BOOKS AND CURRENT LITERATURE 221 



geographical subdivisions, corresponding closely to those used in his 

 report on the peat deposits of the state. The topography, soils, lead- 

 ing economic features, and vegetation are separately described for each 

 of these areas. A "quantitative" method devised by the author has 

 been applied to the vegetation in such a manner as to give a rough 

 approximation of the relative abundance of the leading species. Little 

 attention has been given to habital differences in vegetation, but the 

 contrasting features of the twenty areas with respect to the vegetation 

 as a whole are very distinctly brought forth. Although the method of 

 securing vegetational statistics is an indirect and somewhat arbitrary 

 one the author confesses that he has sometimes adjusted them a little 

 "if the results are obviously inconsistent with known facts." If there 

 are some "known facts" in reserve why can't we have them? The au- 

 thor has, nevertheless, covered a very large extent of country with his 

 rapid field method and has brought out some interesting results in cor- 

 relating the vegetation with the geographical and agricultural features 

 of this regions. Only six of the areas have less than 60 % of their vege- 

 tation composed of pines and other evergreens, and the general obser- 

 vation is made that the richest soils produce the smallest percentages 

 of evergreens. A list of the 126 species of trees in northern Florida is 

 appended, with a brief statement of the habitat of each. A large num- 

 ber of illustrations are collected at the close of the paper and a care- 

 fully elaborated index is given, designed to further the use of the bulle- 

 tin by the non-technical reader. 



Both of the papers under notice give internal evidence of the zealous 

 emphasis which their authors place upon the investigation of vegeta- 

 tion as contrasted with the study of the flora. In alluding to the fact 

 that he made no collections in his field work Harper states that "those 

 parts of the country where botanists are most particular about the cor- 

 rect identification of plants are generally those where the least progress 

 has been made along phyto-geographical lines." If this geographical 

 observation is indeed true for the United States it is because our oldest 

 botanical institutions and our best stands of highly diversified or nearly 

 virgin vegetation are separated by great distances. We must not for- 

 get, too, that most of our knowledge of the flora of the remoter portions 

 of the country is due to the work of men located in the taxonomic 

 centers. An impatience with regard to nomenclatorial exactness can 

 be willingly brooked in a man who knows the flora of a region as well as 

 our author knows that of the southeastern states, but it would seriously 

 discount the phytogeographical work of a less experienced man. 



THE PLANT WORLD, VOL. 18, NO. 8, 1915 



Ui LIBRA R 



