eo | This is porhaps most al Wath tho others, thore is peactically, you nish? say = of the uptake dis ineronsins gonovally, i 4 wide vanze if those u This probably would uot hold ovoy such be) rouzhly a constant, Eut even this constancy is somowaat seyprisins. fissicn profivets were essential clemonis, but you must roucaber theso are not essential clemonts and they aro not nosded by the plant. n The next slido shovs 4 test of the possible explanation of this wptaize and hero (indicating), as you vomembor, is an ineros CG absorption of icdine, and in this brohena line hers wa have another enperinent in which the amount of icdine was varied and I-131 was tested; and thore was an uptat:o of iodine by the plant. € 3 This particular test was made to determine whether this mignt be due to tonicity of the root coll mombrane and allowing tho miterial to pour throvech it more roadily. If this were truo, it should b3 possible to create the toxicity byone elenent and cause another one toe pour in, and wa tested then the toxicity with iodine and the toxicity factor os strontiug, and, under these circunstances, there seers to be a marked decrease in tho effect of strontium by the toxicity of dodinea. Aprarently this is not | dus to a membrane toxicity or toxicity to the plant itself, Our best guess -- and it is sinply a guess -- is that you will have varying absorption in tho soil. | In summary, I misht just say that these plant studies