902 THE AMERICAN NATURALIST. [Vor. XXXIV. 
placed; but many of the references are mere rubbish and should be 
noted as such, to save the labor of future students. Thus, the un- 
certain genus, Molybdis Pachinger, has been shown by Braun to 
be in all probability based on eggs of Déstomum turgidum, and yet 
no note of this fact appears in the text. If all references to sup- 
posed members of the group are to be included, reference should 
have been made to Coccidium pylori Gebhardt, a species founded on 
a similar confusion. The listing of such forms without explanation 
entails endless labor on those not familiar with the details of the 
particular case, and reference should be made under doubtful forms 
to all such explanations, whether accepted by the monographer or not. 
Some instances were noted of opposite conclusions in cases in- 
volving very similar conditions. Thus, the author accepts two gen- 
era, Haemoproteus and Halteridium, for the parasites of the avian 
red-blood corpuscles, but reduces similar forms of man, not only to 
one genus, but even to varieties of a single species! Some of the 
differences given to the first-named genera in the text, it should be 
noted, have never been confirmed since the original observations of 
Labbé on these forms. Again, he accepts the genus Goussia on the 
basis of a trivial difference in the form of the sporocyst, but rejects 
Benedenia as an independent genus, though it differs radically in 
number of sporozoites produced. Recently discovered differences 
in life history make the distinctness of this genus unassailable. 
Withal, these are minor criticisms; Labbé has traversed nearly 
untrodden ground. It is not surprising that the results are most 
satisfactory on best-known territory, e.g., Gregarinida, and weakest 
in those groups, such as the Coccidiida and Hzemosporidiida, which 
are not only least known, but which are now the object of careful 
study at many hands. The work of the author is very complete and 
is a mine of useful information for workers on this group; remark- 
ably few references are lacking, and only a simple misprint was 
noted. The figures also are well selected and, for the most part, 
well reproduced. Henry B. WARD. 
Faune de France.! — Half a century ago this work would have 
been accepted as very good ; to-day it is out of date in classification, 
in method, and to some extent in illustration. The classification 
shows little improvement on that of Cuvier. The method is synop- 
tic; in the special synopses the points of comparison are most often 
1 Acloque, A. Faune de France. Les Poissons, les Reptiles, les Batraciens, Jes 
Protochordes. Paris, Bailliére, 1900. Pp. 209, 12mo, illustrated. 
