133 
with the present forms. Still, however, Auerbach’s experi- 
ments, with reagents or otherwise, do not seem to have pro- 
duced a separation of the body proper from the closely 
investing covering, that is, they do not seem to demonstrate 
their, so to say, independent character. 
Descanting, however, upon this outer, doubly-contoured 
investment, which he was inclined to regard as nothing else 
than the presupposed cell-membrane, which he would ascribe 
to all Ameebee, and, alluding to the mode of projection of the 
pseudopodia and the thinning off and interruption of the in- 
vestment where they occurred, Auerbach goes on to say :— 
** Allein indem ich langer beobachtete, wurde ich tiber diese 
Ansicht bedenklich. Namentlich war mir das Verhalten der 
Contouren an der Basis der Fortsatze ein Stein des Anstosses. 
Ich hielt es fiir unwahrscheinlich, dass eine dicke Zellen- 
membran an einer so scharf begranzten Stelle so sehr sollte 
verdiinnt werden kénnen. Deshalb warf ich mir die Frage 
auf, ob ich nicht vielleicht Rhizopoden mit emer mem- 
brandsen Schale vor mir hitte, welche an gewissen Stellen 
fiir auszustreckende Fortsatze durchléchert ware.” And 
with the light thrown by the knowledge of the form de- 
scribed in the present paper and of those made known by 
Greeff, does it not appear that Auerbach’s conjecture in the 
foregoing extract is right: in other words, that if it should 
turn up once more it is highly probable that Ameba bilimbosa 
will reveal itself as appertaining to Amphizonella (Greeff) ? 
A ferm of rhizopod, described as involved by a very flexi- 
ble “membranous tegument,” met with by Dujardin, to 
which he has given the generic name of Corycia,! seems 
possibly to come close to this genus. The account given by 
him, unaccompanied by any illustration, is, however, too 
meagre to be certain as to what this actually is; it does not 
seem, however, to be the same thing as Ameba bilimbosa 
(Auerbach) ; it probably most resembles one of the forms re- 
ferred to Amphizonella by Greeff—A. flawva—but is most 
likely not specifically identical therewith; a decision in 
respect to it must, I fear, remain in abeyance. 
I have sometimes thought that the unnamed rhizopod 
referred to by Focke® in a recent paper, simply under the 
designation of ‘No. iii” (loc. cit.), might be closely related 
to my form, here named Amphizonella vestita. But the 
account given by that author of the form he had in view is 
' Dujardin, in ‘ Annales des Sciences Naturelles,’ 1852, p. 241. 
2 Dr. G. W. Focke, “ Ueber schalenlose Radiolarien des siissen Wassers,” 
in Siebold and Kolliker’s ‘ Zeitschrift fiir Wissensch. Zoologie,’ Bd. xvii, 
p- 355, t. xxv, ili, a, b, c. 
