258 Report S.A.A. Advancement of Science. 



On April 12th there was not the least doubt that, small though 

 the differences were in the times of incidence, the peas varied greatly 

 in the height to which they had grown and in the size of their leaves. 

 No. 6 had come up after No. 8, and was much the worst of all. 

 The remainder had come up within a few hours of one another, but 

 were visibly smaller as they approached the screen. No. 8 was 

 much smaller in every way than No. 5, and two of its five leaves were 

 only just visible. The leaves of No. 5 were much inferior to those 

 of No. 2. Nos. 9 and 10 in the shadow of the screen had not come 

 up, nor had Nos. 3, 4, and 7. The three latter were accordingly dug 

 up and examined. Two of the seeds were good, and one of them 

 was germinating. The screen was removed before sunrise on April 

 13th, and direct sunlight admitted to the whole of the plot by yh. 

 i6m. in order to see whether any of the seeds 3, 4, 7, 9, or 10 

 would come up. They did not do so. After the screen was removed 

 II weeds appeared within the area of the shadow, whereas none had 

 appeared there previously though there were many in other parts 

 of the plot. 



Meanwhile the peas in Plot B were teaching exactly the same 

 lesson. Growth was in proportion to the amount of early rays the 

 plants received, and the direct light during the rest of the day did 

 not equalise matters. But a curious result followed from perforating 

 the screen. The two nearest peas to it received intermittent rays for 

 some 6 minutes at a time between 8h. and 8h. 30m. During 9 days 

 the leaves remained just visible above ground. There was no growth 

 whatever. The holes were then stopped up, so that the peas remained 

 in shadow till loh. 30m. In 7 days' time no change in colour 

 occurred but they were onlv 2 m.m. and 5 m.m. high respectively. 

 Sunrise rays were then admitted to one of them, but not to the other. 

 The latter is dead, the former is still alive, nearly 3 months 

 afterwards, but is barely 5 m.m. high.* 



These experiments and observations appear to be worthy of 

 consideration. The exceptional circumstances under which they were 

 carried out must be borne in mind, but, taken in connection with the 

 remarkable effect of sunrise rays upon the cirrus particles in the sky 

 on March 12th, they suggest that protoplasm in the presence of 

 water may be a ynedium through which the vibratory energy of the 

 rays is conveyed to the chlorophyll-granules imbedded in it. 



The lesson taught by the Kei-apple border, confirmed by the 

 experiments with vegetables and macrocarpas, and interpreted by the 

 cloud-phenomenon which has been described, may possibly be that 

 the directive force lies in the rays of light, and is not entirely 

 inherent in protoplasm. I would remind you of the discovery of 

 protoplasm, and of its behaviour in the water-weed M aucheria clavata. 

 It is between the hours of 8 and 9 a.m. that new protoplasm is 

 always put forth by a movement of rotation and forward straining 

 (Kerner). The little ellipsoid has a polarity, and falways moves 

 with the same end forward. Its first motion is towards the light, and 



* It lived till Aug. 3rd. 



