814 MORPHOGENESIS 



Hertwig, R. 1903. tJber Korrelation von Zell-und Kerngrosse und ihre Be- 

 deutung fiir die geschlechtliche Differenzierung und die Teilung der 

 Zelle. Biol. Zbl., 23: 49-62; 108-19. 



1908. Tiber neue Probleme der Zellenlehre. Arch. Zellforsch., 1: 1-33. 



Hetherington, A. 1932. On the absence of physiological regeneration in 

 Stentor coeruleus. Arch. Protistenk., 77 : 58-63. 



Hewitt, J. H. 1914. Regeneration of Pleurotricha after merotomy with refer- 

 ence especially to the number of micronuclei and the occurrence of un- 

 inucleated cells. Biol. Bull., 27: 169-76. 



Hofer, B. 1890. Experimentelle Untersuchungen iiber den Einfluss des Kerns 

 auf das Protoplasma. Jena. Z. Naturw., 24: 105-76. 



Holmes, S. J. 1907. The behavior of Loxophyllum and its relation to regenera- 

 tion. J. exp. Zool., 4: 399-430. 



Horton, F. M. 1935. On the reactions of isolated parts of Paramecium cauda- 

 tum. J. exp. Biol., 12: 13-16. 



Hosoi, T. 1937. Protoplasmic streaming in isolated pieces of Paramecium. 

 J. Fac. Sci. Tokyo Univ., Zool., 4: 299-305. 



Howland, R. B. 1928. Grafting and reincorporation in Actinosphaerimn 

 eichornii Ehr. Biol. Bull., 54: 279-88. 



Hyman, L. H. 1917. Metabolic gradients in Amoeba and their relation to the 

 mechanism of amoeboid movement. J. exp. Zool., 24: 55-99- 



Ishikawa, H. 1912. Wundheilungs- und Regenerationsvorgange bei In- 

 fusorien. Roux Arch. EntwMech. Organ. 35: 1-29. 



Jennings, H. S. 1901. On the significance of the spiral swimming of organ- 

 isms. Amer. Nat., 35: 369-78. 



Jennings, H. S., and C. Jamieson. 1902. Studies on reactions to stimuli in 

 unicellular organisms. Biol. Bull., 3: 225-34. 



Jensen, P. 1896. Tiber individuelle physiologische Unterschiede zwischen 

 Zellen der gleichen Art. Pfliig. Arch. ges. Physiol., 62: 172-200. 



Kepner, W. A., and B. D. Reynolds. 1923. Reactions of cell bodies and 

 pseudopodial fragments in Difflugia. Biol. Bull., 44: 22-46. 



Landis, E. M. 1920. An amicronucleate race of Paramecium caudatum. Amer. 

 Nat., 54: 453-57. 



LeDantec, F. 1897. La Regeneration du micronucleus chez quelques infusoires 

 cihes. C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, 125: 51-52. 



Lewin, K. R. 1910. Nuclear relations of Paramecium caudatum during the 

 asexual period. Camb. Phil. Soc. Proc, 16: 39-41. 



■ 1912. The behavior of the infusorian micronucleus in regeneration. Proc. 



roy. Soc, B, 84: 332-44. 



Lillie, F. R. 1896. On the smallest parts of Stentor capable of regeneration. 

 J. Morph., 12: 239-49. 



Looper, J, B. 1928. Cytoplasmic fusion in Actinopbrys sol, with special ref- 

 erence to the karyoplasmic ratio. J. exp. Zool., 50: 31-49. 



