Feb. 2 ,1924 
Tissue Fluids in Cotton 
277 
PRELIMINARY STUDY IN 1920 
A first comparison was based on Pima Egyptian and Acala Upland 
cotton taken August 14, 1920. The plants from the north and south 
ends of this border differed greatly in size, apparently because of the 
influence of alkali. Samples 1 and 2 were from well-grown plants from 
the south ends of the border. Samples 3 and 4 were from somewhat 
dwarfed plants at the north end of the border. 
Table l.— Physicochemical constants for the leaf tissue fluids of various types of cotton 
grown in IQ20, and the differences between the constants for the various types 
Types and varieties compared. 
Pima Egyptian. 
Acala Upland. . 
Pima Egyptian. 
Acala Upland. . 
Pima Egyptian. 
Acala Upland. . 
Pima Egyptian. 
Sea Island. 
Acala Upland. 
Kekchi Upland 
Pima Egyptian... 
Wa Gale Asiatic... 
Pima Egyptian.... 
Lone Star Upland. 
Pima Egyptian.... 
Lone Star Upland. 
Pima Egyptian.... 
Lone Star Upland. 
Pima Egyptian.... 
Durango Upland.. 
Pima Egyptian.... 
Durango Upland.. 
Pima Egyptian.... 
Durango Upland.. 
Pima Egyptian... 
Holdon Upland.. 
Pima Egyptain... 
Acala Upland. . . 
Depres- 
Sample sion of I 
numbers. freezing j 
point, A. 
(1) 
(») 
(I) t? 
ifi) 
(5 M 6 ) 
(7) 
(8) 
M 
(10) 
(7H8) 
(7) 7(9) 
(7) -(i°) 
(8) 7(9 
(8) -(io) 
(«) 
(12) 
(II) -(l2) 
(13) 
( 14 ) 
(I3MI4) 
(15) 
(16) 
(l 5 Hl 6 ) 
( 17 ) 
. (l8) 
(l 7 )-(l8) 
( 19 ) 
( 20 ) 
(I9H20) 
(21) 
( 22 ) 
(2lW22) 
(23) 
(24) 
(23M24) 
(25) 
( 25 H 26 ) 
( 27 ) 
(28) 
(27)-(28) 
I. 392 
I. 2l8 
-fo. 174 
i- 573 
i- 349 
+0. 224 
1. 244 
1. 201 
+0. 043 
1. 390 
i- 193 
1. 274 
1. 178 
-fo. 197 
4 - o. 1 16 
-j-o. 212 
—o. 081 
4-0.015 
I. 43 2 
1. 169 
4-o. 263 
1. 285 
1.058 
4-0.227 
1.123 
O. 943 
4-0.180 
i- 334 
0.974 
4-o. 360 
1. 154 
1. 030 
4-o. 124 
1 . 2 54 
1. 230 
4-0.024 
I. 162 
I. 055 
4-0.107 
i- 347 
1. 250 
4-0.097 
i- 2 53 
1. 113 
4-0. 140 
i 
i 
I 
1 
j 
j 
i 
1 
Osmotic 
concent¬ 
ration in 
atmo¬ 
spheres, 
Specific 
electrical 
conduc¬ 
tivity, K. 
P. 
l6. 74 
14.65 
4 - 2.09 
l8. 91 
l6. 23 
4-2. 68 
o. 03880 
. 03083 
4-. 00797 
• 03490 
. 02635 
4-. 00855 
14.97 
14- 45 
4-o. 52 
16. 72 
14 - 35 
15- 33 
14. 17 
4-2.37 
+ 1. 39 
+2. 55 
—o. 98 
4-o.iS 
17. 22 
14. 06 
4-3- 16 
15.46 
12. 74 
4-2. 72 
13* 5 * 1 * * 4 * 
n-35 
4-2. 16 
16. 05 
11. 72 
+ 4 * 33 
13. 89 
12. 39 
+1- 5° 
*5- 09 
14. 80 
4-0.29 
13. 98 
12. 70 
4-i. 28 
16. 20 
15.04 
4-i. 16 
15- °7 
13- 40 
4-1. 67 
. 03071 
. 02871 
. 00200 
.03152 
. 02930 
. 03040 
. 02939 
4-. 00222 
-j-. 00112 
4-. 00213 
—. 00110 
—. 00009 
• 03184 
. 02839 
4 -- 00345 
. 04781 
. 03612 
-f. 01169 
. 03661 
. 03188 
4 -- 00473 
. 03461 
. 02788 
4-. 00673 
. 02971 
. 02656 
4-. 00315 
. 03190 
.03118 
-f. 00072 
. 03163 
. 02861 
4-. 00302 
• 05574 
- 05154 
-f. 00420 
. 03209 
. 02794 
-f. 00415 
Ratio of 
conduc¬ 
tivity to 
depres¬ 
sion, */A. 
o. 02787 
.02532 
+• 00255 
. 02219 
- 01953 
4-. 00266 
. 02468 
. 02392 
4-. 00076 
. 02266 
. 02456 
. 02386 
. 02496 
—. 00190 
—. 00120 
—. 00230 
4-. 00070 
—. 00040 
. 02224 
. 02430 
—. 00206 
. 03721 
• 03415 
4-. 00306 
. 03260 
. 0347 1 
—. 00211 
. 02594 
. 02864 
—. 00270 
• 02575 
. 02580 
—. 00005 
. 02543 
.02536 
4-. 00007 
. 02724 
. 02712 
4-. 00012 
. 04137 
• 04123 
4-. 00014 
.02561 
. 02510 
4-. 00051 
