M. Koidzumi 
301 
The first serious attempts to classify these organisms, and to arrange them 
in a system, were made by Grassi (Grassi, 1892; Grassi and Sandias, 1893; 
Grassi [and Foa], 1911). In 1911 he established a new order, Hypermastigina, 
in the Flagellata, for the group of organisms provided with numerous flagella, 
and suggested that three families might be distinguished. These families were 
not named, however. The first would include Eulophomonas , Lophomonas , 
Mesojoenia, Joenia ; the second Trichonympha', the third Spirotrichonympha, 
Holomastigotes, and Holomastigotoides. But Grassi remarks that Microjoenia 
and Pseudotrichonympha —which do not fit into this system—make it difficult 
to arrange the organisms in question in groups higher than genera. The 
forms with a small number of flagella he classified among the Polymastigina, 
and established two new families, viz. Calonymphidae and Dinenymphidae, 
for them. 
After Grassi, Fran$a (in a paper sent to the editor in 1914 but not pub¬ 
lished till 1916) and Janicki (1915) published their views on the classification. 
Fran§a divided the Hypermastigina into four families, giving family rank to 
the genus Lophomonas ; his four families being Calonymphidae, Lophomonad- 
idae, Trichonymphidae, and Holomastigotidae. Janicki proposed, following 
Grassi, to classify the Calonymphidae among the Polymastigina, and to divide 
the Hypermastigina into the following four families: Lophomonadidae, 
Joenidae, Trichonymphidae, and Holomastigotidae. In his most recent paper, 
Grassi (1917) has described a large number of forms which he classifies in 
eight families, belonging to two different orders. In the Hypermastigina he 
distinguishes five families, viz. Joenidae, Staurojoenidae, Trichonymphidae, 
Spirotrichonymphidae, and Holomastigotidae. The rest of the forms, which 
he assigns to the Polymastigina, are classified in the three families Tetra- 
mitidae, Dinenymphidae, and Calonymphidae. 
As many of the organisms are still not thoroughly investigated, their 
classification can but be, at present, provisional, and alterations and im¬ 
provements will inevitably accompany progress in our knowledge. The forms 
studied by myself belong to more than a few types, but not to so many as 
to enable me to attempt a final classification of the entire group of these 
organisms. Accordingly, it is rather my intention in this section to consider 
the classification of those forms only which I have myself studied, and to 
make clear the characters of the genera and families to which these forms 
belong. 
Trichonympha and Pseudotrichonympha are closely similar, and it is reason¬ 
able to place them near one another in the system. Teratonympha, as remarked 
in the preceding section, shows a rather close resemblance, in the structure 
of the anterior portion of its body, to Trichonympha and Pseudotrichonympha. 
Teratonympha, however, displays some distinct peculiarities in both the 
anterior and posterior regions of its body; and I think these sufficient to 
justify me in establishing a new family, which I propose to call Teratonym- 
phidae, for these organisms. 
