22 



mately or provisionally under received Orders or Families. 

 Thus the three Pleurophrys (?) shoAvn in Plate XX, figs. I, 

 2, 3, and Amphitrema (figs. 4, 5), and Diaphoropodon (fig. 

 6), Avould come under the Order Proteina, as adojDted by 

 ClajDarede and Lachmann, but would seem possibly to make 

 a Family intermediate in character between Amoebina and 

 Actinophryna. Gromia socialis (figs. 7 — 11) surely belongs to 

 Gromida, whilst Acanthocystis and Raphidiophrys would 

 appertain to Echinocystida by reason of having siliceous 

 spicules ; but Heterophrys, Pompholyxophrys, and Cysto- 

 phrys have no spicules, yet are, no doubt, closely related, but 

 yet according to the characters given by Claparede and 

 Lachmann they would require a new Order. 



Endeavouring, again, to arrange them after the system laid 

 down by Haeckel in his " Radiolaria,"^ and acquiescing that 

 the forms here drawn attention to, referable to Pleurophrys 

 (Clap, et Lachm.) do not possess a contractile vacuole, and 

 if it be conceded that the marginal, pulsating vacuole shown 

 by Diaphoropodon is entitled to come under that designation, 

 then thelattergenusmust be jjlaced near Difflugia and far ajiart 

 from Pleurophrys, whereas I believe it cannot be doubted 

 but that they are really closely allied. Again, the forms I 

 have comprised under the new genera Raphidiophrys, 

 Heterophrys, Pompholyxophrys, Cystojihrys — not one of 

 them, in my own opinion, possesses a central capsule, nor so 

 far as I see even an analogue of that part of the organization 

 of Haeckel's marine forms. A priori then they would fall 

 under Haeckel's Order Acyttaria and Family Athalamia,- 

 where he Avould, when he then wrote, place Actinophrys sol. 

 But I think there can be but small doubt that they have a 

 far stronger claim to admission into the Order Cytophora, 

 Family Radiolaria, notwithstanding the want of a '' central 

 capsule." 



Again, on having recourse to the system laid down by 

 Carpenter,^ the forms referable to the genera Raphidiophrys, 

 Acanthocystis, Heterophrys, Pompholyxophrys, would, of 

 course, fall under his Radiolaria. The new Gromia (G. 

 socialis) must be placed to Reticulosa; but then what of the 

 form I have called Cystoj^hrys Haeckeliana, with its sub- 

 arborescent pseudopodia, which often coalesce, more or less, 

 in a reticulose manner, whilst the other form referred to the 

 same genus as yet (C oculea) has linear and non-coalescent 

 pseudopodia, clearly placing it under Carpenter's Radiolaria. 

 What too of the forms on PI. XX referred by me to Pleu- 



' ' Die Radiolarieu,' p. 212. 



^ ' latroduction to the Study of the Foraminifera,' 1862, p. 17. 



