SCIENCE

regarding several phases, Referring to the footnote in my article which appeared in March, 1935, they state that "Thompson reports a later success in crys- tallizing what was very probably our Ergometrine." That the three independently obtained substances are identical is now established, but I would emphasize that my footnote did not refer to a "later success." This same footnote is contained in the bound copy of my doctorate dissertation, which was accepted by the Johns Wopkins University prior to May 1,1934, and it constituted a part of my March, 1935, article a t the time it was submitted for publication in the Jourfial of the American Pharmaceutical Association on May 10,1934, more than nine months prior to the announce- ment of crystalline Ergometrine by Dudley and Moir or the subsequent announcement of crystalline Ergo- tocin by Kharasch and Legault.

I would add my support to the suggestion by our British colleagues that a single scientific name be decided upon for this new important alkaloid, but unfortunately my name "Ergostetrine" is not a mere matter of "note-book record." This name was both scientifically and legally assigned2@ by me in May, 1934. I would emphasize the importance of a univer- sal agreement establishing a single place of registra- tion for new names assigned to complex new plant or animal constituents, without the necessity of patent application to establish a point on a definite date.

T H E CROSS-INOCULATION OF BACTERIAL- PLANT GROUP OF CICER

THE isolation of pure cultures of the root nodule bacteria, cross inoculation and strain efficiency studies .on Cicer arietilzzlm L. and other species of Indian leguminous crops were conducted by the writer a t the University of Wisconsin during 1931-33. I t was found that the root nodule bacteria of Cicer a r i e 2 i . n ~ L. are specific for that host plant and inay be con- sidered a separate group not belonging to the pea group as stated by Sim0n.l A preliminary mention of this finding appeared as a footnote in the mono- graph of Fred, et cl.1; and the detailed paper has recently been submitted to the Ifidiam J o w a a l of Agriczlltural Scieace.

Rasumowskaja3 has recently reported on the speci- ficity of Cicer arietifium L. for nodule production and

28 See footnote 14. = J. Simon, Centbl. Baht. (etc.1, 2 A4bt. 41: 470-4799

1914. 2 E. B. Fred et a$., University of Wisconsin Studies in

,Science, No. 5, footnote on p. 137, 1932. 3 S. G. R,asumowskaia. CentbZ. Babt. (etc.).. ,, 2 Abt. 90:" ,

"330-335, 1934.

states that it does not belong to the pea-group. This author does not appear to have noticed the previous mention of this by Fred, et aL2 His work was con- fined to inoculation of Cicer a r i e t i w m with the crushed nodules of Vicia sativa, Vicia cracca and Pisum sati- v u m and pure cultures of nodule bacteria of pea and vetch only, whereas the present writer's conclusions have been based upon studies on cross-inoculations with pure cultures of all the known bacterial-plant groups.

VITAMINS? INthe early days of vitamin research, classification

by alphabetic order was accepted as a temporary con- venience. Indirectly this lettering of unknown, quasi- mysterious substances did much to popularize them and to make the world vitamin-conscious.

The crystallization, the isolation and our more.or less definite knowledge of the physiological properties of the so-called vitamins show that there is no longer any scientific basis to maintain such widely different chemi- cal substances as carotenes, ascorbic acid, irradiated sterols, pyrimidine-thia~ole compounds, sodium phos- phate, manganese compounds, etc., under the same heading, except perhaps for historical purposes.

The academical disagreement between British and American biologists over mere initials to be given to otherwise well-defined products adds to the confusion.

Anti-neuritic, anti-scorbutic, anti-rachitic, anti-anemic, anti-goitric, etc., substances should be classified with the chemical family to which they belong or grouped with the natural or pharmaceutical subst.ances which have closely related physiological properties.

The vague expression "vitamin" will eventually join the musty company of phlogistic, humors, animalcules and kindred antiquated terms.

ANDREWMOLDAV~W

CYTOGENETIC NOTES ON SPHAERALCEA AND MALVASTRUM

No chromosome numbers in the genus Sphaeralcea have been recorded previously. The only chromosome number reported for a closely related genus is that of 21 pairs in Malvastrzcm capease Gray and Harvey.l

Recently the chromosome numbers of approxi-mately 15 species, 20 subspecies and 2 botanical forms of the subgenus Eusvkaeralcea from the south- -western United States have been determined. The basal c~romosomenumber for the subgenus is 5. The prevailing numbers are 5 and 10 pairs, but 15 pairs are of frequent occurrence. Only one form with 25 1 A. H. S. Stenar, Alcad. Abhand. Upsala, 1-75, 1925.

SCIENCE

pairs has been encountered, and none, so far, with 20 pairs. Among approximately 275 plants exam-ined, 1 2 were apparently natural hybrids. During meiosis these plants exhibited chromosome behavior typical of hybrids.

Of forms usually referred to Sphaeralcea but not belonging to the subgenus Eusphaeralcea, the writer finds that S. rivularis (Doug.) Torrey has 33 pairs of chromosomes and that S. umbellata (Cav.) Don and S . abutiloides (L.) Don, have 1 7 pairs. Six species and 2 subspecies of the related genus Malvas-t r u m (subgenus M a l a c o t h a m ~ u s )were found to have 1 7 pairs of chromosomes.

The subgenus Eusphaeralcea is unique i n that i t presents the lowest basal chromosome number and the first highly polyploid group detected in the Malva- ceae. I n view of the occurrence of several 5-paired species, Davie's suggestion2 that 7 is the ancestral basic number f o r this family can hardly be accepted.

The chromosome number of the California species of Malvastrum (the genus Malacothamnus of Greene) clearly separates this group from Sphaeralcea. The chromosome numbers, considered in relation to the morphological evidence," indicate that Greene's genus Il iamna, represented by 8. rivularis, Zuccarini's genus Meliphlea, represented by S. umbellata, and Des-vaux's genus Phymosia, represented by 8.abutiloides, may be well founded.

J. M. WEBBER

SCIENTIFIC M E N AND T H E NEWSPAPERS I LEARN from a letter which my friend Howard W.

Blakeslee, of the Associated Press, publishes in SCIENCE for June 14, 1935 (p. 591) that scientists should "speak the language of the newspapers" and that they should be more emotional. This implies that newspapers are thoroughly satisfactory i n their methods of appeal.

A community gets exactly the kind of a newspaper

that i t can digest-no better, no worse. Editors are aware of this and present the news accordingly. I f their readers all wore Phi Beta Kappa keys they would remold their policies.

I see no particular reason why the scientist should become emotional and talk in the vulgate because the newspapers will then give his utterances more space.

I t is the business of the journalist and not of the scientist to present the discoveries of the laboratory so that the many will understand. But heaven forbid that the popularizer should rely too much on emotion. W e have passed the stage when gasping wonder can pass fo r popularization. W e need more journalists trained in science and not more scientists with a flair f o r pppular writing.

Since newspapers are published to meet the needs of the people by men who know their business i t follows that it is the school and the college that are a t fault. I f we had a public adequately educated in science it would not be necessary to explain the meaning of ele- mentary technical terms and principles o r to resort to the literary devices of the primary school reader to drive home the facts about a new discovery. The ques- tion that Mr. Blakeslee raises is one that must be solved not by laboratory workers or newspaper editors but by the faculties of our colleges and universities. To think that a t this late day it is possible to print i n only one American newspaper the simple equation that ex-presses the mass-energy relation of Einstein in a popular article on atomic physics with the realization that it will be understood by enough readers! I f an educated Greek in the time of Pericles could discuss geometry a t the dinner table it must have been because science was taught as a cultural subject. Give us high- school and college graduates with a broad knowledge of science and the newspapers will respond to their demands rapidly enough.

WALDEMARKAEMPFFERT, Scie.rzce Editor, T h e New Yorlc Times

SCIENTIFIC BOOKS QUANTUM MECHANICS

Primciples of Quamtum Mechanics. B y P. A. M. DIRAC. Second Edition. Oxford, Clarendon Press. 1935. xi + 300 pp. $6.00.

THE first edition of this book (1930) contained a n absolutely reliable and authentic account of the foundations of quantum dynamics, its main methods and results. Naturally, i t soon became a n indispensa-

2 J. H. Davie, Jour. Genetics, 2 8 : 33-67, 1933. 3 T. H. Kearney, Univ. Calif. Publ. Bot., 19 : No. 1,

in press.

ble aid both to independent workers in this field and to advanced students preparing f o r independent work. The systematic use of the symbolic transformation theory, largely developed by Dirac himself, made the presentation in the larger par t of the book concise, elegant and simple. I t had, however, one serious drawback: the highly abstract character of the intro- ductory chapters. I n the first place, the notion of observables (see below) was introduced in a manner so detached from experiment that the reader may have remained unconvinced that their measurement is in all cases possible. I n the second place, a rather