386 
MA GORE 
(FEBRUARY 25, 1904 
phrys, of Peranemata, and of diatoms—have been ob- 
served by Dr. Bastian. Thus he describes in detail 
how within the closed cells of sprigs of Nitella opaca 
multitudes of Actinophrys appear; ‘‘ all the smallest 
specimens are of just the same size as the chlorophyll 
corpuscles,”’ ‘ none are to be found smaller than these 
corpuscles,’’ they have at first no rays, and they are 
motionless. ‘* The myriads of chlorophyll corpuscles 
are converted into the myriads of Actinophrys.’? That 
is to say, the corpuscles of a vegetable cell may be sud- 
denly transformed into well-known Protozoa with a 
specific cytoplasmic and nuclear structure, a per saltum 
transformation which no biologist would believe even 
if he seemed to see it, for it suggests a magical evolu- 
tion entirely beyond credence, because so meaningless. 
In the same way the author describes the origin of im- 
mature diatoms as heterogenetic products due to the 
transformation of the cells of the alga Chlorochytrium, 
parasitic in the duckweed. Of course, the author dis- 
cusses other interpretations, the infection hypothesis, 
backed by a further hypothesis of chemotaxis, and 
shows at length that they do not fit the facts he has 
observed. It may be noted that we have a very imper- 
fect acquaintance with the complete life-histories of 
most unicellular organisms, that there is probably an 
extraordinary complexity of symbiosis and commen- 
salism amongst them, that many are known to be very 
modifiable or plastic; and it may be that Dr. Bastian’s 
work will find its reward in provoking research to make 
our knowledge of unicellular organisms more con- 
tinuous. On the other hand, it is well known that 
many forms carefully studied have a very definite and 
specific organisation, and we would believe many 
things—even that Dr. Bastian’s carefulness of method 
was not all that could be desired—rather than accept the 
view that one type of cytoplasmic organisation can be 
suddenly transformed into another. Evidence in favour 
of a certain amount of heterogenesis many biologists 
would be prepared to consider carefully, but when. it 
comes to a chlorophyll corpuscle changing into an 
Actinophrys, we are in the position, absolutely inevit- 
able, of those who would not believe in a resurrection 
though one rose from the dead. 
(4) The climax of Dr. Bastian’s book is his account of 
the heterogenesis of ciliated infusorians. These rela- 
tively highly organised forms may arise, he says, from 
the pellicle on organic infusions, from the transform- 
ation of amcebe, from encysted euglenz, from the eggs 
of Tardigrada, and from the eggs of the rotifer, Hyda- 
tina. Let us confine ourselves to the last instance. It was 
found that the eggs of Hydatina may give rise in a few 
days to young forms of Vorticella, Oxytricha, Aspi- 
disca costata, or to a large ciliate known as Otostoma 
cartert. Nine stages in the transformation of a fresh 
egg of Hydatina into an Otostoma are described, and 
the author says ‘* however improbable this transforma- 
tion may seem to those who have not studied the 
changes for themselves, the possibilities of error are still 
more improbable.’”? Against the suggestion that he 
mistook encysted Otostoma the rotifer’s eggs, 
Bastian gives seven items of evidence; against the sug- 
gestion that each egg seeming to undergo the trans- 
NO. 1791, VOL. 69] 
for 
formation in question, was infected by an immature 
form of the infusorian, he gives eight items of evidence. 
If we take for granted that Dr. Bastian made no mis- 
tale in identifying either the Hydatina eggs or the large 
Otostoma, we must conclude that he witnessed a re- 
markable phenomenon which should be re-studied and 
properly figured. Different stages should be treated 
by the usual histological methods, carefully drawn 
and compared with the normal course of development. 
Careful attention should also be paid to the numerous 
parasites of rotifers, e.g. those described by Przesmycki. 
The photographic method used by Bastian has_ its 
obvious value, but the results are very far from clear or 
convincing. 
In an exceedingly interesting and acute chapter on 
the general subject of discontinuous or per saltum vari- 
ation, Dr. Bastian points out that his general position 
is supported by analogies in the inorganic world, e.g. by 
the fact that many substances crystallise in forms which 
belong to two or three different systems of erystallis- 
ation, and that the difference of crystalline form which 
they exhibit is associated with difference of specific 
gravity, hardness, colour, and other properties. Then 
there is the case of radium, which ‘‘ may be looked upon 
as continuously giving rise to new elements by a pro- 
cess of material evolution.’’ He discusses cases of 
abrupt or transilient variation in animals and plants, 
and combats the opposition which Weismann expressed 
in his early ‘* Studies in the Theory of Descent ’’ to the 
idea of ‘sudden transformation of the whole 
organism.’’? But Weismann’s views have changed not 
a little since 1882, and it would have been fairer to have 
quoted from his ‘‘ Vortrage’’ of 1902. Dr. Bastian 
does not seem to have quite realised how many 
biologists now accept, as proved up to the hilt, the fre- 
quent occurrence of Galton’s ‘‘transilient,’’ or Bateson’s 
‘* discontinuous,’’? or De Vries’s ‘‘ mutational ’’ vari- 
ations. But this is not quite the same thing as accept- 
ing the observational conclusion that the chlorophyll 
corpuscle of Nitella may become a sun-animalcule, or a 
rotifer’s egg a large ciliate! There are some things 
that one must see for oneself, and even then one 
would not believe them! It may be that “ the lowest 
organisms exist at the present day because they are ever 
seething up anew by processes of heterogenesis’’; and 
we should not be greatly surprised if that turned out to 
be a thesis ‘f founded upon fact and consistent with 
reason.’ But such an epoch-making conclusion must 
be proved, not by one prejudiced in its favour, but by a 
man of thiatige Skepsis, who takes every possible pre- 
caution to avoid discovering heterogenesis, who will 
certainly not adduce as evidence cases of a rotifer’s 
germ-plasm demeaning itself to reincarnation as a 
ciliated infusorian. The author was forced, indeed, to 
offer the evidence that he observed, but if he had not 
drawn his bow quite so far as the case just cited im- 
plies, the arrow with ‘* heterogenesis *’ on its feather 
might have penetrated further. 
Very useful, it seems to us, is the author’s idea of 
a ephemeromorphs,”’ that is, of transitorily occurring 
phases among unicellulars, which may be wholly due to 
modificational influence, in contradistinction to the 
