ADDENDA. 



NOTES, References, Authorities, etc., omitted in the text: 



Page i, line 16. The doctrine of unicellularity in regard to the 

 Infusoria has been upheld by Sibold and Kolliker; the ma- 

 jority of naturalists have conceded it. 



Page 9, line 21, et seq., vide Pfiiiger's Arch., Vol. XXIII, 1880. 



Page 10, line 4, vide Rouget, Revue Scientifique. March 15, 1884. 



Page 10, line 13, videAnna/es des Sciences Naturelles, 1835, Vol. IV, 

 pp. 348 and 361. 



Page 12, line 29, et seq., vide Arbeiten aus dem zoblog. Institut in 

 Wiirzburg, herausgegeben von Prof. C. Semper, Vol. I. p. 

 9, 1872. 



Page 15, lines 12 and 13, vide Morphologisches jfahrbuch, Vol. X. 

 1885, p. 534. 



Page 16, line 25, vide Pftiiger's Arch., 1876. 



Page 19, line 28, vide Balbiani, Lecons sur les Sporozoaires . 



Page 20, line 6. By protoplasm in this connection is understood 

 the entire cellular body; the distinction of function between 

 the protoplasm properly so called, and the nucleus, is estab- 

 lished later on in the essay. 



Page 26, lines 9 and 10, vide Comptes rendus de FAcad. des Sciences, 

 Nov. 2, 1886, No. 18. 



Page 29, line 26, vide Bot. Zeitung, 1881, 1883, 1884, 1886. 



Page 46, last line, vide E. Maupas, Etude des Infusoires ciltts, 

 Arch, de zool. exptr., 1883, No. 4. 



Page 58, lines 30 and 31, vide Henneguy, Sur la reproduction du 

 Volvox dioique. Acad. des Sciences, July 24, 1876. 



