934 THE JOURNAL OF BOTANY 
Conspectus Flore Grece auctore E. pe Haticsy. Vol. 
8yo, pp. 224 [Ranunculacee—Alsinacea. | Linea’ pe 
900. 
We have here a welcome and much- Sotiiegg addition to our 
matter will be published with the eens part; the present 
instalment begins at once with Ranunculac 
Generic characters are not given ‘aa ‘those of sections are 
supplied, with in most cases a short diagnosis of each species, 
giving the salient eocare of its differentiation. A very ample 
bibliography of each plant is given, and the geographical distri- 
bution is also aly s set forth. Large genera are provided with a 
— drawn up and not too brief oe so that the volume is 
in 
greatly to the advantage of the worker 
n the absence of explanation it is not quite clear what pa 
the actline adopts as es nomenclature; we note tha ” 
Nymphea and Nuphar in the sense in which they were generally 
wn — —_ Cnatalia. was revived for the former, and that the 
(Garda ine). ean ’s name was taken up by "Ascherson (Fl. 
endenh. i. 82) in 1864, whose name should be attached to it 
as authority; Lamarck’s specific name, which should be cited from 
l. de France, ii. 499 (1778), would we imagine be ignored 
Berlin under the “ fifty years’ limit” rule which now prevails there. 
Occasionally we find a citation which strikes us as pitig accurate 
—e.g. “KR. Br. Hort. Kew. iy.” or even “RB. Br. Kew. iv.’; the 
reference being of course to Aiton’s Hortus Kewensis. But ‘as 8 
whole the Flora impresses us as very carefully done, and we hope 
the publisher’s promise as to its rapid progression may be fulfilled. 
J. B. 
