44 
PEOCEEDINGS OP SOCIETIES. 
M. Duthiers' figure was drawn from a somewhat immature specimen, 
and mentioned that a difference in structure visible at the lamellar 
extremity under polarized light, both in B. Haimeanus and the other 
allied organism, had induced him to think that here might be the 
beginning of rudimentary shells. If the structure containing B. 
Haimeanus could be found in oysters, it would disprove his conjecture 
as to the nature of these organisms. He briefly alluded to the 
recorded encystment of B. Haimeanus, which, if confirmed, would 
introduce us to a life history of remarkable character and great 
interest. How the ova of the supposed sexual fluke entered the 
cocl<les so abundantly on our coasts had not as yet been indicated ; 
and if the structure in which B. Haimeanus was found was a sporocyst, 
it was an anomalous one, and furnished a subject for good work in 
tracing its parentage and development. 
Mr. W. Fell Woods read a paper " On the relation of Bucephalus 
to the Cockle." Having stated that his investigations began as far 
back as June, 1872, he traced, as the result, verified by his notes up 
to May, 1873, the growth of his impression that Bucephalus, instead 
of being parasitic, was the larval form of the cockle. Having detailed 
the reasons, he pointed to the independent examinations of Dr. Moore, 
commenced in May, 1873, as issuing in the like conclusion. These 
facts were his warrant for still advancing the theory at the meeting 
of the Royal Microscopical Society on the 4th of November last. He 
then adduced more recent observations, furnishing new confirmatory 
facts, which he considered of great interest ; and after indicating some 
points of difference between Dr. Moore and himself, and referring to 
the memoir by M. Lacaze-Duthiers on Bucephalus Haimeanus — to 
whose description of the earliest stage he took exception, he pointed 
to his own discovery of the same eggs contemporarily in the ovisacs 
of the cockle and in the supposed sporocysts ; and whilst admitting 
the parasitic character of Bucephalus, if its observation in the oyster 
were reliable (his own large experience had never afforded an instance), 
he argued that either, 1st, Bucephalus is the larva of the cockle (and 
if not, it remains an interesting question for solution, what is ?), or, 
2nd, Bucephalus is a parasite, but if so it does not render the cockle 
sterile, as asserted by M. Lacaze-Duthiers ; and, 3rd, the connection 
of the tube with the ovisacs, as established by the presence of the eggs 
in both, proves it is not an independent sporocyst, as asserted, but an 
organ of the cockle ; whilst, 4th, if this connection be denied, though 
the case quoted seemed to render it certain, Bucephalus must still be 
developed from eggs seen in the tube, in contradiction of a third 
statement of M. Lacaze-Duthiers. 
Some illustrative drawings were exhibited. 
