ARCHERINA, GOLENKINIA AND BOTRYOCOCCUS. A425 
sion of Archerina, which were described and figured by me 
in my paper of 1885. These are the symmetrically-grouped 
division-products of Archerina drawn in figs. 21 and 22 of my 
paper (Pl. 7, ‘ Quart. Journ. Micr. Sci.,’ vol. xxv). I would 
further draw attention to the oblong form of the chlorophyll 
bodies shown in my fig. 21, as agreeing with some of 
Lemmerman’s figures of another supposed new genus of his. 
It is, of course, possible to maintain that these oblong 
bodies are specially distinct from the more usual spherical 
forms, but I do not think that there is any sufficient ground 
for separating, generically or specifically, the much divided 
groups of small-sized spheres from the larger single spheres 
of Archerina boltoni with which they were associated 
and with which they are connected by intermediate phases of 
division, as well as by the characteristic radiating processes 
of the cell-envelope. 
In my judgment Golenkinia and Richteriella are synonyms 
of Archerina, and I think this will be admitted by botanists 
who compare my plate of 1885 with the much later drawings 
of Chodat and of Lemmerman. I am at the same time of 
the opinion that the reference of Archerina to the Protozoa 
by me was an error, and that the organism is to be regarded 
as one of the simpler Protophyta. 
B. Botrryococcus. 
Curiously enough it is to a paper also published by Prof. 
Chodat in Morot’s Journal at a later date, 1896, that 
I am indebted for the identification of a very beautiful 
minute fresh-water organism which I studied and drew about 
the same time as that in which Archerina came before me. 
I used to speak of this as the ‘Cayenne pepper growth,” 
since it appeared as little grains resembling in colour and 
size those of that condiment, floating in closely packed 
ageregates on the surface of the Hnglish Lakes (Grasmere 
and Derwentwater). I received it first in 1884 from Mr. 
Bolton, of Birmingham, and some sixteen years later from 
