SYNAPSE 1:589-591(1987)

Book Reviews

ADVANCES IN NEUROLOGY, VOL. 45, PARKINSON’S DIS. EASE. Edited by Melvin D. Yahr and Kenneth J. Berg- mann: Raven Press, New York, 1986,640 pp.

The literature in the neurosciences is growing so rap- idly that I am on the lookout for any review volume, in or out of my subarea, which both dissects and synthes- izes the recent findings. I want such a volume to present as wide a diversity of thought as there is in the area and to critically comment on the material. I seek an analysis of the findings as well as hypotheses which can be tested and bind the body of knowledge together. As you are well aware, such volumes are rare and treasured finds. In contrast to this ideal review volume, there are the “typical” meeting volumes which are but a series of transcriptions of well-worn talks from the same investi- gators without comment or synthesis from either the editors or the participants. Unfortunately, despite some interesting and provocative chapters, volume 45 of Ad- vances in Neurology falls closer to the latter category than the former, for it is a meeting report in need of synthetic “glue.”

Let me give a specific example of where some critical comment would have greatly aided the volume. There are eight chapters dealing with epidemiologic and etio- logic factors in Parkinson’s disease. Six of these chapters discuss genetic and/or demographic factors, and they find no single good correlation between a variety of possible causes and the disease. The other two chapters in this section caused much discussion even before their publication here, as Science commented on the linkage they make between environmental toxins and the inci- dence of Parkinson’s disease. These two papers reported that the incidence of Parkinson’s disease was greatest in areas where pesticides and herbicides were most likely to be found in the water. Thus, there are clear and dramatic differences in the findings reported at the meeting. But this is all we are given. Clearly there must have been some discussion as the participants at the meeting included some of the most respected epidemiol- ogists in the world. How do they reconcile these reports with earlier studies? Are there methodological flaws? Did the older findings simply fail to find the correlations reported here? What were the questions asked at the

meeting? As this volume’s jacket claims it offers “essen- tial guidance” I would like to know where the guidance is in this ground-breaking section?

Review volumes may also suffer when their contribu- tions are in large part a pastiche of paragraphs, tables, and figures assembled so that the author may add an- other title to the CV. Whilst there can be pastiches which, like some operas by Handel provide a new syn- thesis of great parts, the majority tend to lack coherence and originality. Furthermore, the more frequently an author is asked to write review articles, the more com- monality between articles one is likely to find. Volume 45 of Advances in Neurology contains a moderately high number of pastiches, which contain differing quantities of new or original thought. Clearly this volume suffers from its similarity to other recently published volumes in the field.

A broad coverage of an area is also highly desirable in a review volume. The breadth of the volume’s coverage is clearly its greatest strength, €or both basic and ap- plied studies are reported here. In part the breadth was obtained from solicited contributions from researchers active in different areas, but additional reports from the participants form the remainder of the volume. As the chapters were not given a peer review, care must be taken to critically evaluate which conclusions are sup- ported by the evidence presented and which conclusions require further evidence.

Technically, the volume is very well produced, with high-quality printing and graphics. Unfortunately the contents of the volume do not provide a well-integrated whole. Controversies are not resolved or even openly discussed, making reading the book a frustrating expe- rience for one seeking “a definitive statement of our current knowledge” or even a discussion of our ig- norance.

JOHN A. WILSON Department of Physiology School of Medicine Creighton University Omaha, Nebraska 68178

NEUROBIOLOGY OF HEARING: THE COCHLEA. Edited by Richard A. Altschuler, Richard P. Bobbin, and Doug- las W. Hoffman: Raven Press, New York, 1986,506 pp.

Significant advances in cochlear research in the past decade have led to the development of fundamentally new concepts of cochlear function. A major impetus for much of the new thinking was Kemp’s demonstration in 1978 of acoustic emissions from the human ear evoked to click stimuli (Kemp: J Acoust SOC. Am. 64:1386-

1391, 1978). His discovery of active sources of acoustic energy in the cochlea and subsequent research by sev- eral investigators have led to the hypothesis that the outer hair cells of the mammalian cochlea play an active mechanical role in transduction leading to enhanced sensitivity in the cochlear duct. Further it has been proposed that elements of the efferent system projecting from the brain to the cochlea modulate this activity of the outer hair cells. Along with significant new infor- mation about sensory transduction by hair cells, these