Anatomy of Seed Plants. by Katherine EsauReview by: F. A. L. ClowesNew Phytologist, Vol. 79, No. 3 (Nov., 1977), pp. 731-732Published by: Wiley on behalf of the New Phytologist TrustStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2433701 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 03:30

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Wiley and New Phytologist Trust are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to NewPhytologist.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.76 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 03:30:09 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REVIEWS

Fundamentals of Mycology. By J. H Burnettt. 9 X 51/2 in. Pp. xiii + 673 with 15 plates and 182 text-figures. London: Edward Arnold. 2nd edition, 1976. Price ?27.50.

This is the second edition of a book first reviewed, on its initial appearance, in the New Phytologist for 1969. The reviewer, on that occasion, drew attention to Professor Burnett's claim that the book was an attempt 'in a limited compass, to expound the broad trends in structure, function and behaviour which can be discerned in the group'. This new edition, even more than the first, does exactly this, very successfully, in a way that distinguishes it from any other mycological text-book.

The second edition is a thorough revision of the first, while adhering to the same general pattern. Most chapters are revised in detail, but some, where much new information has be- come available, are largely rewritten and expanded. Thus the chapters on structure and fine structure of fungal cells (Chapter 2) and on hyphal growth (Chapter 3) are nearly doubled in size and are authoritative summaries of the present state of knowledge. Then again, in Section II, the chapters on transport processes (Chapter 8) and metabolism products (Chapter I 1) are considerably expanded and in Section III the same is true of the chapters on nuclear division (Chapter 13) and sexual reproduction (Chapter 15).

Of course, in so encyclopaedic a book one can find a few trivial errors. Thus, for instance, it is stated on p. 378 that ten gibberellins are known, six being produced by the fungus Gibberella fujikuroi; the figures, at the time of writing, should be fifty-two and twenty res- pectively. Again, the impression that little has been done on the mode of action of grise- ofulvin (p. 382) is not entirely correct. I expect that others could find a few similar errors. But even so, this in no significant way detracts from a unique and masterly book that everyone who wants to know about or work with fungi should possess.

That brings me to my final point. How many university students are going to be able to buy the book for themselves, as any proposing to specialize in mycology should do, at a price of ?27.50? The first edition (1968) had a paper cover edition at 65 shillings. The present edition has no paper cover edition, so the relevant increase in price is nearly 750%. We live in inflationary times, but that seems a bit much!

P. W. Brian

Anatomy of Seed Plants. By Katherine Esau. 9 X 7 in. Pp. xx + 550 with 320 text-figures. New York: John Wiley and Sons. 2nd edition, 1977. Price ?11.50.

Professor Esau, the doyenne of plant anatomists, has two books in print on plant anatomy as well as one on the development of the vascular tissue. The volume under review is the second edition of a textbook originally designed to accompany an indergraduate course and first published in 1960. The previously larger book, Plant Anatomy, has also run to two editions in 1953 and 1965. It has a developmental bias and those who remember books on plant anatomy will understand what a debt we owe to Professor Esau for writing interestingly about the subject and correcting so many misconceptions. The first edition of Anatomy of Seed Plants was shorter and simpler than Plant Anatomy with less ontogenetic and historical detail.

The new book is twice the length of its first edition and 72% of its citations are to public- ations that have appeared since 1960 and 62% are post 1965 when the last edition of Plant Anatomy appeared. These changes will make a difference to the use of the book. It will be

731

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.76 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 03:30:09 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

732 Reviews

consulted for an up-to-date account of anatomical topics, but it will no longer serve merely as an introduction to plant structure. It provides a fuller course and, no doubt with this end in mind, it has been given a more developmental flavour than it originally had. However, it still retains the readability that distinguishes Professor Esau's writing and in the passages that have not been altered much in content the style has even been subtly improved.

The greatest changes in content have naturally occurred in the chapters and sections on cell structure and also on reproductive organs. But perhaps the most valuable change brought about by the expansion of the text is the introduction of more functional ideas. There is, for example some discussion of C3 and C4 plants and incompatibility responses in pollination. This extension will make the book a better text for undergraduates. But I also recommend it to any botanist who did his anatomy some time ago, for he will be surprised how much the subject has changed. The attractive style of writing is complemented by attractive printing in double columns and by the numerous illustrations in the text.

F. A. L. Clowes

Annual Review of Plant Physiology. Ed. by W. R. Briggs. Volume 27. 1976. Pp. 581. Price ?9.45.

This weighty volume contains twenty-two articles. A wide range of topics is covered: the editor's choice is reasonable but it may be argued that there is a slight bias, eight articles, in favour of development, and that this gives the initial impression that our understanding, as opposed to description, of development is progressing faster than it is. The quality of the reviews ranges widely but I think that nine of them may be described as good or excellent. I think that four of them are first class. These are the discussions of rhythms and timing by Hiliman, of hormone binding by Kende and Gardner, of self-assembly in development by Bouck and Brown, and of modelling of plant growth by Erickson. Each of these authors con- centrates on our understanding of the subject, and by critical analysis of ideas and results pinpoints the major problems to be solved, establishes what is understood and suggests what needs to be done to increase this understanding. These reviews present the carefully considered views of people who have thought deeply about their subject and have taken pains to express their thoughts clearly. I also commend the articles on osmoregulation by Hellebust, slime moulds by Sussman and Brackenbury, geotropism by Juniper, RNA poly- merases by Duda, and fruit development by Coombe. Each is based on critical and selective treatment of the important work and gives a clear picture of the present state of the topic. Trewavas wrote well on post-translational modification of proteins by phosphorylation but had to depend primarily on studies of animals.

Many of the remaining reviews had their good points but were not in the same class as those that I have mentioned already, and some seem to me to be of very limited use. My major complaint is that in many instances there is a tendency towards description rather than analysis. A review should be something more than a record of the papers published and the opinions expressed since the topic was last reviewed. Such catalogues are difficult to read because they are based on what happens to have been published rather than our understand- ing of the subject, and thus lack coherence. They also fail to provide the intellectual stimulus of an analytical review. In biochemistry and micro-biology it has become necessary to intro- duce a series entitled 'Critical Reviews', despite the regular appearance of Annual Reviews of both subjects. This seems to me to be an admission of defeat, and I hope that the inclusion of descriptive articles in the Annual Review of Plant Physiology will cease so that we are not forced to start 'Critical Reviews in Plant Physiology'. We ought to be able to write about our subject clearly, critically, and engagingly. If we cannot then we had best keep quiet.

T. ap Rees

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.76 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 03:30:09 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions