Some Observations on Amoeba proteus. 203 
I owe to Mr Bolton an original method of bringing amcebe to the surface 
of the mud in the collecting bottle; a method perfected for me in a small 
convenient apparatus by the Rev. James Rowland,’ SJ., B.Sc., to whom 
I would here record my indebtedness. 
There are a few points still calling for remark. The spherules often 
mentioned as present in A. proteus, particularly in A. proteus Y, are not all 
alike in composition; some stain well and may help in the identification of 
this uninucleate form in preparations, other spherules disappear if ammonia 
has been added to any of the reagents, and again others neither retain stain 
nor dissolve. 
The crystals, too, which in the living amcebze are a great help, disappear 
completely after treatment with the ordinary acid reagents. Thus it will be 
seen that should A. proteus X and A. proteus Y be in that phase in which 
the chromatin granules are evenly distributed in the nucleus and no diatoms 
present in the XY specimen, it will be practically impossible to distinguish the 
one “type” from the other in a permanent preparation. This is important, 
because so many workers kill off at once and study their preparations, a 
method entirely unsuitable when working on A. proteus. 
The foregoing observations are but a small percentage of those which 
have been made, but they are sufficient apology for the protest here raised 
against new specific names being given to A. proteus until a more conclusive 
life-history can be traced. 
A short historical survey may add some weight also, showing as it does 
that there are names in plenty for this species of amceba whatever its 
ultimate fate may be. It may also convince others that if distinct species 
ever are formed from these amcebe, the name A. protews Pallas, should be 
retained by the form here designated provisionally A. protews XY, the type 
normally feeding on diatoms. 
HISTORICAL SURVEY. 
It would be superfluous to repeat the oft-told story of the discovery 
and naming of A. proteus but for the interest now being focussed upon the 
“ variations ” observed in the amcebee passing under this name. 
By all readers of A. proteus literature it must be evident that the earliest 
observers in this field were attracted by the size, general appearance and 
movements of these large amcebe, and named them from some one or other 
of these characteristics. No nucleus has been included in descriptions 
before Auerbach,? 1856, exactly 100 years after the discovery made 
1 Professor of Physics and Chemistry, Mount St Mary’s College, Chesterfield. 
2 Auerbach, Zeit. fiir wiss. Zool., Bd. vil., 1856, p. 409. 
