1042 PARASITES OF PROTOZOA 



In more recent work, Sphaerha-like Chytridiales in free-living rhizo- 

 pods and flagellates have been differentiated into several species, but 

 a comparative account of the differential characteristics is lacking. Chat- 

 ton and Brodsky (1909) proposed to give the parasite of euglenids, if 

 separated from S. endogena, the name 5. dangeardi; Skvortzow (1927) 

 briefly designated as 5". trachelomonadis a parasite of Trachelomonas teres 

 var. glabra and T. sivirenkoi in Manchuria; Jahn (1933) differentiated 

 5". phaci from Phacus pleuronectes and P. longicauda, and Gojdics 

 (1939) reported the same species from Euglena sangmnea. Puymaly 

 (1927) failed to recognize 5. dangeardi, describing the life history of a 

 chytrid of E. viridh under the name 5. endogena. Dangeard (1895), 

 with no great positiveness, proposed the name Pseudosphaerha euglenae 

 for a parasite of E. v'lr'idh in which, in the formation of the sporangium, 

 there is fragmentation into islets, and the contour of the sporangium 

 often becomes irregular and cord-like. Mitchell ( 1928) suggested assign- 

 ment to Pseudosphaer'ita of a parasite, found in species of Euglena, which 

 showed neither of these characteristics; Jahn (1933) considered at least 

 those Mitchell described in E. viridis to be S. dangeardi. 



The parasites found by Nagler (1911b) in Euglena sangmnea are 

 Sphaer}ta-V\kQ\ but the form in the cyst, with prominent protuberances, 

 does not resemble Sphaerita. Mainx (1928) found Sphaerita often in 

 E. sanguinea and E. viridis; Giinther (1928) reported it in E. geniculata. 

 Further records of Sphaerita. by Alexeieff (1929), are from Monas 

 vulgaris and Dimasti gamoeba gruberi. 



Since Dangeard's accounts (1886a, 1886b), Sphaerita in free-living 

 rhizopods has been studied by Chatton and Brodsky (1909) in Amoeba 

 Umax, by Penard (1912) in A. alba, and by Mattes (1924) in A. 

 sphaeronucleolus. The last observer described two new species, S. amoebae 

 and S. plasmophaga. The confused and improbable cycle of Allogromia 

 sp. {Cryptodifflugia sp., according to Doflein, 1909, 1911), outlined by 

 Prandtl (1907), probably was based on a free-living testacean, certain 

 small free-living flagellates, ingested Testacea, and an infection of A. 

 proteus with Sphaerita. Prandtl discussed the observations on supposed 

 reproduction by Carter (1863), Wallich (1863a), Greeff (1866), and 

 even those of Stein (1878), which as stated above were based on para- 

 sitization by chytrids; and he considered that they were really made on 

 "gamete formation" by Allogromia or other parasitic rhizopods. A para- 



