68 BOTANICAL GAZETTE [JANUARY 
death. In fine qualities of exposition and balance this part is a worthy com- 
panion of the first. In places, however, it suffers a little from an extreme of 
— although its 189 pages (with their 81 illustrations) would seem 
to ple for the subject in comparison with part I. Thus the treatment 
of ae Oadis (pp. 314, 349) and of osmotic phenomena (p. 309) is too brief for 
complete clearness. And (while we are faultfinding) the inference (p. 371) as 
to the wastefulness of the plant motor does not follow from the evidence; and 
surely the protoplast is not dragged, but pushed, from the wall (p. 310), and 
that the fiendish glee of the reviewer in the detection of error must glut itself 
in this book, and their very insignificance is eloquent testimony to the general 
accuracy and worth of the work, which offers an unsurpassed synopsis of the 
present state of our knowledge of plant physiology. 
This part, and in lesser degree the first, reflects the efforts of the authors to 
give more exact definition to area especially in the direction of elimina- 
tion of teleological expressions. The result is, however, not always happy, and 
it is a question whether it is not ee in most cases to retain the familiar 
frequent warning to the student as to its scientifically erroneous character. 
Every teacher will wish to know to what grade of instruction the work is 
adapted. Presumably part II will correspond in this respect to those before — 
us. The title shows that it is intended “for colleges and universities.” li 
by colleges is meant the general elementary courses in which botany is pre- 
sented for the first time to undergraduates, then in the opinion of the reviewer 
the book contains too much, and is of too advanced a character, unless the plan 
is followed of irrigating the student mind with a vast flood of information in the 
hope that out of the profusion he will find and retain something that interests 
him. But for the second courses in colleges, those devoted to morphology, 
physiology, and ecology in particular, the work seems to the reviewer wholly 
admirable, and much better adapted than any other to the needs of American 
college students _—* our oe of instruction. For this purpose, however, 
he part parately, and the physiology would have borne 
some amplificatio: 
The book is beaatihitiy printed, and the llent illustrati re admirably 2 
reproduced. Altogether it is mechanically, as it is in substance, one of the ie 
most attractive of textbooks.—W. F. GANonc. 
Lichens of Minnesota 
Professor Bruce FINK has been studying the lichens of Minnesota since 
1896, and the result has appeared in the form of a large bulletin from the Us. 
National Museum.’ It is a notable contribution to the lichenology of North — : 
? Fink, Bruce, The lichens of Minnesota. Contrib. U.S. Nat. Herb. 14: pt © 
pp. xvii+269. pls. 51. figs. 18. 1910 
’ 
: 
: 
a 
: 
; 
: 
: 
& 
