Interesting and Informative, 10 Aug 2007
All the Collins Gem books are great for keeping in your pocket if you are out on a field trip for the day and this one is no exception. The photographs are first class and the descriptions of the individual fungi clear and concise. The book describes almost 240 different species of mushroom and toadstool (when you've read the book you will know the difference). Their habitats, size, appearance and also whether they are poisonous or not.

They say that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing and with fungi it could be fatal. The book goes out of its way to show which fungi are edible and which are poisonous. Personally I prefer to err on the side of caution and buy mine from the supermarket.

A very compact source of good information, 09 Aug 2007
I went on a fungas foray with the author of this book last year and it was extremely interesting and great fun. This book, although small, is packed full of the stuff I learned and much more information that gives me the confidence to go hunting on my own. It's the perfect size to pop in your pocket or basket while out walking.

One of the great things about it is that it identifies other species that can be confused with what you might have found. This allows you to double check and should make any mushroom hunting a lot safer.

a good pocket-sized guide, well illustrated, 28 Nov 2002
This little guide identifies a wide selection of funghi by reference to excellent photographs - much better than many of the artists' representations in some of the larger, dearer and more scholarly books.
There are short,sharp details about habitat, season and something of each specimen's histology. The book errs on the side of caution when dealing with edibility - so this is a book which could be given to a keen young explorer without too much risk of poisoning!
We keep a copy in the foraging basket, and refer to the more heavyweight volumes when we get home. It has much to recommend it.

Interesting and Informative, 10 Aug 2007
All the Collins Gem books are great for keeping in your pocket if you are out on a field trip for the day and this one is no exception. The photographs are first class and the descriptions of the individual fungi clear and concise. The book describes almost 240 different species of mushroom and toadstool (when you've read the book you will know the difference). Their habitats, size, appearance and also whether they are poisonous or not.

They say that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing and with fungi it could be fatal. The book goes out of its way to show which fungi are edible and which are poisonous. Personally I prefer to err on the side of caution and buy mine from the supermarket.

A very compact source of good information, 09 Aug 2007
I went on a fungas foray with the author of this book last year and it was extremely interesting and great fun. This book, although small, is packed full of the stuff I learned and much more information that gives me the confidence to go hunting on my own. It's the perfect size to pop in your pocket or basket while out walking.

One of the great things about it is that it identifies other species that can be confused with what you might have found. This allows you to double check and should make any mushroom hunting a lot safer.

a good pocket-sized guide, well illustrated, 28 Nov 2002
This little guide identifies a wide selection of funghi by reference to excellent photographs - much better than many of the artists' representations in some of the larger, dearer and more scholarly books.
There are short,sharp details about habitat, season and something of each specimen's histology. The book errs on the side of caution when dealing with edibility - so this is a book which could be given to a keen young explorer without too much risk of poisoning!
We keep a copy in the foraging basket, and refer to the more heavyweight volumes when we get home. It has much to recommend it.

A great very accessible book on evolution, 09 Mar 2008
I read this one after the 30th anniversary of The Selfish Gene, and though Dawkins states in his intro that he regards this as his best work, I personally prefer the slightly expanded Selfish Gene which takes into account his extended phenotype theory. I guess one further point on this is that there is a lot of repetition between the material in the two works too! He also states that this is aimed at his academic colleagues rather than as a book for the layman but I found the science to be pretty straightforward and commonsense and only needed to check the glossary at the back for about half a dozen words. However, other than those points its pretty much faultless and the plot will keep you gripped to the bitter denoument... I'm certainly looking forward to the sequel!

Difficult but eminently worthwhile, 29 Dec 2006
This is a long and difficult book, although not as long and difficult as it might be if it had been written by somebody without Richard Dawkins' gift for clarity of thought and expression.

The crux of Dawkins' thesis is expressed early on and much of what follows is a very detailed supporting argument. What he wants us to see is that the "selfish gene" has a reach that extends beyond the confines of the individual organism that houses the gene. The phenotype of our genes is the human organism in all its glory; however the extended phenotype of our genes is not only the human organism but part of the environment in which the organism finds itself. In other words, the gene has the power to influence not only our behavior but the behavior and structure of elements in the world in which we live.

This thesis is not as striking to me as it has been to many others mainly because I have studied Eastern religious views, and it is a tenant of such views that the distinction between ourselves (the "selfish organism," in Dawkins' terminology) and the environment is an artificial one, an illusion actually. We are part and parcel of all that is around us and within us, and the boundary of our skin is merely functional. We cannot be understood by looking at only our bodies. Dawkins makes the point that looking at a beaver and microscopically examining it and its genes is not sufficient to an understanding of what a beaver is. We have to also consider the dams that the beaver builds, the trees that it gnaws down and even the streams that it dams and turns into lakes.

Presenting a point of view somewhat at odds with that of Dawkins (and one that I think that Dawkins does not sufficiently appreciate) is Franklin M. Harold in his book, The Way of the Cell: Molecules, Organisms and the Order of Life (2001). He writes, "Organisms process matter and energy as well as information; each represents a dynamic node in a whirlpool of several currents, and self-reproduction is a property of the collective, not of genes.... DNA is a peculiar sort of software, that can only be correctly interpreted by its own unique hardware.... [S]ending aliens the genome of a cat is no substitute for sending the cat itself--complete with mice." (p. 221)

Dawkins tries to discount the view of those he calls "group selectionists" who see life from a "group benefit" viewpoint. Dawkins has, since writing this book, stepped back from this position to allow that some group selection may take place. I believe some day he may see the world not from a "selfish gene" point of view, and not from a "selfish organism" point of view, but from a "selfish ecosystem" perspective--well, more likely his successors will see this, since the work of a lifetime is not easily amended in one's later years.

Dawkins gives what he calls "our own 'central theorem' of the extended phenotype" on page 233: "An animal's behaviour tends to maximize the survival of the genes 'for' that behaviour, whether or not those genes happen to be in the body of the particular animal performing it."

This is a mouthful. Clearly we can say that the genes of the reed warbler code for behavior that benefits the genes of the cuckoo who has laid its egg in the warbler's nest. This is what Dawkins has in mind. But then arises the question, "how far afield can the phenotype extend?" Here Dawkins gets cautious and writes, "The farthest action at a distance I can think of is a matter of several miles." (p. 233) Note the chosen terminology, "action at a distance." This is from physics of course causing Dawkins to ask if there is "a sharp cut-off" of the genes' reach or "an inverse square law" at work?

It is here that I believe Dawkins has come so, so close to that which he will not see (or couldn't see then), namely that everything works toward an ecology and that the idea of selfish genes and selfish organisms is a limited view. In truth the reach of the genes should be governed by something like an inverse square law since humans are now reaching beyond the solar system.

When we look at such great distances we might want to credit the dreaded and verboten "group selection" that Dawkins is at pains to reject. Just as some see our earth as "Gaia," an organism itself, so too might we see those organisms that have the means to survive the destruction of the home planet by migrating to other planets as being selected by group as opposed to other groups who have no such ability. Planet A produces beings that extend beyond their solar system; planet B produces beings that do not. Both planets blow up. Who is "selected" by the (extended) environment and who is not?

Dawkins is one of the geniuses of science, and I don't mean to argue with the great insights he has brought to biology, but my point is that it is always something of an artificiality to speak of living systems as confined to one level of existence or expression. We may think of earth creatures as being completely separate from the rest of the universe, yet without the sun, 93 million miles away, we would not exist; and come a supernova even many light years away, we will be affected.

So all is one and one is all in some extended sense. And using the word "selfish" (as Dawkins knows) at any level of life is merely to be anthropomorphic.

Daniel Dennett, in a new afterword written in 1999, asks if this book is science or philosophy, and he answers both. I agree, and it is science and philosophy of the highest order, aimed equally at the professional and at the educated layperson.

Warning: very different from The Selfish Gene, 11 Mar 2006
This summary is primarily aimed as a warning to readers of the Selfish Gene and other books by Dawmins who are expecting more elaboration on the same theme. This is not the intention of The Extended Phenotype. Instead this book is aimed squarely at professional biologists and other life sciences professionals. The book presents very few down-to-earth examples or interesting facts that would suprise a reader with basic knowledge in the area. The bulk of the book is Dawkins' attempt to advocate his point of view on the subject and he does this by quoting other scientists and arquing his case both with and against these other views. The reader is assumed to know these arguments in advance, and unless you're prepared to read the references, in detail, the majority of the book's content will be remain a mystery.

The essentials of life's story, 15 Aug 2005
Biodiversity is more than a buzzword for ecologists. Variation gives life its grandeur, and Richard Dawkins gives us a description of the workings of variation. Fortunately, with a sharp mind and sharper wit, he has the ability to deliver this portrayal so that nearly everyone can understand it. That's not to say this book is an easy read. Although he delivers his narration as if sitting with you in a quiet study, you may still need to review his words more than once. That's not a challenge or a chore, it's a pleasure.

Dawkins, unlike other science writers, is forthright in declaring his advocacy in writing this book. It's a refreshing start to his most serious effort. After publication of The Selfish Gene led to a storm of fatuous criticism, Extended Phenotype comes in response with more detail of how the gene manifests itself in the organism and its environment. It's clear that Dawkins' critics, who label him an "Ultra-Darwinist" [whatever that is] haven't read this book. His critics frequently argue that The Selfish Gene doesn't operate in a vacuum, but must deal within some kind of environment, from an individual cell to global scenarios. Dawkins deftly responds to critics in describing how genes rely on their environment for successful replication. If the replication doesn't survive in the environment it finds itself, then it, and perhaps its species, will die out.

The child's favourite question, "why" is difficult enough for parents and teachers to answer. Yet, as thinking humans we've become trained to deal with that question nearly every context. So well drilled that we consider something for which that question has no answer to be suspicious if not insidious. Part of Dawkins presentation here reiterates that there is no "why" to either the process of evolution nor its results. It isn't predictable, inevitable or reasonable. It's a tough situation to cope with, but Dawkins describes the mechanism with such precision and clarity, we readily understand "how" if not "why" evolution works. We comprehend because Dawkins does such an outstanding job in presenting its mechanics.

This edition carries three fine finales: Dawkins well thought out bibliography, a glossary, and most prized, indeed, an Afterword by Daniel C. Dennett. If any defense of this book is needed, Dennett is a peerless champion for the task. Dennett's capabilities in logical argument are superbly expressed here. As he's done elsewhere {Darwin's Dangerous Idea], Dennett mourns the lack of orginality and logic among Dawkins' critics. Excepting the more obstinate ones, these seem to be falling by the wayside. It's almost worthwhile reading Dennett's brief essay before starting Dawkins. It would be a gift to readers beyond measure if these two ever collaborated on a book. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

excellent as always, 02 Aug 2005
As much as I love all Dawkins' books, this is probably my favourite. It explains how genes are not content to build organisms to ride around in - they also build structures like beaver dams, nests and so on, which are just as much an expression of genes as overtly biological traits and further perpetuate the genes' selfish 'desires'.

This is a really good treatment of that subject - you are unlikely to find any better.

Interesting and Informative, 10 Aug 2007
All the Collins Gem books are great for keeping in your pocket if you are out on a field trip for the day and this one is no exception. The photographs are first class and the descriptions of the individual fungi clear and concise. The book describes almost 240 different species of mushroom and toadstool (when you've read the book you will know the difference). Their habitats, size, appearance and also whether they are poisonous or not.

They say that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing and with fungi it could be fatal. The book goes out of its way to show which fungi are edible and which are poisonous. Personally I prefer to err on the side of caution and buy mine from the supermarket.

A very compact source of good information, 09 Aug 2007
I went on a fungas foray with the author of this book last year and it was extremely interesting and great fun. This book, although small, is packed full of the stuff I learned and much more information that gives me the confidence to go hunting on my own. It's the perfect size to pop in your pocket or basket while out walking.

One of the great things about it is that it identifies other species that can be confused with what you might have found. This allows you to double check and should make any mushroom hunting a lot safer.

a good pocket-sized guide, well illustrated, 28 Nov 2002
This little guide identifies a wide selection of funghi by reference to excellent photographs - much better than many of the artists' representations in some of the larger, dearer and more scholarly books.
There are short,sharp details about habitat, season and something of each specimen's histology. The book errs on the side of caution when dealing with edibility - so this is a book which could be given to a keen young explorer without too much risk of poisoning!
We keep a copy in the foraging basket, and refer to the more heavyweight volumes when we get home. It has much to recommend it.

A great very accessible book on evolution, 09 Mar 2008
I read this one after the 30th anniversary of The Selfish Gene, and though Dawkins states in his intro that he regards this as his best work, I personally prefer the slightly expanded Selfish Gene which takes into account his extended phenotype theory. I guess one further point on this is that there is a lot of repetition between the material in the two works too! He also states that this is aimed at his academic colleagues rather than as a book for the layman but I found the science to be pretty straightforward and commonsense and only needed to check the glossary at the back for about half a dozen words. However, other than those points its pretty much faultless and the plot will keep you gripped to the bitter denoument... I'm certainly looking forward to the sequel!

Difficult but eminently worthwhile, 29 Dec 2006
This is a long and difficult book, although not as long and difficult as it might be if it had been written by somebody without Richard Dawkins' gift for clarity of thought and expression.

The crux of Dawkins' thesis is expressed early on and much of what follows is a very detailed supporting argument. What he wants us to see is that the "selfish gene" has a reach that extends beyond the confines of the individual organism that houses the gene. The phenotype of our genes is the human organism in all its glory; however the extended phenotype of our genes is not only the human organism but part of the environment in which the organism finds itself. In other words, the gene has the power to influence not only our behavior but the behavior and structure of elements in the world in which we live.

This thesis is not as striking to me as it has been to many others mainly because I have studied Eastern religious views, and it is a tenant of such views that the distinction between ourselves (the "selfish organism," in Dawkins' terminology) and the environment is an artificial one, an illusion actually. We are part and parcel of all that is around us and within us, and the boundary of our skin is merely functional. We cannot be understood by looking at only our bodies. Dawkins makes the point that looking at a beaver and microscopically examining it and its genes is not sufficient to an understanding of what a beaver is. We have to also consider the dams that the beaver builds, the trees that it gnaws down and even the streams that it dams and turns into lakes.

Presenting a point of view somewhat at odds with that of Dawkins (and one that I think that Dawkins does not sufficiently appreciate) is Franklin M. Harold in his book, The Way of the Cell: Molecules, Organisms and the Order of Life (2001). He writes, "Organisms process matter and energy as well as information; each represents a dynamic node in a whirlpool of several currents, and self-reproduction is a property of the collective, not of genes.... DNA is a peculiar sort of software, that can only be correctly interpreted by its own unique hardware.... [S]ending aliens the genome of a cat is no substitute for sending the cat itself--complete with mice." (p. 221)

Dawkins tries to discount the view of those he calls "group selectionists" who see life from a "group benefit" viewpoint. Dawkins has, since writing this book, stepped back from this position to allow that some group selection may take place. I believe some day he may see the world not from a "selfish gene" point of view, and not from a "selfish organism" point of view, but from a "selfish ecosystem" perspective--well, more likely his successors will see this, since the work of a lifetime is not easily amended in one's later years.

Dawkins gives what he calls "our own 'central theorem' of the extended phenotype" on page 233: "An animal's behaviour tends to maximize the survival of the genes 'for' that behaviour, whether or not those genes happen to be in the body of the particular animal performing it."

This is a mouthful. Clearly we can say that the genes of the reed warbler code for behavior that benefits the genes of the cuckoo who has laid its egg in the warbler's nest. This is what Dawkins has in mind. But then arises the question, "how far afield can the phenotype extend?" Here Dawkins gets cautious and writes, "The farthest action at a distance I can think of is a matter of several miles." (p. 233) Note the chosen terminology, "action at a distance." This is from physics of course causing Dawkins to ask if there is "a sharp cut-off" of the genes' reach or "an inverse square law" at work?

It is here that I believe Dawkins has come so, so close to that which he will not see (or couldn't see then), namely that everything works toward an ecology and that the idea of selfish genes and selfish organisms is a limited view. In truth the reach of the genes should be governed by something like an inverse square law since humans are now reaching beyond the solar system.

When we look at such great distances we might want to credit the dreaded and verboten "group selection" that Dawkins is at pains to reject. Just as some see our earth as "Gaia," an organism itself, so too might we see those organisms that have the means to survive the destruction of the home planet by migrating to other planets as being selected by group as opposed to other groups who have no such ability. Planet A produces beings that extend beyond their solar system; planet B produces beings that do not. Both planets blow up. Who is "selected" by the (extended) environment and who is not?

Dawkins is one of the geniuses of science, and I don't mean to argue with the great insights he has brought to biology, but my point is that it is always something of an artificiality to speak of living systems as confined to one level of existence or expression. We may think of earth creatures as being completely separate from the rest of the universe, yet without the sun, 93 million miles away, we would not exist; and come a supernova even many light years away, we will be affected.

So all is one and one is all in some extended sense. And using the word "selfish" (as Dawkins knows) at any level of life is merely to be anthropomorphic.

Daniel Dennett, in a new afterword written in 1999, asks if this book is science or philosophy, and he answers both. I agree, and it is science and philosophy of the highest order, aimed equally at the professional and at the educated layperson.

Warning: very different from The Selfish Gene, 11 Mar 2006
This summary is primarily aimed as a warning to readers of the Selfish Gene and other books by Dawmins who are expecting more elaboration on the same theme. This is not the intention of The Extended Phenotype. Instead this book is aimed squarely at professional biologists and other life sciences professionals. The book presents very few down-to-earth examples or interesting facts that would suprise a reader with basic knowledge in the area. The bulk of the book is Dawkins' attempt to advocate his point of view on the subject and he does this by quoting other scientists and arquing his case both with and against these other views. The reader is assumed to know these arguments in advance, and unless you're prepared to read the references, in detail, the majority of the book's content will be remain a mystery.

The essentials of life's story, 15 Aug 2005
Biodiversity is more than a buzzword for ecologists. Variation gives life its grandeur, and Richard Dawkins gives us a description of the workings of variation. Fortunately, with a sharp mind and sharper wit, he has the ability to deliver this portrayal so that nearly everyone can understand it. That's not to say this book is an easy read. Although he delivers his narration as if sitting with you in a quiet study, you may still need to review his words more than once. That's not a challenge or a chore, it's a pleasure.

Dawkins, unlike other science writers, is forthright in declaring his advocacy in writing this book. It's a refreshing start to his most serious effort. After publication of The Selfish Gene led to a storm of fatuous criticism, Extended Phenotype comes in response with more detail of how the gene manifests itself in the organism and its environment. It's clear that Dawkins' critics, who label him an "Ultra-Darwinist" [whatever that is] haven't read this book. His critics frequently argue that The Selfish Gene doesn't operate in a vacuum, but must deal within some kind of environment, from an individual cell to global scenarios. Dawkins deftly responds to critics in describing how genes rely on their environment for successful replication. If the replication doesn't survive in the environment it finds itself, then it, and perhaps its species, will die out.

The child's favourite question, "why" is difficult enough for parents and teachers to answer. Yet, as thinking humans we've become trained to deal with that question nearly every context. So well drilled that we consider something for which that question has no answer to be suspicious if not insidious. Part of Dawkins presentation here reiterates that there is no "why" to either the process of evolution nor its results. It isn't predictable, inevitable or reasonable. It's a tough situation to cope with, but Dawkins describes the mechanism with such precision and clarity, we readily understand "how" if not "why" evolution works. We comprehend because Dawkins does such an outstanding job in presenting its mechanics.

This edition carries three fine finales: Dawkins well thought out bibliography, a glossary, and most prized, indeed, an Afterword by Daniel C. Dennett. If any defense of this book is needed, Dennett is a peerless champion for the task. Dennett's capabilities in logical argument are superbly expressed here. As he's done elsewhere {Darwin's Dangerous Idea], Dennett mourns the lack of orginality and logic among Dawkins' critics. Excepting the more obstinate ones, these seem to be falling by the wayside. It's almost worthwhile reading Dennett's brief essay before starting Dawkins. It would be a gift to readers beyond measure if these two ever collaborated on a book. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

excellent as always, 02 Aug 2005
As much as I love all Dawkins' books, this is probably my favourite. It explains how genes are not content to build organisms to ride around in - they also build structures like beaver dams, nests and so on, which are just as much an expression of genes as overtly biological traits and further perpetuate the genes' selfish 'desires'.

This is a really good treatment of that subject - you are unlikely to find any better.

Survival tool, 25 Aug 2006
Couldn't have survived the stats in either my degree or my MSc without this book, it gets down to what biologists care about in stats, what test to use, how to use it and what it shows, and avoids all the confusing 'mathsy' stuff in the middle (leaving you to read it in other books if necessary). If you want a stats book that is designed for biologists who have to cope with stats rather than statisticians trying to make something relevant to biology this is probably the book for you.

If you HATE stats, but have to do them for your degree..., 13 Jan 2005
...buy this book! It covers everything you need to know for a Biological honours degree in the UK, and for most of a masters as well. If you have got no idea about what it all means - and frankly don't care about what n represents - you just want to type in the data, and get a significant result... buy this book, it cuts out all the crap and is easy to understand. You will learn something! You need MINITAB or SPSS though.

Highly recommended., 27 Nov 2003
I became interested in this book when I was an undergraduate because all the PhD students were using it for their work. I soon found out why. More and more science departments across the land are requiring their undergraduates to learn statistics and as a result more and more books on the subject are appearing. This book raises itself from the pack by explain the basic concepts of statistics very well and relating them with useful examples. Consequently it is extremely handy for Biologists like myself who lack a background in mathematics but have to use it all the time to help justify results.

Great 'Biologist-proof' guide!, 04 Dec 2001
Absolutely agree with the review above - This was recomended by Plymouth Uni as the top 'Must Have' book for all things stats.
More detail (if that's your thing!) can be found elswhere, but this book tied all those lectures and other reference books together as to why something is used when it is.

Thank you Mr Dytham!

The statistics mystery resolved in one little book., 15 May 2001
The check list at the start helps you to decide which test is right to use, something that has always been a problem for non-statisticians. The book then easily takes you through the steps necessary for completing the test, but also, the best bit, it tells you how to do it on a number of stats computer programmes, which if you have access to, saves you gallons of time- fantastic- statistics was a mystery until finding this book.

Interesting and Informative, 10 Aug 2007
All the Collins Gem books are great for keeping in your pocket if you are out on a field trip for the day and this one is no exception. The photographs are first class and the descriptions of the individual fungi clear and concise. The book describes almost 240 different species of mushroom and toadstool (when you've read the book you will know the difference). Their habitats, size, appearance and also whether they are poisonous or not.

They say that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing and with fungi it could be fatal. The book goes out of its way to show which fungi are edible and which are poisonous. Personally I prefer to err on the side of caution and buy mine from the supermarket.

A very compact source of good information, 09 Aug 2007
I went on a fungas foray with the author of this book last year and it was extremely interesting and great fun. This book, although small, is packed full of the stuff I learned and much more information that gives me the confidence to go hunting on my own. It's the perfect size to pop in your pocket or basket while out walking.

One of the great things about it is that it identifies other species that can be confused with what you might have found. This allows you to double check and should make any mushroom hunting a lot safer.

a good pocket-sized guide, well illustrated, 28 Nov 2002
This little guide identifies a wide selection of funghi by reference to excellent photographs - much better than many of the artists' representations in some of the larger, dearer and more scholarly books.
There are short,sharp details about habitat, season and something of each specimen's histology. The book errs on the side of caution when dealing with edibility - so this is a book which could be given to a keen young explorer without too much risk of poisoning!
We keep a copy in the foraging basket, and refer to the more heavyweight volumes when we get home. It has much to recommend it.

A great very accessible book on evolution, 09 Mar 2008
I read this one after the 30th anniversary of The Selfish Gene, and though Dawkins states in his intro that he regards this as his best work, I personally prefer the slightly expanded Selfish Gene which takes into account his extended phenotype theory. I guess one further point on this is that there is a lot of repetition between the material in the two works too! He also states that this is aimed at his academic colleagues rather than as a book for the layman but I found the science to be pretty straightforward and commonsense and only needed to check the glossary at the back for about half a dozen words. However, other than those points its pretty much faultless and the plot will keep you gripped to the bitter denoument... I'm certainly looking forward to the sequel!

Difficult but eminently worthwhile, 29 Dec 2006
This is a long and difficult book, although not as long and difficult as it might be if it had been written by somebody without Richard Dawkins' gift for clarity of thought and expression.

The crux of Dawkins' thesis is expressed early on and much of what follows is a very detailed supporting argument. What he wants us to see is that the "selfish gene" has a reach that extends beyond the confines of the individual organism that houses the gene. The phenotype of our genes is the human organism in all its glory; however the extended phenotype of our genes is not only the human organism but part of the environment in which the organism finds itself. In other words, the gene has the power to influence not only our behavior but the behavior and structure of elements in the world in which we live.

This thesis is not as striking to me as it has been to many others mainly because I have studied Eastern religious views, and it is a tenant of such views that the distinction between ourselves (the "selfish organism," in Dawkins' terminology) and the environment is an artificial one, an illusion actually. We are part and parcel of all that is around us and within us, and the boundary of our skin is merely functional. We cannot be understood by looking at only our bodies. Dawkins makes the point that looking at a beaver and microscopically examining it and its genes is not sufficient to an understanding of what a beaver is. We have to also consider the dams that the beaver builds, the trees that it gnaws down and even the streams that it dams and turns into lakes.

Presenting a point of view somewhat at odds with that of Dawkins (and one that I think that Dawkins does not sufficiently appreciate) is Franklin M. Harold in his book, The Way of the Cell: Molecules, Organisms and the Order of Life (2001). He writes, "Organisms process matter and energy as well as information; each represents a dynamic node in a whirlpool of several currents, and self-reproduction is a property of the collective, not of genes.... DNA is a peculiar sort of software, that can only be correctly interpreted by its own unique hardware.... [S]ending aliens the genome of a cat is no substitute for sending the cat itself--complete with mice." (p. 221)

Dawkins tries to discount the view of those he calls "group selectionists" who see life from a "group benefit" viewpoint. Dawkins has, since writing this book, stepped back from this position to allow that some group selection may take place. I believe some day he may see the world not from a "selfish gene" point of view, and not from a "selfish organism" point of view, but from a "selfish ecosystem" perspective--well, more likely his successors will see this, since the work of a lifetime is not easily amended in one's later years.

Dawkins gives what he calls "our own 'central theorem' of the extended phenotype" on page 233: "An animal's behaviour tends to maximize the survival of the genes 'for' that behaviour, whether or not those genes happen to be in the body of the particular animal performing it."

This is a mouthful. Clearly we can say that the genes of the reed warbler code for behavior that benefits the genes of the cuckoo who has laid its egg in the warbler's nest. This is what Dawkins has in mind. But then arises the question, "how far afield can the phenotype extend?" Here Dawkins gets cautious and writes, "The farthest action at a distance I can think of is a matter of several miles." (p. 233) Note the chosen terminology, "action at a distance." This is from physics of course causing Dawkins to ask if there is "a sharp cut-off" of the genes' reach or "an inverse square law" at work?

It is here that I believe Dawkins has come so, so close to that which he will not see (or couldn't see then), namely that everything works toward an ecology and that the idea of selfish genes and selfish organisms is a limited view. In truth the reach of the genes should be governed by something like an inverse square law since humans are now reaching beyond the solar system.

When we look at such great distances we might want to credit the dreaded and verboten "group selection" that Dawkins is at pains to reject. Just as some see our earth as "Gaia," an organism itself, so too might we see those organisms that have the means to survive the destruction of the home planet by migrating to other planets as being selected by group as opposed to other groups who have no such ability. Planet A produces beings that extend beyond their solar system; planet B produces beings that do not. Both planets blow up. Who is "selected" by the (extended) environment and who is not?

Dawkins is one of the geniuses of science, and I don't mean to argue with the great insights he has brought to biology, but my point is that it is always something of an artificiality to speak of living systems as confined to one level of existence or expression. We may think of earth creatures as being completely separate from the rest of the universe, yet without the sun, 93 million miles away, we would not exist; and come a supernova even many light years away, we will be affected.

So all is one and one is all in some extended sense. And using the word "selfish" (as Dawkins knows) at any level of life is merely to be anthropomorphic.

Daniel Dennett, in a new afterword written in 1999, asks if this book is science or philosophy, and he answers both. I agree, and it is science and philosophy of the highest order, aimed equally at the professional and at the educated layperson.

Warning: very different from The Selfish Gene, 11 Mar 2006
This summary is primarily aimed as a warning to readers of the Selfish Gene and other books by Dawmins who are expecting more elaboration on the same theme. This is not the intention of The Extended Phenotype. Instead this book is aimed squarely at professional biologists and other life sciences professionals. The book presents very few down-to-earth examples or interesting facts that would suprise a reader with basic knowledge in the area. The bulk of the book is Dawkins' attempt to advocate his point of view on the subject and he does this by quoting other scientists and arquing his case both with and against these other views. The reader is assumed to know these arguments in advance, and unless you're prepared to read the references, in detail, the majority of the book's content will be remain a mystery.

The essentials of life's story, 15 Aug 2005
Biodiversity is more than a buzzword for ecologists. Variation gives life its grandeur, and Richard Dawkins gives us a description of the workings of variation. Fortunately, with a sharp mind and sharper wit, he has the ability to deliver this portrayal so that nearly everyone can understand it. That's not to say this book is an easy read. Although he delivers his narration as if sitting with you in a quiet study, you may still need to review his words more than once. That's not a challenge or a chore, it's a pleasure.

Dawkins, unlike other science writers, is forthright in declaring his advocacy in writing this book. It's a refreshing start to his most serious effort. After publication of The Selfish Gene led to a storm of fatuous criticism, Extended Phenotype comes in response with more detail of how the gene manifests itself in the organism and its environment. It's clear that Dawkins' critics, who label him an "Ultra-Darwinist" [whatever that is] haven't read this book. His critics frequently argue that The Selfish Gene doesn't operate in a vacuum, but must deal within some kind of environment, from an individual cell to global scenarios. Dawkins deftly responds to critics in describing how genes rely on their environment for successful replication. If the replication doesn't survive in the environment it finds itself, then it, and perhaps its species, will die out.

The child's favourite question, "why" is difficult enough for parents and teachers to answer. Yet, as thinking humans we've become trained to deal with that question nearly every context. So well drilled that we consider something for which that question has no answer to be suspicious if not insidious. Part of Dawkins presentation here reiterates that there is no "why" to either the process of evolution nor its results. It isn't predictable, inevitable or reasonable. It's a tough situation to cope with, but Dawkins describes the mechanism with such precision and clarity, we readily understand "how" if not "why" evolution works. We comprehend because Dawkins does such an outstanding job in presenting its mechanics.

This edition carries three fine finales: Dawkins well thought out bibliography, a glossary, and most prized, indeed, an Afterword by Daniel C. Dennett. If any defense of this book is needed, Dennett is a peerless champion for the task. Dennett's capabilities in logical argument are superbly expressed here. As he's done elsewhere {Darwin's Dangerous Idea], Dennett mourns the lack of orginality and logic among Dawkins' critics. Excepting the more obstinate ones, these seem to be falling by the wayside. It's almost worthwhile reading Dennett's brief essay before starting Dawkins. It would be a gift to readers beyond measure if these two ever collaborated on a book. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

excellent as always, 02 Aug 2005
As much as I love all Dawkins' books, this is probably my favourite. It explains how genes are not content to build organisms to ride around in - they also build structures like beaver dams, nests and so on, which are just as much an expression of genes as overtly biological traits and further perpetuate the genes' selfish 'desires'.

This is a really good treatment of that subject - you are unlikely to find any better.

Survival tool, 25 Aug 2006
Couldn't have survived the stats in either my degree or my MSc without this book, it gets down to what biologists care about in stats, what test to use, how to use it and what it shows, and avoids all the confusing 'mathsy' stuff in the middle (leaving you to read it in other books if necessary). If you want a stats book that is designed for biologists who have to cope with stats rather than statisticians trying to make something relevant to biology this is probably the book for you.

If you HATE stats, but have to do them for your degree..., 13 Jan 2005
...buy this book! It covers everything you need to know for a Biological honours degree in the UK, and for most of a masters as well. If you have got no idea about what it all means - and frankly don't care about what n represents - you just want to type in the data, and get a significant result... buy this book, it cuts out all the crap and is easy to understand. You will learn something! You need MINITAB or SPSS though.

Highly recommended., 27 Nov 2003
I became interested in this book when I was an undergraduate because all the PhD students were using it for their work. I soon found out why. More and more science departments across the land are requiring their undergraduates to learn statistics and as a result more and more books on the subject are appearing. This book raises itself from the pack by explain the basic concepts of statistics very well and relating them with useful examples. Consequently it is extremely handy for Biologists like myself who lack a background in mathematics but have to use it all the time to help justify results.

Great 'Biologist-proof' guide!, 04 Dec 2001
Absolutely agree with the review above - This was recomended by Plymouth Uni as the top 'Must Have' book for all things stats.
More detail (if that's your thing!) can be found elswhere, but this book tied all those lectures and other reference books together as to why something is used when it is.

Thank you Mr Dytham!

The statistics mystery resolved in one little book., 15 May 2001
The check list at the start helps you to decide which test is right to use, something that has always been a problem for non-statisticians. The book then easily takes you through the steps necessary for completing the test, but also, the best bit, it tells you how to do it on a number of stats computer programmes, which if you have access to, saves you gallons of time- fantastic- statistics was a mystery until finding this book.

Lavishly illustrated guide to 1000 European species, 03 Aug 2007
This guide is on a par with the older Roger Phillips "Mushrooms" and very similar in size and format. Unlike Phillips, all photographs have been shot in situ. With so few guides to fungi available, and each covering a particular selection of species, it's best to assemble a good library - and this should be one of the major works. Even though the focus is Britain and Europe, many of the fungi have much wider ranges and this book is invaluable elsewhere in the world too (I use it regularly in temperate and tropical America).

Chris Sharpe, 3 August 2007. ISBN: 0711223793


Simply fantastic , 11 Dec 2006
I know nothing about fungi until a few weeks ago when using my macro lens I started filming various types simply as most of the insect life had gone to bed for the winter. To ID the pictures I needed a guide to what I was filming.

I spent a week or so looking through the Amazon listings and reading all the reader's reviews to try and get the best guide I could. (When I say the best I mean in terms of one I could use rather then something that was too basic or so advanced I'd be lost).

With only one review of this book I was in two minds to get or not, but then decided I would give it a go.

It came today and for the past few hours I have been going through it. The photos are all by natural light where ever possible,....that means a lot when you are trying to match it up with what you have seen or have a picture of. The pictures are also good at showing the conditions they are found in. The text is excellent for each species. At the front there are various chapters on how to ID the fungi, a colour key and a ID key for all the species featured in the book.

Having purchased various guides on insects, plants and wildlife in the past few months I have to say that I cannot imagine how Michael Jordan could have improved on this excellent guide and encyclopedia. My only wish is he turns his hand at an insect guide next!!! LOL.

Michael clearly loves his subject, and that love is so apparent in this book. A classic guide.

Very good quality & value for money, but difficult to use, 04 Nov 2006
* I am a complete fungi novice - please bare that in mind when reading this review! *

This fungi encyclopaedia by Michael Jordan is the 2004 revised edition of his highly regarded 1995 original. As a revised edition, you'd expect it to be excellent quality, and so it is; listing more than a thousand species with superb photographs and detailed descriptions.

The first `introductory' sections to this encyclopaedia, ending on p33, offer some very helpful advice on fungi biology and structure; with a `How to use this book' feature - which you'll need to read! - and a reference section with bibliography and glossary. The main encyclopaedia then follows.

If you take advantage of Amazon's excellent `Search Inside' feature, you'll see how Jordan lays out the entries. It's very thorough, with long, impossible to pronounce Latin names (very few have English names), dimensions, detailed descriptions of the cap, gills and stem of the fungi (if it has them), as well as microscopic analysis of the spores and any relevant chemical tests.

Anna and I are, therefore, starting to discover that the task of identifying each fungi accurately is legendarily difficult! This is not helped when names and classification of fungi are continually changing and, authors can apparetnly disagree on both. Also, it appears that fungi are continuing to evolve thus giving rise to frequent new strains.

As a novice, this is supremely difficult to overcome - but it is the nature of the fungal beast, not a fault of this book. However, relevant photographs of all listed fungi in their young, mature and `over-blown' state would be very useful. This is because a mushroom (for instance) that starts out as pink ball, may mature into a white umbrella shape. Unfortunately, this encyclopaedia only has some pictures of fungi in their young and/or old states.

I think Jordan's offering is as good an encyclopaedia as one can expect, and better than many. But the complexities of accurately identifying each species mean that it is always going to be a difficult to use volume. However, it is still top quality, managing to convey the author's passion and it represents superb value for money. Recommended.

Interesting and Informative, 10 Aug 2007
All the Collins Gem books are great for keeping in your pocket if you are out on a field trip for the day and this one is no exception. The photographs are first class and the descriptions of the individual fungi clear and concise. The book describes almost 240 different species of mushroom and toadstool (when you've read the book you will know the difference). Their habitats, size, appearance and also whether they are poisonous or not.

They say that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing and with fungi it could be fatal. The book goes out of its way to show which fungi are edible and which are poisonous. Personally I prefer to err on the side of caution and buy mine from the supermarket.

A very compact source of good information, 09 Aug 2007
I went on a fungas foray with the author of this book last year and it was extremely interesting and great fun. This book, although small, is packed full of the stuff I learned and much more information that gives me the confidence to go hunting on my own. It's the perfect size to pop in your pocket or basket while out walking.

One of the great things about it is that it identifies other species that can be confused with what you might have found. This allows you to double check and should make any mushroom hunting a lot safer.

a good pocket-sized guide, well illustrated, 28 Nov 2002
This little guide identifies a wide selection of funghi by reference to excellent photographs - much better than many of the artists' representations in some of the larger, dearer and more scholarly books.
There are short,sharp details about habitat, season and something of each specimen's histology. The book errs on the side of caution when dealing with edibility - so this is a book which could be given to a keen young explorer without too much risk of poisoning!
We keep a copy in the foraging basket, and refer to the more heavyweight volumes when we get home. It has much to recommend it.

A great very accessible book on evolution, 09 Mar 2008
I read this one after the 30th anniversary of The Selfish Gene, and though Dawkins states in his intro that he regards this as his best work, I personally prefer the slightly expanded Selfish Gene which takes into account his extended phenotype theory. I guess one further point on this is that there is a lot of repetition between the material in the two works too! He also states that this is aimed at his academic colleagues rather than as a book for the layman but I found the science to be pretty straightforward and commonsense and only needed to check the glossary at the back for about half a dozen words. However, other than those points its pretty much faultless and the plot will keep you gripped to the bitter denoument... I'm certainly looking forward to the sequel!

Difficult but eminently worthwhile, 29 Dec 2006
This is a long and difficult book, although not as long and difficult as it might be if it had been written by somebody without Richard Dawkins' gift for clarity of thought and expression.

The crux of Dawkins' thesis is expressed early on and much of what follows is a very detailed supporting argument. What he wants us to see is that the "selfish gene" has a reach that extends beyond the confines of the individual organism that houses the gene. The phenotype of our genes is the human organism in all its glory; however the extended phenotype of our genes is not only the human organism but part of the environment in which the organism finds itself. In other words, the gene has the power to influence not only our behavior but the behavior and structure of elements in the world in which we live.

This thesis is not as striking to me as it has been to many others mainly because I have studied Eastern religious views, and it is a tenant of such views that the distinction between ourselves (the "selfish organism," in Dawkins' terminology) and the environment is an artificial one, an illusion actually. We are part and parcel of all that is around us and within us, and the boundary of our skin is merely functional. We cannot be understood by looking at only our bodies. Dawkins makes the point that looking at a beaver and microscopically examining it and its genes is not sufficient to an understanding of what a beaver is. We have to also consider the dams that the beaver builds, the trees that it gnaws down and even the streams that it dams and turns into lakes.

Presenting a point of view somewhat at odds with that of Dawkins (and one that I think that Dawkins does not sufficiently appreciate) is Franklin M. Harold in his book, The Way of the Cell: Molecules, Organisms and the Order of Life (2001). He writes, "Organisms process matter and energy as well as information; each represents a dynamic node in a whirlpool of several currents, and self-reproduction is a property of the collective, not of genes.... DNA is a peculiar sort of software, that can only be correctly interpreted by its own unique hardware.... [S]ending aliens the genome of a cat is no substitute for sending the cat itself--complete with mice." (p. 221)

Dawkins tries to discount the view of those he calls "group selectionists" who see life from a "group benefit" viewpoint. Dawkins has, since writing this book, stepped back from this position to allow that some group selection may take place. I believe some day he may see the world not from a "selfish gene" point of view, and not from a "selfish organism" point of view, but from a "selfish ecosystem" perspective--well, more likely his successors will see this, since the work of a lifetime is not easily amended in one's later years.

Dawkins gives what he calls "our own 'central theorem' of the extended phenotype" on page 233: "An animal's behaviour tends to maximize the survival of the genes 'for' that behaviour, whether or not those genes happen to be in the body of the particular animal performing it."

This is a mouthful. Clearly we can say that the genes of the reed warbler code for behavior that benefits the genes of the cuckoo who has laid its egg in the warbler's nest. This is what Dawkins has in mind. But then arises the question, "how far afield can the phenotype extend?" Here Dawkins gets cautious and writes, "The farthest action at a distance I can think of is a matter of several miles." (p. 233) Note the chosen terminology, "action at a distance." This is from physics of course causing Dawkins to ask if there is "a sharp cut-off" of the genes' reach or "an inverse square law" at work?

It is here that I believe Dawkins has come so, so close to that which he will not see (or couldn't see then), namely that everything works toward an ecology and that the idea of selfish genes and selfish organisms is a limited view. In truth the reach of the genes should be governed by something like an inverse square law since humans are now reaching beyond the solar system.

When we look at such great distances we might want to credit the dreaded and verboten "group selection" that Dawkins is at pains to reject. Just as some see our earth as "Gaia," an organism itself, so too might we see those organisms that have the means to survive the destruction of the home planet by migrating to other planets as being selected by group as opposed to other groups who have no such ability. Planet A produces beings that extend beyond their solar system; planet B produces beings that do not. Both planets blow up. Who is "selected" by the (extended) environment and who is not?

Dawkins is one of the geniuses of science, and I don't mean to argue with the great insights he has brought to biology, but my point is that it is always something of an artificiality to speak of living systems as confined to one level of existence or expression. We may think of earth creatures as being completely separate from the rest of the universe, yet without the sun, 93 million miles away, we would not exist; and come a supernova even many light years away, we will be affected.

So all is one and one is all in some extended sense. And using the word "selfish" (as Dawkins knows) at any level of life is merely to be anthropomorphic.

Daniel Dennett, in a new afterword written in 1999, asks if this book is science or philosophy, and he answers both. I agree, and it is science and philosophy of the highest order, aimed equally at the professional and at the educated layperson.

Warning: very different from The Selfish Gene, 11 Mar 2006
This summary is primarily aimed as a warning to readers of the Selfish Gene and other books by Dawmins who are expecting more elaboration on the same theme. This is not the intention of The Extended Phenotype. Instead this book is aimed squarely at professional biologists and other life sciences professionals. The book presents very few down-to-earth examples or interesting facts that would suprise a reader with basic knowledge in the area. The bulk of the book is Dawkins' attempt to advocate his point of view on the subject and he does this by quoting other scientists and arquing his case both with and against these other views. The reader is assumed to know these arguments in advance, and unless you're prepared to read the references, in detail, the majority of the book's content will be remain a mystery.

The essentials of life's story, 15 Aug 2005
Biodiversity is more than a buzzword for ecologists. Variation gives life its grandeur, and Richard Dawkins gives us a description of the workings of variation. Fortunately, with a sharp mind and sharper wit, he has the ability to deliver this portrayal so that nearly everyone can understand it. That's not to say this book is an easy read. Although he delivers his narration as if sitting with you in a quiet study, you may still need to review his words more than once. That's not a challenge or a chore, it's a pleasure.

Dawkins, unlike other science writers, is forthright in declaring his advocacy in writing this book. It's a refreshing start to his most serious effort. After publication of The Selfish Gene led to a storm of fatuous criticism, Extended Phenotype comes in response with more detail of how the gene manifests itself in the organism and its environment. It's clear that Dawkins' critics, who label him an "Ultra-Darwinist" [whatever that is] haven't read this book. His critics frequently argue that The Selfish Gene doesn't operate in a vacuum, but must deal within some kind of environment, from an individual cell to global scenarios. Dawkins deftly responds to critics in describing how genes rely on their environment for successful replication. If the replication doesn't survive in the environment it finds itself, then it, and perhaps its species, will die out.

The child's favourite question, "why" is difficult enough for parents and teachers to answer. Yet, as thinking humans we've become trained to deal with that question nearly every context. So well drilled that we consider something for which that question has no answer to be suspicious if not insidious. Part of Dawkins presentation here reiterates that there is no "why" to either the process of evolution nor its results. It isn't predictable, inevitable or reasonable. It's a tough situation to cope with, but Dawkins describes the mechanism with such precision and clarity, we readily understand "how" if not "why" evolution works. We comprehend because Dawkins does such an outstanding job in presenting its mechanics.

This edition carries three fine finales: Dawkins well thought out bibliography, a glossary, and most prized, indeed, an Afterword by Daniel C. Dennett. If any defense of this book is needed, Dennett is a peerless champion for the task. Dennett's capabilities in logical argument are superbly expressed here. As he's done elsewhere {Darwin's Dangerous Idea], Dennett mourns the lack of orginality and logic among Dawkins' critics. Excepting the more obstinate ones, these seem to be falling by the wayside. It's almost worthwhile reading Dennett's brief essay before starting Dawkins. It would be a gift to readers beyond measure if these two ever collaborated on a book. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

excellent as always, 02 Aug 2005
As much as I love all Dawkins' books, this is probably my favourite. It explains how genes are not content to build organisms to ride around in - they also build structures like beaver dams, nests and so on, which are just as much an expression of genes as overtly biological traits and further perpetuate the genes' selfish 'desires'.

This is a really good treatment of that subject - you are unlikely to find any better.

Survival tool, 25 Aug 2006
Couldn't have survived the stats in either my degree or my MSc without this book, it gets down to what biologists care about in stats, what test to use, how to use it and what it shows, and avoids all the confusing 'mathsy' stuff in the middle (leaving you to read it in other books if necessary). If you want a stats book that is designed for biologists who have to cope with stats rather than statisticians trying to make something relevant to biology this is probably the book for you.

If you HATE stats, but have to do them for your degree..., 13 Jan 2005
...buy this book! It covers everything you need to know for a Biological honours degree in the UK, and for most of a masters as well. If you have got no idea about what it all means - and frankly don't care about what n represents - you just want to type in the data, and get a significant result... buy this book, it cuts out all the crap and is easy to understand. You will learn something! You need MINITAB or SPSS though.

Highly recommended., 27 Nov 2003
I became interested in this book when I was an undergraduate because all the PhD students were using it for their work. I soon found out why. More and more science departments across the land are requiring their undergraduates to learn statistics and as a result more and more books on the subject are appearing. This book raises itself from the pack by explain the basic concepts of statistics very well and relating them with useful examples. Consequently it is extremely handy for Biologists like myself who lack a background in mathematics but have to use it all the time to help justify results.

Great 'Biologist-proof' guide!, 04 Dec 2001
Absolutely agree with the review above - This was recomended by Plymouth Uni as the top 'Must Have' book for all things stats.
More detail (if that's your thing!) can be found elswhere, but this book tied all those lectures and other reference books together as to why something is used when it is.

Thank you Mr Dytham!

The statistics mystery resolved in one little book., 15 May 2001
The check list at the start helps you to decide which test is right to use, something that has always been a problem for non-statisticians. The book then easily takes you through the steps necessary for completing the test, but also, the best bit, it tells you how to do it on a number of stats computer programmes, which if you have access to, saves you gallons of time- fantastic- statistics was a mystery until finding this book.

Lavishly illustrated guide to 1000 European species, 03 Aug 2007
This guide is on a par with the older Roger Phillips "Mushrooms" and very similar in size and format. Unlike Phillips, all photographs have been shot in situ. With so few guides to fungi available, and each covering a particular selection of species, it's best to assemble a good library - and this should be one of the major works. Even though the focus is Britain and Europe, many of the fungi have much wider ranges and this book is invaluable elsewhere in the world too (I use it regularly in temperate and tropical America).

Chris Sharpe, 3 August 2007. ISBN: 0711223793


Simply fantastic , 11 Dec 2006
I know nothing about fungi until a few weeks ago when using my macro lens I started filming various types simply as most of the insect life had gone to bed for the winter. To ID the pictures I needed a guide to what I was filming.

I spent a week or so looking through the Amazon listings and reading all the reader's reviews to try and get the best guide I could. (When I say the best I mean in terms of one I could use rather then something that was too basic or so advanced I'd be lost).

With only one review of this book I was in two minds to get or not, but then decided I would give it a go.

It came today and for the past few hours I have been going through it. The photos are all by natural light where ever possible,....that means a lot when you are trying to match it up with what you have seen or have a picture of. The pictures are also good at showing the conditions they are found in. The text is excellent for each species. At the front there are various chapters on how to ID the fungi, a colour key and a ID key for all the species featured in the book.

Having purchased various guides on insects, plants and wildlife in the past few months I have to say that I cannot imagine how Michael Jordan could have improved on this excellent guide and encyclopedia. My only wish is he turns his hand at an insect guide next!!! LOL.

Michael clearly loves his subject, and that love is so apparent in this book. A classic guide.

Very good quality & value for money, but difficult to use, 04 Nov 2006
* I am a complete fungi novice - please bare that in mind when reading this review! *

This fungi encyclopaedia by Michael Jordan is the 2004 revised edition of his highly regarded 1995 original. As a revised edition, you'd expect it to be excellent quality, and so it is; listing more than a thousand species with superb photographs and detailed descriptions.

The first `introductory' sections to this encyclopaedia, ending on p33, offer some very helpful advice on fungi biology and structure; with a `How to use this book' feature - which you'll need to read! - and a reference section with bibliography and glossary. The main encyclopaedia then follows.

If you take advantage of Amazon's excellent `Search Inside' feature, you'll see how Jordan lays out the entries. It's very thorough, with long, impossible to pronounce Latin names (very few have English names), dimensions, detailed descriptions of the cap, gills and stem of the fungi (if it has them), as well as microscopic analysis of the spores and any relevant chemical tests.

Anna and I are, therefore, starting to discover that the task of identifying each fungi accurately is legendarily difficult! This is not helped when names and classification of fungi are continually changing and, authors can apparetnly disagree on both. Also, it appears that fungi are continuing to evolve thus giving rise to frequent new strains.

As a novice, this is supremely difficult to overcome - but it is the nature of the fungal beast, not a fault of this book. However, relevant photographs of all listed fungi in their young, mature and `over-blown' state would be very useful. This is because a mushroom (for instance) that starts out as pink ball, may mature into a white umbrella shape. Unfortunately, this encyclopaedia only has some pictures of fungi in their young and/or old states.

I think Jordan's offering is as good an encyclopaedia as one can expect, and better than many. But the complexities of accurately identifying each species mean that it is always going to be a difficult to use volume. However, it is still top quality, managing to convey the author's passion and it represents superb value for money. Recommended.

brill, 10 Oct 2006
I started my A levels in bio chem and physics 5 weeks ago and i have not but it down yet it is really useful if you are doing A level you need this

The best choice for those who read a lot of popular science, 16 Aug 2004
This is a relatively inexpensive, concise, and handy dictionary of science. It is an updated version of the Concise Science Dictionary originally published by the Oxford University Press in 1984. This, the latest edition, is from 1999. It is aimed at professionals and an educated public who want a quick reference to terms in fields other than their own. Unlike science dictionaries found on the reference shelves of libraries, this book is small enough to fit into a knapsack.

As with all specialized dictionaries the task for editors is to decide what to leave in and what to leave out, and how technical to get. The people at Oxford University Press, one of the preeminent publishers of reference books in the world, have tried to eschew "unnecessary scientific jargon" while "always bearing in mind the needs of the readers" (from the Preface). Nonetheless, many of the entries are highly technical, having been written by experts. Clearly the editors have decided to err on the side of technical precision rather than anything resembling a dumbing down. The entry on "optical activity" for example is a mini essay of about 400 words adorned with a drawing of the D-, L-, and meso-forms of the isomers of tartaric acid along with several cross references to related terms in the dictionary. A two-page boxed entry on "El Nino" however is written in language easily accessible to the average high school graduate, as are many other entries including over 160 mini biographies of important scientists.

I also use The American Heritage Dictionary of Science, another handy (as opposed to comprehensive) reference and would like to make a quick comparison. The Heritage dictionary is a hardcover and contains noticeably more entries (16,000+ to perhaps 10,000 to 12,000 for the Oxford). However the Heritage hasn't been updated since the edition of 1988. Of course a lot has happened in science since then, which is why I purchased the Oxford paperback. The Heritage also uses the entries words or phrases in sentences, usually quoting some scientist whereas the Oxford does not bother. The Heritage also gives the pronunciation of most of the entries (e.g., it's "pree'-on," not "pri'-on" for the mad cow infectious agent) whereas the Oxford does not. The Oxford is more technical overall--it is especially strong in physics--and of course more up to date. The entries also tend to be more thorough. For example, the Oxford has a schematic drawing of a mammalian kidney system whereas the Heritage has only text.

There are seven appendices on SI units, fundamental constants, the solar system, the geographical time scale, plant and animal kingdom classifications, and the periodic table. Curiously, nowhere in the Oxford is the abbreviation SI defined or even noted! The Heritage gives it as the French Systeme International d'Unites (or International System of Units). This is actually an indication of how the Oxford assumes a greater scientific sophistication on the part of its readers than does the Heritage.

Bottom line here is that this book is practically a must for those who read a lot of science in fields other than their own. It is better overall than the Heritage because it is eleven years more up to date; and it is a better choice for most people than the more comprehensive hardcover volumes which are significantly more expensive, heavier and take up more space.

awesome, 06 Mar 2004
I am currently doing my a-levels, and this book has helped me a lot so far. Any word from bio, phy, chem i don't understand, i just have to open this book , and there it is. But its just not a dictionary, it also explains many topics and gives proper definitions. A must have for all science students.

Interesting and Informative, 10 Aug 2007
All the Collins Gem books are great for keeping in your pocket if you are out on a field trip for the day and this one is no exception. The photographs are first class and the descriptions of the individual fungi clear and concise. The book describes almost 240 different species of mushroom and toadstool (when you've read the book you will know the difference). Their habitats, size, appearance and also whether they are poisonous or not.

They say that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing and with fungi it could be fatal. The book goes out of its way to show which fungi are edible and which are poisonous. Personally I prefer to err on the side of caution and buy mine from the supermarket.

A very compact source of good information, 09 Aug 2007
I went on a fungas foray with the author of this book last year and it was extremely interesting and great fun. This book, although small, is packed full of the stuff I learned and much more information that gives me the confidence to go hunting on my own. It's the perfect size to pop in your pocket or basket while out walking.

One of the great things about it is that it identifies other species that can be confused with what you might have found. This allows you to double check and should make any mushroom hunting a lot safer.

a good pocket-sized guide, well illustrated, 28 Nov 2002
This little guide identifies a wide selection of funghi by reference to excellent photographs - much better than many of the artists' representations in some of the larger, dearer and more scholarly books.
There are short,sharp details about habitat, season and something of each specimen's histology. The book errs on the side of caution when dealing with edibility - so this is a book which could be given to a keen young explorer without too much risk of poisoning!
We keep a copy in the foraging basket, and refer to the more heavyweight volumes when we get home. It has much to recommend it.

A great very accessible book on evolution, 09 Mar 2008
I read this one after the 30th anniversary of The Selfish Gene, and though Dawkins states in his intro that he regards this as his best work, I personally prefer the slightly expanded Selfish Gene which takes into account his extended phenotype theory. I guess one further point on this is that there is a lot of repetition between the material in the two works too! He also states that this is aimed at his academic colleagues rather than as a book for the layman but I found the science to be pretty straightforward and commonsense and only needed to check the glossary at the back for about half a dozen words. However, other than those points its pretty much faultless and the plot will keep you gripped to the bitter denoument... I'm certainly looking forward to the sequel!

Difficult but eminently worthwhile, 29 Dec 2006
This is a long and difficult book, although not as long and difficult as it might be if it had been written by somebody without Richard Dawkins' gift for clarity of thought and expression.

The crux of Dawkins' thesis is expressed early on and much of what follows is a very detailed supporting argument. What he wants us to see is that the "selfish gene" has a reach that extends beyond the confines of the individual organism that houses the gene. The phenotype of our genes is the human organism in all its glory; however the extended phenotype of our genes is not only the human organism but part of the environment in which the organism finds itself. In other words, the gene has the power to influence not only our behavior but the behavior and structure of elements in the world in which we live.

This thesis is not as striking to me as it has been to many others mainly because I have studied Eastern religious views, and it is a tenant of such views that the distinction between ourselves (the "selfish organism," in Dawkins' terminology) and the environment is an artificial one, an illusion actually. We are part and parcel of all that is around us and within us, and the boundary of our skin is merely functional. We cannot be understood by looking at only our bodies. Dawkins makes the point that looking at a beaver and microscopically examining it and its genes is not sufficient to an understanding of what a beaver is. We have to also consider the dams that the beaver builds, the trees that it gnaws down and even the streams that it dams and turns into lakes.

Presenting a point of view somewhat at odds with that of Dawkins (and one that I think that Dawkins does not sufficiently appreciate) is Franklin M. Harold in his book, The Way of the Cell: Molecules, Organisms and the Order of Life (2001). He writes, "Organisms process matter and energy as well as information; each represents a dynamic node in a whirlpool of several currents, and self-reproduction is a property of the collective, not of genes.... DNA is a peculiar sort of software, that can only be correctly interpreted by its own unique hardware.... [S]ending aliens the genome of a cat is no substitute for sending the cat itself--complete with mice." (p. 221)

Dawkins tries to discount the view of those he calls "group selectionists" who see life from a "group benefit" viewpoint. Dawkins has, since writing this book, stepped back from this position to allow that some group selection may take place. I believe some day he may see the world not from a "selfish gene" point of view, and not from a "selfish organism" point of view, but from a "selfish ecosystem" perspective--well, more likely his successors will see this, since the work of a lifetime is not easily amended in one's later years.

Dawkins gives what he calls "our own 'central theorem' of the extended phenotype" on page 233: "An animal's behaviour tends to maximize the survival of the genes 'for' that behaviour, whether or not those genes happen to be in the body of the particular animal performing it."

This is a mouthful. Clearly we can say that the genes of the reed warbler code for behavior that benefits the genes of the cuckoo who has laid its egg in the warbler's nest. This is what Dawkins has in mind. But then arises the question, "how far afield can the phenotype extend?" Here Dawkins gets cautious and writes, "The farthest action at a distance I can think of is a matter of several miles." (p. 233) Note the chosen terminology, "action at a distance." This is from physics of course causing Dawkins to ask if there is "a sharp cut-off" of the genes' reach or "an inverse square law" at work?

It is here that I believe Dawkins has come so, so close to that which he will not see (or couldn't see then), namely that everything works toward an ecology and that the idea of selfish genes and selfish organisms is a limited view. In truth the reach of the genes should be governed by something like an inverse square law since humans are now reaching beyond the solar system.

When we look at such great distances we might want to credit the dreaded and verboten "group selection" that Dawkins is at pains to reject. Just as some see our earth as "Gaia," an organism itself, so too might we see those organisms that have the means to survive the destruction of the home planet by migrating to other planets as being selected by group as opposed to other groups who have no such ability. Planet A produces beings that extend beyond their solar system; planet B produces beings that do not. Both planets blow up. Who is "selected" by the (extended) environment and who is not?

Dawkins is one of the geniuses of science, and I don't mean to argue with the great insights he has brought to biology, but my point is that it is always something of an artificiality to speak of living systems as confined to one level of existence or expression. We may think of earth creatures as being completely separate from the rest of the universe, yet without the sun, 93 million miles away, we would not exist; and come a supernova even many light years away, we will be affected.

So all is one and one is all in some extended sense. And using the word "selfish" (as Dawkins knows) at any level of life is merely to be anthropomorphic.

Daniel Dennett, in a new afterword written in 1999, asks if this book is science or philosophy, and he answers both. I agree, and it is science and philosophy of the highest order, aimed equally at the professional and at the educated layperson.

Warning: very different from The Selfish Gene, 11 Mar 2006
This summary is primarily aimed as a warning to readers of the Selfish Gene and other books by Dawmins who are expecting more elaboration on the same theme. This is not the intention of The Extended Phenotype. Instead this book is aimed squarely at professional biologists and other life sciences professionals. The book presents very few down-to-earth examples or interesting facts that would suprise a reader with basic knowledge in the area. The bulk of the book is Dawkins' attempt to advocate his point of view on the subject and he does this by quoting other scientists and arquing his case both with and against these other views. The reader is assumed to know these arguments in advance, and unless you're prepared to read the references, in detail, the majority of the book's content will be remain a mystery.

The essentials of life's story, 15 Aug 2005
Biodiversity is more than a buzzword for ecologists. Variation gives life its grandeur, and Richard Dawkins gives us a description of the workings of variation. Fortunately, with a sharp mind and sharper wit, he has the ability to deliver this portrayal so that nearly everyone can understand it. That's not to say this book is an easy read. Although he delivers his narration as if sitting with you in a quiet study, you may still need to review his words more than once. That's not a challenge or a chore, it's a pleasure.

Dawkins, unlike other science writers, is forthright in declaring his advocacy in writing this book. It's a refreshing start to his most serious effort. After publication of The Selfish Gene led to a storm of fatuous criticism, Extended Phenotype comes in response with more detail of how the gene manifests itself in the organism and its environment. It's clear that Dawkins' critics, who label him an "Ultra-Darwinist" [whatever that is] haven't read this book. His critics frequently argue that The Selfish Gene doesn't operate in a vacuum, but must deal within some kind of environment, from an individual cell to global scenarios. Dawkins deftly responds to critics in describing how genes rely on their environment for successful replication. If the replication doesn't survive in the environment it finds itself, then it, and perhaps its species, will die out.

The child's favourite question, "why" is difficult enough for parents and teachers to answer. Yet, as thinking humans we've become trained to deal with that question nearly every context. So well drilled that we consider something for which that question has no answer to be suspicious if not insidious. Part of Dawkins presentation here reiterates that there is no "why" to either the process of evolution nor its results. It isn't predictable, inevitable or reasonable. It's a tough situation to cope with, but Dawkins describes the mechanism with such precision and clarity, we readily understand "how" if not "why" evolution works. We comprehend because Dawkins does such an outstanding job in presenting its mechanics.

This edition carries three fine finales: Dawkins well thought out bibliography, a glossary, and most prized, indeed, an Afterword by Daniel C. Dennett. If any defense of this book is needed, Dennett is a peerless champion for the task. Dennett's capabilities in logical argument are superbly expressed here. As he's done elsewhere {Darwin's Dangerous Idea], Dennett mourns the lack of orginality and logic among Dawkins' critics. Excepting the more obstinate ones, these seem to be falling by the wayside. It's almost worthwhile reading Dennett's brief essay before starting Dawkins. It would be a gift to readers beyond measure if these two ever collaborated on a book. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

excellent as always, 02 Aug 2005
As much as I love all Dawkins' books, this is probably my favourite. It explains how genes are not content to build organisms to ride around in - they also build structures like beaver dams, nests and so on, which are just as much an expression of genes as overtly biological traits and further perpetuate the genes' selfish 'desires'.

This is a really good treatment of that subject - you are unlikely to find any better.

Survival tool, 25 Aug 2006
Couldn't have survived the stats in either my degree or my MSc without this book, it gets down to what biologists care about in stats, what test to use, how to use it and what it shows, and avoids all the confusing 'mathsy' stuff in the middle (leaving you to read it in other books if necessary). If you want a stats book that is designed for biologists who have to cope with stats rather than statisticians trying to make something relevant to biology this is probably the book for you.

If you HATE stats, but have to do them for your degree..., 13 Jan 2005
...buy this book! It covers everything you need to know for a Biological honours degree in the UK, and for most of a masters as well. If you have got no idea about what it all means - and frankly don't care about what n represents - you just want to type in the data, and get a significant result... buy this book, it cuts out all the crap and is easy to understand. You will learn something! You need MINITAB or SPSS though.

Highly recommended., 27 Nov 2003
I became interested in this book when I was an undergraduate because all the PhD students were using it for their work. I soon found out why. More and more science departments across the land are requiring their undergraduates to learn statistics and as a result more and more books on the subject are appearing. This book raises itself from the pack by explain the basic concepts of statistics very well and relating them with useful examples. Consequently it is extremely handy for Biologists like myself who lack a background in mathematics but have to use it all the time to help justify results.

Great 'Biologist-proof' guide!, 04 Dec 2001
Absolutely agree with the review above - This was recomended by Plymouth Uni as the top 'Must Have' book for all things stats.
More detail (if that's your thing!) can be found elswhere, but this book tied all those lectures and other reference books together as to why something is used when it is.

Thank you Mr Dytham!

The statistics mystery resolved in one little book., 15 May 2001
The check list at the start helps you to decide which test is right to use, something that has always been a problem for non-statisticians. The book then easily takes you through the steps necessary for completing the test, but also, the best bit, it tells you how to do it on a number of stats computer programmes, which if you have access to, saves you gallons of time- fantastic- statistics was a mystery until finding this book.

Lavishly illustrated guide to 1000 European species, 03 Aug 2007
This guide is on a par with the older Roger Phillips "Mushrooms" and very similar in size and format. Unlike Phillips, all photographs have been shot in situ. With so few guides to fungi available, and each covering a particular selection of species, it's best to assemble a good library - and this should be one of the major works. Even though the focus is Britain and Europe, many of the fungi have much wider ranges and this book is invaluable elsewhere in the world too (I use it regularly in temperate and tropical America).

Chris Sharpe, 3 August 2007. ISBN: 0711223793


Simply fantastic , 11 Dec 2006
I know nothing about fungi until a few weeks ago when using my macro lens I started filming various types simply as most of the insect life had gone to bed for the winter. To ID the pictures I needed a guide to what I was filming.

I spent a week or so looking through the Amazon listings and reading all the reader's reviews to try and get the best guide I could. (When I say the best I mean in terms of one I could use rather then something that was too basic or so advanced I'd be lost).

With only one review of this book I was in two minds to get or not, but then decided I would give it a go.

It came today and for the past few hours I have been going through it. The photos are all by natural light where ever possible,....that means a lot when you are trying to match it up with what you have seen or have a picture of. The pictures are also good at showing the conditions they are found in. The text is excellent for each species. At the front there are various chapters on how to ID the fungi, a colour key and a ID key for all the species featured in the book.

Having purchased various guides on insects, plants and wildlife in the past few months I have to say that I cannot imagine how Michael Jordan could have improved on this excellent guide and encyclopedia. My only wish is he turns his hand at an insect guide next!!! LOL.

Michael clearly loves his subject, and that love is so apparent in this book. A classic guide.

Very good quality & value for money, but difficult to use, 04 Nov 2006
* I am a complete fungi novice - please bare that in mind when reading this review! *

This fungi encyclopaedia by Michael Jordan is the 2004 revised edition of his highly regarded 1995 original. As a revised edition, you'd expect it to be excellent quality, and so it is; listing more than a thousand species with superb photographs and detailed descriptions.

The first `introductory' sections to this encyclopaedia, ending on p33, offer some very helpful advice on fungi biology and structure; with a `How to use this book' feature - which you'll need to read! - and a reference section with bibliography and glossary. The main encyclopaedia then follows.

If you take advantage of Amazon's excellent `Search Inside' feature, you'll see how Jordan lays out the entries. It's very thorough, with long, impossible to pronounce Latin names (very few have English names), dimensions, detailed descriptions of the cap, gills and stem of the fungi (if it has them), as well as microscopic analysis of the spores and any relevant chemical tests.

Anna and I are, therefore, starting to discover that the task of identifying each fungi accurately is legendarily difficult! This is not helped when names and classification of fungi are continually changing and, authors can apparetnly disagree on both. Also, it appears that fungi are continuing to evolve thus giving rise to frequent new strains.

As a novice, this is supremely difficult to overcome - but it is the nature of the fungal beast, not a fault of this book. However, relevant photographs of all listed fungi in their young, mature and `over-blown' state would be very useful. This is because a mushroom (for instance) that starts out as pink ball, may mature into a white umbrella shape. Unfortunately, this encyclopaedia only has some pictures of fungi in their young and/or old states.

I think Jordan's offering is as good an encyclopaedia as one can expect, and better than many. But the complexities of accurately identifying each species mean that it is always going to be a difficult to use volume. However, it is still top quality, managing to convey the author's passion and it represents superb value for money. Recommended.

brill, 10 Oct 2006
I started my A levels in bio chem and physics 5 weeks ago and i have not but it down yet it is really useful if you are doing A level you need this

The best choice for those who read a lot of popular science, 16 Aug 2004
This is a relatively inexpensive, concise, and handy dictionary of science. It is an updated version of the Concise Science Dictionary originally published by the Oxford University Press in 1984. This, the latest edition, is from 1999. It is aimed at professionals and an educated public who want a quick reference to terms in fields other than their own. Unlike science dictionaries found on the reference shelves of libraries, this book is small enough to fit into a knapsack.

As with all specialized dictionaries the task for editors is to decide what to leave in and what to leave out, and how technical to get. The people at Oxford University Press, one of the preeminent publishers of reference books in the world, have tried to eschew "unnecessary scientific jargon" while "always bearing in mind the needs of the readers" (from the Preface). Nonetheless, many of the entries are highly technical, having been written by experts. Clearly the editors have decided to err on the side of technical precision rather than anything resembling a dumbing down. The entry on "optical activity" for example is a mini essay of about 400 words adorned with a drawing of the D-, L-, and meso-forms of the isomers of tartaric acid along with several cross references to related terms in the dictionary. A two-page boxed entry on "El Nino" however is written in language easily accessible to the average high school graduate, as are many other entries including over 160 mini biographies of important scientists.

I also use The American Heritage Dictionary of Science, another handy (as opposed to comprehensive) reference and would like to make a quick comparison. The Heritage dictionary is a hardcover and contains noticeably more entries (16,000+ to perhaps 10,000 to 12,000 for the Oxford). However the Heritage hasn't been updated since the edition of 1988. Of course a lot has happened in science since then, which is why I purchased the Oxford paperback. The Heritage also uses the entries words or phrases in sentences, usually quoting some scientist whereas the Oxford does not bother. The Heritage also gives the pronunciation of most of the entries (e.g., it's "pree'-on," not "pri'-on" for the mad cow infectious agent) whereas the Oxford does not. The Oxford is more technical over