1908] CURRENT LITERATURE 231 
ing plants the organ that creeps may be either the stem, the stolons, or the roots. 
Finally, the fifth subclass contains species with the shoots elongated, which are 
able to persist for many years, for instance, the herbaceous Arabis alpina, also 
Armeria, Androsace, Eritrichium, etc.; and among the woody forms, Bambuseae, 
Coniferae, the dicotyledonous trees, etc. 
An interesting chapter is devoted to the leaves and leafy shoots. The author 
recognizes three factors as being the direct cause of the shape of the leaf: (r) 
its function as an organ of assimilation; (2) the medium in which it lives (air 
or water); (3) the particular structure (outline especially) which belongs to the 
species, thus constituting a specific and very marked character developed through 
relationship. But the author makes no mention of the position of the leaf upon 
the shoot as having any bearing upon its form, although this seems an important 
factor when one remembers the great variation in leaves from seedling to mature 
Plant, so profusely illustrated in North American plants especially. 
€ arrangement of plants according to their biologic character is a most 
difficult task, if really possible. To arrange plants in accordance with their 
Vitality, as for example annuals, biennials, and perennials, gives no satisfaction; 
yet the question of age is of no small importance in classification. The charac- 
terization of biologic types, when comprising the structure of the shoot, leads us 
into perplexing difficulties, on account of the enormous number of intergrading 
forms that exist, of rhizomes for instance. It appears to the reviewer that the 
autonomic land plants have been classified less successfully than the others. 
However, we know of no system published, so far, where the classification of 
is particular group of plants has been outlined in any way clearer than the one 
Suggested by WaRminc. Much would be gained if the ecologists would follow 
his example and study the plants in the field, and not merely in the laboratory. 
It seems very strange that modern botanists pay so little attention to the study 
of Organography, which actually is one of the bases of ecology; and plant- 
8eography is indeed of no less importance. WARMING’S paper contains in itself 
an excellent guide to future workers in this line, and we hope that translations 
“Ht follow soon, so as to make the paper more accessible to foreigners.—THEO. 
OLM, 
A text-book of botany and pharmacognosy 
A second edition of KRaEMER’S Text-book has appeared,? designed primarily 
for students of pharmacy, for pharmacists, and for food and drug analysts. 
‘erhaps it is not the province of a botanist to review it, but it certainly is an 
wieresting illustration of the kind of botany required of students of pharmacy; 
des, some of the introductory chapters deal with botany in the ordinary 
Sense. The first impression is that of a mass of details, without any thread of 
‘ontinuity, which makes a book of reference rather than a textbook, a book to 
anit rather than to read. - 
> KRAEMER, Henry, A text-book of botany and pharmacognosy. pp- vi+84o. 
Ps. Sar (igs. 1500). Philadelphia and London: J. B. Lippincott Co. 1907- 
