world of amoeboid organisms

Euglypha cabrolae
4 Eugypha rotunda var. minor: apertural scale (5) and detail of the test (6); 7 Euglypha hyalina: apertural scale (8) and detail of the test (9); 10 Euglypha capsiosa: apertural scales (11-12) and detail of the test (13) – after Coûteaux, 1978

Euglypha rotunda  var. minor Wailes,

Coûteaux (1978): “Out of twenty individuals observed in scanning electron microscopy, three types of Euglypha correspond to the description of the small Euglypha rotunda. They can be distinguished from each other by characters which appear clearly in scanning electron microscopy: these traits are mainly the shape and number of scales around the pseudostome and the body, and the number and position of teeth present on the internal surface of the apertural scales. It is difficult to say which of these three forms corresponds to Euglypha rotunda var. minor since the characters used for their distinction could not be observed. Netzel (1972) in a work on Euglypha rotunda published a photo whose characters (shape of the scales of the pseudostome and the body, correspond to the type of PL III, E (in Coûteaux 1978). Only the size is different. It is therefore possible to define Euglypha rotunda var. minor as follows:”

Diagnosis: Test ovoid, little or no laterally compressed. Eight diamond-shaped apertural scales, almost as wide as they are long, and characterized at their distal end by a finger-shaped structure; the largest width is half the length. On the inner side, there is a median hook at the tip of the scale and two pairs of side hooks located in its anterior third. All hooks are straightened outward and forward. The length/width ratio is 1.37. Test scales: 8 rows visible in width, 6 in length, elongated, almost rectangular.

Dimensions: (n=2) Test length: 19.6-22.6 µm; width: 12.6-14.3 µm. Apertural scales: length 3.8-3.9 µm, width 2.8 µm. Scales: length: 3.6-3.9 µm, width: 2.8 µm).

Remarks: The other two similar types (E. hyaline and E. capsiosa) are also uncompressed and can not be attached to a species already described. They differ from Euglypha rotunda var. minor by the shape of the scales of the pseudostome and the test, they resemble it by the size and the general shape of the body.

Literature: Coûteaux, M., 1978. Quelques Thécamoebiens du sol de Japon. Rev. Écol. Biol. Sol, 15:1:119-128.

Recent posts

Alabasta longicollis

Alabasta longicollis, after Penard, 1890 Alabasta longicollis  (Penard, 1890) Diagnosis: Test pyriform, very elongated (3 times as long as wide), transparent, very little compressed, embedded

Read More »

Alabasta kivuense

Alabasta kivuense, after Gauthier-Lièvre and Thomas, 1961 Alabasta kivuense  Gauthier-Lièvre and Thomas, 1961 Diagnosis: In frontal view, the test is finger-shaped with subparallel sides, the

Read More »

Paulinella micropora

Paulinella micropora, – from Lhee et al., 2017 Paulinella micropora Lhee, Yang, Kim, Andersen & Yoon, 2017 Diagnosis: Test elongate, with five columns of scales,

Read More »

Quadrulella tubulata

Quadrulella tubulata, after Gauthier-Lièvre, 1953 Quadrulella tubulata  Gauthier-Lièvre, 1953 Diagnosis: Shell almost lageniform, compressed, with rounded fundus and more or less irregularly arranged, commonly small,

Read More »

Quadrulella elongata

Quadrulella elongata, after Van Oye, 1952 Quadrulella elongata  Van Oye, 1952 Diagnosis: Test elongated with long neck and square plates, without any pores. Pseudosome slightly

Read More »

Quadrulella scutellata

Quadrulella scutellata, after Wailes, 1912 Quadrulella scutellata  Wailes, 1912 Diagnosis: Test moderately large, hyaline, pyriform, compressed; composed of small siliceous, rectangular plates arranged in irregular

Read More »