430 Notes . 
thank Sir W. Thiselton-Dyer for the account of their subsequent 
behaviour. 
Blaze reactions. 
Subsequent behaviour at Kew. 
Date of germination. 
Condition. 
Bean No. 1 . . . 
0.0050 
December 28 
Weak \ 
}> 
2 . . . 
0-0025 
Failed 
>} 
3. • • 
0.0175 
December 22 
Strong. 
>> 
4. . . 
0-0125 
December 27 
Moderate. 
h 
5 • • • 
0 
Failed 
6 . . . 
0.0100 
December 22 
Strong. 
» 
7. . . 
0 
Failed 
» 
8 . . . 
0.0100 
December 25 
Strong. 
y> 
9 . . . 
0 
Failed 
>> 
10 . . . 
0.0050 
December 31 
Weak '. 
>> 
11 . . . 
0*0100 
December 24 
Strong. 
12 . . . 
0*0100 
December 24 
Strong. 
Conclusion. 
The physiological character of the blaze reaction is proved (i) by 
the influence of raised temperature ; (2) by its general parallelism with 
germination tests ; (3) by the influence of lowered temperature ; (4) 
by the influence of anaesthetics ; (5) by the influence of strong electrical 
currents; (6) by the absence of blaze and failure of germination in the 
case of waterlogged seeds. In every instance a bean giving no blaze 
gave subsequently no sign of germination. 
There has been throughout these first observations a general, but 
not faultless, correspondence between the blaze reaction and the 
germinative activity. The correspondence is such as to make good 
the principal fact that the blaze reaction is a sign of life, and that its 
magnitude is some measure of what we designate as * vitality.’ The 
defects of correspondence may have been due to irregularities in the 
results of the blaze test, or of the germination test, or of both tests. 
As regards great differences of vitality, both tests are obviously and in 
every case concordant, both replying by an indubitable ‘ yes ’ or ‘ no * 
1 Those marked weak are not likely to get beyond the cotyledon stage. 
