CURRENT LITERATURE. 
The evolution of plant life. 
Another book intended as a University Extension manual has re- 
cently come to our notice. In these days when college men are 
eagerly looking for books suitable for interested intelligent but unin- 
structed people to read—books which will give a connected idea of 
plant forms and their activities—any title which promises as much as 
the above will attract attention. But when attention is directed to the 
book, few, we think, will be able to detect the appropriateness of the 
Mycetozoa, Thallophyta, Lichenes, Characee, Muscinez, Pteri- tak 
dophyta,and Phan gamia, form essentially a much abbreviated text- me 
Ook on morphology, whose faults, while chiefly those of abridgement, ie 
are too often due to confused ideas of homology. cee 
Mr. Massee’s statements are often obscure, and this obscurity ap- 
Péats to be traceable sometimes to his ideas and sometimes to the in- i 
appropriate phrases chosen to convey his ideas. The definition of ee 
metabolism (p. 41) illustrates the former case, and such a phrase as ~ 
Protection against climate” (p. 18) the latter. In discussing the evo- 
lution of sexuality (p. 66) the author goes far astray. Having men- 
tioned examples of conjugation he adds: : 
‘Tn these examples the greater part of the protoplasm is used up in ie 
Mation of the reproductive bodies; but as differentiation in this direction pro- 
» We observe that the relative bulk of the individual specialized for repro- 
he for- 
pat Usually bear a very small proportion [sic] to the whole; pen 
This confusion of ideas regarding sexuality in Pp ea ee - 
“ryptogams continues throughout the entire book, most Strikt Py oe 
PP. 68, 60 : ‘ : 
to ; 
‘ Phen the writer has been these last ten years. It 
Pot remote or secluded, for we are assured (p. 7 
1 
a - GtorGe:—The evolution of plant life, lower forms. 
88. 38. London: Methuen & Co. 1891, 2sh, 6d. 
) that “the most 
12 mo. pp.vilie 
