C. Ao BARBER 



123 



In the table giving details of the seedlings obtained in 1913-15, several 

 features of interest are observable. In the first place, it may be noted that 

 there is a total absence of seedlings with parentage of indigenous Indian canes. 

 This was by no means of choice but, as has already been pointed out, hardly 

 any of these canes flowered during the year, on being transferred, out of season 

 from the Botanic garden to the Cane-breeding Station. Secondly, there is a 

 greatly extended range of parents, especially in the direction of those of better 

 quality, more recently introduced into India. Thirdly, taking advantage of 

 the fact that Veiled frequently has a very 230or development of open anthers, 

 a serious attempt was made to dust its arrows with pollen from other varieties, 

 an experiment which was rendered possible by a large number of arrows on 

 the Vellai plants growing in the wet land on the Central Farm. 



These Vellai arrows on examination gave percentages of opened anthers 

 from to 63 (of. PL II), and the probable proportion of crosses obtained_ is 

 judged accordingly in the remarks column. Where the pollinating plant was 

 a thick, exotic cane, it is less easy to state whether crosses have been obtained- 

 Those used were Chittan, Karun, Fiji C, Ashy Mauritius and Striked Mauritius 

 and all of these canes are more or less similar in general character to Vellai. 

 In the cases of Vellai pollinated by Saccharum Narenga and by Madras Seed- 

 lings 1464, 1428 and 1354 (parents Naanal), however, there is no manner of 

 doubt, from a casual glance, that all or almost all are genuine crosses. The 

 differences between the parents are very great, and the seedlings obtained 

 are half way in measurements of leaf and stem and in the character of then- 

 inflorescences, in general habit and appearance, and in sucrose in the ]uice. 

 These morphological characters of parents, seedlings and crosses are illustrated 

 in a series of figures in Plates IX to XI. And this fact also renders it at least 

 probable that many of the first named seedlings, those obtained after dusting 

 Vellai arrows with pollen of thick canes, are also crosses, and therefore likely 

 to be of value in cultivation.^ 



The usual collection was made of arrows of local canes from neighbournig 

 villages, and over a hundred pans were sown with these. An analysis of the 

 results rather reverses the conclusions which might have been drawn from a 

 study of the 1912-14 seedlings. In the latter case, while masses of seedlings 

 were readily obtained from Chittan and Karun arrows, those of Kaludai Boothan 

 gave poorer results. But in 1913-15 the Kaludai Boothan arrows were ex- 

 tremely fertile, yielding at least 100 seedlings per pan, while Chittan and Karun, 

 with 70 pans, gave only 300 seedlings together. This reversal was nut 



1 Note.— This is reiiderecl more probable iii that later attempts at raising uncrossed Vtllai 

 seedlings have failed— Apl. 1916. 



