Skip to content

Please be aware that some material may contain words, descriptions or illustrations which will not reflect current scientific understanding and may be considered in today's context inaccurate, unethical, offensive or distressing.

Description

Recommended for publication in the 'Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society'. Suggests expanding scope of paper to look at other parts of the plant anatomy. The paper could be published sufficiently in the Proceedings, but the 'beauty of the drawings' entitles the paper to publication in the Philosophical Transactions.

Subject: Botany

[Published in the 'Proceedings of the Royal Society of London']

Reference number
RR/2/100
Earliest possible date
11 May 1852
Physical description
Letter on paper
Page extent
4 pages
Format
Manuscript

Creator name

Charles Giles Bridle Daubeny

View page for Charles Giles Bridle Daubeny

Use this record

Citation

Charles Giles Bridle Daubeny, Referee's report by Charles Giles Bridle Daubeny, on a paper 'On the anatomy of the stem of Victoria regia' by Arthur Henfrey, 11 May 1852, RR/2/100, The Royal Society Archives, London, https://makingscience.royalsociety.org/items/rr_2_100/referees-report-by-charles-giles-bridle-daubeny-on-a-paper-on-the-anatomy-of-the-stem-of-victoria-regia-by-arthur-henfrey, accessed on 09 October 2024

Link to this record

Embed this record

<iframe src="https://makingscience.royalsociety.org/embed/items/rr_2_100/referees-report-by-charles-giles-bridle-daubeny-on-a-paper-on-the-anatomy-of-the-stem-of-victoria-regia-by-arthur-henfrey" title="Referee's report by Charles Giles Bridle Daubeny, on a paper 'On the anatomy of the stem of Victoria regia' by Arthur Henfrey" allow="fullscreen" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>

Related Publications

Related Fellows

Explore the collection

  • Referee Reports

    Date: 1832-1954

    This collection contains reports on scientific papers submitted for publication to the Royal Society. Started in 1832 when the system was formalised, it is a record of the origins of peer review publishing in practice.

    View collection