SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. VIII. No. 187. 



exclusively should eud in -acex and ordinal 

 names in -ales, in this first publication issued 

 under those rules their author violates them in 

 giving the termination -ales to fourteen out 

 of thirty-four of his classes ! But this is not all. 

 In the synopsis before us the same termination, 

 which by the rules should be restricted to 

 orders, is given to group names of four different 

 grades, as follows : 



Alassen; Plasmodiophorales, Peridiniales, etc., 

 as above. 



Vnierklassen: Bangiales, Sphagnales, Andrese- 

 ales, Archidiales, Bryales. 



' Familien-gruppe {Unterordnung) :^ Uredina- 

 ceales, Auriculariaceales, Perisporiaceales, etc. 



Beihen: Is used in the majority of cases 

 (though for less than 60 per cent, of the crypto- 

 gamic orders), but with such unnecessary excep- 

 tions as Siphonese, Phfeosporeae, Zygomycetes, 

 Autobasidiomycetes, Basidiolichenes, Cleisto- 

 carpse, etc., among the cryptogams, to say 

 nothing of iiine out of the eleven orders of Mono- 

 cotyledince ! Surely consistency is not a marked 

 feature of the Berlin system ! 



If any of the leading parts of a system 

 are to appear, their appearance should be a 

 constant feature. Surely classes and orders 

 should not be omitted in any well-constructed 

 system ; and yet here we find no orders what- 

 ever among the schizophyta, the diatoms, the 

 conjugate, and the gymnosperms, and among 

 many of the cryptogams, particularly the fungi, 

 the orders appear to have been distributed to 

 the next lower groups of some suggested sys- 

 tem, instead of being built up as names for 

 closely allied groups of families bound together 

 by such morphological characters as would in- 

 dicate a community of descent. Surely such 

 conglomerates as Autobasidiomycetes and Euas- 

 cales are not homogeneous, and no one familiar 

 with fungi would think of regarding them as 

 such. 



If the Zygomycetes and the Oomycetes are to 

 be regarded as simply orders, why should their 

 homologues in the algal series be placed the one 

 as a class {Conjugate), and the other simply as 

 an order {Siphonex) ? And what reason except 

 inconsistency for not writing the latter name 

 Siphonales, uniform with Protococcales and 

 Confervales, which are consistently formed? 



For our own part we cannot see why Spirogyra, 

 and the desmids deserve class distinctions from 

 Vaucheria, when Hydrodictyon and Draparnal- 

 dia do not receive it. Surely an order Conju- 

 gales among the Chlorophyceffi would be a more 

 logical arrangement and it would seem that 

 Coleochsete might be more properly advanced to 

 ordinal rank than Chara to that of a distinct 

 class. The elevation of the Laboulbeniacese to 

 class rank will be regarded as a bold step. 

 Surely with all their unique characters they 

 are more truly Ascomycetes than the Ustilagi- 

 nales are Basidiomycetes ! An order surely they 

 are, as we have before affirmed, but scarcely a 

 class. And one order, the Myxobacteriales, is 

 not even mentioned, due largely, no doubt, to 

 the fact that they have been worked out by an 

 American investigator, for work done on this 

 side of the Atlantic is systematically overlooked 

 by the Germans in their usual self-complacent 

 manner. 



We doubt, too, if bryologists will agree in as- 

 signing subclass distinction to the four orders of 

 Musci, especially when Anthoceros has only or- 

 dinal separation from the other Hepaticje. 

 Neither will fern students agree with the sep- 

 aration of Marattia and Ophioglossum as types of 

 orders while the other groups of ferns remain 

 merely families. Better by far regard the 

 Filicales, Lycopodiales and Equisetales as orders 

 and thus avoid the unjust and unequal separa- 

 tion of groups that were never thus organized 

 by nature. A similar criticism again might be 

 given to the classes of Gymnospermse which, 

 posing as orders, would be at once more simple 

 and more rational. 



The German tendency towards redundancy 

 shows itself not only in the Abteilung as noted 

 above, but also in the Beihe as ' Filicales lepto- 

 sporangiatae, ' and 'Lycopodiales eligulatse,' 

 and even in the families as ' Jungermanniacefe 

 anacrogynse.' Such complexities of polysylla- 

 bles as well as such minor redundancies as 

 Euequisefales should not be allowed to compli- 

 cate a proper system. 



In several cases, ordinal terminations are 

 badly formed as Uredinaceales for the simpler 

 XJredinales, Auriculariaceales for Auriculari- 

 ales, Hypocreaceales for Hypocreales, Sphaeria- 

 ceales for Sphteriales, etc., all of which were 



