376 Prof. H. E. Armstrong and Dr. J. V. Eyre. [Apr. 3, 



Table I. 



Material examined. 



Leaf. 



Seed. 



Linaeese. 



G-lucosides. 



Glucosides. 





Amy. 



Prun. 



Sal. 





Amy. 



Prun. 



Sal. 



L. grandiflorum rubrum ... 



75 -7 



4-7 



80 -2 



63 -3 



67 -5 



24 '5 



41 -5 



20 4 



L. grandiflorum roseum ... 











69-8 



21 -2 







L. usitatissimum 



80-7 



3-7 



36 -7 



33 -0 



73 -1 



10 -o 



33 5 



31 -7 



L. v.sH at issimum album ... 



78 -5 



3 3 



67 -7 



34-7 



71 -5 



7-2 



39 -7 



35 -0 



L. alpinum 



77-7 



3-0 



58 -2 













L. lewisii (perenne) 



51-2 



4-5 



21 -2 













L. catharticum 



1 "5 



8 



13-5 



8-0 











L. perenne 











11 -7 



2-8 



8-7 





L. perenne album 



87 -0 



5 o 



33 3 





17 "2 



5-2 



12 -5 





Table II. 



Material examined. 



Leaf. 



Seed. 



Linaceae. 



Glucosides. 



G-lucosides. 





Amy. 



Prun. 



Sal. 



Lin. 





Prun. 



Sal. 







L. grandiflorum rubrum ... 



80-7 



5-0 



85 -5 



67 -5 



80 -7 



29 -2 



49-6 



24 -3 



L. grandiflorum roseum . . . 











80-7 



24 -5 



41 -8 





L. usitatissimum 



80-7 



3-7 



36 -7 



33 -0 



80-7 



11 -o 



36 -9 



35 -0 



L. usitatissimum album ... 



80-7 



3-4 



69-6 



44-4 



80 -7 



8-1 



44-8 



39 -5 













80 -7 



19 -8 



60-0 















80 -7 



24 -4 



58 -6 





L. catharticum 



80 -7 



43 -0 



726 -3 



430 -0 











The results recorded in No. XIII of these studies show that the " enzyme " 

 of Phaseolus lunatus is about equally active towards linamarin and prunasin. 

 As already pointed out, it in no way follows from this result that linase is 

 equally active towards these two glucosides ; the hydrolysis of the prunasin 

 may have been due in part, if not entirely, to prunase being present together 

 with linase. It is clear that some such reservation must be made in view of 

 the results given in the above tables : in only one case (Z. grandiflorum) is 

 the activity towards linamarin and prunasin equal; in half a dozen, the 

 prunase value was about half the magnitude of the linase value, showing 

 that linase is not equally active towards the two glucosides and that — as is 

 to be expected — it is more active towards the correlated glucoside. 



It is clear that " prunase " accompanies linase both in Phaseolus lunatus 

 and in many Linacece and from this point of view the high prunase value given 



