sociated with Green Algae, and the Diatoms are made a class, "Bacillarioideae," of the "Zygophyceae." Four phyla of seed-plants are recognized, "Cycadophyta," Gnetales, "Strobilophyta" (Coniferae) and "Anthophyta" (Angiosperms).

Engler, two years later, published his Syllabus,' in which he follows Bessey's arrangement to a considerable extent, also omitting entirely the term Thallophyte. He recognizes thirteen primary divisions, viz., Schizophyta, Myxomycetes, Flagellatae, Dinoflagellatae, Bacillariales, Conjugatae, Chlorophyceae, Charales, Phaeophyceae, Rhodophyceae, Eumycetes, Embryophyta-asiphonogama (Archegoniatae), Embryophytasiphonogama (Spermatophyta).

That the authors of some of the recent text-books should prefer the obsolete classification of Eichler to the much more scientific system of Engler seems rather extraordinary.

While agreeing in the main with Engler's classification, the writer would be inclined to unite some of Engler's primary divisions. It may be questioned whether the Dinoflagellata (Peridineae), Diatoms, Conjugatae and possibly Characeae, are sufficiently distinct to warrant raising them to the rank of subkingdoms. The writer believes that the Conjugatae, and probably the Characeae, should be included in the Chlorophyceae, while the Peridineae might either be included with the Flagellata, or possibly be regarded as the lowest of the Phaeophyceae. It is even possible that the Diatoms might also be united with the latter.

Should these suggestions be accepted, we should then reduce Engler's primary divisions to nine.

It is pretty generally admitted that the origin of the Chlorophyceae and Phaeophyceae is to be sought among the Flagellata; but the two classes have probably arisen quite independently from green and brown flagellates, respectively.

The writer believes that the Green Algae, with the possible exception of the Characeae, form a homogeneous class, and can be traced back more or less directly to some flagellate forms not unlike Chlamydomonas. The succession of forms from the flagellate unicellular stage to the highly organized forms characteristic of most Phaeophyceae is not nearly so evident as in the Green Algae; but some of the simplest of the Peridineae closely resemble the zoospores of the Phaeophyceae and may possibly be remotely related to them.

The systematic rank of the Peridineae and Diatoms is difficult to determine; but some of the investigations on the development of the simpler Diatoms point to a possible derivation from forms related to

7 Engler, A., "Syllabus der Pflanzenfamilien," Berlin, 1909.

the Peridineae, and as some of the simplest types of the latter much resemble the brown zoospores with lateral cilia, characteristic of the Phaeophyceae, it might possibly be justifiable to include the Peridineae and Diatoms with the Phaeophyceae, as the simplest members of the class. The origin of the Red Algae is more obscure and they may possibly be an offshoot of the Chlorophyceae.

In view of the decidedly doubtful origin of the Phaeophyceae and Rhodophyceae, it may be well, for the present, to unite all the Algae in a single subkingdom, the three main divisions being treated as classes; and perhaps the Peridineae and Diatoms might also be ranked as classes.

The relationships of the Fungi are even more obscure than those of the Algae. This immense assemblage of parasites and saprophytes have become so much changed from the normal plant-type that in most cases a comparison with the Algae is almost impossible. Whether the Fungi form a single homogeneous group, or whether they include several unrelated phyla, it is now impossible to say; and for the present, at least, we shall probably best keep them together as a single sub-kingdom.

Engler, as already mentioned, proposed the very appropriate term Embryophyta for the higher plants, viz., Archegoniates and seed-plants, which he calls, respectively, E. asiphonogama and E. siphonogama, based upon the absence or presence of a pollen-tube.

The old separation of the Archegoniates into two sub-kingdoms, each coordinate with the whole assemblage of Thallophytes, is still maintained in many of the standard text-books, although the absurdity of such a divorce of the two obviously related divisions of the Archegoniates is apparent to any one with a first-hand knowledge of the close resemblances in the essential structures of both gametophyte and sporophyte in the less specialized members of the Bryophytes and Pteridophytes.

Adopting the changes suggested by the writer for Engler's system, there would remain nine sub-kingdoms, viz., Myxomycetes, Schizophyta, Flagellata, Chlorophyceae, Phaeophyceae, Rhodophyceae, Fungi (Eumycetes), Embryophyta asiphonogama (Archegoniatae), E. siphonogama (Spermatophyta).

We might still further reduce the number of primary divisions by uniting the three first into a subkingdom Protophyta, and combining all the Algae into a single sub-kingdom. It would be logical, also, to unite all the Embryophytes into one sub-kingdom. The following scheme is offered as a suggestion based upon the above proposal:

IN these days when conservation of natural resources is happily coming to occupy an important place in the nation's thought and plans, it may be of value to consider a most striking example of the utter ruination which man, within comparatively few years, is capable of effecting in nature's long-developed scheme. I refer to Guadalupe Island, a volcanic peak which rises out of the ocean some 150 miles west of Lower California and which I have twice visited during the past two years in the interests of the Natural History Museum of San Diego.

In contrast with most of the other islands on the west coast of the peninsula, which are completely arid, Guadalupe's crest is lofty enough to tap the clouds, and as a result its summit was blessed in bygone days with forests of cypress, oak, pine and palm, as well as with many other smaller shrubs and flowers. This flora became a natural refuge for many birds, although Guadalupe was too far from the mainland to be entered by any land mammals. Through the ages, many of the plants and birds, by their long isolation, became differentiated from mainland forms, and this gave the island a unique natural history interest.

The first event to shock the tranquility of the place, so far as our knowledge goes, was the discovery by sealers, about the end of the eighteenth century, of several rookeries of fur seals (Arctocephalus townsendi) on the rocky shores of Guadalupe. In the ensuing years, Russians, British and Americans seem all to have had a hand in the slaughter of the seals, which was continued relentlessly till about 1830. It is believed that many of the skins were used in the Oriental trade, which was flourishing at that time. During this period stone houses were erected for the seal-hunters, the walls of which still remain. It was probably as a result of these first human invasions that the common house mouse was introduced on Guadalupe and, with it, the domestic cat. These two animals, so foreign to the natural fauna of the island, were destined later on to play a lamentable part in the overturning of nature's balance. When the fur seal rookeries became so depleted as to offer their exploiters no further profit, the sealers left the island, although they had not completed the extermination of the animals.

The next, and by far the most serious intruders upon Guadalupe were the whalers, although, during their brief visits, they did not stop much longer than was necessary to fill their water casks. However, to the whalers is attributed the grave responsibility of having liberated goats upon the island. It is supposed that their idea was to have a convenient place where fresh meat might be obtained on later cruises. No doubt their plan was logical, so far as it concerned themselves, and for a time their demands may have prevented undue increase of the goats. But, with the advent of more settled routes of transportation and boats with better facilities, the goats that had been released on Guadalupe were forgotten and left to their own resources. The place proved to be a goats' paradise, for with plenty of low herbage and not a single enemy, they had life their own sweet way. They increased by tens of hundreds, devouring everything green that was in sight and gnawing their way into the very heart of the primeval forest.

Meanwhile, the northern elephant seal (Mirounga angustirostris), another native resident of Guadalupe and its adjacent waters, began to be sought after and persecuted. Whales were becoming scarce and their hunting grounds more distant. Therefore, when the great blubbery elephant seal could be found sunning himself on the sandy beaches, he fell a ready prey to the whaler and his try-pot. At this time, gold had been discovered in California and the demand for whale oil was tremendous, for it filled the place of kerosene in those early days. Man, in his greed, turned to the easiest thing obtainable and the elephant

seals were reduced to the verge of extinction. In fact, for many years leading authorities thought that they had been exterminated. Nevertheless, in 1892, a party of scientists led by Dr. C. W. Townsend was gratified to find that a small group of elephant seals still existed on Guadalupe Island.

In the case of the fur seal, too, nature had done her best to recuperate. In the early eighties, word was passed about that a few fur seals could still be found on the island. Free lance seal-hunters at once set out from the coast of California and relentlessly pursued the unfortunate seals, invading even the caves to which the last of the herds had retreated. Even though certain of these caves were accessible only during the lowest tides, the protection thus afforded did not save the remnant of the fur seals from complete extermination. Had a few been left to survive, it is possible that the seals might have regained their strength and might to-day be netting Mexico a handsome sum annually, through the sale of their pelts, just as the fur seals of the Pribilof Islands yield to the United States a revenue of about a million dollars a year.

In spite of the damage to Guadalupe Island's bird and plant life that must already have been wrought by mice, cats and goats, Dr. Edward Palmer, wellknown government botanist, who visited it in 1875, described it as a "naturalists' paradise." It would seem, however, that he arrived only in the nick of time to secure a few of the vanishing birds and plants and thus preserve their memory forever in the annals of science. After his departure, some of the birds were never again seen by ornithologists. If Guadalupe was a naturalists' paradise in 1875, what must it have been in its unspoiled glory!

Following the history of this luckless island till modern times, we find that, for a short time in the end of the nineteenth century, it was used as a penal colony by the Mexican government. However, the effect on natural conditions of its habitation for this purpose was probably negligible, since the island had already given nearly all it had, directly or indirectly, to human greed.

In the first part of the twentieth century, man again turned his eyes toward Guadalupe, this time with his attention on her unnatural possession-the hordes of goats. Corrals were built about the water hole on the summit of the island and vast numbers of the goats were butchered for their pelts and tallow. But they had increased to such an extent that the inroads of several of these expeditions had no appreciable effect upon their abundance. During the World War the goats were again exploited, being taken to San Pedro and San Diego, where they were

kept for fattening. However, the many years of over-population had had its effect upon the size of the goats and the quality of their flesh, and the project was a failure owing to the high cost of transportation and feed.

My own acquaintance with Guadalupe Island dates only from 1923, when the overwhelming goat population, by devouring every green thing within reach, had for many years prevented the natural increase of any form of plant life. The condition of the island at this time has well been described as that of a "biological sepulcher." There was, however, one tremendously encouraging feature of my first visit, which was made at the invitation of the Mexican government, for no less than 366 elephant seals were counted as they lay basking on the ancestral beach-by far the largest number that had ever been recorded. The following year (1924) I was again invited to make a census of the elephant seals and found only 124 animals. Reduction of the number does not, however, necessarily indicate a corresponding diminution of the herd, as there was a difference of six weeks in the time of year when the count was made-July 16 in 1923, and August 30 in 1924 and our knowledge of the movements and life history of the elephant seal is still too meager to warrant the drawing of definite conclusions.

On the other hand, a keen look-out during both years for a single possible remaining fur seal proved fruitless. In 1923 complete circumnavigation of the island failed to reveal the slightest trace of these animals, although the polished rocks of the rookeries and even the tiny wooden pegs used a hundred years ago by the seal-hunters to stretch out the skins to dry, could still be found in place on the old killing grounds. It is known that in the more recent raids upon the fur seals their pelts were preserved by salting and not by drying.

What, then, from a naturalist's standpoint, does this former "paradise" hold in the way of hope for the future? Surely nothing of its former wealth of plant and bird life. These are gone forever. From now on the fame of Guadalupe must lie in the fact that it harbors the only known herd of northern elephant seals on earth. Even for them a new and modern type of persecution has lately arisen in the form of disturbance by curious or mercenary photographers and "movie" men. To the lasting credit of Mexico let it be said that she is fully awake to the unique interest of her "elefantes marinos" and has now created Guadalupe Island a federal reservation, protected by a permanent garrison of soldiers. As a result of this wise action, it is within the realm of possibility that these strange animals will have oppor

ROGER FREDERIC BRUNEL1

IT has been my good fortune to come in close contact with the scientific work of Dr. Brunel from a number of points of view, and I consider it a privilege to have the opportunity to endeavor to make clear in a non-technical way the value and significance of his contributions to the science of chemistry.

My interest in Brunel's work was aroused by his first publication because I was working in the same general field of chemistry and because of the fact that we were graduates of the same university. The thesis presented by him in connection with his work for the doctorate gave a clear indication of his skill in experimentation, and an insight into the kind of a problem that aroused his interest. In contrast to many researches in organic chemistry which have as their aim the preparation of a series of new compounds lacking theoretical interest, the problem under study had to do with the more fundamental properties of molecules. Chemistry is concerned primarily with the study of the transformation of one kind of molecules into another kind. Only recently has attention been paid to what may be called the mechanism of such transformations—that is, the manner in which reaction takes place between the chemical units. Research of this kind involves the development of new methods and a high order of scientific imagination. It is more difficult and less likely to yield a wealth of new facts suitable for publication. It requires quantitative measurement and the point of view of the physicist.

The fact that Brunel began his research work in this special field of organic chemistry, no doubt, was the determining factor in his subsequent activities. All his published work has to do with the study of the most fundamental things of the science. The reputations of many chemists are based upon the fact that they have added perhaps hundreds of new substances to the long list of known organic compounds-Brunel was attracted by the more profoundly important problems of how molecules interact and the nature of chemical affinity itself.

His association with Professor Arthur Michael, immediately upon graduation, was most fortunate, because he came in the closest contact with the leading investigator in organic chemistry in America, and a man of international reputation on account of his 1 Address at the meeting in memory of Dr. Brunel held at Bryn Mawr College on February 5, 1925.

leadership in what I may call the philosophy of the science. Michael was studying chemical affinity from the standpoint of energy, and the work of the two investigators led to results of great value.

When I was asked to review Brunel's work I wrote to Profesor Michael to tell him of the action taken by the authorities of Bryn Mawr, as I knew he would be pleased at this recognition of the services of his former co-worker. I have just received a reply to my letter from Professor Michael from Bermuda. He writes:

The sudden death of Dr. Brunel was a shock to me, as it must have been to his other friends, who, like myself, know his fine personal character. He worked two years with me, so I had ample opportunity to appreciate his acute, rare mentality, and his unusual skill in experimentation. I have always considered Dr. Brunel one of our ablest investigators in organic chemistry, who already had made notable contributions to the science and of whom much might have been expected.

The work done with Michael had for its object the study of variations in chemical affinity brought about as the result of the change in the arrangement of the atoms in molecules of the same composition. In these researches the quantitative point of view, which is not considered in so much work in organic chemistry, was stressed as before the results obtained were of great scientific value. It may be interesting to point out here that these results have been found useful in connection with certain industrial developments based upon the compounds studied.

One of the outstanding contributions of Brunel was the paper published in collaboration with Marguerite Willcox. This investigation centered around the study of the relative chemical affinities of certain important groups of atoms. The concept of chemical affinity was that derived from modern physics and physical chemistry, and quantitative measurements were made. The mode of attack of the problem and the detailed plan were both most ingenious. The research is a model that could well be followed in investigating further chemical affinity, and this study is, to my mind, the most important problem before chemists to-day.

Another paper published by Brunel, in collaboration with Crenshaw and Elsie Tobin, illustrates a second type of research in which he was a master. In this paper are recorded the properties of certain alcohols. The materials upon which measurements were made with a high degree of accuracy were first obtained in an unusually pure condition. The work showed great attention to details, and the results are taken as standards by organic chemists.

A short time ago one of my own students was preparing a sample of an alcohol and I questioned him as to the purity of his product. He replied with a

sense of conviction as to the success of his work, that the properties of his material were identical with those published by Brunel. He was satisfied and so was I.

During the war Brunel interrupted his work to take up certain investigations on war gases suggested by the authorities in Washington. He studied with his customary care certain gases which were used to induce a copious flow of tears. Such gases served an important purpose in interfering with the preparations which are necessary before an attack is made. Lines of communication are shelled and, as a result, all work must be done by soldiers who are protected by masks. These cut down markedly efficiency and, consequently, slow up military operations. I had the pleasure of communicating to English chemists, who were working on the same substances, the results obtained by Brunel. As a result their efforts were turned to other problems.

JAMES F. NORRIS

SCIENTIFIC EVENTS

WORLD WHEAT PRODUCTION1 DURING the past ten years it has been realized that all the countries in the world have a common bond

in the international trade in wheat. Various adjust ments in relationships have perforce been necessary, but the six years which have elapsed since the war have given wheat-growing countries time to stabilize their positions and in some degree to accommodate themselves, on one hand, to the cessation of export from Russia, and, on the other hand, to the discontinuance of the artificially enhanced production prevalent during the war years. For this reason the agricultural statistics for 1923 published by the International Institute of Agriculture at Rome, with their comparisons with pre-war years, are of special interest, since they do at this stage indicate the trend which agriculture in general and wheat production in particular is taking throughout the world.

The situation as revealed by the year-book is, on the whole, reassuring. Except in Europe, both area and production in wheat show an increase over the corresponding figures for the period 1909-1913. In North America the increases in area and production are approximately 40 per cent. The year 1923 was admittedly a favorable one for wheat growing, but an examination of the annual returns shows that this increase is not an isolated instance. Europe is still 7.3 per cent. below its pre-war average in production of wheat, and 9.5 per cent. below its average area in that crop over the same period; but the area has increased steadily since 1920, and the production, not

1 From Nature.

withstanding fluctuations, has never fallen lower than it was then.

Russia is omitted from these returns, but the decrease in wheat production in that country during 1922, when famine conditions were at their worst, is now authoritatively stated as fifty-five and a half million quarters, or 65 per cent. of the pre-war average. In 1923 Russia had a small export trade. It will be remembered that, before the war, Russia was one of the chief sources of the world's wheat supply.

A good deal of attention has recently been directed towards the wheat production and crop balancesheets of Canada and the United States. No appreciable decrease in area under cultivation in either country is recorded in the data published, but wheat production in both is less in 1923 than in 1922. Almost the whole of this loss can be apportioned to the United States, where increases in the more important crops of cotton and maize more than counterbalance it. Four million acres went out of wheat in 1923 and 5.4 million were added to the maize and cotton crops. Further, the excess of exports over imports of wheat has fallen from 32 million quarters in 1921 to 9.6 millions in 1923. Taken together, these

figures would seem to afford a striking confirmation of the forecast made by the Bureau of Agricultural Economics in the U. S. Department of Agriculture Year-book for 1921. In a paper on "Wheat Production and Marketing," O. E. Baker says, "Wheat production, however, has been increasing less rapidly than population in this country, and it is very probable that this will continue to be true, at least until we reach the point where we consume practically all we produce." Such a state of affairs is obviously of very serious import.

The International Year-book has grown during its brief career, and this issue gives many more details than its predecessors. It is to be regretted that in so doing it has been thought necessary to discontinue some of the summary tables. That relating to the percentage of each crop, based on total area under cultivation in each country, is a noticeable omission. The book contains sections dealing with crops, live stock, trade returns, prices, freight charges, fertilizer consumption and rates of exchange, and will repay perusal not only by the agriculturist and economist. but also by the interested layman.

THE TRANSMUTATION OF MERCURY THE department of chemistry of the University of Chicago has authorized publication of the following statement:

Recent reports in the press indicate that Miethe, in