C. A. BARB Eli 85 



An inspection of the table and graphs will convince the reader of the 

 greater tillering power of the widely spaced plants, where of conrse there were 

 considerably fewer plants to the row, and the snbseqnent great mortality of 

 shoots which soon reduced the numbers, till they were more or less uniform 

 in all the rows — all the available light being used up. 



The author draws the following conclusions regarding the possibility of 

 reducing the number of sets planted per acre. This is of special importance with 

 the costly imported material, and he points out that, with Cheribon and J. 100, 

 it can be substantially diminished with safety. This also applied more or less 

 to locally grown seed, but the danger of sereh is greater and the cost of the 

 seed is much less, so that no change is suggested. 



The experiments were repeated in 1909, with 8-20 sets per row, as it seemed 

 to Muller von Czernicki that th3 lower limits of sowing had not been reached. 

 The results confirmed those of the previous year. In J. 100, owing to a mistake, 

 there was only one plot, but in the row with 8 sets a full stand was easily 

 reached. 



Muller von Czernicki makes certain observations as to the sucrose content 

 of the mother cane and its branches. He states that some people seem to 

 believe that the mother canes are richer than those developed later, but he 

 cannot find any grounds for this belief. " After many years of observation," 

 he has come to the conclusion that, provided that canes are ripe, there is little 

 or no difference in this respect. He points out that the definition of mother 

 shoot is a very loose one, and quotes Hovenkamp as saying that " mother 

 canes need not be primary stems, but are the thicker and richer canes. " We 

 see elsewhere that the assumption is unwarranted, in that the canes of the third 

 order of branching are almost alwa}'S thicker than the mother canes. And we 

 fail to see in what respect Muller von Czernicki's own deductions are more 

 accurate, in that there are no references to stool dissections, and, without 

 these, it is practically impossible to decide which the mother canes are. He, 

 however, approaches the matter from another point of view. With closely 

 planted sets, there will, he argues, naturally be more mother canes than in 

 widely spaced rows, and this must make its influence felt, if there is richsr 

 juice in them, than in the branches ; but he has not been able to detect any such 

 difference. Muller von Czernicki's deduction would appear at first sight to 

 be perfectly sound, but he does not go far enough. There will certainly be 

 fewer rts in wider pacing, but we do not know whether the relative increase 

 in the numbers of branches of the lower orders is in the 6s, cs, or possibly ds. 

 Again, in closer planting, there will be a greater proportion of os in the canes 



