Bek. 7 
% 4; 
b. 
208 Proceedings of the Royal Physical Society. 
Metcalfe! admits the difficulties arising from the “types,” in a paper 
of his published in 1910. From his text he seems to have studied 
A. proteus Y, on which he makes the following note:—“ Hither the species 
proteus includes very diverse individuals, diversent as to food-habits, the 
condition of the crystals and plastids and plasma, or we should distinguish 
in the diverse types two or more species or sub-species if preferred. The 
species here studied feed almost wholly on bacteria, have numerous crystals 
... the species I had for study seems to be a form of A. proteus. The 
individuals are very large and quite typical A. proteus, except that their 
diet was almost exclusively bacteria, which is not ordinarily true of 
A, proteus.” ) 
Doflein’s * text-book on Protozoa appeared in 1911 with a clear description 
and good figures of A. proteus Y, under the title of A. proteus Pallas. 
Karl Gruber? worked on the form A. proteus Y, under the name of 
A. proteus, in 1912. : 
In 1913 my own short paper‘ on A. proteus Pallas, calls attention to 
the difference in diet of the two uninucleate forms, but I also refer the 
forms to Leidy’s A. proteus. 
In this same year Vonwiller> published a note on the multinucleate 
form suggesting its withdrawal from the proteus group, at least the special 
multinucleate form upon which he worked, and as an alternative considered 
A, nobilis Penard to be a more suitable name. Dr Vonwiller sent me some 
beautiful preparations of his amceba for comparison with my own to which 
I found them similar, and, therefore, could not agree with his arrangement 
until we had further evidence. He had only studied the amceba two-and-a- 
half months, and admitted that it was hardly long enough under the 
circumstances. The war in 1914 stopped all further comparison of notes 
and work. 
It is Scheeffer’s® decision of 1916 and 1917 which has, however, called 
forth the protest which I have put forward in this paper. His grouping 
and specifications are given on the first page. , 
From his excellent text-descriptions it must be concluded that his . 
A. proteus Pallas emend. Leidy, is the amceba already named A. proteus 
Pallas, var. granulosa by Cash and Hopkinson; that his raptorial A. debia 
(or dubia) Scheeffer, the diatom feeder, corresponds to the A. proteus of 
1 Metcalfe, Journ. Kuper. Zool., vol. ix., 1910, pp. 301, 307. 
2 Doflein, Lehrbuch der Protozoa, 1911, pp. 
> Gruber, Karl, Arch. fiir Protist., vel. xxv., 1912. 
4 Carter, loc. cit. 
° Vonwiller, loc. ctt. : 
5 Scheeffer, loc. cit, 
