Soils 55 
* The data show in a general way what has been observed 
before. that the quality of the soil has but little to do with 
sugar content of the beet. It ts true that if the soils be 
so very poor that the beet is very much stunted in its 
growth, reaching a weight of only two or three ounces at 
maturity, the poverty of the soil would act in this way to 
increase the percentage of sugar in the beet; but this is 
only incidental, since any unfavorable condition would 
act in the same way, as, for stance. a deficient rainfall 
or imperfect cultivation. It is quite certain that a very 
rich soil, in the presence of an environment otherwise 
favorable to a large growth, would have the opposite ef- 
fect. for the overgrown beet is prone to have an excess 
of cellular tissue. to become pithy and be less sweet. In 
this case, also, the effect is largely fortuitous. for it is 
evident that in any condition of overfertility the beets 
may be grown so close together as to prevent large size, 
and thus their percentage of sugar may be largely con- 
served. 
“Tt is undoubtedly true that the use of certain fer 
tilizers in definite proportions may tend to inerease the 
percentage of sugar. This is particularly true of potash 
and phosphoric acid. On the contrary, an abundant 
supply of nitrogenous fertilizer may tend to depress the 
content of sugar. In the latter case the effect is probably 
due to a tendency to increase the growth, while in the 
former case it may be partly due to securing a proper 
ripening of the beet and thus avoiding overgrowth. and 
partly to actual saccharigenic influences of the fertilizers 
themselves. Whatever the physiological action may be, 
it is evident that neither soil nor fertilizer is the dominant 
