56 



H. H. Love and C. E. Leighty 

 2 3 4 5 6 7 



11.5-12.5 



1 











1 



12.5-13.5 





2 



2 







4 



13.5-14.5 



2 



2 



9 



2 



1 



16 



14.5-15.5 



4 



12 



25 



9 





50 



15.5-16.5 



7 



22 



29 



11 



3 



72 



16.5-17.5 



12 



33 



47 



6 



4 1 



103 



17.5-18.5 



14 



34 



28 



6 



1 



83 



18.5-19.5 



5 



14 



16 



1 



1 



37 



19.5-20.5 



5 



9 



3 



2 





19 



20.5-21.5 





5 



5 







10 



21.5-22.5 





1 



2 



1 





4 



22.5-23.5 

















23.5-24.5 







1 







1 



50 134 167 38 10 



400 



Fig. 61. — Average weight of kernels per plant in milligrams, subject 

 Number of culms per plant, relative. 1910 

 Coefficient of correlation ^ .184 ± -033 



11.5-12 

 12.5-13 

 13.5-14 

 14.5-15 

 15.5-16 

 16.5-17 

 17.5-18 

 18.5-19, 



2 



3 



4 



5 



6 



7 



8 



9 



10 



11 



12 



13 



14 









4 









1 















3 



16 



4 



7 



13 



10 



1 













2 



11 



20 



35 



23 



24 



30 



7 



4 



1 







1 



2 



9 



17 



19 



21 



17 



25 



11 



4 



1 



2 









2 



6 



13 



6 



6 



5 



2 





2 













1 



1 



2 



1 





1 



1 



1 













1 



1 

 1 



1 



1 



















Fig. 62. 



4 25 61 78 61 61 70 23 9 



1 



5 



54 



158 



128 



42 



8 



3 



2 



400 



Average weight of kernels per plant in milligrams, subject 

 Number of culms per plant, relative. 1912 

 Coefficient of correlation = .050 ± .034 



from — .021±.030 for 1909 to .184±.033 for 1910. This again is 

 fluctuating and weak, which signifies that both large and small kernels 

 are found on plants that produce few or many culms. 



Considering the relation of average weight of kernels per plant to other 

 plant characters as a whole, it is evident that kernel weight is not cor- 

 related closely and consistently with any other character here considered. 

 The highest and most stable correlation found is that with average yield 

 of culm per plant, in which the correlation is always positive and rather 



