1920] 



WALSTER— BARLEl 



7 



121 



TABLE XIII 



Effect of temperature upon amount of cell wall material, 

 etc. F 3 — [(N in F 3 X 6. 25) + (starch in F 3 )l; expressed 



as 



TAGE OF TOTAL DRY WEIGHT OF LEAF 



Culture no. and treatment 



44- 

 24. 



41. 



108. 



87. 

 104. 



High N warm 



High N warm 



High P and N warm 



Average warm 



High N cool 



High N cool 



High P and N cool. . 

 Average cool 



Cell wall material, 



etc. 



Ratio of supporting 



tissue (cell walls, 



etc.) to all other 



plant ^ substances, 

 including water 



32 



99 



34 



47 



3° 



90 



32 



78 



32 



.89 



35 



36 



34 



.16 



34 



13 



0.0470 

 0.0525 



0.0367 

 0.0454 

 0.0539 



0.0581 



0.0558 



0.0559 



TABLE XIV 



Effect of temperature on distribution of phosphorus; summary table 





NO. 24, HIGH N, WARM 



NO. 87, HIGH N, COOL 



Material 



Percentage 

 total leaf 



Percentage 

 total P 



Percentage 

 total leaf 



Percentage 

 total P 



Lipoid P, F x 



00539 

 O.2105 

 O.0665 

 O.1411 

 O . 2067 

 O.6787 



794 

 31.OI 



9.80 



20.80 



3045 



O.0627 

 O.0714 

 O.0703 

 O.0832 

 O.2833 

 O.5709 



„ 



IO.99 



12.80 



Phosphate P, F 2 



Organic P, F a 



12.11 



Phosphoprotein P, F 3 



Nucleoprotein P, F 3 



Total P 



18.38 

 49.62 









Results of chemical analysis 



Lipin fraction (F x ). — The results given in table V indicate 

 that the temperature has very little effect upon the amount of 

 lipins, except in the case of a high phosphorus supply, where the 

 percentage of lipins is decidedly higher. This fact is possibly 

 correlated with the higher percentage of phospho-lipin phosphorus 

 in the entire leaf, as shown in the third column of table X, and the 

 higher percentage of lipin N as shown in the third column of table 

 IX. Since the proportion of lipin P is practically the same for 

 both temperatures in the case of the high nitrogen series, these 

 data lead to the conclusion that the lipin fraction is not an impor- 

 tant growth determinant. The writer recognizes the desirability 

 of more data. 



