WINTER 1959 I ril AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH -j '5 $0, AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION of the ALABAMA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE A Quarterly Report of Research Serving All of Alabama SYSTEM j~' ' HIIGHLIGHTS of Agricultural Research VOLUME 6, No. 4 WINTER, 1959 WOODLOT HARVESTS- Gives Management Practices r101 s( WooII(oI Yields LIME FINENESS - Determining Factor in Neutralizing Effectiveness of Limestone REJUVENATING WORN-OUT SOILS- Cropped-Out Soils Can Be Brought Back Into Production- ........... FOREST INSECTS - Important Factors in Reproduction of Pine-- RURAL HOUSING NEEDS - Points Up Need for Improv- ing Southern Farm Houses 3 4 5 6 7 TENNESSEE VALLEY SUBSTATION - Reviews Farm Prog- ress and Prosperity in The Region 8-9 PELLETING CONCENTRATES- A Comparison of Pellets and Meal for Dairy Cows 10 RESTRICTED FEEDING OF LAYERS - Laying Hens Pro- duce As Well on Less Feed 11 SEEDLING DISEASES - Presents New Problem Facing Forest Nurserymen --- 12- ZINC DEFICIENCY - Reports on Research Results of Corn Disorder 13 PLANT FOLIAGE FOR DECORATION- A Survey of Foli- age Decoration Preference -14 WINTER COATS- Reveals Fiber Preferences for Ladies Fabric Coats- 15 BALANCE SHEET - Gives Figures on Net Worth of Ag- riculture in Alabama 16 Published by AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION of the ALABAMA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE Auburn, Alabama E. V. SMITH Director COYT WILSON Associate Director CHAS. F. SIMMONS -- Assistant Director KENNETH B. RoY--------------- Editor E. L. McGRAw....... Associate Editor R. E. STEVENSON --- Assistant Editor Editorial Advisory Committee: COYT WILSON; E.A. CURL, Associate Plant Pa- thologist; W. G. EDEN, Entomologist; T. E. CORLEY, Associate Agricultural Engi- neer; AND KENNETH B. RoY. lwC a O74ie PUBLICATIONS Listed here are timely and new publications reporting research by the Agricultural Ex- periment Station. Bul. 316. Agricultural Drought in Alabama presents an estimate of drought occurence in Alabama based on climate records of the 1930-54 period. Bul. 317. Southern Table Peas reviews top varieties for table use, including some strains developed by API Experiment Station. Bul. 318. Nutritive Qualities of Sericea Forage reveals feed value of lespedeza seri- cea as a forage for dairy animals. Cir. 135. Independent vs. Contract Egg Production and Marketing reports informna- tion gained in a study of Sand Mountain table egg producers. Prog. Rept. 75. Grinding and Molassifying Hay for Dairy Cows covers advantages and disadvantages of this practice. Prog. Rept. 76. Roughages for Dairy Cows points out comparative values of different roughages as feed for milking cows. Free copies may be obtained from your County Agent or by writing the API Agri- cultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Ala. 9cFciad maaem eowaciea WOODLOT HARVESTS H. E. CHRISTEN, Forester Unmanaged stand comprised of low-grade hardwoods and one age class of pine, right, and managed stand resulting from removal of undesirable trees, below. IAH 1X I S, 1 (CXN b)e initle iii fari wooxad- lots ait trelpIelit ilterx s provl\ided tia(' (l)\X 1( has at Simle~~l ilsic Pliti for) liiii it I1951 i XX Illot of' apoim~)IittiX 15 aces, at patt aft het API \g it altla.Id intenisive 0 lutst Illillage'llilt. IThe ii Li wa.s (Il in~to) 5 XlII-,ii-itsxo 3 atires ('it I; it I UV' 01 11)51'e x as iliLdi ofX ti'e 18 li.ll il eilih i('tlbili l I 11t \ilI toid ttlIi the aa\7jd ei ,11(1 agc005 511 -, Ml(i bX tilSXXillil t, 1)0x iI(10 Lit $asr' there \ ie 5clds Reod e ciitd Lil sti3 LI) iSg Ild it'ilpiXX ll Iit1110 tih it, XX(t1h i \vmdd be 11) .1 d at $ILll15 I'll betn tilitc IlllIil I .%st 1111 .itl it III At11) tuilet tIl 110e t' 1 L'i 1(1(111 Sill'', 1i11 tit been'. .1de ini 111 (It'd tilil\f CX 8 i. 1)10', Il flt 5ICII tI't 2ill tiII's li ta kd.e Isi aa i I i ll 1 iw L' s lditl al - I ) L ti 1 . 1 t ti it 5-i'i .t ti1'IX tol be I Li)1 St(Li IS I. I ij(1.1.11 I I I t') it't' t X ones 5ie \t', Ii l lij\1 ,t t o i illulii' LiL'LXLI Xtpl p Lt i I', ia ss 11 11)1 11of tIVCS)1 IIIlsi l~ti~ll' lillC tiLt ll I C i Ilt I'II 1tiWI' iL. hlL II) (Ii 150 t 259L ti.IX,t's11 ill I i l 111 5 i. Iti 1 ill t di L bIIX . it it i s it. of I(IsNrtXjj~ I ( 11 I ) I L t, I hit IlL') LII Il s It esiX ll XIti'l It ll tilL' s 1. l ttIXX k,1 11(151, lssI did IX () L i' II ILI tie ilt 1(1111 III (I) II 11 i ',s h .t l t ' tI tlo'.ltL 5 5tilis st n . It tikies it grILLt Ililli)V XSmall t)rees ol till' .11('. 1 tX L')ltul),i p)I IicO thlL filILill clop11 ofI liliu i cc IL . Ill orde tio gieltt 1e- lIX O\(st cu(t, it is (151lilV lit't'tssiIV I r ftL ilIilXX k'III toX ol~st ili o hi ill - coll'e ill site11 lu Litill' Xll ill 1111 III l(fe t~l'ill oft' It' 110 1.11)11 XX lelIillu I UIl it) t i ills '.1X 111 t ('1111.1 to i t f1(iX ll Aii ofillIzol' ('.) It' iv 5LIetlide i'lill (l'L' AI fi111 Sil' I jI1.1 its i(IXX e X vt 111) I llo FINE LIME is several times more ef- fective than coarse limestone, yet both cost the same! The use of quality liming material is highly important, in addition to spread- ing the right amount (based on soil tests) evenly over the land at the right time, and mixing it thoroughly with the soil. Although lime may affect soil several ways, its chief purpose is to neutralize soil acidity. Lime quality is measured by how effectively it neutralizes soil acidity. This is determined largely by (1) its neutralizing value and (2) size of particles. The neutralizing value of lime is ex- pressed as equivalent calcium carbonate content. It is a measure of how much of the material can react with the soil to neutralize acidity under ideal con- ditions. Limestone should have a neu- tralizing value of at least 90%. This minimum neutralizing value is easily met by the many deposits of high grade limestone in Alabama. Research on Quality Even though the neutralizing value of lime may be satisfactory, it will not neutralize soil acidity unless the lime- stone is finely ground. The influence of size of lime particles on soil acidity has been well established by research at the API Agricultural Experiment Sta- tion. An experiment was conducted using limestone that was screened to separate the particles into groups of known size. Equal amounts of lime from the dif- ferent size particles were added to dif- ferent areas of a Norfolk loamy sand. Sudangrass and crimson clover were grown in rotation on the soil for several years. The amount of vegetative growth produced by each crop was measured. The soil acidity was determined at reg- ular intervals. Results from this experiment are sum- marized in Figure 1. The crop yields and soil data covered 4 years, during which time the coarse material exerted its maximum beneficial effect. The very fine material (100- to 200-mesh) was superior to all others for the first year or two. However, the fine material (60- to 100-mesh) was just as good by the third year. The medium size particles (20- to 60-mesh) were definitely in- ferior to finer particles. The coarse ma- terial was not effective in neutralizing acidity at any time during the experi- ment. A second experiment was made to determine the influence of initial soil pH on the amount of soil acidity neu- tralized by various sizes of lime parti- cles. The effects on soil acidity are shown in Figure 2 for sandy loam soils of pH 5.7 and 4.7. The fine lime was superior in neutralizing acidity regard- less of soil pH. Although the effective- ness of medium size particles (20- to Relative value of lime in per cent vcVC M F VF - very coarse - coarse - medium - fine - very fine = 4-10 mesh = 10-20 mesh =20-60 mesh 60- 100 mesh =100- 200 mesh FIG. 1. Comparison of fineness of lime- stone on plant growth and soil acidity. FINENESS LIME FRED ADAMS, Associate Soil Chemist 60-mesh) was greater in the more acid soil, there was no such effect for ma- becomes apparent that coarse lime par- ticles are not effective in neutralizing soil acidity even in more acid soils. There is no place for coarse lime in a good liming program. Limestone Surface Lime particles remain where they are placed. Likewise soil acidity does not move, since it is attached to the soil particles. Therefore, they must be ad- jacent to each other for lime particles to react with soil acidity. The reaction between soil acidity and lime occurs at or very near the surface of the lime particle. The more limestone surface that is in contact with the soil particles, the more soil acidity that will be neu- trailzed. When sufficient lime has dis- solved to neutralize the soil acidity in Relative value of lime in per cent 0 20 40 60 80 Io00 . Soil acidity = 5.7 F " , ." ..... . ...... ................. Soil acidity = 4.7 FIG. 2. Comparison of fineness of lime on soil acidity at two soil pH values. the immediate vicinity of the lime par- ticle, any further reaction will be ex- tremely slow. Since soil acidity is neutralized largely at the surface of the lime par- ticle, it becomes apparent that the amount of surface available for reaction is important. The surface area of a ton of lime will depend upon the size of the particles. For example, lime passing a 60-mesh screen will have about 8 times the surface area as that passing a 10-mesh screen. Thus, it becomes ap- parent why 60-mesh lime is much more effective than 10-mesh. The research results reported here show that limestone coarser than 10- or 20-mesh is of practically no value, even after several years. Lime must be fine enough to pass about a 60-mesh screen to be effective in neutralizing acidity. The Alabama Station recom- mends that at least 90% of the lime- stone passes a 10-mesh screen and at least 50% passes a 60-mesh screen. In summary, you get the lime you pay for only if it is fine. REJUVENATING WORN- OUT SOILS J. T. COPE, JR., Agronomist THE BEST WAY to be sure soils are in condition to produce satisfactory yields is to fertilize them right every year. However, you may wonder if soils that have been cropped without fertilizer for a long period can be brought back into satisfactory production. The answer is "yes," even for soils that have been cropped continuously without fertilizer and are producing ex- tremely low yields. Their "worn-out" condition can be corrected rapidly with proper fertilization. This has been dem- onstrated on many soils having good physical properties and moisture rela- tionships. It takes several years for soils to completely recover, although most nutrient deficiencies can be corrected the first year. Research Shows Recovery Experiments have been conducted at many locations in Alabama to determine SEED COTTON YIELDS SHOWING EFFECT OF SOILS AS COMPARED WI'I Treatment No. N-P 2 0-K 2 0 Period of test See( Alex- andria Two-year cotton-vetch-corn rotation 5 0-0-0 1930-48 530 5 64-72-30 1949-52 1,236 4 16-54-23 1930-48 1,204 4 32-72-30 1949-52 1,352 Two-year cotton-vetch-corn rotation 2 0-54-0 1949-57 1,197 2 120-60-60' 1958 1,512 5 64-72-30 1949-57 1,246 5 120-60-60 1958 1,560 Continuous cotton 2 0-60-24 193&8-43 2 72-60-40 1944-46 5 36-60-24 1938-43 5 72-60-40 1944-46 483 1,299 1,186 1,081 Additional potash based on soil tests ap how rapidly unfertilized soils can be returned to production. Many longtime tests have included check plots that received no fertilizer or fertilizers with- out either nitrogen, phosphorus, or pot- ash. Yields on these plots dropped to very low levels. Presented in the table are results of several of these experi- ments with cotton where fertilizer has been added in recent years. The top section in the table shows cotton yields at 5 locations in a fertilizer experiment on a 2-year cotton-vetch- corn rotation. Yields from treatment 5, which received no fertilizer for 19 years, averaged only 591 lb. of seed cotton, and were even lower near end of the period. Beginning in 1949, these plots received a good rate of a com- plete fertilizer and yields increased markedly the first year. Average for the first 4 years after fertilization was 1,- 306 lb. Treatment 4 was fertilized for With proper fertilization, cropped-out soils like that shown at left can be returned to production like well fertilized companion plot at right. the entire 23 years. It averaged 1,342 lb. for the first 19 years and 1,457 dur- ing the next 4 years. This is only 151 lb. per acre more than that produced by the previously unfertilized plots for the last 4 years. The middle section of the table shows recovery from one application of potash and nitrogen on plots that had received only phosphorus for 28 years. Average yield during 1949-57 was 818 lb. In 1958 the plots received 120 lb. of nitrogen and enough potash to correct the deficiency in one application, as shown by soil test. Yield was increased to 2,017 lb. - 1,199 lb. above the pre- vious average. Yield at Prattville was increased about 2,000 lb. Treatment 5 averaged 214 lb. more than treatment 2, showing again that complete re- covery was not obtained the first year. Nitrogen Effect The bottom section of the table FERTILIZATION ON RECOVERY OF WORN-OUT shows effect of adding nitrogen in an- FH WELL-FERTILIZED SOILS other experiment after 15 years of con- d cotton yield by locations, lb. per acre tinuous cotton with only phosphate and Sand Mt. potash added. Yield was raised from a Brew- Monroe- Pratt- Substa- Average 6-year average of 429 lb. to 1,535 lb. ton ville ville tion for the next 3 years. Treatment 5 pro- duced only 29 lb. more than the pre- 271 546 832 775 591 viously unfertilized plots during 1944- 1,092 1,336 1,440 1,425 1,306 46. 1,139 1,220 1,397 1,750 1,342 Similar effects on yields have been 1,276 1,465 1,612 1,579 1,457 obtained on corn and winter legumes. Striking results were obtained in a Main 484 802 934 674 818 Station experiment. One treatment was 1,869 2,308 2,923 1,473 2,017 600 lb()() 11). superphosphate and 100 lb. 1,450 1,518 1,544 1,571 1,466 muriate of potash but no nitrogen for 2,439 2,457 2,952 1,749 2,231 23 years. Yield averaged 6.3 bu. of corn. With 80 lb. nitrogen added in 451 226 353 633 429 1948, yield was 50.6 bu. For 5 years 1,386 1,306 1,842 1,842 1,535 (1948-52) this plot averaged 45.8 bu. 1,167 824 1,177 1,636 1,198 and companion plots that had been 1,350 1,641 1,870 1,880 1,564 well fertilized throughout the period plied to these plots in 1958. produced 48.5 bu. r ..1. ti 3 r, I NS EC TS - Ocracrd4 ita Pine Reforestation LACY L. H-YCflE Assistant Entomoloie~st ti uDT to be hlii' t',ti'i ;1i( mIiiiIi tol lit iiil i i I'tll tlil! ae ro tit' te ilix xv iii hlit ed ti lilt1 itog lii' 9 5 1 hi t't'i o hi f itIi i .ixilil. iiitiiiit 195,i'xticc xxii xti xltpplx'i Ciii ght itt' iltica tt ll ' tiJOi il ~ lli 2 to miitixxli foiiit x'liii c. Sil to a slp ic 6ie so lciid "o\l~ ldilv k hli.dlcd. Olle of .c\clid lc;lsolls fol tili" dcla \ ( littill", '111d w pLillt- ilw \\;Is to ilNoid (L1111,1"c bv pille le- PI .( )(hictioll w cc\ ils. Importance of Weevils 'I li( pitics il, 11111obills plIcs (lihst.), aild pillc pitch-(,ilting \v('c\iI, P(Alillobills picilolll.,, (:clilt., ilre (oill- Illook to ;ls I)ill(' 1cp1mlliction VC(lVil'i hccilww of 111cil IiA)it of fccd- im, oI] pille wpimlliction or "ccd- liw ";. 'I It(, \\cc\ ils, \cl\ ,it 11 ilitr ill ill)- itle 1('ddisll-hlo\ ] I to hLtck '11mit hcutles, litil"ill" ill size from almill 'I to , it). lolw. '111c adilits are leadil , N attlileted to ll(,SlllN clit pill Ll\ their ill stilill ), ;llid loot" the litrv;w Iccd zlild de\clop. [);tllutge to youll'T pille pLinkttio is i fll( 1(,Sillt of ;ldllIt fccdill'r. 'I'll(, Illustrated in title is the pine pitch-eating weevil and above is the pates weevil. Both attack pine seedtings, often scriousty re- dlucing stands in newly established plan- tations. l)ilik ilf I - ;iitt 2- xl -ol iijtj l xtil iiws, ii al wiii ili . I t i iu' ix Ilixt S'ix l eit %\ Iwoi ' uil ill ii plittdi tioo soioni Il II ixxi il.4 t'lilii iiitt iii 11 ')i), ttui i'. Ill ('l iii i ii I titIl ix scci l .5 t a s a it' Relative Abundance xcii (iiit h i' tt)545 ilxoi lior:1t. oh' f i ill xxcrl )(t]x dx cull'tht'il x i l hu Bi]it' jil ii (11 lIcs i HK;xrx i of (he' ol xxtix 1 Control lic.Ix itx ofi \\ cc\ if (.()ltt ol Ii xiia (.11 I o'iri it i ii 1 ~J'h 1 uc57it i t I lilt (I ii itgi' Ixv iii l ((I iilil( i t loll \\ c ti I t %i lot, iii titid 1 oiti cI (i lt(,6 of tIil(' xtii i d i tilc o it llit i ,tttlilil ii u' iiii' iit otto iid i is Uc iijlt It TxIl 1 ill itit i. Ii xxl t I't' i lt iiiil' . ~ l( 1k d o ft u x rexb cc\ ttil i)I itititt 60liitxo itttil ui\ celilhx r xxis 16% Jjiliwedx'ui -itllx red ift ;t isix oflix'x.t~ck Shown here is typical damage to pine seed- ling by pine pitch-eating and pales weevils. In this case the bark and combium layer have been stripped from stem. These houses illustrate problems and progress being made in Southern rural housing. There are still many dilapidated houses like the one at left. Home at right shows how many farm- ers are providing good housing for their fami- lies. r WT11'11 >A Ram HOUSING NEEDS BOYD B. ROSE, JAMES R. H-URST, and J. H. YEAGER Department of Agricultural Economics M AXNi XAS iIXX XXiiV I)C1 t'tIiiC t \uit pSiilor1 (-roo XXLi C illt fo1i-(t tlirl Better iii si~lik' i ilee et'i odi ii% illu bo ~lt' t itItiii lil il t t ie i iiit'itjiii l iXe i,ill r t ifti iI1 Xt i i iiiii t~l ueti s ouh i. ttitIX XXhe ht' 3 u C(oii 1958~l tat, iii' th Cotto i ef t 72 ( '11( of11 liim l it', IIt bui.it s i l it' I9 dii~ iit4 , ii t i lit' or h lon ' f\a'cL-i ~ Xii tlitislk ril iil l witie lld i ptt'iituilg (5 Of' thsli it I liu )~i4.et (I 1910, A 1,11e pa' irt oif thit stud,\X is blTui le rii t S i h lila'i it .II r coit' m- 5( (014Liitll fillioihit ii4 t dittililii4 ',LiCC~ ob hiiui1 ill it il C or Bei lt (14 1 t o L iX C - It1 eachI~u Xf tid uii14X iX'ls ti]t sampleU ofililil ri dentsIl ll~ts betll ill XXiii' Xi XX oXl Ic li',, f i't l l iit . 1)1' i, li tti( XX i s i IX, Lld i i tll zl-litie'l il iil d:3%7 ri'(iIcLI. Slig2litlX' meX t' thiitd (of tIii' I dir l)uill c' t. of hlotsc Siiio, 1951 12.7 1 9)51) 5 1 10.2 l )I() 49 163.3 I )039 10.2 I 9)29 oi cirlit i :1,5.7 Amn thex' rura reiet ii.9 ('(I'S, di l 3'Cloi It)d Xi their 1001 C hoiii ls ti 5X %ea'1, 18 (% iiloCi-it-t \oi, tl for,(L ~t I~C 10Vasill-il CICC I hadX O IMX ill3 11he t iei lI -COIl 1 Apio 'llilii1 the mi('l' il2ii int'herited ('3r house 22%1 X i~ Ifl(Ttl \it, iii 10% 25%1( 1)LClit x(201(1 Xit ti, mlid ILO1iXC, buX ilt 1 I ' Almt oit 96t'I of'X te houses d iiCeei SLjrii t.\ ()itll.\ t it'% had ht'C 101 o ld I lltM, h iii Col p~l l i pe d 1 ll L itli d ((ii ,iit ill ii itt'.o la t fu h tolt ,Icic ":ll" it l i 1 i ii ii(1(1(hinia r f ig t', i ) 'iii I'll1eIXXI it) t ',Xli h ll i def( jOiieci esI 111(1e IIll i 2.51))) e 0,00(1 11iillid (OX . 'fiC--l I I~il~ S111II' 1 X Ii'KiLd(1lt' dthjtl i'il.e S am \it lxtil ll 1oy' -' . I Proper land essential for Slike crimson 'It I ilt wat I ](, i it Ilit t I itt l \ i)t iii 's hh I f y1 V tle 3 (it hi sx t; li fro IsIi. the T1,)1 ~ si ( . (1 V iiuiic\ s lih ii o \ i ts I1 1("i) sh d ft 111 t \ to l. pli ()N i.ii i liii )s Ii I5 111(5l Til ist ( 111 11 xxod IxI) I tilIl ij illilic15 hiato"t 927 \ itih lit 3 j5.lli 111 2 Itt (iltits G 3519t)ofll ci xx)i sx is (d lli to. ]i llttu' till) lii to) Ii it e II i ~s. i Bccli iti di. til vi iii 11ittl iii 13 iitlIi M M1 (Fl li! it i ' piii tili it. \jeci ill i m - N i i ilii itel 1 . I IIII(s II I i t I1 lil I I I S N lii. he 192 iti tzii 1 Sit imcsx cis fiti 1)32.tiu' ili oLi' xxi 2the5 iii 'IhIs xx"(, from I ill I) ~ is st ii xxu(ik i is xiii xxi ti i (-It il lxx i 3 ( the1 I I5 'i i'it Ii ii ( i'() l i CH i 5 (,itiii i i 1 1)1 cx , x 1 1 11 ) oi f xx ('10111. (jui') spicill" It\ u litc k.\ tii iiiiptox ii Ii hi 1920 toi'~i ;ii Work Ex N\'ill to i xx \il pioiltut xxiu oi .( 76e TENNESSEE VALLEY SUBSTAION-aa acccoe oi Mie 'cU((e'6e9 az torozozcaa R. E. STEVENSON, Asusiant Editor JOHN K. BOSECK, Superinti~ndent W. B. WEBSTER, Assistant Superiintendent preparation proved ii!] till, sii'iii. h'it iiiii It3 ciii lIi lix i success with crops stock xxits thieli1iii sitititilili hit thw 1 i 1 clover and alfalfa. V(111111 id els ilt i ic tol 15r it Is iJ l I it .1)1,111' xli ( Ill te (.1( iiii iii ii I ii ix 1 sill 11.11111', liixxii 1 01 t dlsliiii hat ( il t istl ci i s i t soil . ii lii i i it Ij~ ii til builder l l (tit 11. il ( t' s illi m 1,111 'ii lo iol 1 . 1 ) II i- t(ifl its mp iiii'ii. liii t ii II.11 I ill 1 liipo x t i'ic, litsiii(( Iiit F i itidsti\t t1111' it iii'llw iii)i i i i 11\i iwc. th t i ill 111 ki c n cr ' pp atc wedcd fltl~wc l o p itse il ' xitt' ; I ic (!(,si t .11 3 its ii tl. p I'i ci 113 ( 11l tlil li ii( ii. s lii t I I iiis xx" th ii' ci lis l 'Il l \i' liii' ~ ~ to it pil' 1 , ' pi lled xxix hc iittiitiii li lit( sthi i111 itt 5 t) i i l. 1111',S' t5 Ill i s i xbl lo (11 hits . iii i( i t ix eliw i o 41 Imiit s i lxx (.115 i tSll Iis tl(.I)\ (,I 1 is t iii o li it Fiii Ii' 1.1111 lf5 ic i ' ,,lositis tti111' iiIili s ii ili .1 The auditorium shown at left is used tar many meetings held at the Substation. Houses and other buildings are shown in background. Bottom defoliation ot cotton (right) is beirg tested in a new furrow irrigation project that was carried out for the first time in 1959. xxii kid ito u xiittxxil tiitittimiis. *\lailiti'x ft xt xink \% i p' iiiti paxtit x \\it AS at ( T'tittxx t \ift Stitittit. Olitliit cbrilixs, blcuitgix, D allis- "I ass, \\ Iliti (lo('1., lioop efiixr it] au 4 fix.pctl/iL iiiitdt 11p lt(n' fit xt tIi\tiiie 1 (Mii It. Fe till/ti itt 1 limie t'yjici eociitx tli iTVA i i t o Ill i)a t ixan r; iie oil i(I ' Sihxti Fiiii xCli ti liixxS tixl ITi i tilitit3 -cpix of i i'i lace xx~l ax I xidi I t'ped/al set o icea ii its iit ]it itla x ns i ii x)( succsik iixx vl Ill it theesi t'xt A dyiji iiiit xx0 ax xtt ip iiw il of I) i itixe lit kiiix tlisoxx Iii pa ti\%ts and Lax' f olit i l it x ix hi'il itl I II t \ itt ti lt t i lk t xix 1iti v tl f I itoxioli c ixt' ixx its xttilf ittsl toiltI hoiixitt Thuxx si Ilit t' t l ctol t\ it s t(xxtt Ii. -i iii tfll tt'I ill" fI tx ~ 1 f lI- itle itt' \ x t h \\(ll (t iti if~ v xx Irvi flth xx'i il i ttttl hu Jtf' ti It\tsas f~ittt ttott'igt that or plixl (titifi t i d at l it xxt'atf\' pcrtiit \\ ott tlilx'at ilittti \al-ol pol'm tiol TtnFlt't ithcet tiiti.~s\Nil 0)m 1) producttio n itii I \ ou l x it'i idu c Ill hisma tit tf piljt'ttx x o c liix iui st't'i I xt \%,it Ill tflic~itt ic tat l II it a it Iit' lhox ith l coli iug.le pcx titig' sits dl ofi s t' fi ll e itoI lt( it l gil i ix lwil x Ieit xx iii I i i t ii i c Ill , ixx til li llilxhit't tchugc t'iidaelllft l'.(ix xx etlcI nod i ix ti ale ill 351 ad ilid. xi'id \\'itsti i plllil. i to ri n f t o ftalx rit to il x te falx Ittcil l( o u f i ' c 11(111 ax id Cotton-vetch-corn rotation (left) showed value of legume rotation with row crops. Grain sorghum (right) is typical of the area as result of Substation work. (453 11). -- anitixt'igL' dafilx, ugtiit of 1.8I xxto T2 per heid. h Co ctton Meldchai\ationlie vr Zlix' fax tlt' (2) \. a it l ahof' liliitr ttiifti hasI iletttils (it3i' I is as oficit x)t'. to i er i i i,t' 1 oltclitt' tio an itt! alit/at iiti ith sstciwxi the i-s j'(xlt't'Iii,tiiiip ic atcliixLe Ii x, hast't dcit) , xitiiltb~c dtflaborit fet'd I, itx dixxlt'lttI x iatc I i Iie iti \t'xxsi 1 t \ ' I it the Itt i 'xt'' iid l1:o1.xeto ei itt 's xxibori titi tti X xx il oil icc tian 0iz fii'xt uit ti n anSdi Ot 'xxls ht' i lc ito ti xxii h ('(111 tit' It itini i ll l ri i' tII1l i ti ((lts t i t i l p it)- bcd i ll t'\t't lt tt I i ti d ls tf ciii ig. '~I~Y 5 I ~ -St K 5W~~m~'~ i FEiiiNG i'm i i ii ) coliiiciitialtes is iieah foiii. This List eiltiiiT IXis deiraihle XX er licii (iIXs are miilkedil ii pa li s ii h XX im Ii i lihi is pliitedsa. losii atc t Ae iith i a l iiig ui'l cit iisci a iteic 1 clltc( iiti pellt am ohiiits o il bipiaii- fitX (ielliigligc Tce hclilo astai in- illti Liiit el f t he rtol h le o steall) ~ i idl (resur ill p le ilii 1 llctXbe Sixe CIis oeX the Xdtop ill bltLi 1()ia tie ii iothiii XXd ifeie'l i tsed il4 (tie huiu. d IIxllc iid Iuli\ al (lal Forms of concentrate used in the tests are shown in the photo. Two sizes of pellets- 3, 16 ornd 3/ in. in diameter were com- pared with the some feed mix in meal form. test. 'Iwl Xti(IX XX 15 (Iesigiicd so that (.01t'IXX XXw \llihi be lcd eachi t -\pe it cci itriate diii iii) g olue pci iiol. Ilate OMiX 5 XXii fel :ill the hiSt the'X XX iiiihih (cit lt~d guot all it aiid fidI (:iiistal BIi iIII olgi ass. till of' the pellets aiil iiieail arie giscii ill ij ih t~l' Increassi(lt cold \ve iiashl Resons e froml iels itepellets rb Ib i rii lu'h ilite rin a i l i ll i XX t I il XXl i'lld Xi n. li t IX stI id\ i's ic iii t')iist' fill ithe si."i's t clags( lts lt I X (ji mii Ile I peiii ltos tis 11i('-,I IItX (I th Ai \I IItoI)11 i d v11 \N eI'i (1i op ill biit tei tat pci ciltagi'. Siiicec I- ci ]iiit I ' I i ('( e ii ts, XX it' (lifferenii t I I Ill I lil ed tl her XXICsttioll, XX itli 7 X- sC til i'i (Al I ciiti ic l .ii' li t '. as fid 1(6 to 20 11). of cmu'iiti ate (dailx to ,iisiii-c a citifcal test out tlie pellets. l)ils 4% 1(Nl produictio iii Xci agcd ailiiist thet samle foir coiXX oil the ii tId mnix aiiil tlie t'ilmiileci Ia pellets. I)ii tg the set'iiit XXeek, butter fat pecciitagc xxa- s 4.1.3% iii miilk fro oio s fedX5 1( the heurid miN, its comiiiiisi cc vith :3.73", fori 'I'lR Nii' t X ll 10*ii] vaijatjlli l fat test f holl loth gIiiiijs (liii hng the( first XX i'ik ofii lei test. 1)Iii og the s'ciinid V. ik hiiX tX i milk fro lf il cowsX fed thle clt'iiiiircial pelle'ts tiestedIIOXc thail diii tong the stiiitl-iittiiii pcioil. of ilk i oiii c'ilXX5 fcd thic herd ical Tii X.XXils ft i( s:1le illi l li the iseciondlii tist as'(' dXiiiing thie stmaiiz jiioil piod111, Xjtli oiIIV (lilt' ci)XX 5l~miiX g a tlc'tliii& iii fat. 5 et that iiig'ediciits ill thei IIi itiii- deihi ti' , illiii \vlehiitl( pei'll"u of fccd XX ill ('."iisc chiaiig(cs it) fat ciiiti'iit lit milk. It tlsoi ills'is tat luX ('liaiiligu ill lit ('(liiui'iti ,t(' XX ill ri'teiI aboiit 2 XX i2Qs to b lteitd. I'IIioiI iA Ni: i ii (CXX\ O N MEA1 XiAND PEIA' ANi ) (',0\11iilSi[0\O .li (4i Cldcfo plicel N-ficcii iiia t i ' lo cir,,lt g'ili PIo Ililli tX Nical 5oj) 16.7 5 1.5 10t.8 4.5 M1..5 I10.9 15.6 l..15 261.10 4.79) 7.00t (12A. 18.0 56.9) ). 6 4.5 1It 9. 8 1.6 2.50 2600l 4.88 20).50t 6(1. 1 1.5 12.7 21t.2 187 26.401 1.8.3 7.30 PELLETED coaec(aioarea G. E. H-AWKINS, Associate Dairy I-/isbandtman ' TDN content of compicte rations. RESTRICTED FEEDING ELLIS CROSS, G. R. INGRAM,' and D. F. KING Department of Poultry Husbandry A BE YOU WASTING money by feeding layers more than they need? Recent investigations by the poultry department, API Agricultural Experi- ment Station, have revealed that this may be true. Feeding experiments over the past 2 years indicate that it is pos- sible to restrict the feed of laying hens without adverse effects. Restriction Practiced Restricting the feed of chickens is al- ready being practiced by many opera- tors in two types of poultry enterprises. One, growing pullets on restricted feed, and the other, restricting the feed of mrneat-type breeder hens. Three experiments were conducted at the Station to determine the effects of restricting the feed of laying hens (commercial egg-type hens). In the first experiment four groups of 50 hens each were used. Pullets that had been grown on full feed and laying approxi- mately 10 to 15% were placed in in- dividual cages and full-fed until they reached 68 to 70% production. From this point on, the four groups were fed as follows: One group was full-fed (control group), one group was fed 5% less feed than the control group, while the other two groups received 10% less feed. The amount of feed to be fed the restricted groups was figured on the amount of feed consumed by the con- trol group the previous week. The amount was given the restricted groups in seven equal feedings at 8 o'clock each morning. The 10% restricted groups were only restricted 5% the first 2 weeks and then restricted a full 10% from the third week on. No hens were culled during these experiments and the percentage of production is figured on a hen-day basis. The average fig- ures for the 2-year test are presented in the following table. Resigned. Restric- Produc- tion tion None 5 10 65.27 67.25 62.16 Av. wt. end of yr. Lb. 4.65 4.59 4.29 Av. gain Lb. .58 .47 .26 Feed doz. eggs Lb. 4.65 4.43 4.29 From the data presented it is ap- parent that restricting the feed up to 10% did not reduce production signifi- cantly. The smaller birds utilized feed more efficiently resulting in a saving of 1- 1/ per dozen eggs. Since the data obtained from the first test indicated that it was possible to restrict the feed of laying hens, tests were then made to determine the pos- sibility of following a pre-determined feeding schedule. In this experiment, three groups of 50 birds each were used. One group was full-fed, while the other two groups were restricted as follows: groups 2 and 3 were fed the same amount of feed each day that the 5 and 10% groups had received for the same day the previous year. The results of this experiment are given in the following table. Restric- Produc- tion tion None None 4 65.02 66.45 69.79 Av. wt. end of yr. Lb. 4.69 4.56 4.52 Av. gain Lb. .71 .65 .61 Feed/ doz. eggs Lb. 4.40 4.16 4.28 In this experiment group 2, which was fed the same amount of feed that the 5% restricted group had received the previous year, actually consumed more feed than the control group by 1.1%. The control group in this experi- ment did not eat as much feed as the same group the previous year. Group 3, which was fed the same amount of feed that the 10% restricted group received the previous year, was actually only restricted 4% when com- pared with this year's control group. Although the hens in groups 2 and 3 were not restricted to the same ex- tent as the hens in the first test, the Caged hens are shown with the amount of feed consumed and eggs produced in a year. Hen on left was fed 10 per cent less on right. data show that it is possible to follow a pre-determined feeding schedule. Group 3, which was restricted 4%, had a slightly higher production percentage than the control group. Throughout these experiments it was observed that the 10% restricted group would usually be out of feed by 6 o'clock in the evening and sometimes by 4 p.m. This group had to go without feed until the next morning at 8 o'clock. Time without feed would be another practical way to restrict the feed of lay- ing hens. The old recommendation that hens should clean out the feeders by the end of the day was good advice. There was no difference in percent- age of mortality or egg weight in any group attributed to the method of feed- ing during these experiments. The data from these experiments show that it is profitable to restrict the feed of laying hens. Hens can be re- stricted up to 10% without adverse ef- fects. In one test (not discussed here) where feed was restricted up to 15%, egg production was not reduced more than the 10% restricted group. It is possible apparently to restrict the feed of laying hens up to 10%, if it is done properly. The best method to use in restricting the feed is still a question. Probably it would be best to use a control flock on full feed as was done in this test. If this is not possible a pre-determined feeding schedule or providing no feed from 5 p.m. to 8 a.m. each day could be used. 11 I h co Me bu~ Iht sh P ; ht th ro ve 3 P l un v ice en sirnd ere >f >a SEEDLING DISEASES W. H. PADGETT' and J. A. LYLE Department of Botany and Plant Pathology A N I's( II 'SLI INIVIIi.SiTI til('l Il0- (Ilietlil of 1 nilI 5CCdliligs has1 ibrou~ght I ilit io il dI(1isease j)1)1 Collcls to forest The 1)1111 anld papr ilitlyt anld the Soil B~ank Pr ogiram placed illI adii onal Ness 1115) m it'sr velt' I'stalisII by pIlipl 111(1 paper comlpanies. Niii-sei'?IIs i op- 11ltcet jnl-crasiilg (leTlaTll for piole ia'ed- lIT'S. This crete I',tI liced for reseilCh1 of 1)11l) 011 sCTV dlisealse proiblems. Exten~sive reschI (I ('oIl ilg fiigi I It&ali sins a ssoiailte w'iX'ithi th di ' cii 1115C prevaX'ilinlg il i 111SeI IS lhas ileell (OTT Thict( ill T)sTome, rcgioTii oTf tille UnTited States. However, iTI tile Souitheasternl States tile hinvestigaItioni if' forTcst 1111- scry (lisease pi T)1iCTs 1015s lagged be- hind1( other settions of the coulntiry. Survey Made i'A CXl-e o~f dise'ases was m-llie 1 iV mlen~t, API AgiiCiltua ITTII \ 1 )imid Stai- tion?, din lg tile I 957 growX Iig sealsonT OTlid part (If 1958. t'ilnlgs iiii(icne and1 IdiscIIsI deveiop)TlCTt oll dlaimpig Til 1T rolot Trlt (If fiXe CsoTiltIIIT TIpiTC seedilinigs \Nr ('Cstuldiedi. LoiIITIIIX, loilgdelf, s11111 leaf, slash1, alild Vii gillill piiies XVII C till secics studied. Tihiee forest tree 1(111 Xli ies wXere choseii (1) Aiihii II "'ii Xi'Tv, Atili-ii; (2) Coo(11sa i ,N iiiSTV, C'oosa PiTl'5 11nd (.3) JohnIT IL. Miller NurITs(1V, AtitaiIwglville. I)is(',sed se iiigs XX ( I Collected ;tllosiXC XXel CT 1111d1 tio (eterillille fillii li se'it. In(cuilaltlion experimcnTts Xwere inaldi ill till grTI-illiTose to (iCtI'rli IT Xwhlat follgi cIli5C IliXslse to il lle selli lliTgs. IXVcIX I'diffi'iI'it sfT(iI'X Nvc(1ob tainled from dlise~sed Xselitils of' till 1' 1111Cr gradu (ate assistanit. Pine seedlings with root-rot infection above (foreground), healthy seeadlingsl (background); below left, healthy seedling, right, seedling with Scierotium bataticola infection. fi\ iSfll i Sjj)i). .X ('C illeli I (Taill lii 5l'ti('S lt ~il mot AlaIi ils.N~ T\ o,1( of,1 1 iiIXI S cIc o it I as I I T b It I tic ll and lilIT i'r'i el spl.I' illr oti IlI hlse ll] tpie t f' (iii l a TI C~il.T ~t ea TX1-si Samil ip l l' w lcluillTg. I d l iiIlgo tS ('.111 ill' (ITTegIS is itlle iI'( l il s ]it (] oli Tcc.liltd S . ailti co fes ( i'll 5 r 1 Ito clis(. aippeia l illie c c d ilill, 5l1Tl,5 t1TJITIS i jit Nioff'. X (1 ~ i TIwe er it . Na I ~lel ui ill ep s NuT il Xf ilIlcillt ape111. o e t Ii I', i rtarded s ill its~ a iT) , til ut 1 I l age iS, illt Il'.i X'11 (CX('I Is t lillt illg /11 j"f ."jh1 I ilTwi e'xists iil pull' sI't'hilT~s, Sill'e thely ((((TIl leI till dll iilllilt I llI .(.iil (irill- iiio obai ne \tT(T . illS dililie ro'tX s. I i Ill Sepemer oi 11 957i'S(ldi~, Vl ro T'So t'rl' 1ci ws;lj h i ( t e ls ('lillg h 1F1.1( I (XliTs (Ililli , t more.l T i s nnse's \\,Citgs 11o1t 5'i' t ill o in illi fil ogv The i~tli a e '( ITill- hiill lh if slas pill tcil os siI ilsg~ svrle. Nla tap~ fioios of'i~T~ Idilishad JIw i'- tll' lull'l rot s,~l'I il ill lcSked X (T'el' coor lit il~~ l 11 1lI XX t's 11 II I.IIitTs hadI tlt he St'Ti i 1 51 ll( III aill st r'ii ils A NEW DISORDER appeared in corn fields of central and southern Alabama in the spring of 1941. The trouble was zinc deficiency. When corn was 6 in. to 1 ft. in height, yellow streaks in the leaves and a white to yellow top appeared. Most of these plants seemed to recover to normal condition after a few weeks' growth. These symptoms were not ob- served in many cases under the old system of open pollinated, low yielding varieties that received low rates of fer- tilizer and. that were generally grown on acid, unlimed soils. As progress was made from a 25-bu. to a 60-plus-bu. per acre yield, a new problem was in- troduced to many farmers. The faster growing corn plant on well fertilized, limed soils could not get enough zinc for maximum yields. Research Conducted Research was begun by the API Ag- ricultural Experiment Station in 1941 to determine how much yields were reduced and how to correct this de- ficiency. The first tests at the Main Sta- tion involved use of zinc or other minor elements in an attempt to correctthese conditions and to increase yields. Re- sults of these tests from 1941-51 showed an annual increase of over 6 bu. per acre from an annual application of 15 lb. of zinc sulfate per acre. Plots were limed to a pH of 6.0 and were well fertilized. In 1946 zinc deficiency was observed at the Plant Breeding Unit at Tallassee. The addition of zinc corrected this de- ficiency and increased yields about 8 bu. per acre. In 1951 a rate and residual zinc study was started at the Wiregrass Substation on an area that had shown zinc defi- ciency symptoms. Rates of zinc sulfate of 0, 5, 10, and 15 lb. per acre were applied annually from 1951-54. From Zinc deficiency is indicated in corn by yellow streaks in leaves and a white to yellow top. JOHN I. WEAR Soil Chemist ZINC DEFICIENCY ag co on d4o4 ofr cor 1955-58 a residual study was c to determine if zinc applied di first 4 years would increase another 4 years. The table sh a small consistent increase of was obtained from the unli (pH 5.9) and 8.7 bu. increas limed soil (pH 6.5). No incr obtained from more than 10 11 sulfate per acre. For the nex the test was continued, but no added. The increases for the zinc were 3.7 bu. on the unl and 7.6 bu. on the limed soil Field Tests From 1954 through 1956, 25 field tests were conducted ers' fields in the State on m coarse-textured soils. The test measure the yield response o 10 lb. of zinc sulfate per ac soils were selected as average corn land without knowledg( content. At each location yic measured from areas with an( RATES AND RESIDUAL STUDY OF ZINC FOR CORN AT THE WIREGRASS SUBSTATION, HEADLAND Treatment 1951-1954 No zinc 5 lb./A zinc sulfate annually 15 lb./A zinc slate No zinc, lime 10 lb./A zinc sulfate, lime Yield of corn per acre pH value 1951-1954 1955-1958 of soil Bu. Bu. 33.8'-' 35.4 37.3 ,6.1 27.4 36.1 67.7 71.1 71.0 71.4 70.2 77.8 5.9 5.9 5.9 5.9 6.5 6.5 Extractable by Dithizone. 2 Yield higher second 4-year period due to more moisture. onducted lime. These tests showed no increase uring the in yield from zinc at any location on yields for unlimed soils (pH 5.1-5.9). On limed Lows that soils increases in yield were obtained at 3f .5 bu. 6 of the 25 locations. Soil tests for zinc med soil showed a range of 0.1 to 2.2 p.p.m. e for the extractable zinc. Three of the four soils ease was with a pH value of 6.2 or above and a b. of zinc low zinc content (less than 0.4 p.p.m. t 4 years zinc) resulted in an increase in yield zinc was from applied zinc. All responses were residual from soils with a pHI of 5.9 or higher imed soil and 0.9 p.p.m. of zinc or less. No re- . sponses were measured on soils with pH values less than 5.9 or with a zinc content of more than 0.9 p.p.m. A 2-year test at the Lower Coastal a total of Plain Substation and 3-year tests on the on farm- Brewton and Monroeville Fields have edium to generally shown the same relationships s were to as the other tests. f corn to Zinc deficiency in corn generally oc- re. These curs on limed soils with low zinc con- unlimed tent. However, all soils low in zinc with e of zinc high pH value do not show zinc de- lds were ficiency. Other factors such as moisture, d without temperature, and amounts of K 2 0 and PO in the soil are undoubtedly of im- portance in this relationship. A survey conducted in 1956 in Ge- Zinc neva, Pike and DeKalb Counties soil, showed only 3% of the 391 fields sam- pled had a pH value over 6.0. p.p.m. A general recommendation of zinc 0.6 for corn at the present time is not 0.9 warranted, because field tests do not 2.0 show increases in yield on acid soils. 0.6 Zinc is recommended by the Soil Test- 2.1 ing Laboratory for corn on soils known to be low\v in zinc with pH of 6.0 or above. 13 ,Bi~s I I kl T1- 1CT l.e d taE P ne 1-e ;oi .C3 /3 L1UIt !-Y Su on tll7 3 PLANT FOLIAGE a DECORATION HENRY ORR, Assci ate Horticulturist L YOU I AlRE iiltli'itCdl ill gl11(55 nig planits f01 100)11 inlteio 0) (ee-oatjil xvoody fo1lage plan ts inay be) tile ill 0 sxver. To thc co01111r.(i Col ulsers, at xx 11(1 foliage 1)111) is a0lY 1)11-dx, xx ondy planlt th at prl )( tees a ( 1 CC 01 at ixe, dllial 11 foliage and foliage branliches uxnaible ill tiheir triliC. I lIC'se sillie plilits ciIi ibe l(sell 1) tile, alC1.tek11 inl tn1w 1.l In 1 958 all ex\ illilt ion stilliS Nvils APId Xg1 illt llo1 Lt~i lllt deStilt xx ill fixe iCJeiI'sl1tatie C (loilpx (If muli il~ sel~S. ihice Of these giops (oill s istell of a11iltelil ffnxve i 1ilgel x; tite (Otiher txxT Nvxxei e' CoIiicicI l 1 flor iis gi Olups. Ixx'elxe ioiiatgex \\('I(' ulsed. Foliage Demand Ali im11portimt nb is itin of til(, e~iil- illalitelu gilif)'p ill fnliage'S not Coinl 101(111' lised( by' tile ColOl lci ujil flmoit. lBronzeleaf li aeagns 11Chiinese itold Japalnese Pilotinia xxei e pIicked lit ie ('I tllc( to the cdilk hi((f 1(11l oI (f Solih eni Miagniola or 0 Lallieecilf Creeibl(1ier 1wx txxn oIf tit(' tivle itlll11 14bhlps. Thi 'ColICi lila 1 fllists priefei'r I ((I till dar1k lealf foni of Sotloil Nliaglllia bix en tue floliae Lfaax S i lole ilul11 ta)blle~let111I thi "n(1i lel ('dol ( for pe ili jtpWee I'lto li Gro ,bliv A selectibn OIf xxo(I\ follilgi plants call b~e gilown1 ~ prlet fealix a(II' plae ihrl s iale soi te oln si (id e If in'v (11'(((15 n t ( plilx I \\lis I ll c 1' 1101 tilat l-pls x((1( 1( tbinIl x cx hIl111 I tildI J pill h tli a ioth r\I 'o OrcharIlYil xpd Loca ttio l ro bloi I lel liii ic, lodeldii l i s 11011111 fezsIt ('l l It h off l ti(' 11ili ~ileiis4' oIf i( CIII?.illxxlt Ieilail, 11(11'r tileiISS(I 1 ililtS. Oril ~icharfdI Loaiogn1(1xCCiliC Line-mass foliage arrangements are be- coming increasingly popular for public buildings and homes where long-lasting ar- rangements are needed. and1 pi Ieli( till' hnlish el pilodilct ix e l''x(' tli. 11111' (1111) tiC rilli a~ ll ix too ic e 1 iied x(di Foliage Processing lx (lila, Ci IIe nIh'lloIxoxa x I0tel (Ii Lvlitl iiilo\C olIII in loxiC fli ', iWCI ili be~ ctilliel(' mIf shC x I Ixipe Fhiof tel I ll~x l lliw tOlltil (If 1l1 lCI piI ((Sill all al xl (((1(1lce ofI dltin ((I sh~db hiiledt((tl(I.TKldl Branches of the dark green form of Southern Magnolia, right, are chesen by florists for decorative work in preference to Ternstroemia, Loquat, and Bronze Elaeagnus, left, preferred by amateur groups. -I S WINTER TOPCOAT fiber preference JANET RIE MER, Graduate Fellow' NELL SKAGGS GLASSCOCK, Assoc. Home Economist IS THE LABEL in your winter coat a good basis for selecting fiber content? Interest in fiber content of garments was studied in a survey made by 20 members of the textile class of the School of Home Economics of The Ala- bama Polytechnic Institute. The women students were juniors and seniors ma- joring in clothing and textiles. The pur- pose of the survey was to determine what fibers and fiber blends were pre- ferred in winter coats owned by API women students. The woven labels of 378 fabric win- FIBER CONTENT OF WINTER TOP COATS OWNED BY 378 API WOMEN STUDENTS LISTED BY PREFERENCE Fiber content 100% wool . . Unknown --------------------------------- 100% cashmere 90% wool, 10% cashmere 100% virgin wool .. 80% wool, 20% cashmere Unknown amount of wool ..... Unknown amount of cotton- 80% wool, 10% cashmere, 10% orlon ------- Unknown amount of wool and cashmere 100% alpaca .............. O rlon -- --- -7-- -- -- -- - Miscellaneous preference' Per cent 19.8 16.9 12.4 10.3 5.0 4.5 4.0 2.1 1.8 1.6 1.3 1.0 _ 19.3 100.0 'Wool with either mohair, fur, acrylic, rayon, dacron, nylon, camel's hair, lamb's wool (each less than 1I% of preference group). Resigned. Two of 20 clothing and tex- tile majors making survey model coats of wool (right) and cashmere (left) as first and second choices of 378 API women students. ter coats were examined and the fiber content information given on each was tabulated. The owner was questioned as to the fiber content of the garment if the information was not given on the label. The percentages of all fibers used were computed to determine what fib- ers were most commonly found and preferred. The results in order of preference are summarized in the table. They in- dicate that 100% wool is the preferred fiber for fabric winter coats; 100% cashmere was the second choice to wool. The favorite blend was 90% woDl and 10% cashmere. Another common blend was 80% wool and 20% cash- mere. Many of the young women preferred cashmere or cashmere blends, as shown by the results. The percentage of 100% cashmere coats might have been even higher had not the cost of cashmere been so great. Its softness and gentle warmth are the characteristics of this luxury fiber that account for cashmere's high desirability. The fiber content of 16.9% of the 878 coats was reported as unknown, for which there are several possible reasons. The fiber content of some of these coats may not have included any wool, and as yet fibers other than wool are not required by law to be labeled as to percentages of content. Probably most of the coats reported as having unknown fiber content were originally labeled on a "hang" tag, when the garment was purchased. Such tags are removed before wearing and are usually thrown away or lost. If the owner forgets the fiber content or is not interested at the time of purchase, there is no way of the consumer de- termining content readily. Loss of such information often proves unfortunate. When an owner takes a garment having no fiber-content label to the dry cleaners, the operator must clean it thoroughly yet not harm the fabric. Fabrics respond in many ways to various cleaning solvents, and some- times fibers are even destroyed by cleaning fluids. The consumers risk this Fossibility when the fiber content is not known. The more information the man- ufacturer or consumer can give the cleaner, the less is the risk of damaging the garment. Information about fiber content to facilitate garment care is one of the most important reasons for adequate labeling of fiber content. 15 V ALUE of Alabama agriculture con- tinues to grow. This is revealed by a balance sheet showing assets and lia- bilities for the entire State as of Jan- uary 1, 1950, 1955, and 1958. Total farm assets in Alabama in 1958 exceeded $2.2 billion, an all-time high (see table). Asset valuation was about 50% above that of 1950. Assets were controlled mainly by farmers, as assets exceeded liabilities by about 9 to 1. Total farm equities (net worth) on January 1, 1959 were slightly under $2 billion. Land and buildings comprised over 60% of asset valuation on Alabama farms. This has increased more than 40% since 1950, because of inflation and increased land prices. Economies gained from increasing the scale of op- erations and the value of real estate as a hedge against inflation offer strong support to real estate values. Livestock Gains Value of livestock inventories showed significant gains since 1950. In many cases increases reflect improved quality and higher value of animals rather than increased numbers, particularly be- tween 1955 and 1958. While cattle and calves have shown large increases in number since 1950, a slight decrease occurred between 1955 and 1958. Ex- cept for broilers and sheep, other classes of livestock decreased in number or re- mained the same. Alabama farmers have added ma- chinery and equipment at a rapid rate. The January 1, 1958 inventory figure was 170% above 1950 and 69% greater than 1955. The data represent average values of one-half of the estimated new cost of trucks, tractors, and equipment. Feed crops stored on farms, house- hold items, and liquid assets in the EDWARD E. KERN, JR. Ir Assoc. Agricultural Economist form of cash, demand and time de- posits, and convertible securities on hand show substantial increases for the periods shown. The main items of feed on inventory were corn and hay stocks. In 1958, corn accounted for about $41 million of the $51 million total. The low 1955 inventory valuation resulted $ 978,407 161,056 107,186 49,154 90,706 103,664 from reduced stocks following dry weather in 1954. Real Estate Loans Real estate mortgages and loans backed by net worth statements or chattel mortgages are major classifica- tions of liabilities. A third category is installment credit or other personal loans. Farm real estate loans are usually for land purchases or for refinancing outstanding debts. Loan volume has in- creased at the rate of about 9% per year since 1950. Production and other loans unsecured by farm real estate on January 1, 1958 was slightly below the 1955 balance and 27% above that reported in 1950. As these loans represent short or inter- mediate term debts, outstanding bal- ances among specific periods vary. The size of loan balances is influenced by the ability to repay gained during the previous income period plus the eco- nomic outlook for the season ahead. COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET OF AGRICULTURE, ALABAMA, JANUARY 1, 1950, 1955, and 19580 Item Assets Land and buildings Livestock, poultry Machinery, equipment- Crops, supplies Household goods Deposits, savings, cash Total assets .. Liabilities R eal estate .......... Non-real estate ....... Non-reporting (est.) Total liabilities --- Net worth - - 1950 1955 Change 1950-58 1955-58 SPct. +26.0 +39.7 +69.0 +82.2 +33.5 +48.3 $1,098,816 123,023 171,416 28,235 99,504 127,934 $1,384,508 171,890 289,618 51,454 132,823 189,748 + 41.5 + 6.7 +170.2 + 4.7 + 46.4 + 83.0 $1,490,173 $1,648,928 $2,220,041 + 49.0 +34.6 $ 87,156 42,058 31,544 $ 119,476 54,023 40,517 $ 160,758 $ 214,016 $1,329,415 $1,434,912 $ 156,514 53,311 39,983 $ 249,808 $1,970,233 + 79.6 + 26.8 + 26.8 + 55.4 + 48.2 +31.0 - 1.3 - 1.3 +16.7 +37.3 * Estimated fromgovernmental and private statistical reports. FREE Bulletin or Report of Progress PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE TO AVOID PAYMENT OF POSTAGE, $300 AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION of the ALABAMA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE E. V. Smith, Director Auburn, Alabama Permit No. 1132-1 /59-8M Thousands Thousands Thousands Pct.