construction of forcing-houses, for, he said, ‘not a single building of this kind has yet been erected in which the greatest possible quantity of space has been obtained, and of light and hear admitted, proportionate to the capital expended ’. A perfectionist, he had presented a paper in 1808 on the subtle and specific art of angling the glass of a forcing-house. He calculated that an angle of 34 degrees at a latitude of 52 degrees would produce a highly flavoured, rather than an early crop of grapes. He was convinced that control of the environment under glass was capable of producing ‘a peach…ripened in greater perfection in St Petersburg, in a house properly adapted to the latitude of that place, than in the open air at Rome or Naples’. Clearly Knight was bringing the art of horticulture into the realm of science. In this spirit he challenged his colleagues when he told them in his inaugural address that ‘the proper application of glass where artificial heat is not employed, is certainly very ill understood’. In a bold attempt at hothouse improvement Sir George Mackenzie sent a paper to Sir Joseph Banks, ‘On the form which the glass of a forcing-house ought to have in order to receive the greatest possible quantity of rays from the sun’. In 1815 he read it to the London Horticultural Society and instructed its members to ‘make the surface of your green house roof parallel to the vaulted surface of the heavens, ot to the plane of the sun’s orbit’. This was the first proposed curvilinear glass roof for horticulture. The letter and drawing described an elegant iron and glass quarter-sphere backed by a brick wall on the north. The radius of the dome was set at 15feet, ‘ as anything less would be too confined and anything greater would render necessary an inconvenient height’. A vertical trellis for grapes was placed along the back wall. Mackenzie suggested that his semi-dome ‘could be made in two movable parts to open in the manner of an observatory dome so as to expose the whole of the plants in the interior to the direct influence of the sun’. London, though impressed by the beauty of Mackenzie’s semi-dome, attacked its deficiencies. He objected to the distance from the glass skin to the trellis, and suggested the trellis should follow the curve of the vault. He noted that when the sunlight was perpendicular at any one point, it would not be perpendicular to the rest of the surface. He thought that Mackenzie’s house was too high, relative to its length and width, there were too many bars at the top of the dome and its flatness would collect condensation, which would drip and injure the plants. He proposed an alternative design with improvements to answer his own complaint.

针对温室的建造，他说“至今为止，还没有一座既能最大限度地利用空间，又能最有效地采用光线和热量，而且能合理运用投资的温室被建成。一个完美主义者，他在1808年发表了一篇文章，是一个关于在温室建造中怎样合理运用玻璃角度的精奥而特定的技术论述。他认为，在北纬52度的地方，采用34度的角度，温室中所产出的葡萄会比早期收获的葡萄味道甜美得多。他深信：合理地控制室内的环境，能够使"在圣比得堡地区的某一个能合理运用当地纬度的一所房子里所产出的桃。。。比在罗马或那不勒斯露天生长的成熟得更加完美。Clearly Knight把温室技术带到了一个科学领域。带着这种精神，在就职演说中，他向他的同事们提出异议“不采用人工加热而来合理地使用玻璃，是绝对的错误理解”.在一个温室改进的大胆尝试中，George Mackenzie 先生给Joseph Banks先生写了一篇文章，“关于如何合理地运用玻璃形态，才能使温室能够最大限度地吸收到来自太阳的光线”。1815年，他把这篇文章读给伦敦园艺协会，并且指导协会成员们“要使你的温室顶棚表面与天空的穹窿状表面相平行，或是与太阳轨道的平面相平行。这是温室建造中第一次提出的曲线型玻璃顶棚。文字和图形描述了一个典雅的由北面的一堵砖墙支撑着的铁材和玻璃所构建的四分之一球体。拱顶的半径被设定为15英尺。“因为如果尺寸过小，会显得太狭窄，如果尺寸过大，势必造成很不便利的高度”。一个垂直的葡萄架被沿着后支撑墙放置着。Mackenzie建议，他的半圆型屋顶应该做成两个可移动的部分，这样就可以象天文观测台的圆形屋顶的工作方式一样，能够打开，使室内的所有植物露出来而享受阳光的直接照晒。LOUDON 虽然被MACKENZIE的半圆形屋顶的美观所深深打动，但是他却抨击了它的不足，他不赞同从玻璃外壳到葡萄架的距离。并且建议，葡萄架应该同拱顶保持相同的曲线形态。他解释说，当阳光垂直照射到葡萄架的某一特定点的时候，就不会垂直照射葡萄架上其余的任何点。他认为，MAXKENZIE的温室，相对于它自身的长度和宽度，显得太高了。圆顶的上面有太多的横椽，并且它的平面会聚集水汽而凝结成水滴，水滴落下会砸伤植物。他又提议出一个经过改进的替代型设计来维持他的观点。