1911.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 31. 197 



A study of this table shows some positive signs of individual- 

 ity in the trees in the characters of size, form and productive- 

 ness. Size is of course considerably aifected by the number of 

 apples borne, though not as much as usual in this case, as the 

 trees have not matured a very heavy crop during the period of 

 observation. The marked seasonal fluctuation in size will be 

 considered later. We can say that llm Davis trees 7 aud -2 show 

 a tendency to bear large a]i|)les and trees 3 and 5 a tendency 

 to bear smaller fruit, though in 1910 tree 5 l)ore the largest 

 fruit of any, but at the same time the crop was lightest of all. 

 Among the three Baldwins, the rank has l)een the same each 

 year, in spite of the fluctuations in productiveness. In varia- 

 bility there are no constant difl'ereuces. In the Ben Davis there 

 seems to be a relation between varial)ility aud nundjer of apples 

 produced, the greater the nund)er of apples the greater the 

 standard deviation and cocflicient of varial)ility, — a relation 

 that is to be expected. 



In form, the situation is much the same. Ben Davis tree 7, 

 which produced the largest apples, has invariably borne the flat- 

 test ones, usually by a considerable margin. Tree 2 shows a 

 fairly constant character of producing more elongated ap})les 

 than its fellows. In the Baldwins, also, there are signs of slight 

 differences between the trees. 



The variation in number of apples borne by the difi'erent 

 trees is great. Ben Davis tree 8 has averaged about three times 

 as many apples as tree 5, and they have been larger. A part of 

 this difference is due to the fact that tree 8 is somewhat larger 

 than tree 5, but the difference in size is not enough to account 

 for all the difference in productiveness. 



Productiveness is one of the most important qualities of a 

 variety or individual tree. If the tree does not produce at least 

 a fair crop of fruit, all other valuable qualities it may possess 

 lose their attractiveness to the commercial grower, while great 

 productiveness covers a multitude of deficiencies. Other inves- 

 tigations, and common observations as well, have shown very 

 marked differences in the bearing ability of different trees.^ 

 In our opinion, these differences, as well as any others which 

 may occur, are generally due to one or more of four influences: 



' See Macoun, Report Central Experiment Farm for 1903, p. 102. 



