98 
Proceedings of the Royal Irish Acadenry, 
do not seem identical either with that form or with the individual 
globules of the form I named Cystophrys octdea. I would here beg to 
refer to my previous remarks thereon.* I have occasionally since then 
taken examples of both one and the other, still maintaining the cha- 
racteristics and appearances they originally presented. It will, perhaps, 
not be unconnected with the subject to mention here, that, since my 
preceding communication appeared, in which I stated I had not then 
seen anything like Greelf's figure 25 (loc. cit.), I have now had more 
than one opportunity to do so. The specimens I have seen, however, 
were like, but in one respect not identical with, Greeff's. His figure 
shows the pencils of pseudopodia as proceeding from the exterior 
margin of the four juxta-posed bodies, whereas the pseudopodia in 
mine emanated from the clefts or intervals between the four bodies. 
IS'ow these bodies were considerably larger than the yellow bodies, 
with their surrounding halo, emanating from certain specimens of 
Acanthocystis spinifera, and go far to indicate that Biplophrys can 
repeat itself by a complete subdivision into several. Bearing in mind 
that this form is characterised by the possession of two tufts of pseu- 
dopodia given off from opposite ends, and that one of these tufts some- 
times is projected and not the other (not unfrequently, indeed, neither), 
the difference between the position of the place of origin of the pseu- 
dopodia, shown in Greeff's figure 25, and in my examples referred to, 
may be probably explained by supposing that, in the former, one set 
of pseudopodia were predominant, and in the latter the other set were 
those rendering themselves conspicuous. I must admit, however, that 
the whole question of the relations of the forms, just now adverted to, 
is as yet problematic ; and it may take a long time, and the result of 
many fortunate observations, but seldom indeed obtained, to dispel all 
obscurity that may exist. 
I have taken the opportunity, as possibly not unconnected with 
the question, to insert on the accompanying Plates a couple of sketches 
of an organism, previously adverted to by me,| very enigmatical in it- 
self, but curious as presenting so close a remnllance to a specimen of 
Diplophrys without pseudopodia, or these retracted, and irregularly 
surrounded by a cluster of minute diatoms and fragments of larger 
diatoms, as well as various fibrous elements and indescribable ^'bits of 
things," forming a kind of ''nest" in which it occupies the centre. 
Sometimes this ''nest," is almost wholly made up of diatoms (Fig. 9), 
and at others heterogeneous in materials, and sometimes not any dia- 
tomaceous frustules are to be seen (Fig. 10). This aggregation of foreign 
bodies seems to be held together by a very delicate and very pellucid, 
colourless connecting medium, but what relation this latter may have 
to the body itself is problematic ; the whole usually possesses a de- 
cided more or less oval general shape, although, as in undoubted 
Diplophrys, the body is nearly quite orbicular, not rarely, however, more 
* "Quart. Journ. Micr. Science," vol. x., N. S., pp. 101-3. 
t Loc. cit, vol. ix., N. S., p. 323-4 ; also vol. x., N. S., pp. 102-3. 
