Although Schroeter does not so characterize each group distinc tively as "order" or " family ; " their rank is clearly implied in the context and the termination -aceae is consistently used for the family. His ordinal groups, though mostly natural ones, lack uni formity and are often complicated in pronunciation, e.g., Phacidii neae, Pyrenomycetineae, Hysteriineae.
The systems adopted by both Zopf and Vines are manifestly incomplete and are inserted simply to show the conspectus given in two standard works that have an extensive circulation in this country.
Warming's system is in some respects the most consistently carried out, but he introduces too many intermediate groups for clearness and most unaccountably makes the group order subordi nate to family or even in some cases to surb-family. His group name series is not to be recommended for a group subordinate to a class.
The systems in use have thus been made confusing: (I) By lack of uniformity in terminations so that the relative rank of a group name cannot be told from its termination ; (2) By con fusing the usually accepted sequence of group names, so that the usual order of phylum (series), class, order and family is varied or even inverted; (3) By the use of numerous and confusing in termediate group-names which may be adapted to a monograph where details are entered into more minutely, but are out of place for presentation in a general way where clearness and simplicity ought to prevail ; and finally, (4) By attempting to preserve old group names that no longer have a place in the system because they represent heterogeneous groups co rdinate with nothing now recognized.
It would seem that certain fundamental principles of terminology could be adopted that would vastly simplify the matter of a system of plants and, once in use, enable a student to more intelligently grasp the relationships of plants without subjecting him to this ir regular and confusing terminology. Groups will change their limits with our increasing knowledge ; new groups will appear and the system of relationships be modified with each generation, but a set form of expression once adopted might become as easy of comprehension as the simple principle involved in binomial nomeclature. Among the features of such a form of expression
are: I. The two group names above the genus should be definitely fixed and their sequence rigidly maintained. The termination acme should be reserved for families in accordance with well known and long existing usage among the higher plants. To make this termination significant every time, it should appear no where in the system outside of family names.
2. For the ordinal name no termination could be better than that of -ales.* Long usage as a " Cohort" name, simplicity of af fixing and pronunciation, clearness and brevity, all recommend it. If used it ought to be used exclusively for orders ; it would then characterize at sight the rank of the group name as the termina tion -ulae does the family in zoology.
3. The names should as far as possible be affixed to the names of representative genera or, if not, be derived from some striking characteristic or feature of the group. Family names, for obvious reasons, should always be of the former class.
4. Miscellaneous group names need not be retained after their usefulness in the system ceases to exist. Where an older name occurs which is practically an order, in the modern sense, it is de sirable, where simplicity can be preserved, to so modify the old name as to conform in termination with the new system, but the rules of priority accepted for genera and species need not neces sarily apply to either family or ordinal names. It would seem better to attain uniformity of usage by other means.
As a further means of illustrating this simplicity I append the ordinal groups that I am accustomed to use in presenting the rela tionships of the fungi to students. Nothing is claimed for it ex , cept an adaptation of the principles above recommended to the system believed to be nearest in accord with modern research.t In case the slime moulds and Bacteria are not to be relegated to the domain of animal life, as has been time and again suggested, they would properly form classes lower than the Phycomycetes,