A specimen of this kind is represented in Pl. 3, fig. 2, where the meshes of the network are seen to be finer immediately around the nuclei, and coarser in the intervals. The specimen further shows in the clearest manner that this network is not divided into areas, each representing a cell and each containing a nucleus. I do not know to what extent this network extends into the yolk. I have never yet seen the limits of it, though it is very common to see the coarsest yolk-granules lying in its meshes. Some of these are shewn in Pl. 3, fig. 2, _yk_.
This network of lines[11] (probably bubbles) is characteristic of many cells, especially ova. We are, therefore, forced to believe that the fine granular and probably coarser granular yolk of this meroblastic egg consists of an active organized basis with passive yolk-spheres imbedded in it. The organized basis is especially concentrated at the germinal pole of the egg, but becomes less and less in quantity, as compared with the yolk-spheres, the further we depart from this.
Footnote 11: The interpretation of this network is entirely due to Dr Kleinenberg, who suggested it to me on my shewing him a number of specimens exhibiting the nuclei and network.
Admitting, as I think it is necessary to do, the organized condition of the whole yolk-sphere, there are two possible views as to its nature. We may either take the view that it is one gigantic cell, the ovum, which has grown at the expense of the other cells of the egg-follicle, and that these cells in becoming absorbed have completely lost their individuality; or we may look upon the true formative yolk (as far as we can separate it from the remainder of the food-yolk) as the remains of one cell (the primitive ovum), and the remainder of the yolk as a body formed from the coalescence of the other cells of the egg-follicle, which is adherent to, but has not coalesced with, the primitive ovum, the cells in this case not having completely lost their individuality; and to these cells, the nuclei, I have found, must be supposed to belong.
The former view I think, for many reasons, the most probable. The share of these nuclei in the segmentation, and the presence of similar nuclei in the cells of the germ, both support it, and are at the same time difficulties in the way of the other view. Leaving this question which cannot be discussed fully in a preliminary paper like the present one, I will pass on to another important question, viz.:
