200 



S. W. John, 



soda solution, in the usual n 

 mixture of equal bulks of sod: 

 gave 0-187 and 0207 per cent or nitre 

 l.v 6-25 leads to the content of aOmmv 

 mated by difference. The summing up 

 Water 



of the Swet 





istion, with the 

 id slacked lime, 

 hich multiplied 

 Starch was esti- 





. >>v 











(1 :S 

















Ash 





Table I includes all tl 

 I have been able to find. 



i the older analyses, 1 to 6, the figu 



;s of the sweet potato that 



starch and cellu- 

 _. value because they were the results of an 

 attempted mechanical separation. In fact these analyses are 

 worthless for any purpose, except as regards the water and 

 sugar estimations. Fromberg's figures for water are too excep- 

 tional to have any claim to accuracy. 



As already mentioned, the figures in analyses 6 and 7 are so 

 coincident in regard to several ingredients, and so plainly 

 wrong in 6, as respects ash. that thev mast both be considered 

 untrustworthy. Whether the low amounts of water in 8, and 

 of sugar in 9, and the high percentages of sugar in 8 and of 

 starch in 9, are analytical errors or characterize the sweet 

 potato in its dirterent varieties, remains to be established by 

 future comparative investigations. 



In the common potal S .»> a range of water 



content from 68 3 to 821 per cent, and of starch-content from 

 15 to 26 per cent has been observed. 



In nutritive values the Hanover sweet potato and the com- 

 mon potato on the average differ but little. Their comparative 

 composition is as follows : 



weet potato. Potato. 



Wai 



Albuminoids 





2-2 



The average composition of the ci 

 der Futterstoffe. 



