102 



BULLETIN 697^ U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGEICULTURE. 



In Table V and the corresponding diagrams, figures 3 and 4, the 

 trees in the two performance-record plats are grouped by strains, 

 and the average annual production of the individuals of each group 

 is expressed. Groups are included which comprise the five highest 

 producing and the five lowest producing trees irrespective of their 



TOTAL CROF 



S MGMCST, e/fODUC/NG , -^f^f I 



f/tii UAHiM JTIIAIN/ S6S C 



F/flST GPADC SfCOW CffAP£ CULL GMD£ 

 2/6/ ^ 



/ ROUe/i sr/?A/N 

 /9 /^ARS/i 5r/?A/fi/ 



4 ROUe//, S£TDY ST/fA/N 



5 LOWS ST RRODUC/NG 



/ Sf^OOTfi. S£Si>Y STRA/A/ 



/84.2 ■ 

 225 C 



206.3 I 



268 I 



204/ I 



269 I 



S6.2 m 

 64 CD 



66.9 la 

 13 en 



222.4 ■ 

 248 C 



/09:7 I 

 ///I 



/4/5 ^aa 



/S6 C=^ 



/32.2 ■■ 

 /45 ci:= 



29./^ 



70 cn 



24.3 i 

 SSC 



28.2 U 



70 nj 



38.2 a 



68 en 



3S.9m 

 64 CD 



26.6* 

 48 a 



m POUNDS 



□ fRU/rs 



P20930HP 



Fig. 3. — Average annual crop of the individual trees of the different strains of Marsh grapefruit occurring 

 in the investigational performance-record plat A in a grove planted in 1898, heing a summary of data 

 for the 6-year period, 1910 to 1915, inclusive, except that the data relating to culls covers only the 4- 

 year period, 1912 to 1915, inclusive. 



strain, and it is worthy of note that the trees showing the highest 

 production in both plats are all of the Marsh strain. The average 

 production of the trees of tho Marsh strain is shown to be greater 

 than the average for any other strain in the same plat. The crop of 

 the one tree of the Rough strain in plat A can not fairly be considered 

 comparable to the averages shown for the other strains. 



2/8.2 ^^BH 



-| /T,^ 1 1 



86 IZZ] 



/2.3\ 



^6 -t 1 



28 



/6/.6 EHBB 



/06.7 waa 



/^n 1 1 



49.5 m 

 62 CH 



8.01 



/V,-) 1 1 



20 a 



, /S/.5 ERB 



3S>.7 ■■ 

 //rt-l 1 



46.4 m 

 6/ C3 



8.0 \ 



/c;/ 1 1 



20 Q 



//9 1 1 



673 tm 

 75 CZI 



23.8 ■ 

 35 a 



5.6 \ 



/4 a 



89.7 ^ 

 /Off 1 1 



59.6 ■ 

 65 □ 



26.8% 



32 



5.0 \ 



/3i 



TOTAL CROP r/RST CRAPS SECOND GRADC CULL CRADC 

 S /i/G/fCST PffOOC/C/A/G , 



[AiC MAR3M STRAf^J 



40 MARJM STRA/A/ 

 S ALTfRA/ATC-BCAR/NG STRA/A/ 

 S LOWeST PROPUC//VG 



3 UA/PROPUCT/Ve STRA/A/ ^^^ ^ ^ 



■i POUNDS 



C3 r/iu/Ts 



P2a9l9HP 



Fig. 4. — ^Average annual crop of the individual trees of the different strains of Marsh grapefruit occurring 

 in the investigational performance-record plat B in a grove planted in the fall of 1903, being a summary 

 of data for the 6-year period 1910 to 1915, inclusive, except that the data relating to culls covers only the 

 4-year period, 1912 to 1915, inclusive. 



Figures 5 and 6 show the average annual proportions of fruit of the 

 different grades in the crops of the trees of the various strains occur- 

 ring in the investigational performance-record plats, based on the 

 average weights of the crops for the six years, 1910 to 1915, inclusive. 

 Figure 5 shows that in plat A the highest proportion of fruit of the 



