46 NOTE ON THE WORD PROTOPLASM. 



be ultimately accepted by biologists), as indicating the 

 ideal living matter, cannot be given to any substance 



simply distinguishes it as living. A living white blood-corpuscle is a 

 mass of bioplasm, or it might be termed bioplast. A very minute 

 particle is a bioplast, and we may speak of living matter as bioplasmic 

 substance" (Qu. Mic. J., July, 1870.) If this name had been given at 

 first, and at the same time the id-a as rigidly defined, probably it 

 would have been universally adopted, but whether it ultimately will 

 be now since other words are current already, no one can tell. With 

 respect to the propriety of the word bioplasm to express what is meant, 

 an excellent classical scholar Mr. Scott, of Birmingham to whom I 

 submitted the question, says, " There is nothing in the word itself to 

 indicate that the thing formed is also itself living ;" hence it would apply 

 equally to the formed material. Hackel (" G-enerelle Morphologic," 

 i., 1866, p. 276) says TO jr\a<r/ia signifies properly the thing formed, 

 and the forming material would be better designated plasson, from, 

 TO TrXaavov. Accordingly, more recently, he calls the substance of the 

 cvtodes "plasson," while the substance of the nucleated cells is named 

 protoplasma (Die Kalkschwamme, 1872). This would simply amount 

 to inventing another new name for the ideal living or germinal matter, 

 and restricting the word protoplasm to a particular variety of living 

 matter. The name given bj Hackel to what corresponds with Beale's 

 bioplast, is plastid, which is a very convenient word if bioplast should 

 not be ultimately adopted. As observed by Dr. Sharpey, the word 

 protoplast having been already taken up for such a widely different 

 signification, it is not available in physiology. " On the whole, as 

 remarked in my fanner work, it is most probable that the term pro- 

 toplasm will still be retained in this country to express the idea of 

 Beale's germinal matter and bioplasm, as it is so accepted by Dr. 

 Sharpey, whose calm and solid judgment reveals to us, as it were, the 

 verdict of posterity." Dr. Beale himself seems to acquiesce in this, 

 or he says in his last edition of " Protoplasm," 1874: " It is, I think, 

 possible that after some years have passed, protoplasm may be restricted 

 to living matter only. The term will then become synonymous with 

 bioplasm, or living matter, in which case the latter words may be 

 given up" (188). I will, therefore, continue to use as synonymous 

 with the ideal living matter the words "irritable matter/' ' "living 

 matter," "diffused ganglionic nervous matter," "germinal matter," 

 "bioplasm," "protoplasm;" and for adjectives, protoplasmic, bio- 

 plasmic, or living ; and for an individual mass, protoplasmic mass, 

 bioplast, and plastid. However, as every visible mass, or plastid, 

 contains, in addition to the ideal living matter, some pabulum and 

 some formed material, besides water, I would suggest that the gelatin- 

 ous matter forming the bulk of many of the lowest and so-called uni- 

 cellular organisms should still, as originally, be called sarcode, while 

 the word protoplasm should be strictly reserved for the true ideal 

 living matter. 



