263 
is nothing at all like the vigorous flow of the granules along 
the pseudopodia seen in that genus, nor do they reach any- 
thing like a proportional length and size ; in fact, in our 
form they are very slender, and sometimes somewhat silvery 
in appearance ; but, moreover, it differs from Gromia, as I need 
hardly observe, and to speak of nothing else, in the absence 
of a test. With the genus Lieberkiihnia (Clapar4de et 
Lachmann), it agrees in the absence of a test ; but it differs 
equally widely in the character of the pseudopodia, Lieber- 
kiihnia being, so to speak, a Gromia minus a test. In our 
animal the pseudopodia emanate from all parts of the body, 
from amongst the central cluster of cells, whereas in Lieber- 
kiihnia, notwithstanding that the creature’s body is devoid of 
a test, the pseudopodia emanate from a given part only. It 
is also very greatly larger than our form. I have never been 
so fortunate as to encounter Lieberkiihnia, nor am I aware 
that it has been met with by any other than its original dis- 
coverers. 
I have, however, very rarely met with a form in the fresh 
water, which I would now have little, if any, doubt in regarding 
to be the same as the so-called Amoeba porrecta (Schultze).' 
To the description given by Schultze I have nothing to add, 
save that, if my identification be correct, this form presents 
ir the granular mass of the body an olive colour. With 
Haeckel I may venture, however, to say that I quite concur 
in believing that such a form as this cannot possibly be re- 
garded as falling under Amoeba ; without, however, knowing, 
as I need not say, anything whatever practically of his genus 
Protogenes, it is quite possible that it may be far better 
called Protogenes porrecta, but still I fancy there is a con- 
siderable affinity to Lieberkiihnia, notwithstanding that in 
the porrecta the pseudopodia emanate from everywhere or 
anywhere, and not from a single part only of the surface of 
the body. Neither have yet shown a nucleus or contractile 
vacuole. I mention this form here, however, whilst likewise 
drawing attention to its resemblance to some extent to our 
new form, to say that I by no means would regard the latter 
as the same thing plus the cells — that is, as any state of 
porrecta loaded with what might possibly be regarded as 
reproductive cells. Whilst there is, no doubt, a resemblance, 
the mode of branching form assumed by the pseudopodia in 
each is sufficiently characteristically different, at least to my 
eyes, and as, I think, an inspection of both Schultze’s 
figure and that which I have made of my Cgstophrgs Haeck- 
1 Schultze, ‘ TJeber den Organismus der Polythalamien,’ p. 8, t. vii, fig. 
18 ; Pritchard, ‘ Infusoria,’ p. 550, pi. xxi, fig. 3. 
