THE MYXOSPORIDIA, OR PSOROSPERMS OF FISHES. 215 
Habitat—Common on fins (where the spores exist in great numbers 
in the subeutaneous tissue) of Gobio gobio L. (gudgeon); 
same fish, of Cyprinus carpio L. (carp), and of Alburnus alburnus L. 
43. Myxobolus ? cf. oviformis. 
branchize of 
Psorosperms of Cyprinus carpio, Balbiani, 1883, Journ. de Microgr., vil, pp. 199- 
201; ib., Balbiani, 1884, Légons sur les Sporozoaires, pp. 128, 130, 131. 
Cyst and myxosporidium not mentioned. 
oe Spore.—Length 18 nx; breadth 12 ju. 
Habitat.—On Cyprinus carpio L. (carp). 
The dimensions differ so markedly from those of M. oviformis that 
on the present evidence [ have not felt justified in fusing the 2 
forms. 
It is, however, worthy of note that the ratio between the dimensions is 
the same as that in M. oviformis, and also that “18” may not impossibly 
be an error for 8. M.Thélohan writes that he has never found in the 
carp spores measuring 18 by 12 yw, and suggests that these dimensions 
may be an error. 
44. Myxobolus sp. incert. 
Pl. 15, fig. 7. 
Authority; reference. 
Cyprinus | Gobio fluvia- 
brama, tilis [error] 
“* pnsoro- myxospo- | Date. 
sperms,”’ ridian spore 
etc., of— of— 
Chari weal a2 cet nace 1841 
x sadAoch oueoes 1854 
Ks WeeeeShe Sogeose 1879 
x 1882 
x 1882 
BSP GShagerssbs - 3 | 1886 
. Se) We8boseeeseaect 1887 
Miiller, Miiller’s Archiv., pp. 491-2 
Lieberkiihn, Miiller’s Archiv., Dp. 368, pl. 14, figs. 7, 8. 
Leuckart, Die Parasiten des Menschen, p. 248, fig. ‘990. 
Biitschli, Bronn’ s Thier- Reich, I, p.6 
Lieberkiihn in Biitschli, Bronn’s iihiow-Reich, I, pl. 38, 
tig. 18a-c. 
Leuckart, The Havanites of Man, 2 ed., p. 197, fig. 99B. 
Koch, Ene Pee Sesamint. Thierheilkde u. Thier- 
zucht, IV, p. 94, fig. 668, 2,3 
Biitschli’s reference to Gobio fluviatilis is certainly an error. 
figs. 18b and 18¢ (loaned him by Lieberkiihn) are respectively copies of 
Lieberkiihn’s figs. 7 and 8. That they are not merely independent 
figures of specifically identical material can be seen from the identity 
of the figure of the ever-varying ameeboid (fig. 8, Lieberkiihn; fig. 
The question is, moreover, additionally 
settled by Prof. Biitschli’s statement that— 
Concerning the subsequent fate of the spore, only two observers, Lieberkiihn and 
Biitschli; see pl. 15, fig. 7c). 
Balbiani, have so far expressed opinions. 
His 
18e, 
They agree that the spore-shell finally 
separates, the protoplasmic contents emerging as a small active ameboid body (188, c). 
Thus the 2 figures in question were copied. Further, Lieberkiihn 
mentions a ‘“ psorosperm” from the body cavity of Gobio fluviatilis (see 
p. 243), and describes in detail his observations in that form upon 
the separation of the valves and the exit of the ameboid posterior 
mass. He makes no mention, however, of any forms upon the branchize 
of Gobio fluviatilis. 
The fact that Biitschli cites its habitat as the 
branchiz, with his statement that in this matter he is quoting, estab- 
