332 



Harris M. Benedict 



punching, and the various standard precautions were observed in their 

 manipulation. The results with the paired vines are shown in table 46: 



TABLE 46. Vines with 6 and 20 Rings Compared as to Increase in Dry Weight 



IN Light 



Number of 

 disks 



Morning 

 weight 

 (grams) 



Gain 

 (per cent) 



Vines with 6 and 20 rings 



Vine with 6 rings 



Vine with 20 rings 



• 98 0.2244 



104 0.3099 



0.2530 

 0.3163 



12.7 

 2.1 



Vine with 20 rings 



Vine with 40 rings 



Vines with 20 and 40 rings 



95 0.3623 



95 0.2752 



0.3956 

 0.2996 



9.2 



8.9 



Vines with 8 and 25 rings 

 (The day on which this comparison was made was cloudy and dark) 



Vine with 8 rings I 52 1 0. 1520 I 0. 1642 1 



Vine with 25 rings | 49 | 0, 1912 | 0. 1900 | 



8.0 

 0.6 



Vine with 6 rings . . 

 Vine with 20 rings . 



Vines with 6 and 20 rings 

 ..I 35 I 0.1761 



35 0.1460 



0.2024 

 0.1560 



14.9 

 6.8 



Vine with 5 rings. . 

 Vine with 25 rings . 



Vines with 5 and 25 rings 

 . ..] 45 1 0.1230 



50 I 0.1394 



0.1336 

 0,1356 



8.6 

 -2.0 



Vine with 8 rings 



Vi 



aes with 8 and 

 35 

 69 



24 rings 



0.0832 

 0.1844 



0.0854 

 0.1860 



2.6 



Vine with 24 rings 



0.9 







These determinations were made late in August, and are doubtless 

 low in percentage of gain for all the vines as contrasted with carbohydrate 

 formation earlier in the growing season. This does not miUtate against 

 the results furnishing a fair comparison between the old and the young 

 vines. In fact, it tends to make the test a more delicate one. On very 

 dark days the leaves of the old vines were not able to produce as much 

 carbohydrate as was used, while on the same days the leaves on the young 

 vines adjacent were able to make at least a small gain. 



