102 
W. B. Crow 
(9) Gardner, N. L. Cytological Studies in Cyanophycese. Univ. of Cali¬ 
fornia Publications, Bot. 11. 1906. 
(10) Gomont, M. Recherches sur les enveloppes cellulaires des Nostocacees 
filamenteuses. Bull. Soc. bot. de France, Ser. 2, T. 10. 1888. 
(11) Kirchner, O. Schizophycese in Engler u. Prantl, Die naturl. Pflanzenfam 
Teil I, Abt. 1 a. 1898. 
(12) Kohl, F. G. Uber die Organisation und Physiologie der Cyanophyceenzelle, 
u. s. w. Jena, 1903. 
(13) Lemaire, A. Recherches microchimiques sur la gaine de quelques 
schizophycees. Journ. de Bot. 15 . 1905. 
(14) Lemmermann, E. Algen in Kryptogamenflora der Mark Brandenburg, 3 . 
1907. 
(15) Olive, E. W. Mitotic division of the nuclei of the Cyanophyceae. Beihefte 
Bot. Centralbl. 18 . 1905. 
(16) Tilden, J. Minnesota Algae. Vol. Myxophycece Minnesota. 1910. 
(17) Virieux, J. Sur les gaines et les mucilages des Algues d’eau douce. 
Comptes rendus Acad, des Sc. 151 . 1910. 
(18) West, G. S. Algce. Vol. 1 . Camb. Bot. Handbooks. Cambridge, 1916. 
(19) Zimmermann, A. Botanical Microtechnique, trans. J. E. Humphrey. 
New York, 1893. 
REVIEW 
Lichens. By Annie Lorrain Smith, F.L.S. Pp. xxviii and 464, 
with 135 figures in the text. (Cambridge Botanical Handbooks.) 
University Press, 1921. Price 55s. 
The publication of this second volume of the Cambridge Botanical 
Handbooks has been delayed owing to war conditions, and if this delay 
is, in any way, responsible for its excellence, all students of lichenology 
must congratulate themselves that it has occurred. It is so full of matter 
that one marvels at the wonderful application of the author in collecting 
and arranging the work on the various aspects of lichenology into critical 
articles, and then weaving these articles together so as to form a con¬ 
nected whole, which may be read with pleasure and profit, not only by 
a lichenologist, but also by a general botanical reader. 
The Bibliography of works consulted in the preparation of the volume 
is an extensive one, and includes all the important books and papers on 
lichens. Very few British articles on lichenology, whether important or 
otherwise, are omitted. One cannot remember a dozen which are not 
included, and such omissions as there are involve no great sacrifice to 
the completeness of the work. Even Wheldon’s article on mites using 
the pits of immersed apothecia for their homes is included, though such 
a paper, interesting as it is, seems rather out of place in a general work 
on lichens. 
The terminology is much simplified as compared with that employed 
by Leighton and Crombie, and the author must be congratulated on 
the ability with which she has lucidly explained the morphology of lichens 
without requiring an extensive glossary. A glossary is given, but many 
of the terms in it are sparingly, if at all, used by the author. The value 
of Crombie’s monograph was largely discounted by the technical jargon 
he used. 
