CHLAMYDOMYXA MONTANA. 243 
fact that in C. montana as compared with C. labyrinthu- 
loides the fusiform nuclei are still further reduced, being but 
one third their size, tends to indicate a progressive reduction 
of these bodies. The protoplasm surrounding the nuclei of 
the oat-shaped corpuscles of Labyrinthula is represented in 
Chlamydomyxa by an exceedingly delicate and practically 
invisible layer, which is also extended over the threads, and is 
the seat of the movement which is rendered visible by the 
translation of the nuclei. 
The Protozoa which come nearest to Chlamydomyxa and 
Labyrinthula are certain of the Mycetozoa; but each of the 
two genera in question differs in its own way from the typical 
Mycetozoa, especially as to reproduction, and nothing would be 
gained by sinking them taxonomicaily in that assemblage. 
The most remarkable feature in which Chlamydomyxa differs 
from Labyrinthula and from all other Protozoa is its “ encysted 
phase.’’ The enclosure of the general protoplasm in a cyst- 
wall may be compared with the fruit-formation and other 
cyst-like productions of the Mycetozoa. But the physiological 
character of the cysts of Chlamydomyxa, the activities of the 
encysted organism, and the great relative duration and im- 
portance of the encysted phase are peculiar to Chlamydomyxa, 
and may be explained by the fact that this organism is an 
inhabitant of fresh water, and subjected to the vicissitudes of 
temperature and evaporation of the inhabited water which we 
know are frequently associated with special protective struc- 
tures and aberrant phases of growth and activity. 
A point in which both Chlamydomyxa and Labyrinthula 
agree with the Mycetozoa is their epiphytic habit. 
In his paper on Chlamydomyxa labyrinthuloides, 
Archer draws attention to a terricolous plasmodium (found in 
a flower-pot) of an unknown Mycetozoon described by Cien- 
kowski. It is not possible to decide from his (Cienkowski’s) 
description whether he had before him Archer’s Chlamy- 
domyxa, but it is most probable that he had not, since 
he does not describe the characteristic structures of that 
organism. Similarly the Biomyxa vagans described and 
