1884.] 



MICROSCOPICAL JOURNAL. 



25 



This species of pyxicola I have 

 taken attached in some profusion to 

 an alga growing in the Delaware and 

 Raritan Canal, and from that locality 

 only. 



Trenton, N. J. 



Has Salpingoeca Urceolata, S. K., 

 a Fresh- Water Habitat? 



BY DR. ALFRED C. STOKES. 



In this Journal for November last 

 the writer expressed the supposition 

 that Salping-oeca urceolata^ S. K., is 

 not more restricted to salt-water than 

 is a certain almost cosmopolitan infu- 

 sorian frequently met with by every 



Fig. 6. — Salpingaeca Fig. 7. — Salpingoeca acuminata, 

 urceolata. deforme t. 



observer. The statement was based 

 upon a somewhat limited experience 



of early spring. At the time. I could 

 not speak with absolute certainty, as 

 this salpingcEca seems rather rare, 

 and as I had not captured it again un- 

 til the article above referred to was in 

 print. Since then, however, I have 

 taken the same creature on Alyrio- 

 phyllum from another locality, and, 

 upon comparing this recent find with 

 the description and figures of Kent's 

 typical marine form, the dift'erences 

 appear so slight and the resemblances 

 so many and strong, that an observer 

 must be convinced that it is either 

 Salping-oeca urceolata with a fresh- 

 water habitat, or at least a fresh-water 

 variety. The resemblance holds ti'ue 

 even in that peculiar and characteris- 

 tic contractility of the lorica-neck in 

 the marine form. 



The lorica of the salpingoeca found 

 by the writer is represented in fig. 6 

 reduced from a pantographic enlarge- 

 ment of a camera drawing. After 

 the animal had been on the slide for 

 some time,^ the zooid retracted the 

 collar and flagellum, and withdrew 

 itself entirely out of the neck into the 

 body of the lorica ; it was in that con- 

 dition, and was purposely omitted, 

 when the drawing was made to show 

 the similarity of the contracted lorica- 

 neck to the same part in Kent's fig- 

 ure. Differences which I have noticed 

 between the fresh-water and marine 

 forms are the somewhat smaller size 

 of the lorica and the slightly increased 

 length of the pedicel of the former, 

 differences of the very least import- 

 ance. 



May I here also ask the reader's at- 

 tention to fig. 7 as an interesting 

 deformity? The salpingoeca there 

 shown is apparently the species de- 

 scribed by the writer in this Journal 

 under the name of S. acuminata. 

 How the animal happened to properly 

 form one side of its lorica and to get 

 the other so out of sorts is a mystery. 

 It is easily imagined, however, that 

 after producing the pedicel and the 

 posterior fourth of the sheath, the sal- 

 pingoeca was, by some overwhelming 

 force, thrown against an uneven sur- 



