REVIEW. 
169 
Beitrdge zur Phanologie. By Egon Ihne and Hermann Hoffmann. 
178 pp. Giessen, 1884. 
This pamphlet consists of two parts, the first giving a history of 
plienological observations in Europe and a list of the magazines and 
other publications in which they are enshrined, compiled by Dr. E. 
Ihne; the second a number of unpublished plienological observations 
during the years 1879-82, from various parts of Europe, arranged by 
Dr. H. Hoffmann, Professor of Botany at Giessen. Dr. Ihne undertook 
the enormous task of compiling this history in preparation for the 
work which he intends to perform of publishing a series of pheno- 
logical maps of Europe, each devoted to a single plant. He expects 
that the first of the series, relating to Syringa vulgaris, will appear 
during the present year. He gives not only a list of various publi¬ 
cations in which observations of this kind on flowering plants and 
mosses are contained, with, in many cases, details to show their 
usefulness and extent, but also lists of the stations at which these 
observations were made, classified (1) alphabetically and (2) according 
to countries. From this it is manifest that an enormous body of 
trustworthy observations now exists, extending over more than a 
hundred years, and over nearly the whole of Europe. The only 
country which has not contributed to the total is Turkey; Greece and 
Montenegro come next with one station each, then Denmark, Portugal, 
and Spain. Great Britain occupies a most honourable place, being 
surpassed only by Germany and Austro-Hungary (which are combined 
in one total). The “Midland Naturalist” is duly quoted for the 
records which appeared therein from 1879 to 1882. 
The second part, by Dr. Hoffmann, contains a scheme for pheno- 
logical observations, which it would be best for English observers to 
adopt, as by that means their records will be capable of easy 
comparison with those of Continental observers. This is presented on 
another page. Dr. Hoffmann has invented a method of calculation 
which enables him to check published records with great ease. He 
chooses Giessen as the standard, as not only is it situated towards the 
middle of Europe, but it possesses the longest and most extensive 
series of plienological observations made by one man, namely 
himself, as a sure basis for comparison. He then calculates the 
average time of, e.g., the flowering of various trees at Giessen, and 
with them compares the average times so calculated for some other 
place. It will be found that, if the data are equally correct, in each case 
the average retardation or acceleration of blooming in any one month 
will be nearly the same for all the plants compared. Thus St. Paul 
is three days later than Giessen, on the basis of eight April-blooming 
plants; St. Petersburg, forty-two days later; Vienna, eight days 
earlier; while Edinburgh is doubtfully given as thirty-six days later. 
What Dr. Hoffmann wishes, in order to carry out his plan, is a series 
observations made at the same place by the same observers on the 
same species of plants. W.B.G. 
