NEW HOOKS
45
Part I1 of the book really deals with the chemistry of individual foods. The materials covered and the several authors include: Milk, Cream and Dairy Products by AI. B. Jacobs; Meat and Meat Products by W.11.L-rbain; Fish, Shellfish and Crustacea by AI. E. Stansby; Poultry and Eggs by 11.E. Pennington; Edible Oils and Fats by -1.E . Bailey; Cereal Grains by W.F. Geddes; Baking and Bakery Products by W .€1. Cathcart; Yegetables, Mushrooms, S u t s , and Fruits by F. A . Lee; Carbohydrates and Sugar Foods by E. F . Degering; Confectionery and Cacao Products by 11. Schoen; Coffee and Tea by IT. €3. Ulcers; and Flavors, Spices, and Coiidiinents by Lee Worrell. A total of forty-nine pages is occupied by a convenient and detailed subject indes. There is a vast amount of useful inforniation in these sections. In general, there appears to be more data and test discussion of the composition of the several foods than of the principles involved in or cont,rol of the processing treatments. The book n-ould scarcely serve as a manual of the operations in which the food technologists might engage. The table of contents of Volume I1 suggests that it n-ill be devoted quite largely t o processes. C. H. BAILEY.
Soil and Plant A n a l y s i s . By C . S . PIPER.368 pp. S e w Tork: Interscience Publishers, Inc., 1944. Price: $4.50. This book comprises a description of methods for the analysis of soils a t Waite Agricultural Institute (Australia). It includes detailed directions for the collection of samples and their preparation in the laboratory. The treatise is ne11 organized and clearly and concisely written. The methods described are standard in the main and are as applicable in the United States as in Australia and Ken- Zealand. The inclusion of procedures of calculat,ions strengthens the h o l i for student use. Weaknesses of methods are fully discussed. -1s would be expected, there is a tendency to place emphasis o n methods in use in the British Coninion~ealth,although niany methods commonly in use in this country are included. This is a desirable feature, since it will give the American student a broad knowledge of applicable procedures. This hook constitutes a ready reference n-hich soil scientists and chemists \Till be glad to have close at hand. C. 0. ROST. Contributions to Chemical Education. A-io?iber 3. .UOTL‘ S c i d s and Bases. A Collection of Papers by D. DAVIDLOS, W. F. LLTER (with W.S. ~ I C G U I Rand E S. ZUFFASTI),L. F. : i U D R E I T € I , .4su T. ~ f o l ; J d L r i n and , by It. C;I~-~LI,.79 pp. Easton, Pennsylvania: Thc qJnurnal of C’1ieniir:il I ~ ~ d i i c ~ ~ t1943. i r i ~ i ,Prier: $1 .OO. I n tlie fown.ortl, 111.. S .\T. Raliestrxiv, k,’Oit~r,states: “Sincc the publication of ‘Acids aiifl UUSCF’i n 11141 i(rc~vi~~ivvl i n .J. Pliys. C‘heni. 46, 1008 (1942)) several more articles on this stiriic- subject l i a w :iI)penrctl i l l t 1 1 .Jour~ial ~ of Chciiliical Education. The interest which have d i o w n in the earlirr volume has led us t o ninny teachers a r i t l stritlmts of ~~hcniirtry wprint these articlc,~,w i t h :I fen- inillor changes.” This addition t o T701miic I of the ‘,Series”irill l ~ t :welcomed by many teachers, students, and othrr chemists iiiterested i t i thc subjrct . Tlic appearance and print are attractive. /1.he s e w n papers rppriiitrcl i n Iir volume all cloiitain somc original views and suggestions. The revicwer ai11 icipates f h:it t h e cmiphaeis oii the relationship bet]?-een an acid (electrophilic) ant1 a n oxitlizing agent on thc one hanti aiid a base (clectrodotic) arid a reducing agent on the otlicr hand (a.I:. Lutler, p. 39) may liecome the S~JIII‘CCof much confusion. For example, hydroquinone is an acid, hut n reducing agent, n-hereaa quinone is a base, but an oxidizing agent. As a base, then, quinone is electroclotic in the terminology of Litder, hut as an osidizing xgent it is electrophilic. In a recent article (J. Phys. Cheni. 48, 51 (1944) j the reviemr pointed out that the Lewis arid Bronstetf concepts are not contradictory and that both should be adopted (and taught). Fortunately, most of the authors of illore A c i d s and Bases recognize both the Lewis anti the Bronsted concepts. There is no justification in selecting one theory in preference to the other; there is a useful place for both. It n-ould be desirable that a committee of the American Chemical Society express itself on this matter in an authoritative way. I. M. ICOLTHOFF.
