It is remarkable that Mr.Darwin brings forward in support of gemmule fission, the observation that "Thuret has seen the zoospore of an alga divide itself, and both halves germinate." Yet on the hypothesis of Pangenesis, the zoospore of an alga must contain gemmules from all the cells of the parent algae, and from all the parts of all their less remote ancestors in all their stages of existence.

What wonder then that such an excessively complex body should divide and multiply; and what parity is there between such a body and a gemmule?
A steam-engine and a steel-filing might equally well be compared together.
Professor Delpino makes a further objection which, however, will only be of weight in the eyes of Vitalists.

He says,[226] Pangenesis is not to be received because "it leads directly to the negation of a specific vital principle, co-ordinating and regulating all the movements, acts, and functions of the individuals in which it is incarnated.

For Pangenesis of the individual is a term without meaning.

If, in contemplating an {216} animal of high organization, we regard it purely as an aggregation of developed gemmules, although these gemmules have been evolved successively one after the other, and one within the other, notwithstanding they elude the conception of the _real and true individual_, these problematical and invisible gemmules must be regarded as so many individuals.