.~ ... 
LI 
H
VOLUME 9, NUMBER 4
WINTER, 1962
i 4
~ ~,
*V.,~ ~
Ag ricultural Experi ment Station
AUBUR UNIV ERSITYAUBURN
-IGH-LIGI-ITS of
Agricultural Research
A Quarterly Report of Research
Serving All of Alabama
VOLUME 9, No. 4
WINTER, 1962
DRUG RESIDUES IN MILK- Persistency of Secretion after
Treating Studied at Auburn 3.......
SKIP-ROW COTTON PRODUCES HIGHEST YIELDS- Best Way
for Top Production on Small Acreage 4
ALABAMA'S BROILER INDUSTRY - Traces Growth of Ala-
bama's Broiler Industry for Past 15 Years 5
COOL-SEASON GRAZING FOR YEARLING STEERS - Shows Po-
tential in Producing Market Beef- 6
FOOD RESERVES IN NEMATODE LARVAE - Determine
Whether Pests Can Infect Plant Roots 7
HERBICIDAL CONTROL OF JOHNSONGRASS IN COTTON- New
Chemical Shows Promise 8
YoUR WILL - IMPORTANT LEGAL DOCUMENT - Needed by
Every Farmer Regardless of Size Operation 9
CALCIUM REQUIREMENTS OF LAYING HENS- Tests Show
Calcium is Valuable Mineral to Laying Hens 10
LIME AND COTTON - Points up the Importance of Liming
Cotton, an Often Neglected Practice 11
TUSKEGEE EXPERIMENT FIELD - Unit Devoted Primarily
to Research on Forage Production 12
GROWING DWARF AND SEMI-DWARF APPLES IN ALABAMA
- Outlines Practices for Successful Production ...... 13
PEANUT SEED TREATMENTS-NEW VS OLD - Cites Results of
Testing Various Fungicides ... 14
DAYLILIES FOR SOUTHERN LANDSCAPE- Valuable Peren-
nial with Many Landscape Uses 15
POVERTY WORE COTTON'S FACE IN 1860 - Reviews Cotton
Industry During Past 100 Years 16
O te4 C o. C These beef animals are grazing cool-season
crops at the Tennessee Valley Substation in tests aimed at learning
best management methods for beef production. Results indicate that
such pastures are better for producing slaughter beef than are sum-
mer grazing crops. Increased use of cool-season grazing, coupled
with confinement feeding and other intensive farming methods,
shows good potential for Alabama cattle producers.
Published by
AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT
STATION of:
AUBURN UNIVERSITY
Auburn, Alabama
E. V. SMITH Director
COYT WILSON Associate Director
CHAS. F. SIMMONS Assistant Director
KENNETH B. RoY Editor
E. L. McGRAw Associate Editor
R. E. STEVENSON Associate Editor
Editorial Advisory Committee: COYT
WILSON; J. H. BLACKSTONE, Agricultural
Economist; H. J. AMLING, Associate Hor-
ment Head; AND KENNETH B. ROY.
New and Tmey
PUBLICATIONS
Listed here are timely and new publications
reporting research by the Agricultural Ex-
periment Station.
Bul. 330. Costs and Returns of Producing
Runner Peanuts in Southeastern Alabama
summarizes input and return data furnished
by farmers of the area.
Cir. 141. Response of Field Crops to Fer-
tilizer and Returns per Dollar Invested re-
veals value of fertilizer for different crops
grown in Alabama.
Leaf. 55. Young Oat Forage A High Qual-
ity Dairy Feed presents information on di-
gestibility and palatability of young green
oats and value as dairy grazing.
Leaf. 67. Arrowleaf Clover. Gives results
of 2 years of testing of this winter annual
legume from Italy that was recently brought
to the United States.
Prog. Rept. 84. Rainfall Distribution in Ala-
bama is a longtime record of average rain-
fall for each 10-day period throughout the
year in five areas of Alabama.
Free copies may be obtained from our
County Agent or by writing the Aubum
University Agricultural Experiment Station,
Auburn, Alabama.
1 I\ -
p
Use o)f such) (11mr ilx iittii is txxciitial 
fi- licaltli lfit a jil v herd1.
that ,()II( ioi themi arlt secrete ti 
iiiIfilk fromit teted COWS.
Ittilxi Adi it (iiistrtioii i' 
te eo hiliiicex tfor L'ccla iud
11111k 011(1 biaiiid iuse of ccrtiii 
onesx tfol titiixx cow. Ili ad-
(hitill, ililk Ii cli tco\\ s titttt1 withi 
aplo)\c i l h gs caiticlt
hbt mariketed( ltglillx duringi a pretscribedt 
piixtritlteliIt p(a iod
uixiallx 72 Iiloit x r
TOi tili ictX sit limiits foir tlliii4'i 
biasic icici iclatioll wax
neededt oil pii xtttcx of residuest 
il milk tchlcxx ing ti (at-
iit A stildix w xas beitgi 
at Aimri L'ix ti itx ATricil-
total Exp)erimenlt Statiii to prii 
li 1 lxich ii ilIiatiii lloil mill-
1)1-ligs stuiedtt xx c pellit.ihlili. (hNiiti 
o t
1
)(,to ICiii , oii . \
ttiatxdiiii (til rlie ill), aMid hilacilt. 
Six to 12 COWS xc
twiatted xx th tliflti mit concoti atjiiii 
of each ri xvi andth l\
lifhtrtiit tiviatiilt meththds as listedi 
ill thet tailes. \llxlig
tic tlrill'S test,t plrOiimt )tiiillii 
ixtll illae c)ii ix cit
ippliix d fori use xxt itlir 
c attle. Nctthe isl the 300,001)
.\fttr 0tlatiut, imilk x\iax tettdt at 
eachi inilkllll unltil
tilel \itsa nio deuitlilt leig ris 
liil twxo coislxte tlliilkiiigx.
pilteils. txoa iii llit ibootjcx 
andth a. cIi ititti ric inlithdloiii
fuiiacill
ixcxt oii ime ilil 1. P eixstiiiet 
x t i72 iitti io\j~ icxli-
t iici lotax fi lili . P litelile. itr 
eliiit iild oill sexanit oili
ix tli\ (,iill TableiI .nicta Pe 
ijttc itst 72 hiuii or aIctti 
o] c
i(lxlis paitti (liir peitci llC, 
ixc'1 ll i\ lltoli., xii tiifhg
\\lil. alcc tit tcl i o x e iiiiitt loi 
tc il iii l t a i ixx
ibt xxax itit xI l ijatjiii Poitill tpeniiin 
ii xticti sesam cil
1 atlil 2. Ihuit apioxeLItil 
i(i xxasted t86 xhtiurs a~teill
dsiltttl a nda96ihooin iii 7 iuoouitis 
xxhenitiiiiiiostic at aru
pei ix iiic lx. detcte cilltiast afteicaill 
ji etiiii c iiixll\'its
oiii l xx iti '3- litciic11 i ii 
ii lxl iit a ili pplx (I tui
thei xitls t tid I s2 lulici Il flaio 
fsceio.nri
Li lii 2. IToseli apiiie foi li 
hu (XIF dailitli' iN\\ (illii
istdltaxi. ii x x of 7 ii Nlur \'\he 
x iiii~iiied IiAtiN l
oil\\th % thotiti iron llitt (it 
iio l ritjil ii1i g
TAioBiiLE 11) DIt Iiiit 01" Si: HiloNO 
Aiiuuoiou 9(5 MIL
i'iLtL',llli IN 11 11 A )cLt M) P IPIE 
A iiitoriuuo .31
i~it,'jiii 2(11 iijx b. i iiiit i slretiicii 44 
i i1k
PxxliIic il iji G, 1gi 
it i nux 3
Poasiumc d3tot000 ut 24) iiaiii s ttcr 
t 7itii6i
1 l( ii , :3t 000 xx i , x 11).iit ii part 
i r 96 8 . iiilj i
Potasium gr0antunt.Itint-r~ 
:
I
I
DRUGS in MILK-
H-ow Long Do
Residues Persist?
G. E. HAWKINS, R. Y. CANNON and G. E. PAAR
Department of Dairy Siience
Itits 'afounidt that oo1011 0eatiti (ijiiiie tilxc 
protducedliiilk
cilitilil' (iiiig lii I cxidiicx. Till 2. 
1 to\I,x (ix , ptrisxtcoc\
xits lexss thaii f or ti catcti qll toix. Liiigext 
lhlxtiiig tliiiiiy ill
lon11tiiattti qulartterx xxas thet promililit 
heliuillil G Ill sicsiaoIt
iii xit \ i _)% ii liollill ill o l 1 (1 ui 
tic t.
The ilottriallx t\viui ti tatilittit xx 
ith thu tli ligxs aind plc-
duuctiiiui of milk xx utli o i cxitlici 
icillixoitll\ ix llli
coix to ccx. iitxi. ainliimit oii 
muilk piroduicttd lix tim c-xx
Resuilts oif tihe liilii i stuies tiii o 
that il\'x appilix id
ai it iliotitx at ljxpie ]ix '( ixts shiould 
hit iixtd ifoi tittiiig
dcixr cowxxs. ELx tii il i milk puiilicd 
duiiiiio thet first 72
bi kept itf thet iiikit.
TALE 2. I)LBTIxliN 01- Srt iii huN iiO 
i 111111 Clxi. Ai;[i Nix'
ii') iM-E Axii 'Nil NNINIL~ ti 1) Ot xlIii'I 
OF
DI) xiiix (ix 'Oi (i xNi TI \1\1xii\N
l)111a lii I 1 S iiiuu
Pox til, ii 10000 ooog. its(liit
Stv footll()t(, 1, Tabl(, 1.
\Oil(- (It4e(N-d 14 or 24 hour,, after treatOwnt.
,.t ' 5
,:i,.' 2
Skip-Row Cotton
Produces
Highest Yields
D. G. STURKIE, Agronomi~st
J. K. BOSECK, Supt., Tennessee
Valley Substation
)laiiitilii. T his ss stt'iii rsuslts iii :3) tii
5t)': litdiei iells tlim froum tiiiX tO
XXiW5iIXiih i itM~iltX O Ski) 1.21\\1 IN~il(
Ooii .11eeattir tlis soil. Thri'i sX sttils
Of XXntn t\lt stiiledl: I ) 2 i iiXX
plait'si 2 mowXs skipped. (2) 4 ilIXI
plaited. 4 skipped andi ( 3) eiiiiX tiliiii
XXR 10 (' iet, 6it)) aiii 9011)l. per acee
alie)1(d Olix toii t lil teI d -iaOIt tii
thie sksips. C:ottoi XXIX spitced toi . sti)l
ofi aibut 40t.009t stalks pei acie, XXitii
spilint_ tht sai) ill all i iiXX . Skipped
XXW t'ite kept lilIXI excet't i I II\
tivtmntiiit uisedi ill 1956. Sx stealts used
I hitdiust \idits i esiltet fli])) 1 XX teii
0t pliltilt) 2 i isis iiiil skippingt 2 iriws .
Pliiitht 4 ass\, s iit skippl~iig 4 prio-
'u/li ili
2 iii 2 ioit
.1 iil- I iiit
Total Iieldu
2 1.0 bile
5
s
2)0. 1 ii lis
15.4 bilecs
aplieatllaiii ut ilseti ftudes Si ax~l iill
iiiistiiig liititiiiis cani iilptrite ill skipis
0I 1i I -i r io I 1 lb XX1 s N I S II,-Iio\
XXT NNXl~ ii ii I~
(t si di
4 in4 ou 90011) )lii~iut
\X tide0'
2 i-
21 
out
Solid
Solidi
4 iii1 outii
lisp ilil
4 ill I iiit
il .Ili/:ic
(6110
90(11
600)1
90051
1(010
900 11)li.
Ills iiii
( )itsidi
-\\ c i le
Iiisiili'
Olii di
AX \ .I.
1 A350
1,21.5
2.,0 17
2,4 1
1,125
1,157
1 2_91)
1L125
18iS)
1 2 51
*
5
t
dlied cotol tallsoid c( V II
nKlll pliliim bu esSal li l(
Ol kppo .~ Mos oftcidil
T heiii ) )iitl adt \u iless t ,c o u Au 
1
liitiii
2hi ii Ipp t 2. \ris fi l~ tc ill teta ili idd
MI- siped sX tliei Priodcion arll it
1it) ic ailiitiioit wXithi tue tiie S\ stellis
1 is iX s vIi ibiliXX basedl oil IeI tiliiatiiiii
ANDi (N\eP I XI" \1 1)i Ii N. 
LiS.
1,F) Si iBS FAIIi\
Lb).
2(,131)
2'.5 15
2,9661
1 . :)32
195.8
2. 942
2.0:3S
21:6
2,52-1
S7111
t f()13
1.71-4
1.11610:
1 ) 1 )Jil)) r. ii . 5-. n Xa .
Lb. Lb. Lb. 1,.6.
18018 2.294 2:3 18 2110(65
31)16 :3.562 :3.3 : .100)
:. AiS? 2 928 2. 8:) 6 2 ,5 82
2 17) 23 :)8 2 2)46 2.137T
1, 15S :S4 6 .(8 2 :3,:2-)
:),K" :.1:38 3,06 1 2, 730
i)W2 :3,7 12~ 3,389 :3,028
4,185 .3,529 -3,475 .3,23:3
2. 4:3 2. 4-46 2.1,1 16: .9I4.3
:3,101 2,441 2,3.88
2,7:11 2,788 2,375
I'citilizil Xwas 6-8-4 i N11561 ui S-s-8 i remning ica]I.
less wXithi 2 to\\,s plantill ioi 2 i oXs
X ih solidi plal itilit). T his is p r1 illxh
littlllse tll ,I NXXl IlX n soi 5111Iloiii XX lil
cach pjiiiit cold lii i ll ii ti i ts ill tl '
planlt tood eleuieiuts. i'eitilizei \\ias noti
aided to skippedl 1'o\\X. but tie sOil \\.ias
il(esiilts ofi ithier expeliiii'its ait tlii
spouii X fiontb 90) ii). iiX(,Ir 6( t) l. of
t1(eii. T he IDeeatiir Sil shiouid (~'et i'iliiit~l
Toi (li.teriiit if skipped i iiXX eioild he
jifiiti'ii ill the skip)s as it ticeatiiieiit ill
of skip row i s 5 I I 'i'si ill-Nt] ilia\iIIIlIIl)
A\ iisilIX iititw 01i the skipro I iXX55-
huit i itht tIl iiii lii isth liiid is I li
onctliud is iiit adapted to stet p slopes
bieaiise oh croisiiiii of the bait oi fal-
lowedi'( alis.
the
1  
ielti it] liasi' froiii tile X\ stIll is
ibtaittid it tue( adtditioiialilat) t XX ce
I fiti ted to ii iotiiei crop.
MOST ALABAMIANS know that broiler
production in the State is big business.
But few are aware of the cooperative
efforts on the part of those in the indus-
try that have contributed to making the
business what it is today.
No accurate estimate of the total value
of the broiler industry in Alabama is
currently available. Recent expansion,
however, reflects the rapid adjustment
that has been made.
Production of broilers in Alabama in
1961 was 198.1 million, or 41 times the
number grown 15 years earlier in 1947.
Because the average market weight of
broilers has increased from 2.4 to 3.4
lb., total pounds of broilers sold by grow-
ers in Alabama has increased more than
numbers, and was 59 times greater in
1961 than in 1947.
Significant changes have taken place
in the relative importance of states as
broiler producing areas. Almost 2.0 bil-
lion broilers were produced in the United
States in 1961, more than 3 times the
number in 1950 and nearly twice as
many as in 1955, Although broiler pro-
duction increased in 27 states between
1955 and 1961, most of the expansion
was in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Mis-
sissippi, and North Carolina. During
this period, the number of broilers pro-
duced in these states increased an aver-
age of 160% and they contributed 55%
of the country's broilers in 1961. Produc-
tion in Alabama increased 243%, which
boosted the State from 10th to 3rd place
among states.
Increases in production resulted in
the need for increases in hatching egg
supply flocks, hatcheries, feed mills,
transportation facilities, and service per-
sonnel. Combined capacities of hatch-
eries in Alabama exceeded 20 million
eggs, and slightly more than 204 million
chicks were hatched in 1961. Had all
houses been of 10,000 bird capacity and
had 4 batches been grown in each house
during the year, approximately 5,000
houses would have been needed. To
ECASH RECEIPTS,
MIL. DOLLARSr
80
60
40
20
0
1947 1949 1951 1953 1955 !957 1959 1961
YEARS
grow the 673.3 million lb. of broilers re-
quired in excess of 800 thousand tons of
feed, most of which was an output from
mills located within the State.
The broiler industry is among those
for which overall costs for supplying a
finished product to the retail market are
lower when processing takes place in or
near areas of production. This has led
to the construction of modern process-
ing plants in major producing areas of
the State. There are 22 plants in Ala-
bama with capacities ranging between
3,600 and 7,500 birds per hour, op-
erating under the Poultry Products In-
spection Program. In addition, a num-
ber of plants with lesser capacities are
processing broilers for sale within the
State.
Changes in organization within the
industry have occurred during its rapid
expansion. A most significant change
has been themerging of firms that pre-
viously performed different operations.
Coordination of production, processing,
and marketing functions was achieved
and control passed to operators of the
fewer and larger firms.
Rapid development and adoption of
improvements in type of bird, housing,
feeds, medication, processing, and man-
agement have lowered production costs
and have enabled those in the industry
to continue increasing numbers of broil-
ers produced at a time when prices were
continually dropping, see chart. Annual
average price for broilers has dropped
below the price for the previous year in
12 of the past 15 years. However, in-
creases in production have been suffi-
ciently large to result in an increased
total income for broilers. The trend was
changed in 1961 when production was
increased by only 12% and price de-
creased 20% from the previous year.
Total cash receipts by producers from
the sale of broilers dropped from $91.6
million in 1960 to $87.5 million in 1961.
Returns to the industry, obtained by
multiplying the average price paid by
PRICE, LB. PRODUCED,
CENTS .LB. MIL.
38 1 0. .0 PRICE 650
36 --. - RDUTO 600
34 550
32 500II
30: 450
28 ~ .~400
16 .350
24 .. ~.300
22 250
20 .200
18 15I0
14 . 50
0 1947 1949 1951 1953 
1955 1957 1959 1961
YEARS "
Shown at left are cash receipts from broiler marketings 1947-61 and at right price and
production of broilers in Alabama for the same period.
ALABAMA'S
BROILER
INDUSTRY
MORRIS WHITE,
Agricultural Economist
retailers times the pounds of dressed
broilers purchased from processors, in-
creased from $125.5 million in 1960 to
$180.7 million in 1961. These are gross
return estimates and do not indicate
profits.
Per capita consumption of broilers has
increased each year since 1946, and was
reported to be 25.5 lb. in 1961. This
was approximately 12% of the total per
capita consumption of all meats. To
NUMBER AND POUNDS OF BROILERS
PRODUCED, PRICE, AND CASH
RECEIPTS, ALABAMA, 1947-61
Number Pounds
broilers Farm Cash
Year pro-
pro- duced price receipts
duced
Mil- Mil- Cn Million
lions lions Cents dollars
1947 -------------- 4.8 11.5 38.0 4.4
1948 -------------- 6.0 15.0 86.0 5.4
1949 -------------- 10.5 27.8 28.3 7.7
1950 --------------. 18.1 85.4 27.0 9.6
1951 -------------- 16.7 45.0 29.1 18.1
1952 .............. 28.5 68.4 28.8 18.3
1958 -------------- 28.4 73.9 27.0 19.9
1954 -------------- 47.7 148.2 22.8 82.7
1955 -------------- 57.8 179.1 24.5 43.9
1956 -------------- 82.5 255.7 18.7 47.8
1957 -------------- 108.9 332.4 18.0 59.8
1958 .............. 181.6 421.2 17.6 74.1
1959 -------------- 158.2 522.2 15.1 78.9
1960 -------------- 176.7 565.8 16.2 91.6
1961 -------------- 198.1 673.8 18.0 87.5
maintain or improve this relative posi-
tion, participants in the broiler industry
will have to continue efforts to improve
their product. Those in the industry in
Alabama have proved in the past that
they can produce broilers competitively.
Future progress of the industry will de-
pend more heavily upon the ability and
willingness of industry people to make
whatever adjustments are necessary to
provide a competitively priced high qual-
ity product, attractively packaged, and
with a maximum of convenience for con-
sumers.
r nr r r
Yearling steers ore shown
grazing cool-season crop
at the Tennessee Volley
-~ Substation.
COOL-SEASON GRAZING
FOR YEARLING STEERS
R. R. HARRIS, W. B. ANTHONY, J. K. BOSECK, and E. M. EVANS*
(1171111Fi XON141 razilla tropsI are llr
XX Xtt'ill thli Itre XX :11111st',IXIli pastlilles.
The gi t'itcst po tenutia lil proiducfiig
illai k 't befa -I pptears to b le th iolu g ill-
iiig aini use of inittnive farin( ifloeth-
iltisuc X iti IX ooiifioit'ii't fl-Idiga. LeCss
tlept'tticc catlil b'eIplacedl 1i
1
Ili Xvaril-
XeaXsiii pasture s ii ltli sxc stcems, accord-
1104y to rt'stearchi results it Auburnil Uji
X crsitv -\grf il ttiial IL per fim'lIit Stat ion.
Three gra sX-lt'gliimt forage toI )11)
tiol foiXhxt' heci t'x ab iatcd XXith Netarliiig
bet-e steers ill a X-ea t' tuIv (19-56-
1962) ait tihl 'liiiIt'stc N Valley Slibstil-
tiiiii Beilh \iia. The inifluet-ce. iif iri
.4ation iil betef X iclds. tiockiiia i-ate aiid
late oIf gain1 XXa mi ieasuretd tfll teach test
5XXr Fort fl t'e first 6 yeal-s.
The c-omboiations tXvaluiatetd XXcrc: ( I
Iill Iisgi IXX-XX lute tIIx ci: (2) alfalta-
ii -liai-tlgrass XX ]lite' ciliX t'r alit
1 
( :3
Coiastal Betrloil ag'rass-i hili X Xtt'i. 1Th1
Idris thei test ii X ISllitlIX X io idalt
dlii flig the' late-r X\cars. Nlfalf-a (fll not
co'iiillaitiili XXIer it \v t X s iIlllctl be-
',XX.11ts t,II' forcadrs Illt vilzi
1;\\M~~dh sutbefrgaig uiitii tlic 1959
grXi I'llll ths5.eCatl-e l
Aojimal per'~formnl dl:itttata foi thet ft-st
I igatou ia iiat sOubsitanitial e-fft-ct upoI1i
ss iat a n 011 imlt- ntitf~ t-loist ii't' d no-
.IililliII petrfolrmncel flol- IIix XXXart!;
I~I~' itn\11mv4 carr fmiapaitv o~f tht' pas-
tuirte XX\is incrteasetd XligIltiX by the appi
(-atill of, all ax eragtf iif 6 ini. ill Xlipl'
iiieitii XX itI' (111il t ite grazing scasill.
Tht aXveraIge A\pril NAghust raifall XXaI
2(0.1 ill. durin lg till 6 ' twlls fririgationi XX1I
studtied ITh, l ant' \\,it4' Xs 13.9-2.0 iin.
Blast-t 11o i tese c XIIItX i rrigatifoii cail In 
ot
I t'c l 1(C)111 oig pt'lastue al f''loi proucafrt--n
iif slliafitcl bee1f -
TABLEI 1. SCNINIH Xl MA Pi).\XI 1ERF IOXMAN1CE
DAA l. 1111.5rouN1GAZ (;ozll; 11 X
1956-f 1962'
\hx -rt
A lfui
irll i
gra-
XXi
tilox
i rr.
ft- Couastal
irt- Biriutia-o
c-r clover"
N olt I.'Not
irr. Ir' irr.
Beef y ild per acre
1, b Lb. Lb. Lb1. 1Lb. Lb.
titil :3 89 ;.7: 4) :371t .369 407
Average tdaily gain
Lb1. 1.1. 1.). Lb7. Lb. Lb.
ix. 1.33v 1.37 t1-3 2 1.26 1 23 1.21
Stocking rate per acere per (lay
.\*o. Vo \uo . N o'I. Nll.
I. 1.54 1.36 1.59 1.47 2.3 7 2.13P
'Each ' ilun' is an av erage of 2 repiica-
tjins pur xcir
-'Etch Xvaluie ' i, a X av'io, v of 2 itfllild
111111' for 4 Nearns iI'.tc'lt If -, as iiit itctl
-\et-ft 1961 and~t 1962. Il 1 961 sul 9lliltai
III tc Ill s notI ap-u uaic l d~u
1T-e for age comiiiijiitioiiX tested XXIII
eX',II Iti a]lx' equal il be~ef produ1 tced pei
acre, :369 to 4018 lb). Since irriuatioo had
IIti data are comb10111ied XXith10o1t I t'1artl to
0) a/iII t est 1pas tureis had .1( vXraa ''C iki
gailos of 1.3.5 1.29. aiid 1.22 lb). respcc-
tiX t~x for Djallis, o1rchairdi aitti Coastal
XXX artls. The i ankiog of these forages
ill averciage seasoinal carr ilig caipaIcity
%\,its iii re cx rsc ollder: (:tastal. 2. 2 5:
orchard, 1.5:3: aniid Dallis, 1.45 alniiialX
per [t ac dliilX. lTe bi)gT.'t iIIX.11 tage
of the Coastail s~vaid is its alolitv. to slip-
porat lic av Xst ocking rates -3.7.5) io finals
petr acere at peak 14roXXth.
The moilst usefu l meiasuireIf' tile rela-
tiXe CXallic of, 5XX 1a (I ill produciing slaogh-
tel bleef is perbo itialice of ai illil grazled
reveal'd thit trule XX iii of u the firll :041 ill
termls iof tiit' lilli.te tuft prmfuict, at
Xale'ale (Illini . Suifi data for tis test
are gfivei iii Tile( 2. 'I'li to tal seasonal i
gaii per iiial 110 D~allis, olrchiard, aiid
Coiastal \\ its 222, 199. aiid 14 lb., re-
spiectfXc ('v. IThese gaflis XXer miade~tf ill
grazfing sca',isili of apiflpi miatci\ 15t)
(lavs fil leigth. The cattle gi azed foi-
thie sCasoll si 11 ii m atd' sightr1it]x faster
140 ills ti1,111 thet a i-rage of 
all Cattle onl
the part icua s'i i XXar. Talde 1. Thie re-
'aiitait lafik g(faii oXif 1.24, i1.38, anti
1.44 11). mustX lie r eco~gizedt ,i gr-o~vth
gafins. All animials cameit otf thieste forage
coiiilitfios giidiiig Ui~tlity ant! re-
quliretd fiofshiii- ill tlrx lt to) tt'inaot a
coii1)ttitiX t market pritce.
TAXBLEz 2. PERoFORMAN \(CE OF S rELLX GRAZED
CONTlINUOUSLY FORS SEASON. 1956-1962'
Dalis-
grass-
Xv~hite
clover
'lfila- Coastai
torc-iard- Be'rmudta-
grass- X etch tor
XXfit)' crimlsoni
(t\ ilX i c-lovetr
Number of
arjilIlalX -45 5:3 16
Lenlgth oIf
grason, tdays 1 55 1441 154
AX traIgl tdaily
glili. lb). 1.44 1.-38 1.24
gain pir
ilinial, ib). 222 199 194
cwXX. gain. ih). 6318 672 694
Slauighite r
gratle--nid
o-f grazing - Uti. + Uti. _ uti.
'Each X alic is (Ill itX'trage oIf 4 rIepflit'a-
titons fo~r t.Itli Netar ecep'tt for Coastal-leg-
1959-62, 011.111 iSc. S ii it irri gatiion h110l
M .ULii 01' 111E liNili'Ch ()Ii lillit lu,~l
sitieIc' iCIiI I iC'Xd at AliiuriI IisI coiCil
Alabamal thait it is lomilill mi olst soil
i1)iltiIICi' ofI the pist julstifies5 theC COOl
()CV;I[NioliallV ilillil Cull1) 1(11 oriilJ-
HIii I illiXX IICC Iii IlX iCilrOO ll\d1t
Clillel(I. itX liC't\v~l Ciill-it XX 1(1Cr planits
CIII XatislikC-toih anX \111X ii'IC the\X iiIX beC
toldils Illiseilt illit 0 Sil saiiipli' is IIC'cC'
sarlX tio accurlatelXy pr edict if plilltilig
XXwi be ii Xaf withou~t s11i1 tieatillc'lts.
t III rlil icL sjrC'iiC ilt rofillctioll b NIC
root-1kollt lai 5 JC' i spial stoiolX XXJ \ 111s
ioftI us hn i iri I L I ii\ el sitS A"icliltili al
flowX 111011 v illiectisc i'l-it e ari C'pIivslit.
fillilicI' ili iits\ tol filt il od i i I te' ]-(lolts
Food Reserves Measured
All i10)1 rtao(t facit illbou t 11)1 t-kn ot
laX i' is that Liftter haitchling litc are
oIf it XliithiL' 
]lost planit. 'I lliu 
oi]
Ii(XX li- iili tolf CCICi is CSl ll If le
oli factr overs~liC witch51X i t illillttoe i'
]toiC c oIol It'(1 soil il iltisC'Ils r io ll sl
XIX tiliur Illtitep il e tl ilIg tle, proe
lassi'dta consume ilICits lsre to Cl'iit' it
ofI detl ('XIX diX Iiit 111 pi Cuiclil di 'JX
i h i~it iioilies iitlliL'tiX oICXXif ths
foodi lcII \ ofXdii XI la XX ili ill so11il
Obsl iti onlIi of i~'i o til Sof 1111 X ilC'
(111 i 'I to i115( shoIwed it 101$. i i'tI) atr
iltlli' bodes 11 ICXCiil 1iiles ofiC these
tilL' alva I u~Ii 11( lld\i\' ill ti' C'C'r at (OX
tilo\\t I ill the'C illicocp phoI'Siili'i~togrLXash
XX l 11511)(1ili to il'be ICtii dli i i i il t 1no
Photo of magnified
root-knot nematode
larvae shows effects
of using up food re-
serves. The clear areas
of varying sizes are
portions of tissues
from which the re-
serve food has been
utilized. These areas
serve as a quantita-
tive guide to infective
potential of larvae.
FOOD RESF
Factor in Plani
Root:-Knot Ne
E .CAIRNS
Deportment of Solon
pliedi In tec'llliiaiiis tio ilpiiilX judCge
cdolitiolis ofll ail('Zl at tunei ofi idcliltiiXv
ill(, iil coultiiiw themii foil soil samlples.
Relation of Reserves to Infection
lii X Jr to thou'l ilhiit.\ tii iiit'i Iflit
11)015. A scI ic's ol\l ' cx ciiic'itt' XXas die
Sc'llipC'i that ('llblcI this pilit to be'
lultX \tl Ileastilii iellc im i X o'thitr
tolic l lai~' lit-or sIl (ih til t h
)ilitilts hatiloc tX)hal at abiitys of iC'
\ladc'to iic tutt iijs letio itX oille
o elaiiif foo ('i X' X i C' 115C . Es 'it cilat
tle iitdXX 'ifCW(TC liii~ loliger (IIIlili to w
oi it tat tue( lot ,rct dear i ii still re
ide of IiloI lt 011(1 still l~X it
OAa
F
WVES-
Infection by
natode Larvae
nd E. BOLMAR
and Plant Pathology
D~eaith front1 stai 5 tiilll X\its tile finli 1-
i ros copic ( ) i till il'Xio ofC 'liteei ill'e
and' ropot i tisi IC' X'l rksolle ogleixi
IX te reI~slt i f' food jit ctiX C' pil etion.ll
lIt kllowdht a l~l~( lilill l of 0 foo Xeser-
('iliiibout ill, sIX 11'il 1111 po f or tili e ser
pC'stXof SIil Pt fi illioi ilitfl fmd reeve li hei
illliuit doped to Caroli thaXt eril
111cla1 tiisdc01.d hi \it h
Chemical Control 
of
Johnsongrass, Annual
Grasses in Cotton 
Fields
V, S. SEARCY, Assistant Agronomnist
2
it
1...
fi c I d, Iii I o\ X\cr c (Ii itto \\o X I II di li II It I d 
I sl if sced I i I I, s
M9ildC beX kille it ii iii X rcll~ocX 
- l( lbcd . IIp li.
XCj de( iti al coul belX I i lX(9 ilid tiX Ilit 
11141 iolsilttiol I atiX
hi 'iiitiilo dc pIililiit lX (((rliiii4 XdttIi 
tidlt il li~l( a IX
1iI\ CX Ciall )iicil. Ixceacoti Icttli 
of iost small
"~C tI aI XXl as11 C(l a I 162 C''\it l iiltiat 
Iili tiiC g \ littis
to1 o it) at Ailloll iii (lustim' 1(1(1 
SlItcX luih sol w]ci
tiX CX XXr to (1(4(9 to cottil p117lit o 
jtlal oi Iiiisii.
A ell4Xati(l ,tu v X CCCIX titid o Ctlitlt , 
iitliX. \1 estr of
a l'Cititt~t(I'CI~) ( (iid 4111(9( Iu'iitiisc. o f~t
col 11(91llCiCIX XXg ol il l iCCIs sc-lil 0 i 
ll c o1t. I XX I t it.' ll tild
on Atk ii 2)tit ll iil l l (9(1 1 . ii 
E11l ' " iittigi.1) s IiiX
XX (91( ttll(Iic bodax alttids plati 
\ is iti Citlli [toiiiltX
XXil most (9iiiCI 40 (iX ll oriritinto b fecie
Dct Ililt was used~tI C' its 1962~aI cp 
iiti il uth tliA(1 illli
F '1 11 igh i ilit (m i it liltlril XX('I 
iti l lli oil 011 ,It('CI
Mf (liX 's al , li t i cr XXc s CCI it d Xt 
lii iiiitlX plats. iii I iiXIC
itt tio rteIC XX 12 to 15 11). pr aciv Cii 
XX('i'k iskcd laihht.
,All herb ie were-NI XXpiIIL bodcast.i 
Twoi r)ite of act
Pr-i jit wrgiw
lt ( aiiilt,,t
Pi )\\it i iCd ik Ioc
111c l
1.011).
I -zi ii Ii Ih f
S. 'ili~ c' cX I I(Ii's
o. 'i No.
( I (i, n
Nio
.5 2:3 1 12, 601111
174 1 84t 9 1 9:),500
2401 2 1~l 90,90 2,182
!5 10 1 101,.500 2479
1 % 80(1 2,274
2 10011 500t 2A32:3
5) 29 2 102,9(1( 
2.5 93
6 31 2 97.,51( 
2,553
U
~Cs'
-i-2
Is'
pci'tt I
yield
pc acrI
-
\1 i \tI 11 ( of cral 
Ignt's, Oigitalia 
w1gilillahs, ( 1-o\\ fo( 
t,,ritss,
0octilloctc1lifol) aigyptiactlill, alld 
Efi'llsilic indica.
YOUR WILL
Important
Legal Document
J. H. YEAGER, Agricultural Economist
EVERY ADULT should have a will. Surveys indicate, how-
ever, that a relatively low percentage of farmers have made
wills.
It is commonly thought that making a will is desirable
only for those who have accumulated considerable wealth
in the form of real estate, machinery, livestock, stocks, bonds,
or other things of value. In these days of large lawsuits
that may arise from such things as an automobile accident,
a person may be placed in a position that a will would be
desirable. Also, one may have a potential estate through in-
heritance.
Some think that a will is a document to be prepared after
reaching age 65. This is not the case. A young farmer or
businessman who is in debt and has minor children 
should
be concerned about leaving his wife in the best possible
condition regarding control over property that she must de-
pend on for income.
What is a will? A will is a plan or document that directs
disposal of a person's property at death. If a person dies
without a will, his property is distributed according to state
laws, known as laws of descent and distribution. These laws
may or may not distribute wealth as the owner desires.
Every person has a right to direct how he wishes his prop-
erty to be distributed.
Who can make a will? In Alabama, every person of age
21, of sound mind may, by a will, direct disposition of land
or interests in land. Persons over 18 years of age and of
sound mind may, by making a will, direct disposal of per-
sonal property.
Must a will be in writing? Generally, a will must be in
writing, signed and witnessed. Under Alabama law, an un-
written will covering personal property is valid only when
the property willed does not exceed $500 in value. A will
conveying land or interests in land must be in writing.
At least two witnesses must sign the will in the presence
of the person who makes the will. It is desirable that wit-
nesses be younger than the person making the will. Also,
witnesses should be persons not mentioned in the will.
Can a will be changed? A will does not take effect until
death. A person may revoke or change his will any time
before his death. When a new will is made, a statement
should be included that expressly revokes the old will in
whole or in part.
If only a few minor changes are needed, it may not be
necessary to make a new will. Changes may be made by
preparing a codicil that is a separate addition to a will.
Changes in a will should not be made by cross-outs, inser-
tions, and erasures.
It is not wise to prepare a will and forget it. Changes
occur in family composition and situation. A will should
be reviewed periodically to see that it provides for the dis-
position of property as desired.
How can a will be used in farm transfer? To farmers, a
will is important in planning the transfer of a farm to a
son or sons. A will can provide for keeping a farm in the
family rather than selling it outside the family. It may
provide for a farm operating son or sons to buy the interests
of other heirs. Consideration to heirs who have contributed
more to the farm and building up farming operations and
to care of parents in declining years may also be set forth
in the will. It is possible for parents to keep control over a
farm through transfer by will rather than outright sale.
A farm operating son may feel that a will fails to provide
the security desired since changes may be made in the will.
Also, a son may not want to wait the number of years re-
quired in order to gain ownership of a farm and home.
Should I get help in making a will? If the will to be pre-
pared is relatively simple, it may not be necessary to get
help. Since legal requirements must be met, however, it
may be wise to get the services of a competent attorney
for preparing a complicated will. Cost of an attorney's serv-
ices may be insignificant relative to financial and personal
difficulties that may otherwise occur. An attorney should
be instructed as to desires for distribution of the property
and the person making the will should read it carefully.
The will should be stored in a safe place.
One should plan ahead on his property, its use, and what
is likely to happen in event of his death. It may not be
wise to wait in making a will - probably it is later than
you think.
M ORE PEOPLE fail to receive the rec-
ommended levels of dietary calcium
than any other nutrient.
1 
This mineral
element is even more important for the
laying hen because it is not only re-
quired for bone and other tissue but a
dietary deficiency will result in thin-
shelled eggs and eventually no eggs at
all.
Apart from 'dietary intake, calcium
metabolism in -layers is also affected by
simultaneous intake of other nutrients,
such as phosphorus and vitamin D, by
disease, age, and environment. Egg pro-
ducers in the Southeastern United States
are plagued with thin-shelled eggs dur-
ing summer months often caused by
older birds finishing their laying period
in the summer.
Experiments Conducted
In 1961 research was begun at Auburn
University Agricultural Experiment Sta-
tion to investigate diet, age, strain, and
environment as factors affecting calcium
metabolism in the laying hen. Results
of the first year's work with different
dietary levels of calcium and phosphorus
are being analyzed. Since the National
Research Council recommendations for
dietary calcium in layer diets is 2.25%,
this level was chosen as a control diet.
Using over 1,000 individually caged
H3W strain pullets, the effects of 3 die-
tary levels of calcium, 2.25, 3.75, and
5.5%, were evaluated. Some factors eval-
uated over one laying cycle included egg
production, egg size, egg quality, mor-
tality, feed efficiency, egg shell thickness,
egg shell strength, fertility, and hatch-
ability.
Research Results
Figure 1 shows that the 2.25% die-
tary. calcium level, as presently recom-
mended by the N.R.C., resulted in poor
1 World Health Organization.
10
1-3
Months
4-6 7-9
Months Months
Egg production over a 9-month period for
3 calcium diets is shown here. (L- 2.25 %;
M 3.75%; and H = 5.5%).
egg production. These results compare
with those found in the cooler and drier
areas of this country. The most persistent
good egg production was obtained with
the 5.5% dietary calcium. Egg produc-
tion was adversely affected by the med-
ium calcium diet during the last 3
months.
Egg Shell Thickness
When egg shell thickness was evalu-
ated by specific gravity, Figure 2, egg
shells were progressively thinner over
the experimental period and appeared to
be directly related to calcium intake. Re-
search is now being conducted at Au-
burn to determine the breaking strength
of egg shells in terms of shell thickness.
A thick egg shell has been largely ac-
cepted in the industry as being stronger,
but this relationship may only be true
for a limited range.
CALCIUM Requirements
of LAYING HENS
J. R. HOWES, Assistant Poultry Husbandman
is shown above. L, M, and H represent the
3 dietary levels of calcium.
Egg Shell Strength
Egg shell strength as measured by
impact and crushing tests appeared to
be directly related to the dietary intake
of calcium. The high mortality among
birds receiving the 2.25% calcium diet
was very pronounced when compared
with the low mortality of the other 2
groups.
Calcium Level Low
Tentative results confirm that in the
hot humid Southeastern United States
the currently N.R.C. recommended level
of dietary calcium is inadequate for high-
producing layers. However, a large in-
crease in dietary calcium should be
viewed with caution since especially in
breeding stock high calcium diets may
result in other dietary imbalances, in-
fertility, and poor hatchability. Further-
more, at a time when more and more
feed ingredients are being selected
largely on a price basis by linear pro-
gramming, it may become difficult to
produce high calcium diets without im-
pairing dietary protein and energy in-
takes. More emphasis, therefore, should
be placed on ingredient quality to allow
the production of diets that compensate
for their higher price by giving a better
feed efficiency and lower bulk transpor-
tation costs.
Since many workers are finding dif-
ferences in response to protein and energy
by different breeds and strains of poultry,
it is quite possible that such differences
may also apply to mineral requirements.
However, these differences will probably
be relatively small but work now in
progress will attempt to evaluate breed
and strain differences.
Egg shell thickness in
specific gravity units
1.084
1.080
.076
1.072
L MH IL MH L M H
.068 - r-
I- 3 4-6 7-9
Months Months Months
The average egg shell thickness for the 3
calcium diets over a 9-month laying period
LIME and COTTON
of nitrogen from sandier soil before nitri-
fication or denitrification occurred. Thus,
the direction of change in soil pH with
the use of a particular nitrogen fertilizer
may be predictable but the amount of
change is not. A periodic soil test is
necessary to determine such soil pH
changes.
Yields and pH
L IMING SOIL for cotton is an old, often
neglected practice. The penalty for such
negligence can be costly because pres-
ent-day farming practices increase soil
acidity at a much faster rate than did
the practices of 2 decades ago.
The use of fertilizers probably affects
soil pH more than any single practice.
At one time Alabama cotton farmers pri-
marily used sodium nitrate as the source
of nitrogen. In addition, low rates of
phosphorus and potassium fertilizers
were used. These fertilizer practices did
not greatly affect soil acidity. Conse-
quently, lime applications every 5 to 10
years were adequate, as shown by earlier
research of the Auburn Agricultural Ex-
periment Station. With the use of higher
rates of fertilizers new research was
needed to determine present-day lime
needs, especially where higher rates of
ammonium fertilizers are used.
Field experiments were established at
Brewton, Monroeville, and Prattville in
Yield
(lb. per acre)
2400
2200- - - --
2000-- -- -- -- -
8 , 00
1600
12 0 
0 
,"
1000
* Brewton
600 o Monroeville --
5.0 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.0 6.2 6.4 6.6 6.8
Soil pH
This chart shows yields of seed cotton at
various soil pH levels at both the Brewton
and Monroeville Experiment Fields.
1957 and 1958 to determine the effect
of various lime rates and nitrogen treat-
ments on soil pH and cotton yields.
Data in Table 1 show that soil pH
is greatly affected by kind and amount
of nitrogen. Although these soils were
uniformly limed with dolomite limestone
3 years before, the soil pH levels differed
greatly. Data show that soil pH was
affected by the amount and kind of ni-
trogen fertilizer used and by soil type.
The increase or decrease in soil pH was
determined by the kind of nitrogen, but
the magnitude of pH change was de-
TABLE 1. EFFECTS OF RATES AND SOURCES
OF NITROGEN AFTER 3 YEARS ON SOIL
PH OF DIFFERENT SOIL TYPES
Green-
Total Kalmia 
Mag- Villreen-
N N sl nolia fsl fsl
per source Brew- Mon-Pratt-
acre 
ton roeville 
ville
Lb. pH pH pH
0 5.9 5.9 6.2
180 amm. nit. 5.6 5.7 6.0
720 amm. nit. 5.3 5.5 5.4
720 amm. sul. 5.2 5.0 4.7
720 sodium
nitrate 5.9 6.3 6.7
termined by amount of nitrogen used
and soil type. This is an example of
how lime requirement can be determined
only by a soil test.
Soils and pH
Generally clay soils require more lime
or acid to change soil pH than sandy
soils. Therefore, nitrogen fertilizers alter
the pH of sandier soils more. However,
data in Table 1 show the effect of nitro-
gen was less marked on more sandy
soil at Brewton than on heavier soil at
Prattville. The soil at Monroeville is in-
termediate in texture between the above
two soils and so was the change in soil
pH. This was a result of greater leaching
The effect of soil pH on yield of seed
cotton in 1961 in experiments at Brew-
ton and Monroeville is shown in the Fig-
TABLE 2. YIELD OF SEED COTTON IN 1961 ON
DIFFERENT SOIL TYPES AT 2 PH VALUES
Yield of seed
cotton
Location 
Soil type 
per acre
pH 5.3 pH 5.8
Lb. Lb.
Brewton
Monroeville
Prattville
Kalmia sandy
loam 1,520 1,980
Magnolia
fine sandy loam 1,260 1,650
Greenville
sandy clay loam 2,180 2,270
ure. Regardless of lime rate or nitro-
gen fertilizer, cotton yields depended
upon soil pH. The minimum soil pH
value that did not reduce cotton yield
was about 5.8 in both cases. Yields were
about the same at all pH values above
5.8, but were progressively less as soil
pH values decreased below pH 5.8. At
Brewton, yields were only 1/5 as much
at pH 5.0 as at pH 5.8, see Figure.
Soil Properties Vary
More than one property of acid soils
is responsible for poor growth at low soil
pH values. Since these properties vary,
the extent to which yields are reduced
at a specific soil pH varies. For example,
even though cotton yields are generally
less at pH 5.3 than at pH 5.8, the actual
decrease in yield varies with the soil.
Data in Table 2 show yields were in-
creased much more at Brewton and Mon-
roeville than at Prattville by raising soil
pH from 5.3 to 5.8.
Subsoil pH
One of the factors that determine the
amount of yield reduction at low soil
pH is the depth to which the low pH
extends. The subsoils at Brewton and
Monroeville are considerably more acid
than the subsoil at Prattville. The subsoil
at Prattville has a pH of about 6, within
the optimum range for cotton.
11
FRED ADAMS, Associate Soil Chemist
rhese cot-te ore grazing plots at the Experiment Field that 
are used to
determine effects of nitrogen fertilization on palatability of 
grasses.
SEmphasis onForage 
Crops a
Tuskegee Experiment Field
xx
4i&~
V.
~ ~tY~ -
J. T. COPE, JR., Agronomist
F. E. BERTRAM, Superintendent
1L ' .Si I tSE E EXPIUNit i ildt is
tit's ott't in11,lii to r i'atlii 11oi pio-
ditctili o)1 110.it(t l'it. This tw1it of
o'ut il 2:31) 0 cires of Sltsquitilia
vix ' 2 iiiill ioo acrusx ii tic ( tastal Ilikit
1c(4il~ls of Aili),tilit. \lost ofi this is ill
Blacok Belt.
Tiht Fititi \\its estailshedt ini 1938 tot
LEiti- lx \ ' upcim ctts iii (1111 ct \\ ork oiii
ttlitx. sox beatis, (4t aitsti o giiti sweeot
sorglitl) '\\ cct potatoes. costpeits, 1li-
ili, icsjtctlc,,is, oalts. wx Iiitc cilox er,
c iiol itioverxx,x iittI tll l iiir bill lt iii1
xaictic ,vps. iid tiiic s. iti l cittliilb N
Emphasis on Forage Crops
th lii 11) atccil sitpis tt to icy
tiisgs ofs (riici C iiiois iii siiittd alIt
istili toiix ro i cti'i op. iliw te lists
,1 il'2 'N 
c o p lg 
o l t is t'\ 
c ltl
cul t to e staiilish til cri )i td slope wherxxeit''
titts' is .c (410x tihi i's tlliillit ains
Ari Bahscia 11 itg ass,%xel aiiptd 1tot
these i ls, grit iiax t bes11 t xxoii ili i ltow-i
of i l'st D lgi ass a i ift iculIt ito iiii ti I i'l
(a itlstiof comtl~5iititii itoi c ctis
Tal1 ,ist. ctitctii t is ilsigg xx" itid (tiata
xx iti tttt rioass Work iiis hil itis.
tifi tiese
1
ii IgrNasses i'i~i' at itfeen litgn e
i tttxi ii kilraitttesi.att ia
t 0ll ill l iild hiti. l\ r l~e b e
th i besti its ft' it' se wil ithc p i i Ii
t1'st itt itfit o is li it i di u\t x i t it-txl
Qct llia o ci itx li',id u tilo l' tiiit el
ci al i't t cxts xxe csitiis tlie gi aiti hio'ii
.\ht iul lhsict'itil ha st pru I igily
Gaistt I a lpp Sill] xx a lt ci' t t)c~tlioilits
rt'
1
,i1111 icti g ii i'lltlit d iiig 2 s 1,11 s i otit
sc,itci0iig tilil l Abo t I al- i p ititi lit,
A ilt, l \x c i c ias icrigti l xx i t ei is
ilitll ilcuis c ittit 1,t hus xxilili u
1
'
1  
2lt)(
res ionte to ii ga41,ti to (lii t \ii ('1 f re-
sei rc' p aslics trtlt'oll pastri dry x t'iis thcs
lthas hcc I io ims-i d i lit I ul it pdir on
55 t' it i it) d5t tli 011 i lig h itt -\ iilitt(4
gil iiv he (4lii42 oll~s whi 200~ 4:
11). ic of[it xxiii tii s apiet d.~1h li sii i
A herd of, 1 a iage Heireitior t' -\,ii ii
kpt ciii t stihtrcttield to iiitiit'
The use of Simozin for pre-emergent chemi-
cal weed control, left, is contrasted to Para-
quat, an experimental herbicide, used in
post-emergent weed control tests, right.
o~wrttiois 1111t b~ ca lit!I iiit loii Xllci
tx sfu. liii' Xpiol tf p Ic irtl'l labait
Uilii et o (t' .it],v o i h s p iIto l %l
cssili to il iiati theii (iXX ,I si l'licit l d~X
Illit'iit'aici I-ixc )iltl ait \iiioiii iliii
Iiiili Iticelt Neal s lo iitins il .()%
all' i iii of sptill s o~c i ii'i i i l iiii -ilXXiiii
'A i ~ 4
,Cn
a
4
~ ,~,4i
.
", C
A ~
Growing DWARF -SEMI-DWARF
APPLES in Alabama
H. J. AMLING and JACK TURNER,
Department of Horicuture
jolla portioll" of shoots \\itholit lcil\cs,
it (11,11 ac-tcl istic of certiliTi appIc % arictics,
such its Lodi, %\ licli (,I-o\\ I) ill the South
ould bc o\ cl-collic ilhl
Color d(ivelopilicilt of I-cd apples
I I i or I I 1 1) f I I I c I I ce I)\ so lili(flit, \ ill i(itv,
tc1lipcrilturc, looisture, illid ti c(i \ i' ol
( "ol)sidt'rilb1c \ ill-ii1tioli exists but\\ (,(,I I I ed
sports of Bcd I )(diciolls ill respect t('
color dc\ clopillclit ill thc lo\\cr hall oI
the appIc-I o\\ il of Alilbilill't.
Villice Bcd Dclicious is it presclit coli-
sidcred the loo'st ploillisilig of the Iloll
spur t \ pes ill this r(ispcet.
Adc(piatu inoistme aod (rood ])lit low
excessk(i tree Xi(-'()l is illso needed fol
L ood coh)] deiclopillcilt.
Shown here is the_ growth and truiting char-
acteristics of spur-type Delicious.
-'
The influence of mulch on tree vigor and leat rtention is shown h
Allek.AiL 'd 'I'lic Its(, of "top-drop spril\ s should
he it stillidill-d procedilic \\ ith it]] thc \ if-
ictics I ccollillicilded Ior Alabama \\ ith
the excuptioii of Lodi.
Tl i c semi-(t\% itrf rootstocks (-ill I (,iitl\
Ccollilllcodcd Iv( juire it 111111A tl litt \% ill
o\\ (it- soil telliperittilre" ill the root zolle.
14'scal-ch wslilts obtitiocd A Alibill-11 ill-
dicith. that 0 to 8 ill. of pilic strik\\ \\ill
lo\\(,] ",oil tellip iriltill-es 19 F. iLlId illl-
pro\c Soil Illoistorc coillditiolls.
Most orchards woold 1wilefit Iroill
slippIcIllcotary irrigatioll. silicc apples
iIl'(, it lli(dl retill-11 pcr acre crop, ilrigit-
tioll \vollld illole thitil pil expelises Ill
ere. incicased 
finit sizc, color, iind tivc 
\i(,Yor.
13
*55.1
5.-
5,
A s appIcs approilch Illiltill-it\ , thc
telidelic \ to drop ilicleascs. Thc losses
froill this call hoi, o\ crc ollic b.\ itpplicil-
tioll of thc so called stop-drop split'vs.
Napthitlene acetic acid imd 2-4-5 TP
Sil(Ill Illatcri;lls that hilve beell liscd
It
iaii XTTlli thT TXX\i~ sTt caIXTTT. IT lix IidlX
TtILHi ot these do (ITTiit ap~7pe'al ilt71j1iotault:
l i ili.'Tt. Pili tCd s('ic(l aTiid \ TIN X iiiuii
)Iaiitx s Cr subIject lto ox it\ pt's ttl (lix
easi TiXh' t~~t'shoe li-cile The ot
1
i lc tSCedi
liTi(till dciiie it. 'ithep ittli l i-
iXI'dxs ITTIX ]lt beeni xtili 'd ext.'ii
xix el x Sitllil l T paaitic alild sap1r0
phi 11 i11"
1
i itiax (ICCTX XiClx. Cxp)CCiillV
if o4Cllliliitioisi TX lal~ix o i fi i ee aCC rei
Lose 171iitit n pi-cdX lii' '(t e of CI~ ix acl
b\x seedT ti'dttflii. Pio'i
1
CTIN " y applied'
XCCed f T i 4iCidlCs Wxill libe~ itfCt ix waiils
taxliT if(cii tTtioii is t dcaut d
Vei'ax~ii cm t'ixtdiitils ntl 'ce t ~i-xt
liii'ii \N'il ITI c i(-t14 l so iit tai xsoi
iril lt TelTiti (1oi prel('5. il o e
tn sitl Ai 'riltuilril FIT'aiiot Sirttioni
felti~ltIlit' isiTlitil i etliihed OXitherix
14v ltouc ee iwcdsh~
Susation, la C~d Diiit't'xiii 1956.r ])
lixa i i li jiiii sea iT
1  
see i liai'il baxei
Ilii', I ix \ l xx I i ' t maiteras.
aipi, d tii o Spii t seedi L a ' Ii i r tos-
15,lide L ax ' lxiilt'' lit ix see t'liecii ts
Gi~ tliitil expeima t ~'ialt id .3 ii.'. pli
thos iie 1 cool ii lii Xi labiei Xi TXbl 1.it
\Tnxslll I.-
1i 720) 75Wi
1
7
i l i , oo
C I iiili' 7 5
1 1 P-176
v.' P2(04
1 lci ouls x:39-11
liii. ilix 42:3:3
2, 3, 1. .5
*3, 6
1 '2, .2 1 .
il :3
1 '2, 2 fluid
12, :3 fliii
2, :3, 4
:). 4
71 3 flid
1, 2
1, 2, -1
2, :3, 4
TA 131,i 2. 1' F IT 1 T' i xA 1 1 3tN, SC I IF (,
DI)I \ N\ \\I Ti F lii HuNN S it
PI \ r %I IIIp \ IIIii Ii Xiiis XX! Ii X it
Shown here is effective
control of seed-and soil-
borne fungi affecting
peanut seed germination.
Seed ot left untreoted;
seed on right treoted.
PEANUT SEED TREATMENTS
new vs old
JA. LYLE, Dept. of Botany and Plant Pathology
C. A. BROGDEN, Supt. Wiregrass Substation
Ar,iii 7.5
\T,T 75
('icixali 2'
(Cii'xti 2'
I liii. iii'. 3944
\I()r llu i 75
S i'm ,_ii 15
hicurca~c
Bai, o
tio 1,
:36
413
:36
:39
:3 6
15
28
19
_10
24
15
28
:35
241
20
\lotli\aiti add iiiiii' 1.(. itiona (etly Ot ie teed
Sraitl h iit'i lixe tha 2% Xi'x(fiu i litar
xlaaii iE, OPiitdiiw 156:3 t mtidl Tittti
2i mdid x2 itli II iisltiidY pe 
1
00iit' 11).
iOf ishelT4led i itiili t ed. Ititiax i
xt'tE, alxotrPiiag'n xx Tolt aix iiici tii
iitinii \ dr liilols These X''ll t it'
111\ s bi x andi \LII i u lii x Calti Nl Il seed
St~li TI i i'tlti
\li in Toi
\ht,ul Nii
Oiiiadiin 156:3
0O1iici 2129
l'aiiihi' IM
Paiii iii 1 Gbc
Spergi i
'I iuigtii
? (;abli
1, luid t
1, 2 flid
1 !i2 2, :3 tltiui
2, :3
1, 2,3, 4, 5
T
1  
lliiii
1 3 , 5lii
4
71 34
62
52
7 6
57
590
(64
Ilnit 48
flid 49
48
f
data olll\ all other at least
D AYLILIES (Hemerocallis) o f f e r a
wealth of landscape use possibilities for
southern gardeners.
In a climate where summer-flowering
perennials are scarce, the diversity and
durability of daylilies are welcomed by
the home landscaper. Often the hobby
gardener with a few good standard day-
lily varieties becomes interested in hy-
bridizing and becomes a specialist in his
own back yard. Each year hybridizers
offer plants of greater ruggedness, with
a wider range of colors and heights and
increased beauty.
Various Uses
There are numerous landscape situa-
tions where daylilies can be used ef-
fectively. They are equally at home in
formal or informal developments. Count-
less color combinations are available.
Herbaceous and woody companion plants
combine easily as foreground, inter-
mediate, or background plants with a
choice of daylilies in varying heights.
Through use of early, mid-season, or
late blooming varieties of daylilies, an
exceptionally long season of bloom can
be attained. Interesting color combina-
tions can be worked out for the entire
season.
Daylilies are particularly effective if
grown in front of dark foliaged ever-
greens in bays in the shrub border. Re-
peat bloom can be expected with many
varieties. A few choice varieties can
give the needed amount of color in the
dark bays throughout much of the sum-
mer.
Clumps of daylilies are effective bank
covers. Their use on roadsides is being
explored by the State Highway Depart-
ment.
Another effective use for daylilies is
in bold, mass plantings. The larger the
mass of selected compatible colors, the
more striking the effect. Lighter colors
are generally more effective in mass
plantings.
The naturalistic, graceful foliage ef-
fect of daylilies combined with pictur-
esque stalks (scapes) topped with gay-
colored flowers forms the perfect scene
in combination with water. Daylilies are
particularly adapted for well drained lo-
cations near water.
Little Attention Required
If the garden bed is well prepared and
planting done properly, daylilies require
less attention than practically any other
perennial garden flower. Preferably the
soil should be loose and friable and con-
tain organic matter. Soil acidity should
be in the range of pH 6.0 to 6.5, and
phosphorus level should be medium to
high.
Incorporating 2 to 3 lb. of 0-12-12 in
each 100 sq. ft. of bed area at planting
time aids in promoting effective root
growth. After vegetative top growth is
apparent, 1 to 2 lb. of a complete fer-
tilizer, such as 8-8-8 or 10-10-10, per
100 sq. ft. of bed area is needed month-
ly during April-August to sustain top
growth and flowering.
Daylilies can be planted practically
- - Shown is a land-
Sscope plan for in-
formal develop-
ment of rear 
border
of a small home
featuring mass
beds of daylilies
against background
3.' of adapted woody
S ornamentals.
any time of the year. The two best sea-
sons are: (1) in fall, beginning about
when seeds have matured and extending
until winter; and (2) in late winter and
early spring just before vegetative
growth begins.
For individual plants, a hole meas-
uring at least 15 in. deep and 20 in.
wide is prepared. Roots of the plant are
spread and slanted down at a slight
angle. The hole is filled and water is
added to settle the soil closely around
the roots. Where root and stem of the
plant join should be about 1 in. under
the surface after soil settles. To plant
growing specimen, leaves are cut back
4 to 5 in. from soil level.
In test gardens at Auburn University
Agricultural Experiment Station, the
only severe insect infestation has been
from thrips. By using systemic insecti-
cides, this pest can be easily controlled.
Di-syston was highly effective in 1962
studies. DDT dust or spray can be used
with satisfactory results, but repeated
applications are necessary.
The following varieties are recom-
mended for planting in any home garden.
Yellow
Fairy Wings
Green Valley
Cradle Song
Summer Love
Colonel Joe
Delta Girl
Sideshow
Revolute
Cartwheels
Lime Frolic
Lady Bountiful
Cathedral Towers
Cosette
Red
Bess Ross
War Eagle
Crimson Glory
The Doctor
Black Falcon
Flanders
Potentate
Yellow Orange
High Noon
Cibola
Jake Russell
Rose Pink
Neyron Rose
Marie Wood
Picture
Cherokee Rose
Pink
Evelyn Claar
Coral Mist
Pink Orchid
Pink Damask
Pink Prelude
Pink Dream
Apricot
Multnomah
Capri
Colonial Dame
15
DAYLILIES- Valuable Perennial
for Southern Landscape
HENRY P. ORR and W. C. MARTIN, JR.
Department of Horticulture
That old devil Poverty
Wore COTTON'S face in 1860
LILLIAN FOSCUE, Graduate Assistant
OLD TIMERS will tell you this State
has been poor since the Civil War, but
before that? "Why, there was easy liv-
ing. Cotton grew lush on virgin soil,
unmolested by boll weevils. There was
no cash outlay for labor wages and every
man was a king on his thousands of
acres.
SWas there really easy living? 
One
hundred years later let's look at the
facts. In 1860 there were more than
50,000 farms in Alabama, but almost
half were less than 50 acres in size. Only
700 contained 1,000 or more acres.
Was labor without cost?Almost half
the State's population of one million
people were slaves, an estimated invest-
ment 
i
of about $275 million. Annual up-
keep even of a slave cost at least $15
a year. Only I out of every 15 free
persons could afford a slave.
How fertile wasthe virgin soil? Stud-
ies have cast doubt that much of the
South ever had deep, fertile, heavy soils
such as those that cover much of the
Middle West, although the Mississippi
Delta area is an exception. Much of the
South's land had considerable slope;
erosion started as soon as the forests
were cleared. Fairly heavy rainfall plus
extensive use of row crops that left no
cover on the soil in winter contributed
to erosion. Millions of acres along the
coast were thin and sandy, leached eas-
ily, and held humus only with difficulty.
There were millions more acres in moun-
tainous areas and in swamps and bogs.
The cost-price squeeze was felt in the
Cotton South as early as 1830. Fresh,
fertile soil was demanded as a steady
sacrifice at cotton's altar and the costs
of clearing land -and securing additional
slaves squeezed profits tighter each year.
Average price of a prime field hand in
1860 had reached more than $1,000.
No boll weevil problems? True, the
boll weevil didn't reach Alabama until
after the turn of the century, but there
were plenty of pests. Members of the
Alabama Agricultural Society complained
in 1884 that one-tenth of the State's
cotton crop was destroyed by worms in
a single year, amounting to a loss of 81/2
million dollars.
Counting both free and slave popu-
lation, annual per c a p i t a income
amounted to about $250 in today's dol-
lars. Not counting slaves, dividing in-
come only among the free, per capita
income was about twice as much. How-
ever the status of slaves was changed al-
most overnight to that of free men, but
Alabama's income did not double with
free population, so $250 is a more realis-
tic estimate of prewar per capita income.
Per capita income dropped even lower
in the South during the war and Recon-
struction. It was still low in 1883
the year the Auburn University Agri-
cultural Experiment Station was founded.
A "generally run-down" farm of 226
acres was bought with the first State
appropriation to the Land-Grant Col-
lege. Experiments were started even
before the underbrush was completely
cleared from the farm and all the gullies
filled. At that time Alabama's popula-
tion totaled slightly more than 1 million
people, with more than 95% of them
farmers.
Soil fertility, cotton variety tests, and
pest control measures were among the
earliest research projects as Station per-
sonnel worked to meet the State's needs.
Appeals to diversify were lost on farmers
whose only basis for credit was cotton
and whose only markets were for cot-
ton. Between 1875 and 1890 South-
FREE Bulletin or Report of Progres:
AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION
AUBURN UNIVERSITY
E.V. Smith, Director
Auburn, Alabama
Permit No. 1132-11/62-1OM
erners doubled their cotton production
and tripled it in the next decade.
Today the Agricultural Experiment
Station System of Auburn University
serves three times the number of people
it did in 1883, with the State's popula-
tion passing the 3 million mark. Slightly
more than half the population is urban.
The Agricultural Experiment Station has
grown to encompass the Main Station
and 23 outlying research units. Per
capita income in Alabama today amounts
to $1,409, almost six times that of 1860.
National per capita income, though it
still exceeds that of Alabama, has in-
creased only about four times.
In the words of Dr. Coyt Wilson, as-
sociate director of the Experiment Sta-
tion: "For many years our most pressing
problem was low production. Therefore,
we concentrated in earlier years on pro-
duction practices that would result in
higher yields per acre. Acreage controls,
made necessary by surpluses, placed lim-
its on the amount of income individual
farmers could realize from cotton and
created a need for information on the
possibilities of adding other enterprises
to the farm operation. As a result of
these needs, we expanded our research
on horticultural crops, on soybeans, and
on livestock. An adequate agricultural
research program is one that serves the
needs of the part-time farmer, the rural
resident who does not farm, the urban
dweller, and the full-time farmer. Our
goals remain the same. Since 1883 the
Agricultural Experiment Station of this
State has been dedicated to: (1)
developing more efficient production,
harvesting, and marketing practices for
agricultural products; (2) improving
the quality of agricultural products; (3)
conserving our physical and human re-
sources; and (4) making farm life more
attractive and rewarding."
S PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE TO AVOID
PAYMENT OF POSTAGE, $300