Vegetation of the Engadine. 
367 
Rubel’s fifth “ vegetation type” is made up of swampy grounds 
(Sumpffluren), divided into two “formation groups,” (1) “ Hochmoor” 
associations (Hochmoorbestande) and (2) “ Flachmoor” associations 
(Flachmoorbestande). The concepts of “ Hochmoor” and “ Flach¬ 
moor ” have recently been discussed by Tansley (8) and Moss (9); 
and it is only necessary here to state that the “ Flachmoor” of the 
Engadine would, very largely, he placed in the British moor 
formation and not in the fen formation, although of course in many 
parts of Switzerland, particularly in the lowland districts, true fen 
is largely developed. It may also he pointed out that one of Rubel’s 
“ Hochmoor ” associations is dominated by Pinus montana , in the 
tree form, so that here, at all events, the determination of plant 
formations by plant form breaks down, as Dr. Rubel has two 
communities dominated by this species. The particular point has 
been discussed by Gradmann (10). 
Dr. Rubel goes on to describe his sixth “vegetation type,” the 
fresh water vegetation, and lastly his seventh “vegetation type,” 
the stony grounds (Gesteinfluren). The latter are divided into 
three “formation groups,” (1) rocky grounds (Felsfluren), (2) rubbly 
grounds (Geroll- and Schuttfluren), and (3) sandy and gravelly 
grounds (Sand- and Kiesfluren). The Felsfluren consist of a single 
“formation,” namely, the Felsflur, the Geroll- and Schuttfluren of 
two “formations,” namely (1) the fixed rubble (Schuttflur) and (2) 
the sliding rubble or screes (Gerollflur), and the sandy and gravelly 
grounds are represented by a single formation, namely, the alluvial 
ground (Alluvialflur). These include in all ten associations. It is 
worth while adding the special Swiss significance of a number of 
terms which are here used, taken from Schroter (11). “ Blocke ” 
(boulders) are from 25 cm. upwards in diameter. “Geroll” refers to the 
sliding screes, “ Schutt ” to stones which do not move down the 
mountain side. “ Kies,” or gravel, refers to stones which are 
rounded by water action. Each of these—“Geroll,” “Schutt,” 
and “ Kies”—may he “gross” or “fein.” “ Grossgeroll,” “ Gross- 
schut,” and “ Grosskies ” have stones with a diameter of 2*0—2-5 cm., 
whilst “ Feingeroll,” “ Peinschutt,” and “Feinkies” have stones 
with a diameter of 0'2—2'0 cm. The particles of sand are (K)25— 
0’2 cm. in diameter. 
The second (floristic) part of Dr. Ruhel’s work is as important 
and as carefully done as the first; and it is worth while drawing 
special attention to the fact that in a large number of cases the 
altitudes reached by species are given, and that these altitudes are 
in numerous cases higher than any previously recorded. 
Although the concepts of vegetation units in Dr. Rubel’s 
monograph are not strictly comparable with those that are adopted 
in this country, it is obvious that they (the Swiss concepts) serve 
quite well to describe the vegetation of the mountainous districts 
of Central Europe; and I have purposely refrained from any 
criticism of the Swiss views. The time is not ripe for a settlement 
of the vexed questions which are involved. It is my strong opinion 
that what is needed at present is not controversy, but a thorough 
understanding of each other’s point of view ; and if this review has 
been of a rather formal character, my excuse is that I wished to 
give some assistance to the younger and more serious-minded 
British ecologists in their efforts to become familiar with the phyto- 
