eel = = Pinned tn Se Te ee 
1897 | CURRENT LITERATURE 473 
the word anatomy, a meaning which is necessary to the very conception of 
physiological anatomy. He defines the scope of morphology as including 
the outer and inner structure. The inner structure includes histology and 
anatomy ; as far as the inner structure is confined to the elements of the 
Separate tissues, it is histology ; when we go farther and consider the tissues 
in relation to their position and arrangement in the plant, it is anatomy. 
This brings out clearly the principle upon which physiological anatomy is 
based, that is, the connection between function and form, when form is limited 
to certain tissues and combinations of tissues inside the plant. These tissues 
and combinations of tissues are therefore to be considered as organs in the 
real sense of the term, and not simply as the component parts of the plant. 
Another prominent feature of this book is the copious notes or references at 
the end of each chapter. Here are discussed in detail those points of the 
text which may be considered debatable, and all the authorities on such 
questions are cited. For example, Strasburger maintains that the anatomi- 
cal-physiological idea is not a part of morphology, but must be considered as 
belonging to physiology. He expressly states that morphology is based upon 
phylogenetic principles only and has nothing whatever to do with the idea of 
function. This Haberlandt considers a too narrow conception of morphol- 
ogy. He makes phylogenetic morphology only a branch of the whole 
palisade tissue or the skeleton system, by its morphological qualities as well 
as by its physiological performance, we must admit that such tissues and 
Systems may be treated from a morphological standpoint. 
He further claims that this method of classification of tissues is the 
broadest of all and the only one based on purely scientific principles, because 
it considers the plant as an individual organism consisting of elementary 
organs by virtue of which it is enabled to carry on a series of life processes. 
Other methods of classification may be used, but they must be carried 
Out in a manner consistent with the principles upon which they are founded. 
But a method purely didactic, which aims only to form a convenient basis 
fora general view of the different tissues cannot be called scientific. 
clearly expressed statements of the two opposing views concerning ‘the : 
_ hature and scope of morphology are of special interest at am present Hin ae 
that phylogeny is the only basis of morphology, and that We only way to 
termine morphological characteristics is to show that one form has been 
derived i another. ‘But Haberlandt claims: that we > do find certain : 
morph acteristics in any cell c 
to be - ec bes Gi separate e individual function. "Therefore. oy 
» and in constructing poe 
to have a: 
