HISTORICAL REVIEW OF THE PHiEOPHYCE.E 273 



and Sautageau (Gulf of Gascony), while the establishment of the 

 Marine Station at Naples by Anton Dohrn (1878) has enabled 

 inland continental observers to work under favourable circumstances on 

 the shores of the Mediterranean (Berthold, Reinke, Falkenberg, 

 Oltmanns). The writings of these and many such observers are still 

 the working literature of the subject. The latest official review of the 

 group Phseophycea3 is that of Kjellman i (1891), the most complete 

 systematic text (in Latin) that of De Toni (1895) ^, and the most 

 complete text-book that of Oltmani^s ^ (1904-5). 



General morphological and structural problems have been most 

 successfully dealt with from a modern standpoint by Keinke^ 

 and Oltmanns ^, while Kuckuck ^ (Helgoland) has set the highest 

 standard of draughtmanship for cells and tissue-details ; Sauvageau '^ 

 (Guethary) has shown what can be done with simple line-work. 

 Good figures of weeds in a natural condition, free from the conven- 

 tions of herbarium material are given by Okamura (Tokyo) ^. 



The opening years of the present century have seen advance in 

 new directions ; as on the ecological side, — the account of the Algal 

 Flora of the Faeroes by Borgesex ^ constituting a model for floristic 

 work, which has been followed by Cottois^i^ for Clare Island in 

 British seas ; while on a more restricted formation Miss Baker i^ 

 has stated the algal problems of the Salt-marsh. A distinctly new 

 standpoint has been introduced in the discussion of cytological 

 problems of the organization of the nucleus in karyogamy and meiosis 

 ( Strasburger, 1897 ; Farmer and Williams, 1898 ; Williams, 1904). 

 In this department Yamanouchi ^^ has set a standard of technique 

 and comprehensive detailed observation for application to all life- 

 cycles, which may be equalled but scarcely surpassed, as expressing the 

 limit of modern microscopic methods. 



The footnote references are only intended to afford a guide to the 

 best methods of work in the group at the present time — the first 

 desideratum for British seas being undoubtedly a comprehensive 

 account of the British plants, with figures and full structural and 

 ecological details, to replace the Phycologia Britannica of Harvey. 



^ Kjellman (1891), Phfeophyceas, in Engler & Prantl's Pflanzenfamilien. 



- De Toni (1895), Sylloge Fncoidearnm. 



^ Oltmanns (Jena, 1904), Morphologie und Biologie der Algen. 



■* Reinke (Kiel), cf. Alias Deutsche)- Meeresalgen (1889). 



^ Oltmanns (1889), Bibliotheca Botanica, iii. p. 78. 



^ Kuckuck (Helg-oland), cf. WissenschaftMche Meeresuntersuchnngen, 1898. 



' Sauvageau, J. de Bot. 1892, 96; 1902, Sphacelarias, Myrionemas. 



^ Okamura (Tokyo), Icones of Japanese Algse, 1907 et seq. 



^ Botany of the Faeroes (Warming, 1908) ; Marine Algae, B<)rgesen (1903), p. 403, 

 1908, p. 683. 



^^ Cotton (1912), Clare Island Survey. Proc. Roy. Irish Acad, xxxi., Marine 

 Algae, p. 94. 



" Baker and Blandford, Brotvn Sea-tveeds of the Salt-Marsh. Journ. Linn. 

 Soc. p. 325 (1916). 



•- Yamanouchi (Bot. Gazette, Chicago), Fmch,,s' (1909), Cvtleria (1912), Zanar- 

 dinia (1913). J. L. Williams, Dictijota (1904), Annals of Bot. p. 183. Stras- 

 burger. Fertilization of Funis (1897). Brings. Jalirb. xxv. p. 372. 



