Sails 55 



" The data show in a general way what has been observed 

 before, that the quality of the soil has but little to do with 

 sugar content of the beet. It is true that if the soils be 

 so very poor that the beet is very much stunted in its 

 growth, reaching a weight of only two or three ounces at 

 maturity, the poverty of the soil would act in this way to 

 increase the percentage of sugar in the beet ; but this is 

 only incidental, since any unfavorable condition would 

 act in the same way, as, for instance, a deficient rainfall 

 or imperfect cultivation. It is quite certain that a very 

 rich soil, in the presence of an environment otherwise 

 favorable to a large growth, would have the opposite ef- 

 fect, for the overgrown beet is prone to have an excess 

 of cellular tissue, to become pithy and be less sweet. In 

 this case, also, the effect is largely fortuitous, for it is 

 evident that in any condition of over-fertility the beets 

 may be grown so close together as to prevent large size, 

 and thus their percentage of sugar may be largely con- 

 served. 



"It is undoubtedly true that the use of certain fer- 

 tilizers in definite proportions may tend to increase the 

 percentage of sugar. This is particularly true of potash 

 and phosphoric acid. On the contrary, an abundant 

 supply of nitrogenous fertilizer may tend to depress the 

 content of sugar. In the latter case the effect is probably 

 due to a tendency to increase the growth, while in the 

 former case it may be partly due to securing a proper 

 ripening of the beet and thus avoiding overgrowth, and 

 partly to actual saccharigenic influences of the fertilizers 

 themselves. Whatever the physiological action may be, 

 it is evident that neither soil nor fertilizer is the dominant 



