Difflugia paulii Ogden, 1983
Basionym: D. oblonga var. elongata Van Oye, 1953

Diagnosis: According to Van Oye (1953): Compared to D. lacustris, the shell is more slender and the buccal margin is more regular. The quantity of quartz grains in the shell is smaller than in the lacustris variety. The sides are almost parallel. Overall, this form resembles the shape of a glove finger, with the terminal part tapering slightly into a truncated point. Finally, the length-to-width ratio always exceeds 3, whereas in the lacustris variety, this ratio never exceeds 2.60. The apertural margin, the limited number of quartz grains in the shell, and especially the length-to-width ratio—greater than 3—allow for an easy distinction between this species and the lacustris variety.

Description according to Ogden (1983): The shell is transparent, slim and elongate, tapering evenly from just anterior of the mid-body region towards the aperture, the posterior region is slightly swollen, curving sharply and smoothly at the extremity. It is composed of flattish pieces of quartz to give a smooth appearance, with small areas of organic cement often apparent as part of the matrix. The aperture is circular and surrounded by small pieces of quartz.

Dimensions: According to van Oye (1953): Shell length 140 µm; width 43 µm; diameter aperture 30 µm; L/W 3.25 (n=?).
Ogden (1983): Shell length 119—130 µm; width 48—54 µm; diameter aperture 19—23 µm; L/W 2.25 (n=4).

Ecology: Freshwater. Sphagnum.

Remarks: I have quite a few doubts about Ogden’s (1983) description. Especially when comparing Van Oye’s (1953) drawing with Ogden’s photograph (see images below), his photo and drawing shows a pyriform shell, whereas Van Oye’s  drawing depicts an oblong shell. This drawing seems rather stylized but clearly illustrates a fundus with a rounded nipple, while Ogden’s images shows a semicircular fundus.
What stands out in Van Oye’s description is that he provides only a single measurement, as if he observed only one specimen. The measurements given by Ogden are slightly smaller, but this could fall within the variation of a species. While Van Oye emphasizes that the L/W ratio is always above 3, Ogden’s is significantly lower (2.6). The shell in his photo has an L/W ratio of 2.8. These must be two separate entities.
I also question whether the variety/species described by Van Oye can be maintained. It bears resemblance to Cylindrifflugia lanceolata (see below).