By John Lindley, Ph. D. 



45:1 



This result was further confirmed by another circumstance. In 

 the same part of the garden in which the first experiment was 

 carried on, and under exactly the same conditions of soil, exposure 

 and times of planting, except that the rows of tubers were four 

 feet apart instead of eighteen inches, and the plants six inches apart 

 in the rows ; and where consequently the tubers had full room to 

 grow, it was found that the rate of increase was still in favour of 

 sets with single eyes, as will appear from the following table. 







"Si 



£s 



u 





• 1 J 





Matr ol 



i-.er.-V-rr. 



C,Hy Ma».ey . 



Red Nosed Kidney 

 Pink Eyed Scotch 

 Champion . . 



Whole Tubers 

 Single Eyes 



Whole Tubers 

 Single Eyes 



Whole Tubers 

 Single Eyes 



Whole Tubers 

 Single Eyes 



V;jT|. 



12,43i 



8,57< 

 4,5 1_ 



8,080 

 4,448 



ll>,24< 



3,632 



May 8May31 



.. | Ju „ e2 



May 10 June 4 



2* A. L.5 

 h £ Au£.12 

 3 ft. |Aug.2( 



3| do. Augfl 



21 ft. Sept. 6 

 3 do. Sep. 13 



Oct. 12 



Oct. 16 

 Oct. 17 

 Oct. 17 



8?,920 

 96,000 



65,536 

 89,088 



89,344 

 \0\,C,3. 



\i)7;2t>i 



12.3,«4> 



1.13.644 



i:is.r>is 



1: 7.757 

 liKi.so: 



1: 7.641 



1:19.710 



1:11.057 

 1:22.S-1H 



1:10.476 

 1:34.044 



IS 1!; 88 



19 89 



17 12 4!' 



17 13 51 



20 2 7 



21 4 39 

 24 9 18 



Here we also find that the produce per acre is in favour of sets 

 with single eyes; but this arises from the tubers having been 

 planted too far apart, so that at least a quarter of the ground was 

 lost. But, making fair allowance for this, the crop obtained from 

 single eyes was fully as good as that from tubers in four cases out 

 of five, or with the single exception of Shaw's variety. 



It would therefore appear, if these experiments can be deemed 

 conclusive, and I confess I can discover no probable source of 

 error, that the opinion which has been entertained of the superior 

 productiveness of tubers over sets is unfounded, a conclusion to 



