135 
coat standing apart from the inner body, pale yellowish, very 
thin, smooth, often falling into folds. 
Amphizonella vestita (Arch.) } 
Minute, but variable in size, normally rotund, but capable of 
varying its figure; nucleus comparatively large, elliptic, gra- 
nular, smoothly bounded, but not seemingly enclosed in a special 
investment ; body-mass nearly colourless or bluish, varied by a 
palish-brownish hue, enclosing a number of minute clear shiny 
purplish-grey, generally elliptic, sharply-bounded corpuscles, 
these forming a stratum just under the periphery of the body, 
below which often occurs a more or less dense stratum of large 
bright chlorophyll-granules ; pseudopodia hyaline, generally 
emanating in a cluster from a comparatively restricted region, 
but occasionally singly, from other different points, short and 
conical, or more elongate and tapering, bluntly pointed ; in- 
vesting coat thin and of uniform depth, often seemingly deficient 
at the region giving off the corona of pseudopodia, at other 
times seemingly completely covering the body, showing a num- 
ber of sharply-marked, closely and vertically posed equidistant 
lines, seen, when viewed equatorially, inits substance, reaching 
through its depth, and clothed superficially with a dense covering 
of more or less elongate extremely fine filiform hair-like pro- 
cesses, giving a hirsute or pilose or narrow fringe-like appear- 
ance, and when empty, a dotted aspect, or these obsolete. 
Measurements.— Diameter varying from about ;4,”, down 
to perhaps two-thirds of that size. 
. Localities—Pools in counties Westmeath and Tipperary. 
In the latter locality no specimens were seen showing chlo- 
rophyll-granules—a temporary character however in many 
Rhizopoda. 
Affinities and Differences.—Considerations which would fall 
under this head, so far as they have a bearing in a generic 
point of view, and so far as the genus Amphizonella is typi- 
fied by Greeff’s forms, have been already adverted to. In 
respect, however, to our new form, it might suggest itself 
just possibly that certain considerations might operate in a 
measure to exclude it from one and the same genus with 
Greeff’s. I allude to the mostly one-sided emanations of the 
pseudopodia; to the seeming absence of the coat at a given 
area ; to the presence of the superficial hair-like processes, and 
to the subtle hyaline sarcode envelope sometimes seen. The 
first circumstance might be thought to bear a parallelism to 
1 Pl. VI, figs. 1—6, accompanying this paper. 
