602 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XXXII. No. S26; 



preceded by an arcliicarp and a trichogyne 

 which are supposed to constitute a reproduc- 

 tive tract. The more recent researches of 

 Baur, Darbishire, Lindau and Wainio have 

 proved the existence of similar tracts in 

 lichens of several genera, and while there is 

 yet much need of research regarding nuclear 

 behavior, the general presence of sexual or- 

 gans in lichens can scarcely be questioned 

 longer." 



It need scarcely be said that both authors 

 accept the duality of the lichen's structure as 

 no longer to be questioned, which reminds the 

 writer of this review of the complete change 

 of opinion in this regard that has taken place 

 in the past thirty years. Then every Ameri- 

 can and practically every English lichenol- 

 ogist denounced the " algo-lichen hypothesis " 

 as they styled it, as the height of foolishness, 

 as well as the depth of stupidity. Now one 

 wonders whether there are any botanists who 

 regard lichens as autonomous in the old sense. 

 Are there any who deny that the " gonidia " 

 are algag? Where are they who so vehemently 

 denounced Schwendener and his little band of 

 followers? Here we have a professed lichen- 

 ologist uttering such words as these : " What- 

 ever may be the outcome of further study of 

 this question, the conception . . . which is 

 still held by some botanists, that the fungus 

 and the alga together compose an organism or 

 an association which constitutes the lichen 

 need be abandoned before there can be any 

 clear thinking regarding lichens. The lichen 

 is the fungus of the association." In the old 

 days this would have been regarded as a be- 

 trayal of lichenology, for logically it reduces 

 all " lichens " to the category of fungi. In 

 the old days the paragraph quoted would have 

 brought down a storm of wrath upon the head 

 of the author, but now no one notices this as 

 at all out of the ordinary. Tempora mutan- 

 tur! 



In Mr. Herre's book 307 species and sub- 

 species are described from a peninsula 90 

 miles long and including perhaps no more 

 than 1,800 to 2,000 square miles, and ranging 

 from sea level to a maximum elevation of 

 3,793 feet. In Professor Fink's book which 



covers an area more than forty times as large,, 

 the number of species and subspecies is 441. 

 We have no means for comparing the treat- 

 ment of species and lower groups by the two- 

 authors, but from " the face of the returns "' 

 as here given it appears that the Santa Cruz 

 peninsula must be more than ordinarily rich 

 in lichen forms. 



Mr. Herre's book includes one new genus 

 and eleven new species, certainly not a great, 

 number for such an area, or such a total num- 

 ber of forms. In Professor Fink's book we- 

 have been unable to find a single new species.. 

 These are encouraging signs. In some other 

 departments of systematic botany two such 

 books as these could have been depended upon 

 to yield from 50 to 100 new species at the very 

 least ! 



In both books all specific names are de- 

 capitalized. Professor Fink's book is richly 

 illustrated by 52 plates (mostly reproductions 

 of photographs) and 18 text figures. Some of 

 these are exceptionally fine. 



THREE PATHOLOCxICAL BOOKS 



It is not so very long since there were no 

 plant pathologists in the United States. At 

 least there were none known by that name.. 

 There were a few botanists who began to real- 

 ize that plants were subject to diseases, but 

 the United States Department of Agriculture 

 had as yet given no attention to the subject, 

 and this was before the inception of the ex- 

 periment stations. At one time several botan- 

 ists united in a memorial to the Department 

 of Agriculture calling attention to the de- 

 sirability of beginning work in plant pathol- 

 ogy, and what was their astonishment when 

 the secretary very promptly appointed Pro- 

 fessor Scribner, until then a student of the 

 grasses, to be the pathologist. And no one 

 was more astonished than the professor him- 

 self, but at that time secretaries of agricul- 

 ture knew little or nothing as to the qualifi- 

 cations of a pathologist. And it is greatl.y to 

 the credit of the graminologist so suddenl.v 

 torn from his chosen speciality and thrust 

 into a new field, that he started the work in a 

 creditable manner, and laid a good founda- 



