Plourocystis ciu'noti, Hesse. 



2r)9 



iiiiulequate fij^iire. Ir» Monori/stis agilts and other speciiM 

 tlie ai)|)licati()ii of the coiiju:;;iMt3 is polar of " oiul-to-ciul " 

 (tig. 2). Since the parasitt-s are attachetl to the sotninal 

 lunnels oE the hosts purniancntly, us all a^reu (and they do 

 not hecouie detached post mortem), it is the close proximity 

 of the individuals to one an<ithur which determines their 

 association into diploids inter sf, which mii^t theretore of 

 necessity be longitudinal, A curious condrmation of this i-i 

 shown in fig. 3 in the case of the diploids D and E, which 

 are partially attached to one another at their posterior extrt-- 

 mities, from which I infer that di[)loiilal association [trobaUly 

 always hvijins at this eiul. 



Fi-. y. 



D. 



riettrocystia cuhioti. Two diplniils, D and E, pnrtially attacliud to ono 

 another nt tliiir llo^t(. rior extiemities' 



But Ilesse (1009) pointed out that ^fonocystis magna, 

 Schmidt, ditYered so materially from other species that he 

 proposed for it the generic name of Ntinatocx/stis. Further, 

 that there was existing another animal, which, agreeing in 

 the main with the characters of Monocystis rather than with 

 those of JS^enuifncJ/slin, became coupled, in a longitudinal 

 nrinner, with a partner for life like j\einatocysl{s, and not 

 merely during the process of conjugation. To this form he 

 ^ave the name of FIcnrocystis cuinotiy and, whilo aihnitting 

 that it is very rare, remarks that the animals arc always in 

 the diploidal tomlition and never found siutjli/. After giving 



