Part II] Hole: Regeneration of Sal (Shorea robusta) Forests 19 
Plot V owing to the fact that, during short breaks in the 
rains, the soil of Plot IV dried out, whereas that under heavy 
shade in Plot Y remained continuously wet. On the other 
hand, during the cold and dry season, the soil of Plot IV 
remained much moister than that of Plot Y, owing to the 
much heavier deposition of dew in the former, the subsequent 
evaporation of which was retarded by the side-shade. Also, 
in the case of light showers of rain, the rain was able to reach 
the soil of the open plot unimpeded but failed to moisten the 
soil under shade to the same extent, much of it being evaporat¬ 
ed from the leaves, branches and boles of the trees. The 
net result was very obvious, viz., that whereas, during the 
cold and early dry season, the soil of Plot IV in the cleared 
patch remained constantly moist, that of Plot Y in the shade 
remained comparatively dry. 
(4) The general differences in soil moisture drawn attention to 
above are illustrated by the following determinations of 
water in the upper foot of the soil of the two plots, carried 
out on samples collected on the dates shown : 
Plot. 
Plot IV. Overhead 
COVER REMOVED. 
Plot V. Overhead 
COVER MAINTAINED. 
Remarks. 
Northern 
half of bed. 
Southern 
half of bed. 
Eastern 
half of bed. 
Western 
half of bed. 
Percentage of water in soil 
in :— 
upper 6 inches 
27-2 
28-4 
30-0 
30-5 
Samples collected 
lower 6 inches 
26-1 
27-0 
26-5 
26-8 J 
after 2 days 
fine weather on 
June 21st, 1915, 
subsequently to 
setting in of 
rains. 
upper 6 inches . 
18-4 
20-5 
9-3 
10-1 '"j 
Samples collected 
lower 6 inches 
21-9 
22-3 
14-3 
13-6 J 
during a spell 
of hot dry 
weather on 
April 7th, 1916. 
It will be seen that, whereas there is comparatively little difference 
in the water content of the soil in the two halves of Plot V 
in the case of the soil of the southern part of Plot IV the 
[ 181 ] 
