SACCHARINE CONTENT OF SUGAR BEETS 
sugar and size of root as found in beets at Brookings in 1 910 is shown 
in table I. 
Tables I, III-& and IV 
Summary of Biometrical Constants 
Num- 
ber of 
Table 
Num- 
ber of 
Roots 
Ana- 
lyzed 
Characters Employed 
Coefficient of 
Variability 
III-5 
IV 
3,784 
3,784 
3,784 
Percentage of 
sugar in beet . , 
Weight of indi 
vidual roots, in 
grams 
Percentage of 
sugar in beet . 
Quantity of sugar 
per root in 
grams 
Quantity of sugar 
as per root in 
grams 
Weight of root in 
grams 
I7.67it .017 
458.52zb1.64 
I7.67± .017 
79.87zh .266 
79.87± .266 
458.52i1.64 
i.59± .012 
149.70zb1.16 
i.59zb .012 
23.941b .186 
23.94zb .186 
149.70zb1.16 
8.99 zb. 069 
32.64zb.278 
8.99 ±.069 
29.97zb.263 
29.97 ±.263 
32.64zb.278 
.258zb.0I0 
.005 =b. 01 1 
.92 zb.00l6 
The table shows that small roots are richer on the average than 
larger roots, that the correlation is negative and amounts in this case 
to ■ — .258. Since correlation varies between i.oo and — i.oo, — .258 
represents a fairly large coefficient. 
For the purpose of further comparison, similar calculations were 
made from four groups of beets grown at Fairfield, Washington, and 
the results summarized in table II. 
Table II 
Correlation between Percentage of Sugar and Weight of Root of Beets Grown at Fairfield, 
Washington 
Group 
Year 
No. of 
Roots 
Coefficient of 
Correlation 
Percentage of Sugar 
Weight of Roots, Ounces 
Mean 
Standard 
Deviation 
Mean 
Standard 
Deviation 
a 
1907 
230 
— .284ib.04I 
2i.i5zb.O56 
I.26dz.039 
22.39zb.3il 
6.99zb.2i9 
b 
1909 
400 
-.499 ±.025 
20.37 dz.049 
i.47=t.035 
2O.7Ozb.O25 
7.6izb.i8i 
c 
I9IO 
400 
-.257ib.03i 
i7.34±-044 
i.3i±.03i 
19.00 zb. 290 
8.61 zb. 205 
d 
I9IO 
400 
-.253zb.032 
18.76zb.042 
I.25zb.029 
20.71 zb. 213 
6.32 zb. 151 
These coefficients of correlation are practically the same as those 
of the preceding table, except for the year 1909. All show a relatively 
