240 W. WALDEYER. 
If van Beneden is correct in his account we shall get a deeper 
view into the significance of karyokinetic phenomena. I have 
already (I) pointed out my objections to the opposed views 
held by Fol, Brass, and Fraisse, who would regard the groups of 
chromatin threads only as of subordinate significance. In 
view of van Beneden’s account we must ascribe the very 
greatest significance to the appearances and changes in the 
chromatophilous substances. Van Beneden, like Nussbaum, 
comes to the conclusion that this process is exceedingly im- 
portant for the question of heredity, since we must suppose 
that the same process occurs in all following divisions as in 
the first cell-division ; that, namely, in each division the male 
remains separated from the female chromatin elements, and 
distributes itself equal to the daug!*-zr-cells. From this it 
directly follows that each cell of our body contains male and 
female elements, and is thus hermaphrodite. The view held 
by Hensen, who, as is known (vide ‘ Physiologie der Zeugung ’) 
regards the original form of generation as the sexual and not 
the asexual, is in accordance with this. EH. van Beneden, how- 
ever, goes further, and advances a very interesting hypothesis 
as to the significance of the directive corpuscles. If the egg- 
cell, like all cells, is to be regarded as hermaphrodite with 
male elements, these must be extruded before fertilization in 
order to become a new female cell. Now, in the directive 
corpuscles, van Beneden sees the outcast male elements of the 
egg-cell. If this view is correct, then in the formation of the 
spermatozoon, directive corpuscles should be extruded, which 
would here represent the female element. E. van Benedeu 
and Julin (22) have in fact recognised them in Ascaris 
megalocephala. They consider, as the directive corpuscles 
of the spermatozoon, the so-called “corpuscles residuels ” 
which are left behind during the division of the sperm-forming 
cells. I myself have previously (see Rensen, “ Spermato- 
génése,” ‘Arch. de Biol.,’ 1879) suggested the view that the so- 
called paranuclei (Nebenkerne) which appear during the forma- 
tion of spermatozoa may be regarded as the equivalents of 
directive corpuscles. I see that Weismann (‘Zahl der Richtungs- 
