■ Because of the conclusions just ststed, it is vin- 



necessary to present the detailed ;];roT;th deta in thif=! pnper, 



o 

 and the data for 31 C. and Tjpe I_j f or the whole culture 



period (table I) may svifflce as an Illustration. The most 

 Interesting points of the omitted tables for the entire culture 

 period are presented, hov/ever, in tables II and III, in sum- 

 marized form. Table II gives a list of apparently best solut- 

 ions for shoot elongation for each temperature (excepting the 

 lov/est, for -.vhich only one single test was made) and for each 

 solution type. Tlie solutions listed include only those which 

 agree^ for both tests in giving mean hourly rates (for the 

 whole culture period) that are more than 2 percent above the 

 average for the series in which they occur, and for v/hich the 

 difference between the corresponding rates for the two tests 

 is .ll ram QX" less. Of the three solutions marked with s double 

 X in table I, as giving grov7th values more than 2 per cent 

 above the average for their series in both tests, the first 

 (R3S2) is oraitted from table II because the value for the first 

 test is .68 ram. and that for the second is .80 ram., the differ- 

 ence being more than .11 mm. By this somev.'hat arbitrary scheme 

 those solutions are listed as apparently best that showed fair 

 agreement in the actual average hourly growth rates of the tv/o 

 tests and that showed growth rates, for both tests, more than 

 2 per cent above the series average. 



Three grov/th values are given opposite each culture 

 symbol in table Iljthese being separated by colons; the first 



