[21]

1879

Pinus pinaster— laid Horizontally in dark

Feb 3d 9° 30 am— 2 leaves at top of shoot. ⨀ ⨀

A marked red.

B 2 from on lateral relative branch pointing obliquely vertically downwards ⨀ ⨀

(Weather cold for leaves probably not growing quickly

C 2 leave obliquely upwards ⨀ ⨀

A Feb 5th 10. 30' a.m— no apogeotropism in leaves & distance of red tips a little increased ⨀ ⨀

B. 5' 10° 30' some distance apart

C.  do  do  do

Feb 7th 10. 30 am

A ⨀ ⨀ The same as on 5th, but increased since 3d

B ⨀ ⨀ — same distance as on 3d

C. same ⨀ ⨀ certainly a little diverged} very young leaves

a trace of apogeotropism in all the leaves on summit of shoot & this wd oppose divergence of leaves — (over)

Feb 3d 10° 30' am

Upright Pl (with stick) in dark — red tips — ⨀ ⨀

D ⨀ ⨀ Feb. 5 10° 30' a.m distance a little increased

⨀ ⨀ Feb 7' 10. 30— do do do

2° E little Plant do do. ─ ⨀ ⨀

⨀ ⨀ Feb 5 10° 30' a.m distance a little increased

⨀ ⨀ Feb 7' 10° 30 clearly diverged

It is evident that darkness does not prevent divergence of leaves.

[21v]

As in the case of the [illeg] in the leaves while very young do not seem more affected by G. or H.— for this divergence continued in the [2 words illeg], with one young plant laid horizontally & with another kept upright, both by [illeg] in the dark.

The [curving] very slightly upwards of upper & lower leaves in the plant laid horizontally would perhaps check divergence & render difficult rough measurements, such as these.