1917 
16 The Philippine Journal of Science 
Table 8. — Experiments showing assimilation at temperatures between 15" 
C. and UO" C. {Matthaei, Table XI.) 
Experiment No. 
Date. 
Tem- 
pera- 
ture. 
Light 
intensi- 
ty. 
Area. 
Apparent 
assimila- 
tion per 
hour. 
Eespira- 
tion per 
hour. 
Real assi- 
milation 
calculated 
for 60 sq. 
cm. and 1 
hour. 
1903. 
°C. 
Sg. cm. 
Grams. 
Grams. 
Grams. 
I 0.0050 
LVI 
Apr. 6 
15.0 
13 
37.0 
I 0.0046 
] 0.0050 
^ 0. 00476 
•0.00485 
•0.00036 
•0.00706 
1 0.0065 
LVII 
Apr. 4 
23.7 
26 
42.0 
1 0.0080 
1 0.0084 
1 0.0076 
•0.0076 
•0.0009 
•0. 0101 
, 0.0134 
0.0157 
0.0116 
1 0.0106 
LVIII 
Apr. 3 
30.5 
46 
46.0 
1 0.0099 
•0.01135 
“0.00116 
•0. 0136 
( 0.0154 
0.0237 
I 0.0106 
j 0.00795 
LIX 
Apr. 7 
37.6 
46 
36.0 
1 0.0059 
•0.0100 
•0. 0019 
•0.0163 
, 0. 0099 
0.0149 
1 0.0076 
1 0.0060 
LX 
Apr. 9 
40.5 
45 
38.5 
1 0.0020 
• 0.0063 
' “0. 0016 
•0.0102 
* Mean values per hour. 
In Table 9 the two experiments are compared. In experi- 
ment 37 the temperature is lower and the light less intense than 
in experiment 56, while the assimilation is slightly greater. 
The difference in temperature between these two experiments 
would, according to Matthaei’s final curve, account for an 
increase in assimilation from 48 to 70 milligrams of carbon 
dioxide. Then, according to Matthaei’s argument (p. 79), if the 
leaf were “exposed to nearly twice the light necessary for the 
assimilation which it has actually performed,” it was also 
exposed to a higher temperature than was necessary for this 
assimilation. Obviously, the only conclusion that can be drawn 
from a comparison of these experiments is that the leaf used 
in experiment 56, performed in April, was less active than the 
one used in experiment 37, done in March. 
