July 10, 1908] 



SCIENCE 



51 



attempt has been made to find out if injurious 

 effect is produced by sterilizing this soil, un- 

 less we are to imderstand that pots Nos. 4 

 and 5 in tables Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11 

 and 12 are inoculated with a mixture of cul- 

 ture and unsterilized soil. If this premise is 

 correct it is evident that neither culture nor 

 soil inoculation was able to produce nodules 

 in the sterilized soil. If, on the other hand, 

 one is to understand that pots Nos. 4 and 5 

 in tables Nos. 1, 2, 5, Y and 11 are inoculated 

 with culture mixed with sterilized soil then 

 we must admit that no true parallel exists 

 between the two series of experiments, and 

 that it is impossible to determine what the 

 effect of the use of pure cultures has been. 

 There is also a contradiction between the 

 headings and subheadings of some of the 

 tables, making it impossible to determine 

 whether that particular series was inoculated 

 or uninoculated. 



For the above reasons I would take excep- 

 tion to the summary of results reported by 

 Dr. Stevens and Mr. Temple, and return the 

 Scotch verdict of not proven to their stric- 

 tures upon pure cultures and the pure culture 

 method of inoculation. The note following 

 the summary referring to Farmers' Bulletin 

 No. 315, "Progress in Legume Inoculation," 

 issued January 11, 1908, quotes the figures 

 reported in that publication in a way that is 

 very misleading. It is obviously impossible 

 to determine whether or not a culture pro- 

 duced nodules if the entire crop is withered 

 by drought or carried away by floods or if 

 other uncontrollable factors entirely apart 

 from the question of inoculation have de- 

 stroyed the crop. It is, therefore, unfair to 

 compare the 2,037 doubtful results with the 

 1,770 successes. As stated in Farmers' Bul- 

 letin 315, " the successes credited to the cul- 

 ture have been so recorded only when a clear 

 gain was shown to be due to inoculation. A 

 less strict interpretation of the doubtful re- 

 ports would place many of them in the col- 

 umn of successes, and undoubtedly many 

 classed as failures to secure inoculation would 

 prove upon adequate investigation to have 

 been failures from causes other than deficient 

 nodule formation." If one must express the 



result in percentages it would be necessary 

 to consider only the failures and successes, 

 making the percentage of successes 78, in- 

 stead of less than 50. 



In closing, I wish to emphasize the neces- 

 sity in experimental work of paying more 

 attention to the soil conditions which may 

 affect nodule formation. Some reasons for 

 this Mr. Eobinson and I have clearly indi- 

 cated in Bureau of Plant Industry Bulletin 

 No. 100, Part VIII., "Conditions Affecting 

 Legume Inoculation." 



Karl F. Kellerman 

 Washington, D. C. 



a study of the remarkable illumination of 



THE SKY ON MARCH 27, 1908 



On the night of Friday, the twenty-seventh 

 of March, 1908, between the hours of 7:45 

 and 8:30, there was an unusual illumina- 

 tion of the heavens. The display was noted 

 by many observers at Sandy Hook, N. J., and 

 at Montclair, N. J. Some of the New York 

 papers stated that the phenomenon was also 

 visible at Hartford, Conn. Beyond a casual 

 and unscientific reference to the matter in the 

 daily press at the time, I have not been able 

 to find any further reports or study of the 

 phenomenon. 



The 27th of March was a remarkably dear 

 and warm day, the temperature mounting well 

 above 70 degrees. The evening was also clear, 

 but decidedly cooler. There was no moon, 

 but Venus shone unusually bright in the 

 western sky. This last fact is mentioned 

 particularly, because the best authorities state 

 that the light of a brilliant evening star is 

 sufficient to preclude any marked illumination 

 like that observed. Every one whom I have 

 interviewed informs me that he had never be- 

 fore witnessed any such display. With the 

 exception of one eye-witness at Millbum, N. 

 J., all of my information has been obtained 

 from observers at Sandy Hook, N. J. I was 

 so unfortunate as to witness the last part of 

 the spectacle, only. Details beyond my own 

 knowledge are furnished from accounts given 

 me by army officers stationed at Sandy Hook 

 and members of their respective households. 



