separated
by very shallow water.
The sub-region appears to fall into four provinces:—
(a) Cuba, the Bahamas, and S. Florida; (b) Jamaica; (c) San
Domingo (Haiti), Porto Rico, and the Virgin Is., with the Anguilla and
St. Bartholomew group; (d) the islands from Guadeloupe to
Grenada. The first three provinces contain the mass of the
characteristic Antillean fauna, the primary feature being the
extraordinary development of the land operculates, which here
reaches a point unsurpassed in any other quarter of the globe. The
relative numbers are as follows:—
Cuba Jamaica San Domingo Porto Rico
Inoperculate 362 221 152 75
Operculate 252 242 100 23
It appears, then, that the proportion of operculate to inoperculate
species, while very high in Cuba (about 41 per cent of the whole),
reaches its maximum in Jamaica (where the operculates are actually
in a majority), begins to decline in San Domingo (about 40 per cent),
and continues to do so in Porto Rico, where they are not more than
24 per cent of the whole. These operculates almost all belong to the
families Cyclostomatidae and Helicinidae, only two genera
(Aperostoma and Megalomastoma) belonging to the Cyclophorus
group. Comparatively few genera are absolutely peculiar to the
islands, one or two species of most of them occurring in Central or S.
America, but of the several hundreds of operculate species which
occur on the islands, not two score are common to the mainland.
 Map to illustrate the
GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION
of the Land Mollusca of the
WEST INDIES.
The red line marks the 100 fathom line.
London: Macmillan and Cọ. London: Stanford’s Geogḷ Estabṭ.
The next special feature of the sub-region is a remarkable
development of peculiar sub-genera of Helix. In this respect the
Antilles present a striking contrast to both Central and S. America,
where the prime feature of the land Pulmonata is the profusion of
Bulimus and Bulimulus, and Helix is relatively obscured. No less
than 14 sub-genera of Helix, some of which contain species of
almost unique beauty and size, are quite peculiar to the Greater
Antilles, and some are peculiar to individual islands.
 Here, too, is the metropolis of Cylindrella (of which there are 130
species in Cuba alone), a genus which just reaches S. America, and
has a few species along the eastern sea-board of the Gulf of Mexico.
Macroceramus and Strophia are quite peculiar; the former, a genus
allied to Cylindrella, which attains its maximum in Cuba and San
Domingo, is scarcely represented in Jamaica, and disappears south
of Anguilla; the latter, a singular form, resembling a large Pupa in
shape, which also attains its maximum in Cuba, is entirely wanting in
Jamaica, and has its last representative in S. Croix. One species
irregularly occurs at Curaçao.
The carnivorous group of land Mollusca are represented by
several peculiar forms of Glandina, which attain their maximum in
Jamaica and Cuba, but entirely disappear in the Lesser Antilles.
A certain number of the characteristic N. American genera are
found in the Antillean Sub-region, indicating a former connexion,
more or less intimate, between the W. Indies and the mainland. The
genera are all of small size. The characteristic N. American Hyalinia
are represented in Cuba, San Domingo, and Porto Rico; among the
Helicidae, Polygyra reaches Cuba, but no farther, and Strobila
Jamaica. The fresh-water Pulmonata are of a N. American type, as
far as the Greater Antilles are concerned, but the occurrence of
Gundlachia (Tasmania and Trinidad only) in Cuba is an unexplained
problem at present. Unionidae significantly occur only at the two
ends of the chain of islands, not reaching farther than Cuba (Unio 3
sp.) at one end, and Trinidad (which is S. American) at the other.
A small amount of S. American influence is perceptible throughout
the Antilles, chiefly in the occurrence of a few species of Bulimulus
and Simpulopsis. The S. American element may have strayed into
the sub-region by three distinct routes: (1) by way of Trinidad,
Tobago, and the islands northward; (2) by a north-easterly extension
of Honduras towards Jamaica, forming a series of islands of which
the Rosalind and Pedro banks are perhaps the remains; (3) by a
similar approximation of the peninsula of Yucatan and the western
extremity of Cuba. Central America is essentially S. American in its
fauna, and the characteristic genera of Antillean operculates which
occur on its eastern coasts are sufficient evidence of the previous
existence of a land connexion more or less intimate (see map).
(a) Cuba is by far the richest of the Antilles in land Mollusca, but it
must be remembered that it is also much better explored than San
Domingo, the only island likely to rival it in point of numbers. It
contains in all 658 species, of which 620 are land and 38 fresh-
water, the land operculates alone amounting to 252.
Carnivorous genera form but a small proportion of the whole.
There are 18 Glandina (which belong to the sections Varicella and
Boltenia) and 4 Streptostyla, the occurrence of this latter genus
being peculiar to Cuba and Haiti (1 sp.) among the Antilles, and
associating them closely with the mainland of Central America,
where Streptostyla is abundant. These two genera alone represent
the Agnatha throughout the sub-region.
There are no less than 84 species of Helix, belonging to 12 sub-
genera. Only one of these (Polymita) is quite peculiar to Cuba, but of
7 known species of Jeanerettia and 8 of Coryda, 6 and 7
respectively are Cuban. Thelidomus has 15 species (Jamaica 3,
Porto Rico 3); Polydontes has 3, the only other being from Porto
Rico; Hemitrochus has 12 (Jamaica 1, Bahamas 6); Cysticopsis 9
(Jamaica 6); Eurycampta 4 (Bahamas 1).
The Cylindrellidae find their maximum development in Cuba. As
many as 34 Macroceramus occur (two-thirds of the known species),
and 130 Cylindrella, some of the latter being most remarkable in
form (see Fig. 151, B, p. 247).
The land operculates belong principally to the families
Cyclostomatidae and Helicinidae. Of the former, Cuba is the
metropolis of Ctenopoma and Chondropoma, the former of which
includes 30 Cuban species, as compared with 1 from San Domingo
and 2 from Jamaica. Megalomastoma (Cyclophoridae) is also
Haitian and Porto Rican, but not Jamaican. Blaesospira, Xenopoma,
and Diplopoma are peculiar. The Helicinidae consist mainly of
Helicina proper (58 sp.), which here attains by far its finest
development in point of size and beauty, and of Eutrochatella (21
sp.), which is peculiar to the three great islands (Jamaica 6 sp., San
Domingo 6 sp.).
The Bahamas, consisting in all of more than 700 islands, are very
imperfectly known, but appear to be related partly to Cuba, partly to
San Domingo, from each of which they are separated by a narrow
channel of very deep water. They are certainly not rich in the
characteristic groups of the Greater Antilles. The principal forms of
Helix are Plagioptycha (6 sp.), common with San Domingo, and
Hemitrochus (6 sp.), common with Cuba. Strophia is exceedingly
abundant, but Cylindrella, Macroceramus, and Glandina have but
few species. There are a few species of Ctenopoma, Chondropoma,
and Cistula, while a single Schasicheila (absent from the rest of the
sub-region) forms a link with Mexico.

Fig. 229.—Characteristic Cuban

Helices. A, Polydontes imperator
Montf. B, Caracolus rostrata Pfr.
C, Polymita muscarum Lea.
Southern Florida, with one or two species each of Hemitrochus,
Cylindrella, Macroceramus, Strophia, Ctenopoma, and
Chondropoma, belongs to this province.
(b) Jamaica.—The land Mollusca of Jamaica are, in point of
numbers and variety, quite unequalled in the world. There are in all
as many as 56 genera and more than 440 species, the latter being
nearly all peculiar. The principal features are the Glandinae, the
Helicidae, and the land operculates. The Glandinae belong
principally to the sub-genera Varicella, Melia, and Volutaxis,
Streptostyla being absent, although occurring in Cuba and San
Domingo. There are 10 genera of Helix, of which Pleurodonta is
quite peculiar, while Sagda (13 sp.) is common only with S.W. San
Domingo (2 sp.), and Leptoloma (8 sp.) only with Cuba (1 sp.). The
single Strobila seems to be a straggler from a N. American source.
Macroceramus has only 2 species as against 34 in Cuba, and of
Cylindrella, in which Cuba (130 sp.) is so rich, only 36 species occur.
The genus Leia, however (14 sp.), is all but peculiar, occurring
elsewhere only in the neighbouring angle of San Domingo, which is
so closely allied with Jamaica. The complete absence of Strophia is
remarkable.

Fig. 230.—Characteristic
Jamaican and Haitian
Mollusca: A, Sagdae
pistylium Müll., Jamaica; B,
Chondropoma salleanum Pfr.,
San Domingo; C,
Eutrochatella Tankervillei
Gray, Jamaica; D, Cylindrella
agnesiana C. B. Ad.,
Jamaica.
 The land operculates form the bulk of the land fauna, there being
actually 242 species, as against 221 of land Pulmonata, a proportion
never again approached in any part of the world. As many as 80 of
these belong to the curious little genus Stoastoma, which is all but
peculiar to the island, one species having been found in San
Domingo, and one in Porto Rico. Geomelania and Chittya, two
singular inland forms akin to Truncatella, are quite peculiar. Alcadia
reaches its maximum of 14 species, as against 4 species in San
Domingo and 9 species in Cuba, and Lucidella is common to San
Domingo only; but, if Stoastoma be omitted, the Helicinidae
generally are not represented by so many or by so striking forms as
in Cuba, which has 90 species, as against Jamaica 44, and San
Domingo 35.
(c) San Domingo, although not characterised by the extraordinary
richness of Cuba and Jamaica, possesses many specially
remarkable forms of land Mollusca, to which a thorough exploration,
when circumstances permit, will no doubt make important additions.
From its geographical position, impinging as it does on all the islands
of the Greater Antilles, it would be expected that the fauna of San
Domingo would not exhibit equal signs of isolation, but would appear
to be influenced by them severally. This is exactly what occurs, and
San Domingo is consequently, although very rich in peculiar species,
not equally so in peculiar genera. The south-west district shows
distinct relations with Jamaica, the Jamaican genera Leia,
Stoastoma, Lucidella, and the Thaumasia section of Cylindrella
occurring here only. The north and north-west districts are related to
Cuba, while the central district, consisting of the long band of
mountainous country which traverses the island, contains the more
characteristic Haitian forms.
The Helicidae are the most noteworthy of the San Domingo land
Mollusca. The group Eurycratera, which contains some of the finest
existing land snails, is quite peculiar, while Parthena, Cepolis,
Plagioptycha, and Caracolus here reach their maximum. The
Cylindrellidae are very abundant, but no section is peculiar. Land
operculates do not bear quite the same proportion to the Pulmonata
as in Cuba and Jamaica, but they are well represented (100 to 152);
Rolleia is the only peculiar genus.
The relations of San Domingo to the neighbouring islands are
considerably obscured by the fact that they are well known, while
San Domingo is comparatively little explored. To this may perhaps
be due the curious fact that there are actually more species common
to Cuba and Porto Rico (26) than to Porto Rico and San Domingo.
Cuba shares with San Domingo its small-sized Caracolus and also
Liguus, but the great Eurycratera, Parthena, and Plagioptycha are
wholly wanting in Cuba. The land operculates are partly related to
Cuba, partly to Jamaica, thus Choanopoma, Ctenopoma, Cistula,
Tudora, and many others, are represented on all these islands, while
the Jamaican Stoastoma occurs on San Domingo and Porto Rico,
but not on Cuba, and Lucidella is common to San Domingo and
Jamaica alone. An especial link between Jamaica and San Domingo
is the occurrence in the south-west district of the latter island of
Sagda (2 sp.). The relative numbers of the genera Strophia,
Macroceramus, and Helicina, as given below (p. 351), are of interest
in this connexion.
Porto Rico, with Vièque, is practically a fragment of San Domingo.
The points of close relationship are the occurrence of Caracolus,
Cepolis, and Parthena among the Helicidae, and of Simpulopsis,
Pseudobalea, and Stoastoma. Cylindrella and Macroceramus are
but poorly represented, but Strophia still occurs. The land
operculates (see the Table) show equal signs of removal from the
headquarters of development. Megalomastoma, however, has some
striking forms. The appearance of a single Clausilia, whose nearest
relations are in the northern Andes, is very remarkable. Gaeotis,
which is allied to Peltella (Ecuador only), is peculiar.
 Fig. 231.—Examples of West Indian
Helices: A, Helix (Parthena)
angulata Fér., Porto Rico; B,
Helix (Thelidomus) lima Fér.,
Vièque; C, Helix (Dentellaria) nux
denticulata Chem., Martinique.
Land Mollusca of the Greater Antilles
Cuba. Jamaica. S. Domingo. Porto Rico.
Glandina 18 24 15 8
Streptostyla 4 ... 2 ...
Volutaxis ... 11 (?) 1 ...
Selenites 1 ... ... ...
Hyalinia 4 11 5 6
Patula 5 1 ... ...
Sagda ... 13 2 ...
Microphysa 7 18 8 3
Cysticopsis 9 6 ... ...
Hygromia (?) ... ... 3 ...
Leptaxis (?) ... ... 1 ...
Polygyra 2 ... ... ...
Jeanerettia 6 ... ... 1
Euclasta ... ... ... 4
Plagioptycha ... ... 14 2
Strobila ... 1 ... ...
Dialeuca ... 1 ... ...
Leptoloma 1 8 ... ...
Eurycampta 4 ... ... ...
Coryda 7 ... ... ...
Thelidomus 15 3 ... 3
Eurycratera ... ... 7 ...
Parthena ... ... 2 2
Cepolis ... ... 3 1
Caracolus 8 ... 6 2
Polydontes 3 ... ... 1
Hemitrochus 12 1 ... ...
Polymita 5 ... ... ...
Pleurodonta ... 34 ... ...
Inc. sed. 5 ... ... ...
Simpulopsis ... ... 1 1
Bulimulus 3 3 6 7
Orthalicus 1 1 ... ...
Liguus 3 ... 1 ...
Gaeotis ... ... ... 3
Pineria 2 ... ... 1
Macroceramus 34 2 14 3
Leia ... 14 2 ...
Cylindrella 130 36 35 3
Pseudobalea 2 ... 1 1
Stenogyra 6 7 (?) ...
Opeas 8 (?) 4 6
Subulima 6 14 2 2
Glandinella 1 ... ... ...
Spiraxis 2 (?) 2 1
Melaniella 7 ... ... ...
Geostilbia 1 ... 1 ...
Cionella 2 ... ... ...
Leptinaria ... 1 ... 3
Obeliscus ... ... 1 2
Pupa 2 7 3 2
Vertigo 4 ... ... ...
Strophia 19 ... 3 2
Clausilia ... ... ... 1
Succinea 11 2 5 3
Vaginula 2 2 2 1
Megalomastoma 13 ... 1 3
Neocyclotus 1 33(?) ... ...
Licina 1 ... 3 ...
Jamaicia ... 2 ... ...
Crocidopoma ... 1 3 ...
Rolleia ... ... 1 ...
Choanopoma 25 12 19 3
Ctenopoma 30 2 1 ...
 Cistula 15 3 3 3
Chondropoma 57 (?) 19 4
Tudora 7 17 5 ...
Adamsiella 1 12 ... ...
Blaesospira 1 ... ... ...
Xenopoma 1 ... ... ...
Cistula 15 3 3 ...
Colobostylus 4 13 5 ...
Diplopoma 1 ... ... ...
Geomelania ... 21 ... ...
Chittya ... 1 ... ...
Blandiella ... ... 1 ...
Stoastoma ... 80 1 1
Eutrochatella 21 6 6 ...
Lucidella ... 4 1 ...
Alcadia 9 14 4 ...
Helicina 58 16 24 9
Proserpina 2 4 ... ...
The Virgin Is., with St. Croix, Anguilla, and the St. Bartholomew
group (all of which are non-volcanic islands), are related to Porto
Rico, while Guadeloupe and all the islands to the south, up to
Grenada (all of which are volcanic), show marked traces of S.
American influence. St. Kitt’s, Antigua, and Montserrat may be
regarded as intermediate between the two groups. St. Thomas, St.
John, and Tortola have each one Plagioptycha and one Thelidomus,
while St. Croix has two sub-fossil Caracolus which are now living in
Porto Rico, together with one Plagioptycha and one Thelidomus
(sub-fossil). The gradual disappearance of some of the characteristic
greater Antillean forms, and the appearance of S. American forms in
the Lesser Antilles, is shown by the following table:—
S
P S S G M t
o t S t u a S .
r . t A . a D r t B T
t S . T n A d o t . a V G r
o T t o g K n e m i r i r i
h . C r u i t l i n L b n e n
R o r t i t i o n i u a c n i
i m J o o l t g u i q c d e a d
c a a i l l ’ u p c u i o n d a
 o s n x a a s a e a e a s t a d
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Bulimulus 7 4 2 4 1 2 2 3 8 9 5 3 3 6 2 4
Cylindrella 3 2 1 1 1 . . . . 1 1 1 1 . . 1
Macroceramus 3 1 1 . 2 1 . . . . . . . . . .
Cyclostomatidae, etc.23 4 1 5 1 1 1 . 4 . . . . . . 1
Dentellaria . . . . . . 1 1 8 5 11 2 2 . 1 1
Cyclophorus . . . . . . . . 1 2 2 . . . . .
Amphibulimus . . . . . . . . 2 3 1 . . . . .
Homalonyx . . . . . . . . 1 1 . . . . . .

(d) In Guadeloupe we find Cyclophorus, Amphibulimus,

Homalonyx, and Pellicula, which are characteristic of S. America,
and nearly all recur in Dominica and Martinique. These islands are
the metropolis of Dentellaria, a group of Helix, evidently related to
some of the forms developed in the Greater Antilles. Stragglers
occur as far north as St. Kitt’s and Antigua, and there are several on
the mainland as far south as Cayenne. Traces of the great Bulimus,
so characteristic of South America, occur as far north as S. Lucia,
where also is found a Parthena (San Domingo and Porto Rico).
Trinidad is markedly S. American; 55 species in all are known, of
which 22 are peculiar, 28 are common to S. America (8 of these
reach no farther north along the islands), and only 5 are common to
the Antilles, but not to S. America. The occurrence of Gundlachia in
Trinidad has already been mentioned.
The Bermudas show no very marked relationship either to the N.
American or to the West Indian fauna. In common with the former
they possess a Polygyra, with the latter (introduced species being
excluded) one species each of Hyalosagda, Subulina, Vaginula, and
Helicina, so that, on the whole, they may be called West Indian. The
only peculiar group is Poecilozonites, a rather large and depressed
shell of the Hyalinia type.
(2) The Central American Sub-region may be regarded as
extending from the political boundary of Mexico in the north to the
isthmus of Panama in the south. It thus impinges on three important
districts—the N. American, West Indian, and S. American; and it
appears, as we should perhaps expect, that the two latter of these
regions have considerably more influence upon its fauna than the
former. Of the N. American Helicidae, Polygyra is abundant in
Mexico only, and two species of Strobila reach N. Guatemala, while
the Californian Arionta occurs in Mexico. S. American Helicidae, in
the sub-genera Solaropsis and Labyrinthus, occur no farther north
than Costa Rica. Not a single representative of any of the
characteristic West Indian Helicidae occurs. Bulimulus and
Otostomus, which form so large a proportion of the Mollusca of
Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru, together with Orthalicus,
are abundant all over the region. Again, Cylindrella, Macroceramus,
and some of the characteristic Antillean operculates, are
represented, their occurrence being in most cases limited to the
eastern coast-line and eastern slope of the central range.
Besides these external elements, the region is rich in indigenous
genera. Central America is remarkable for an immense number of
large carnivorous Mollusca possessing shells. There are 49 species
of Glandina, the bulk of which occur in eastern and southern Mexico;
36 of Streptostyla (S.E. Mexico and Guatemala, only 1 species
reaching Venezuela and another Peru); 5 of Salasiella, 2 of Petenia,
and 1 of Strebelia; the last three genera being peculiar. Streptaxis,
fairly common in S. America, does not occur. Velifera and
Cryptostracon, two remarkable slug-like forms, each with a single
species, are peculiar to Costa Rica. Among the especial peculiarities
of the region are the giant forms belonging to the Cylindrellidae,
which are known as Holospira, Eucalodium, and Coelocentrum (Fig.
232). They are almost entirely peculiar to Mexico, only 7 out of a
total of 33 reaching south of that district, and only 1 not occurring in it
at all.
 Fig. 232.—Examples of
characteristic Mexican
Mollusca: A, Coelocentrum
turris Pfr.; B, Streptostyla
Delattrei Pfr.
The land operculates are but scanty. Tomocyclus and
Amphicyclotus are peculiar, and Schasicheila, a form of Helicina,
occurs elsewhere only in the Bahamas. Ceres (see Fig. 18, C, p. 21)
and Proserpinella, two remarkable forms of non-operculate
Helicinidae (compare the Chinese Heudeia), are quite peculiar.
Pachychilus, one of the characteristic fresh-water genera, belongs to
the S. American (Melaniidae) type, not to the N. American
(Pleuroceridae). Among the fresh-water Pulmonata, the Aplecta are
remarkable for their great size and beauty. In the accompanying
table “Mexico” is to be taken as including the region from the United
States border up to and including the isthmus of Tehuantepec, and
“Central America” as the whole region south of that point.
Land Mollusca of Central America
Mexico Central Common to
only. America both.
only.
Strebelia 1 ... ...
Glandina 33 13 3
Salasiella 4 ... 1
Streptostyla 18 12 6
Petenia ... 1 1
Limax ... 1 ...
Velifera ... 1 ...
Omphalina 10 1 1
Hyalinia 2 5 3
Guppya ... 8 3
Pseudohyalina 2 ... 2
Tebennophorus 1 ... ...
Cryptostracon ... 1 ...
Xanthonyx 4 ... ...
Patula 3 ... 4
Acanthinula 1 2 2
Vallonia ... 1 ...
Trichodiscus 2 2 3
Praticolella 1 ... 1
Arionta 3 ... ...
Lysinoe 1 1 1
Oxychona 2 5 ...
Solaropsis ... 2 ...
Polygyra 14 1 2
Strobila 1 1 ...
Labyrinthus ... 5 ...
Otostomus 23 20 7
Bulimulus 6 5 2
Berendtia 1 ... ...
Orthalicus 6 3 3
Pupa 1 1 1
Vertigo 1 ... ...
Holospira 12 ... ...
Coelocentrum 6 1 1
Eucalodium 15 ... 5
Cylindrella 6 4 ...
Macroceramus 2 1 ...
Simpulopsis 2 1 ...
Caecilianella 1 ... ...
Opeas 1 2 3
Spiraxis 8 2 1
Leptinaria ... 2 ...
Subulina 2 3 4
Succinea 11 3 1
Vaginula 1 ... ...
Aperostoma ... 4 1
Amphicyclotus 2 1 2
Cystopoma 2 ... ...
Tomocyclus ... 1 2