390 
NATURE 
[January 18, 1917 
As soon as I came across Prof. Bayliss’s statement 
I wrote to him pointing out what seemed a use of 
““metabolic’’ earlier than 1883. Not possessing the 
work jn the original, I asked Prof. Bayliss what was 
the exact word translated ‘‘metabolic,” as I wished to 
know whether it was any derivative of ‘* Stoffwechsel,’’ 
the present-day German word for ‘‘metabolism.”’ Prof. 
Bayliss replied at once to say that he had found the 
original passage, which he kindly transcribed for me 
as follows :— Zweitens, Erscheinungen, die sich auf 
chemische Veranderungen, sowohl der Bestandtheile 
der Zelle selbst, als des umgebenden Cytoblastems, 
beziehen, diese kann man metabolische Erschein- 
ungen nennen (76 peraBoduxdv) was Umwandlung her- 
vorzubringen oder zu erleiden geneigt ist.” 
**Metabolische,’’ and not any derivative of ‘‘ Stoff- 
wechsel,’’ is, therefore, the word employed. Thhis is not 
the only passage in which Schwann uses the word; on 
p. 197 he speaks of “metabolic power,’’ and again 
later, in contrasting a crystal and an organism, he 
remarks that the metabolic properties are ‘‘ quite pecu- 
liar to cells... The word occurs twice more at the 
close of this remarkable chapter. 
As the origin of anything cannot fail to be interest- 
ing, and as the word ‘“‘metabolism’’ is so very much 
used in biological exposition, I have thought it well to 
ask you to publish these remarks, 
D. Fraser Harris. 
Cultural Amebz from the Intestine of Man. 
I soup like to thank your reviewer for his com- 
mendatory remarks in Nature of December 21, 1916, 
on the account of the parasitic Protozoa which I con- 
tributed to the ‘Animal Parasites of Man.” Without 
in any way wishing to raise a discussion, I think it 
should be pointed out, in respect to his statement about 
Amoeba limax, that much information concerning 
these cultural organisms that may occur in the human 
intestine will be found under the designation ‘‘ cultural 
amoebze’’ on pp. 42, 618, 742 and 743 of my work. 
As your reviewer rightly infers, A. limax is not now 
strictly the name of a single species, but rather of a 
group or type of free-living forms which show differ- 
ences among themselves, but can be cultivated on 
artificial media. It is not easy to point out marked 
differential characters between them and Entamcebz, 
especially after consideration of the work of Drs. 
Williams and Calkins, to which reference is made by 
me on p. 42 and pp. 742 and 743 of the book. 
H. B. FantHam. 
Cambridge. 
Dr. Fantuam has given information concerning the 
culture of “cultural amcoebe,” and mentions (p. 618) 
that they are non-pathogenic, but beyond the statement 
(previously overlooked), on pp. 42, 743, that they 
exhibit morphological variations there is no note of 
their characters. The account does not therefore 
afford adequate help to those who, during microscopic 
examination of a stool, find for the first time amoebze 
with a very large karyosome, and desire to know what 
they are. Although amoebze of the limax type exhibit 
variations under different methods of culture, as de- 
scribed by Williams and Calkins, reference might 
have been made to the striking karyosome by which 
amcebze of this type, as found in the human, intestine, 
are often distinguishable. In view of the frequent 
references in recent literature to ‘“amoebz of the limax 
type,” some account under this designation might have 
been given, e.g. on p. 42, following the account of the 
morphology of species of Entamoeba from the intes- 
tine. Tue Reviewer. 
NO. 2464, VoL. 98] 
FLOUR STANDARDS. 
EFERENCE was made im Nature of Novem—. 
ber 23 and 30, 1916, to the Order directing 
that millers shall increase the yield of flour from: 
wheat by about 5 per cent. The result was that 
the corresponding proportion of “offal” was. 
mixed in with the flour, An Order has now been. 
made to the effect that a further 5 per cent. 
must be added to the flour. This may be done- 
either by taking another five parts of offal for 
that purpose, or (and this is a most important 
new departure), at the miller’s option, by adding~ 
five parts of flour derived from barley, maize, 
rice, or oats. In addition, he may add voluntarily 
another five parts, making ten parts in all over 
and above the previous increase in flour yield of 
seventy-one to about seventy-six parts of flour’ 
from 100 parts of wheat. The result is a com- 
pulsory ro per cent. or a voluntary 15 per cent. 
more bread with the use of the same quantity of 
wheat. 
In his article in Nature of November 30, the 
present writer deprecated any further addition 
beyond the first 5 per cent., except in case of 
dire necessity, because of the deterioration in 
quality of the resultant flour. The necessity -has- 
apparently arisen, but the use of flour from other 
cereals is a valuable alternative in the present 
difficulty. Except for the absence of gluten, 
barley and the other flours indicated will not 
differ greatly from wheaten flour. They will not 
of themselves have rising power, and conse-- 
quently the gluten of the wheaten flour present 
will have to buoy up the whole loaf during fer- 
mentation. But, on the other hand, there will 
be an absence of the proteolytic and starch-con-- 
verting enzymes which are so active in the 
whiter portion of the offal of wheat, and act so 
adversely on the gluten and starch of the flour. 
So early as January, 1915, the Lancet, in a 
leading article, suggested the use of cornflour 
in order to eke out the wheat supply. In conse- 
quence some experiments were made by Lieut.. 
W. Claude Jago, the results of which were pub- 
lished in the Lancet of February 13 of the same 
year. 
London ‘household flour only, (2) a mixture of 
ninety parts of the same flour and ten parts of 
cornflour, and (3) a mixture of eighty parts of 
the flour and twenty parts of cornflour. The 
bread from the mixtures was slightly less in 
volume, but fairly equal to that from the flour only 
in texture and appearance. This judgment was 
confirmed by the editor of the Lancet, who stated 
that the loaves “appeared to be quite acceptable.” 
Cornflour is, of course, maize starch, and is manu- 
factured very largely in the United States. If 
this variant of maize flour be permitted, its em- 
ployment will result in a considerably larger yield 
of bread and of a type which will accord with the 
reasonable tastes and requirements of the British 
public. 
Wirttam Jaco. 
Loaves of bread were baked from (ry 
. 
