112 



University of California Publications in Agricultural Sciences [Vol. 4 



less regular. There are contrasts similar to those of table 15 up to 

 lot 26, which is late, while the check lots 27 and 28 are early. The 

 singles show the type differences very strikingly throughout lots 1 

 to 20, while lots 21, 22, and 26 give less positive indications of the 

 presence of the early factor. 



Table 19 gives the numbers of singles flowering, in primary in- 

 florescence or elsewhere, by November 3, when growth had practically 

 stopped. The indications are in general the same as wdth the data 

 already discussed, Avith better evidence than usual that lots 21 and 22 



Table 18 

 Same as tahle 17, for doubles.^ 



" See note to table 17. 



possessed the early factor. The mean time of flowering is irregular, 

 but shows some effect of the earliness factor. Lot 26 is late as to 

 number flowering, but early as to mean. 



Table 20, for doubles flowering by August 1, no doubt gives more 

 reliable means; these means disagree with our scheme only in lot 26 

 and perhaps lot 22. 



According to tables 17-20, the fewer-noded check parent of each 

 check row has usually given the earlier progeny. In fact, the agree- 

 ment of parental and progeny differences, throughout the cultures, is 

 decidedly remarkable. It is unfortunate that the later parents were 

 always placed in the east half of the row, especially in view of the 

 fact that there was indication of important differences in soil and 



