350 
POPULAR SCIENCE REVIEW. 
rejoice in it, so no true biologist would reject “ heterogenesis ” 
for its own sake, or because it opposed wbat seemed to be estab- 
lished facts ; but as it would be retarding the development of 
the most sacred of all things — Truth — to accept as evidence of 
Nature’s continuity between the living and the dead Dr. Bas- 
tian’s proffered evidences— even the latest — of “ abiogenesis,” 
so it would be weakness without a name to accept “ hetero- 
genesis ” on the erroneous facts and equally erroneous in- 
ferences of its principal if not its only advocate. 
EXPLANATION OF PLATES CXXXIX. AND CXL. 
Fig. 1. A group of minute rotifers, which, their history being unknown, 
might have been supposed to have been transformed volvoxes. 
Fig. 2. The above rotifer magnified 80 diams., and identified with Notom- 
mata parasita (Ehr.). 
Fig. 3. The same rotifer as a parasite within the volvox, the latter being 
slightly out of focus to sharpen the image of the rotifer. 
Fig. 4. A new and unknown monad, found in a pond at Sandhurst. 
Fig. 5. Dinocharis Collinsii, which suddenly appeared with the disappear- 
ance of the monad (fig. 4). 
Fig. 6. A metamorphosis of fig. 4. 
Fig. 7. Profile of fig. 5, showing a grotesque similarity between figs. 6 
and 7. 
Fig. 8. The body of a tardigrade, said by Dr. Bastian to have resolved its 
“ total internal substance” into germs which are said to be 
capable of development into tardigrades. 
Fig. 9. A similar phenomenon seen by Mr. G-. F. Chantrell, in which the 
germs were followed out and became stentors. 9 a, 9b. 
Fig. 10. The hollow skin of a tardigrade, showing that it may become the 
accidental resting and hatching place of small eggs or spore ; b an 
egg, and c a rotifer ( Monura dulcis), emerged from it. 
Fig. 11. Amoeba at a a, supposed to have arisen from the fungus which 
appeared upon anacharis (Gr. F. Chantrell). 
Fig. 12. Supposed case of u heterogenesis ” of diatoms from Cladophora and 
algoid corpuscles, e e r , l V, m m', but shown by Professor Smith to 
have arisen naturally in this position, which is their habit. 
Fig. 13. A supposed case of 11 heterogenetic ” production of Naviculae from 
Euglena, but shown by Professor Smith to be a cluster of 
diatoms that had been devoured and ejected by an amoeba. 
Fig. 14. Supposed origin of Monas lens in transformed bacteria. 
Fig. 15. The reputed u heterogenetic ” change of monads into amoeba and 
back again to bacteria (Bastian). 
Figs. 16 to 22. The changes in fig. 15, supposed to be heterogenetic, 
explained by the ascertained metamorphoses of the monad here 
depicted. 
