158 Paulinella Chromatophora (Lauterborn) in Britain. 
born (1895), who obtained it from the Rhine, at Neuhofen 
(Bavaria) and from the Black Forest. 
Later, Dr. Penard collected numerous specimens in Lake 
Geneva, and gave an excellent account (1905), of the structure 
and habits. In a footnote to this paper, Penard mentions that 
it had been obtained also by Levander in a lake near Helsingfors 
(Finland). 
It was first reported from Britain by Penard (1905a), who 
observed a single empty test amongst some material supplied 
to him from Loch Ness (Scotland), and obtained at a depth of 
Bye cee, 
The present writer obtained further a number of empty 
tests in a small tarn—Highlow Tarn—in Lancashire (1910). 
This was the first record of its occurrence in England. 
Since then no records from Britain appear to have been 
published, but after continued collection of material from the 
lakes and tarns in the English Lake District, I am able to 
extend the known British distribution by the record of the 
following localities where I have collected specimens :— 
Sprinkling Tarn (Cumberland) in 1911 ; Windermere Lake 
(Westmorland) and a small tarn on Claife Heights (Lancashire) 
in 1912; Easedale Tarn (Westmorland), and again Highlow 
Tarn (Lancashire) in 1913. 
In the gathering obtained from Easedale Tarn during 
May, I913, and examined during November of that year, the 
living animal was obtained for the first time, I believe, in 
Britain ; though only one was discovered. In this individual 
the protoplasm showed the characteristic faintly bluish tinge, 
and contained numerous clear granules and rounded bodies 
(droplets ?), and a single pulsating vacuole. The nucleus was 
obscured by the large size of the chromatophores. Of these 
bodies the protoplasm enclosed two, lying across one another 
(fig. 2 chr.). They were of a bright bluish-green colour, 
similar to that of the blue-green alge. Penard, in his account, 
describes the chromatophores as having all the characters of 
distinct organisms of the nature of cyanophycee, living 
apparently symbiotically with the rhizopod, but incapable of 
existence apart from it. They grow and divide, and thus the 
occasional occurrence of two chromatophores in one individual 
would be accounted for. 
Chlorophyll bodies are also observed in some other rhizopods, 
e.g., species of Amphitrema, and they are here probably of a 
similar nature. In both these cases, solid food bodies are not 
observed in the-protoplasm of the animal, and this absence 
would be explained by the supposed symbiosis. Much work, 
however, remains to be done on this interesting subject.* 
* One might refer here to the observations on symbiosis by Professor 
Keeble, an account of which is given in his book on ‘ Plant-Animals.’ 
Naturalist 
