2 20 



BOTANICAL GAZETTE 



[march 



Growth irregularities in individuals have been noted by others, 

 although their results are in some cases to be questioned because 

 they were based on external measurements alone. Such are those 

 of Christison (5), Von Mohl (25), and Jost (13), reference to 

 whose work has already been made. The results of Th. Hartig 

 (12) and RoBT. Hartig (10) can have no significance in this con- 

 nection, inasmuch as individuals were felled to secure data and 

 consecutive measurements were quite impossible. Mischke (24), 

 as already noted, employed an increment borer, and his results, 

 with those of Wieler (39) who pursued the same method, are more 

 reliable though not as accurate as is desirable. The former made 

 comparative notes on Norway spruce and Scotch pine, and his 

 results clearly indicate growth fluctuations. Wieler subjected 



TABLE J 

 Growth or white pine at Dresden, Germany 



more trees to the same inquiry, and his investigations are of greater 

 interest because he worked on white pine. Table J indicates his 

 results on the three different specimens mentioned previously; and 

 in each case fluctuations in growth are marked. The work of 

 BucKHoxjT (2) serves to accentuate the same point. He made bark 

 measurements on a white pine and a larch which extended over a 



