G--Grafts Set C--Successful Catches ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shagbark Mockernut Pignut Pecan Bitternut Total G C G C G C G C G C G C % Barnes 6 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 18 18 100.0% Brooks 5 0 4 2 5 1 5 2 19 5 21.0% Clark 5 1 5 0 5 2 5 1 5 2 25 6 24.0% Fairbanks 27 17 27 17 59.3% Gobble 1 O 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 4 80.0% Griffin 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 5 3 60.0% Hales 5 3 4 1 5 4 5 5 19 13 52.5% Kentucky 5 4 3 1 5 4 5 4 5 1 23 14 61.0% Kirtland 3 1 3 2 3 2 3 2 12 7 58.4% Laney 6 4 6 4 66.7% Long Beach 4 3 3 2 4 1 4 2 3 1 18 9 50.0% Manahan 5 1 5 1 6 2 5 1 5 1 26 6 24.2% Siers 5 5 5 5 100.0% Stanley 3 3 3 2 3 3 9 8 89.0% Taylor 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 15 12 80.0% Vest 5 1 5 0 5 1 5 2 5 1 25 5 20.0% Weiker 5 1 5 2 5 1 15 4 26.8% -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --- --- 32 17 51 20 52 26 46 24 91 53 272 140 53.1% 29.2% 50.0% 47.0% 59.3% 51.5% An inspection of the 1923 grafts made August 21, 1924 showed the following number growing: on shagbark 14, on mockernut 6, on pignut 26, on pecan 24, and on bitternut 16, the only place where there was any material difference being in the case of the mockernut where nearly three-quarters of the number of grafts growing last summer failed to grow this spring, in fact all varieties failed to grow excepting three, the Barnes, Gobble and Long Beach, all three of which I suspect from other evidence, have mockernut parentage. In the ease of those on pignut and pecan stocks there was no loss from 1923 and in some instances at least of those on shagbark and bitternut stocks the loss was due to outside causes, such as being broken off. 1924 GRAFTING