124 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. 
of experiments the tubers all decayed normally whether cut or not, 
but in another planting, of ' Midlothian Early,' where the crop was 
very poor, none of the tubers decayed whether cut or not.] 
It is clear also that the " rose end," where the greater number of 
eyes and usually the best developed eyes are situated, tends to give 
a higher yield than does the " heel end," i.e., the end of the tuber 
bearing the tag which attached it to the old plant. This point is 
confirmed by comparing Nos. 9 and 10 with Nos. 11 and 12, where 
the same tendency is apparent. The " rose end " seems, too, to 
possess some advantage over the half tuber cut lengthwise, i.e. where 
" rose end " and " heel end " are both represented, for the yield of 
No. 7 is higher than either No. 5 or No. 6. The lower yield of 
Nos. 5 and 6 may be due to the increased amount of unprotected 
surface exposed, for the size of the surface exposed seems to have 
had some effect upon the yield when a long time elapsed between 
cutting and planting. The tubers cut lengthwise in January gave a 
smaller yield than those cut in the same way immediately before 
planting ; the difference was much less when the tubers were cut 
crosswise and similarly treated ; and merely cutting away the extreme 
heel end reduced the yield but little. In this series liming the cut 
surface, whether the cut was made at planting time or in January, 
seems to have reduced the yield to some extent, unless the failure of 
two sets in the unlimed January cut series (No. 5) is to be attributed 
to the cutting. 
Nos. 9 to 12 were larger tubers than those used in groups Nos. 7 
and 8, and gave larger yields under similar treatment. This result 
should be compared with those in Series IV. 
Sets. 
No. 
Yield. 
of 
plants 
Size. 
Cut. 
Time of 
Cutting. 
Limed or 
not. 
sur- 
viving. 
Ware. 
Chats. 
Total. 
Average. 
lb. 
oz. 
Lb. 
oz. 
lb. 
oz. 
lb. oz. 
I 
Seed 
Not cut 
20 
50 
10 
2 
6 
53 
0 
2 ioi 
2 
j, 
Sliced at 
bottom 
Planting 
time 
Not 
20 
49 
4 
I 
10 
50 
M 
2 8| 
3 
y ? 
Lengthwise 
)> 
> > 
20 
48 
6 
I 
5 
49 
11 
2 1\ 
2 4? 
4 
>> 
Limed 
20 
45 
4 
1 1 
45 
15 
5 
> > 
>> 
January 
Not 
18 
34 
4 
I 
0 
35 
4 
2 O 
6 
j > 
Limed 
20 
34 
6 
12 
35 
2 
1 12 " 
Rose end 
> > 
20 
44 
2 
I 
1 1 
45 
13 
2 4I 
8 
}> 
Heel end 
> > 
Planting 
time 
> > 
20 
37 
15 
14 
38 
13 
I 15 
9 
Ware 
Rose end 
> > 
20 
49 
5 
I 
1 1 
51 
0 
2 q 
10 
>> 
January 
20 
49 
6 
I 
2 
50 
8 
2 81 
1 1 
j , 
Heel end 
Planting 
time 
20 
42 
9 
I 
6 
43 
1.5 
- 3 
12 
>> 
>> 
January 
>> 
20 
4i 
10 
I 
0 
42 
10 
2 2 
It may be pointed out that, where seed is scarce or expensive, 
cutting the sets, in spite of the reduction in yield from each plant, gives 
a much greater return from a given weight of seed. Thus the twenty 
uncut tubers gave a crop of 53 lb. ; but twenty seed tubers of the same 
