rattle in the wind and the name of "rattle-weed" has thus arisen. A third name is the Spanish title of "loco" or "mad" plant, from the effects of its poisonous foliage upon the hungry cattle which are occasionally tempted by its green foliage and succulent stems-green and succulent when all around is brown and scorched, when even the "burrs" of the burr-clover (Medicago denticulata) are scarce and baked to chips, and the bents of grass are broken down into chaff-to feast upon what in times of greater plenty they avoid.

Although, broadly speaking, there are no trees on the peninsula of San Francisco, except the thickets of scrub oak (Quercus agrifolia) which clothe some of the more sheltered hills and valleys, yet the ravines of the few permanent springs display a crop of willows, mingled with a few examples of Myrica californica; and cliffs with a northern aspect are in some spots made beautiful by an abundant growth of Heteromeles arbutifolia, a showy rosaceous shrub, with red berries like the European hawthorn, but no thorns. Earlier in the season it blooms into a mass of showy bunches.

Ceanothus thyrsiflorus, a few starvling plants of which may be found among or near the willows, is, in more favored localities, one of the loveliest of shrubs, or rather trees, for it grows to the size of an apple tree. Covered all over with lilac-like bunches of odoriferous blue flowers (whence its local name of "blue myrtle"), and growing in extensive thickets over terraces and uplands, it is a living contradiction of the theories of color purists who deny that blue flowers and green leaves can be beautiful.

If we pick our way through the sand and over the hard-baked bed of what in winter is a watercourse, to one of the little coves which lie between the cliffs, we shail probably find numerous specimens of the curious little crustacean, Hippa analoga Stimpson. This little fellow lives in the sand between tide-marks, and although in the vernacular confounded with the species of Orchestia and Allorchestes, under the general term of "sand hopper," really belongs to a very different and higher division of the class Crustacea than that which includes his companions of the sand. He, or rather she, for the female is much the larger, has the body longer than wide, a narrow abdomen tucked under the body like that of an ordinary crab, five pairs of limbs, eyes

borne on stalks, and very conspicuous antennæ and mouth appendages. Thus he belongs to the Decapoda or ten-footed crustacea, while the other sand-hoppers, with seven pairs of limbs and sessile eyes, are in a lower sub-class. His great forte appears to be digging in the sand, which he does backwards, and with astonishing rapidity, disappearing in an attitude similar to that of a diving duck. Securing a few of these lively fellows, we return up the watercourse and across the sandy prairie to the road, gathering, as we proceed, a few flowering stalks of the yellow Bahia lanata and a twig of Croton procumbens, with its light green berries.

I think it is about time that the notion that a species must necessarily be named after some peculiarity that it possesses, should pass into the limbo of exploded ideas. There are now so many species of animals known, that it is, in many cases, impossible to define the differences between those which are nearly related in one word-it needs at least five lines of writing to do it. Two species differing in twenty particulars, no one of them, perhaps, very important, cannot be correctly distinguished by incorporating one of these points of difference in a specific name, and it frequently happens that a name which correctly describes one species will apply equally well to another species which has other peculiarities rendering it totally different. Thus Sebastes ruber, the red rock cod, is red enough, but there are two or three other red species of the same genus in our waters; and among the shrimps of the genus Hippolyte, H. brevirostris, although it has a short rostrum, is excelled in that particular by other species. As species are distinguished from each other not by one but by several peculiarities, it sometimes happens that the very character which, from its conspicuousness, has been incorporated into the specific name, may be wanting in an individual which yet belongs to the species; thus Asterias ochracea, the ochreous star-fish (our common species), is quite as frequently deep purple as yellow, and Astacus nigrescens, the blackish crayfish, is usually of quite a light tint.

The great necessity of zoological and botanical nomenclature is not so much to have a descriptive name for every species as to have one fixed, indisputable name by which each shall be universally known. This is an end difficult to reach, but will, at least in the majority of cases, be at length attained. Isolated workers in different countries, or distant parts of the same country, not

having access to the results of each other's labors, have separately described the same species, and have each given it a name. Perhaps one has called it obesus because it was short and thick, another, sanguineus because it was red, a third, macrodactylus because it had a large toe, while a fourth has named it smithii after his friend, John Smith.

But it is now a recognized rule among naturalists, and it is a rule that ought to be rigidly enforced, that priority of publication shall give precedence, and as soon as it can be ascertained which of the names was first given, provided it was accompanied by a description, that name shall in future be the name, no matter whether it is good or bad Latin, or even whether it is rightly or wrongly spelled. It is the baptismal name, and, like that of an infant, must ever remain its name. It is only by keeping to this rule that we can ever reach bottom in scientific nomenclature; if every aggressive genius were allowed to change a well-known name for one that, in his estimation, fits it better, and if every Latinist, ignoring every consideration but those belonging to his pet grammar, might alter terminations and orthography at his will, the synonymy of species would be endless. The same rules apply to specific names that apply to the surnames or cognomens of human beings.

When men were fewer, and proper names like John and William were the only recognized ones, the various Johns and Williams were distinguished from each other as John the baker, John the butcher, etc., or personal peculiarities were made a note of, and William Tallboy and John Short, with other sometimes very curious names arose; or a man leaving his native town of, let us say, Lincoln, became known in his new residence as John of Lincoln. These names stuck to the families, the members of which changing their trades, or possessing different physical peculiarities, often become the antipodes of their names. Thus, John Baker may be an iron monger, John Short may be tall, William Armstrong may be no stronger in the arm than John Smith, and John Gross may be a Lilliputian. I must now beg pardon of our esteemed corresponding secretary of the California Academy of Sciences, because I have taken the liberty to append his name to a species of fish which I believe has hitherto not been described. Many other names would fit it; it is long, slender and round, so are all the tribe it belongs to; it is brown, so

are others that are nearly related; it has two rows of teeth on each side of the mouth, so have all its family; there are ten teeth in the front row and nine in the back; this is characteristic, but it would puzzle the best Latinist to put it in one word; and it has eleven gill openings, and this might be expressed by a compound Latin name which would be awkwardly long, and after all would not mean with eleven gill openings, but simply with eleven openings, so that on the whole I prefer stoutii; and stoutii, with the doctor's permission, it must be, unless some one has anticipated me in describing the fish.

Bdellostoma stouti nov. sp. Eleven gill openings on each side; ten teeth in the anterior and nine in the posterior series. 151⁄2" long. Eel river, Humboldt county.

It is rather singular that this fish, which is abundant in Eel river, and is sold for food, and also occurs in this harbor, should hitherto have escaped notice. I believe it to be the only species of its genus hitherto found on the Pacific coast of North America; and it differs from Bdellostoma polytrema, a species which occurs along the coast of Chili, both in the number of its gill-openings and that of the teeth, B. polytrema having fourteen of the former and twelve of the latter in each series.

-:0:

A

THE BENEFICIAL INFLUENCE OF PLANTS.

BY J. M. ANDERS, M.D., PH.D.

GOOD deal of attention has recently been given to the sub

ject of the sanitary relations of plant life. Since plants constitute so great a factor in the organic world, a study of their functions necessarily becomes interesting and important. As every one knows, the knowledge of these processes is being rapidly unfolded, and clearly, the way to render this most useful is to examine into their practical relations; for our appreciation of plants and flowers must, to a great extent, go hand in hand with the increase in knowledge concerning their influence on our health and welfare. As our information in this direction increases we shall be more ready to acknowledge how much we owe to vegetation; still it is to be hoped that our ideas will never revert to the extravagant theories of the ancients, for we find that mythology credits trees with marvelous powers, such as their

being the abode of spirits, some of which were held sacred while others were supposed to be demonic. Trees were also supposed to be sentient beings and even possessed of souls. Strange as it may seem in this age of enlightenment, some relics of these ancient superstitions still linger in certain quarters of the globe.

Prof. Pettenkofer has lately discussed the question of the hygienic relations of plants from a new standpoint, and has doubtless thrown new light upon it. He has, to his own satisfaction, demonstrated that three of the great functions in plants, namely, the giving off of oxygen, the absorption of carbonic acid and generation of ozone, really have no hygienic value whatever. The proof of his argument rests largely upon the solid basis of experimental researches conducted by himself and other noted investigators. It is but fair to say, however, that Prof. Pettenkofer does not deny all hygienic influence of vegetation, but attributes its influence to other circumstances rather than to the variation in the amount of the gases; and yet, in setting forth what he believes to be the sanitary operations of plants, he omits making any allusion to the process of transpiration as affecting the sanitary conditions of the air. This is not so surprising when we reflect how very imperfect our knowledge of this function has been up to a very recent date. In a paper on this subject we have presumed to attach more importance to this function.

We shall now make the proposition—a deduction from actual experiment that the hygienic conditions of the air are both directly and indirectly affected by plant transpiration. It will be seen that the statement ventured contains two distinct elements, one implying the direct effect of transpiration on the air, the other the indirect; and it has been deemed best to discuss these elements separately in order to render the subject easier of comprehension.

The direct effect of transpiration might be formulated thus: In all atmospheres in which the proportion of aqueous vapor is less than the healthiest standard (about seven-eighths of what the air can contain at a given temperature), the beneficial influence of transpiration must be in proportion to the amount of aqueous vapor exhaled. In this connection the question naturally arises, What is the rate at which watery vapor is given off from plants? Here it will, perhaps, be pardonable to refer to the author's pre1 Popular Science Monthly for February, 1878.