Some Observations on Amcoeba proteus. 209 
Griiber,! A. proteus Pallas of Cash and Hopkinson,’ A. proteus Pallas of 
my own earlier papers and provisionally A. proteus X in this present paper. 
I hold it that if this amceba is to be finally separated from the others it 
should be the amceba to retain the name of A. proteus Pallas, for reasons 
already given. 
There are at present recorded in Leidy’s work of 1879 sixteen different 
names for the amoeba described by him as A. proteus, while Cash and 
Hopkinson, in 1905, were able to produce at least twenty-three and to 
draw attention to the fact that this synonymy was not exhaustive; they 
did not include the multinucleate form. Can it be necessary to add to 
this list ? | 
If the amceba is to keep the name 4A. proteus then some designation 
of its condition or “type” at the time of observation is absolutely necessary, 
hence the suggestion of A. proteus X, Y and Z. If, finaliy, the different 
“types” are proved to be also different species, evidenced by conclusive 
life-cycles, then the following names might be chosen from those already 
well known, eg. A. proteus Pallas, A. princeps Ehrenberg, and A. nobilis 
Penard. : 
A remark made by Scheffer? corresponds with my own sentiments in 
this work—“ Whether these two types” (he does not seem to include the 
multinucleate form) “represent two or more species, or only different stages 
in the life-cycle of a single species has not yet been determined... . It is 
almost needless to say that it is of fundamental importance in physiological 
studies to know just what animals were used for observation and experiment. 
It is easy to see that the conclusions would be different from what they are 
if all the experiments in this paper had been performed on amebas of the 
granular type or on the raptorial type exclusively.” The truth of this can 
only be appreciated by one who has studied A. proteus in all its forms in 
the living material. 
- Nothing but an intimate knowledge and careful microscopic study of the 
living amcebee can give one an insight into the various conditions physiological, 
pathological or reproductive, as the case may be, in which these amcebe may 
be found. Dr Scheffer is certainly carrying out this careful study, and his 
grouping of granular and raptorial is excellent, presuming that he places 
the multinucleate form with the granular amcebe; but I do not think the 
position he gives to the old name A. proteus Pallas, nor the new names 
set forth as his own, are justifiable either now or in the future. 
1 A. Griiber, loc. cit. 
2 Cash and Hopkinson, loc. cit. 
> Scheffer, Journ. Kaper. Zool., vol. xx. p. 537. 
