222 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XLVII. No. 1209 



tion on page 148. It should not be forgotten 

 that the nervous character of the so-called 

 thalamic nerve (mentioned on p. 184) has 

 never been demonstrated, nor is it so certain 

 that " the eye grows out from the dorsal zone 

 of the forebrain" since that depends upon 

 what is taken to be the morphological anterior 

 end of the brain. 



Is the conclusion (p. 191) justified that 

 " since the vagus is a cranial nerve, its dis- 

 tribution to heart, stomach and lungs, shows 

 that these structures belong to the head"? 

 Possibly they do, but by the same token so 

 does the tail belong to the head since this 

 also is innervated by a branch (N. lateralis) 

 of the vagus. In the light of what we now know 

 regarding nerve histogenesis is it not time that 

 the dogma of a primary, unalterable connec- 

 tion between nerve and its terminal organ 

 were abandoned? Fats are spoken of (p. 220) 

 as " hydrocarbons," although the term is used 

 by organic chemists only in reference to 

 oxygen-free carbon compounds. Considering 

 the scope of the book, however, such excep- 

 tional errors are not surprising. In a field 

 where the possibilities of divergent opinion 

 are so many it is remarkable that the book 

 contains so few statements to which excep- 

 tion may be taken. 



Numerous illustrations, mostly from orig- 

 inal sources, constitute one of the most dis- 

 tinctive features of the book. The unusual 

 skill of the author as an artist is shovm espe- 

 cially in the admirable stereograms scattered 

 through the book, which in this respect makes 

 another real contribution to the pedagogy of 

 comparative anatomy. The outline drawings, 

 however, are not always easily analyzed by the 

 eye and might be improved by more contrast. 

 The addition of a diagram to illustrate some 

 of the more important fiber tracts of the verte- 

 brate (Mammalian?) brain would aid the de- 

 scription on page 153. A few errors of label- 

 ling persist in the second edition. The num- 

 bers of the first and second head cavities are 

 interchanged in Fig. 2Y0. In Fig. 336 the 

 right and left post-cardinals are incorrectly 

 labelled as " post-cavse." In Fig. 378 the two 

 oviducts are shown as uniting in a " urinary 



bladder." Some typographical errors there 

 are of course. The book as a whole however, 

 is one in which American morphologists may 

 take just pride as an admirable piece of work 

 by an American zoologist of distinction aided 

 by an American publisher of high ideals of 

 typographic workmanship. 



Herbert V. Neal 

 Tufts College, Mass. 



A Year of Costa Bican Natural History. By 

 Amelia S. Calvert and Philip P. Calvert. 

 The chief object in the visit of these two 

 entomologists to Costa Eica was a study of 

 the dragonflies with special reference to their 

 life-histories and seasonal distribution. How- 

 ever, in the preface, we are told : " Our in- 

 vestigations have not yet been completed and 

 we have little to say in these pages on that 

 technical subject. What we here set forth are 

 chiefly our more incidental observations re- 

 corded in our diary." The first point made by 

 the authors is in regard to the changes which 

 will be induced by the Panama Canal. We 

 are given no hint of the factors productive of 

 such changes or of their nature or extent. 

 But in view of the expectations of such trans- 

 formations, it is a pity that a delay of about 

 eight years has intervened' between the ex- 

 pedition and this publication of the general 

 resume of its results. 



The authors have shown wisdom in rewrit- 

 ing their notes and doing away with any diary 

 form. They have grouped their observations 

 geographically and when several separate vis- 

 its were made to any one place, these are 

 grouped in a single chapter. As the five hun- 

 dred pages of text deal chiefly with discon- 

 nected, casual notes, with annotated facts and 

 identifications, it is impossible to offer any- 

 thing like a detailed criticism. The excellent 

 index places this information in a form read- 

 ily available for reference. The volume is 

 filled with interesting matter and adumbrates 

 what must be the all-important scientific work 

 of the future — ^the direct correlation of field 

 work with that of the laboratory and museum. 

 As we might expect, the chief interest was in- 

 sects, although plants form a close second in 



