168 NOTES AND COMMENT 



pean mentioned any extra-European work, while eleven Americans 

 mentioned extra-American work. Four physiologists mentioned non- 

 physiological work, and one morphologist mentioned non-morpholog- 

 ical work. None of our correspondents mentioned taxonomic work, 

 and none of the taxonomists to whom our inquiry was addressed replied 

 to it. 



The net result of the responses secured is .that a healthy difference 

 of opinion exists among botanists as to what current work is of the most 

 importance, and this difference of opinion does not seem to be determined 

 by the limits which bound the several sections of the science. In fact 

 one of the most refreshing phases of our replies is the extent to which 

 men have mentioned work outside their own special fields, and also 

 the several cases in which men have mentioned the work of other bot- 

 anists with whom they are well known to have been in sharp compe- 

 tition for the freshest laurels in certain restricted fields of . endeavor. 

 We are sorry not to be able to point out a geographical catholicity among 

 botanists as satisfying as that which exists between the several depart- 

 ments of the science. 



