378 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BOTANY [Vol. 8 
Table 2. Mean number of bundles at base of hypocotyl 
f Primary Double 
Intercalary 
Total 
Bundles 
Bundles 
Bundles 
Line 2Q 
1—1 
5.68 it .05 
.27 db .07 
5^ 0'> H- 01 
A1 
•+0 
5.21 ± .08 
zh .12 
=^ 7zL + 10 
2-2 
99 
4.04 d= .01 
.16 ± .03 
4.20 zb .03 
(t>~2)~(i—i) 
+ .26 d= ,14 
— 0.21 zb .1 1 
(3—2)— (2— 2) 
+ I. 17 ± .08 
+ .37 db .12 
+ 1.54 dz .10 
Line 7=^ 
IA2 
1; 08 dr .02 
.21^ d= OA. 
6 -\- 01 
1—2 
0/ 
S 7-L zb .0=^ 
.Ad. dz 07 
6.18 dz .07 
2-2 ; . 
199 
.62 dz .05 
4.85 zb .05 
(3-2)-(3-3) 
— 0.24 rb .05 
+ .19 ± .08 
— 0.05 dz .08 
(3-2) -(2-2) 
+ T.50 ± .06 
— .18 ± .09 
+ 1.33 zb .09 
Line 98 
■z- T, 
183 
=^.9^ =b .01 
.13 ± .02 
6.06 dz .02 
3-2 
43 
5.67 =t .07 
.53 d= .09 
6.21 zb .08 
2-2 
226 
4.II zfc .02 
.62 dz .03 
4.73 ± -04 
(3-2)-(3-3) 
— 0.26 d= .07 
+ .40 zfc .09 
+ 0.15 zb .08 
(3-2)-(2-2) 
+ 1.56 db .07 
— .09 dz .09 
+ 1.48 zb .09 
Line 139 
3-3 
106 
5.91 ± .02 
.09 dz .02 
6.00 zb .02 
3-2 
42 
5.36 ± .08 
.43 ± .05 
5.79 ± -06 
305 
4.01 zL .00 
.13 dz .02 
4.14 zb .02 
(3-2)-(3-3) 
- 0.55 ± .08 
+ -34 ± -05 
— 0.21 dz .06 
(3-2)-(2-2) 
+ 1.35 ± .08 
+ .30 zb .05 
+ 1.65 dz .06 
Line 143 
3-3 
221 
5.81 ± .03 
.29 dz .02 
6.10 dz .03 
3-2 
114 
5.45 zk .04 
.28 dz .03 
5.73 ± .04 
420 
4.06 d= .01 
.29 ifc .02 
4.35 dz .02 
(3-2)-(3-3) 
- 0.36 ± .05 
— .01 zfc .04 
- 0.37 zb .05 
(3-2)-(2-2) 
+ 1.39 ± .04 
— .01 zb .04 
+ 1.38 dz .04 
We cannot, therefore, assert on the basis of the data now in hand whether 
dimerous, hemitrimerous, and trimerous seedUngs differ in the number of 
intercalary bundles at the base of the hypocotyl. In so far as it goes the 
evidence suggests that the hemitrimerous seedlings have a larger number 
of intercalary bundles than the trimerous but a smaller number than the 
dimerous plantlets. 
The means for total number of bundles (primary double bundles plus 
intercalary bundles) at the base of the hypocotyl set forth in the third 
section of table 2 show that in four of the five cases the mean number of 
bundles is lower in the hemitrimerous than in the trimerous seedlings. 
The differences are, however, very slight indeed and cannot in general be 
considered significant in comparison with their probable errors. The 
differences between the hemitrimerous and dimerous seedlings on the other 
hand are rather large and in every case are unquestionably significant. 
Summarizing these results, we note that the hemitrimerous seedlings 
are conspicuously differentiated from the dimerous seedlings in the number 
of primary double bundles and in the total number of bundles. They are 
less conspicuously differentiated, if at all, in number of intercalary bundles. 
They are unquestionably differentiated from the trimerous seedlings by 
