![](./pubData/source/images/pages/page11.jpg)
them. Hence in inquiring after their affinities we must be
content with searching for a possible connection with an inferior
group, and for the simpler forms from which they have
proceeded.
‘‘ When we seek for such a connection among the forms with
which we are acquainted, we find it impossible to establish any
strict homologies, and we are limited to the observation of
resemblances in form, structure, and mode of life. Such a course
of unprejudiced comparison leads us by a very short step to
the naked ‘ Amoebae ’ of the zoologists, especially in Butsohli’s
sense, as the starting-point, organisms with bodies having the
amoeboid movements of the swarm-cells of the Myxomycètes,
which multiply, as far we at present know, by successive bipartitions
without forming plasmodia, and which may pass singly and
without aggregation or coalescence into states of rest not" essentially
different in their characteristics from those of the spores
of the Myxomycètes.” ’
Undoubtedly the Myxogastres must be considered as a
terminal group, and the very fact of this admission implies a
certain amount of differentiation, in fact sufficient to give
individuality to the group. I accept De Bary’s reasoning as to
the origin of the Myxogastres, and as an evolutionist am ready
to extend the same reasoning to other groups, as having had a
common origin from the lowest forms of life, where, owing to
absence of differentiation, the ideas implied in the terms animal
and vegetable respectively are not evolved, and I consider that
the entire evidence as to the animal or plant tendency of any
departure from this neutral starting-point consists of the aggregate
tendency of the evolved features which collectively co°nsti-
tute the characteristics of the group under consideration ; and
this tendency as manifested by the Myxogastres I consider to be
m the direction of the vegetable kingdom, and more especially
in the direction of the Fungi, for the following reasons, which,
keeping in view the fact that wo are dealing with a terminal
group, and consequently can draw no comparisons from higher
forms of the same type, “ we find it impossible to establish any
’ Tom. cit. p. 443.
strict homologies, and we are limited to the observation of
resemblances in form, structure, and mode of life.”
1. Frequent presence of cellulose in the general membrane
protecting plasmodia, cell-walls of spores, sporangia, and walls
enclosing the protoplasm in the sclerotioid or resting stage of
plasmodia.
2. Presence of germ-pores in the oell-walls of the spores, of
some species.
3. The frequent separation of lime from the protoplasm at the
commencement of the reproductive phase.
4. In the frequent separation of a substance from the protoplasm
during the period of spore formation, homologous with
the substance separated during the same period in the Ascomy-
cetes, Mucorini, &o. This substance in the Myxogastres forms
the eapillitium.
6. The agreement with many fungi in the contrivances for
spore dissemination.
6. The production by free cell-formation of spores protected
in the early stage with a wall of cellulose, which eventually
becomes differentiated, and as stated by De Bary, “ behaves
towards reagents in a similar manner to cuticularized plant-
cell-membranes and to spore-menihranes as in the Fungi.” ’
7. Presenting analogy with undoubted members of the
vegetable kingdom, as Eyclrodictyon, where the naked, motile
swarm-cells coalesce to form a ooenobium which eventually
becomes invested with a membrane.
8. In the close affinity with the genus Oeratium, where we
trace the sequence which leads to what is morphologically a
mycelium furnished with transverse septa. In Geratium the
spores do not originate by free-cell-formation within a sporangium,
but are produced after the manner of the spores of the
Basidiomycetes or the conidia of the Hyphomycetes. The general
course of development in all the species, so far as can be determined
from herbarium specimens, agrees with that of Geratium
hydnoides as described by Famintzin and Woronin,® the specific
’ Tom. cit. j). 441.
® Mem. Acad. Petersburg, XX, No. 3 (1873).