Several colleagues have recently adopted, or plan to adopt the new textbook by JUDD, W. S., CAMPBELL, C. S., KELLOGG, E. A. & STEVENS, P. F. 1999. Plant systematics, a phylogenetic approach. ISBN 0-87893-404-9, for teaching vascular plant taxonomy. The book has some very useful introductory chapters on modern tools, which provide students with an insight on the applications of phytochemistry, mollecular biology and confection of cladograms.
Surely plant (and other) systematics bear on a traditional use of systems which have inherent flaws, given the tremendous diversity os species (or whatever you can call the final taxa) they deal with. The limitations of a patchy fossil record render phylogenetic approaches, however tempting their confection may be for a plant scientist in his search of a broader understanding, a kind of Nirvana that can never be completely conquered. We can know with some accuracy how long ago currently fossilized plants lived, but anyone familiar with the concept of convergence can hardly attribute affinities to a leaf imprint not attached to a flower or vice versa. Oddly enough, some of these concerns are addressed in Chapter 1 of the book, which is not consistent with the classification system proposed [since a large number of smaller but very important families was left out].
On p. 3 the book addresses the theory-neutral approach and clearly states it's intent to go further - into Phylogenetic interpretations. Conversely the most exhaustive numeric study of all species in a single extant genus, using all characters one can securely split into states, will shed light on their similarities, providing just another elegant and often valuable way to organize data, such as a cladogram. Distinguishing similarities reflecting true affinities from those brought about by convergence remains a cumbersome task which shall always rely on traditional methods.
The comment on p. 6 says: "We do not know the actual phylogeny of any nontrivial group of organisms [what would a trivial one be?], but instead must infer phylogenies from the data available to us." I have trouble agreeing with this point of view, since available data is admittedly patchy and often inconsistent. Paths in the true cladogram of evolution can not be retraced based on assumptions. We only have access to the dense upper surface of the crown, while the gross remainder of the tree's branches and trunk are obstructed from view. No matter from which angle one looks at it, Phylogeny draws on a generous dose of guesswork. On the practical purpose of classification, I cannot but paraphrase CRONQUIST (1988:12), one of the traditional taxonomists excommunicated in this book: "In taxonomy, consistency must always be secondary to the primary objective of recognizing natural groups on the basis of all available information".
Fitting the entire universe of traditional knowledge and current advances of plant systematics into a comprehensive book for students at any level poses obvious problems: How does one cope with limited space to organize the maelstrom of data? Our minds need to create categories in order to control storage and retreival of information. Obviously some omitting is inevitable, but at least the general idea of diversity must come across. In that sense I am especially intrigued by the comment by Michael Donoghue in the foreword "Students will readily appreciate the desirability of abandoning ranks altogether."
Following one of the modern trends, some groups of plants in the book's system, (for ex. used for Orchids in Dahlgren's treatment) are named using formal taxonomic rank, while other are not. If a group is recognized as separate, why not give it a rank? One inherent function of ranks is providing a common language - the only method of sharing knowledge currently used by humans. It must be recognized that the way in which ranks are currently applied is not problem-free: why must there be a defined number of them, let's say, between family and species? Rather than eliminating ranks, we should create new ways to apply them and see them.
No matter how deeply modern views have shifted, we can never entirely erase nor replace the results presented in old publications. Students need to know and understand important footsteps in 2 centuries of botanical investigation, which have paved the way toward current advances. We can now add new characters from an arsenal of chemical and mollecular data, ecological observations and a substantially improved matrix of geographic data. Regardless of academic rank, we are all students with a mission to discover and organize information and convey knowledge, not to ignore, misplace or ommit data. How can a student fit families like the Acanthochlamydaceae, Acoraceae, Boryaceae, Burmanniaceae, Corsiaceae, Costaceae, Didieraceae, Epacridaceae, Lemnaceae, Velloziaceae or Xyridaceae into such a system, when they are not even in the alphabetical index?
A good system must account for every component as best it can. Misplacing taxa (implicitly considered the most common flaw of traditional classifications) is still better than making-believe that odd parts don't exist. The argument of producing a textbook for undergraduate courses does not justify the omission of important plant families. Students deserve to start out at least with a complete set of families and the tools to recognize them. Even a great job of organizing a mere subset of information has very limited practical value, especially if Phylogeny is one of its main goals. Some of the smaller families which were left out are very important from both the taxonomic and the phytogeographic perspectives. Despite some hardships such as dichotomic keys starting with presence or absence of betalains, Cronquist's system remains the most recent comprehensive reference guide to the diversity of flowering plant families, simple enough to be used at the undergraduate level.
Though data from modern sources, such as molecular and chemical, are used in the introductory chapters, it is not quite clear how this data was usen in confecting the classification by JUDD et al., and there is no way of knowing whether the new system proposed shall hold its consistency after all omitted families of vascular plants are included in the data.

The second edition (2002) has been much expanded (from 464 to 576 pages) and has been adjusted to keep up with the (headlong) developments in this field. It also includes more descriptions of families.

In some ways the book has not changed. It very much looks the same since the same illustrations were used. It still has only limited usefulness as a systembook in that coverage is far from complete. The appendix on "Botanical nomenclature" is still a soft spot. Not only is the (badly) erroneous bit on the naming of cultivated plants still there, but the slanted view of the ICBN has worsened (the ICBN even being called "Linnaean" in a bit of blatant forgery of history) and the PhyloCode is plugged.

Nevertheless the times they are achanging, and those desiring to change with the times will find the second edition a work they need to be familiar with.

The book of W. Judd is essential to all Botany student and studious of Systematics and General Botanical. For the ones that still feel difficulties in the comprehension of the concepts of Phylogenetic Systematics, the clear text and explanative allows a very clear vision of the whole process. The approach of the initial chapters, mostly of the chapter 2 is too much elucidative, allowing to the reader if involve with the study themes, learning simultaneously all vision of the phylogenetic systematic current. It is a book that can't miss in shelf of any botanist or studous of plants.

When I read a book with 'Mastering' in the title I expect something that gets down and dirty -- you know -- DEEP. This book doesn't do that.

Although it would be a great book if I were completely new to NT Workstation, I've been using it for several years and I had already picked up 90+% of the contents of this book through osmosis.

I felt the early chapters on the apps bundled with NT (such as wordpad and pbrush) were a total waste of time. The book is over 1000 pages long and I can write all the new/useful stuff I learned from it on one page.

This is not 'Mastering' so much as simply 'Basics'.

This is a thorough treatment on NT Workstation 4.0. No doubt about it, it's all here. My criticism is the structure of the book, not it's content so my gripe is with the editors not the writer.

Well there is not much to say, except that this is the book for you for mastering Windows NT Workstation 4.0. Whether you want to know NT just to know it, or put it to work for you for your MCSE core requirements. This book was highly recommended by all of my peers who were studying for there MCSE certification.

I am pursuing an MBA. I had no economics background, however I found this book to be easy to read, very well structured and most of all, you can find the actual applications of Economics. I highly recommend this book over Economics from Samuelson, he's a brilliant economist but he clearly doesn't explain as good. If you are going to buy only one book of economics, I recommend this one.

I used this textbook in an advanced placement Macroeconomics course. Believe me the textbook itself is more interesting than the class. The text provides well detailed explainations of concepts and even provides a comprehensive glossary for those who might find the language alittle to difficult to understand. An overall great book, I've read other economics texts and this one is absolutely stellar in comparison.

I don't study Economy, but I found that this book is easily understandable for those that have at least some notions on the subject. I liked it, because it includes the main themes on which everybody should know at least something, and it is quite entertaining (for a book on this subject).

Also, at the end of each chapter the authors include some questions that help you to understand it better. There is also a web link that provides you with the answers to those questions (so, if you are like me, and want to be sure you answered correctly, you have the opportunity to find out).

Anyway, I highly recommend this book: it is a thoroughly good introduction to economy!!!!. And last, but not least, it is also of good help in exams, because some basic questions have a tendency to be repeated, and with this book: you have the answers!!!).

It is overall a fairly good book, but contains much to much detail for the typical non-major collegfe student. I am a teacher for the Intro Biology class ar a well known university, and I was admittedly called in at the last minute to teach this course, so I couldn't choose the text. This one I would not have chosen, as it has too much info for students who have never taken a biology class in their lives before. I find I have to "dumb down" a lot of the material, which is unfortunate, because it really is a well written and well thought out textbook.

I would just like to mention that none of the reviews here are talking about the 4th edition, which came out in 2002. While a new edition isn't a completely different book, according to the publisher, there are some significant changes that have been made to the book.
I used the 2nd eidition in my Freshman year of High School and I really like how the book was made, laid out, and how the information was presented.

I used this book during my freshman year in college. It was an excellent book with top-notch descriptions, well-placed layouts, and easy to understand content. The topics range from biochemistry to genetics to histology and all sorts of tangents into zoology, anatomy, and pharmacology. I have kept this book for 4 years and now that I will be starting medical school, I am taking the book with me. Many others in classes ahead of me have said that this book helps to clarify some of the complex topics that are presented in 1st year medical school. I firmly believe that and recommend this book to anyone with an interested in biology, medicine, and related fields.

The Campbell's was a good book when it was just 2 volumes, but with 4 volumens it has became a very large and hard to up-date book, it was better when editor was Crenshaw, but with Canale it has became a "heavy" book. I personally don't like it for my residents fellows, they buy the Mercer and the Apley's, and for surgical exposures the Hoppenfeld's. It must become a 2 volumes book, getting the 6th ed. as a sample, and maybe Canale will make a "campbell's yearbook".

Is a good book, but it is 1-very large and editions are very long one to the other. 2- very expensive to be changed as often as desirable. 3- Canale must make a "Campbell's year book" as an apendix. Any way is a book every one in orthopaedics need at least for the beginning.

Campbell's Operative Orthopaedics is the Bible of ortho surgeons.But there are a few errors which are repeated in the editions.As an example,in the figures for neurorhaphy the direction of vasanervosa is incorrect. They face each other as if two separate nerves are sutured with their distal ends together!

If the editor is interested,I would be happy to help in correcting the numerous similar errors to make a more perfect Campbell's Operative Orthopaedics.

I just started reading decorating books and so far this has been the best one. It gives advice on what you need to think about before decorating and the specific elementS a room needs to successfull. This book gives you the underlying principles that can be applied to many differnt styles.

English designer Nina Campbell has rewarded us with yet another piece de resistance. Brimming with sumptuous photographs (all of which left me salivating), this book has quickly become my perennial favorite. DECORATING SECRETS is robust in every area, not just a few, and seems to appeal to a wide audience.

This book is more than just tassels and fluff. Firstly, Nina makes it clear that she is a traditionalist. "...I am not advocating the minimalist approach - anyone who knows my look would realize how alien that is to me..." Secondly, her sage advice is for appropriate for every designer, regardless of budget limitations. If the photographs are not your speed, then pay strict attention to her words, you can adapt the ideas presented to a home of any size.

In essence, what makes this book stand out head and shoulders above the others is the combination of Nina's elegant writing, her down-to-earth presentation, inspiring ideas and -- the details, details, details! She deftly explains what a novice designer needs to know before tackling a project, and then walks through the process room by room. She also addresses small spaces, a topic usually covered under separate titles. Most of the photographs are close-ups, which enables readers to catch specific details and replicate the looks most inspiring to them.

If you are confused by the myriad of decorating books on the market today, and are looking for that one book that you can use over and over again as a quick reference guide, this is one I would recommend hands down. I also suggest that you check out Nina's other book entitled The Art of Decoration. My copy is two years old and very tattered.

Cris Cunningham

I TRY to live like this. Part of the art of living beautifully is hiding and improving the not-so-beautiful. Nothing fancy about that. If you're as tired of pictures of spare, beige rooms as I am, this is a wonderful book, full of color and elegance and a variety of styles in an English context. There is a far wider scope of styles and accessories than in many design books, and the use of international motifs and accessories always fascinates me. If you like layers, color, and variety in a traditional to transitional style, this is a beautiful and educational read.

This is not a must buy book it's more like a friend let me hold it and it was an o.k. book the ending is terrible the plot and story was nice and the sex parts was hot. The book really does not hold your interest it get very boring.

Did't care much for this book. I know it's fiction, but it's too far fetched. The story had a unbelieveable ending. I like a good mystery but Ms. Campbell is no mystery writer and it seemed like she didn't know how to end the book. The story ends somewhat abruptly and she tries to tie all the loose ends together. In my opioion it did't work. For [amt]there are a lot better books. Seemed she just wanted to end the book somehow and didn't know what else to do.

I like them Hot and desriptive! This author knows how to make you sweat. Her choice of lovers varied enough to make you feel she was having the time of her life but watch out cheaters!!This author is in line with Beverly Jenkins and Zane!

Is reading about murder addicting? No. Is reading about all of the people involved? Yes. Irving introduces all of the characters--victims, family, police officers, undercover detectives,lawyers, accused, almost everyone. It's more of a combination between character study and what really goes on behind the scenes of a murder case. The first 350 pages are entralling--I gasped and yes, I even laughed. The next 150 gets into courtroom drama. The last 100 I grazed through because I just wanted to find out what happened. I reccommed it--a thourough presentation of a terrible happening, and an author who reflects upon and "personalizes" this event into which he is drawn.

Judging from the online reviews of DADDY'S GIRL, you either love it or hate. Put me in the camp of those who love it. It's the best "true crime" book I've ever read, because you get so deep into the minds of not only the murderers but also the lawyers and the investigative journalist, author Clifford Irving.

It could be a Shakespearean tragedy, but it's not: it's a gritty prose rendition of love and revenge set in Houston, Texas in the 1980s. Irving is there as a spectator (and witness, which is a remarkable story in itself) at the trial, and you're there with him. The characters are bizarre yet real. Moral dilemmas abound. Irving, who is a fine novelist, writes the story like a personal novel, with a dark vision of human nature, but there is a clear ring of truth to the way he describes incidents, thoughts, and renders dialogue. I went from this book to Irving's novels and enjoyed all of them.

One fault: it's a bit long, but I can bear with that, because it's fascinating all the way. A five-star book, no doubt of it.

First of all, I admit to being a fan of Clifford Irving's novels, most of which are, sadly, out of print. This is the only nonfiction book of his that I've read, and it's a winner. It tells of how a young woman and her Marine Corps boyfriend murdered her parents, but I won't spoil the story by discussing their motives. It's highly detailed, and I think that's a plus, since for the first time I understood the complexities and absurdities of jury selection, as well as the hidden motives of prosecutors and defense attorneys. Irving is involved in his own story -- he knew so much about the dramatis personae that he became, against his will, a witness at the trial! That makesa this a unique book, and one not to be missed by all who read "courtroom" fiction.

As a collector, and reader of books upon the Loch Ness Monster, this book is not one which I would recommend to readers with little or no knowledge of the subject. The author is highly skeptical of the existence of any such creature and debunks all available evidence. This is all well and good, however,in this reviewers opinion, he does on occasions dismiss too much information. Despite these objections, some of the authors criticism of evidence is quite properly and correctly deduced. But be warned, if you are looking for something to arbitarily explain the case facts, then this is not the volume for you. It is though, still a good read and a useful work to own to discover both sides of the argument.

Being an examination of the evidence (or lack thereof in the author's opinion) for the Loch Ness monster, while interesting, this book falls short on a few points. First off, it's extremely scientific tone makes for dry reading, yet on the other hand seems brief for it's intended purpose of thoroughness. Also, despite making some very good points the author tends to dismiss some evidence for reasons that would require more suspension of reality than would belief in a monster. In one case in particular, Mr. Campbell goes on for some pages discussing a case of evidence and abruptly dismisses it by stating that he came upon "rumors" of a hoax, the details of which he doesn't even go into. All in all, whether you are a believer or not, this book is interesting reading if you can get past the dry anylitical tone of it. However, be prepared to use the evidence presented to form your own opinion rather than buy into the author's emphatic belief that there simply cannot be a monster. Having visited the Loch in person myself, I find it very difficult to believe that someone could look into it's massive, murky depths and say with 100% certainty that there could not be something lurking below. But that is exactly what Mr. Campbell does with this book.

The Loch Ness Monster is a detailed evaluation of every photographically supported sighting of the loch's alleged denizen since 1933. Campbell offers the most plausible explanation of each, and concludes that none survives close inspection. While he lists the ancient mythology that has been retroactively postulated as evidence for Nessie's existence, he finds that it is nothing more than a desperate ploy to reinterpret older fairy tales as early sightings.
If Nessie exists, then its ancestor must have entered Loch Ness at some time in the past, when there was a tunnel from the loch to the open sea. But since Loch Ness is 16 meters above sea level, any tunnel large enough to take Nessie would drain the lake down to sea level. There is no tunnel, and probably never was a tunnel. And for the creature to have survived for centuries, there would have to be a breeding herd of at least twenty individuals. But Loch Ness is too cold to support any cold-blooded species, and also does not have the capacity to feed such a number of large lifeforms.
Campbell shows that all alleged positive results of sonar, radar and photographic imaging, on close inspection, in fact prove to be negative. Not only does the loch not have the capacity to support a herd of monsters. No legitimate evidence exists that it does contain them. And given the thousands of man-hours devoted to loch watching by serious searchers, photographers and tourists, the logical conclusion is that, if Nessie existed, someone would have proven it by now. But the more Loch Ness is watched, the less the alleged monster shows itself.
Campell concludes that there is absolutely no reason why anyone should believe in lake monsters. If anyone doubts that conclusion on the basis of any specific evidentiary claim, the chances are it is one of the dozens of claims that the book examines and demolishes.

Substandard. I could hardly wait for this muddled tale to end. Julie Campbell Tatham, writing as "Julie Campbell," wrote the first six books of the series, and this, the fifth, stumbles. The scenes where Trixie tries to convince her family and friends that she's "in love" to achieve a noble secret agenda, were embarrassing and unnecessary -- she could have achieved the same end by confiding in her parents straightforwardly. And the "mystery" turns out to be a disappointing non-mystery. I recommend this book strictly to continuity fans who want to know every detail of the development of the Bob-Whites of the Glen club; otherwise, skip to the Mystery in Arizona for a believable story and entertaining (rather than ridiculous) style.

I could hardly wait for this muddled tale to end. Julie Campbell Tatham, writing as "Julie Campbell," wrote the first six books of the series, and this, the fifth, stumbles. The scenes where Trixie tries to convince her family and friends that she's "in love" to achieve a noble secret agenda, were embarrassing and unnecessary -- she could have achieved the same end by straightforwardly confiding in her parents. And the "mystery" turns out to be a disappointing non-mystery.

I recommend this book strictly to continuity fans who want to know every detail of the development of the Bob-Whites of the Glen club; otherwise, skip to the Mystery in Arizona for a believable story and entertaining (rather than ridiculous) style.

I love this book!I think the best part is when Trixie pretends to like Honey's cousin Ben.If your a Trixie fan then I sugest
reading this book.Its not mystery like but it is a lot of fun!