News, Notes and Reviews 
153 
of Uromyces. As to genera, the situation is perhaps still more 
striking, Plowright having included all species under n genera 
as compared with a list of 24 by Grove. It must be noted, how- 
ever, that some genera have been discussed which have not yet 
been collected in England, but which the author apparently be- 
lieves may be found there at any time on account of their preva- 
lence in Europe. 
The book is well printed, profusely illustrated, and makes a 
neat appearance. The illustrations are original and highly satis- 
factory. They are very similar to those in Fischer’s Uredineen 
der Schweiz, from which work the general form of the drawings 
seems to have been adapted. 
The author very generously acknowledges that the descriptions 
of species are based upon Sydow’s Monographia Uredinearum. 
In some instances it is regrettable that this work has been fol- 
lowed so closely as to include some of its errors. The descrip- 
tions are said to be revised and amended but evidence of culture 
work or first hand investigations of many of the special problems 
is usually lacking. Other writers’ opinions are rather freely 
cited, but there is frequently considerable hesitation about the 
adoption of results if they differ from the usual disposition. In 
the citation of names, the dates have been intentionally omitted. 
As they are frequently important and would have required no 
additional space and little extra time in preparation, there seems 
to be no sufficient reason for such a procedure. 
Sometimes statements in the biological discussions are of such 
a nature, either because of incompleteness or dogmatic form, as 
to attract attention. On p. 33, in a discussion of germ-pores in 
urediniospores, the statement is made that only one species of 
Puccinia, P. monopora, is known with the urediniospore possess- 
ing a single pore, although P. uniporula was published in 1912 
(Orton in Mycologia 4: 201). Since that time the reviewer has 
found Puccinia Veratri and an undescribed Uredo on Geranium 
mexicanum to have i-pored urediniospores, which suggests that 
the character is probably not so rare as was believed formerly. 
The conception of amphispores as given on p. 34 is not very 
clear, as is evidenced by the fact that Fig. 22 is given as an amphi- 
spore of Puccinia Pruni-spinosae, and that in the technical de- 
