Dear Dr. Wilson:

t note with interest your finding of organic nitrogen In New
Zealand snows at high altitude. It is of course quite likely as
you suggest that much or all of this matertal is of oceanic originé

However, | wonder if you have given any consideration to the pos-
sibility that it is either m volcanic or meteoritic. 1 would stress
the latter since most Investigators have tended to neglect the nitro-
genous and organic components of meteoritic infall notwithsaanding
the elementary facts of atomic abundance, (cf. Sclence, 127:1473-75,
June 27 1958).

at high altitudes

Collections/of possibly meteoritic material have been made in
Hawall by Pettersen, Nature, 181:330 (1958), and from jet aircraft
by some of Whipplea's associates at the Harvard College observatory.

Since you now have this lead, it should be possible to characterize
the chemistry of the nitrogen to better define its source. As 1! under-
Stand it, Standard Methods gives ‘albuminoid nitrogen” as nonvolatile
N converted to NHs by alkaline permanganate oxidation. This might well
include nitrides as weli as organic nitrogen.

The quantities you calculate do come out rather high for my suggestion.
However, Petterson reports an infall of about | mg/m* of Ni or about
4 g. of this element per acre per year. The Ni:N ratio for maxeax
interplanetary material is not known. In the cosmic abundance it is estima:
ted at 1:500 (Urey). That this could give an approximation of ‘a few
pounds' per acre per year is too good to be true for such number-jug-
gling, and | hope this does not obscure the serfous suggestion that
some nitrogenous material must come from meteoritic infall, and that
Surveys such as yours are well suited to help determine how MMKKXX much.

Le Crees 6 PI

Have you any estimates of Na and Cl that might help test the oceanic
provenance of your N? These ions might, of course, have a quite different
distribution than N.

Yours sincerély

Or. AT Wilson

Division of Nuclear Sciences
Private Bag, Lower Hutt

New Zealand. ‘ ‘

PS: May | have the favor of a reprint of the present and the detailed
future communi cation?