Scientific Intelligence—Botany and Zoology. 
which do not reach that height. Other species, again, are confined be- 
tween lower and upper limits which are not far distant from each other ; 
and these neither grow towards the base of the mountain nor at the sum- 
mit. The table shews, in a striking manner, the unequal extent of the 
zones of the different species ; for some of them only grow under condi- 
tions differing very little from one another, while others are suited to very 
various climates—an observation which accords with what is remarked in 
regard to differences of latitude. Among the plants which grow on the 
summit of the mountain, M. Massot mentions two, the Potentilla nivalis, 
and the Sawifraga oppositifolia, which cease to grow at 443 feet below 
it (that is to say, at 8694 feet above the level of the sea), whereas the 
Gentiana verna, and the Luzula spicata, which also grow on the sum- 
mit, are met with on the slope of the mountain at much lower elevations ; 
the former at 4337 feet, and the latter at 3238 feet above the level of the 
sea; the one thus inhabiting a zone of about 4800 feet, and the other a zone 
of about 5900 feet, It would be interesting to be able to extend this com- 
parison to the greater part of the plants growing on this mountain, but in 
regard to many of them we are still in want of data for the purpose: thus, 
of forty-two species observed by M. Massot, on the summit of the Canigon, 
he only gives the lower limits of twelve. It is to be desired that the author 
should prepare as complete a catalogue as possible of the plants growing 
on the mountain, that he should determine the lower and upper limits of 
each of them, and that he should include in his researches the different 
slopes of the mountain, so as to ascertain the influence of the exposure 
on the limits of these different plants. The author ought also to be re- 
quested to extend his observations to the limit of the cultivation of the 
olive, and to add to his catalogue a list of the plants belonging to that 
region, in order that we may be able to ascertain what are the plants 
of the olive region which in that district penetrate into the region of vines, 
and what are the relations between the flora of that region of vines and 
the flora of the vine region of central and northern France. In M. 
Massot’s table the limit of the oaks is not given; and it is very pro- 
bable that, besides the evergreen oak and the cork tree, which must grow 
in the olive region, and whose upper limit it would be interesting to de- 
termine, oaks with deciduous leaves are to be met with higher up, re- 
garding which it would be important to determine the upper and lower 
limits, and also to ascertain distinctly the species. It would also be de- 
sirable to ascertain, with accuracy, the limit of all the trees on the dif- 
ferent slopes, and that those which generally grow in the Pyrenees, but 
which seem to be awanting on the Canigou, should be indicated in a 
special manner ; because the limits of trees, being those which are most 
easily recognised, are most available in comparisons with different 
countries. In pointing out the deficiencies in M. Massot’s investiga- 
tions, my chief object has been to shew how interesting it would be for 
botanical geography to possess a complete account of the distribution of 
plants on a mountain so favourably placed as the Canigou, and which, 
by its isolation, its various exposures, and its height, might become 
one of the most important elements in the general examination of the 
geographical distribution of plants in Europe. I shall only add, that, 
in order that an investigation of this description should possess all de- 
sirable certainty, it would be necessary that the author should collect, 
