HIGHLIGHTS of agricultural research VOL. 20 NO. 3 FALL 1973 Agricultural Experiment Station AUBURN UNIVERSITY Th I. I a V ) ~~1 / Art - I I I / - e A V r,>t4 >/ -- ~ ~t, a a b 1~ U A I DIRECTOR'S COMMENTS llF(TIN I C ON( i1N about ftood pric('s id food suipplies hia', hi gi ii l ed tile imporllitanoce o)1 thet Uitedt States' agl it i lial 1p1o- duct ion . Various statemei ts aud( expr ession s reporteti iii the pr ess, howeverC ', iniat it a gross laick of uniii titi X i lig abou11 t food pi odtic- tioll. XillplV y aiitl prices. 'lie 1IatimlXXide nietwor0k of agi- cui tila experliment~t stations 1has tlen ollstlac itei. capit "N ]lot oly ht) 5Cr\ the loc(a1 (111 iimmiediiate initerest ot tihe ipeoile of ~icac state but also to oX itl.X. col cnt tilu il~I ali XX st basic. research1, Xcic Iitific (IIXOceic. Thoise whIIo Iread tiitst' comlirilelts knowX tiiat agicui oture and relatedl a- iisi XlesS Ill ba iisc- tol our t'COiI(Iil 'fiThev supply tiii.' f'ood needs of this N\ati :iii a111( liinYi peIioples in theri R. 'DENNIS ROUSE natioins. 'The people of these 1jilted States atc ll8 aga~e of 1,449 lb). of food in 1971. N\CXei befoie C iaXe a people Ileei fetidi so \ell alnd for stuch a small pioportioi of tile wvagcearnlliiers' p ciiccks. All abuindanice of footd is the Xtrenlgtih (If inir Natoni. ()nklv wxith United( States' stX le researchi anid tecll oiog\ , baciikedtl ip) XXitli the illceiltX of free eniteirprise X\ Xtem, tain \\(, conltiniue tto feed the ec r-goinOXiig populatioin of thlisX atioli andt proXvitde at supplnX foi exNport. For th e palst scX eral y ears aid it lit il r ccIit mo(liths our i miili IIo coincern Xvas agr icultiural surp1luses'. Policies and program .111 X'IC geared to redutinig produlctioni and to ii ci tasing expor ts. Wiith iincreasiing albilitX to puirchiase abiroat, agYliCiiiitiii al i'\[illtS llili healine ie5s a ) it ptenil soiluioll to halin1 i io(f paiCit i mn pobdlmX. Thei, ilmiost OX (I iiglit, XXe becamet'(101 cn etie about liug1 i doetlictI food prites a11( Xlii)rtageX ofI agicu tltturail poducts. Oiii col tenI's about Xiurpluses lapitlx changetd to colicerlis about de'fits. WVhy tile sultli' icthange? A prime factor iin otr piresenit sliolJ age is tile lack (If ap1 1 1 eciatioi by some iptople that agiculturial production is still based onl biologrical pioc iipies. ])(,spite tremei- dous atdXanices ini kuoiwXXhoXX 1(1r pi tduciuig fi et mid( f'oodIt, there is still a biological lag( b~etwXeeln the detcision toi protduce mlore andtl the ability to p~rodlucet u -' XXe ct li't protductt beef XXithiout first IlaXi i g tile capacltity to prodtc t t call. Tihen, theiet i C tte biiological lag( betX teli the call an id tile readl 'vto-cook 111ioduc t in tihe it'tail stole. A setontd factor is til t hlie ic piociipie of inelaistic- denliaiid tilat prevails the nIa rrowX rainige from ill Xlificiei t suply~i to at surl- plus. lTe preseiit shlortage of telrtain foods1 emlphaizcs tile unlap- preciatetd blessiiigs (If it surlplus. IiitentiXve is a ti thid factor ill tis supply picture. The tottalli mug pi (litctiX itX (Ivf tiiC, Ameicain fame tr aiii is seinse (If comopeti- pix' of' food 01oil t'e imar1ket at iioX prices thlat haveX ext'istedt ini rec('l t vears. Tis has bleen accomlplishietd through (I ighler priotductiton per mail bY usin~g til(' retsXults ofI Icsac Xtainii dI t imp)roved tehnoii lotgies. 18111 output per' manli has iI itreaseti 3.A times in tilt' past 2t0 X ears, at Xcom partet XX ithil] 1. .7 tiimes illii t' man1 Iiilmti h i ind( 1 us- tries. LII llltrs acttompilished't tis bX makilig hleavy itiXcs i tieilts iii tis~ iliti(',et'l i iX ('stilent allil prodtucitiXvity, the averagt' incont' of' farmeris lags 1T% 1beh ind tI 1111 811 petople'. Thuils, fai l 'I5i laXe t'i(t shlart'd fllyX ill tile' lletflts iii thetir proltilitiXitX . At at tiiie XXhlen Amt'ritans are tolitt'rled mabout suppi l lld pirice ilf flotis, it is 1i11port aint foi' pc'opi(' to app~reciamtt' thlat algrictiurial lii (It ill is it bitoligital prtotet's, tihamt thetreI is itaro Im1 IXIlarginl 1 It\e X('i i iCit intenltiv e to producie for otihtis. 1)-.Iri e 'I' c 11tvedt ec ul ap Deanil, Agritlturlal Experimienit Stationi (Alkahoonia Stitt', I i is 'it XX r illlIiie XX as II O~F mil lial 5tiI'l tI I )r. 0GiltM'(It i, hiv oll l is ut it'iliX [Iit tnI If i i i y t~l tiiX I ti l U ieritijii iii anlimlla stie itt'. Ile re- ceIXved both the MI.S. andil i t degrees from1 (Wkallolna Stitt( ' hjls itX XXithl m mal~jor ill aimual Iaeediiug aiid gen'letics. IHis expferience' iiitludes XXork as a fit'lt- mauil for Wuisconisin LiXvestoIck Improve- 11111 t Assoctiationi; asistanit allit associate p r(If'XXII (I itd Etenlsion spec('ialist at ti e Ui IX 'Isitv (If Muniesotal; assoIciaite pro1- less511r and ptrolfeso (' o1(f liiiliai stiencItt, O)klahoma State UiXeisitv. Ill. OlflvtX 'ltis athoredI or clmli- tillc mor I11(1e thanII 90 researti an~ld thier' pubicat~tionsX ilid 11as bet'n mal~jor asdvisor oIl fi~t' Ph.D. thitses anti 12 MI.S. thetses. Ile' is at mlember o1(f 11utmerous Ipr~ofession al aud( illolorarl V(i gaiIzitionii. He and Mrs. HIGHLIGHTS of Agricultural Research FALL 1973 VOL. 20, NO. 3 A quarterly report of researcih publisihed bXy tile Agricultural Experiment Stfationl of Auburn University, Aubuin, Alabamna. R. DENNIS ROUSE ------- -- Dire'ctor li-, XIT. 0OXI rI II)r _AssocI(iatt' 1)mu (ttr CHiAS. F. SIioNS--- Assistant Director T. E. CORLEY- --- Assistant Director E. L. \iNcCRAX' --- -------- Editor R. E. STEXTNSON - ---- Associate Editor E1.111t)1 jl Advt~isr Cool ifcc IRVXIN T. 0XIIlIIID; JOHN LVIE llN) I PrIfCS~Or OIf Fishieries and Allied Aquacnltnres; ROB- ERT N. BREWER, Assistant Professor of Poultry Science; HI. S. LARSEN, Associate Professor of Fores'try; AND E. L. Mc- Cu XXX. ON THE COVER. Candling detects infertile eggs, see story, page 3. H A..TC.HAIIY is usually identified as the number of chicks hatched from ai given number of eggs. If a hatchability problem arises, this information is not sufficient for a solu- tion. First, it is necessary to know the true fertility. There is little one can (do to improve overall hatch if he is obtaili- ing an 80% hatch from eggs having ai, overall fertility rate of only 85% since a 5% differential in true fertility and hatch of fertile eggs is considered normal. On the other hand, if 95% of the eggs are fertile and only an 80% hatch is ob- tained, problems do exist that can b, corrected. True fertility may be established Ib using an egg candler. All infertile eggs and early dead should be removed from trays at 7 days of incubation, brokein out, and time of death determined. A set of 35mm. slides 1 showing the devel- opmental stages from day-old to hatch- ing is available as an aid to hatcherymeni in distinguishing fertile from infertile eggs. Embryonic mortality exceeding "nor- mal" (2-2.5% during 1-6 days of incuba- tion) may be an indication that one of the following managerial factors should be checked: 1. Storage temperature- too high or too low. 2. Age of eggs should not be held over 1 week. 3. Internal contamination - floor eggs or dirty litter in nest. 4. Improper temperature, humidity, and fumigation in incubator. 5. Nutritional. Embryonic mortality between 6 and 18 days of incubation should be less than 1% although considerable mortality will occur during this stage if eggs are improperly handled. As an example, in- formation in the tables are hatchability data collected from a flock where the eggs were improperly handled. This was a relatively young flock and hatchability had been unsatisfactory. Candling was performed at 7 days of incubation and all eggs that appeared clear were broken to determine true fertility, as shown be- lo\ : Classification Number Per cent Total eggs checked 3,424 Fertile ._ 3,168 93.00 Dead at 1-6 days 81 2.56 Upon candling it was established that fertility was not as high as it should 'Address and price of slides available from author. All infertile eggs and early dead should be re- moved from trays at 7 days of incubation. ANALYSIS of HATCIHABILITY PROBLEMS G. R. McDANIEL, Department of Poultry Science have been for a young flock; however, it was good enough to give a respectable hatch. Number of early dead (1-6 daxs) was not unusually high. After 21 days of incubation, a further analysis was made by breaking all eggs that did not hatch and classifying as to age at em- bryonic death. These data are presented below: Number fertile eggs Number chicks Hatch of fertiles % Per cent not hatching Dead 1-6 da. % Dead 7-14 da. % Dead 15-18 da. % Dead 19-21 da. % Cull chicks / Cracks , 3,168 2,804 88.5 11.5 2.5 2.8 1.9 1.6 1.5 1.2 As noted in the data, there was ia spread (difference between hatch and fertile) of 11.5%. The embryonic mor- talit which occurred between 1-6 (lays and 19-21 days was considered normal iind the sprelad should have been 4%. In other words, this flock should have received a hatch of 95% of fertile or 89% of total eggs set. Referring to the analysis data for pos- sible improvements, the 1.2% cracks oc- curred after traying and was probably a result of rough handling during setting and transferring. The mortality which occurred between 7-18 days (4.7%) was excessive and most eggs appeared to be contaminated. The 1.5% cull chicks was excessive and was probably a result also of contamiination. To correct the con- tamination problem, nests were cleaned and new litter added. One of the simplest ways to determine if problems exist in the illcubator is to collect eggs from clean nests iand set im- mediatelv. Check fertility and calculate the per cent hatch of fertile eggs. If a spread of 5% or more exists, the problem is in the incubator. If a good hatch is oh- tained by this method as compared to tile regular handling methods, the problem is outside the hatchery and concentrated efforts should be made to ensure proper egg handling procedures. -.- ~i ,'1 2. L "I- IMPOUNDMENT TERRACES REDUCE SOIL EROSION EUGENE W. ROCHESTER and CHARLES U. BUSCH Department of Agricultural Engineering V AIlOU~S ( NS~lls xl ION p1 actices hlave been~ used foIr years by farmers to stopI soil erosilou caused 1by rainlfall. Early efforts inlclluded terraces oIll tile conltour. Tllrolugil conltoulr terracin~g camel 0(1(1sliaped crolffilmg alreas and1 short ross - no( troule for tile h~orse a11nd floss but at real fprobhleml for 111111tir-ms tractor aiIll 111g. Xi tli I Ilcrcasecf use of' thfe tI ac- tor-, MIAMItOO tel _I ,W5 C I Cvr mod1(1ified to1 ma1k e thleil 11a1rallel. Pallel11IC terraci IIg uIsual]\, ni I .11t reshlaping (It tile laud1( surface to get proper dIiaillage and1( ill mnaII cases, tile addcitionl of v egetatedl w5atcr\5 a5 ,\ to ((1115 " Nsswater doss II Slope. Thlese mrocleri ied d0cservtioni ch~anges 11av5e ci eateci Iless fprolemdd~s. Ill ero(sisve soils, ssaterwsay s ar-c ClifflcCLlt to Illaili taill. Manl 5, yattcr\55a.s qu(~lickly c-oiliver-t to Id(itIcles 115 illtr111111 Irain s Icculrrin Ig sI 1111 I after coulst rccti(Ii bfor pr(1 olIfplc i I tatioll Icall b~e estab~lishled. WXaterss )\S establishled 55 itl Itve(4i' taltioll are regillail Isbombardedl 115 tractori traffic of cu111th a \at ilol, 115 lhe rbicidfes f roml fild cs, and cI san S bl ast 111illIg fr, pricles coried 55ith ft of 1(111 alltel. CII 115(1(1(1 tIS 51 IIICs tCl-\\ as s 1f111 in~toI (isiepail , forlmlin~g uconc(itrolld field clitelles. D~itchles blreak fields inlto seglilelI ts reslultil ig ill sholrter V11\\ id( less efficie lIt farIill g., InllyI tillI s remov05illg v ~allibl 11111( from produllctioni. Man-ma l~lde colocelnti Itiols (If wsater from di tiles cll Icause5 lmos1t1 as malls fprob1 lemls a1s havsillg nlo conlservaOtionl practices. FIG. 2. View of impoundment terraces shortly after a 5.7-in. rainfall. FIG. 1. Parallel terraces crossing old drainage channels (illus- tration compliments of USDA Soil Conservation Service). ition of troubllesomne ssatersvays bY extending terraces across the riraiuag'(e chann~el 'forming implounldmen~t areas its Ishown iii Figure I . Tlhe imrpoiiidineiit areas collect thle excess wvater anld sloNis discharge it through sunrface inlets to an iii (Id ground pipe system. The big ads antagyes of impoundmlent terraces include cim- Illat ion of ss aterss as m ainlten ance and1( all in crease of colitil no 011S ross len gth from ross s extending across old ss atcrss dv lo- catins. The public 11(1efits too. Dlurinlg tile tulle wsater is fpll (ed ill tile terraces, sandli ai 1( silt 11a1ticles ss Iliell we re flicked upl by tile mos ilg ss ater are settled out of su~spenlsionl. Thlis mfeanls cleanler ssatei cdischiarged from the field. Thle pliblic gainls fbx basing cleanler streams wshile the farnler m~a intain I salunale soil oil tile field.li Illmost eases the ill field ImIovem~en t o f solil f rm steep) slopes toI tle impn dmn area1(1Ilo actually improves tile hld slope inl the field. The dlesignI of impondmcllent terraces inlcludels plann~ing tile storage svoluinc and outlet size to take care (If' runoff from mrost stormls. T1he larger the stor age volume,, the( smraller the req~uired dlischlarge Irate. UsuallyV a "saf ety svalsve" or overflowv area is provlsideLd at SonI I loeationl fIile terrace toI disch arge ss ater if stoIlage N olunle is exceeded. Tile us erf]lss' locationl 1s selected toI miiizei/ potenltial ofaiage to thle terrace and( tol tile field. he plipe oultlet system is designled suffieiill large to r emov0e stalldillg ss ater swithlin it period (If' 24 to 48 hlours to plrevenlt damrage to crops. Perforalted p1ipe is buiedc 1beneIathl thle impoundmen11(1t area 11) pro(1vide soIiI( il linge allnd thuis shlorten tile ssaitil g perIiod be(for1e traffic call safely crotss ItIC impoi1 11111 inet III (I. Two ilmpou11111 ilCet ter races located onI tIe IC \gc ilfti Irad Digin eeril Ig liesearel UnIIit are sh~ownl 1in Figure 2. 'dau farmercis are C io dilng impoundmI Icilent terraces useful ili d economl~ical. 0Ovei 100t syss have5 115 beeln installed inl Alabama. Es Cl tihoughl they showIN proise i1s an1 Crilsioul cont1roIl fpractice, impoll mi1diIet terraces lare lno t desirIab~le fori i111 Alabama croplal 1(. fopog apI Ivy, soil ciod if dlitY V.l 1111crop- flillg practices shlould b~e consiclei-Cf s when selectinlg imspoundci ll1clt terraces or anll erosionl con~trol plractice. Young crossbred bulls like these have made economical gains when put in feedlot at 180 days and finished by 13 months old. IPUSHINC BEEF CATTLE to slaulighter size and grade as fast as possible offers chances for feed savings. Young cattle are efficient users of feed energy, almost equal to any meat pro- dueing animal, but traditional systems of growing and finish- ing do not take advantage of this. A good example of age differences shows up in an ainimal's daily maintenance requirement. An 800-lb. steer requires 6.47 megacalories of feed energy per day, as compared with 3.85 megacalories for a 400-11. calf. If the 800-lb. steer gains 2 lb. daily, energy cost of gain is 4.45 megacalories. When the 400-l1). calf gains 2 lb. per day it requires only 2.64 mega- calories of feed energy. Thus, pushing for rapid growth while animals are young offers opportunities for conserving feed energy. Research Shows Potential Advantages Data from the nutrition research herd at Auburn provide evidence of potential with young cattle. Crossbred calves are weaned at 180 days and continued on a drylot ration until they reach slaughter weight at about 13 months old. The calves are creep fed whole corn while nursing and their dams are fed a waste-containing ration. The male calves are left intact and continued on test to 13 months of age. Feed efficienevc after weaning of two sets of these bull calves is reported here. Set 1. This group of bull calves was placed in drylot at weaning and fed a corn-silage-protein supplement ration. One group received this mixture prepared daily. For the second group, the same mixture was ensiled before feeding. Performance data are smuinarized in tIe table. The ration energy utilized by the cattle was calculated using energy values for ingredients published by the National Research Council. Energy efficiency of the test cattle was essentially the same as predicted from the NRC standard. Feed dry matter per unit of gain averaged 6.36 lb., which ENERGY UTTILIZATION BY CHAROLAIS-CHOSS CALVES AND PERiFOIMANCE FROM 180 -TO 390 DAYs OF AGE Item of measure Calf performance 180-day weight, lb. Final Mw eight, lb. Total gain l. , lb. . -- -- Axcriage daily gain, lb. Average daily feed consumption Corn Co,-n silage -- .. Au\lrn 65 supplement Cottonseed imeal Coastal hav TOTAL FiED Energy use NRC requirement for maintenance, neg-al. Feed required for maintenance, lb. liation remainder for gain, lb. Result Pen 11 Pen 2' 446 1,053 607 2.85 14.93 6.56 .55 1.47 1.57 25.08 6.16 9.07 16.01 449 1,110 661 3.07 13.79 5.98 .49 1.24 1.78 2:3.28 6.35 9.37 13.91 SFFed coi-silage-supplement ration prepared daily. ' iFed sanme ration as Pen 1, except it was ensiled before feed- ing. PUSHING YOUNG CATTLE TO SLAUGHTER SIZE FOR FEED EFFICIENCY W. B. ANTHONY, Dept. of Animal and Dairy Sciences confirmed that young animals grown rapidly to slaughter weight have relatively low feed requirements. Set 2. In this test 14 bull calves were on a feedlot ration of ground corn, corn silage, and supplement. The corn silage portion of the ration was restricted to 6 lb. per head daily. Fast Gain, Low Feed Requirement Average weight of the animals when weaned at 180 days was 427 lb. From 180 to 390 days they gained rapidly, 3.18 lb. per head daily, and used 6.75 lb. of feed per 11). of gain. The energy density of this diet for maintenance was 0.72 inegacalorie per lb. Therefore, feed requirement for main- tenance was 9.66 lb., leaving 11.3 lb. to support gain. Gain wxas considerably above the expected rate of 2.55 lb. per day, Iuither supporting the theory that young cattle are efficient converters of feed to beef. These data clearly illustrate the economics of feeding young cattle for rapid growth. The economic advantage comes 1rom (1) reduction in maintenance cost, and (2) a reduced energy cost of gain. The improvement in feed efficiency for the young cattle justifies considerable effort and expenditure to ensure that the young cattle receive all the high quality hIed they will consume early in life. A STUDY of 104 homeowners and 26 apartment complexes in seven metropoli- tan areas in Alabama was conducted to determine what motivates homeowners to buy plants, lawns, and related prod- ucts. Survey Sample An adult member of each household from each home sampled in the seven areas was personally interviewed. Socio- economic characteristics of the home- owners, characteristics of the house and lot, and landscape expenditures of the family were recorded. Homeowners were questioned concerning their attitudes towards landscaping, their use of land- scape plantings and lawn materials, their sources of technical information used, who made the plant purchases, where they were made, who maintains the land- scape, and other landscape related ac- tivities. Ratings Homeowners rated beautification as the most important reason for having landscape plantings. Closely following were increased property value, neighbor- hood pride, shade, and privacy. Environ- mental factors other than erosion control were generally ranked lower in impor- tance. The most important sources of technical information named were their own knowledge and experience (86%) and nurserymen (24%), see figure. 6 Purchases Made Total purchases of plants for outdoor use in Alabama was $4 million by single unit homeowners in 1970, and over half of the decisions regarding these pur- chases were made by the wife. Approxi- mately 68% of these purchases were made from nurseries and garden centers, 26% from chain stores, 2% from mail order, 1% from florists, and 3% from all other sources. Purchases in Relation to Income The amount of plant purchases in re- lation to income and home value are shown in the table. Families with less than a high school education were gen- erally in the lower income group and lived in homes costing less than $25,000. People with at least a high school edu- cation earning over $10,000 per year and living in homes of $2.5,000 value or more, account for the greatest portion of the plant purchasing public. AMOUNT OF PURCHASES IN RELATION TO INCOME, AND HOME VALUE Amt. of Income Home value purchases $ 40 Under $10,000 Under $25,000 $228 Above $10,000 Above $25,000 Sale of Nursery Crops The sale of nursery crops for Alabama included in the study amounted to al- most $6 million, according to the 1969 FACTORS AFFECTING USE of LANDSCAPE PLANTS in ALABAMA Agriculture Census. Alab am a's sales amounted to 13% of the total sales of the eight Southeastern States. There were 381 firms producing and selling nursery products in 1972, an increase of 350% over 1969. However, these data may under estimate the importance of the in- dustry since there are numerous small nursery oriented businesses not included in the Agriculture Census. Population Increase During the period of 1960-1970 the population in Alabama increased 5.4%, while the number of single unit family homes increased 16.9%. In the eight Southern States, population increased 15% and household units increased 27%, which was considerably greater than the increase for the Nation during the same period. Because of the continued popu- lation growth and home building in the Southeast, the demand for nursery prod- ucts is expected to increase even higher than it is at present. The development of shopping centers, industrial parks, and an increase in land use for recreational and institutional purposes should also contribute to the increased demand for these products. There is probably no period in time when there has been a greater awareness of ecological surround- ings. This emphasis on environment of- fers an unequalled opportunity to the plant industry to further educate the buying public and to inform them on the materials and methods available to them for the, improvement of their outdoor environment. Neighbor Nurseryman Garden Center Garden Ma caine 1 "- Newspaper "Caunty Ag. Agent Own Experience 5 IC 15 ' 20 '25 .. .30 Per Cent. Sources of information on landscape plant- ings. FRED PERRY, Department of Horticulture A COW-CALF PROGRAM reflecting dif- ferent combinations of forage and man- agement practices was initiated on the Lower Coastal Plain Substation in No- vember 1969 in an attempt to provide some of the answers farmers need to get maximum returns on farm investments. The study consists of four treatments in managing cow-calf herds on relatively small acreages to determine which sys- tem will produce the highest net return. The treatments range from an intensively managed row crop-cattle combination to a rather casual grazing program similar to that now being practiced in the area. System A This system consists of a row crop- cattle combination of 45 acres of produc- tive land, a 3-acre holding pen, and 30 brood cows. During the summer 20 acres are used to grow corn for silage, 20 acres are used for soybeans, and 5 acres are planted to summer annuals for creep grazing. The cows are maintained in the holding area and fed silage during the crop season except for days when they are used to utilize surplus forage in creep area. After corn and beans are harvested, the entire 45 acres are planted to cool season annuals. When grazing is ready, the cows and their calves are turned onto it. Any excess forage is harvested as sil- age. As planting time approaches cattle are moved to the holding area; cool sea- son annuals are plowed under, and the area goes back into 20 acres of corn, 20 of soybeans, and 5 of creep grazing. System B This system consists of a herd of 30 cows and 45 acres under a more familiar management system. Summer grazing for cows and their calves is provided by 30 acres of permanent Coastal pasture. Cool season grazing is provided by 15 acres of fescue and 15 acres of the Coastal pas- ture overseeded with a mixture of arrow- leaf and crimson clover. Hay harvested from the area and I lb. per head daily cottonseed meal is provided when nec- essary. System C Thirty cows are managed under Sys- tem C on 40 acres of permanent Coastal pasture with any excess forage being taken off as hay. During the winter these cattle receive Coastal hay and a liquid protein supplement. System D This system also contains a 30-cow herd. In a similar manner, these cattle Two-YEAR AVERAGE OF COSTS AND RETURNS BY SYSTEM rItemType of system A B C D Calf performance and sale data Number weaned- --- 26.5 28 27 27.5 Adjusted sale weight (adj. weaned weight)- 594.0 516 414.5 392.0 Average sale price per cwt. .---- 30.54 31.36 32.74 33.53 Average adjusted sale value..... 181.36 161.82 135.66 131.45 Receipts Value of calves------------- $4,808.41 $4,528.29 $3,667.94 $3,607.36 Value of soybeans- 2,166.30 0 0 0 Value of surplus hay 286.75 532.00 0 0 Value of corn ---------- 678.00 0 0 0 Total receipts ------------------ $7,939.46 $5,060.29 $3,667.94 $3,607.36 Expenses Cash expenses, including costs of producing crops, hay and pasture $3,833.85 $1,665.30 $2,163.81 $1,815.01 Non-cash expenses, including depreciation, interest, taxes and insurance ......................-- 1,443.20 953.55 851.70 851.70 Total expenses----------............----------$5,277.08 $2,618.85 $3)015.51 $2,663.35 Return to operator's labor, land and mgt .-.......................... $2,662.38 $2,441.44 $ 652.43 $ 944.01 Per acre return to operator's labor, land, and mgt................ $ 59.16 $ 54.25 $ 21.74 $ 31.46 are maintained on 30 acres of permanent Coastal pasture with the excess forage going into hay. This herd receives only Coastal hay as supplementary feed dur- ing the winter months. Analytical Procedure All calf weights were adjusted by age of dam and sex of calf. Sale value of calves was the adjusted weaning weight minus actual shrink multiplied by market price of calf at time of weaning. Total receipts from each system also included the value of crops such as, soybeans, corn, and hay that was harvested and not fed. The cash expenses included all items purchased, such as feed, seed, fertilizer, gas, oil, and seasonal labor plus an in- terest charge on operating capital. The non-cash expenses included depreciation charge for all capital items, such as ma- chinery and silos, and an interest charge on these, capital items. Also included in non-cash expenses was an interest charge on the breeding livestock. System A for 1970-72 had the highest gross returns of any system because of sale of crops and heavier weaning weight of calves (see table). This system had almost double expenses of the other sys- tems but still had the highest net returns ($59.16 per acre) of any system. This net return is the return to operator's labor, management, and land. System B with net return of $54.25 per acre had the highest return of any system that did not include soybeans. This net return indicates allotting an ad- ditional half acre per cow and providing winter grazing of fescue and clover were profitable. This increased the weaning weight of the calves about 100 lb. per calf over systems C and D which did not have winter grazing. System D with a net return of $31.46 compared to $21.74 for system C indi- cated that feeding a liquid protein sup- plement during the winter was not a profitable practice under the circum- stances of this experimental work. This practice increased weaning weights of the calves but the extra expense more than offset the extra pounds of calves. COSTS and RETURNS of FOUR CROP and BEEF PRODUCTION SYSTEMS SIDNEY C. BELL, Dept. of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology LAVERN BROWN, Lower Coastal Plain Substation C. C. KING and E. M. EVANS, Dept. of Agronomy and Soils W. B. ANTHONY and R. R. HARRIS, Dept. of Animal and Dairy Sciences Poultry Litter Materials - Scarce and Expensive MORRIS WHITE oand BARRY GILBREATH Dept. of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology D ISAPPEAHANCE OF the familiar sawdust piles along Ala- balma's roadway s reflccts a serious problem facing poultry producers - a grossing shortage of litter material. Such a shortage means higher cost of litter, xxhich adds to the al- read increasing productiou expense. 'ie shavin gs and sawdust are preferred litter materials. iUntil recentlx, these bY-products of wxood-using industries \eirc ple tifuil and relativelv iiiexpesive. But niot any more. lChaiges iii methods it 00 ood-using industries reduced amounts of sawdust aind shaviiigs available at the same time that Ipoultir\ productioll was increasing inll the State. Broiler prolduction increased at the annual average rate ol (612% driing the 196(3-72 decade. Expansion was greatt in areas lwhere proluctiii was alread conccntrated. \Vil litter needs were increasing and olunime of shavings and sasn- tdust were decreasing, wood techiologists were developin 1(x er luses for the bx-products in manufacturing. Tocetlhr these developmetits have drasticallx reduced supplies 0I shaviiigs and sassdust available for litter material. The Ir- stilt is that poultrxmeii are having to pay higher prices. Poultrsmncii hase tried at least two dozen substitute littter materials. Iice hulls. peanut hiills, ani cane ponmace ha\c beenlci used suiccessfullx v, but neither equals pine shaviigs oa sa(wdust. Neither of these three substitutes is produced in volmie in areas cwhere broiler growing is concentrated. This resiuilts ill long-distanice Ihauling thIat, coupled wxith bulkines. minakes traiisportatioii cost so high that use of the materials is prohibitive. The imbalance between supply and demand was prevented fIrom becoiniiig critical because most broiler growsers wcre ablle to shift to annual litter replacement rather than changinii it after each batch of chickens raised. Even xxith this cliang . litter supply remains short inll some areas year roundl and iii mansy areas durling xwinter months. Information from poultrymen in counties where approxi- inatelv 87% of the State's output of broilers was grown illis- trates nieeds. About 66 cu. ft. of litter material is needed for each thousand Ibroilers griown, accorlding to the producers. This includes amouint used for breedler hens and pullets, as xxcll as for grossing broilers. II 1972, poultrymeii ill Ala- blama would hav e needed 23.4 million cu. ft. of litter material for the 399.3 million broilers grown. Area and county needs are shown on the mnap. Saw mills, planer mills, and various wvood-working planis were narmed as miajor sources for litter materials. Procur c- metint xwas reported as follows: 17% purchased and hlauld dlirect from source, 28% purchased direct from source b]it delpendled on someone else for hauling, and 55% bought fromi a dealer. All dealers oplerated onil a purchase-resell basis. Dealers hiauled materials ilt to 92 miles. Average lenlgth i of haul for 18 delcalers was 51.5 miles. Size of truck bed used in lauliiig varied from 14 ft. X 7 ft. X 32 in. to 40 X 8 X S ft. The larger ones were uised for long-distance hlauling, ait 8 ill combinillatioin ith a redistribution point wxhere materials were transferred to smaller trucks for delivery to poultry houses. A tractor equipped with firoit-endl loader was the most common machiite used to load trucks at the source and at redistribution points. A drag gate xxas comniionlyv used for iunloading materials in poiltry houses. Cost of pine shavings and sawdust varied among areas and iby seasons. Prices at the sources varied from 0 to $11 per load. Iii 1972, ponltrymen paid dealers anll average of $26.70 per load (about :360) cn. ft.). Poultrymen used approximately 1(0.3 loads per year per 0,0 sql ft. of floor space. Litter cost was 7.4i' per eu. ft., 01o $275 annually per 10,000 sq. ft. of house. Chick place- ment rate was such that litter cost was approximately 0.4i per bird. The search is continuiiig for a suitable material that could ble available year-round at a reasonable cost. One potential material, a by-product of the newsprint industry in Alabama, was tried at Auburn. Broilers grown oil it performed as well as those grown onil usual litter. Samnples of the experimental material shown to poultrx'men and litter dealers created interest. However, methods of handling and costs have not 1ben worked oiit. LI Over 1,000,000 cu. ft. L 500,000 - 999,999 cu. ft. M100,000 - 499,999 cu. ft. I 25,000- 99,999 cu.ft. F- Less than 24,999 cu. ft. Volume of litter materials used in 1971, based on current use rote and numbers of broilers and hatching-egg flocks. I xiL i vci,5 or otehartigrass planited xxith serieea lespedeza not oix],% in creases total f orage Yield but extends5 the produc- tiNx c ason 1) -v 3 mionths and in creases oxverall forage quality. liesuilts of, a 3-ear experimectit onl Decatuir clay at the Tell ]essee I alley Substation showx that a gTrass-set icen eominiatjon is sup 1 erior to set icea alone. Ind iv iduial 1)1(,, o5if Sc rada and Iitefrstate sericea wxere planted inl Apri ii ad Kentiicks 31 tall f'escue or Bootle or- thartlgi ass wxas ox tiseeded itl O ctober 19(69. The grasses xx cre fet tilized antialix \k ith 0,. 80, or 16 6t). N per acre. Ont' bait of the N xxas a)pliedl ill laite Februaryx andi the re- matiiiler iii earls Septecmb er. Fora ge' harvesting be(gan in) ,\prii attll ('idtl'( itt Noxvdllibr. Results Tlotal f'orage x i('ids of' St'raa xxere high.~erthua Ittrstate 5( i c('a, sc'( tal . ox erseed iii" tal fe Iscue' i- ordartlgrass ''lil -I 'LA 50 \ i E TOTAL l"Oit E IiLLDS OFr SI iO( EA- GRAS Mxss BE Ai.iitss AFFETEDi)O B RATiE OF NMIOCEi~iNT Percent 0DM in forage 80- Seralo sericeo a Toll fescue + 160 tb/A To1 ece+101AN 70- 60- 50- Serolo sericea Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. FIG. 2. Digestible dry matter (DOM) of forage over the grow- ing season, 1972. I)ry fttrit' N' il per acre- 0) N 8~0 lb). N 160 t)f. N Lb. LI). Lb. 8,520 8,70t0 8,220) 7,420 6,690~t 5,900t 9,27t0 10,170 8,550) 9,840 8,660 8,910 7,760( 8,500) onl St'rala xx itilolit appill tX Na li~i o tibet oil total it'ld bit the grass Ititersl at miturieits ait zero N produiicetd less tha Ii terstate alot'. Nitrogen inicre'asetd ft'e yield of all rass- sericea ti tint i Ini. Tolt al yields xxe rt' highest oil Serala- grass, as t'tasrine~ about .5 tons per acre wxhen 16 611lb. N per acre xwas applit't. Season ial dlistribumtion if forage xxas more i inport atit thanl total Yitld. Taill fescue extentd't tlse producittive st'ason of set tcea 1)'x about .3 moth s xwhlen t60t) l. N per acre x\\as ap- pl ied, Figure 1. Ot clardgrass made somewhlat more sprinig g'rossth bitt less autuii gIroxxtI thtan tall f'escue. WheItn grass xx ais not fecrtilizef xxith N, x erx little' foragye xsas ohtained. This imiticates that although seniea is a legumne, it fuiirisht's little N to associatetd giasses. Nitrogt't-fertilizt't girass de- F FF S I F F F FSF1 F S FFSF Ft 806 0 oscit 080160 08060 08160 080160 A 3 Apri 28 Slay 30 J.ly 19 Sept 8 Nos 8 FIG. 1. Seasonal growth in 1972 of Serala seriCea (S) and sericea-fescue (F) as affected by rates of nitrogen to, 80, 160 lb. per acre). Fescue growth is shown in cross-hatched areas ond sericca in plain areas. SERILA-G RASS MIXT URES for the TENNESSEE VALLEY C. S. HOVELANO, Department of Agronomy and Soils W. B. ANTHONY, Department of Animal and Dairy Sciences J. K. BOSECK and W. B. WEBSTER Tennessee Valley Substation pressedi spring attd early' suinner producetioni of serit'ea hut hadl no effet't in late summer wheit grasses made little growxth. Stands of both sericea v arieties Petrsisterd xweli iii assocta- tion xwith grasst's at all rates of N. Both tall fetscue anti or- tctartigrass maintainetd extellenit stainis in seniea xxhenl fer- tilizedt x itli 16( 11). N per acre. At 80t lb) N 1 )er acre grass statl(l5 werttet retduced abiout 40% in Serala hut none iii Inter- state. W~hen N xwas no~t applied,1 grass standis xvere sharply re'ducetd onl Serala and to a lesser exte'tt oin Interstatt'. Forage' quoality as measuredi hy dligestilie dry matter (lDl}I) was improved over the entire season by growving tall fescue ini association wvith sericea anti fertilizing xwith N, lFiguire 2. DDMx of Set ala senecea averaged 47% for the year as comrpared to 601% for non-nitrated fescue-sericea and 67% f'or fescuie-sericea xxwith 160 lb). N. per acre. DIDN of or- chiat tgrass xvas similar to that for tall fescue. M)M of Serala sertcea wxas similar to that dleterminied in Other tests for Cojastal hset inudagyrass. The improved forage qualdity of the gtrass-serict'a swxardt as compare'd to scricea alotie shouiltd re- stilt in improvedi animal petrfor'mance. Results of this experiment shows that tail fescue or orchardi- grass cani lie girownt successfully- in Serala serieea to extend the protduttiv e season aid( improv e forage quality. To utilize f'orage, grass canl le graz'ed from March until Max -. Rapid Ltite spiug and summer groxi [Ii of sericea canl he cut for hia'. :Ssericea grosvti cease's inl late suimmer, autumin grtowth of till ftestcue tan he grazed1 uittil Noxeitiber or D~ecemiber. Seniea C ass Set ,la N oi' 'Tall tt'scil' Ot chat dciass I utit state Notit' Ta ll feclu' ( )ci nit ti ss economies of size in swine finishing . ' V operations TONY A. OTTS, Dept. of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology F INIxHIiix OPI'i TI()\S are ('>ililnO pop1- ilar itN amiong \lahania xxx me ChiCIui's. ()le reason1 is thle in(1cased ax .ilahilitx of top quality te eder pigs throli or- ,*mze pigr sales in recci t x eml s. Also conitributinig to 1)01)110 ix of finishing operiations is the loxxcr labor requiiremnlt Miid less iiItial capital invxestmivilt th an for oilher ltog enterprises. TI e in creashw n cialit s of axvallalble feeder pigs has been accoinpal led by gre-at'1 demand and higher prices. The higher p~rices5 iniak e it ece ii more imi p( rtao t th iat fini sling operation s lbe as Eceononix of si/c' is an ini)ortaint rjues- iiodliI i for prdcersdI init Ieested iii expand c- iing sxx inc fiiiislii'T operations. It scems logical that groxx th in size of operations slioold lredu ce ccert ain unit costs of pro- dluction . For example, buy ing feed at (IIanttxv cdiscounits cor operating a feed miill on tlic farmn should gTixe savings. Non lec'd xaiabilec costs,. such as Ilan dIi ig, electicitx ' v, ad telephone expenses, aiid fixed costs like depreciation and taxes on 1ni dliigs shnould bie lowxer on a per 1 io g sold b1a sis for larger operations. Possibilitie's of size econrim xxerc' In- x estigrateci hx using farin data collec ted onl sec'ral fiiin i)g opera.t ions for the x (ar 1971. F~armicrs xxere pcersoni1l in- teriew'xed iii all sectio)ns of the Staite. Size of op)erationis ranged fromt 922 to 740(0 hogs sold pei year. For ex aliia- tioiil prposs tlic fars xxerc' (Il ed into large (oxvcr 1,5001 hogs sold pc'r sear) and smnall (under 1.50)0 sold pc'r vear) categrories. Thle sear 1 91 1xwas not a good year for hiog homrers . Axeragc' 1)1ice for market hogs xx as 8*18.78 per cxxt. The hiighecst mioiitll axv'raige xxas S21l.38, reportecd 1v xh Selc'inma mci, rket. Thus, hiog pio- cducers r ece'ixvecd c'xti'inelx\ loxx prices that Near. Tx one 1. AxVEnRAGE COST AMs) RLETUISN FOR FI1'1INii'( OPERAIONs'Sx IN ALABASMA, 1971 Item Returnis Goss sales -- (Gross returns C'ost F ec d N on tieed xii ialdc Ueedcr pil's I lteoiliag Sil)plcs ReI),iirs Inite'rest oin oIpratin', icipitzil Toital s ariablc' Fixe'd Capi tal d epriai:tion Iisun a ic I, initercest, tacs Totl~l fixedl 131 nns tol lalbor and No. if)lllilI P'igs soild, a(r1-v11 -Result/pig sold Small Large p1 oclucer producer Dollars Dollars 12.07 10.89 1.8.1 1.21 43.91 42.10 23.03 14.2 6 Al1 .93 .13 .o)5 .05 .20 15.93 2.22 1.78 4.00 .95 4 1,173.0 21.14 17.61 .39 .63 (06 .(A .05 .18 .35 19.28 1.20 '94 2.14 42.56 - .46 4 3,240.5 c'suillts xxen' sonc'xxhat as expected iidc r lprc'xvail inig loss prices of th at sear. Grocss rectuirn s showxed little'cli di'lec' be- txxeen in)all and larige p)rolduccers, Table 1Total cost pc'r hog wyas essei tiallv tlhe samne 8.96 otfo sin all and ic $42 .56~ for large procducers. Rcturnis to labcor anid mn agcemnent xx cre fprlct icalh~ zero for 1both iSize op- orators, xxith large procducer s actually~ showsing a negative return. Thus, the ex- pected adsvantages for larger size opera- Iliis xx\cre not p~resent iii the fincdings. Hloswevxc, closer oblserv ationl exp~lainls this fininiig aiid icnitifies cleffiiite co~st sax - ings possibl through larger size (of op- ci atioiis. Iixed cost wxas S4 per hog sold for the smnall group andc 82.1.1 per hog for thec lar~ge oper ationis. Thus, there was a $1.86 Iper hto" differ ence in fav or of the large \mnow ig11n1-feed variahle costs, elec- tri ditS, hiaul]inig, an d telephonile expelnse'' xx crce also less for the large size group. Howxeverc, total iioi-feed variab~le costs \\,ere 8:3.3,5 per hog more for large pro- duicers -- $19.28 ats com p ared wvithI $1.5.9.3 for the small operations. Ileason for this xvas that large producers aver- agedl pax 'ing inore for feeder pigs than smaller opeirators. H-oxxever, the higher price paid per pig xvas primairily bv the single, largest pr oduicer. The extra $3.52 pecr pig paid hv large prodceccrs appears to he alnn11ecessary expense. WVhen feeder pig prices xwere equal- ized amiong groups, r-esuilts xxere as il- lustrated in Table 2. Such an adjust- menit is not unr)1easonale since larger farmers should certainly he able to hi' feeders as cheap as smaller operator s. Therefore, a price (of $14.66 per feeder pigr wxas used for loth groups ill the com- WVith pig putrchlase pinc' the same. total cost per pig xxas $45.19 for small p)rodudcers and 840.66 for large ones. WVith sales remaining as prexviously pre- seited, adjustecd returns to labor aiic Maniagement per~ hog sold xvere mninus 81.28 for the small operations and plus 81 .44 for the large group, at complete rexversal of actual findings. This indicates p~ossille adxvantages or economies oif size hased onl information from thle eigh t sxx inc pr oducers in the studx'v Axvailable iinformation indicates that si/ze efficieiices are p)ossible in hog pro- dluction, hut onilv if good maniagement is followsed. To the operations studied, poor management in lui n feeder pigs xxas costly. TABLE 2. COxS AM) Ri icNxs AinjUSTE F OR I']EIi ii PI: lImCiES Item) Go ss, returns Reslllts/pig sold Small Large producc'r producer Dollars D)ollars 13.91 42.10 Costs F'c'd 2:3. 0:3 FEEDER PICS 16.49 O)the(r lncnlifeed xvariale 1.67 Fixed 4.00 TOT AL COST 45.19 Rc'turn to labor and Iing. /pig so~ld 1.28 21.14 15.71 1.67 2.14 40.66 1.44 HIDDEN COSTS MAY LURK IN TRADITIONAL FARM LEASES HOWARD A. CLONTS, JR., Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology HIDDEN OR OVERLOOKED costs in farm lease arrangements may cause farmers to fall short of their profit goals. This is a frequent occurrence when farms are op- erated along traditional share-lease lines. Although numbers of tenant farms are declining in Alabama, part-owner farms are increasing. In fact, some of the State's largest farms are part-owner, part- tenant operations. Most part-owner farms involve cash-lease arrangements, al- though many use share-lease agreements. Many factors associated with share- lease farming may prevent maximum profit for a given farm. The most serious of these is division of management re- sponsibilities based on shared investment. Research in the Tennessee Valley Area indicated the most common lease terms to be /4 of all cash crops as rent to the landlord. Livestock shares were reported to be -/2 to each party. With crops, land- lords furnished all real estate, /4 of such variable costs as seed, fertilizer, and lime, and '/ of necessary chemical costs. Ten- ants furnished the remainder of these items plus all labor, machinery, and ma- chinery operating costs. There were variations in proportions of shared income and costs. For ex- ample, some farms reported landlord shares equal to 1/4 of cotton, 1/3 of corn, S1/4of soybeans, and :1/2 of cattle. In some instances, soybean returns were reduced to 1/5 of the crop value. Wide share variations provide even more incentive for landlord and tenant to disagree on crop and farm plans. A landlord receiving 1/4 of the cotton but only 1/5 of the soybeans may insist on planting all land to cotton, even if leas- ing is necessary and allotment lease prices are at subsidy payment levels. A tenant may prefer the opposite, since he, like the landlord, is seeking to maximize returns to his own investment, not whole- farm investment. In some cases reported, tenants paid the total cost of leasing ad- ditional crop allotments. In the northern Alabama study, aver- age costs for several enterprises were cal- culated on the basis of contributions by landlords and tenants. A typical farm situation was used to compare the various tenure arrangements. Cost and return distributions made on basis of traditional share arrangements, given in the table, show inequities in these lease arrange- ments. In all situations, returns to the whole PROPORTIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF COSTS AND NET RETURNS BETWEEN LANDLORD AND TENANT BY SELECTED ENTERPRISES, TENNESSEE VALLEY, ALABAMA, CASE STUDY, 19711 Enterprise e Cost distribution Net return distribution Landlord Tenant 2 Landlord Tenant Pct. Pct. Pct. Pct. Soybeans ----------------------- 16.1 83.9 38.1 61.9 Cotton, solid plant 13.8 86.2 46.6 53.4 With leased allotment --------- 15.6 84.4 58.8 41.2 Cotton, skip row -------------------------------- 14.8 85.2 39.1 60.9 With leased allotment ........... 16.1 83.9 42.6 57.4 Beef cow-calf herd 3 49.3 50.7 50:5 49.5 Pasture ---------------------- 58.6 41.4 Hay -------..----.-.------------------ ......-- - - - - -- - 48.2 51.8 1 Opportunity cost for landlord's land investment and value of tenant operator's labor and management not included. Tenants pay all costs for labor and cropland expansion, plus half of purchased feed. 'Excludes all pasture and feed costs. farm operation were: significantly less under share arrangements than under an owner-operator or cash-tenant plan. Whole farm returns dropped significantly when returns to either tenant or landlord were maximized. Although customary arrangements spe- cified that landlords would receive /4 of crop value, the actual net return ex- ceeded 30% for all enterprises and 50% in two cases. Costs borne by landlords were below 20% of the total for all cash crops and approximately 50% for cattle expenses. These data clearly show the problems encountered when tradition is followed without regard to changing economic conditions and resource values. True costs and returns are hidden under a mask of tradition that may not be "al- ways right." Lease agreements generally used evolved through trial and error. There are indications that neither party fully understood the lease conditions nor knew the true value of either party's contribu- tions. In this study, inequities directly related to production resources of the landlord gave him a competitive advan- tage. Heavy investments by tenants in farm equipment were not proportionally rewarded. Thus, a tenant would have incentive to exploit land resources and landlords would exploit the labor re- source. Successful farming requires good man- agement and efficient use of all resources. Inequitable lease arrangements, whether cash or share types, do not allow realiza- tion of that goal. Customary types of agreements may have to be abandoned in favor of leases that provide for the di- vision of returns based on dollar value of inputs from both tenant and landlord. Such a system would allow tenants to recover, within a reasonable time, their heavy investments in machinery and other necessary production inputs. 11 OPF) Adds Meaning to JT. COPE, JR. Dept. of Agronomy and Soils FO oiA SOIii TE,5 r to Ser'( se it relialc basis for fertilizer and limae recommenidationis, it shouild shiow the degree of die- ficiency of each u11trielit and amiouiit needed to protuce m1ax- imumi yield. This ins ols es mnoie than at simpsle mecasuire of soil con ten t because n eeds varyv for dlifferenlt soils and dlif- I erent crops . Mutch research is required to calibrate soil test lev els to crop~ gros tli. MIost laboratories use some type of ratii i svsteni, suich ais Loss, Mediuim, and Hligh, inl wh ichi the teruns are often iiot wxell definied. Others repoirt soil test results inl fiunds per acre or par ts per- million. This can be confoising b~ecause oif wside variation in amnotnts ofi the different ele- mnents fond inl soils aii vIxariat ioins inl ric i iiemnents auu on g crops. Four example. 5 (11) of piosphortis, 80) lb. of potassinim, 25 l1). of inagliesiumn, ai id 300)1lb. of calciumn per acre shiould lbe foinid inl soils for pseai iits. Inicliudoin g am oin it 5 extracted by soil tests il reports ss ouild he confusing to grossers not fa_ mailiar xx itli calibratiion illtormatiuii. The Auibuirn Unis ersitv Soil TIestiw ugILaboratory uses a rating system of "Verv Lows, Loss, Mediumi I ligh, Very I ligh, and Extremnels High .- Since 190 the laboi atorv has used a lertilitv iiid cx along wxith these' iatingus. This indcex, all ex- piressioni of per cent sufficienucy, giv es a more comiplcte pic- tuire ofl the siiil's fertilits conlditionl than the rating alone. It is uised for phios phoru s, potassiumn, iagn esi oln, aid cal ciumn and o is reportedl to the iucai est 10% fiont 0 to 9,00) Ani inidex ii l10t for a particular elemenit nileals that the soil contlainis ei ouli of that element to produice top yields wsithoiit fui tluc addltition . The ic rlatinships amiong fertility indiex, soil-test ratinugs, ainticipatced vielcl, and rates of fertilizer recommended are piresen tedl in the tahle. Ohjectiveos of the iind~ex include 1 ) to repoirt all rntrients dleterniid onl a ~percen tage siifficieiicx basis so that re- suilts calli be easil - liielrstoiol hs' growsers, an d (2) to pro- vide a conii ient ss stein that canl be used iii keeping records, oft soil fei tility' buildup or depletion. The in dex belowx 1001 inidicates percentage of mnaximumn yield that can be expected wxithont addling fertilizer containinig the element. Above lot). the indcx iii dicates the inargiii of adequoicv' or the degree of excess, as sh oss fo r fpotassiun inl the graph. Including the \erv Lowx, Very high. aind Extricel HigTh ratings alon g wxithi per cenrt sufficiemicies is omue of the most imaportanit aspects of' this sy stein. Index miluiiiers helowv 501 indicate the need for large appliicatioins of feirtilizer to build soil fertility . Onl the other hall(]. manyv Alabamia soils hax e b~ecn feirtilized wvith phosphoirus ciiitinuiouslx for 100 scvars. Many laswns, shrubs, and garden areas haxve receivedi ex- trenielv higrh rates, anid phosphorus has accumunlated to levels swhere iio beinefit fromt applications c0o101 be expected for illanx veal s. In fact, excessiv e phosphorus frequiently cauises problemns wxith iron or zinc deficiency. Onl samples for gar - dens, lassns, and shirubs) in 197(0 71, 2.5% wsere Extretnaei IHigh and] mais lhud inidex x altmes of 2,000) to 4,000, wvhiich c2(0 to 49 timies the soil leveols considleredl adequate. Iii 1970-7 71, 2.57 oil all samples receixved by the laborators for cottoni wxere Ver.\ IHigh ini pluosphoi-tis, with index valuies Index, pct. sufficiency I Soil test K, lb./acreI The fertility index up to 100 indicates expected yield at different soil-test potassium levels without adding the fertilizer element on different types of Alabama soils. of 0over 200. It 55 as recorniflii(ledl that iio )lphsphorus le applied to them i iil the lev el dirops below 200. Suich high index values hiave helped convince farmers and home owisers to uise feirtilizeis wxit hoot plosploris onl a trial basis. Farm- ers are ur ged to follow the recommendations on stirips in their fields when the-\ are reluctant to ab~andon rates and grades of fertilizers that have pr oduced good cr ops in the past. They'N are also urged to use the indlex values in keeping records of soil li tilitY bldupl hi)0 deplietioin. EELATiIONSIIi's A\io-xc FEIITiirY INDEX, Soic-TESr RATiN(;S, 11LAHV i, Y SI EiLi) AND RECOMMEiNDAIONS BASED~i ON Soil. Ti is Fertility Soil test Relativei index' rating ofiero llecollinlenclations 0- 50 Very Low