348 Harshberger on Relation of Ice Storms to Trees. 
a lateral one, and weigh it surrounded by its sheath of ice. 
The ice was permitted to melt, the branches or twigs were 
then dried and carefully weighed. The difference in the 
weighings corresponds with the weight of the ice. A ratio 
was then calculated which expresses approximately the 
relativity of the force brought to bear upon the branches or 
twigs of the different trees. The accompanying table pre- 
sents the results of the study: 
; = Ag Pa es ae 
| dy |in) #2) 28] EI 
No. Name of Plant. we 1 Sa | ao 3} Co) = 
ef || 2, [fel fe| © 
Go erie edo ves 
Blade 
1—Rhododendron maximum] I1.5x5 | — 52 2 50 1:25 
Blade 
2—Rhododendron maximum] 1.25 x | — 39.9 I 34.9 | 1:35 
4.25 
3—Tilia Americana ........ 12 fo) 45 5 40 1:8 
4—Populus nigra Italica ...| 17 oO 62 5 57 I:II 
s—Liriodendron tulipifera..| 10 3 50 9 AL 174.5 
6—Betulaviuteasaseeer ccs ces II Onl rA7, 3 44 1:14 
7—Maclura aurantiaca ..... 36 2 | 439 42 307 1:9 
8—Populus monilifera ..... 22 9 | 97 14 83 1:6 
o—Paulownia imperialis ...} 22 o | 360 65 205 1:4.5 
10—Juniperus Virginiana .. 12 o | 310 13 207 1:23 
Ti—Pinus figida:..s2ss2s00 5.5 o | 175 17 158 1:9 
ne — Picea alba | s\sm\2<'50\es- ois 6 Oo} 70 5 65 L213 
ha iced. Higra, o.c he ece es 15 o | 508 65 | 533 1:8 
14—Aesculus hippocastanum.| 10 (a) 52 12-501 3055) 54 
15—Acer dasycarpum ....... 18 3} 250 29 «| 221 1:8 
16—Platanus occidentalis ...| 22 4 70 12 58 1:5 
17—Ulmus Americana ...... 27 6 | 320 24.5 | 205.5] 1:12 
16— Grass) blade) jue weiss el 2 — 5.5 5 5 1:10 
These ratios do not express the relation of the breaking 
weight, because in all cases the branches, some of which 
were considerably bent down by the storm, were removed 
before they were broken off. However, the damage during 
