284 NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY OF DUBLIN. 
bia BB oe of examples variable; diameter of inner bodies 
from about zq59’ 
Localities. O08 in Callery and Carrig neighbourhoods (county of 
Wicklow), very sparingly; rare. 
Affinities and Differences. —Distinguished from preceding at once by 
the salient characters alluded to under this heading following the de- 
scription of C. Haeckeliana. As mentioned under the similar paragraph 
following the description of Acanthocystes Pertyana, it will be seen that 
I hold little doubt but that form is identical with Greef’s fig. 29 (loc. evt.) 
to which I have already adverted. This form is not named by Greef; 
hence it has no synonym. 
Having made several allusions in the foregoing to Greef’s new genus 
Astrodisculus, and as he likewise in his recent valuable paper makes 
some observations upon Clathrulina (Cienkowski), a short résumé of 
those portions of his communication may be of some advantage. 
In bringing forward the genus Astrodisculus, however, Greef does not 
give, as yet at least, diagnostic characters ; but, as I glean them from his 
general account of the forms he refers thereto, 1 believe they are some- 
thing like the following :— 
Genus, Astrodisculus (Greef).* 
Body of two distinct well-marked regions, the outer a hyaline, 
‘‘norous,” sharply bounded investment, without any external processes 
(which withstands the action of sulphuric acid), and gives passage 
to a number of fine linear pseudopodia emanating from the contained 
inner sarcode mass, which contains a globular, smoothly bounded “ cen- 
tral capsule” (or sometimes several, 4. minutus, A. radians), with va- 
riously coloured contents. 
Greef describes the outer coat or marginal region of the forms apper- 
taining here as porous and siliceous. I myself have met at least one form 
which I am greatly disposed to suspect would belong here ; but I know 
it too slightly as yet to venture to record it. But it strikes me that in 
the form to which I allude, the outer marginal region is distinctly flexi- 
ble, giving way to certain circumscribed changes of figure of the Rhi- 
zopod. Ifso, I can hardly suppose this outer region can be a siliceous 
skeleton. Nor does it appear to me porous, though showing an evenly 
and regularly dotted appearance through its substance, and giving pas- 
sage to exceedingly fine pseudopodia. In this Rhizopod I certainly did 
but consider that I had before me a form coming close to Heterophrys, 
but differing in the sharply bounded outer surface of the comparatively 
rigid marginal region not being mobile nor divided into processes. 
* Loe. cit., pp. 496, et seqg. 
