Bibliographica! Notices. 401 
made some instructive observations in St. Andrews Bay. He care- 
fully noted the faunal monthly changes for a year, eliciting that, 
winter or summer, swarms of plant and animal surface organisms 
abounded. May was the maximum, January the minimum, and 
June, July, and August high in pelagic life. His researches, com- 
prising surface, mid-water, and ground fauna prevalent in the bay 
at stated periods, to a limited extent only corroborate those of the 
praiseworthy ‘ Plankton’ Atlantic Expedition. ‘he method em- 
ployed by him, less minute and systematic, but nevertheless fairly 
satisfactory for practical purposes, differed from that of Hensen, and 
gave no warrant to this savant’s mathematical apportionment and 
supposed uniformity of the ‘ Plankton’: the essence of the former’s 
research, derived from superficial, mid, and ground netting, tending 
rather to prove that trawling of inshore waters cannot deprive 
food-fishes of nourishment by rendering the sea-bottom barren, as 
some authors haveasserted. Withal it truly corresponded to Heeckel’s 
expression of a ‘‘ Wonderland” in his ‘ Plankton Studien,’ and 
rather sustains Heckel’s views of the continuous variation of the 
surface organisms monthly, daily, and even hourly; hence he 
arrives at a conclusion opposed to that of Hensen, viz. that rigid accu- 
racy is out of the question in such a biological problem. Garstang at 
Plymouth and Peck in the United States have each essayed on the 
same lines as M‘Intosh, and there is every promise, when our bays, 
inlets, and estuaries are better worked out, that some at least of 
the inshore fish migrations will be more thoroughly understood, 
and theoretical as well as practical results follow. 
In the ‘General Sketch of Marine Teleostean Development ” 
what Balfour did for Elasmobranchs has been done in the Teleosis, 
and is here given in ‘a brief and somewhat popular réswiné,” 
quoting the authors’ own words. The same is chiefly based on 
M‘Intosh and Prince’s monograph (Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb. 1890). 
The present authors have, as a rule, eliminated controversial dis- 
cussion or reference to the special labours of others’ investigations, 
limiting their treatment of the subject as much as possible to the 
presumed facts of the case as tolerably well agreed on. In this 
way they have given a succinct but unusually clear scientific 
account of the processes involved from fertilization to ultimate 
hatching and issue of the embryo onwards, through larval and post- 
larval conditions to adolescence. Therefrom the student can easily 
follow the changes step by step, and finish with definite ideas of 
the cell-division, origin of membranes and organs, whether derived 
from epiblast, mesoblast, or hypoblast. The whiting and cod are 
the types taken, with woodcuts, to illustrate the gradation of 
changes in their embryology. 
The authors tell us “ very little is definitely known in connexion 
with the rate of growth of food-fishes.” This statement rather 
takes us aback, for we were of opinion that, as Cunningham puts it, 
‘a considerable amount of evidence has been collected bearing upon 
the question of the growth of fishes.” Are the researches of Fulton, 
