HIGHLIGHTS
of agricultural research 
Agricultural Experiment Station
AUBURN UNIVERSITY
4; ,) 
.. ,
DIRECTOR'S COMMENTS
S0\11-1 500 '1'() 700 larm imd cominimik 
lead-
cl.,; hoill I I S()Iltll(,I.ll States \\ill asscillble ill
.-lilakulla polt (.it\ of Mobile cill-k ill \oxelll-
bc]. 'I'llev \ ill I)c i1twildi[lo, the Solitlicill
licultillid sciellce illid I"Allcatioll \ olkllop.
spol cd joilak b\ tlic \iltiollill .\('ricultillitl
11c."caldl (:oIllillittee, thc I'liited
St, I I c" I )cpal t I I IcT I I of \('l i(-Illtlll c, and the
Solltllcm Lalld-(:rillit (:ollcocs.
'I I lose ill Atclidillicc \\ill hcdj\idcd ilito 1 )
I \ Sith
i l ii' t till s ltt i ciilln t tit ii. i id it i i l ol i i i t i s an fill1 ill(
c I ill iit ii li I. i 'I'l 111t il iilit iitigr up it. e I itsi 5 dil\S aiit ia i
isti t'sok oiir ,dtr,\ ( l tiIal 
sre e e
itls , It I(I it t I lI(I' IgI I t i ce, ss il '' I I it iii , I it iI s ~ t I I(,)
1  
ft titit it lII(I
I111 cc(I ( it i I t~ s i ist b iiss itiil it pe i~ut ii \o tt: 31 liii' s- a ll pastur'e
Iititi Is iik sisittis t i ii itu i' IS it litX i ol g i l-ich people,
sissitt iii turfliii Itsitutu hi\ ails isiti 5 :llllsirii iti l d s'Sicitrs itt
\g WI i iii' \I lol lit iielttil seso f)0cioilfgo
silt i's u 5t g t i c gro l \\i il i l tit lwa tilI it tdd es i l opptt I i l itics fi-
I it'i'ili't" I it ils i' iiriictts S ti'i's illi~ So th Atik 1 1:3 1) t ill breakou
ito is )j ititi ils reIu 'cit' ils ss l( I Si t iiii k sIt s is ilischsworii
it ll il \i ill 5 c It itkid I t four itill tlt I i ''tti'lit\ 11 r ap oite ill 
icr ttl ois
F Icii i il i ii' t liii' \\ li sn imistii sf t ih i' i litd ro i t he u d ays
il tu\ iilit It~liciit i o r ii ti c t l iieed itit.rp liclil-Colii 
d
it oii itiitI ism i s itt lsiii s rei i ksu 
1  
it' I ediili i gtti rg ramsi
Huntingf Preseresll filabama 
3ttcin i\ii~ idbcgons
Reen come Tax~e Chan~ililge Imp \ortan t"ol Fil armer 5hgs
Ruslit Reolsisn cSot or Goar Tacpl tej ol Fescec 6eeac
Fa'lt Lean at of Biteeof Meas\\oue by eldt Gradliec 
7eot
New SItllit foIak Herb idllpi Actio 
8h eolliilaiso i
Chagers (,oi osmrInoeadFodPie
Asplirain eandieso Fily 2da Pro klo vl e tdl dress 1
Summter Grassd iRiue Affilects Winte, rD Legum e g on Sod 1 
2
Lololly Seeil11 id Sources inlllll~t A labamal 
14lialssteSuh
Ilicat exionse o A-cltentie csc Land Reteentol Pa 
i 15r
Diapasen Conrle ofiBol Weneil 16ulGrse
"4~ we eaac~i...
lIii' ,itttii t . ill d d t It-., is l tiijt'ot
t eiik tllttitt' ()I iw 16 [is itp ojc
iearc t ii )t'pi t l ( d itt cH 1ta kil
iltito ilUblidstd ll a. s oiS l dtti i c -i"b
wltii' reportedt i hii I
I islt. ('ililld 55 nik.lk
oiu thc Dlt ti (:lhge li i li'\I .It of't'
stIlt l-iitio(, ul Stii' i
b liii' il add it titi t Iiii tttts tl
rcArc vl. a csa
FALL 1971 VOL. 18, NO. 3
A quarterly report of research p)ubljiedl
by the Agricultural Experii'iil Station
of Auburn Uuniversity, Auburn, Alabama.
E. V. SMITH
It. D. ROUSE
CHIAS. F. SIMMONS
T. E. COIILEY
E. L. NICGRAW
R. E. STEVENSON--
J. D. HARWOOD
Director
Associate Director
Assist art Director
Assistant Director
Editor
Associate Editor
Assistanit Editor
Editorial Advisory Commnittee: 11. D.
HOUSE; Mlonus Wiun, Professor of Ag ,
riemtltu ral Ecoiomn ics; PiOBEliT N. BREW-
i:ii, Assistatit Professor of Poultryq Sci-
c'nce; C. (. KING(,, JR., Associate Prof es-
sor of Agroituuum and Soils; AND E. L.
NICGRAW.
ON THE COVER. The boll weevil is the
number 1 pest of cotton. A relatively new
method of controlling the boll weevil is de-
scribed on page 16.
HUNTING PRESERVES
I IN ALABAMA
S
4's
of it'l 'lix l X li iid 1ovs 1(4 ii the iili
p iI i II Ill x xlm it ji' it "liiI il
uw 'w 1)711te I 11 i i l'xi ul \ I'll I
li i l li olx i ii i'i' li t'' \\Illt to f 
l ix 11111 m
txt i\ t 111ln'111 1 ill p \ i 'e \ 4 1 e I II ill ' w
liii11e lii il i li (illi, l t'i x i l l Ali tit if)114
LHOWARD CLARK and E. W. McCOY
Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology
i)I i h liil it ru(illillil" 114 1(ic 'lle 1) 1'
liiics xlii xliii x 'l ixu l~wii'e pr)
1 
lxiil xxoit
(11)1 iiii ix ii iix ii' fei (x l l ro l 'l
Cic ixt xc xx I i NII ltll]i. SIpil d tril
ilitr it oiil iii chl i liiii i xo illo cil
o u Lt d it' lk t ii - .' s a li
111\ i 15 .ii i it l11ix l i liii4 i t \\l~ iiai
it ix iilce l.cs l tx ii 414( Ii i(i rwi 14 i ii'
lit (",(' \ i (' lt'gi I li it(x 'd t't'ate ' lii oil
I'iitiil litx l i l i i I ll(,~ . B i ,u l I iii'
ili uiii 'N 1( V t h i 1111 1iii" mwiio t' a x t'i'lii
ol l of i l it i i s s l't liii ill iiiht' hil.
liti l,\ ix ls to i be iiiilillTo illl \\ i it'ii s' x ii
m4 id lix r imx i i i xt'x i like ih ixeii'of
ii el\( iii xxo I f-ofIi14' ii iii li (ii stl lx olii
0i ll iix ciiov11111 presrve 11 1111 hi p
"lit ei lii' iii cxli xi' 1 w clii i i4 itilliil
es al is h li i it ii ig. 11 (,Iil li es (ii lit'
iw(ire b\ iii \ li t' l ill illix. O ) it of t'w
Icxi I i'(x il t'l xxiii~ 1 ii l l teili ](iks(ix
ott lIilti ig rirluts xfrotm ;I Liii ilxii. Ad-
(,oit\i liii i4lbor' i('il ii Hp iiIiim
lliiiciiiict prt'xt'ie xi' hlllxl 
Ic's; hia-
i it * \ ili i iii' I tl jil ('('~a l o 41i i bliii
iiii i I it xi-s x t
1 
xl eq ili'il'xi ald hlil'
thui ('1)1 i Iiixixt14( it Iiii' r pitit (il
costs lxi lixse as \\(T it'siitl ('di ('di
I jxiill it ii i i iistt c liiTl u ot i llict s i
ioi' devloing i lvee l'tilol pi''i l'
io I lisi t, iim 'lx .ll i i ii liet s x' i (. l a it
lil'xiii of( alit hIeuh t I' iTiil ill l a o
Thedx x iii ios of (-lx I ( liiili ii ii' liie \it
il bi' xx o l ill )ii eIii foi441 -i lcxxilil ' f
111'd o II Ix Lll'I \it li iii iit ( ~i i ('xiifxixe
ii \iiiii ut
4  
i fiit t p ili t (iil ix lilit
l e i l l i i (i lxxi i'x.1 Ia\ (di Nillilly A it11
1ix ' iii pi tioll to tlli I cI Stal t' iii
ill'Iliit'ilt t ixx2il9 x i it t' iiiliixmor
Locations of licensed hunting preserves and
management areas in Alabamna.
Overseeding Sericea Withi Winter Annual Grasses
C. S. HOVELAND and E. L. CARDEN' Departmient of Ai
1
, .oorny atid Soils
Dry forage
I b/A
1 A I,, 1 )k \1 \\( I aC I mp oC XX i\ it ill \\ i t er o it 1111
sclla\%th Uit \\ii~r ilux \XjIats ill~ to tlm l The o)pet 
1 1
)C i ll
"H t.~( II I~ ' a l(ll an XX ll a. tot1 IT )Iit I plltlu of(( he i it cul
Dry forage
I b/A
M Total forage by Morch 20
A Total forage by April 20
D1 Winter annual 
gross
El Sericeot
A
Sericeo
only
M A M A M A M A
Rye Rescue Rescue Ryegross
drilled drilled broadcast broadcast
FIG. 1. Three-year average winter forage production by sericeo-
annual winter gross mixtures.
4
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
Rye
sod-
seeded
Z Winlter gross
Sericea
Rescue Rescue Ryegross
sod- broadcast broadcast
s eeded
Sericea
only
FIG. 2. Thrcc-ycar average total forage production by sericeo-
annual winter grass mixtures.
o ( I .I( 1)1c ( ill ii'il lOiN N a i 2( i \i . A(i 0 ws ;3- (il
b\ March 2i111111 11 0 f vcrcl .1 t1a i clgd 5,9(rs ~elo ih
lift]( ol '?to loI t io 3 (Ar piw iO(. iie. Icslv(yrl, j ijc e the
t( fl" )It o th 1(101 OX load t i t(l J ;lo t ])lts.~1I 11(
foi- ill]~r~ th \Niitr i Yissed t. I liliiY tisi pcljod i ci o ci it.
I Ifdc abou 50'u of4 \Iiil (It(1 plots I(ith (1 n fer gra~If (
o\ esccdcd il ,ricc produced.\f~f The flir aii(, ct(Itlit iill
i v,~ scr icc h\ tQ i*l 220 idi cat 1)1 ing tt th \\lb t I \jVi lii i
dca- e s lw (1(\tlofslicl
3,000
2,500
2,000
500
',000
500
Income Tax Changes Important To Farmers
JH. YEAGER, Department of Agriuuat Economic and Rural Sociology
t't'i I Ftg l \1ttt l I\\ t I itto ((Iiofxw tolx people M l p4it\'a
iitI 
1
t't ia ( I tttilti % o f tI it' 'S. fa t to pIf)ejlfaitSt. t
It it lgi it littu lil tx I ixt' 1pi it ftl itit I Fc e i tilx n x i s Ithfe
mot x 'it lit tillt foili Iti ilft xe l ,ii pat o ti tfu'Iaxx stbfutr
silite t il il titof fhlt h iiiif 0illici(' it toii tit( l lx I ita l tin
Il i Iofixtt li I IT 'c II tit \ o I I6 it xx axo o\ to1 15 of itedt-i'
frl(T it( . 1tf' ll 1)tit it "' , fgh itt 9 xxax o'tft'i
Billion
dollars
25 Personal income 0f form
popultion
5 k
Personal to. end nontax
LpaymentIs to governments
.. ..... ............... ....................... 
... ............
940.1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970
Total personal income of farm population and personal tax and
nontax payments to local, State, and Federal governments are
contrasted here for the United States during 1940-69.
An d the' ~ plifortt l u l oh tLixex to ii itlii ott fatl11 iii ltilje ix
I ik(It' o (ii o e l h'it ghifer'.
With ittio nit Vai rof th 'e .liti p eopulfa tilt, c lx c tt il tax
liix t'alliot (ttio bcii hu ti~freiilx x It ituitit iThne Tto
'lit~ tIwflo 'i xitt r iil itit t iii a \\ j it h lgil lx it cI ii'' ilclleto
lsct ttttt. thses t'oex ofe lici c Thi gixt', a ve t' )5 ttt xit ta x-i
fiii xo sc (aill si i it il be dlt' t'\t.t'xx tft l tt ilt e ix~ t' il di lit f u
t'ti t i li ii \lt fi ic liltt ii'c~~il i.t iii ix os iiiI',lt'lI s ab t\
850)00, Lohet, xesif it ut,' lox ia xxfsses fr~\,$2,0 o ld betii
ti'x d i ll xxhh tit ' ta)(fc ix -c s dedti s c'ig ctt' l it'pit.' I t fti'
\ ilr I til I i'itlfr ill t e Xtoe. detixiitixs I i'g l tlos \\ lllx be
lelie b\I~) ifl-1 i iiih gait ir c ti 'i flixl t'xti Sa e tf i',ttecl as
e c ti or oil al oli 0111' l ter thall t exath bion s. X)0S. I (
it t i i 1 '' ill l\lt'l the tx i ic ~i x lta dlli g fo', pricit oi'f it" If xthi
gaxiii i its xuiiffitsih xx 5it' caxrs (2tl of7,-w rift taken gI
1t'ctillti '1. lw I l riwi. of i scs)u ix hel 0 ','ear d o Itii e
Ilfdi n, Period~ :3 I ULt ti 'it' ixc i i r'i.' ifttl \'i sitfthNc
xx ifll oi ti s (it' of l t cki t'ix fol t dt raf tlc breeinohi- is dt
pltt't',' to he atitfc( 9,'it' a11ftel aubititl i tcaturei~ varis frod
Iitai tof tol he 1i'x ) ' \\i it\\ ateqfore tgatehoi seg ill in pt'l
b Ie l x', t'i'go~is to I i'ti o caitalk it hes treatmnt.ou ftic
ofi N6 it'll ill s t itt iii it iii, 'ff ix o ' toc'e t ee d asin
I f)litl i l, i illo 1) to''' fix( hiiifll iixe o',tf tx p \ex'l degreiation
te lclol" 'IIka pisox\asafe W lido k t e
Healthy (top) and rusted (bottom) leaves of Goar tall fescuc.
Ruiist R esif'li ute SO iitghb
for Goar 
Tall Fecue
CHARLES D0 BERRY, Dept. of Agronomy and Soils
ROBERT T. GUIDAUSKAS. Dept. of Botany and Microbio/ogy
1111)01tiit ill \lilii)L tL. Ti\i lI iict N fila~kes
IIl IX til I ri \\X II t ha o f i( I(I i X (('iI
11 o I ((XX icI I :31 \i triL l \, II till idi i tX
Ili' Ill \iI (Ill . Iii ll , i t . IX 11 XI I IIIeI
fib IX r~ Ils XIIc1111 11il/ild ( b\ the114 L ll inis1
Iii l l(Iill X( lit('I XXl Ii'i fl o 14' X Xt ,I( '
I) lX III an, (I sI 1i'J)''I oIX llic 80000 lILIXf e
I i ll II i k i ia III it 1(141(111.il
C ~Is Feiti is olkX of 'I I' I( I f \,,I aI(' i'
aIle coII ctsl (XI 111 IXLIXI JiilIIX grase that"
fit it \c11 11,', (I ((X graingl~ II L prol La i tlia
thcIIL LII onc1 ta cll t(IXLIiX II(IX Xlicc'jI-'
II] DIseashll e ESie to Spot e
tlilliw d th'I X is III i s cal pl-mXI (II I 11IIl LI'illa
ill tlil till II14 IX. Ite blo co\,, oi l (I 1011
paoIXi is olfll (tiP ape fLIII' IIIXh a1( XX ll it\
kI llIillcX X 13 1 [(11.J( i t 1 
j11 it(IX '(II''
biliI X 'II'.o X iXI l obe~lLL i4 lliII Ii i('l
11(111 it, too hil XI o \1 rusII Ltol IL I (I 111 LI It
6c ,c . ''i ir p o l il i \ t o l-
(III11i11i:tte ll( I 1la1e XII(i iI' 11 1( It l IXl till]
(.il 1 (111 X IIll ls LIII ItIL 111 i (] li tag ofXI IIIX
Ci ' s 1(1 l(l('1 iit III IlX (lll il it -ls III I IX
Breeding Program Underway
\LL I FX ci'lliI'ilt sIILLi II(I(111 )lL]
e It i
1
ll( 196S X i s i'(IItIm II aIX Xc\il~il14
IOLclitoI i Ill 'stX ei)L i til XXII it]II i lL of illI
fill]X Ic' lc Pro lem Xthat 1ha1' to beIX IIIIX X~I'
LI Io i'III' to I c i L I~. Ill it projec ('3) IiXX
bii (, I IiX of 'll.s f r Icssilie iid t c
Si \ X Isalks i 111 s oI IIilIL' e X I'all' (II
]i c. spores \ave L o ifIsil
(IXas L LL a ( ~t ('40 XX im i )I I X Xic d(I to
I t rl IX 1 (11 IX) ]to\ liX Xh XX NII IXill i ll-'
I;1It(lI 1(1C11 to111 XLIXec plitk ;1' 1 (:I XX ll
t ilrlti' l- fI(III 'I' I-isIIt X d uic I' ll OX \\,iXs
lso iclIt (1 1111 tI((I 111 tl I X 11
(III \ ckol LIoII] itdlf I\ LIIII II X IIIX 11('I LI LII
111's XXs pLIXlt AfI ~tr be pti Icat ed th
mld if tc I o LI(L b I ('XistLi (('I 12 IliX. X Latci'
1 o ((X i tt I 0 'I II' XX ll(' 1 i I LXI~ i i ill-I
Io\ \\fllI fll I!(''ill
1 
bc(111141' LIlIll Il toll
it(14 1(111Ill . Hcisi mc oI IXlII Iletc sccd
resist il'I('( pl\II it \\ilI(\ s Ii X II LXI ILL (INp
i I, il I I I XLI It allLI f Slle \i? I Ic
EXI I XI I SI, t] S I L 'I I Io
RI 1\(im \ I I I ILL LtII.I\ I 1
Sp Il ilci Cp l(td XIIII Lice'c
11 IIX I I c ll~ III c
27 LdiX\ S. 2.7
55( Lf.LX.-)3.
1:111( 40 2.
1 :2.
75 F" 8.-j
60) +- 75 F' 8.71
9)) 0'p 75 FI0
(I lid XItIl l', I llot rl. :10 M to 10
SfILL 1 'XXIX 1' 12 L X '\IIXtcI I L L
Fat-Lean Ratio of Beef Measured by Yield Grade
W. E. POWELL
1
and D. L. HUFFMAN, Department of Animal and Dairy Sciences
FAT MEANS WASTE to the average meat
buyer, so beef with a lot of fat is usually
passed over in the grocery store. There-
fore, relationship between fat and lean
of carcasses is of major concern to beef
producers and packing plant operators.
Being able to evaluate carcasses on
basis of yield of salable lean meat is of
primary importance in meeting market
demands. The USDA yield grade is one
tool available for this purpose, and it
proved accurate in tests at Auburn Uni-
versity Agricultural Experiment Station.
Fifteen 600-lb. carcasses were se-
lected to give three representative of the
lower end of each of the five yield grades.
' Now with Cooperative Extension 
Service,
Auburn University.
Pct. of
cold
carcass
100
90 - i: Miscellonous
i portion
80
70 
one
60
.Fat trim
50 -
40-
Boneless, trimmed
30 - wholesole cuts
20-
10-
I 2 3 4 5
USDA yield grade
FIG. 1. Physical components of beef car-
casses by USDA yield grades.
The carcasses were graded and the right
side separated into the five standard
wholesale cuts (chuck, rib, loin, rump,
and round) for study. Each wholesale
cut was weighed, outside fat trimmed to
about 0.2 in., and then reweighed. The
remainder of the carcass (flank, hind and
fore shank, plate, and brisket) went into
the miscellaneous category. Each cut
from the carcass was separated into a
bone and a fat-lean portion and individ-
ual weights recorded.
The fat-lean portion of each carcass
side was ground into a homogeneous
mixture and a sample taken for chemical
analyses of moisture, fat, and protein.
Percentages of boneless trimmed whole-
sale cuts, fat trim from the wholesale
cuts, carcass bone, and miscellaneous
portion were calculated for each carcass.
Pct. of
edible
carcass
100
90
80
TOMoisture
60
50
30
20 -Fat
10
I 2 3 4 5
USDA yield grade
FIG. 2. Chemical composition of beef car-
casses by USDA yield grades.
Differences in physical components be-
tween yield grades, from Figure 1, show
a wide variation in percentage boneless
trimmed wholesale cuts and 
fat trim.
The boneless trimmed wholesale cuts de-
creased progressively from 
61% for yield
grade I to 49% for yield grade 5. There
was essentially a 3% decrease in 
bone-
less wholesale cuts with each additional
yield grade. Conversely, amount of fat
trim from the five wholesale cuts 
in-
creased from 2% for yield 
grade 1 to
11% for yield grade 5. The 
increase be-
tween yield grades was greater as 
car-
casses became fatter (yield 
grades 8, 4,
and 5).
As expected, there was little variation
in percentage bone regardless of yield
grade. Carcasses in yield grade 1 had an
average of 18% bone, those 
in yield
grade 5 had 12%.
There was a steady increase 
in per-
centage fat in the edible carcass as 
yield
grade increased from 1 to 5, Figure 2.
The marked difference in fat cortent 
be-
tween yield grade 1 and 5 carcasses can
be seen from this graph alone. Fat in-
creased from 24% to 45% as yield grade
went from 1 to 5 - an increase in fat
content of 88%.
Protein decreased from 19% for car-
casses in yield grade 1 to 18% for those
of yield grade 5. The greatest decrease in
percentage protein was between yield
grade 1 and 2.
Moisture followed essentially the same
pattern as protein, decreasing from 57%
for yield grade 1 to 42% for yield grade
5 carcasses. The decrease was about 4%
for each yield grade, except for yield
grade 5 it was only 2%.
There were definite relationships be-
tween USDA yield grade and carcass
composition determined by chemical
methods. This was true for percentages
of moisture, fat, and protein. In fact,
yield grade alone accounted for more
than 83% of the variation in carcass com-
position.
These results indicate that USDA yield
grade is an accurate tool for determining
amounts of lean and fat in a beef carcass.
Since this method is easy to use and re-
quires no extra handling or cutting of
the carcass, it has wide application for
the livestock and meat industry.
New Site for
Herbicidal Action
Pinpointed
EARL R. BURNS ond GALE A. BUCHANAN
Deopa~rment of Agronomy and Soil
MASON C. CARTER, Department of Forestry
Prl xi iuiii Iluifit mm~iikioii treiuiiiuiiiiilx lx reiiiiciiig (101)
Th x kiiiixxeli of theii )ix tici s it il eitsi hadx aliitici
titllix, re li d i -iiei
1
i .x (tic i imihit nilli x ac ixo
tit pctiidi ishit oio, iiithe i petii iutibeiomea iti tail e
too i iui lijix ill "to ijf tiilitti ololl extt ae) ix t i al of lipl t itn
~iii iiLioxloit ix xiios I I lijt 11ltit iit l lii s ti( i ii(, pr( l )( ic
di taix toi( iiletix b kiiixxhgeitilt li le ctiii ax xiii ixetii' u
ii T i s c i i iii xi i ii le t I iciil is iox \iiiii xolipiii hue
Aids Study of Photosynthesis
ii ii iiii) it ill( Il _Ii iu ( xi ( ixc li t 'Ilt it ii i it ii i i i li ) i
xoix i Iiox eatol f clii eriiti iaxct i f iiiit l ixtli cieu i
xtiliii itt tiiillcitiiii ofi pluithuxtluexix bitc thuese her].
1 iteitlix loci k i a' iili ofi pu ttix Tit I lxix xx it 11)1t io t'rim iu
xx ith oithe liphixixes Muc iiiii lax il Iiaiuiei iaiioit phiotiix Vll-
tllei tiiiiiiigli the li' itihese pcxticiihx. Muichi more1 ('li
hei iiiiii xx ieu tliiir spec'ific site' of ictioil ix deiterinediC~.
xi ix xitt I italotuic i tol it \\11j.1 111,1, \utiuutu Iiixcix It
mlate ), andi Jix icior ( 2,:3,5-ti 1(1111)1(14 pI iiIiiioi ) wxhile dli
icaly ixdissim iiar, 
1
)rodi i edlxi simi l I ii (ts oil sensidtive PITAotS.
Thiese effects aire itidteli/eli I\ tihe almiosit total albseuice of'
(iiioroiilxiIli ite \\ g(lxx tii tlolugil~ tiiiii t. .. \idic front
(rll sienits hlax attempi
1
tedi. \0 ilott successN, to ih(Om('
siili iltilijiit ut I tilte sxli , v texix ofi iltliti iilxi or (.1l iopiat
dix li
1
omeiit Mxlichl might ixpitii i 1ii ai otli of tliixi Ileiiii
i( s.
Inhibits Corotenoid Production
Ili stuii iij t Aiilaui i it \\ it, iiotedl tiiat Jlatit tireatiei xxitit
aii itoe. iiicloiiitlte, ori fl\ idoii atti io\\oi ill hat koexx pio-
uphillatc plllto miidt iritl.o \isiiiii (i oteol aiehlt
phi, ti ool ei lil litiol o otsglfcli \steos
uiixeiiithat trixeated ats fiild to tiliiiicox liolix l tiat it ll-
tiiediciii Inst iti. one or moreii pStudix ixititx o t Bcloker Lax lil
gatte tili xhe hreate xx a tste xitlotieitti i piiient tihatie (fill
iW1111 t ll t ifireate phI t wvusalea iapae
ighdt treatiminto
144 hr. GO0 ftc.
144 Ii-. ( t) ftt. +
3)1 14 15 :28
[36 I 8 [16
ii~ex resulitx fr om thii phititiiitruitiuuu ofi iitiii pli~d illit
More Study Needed
B -iatliti'iiu is a largeT loItilitl11( itxsx iitlii'isi iiixke
ittllieu or xti c \oiti i' ( pciii ) iiat the ri'iii iiiiu
otther exseial x itillitix E hu alx Kili' xx ltiiix,iil tro tiiiit
ioteluoii precusors ill pliallt tixxiii. Thei itflitilcc iii imitiiiie
ilhornate, aind pvricior ii thie xx oittiiis if thiise lattet
v itarmiii ix llut kiioxx o..
B-u t the i' lscmci x ioi thle muchmis o x ii ct ii ofiii these ]ier-
hiiiii ma iit itiixl il itt o liiuui.'iix tiixxl~ Il l ituii'ttiliiig
to devixelopmnot of miiiri ill ett ix 'I hrici des
C J151 fi111\0 \ \1, I\ 1 1111 ts ;Ij011\ (l5:ailO tolj1c is - 1-
\lost leole take Ito) act ioo - x li.\jst eorollain, pal
IHrics, and
1 
;sk for itxx ige ilicrease.
al :I lot of1 oiskiiig I\idlliltl\ ,v most of till askiiigs weret, 
lit ill ioese \\iIs ol\II";,soI)c ci(lj)iti inicome 
rose 7 1 "
Not all segmnelts of tile ((Illlollix got thir share 
of the III
crisc5 iii iisposal l ioiic~. I ikc fII 10(15, 
lot- example.
Mlost lwll raiz ('Mi/I it hiniiis doi oot pioch(1 
a timle clock.
but it Is I (It glill .li\ I itdet stood ioxi thieir ii comne 
N'l les
or)1kid.
Oo liii ig tha I t itis tiii sales II (I ii 1(011ic is ft I 
linrilell
(11)10 ltlliit\ I or -i lusilig1w jill1)111 oisc o giicititi M l 
0(1od
icts. Sillc) tiiiiix X high1 itse ofli lix tiig pbsXJiles mlost peopilc
xx itil tie foods tliix Xx out, htt c o an ilcilme raise 
wxill be
sj)ei it lot. food(.
sttis iillcresel aboulit i8" b ict\\ll I1961 anl 1970). 
But
ttirdli s of (t(inhcrease resltedl 11.011) 
1
1J)ilatill gi-oxxtii.
1I .ills l iitalos of5 fat Ii i p odilcedlholds inicreasedi 6o7
Mxille )1 li uit a diisj)osidlc iocm \\asOii i sill 71%.~
Ilalill 1961. Thiis I ,iis Si (Il it l l ixl ii to 
xx fill Mole dle-
aingl~, alii (itlil coiisoluir xcix ices. ()iii ;1 siiil poit 
of tie
ii) io se xx lit toi puiuiiiei .
anid \N le( 29 hiliiel iii 1 971)0 a I 1961. Priices i clix 
id lix
fill lills fluctualted lor 111 1011 retili foiodl jiricex 
bult tiiex
till 50111 l)(rcclitl illcll051 as for1 retaiil price' alctuaol 
(fl
far and( cents iltlillili5 \\erll giiitii , Fori lelliijfi, 
ax erng
1)1ri ((lix (Ii lI belf lit tle 1)-o 1 oiccis \x c Iti 11p :34 7 hetxx 
cellI
i961 01111 197), all actio iIllclise lit (6.81 p~ci 
il. )uuriiig this
salil iln tl ht iii ee ills xxiit III) (oilix\ 25 
-hot this
ave 5w 1 9 5 iiii x1) II ) ii Il t h I I ( ii ill R i i llreoe 
o c t
lkloll a liiitua I oot xos i I 511)1itt11) leii 
iot 115icillase
\\t) Ilic p io (liii, i966 s t96ll andc 1969k AlI 1)1
1
1 coliii (1
didl jt shai oik e )i (15 \lt li 11(1c Ise ual 
all( 19o4-
965 il d i i ssl iiiIiial il the lst sc .) dI i iiisle 
piies
fj \i l ly i ll oI (glw i ( 4 li t i t a)o iii cI ill) l.o 
ii ixx ills
rt(i b ilxlic iiii xlloes fo1 ti lxs mik 1971).rs 
ido vlies
Fwc ll lx- 196f beel h)ili))x 96co iI p1c icm 
oilfxere 1964
Mlilk pllue s recekc5 (lltl seio tx lll. rc tlipies be\ 
l 16 ndk
I 9(5r IIll fl970l~.
SI lhl ig Il 145ilixs I i~ ii Iiti i l ic s Ii) j oll ii)il 
I ( )r IIc
I ll) ijs xiii ltillie tol wideoII.1 I ai Irie of rn1,11
H G
C Nma S IN_
consumer
in corne
frm
food prices
retail
food prices
MORRIS WHITE, Dept. of Agricultural Economics oand Rural! Sociology
I- Index 
-
(1961
1801
170
60
50
30
120-
110
20
110
00
-t00)
Disposable income Civilian
expenditures/'
for farm
foods
- RetailI food/
- prices/
- - - -.. .*/Prices received
. farmers for too d
1962 1964 1966 1968 1970
,.M I.ilk
.. Wheat
L _i..II.
962 1964 1966 1968 1970
90qu~
I'( 62 1962 1964 1 966 1970
A comparison of 1961 -70 changes in consumer income, form
food prices, and retail food prices illustrates the widening gap
between prices received by farmers and prices paid by consum-
ers.
Aspirations and
Family Progress
NANCY W MARTIN
J. E. DUNKELBERGER
Dept. of Agricultural Economics oaid
Rural Sociology
11 IN Ili t I w l.\ xx cl appe(1
l )t tiiili ix" Ill(.\ lii' il the pasi l t . To
s lic it'iisli's I~ilit l to tIlleift 
' ta
lot x It x i q tic sOtt is ii 
i t i I is Iit
is.5 I liliiiix, xxcit x i i odies tlrt 
ithtoi
xxiii, Iiilx tix id \i hoidx t~ig xtipil x 
i
Ittiiti lo11i'hi t t itiocolo lxi Il) 
1.(1)10 aditc
iiIT( s iiix l(AiI jI1 lit .52 
liicilcx
IeT \lli dl ii li xx iijit dliii i ii-6 
tlllit
it t itil ix of I'llx it l i i ii l it 
it 5l
liializ (.1()1 ' lilt t iti . Il 
9 0
15 2 ii lis \ iT I (\oj i ii 
tixit licad
I\ litli itlricicd \x flx uhf T i1 till 
ast
Lxd till h96it iiloly iittii I ilil ii 
xx hu
(t dH~IT I iI c the c\i l clit ofi 1 xil 
hcf Till lit.
()tii il l\ it (it xxf l (I t t 52 
Tim(liT I
fTuutI tl ilcii Hixtitti ixiteIioti
ill 96. l of IitxI Tth fiT IJIc 
h t tIixxv
xxoit I I I xx tal t I ijtli ixj)tl I it 
cl j i xcithi
iitx e to I% r 9 ( )I ixpl t l xtttx 
lile comx-(
pliii I ilt lii Ito li bif x im. ofl 
death I l6
Sitito I 01 i of tl t xi it lxse' 
Illitfx Itlle
xit( 6 lit il xi i (clt ix ti lNi It 
xittxx lls
are tilt- fron iii tilt 111if placcf
1
s. iixx I\lT
xiii~i S ilillills ofhitTTlaIi ii icTilxs 
(u iitl(it
lto it l ryxliiix ti ca Sit ))tlllt 
il \ttc
ilt o lit(( At t t lit.4l pix lg itptix 
ittI
I itlt if iti thlii lxe l to3 xxii 
xllc ii ig I
N liii tiihilt xxiii xx illitigT tuo x ii
iilxlt deTxx tktiitlithei Spax itillxxc11
l ( tot xiiixit lit iOmlirtC ii lxcI
xx W titt il lic toiuf dtiixi I itt lol.
IMi I tilTlx htilt I I60 ;ill( 196 clsiderioxil
illitilfx l fitt' li lik xhl posses lt iii. l
crafi itliitic itci stinkx iii luig \\uit-I
titug b ii I iklll c xilt A itm ijix 1 
ii
"ouil if litigli Lx l lt li ii t ot 
h ul i l l t
xxi tl r i dedt t ha Iit 4:i3;i~i~ 
x i titlifd
'\i l liii -otthiilir of liiii.th o l(Iii 
f iui
l tit l i lxx ccii ll o (r 1 (5(5c] dia 
1 titi x -
oish xll 1x96i. (icci sit xf milxi 
tixx'
ha a I itt th ulloflixl~ xxutu ix 
lug~k it
\\ilit toot t.\uuoxc tttit tt (ll x~~c 
x tuItiu.
it()\\ i (I lelx tlwliii ix r h e x tIicii 
lttu i
NIt oither Xii iitxxx c xx dxiw xtt.lt 
lix ut-k
Ittiiuci lolx lix clitit l ju pix 
ituditit
fnxciili I911(l . x d xlevltail ai\)igi 
thei,
Itiutaltfiflixilix xxb ilid hihdliii 
ihllii
xxr both lix iii ud A1 itlmt it]] If88 ili
iof Hociliil lx\ c ii liuttili hgh 
josxl
Iit (4Iolx.l iii be\% e 1 960-66 bxui t 
t il]\t it
xitt\i hil Iliilit aiipi cioclTeillxxix 
2.911 ott
Afi x(,-lc~ia titptl xxtil telit 
uxpli
litil itv 4ilsIttiol ofiit xIlioxI 
till 96
Many rural tonilic aspire to go from thc
type house shown at left to the type 
shown
at right.
(I i x 4'4ixl 1 t l I I gtsk il 
ixut iltl iiic
xoiiitt I ll 11111 illli lix iii li i l o l I I i 
Iit
i i i l c I i l i ltitt i i t t i l tl i x i l l t 
l i l t
ill11 tt jl liai l ofii allx xi i (itiixiit'.ii
XX l i Iit t itttit~t ;l i xtsit t t hat 
t it ci-
liii li 'Il it s a itt ili (t iiiilitx 
ilol
itlt xt ix ct iou t lityli soit-co 1111 Iitt 
p x ci
itilxjillililie hittlitjil\ iixfuto xlx 
lll( ltc
ft itt t h li iitlti xx it i of11 c 
i w tiui li t it-
xtio i IcNi. ili ii, iNmv dcx t I xidi 
ixxI l l-
xxlTkt~it titfit
\%ii l it itt li it
liii icr, ti
pIc till 
xl(iiiit1 ttlid'? ta
xill l~il)x
52 6u 1o152
196 1966
SOIL CHARACTERS that favor growth and
high yield of crop plants are also favor-
able for maintaining a rich population of
soil microbes. Therefore, attempts have
been made to relate soil fertility and
numbers of microorganisms present.
Numbers of soil microbes are usually
assessed by a dilution plate technique.
A small amount of soil is suspended in
water, and a portion of this suspension
is mixed with a nutrient agar medium.
After a suitable incubation period, num-
bers of bacterial or fungal colonies that
grow on the agar are counted. Although
the approximate numbers of bacteria and
fungi per gram of soil can be estimated
by this method, the technique is time
consuming and tedious. Also, the re-
sults show a great deal of variability.
Recently, attention has been directed to
assessing soil microbial activity by meas-
uring chemical activity rather than popu-
lation.
All living organisms possess special pro-
tein molecules, called enzymes, which
are the chemicals responsible for a cell's
chemical transformations. Each chemical
reaction involved in growth and develop-
-ment of a cell has its own particular en-
zyme. Since such enzymes are usually
associated with living organisms, their
occurrence in soil can be taken as indi-
cating the presence of living cells. In
other words, the higher the level of en-
zyme activity, the greater the numbers
or activity of the cells present.
One enzyme which can be detected in
soil is called catalase. This enzyme de-
composes hydrogen peroxide (H
2
0
2
) to
produce water (H
2
0) and oxygen (02).
FIG. 1. Relationship between quantity of
a fungus-infested soil and catalase activity.
FIG. 2. Differences in catalase activity of
soil samples from 10 experimental field plots
at Auburn.
In the past, catalase activity of soils
was usually measured by adding a known
amount of hydrogen peroxide to the soil
and then, after a suitable time period,
measuring the remaining hydrogen per-
oxide by a chemical procedure. This
technique was not very good and it could
give misleadingly low estimates.
In recent research at Auburn Univer-
sity Agricultural Experiment Station, a
technique for rapid, accurate measure-
ment of soil catalase has been developed.
In this technique a small amount of soil
is suspended in water, a known amount
of hydrogen peroxide is added, and the
amount of oxygen released is measured
directly with a special electrode which
detects changes in the oxygen concentra-
tion of the water.
The method was tested by measuring
the eatalase content of different quanti-
ties of soils which had been inoculated
with fungi and incubated until the soil
became infested with the fungi. Results
for one of these fungus-infested soils is
shown in Figure 1. The amount of cata-
lase detected was directly proportional
to the amount of soil. This means that a
measure of catalase can be used as an
indirect measure of the soil's fungal con-
tent.
The technique was used to measure
catalase in soil samples taken from 10
experimental plots at Auburn. Each plot
had been maintained under a different
fertilizer regime for at least 10 years.
These plots were planted to cotton in
1968.
The catalase content of soil from these
plots is shown in Figure 2. It is evident
that the different plots showed very dif-
Crop Yield as
Related to Soil
Enzyme Activity
BRYAN TRUELOVE and R. RODRIGUEZ-KABANA
Dept. of Botany and Microbiology
ferent catalase levels, indicating different
amounts of biological activity.
The table shows the measured catalase
activity and the cotton yield obtained
from the plots. Statistical analysis of
these data showed that there was a sig-
nificant correlation between catalase ac-
tivity and yield. In other words, a low
catalase value was generally associated
with a low yield and vice versa.
Catalase assay alone cannot be used
to predict cotton yield with certainty,
but it could indicate the probability of
obtaining a high, medium, or low yield
on a particular soil. If equally reliable
methods were developed for other soil
enzymes, analysis of soil for several en-
zymes could give a body of information
which might be used to predict the yield
potential of particular soils.
RECORDED CATALASE AcTIVITY AND 1968
COTTON YIELD OF 10 EXPERIMENTAL
PLOTS, AUBURN
Fertilizer Legume Units Cotton
in of Coeldn
regime rotation catalase yield
0
Lb./A.
LPK Yes 29.86 2,468
LPK No 25.76 1,066
None No 18.05 195
LPKN ......... No 27.56 2,907
LKN Yes 27.07 1,700
LPKN ......... Yes 38.88 2,508
LP 11/3 KN .....Yes 2,0.34 1,795
LPN .......... Yes 2,0.34 86
PKN Yes 18.21 1,683
LPKN +
minor ele .... Yes 32.98 2,703
*Data courtesy of E. M. Evans, Dept. of
Agronomy and Soils, Auburn University.
11
12
It;~
Summer Grass Residue
Affects Growth of Winter
Legumes Under Sod
C. S. HOVELAND, Dept. of Agronomy and Soils
E. L. CARDEN, Brew'ton Experiment Field
J. R. WILSON, Dept. of Agronomy and Soils
P. A. MOTT, Environmental Sciences Service Admin., UJSDA
JiioiXino siii n imitiil this ii anit vetchi iii sttmmer
gIrass sod is affected bv atoint of gYrass stubble left. But the
(fleet saiies tiiuiiig slifiiiir gr asses aiid XXinitel atlillial leg-
t imes.
\ uclii arrosslia c'liiver gi('XX bettiei tlim critosol iat all
stiild li'iglts flie ii'l A labamaii~ tests. Penisacoila batia \\sias
tiluc lltli tiii(iisti ictiX to(i l cie giiisstli (him Coastal betuda.
tegairdless iif, stlilile Vegt. Netch seedlings can penetrate
tall] stiibblle, sio this ciiip slIiiiss ed little dileirciice because of
gri ass Stiile li' heigts.
Ili thei tifioiii stiiihs Coastal att iliiii sods were mowedC~
toi s ;iiolis highFlts ill loidl tii late O)ctoiber' bef'ore broadcast
seiedinig sth sealiificed (lhuis oi iiistcfi seed. D iazaiion w~as
applied f'or cricket coi ittiil. Thew sod \sias hf t iiioihistiii bed to
situi li ie 1nit Iia
1
il i('si'('ilig( ii iii) iii is. %\'.iii ros( i tsXd
sefiaritil( friiti lss it hlos st fol- s ieli deteruiiiatioii.
flo Ci:oastal bcriii olagi atss sthib'l piritected v etch anid
is illiist atfliste bv dit ill Tabihle I . Blii iin tfie giass le'ft nlo
priitectk isr'iesiduie d11iii~ iii ii nnaiti on. iind 
4 4
"( iif all seedl
spiiiiti'l d ldiedf Th i' gi ass stulbble sets ed ats anl iiosiilatiir
seed'(lcgil niittiolo ioat I si'((liiig giro\s\tl. Nla~iliii tetllira-
tiires at( tile siiil sin )lioci oil 0( tiihii 25 sstii' 95 F ssicre stiil)-
file ss\as biii cil S.5 ss itli Iiii. stubbille, mdi 77 itidei (73iii.
s tllihili. Ill (iiitil~st, lns soil slii ace tcipijuititi is ii De-
c'ciiibir I I s\-ci c :31 i i ut ei i siid, 32 ss ithi 1-iii., andL 46'
0[1 Plt'saciialoli ii stil duli', hiigh hald little effect otil
ietch ger'mination iir gi iis (i. Es cii ss ith shiirt stubble Ot'
luiriilig, a delse bldiia sod teioniiiiied that p)rotected thii v etch
seied atnd resuilt ed iiihi bttei'r geininiatiij thanl oti bernu ida
Sill.
R~esutlts wyith sill -sceibo cbs c('r- swete geinerdly different
thanj for s'etcf) it)i a 2-vear expeliroient at Auiihiii. Crimson
(Illsver stanids llld fiurnige s ihls iiicisei sliglitl ss th taller-
Coas~tal stuibbhle' Tabilei 2. I1m~r Cis os i(iastal sod swas tbininer
hiii uisial fior this graiss.
1k""'Y
'5'1C
- I',_A
ILA.
Stiill(oh'
hig hit
6 inios
:) ioecii 5
I iii h
Billrlied
fLlaiits/sq. ft.
11/4-111 18
No. No.
6.1 8.2
1.) 4.9
:3.6 5.6
2A 1.4
Dry~ vield pier
Sol. ft.
12/29 -2'/14,
G; .
2.4 6i.6
2.2 5.0)
1.5 2(76
(0:3 01 9
As. sil
1 
teiiip.
10/ 20-12 /31
NMax. Nfin.-_
I)ig F I)'t. F
6~5 48
7(0 4,1
7.3 12
78 42
'1'Amsioti . F -' Ii aiOF SiLiM ii IIF l fei -, i o tOs IAi
SiA\Ins ANoD ii s 2-Yi.. so \EHAGEi~
Closer and( stiilel licieiht
(enii ol bahia o
tiioIli rill \ s.ifi
3-in. 'tilsbhl'
(3-in. tuibbic
( ii.stulberm daO
ciilii inloss ll
3 ito. 41 lbie
(7330. stuibble
]ill. 'til I I
.3 ii. stulb) Ii
(3 iii. stiliflde
f'laiits/sq. ft. Di s forage
lDiceolw bet s i ilcre
No.Lb
2,29 0
1,6201
I ,:350l
S1)07)0
78)
130
2,930
2,890
2,8(00
1,540
1,632)
2,020
Yuchi arrowleaf clover on bahiograss sod April 15 was 12 in. tall
w hen planted on 1-in, stubble (right), but there were only small
clover plants on 6-in, grass stubble plots (left).
Oil a denlse sodl of (Coastail, someli - (1(1d t('(Ii(tjioi proiaili' 
cailli be'expected( \\ ith at tall] grass stiilbbli. At tlhe Alexandria
FLxpel itieit F'iel, crimsoii clrovr 5 jils we (re redutcedi fromt
159t lb. of' (iV\ 10orage per atcre onl 1in. Coastal sod to 970
ifdi'i iIose (lilil('( girass Sod1 at .\iilii i, Y"1 h 11(1) arowxleaf'
\(+(1c1 aboiit tss i(( as imic(1 ats (1 nosonti ci., lalile 2.
(:oaistil bci ikida stilib li i heigt geici als lihild little effect Oil
total clov er vields. I Iigli gi ass stuibble generallY delayed
sfpriiig griixvthi of cbs ci sce photo).
Both clovXers 'shoss cd drasticalls redutced \ iels from high
stiileli of hiafiagrass , Tabille 2. ( noi 011(loX ci producedl 0111.
ii cthur to(i One h1alf ats 1111(11 as, '1ichi ilrrosslealf. Cloveri
stiids 55cr ('e'iclicedf some. buti to at lesser ex\tenit thani X jelds.
Poor cloXver griowth und1e(Ir 6-iii. bah ia stubl \\it c s probably
causedl bs reducedl light 
1
iciieti atiolliialt tiattilig of the sod
Ton coiviparistil \sitli Coastal. Tis reduci(ed early-I spr-ing
growstlh.
Thiese' risijits slhoiw that l('iXiiig it 6-ill. stuldile oil thlil
stiiu(1 (if ( iisasl bet molda illias fin islh protec'tioni andl imi-
prove c'tlover i~i a 5~ \etcli g is (I. I loss eci, lii bel~rmuit
.sod c'aiil t' ('\fO'ted to iciliice late X5 iiitei iiid eryspring
gi oss (II of t'lI)XI cilless the Stubb1 le is ir'lXemve.
B~ahia sods are iisualhY deiisc. so) close cutting Or grazinig is
requirted for giiod ilove ('r giisstli. Ill i.(iitraist, X'ecli seedlings
fiji;bl to pii' it e till]uj stifl il('c iti l seed (l gi'riiut itjuin lili
b 'll e ilijuins(
TABLiiE 1. EtFFE(A rOil COSTAXL Si II.TL, 1101.1' - ON111,11.1 xV: I
STA\SN AND GR1)(3ois r AND) ON Soil. SiURFA(C. '1'i i lii 1 1cii
, tM I "; I i. " I/
som 111Il of, soia~hl oi galli/ai
this tx~p pil itto iii iiiiix dni
peck id] i)tIic'i of lower (VimOk mid st o i) t li igh theit flock
thewi i iii oi'li i liiia ill the floick \\xii is peci'kedt h\
()Iit(( thie soiai li de or lic -pek oldr (Iii a's heiii v"
fihed andC is not ilixiet b\ outtsidfe iiiffiiiex, each iiidfi\
il l t h fok wxill rci tigili/i its social po)titj ill iii rlatiifi 
llc dV(ife elifleit iif the soialti orgaliiatiiiti hegitis asI
axs 6-8 wieks iofag iwcii midies midi 1 I112 weeik of age ill
ii ilixs hiiixx Ix e it is i itt fiill] extaiblishiedfi 111i Iitt i:
Dm)iiwi the fex iloiiietit of the pick order t a elitiliii ,
if a gi essiil mu ii st oi iiii depei in ii ipot I the iiioli t ofi
pit itiiiii loii floii leiiei miiid xx itei spaCe. This aggiix,
bhaxviiir call iige fr om fight jog tmid pus sicil dianlg
the fiiiis to :i siiiiple thiieit ilofid i~ilitwe hbetxxeeii illf
ilals. ligf1tiiig modf plix xii a i iio i och Iiiire piexal
oilix t fliaii illilaeiisi ixpei llx, xx fteie miililctitiiiii is L
Thie aggeiv (ixi ihiliiii Iiax rexiilt ill cilliiliifle (1
liixxex at iou ii IS-20f xx eks i age iiilecss gooid 11oaiagelo
piratctiex arc lsed to redie fighting. \LIs ire-( doinitl
ox ,(Ii eii fiiuxxs hoexei, the I ix lkihx dio i ut peek funl
illiliss (iiiiipititiiiii fiui xtili:i is high.
Af tet mitniriitx" chieisi xxii tiimiuplete thlir social oi gait'
tioii iiuf iluxp sil uiiultiet betxxein iniiduals is l(i"
Ag.iiii coiitiliiii thruighi xoii l exrssioni or1
stiiiex. siitu the bat
1
l il ippilucltigex aie tlhe
icitudutiiui fator iix ch ickiitx xiifiiuifiite ir
fuciif liuxxii tfhaii thetr diliiaiit Iiilhuuis.
this liiiixx postur e ack ts it a tilmilis for dunl
to at tack./
Although phi , sical hal Iii mlax\ not restult lii
menit iif the soeiaul iii tl, there is alxxl vxs at eei
social xtitxx'' iipoii the bfunds. I Ig ityiO
itiI) reduictd gi iux ti irate, (2 ) lack of it
( ") less i cisttaiice to dliseaixes, ( 4) loxxi - tol
iild 5 ) loxw hirt ilits' ili the hiltecing ffca I /
if lix devloipmenit of the peck oi-der it, ild
shnouldloit be prexveintedi. Soicial sties /
he luxxciietf fiuixx ex iiv fix
xx atei ai iii fi ut illoxxiu!2
omicec it flx buell esttihiislt
IHeilicilig xoiai xtiesx ib /
diifficult xiiice aggriolxiii ix It.-
serxvlng xiriie oif thle f~oiioxxiwi t practiesx
(he flouck oiixxii call iiifiic'e xso(
Dechavior
C.'e idteps
2. Hlaxe groxilig Peiix Iiiiiiti1i I'i s to Ilit, x"lilitiilii alli
temipeiraturie so that lii is wxill be (xci lx' ist riloItef thrioughi
coit thei pciix.
:1. fla Liv xiifficieiit feederi and xxater space exeiih, dixti ih
it x oerih ,rwn aiea. xhsis r impoirtant xxhfere a
-1otei tceut g rolig i x lix cx i
Avocid hainig more timi one age group
1 
xx ithi iuta pelt.
D~o not attempt tii eomhiiie pelts after 10t) w xeeks of
'i uceakiiig of fidx andc tfhe lse oif ltiw iiiteixitN light cuinjg
flit girowxinig 
1
)ei-ii i ariieo o iii pract icex. Th ese pract ies
Ill i ititct ipltYicid iuii xx iici rixsiltx fi-om p~eckinig; hioxx
\(I-, tiex xxiii iiot eliiuitte social stres's. It Ilax fbeeiu xhl
htat i ott'ract 611 i are hiigherc iii birdls xxhic h hav e beetl de-
'aiked axs comopared xxwith thoxe that havie tnot.
A fteri thle social ore i ha i is fat it establhi ed n , moan agemni t
a.ctices xxic \iell i upset the peck iter, such ats the coin-
tiig of pensx sftoidii Ie axvoitded. Alxso, social xtiess canl he
leii at at iniiiimr hx xiippli ig ple tnty of f eedci anid xwater
pac e n ,x vii tlixt ii itet thirouighut the pells Venitilationi
nil light iiitcixitx' sfioliltf 1)e liiiforni1 tiroiigliiiit the laviii
olSe iii Oiii ch to prexei Cubircds iiinl i cox iig into ici taiii
An tiiufcrstmilcling of tbn' social bhaxiir patternis of chiek-
is ill colahilt jiiodliie to app]i coilrect maimagemc'tit pro-
* ire l etlitilig oxeirall losses dlii toi ic',YgrlexxuioIh iil
LOBLOLLY PINE SEED
SOURCES in ALABAMA
KEITH D. LYNCH, JAMES F. GOGGANS, and GEORGE I. GARIN
Department of Forestry
SEED SOURCE is an important factor in
determining rate of height and diameter
growth, survival, resistance to southern
fusiform rust (Cronartium fusiforme),
and various other economic traits. This
has been substantiated by numerous
studies of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda
L.). Most seed source investigations have
dealt with large geographic areas result-
ing in small numbers of samples from
any one area. These studies have not
provided foresters in Alabama with in-
formation on desirable seed sources for
specific areas of the State.
In the spring of 1961 a study was be-
gun by the Auburn University Agricul-
tural Experiment Station to test loblolly
pines from 8 seed sources within Ala-
bama. Eight replicated plantings were
established, one in each county that was
used as a source of seed, see map Figure.
In this way, trees from each seed source
were allowed to compete with trees from
each of the other 7 seed sources both in
their area of origin and in the 7 other
seed source areas.,
Measurements were taken on the 8
plantations at the end of the seventh
growing season. Overall analyses included
plantations at all locations except Henry
County where there was an accidental
fire. These analyses indicated that a
number of traits were influenced by seed
source. Among these traits were height
growth, diameter growth, and rate of in-
fection by fusiform rust. No differences
in survival rate among seed sources were
noted.
Average heights of trees from each
seed source at the 7 planting locations
are presented in the table. Trees from
the Henry County seed source attained
14
the greatest height, 17.70 ft. Trees from
Baldwin County and Clarke County
sources were essentially the same as
Henry County trees with heights of 17.41
and 17.30 ft., respectively. These three
southernmost seed sources produced trees
that were among the fastest growing in
most planting locations. The seed source
which produced trees having the slowest
height growth was Winston 
County.
Trees from this source averaged 15.40 ft.
Diameter growth followed approxi-
mately the same pattern as height
growth. The Henry County seed source
produced trees with the greatest diam-
eter growth, 3.13 in., followed by trees
from Baldwin and Clarke counties. Win-
ston County trees, with an average of
2.78 in., showed the least diameter
growth.
Considerable variation in amount of
infection by fusiform rust was noted
among seed sources. In general, trees
from the more northern sources had less
infection than those from the southern
sources. Winston County trees, with an
average infection rate of 4.73%, were
Seed source and plantation locations. Key
to seed sources and plantations. No. 1-
Baldwin, 
2-Chiton, 
3-Clarke, 
4-De.
Kalb, 5-Henry, 6-Tallapoosa, 7-Tusca-
loosa, 8-Winston.
least infected by rust while Clarke Coun-
ty trees, with an infection rate of 9.09%,
were most infected. Trees from Baldwin
and Henry counties had rust infection
rates nearly as high as those from Clarke
County. The tendency for faster growing
trees to be more susceptible to fusiform
rust has also been reported by other in-
vestigators. Rates of infection experi-
enced in this study were lower than those
normally experienced.
In general, the three southern seed
sources produced trees with the most
rapid growth in both height and diam-
eter. Trees from the northern sources,
while having slower growth rates, were
more resistant to infection by southern
fusiform rust. It appears from these early
results that Baldwin, Henry and Clarke
counties would be desirable sources of
seed for reforestation programs in wide
areas of Alabama.
AVERAGE HEIGHTS OF LOBLOLLY PINES AFTER SEVEN GROWING SEASONS
Planting Seed source
location Baldwin Henry Tus - Clarke DeKalb Tala- Chilton Winstonloations Bdwi n H er oapoosa
Ft. Ft. Ft. Ft. Ft. Ft. Ft. Ft.
Baldwin------- 11.05 11.51 11.50 9.95 10.82 9.80 11.54 10.54
Tuscaloosa..... 13.53 14.16 13.03 12.70 11.52 12.08 11.84 11.73
Clarke-------- 14.00 13.71 12.75 14.81 12.39 13.08 12.88 12.11
DeKalb------- 20.02 19.61 18.18 19.93 17.60 18.05 17.40 17.11
Tallapoosa----- 24.52 26.16 23.81 25.84 22.55 23.50 23.67 21.20
Chilton------- 18.04 17.78 16.74 17.29 16.19 16.84 16.92 15.61
Winston------- 20.70 21.00 20.25 20.58 19.77 19.32 20.18 19.63
Average------- 17.41 17.70 16.60 17.30 15.83 16.09 16.35 15.40
MOST GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS for ag-
riculture have a primary goal of main-
taining farm income by supporting farm
commodity prices. Usually farmers have
been required to withdraw land from
production to qualify for benefits.
Different land retirement programs
have been in effect for several years.
These programs varied from long-term
cropland reversion or retirement pro-
grams to 1-year programs tied to spe-
cific commodities. More current programs
are specific-commodity oriented. How-
ever, the Conservation Reserve Program
provided for long-term retirement.
Although cropland retirement plans
were geared to stimulate higher prices,
secondary effects have been equally im-
portant. Under some programs farmers
have shifted marginal land from crops to
more suitable long-term uses. In other
situations maximum land use was neces-
sary to protect historical allotment bases.
Finally, most commodity programs con-
tained provisions that encouraged farm-
ers to continue to produce various com-
modities in order to be eligible for max-
imum program benefits. One result of
these various activities was a reduction
in the rate of off-farm migration.
Major Alternative Programs'
In the 1970's, land retirement pro-
grams will likely involve either plans to
retire whole farm units or to continue
plans to retire parts of farms through
land diversion or set-aside procedures.
Program participation likely will be vol-
untary in the sense that price support is
guaranteed only if all requirements of
the program are satisfied. An individual
operator will be free not to comply with
the requirements, but in doing so will
forfeit all possible benefits. In either
situation, government payments will be
influenced by acres withdrawn from pro-
duction.
Implications for Alabama
The effect of any Federal program on
Alabama farmers depends largely on
what crops receive the most control and
payment limitations. Generally, major
crops produced in the State have high
market values relative to present retire-
ment payments as compared with other
U.S. production regions. For this reason
any plan to retire portions of farm acre-
age annually or permanently will not
'Zepp, C. A. and Jerry Sharples, General
Cropland Retirement-Analysis of Four Al-
ternatives, ERS, USDA Bull. 462, April
1971.
HOWARD A. CLONTS, JR.
Department of Agricultural Economics and
greatly affect production. Farmers will
merely retire marginal land and increase
production on better land as much as is
economically possible.
Controls on crop production, on the
other hand, may have significant effects
in Alabama. Assuming that a government
program were introduced that estab-
lished equal funds to retire cotton, wheat,
and corn land in the major crop regions,
more cotton acreage could be retired
than either of the other crops. Cotton has
a higher cost of production per dollar of
net return than corn or wheat. Hence, it
would be retired first. A low payment re-
striction, say $50 per acre, would reduce
the effectiveness of a cotton control pro-
gram since net returns normally exceed
that amount.
The difference in effects of part or
whole farm retirement plans would de-
pend also on whether acreage or produc-
tion criteria were used. Generally, under
either acreage or production controls,
whole farm retirement plans would tend
to remove large amounts of pasture and
other cropland from production. As a re-
sult, significant acreages of crops not spe-
cifically controlled may be withdrawn
along with the controlled crops. How-
ever, it is possible that whole-farm re-
tirement will affect the less productive
lands first unless acreage payments are
set at very high levels.
Minor Control Measures
Several other plans are available that
could be used to control acreage in pro-
duction. At present these are classified as
minor, but under given conditions they
may become quite important. Among
these proposals are government purchase
of long-term crop-limiting easements,
mandatory land adjustments, and use of
Rural Sociology
regulatory and taxation powers in states
and local communities. Mandatory con-
trols appear the least likely.
These minor plans are limited largely
to local areas and at present have few
general applications. However, it is con-
ceivable to consider large scale tax con-
trol in future years.
General Effects
As with any plan to raise or maintain
prices, there would be a strong tendency
for increasing production on land re-
maining in use. A general cropland re-
tirement program provides more incen-
tive to cultivate new lands than annual
or part-time reductions. The amount of
new land, cultivated depends on relative
prices and costs for alternative crops.
Also a long-term program and whole
farm retirement would enable many mar-
ginal farmers to leave farming. One con-
sequence, however, is a hardship on ten-
ant farmers unless retirement programs
are restricted to operators. Without such
a provision tenants would be forced to
bid against the government for land use,
thus raising rents significantly. This sit-
uation could greatly affect Alabama farm-
ers since a large proportion rent at least
part of the land they farm.
The larger burden of long-term ad-
justment costs would be on the non-farm
sector. However, secondary effects of a
reduction in agricultural activity could
greatly affect communities highly depen-
dent on farm-related businesses.
Changes in agricultural programs are
inevitable. Unfavorable publicity in re-
cent months plus development of tech-
nological substitutes for some crops will
accelerate the change. Farmers must be
aware of alternatives open to them and
be prepared to adapt and adjust.
15
IMPLICATIONS of ALTERNATIVE
LAND RETIREMENT PLANS
in ALABAMA AGRICULTURE
DIAPAUSE
CONTROL of
BOLL WEEVILS
F. R. GILILAND, JR.
Dept. of Zoology-Entomology
llt Iliii 1111 X lC ii~ii wt'IIi ist keyi to 'oito'
il'c nrl ''i' ill ' Alabam j il''ild~ ills tift
Ilic so'l tl I lilitl iS t I ( Ite 11t11e' . I i s s. ( tii
Xl ill ' llic SII tti'l 1) is d o1111 XX t l (''ii i
XX '(Stis Ior11' bo' \\ec Xl X Xi'tIl tO eiti XI
I ia iXl' still Itc cd $1 1 50 mX1 i l lio isi' t o t
thrloc is iin'tlio( (i('igii('( to kill
boll X \((CXjIX below C he callX ('0 ttitin (ial
Duingio 1969, it (iap)iiXc c'oiiti ol pro
graint XXil cOX IIIiCtCd ill tin' ('OO~ iX MT
Va\ i c ia of .Xlilraini. .\Hn o\iniitehl
1I 1061) acres of c'otton iii Sh1bh \, Tallil
(Iega, aOid St. (lilr counities XXrCI ill
I it' WCXt (ill'Ci. The ('oitl ti1) 10 gran coil-
0.25t11). per ti C 'Il( fis appl~oicfain
X%-iOX illalic Sept('zII(i 15) XXitli XiiI)c~j(it
appic'ltio iniadl' oil SI'pt'mhber 25 ai 1(
October 8.
b('r of 1)111 XX ('CX IX attiiiog (iit siX
M11( iid X riSilig theC X iiiter. The suIccess of
theC 1)1 (grain XXits first indlicatedi by sn)01]
XX (cXiI (atIclicX ol ti (IpX b.iited XXithi I
XX iict boill XXI'I'Xii sxI attractilit. TheC
IloaI(IX onic till) pel (ICi. ThitI' i((g
Sioinhg oif boll XX ccX iilfetXtioiIX ill
reiv'c(C'iit(tis C fieldsX thrioughioiit the test
iti COt tilitilei St!ifiCi theC successX (of tie
(IX I'XXiititI weevCXil popi.tioi). A conr-
AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION
AUBURN UNIVERSITY
AUBURN, ALABAMA 36830
E. V. Smith, Director
PUBLICATION-Highlights o
Agricultural Research 9/71 1 om
ill tilt tc~st a11('( illI 1970 (i iid cinints illade
poi (X 1 X 'tI ll l suc t i 'll I laX' 'I t \iI
hlins \\oc(I.9 970 cntiutd t
I~ ill' (I I (ll il ij(' t i ' ll of'(i Ioverig i-
('ll llu s twiiXb ilesii tai eXpi's! Xl
lo\\ c~el., fo lld il th (i ls e c t 7(
Tllc ~ ~ ~ 11' OV1'l bet eo eo i'gll
loui id Is' iw lo.cUolis o to
illso ~ ~ ~ :4. 3.9 c ivo .Ioig til is
_\cios, ~ ~ 23. 
5.1) il (t( e t le1 a v
t\\ t8.iin ils
BOL4 VXI \,~ FDS U R,,I II