The Cambridge natural history, Vol. 01 (of 10)Hickson, Sydney J. (Sydney John)
Science
The Cambridge natural history, Vol. 01 (of 10)
Hickson, Sydney J. (Sydney John)
Animals
_Protozoa performing most of their life-processes by pseudopodia; nucleus
frequently giving off fragments (chromidia) which may play a part in
nuclear reconstitution on division; sometimes with brood-cells, which may
be at first flagellate; but never reproducing in the flagellate
state.[64]_
1. RHIZOPODA
_Sarcodina of simple form, whose pseudopodia never coalesce into networks
(1),[65] nor contain an axial filament (2), which commonly multiply by
binary fission (3), though a brood-formation may occur; which may
temporarily aggregate, or undergo temporary or permanent plastogamic union,
but never to form large plasmodia or complex fructifications as a prelude
to spore-formation (4); test when present gelatinous, chitinous, sandy, or
siliceous, simple and 1-chambered (5)._
CLASSIFICATION.[66]
I. Ectoplasm distinct, clear; pseudopodia blunt or tapering, but not
branching at the apex
LOBOSA
_Amoeba_, Auctt.; _Pelomyxa_, Greeff; _Trichosphaerium_, A. Schneid.;
_Dinamoeba_, Leidy; _Amphizonella_, Greeff; _Centropyxis_, Stein;
_Arcella_, {52}Ehr.; _Difflugia_, Leclercq; _Lecqueureusia_,
Schlumberger; _Hyalosphenia_, Stein; _Quadrula_, F. E. Sch.;
_Heleopera_, Leidy; _Podostoma_, Cl. and L.; _Arcuothrix_, Hallez.
II. Ectoplasm undifferentiated, containing moving granules; pseudopodia
branching freely towards the tips
FILOSA
_Euglypha_, Duj.; _Paulinella_, Lauterb.; _Cyphoderia_, Schlumb.;
_Campascus_, Leidy; _Chlamydophrys_, Cienk.; _Gromia_, Duj. =
_Hyalopus_, M. Sch.
We have defined this group mainly by negative characters, as such are the
only means for their differentiation from the remaining Sarcodina; and
indeed from Flagellata, since in this group zoospores are sometimes formed
which possess flagella. Moreover, indeed, in a few of this group
(_Podostoma_, _Arcuothrix_), as in some Heliozoa, the flagellum or flagella
may persist or be reproduced side by side with the pseudopodia. The
subdivision of the Rhizopoda is again a matter of great difficulty, the
characters presented being so mixed up that it is hard to choose: however,
the character of the outer layer of the cytoplasm is perhaps the most
obvious to select. In LOBOSA there is a clear layer of ectosarc, which
appears to be of a greasy nature at its surface film, so that it is not
wetted. In the FILOSA, as in most other Sarcodina, this film is absent, and
the ectoplasm is not marked off from the endoplasm, and may have a granular
surface. Corresponding to this, the pseudopodia of the Lobosa are usually
blunt, never branching and fraying out, as it were, at the tip, as in the
Filosa; nay, in the normal movements of _Amoeba limax_ (Fig. 1, p. 5) the
front of the cell forms one gigantic pseudopodium, which constantly glides
forward. Apart from this distinction the two groups are parallel in almost
every respect.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account