r~U F LBTJNS OF ALABAMA Agricultural Experiment Station. AUBURN. INDEX. VOL. VII. BULLETINS 101.107, AND 12TH ANNUAL REPORT JANUARY TO T)ECEMBE3R, 1899, MONTGOMERY, THlE BROWN PRINTING ALA.: PRINTERS CO, 1900. CONTENTS. BULLETINS. 101. 102. 103. 104. 105. 106. 107. Experiments with Cotton, 1898.................. Jan., Co-operative Fertilizer Experiments with Cotton, 1898.............. ................. Feb., Experiments in Syrup Making..................March, Velvet Beans.................... ............ April, Winter Pasturage, Hay and Fertility Afforded by Hairy Vetch.....................Aug., Orchard Notes.................................Nov., Results of Experiments on Cotton in Alabama .... Dec., 12th Annual Report............ ............. Jan., 1899 1899 1899 1899 1899 1899 1899 1900 INDEX. Acacia dlealbata...... .............. ..... ..... ... .. Report: 15 longi fo lict...... ........... A ecidiam desmium ................... Aecidium Aesculus..........................................32 .... ..... .......... ......... ........... Accidents and Diseases of Cotton Plant ...................... gossypii ............................................. .... ... .......... ................ .......... Report : 15 328 .317 317 Alibizzia lophantha...... ........ Alexander City, Ala .. Report : 15 Alexander Seed Company....................... Allen, J. ........................ ....... ....... 213, 214 213 212 B.............................. Alternaria tenuis .............................. 302, 307, 312, 317, 328 American Association of Colleges and Stations................. Analysis of cotton plant, A mphisphceria separans .... 181 382 flowering stage..................392, 323 393 for fertilizing constituents............ 382 ................................... cotton lint. ... in water free condition ............... ........................ 381 cotton burrs.............................. cotton bolls ................................. entire mature plant ........... stalk of cotton plant Aniderson, J. ... 380, 381 381, 397 0380, ........ .............. leaves of cotton plant........................... 381 381 72 385 ...................... 381 27, seed of cotton plant.................... P .................................. 371, 390, 401, 402, .. .. . .... ...... Anderson, J. T..2, 4, 22, 28, 96, 107, 116, 128, 162, 180, 183, 369, Report: 5, 24 Anthracnose of cotton................. ......... Aphis of apple...........................................16 apples free from................................ 300, 313, 325, 327 167 apples attacked by ............................. Apopka, Fla........... .............................. 120, 123 Apples....... ........................ ..... .......... 163 varieties of....... ........... ............ 164 diseases of ........................................ 64 adaptability of to changed environment .............. 169 Arborvitae ..... ...... A rmsby, H. P......... ..... ...... ..................... ................ ...................... 167 Armstrong, H. Clay....... ..... Report: 2, Report: 14 16 22, 96, 107 430 212 ..... ................ ......... :.........175 Atkinson, G. 292, 295, 296, 298, 302, 808, 310, 314, 317_ 318, 319, 320, 321, 322, 323, 325, 326, 327 Athens, Ala................................................. 300 ..... ..... Asbury, Ga................ ......... Asp idiotu~s obsctrtus........ .... F.. .183,1289. Atlanta, Ga....................................... 213, 214, 332, 340 Augusta, Ga.. .ii.................................. 213 ,214, 332, 335 Auburn, Ala..................................282, prndiginsiis ................. 299, 303, 313, 332 .. ..... ..... ............ Autry, A......._.......... Bacillus .gossypina............... .. ... ................ ........... ..... 27, .35 311, 312, 317 312, 317 214 Baileyville, Tex........................................... Baker, C. F... ....... ................ ...... 2, 22, 96, 107, 311 ,....................... 27, 51 Ballard, J. L .................. Banks, W. H.................................--........212 Barcklay, J. J ..................................... 193 Bates, R ................................................. 212 Bean disease, Report: ..................................... 31 Beets, sugar, analysis, of...... .... ....... .......... Beeson, W. J...........................................27, Bennettsville, S. L .. C................................ Bern eys. Ala.......... Bevill, Bevill,. W. C............ Ala ................................................ ....... ...................... ............ 282 Report: 20 32 ...... 214 27, 59 282 259 ... ....... ............ Bibliography of cotton diseases..................... 289, 290, 324 Binford, John Bi lbro, ............................................. .. .... A. A................................ ................ Biological Survey ................. Report: Report : 4 31 "Black rust of cotton" .. Blights of tea and, cotton ..... ............................... :...............:....... --..... 327 251, 282 183, 270 27, 65, 277 301, 325 Blo un tsvi lle, Ala ....................................... Bonduaran t, A. J...................................... Borland, T. M.................. .................... ... 361 Botanical characteristics of hybrids ....................... Botanical. characteristics of American crosses ......... ........ 346 classification of foreign cotton ..................... 353 experiments......... ..... ......... Report : 14 . . .. 17, 319, 321, 326 Botanical Gazette ......................... 317 ....................... Botryosphwria Berengeriana.............. fuliginosa..... .............................. ... 317 horizontalis ............... Quercuurn......... :... ......... ............ ........ ............ :.....317 .... 317 subconnata......................... Bow ersville, Ga......... Brewton, Ala .......................................... .................................. 318 212 269, 282 431 Brompton, Ala.............................................. 214 333 ......................... Brownsville, Tex .................. Broun, Win. LeRoy.........2, 96, 107, 128, 162, 180, Report: 3, 5, 7 Bulletins issued by Station ........ Burnt Corn, Ala ........ ........ Report: 10 Bulletin, Torrey Botanical Club ............................. ................................... ........ 323 274, 275, 282 Burton, J. Q, Jr.............................................869 .... .............. Calhoun, Ala........... ........... Carctgctnctfrtescens........ Carbon bi-sulphide.................. ............ 27, 92 ...... .............. ...... Carmichael, D. Jr ........... 22, 96, 107, 128, 162, 180-183, Report: 27 Cary, C. A.............2. 218 ........... Carter'sville, Ga ................................ ..... ..... Report: 26, 29 Cattle, purchase of improved .......... Report: 15 .................. Cedar, Japanese........ ..... Cedar Keys, Fla 0. .......... 292 s..............Report." ................ 117, 282. 14 ....................................... 333, 336 Census, Tenth........................ 290, 328 Cercosporellagossypii .................. ........ Cercosporagossypina........ Chestnut, V. K.............. ..... 318 .................... 302, 307, 308, 318, 320, 325, 329 ....... ............... 122 Cherries, early Richmond......... ......... Dyehouse ......... Montmorency........... .... ...... Ostheimer ............ Suda.............. ........... ..................... .... ................ .......... .......... .................... ... ............... 169 169 169 169 169 ........ ........... Wragg...... ...... Chrtornium olivaceum....................................... Chambers, W. H...........................................183 .............................. C. Charleston, Charlotte, N.C...................................332, ......... 169 318 332 340 S. .......... ...... Chattanooga,: Tenn............................... .......... ................. . Christopher, R. H ......... Citronelle, Ala.............................................261 Clanton, Ala ............................................. .............. Gladosporium herbarurn....................... Clark, George..............................................183 Clark, R. W........ Clayton, James. . 332,9340 .. 212 282 318 ................... .............................. 162, 180, ............ 183 Report: 5-29 318 Cleistotheca papgrophila..................................... 331 Climate of preparatory season ............................... 8334 seed planting season.................. ............ growing season...................................835 developing period............................8337 fiber picking season...................................339 Climatic condition of cotton. belt..............................831 482 Olinic. free ..... .. :...:.. . .... Clover, crimson ................................... Coatopa, Ala.............................................282 ............. ......... Report:- 27 <......... 306 ............... 213 Coldwater, Ga ,.......... Colletotoihum Gos'sypii ....... Collins, D. Collins, W. K.............. E ...... 300, 302, 307, 312, 313, 318, 324, 325 Comparison ... 326 ...................... Comstock, J.- H..............'.... 368 Conclusions drawn from hybrid cotton.............. ......... 27-92 Conner, .G..........................-.. ... ................... Contents.................................. ................ 179 between .original plants and improved cotton.......349 ................................. ........................ ................. 27-68 212 Conyers, Ga ................................... Cooke, M. Cook, WV. ....... C........................................... ... ........... 214 32 212 A..................................................... Coosa Valley, Ala.......................282 Co-operative fertilizer experiments with cotton.... ......... 23, ..... ............... 269 .............. Coppedge, C. S .... .................. Cotton diseases....... .. ,................289, Cotton worm and other enemies ................... Cotton experiments at Abbeville........ 212 .......... 326, Report:. 30 3 25 27-92 59-62 27-9"2 0 Berneys...................49 Bevill ........................ Boligee ............. Blountsville..................5 ....... .............. Brewton............................ Burnt Corn............................49 Coosa Valley....................... 60-62 68, 69 ............. ....... .............. ...... Coatopa ........ Cullman ........ Cusseta ......... Dillburg ......... .......... ..... ........ ... 49 76, 78 50 .......... ..... .......... 52-56 Dothan .......... Gordo ..... ......... ........... ..... ....... 65-67 56 .. Greensboro .......... ........ Hartford....... ........ Hurtsboro............ ... ... 70-7; ....... 77, 78 ..... 4S Jackson........ ........ Kaylor........... ..... .............. 50 ..... ........ ..... ..... ..... .... 48-5*1 Larimore...... ........ LeGrand ........ ........ Lumber Mills......... ...... Maryn..................5 Naf tel ........ .... ........ .... ....... ..... 58-62 50 63, 64 48 4-5 6 Newton........... ...... 27 -9 2 433 ..... ..... ... 49 Snow Hill...... ........ 57-62 ................ Sterrett ....... 50 Sulligent.............. ..... ....... Thomaston......... ...... ..... .... 72-75 Tuscaloosa...... ........ Tuscumbia........ ..... Tuskegee....... ...... ........... ..... ............. ...... 53-56 27-93 48 Union Springs ........ Wetumpka......... ..... ..... ..... ... 73-75 ......... 27-92 Wilson........ ..... ..... .......... 48' ................... 326 Cotton insects, report upon .............. Report 19, 380 Cotton plant, analysis ........................ Cotton per cent. of lint. ... of- :..............188, plant considered in its chemical relation................8369 187, 202, 195 composition of at different stages of growth............. 369 . -...... 225 manuring of............................ 342 number of varieties of, in cultivation in cotton belt .... per centage ratios of.................................389 231 Cotton seed meal versus nitrate of soda ...................... products, effects on composition of butter........... 402 of manure.... ..... 406 194. weight of 100 of each variety ..................... 236 ver~sus stable manure ............................ Cotton wood............. ................... ............. 323 Cowpeas, value as a fertilizer for cotton......................242 as fertilizer on lime land ..................... ..... ..................... disease ......... Craig, Moses............................................ """"..... .......... Urataeguts pyracant ha.... _"""" ..... ............ chiorosarca........... Report: 241 Crossing experiments with cotton ............................ Crytomeria Japonicea.......... ..... Culiman, Ala Culpepper, J. . ................... ..... ......... ........... ................ Report: 14 341 Report: 15 282 .180 Report: 31 14 E...............................21 Cultivating implements ........... Cultivation, late ........................................... Cultivation, depth ......................... 217 217. 218 Culver, T. U...........2, 22, 96, 107, 128, 162, 180, 183, Report. 5 213, 214 Curry-Arrington Seed Co ............................... Curtis, Geo. W.............................................827 .. ........ 274, 275, 282 Cusseta, Ala............................. 327 Dabney, Chas. W ......................................... Dadeville, Ala................... Daffin, E. J........... ......................................... .......................... .......... ......... .............. 311 Dallas, Texas................................ .......... 27-52 212 434 Damping off ....................................... 295, 322, 326 Department of Agriculture .......................... .............................................. Diedrocephala Diplodiagossypina................... Cowdelli 186, 235, 290 .............. ................. .. 311 318 .318 .......................................... herbarum........................... 318 Diplodiella Cowdelli........................................... ............................................ striispora 318 323 Dillburgh, Ala.............................................282 ........ ........... L............. Dill, C. C. ...... Diospyros ebenum .,.... ... .... .... """.......... Report: 27-52 14 289, 326 Diseases of cotton ...................................... 290, 328 accidents and.................................. angular leaf spot.......................291, 309, 325, 326 anthracnose............................291, 313, 326, 329 326 areolate mildew.................................... 301 ............ black rust ........................... 291, 311, 326, 329 boll rot ................................ 328 cotton wilt....................................296, cowpea wilt........................................ ........ ............... 293 damping off........................ frenching ................................. leaf 295, 322, 326 296. 291, 308, 326, 329 blight.... oo........ 326, 328 mildew.......................................291,309 mosaic diseases............................301, 302, 326 root knot (root red rust. .... blight. o.......... ........ galls). .. .............. .... o..... 291, 292, 326 291, 307, 308, 326, 328 red leaf ...o............... ................ 326 rust............................... .. .291, 301, 327, 328 shedding of boils........................291, 315, 326, 328 291, 295, 322, 326, 328 sore shin ........................... .. 296 sterile damping off fungus ........................ wilt .................................. 290, 291, 326, 329 yellow leaf blight...............................301, 326 221 .................. Distance between plants ................ 213 Division of Botany .......................................... Division of Entomology ......................... :.... ...... 292 Division of Vegetable Physiology and Pathology ............... DoassansiaGossypii................................._.......... 290 Dothan, Ala..................................274, Dothiorella botryosphaerioides............................... ... 319 183, 295, 322, 327 B. M ................................. 277, 278, 282 319 Duggar, J. F..2, Duggar, 3, 22, 96, 107, 109, 128, 162, 180, 183, 185, 225, Report: 5, 25, 29 ....... 270, 327 ................. 27-73 ............... ..... Dyktes, J. W................ 435 Eatonton,Ga. Ebony........... 22, 96, 107, 128, 162, 180, 183, 261, Earle, F. S...............2, 5, 15, 32 289, 327........................Report: ......................................... ............................ Report: 214 14 351, 352, 356, 368 Egypt.....................................341, 213 .................. ......................... Ellis,G. B El Paso. Texas........................................332 318 ............................................. Erigeron. 15 Eucalyptus saligna...............................Report: 319 .......................... Eurotium.................. Experiments on cotton inconclusive........................92 objects and methods..........................25 with cotton.................. Farmers Institutes at Centreville..................Report: 25 Courtland.. .................. Report: 25 Dothan.....................Report: 25 Double Springs..............Report: 25 Elba.......................Report: Hayneville..................Report."25 Jasper.. .................... Report: 25 Luverne...... .............. 25 Meridianville ................ Report: 25 Moulton.....................Report: 25 Prattville....................Report: 25 Russellville..................Report: 25 Scottsboro ................... Report: 25 Thorsby....................Report:25 Tuscumbia... ..... ..... ...... Report: 25 25 Report: Fertilizers, amount of money paid by farmers a rational system of for.. ............ 225 amount of constituents to produce 300 lbs. lint....386 acid phosphate versus raw.................... application of in seed fertilization............ ....... 245 247, 254 drill......................... 267 268 analysis of....... ..... ..... ........... application of in center of furrow, ....... .......... Report: 21 262 barn-yard manure ............................... 255, 257 best form of potash ......................... best form of nitrogenous......................... 230 ........... 241, 242 cowpeas as....................... .269 ....................... composting. ........... 269 depth to apply....... ..... .... ............... co-operative, tests made by farmers.............. .269 269 lepth to apply................. ................. deductions drawn from soil tests of................283 ......... 286 definite formulas for ................... 436 Fertilizers-Continued. do they pay for cotton....................79, 227 Edisto High grade acid phosphate...............230 effects of lime on cotton.........................260 experiments with.............................8 at Auburn........................9 extent of the use of.......... ................ 225 for oak and hickory lands in cotton culture.......86 for gravelly hills............................86 for gray mica and red clay lands............. 87 for long leaf pine soils..................89 for Central Prairie region.....................90 for other regions.... ..................... 91 for cotton culture........................5, 7, 23 fractional or intercultural application of..........266 in center furrow versus in listing furrows.........268 kinds of found in market..... ................. methods of applying......... ............. 10, 266 per acre in co-operative experiments............'30 pounds per acre of............ ............... 272 raw versus acid phosphate..................246, 247 requirements of cotton plant...................390 reserving part of, for application in seed 267 residual effects of phosphates...................253 residual effects of nitrogenous .................. 244 results of fertilizer experiments at Auburn.........9 reverted versus soluble phosphoric acid...........252 229 drill. results of potash experiments...................259 soluble phosphoric acid from different sources ....253 225 tags sold ....................................... yield of seed cotton fertilized with potash,....:.....258 Fertilizing constituents in cotton roots, amounts of............373 stalks,.... .............. 375 leaves,... .............. 376 bolls, ....... 378 value of nitrogen from cotton seed............... 15 169 Figs, Celestial...... ..... ..... ..... .................... Brown Turkey........ .... ..... ................... 169 Brunswick ........... ...... .............. ......... 169 White Ischia........ ......... .................... 169 White Smyrna........ ..... ..................... 169 Fiji Islands............................ ................. 341 Foreign cottons compared (table) ......... .. Foods and food materials ......................... Report 360 20 " .. . . .............. effects of climate and soil on..................358 437 Foreign cottons .............................................. Bajwara .............................. Bamieh........................ Bani...........................................8352 852 852, 355, 360 352, 354, 360, 362, 867 Bombay.................. ................... 852 Bourbon.......................................352 Broach........................ 352, 353, 354, 360, 366 (Jreula............... ................... 352,1854 cultivation of .................................. Deshi ............................. Georgia upland 351 352, 353, 354, 860 ............ 352, 353, 354, 360 354 Gu chard..................................352, Herbucco.....................352, 354, 355, 360, 367 Indrepur :..................... ....................... Goghari... (India).............360 352, 353, 354, 355, 360 Jakko........ ................. 352, 353, 354, 355, 360 Jani...........................................352 Mannoah .............. 352, 354, 355, 360, 361. 366, 368 Mexican.......... ......................... 352, 360 Mirzapore................. 352, 353, 354, 355, 360, 364 Mitafifi..352, 354, 355, 360, 361, 362, 364, 366, 367, 368 Nadam ........................... 352, 353, 357, 360 Nagpur jani................................... Narma ............................ ................... ........................ 352 352, 353, 357, 360 .......... ...... 352 352,353 352, 353 Nimari bani............. Painaa........... Roji....... Surat Kupas.................. W adhwan................................. .... :......352, 353, 357, 360 352, 353, 354, 355, 360 W agani a............................... Fort Davis, Texas.....................................:........332 Fort Motte, S. 0.............................................. Fort Smith, Ark. 352, 353, 354 214 ............................................. 332 212 317 326 328 31 4 Frotscher, R ......... ....................................... Fungi, list of .............................................. from Alabama ......................................... observations on from N. and S. America .......... Fungus flora of Alabama...... ...... ................. .... Report: ... Funkey, F ......... Frazer, T. H ...... ..... ..... ..... ..... ............... 128, .... ....................... 27, 93 162, Report: Frazer, W. B........ .... .. ................................. .Fuaruan aarantiacai......................................... oxysporuinn...........................................319 vasinfectu i..............................298, 123 319 312, 319, 320 438 Gachet, Charles.......... ..... ..... ......... Galloway, B. T . ........................................... Galveston, Reot 327 33 Texas........................................... ..... .............. 282 .................... Garland, Ala ......................... Gasparrini.............................................817, 327 Georgia Experiment Station ........... 6 German millet .............. Gilchrist, J. G ................. Ginkgo biloba........ ........ ........ ................ 112, 113 Gibberella pulicaris...........................................319 ........ 2, 22, 96, 128, 162, 180, Report: 4-5 Report: 15 .............. ........................ Gleditsia caspica.. .......... ...................... Gleoosporiumn carpigenum ........... ........ Glenn, E. T............. Glover, Townend ........................................ Gossypiurn arboreum............................ ............... ,32 Report: 323, Report: 15 290, 328 .355 7 Gordo, Ala.................:...............................282 Brazililiense........................................354 glabratum................ ......................... ....... 357 herbaceum............... 317, 319, 321, 322, 345, 354, 357, 358 353 var. microcarpum ......................... 354, 368 hirsutum...................................345, .......... 354, 355 var. album............ ...... 357 ..................... Indicum....................... 345, 348, 354, 356, 368 maritimam.. ......................... var. polycarpum ....................... 354,35-6 345, 357 neglectum...........................................357 ............ roseuarn........................... var. albifiorum........ ................. Wightianvun...................................353, 353, 357 170 Grapes, Jeter ........ Memory.................. .......... ......................... ,35 170 170 170 170 .................. 170 ........ ............. Mish.......... ............. ..... ............... Scuppernong...... ..... ..... Tenderpulp.... ..... .......... ................. ....................... Thomas........ .......... Grayson, W. B............................................213 Grayson, La............................................... 213 Greensboro, Ala .. ......................................... 282 Green Springs, Ala..................................... ..... 332 213 Greenville, Miss ........................................... Griffin, John ..................................... ,......... 213 214 Grovetown, Ga............. ................................ Report: 15 .......... ............ ........ Gum, gray ...... . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . . . . 213 .. G unn, C. S. . . . . ... .. 4, 180, Report: 5~ .... ...... Ilaralson, John................ 439 Hare, C. L ........ 2, 22, 96, 107, 128, 162, 180, Report:. 5 299 Hall, James.....................i.......................... Halloway Seed and Grain Company......................212, 218 Harbuck, W. T.............. ............. ........... 27, 38 Harrington, Prof ........................................... 402 Harrowing and rolling..................................... 216 Hartford, Ala..............................................282 Hatteras, N. C.............................................332 Hawkins, W. ........................................... 213 27, 76 Hayes, E ............. ......... ........ .............. B, Herndon, Ga........................................... 213, 214 Heteroderat radicicola .................................... 291, 325 Hilliard, W. A.............................................. ...... ..................... Holly ..... ......... Holly Springs, Miss.......................:.................214 Horn, C. D ........... ........ ......... 218 Report."14 .............. 27, ......... 41 Hloughton, H. S ............................................ Huckleberry, red ............ ..... ........ Report: 180 14 Hurtsboro. Ala............. 282 .370 Hutchinson, W. L......................................... Hybrids from American and foreign cottons ............... 36t, 365 ..... 341 Hybridization of cotton................................ 324 HIyponectria Gossypii ......................................... ...... ........ ......... Report: 14 Idesia polycarpa ........... Illustrations of .............................. cotton: African (Jackson) .............................. Allen's hybrid long staple ........................ Allen's improved................................. Banks.................... Bates poor land ............ 211 212 212 ............ .................... 212 ......... 212 212 212 212 211 Big boll ........................................ boils of 69 varieties ............................. Borden .......................... .............. Boyd............................................ Bur............................................212 Cheise................ .......... ................ Christopher....................... ............. 211 211, 212 212 Cobweb.........................................212 Cook, W. A.....................................212 C oppedge ................................ ..... 212 Culpepper............................... Cummings ........................ ........... De aring .............................. ......... Dickson ........................................ Doughty................... ..................... ..11 211 211 212 440 ,Illustrations' of cotton-Continued. Drake................... Ellis .. .... ...................... Excelsior.......... .................. ............... ... ............... .. ... .......... 212 211 212 212 211 211 211 211 212 212 211 21 .212 ...... .... ........ Grayson........... ............. Griffin long- staple ................................ Gunn............................................. ................... Hawkins jumbo . .............. Hawkins prolific .... ............................... .... Herlong..................... ........... Herndon.................. ........... ......... ............ Billiard.............................. Improved long staple................ ... ......... Jackson........... ...................... ...... Japan.. .... ......... ................... ...... Jones improved ... ,.............. King .. ........................................... Lee....................................211 Lowry............................................211 Maddox.... .................... Matthews long staple ............................... Mattis .............. 212 .212 211 212 212 211. ............................. Minor.............. .... .................... Moon.............................................212 Nancy Banks .................................... Norris.......... ................... :.....212 .............. 212 211 211 211, 212 211 Parks............................................ Peerless........ Peterkin ............ Pruitt .... ............................. ........................ .. :................ ............ ........ Petit Gulf..... ... 212 Pinkerton .................................. premium........................... .................. .... ....... ............. 212 212 Russell-Plate VI ....................... Scroggins........................ .......... 224 Sea Island....... 212-Fig ...... 211 1 ....... ................ Shine............... Smith improved,....................... Sprueill. ........ ........................... Strickland....... ..................... ...... .... ..................... Texas bur . Texas oak ............................... 212 212 211 211 212 212 .... Texas storm proof............................ Texas wood .............. ..................... Thrash-Plate X. .................... . Tyler... @..."........................ .. ...... .... 212 211 224 211 441 Illustrations of cotton--Continued Welborn..........................................211 Wise............................................ 211 Bamieh leaf and dissection ................... 356 Branch from Mit Afifi-Plate XV ....... ... 68 Branches from Bamieh and Mannoah-Plate XV . ... 368 Boils from 12 hybrids-Plates XVI, XVII, XVIII .. .368 flower Bolls open from hybrids-Plate XIX..............368 XIII............. Foreign and American bolls-Plate 368 Foreign and American boils open-Plate XIV....368 Leaf from hybrid........... ................ ... 362, 363 length of fiber and size of seeds from 20 hybrids-Plate XX. 368 leaves from Mit Afifi... ................ ......... 355 photomicrographs of fiber from 12 hybrids-Plates XXI, XXII. XXIII, 368 Sea Island cotton crossed on upland cotton.-Fig. India .................................... ... 351, 352, 354, 368 Indianola. .................. ........ ........................ 333 Ingram, W. T................. ..... ......... ............ 27, 54 .............. 13:5. Inoculation, increasing the yield by....... .... ................... 187 Inoculating by suitable earth....... ..... 13:) Inoculation, natural........ ..... ... ..... .................. 142. of hairy vetch, does it pay ...................... Introduction.................................... .. .......... 181. 370. Jackson, Prof................................................ Jackson, Ala.................................... .... 274, 278, ................ ........... 27, 313 Jackson, J. E......... ... .... .... 1.. .224 282 Jackson Station, S. C.0 ............... ..................... 212. ............ .................. ................ ...... .............. Jacksonville. Fla................................. ............ Jarrett, R. H........ ....... .1ones, H. P. ................................................. ..... ........ Jones, T. K...... ........... Johnson., E. J...... JonoJ 333 27,' 57, 213 27, 70 123 .. ... .............. Johnson Seed Company................................... Ala.......................... 213. 214; ..... ........... .... Rpr:2Kaylor, 274, 279, ...... ... ... .... ..... 282 Kittyhawk, N. C............................. Knoxville, 'I en... Laboratory building ....... Larimore Ala................ ................................ ................ . .......... ...... ........ Report: .. .... 332 33 12 G Lage rhei rimi, ............................................... Learned. Miss .......... Lee, E. E 328 282 .............................. ........... ....... .................... ....... 214 213 .................................................... Lesburg, Fla......... 123. 442. ........... LeGrand, Ala ................................. Leguminous plants as fertilizers for cotton .................... special value of . .... ................... 131 282 238 13 14 Letter from Secretary of Agriculture................ Report: Report: ........ .......... Leycestric formosa .... ...... .......... Liceat Lindheirneri................................ Lightfoot, Ga.......... ........................... ... List of bulletins on cotton.................................. Little, 0. E........................................... Little Rock, Ark .......................................... Lloyd, A. M....................... .................. .... 214 .... 319 ... 299 332 181 181 .................. Locust, Caspian honey ........... .. ............ ........ Logan, J. A.......... ......... H.......................................... Loughridge, ..... ................. Louisiana Experiment Station ...... U. Report: 15 27, 45 328 117 282 183, 402 213, 214 Lowry, J. G-....................................213 Lumber Mills, Ala ......................................... Lupton, N. T......................................... Lutherville, Ga...................................... Lyman, J. B............:........... ........ .............. .. .............. Mlacrosporium nigricans................... nigricantium................. 302, 307, 319, 321, 324, 3 25 319,324 213 225 328 282 214 Maddox, J.S Marion, S. gossypium.......................... .............. ... 319 .............................. Mailing list .................. ..... ................ ............................ Report : ............ 2 Manuring of cotton........................................ Maple Grove, AlL....... Marvyn, Ala ... Matthews, J-.... McAlpine, J. A......... 0 .................................. ........................ ...... ........... .... .............. ................... 282 ...... 317 213 Massee, Dr.............................. ....................... ... .................... Mattis, 0. F....:..........................................214 212 Mayersville, Ga................ ......... ....... .......... ....... 27, 92 MecBryde,J. B....... ....................... McGregor, A A................. .................. ....... 370,387 241,.244, 254 McIntyre, P. M............. McLendon, J. R .......... ........ ............. .................. ................ 27-1.2 27-63 ......... Meadows, T. T Mell, P. H1............. 27, .. .. .. .. . . . . .. .............. .. 2, 22, 96, 107, 128,- 162, 180, 183, 33, 275 Report. 5, 18, 25 318 .......... ......... ............. 3felogramm a horizontal is..... 332 ................. Memphis, Tenn .......................... 214 .... .............. M eriw ether, Ga ........................ ....... .326 Methods for obtaining pure culture........... ....... 331, 341...... ................... 191,. 443 Mexico ............. .................. 341, 352 354,3857, 358 Middleton, T. H.................................... Midway, Ala.............. Miles, D. F......................................... ........ ........... ................................ 299 214 26 333 Milk inspection ................ Mobile, Ala..................................... Report: ..... ....... Montgomery, Ala.............................. Moon, J.M............................... Moore, C. F............... ............ ... 300, 332, 335 ........ 214 ...Report: 180, 117 Moreman, M. S ............... Moseley, F. M........... Moss, long .......................... ........... ..... ............... Report: 120 4, 1 5i ............................... " Nfucor mucedo.......... ................................. Mlucuna utilis.... ........... ..... .......... Myco.sphurella gossypina Naftel, Ala ............................................... Nashville, Tenn............. ............... Neal,.J. 0 ................................................ Nectriacece perthecia............................... Neighbors, R. ...... ........................... Nematodes............................... ......... ........... 109, ....... 320 294 .................. 309, 318, 320, 322 382 .... 332, 340W 292 ........ ... 298 259 .................. 298 ................ ........ ......... Neocosmospora vasinfecta tracheiphila........... vasin fecta .................................. Newheart, A. P ............ ......... ........................ ................ ...... 124 ... 293 296, 320 Newman, J. S .. N ewnin, Ga ............................ 183, 253, 270, 328 212 New Orleans, La....................... .... ...... New ramularia on cotton ............... .................... New root rot disease of cotton ............ ........... Nitrogen............. .... .................. in leguminous plants, sources of............. 212, 333 325 ... .... 325 70, 109, Nona, Nitrogen or germ fertilizer.......... ........ Ga ................................. Report: 22 138 8324 115i ......... 212 North American fungi, Ellis ................................ Notasulga, Ala ........................... Nyson, t~a............................. ....................... ...................282 ................. Oak, silky........ Ocoee, Fla.. o........ ........ ...... Report: ........ 21215 124 ..................... Oedocephalum echinulatum.....................................8320 Office of Experiment Stations ....................... 235, 289 202, Olex aquifolium........................................ Report 14 Opelika, Olpitrichum caepuphilum ... *....................................8320 Ala.............................................. Ophiobolus Orchard........ ............ porphyrogonus.................. ........... 213 320 ................... .......... Report: 30 444 Orange Orchard hybrid........ Hills, ...... ....................... Ga .................................................. ................. Report:1 213 Ozoniumn auricomum .............................. 318, 320, 321, 324 .317 Palagra................................... Palalto, Ga...:..... ......................................... Palestine, Texas.. ............................... Pam mell, L. H ......... ..................... Papers and magazines sent to Library ................. 320, 321, 324, 325, 328 Report: 13 ........ 213 332, 340 Paris Exposition, exhibit at ........ Parks, G. F ............................ Patterson, L. G.............................................. ............ .................... .................... Report: 1G 214 370 Pears.......... ........ ................. 172 Bartlett....... ..... ...... ............................ 172 Kieffer.................... ..... ............ 172 LeConte.....................................172 Pea Tree........... ......... ............. ........... Report: 14 Penicilliaum candidum............................. ............ 320 Daclauxi....................... .................. 321 gla ucum ..... ..................... ........... ..... 321 Pensacola, Fla.............................................. 333 Persons, A. A.... Pestalozziella gossypina......................................... ............................................. ................................ 124 321 214 Peterkin, J.................................................214 Peytonville, Ark Phoma coroina Phigett na Gossypii........................................ .321 .... ......... ........... 321 ..... ................ Gossypii..................................................... 321 ..... .. 31, 51, 57, 68, 7o .................. Phosphoric acid ........ more important than potash ........ ........... . availability of, in fertilization of soils........ Report " 23 natural, analysis of......... . ll/osticta ...... ....... gossypina.....................321 ........ ............ Report: 21 Pine, larch........ ........... Pinkerton, H. R............................................. ........ .......... ..... Report: 15 .. Pinus laricio.... .......... Report: epor t: ... .214 15 15 martira..........................R Plant food in soil, study of....................... ....... ............ ................ .. Report : ?, Pleo.spora nigricantia ........... ............. ......... Plums, Abundance.......................................... Bailey........... ...... ...................... Berckmans...... Blood No. 4........ ........ ........ ..... 321 17 3 172 17 ....... 2 Blood No. 3....... ........ Botan...... ...... Burbank........ ........ .......................... ........ 173 173 ...... ........ ........ ........ ............. ....... 17:' ................... 174 445 ........................ Chabot.......... _..... ..... .. ................ Emerson....... ....... ................ Excelsior........'........ ........... Golden .Beauty.............................173 Hattanklo.....................................1472 172 172 172 Kelsey-.....,... .......... ................ .......... 172 .......... Lone Star...... ...... Long fruited......... .......... Milton ........ ........................ .................... ....... .... ':..........172 ....... 172 174 173 Orient. .. .. . ..... Satsuma ...... :...... Transparent.......... ....... .......... ...... ............... ;......:...--172 :........172 Wayland.,..,..... ......................... 173 .. .. ................. Whitaker ........ Wickson........ ............................... .......... Wooten........... ....... .... Yellow Tapan .......... Polypor'us.................................. 17:; .............. ....... ................. .. 1( 173 1723 321 .............. ........... 1A24 Pomona, Fla........ ..... ....... !Populvs..................................................... 323 Report: 29 ................ .. . . Pork production........ ...... 2.12 ... ................ Port Gibson, Ala ......................... 31. 51. 57. 68. ,70 ........ ........ ................. Potash ........ experiments ......... ........ ..... ..... "............16 ........ .... ............ best form of............ Preparation and cultivation of soil for cotton......... .......... Prattville, Ala ............................................... .................... Prevost, H. C........................... Purifoy, M. W.......... Quaint ance, A. L.............. ... 255 215 282 214 ".124 .. . . .. . ..... ......... ..... :.. ................ Pyrenophora hyphasmatis...................................... Rainfall during growing season.... ........ Ramularia areola......................... Ransom, McB. A .......... ............ 321 .................. 183 128, 162, ..... ............. ................ Report: 4 309, 321 5 Ravenel ...................................................... Raw versus acid phosphate .................. ............ Renfro, N. P............. ........ Rhinotrichumn macrosporam 321 ................ 245 128, 162, Report 4 812, 295,= 296, 300, 322, 326 .......................... ........ : tenellurn.... Rhizopus .......................... Riley, C. Y .............. nigricans............................................ ........ :.:.........................329 ...... ..... .......... Rhioctni................ ...... 32321 312, 321 322 Report of Agriculturist .. Associate Chemist....... ............. ,.Report: Report: .28 22 446 Biologist ........ .. ... .. ............... Report." 30 Botanist......... .............. ...... .. Report : .............. Chemist..... .......... Director ....... .................. Treasurer........... ......... ........... .......... .......... Veterinarian ...... Report: Report: Report: 9 19 9 7 25 .. Report: Rio Grande City, Tex...................................... Roif's sclerotiuin wilt ..................................... Rome, Ga............................................ Robertson, J. T................ Roestalia pirata.. ........ 333 3822 .213, 214 .................. ....... ................ ..... 27, 58 168 22, 95, 96, 107, 128, 162, 180, 183, 369, Report: 12, 21 Ross, B. B..2, ........ ........ ............ 168 Rust, Apple leaf ............ apples showing, in 1899 ...... ...... .................. 168 Rutledge, Ala .................................. .... ..... 282 Saccardo .............. .................................. 321 322 ....... Saccharornyces.................................. Samford, T. DP........:.................. ............... 183 Samples of cotton plant analyzed........................... 372 San Antonio, Tex .. .. :.................................... 333 Savannah, Ga...............................................333 Sclerotium Scroggins, .. ................ . . . . . . . . . . . 22 214 J. T....................................... ............... Scribner, F. Lamson............:.......................321, 329 Sea Island cotton .................... ....... 348, 350, 365, 368 Seed (cotton), weight in 100 bolls......... ............. ..... 192 average increase in, per acre over unfertilized plots .227 220 effect of climate on............................ increase of per acre, attributable to cotton seed, . .... ... ... 274 phosphate and kainit........... number of bolls required to make one pound of. ... .192 pounds of, per acre, in 1899, with phosphates.....254 218 old versus fresh ............................... .195 proportion of lint to .......................... 218, 220 ...................... selection of........ 187, 219 size and position of......... .............. weight of in each 'variety...................... 194 19, 194, 212 where to obtain seed .................... 18, 232, 250J .......... yield of per acre .............. 27, 44 ..................... Sellers, G. 0 .................... 322 .......................... Septoria gossypina ......... Sergeant, J. S....... ......... ......... ......... :........ 122 Shaeria Gossypii.......................................... Shine, J. A.... .................. "". ......... ,........... 322 214 447 Shine, N. C .. . . : . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . Shreveport, La............................................832 Silvey, Ga.............................................214 Slaton, J. . . . . .214 Smiley, W. J..............................................214 Smith, E. A. .............................................. 283 Smith, C. L .......... ...... ..... ...... ........ ......... 124 Smith, Edwin F .................... 290, 296, 293, 299, 322, 324, 329 Smith, A. P..... ....................................... 27, 39, 92 J................................................ ...... ................... 214 Smith, M. G .............................................. Snowhill, Ala ............................................... Soil, means of determining needs of ............ Some leaf blights of cotton.............. ....... Southeast Alabama Agricultural School......................278 329 .309, 320, 322, 325 817 323 ................... 214 282 82 8326 Southworth, Miss E". A..................................323, Sphaeriala gossypina. ............................ Sphaeria faliqinosa.......... ............................. funicola......................... gossypai............................................324 porphyrogona................... .................... palicaris............................................319 subeonnata.........................................318 Sphaerostilbe coccophila. .:. .. . .............. .. ............. herbarum n...... .......... ........................ Sporotricharn chiorinumrn................ ..... ................. 320 Sporocadois 175 318 322 Sprueill, A. M.............................. Station Library...... ........ ........ Stedman, J. M ..................................... ........... Report: 183, ... 214 13 Stelle, J. P ................................. Stenocarpuas salignus....... ....... . Sterculia p latani/f'otia 312,.329 .... 329 14 ...... .......... ........... ....... Report: 15 ..................... ......................... ..... Report: ...... Sterrett, Ala........ .... Stewart, F. C.................................. 282 295 Strength of Storax .............. Stubbs, W. C........ ....... Sulligent, fiber of foreign cotton (table).....................360 ........... ,....... ... ............ ... ..... ..... 117, 183 210 ...... Report: 15 Subsoiling......................................6, Ala . .............. ..................... 282 Switzerland, Fla......... ..... ........ Syrup, experiments in ....... ..... ........ analysis of. ....... .... ... ....... 120 ..... 95, 97 100 ........................................ clarification agents for........ ................ from cane . ...... .................. Table giving the characteristics of hybrids and ...... 103 parents. .Report." 351, 365 .. 20 448 Taylor, B. A.. ......... Temperature of Miss ............ Temple, winter.. ....... .................. 27 ..................................... ................................... 332 213 27, (60 ............................ ......... Terry, J. W ......... Report: 4 ........ ...... ....... ....... Terry, W. K............ Tetranychus tetarius,......................................307, 311 ........................... Tettigonid sharpshooter. ......... 322 ....... ........ Thi etavia basicota.... ...................... 27, 36, 72 279 ...... Thomason, T. J.......................... 7325 282 Thomiaston, Ala ................. ......... .......... ...... T horn .............................................. ................... Thrash, . ............. Thuemenia vatsarioides........................ Thuja orientalis...... ........ ...... ........ ........ Report: 14 ...... 214 318 ........ Tittandsia Todaro, Tomato diseases......... Agostino......... ................. ....... ... ... Report: Report: 14 ..... ........................... ................................... .............. ...... ........ 163 354 30 Topping ............................ Toruta incarcerata... ..................................... ......................... 224 322, 327 Town Creek, Ala................................. 241, 242, 251, 282 Trarnetes.............................................. ...... 321 Trichodenna Tubercie, rose am................. .... ..................... 322 Tricotheciam rose am................. ......................... 322 Report: 4 .......... ........ ....... Trustees......... ........ function of........ .... ... ...................... 133 .251 Tuscaloosa, Ala ................. Tuskegee, Ala................................................ ............................ ........ ........ ....... 282 Tyrax officinate..... ........ Union Springs, Ala........................................ Uredo gossypui...... ................................... ............ .... l....... Vacciniamr parvi florum ....... Report: Report: 15 282, 332 ...... 323 14 ..323 Valsa gossypina............................................. Yarieties of cotton .......... ................................ 185 187, 192, 193, 194, 197 African (Jackson) ................... , 189, 192, 193, 194, 195, 201, 203, 208, 212 Allen .. 342, 343, 344, 346, 350, 361, 365, 367 Allen's long staple. improved. .187 Allen's new hybrid, 187, 192, 193 average 194, 195,197,198.200. 208,212 number of blooms, &c . ................. 197. 211 :.......... Bailey..... .. ......... Banks......................192. .... 187, 342, 343, 344 194, 195, 197, 200, 206, 212 344, 347, 349. 361. 367 194, 195, 197, 200. 212 .. .. . Barnett. .. .. ...... 187, 342, 343, Bates-poor land.....22.......19,193, Big boll....... ...... 192, 193, 194, 195, 197, 200, 209, 212 194, 195, 197, 200, 212 194. 195, big boll varieties............ ................ :...203, 206 Borden Boyd prolific...2j............19,193, prolific..12,...........19,193, 197,- 205, 211 449 Varieties of cotton-Continued. Bur .................. 200, 209, 212 192,, 193, 194, 198. 200, 212 Cheise improved...........192, 194, 195, Cherry cluster..187, 342, 343, 344, 347, 349, 360, 361, 365, 366, 367 195,197, 197. ............................... 209 choice varieties Christopher improved..........192, 194, 195, 200, 206, 211 cluster varieties............................203,204 Cobweb. . ......-... 192, 193, 194, 195, 197,198, 200, 208. 212 187 ................................ Colthorp pride 187 ............................. Colthorp eureka.. 187 ....................... common.............. 187, 342,343,344 ......................... Cook, J. C Cook, W. A.....192, 193, 194, 195, 197, 198, 200, 208, 211, 342 343, 344, 345, 347, 348, 349, 350, 360, 361, 362. 365,366.367 Coppedge.........192, 193, 194, 195, 197, 198, 2C0, 206, 212 correlation of characters of......................201 345 crossing of......... .......................... Crossland.........................................187 192, 194, 195, 197, 200, 211, 213 Culpepper .................. :.192, 194, 195, 197, 198, 200, 205 Cummings ................ Dalkeith eureka .................................. 187 Dearing................187, 192, 193, 194, 195, 20), 202, 211 Dickson .187, 192, 193, 194. 195, 197, 198, 200, 203, 204, 209, 211, 342, 343, 344 192, 193, 194, 195, 197, 200, 201, 208. 212 Doughty Drake.................192, 194. 195, 197, 198, 200, 205, 211 Duncan.. .............187, 192, 194, 195, 197, 200, 203. 206 Ellis......................192, 194, 195, 197, 198, 200, 211 ............. Ellsworth........................................ Excelsior..............192, 193, 194, 195, 197,:198, .87 200, 212 Gold dust............................. Grayson big boll... 192, 187, 342, 343, 344 193, 194, 195, 197, 200, 201, 206, 211 Griffin .............. Gunn .................. Hawkins improved... .187, 192, 187, 192, 194, 195, 197, 198, 200, 208, 212 192, 193, 194, 195, 197, 198, 200. 212 193, 194, 195, 197, 200, 342, 343 .... 187, 189, 193, 211, 342, 343 Hawkins jumbo ......... Herlong................... 192, 193, 194, 195, 197, 200, 205, 211 211 212 343 187 192, 193. 195, 197, 198,' 200, 205, Herndon select .......... 192, 193, 195. 197, 198, 200, Hilliard .................. Hunnicutt.............................. 187, 189, 342, Hutchiinson...................................... Improved long staple.. 192, 193, 194, 195, 197, 198, 200, Jackson limbless....... Japan.........................192, 19,193, 194, 195, 198, 200, 204, 211 195, 197, 200, 209, 212 208, 212 430 Varieties of cotton-Continued. Jones improved. .187, 189, 194, 195, 197, 198, 200, 206, 211, 212, Jones long staple.......................187 Jones No. I.......................................187 Keith................................187, . .187, 189, 192, 193, 194, 195, 197, 198, 200, 342, 443, 344 342, 343, 344 342, 143. 344 203, 204, King. 209, 211, C'43, 344, 36t Lee improved..................192, 194, 197, 198, 206, 211 203, 207 -......... long limb............long staple...................................203,208 Lowry................... 187, 192, 193, 194, 195, 197, 200, 211 Maddox............................192, 194, 195, 197, 200 Matthews long staple... 187, 192, 193. 194, 1.95,197, 200, 201, 208, 212 192, 193, 194, 195, 197, 198, 200, 209, 211 Mattis...... ....... Minor..................192, 194, 195, 197 198, 200, 205, 212 Nancy Hanks..........192114,195, 197,198, 200, 209, 211 No. 12 (Herlong)...................192, 193, 194, 195, 197 212 Norris.................192, 193, 194, 19b, 197, 342, 343, 344 Okra..................................187, Parks own..................192. 193, 194, 195,197, 200, 211 Peeler................................187, 312, 343, 344 Peerless.... 187, 189, 191, 194, 195, 197, 198, 200, 203, 211, 342, 343, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350, 360. 361, 364, 365, 366, 367 198, Peterkin.....187, 188, 189, 192, 193, 194, 195, 200, 202, 203, 211, 212, 342, 343, 344 200,205, 186,197, Petit Gulf...187,192, 193, 194, 195, 200, 203, 212, 342, 343, 344, 347, 348, 349, 350, 361, 362, 366, 367 Pinkerton...............192, 193, 194, 197, 198, 200, 206, 212 productiveness of............... ..................... 186 202 provisional classification of........................... 192, 194, 195, 197, 200. 212, 342 Pruitt premium ............. purpose of test of.................................. .185 R~ameses ....................... rank of on basis of yield .......... 187, 187, 34, 343, 344 194, 195. 197,200, 206 Rio Grande....................................... 203, 205 192, 194, 195, 197, 200, 206 Russell.....................187, 342, 343, 344, 348, 349, 361, 364, 366, 367 Rust proof .......... 192,194, 195, 200, 206, 211 Scroggins prolific .................. 192, 193, 194, 195, 197,' 198, 200, 201, 212 Sea. Island .......... semi-cluster....................... 192, 193, 194,195, Shine early .............. .............. 203, 205 198, 200, 1971, 212 ..... ... 203, 206 195, ;197, 200, 209, 212 Short limb ............................. Smith improved..... 187, 192, 193,,194, 451 Varieties of cotton-Continued. Southern hope...............187, 842, 848,844 Spruei].......................192, 194, 195, 197, 200, 211 Storm proof.........187, 192, 194, 195, 197, 198, 200, 207, 212 Strickland............187, 192, 194, 195, 197. 198, 200, 207, 211 studied in 1899 .................................... 190 Texas burr............92, 193, 194, 195, 197, 198, 200, 206, 212 Texas oak.......187, 192. 193, 194, 195, 197, 198, 200, 206, 221 Texas wood............192. 193, 194, 195, 197, 198, 200, 211 Thrash select ........... 192, 194, 195, 196, 197, 200, 302, 207 time of maturing of.....................................190 Truitt. .187, 188, 189, 192, 195, 197, 200, 207, 342, 348, 844, 848, 349, 361, 362, 367 Tyler limb cluster...187, 192, 193, 194, 195, 197, 200, 205, 206, 211 unclassified .......................................209 Welborn....187, 189, 192, 193, 194, 195, 197, 195, 200, 204, 209, 211, 342, 343, 344 W hatlet improved.................................187 Wise.......................192,193, Wonderful ........... 187, 194, 195, 197, 2C0, 211 342, 343, 344, 348, 349, 350, 361, 366 Zellner...............................187, 342, 343, 344 Varieties averaging forty or more forms per plant..............198 Varieties averaging less than thirty forms per plant............198 Velvet bean ................................................ 294 amount of seed. required........................121_ advantages and disadvantages.............. .117 analysis of...................................115 ..... ................ 12 5 co-operative tests of ...... ................. 118 for forage..... ........ ..... for soil improvement..... ..... ..... .......... 111 uses of fruit of.......... ........ ............. 110 value as a fertilizer for cotton ...... ......... .. 240 yield of compared with wonderful cowpea.........120 yield of vines per acre ......... .......... ...... 117 Vetch, hairy ........ ..... ..... ......... ................ 129, 306 adaptation to rotation..... ..... ..... ........... 15 8 compared with cotton seed meal .................. 149 composition of ........ ........ ..... ......... 144-148 151 ............. directions for sowing........... enemies of ......... ........ ....... ............. 155 fertilizing materials in ...... ..... ..... ...... 147-149 ..... ................ 153 fertilizers for ..... ........ for green manuring.............. ........ ....... 146 germs absent from Alabama soils.................136 making a start with ........... ........ ......... 141 452 proportion of nitrogen .......... re-seeding.................. ................ uses of........... ............ ....... what is ... ...................... in......... ....... 15(' 157 142 weed question....... yield of ................... ... ,.. ... .............. ........... 13,1 154 14C Thetia villosa......... .............................. 129-121 Verticilium Rexianum.............. ........................ 323 Vick, Vicksburg, Miss...............:.................... 332, 437, 340 240 Yines and stubble as fertilizers for cotton .................... Wailes, B. C. L...........................................329 27, 42, 275 Jo.. ....................................... Ala...........................:.......................282 ... ...... ...................... .... .......... Watkins, J.P..................:............................275 Wattle, golden .......... silver ........ Watkins. Report: Report: 15 15 -White. 330 .............. Watts Dictionary Economic products of India:. 212 ........... Where to obtain seed .. ........................ Report." 4 ...... ............ Whitaker, W. C.......... ...... 370 . ................. H. C....................... 213 .... ....... ......... Wildwood, Ala ....................... .... 27, 46 ............... Wilcox, J. H ....................... Wiley, H. W..............................................402 Williams. R. G................... Williams. Thomas ................. ..... .. .. .. .. .. . ... . .. . . . :.. Wilmington, N. C 'Wilson, Ala................................................. Wilson, James, Secretary of Agriculture ............. .............. ........ Winter-growing °plants:..... ........ Zignoellafunicola ....... .......... ........ ................. .......................................... ........ ,.Report: .4 Report: 332 282 16 134. 323 BULLETIN No. 101, JANUARY, JNAY 1899. 89 ALABAMlA Agricultural Experiment Station OF THE AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE, AUBURN. EXPERIMENTS WITH COTTON, 1898. J. FI. D U G-C-AR. MONTGOMERY, ALA.: THE BROWN PRINTING COMPANY, PRINTERS 1899. COMMITTEE OF TRUSTEES ON EXPERIMENT STATION. I. F. CULVER..................... ARMSTRONG ............................. .. ................... .................... ,Union Springs. ... J. G. GILORRIST ....... ..................................... H. CIkAY Hope Hull. Auburn. STATION COUNCIL. Wil. LERoY BRouN................................................ P. H. MELL............................... ....... B. B. Ross..................... ............ President. Director and Botanist. ......... ...... Chemist. Veterinarian. Agriculturist. C. A. CARP, D. V M.................................... J. F. D UGGAR.. -- ...................... F. S. EARLE................................... *C. F. BAKER .......... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. J. T. ANDERSON.................... .............. Biologist and Horticulturist. .. .. .. ......... ........... Entomologist. Associate Chemist.' Chemist. ASSISTANTS. U. L. HIARE. ................................ First Assistant R. G. WILLIAMS................ .................. T. U. CULVER...... .............................. second Assistant Chemist. superintendent of Farm. of the State on application to the Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama. *Absent on leave. fAMThe Bulletins of this Station will be sent free to anly citizen EXPERIMENTS WITH COTTON, 1898. BY J. F. DUGGAR. SUM MARY. The growing season of 1898 was extremely dry until June 12, which was unfavorable to securing full effects from fertilizers. Of fourteen varieties of cotton tested in 1898, the largest yield was made by Russell Big Boll, 382 pounds of lint per acre. Next in yield of lint followed Deering, Peterkin and Smith Improved. Subsoiling late in February failed to increase the yield. On gray sandy soil all fertilizers yielded a profit; on this soil the yield was profitably increased by application of nitrogen, phosphoric acid and potash, singly or in combination. The yield was larger when all of the fertilizer was applied in the center furrow than when two-thirds or all of it was applied in the two listing furrows. In a comparison of rotted cotton seed, cotton seed meal and nitrate of soda the results were inconclusive. As a means of decreasing black rust, 50 lbs. of nitrate of potash per acre was fully as effective as 209 lbs. of kainit, each material furnishing an equal quantity of potash. One hundred pounds of kainit per acre reduced the amount of rust; 60 pounds of kainit per acre was less effective in causing the cotton plants to retain their leaves. THE RAINFALL DURING THE GROWING SEASON OF 1898. The following is the condensed record of rainfall at Auburn, April to September inclusive, as observed by Dr. J. T. Anderson, of the Chemical Department : Rainfall in inches. April.......... .... ....................... May .............. .. .. .. ................... June .............. ........................... Ju ly . .......... ......... . ..... . ....... August ...................................... .................... September. ............. 5.06 .26 1.18 6 .79 10.13 1.93 The longest period of extremely light rainfall was from April 23 to June 12, during which period only six-tenths of an inch of rainfall is recorded. From April 4 to July 6 no heavy rains fell, only exceedingly light showers; after July 6 the rainfall was abundant. It should be added that fall frosts occurred in 1838 at an unusually early date. VARIETIES. The number of varieties compared in 1898 was fourteen. The rows were 31 feet apart. Thinning was done after counting the plants, so as to leave, wherever practicable, an equal number of plants on each of the sixteen-acre plots. With a perfect stand, the distance between plants averaged about 18 inches. However, the stand on some plots was so poor that we were compelled to conduct the test with inequalities in stand. In all cases the number of plants per acre is given in the following table. Undoubtedly, the deficiencies in stand placed the varieties with small stalks or short limbs at a disadvantage in the instances where such varieties had a poor stand. It is probably for this reason that King, a variety with very small stalk, stood near the foot of the list in 1898. In previous tests, and in an adjoining field in. 1898, it was, with a better stand, decidedly productive. The field used had employed in 18,7 for an experi-mnent to determine the best distance for planting cotton. The details of that test are recorded in Bulletin of this station. The land was flushed before being fertilized and bedded; a, complete fertilizer was drilled at the rate of 500 pounds .per acre a cost of $3.81 per acre. This consisted of 200 lbs. acid phosphate per acre. cotton seed meal "" 200 100 All plots were planted April 15 and the vacant spaces replanted April 27. been No. 89 and at " "kainit Yield per acre, relative earliness, and percentage of lint of 14 varieties of cotton. CI z 0 VARIE TIES. Q cz 15 7 17 1 10 13 2 Russell 11 IDeerinug...................... Peterkin ..................... Smith Improved ............ . Truitt ...... ................ Texas Oak ........... ... ... . Hlutehinson's Storm Prolific.. Jones' Re-improved........... Peerless ....... ......... ... ~-Big Bull........... .. . 8576 10280 10280 10280 10280 10280 10280 10280 8096 7024 8144 7296 7728560 1200 957 978 1062 1010 872 941 962 922 866 816 7653 64. 54. 31.9 85.6 44. 619. 57. 52. 64. 57. 60. 65. 34.7 31 9 32.6 36.5 32 8 31.8 33 5 34. 382 341 339 339 330 318 309 306 304 288 250 6 12 8 Hawkins.................... Strickland .................. . Griffin ............ ......... King ............. ..... ..... 'Unknown.................... *Bought 35. 32 1 .262 67. 643 227 60. 20 32 8 33.5 30.9 216 70 from a seedsman as Welborn. It proved and m-rost seeds were not capable of germination; uutrue to name however, the few plants that.appeared, about 1-20 of a stand, were left to mature. 6 It should be remembered that no single test can be taken as finally determining the relative values of different varieties. Results vary from year to year. The past season was unusual, a fact which detracts from the value of these results. In addition to the varieties in the test just described, Allen's New Hybrid Long Staple and Culpepper Improved were grown alongside the variety test, but on plots which, in previous years, had been cropped in such a way as to render the results in 1898 not comparable with the results obtained on the plots referred to in the table. In this separate division where Peerless was grown as a check on the other two varieties, the yield of lint per acre was with Peerless 374, with Allen p57, and with Culpepper 334 pounds. The number of plants per acre was respectively, 10,280, 10,280 and 7,616. In another field a few of the seed of the Jackson Limbless variety were planted. No difference could be seen between these plants and plants of the Welborn Pet variety as grown at this Station in previous tests. The Georgia Experiment Station had already pointed out the similarity of the two varieties. The limited number of seed planted and the small area of ground occupied do not allow a statement of the yield per acre. By its appearance it was judged to be a good, but not remarkably productive variety. SUBSOILING. This experiment was conducted on red, rather stiff, shallow soil, inclined to bake and sensitive to drought. Flint stones are abundant. On February 24, 1898, one plot was broken to the usual depth, about 4 inches, with a one-horse turn plow. In this furrow followed a scooter drawn by one mule, which loosened a part of the soil to an additional depth of 3- or 4 inches. In this way the soil was loosened to a depth of about 8 inches without throwing up to the surface the clay of the subsoil, which is doubtless poorer when first exposed to the air than is the surface soil. On the same date another plot was broken with a onehorse turn plow in the usual way without the subsoiling scooter. Subsequent treatment,-bedding, fertilizing, and planting,-was identical on both plots. The fertilizer, applied in the center furrow, and mixed with the soil by the use of a scooter plow, was as follows on both plots: 240 lbs. of acid phosphate per acre. 100 " " cotton seed meal " " 48 " " muriate of potash per acre. 388 lbs., total per acre. The yield of seed cotton per acre was 992 pounds on the subsoiled plot and 970 pounds on the plot not subsoiled. The difference in favor of subsoiling is insignificant, being only 22 pounds per acre. It should not be forgotten that the late date at which the land was broken and the light rainfall up to July constituted conditions highly unfavorable to the growth of crops on subsoiled land, the soil having probably never become sufficiently settled until the late summer rains occurred. Attention is also called to the fact that the process which here, in accordance with local custom, is spoken of as subsoiling, is quite different from and much less thorough than is subsoiling by means of a specially constructed subsoil plow, which loosens a wider furrow and runs deeper than the scooter plow used in this experiment. "Light soils would probably not be benefitted by subsoiling. If subsoiling is practiced, it should be done early enough in the winter to allow the rains to moisten and settle the deeply stirred soil before planting time."-Bul. No. 89, Ala. Exp't. Station. EXPERIMENTS WITH FERTILIZERS. This experiment was conducted on a hilltop where the soil was gray and sandy. The sand was deep and the soil very poor. This field had been planted in cotton in 1896 and in 1897 it was used for a test of varieties of oats. No cowpeas or other renovating plant had grown on this field since 1895. Both the oats and the cotton of preceding years had received moderate quantities of a complete fertilizer mixture. All fertilizers for the cotton crop of '98 were drilled in the center furrow and mixed by use of a scooter with the soil. April 15 Peerless cotton was planted in all plots. Single plants were left at distances of 15 to 15 inches in the drill, and the rows were 31 feet apart. The period up to the time when bolls were formed was very dry and hence very unfavorable to the action of the fertilizers. Black rust was worse on plots having no kainit than on those where kainit was used. The rust-restraining power of kainit explains, at least in part, its favorable effect in this experiment. Indeed the weather conditions were so decidedly unfavorable that as late as August 6th the plants on the fertilized plots were as large as those on plots where cotton seed meal, acid phosphate, or kainit had been applied singly. The yield of seed cotton per acre, the increase per acre attributable to fertilizers, the cost of fertilizers per acre, and the profit from fertilizer are given in the table below. In this table allowance is made for the slight difference in yield of the two fertilized plots, and the following prices per ton are assumed for fertilizers: Cotton seed meal, $19; high grade acid phosphate, $12.50; kainit, $13.75. Seed cotton is valued at 1 5-9 cents per pound which is equal to 5 cents per pound of lint and $6.67 per ton of seed. Results'of fer(ilizer expertimenfs ot FERTILIZERS. A bwrnn, 1898. 1'ER ACRE. all IPESULTS P-4 > 22 00N frilzr. 0 7 .. 20 2000Cotton seed meal ........ 74 013S 24.5 3633 140$1.43 21 240OAcid phosphate ...... .... 78318 27 .012 200 Nofriize......... .... 065...... 2 200 Kai nit .... .... ......... 7 78 11013 12 346 17713 .9 200 c.otton seed meal ... 28 240 Acid phosphate ........... 200 Kainit ......... 1..... 25 cr200eottonseed icatt 27 5836234081.96 pr 65 192re 529re 823to 328ed4.95 00nfertilizer........ ... .6.65...................... 2 .1278 0 33 28 24acid phosphate..t........ 17 200 Kaini t................ )....... Increase of seed cotton per acre where cttonsedae was added:. To unfertilized plot....................148 To cidtosehmaeplot.............. To kainit plo0t.. .......... To cdtosph mate and kainit lbs. .128 .... ...... plot.......8(7 407 Average increase with acottponsedame. .268 lbs. 10 Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot..... ............ To cotton seed meal plot..............315 To acid phosphate plot... . ..... 123 lbs. " 308 To cotton seed meal and acid phos. plot...176 " Average increase with kainit.........230 lbs. From the analysis above it is evident that this soil needed all three of the fertilizer ingredients, the nitrogen in cotton seed meal, the phosphoric acid in acid phosphate, and. the potash in kainit. In every case the use of fertilizers returned a profit. Doubtless this profit would have been much larger had there been sufficient rainfall in May and June to properly dissolve and distribute the fertilizer. The largest profit resulted from a mixture of cotton seed meal and kainit; this was closely followed in point of profit by a mixture of cotton seed meal, kainit and acid phosphate. Mixtures of two fertilizers, aggregating 400 to 440 pounds per acre, afforded in every case a greater profit than 200 to 240 pounds of a single fertilizer material. Probably the slightly greater effect of cotton seed meal or of kainit as compared with acid phosphate was due to the fact that in preceding years there had been applied more of phosphate than of any other material. This should not be taken to indicate that phosphate is generally less necessary than the other ingredients. On most sandy soils it is certainly equal, if not superior, to the other fertilizers used. METHOD OF APPLYING FERTILIZERS. The land used for this experiment was a rather stiff loam of light reddish color, and very stoney. The field had been in rye in 1897, followed by broadcast Wonderful cowpeas, which were picked and then grazed by cattle. The land was twice broken, rather to destroy Bermuda grass than as a necessary preparation for cotton. In both of these plow- 11 ings, scooters were used in preference to turn plows, so as to avoid burying deeply any of the grass. When ready to plant, a complete fertilizer was applied, as follows: On two plots the fertilizer was all drilled in the "marking off" or center furrow and mixed by using a scooter; on two other plots one-half the fertilizer was applied in each "listing" furrow, that is about 8 to 10 inches on each side of the line of drill, making no special provision for incorporating the fertilizer with the soil; and on two other plots the fertilizer was divided into three equal portion-, one part applied in the center furrow without mixing and one portion in each "listing" furrow. April 25, the same day that fertilizers were applied and beds formed, all plots were planted with King cotton. When the plants were large enough, all plots were so thinned as to leave an equal number of plants oi each plot. The land was apparently uniform. The fertilizer used on all plots consisted of 240 pounds acid phosphate 120 120 480 " " per acre, " " cotton seed meal " kainit " Total per acre. " The rate of application was heavier than usual in order to emphasize any differences that might be due to the methods of applying the fertilizer. 12 The results are given in the table Fertilixer cpplied all below: listingbirrows, Seed in center,/arrow, or in two or in al three/urrows. PlotFcotton No.eFERTIrIZRs APPLI acre. Lbs. 13 in center furroT........................... 1 in each listing furrow..........................1371 All in center furrow (mixed)......................1338 in each listing furrow ........................... 3 1 in 4 j% in center furrow ............................. eafth listing furrow ...... 5 All in center furrow (mixed)......................1454 6 %2 ini each listing furrow..........................1166 Averages. 2 J 1174 1117 1 & 4 J3 in center furrow........................... 2 &5 All in center furrow (mixed).......1396 13 in each listing furrow........................ 1248 3 & 6 % in each listliIg furrow.......................1170 pounds of seed The highest yield on any single plot, cotton, or practically one bale per acre, and the highest average yield, 1,396 pounds per acre, were made on the plots On which all the fertilizer was placed in the center furrow. A single experiment cannot establish a truth, but as far as this test goes, it is decidedly in favor of applying all the fertilizer in the center furrow, thus not only economizing labor, but also securing, under the conditions of this experiment, a larger yield. Apparently the absence of the fertilizer from the immediate vicinity of the plants on Plots 3 and 6 was quite unfavorable to yield. It should not be inferred that the application of as much 480 lpounds of commercial fertilizer per acre should be 1,454 as applied in the center furrow without mixing. When large quantities of fertilizers are used it is important to incorporate the fertilizer with the soil by the use of a scooter or of some corresponding implement. It cannot be stated just 13 what amount of fertilizer makes this mixing imperative, but it is safest to mix thus when 300 pounds or more per acre is the quantity used; with lighter applications, this mixing though doubtless advantageous, may not pay for the extra labor involved. COTTON SEED VS. COTTON SEED MEAL OR NITRATE OF SODA. The land used for this experiment was similar to that used for the subsoil experiment previously described. In the recent past all plots had been fertilized and cropped alike. The crop in 1897 was corn, with a very thin and unsatisfactory stand of peas growing in a drill between the corn rows. On the corn a complete home mixed fertilizer had been used at a moderate rate per acre. The amount of nitrogen left in the soil by the thin growth of peas and by the small amount of residual nitrogen from previous fertization must have been very slight. The land was flushed and then bedded, applying in the "marking off" or center furrow the fertilizers indicated below. All plots received 240 pounds acid phosphate per acre and 96 pounds kainit per acre. Two cotton plots received no nitrogenous fertilizer; two others, 475 pounds (dry weight) of cotton seed (14 5-6 bushels) per acre, moistened several weeks before being used and in the meantime kept covered with earth to prevent the escape of ammonia. A third pair of plots received 216 pounds of cotton seed meal, this amount containing the same quality of nitrogen as the 475 pounds of cotton seed. Still another pair of plots received a similar quantity of nitrogen, but in the form of 75 pounds of nitrate of soda. 14 The variety used was Truitt, the date of planting, April 18, the fertilizers having been applied quite recently. When the crop was of sufficient size it was so thinned as to leave an equal number of plants (8,800 per acre) on each plot, except on Plot 8, where the original stand was so irregular that only 6,736 plants per acre could be left on that plot. However, a comparison of the yield of this plot with that of its duplicate suggests that the deficient stand was not in this case a disadvantage; hence the figures for Plot 8 are used in the averages in the table below. Two plots forming a part of this experiment were planted, the one with Wonderful cowpeas, the other with velvet beans, to be plowed under in the spring of 1899 so as to compare the value of these plants as fertilizers for the cotton crop of 1899 with the commercial fertilizers that will be applied to that cotton crop on the other eight plots. These plants were fertilized with 240 pounds of acid phosphate per acre and 96 pounds of kainit per acre. It is interesting to note that the yield of unhulled peas on Plot 1 in 1898 was at the rate of 1611 pounds, or more than 18 bushels per acre; the average yield of two cotton plots fertilized like the peas was 888 pounds of seed cotton per acre. The yields of seed cottcn are given in the following table, in which the mixture of acid phosphate and kainit applied on all plots is for convenience referred to as " mixed minerals. " 15 Fertilizing value of nitroqgen from cotton seed, cotton seed meal, and nitrate of soda. FERTILIZERS. Plot No. Yield of 0 s-ed iZ iAm't per a3re. (ott O KIND. per acre - Lbs. Lbs. 3 475 Rotted cotton seed and mixed minerals.992 4 216 Cotton seed meal and mixed minerals. ...... 51 621 5 ... nitrogenous fertilizer; only mixedminerals. 1010 75 Nitrate of soda and mixed minerals ....... 6 7 475 Rtted cotton seed and mixed minerals.. ..... 1067 8 216 Cotton seed meal and mixed No nitrogenous fertilizer; only mixed-minerals.1155 9.... 1350 10 75 Nitrate of soda............. .................. Averages. 1030 3 7 475 Rotted cotton seed and mixed minerals. ...... 4 & 3 216 Cotton seed meal and mixed minerals 963 No nitrogenous fertilizer; only mixed minerals.88 5&9 & 10 75 Nitrate of soda.............................1180 Lbs. -No minerals..........1075 & 142 75 292 The want. ef uniformity in the natural fertility of the different plots, which is indicated by the yield, makes it unsafe to draw any positive conclusion as to the relative values of the several fertilizers compared. This question, will be further investigated. However it may properly be noted here that of the large number of comparisons made between cotton seed meal and cotton seed as fertilizers few agree as to the relative values of these two materials. On some soils the nitrogen in cotton seed meal is more effective than is a similar amount of nitrogen in the form of cotton seed. On other soils and in other seasons the opposite result occurs. Cotton seed leave in the soil a larger amount of fertilizer for' the following crop. than does cotton seed meal. In 14 experiments conducted under the writer's direction in 1896, on various soils, the average of all results showed that the nitrogen in crushed cotton seed was equally as effective as a similar amount of nitrogen in- cotton seed 16 meal. Theresults of the separate tests varied widely. In the tests just alluded to one pound of cotton seed meal was equivalent on the average to 2.06 punds of crusled cotton seed. In a series of tests in South Carolina one pound of cotton seed meal was equivalent to 2.79 pounds of seed. In neither of these series of experiments was any account taken of the residual, or second years, effects of the two fertilizers. SPECIAL POTASH EXPERIMENT. In some years and on certain soils large doses of kainit had exercised such a valuable effect in checking black rust or yellow leaf blight of cotton, that an effort was made in 1898 to ascertain the smallest amount of kainit that would serve to restrain rust. Another object of this experiment was to learn whether muriate of potash was equally valuable for this purpose, and a third aim was to note the effects of applying large quantities of relatively insoluble potash in the form of potash feldspar, or pulverized potashbearing rock. A poor sandy hilltop, known to be very liable to produce rusted cotton was selected. Only six plots were available, which rendered duplication impossible. This field grew small grain in 1896 and again in 1897, with drilled cow peas following the grain on all plots. The peas did not make much growth in either year. In bedding the land in 1898 all fertilizers were applied in the center furrow and were well mixed with the adjacent soil. On all plots the following fertilizers, which we shall here speak of as the "basal mixture," were applied April 11: 120 pounds cotton seed meal per acre and 240 pounds acid phosphate per acre. To this "basal mixture" was added, on one plot, kainit at the rate of 200 pounds per acre ; on another, 100 pounds of kainit per acre; on a third, 60 pounds of kainit per acre. 17 On one plot muriate of potash was used at the rate of 50 pounds per acre, thus furnishing the same amount of potash as 200 pounds of kainit. Peerless cotton was planted April 19. On all plots except plots 3 and 4, where the stand was irregular, there remained, after thinning, 8,640 plants per acre. As early as August 14 rust was noticed on all plots.except on those fertilized with 200 pounds of kainit or 50 pounds of muriate of potash per acre. August 16 black rust was general on the plot without potash, on the feldspar plot and on the plot with only 60 pounds of kainit per acre; on the plots having 100 or 200 pounds of kainit or 50 pounds of muriate of potash there was then very little rust. The following table shows the percentage of the original number of leaves retained, as estimated August 25 and September 23. Percentage of leaves retained. POTASH FERTILIZER PER PLOT. Plot No. Aug. 25. 1 2 3 4 5 6 200 lbs. kainit......................... 100 " kainit....................... 60 " kainit ....................... No potash.................. 1000 " potash feldspar .............. 50 " murate of potash............. 70 50 40 20Y 20 70 Sept. 23. 5 5 2 25 It was perfectly evident from the appearance of the plants that an abundant supply of soluble potash did decrease the amonut of rust and did tend to retain the leaves on the plant. The yieds, however, with one exception, did not show the effects of potash as forcibly as did the appearance of the plants. 18 The yields follow : Yield of seed cotton obtained with the use of different forms of potash. FERTILIZERS. Plot No. Am't per acre. Lbs. 1 2 3 4 5 6 200 100 60 ..... 1000 50 Kainit and basal mixture ................... Kainit and basal mixture ..................... Kainit and basal mixture .................... No potash; only basal mixture............... Potash feldspar and basal mixture............ Muriate of potash..... .................... Yield of seed KIND. cotton per acre. Lbs. 556 492 516 408 482 1*954 * The yield on Plot 6 is so much larger than that on other plots fertilized with potash that we must ascribe it, in part at least, to undetected want of uniformity in the soil. The reasons were unfavorable for securing the full benefit of fertilizers. Hence, positive conclusions will not be in order until this experiment is repeated. However, one re- sult is so noticeable that it should not be overlooked. A pound of potash in the form of muriate was fully as effective, in restraining rust as a pound of potash in the form of kainit. This experiment, together with others conducted by the writer in 1897 and 1898, suggest that 100 pounds of kainit per acre exerts a marked rust restraining power. It is still an open question what is the least amount of kainit that will produce this effect. The potash feldspar used in this experiment was furnished by F. M. Dorsey, Hyssop, Ala., who obtained it from a natural deposit in Coosa county. It was pulverized with crude implements and was not in very fine state of division. 19 WHERE TO GET SEED. The seed of the varieties grown here is not offered for sale or distribution. Growing on small plots side by side, the varieties naturally cross and become impure. Our stock of seed was obtained from the follo wing parties: Allen Hybrid L. S., from J. B. Allen, Port Gibson, Miss. Strickland, from Curry-Arrington Co., Rome, Ga. Texas Oak, from M. G. Smith, Lightfoot, Ga. Hutchinson, from J. N. Hutchinson, Salem, Ala. Russell, from J. T. Russell, Alexander City, Ala. "Smith Improved," from E. A. Smith, Conyers, Ga. Culpepper, from J. A. Culpepper, Luthersville, Ga. Jones' Re-improved, Hawkins, Griffin, and Duncan, from Mark W. Johnson Seed Co., Atlanta, Ga. Deering and Peterkin, from H. P. Jones, a seed-grower at Herndon, Ga. BULLETIN No. 1021 FEBRUARY, ERAY 1899. 89 ALA BAMA Agricultura Experiment OF THE Station AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE, AUBURN. CO-OPERATIVE FERTILIZER EXPERIMENTS WITH COTTON, 1898. J. F. DUGGAR. MONTGOMERY, ALA.: Tine BROWN PRINTING COMPANY, PRINTERS 1899. COMMITTEE OF TRUSTEES ON EXPERIMENT STATION. I. F. CULVER.. ........... ...... ... Union Springs. Auburn. J G. GILCuRIST...........................................Hope Hull. H. CLAY ARMSTRONG ......................................... STATION COWNCIL. WM. LEROY BROUN.......................President and Botanist. Chemist. Agriculturist. Biologist and Horticulturist. Entomologist. Associate Chemist. ............................................... --............. P. H. MELL...................................Director B. B. Ross. J. F. DUGGAR.. C. A. CARY, D. V. M................................Veterinarian. F. S. EARLE ............................. *C. F. BAKER. ........................................ J. T. ANiDER5ON.................... ....................... ASSISTANTS. (;. L . HARE .......... ......................... J. Q. BURTON................ .................... First Assistant Chemist. Second Assistant Chemist. T. U. CUrLVER ................................ Superintendent of Farm. .D'The Bulletins of this Station will be sent free to any citizen of the State on application to the Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama. *Absent on leave. CO-OPERATIVE FERTILIZER EXPERIMENTS WITH COTTON IN 1898. BY J. F. DUGGAR. SUMMARY. Under the direction of the Alabama Experiment Station fertilizer experiments with cotton, or "soil tests, were made in forty-one localities in the State. The object was to learn the best fertilizers for the different classes of soil. Two hundred pounds per acre of cotton seed meal was used to furnish nitrogen, 240 pounds of acid phosphate to supply phosphoric acid, and both one hundred and two hundred pounds of kainit to afford potash. These fertilizers were applied singly, in pairs, and all three together. Of these experiments thirty afforded definite indications as to the manurial needs of the soils on which they were made. Acid phosphate was effective on a greater number of soils than was any other single fertilizing material. The great majority of soils needed a mixture of either acid phosphate and cotton seed meal, or of acid phosphate, cottonseed meal and kainit, that is, a complete fertilizer. Of two complete fertilizers compared, the one containing 100 pounds of kainit (besides acid phosphate and cotton seed meal) was in most soils more profitable than the complete fertilizer containing 200 pounds of kainit per acre. Averaging the results of the 30 conclusive tests made in 1898, the largest net profit was afforded by the same fertilizer which was most profitable in the greatest number of localities in 1897. This fertilizer consisted of 200 pounds cotton seed meal per acre. 240 pounds acid phosphate per acre. 100 pounds kainit per acre. 24 This fertilizer mixture contained 2.59 per cent. of nitrogen, 7.75 per cent. of available phosphoric acid, and 2.93 per cent. of potash. The average yield of the unfertilized plots in 30 localities was 506 pounds of seed cotton per acre. The average increase in the yield of seed cotton was, for the two complete fertilizers, 392 and 435 pounds; for the phosphate and cotton seed meal mixture the average increase was 339 pounds; the average increase for the five other fertilizers or mixtures ranged between 113 and 287 pounds of seed cotton per acre. Generally fertilizers were profitable, but in some cases loss occurred when material not needed by the soil was supplied. In a number of localities the most suitable fertilizer mixture afforded a profit of more than $5 per acre. Soils on adjoining farms, even in the same soil belt, vary greatly. The formulas here given are suggestive only. The history of the land and size of plants may help towards an intelligent guess at the probable needs of the soil, but a local fertilizer experiment is the best means of determining this question. The lime soils of the Tennessee Yalley Region and the reddish lime soils of the narrow valleys of the northeastern part of the state seem to need for cotton little or no potash. For these soils the following formula is tentatively suggested : 160 to 240 pounds acid phosphate per acre. 80 to 120 pounds cotton seed meal per acre. 240 to 360 pounds, total per acre. This contains about 2.2 per cent. of nitrogen, 8 to 10 per cent. of available phosphoric acid, and per cent. of potash. In that region in Central and Northwest Alabama lying between the Central Prairie Region and the Table Lands and Coal Fields, the chief need of the soil in most localities where tests have been made has been for phosphate; cotton seed meal was also needed. As a fertilizer for cotton in - 25 this region, the above formula is suggested, with the addition of 80 pounds of kainit per acre on the poorest sandy soils and on those where cotton habitually rusts. For the red clay lands of the central part of East Alabama the above mixture of acid phosphate and cotton seed meal is suggested; for the poorest gray or sandy soils of the same region, it seems advisable to add to this mixture 80 pounds of potash per acre, or to use the formula recommended below for the Southern Long Leaf Pine Region. In the Southern Long Leaf Pine Region, cotton almost invariably needs phosphate, and to a less extent nitrogen. In some of the soils of this region potash seems to be quite deficient. The following formula is suggested for cotton on these soils: 60 to 120 pounds cotton seed meal per acre. 120 to 240 pounds acid phosphate per acre. 60 to 120 pounds kainit per acre. 240 to 480 pounds, total per acre. This fertilizer contains about 1.7 per cent. of nitrogen, 6 to 7.5 per cent. of available phosphoric acid, and 3.5 per cent. of potash. The lime soils of the Central Prairie Region need drainage and vegetable matter rich in nitrogen rather than the usual commercial fertizers. Melilotus, or tall sweet white clover, used for hay or pasturage and the stubble afterwards plowed under, answers, together with stable manure and cotton seed, the main fertilizer requirement of these soils. OBJEOTS AND METHODS OF THE EXPERIMENTS. The soils of Alabama differ widely. Hence they require different fertilizers. For most profitable results the fertilizer must be suited to the soil. Misfits are frequent and costly, especially in a State spending several millions of dollars for commercial fertilizers. To decrease such losses is the object of the "soil tests," or local fertilizer experi- £6 ments conducted under the direction of the Alabama Experiment Station by farmers in different soil belts. To map the State, even roughly, according to the fertilizer requirements of the prevailing soils, must necessarily be the work of years. The number of co-operative fertilizer experiments provided for in 1897 was 41, from which 37 reports were received. Thirty of these reports give definite indications, and are discussed at length in this bulletin. The others, deemed inconclusive, are more briefly tabulated. Small lots of carefully weighed and mixed fertilizers were supplied to each experimenter. Detailed instructions as to how to conduct the experiments and blank forms for reporting results, were also furnished. 27 The following is the list of those who made the fertilizer tests in 1898 and reported results: NAME POST OFFICE. COUNTY.PAGE. Autrey, A.............. Berneys..........Talladega.. 35 & 50 Anderson, J. P........ Thomaston........Marengo.......72& 75 Beeson, Prof. W. J.....Blountsville.......Blount........32 &.50 Borland, T. M.......... Dothan..........Henry........65 & 67 Bevill, W. C. .......... Bevill...........Choctaw.......59 & 62 Ballard, J. L...........Jackson..........Clarke........48& 51 Carmichael, D., Jr...... Newton..........Dale..........92 & 94 St. Clair.68 Collins, D. K........Coosa Valley. Brundidge........Pike..........92 & 94 Conner, G........... 53 & 56 Daffin, E. J...........Tuscaloosa.......Tuscaloosa Dill, C. C. L..........IDillburgh.........Pickens.......52 & 56 Bullock.......73 & 75 Dykes, J. W............Union Springs. Hartford.........Geneva.......77& 78 Fulton, D. T.......... 31 & 50 . Larimore.........DeKalb Fulton, W. F........ Funkey, F. ......... Tuscumbia.......Colbert........93 & 94 Harbuck, W. T.........Hurtsboro........Russell.......38 & Horn, C. D..........Coatopa..........Sumter.......41 & 49 Cuilman.......76 & 78 Hayes, E...........Cullman......... Marvyn..........Russell........54 & 56 Ingram, W. N........ Jackson, J. C........Sulligent..........Lamar.......33 & 50 Jarrett, R. H........Sterrett..........Shelby........57 & 62 70 & 75 .......... Greensboro ........ Jones, T. K........... 49 Logan, J. A ........... Hale Gordo ............ Pickens ..... 45 & 56 Meadows, T. T ........ McLendon, J. R. ...... Naftel............ C usseta........... Chambers ... Montgomery. 37 & 50 63 McIntyre, Prof. P. M.,. Abbeville......... Boligee ............ McAlpine, J. A ........ Purifoy, W. M........ Snow Hill......... ...... LeGrand... Robertson, J. T . .... Sellars, G. 0.......... Lumber Mills...Butler..... Henry......... 92 & 94 92 & 94 Greene ........ 40 & 49 Wilcox ........ Montgomery... 58 & 62 44 & 48 Slaton, J. P........... Tuskegee.........Macon......... Taylor, Prof. B. A....Wetumpka........ Brewton.... ....... Terry, J. W.......... Thomason, Judge T. J.. . Kaylor Elmore...... Escambia ... Randolph.. 39 & 49 92 &94 60 &62 36 & 50 .. ............ Watkins, J. C ......... Wilco, J. *%Wilson.............Escambia....46 H......... Burnt Corn ........ Monroe........ 42 & 49 & 48 28 The directions sent required each plot to be one-eighth of an acre in area. Rows were 3- feet apart, and each experimenter was advised to so thin the cotton as to leave the same number of plants on each plot, preferably at distances of 18 inches between plants. The directions stated that land employed for this test should be level and uniform, not manured in recent years, and not new ground, or subject to overflow, and that it should be representative of large soil areas in its vicinity. The need of perfect uniformity of treatment for all plots (except as to kinds of fertilizers used) was emphasized. Fertilizers were applied in the usual manner-that is, drilled, ridges afterwards being thrown up above the fertilizers. The following data, recorded separately for the northern and southern portion of Alabama, are taken from the records of the Alabama Section of the Weather Bureau for 1898: Northern. Rainfall for April, inches..........4.77 " " May, " Southern. 4.11 .58 ...... 1.05 " " " " " " " " " " " " June, July, Aug., Sept., Oct., Nov., " " " " " " .......... ........... .... . ....... ........... ........... ............ 3.00 5.98 5.46 3.22 5.29 4.17 .19 6.15 9.40 3.94 3.16 7.02 A severe drought in May and part of June was general throughout the State. In July and August an excess of rain fell. The records show that there was more than the average amount of sunshine in 1898. Frost occurred earlier than usual. Black rust seems to have occurred in a smaller number of the experiments than in 1897 and to have done less damage where it did occur. 29 THE FERTILIZERS USED. The following prices are used, as representing the usual cost of fertilizers delivered in Auburn: Per Ton. Acid phosphate (High grade)......... $12 50 Cotton seed meal.................... 9 00 Kainit ............................. 13 75 Prices naturally vary in different localities. Any one can substitute the cost of fertilizers in his locality for the price given above. The above prices for high-grade acid phosphate (dissolved bone) and kainit are a little below the usual price in most localities. The phosphate used was from the Edisto Phosphate Company, Charleston, S. C. Most of the kainit was donated by the German Kail Works, New York City. In each experiment two plots were left unfertilized, these being plots 3 and 8. The following table shows what kinds and amounts of fertilizers were used on certain plots; the number of pounds of nitrogen, phosphoric acid, and potash supplied per acre by each fertilizer mixture; and the percentage composition and cost per ton of each mixture, the latter being given in order that these mixtures may be readily compared with various brands of prepared guanos: 30 Pounds per acre o fertilizers, nitrogen,.phosphoric acid, and potash used and composition of each mixture. FERTILIZERS. MIXTURE CONTAINS. U O KIND. . bE o oU C) 5.76 200 Cotton. seed meal....... 13.58 In 100 lbs. c. s.meal.* 6.79 2.88 2 240 Acid phosphate........ 36.12 In 100 lbs. acid phos.......15.05 4 200 Kainit...................... In 100 lbs. kainit..13.75 200 Cotton seed meal 13 58 4t88 240 Acid phosphate. 9.52 3.09 In 100 lbs. above mixt 200 Cotton seed meal. 358 576 57 ...... 1.8 6 200 Kainit.. ;..... 1.44 In 100 lbs. above mixt. 3.39 7 Acid phosphate. A240 1 Lbs. Lbs. Lbs Lbs. 3.54 1.77 24.60 $ 19.00 12.50 354 .80 28.14 81 7.03 5.59 28.14 15.45 16.38 13.09 S200 Kainit.......................... 200 9 240 Acid phosphate........13.58 -Cotton seed meal..... In 100 lbs. above mixt..........8.21 41.88 10 ____ 200 Kainit .......... ... ) I n 100 lbs. above mixt.- 2.12 200 Cotton seed meal .. 240 Acid phosphate....... 13.58 100 Kainit ............ InlO00lbs. above mixt. 2.59 *Average 6.54 41.88 4.39 15.84 2.93 14.94 7.75 15.11 of many analyses. t Counting all the phosphoric acid in cotton seed meal as available. Those farmers who are more accustomed to the word ammonia than to the term nitrogen, can change the figures for nitrogen into their ammonia equivalents by multiplying by 1 3-14. Unless explained, the term "profit from fertilizers"~ as used in the following tables, might be misunderstood. Profit or loss, as there used, is simply the. difference between the value of the increase attributed to the fertilizer 31 (after paying 3 cent per pound for picking) and the cost of the fertilizer. To make this more exact, the careful reader may subtract from the apparent profit the cost of applying fertilizers. The price assumed is 5 cents per pound for lint and $6.67 per ton for seed. This is equal to 1 8-9 cents per pound. Deduct from this the cost of picking, 3 cent per pound and we have 1 5-9 cents as the net value per pound of increase of seed cotton; this last figure is used in the following tables. In determining the increase over the unfertilized plots, the yield of the fertilized plots, Nos. 4, 5, 6 and 7, is compared with both unfertilized plots, lying on either side, giving to each unfertilized plot a weight inversely proportional to its distance from the plot under comparison. This method of comparison tends to compensate for variations in the fertility of the several plots. It should be remembered that seasons, as well as soils, determine the effects of fertilizers, so that to be absolutely reliable a fertilizer experiment should be repeated for several years on the same kind of soil. GROUP I. PHOSPHORIC ACID MUCH MORE IMPORTANT THAN POTASH; LATTER NOT NEEDED OR USED AT FINANCIAL LOSS. EXPERIMENT MADE BY W. F. FULTON, LARIMORE, DEKALB COUNTY. Dark gray valley soil ; subsoil red clay, with lime-rock below. The field .has been in cultivation about seventy-five years. Recent crops were corn in '97, oats in '96, and corn in '95 The original growth was white oak, post oak, red oak, black walnut, hickory, poplar and cedar. (The reader should consult the tables on pp. 48, 49 & 50 as he reads the report of each experiment.) Increase of seed cotton per acre when cottonseed meal was added: 32 To To To To unfertilized plot .................... acid phosphate plot ................ kainit plot........................117 acid phosphate and kainit plot ....... 88 lbs. 175 " " 230 Average increase with cotton seed meal ..... 152 Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot .......... ..... ... .. 50 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot .............. To kainit plot .............. 591 324 " To cotton seed meal and kainit plot.......437 Average increase with acid phosphate ...... 464 Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot ................... 142 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot ...... ... 171 " To acid phosphate plot ...........38 To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot 17 Average increase with kainit ............. 73 Phosphate was much more important than any other material for this soil. It was profitable to add cottonseed meal to phosphate, this combination leading in point of profit, $7.16 per acre, closely followed by acid phosphate alone, with $6.36 per acre. Kainit was not greatly needed. EXPERIMENT MADE BY PROF. W. J. BEESON, SCHOOL, ON FARM OF NINTH DISTRICT AGRICULTURAL BLOUNTSVILLE, BLOUNT COUNTY. Dark loam lime soil; subsoil clay. This field had been used for grass and clover for the two years previous to this test, and in the spring of 1898 was subsoiled. The land had been in cultivation for about twenty-seven years. 33 Increase of seed cotton per acre when cottonseed meal was added: .... 328 lbs. To unfertilized plot ........ 104 To acid phosphate plot ................ To kainit plot...... .................. 248 264 " To acid phosphate and kainit plot ........ Average increase with cotton seed meal ..... 241 Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added : To unfertilized plot ................. 608 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot... ............ 384 " To kainit plot ................ ........ 440 To cotton seed meal and kainit plot......456 " Average increase with acid phosphate......472 Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot ........ 64 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot ............. 16 To acid phosphate plot ..............110 " To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot 56 " Average decrease with kainit ............. I The main need was for acid phosphate, which used alone afforded a profit of $7.97 per acre. Cotton seed meal increased the yield to an extent just about sufficient to pay for the meal. Kainit was not needed J. E. WEST OF EXPERIMENT MADE BY JACKSON, TWO MILES SULLIGENT, LAMAR COUNTY. Gray clayey valley land; subsoil yellowish clay. The preceding crop was cotton; the crop of 1896 was corn. The original growth of post oak and short leaf pine had been cleared about thirty years before. 34 Increase of seed cotton per acre when cottonseed meal was added: To unfertilized plot .................... 72 lbs. To acid phosphate plot................. .278 To kainit plot ....................... 104 To acid phosphate and kainit plot ....... 285 " Average increase with cotton seed meal ...... 185 Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot .................... 208 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot................414 " To kainit plot ............... ....... 80 To cotton seed meal and kainit plot.......261 " Average increase with acid phosphate........ 241 Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot..................... 19 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot ................ 51 " To acid phosphate plot..............--109 " To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot..... .. ... .......... .... 102 " Average decrease with kainit ............... 38 " Both acid phosphate and cotton seed meal were important and these two in combination afforded a profit of $4.16 per acre. Kainit was unnecessary or even harmful. EXPERIMENT MADE BY A. AUTBEY, 4 MILE EAST OF BERNEYS TALLADEGA COUNTY. Soil and subsoil stiff red clay. This field had been in cultivation more than forty years. The original forest growth was oak, hickory and pine. Increaselof seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: ....... 192 lbs To unfertilized plot......... To acid phosphate plot..................192 " " To kainit plot...........................296 168 " To acid phosphate and kainit plot ........ Average increase with cotton seed meal........212 " Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: lbs. To unfertilized plot..................128 seed meal plot................128 " To cotton 416 " To kainit plot ....................... To cotton seed meal and kainit plot....... 288 " Average increase with acid phosphate.......240 " Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot......................-64 lbs. 40 " To cotton seed meal plot................. To acid phosphate plot.................104 " To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot.200 " Average increase with kainit.................. 70 " Acid phosphate and cotton seed meal were more effective than kainit, but the largest profit was afforded by a complete fertilizer, 36 EXPERIMENT MADE BY JUDGE T. J. THOMASON, 2 MILESNORTH OF KAYLOR, RANDOLPH COUNTY, ALA. Dark gray upland ; subsoil below. This field had been cleared about forty years. The original growth is reported as oak, hickory and long leaf pine. The preceding crop was wheat; cotton occupied the land in 1895 and 1896. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot...................312 lbs. 98 To acid phosphate plot ................. To kainit plot........................155 To acid phosphate and kainit plot........271 Average increase with cotton seed meal...... 209 Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot..................368 lbs. " To cotton seed meal plot...............154 22 To kainit plot........................ To cotton seed meal and kainit plot.. . . ... 338 " Average increase with acid phosphate.... .. 270 " Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot....................107 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot................-50 " To acid phosphate plot. .........39 " To cotton seed meal and acid phosplate plot.134 " Average increase with kainit... .............. 38 " Acid phosphate and cotton seed meal were both highly beneficial. Kainit was of little or no value except when combined with these other two and was then only of secondary importance. 37 EXPERIMENT MADE BY T. T. MEADOWS, J MILE NORTH OF CUS- SETA, CHAMBERS COUNTY, ALA. Soil and subsoil red with flint stones. The field was cleared of the origninal growth of oak and hickory about forty or fifty years ago. The crop of 1896 was corn (whether with or without peas is not stated) and that of 1897 was cotton. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot. .................. 120 lbs. To acid phosphate plot................228 " To kainit plot....... ................. 115 To acid phosphate and kainit plot ...33 " Average increase with acid phosphate.......107 Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot..................152 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot................260 '" To kainit plot.........................261 To cotton seed meal and kainit plot.......117 " Average increase with acid phosphate......175 " Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot..................... -8 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot..............-13 " To acid phosphate plot........ ........ 107 " To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot ............................ -156 " Average decrease with kainit............... 15 " Phosphate was the material chiefly needed. Kainit was of no value. Cotton seed meal was useful. The results for two years agree in indicating that the best fertilizer for this soil was a mixture of acid phosphate and cotton seed meal. 2 38 EXPERIMENT MADE BY M. T. HARBUCK, 1 MILES NORTH EAST OF HURTSRORO, RUSSELL COUNTY. Light gray soil; yellow retentive subsoil. The land had been cleared about twenty-five original forest growth was long leaf pine. The crop in 1897 was corn and peas, in 1896 corn and peas. No rust was noticeable on any of the plots. was dry until the 13th of July, after which excess. years. The cotton, 1895 The season rain was in Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added : To unfertilized plot...........................111 lbs. To acid phosphate plot................199 " To kainit plot.... .................... 63 To acid phosphate and kainit plot.......131 Average increase with cotton seed meal..126 Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added : To To To To unfertilized plot.....................111 lbs. cotton seed meal plot.................199 " kainit plot..........................99 " cotton seed meal plot............... 167 " " lbs. " Average increase with acid phosphate.... 144 To unfertilized plot .................... To cotton seed meal plot..............-38 10 Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was adUd To acid phosphate plot...............-2 To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot ..............................70 " " Average decrease with kainit..........25 " 39 Although phosphate was chiefly needed, no fertilizer was very effective. Potash was not needed. Preceding pea crops reduced the effect of cotton seed meal. EXPERIMENT MADE BY J. P. SLATON, 7 MILES NORTHEAST OF TUSKEGEE, MACON COUNTY. Rather compact gray sandy soil; subsoil red clay. This field was cleared of its original forest growth of oak, hickory, gum, maple, long and short leaf pine about 75 years ago. The land was pastured in 1896, and planted in corn in 1897; it is not stated whether or not peas were grown between the corn rows. There was very little rust on any of the plots; however plot 5 seemed to be the worst affected. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: 92 lbs. To unfertilized plot.......... .......... To acid phosphate plot.................322 " 5 To kainit plot .......................... To acid phosphate and kainit plot........149 Average increase with cotton seed meal...192 " Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added. To To To To 332 lbs. unfertilized plot..... .............. seed meal plot...............362 " cotton " kainit plot........................204 cotton seed meal and kainit plot.....348 " Average increase with acid phosphate........311 40 Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To To To To lbs. .. unfertilized plot................. " cotton seed meal plot.............-172 13 acid phosphate plot.... ........... cotton seed meal and acid phosphate 115 plot............. ............-186 Average decrease with kainit............64 " The chief need of this soil was for acid phosphate. Cotton seed meal was also important, but kainit was worse than useless. The largest profit, $6.77 per acre, followed the use of a mixture of acid phosphate and cotton seed meal. EXPERIMENT MADE BY W. M. PURIFOY, 2 MILES NORTHEAST OF SNOW HILL, WILCOX COUNTY, ALA. White bald prairie; subsoil white or yellowish rotten limestone at depth of three inches. The preceding crop was sorghum. Mr. Purifoy notes that this soil was especially liable to rust but that there was none in 1898. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To To To To 128 lbs. unfertilized plot...... ........... 27 " acid phosphate plot ................. kainit plot........ ................. 227 " acid phosphate and kainit plot......141 " " Average increase with cotton seed meal.....131 Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid. phosphate was added: 41 To To To To unfertilized plot....................200 lbs. cotton seed meal plot............ ... 99 " kainit plot... .................... 209 cotton seed meal and kainit plot......123 " Average increase with acid phosphate.... 158 Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added : To unfertilized plot........ ..........To cotton seed meal plot ............... To acid phosphate plot...................18 27 lbs. 72 " To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot ............................ 96 Average increase with kainit...........41 Both phosphate and cotton seed meal increased the yield. Some of the results with kainit are also favorable, especially on plot 10, where with the complete fertilizer containing the smaller amount of kainit there was the largest profit of any plot. EXPERIMENT MADE BY C. D. HoRN, COATOPA, SUMTER COUNTY. Darlc sandy soil; subsoil, red sandy clay. The field had been cleared about 25 years. The original forest growth was red oak, post oak, black jack, hickory, and short leaf pine. The land had been in cotton for three years previous to the beginning of the experiment. Increase of seed cotton per acre where cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot... ... ............ 140 lbs. To acid phosphate plot................ 44 To kainit plot.167.....................167 To acid phosphate and kainit plot......- 39 Average increase with cotton seed meal.. " " " 78 Ibs. 42 Increase of seed cotton per acre where acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot..................190 To cotton seed meal plot................91 To kainit plot.................. ........ To cotton seed meal and kainit plot..... lbs. " 192 30 " Average increase with acid phosphate..... To unfertilized plot.... To cotton seed meal plot........ III Ibs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added ............. 8 lbs. 30 " To acid phosphate plot................. To cotton seed meal and acid phos. plot.Average decrease with kainit............ 6 " 89 18 lbs. On every plot there was either a financial loss or only a very small profit. Kainit especially was unnecessary, while acid phosphate and cotton seed meal, used alone, and in most combinations, afforded some increase in yield. There was no rust in 1893; in 1897, on the other hand, rust was severe and kainit, which checked it, was then the most effective fertilizer. EXPERIMENT MADE BY J. C. WATKINS, 2 MILES BURNT CORN, MONROE COUNTY. NORTH OF Gray, sandy and rocky soil; red clay subsoil, 6-8 inches below 8surface. The field on which this test was made had been in cultivation about thirty years. The original forest growth is reported as short leaf pine, red and white oak and sweetgum. No note is made of injury from rust. This field was in cotton in '97, in corn in '95 and '96, and had received little or no fertilizer in recent years. Planting occurred April 28. 43 The same plots were used for the experiment in 1898 that had been employed in the exactly similar experiment in 1897. The number of plants per eighth-acre plot was 990. The weather was abnormally dry from planting time until the middle of June; then for two months rains were entirely too frequent and heavy. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added : To unfertilized plot. ..... .... ... 292 lbs. To acid phosphate plot.................. 6 To kainit plot .......................... 151 To acid phosphate and kainit plot........341 " Average increase with cotton seed meal... 198 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To To To To unfertilized plot .................... 3 4 lbs. cotton seed meal plot..............158 " kainit plot......................... 92 " cotton seed meal and kainit plot. . 282 " .. . Average increase with acid phosphate.... 219 Ibs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To To To To unfertilized plot...................13 lbs. cotton seed meal plot............. -154 " acid phosphate plot...............-265 " cotton seed meal and acid phos. plot... 70 " Average decrease with kainit........... 90 Ibs. Both acid phosphate and cotton seed meal were highly: important, while kainit was useless. The largest profit $3.85 per acre was obtained when acid phosphate was used alone. 44 EXPERIMENT MADE BY G.. 0. SELLARS, 32 MILES SOUTHWEST OF LUMBER MILLS, BUTLER COUNTY. Gray sandy soil 8 in. deep ; red clay subsoil. This field, on which the original growth had been long leaf pine and blackjack oak, had been cleared about ten years. In 1896 the crop was cotton; in 1895 and The stand was good, 8216 stalks per acre, and there was no rust. 1897corn, Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot...................272 lbs. To acidphosphate plot...............233 To kainit plot.........................227 To acid phosphates and kainit plot......250 Average increase with cotton seed meal.-.245 228 Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot.......... ...... 92 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot ............... 153 " To kainit ... ....... To cotton seed meal and kainit plot........ plot.....251 ... " Av rg of seed cotton percdp when kainit was n raewt acre. added : op ae ..26Increase 10 lbs. 35 " To unfertilized plot..................... plot. . ...........- To cotton seed meal To acid phosphate plot ... .............. 146 To cotton seed meal and acid phos. plot ... 63 " Average increase. with kainit ..... .. 21 Cotton seed meal and acid phosphate were decidedly beneficial. Kainit was unnecessary. The largest profit, 45 $3.10 per acre, was obtained by the use of a mixture of cotton seed meal and acid phosphate. In 1897, when rust prevailed, kainit was of somewhat more value than in1898 when this disease did not appear. EXPERIMENT MADE BY J. A. LOGAN, 12 MILES NORTHWEST OF GoRDO, PICKENS COUNTY. Dark ashy second bottom; subsoil red clay. The field had been cleared probably thirty years or more. The original forest growth was oak, mulberry, hickory, and some short leaf pine. The preceding crops were cotton. Rust was not present on any of the plots. The season was very dry until June 1, after which time the rainfall was abundant. The stand was reported perfect on all plots. (See Table, page 56.) Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot.,.................... 56 lbs. To acid phosphate plot.................. 78 To kainit plot....................... ... 35 " To acid phosphate and kainit plot........100 " Average increase with cotton seed meal.... 67 " Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot......................360 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot.............. 382 " To kainit plot ............... ........ . 46 " To cotton seed meal and kainit plot........110 " Average increase with acid phosphate.... 224 " 46 Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added To unfertilized plot................... 59 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot....... .. 38 " To acid phosphate plot..............-255 To cotto a seed meal and acid phos. plot...-231" Average decrease with kainit............ 68 The chief need of this soil was for acid phosphate. Kainit was not needed. Cotton seed meal was somewhat beneficial, bat apparently a much smaller amount of cotton seed meal would have sufficed, say 50 to 100 pounds in combination with 240 pounds of acid phosphate. The largest profit, $4.10 per acre, was obtained by the use of acid phosphate alone. Next in point of profit followed a combination of acid phosphate and cotton seed meal, with a profit of $3.40 per acre. EXPERIMENT MADE BY , J. H. WILCOX, WILSON, ALA. Clay soil, with some sand and gravel. 1808 was the second year of cultivation, the first crop having been corn. The field was subsoiled before Christmas and planted April 28th. As a result of unfavorable weather many of the plants on the unfertilized plots and to a less extent on plots 1 and 6, died before fruiting. (See Table, page 48.) Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To To To To lbs. unfertilized plot.................64 acid phosphate plot................. 37 " 45 " kainit plot ......................... acid phosphate and kainit plot.......134 " Average increase with cotton seed meal.. 70 " 47 Increase of seed cotton per acre where acid phosphate was added : To unfertilized plot.................. 56 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot.............229 " To kainit plot ...................... 236 To cotton seed meal and kainit plot .... 325 Average increase with acid phosphate....261 Increase of seed cotton per acre where kainit was added: To To To To unfertilized plot ........... ....2 lbs. cotton seed meal plot.............-21 " acid phosphate plot ................ -22 " cotton seed meal and acid phos. plot,.............................. 75 " " Average increase with kainit.............7 Evidently acid phosphate was the chief need of this soil. As usual on new ground, cotton seed meal wa3 of but slight benefit. On this new ground, doubtless still abundantly supplied with potash from the recently burned timber, kainit was not needed. Wilson, Lumber Mills and Jackson experiments y..._. ._. _. with cotton. JACKSON. FERTILIZERS. WILSON. W0 LUMBER MILLS. CO 0 U I) c0 oU z 0 0 0 O KIND. N U o'r C ).N O c o COrir d.' P 0 ) -1) C.Lbs. 64 . 1 2 3 Lbs. 200 Cotton seed meal............. 240 Acid phosphate............... No fertilizer................ 200 200 Kainit........................ Cotton seed 240 200 Acid Cotton seed meal phosphate............... meal ............. 9. 10 200 Kainit....................... 240 Acid phosphate.......... ... . 200 Kainit .. ............ .. No fertilizer...... ............. . 200 Cotton seed meal ............. 240 Acid phosphate.............. 200 Kainit....................... 200 Cotton seed ............ Lbs. 64 256 00 00 296, 48 240 8 376 376 256 $.91 2.48 -1.41 1.15 -2.61 293 Lbs. 648 568 376 368 766 560 544 288 776 720 Lbs. 272 192 10 425 237 238 $ 2.33 1.48 -1.23 3 10 .40 .82 1016 1280 1008 1160 1464 1160 1368 1088 1704 2.41 Lbs. 8 272 136 424 .104, 296 -l 78 2.73 .73 3.08 . -1.67 1.72 3234 .76 368 368 .94 1.64 488 2.81 616 784 5.91 8.11 240 Acid phosphate .......... 100 Kainit ........................ meal ............ ... . ) 432 1 2.64 1872 27 . Hurtsboro, Tuskegee, Burnt Corn, Snow Hill and Goatopa experiments with cotton. FERTILIZERS. 0 0 U H URTSBORO. O C TUSKEGEE. H BURNT CORN. SNOW HILL.' :EUR~U Lbs.U Lbs. II COATOPA O 0 O J ci5TU aa KIND. .S r: 1 SO r 44 .6 92$ 72 ~Lbs. 6835 034 cLb 2 .8 4 og 30 624 0 534 2 0 4. 111 ,, -. 18 Lbs. 1 2 3 200 240 Acid phosphate ......... 00 No fertilizer ...... 200 Kainit........... 200 Cotton seed meal ... 240 Acid phosphate ... 200 Cotton seed meal..... . 200 Kainit ..... ..... ... . 240 cid phosphate.. Cotton seed meal .... Lbs. 384 384 273 280 576 LI Lt)5. Lbs2Lbs. Lbs. 111 10 310 73 4E .22 28 319 ~~38 3E )88 115 -1.23 1.42 10 FI 20 9 458 1 508 318 0 326 3 - . Lbs. 2.0 40 140 $ .26 190 . 54 4.8 .7 280 275 82 -8 -1.50 234 175 1.45 .. .24 18-11 3 584 .7542 A 200 Kainit .... 8 336 368 256 -2.15 78 3t92.0 515.2 79-16 880 420 1.7 -. 56 1.09 ......... 00 No fertilizer ........... 1091--1.19 41 240 I-1.05, 8E 280 1 5568 184 88..... 264 200 Cotton seed meal .. 240 Acid phosphate... ....... 200 Kain it......... ) 496 10 200 Cotton seed meal... 536 240 Acid Phosphate... 100 Kainit...............5 ) 14 448 !8518 *416...... 142 102 2.53 .271 91 Ii 624 -. 82 IYIIIY II1IIIL: III 1II1-1IC (1 5=9 plus!'%c'.) V'Seed cotton rated at 1. 5-9 cents. This is net price, or price after paying 13 for seed cotton is equivalent to cents per pound for lint and $6.67 5 per cent per lb. for picking;1 8-9 cents 408 ton for 72....... seed. U Lbs U Lbs. I 48 --2 Lbs. - 1. 534 32 18 200-. 1.8 200 18 4. 0 0k BRerneys, Sulligent, Blountsville, Larimore,' Uu~seta and. Kaylor experiments wit/i cotton. FERTILIZERS. O 0 4-4 )U BERINEYS. O SULLIGENT. BLOUNTSVILLE. LARIMORE. 9 0 CUSSETA. O KAYLOR. U 0 za ) a) N a .N c73) O a N 0 al) a). 0 a) 0 0 .0 a) KIND. 0 0 ".H"- 40 d) 670 .8f 0 Lbs. 1 3 4 200 240 00 200 200 M~ 200 Cotton seed meal... Acid Lbs. Lbs. phosphate.. No fertilizer ... Kainit ....... Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. 328 608 62 Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. 53 416 120 6.34 448 152 S384 296 1.53 290 -8 7.16 680 380 .75 408 107 4.37 560 257 ... 304 6.04 528 224 I.684 ..... 600 192 536 128 108 712 320 232 728 352 368 888 520 792 421 $1.08 536 72 .49 672 208 $3.20 464 1.58 952 486 -64 -2.37 480 i19 -1.09 448 .32 616 123 2.59 560 4~48 3.31 832 !384 2.511 824 392 200 8 9{ 10j 240 200 00 200 240 200 200 240 100 Cotton seed meal. Acid phosphate.. Cotton seed meal.L Kainit....... .. . Acid phosphat.e. .L Kainit ......... No fertilizer... Cotton seed meal.) Acid 4.16 1096 707 1.37 696 305 7.97 960 504 456 . .42 616 142 7.59 116 679 1.46 768 259 4.80 992 466 544... 6.96 1240 696 7.49 ~544' 88 $-. Lbs. 312 $ 2.95 368 4.23 .27 466 262 1 800 329 376 3(.1-1 2.5] 2 720 3.96 .79 2.23 1. 99 -1.34 888 491 396 1.1911552 phosphate . 756 0 976 600 4.55 ... Kainit......... Cotton seed meal, Acid phosphate.. ..... Kainit ..... 2.01 1140 744, 3801 3 1.81 960. 584, 5.00 51 GROUP II. PHOSPHORIC ACID MUCH MORE IMPORTANT THAN POTASH; LATTER OF SECONDARY IMPORTANCE, BUT NEEDED. EXPERIMENT MADE BY J. L. BALLARD FOR SOUTHWEST ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL SCHOOL, JACKSON, CLARKE COUNTY. Red soil, 5 inches deep; subsoil red clay. This upland field had been cleared about ten years, the original growth having been long leaf and short leaf pine, oak, sweetgum, dogwood, etc. It was in cotton in 1597 and in corn in 1896, whether with or without cow peas is not stated. (See Table, page 56.) Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added : To unfertilizcd plot ............. ..... To acid phosphate plot................152 To kainit plot................-32 To acid phosphate and kainit plot.......320 8 lbs. " " Average increasewith cotton seed meal ...... 112 Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot...................272 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot; ............. 416 " To kainit plot 160 " To cotton seed meal and kainit plot .... 512 " ..................... Average increase with acid phosphate.... 340" Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To To To To unfertilized plot....................136 lbs. cotton seed 'meal plot. .............. 96 " acid phosphate plot................. 24 " cotton seed meal and acid phosphate 192 " ............ plot ......................... " Average increase with kainit.............112 Phosphate was more important than either of the other fertilizer materials. However it was profitable to add both cotton seed meal and kainit to the phosphate. A complete fertilizer containing only 100 pounds of kainit per acre gave the best results and afforded a profit of $8.11 per acre. The year before cotton seed meal had given best results. EXPERIMENT MADE BY C. C. L. DILL, DILLBURGH, PICKENS COUNTY, ALA. Crayish table land ; subsoil red clay. The field had been cleared about 45 years of the original growth of oak, hickory and short leaf pine, but had grown up in old field pines, which were removed in 1890. Corn with cowpeas between the rows constituted the crop in 1897. See Table, page 56.) Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot...................672 lbs. To acid phosphate plot..................83 " " To kainit plot........................643 To acid phosphate and kainit plot........170 Average increase with cotton seed meal added: To To To To Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was .... 392 " unfertilized plot.....................736 lbs. cotton seed meal plot..................147 " kainit plot..........................572 " 99 " cotton seed meal and kainit plot ....... Average increase with acid phosphate....388 " Increase of seed cetton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot......................298 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot.................269 " To acid phosphate plot..................134 To cotton s. meal and acid phosphate plot..221 Average increase with kainit...........230 " " " 53 Both phosphate and nitrogen were of prime importance kainit was also effective, but to a less extent. All fertilizers returned a large profit whether used alone or in combination. The largest yield was obtained by the use of a complete fertilizer. EXPERIMENT MADE BY E. J. DAFFIN, 2 MILES EAST OF TUSOA- LOOSA, TUSCALOOSA COUNTY, ALA. Red sandy upland soil 3 in. deep; subsoil stiff red clay. The time since clearing was more than 60 years. The original growth was short leaf pine, oak, hickory, gum, beech, mulberry, sassafras, persimmon, cherry, poplar, locust, hackberry and ash. The preceding crop was cotton. There was no damage from rust. (See Table, page 56.) Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To To To To unfertilized plot..................... 40 lbs. acid phosphate plot.. .. .............253 " kainit plot.........................197 " acid phosphate and kainit plot.. ...... 158 " Average increase with cotton seed meal.. 162 " Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot....................136 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot ............... 349 " To kainit plot ........................ :292 " To cotton seed meal and kainit plot......253 " Average increase with acid phosphate....257 " 54 Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot...................62 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot................219 " To acid phosphate plot................218 To cotton seed meal and acid phos. plot 123 Average increase with kainit........5 Acid phosphate was the chjef need of soil. Cotton seed meal and kainit were also necessary and about equally effective. These results agree with those of 1897. Both years the greatest profit was obtained by the use of a complete fertilizer. this EXPERIMENT MADE BY W. N. INGRAM, MARVYN, RUSSELL, COUNTY. Gray sandy soil 6 in. deep; subsoil yellow clay. This hillside had been cleared 25 or 30 years. The origi.nal growth was long leaf pine and oak. All recent crops consisted of cotton. Assuming that the yield of Plot 9 was reduced by some inequality in the land or in the number of plants, we have this plot in drawing conclusions. ,omitted was Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal added: To unfertilized plot .................... To acid phosphate plot..... 352 lbs. 266" ............ To kainit plot......................... 88 Average increase with cotton seed meatl.235 55 Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot .................. To cotton seed meal plot ............. To kainit plot.........................450 456 lbs. 368 " " Average increase with acid phosphate....425 Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added : To unfertilized plot.................256 To cotton seed meal plot ............To acid phosphate plot..............152 8 lbs. " " Average increase with kainit.............138 " The chief need of this soil was evidently for acid phosphate. Cotton seed meal was also advantageous. Kainit was less important than the other two materials, but somewhat useful. The largest profit, $7.80 per acre, resulted from the use of a mixture of cotton seed meal and acid phosphate. This was closely followed by a complete fertilizer containing 100 lbs. of kainit per acre. Dillburgh, Gordo, Tuscaloosa and .ZMarvyn experiments with cotton, FERTILIZERS. _______ _______ ______ _______ ___ DII.LBURGH. ___ ____ - GoRno. (GrouplI) - TUSCALOOSA. _ _ _ _ MARVYN. _ _ _ KINDS. r"of t)-C) 0 0 1 2 Lbs. 200 Cotton seed meal ............................... 240 Acid 3 4 5 200 Kainit.............. ............................ 976 298 3.25' 724 59 -. 960 62 47 ~200 Cotton seed ma. 1488993114483412039 ~20Cidtosph mae...................48 4191934110448340120239 00ONo fertilizer... phosphate..... 6 00to Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. 1360 672 $ 8.55 720 56.$-1.08 944 40 $-1.28 952 352 3.57 1424 736 9.95 1024 360 4.101040 136 -. ............................ .61 1054 42 888 ............................... 688 ........ -- 664. ........901... 60 ...... 261347278 .61847070 4545.56 256 2.6( edma................60911.7 760 94 -1 82114 5 .78 1040 3442 .07 ............ ............ ...... 200Kainit .... ONo fertilizer............ .................. (200 Cotton seed meal.....160141138720-1613452 . . . . 9 ~240 Acid phosphate..~ . (200 Kainit........... (240 Cotton seed meal. 10 ~240 Acid phosphate . ............... (100 Kainit ........... ........................ 8 1520 870 10 65 772 105 -1.25 1232 354 2.62 1334 606 6.51 640 .......... 668 ......... 872 .......... 760 . .. .810040.5 1 .810 420 1882241618 1814 1600 960 10 85 1000 332 1.08 1280 408 2.26 1480 720 7.12 _______________ 57 GROUP III. PHOSPHORIC ACID AND POTASH BOTH IMPORTANT AND ABOUT EQUALLY EFFECTIVE. EXPERIMENT MADE BY J. W. JARRETT, 11 MILES SOUTHEAST OF STERRETT, SHELBY COUNTY. Gray sandy branch bottom, shallow soil; subsoil yellow. The field was cleared at least fifty years ago of its growth, of oak, hickory and gum. The field was used for cotton-in 1897 and for, corn in 1895 and 1896. (See Table, page 6'2) Apparently the very large yield on Plot 1, was due to some irregularity in the soil; in the first set of averages below this plot is included, in the second set it is excluded. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added : To unfertilized plot...........584 lbs. To acid phosphate plot .......... 93 " 93 lbs. To kainit plot ........... ...... '240 To acid phosphate and kainit nlot..114 " " 240 114 Average increase with cottons. was meal. .[211] " 87 Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate added: To unfertilized plot. .......... .... 392 lbs. " " 392 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot..-.285 To kainit plot................373 To cotton seed meal and kainit plot ........... 373 lbs. 247 247" " Av. increase with acid phosphate.[182] 337" 58 Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added; To unfertilized plot............249 lbs. 249 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot......-95 To acid phosphate plot ....... 230 " 230 To cotton seed meal and acid phospate plot............437 " 437 " increase with kainit.[205] " or 305 " Acid phosphate and kainit were both effective and to about the same extent. The largest profit resulted from the use of a complete fertilizer, containing one hundred pounds of kainit. It is not stated whether cowpeas were grown between the corn rows in 1895 and 1896; if they did this would afford an explanation of the rather slight effect of cotton seed meal. In 1897 the experiment in this locality was made on fresh land, the main requirement of which was phosphate. EXPERIMENT MADE BY J. T. ROBERTSON, LEGRAND, MONT- GOMERY COUNTY. Dark gray soil three inches deep; subsoil red clay. The field had been in cultivation about seventy years. The last three crops were cotton. The original growth was oak, hickory and short leaf pine. (See Table p. 62.) Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot .................... 240 lbs. 386 " To acid phosphate plot .................. 522 " To kainit plot .......................... 359 " To acid phosphate and kainit plot ....... Average increase with cotton seed meal .. .... 377 " 59 Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot ................... 208 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot...............354 " To kainit plot ..... ......... 363 To cotton seed meal and kainit plot ... ... 202 " Average increase with acid phosphate.......382 "" Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot .................. 205 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot ........ 487 " To acid phosphate plot ................ 360 " To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot.335 " Average increase with kainit ......... 347 Cotton seed meal, acid phosphate and kainit were all decidedly beneficial and to about the same extent. The complete fertilizers gave the largest profits, nearly $10 per acre. EXPERIMENT MADE BY W. C. BEVILL, NINE MILES SOUTHEAST OF BEVILL, CHOCTAW COUNTY. Dark mulatto table land; subsoil clay. This field had been cleared fifty years. Long and short leaf pine constituted the principal forest growth. The two preceding crops were corn. Rust was present to some extent, especially on Plot 5. The season was extremely dry until June 20th, after which time there was an excess of rainfall. There was a perfect stand of about 1,500 plants to each eighth-acre plot. (See Table p. 62.) 60 Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton was added: To unfertilized plot....................96 lbs. To acid phosphate plot.................312 To kainit plot.................... 22 To acid phosphate and kainit plot.......296 seed'meal Average increase with cotton seed mel. 3 Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot.................... 8lbs. To cotton seed meal plot...............224 " To kainit plot..................... 44 To cotton seed meal and kainit plot.......120 " Average increase with acid phosphate......124 Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot....................40 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot...............168 " To acid phospha~te plot ................. 80 To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot 64 Average increase with kainit ......... .... 88 The most profitable fertilizer was that used on Plot 10, which was a complete fertilizer that contained a half ration of kainit. EXPERIMENT MADE BY J. W. TERRY, 24 MILES)NORTH OF BREWTON, ESOAMBIA COTJNTY. Dark gray soil; subsoil red clay. The field had been in cultivation. about 12 years ; the crop in 1896 and in 1897 was corn with cow peas between the rows. The forest growth was long leaf pine. 6i Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added : To unfertilized plot...................172 lbs. To acid phosphate plot.................67 116 To kainit plot .................. To acid phosphate and kainit plot.......66 Average increase with cotton seed meal.....130 Increase of seed cotton per acre where acid phosphate was added ; To unfertilized plot...................160 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot...............53 " To kainit plot.......................133 To cotton seed meal and kainit plot......183." Average increase with acid phosphate.......132 Increase of cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot...................169 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot................113 " To acid phosphate 'seed plot ................. 142 241 To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot ............................... in yield obtained on the two Average increase with kainit........... .. .166 unfertilized difference The results are not entirely conclusive on account of the plots, and because of unfavorable seasons. complete fertilizer needed, profit, which was by no means large. -was Apparently a_ greatest this giving the Sterrett, Le Grand, Bev ill and FERTILIZERS. STERRETT. Brewto'n experiments with cotton. f I. LI ) U n.., LEGRAND. BEVILL. BREWTON. Ord a 6-O'er I 6I Ord T U . OLyI /1. I)U 1 0a "r y _r1 O PKIND. 4. oot Poo PP. Lbs. 1 2 3 4 6 Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. 8 240 $ 1.83 584 $ 7.18 568 200 Cotton seed meal......... ...... 1328 208 1.73 392 4.59 536 240 Acid phosphate.................. 1136 00 No fertilizer...... ............. 744........2....... 1.80 2.49 496 205 249 200 Kainit ......................... 992 5 84 299 1.25 848 594 20 edma.....~.1040 to 240Acid ............. 20 otnse el.......... ~ ". 1228 489 4.33 944 727 8.02 ant................ 20 2400Acidnit......................:. 1360 67658532.520 5.95 58 24.Aidphspat.62848..~ ... 736.........143 0(.No fertilizer .................... 20 Acid phosphate...... otnse el.....9240 . 1472 736 6.67 1072 929 9.67 S ...... 200 Kainit ................. phosphate $-.41 880 544 8 -1.38 768 456 448....... 608 488 40 -. 76 744 58 768 768 320 -96 Lbs. Lbs. 172 $ .77 1.00 160 ...... 1.25 169 227 .13 85 26 15 15 1.81 . 2.61 1.14 __ 1. 712 56 264 .82 792 1517'76 88 448.............440 .. 302 468 336 832 952 384 504 __ 1.16 3.76 __ 808 776 __ 200 Cotton seed meal 10 240 . ...... .... Acid phosphate............... ............ 1374 638 6.95 1048 905 9.99 lUG Kainit ...... _____________________ __ 63 GROUP IV. POTASH MORE IMPORTANT THAN PHOSPHORIC ACID; LATTER OF SECONDARY IMPORTANCE, BUT NEEDED. EXPERIMENT MADE BY J. R. MOLENDON, 2 MILES EAST OF NAFTEL, MONTGOMERY COUNTY, ALA. Light sandy soil 12 inches deep; red clay subsoil. The field had been in cultivation more than forty years. The original forest growth was short leaf pine, red oak and hickory. Cotton was the crop in 1896 and in 1897. Mr. McLendon reports that there was no rust and that the rainfall was sufficient. Through an oversight the fertilizers were applied upon tenth-acre instead of eighth-acre plots, making the rate of application, and consequently the cost of fertilizers, twentyfive per cent. greater than in any as the other experiments. (See Table p. 64.) Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: 90 lbs. To unfertilized plot.. .................. To acid phosphate plot.................. 208 " To kainit plot.........................168 " To acid phosphate and kainit plot.......274 " Average increase with cotton seed meal.......185 " Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot.....................90 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot...............208 " 2 " To kainit plot ........................... To cotton seed meal and kainit plot ....... 108 " Average increase with acid phosphate......102 " 64 Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added To unfertilized plot..................184 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot..............262 To acid phosphate plot.................96 To cotton seed meal and phosphate plot..162 " Average increase with kainit............176 Naftel experiment with cotton. FERTILIZERS. NAFTEL. +, 48 KIN~D. a) ~4Lbs 1 Lbs. Lbs. 90 $-.97 2 3 4 - 250 Cotton seed. meal.......................250 250Kainit................................350 250 Cotton seed meal... .......... 7 ........ 40 300 Acid phosphate.......................250 90 00 No fertilizer........................ 160...... 0 300 Acid phosphate......... .... 9 29 -. 47 1.13 3 3 1.37 184 352 186 .... . ,6 250 Cotton seed meal.............. .. .. . . . .530 250 Kainit.............................. Q, 300 Acid phosphate....................... 8 00 No. ................. 19..... 0 9 10 fertilizer...... 250 Cotton seed meal .................. 370 -.74 .18 .12 300 Acid phosphate....... .............. 250 Kai nit............................ .. . 650 590 460 400 _____ 250 Cotton seed meal ................. 300 Acid phosphate ....................... 100 Kainit................................. Each of the fertilizers, whether applied singly or in combination increased the yield to a considerable extent. A complete fertilizer afforded the largest yield. As in 1897, kainit was somewhat more important than either of the other materials. In 1897 when rust prevailed, the favorable effect of kainit was attribnted to its rust restrain- ing tendency, but the results obtained in 1898, when there was no rust, indicate plainly that this soil is notably deficient in potash. No single fertilizer or combination afforded any considerable profit, although each increased the yield. EXPERIMENT MADE BY T. M. BORLAND, MILE SOUTHWEST OF DOTHAN, HENRY COUNTY. Dark gray upland ; subsoil yellow clay. This field had been in cultivation for about ten years. The original growth was long leaf pine. The crop of 1897 was corn, whether with or without peas is not stated. Cotton was planted April 6. There was no rain until June 2, on which date the experimenter noticed that the plants fertilized with kainit, alone or in combination, had resisted drought better than other plants. (See Table p. 67.) Increase of seed cotton per acre where cotton seed meal was added: 32 lbs. To unfertilized plot.................... ... 22 " To acid phosphate plot..'........... 32 " To kainit plot.......................... 228 " To .acid phosphate and kainit plot ........ Average increase with cotton seed meal....... 78 66 Increase of seed cotton per acre where acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot..................... 40 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot................. 30 " ...... 20 To kainit plot.................... To cotton seed meal and kainit plot.......216 " Average increase with cid phosphate........ 76 Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To To To To lbs. unfertilized plot...................136 cotton seed meal plot...............136 " acid phosphate plot................116 cotton seed meal and acid phos. plot...322 " 127 Average increase with kainit.............. All fertilizers were needed, kainit giving slightly the best results. No fertilizer afforded much profit, which was doubtless due to the unfavorable season. Mr. Borland writes that 1898 was "the most unfavorable year for cotton that we have had in this country in twenty years. I did not gather more than half the cotton made as the bolls cracked and the cotton rotted." For this reason the experiment is not conclusive. 67 Dothan experiment with cotton. FERTILIZERS. DOTHAN. o KIND.o r, e-1 Lbs. 1 Lbs. Lbs.$ 32 2 3 4 6 8 300 Acid phosphate....................... 00 No fertilizer.... ....... 250 Kainit....... ........................ 5 250Cotton seed meal.........." 300 Acid phosphate................. 2500Cotton seed meal ...................... ............. :......: 320 328 40.88 288..... .... . 416 136 .73 344 62 -2.43 168 156 - -1.41 250 Cotton seed meal ................ .. ..432 250 Kainit............................ 7 300 A.Cid phosphate . ....... 408 .67 250 Kainit .................... 00 No fertilizer .................. 248... 632 66 .46 .... . 1.19 2i50 Cotton seed meal................... 9 300 Acid phosphate............ 250 Cotton seed meal................ 10 384 10 l0 KAid 00 Acind................ ...... ............ phosphate 38 14 616368..1.64. 69 GROUP V. POTASH MUCH MORE IMPORTANT THAN PHOSPHORIC ACID; LATTER NOT NEEDED OR USED AT FINANCIAL LOSS. EXPERIMENT MADE BY D. K. COLLINS, 11 MILES SOUTHEAST OF COOSA VALLEY, ST. CLAIR COUNTY. Dark sandy second bottom soil; subsoil yellowish clay at depth of five inches. This river bottom had been in cultivation about twenty years and was considered good cotton land, but with a tendency to rust. The preceding crop was corn; in earlier years corn and cotton alternated. The original growth was oak, hickory and gum. Rust appeared and on some plots did great damage, especially on the plot receiving acid phosphate alone, and to a less extent on plot 5. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To To To To unfertilized plot..................... 64 lbs. acid phosphate plot.................454 " kainit plot........ '................ 19 " acid phosphate and kainit plot........ 31 " Average increase with cotton seed meal......142 Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot...................-116 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot............... 274 " To kainit plot...................... -162 To cotton seed meal and kainit plot ....-150 Average decrease with acid phosphate........ 38 " " 69 Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added To To To To 412 lbs. unfertilized-plot .. ............... cotton seed meal plot..............398 acid phosphate plot........... 397 cotton seed meal and phosphate plot.-26 Average increase with kainit............02 All results of this experiment seem to be governed by the amount of damage from rust, hence kainit, which restrained the rust, was the most effective fertilizer, the other two materials exerting slight effect. There was less rust with the complete fertilizer containing 200 pounds of kainit than with the one containing only 100 pounds of kainit. The largest profit, $5.51 per acre, was afforded by kainit used alone. Coosa Valley experiment with cotton. FERTILIZERS. COOSA YALL1iY. KIND.'-NN O P -4 Lbs 1 20 otnsed ma&............ Lb. 58 bs 6 9 1568 ".. .. .. ..... 200 Cotton seed meal ......... 240OAcid phosphate ................... "."..14088116-.30 10 ........ 3200 Nofriizer.................. 1928 .... 200Ka finizer................. 4 74 200 Cotton seed meal . .................. 1 2 9 240 42$3.91 443..51. 3.18 3250 Acid phosphate . . 2 ...................... . . . . . . . . . .. 120 200 K ainit . . . 200 Cotton seed meal.............. 90 240 Acid phosphate ................. 200 Kainit .......................... . 31 18 1720 .07 70 GROUP VI. ONLY NITROGEN VERY IMPORTANT; PHOSPHORIC ACID AND POTASH OF SLIGHT OR NO BENEFIT. EXPERIMENT MADE BY T. K. JONES, 2 MILES SOUTH OF GREENSBORO, HALE COUNTY. Mulatto, or yellowish, sandy soil. This land has been in cultivation, chiefly in cotton, for more than forty years. The original growth is reported as hickory, oak and other hard woods. The number of stalks per eighth acre plot was as follows: 681 on plot 1; 941 on plot 2; 1,050 on plot 3; 666 on plot 4; 1,0 on plot 5; 883 on plot 6; S86 on plot 7; 868 on plot 8; 735 on plot 9. In the following table no corrections have been made for a defective stand, for, judging by the fact that the unfertilized plot with 868 plants yielded more than the unfertilized plot with 1,050 plants, the plots planted thickly had no advantage over other plots. The land was level and apparently very uniform. There was practically no rust on any plot, but on all plots there was heavy loss from shedding of "forms" in June and July. For at least three years preceding this experiment, the field had grown cotton. (See Table p. 75.) Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To To To To 304 lbs. unfertilized plot .................. " acid phosphate plot.................74 kainit plot ......................... 49 acid phosphate and kainit plot....... 19 " " Average increase with cotton seed meal...112 71 Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot .................. To cotton seed meal plot ............To kainit plot ............... - 48 lbs. 182 " 82 To cotton seed meal and kainit plot...-110 Average decrease with acid phosphate.... To To To To 81 Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: unfertilized plot................. .. 29 lbs. cotton seed meal plot ............226 " acid phosphate plot.............-111 cotton seed meal and acid phos. plot.-110 " Average decrease with kainit............105 " Cotton seed meal used by itself afforded the largest yield and the greatest profit. All other fertilizers afforded a financial loss. It is difficult to understand why cotton seed meal gave such poor results when used in combination with other fertilizers, unless we assume that phosphate and kainit, when used with cotton seed meal, exerted a distinctly harmful effect under the rather unusual conditions of this experiment, .viz: (1) late planting (May 3), (2) unusually early frost; (3) continued wet'weather in July and August, causing great loss from shedding of fruit. The experiment, though not conclusive, is suggestive of the special need of this soil for nitrogen; in 1897 the experiment on the same farm indicated unmistakably that the main need was for nitrogen. 72 EXPERIMENT MADE BY. J. P. ANDERSON ON FARM OF DR. THOMAS, THOMASTON, MARENGO COUNTY. Gray, sandy soil, 4 inches deep, with red clay subsoil. This field had been in cultivation for thirty or forty years. All recent crops consisted of cotton. The original growth was oak, hickory, gum and short leaf pine. There was some rust, chiefly on Plots 5 arrd 7. (See Table p. 75.) Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: lbs. To unfertilized plot..................426 To acid phosphate plot........146 To kainit plot.......................119 To acid phosphate and kainit plot.......53J Average increase with cotton seed meal..308 Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added : To unfertilized plot To cotton seed meal To kainit ............. 104 lbs. plot...... ......176" plot... .................- 142 " To cotton seed meal and kainit plot.......278 Average increase with acid phosphate .... 16 In cre a sen o f tse ez d op on p e r a cre . e l d c tto . . . . w he n k a in . it w a sl ad d e d:T 9 s . . . . . . . To cotton seed meal plot .... .. .. .. . . .- 316 " " To acid phosphate plot..............-255 To cotton seed meal and acid phos. plot.. 138 85 Average, decrease with kain it........... 73 The chief need of this soil was for nitrogen. Neither phosphate nor kainit was effective except when combined with cotton seed meal. The largest profit, $4.72 per acre, resulted from the use of cotton seed meal alone. The experiment seems to have been conducted on the same plots as the test made in 1897. In 1897 kainit was most effective, phosphate fairly effective. The main reason why kainit was decidedly beneficial in 1897, was probably the excessive amount of rust during that year on the plots without kainit. There was less rust in 1898. The appearance of the plants in 1896 suggested the need for a complete fertilizer and seemed to show, as in 1898, the special importance of cotton seed meal. EXPERIMENT MADE BY J. W. DYKES, 31 MILES WEST OF UNION SPRINGS, BULLOCK COUNTY. Dark sandy soil just above overflow; subsoil yellow clay. This field, which had a soil about eight inches deep and inclined to be wet, was cleared about 13 years ago. The original growth was short leaf pine, dogwood, gum, hickbry and oak. The preceding crop was corn. (See Table p. 75.) Increase of seed cotton per acre when cottonseed meal was added: To unfertilized plot .................... 336 lbs. To acid phosphate plot ................. 189 " To kainit plot ........................ 169 " To acid phosphate and kainit plot ....... 170 " Average increase with cotton seed meal..... 216 " 74 Increase of cotton seed per acre when acid phosphate was added : To unfertilized plot .................... 160 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot ................ 64 " To kainit plot ............ ............. 12 To cotton seed meal and kainit plot........113 Average increase with acid phosphate ........ 87 Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added : To unfertilized plot .................... 118 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot..............-49 " To acid phosphate plot............... 30 " To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot 51 " " Average increase with kainit................ 22 The largest yield and the greatest profit, $3.88 per acre, was afforded by a complete fertilizer containing 100 pounds of kainit. In most combinations cotton seed meal, was more affective than acid phosphate. Greensboro, Thomaston, and Union Springs experiments with cotton. FERTILIZERS. GREENSBORO. THOMASTON. UNION SPRINGS. Z O Q C C C 4-~~- 4 a 0 ce OO a , y C ON 0 a :vO , U N Lbs. Lbs. ........................ 760 1 200 Cotton seed meal....... .... 504 24OAcid phosphate........................... 2 3 200 Kainit.......................................... ... 504 ofriie...... 5 ........... " ........ 616 0 Lbs.' Lbs. 304 $ 2.83 1466 76 48 --. 1144 ..29 -.91 1064 004 Lbs. Lbs. 426 $ 4.72 856 .11 680 104 -- -1.52 9 250 110 .48 1.57 640 872 712 Lbs. 336 .$ 3.33 .99 160 349 287 118 .45 2.03 1.19 - 5 20Cidtosph mate... ......... sedmel................... .~ 00Coto 6 20Kii......................592 1 122 --.51 1356 78 -2 07 1248 7 200acinit......................148011. 8 20Cto 00ONo fertilizer................. edma ... .. .......... ........................ 552...... 520 -53 -370u 1020u--151- .53 656 .. 1204.........528 --32 -- 5.27 1592 130 400 52 .86 1.44 38 9 240 Acid phosphate........................... 200 Kainit .............................. ...... 388 1.25 928 12 38 14600 16 35 .... ... 10 240 Acid phosphate ........................ 100OKifit....................................................___________.____ 2:00 Cotton seed meal ........... ........... ........... ....... 56 5..6100 76 GROUP VII. NO FERTILIZER VERY EFFECTIVE. EXPERIMENT MADE BY E. HAYS, ONE MILE WEST OF CULLMAN, CULLMAN COUNTY, ALA. Sandy upland; recently cleared. The original growth was oak'and pine. Apparently the land had been in cultivation only one year before the test was begun. On this "new -ground" no fertilizers were decidedly beneficial. (See Table, p. 78.) Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot.................152 lbs. To acid phosphate plot...............-86 To kainit plot.......................-31 To acid phosphate and kainit plo....1 Average increase with cotton seed meal......62 Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot......... ... 112 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot...............-126" To kainit plot. .. . ... . . . ............- 170 " To cotton seed meal and kainit plot....... 74 Average decrease with acid: phosphate........ 27 Increase of seed cotton: per acre when kainit was added : To unfertilized plot. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . .45 lbs. " To cotton seed meal plot............... -138 To acid phosphate plot.........237 To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot 62" Average _decrease with kainit ............. 67 77 EXPERIMENT MADE BY D. T. FJLTON, HARTFORD, GENEVA COUNTY. Gray sandy loam ; subsoil yellow sandy clay. The field had been cleared only three years and had produced but two crops, one of cowpeas and one of corn. The forest growth was long leaf pine with a few oaks. No fertilizer increased the yield to any great extent, a result ascribed chiefly to the unfavorable year. "Much of the cotton rotted in the field." Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton 'seed meal was added : To unfertilized plot...................128 lbs. To acid phosphate plot...............32 To kainit plot. .................... 32 To acid phosphate and kainit plot.. ..... 40 Average increase with cotton seed meal.. 58" Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot ................ 112 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot........... ... 16." To kainit plot........................ 48 To cotton seed meal and kainit plot .... 56 c" Average increase with acid phosphate........ Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit To unfertilized plot...........152 To cotton seed meal plot................. To acid phosphate plot.................. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot 58" was added: lbs. 56 " 88 56" Average increase with kainit............... 88 78 Hartford and Ciullman experiment with cotton. HA 'VFORD. CVULLMAN. FERTILIZERS. a) KIND. N 0 ~ ~ -0 0 0 +) 04U 1 2 3 Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. 200 Cotton seed meal............ 352 128 $ 0.09 880 152 $0.46. 240 Acid phosphate......... ... 336 112 .21 840 112 .24 00 4 200 Kainit...................... No fertilizer ................ 224 ........ 728........ 376 155 1 03 800 45 -68 6 )200 00 No 240 Acid ....... 320. otonseed meal.....Acdhopae 368 150 -1.07 Cotton seed meal....... . 408 194 213 208......864... 464 256 - 808 26 -3.0& 14 -3.07 ... .27 824 1240 cid hosphate ......... 20..ii...:.424 8 9 (200 Cotton.sgeed fertilizer... ........... meal....... .43 712 -125 -4.82' 80 952 88 10 (200 Kainit........... 200 Cotton seed meal... 240 Acid phosphate...........~ 480 272 100 Kainit phosphate...........~ ) -3.41 .15 912 48 -3.33 _______________________ 79 Do FERTILIZERS PAY AT PRESENT PRICES OF COTTON? We may in part answer this question by showing the average amount. of increase in yield of seed cotton attributable to the different fertilizers. The following table gives the average results for 2'2 co-operative tests in 1897, and for 30 in 1898. The price assumed for a pound of seed cotton, 1 5-9 cents, is the net price of increase, or value of the seed cotton after paying 33 cents per 100 pounds for picking, and is equivalent to 5 cents per pound for lint and $6.67 per ton for seed. Average increase over unfertilized plots in 1897 and 1898. FERTILIZERS. ___ _________________ ____ Average 22 Average 30 tests in tests in 1897. 1898. N Pc k KIND.OO _ _ _ _ _ _ 0 Lbs. 1.90 113 $-.15 205 $ 1.29 Lbs.Lbs. 240OAcid phosphate .... ........ 1.50 194 1.51 230 2.08. GONo fertilizer ......... .... ............ ... . 4 200 Kainit.... ....... ...... 1.88 144 .86 97 .13 5 2000Cotton seed meal....... . .3.40 339 1.87 375 2.43 3 240 Acid 2 1 2000Cotton seed meal........$ phosphate........ 6 2000Cotton seed meal 7S200 S200 Kainit ........ 8 00ONo 240 Kainit...... .......... Acid phosphate fertilizer ...... ... ....... "...... ........ . 3.28 282 1 1.10 258 1.58 283 .. . .73 .88 2.88 287 200 Cotton seed meal..... 9-, 24OAcid phosphate........... ........... ) 40 ............. 200 seed meal 200Cotton Kainit ......... 240 Acid 4.78 419 7 1.73 392 .045 1.32 28 10 phosphate 40837.17043.28 This table shows that fertilizers, even when used indis-, criminately, or without any attempt to suit the fertilizer to the soil, were, as judged by average results, moderately profitable. 80 Averages however do not do full justice to the amount of increase which fertilizers afford when selected with special reference to their suitability for the soil on which they are to be applied. The several tables on preceding pages which give the yield and profits in each locality show that in a number of localities, the complete fertilizer, the meal and p~hospate mixture, or even the phosphate applied by itself afford profits of more than $5 per acre after paying for cost of picking the increased yield due to the fertilizer. The absolute necessity for using fertilizers in the regions where they are now in general use can also be inferred from the small yields obtained in most tests on the plots that received no fertilizer. In our conclusive tests in 1897 and 1898, the average yields without fertilizers were respectively 474 and 506 pounds of seed cotton per acre. Excluding all tests where the unfertilized plots produced 500 pounds or more of seed cotton per acre, we find that 1I soils in 1897 averaged without fertilizers only 281 pounds, and 17 soils in 1898 averaged, when unfertilized, only 299 pounds of seed cotton per acre, the entire product, including seed, being worth less than $6 per acre. FERTILIZER GENERAL SUGGESTIONS ABOUT SUITING THE TO THE SOIL. There are no positive indications or signs by which the farmer can tell whether his soil needs chiefly phosphate or potash. He can often decide whether nitrogenous fertilizers are needed. As a rule on soils with the proper supply of moisture, and properly cultivated, a very small cotton stalk suggests a need of nitrogenous fertilizers. A very large cotton stalk, too much "run to weed," indicates that an ample supply of nitrogen is present, and if such a large plant is poorly fruited, and late in maturing, a need for phosphate is suggested, (except possibly in the Central Prairioe Region). A light shade of green on the leaves, instead dark, deep luxuriant green, may indicate a need of either of phosphate or nitrogen, or both. But color of foliage is not, to be relied on, for few have an accurate eye for color, the subject has not been sufficiently studied, and the supply of moisture or the presence of leaf disease is apt to determine or obscure the color of the foliage. A black or dark soil usually contains an abundance of vegetable matter and hence of nitrogen, but lime soils may be dark colored and still need additional nitrogen. Next to size of stalks, the history of the field affords the best indication as to whether or not the soil needs nitrogen. For example, recently cleared land contains much vegetable matter and cotton on "new ground" seldom responds profitably to nitrogenous fertilizers. The ashes left in burning the brush, especially if the growth is hardwood, usually make potash fertilizers unnecessary on recently cleared land. When "new ground " needs any fertilizer at all it is usually acid phosphate alone. Cotton following cow peas, needs little if any cotton seed or cotton seed meal if the peas the preceding year occupied all the space. If the peas were grown between the corn rows and made but slight growth of vines, a small amount of nitrogenous fertilizer may be needed. We are able to give no indication by which to determine the need for potash. Where black rust is prevalent kainit is often needed. The best solution of the fertilizer question is for the farmer to obtain the necessary supplies of high priced nitrogen from the air instead of from fertilizers. This can be done by practicing such a rotation as will require a large area of cow peas (and of vetch and crimson clover, when the farmer has learned from the bulletins of this Station how to "inoculate" them and thus to grow successfully these two soil-improving plants. Inoculation consists in sowing with the clover seed some of the soil from a field where clover has been successfully grown; or in sowing with vetelh seed soil from an old vetch field, and so on. 82 For example, the following three-year rotation will furnish to the soil' sufficient nitrogen trapped from the air by the restorative plants to dispense almost or quite entirely with purchased nitrogen, which now in ammoniated guanos or cotton seed meal costs 12 to 15 cents per pound: First year corn, with cow peas between. Second year fall oats, followed by cow peas. Third year cotton as usual, or followed by a "catch crop" of crimson clover or vetch. If half instead of one-third of the farm is needed for cotton, the above rotation is easily changed to a four-year rotation by causing another cotton crop to follow the cotton crop of the third year, thus allowing cotton to occupy one-half the cultivated land. The growth of the renovating plants does not diminish the necessity for buying phosphate, and, where needed, potash, both of which, however, cost per pound only about half as much as nitrogen. Moreover, the adoption of a rotation embracing a large proportion of leguininous or soil-improving crops would not at once, but only after several years, render the purchase of nitrogenous fertilizers unnecessary. This plan, especially if further perfected by growing a larger amount of livestock, will greatly decrease the farmer's expenditure for fertilizers, without reducing the amount of his sales. MEANS OF DETERMINING THE NEEDS OF A SOIL. While the size of stalks, history of land, color of soil, and even color of foliage are helpful in making an intelligent guess as to the needs of a soil, the only certain means of learning the best fertilizer for a given soil is by an actual test of fertilizers. This Station is able to furnish material for only 30 to 40 such tests each year. A much larger number of tests is needed if we are speedily to arrive at a knowledge of the 83 fertilizer needs of the numerous varieties of soil in Alabama. It will pay farmers to make similar experiments or simpler tests at their own expense. If a farmer is willing to take sufficient pains to make a complete test on 10 eighth-acre plots, it would be well for him to follow exactly the plan of the tests described in this bulletin. However, a simpler test on three plots will throw some light on the needs of his soil. Thus on 3 plots lie can determine whether his soil needs potash, and how much increase or profit he gets from a complete fertilizer and from a mixture of acid phosphate and cotton seed meal. The three plots should be either one-eighth or one-fourth acre in area. The middle plot should have no fertilizer; one plot should receive per acre 80 pounds of cotton seed meal and 160 pounds of kainit; the third plot should receive 80 pounds of cotton seed meal, 160 pounds of acid phosphate and 80 pounds of kainit. Any parties agreeing to make this test at their own expense will, on application, be furnished with a detailed plan suggesting dimensions of plots, forms for keeping records, etc. This simple test can scarcely fail to be profitable to the party making it, and if reports are sent to Auburn and edited, these supplementairy tests may serve to confirm or modify the fertilizer formulas suggested in this bulletin for the different soils of the State, and the tests may thus be made useful to many farmers. This is an opportunity for farmers to help each other, and surely sufficient public spirit will not be wanting to make these simpler tests, involving as they do no unusual expense and only a very small amount of extra labor and pains. The names of parties volunteering to give information about local soils, forest growth, and fertilizers in most general use in their neighborhoods, will be gladly enrolled. In time we shall probably be able to furnish such observers with blank forms on which to record information of this kind. 84 Wherever, in the following pages, a formula is recommended which contains cotton seed meal, cotton seed may be substituted, using at least two and one-half times as much seed as the amount of meal recommended. The suggestions in the next few pages are based on experiments extending over a number of years but are in no sense intended as final nor as universally applicable. FERTILIZERS FOR RED LIME SOILS OF THE TENNESSEE VALLEY REGION. Although commercial fertilizers are not generally used in this region the soil responds freely to fertilizers containing nitrogen and phosphoric acid. There is ample data to sustain this conclusion. Experiments made at Town Creek, Athens, Trinity and for several years at Madison show that acid phosphate greatly increases the yield of cotton and that the use of potash is not profitable. As in all other parts of the State, nitrogen, preferably in cotton seed or cotton seed meal, is advantageous on the upland fields that have been cultivated continuously in cotton for many years. To obtain best results, cotton seed meal or cotton seed on these soils should be applied, not alone, but in combination with acid phosphate. The remarks above are not intended to apply to overflowed land. Doubtless the following formula will give profitable results on cotton on these soils Acid phosphate, 160 to 240 pounds per acre. Cotton seed meal, 80 to 120 pounds per acre. Total, 240 to 360 pounds per acre. 85 This formula contains 2.2 per cent. nitrogen, about 8 to 10 per cent. available phosphoric acid and a little over per cent. of potash. Where the cotton stalks grow large enough the cotton seed meal may be reduced or even omitted. If much cotton seed meal is used, the rows should probably be wider than is usual on the uplands in this region. In a region so well adapted to cow peas, clover, etc., these crops should enter the rotation so often as to make it unnecessary to purchase nitrogenous fertilizers. FERTILIZERS FOR CALCAREOUS VALLEY SOILS OF NORTHEAST AIABAMA. The above designation is here tentatively used to include the valley soils, rich in lime, such as occur at Blountsville, Blount County, and Larimore, DeKalb County. In both localities in 1898 phosphate was greatly needed, as was also nitrogen, (in cotton seed meal) when combined with phosphates. Potash was apparently not needed. It is notable that numerous other experiments on reddish land in Northeast Alabama give similar results. For example, on mulatto land with red clay subsoil, apparently calcareous, at Creswell Station, Shelby County, a test extending over two years indicated a decided need for acid phosphate and no necessity for kainit. The same was true in a two-year test at Remlap, Blount County, on soil described as red sandy land, with clay subsoil. At Attalla, Etowah County, on red loam, with red clay subsoil, results for three years indicated that little or no potash was needed, but that the need for phosphoric acid was imperative. For the soils of this class the writer would suggest the use of the formula mentioned as suitable for the Tennessee Valley Region. 86 FERTILIZERS FOR OAK AND HICKORY UPLANDS WITH SHORT LEAF PINE. Following the agricultural map of Alabama published by Dr. E. A. Smith, State Geologist, this designation is applied to an area in the northwestern part of Alabama lying between the Central Prairie Region on one side and the Table Lands and Coal Fields on the other, and extending northward from Tuscaloosa and Pickens counties. For this region we have no large amount of data. The experiment at Sulligent, Lamar county, in 1898, on gray valley land shows plainly that phosphate was important and potash unnecessary. The same was true at Gordo, on "dark ashy second bottom." At Dillburgh, Pickens county, in 1398, on high grayish table land, with red clay subsoil, and at Davis Creek, Fayette county, in 1891, on "whitish" soil, phosphate was highly important, and potash was beneficial, but to a less extent. Doubtless on most of the better upland soils of this region where fertilizers are needed at all, a combination of two parts acid phosphate and one part cotton seed meal will be sufficient. (See formula for Tennessee Valley soils.) The thinner, sandier upland soils may be benefitted by the addition to the above of 80 pounds of kainit per acre, especially if cotton on these soils inclines to rust. FERTILIZERS FOR GRAVELLY HILLS REGION WITH LONG LEAF PINE. The term used above is not intended to convey an idea that the soils embraced in this region are uniform. They vary widely. This region, as laid down in Dr. Smith's map, embraces the larger part of Tuscaloosa county, a small par t of Pickens, the northern parts of Hale, Perry, Montgomery, Macon and Russell, most of Bibb, Chilton and Autauga and the southern parts of Elmore and Lee. Numerous tests has been made in this region. The great majority of them agree in showing a decided need for phos- 87 phates. This is particularly true in the experiments several times repeated at Tuscaloosa, Clanton, (Chilton County), and Randolph, (Bibb County), and also in tests made at Robinson Springs, (Elmore County),Marvyn, (Russell County), and between Tuskegee and Notasulga, (Macon County.) In a few tests in other localities in this region nitrogen has been most effective, but in no case has potash been the principal material needed. Most of these tests have indicated that potash fertilizers were unprofitable in the rather large amounts employed in these experiments. In other tests potash has been useful, but always less important than acid phosphate. In nearly all these tests nitrogenous fertilizers have been beneficial, but in most of these counties of less importance than phosphates. The following fertilizer formula is tentatively suggested for those soils in this region where cotton does not usually suffer severely from black rust and where the stalks are not notably undersized: 80 to 120 pounds cotton seed meal per acre. 160 to 240 " acid phosphate. 240 to 360 " total per acre. On soils inclined to rust it will probably pay to add to the above 80 pounds of kainit per acre. FERTILIZERS FOR GRAY ISINGLASS AND RED CLAY LANDS OF EAST ALABAMA. This triangular area extends along the Georgia line from Russell into Cleburne county. Its eastern angle or apex is near Yerbena, in Chilton county, on the Louisville and Nashville Railroad. The soils vary from deep red clay to light gray sand of considerable depth. At Cusseta, on red land, a test continued for two years indicated that phosphate was chiefly in demand, that nitrogen was necessary but less effective, and that potash was not profitable. At Kaylor, Randolph County, 88 on lighter soil, the results on the wlole have been but little more favorable to kainit. Experiments repeated for several years on gray sandy soil at Dadeville agree with those just cited in showing the pre-eminent need for phosphates and afford a somewhat more favorable showing for potash fertilizers, which, however, are, as in all the co-operative tests in this region, less effective than either cotton seed meal or acid phosphate. At Roanoke, Randolph County, on sandy loam soil, phosphate was the chief need of the soil, nitrogen of secondary importance, and kainit of still less advantage, although somewhat beneficial. Without attempting a complete analysis of the numerous experiments at Auburn, which lies in the southern edge of this district, it may be said briefly that on the Experiment Station farm potash fertilizers have been less essential than phosphate and nitrogenous fertilizers on the stiffer, reddish soil, but that potash has been beneficial when combined with the other materials and applied to the lighter soils of this farm. In at least one instance potash was also decidedly beneficial on stiffer, reddish loam, this favorable result occurring in a season when black rust was very destructive. It appears to the writer that the farmers of this region can dispense with kainit or other potash fertilizer on red land not very subject to rust. A. mixture of two-thirds acid phosphate and one-third cotton seed meal is probably the correct proportion for most of the red lands of this region. For example I would suggest Cotton seed meal per acre... 80 to 120 pounds Acid phosphate per acre.... 160 to 240 " Total...................240 to 360 " per acre. This proportion should be modified according to the size of cotton stalks usually produced, according to recent cropping of the land, etc., increasing the proportion of cotton seed meal where the cotton stalks are usually too small and 89 decreasing the proportion of meal on fields on which a thrifty crop of cowpeas has recently grown, and omitting the meal entirely on fresh land. On the gray soils of this region where the sand is deep or where rust frequently occurs, 80 pounds of kainit per acre will often prove profitable. The formula given above and containing no kainit, would analyze about 2.2 per cent. nitrogen, or 2.6 per cent. ammonia, about 8 or 10 per cent. of available phosphoric acid, and about j per cent. of potash. If kainit constituted one-fourth of the fertilizer analysis would show about 1.7 per cent. of nitrogen, 6 to 72 per cent. of available phosphoric acid and 3.5 per cent. of potash. FERTILIZERS FOR SOUTHERN LONG LEAF PINE REGION. As here used, this term is applied to the long leaf pine lands of the southern third of the State, or to the greater part of the land region south of the Central Prairie Region. It is usually sub-divided, and embraces a variety of soils. While many fertilizer tests have been made in this portion of the State, many of the results cannot be considered in detail here because of uncertainty as to the kind of soil and vegetation of the localities where many of the tests were made. Deferring a detailed analysis of the results in the southern part of the State until further data is available and until more is learned about the localities in which the earlier tests were made, it may be said that there is a general need for phosphoric acid in these soils and that nitrogen is also important, especially when combined with acid phosphate. As to potash, the results vary widely. There seems to be a more general need for potash than in the cottongrowing regions north of the Central Prairie Region. In most localities potash, while decidedly useful, is not equally as important as phosphoric acid, and should doubtless constitute a smaller portion of the fertilizer than 90 should phosphoric acid. In some tests potash was not needed, especially where a red clay subsoil was present. The following formula is tentatively suggested for the soils of this region: 60 to 120 lbs. cotton seed meal per acre. 120 to 240 60 to 120 240 to 480 " " " acid phosphate kainit Total per acre. On fresh land the cotton seed meal and kainit may be omitted; on the stiffer soils, especially where the forest growth is largely hard woods, it is probable that the potash in the above formula may be omitted if rust is not feared. The formula given above contains about 1.7 per cent. of nitogen, 6 to 7.5 per cent. of available phosphoric acid, and 3.5 per cent. of potash. FERTILIZERS FOR THE CENTRAL PRAIRIE REGION. In this region there is considerable variation in soils. Leaving out of consideration all the soils within this belt that contain any considerable percentage of sand, we have to deal with soils all rich in lime. These lime soils represent every gradation in color and fertility between white or bald prairie and deep black soils, rich in vegetable matter, and indeed in all elements of plant food. There is a widely accepted opinion that commercial fertilizers do not pay on these lime lands. However the majority of these lime soils are greatly improved by the addition of vegetable matter. The better class of soils need drainage and vegetable matter in order that the physical condition may be improved. The poorer grades all need vegetable matter rich in nitrogen. Cotton seed is here generally preferable to cotton seed meal, by reason of the greater effect of 91 the former in lightening the soil, but on some of the thin uplands small quantities of cotton seed meal can be used to advantage. However, the fertilizer most effective on the lime soils of the Central Prairie Region is a crop of melilotus, or tall sweet white clover. After a field has been occupied for two years by this plant and again put in cultivation, the yield is often nearly double what it was before this restorative crop was grown. This benefit to the soil accrues even though the melilotus may have been almost continuously grazed or frequently mowed during its second year of growth. FERTILIZERS FOR OTHER REGIONS.. The data at hand are not sufficient to permit a discussion of the needs of the soils of the Table Lands and Coal Fields in North Alabama. For the numerous narrow soil belts in the northeastern part of the State, lying between the Coal Fields and the Gray Gneissic (Isinglass) and Red Clay lands we have considerable data, which however is unavailable for lack of accurate information as to the soil and vegetation of the localities in which the tests were made. Another region not discussed in this bulletin is a region of short leaf pines and hard woods fringing the central prairies. Information regarding the boundaries and soils of this region, and indeed of any soil, is invited from readers of this bulletin. In this discussion no reference has been made to soils needing lime, although tests of lime have been made for this Station in several localities. Soils which when moistened and brought into contact with blue litmus paper, cause the paper to turn red, need lime. Paper for this test will be supplied free to parties applying to the writer and promising to report the results of their tests. 92 INCONCLUSIVE EXPERIMENTS. The experiment near Abbeville, Henry county,was started on the farm of the Southeast Alabama Agricultural School, by Prof. S. T. Slaton, and concluded by Prof. P. M. McIntyre. The soil was a brown loam. The land had been in cultivation about fifty years. original forest growth was oak and hickory. The The experiment near Newton, Dale county, was made by Mr. D. Carmichael, Jr. The land had been in cultivation about ten years and consisted of a light, gray surface soil, with a red clay subsoil. The original forest growth was long leaf pine. The experiment at Wetumpka, Elmore county, was made upon the farm of the Fifth District Agricultural School, by Prof. B. A. Taylor. The land was dark gray in color, with a yellowish red subsoil. The original forest growth was pine, both long and short leaf, the short leaf however predominating. The land was infested with nut grass, which obscured the effect of the fertilizers on cotton. The experiment near Brundidge, Pike county, was made by Mr. G. Conner, on land that had been in cultivation about sixty years and which was apparently not uniform, the yields of the two unfertilized plots varying widely. The surface soil was gray with a yellow subsoil. The original forest growth was oak, hickory, gum and short leaf pine. The experiment at Boligee, Greene county, was made by Mr. J. P. McAlpine, on land that had been cleared about fifty years. The soil was dark yellow, with a yellow subsoil. 93 The original forest growth was short and long leaf pine, chestnut, oak, hickoryy, mulberry and persimmon. The experiment at Tuscumbia, Colbert county, was made by Mr. F. Funkey upon land that had been cleared and cultivated about forty years. The land was red with a red clay subsoil. Inconclusive experiments with cotton. FERTILIZERS. ABBEVILLE. NEWTON. WETUMPKA. BIIUNDWDGE. BTOLIGEE. TUSCUMBIA. I 1 2 240 Acid 7 S +QJ 0 N & 0 KIND. 4-. -+ ;-. Q) B 0 a);L4 0 N a0 . 0 N N phosphate.'.............. 840200 fetKainit. ... 240 Acid phosphate 200 Cotton seed meal ............... Lbs.720 440, 12 Lbs. 208 -72 -19 Lbs. 400 416' Lbs. -32 -16 Lbs. 624 Lbs. 216 240 Lbs. 512 480 Lbs. 136 104 Lbs. 720 560 Lbs. 152 648 -8 Lbs. 1220 976 Lbs. 532 288 2400Actonsedea............ 600 20Aiphosphate...... 200 Kaitnt......l............ 440 440 .. .. 6200 Coton..seed meal ...... 4-100-1 2....76....56..8...20......640.......146...40040 416 . 2520 4 641148882642oto95ed 888....206 123 576 189 616 192 696 259 269 976 632 450 126 1192 872 517 203 82 464 408 99 66 456 416 24 -24 (200 8 Kainit. ................. ...... 736 576 648 206 78 440 -45 744 832 720 00 No fertilizer.................. ...... ...... 320....... 448 .... 20Cotton seed meal. 584 136 104 424 424 ... 9 ~240 Acid phosphate. ............. 200 Kainit ................... (200 Cotton seed meal...... 256 7C4 70 392 ... 10 240 Acid phosphate ........ ___ ___ ___ ___ (100 Kainit.........................______ 528...4...... 760 808 ___ 656... 176 64 232 280 ___ 408 440 ___ -.56 -24 _________ BULLETIN No. 103,MAC,19 ALABAMA MARCH, 1899 Agricultural Experiment Station OF THE AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE, AUBURN. EXPERIMENTS IN SYRUP MAKING. B. 13. ROSS, Chemist. MONTGOMERY, ALA.: THE BROWN PRINTING COMPANY, PRINTERS 1899. COMMITTEE OF TRUSTEES ON EXPERMENT STATION. I. F. CULVER...................................................Union J. H. Springs. Hope Hull. G. GILOHRITS ...................................... STATION COUNCIL. CLAY ARMSTRONG ................................................ Auburn. WM. P. H. LEROY BROUN. ............................................ President. and Botanist. MELL...............................................Director B. B. Ross........................................Chemist. C. A. CARY, D. V. M................................Veterinarian. J. F.. DUGGAR...--. ........ .Agriculturist. F. S. EARLE....................................Biologist and Horticulturist. *C. F. BAKER ........................................ J. T. ANDERSON............ ....... ....................... ASSISTANTS. (;. Entomologist. Associate Chemist. L. HARE................. ......................... First Assistant -Chemist. J. Q. BURTON............... T. U. CULVER...................................... .................... Second Assistant Chemist. Superintendent of Farm. t~The Bulletins of this Station will be sent free to any citizen of the State on application to the Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama. *Absent on leave. EXPERIMENTS IN SYRUP MAKING. Several years since a bulletin (No. 66) was issued by the Experiment Station, with reference to the making of syrup from sugar cane upon a small scale, and in this bulletin were embodied the results of experiments conducted by the chemist of the Station up to that time. Since that date numerous inquiries have been addressed to this department, asking for additional information on the subject, and it is deemed advisable to present at this time a report of the results of further experiments in the clarification and manufacture of syrup on a small scale. This subject is one that hould be of especial practical interest at this time on account of the very low price of our chief staple crop, and the consequent tendency of the farmers to diversify their crops to a greater extent than heretofore. As noted in a previous bulletin, the supply of home manufactured syrup only meets a portion of the demand for the article during a very small part of the year, and the remainder of the product is obtained from without the State. While the purchaser of the home made article can rest assured that his goods are free from adulteration, the consumer of the imported syrup cannot be at all certain as to its quality and composition, owing to the extent to which the addition of adulterants is carried. A large proportion of the syrups obtained from outside markets contain considerable admixtures, of corn glucose, and some are obtained by the reboiling of syrups and molasses which have undergone partial fermentation, while still other syrups may have been produced from dark colored and low grade molasses which have been brightened by chemical treatment. Some years since the writer ascertained by personal investigation that in some of the chief syrup markets of the 98 country, dark colored plantation molasses was being bleached by the dealers by means of chemical processes, bi-sulphite of soda and pulverized zinc being the chief chemical agents employed. With the exercise of proper care in the clarification and preservation of the genuine cane syrup, the imported or, at least, the adulterated article, should soon be excluded from the market, and the consumer can then be assured of the purity and good quality of the goods which he purchases. As stated in the previous belletin, but little attention has been given, as a rule, to the clarification or defecation of syrups in this State, and in many cases a considerable proportion of the scums and suspended impurities are boiled down with the syrup, darkening its color, affecting its taste and making its preservation more difficult. A satisfactory clarification of the juice not only brightens the product very materially, but also effects the removal of a large proportion of the albuminous matters, whose presence favors the growth and action of ferments. It is also of the greatest importance that more attention be given to the density to which the syrup has been cooked, since in most cases the syrup boiler determines by the eye and in a very crude way the point at which the syrup should be drawn off. In many cases the syrup is cooked to too thick a consistency, and as a consequence, a crystallization and deposition of sugar takes place, while on the other hand, if the syrup is not boiled to the proper density, fermentation is likely to ensue and the preservation of the syrup becomes a more difficult problem. When the ordinary form of evaporator is at hand, the actual process of evaporation can be conducted in the usual manner, but the crude preliminary system of clarification now in general use can be much improved by resorting to the sulphuring process outlined in Bulletin No. 66. In this process, the juice fresh from the mill is allowed to run slowly through a sulphuring box containing a number 99 of inclined shelves, and, as the juice trickles slowly down from shelf to shelf, it meets with an ascending current of sulphur fumes which are produced by burning brimstone or roll sulphur in a roughly constructed brick furnace. In this way the juice is at once rendered lighter in color, and when heated in the evaporator, the separation of albuminous matters and other impurities is effected much more readily and rapidly. After the heating of the juice is commenced, the addition of a small amount of milk of lime is frequently found to facilitate the clarification and renders the separation of scums more easy. Where the above process of clarification is employed, the resulting syrup is much clearer and brighter, and at the same time, it can be preserved much more readily. If it is desired to preserve the syrup for a considerable period of time, the hot liquid, concentrated to the proper strength, is run into a bottle or a well glazed jug of from half gallon to one gallon capacity, which has been rinsed out with hot water. The vessel is filled-almost up to the mouth with the hot syrup and is then securely sealed and stored away for future use. By this process, syrup has been successfully preserved at the laboratory for from one to four years, and crystallization of sugar can also be prevented if care is taken to avoid cooking the syrup to too great a density. In Bulletin 66 reference was made to the composition of syrup put up in sealed vessels in the fall of 1894, as compared with the composition of the same syrup in the fall of 1895. The syrup in question was put up in bottles of three quarts capacity each, and one of these bottles was kept in a sealed condition until quite recently. After a lapse of more than four years no perceptible fermentation had taken place, nor had there been any crystallization of sugar. The syrup possessed a fresh and quite natural taste and the subjoined analysis will show, had undergone very little change in composition as compared with the previous analysis. This bottle was opened accidentally several weeks in ad- 100 vance of the analysis and the increase in glucose and decrease in sucrose is no doubt largely due to this fact. ORIGINAL SAMPLE. PRESERVED SAMPLE. Total solids.... 71.2 per cent. Cane Sugar .... 46.7 71.2 per cent. 43.6 Glucose ... 22.4 26.8 Well glazed jugs of from one half to one gallon capacity can be employed instead of bottles, and tin cans, with small screw top, can also be used advantageously. When it is once known that syrup of good quality and high purity and possessing the fresh taste of the original article can be obtained any month in the year, it will be quite easy to build up a market for such goods and the demand will necessitate an increase in the supply of the article. The Baume hydrometer or saccharometer, described in Bulletin No. 66, can be employed to good advantage in determining the point at which the syrup becomes sufficiently dense to be drawn off, and when the spindle immersed in the hot liquid, reads 3 t to 35 degrees, the liquid can then be run out of the evaporator. Farmers who have used the Baume spindle report good results from its employment and state that by means of its use no difficulty is experienced in boiling the syrup to a uniform density. In the employment of the common evaporators, heated by direct contact of flame, over an ordinary furnace, great trouble is generally, experienced in the proper regulation of the temperature and of the rate of evaporation, and on this account, scums and suspended impurities are frequently boiled down with the syrup. If the temperature of the furnace becomes too high, the evaporation becomes too rapid for the satisfactory clarification of the juice and the syrup is scorched or darkened in color by reason of the high heat to which the thin layers of liquid are subjected. In order to secure the best results in clarification and evaporation, the heat should be easily and quickly con- 101 trolled so that evaporation can be accelerated or retarded at will, or, if necessary, suspended instantaneously. The employment of steam for heating purposes is the only sure means of attaining these ends, and during the past two or three seasons steam clarifiers and evaporators have been employed in the experiments conducted at the Station. Since the evaporation of juices and syrups is carried out in the sugar factories and refineries upon such a large scale, it was impossible to secure upon the market evaporation apparatus adapted to syrup making upon a small scale, and hence two small evaporators were especially constructed for experimental purposes, the smaller of the two being improvised from an ordinary open-fire evaporator already on hand. This evaporator was about 42 feet long, three feet wide and about six inches deep, while the large evaporator had a length of about five feet, a width of about three feet and a depth of ten inches. The sides of the evaporators were of wood as usual, and the bottoms were constructed of sheet copper, but no partitions were employed as in the ordinary evaporators. A series of pipes, connected at the ends by return bends, were placed in the bottom of each evaporator, almost the whole surface of the bottom being thus covered, with the exception of. a space about four or five inches in width which was reserved for the collection of the scums from the boiling juice. This unoccupied space should be on the side of the evaporator opposite to the point at which the steam is admitted, and this side should also be slightly lower than the other in order to facilitate the removal of the scums. The piping. employed was galvanized iron, three-fourths inch inside diameter, and valves were provided for the proper regulation of the steam used in the evaporation, while another set of valves enabled the operator to prevent the too rapid escape of waste steam from the coil. The juice, after sulphuring, is first run into the small evaporator or clarifier, steam is turned on, and the contents of the clarifier brought gradually to a boil. 102 The scums and impurities come to the surface quite rapidly, the greater portion of them collecting over the space not occupied by the pipes, where they can be easily removed. The clarifier is somewhat more elevated than evaporator, and when the juice has been well skimmed, it is at once run into the larger evaporator and the steam is immediately turned on. Fresh quantities of juice are now run into the clarifier, boiled, skimmed and then run into the evaporator, the evaporation of the juice. being conducted all the while. Any scums which form in the evaporator can be removed in the usual way, and when the syrup has reached the proper density, the steam is shut off and the evaporator is emptied through the usual outlet. By the employment of the steam heat, the temperature and the rate of evaporation can be regulated with great exactness, and a much more thorough clarification and satisfactory evaporation is secured than by the employment of the ordinary evaporators, where a large proportion of the scums are frequently boiled down with the syrup, darkening its color and rendering its preservation difficult. The best results in clarification were found to be secured by boiling the juice in the clarifier at a very gentle heat, especial care being taken to prevent excessive foaming and frothing in the early stages of the operation, while a brisker rate of evaporation can be employed in the larger evaporator. An important fact .to be noted in this connection also is that steam gins and mills are frequently found located closely adjacent to lands well adapted to cane.culture, and any surplus steam at their disposal could be easily utilized in the operation of evaporators of moderate size, and if desired, the cane mill could also be operated by steam power. By the cultivation of a good variety of sorghum as well as of sugar cane, the syrup making period could be lengthened somewhat, and the product could be correspondingly increased without any additional cost for evaporating appa ratus. 103 Any one who has already at hand a steam boiler of proper capacity will find the employment of small steam evaporators very satisfactory, and a much brighter and clearer syrup can be obtained with little trouble and small cost. CLARIFYING AGENTS. The process for clarifying with sulphur fumes, as before stated, was described in detail in Bulletin 66, and essentially the same process and apparatus have been employed during the past two or three seasons with excellent results. As a rule, the juice after passing through the sulphuring box has been mixed with an equal bulk of fresh juice, thus securing the clarification of the additional juice without any increased consumption of sulphur, and an excessive absorption of sulphur dioxide gas is thus avoided. Sulphur has been used as a clarifier, both with and without the use of lime, care being taken in the former case to add the lime in the form of a thin milk, in small quantities, to the slightly heated juice, and then bringing the liquid to a brisk boil. In the manufacture of syrup, the best results with lime have been secured where that substance is added just in sufficient proportions to leave the juice faintly acid, as indicated by a piece of blue litmus paper immersed in the liquid. During the preceding season, the Provident Chemical Works, of St. Louis, kindly placed at the disposal of the laboratory about a gallon of the liquid clarifying agent manufactured and sold by them under the name of "Clariphos." This preparation is a strong solution of acid phosphate of lime and has very active clarifying and defecating properties. Some small lots of juice, treated with this agent, brightened very perceptibly in color, and on standing, quite a considerable amount of precipitated impurities settled. This suspended matter was separated by filtering through a coarse cloth, and the clear liquid was evaporated down to a bright syrup. "Clariphos" has been employed very successfully in the sugar houses in Louisiana and is undoubtedly a valuable 104 clarifying agent, but the increased amount of manipulation required in the way of settling, filtering, etc., interferes materiLlly with its adaptability to syrup making upon a small scale. In the present season, a small quantity of bi-sulphite of lime solution was purchased for use as a substitute for sulphurous acid, gas in clarifying juices. A severe freeze damaged the cane selected for experimental purposes and before the experiments in syrup making could be carried out, fermentation had set in, causing still further injury to the cane, as was indicated by the low sucrose and the high glucose content. A sample of the juice of the cane taken when the experiments were in progress showed 16.1 per cent. Total Solids, 8.8 per cent. Sucrose, and 5.0 per cent. Glucose. A small lot of fresh cane gave quite a satisfactory syrup by the use of bi-sulphite of lime, but some of the products of fermentation of the larger lot of cane made the process of clarification much more difficult than in the case of the fresh cane. The bi-sulphite was employed on a neighboring plantation with fairly good results, and it is believed that under normal conditions it can be used to advantage as a substitute for the sulphurous acid gas. About one quart of the bi-sulphite was added to fifty gallons of juice, the clarification and removal of scums being conducted as before described. If settling vessels of sufficient capacity are at hand, it is best to allow the juice to stand for some time after the addition of the bi-sulphite of lime in order to secure the full clarifying effect of the latter. The syrup produced in the experiments with the damaged cane was found on analysis to exhibit the following composition : Total solids, 71.9 per cent., Sucrose, 44.7 per cent., Glucose, 26.4 per cent. These figures show practically no loss from inversion on evaporation and with a good quality of fresh cane, a much better grade of syrup would have been produced. 105 Further experiments with clarifying agents and with steam evaporators will be conducted during the next season and it is hoped that additional information of value on this subject will be secured. BULLETIN No 104. APRIL, 1899, ALABAMA Agricultural Experiment Station OF THlE AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE, AUBURN. VELVET BEANS. J. F. DUGGAR. MONTGOMERY, ALA.: THE BROWN PRINTING COMPANY, PRINTERS 1899. CEOPETIMITTEE OF TRUSTEES ON E I. F. CULVER................. J. G. GILCHRIST .............................. H. CLAY ARMSTRONG............ .................................. STATION ..... ................... ISTATION. .Union Springs. Hope Hull. Auburn. COUNCIL. WM. LEROY BROUN...........................................President. P. H. MRLL........................................Director B. B. Ross.... ...................................... and Botanist. Chemist . Agriculturist. C.A. CARY, D. V. M................................Veterinarian J. F. DUGGAR......-- ...................... F. S. EARLE ................................. *C. F. Biologist and Horticulturist. BAKER ............................................ J. T. ANDERSON. - --.. . . . . . . . . . Entomologist. ............ Associate Chemist. ASSISTANTS. 4;. J. L. Q. HARE.......... ... ......................... BURTON............ ..................... ............ First Assistant Chemist. Second Assistant Chemist. T. U. CULVER................... Superintendent of Farm. The Bulletins of this Station will be sent free to any citizen of the State on application to the Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama. *Absent on leave. THE VELVET BEAN. BY J. F. DUGGAR. INTRODUCTORY. Among the plants recently introduced to the public, few have received so much notice in the Gulf States as the velvet bean. In Florida within the last few years it has come into extensive use and has found general favor, especially as a plant for use as a fertilizer in orange groves. Although Alabama has no orange groves, the farmers of this State also have uses for the velvet bean, which matures seed in the southern part of Alabama and makes a luxuriant growth of vines in every part of the State. The velvet bean (Mucuna utilis) is a plant which, in general appearance of leaves and stems, is nearly similar to the running varieties of cow peas. The vines attain great lengths, a growth of twenty feet being usually made and much greater lengths being sometimes attained. The beans are larger than cowpeas and usually 3 or 4 are found in each pod. The pods are short and stout, nearly black in color and covered with a coat of velvety hairs. The velvet bean belongs to the same family as the cowpea. It is a legume or leguminous plant, and like the cowpea, the velvet bean is a renovating plant, having the power to enrich the land on which it grows. The velvet bean, cowpeas, vetch, clover, lespedeza, beggar weed, and indeed all the commonly-cultivated leguminous plants, have the advantage over other cultivated plants of being able to obtain a large proportion of their nitrogen from the air. Nitrogen, if purchased in cotton seed meal or commercial fertilizers, costs 12 to 15 cents per pound. Nitrogen is several times more expensive than an equal weight of phosphoric acid or 110 potash, the other two constituents that make fertilizers useful and costly. The farmer who plants a fair proportion of his land with cowpeas, velvet beans, or other legumes, can dispense with high priced nitrogenous fertilizers or ammoniated guanos, not only with the legumes themselves, but he can also dispense with them in fertilizing the cotton, corn, or small grain which follows on the land where the restorative crop grew the preceding year. Most of the soils of this State are deficient invegetable matter and nitrogen. This deficiency can be made good by the growth of luguminous plants. A large proportion of the energies of the Agricultural Department at this Station are given to the endeavor to learn which of these plants is most effective as a fertilizer and best adapted to use as a means of restoring the fertility of the soil. Daring each of the past three years velvet beans have been grown on the farm of the Alabama Experiment Station. Most of our exp--ritnents have had as their object the determination of the value of the velvet bean as a fertilizer, for which use it seems even better fitted than for forage. Our fit st seed was bought in the spring of 1896, from J. W. Thorburn & Co., New York City, under the name of banana field pea, or velvet bean. USES OF VEL VET BEANS. Apparently the first use made of velvet beans was as ornamental climbing plants. Planted around porches with proper trellises they make a dense shade. Doubtless for this purpose the shade could be obtained earlier in the season by planting the seed in very small flower pots and transplanting after danger of frost is passed. The first recognition of the value of velvet beans as renovating plants seems to have been made in Florida, where they are now planted in orange groves as a means of enriching the soil. As a rule the luguminous plants prized for soil improve- 111 anent are also excellent for feeding animals, their large percentage of nitrogen minking them especially nutritious. Both vines and seed of the velvet bean are used as food for domestic animals, and some slight use has been made of the seed as food for mankind. Another use for velvet beans is as means of crowding or shading troublesome weeds. In the velvet bean we probably have a means of fighting Bsrmuda and nut grass, and perhaps also Johnson grass. VELVET BEANS FOR SOIL IMPROVEMENT. Soil improvement as measured by increased yield of sorghum Hay.-At Auburn, on poor sandy soil, velvet beans were planted May 13, 1896, to note the character of growth and the effect in enriching the soil. For comparison a similar plot of land was planted on the same day with Wonderful or Unknown cowpeas. Both crops were fertilized alike, as was also an adjacent plot which produced no crop during 1896. Both velvet beans and cowpeas were planted in drills about two feet apart. Velvet beans were sown at the rate of 80 pounds and cowpeas at the rate of 60 pounds per acre. The cowpeas ripened a fair crop of seed; these were not picked, but left to be turned under as fertilizer the following spring. The velvet beans formed pods but matured no seed. In March, 1897, the cowpeas and velvet beans were plowed under, and April 23 early amber sorghum was sown broadat a uniform rate on all three plots, and fertilized with '240 pounds per acre of acid phospate, and 64 pounds of anuriate of potash. The cowpeas and velvet beans were depended upon to supply sufficient nitrogen for the successful growth of sorghum. The weights in pounds per acre of cured sorghum hay obtained in 1897 on each plot, were as follows: cast Yield of Increase due sorghum hay. to legumes. Lbs. Lbs. . Sorghum, on plot not cropped in 1896 ...3792 Sorghum after cowpeas, plowed under.... 7008 Sorghum after velvet beans, plowed under. 7064 .. 3216 3272 112 In this case the crop of sorghum in 1897 was nearly doubled as the result of plowing under a crop of velvet beans or of cowpeas. The increase in the yield of sorghum hay which we must attribute to the favorable effects of the preceding leguminous crops is more than 11 tons per acre. The value of the increase is more than $12, if we value sorghum hay at $8 per ton. The yield of sorghum was practically the same on the plot where velvet beans had been grown as on the plot where cowpeas had been turned under. The two plants stand then, under these conditions, on an equality, as measured by the increase in the yield of the crop following immediately after the legumes. Probably both velvet beans and cowpeas afforded sufficient nitrogen for a much larger crop of sorghum, the yield of which was lowered by extremely dry weather. Soil improvement as measured by increased yield of oafs.A somewhat similar experiment was begun May 14, 1897, when two plots were planted with velvet beans at the rate of three pecks per acre, two with Wonderful cowpeas at the rate of one bushel per acre, and a fifth plot with German millet. A sixth plot was plowed and ertilized like the other five, that is with 264 pounds of phosphate and 66 pounds of muriate of potash per acre, but was not planted, being left to grow up in crab grass and poverty weed. The soil was poor and sandy and similar to that in the experiment described above. At the proper stage the millet, one plot of cowpeas, and one of velvet beans were cut for hay. The dates on which these plants reached the proper stage of maturity were July 16, Sept. 10, and Sept. 21, respectively. The weights in pounds per acre, were as follows: Green forage. Lbs. Cured hay. Lbs. German millet....................... Velvet beans ....... ............... Cowpeas ................ .......... 2,732 11,550 13,750 994 3872 2420 113 The yield of both cowpeas and velvet beans was several times greater than that of German millet. This is partly due to the longer period of growth of the velvet beans and cowpeas, but it is also due to the fact that these two legumes had the power to draw a large part of their nitrogenous food from the air, while the millet could obtain only the small amount of nitrogen which a poor soil afforded. The stand of velvet beans was not quite thick enough in the drill. The drills were two feet apart. When weighed the velvet bean hay contained perceptibly more moisture than the cowpea hay; hence we can not conclude from the above figures that the yield of dry matter (food) was greater with the velvet beans than with the cowpeas. The velvet bean plants on the remaining plot were left to continue their growth until the time should arrive for plowing them under. The peas on the remaining plot were picked October 6, and yielded at the rate of eleven bushels per acre. Velvet beans did not mature seed. October 25, 1897, oats were plowed in on all six plots with a one-horse turn plow, turning under on one plot the growth of crabgrass and poverty weed, on a second the stubble of millet, on another the stubble of cowpeas, on a fourth the stubble of velvet beans, on another the vines of cowpeas (after being picked), and on still another the entire growth of velvet beans, including the half-grown seed. The plowing was poorly done on the plot containing velvet beans, a large proportion of the vines being left on the surface. This could have been remedied by the use of a rolling coulter attached to the plowbeam. The oats were fertilized with acid phosphate and muriate of potash. No nitrogenous fertilizer was applied to any plot. The yields of oats, as influenced by the preceding crop of legumes, are recorded in Bulletin 95, published last summer, and the results are quoted here. 114 Yield per acre of oats grown cfter stubble or vines of coupeas, velvet beans, etc. z o, o YIELD PER ACRE. Grain. Bus. Straw. Lbs . 1439 1738 231 31 296 1463 2013 1206 1672 28.6' lOats after velvet bean vines.................. 6 Oats after velvet bean stubble................38.7 33.6 Average after velvet- bean vines and stubble .......... 28 8 4 Oats after cowpea vines .......... 4 3 Oats after cowpea stnbble.........4 31.6 and stnbble Average after cowp a vines 2 Oats after crab grass and weeds...............7.1 5 Oats after German millet.....7 8.4 Average, after non-legurninous plants From early spring there was a marked difference in the appearance of the several plots, the plants being much greener and taller where either the stubble or vines of cowpeas had been plowed under. When the oats began to tiller, or branch, the difference increased, the plants supplied with nitrogen, through the decay of the stubble or vines of cowpeas and velvet beans, tillering freely and growing much taller than the plants following German millet or crab grass. May 18, 1898, oats on all plots were cut. In thi6 experiment the average yield of oats was 33.6 bushels after velvet beans, 61.6 bushels after cowpeas, and only 8.4 bushels after lion-legurminous plants (crab-grass, weeds and German millet). Here is a gain of 24.2 bushels of oats and nearly threefourth s of a ton of straw as a result of growing leguminous or soil-improving plants, instead of non-leguminous plants, during the preceding season. The figures in the above table measure the improvement in the soil which, under favorable conditions, velvet beans may effect. Here again cowpeas and velvet beans seem to stand nearly on an equalit~y as renovating plants. Doubtless both furnished sufficient nitrogen for much larger crop of oats than was produced, which excess was useless in a dry season. a 115 It will be noticed that the oat crop following velvet bean stubble was larger than that obtained where the effort was was made to plow under the entire plant. This should not be taken as indicating that the stubble and roots contain most of the fertilizing material of the plant. It indicates rather that they contained sufficient nitrogen for as large a crop as the moisture conditions of the soil and the unfavorable season permitted to be grown. It is certainly more profitable to cut and feed most legumes, saving the resulting manure and plowing under the stubble, than to use the entire plant as fertilizer. There are, however, conditions under which it is desirable to plow under the entire velvet bean plant, as on fruit farms or on other farms where there is an insufficiency of live stock. If velvet beaus are cut for hay it should be remembered that the removal of the hay takes from the land a large amount of nitrogen, phosphoric acid, and potash. According to analyses made at the Louisiana Station (Bul. 55, p. 121) a little more than one-third of the nitrogen of the entire velvet bean plant is found in the roots and fallen leaves. Two other experiments are now in progress here to determine the amount of increase in the cotton crop which may be effected by turning under the stubble alone or the entire velvet bean plant. Nitro/en in velvet beans growing on one acre.-A field of velvet beans grown here on very poor land in 1898 and fertilized with 240 pounds of acid phosphate and 48 pounds of muriate of potash per acre yielded 1),040 pounds of green material per acre. The weight of hay after five days curing was 8,210 pounds per acre. These beans were planted April 20 in rows 3. feet apart and at the rate of 110 pounds per acre. They were not cut until October when the stems had become too hard to make first class hay. October 8, 1898, samples were taken from this field for analysis. The roots found in the upper six inches of one square yard were carefully taken up, and the weights of the fresh roots and vines recorded. After drying 11 days the 12, 116 weights of roots and vines were again taken, and samples sent to the chemical laboratory for analysis. The roots and stubble from one square yard, on which six plants were growing, weighed when dry 0.26 pound, which is at the rate of 1,258 pounds per acre. Dr. J. T. Anderson, Associate Chemist of the Station, determined the percentages of nitrogen and of moisture in both vines and roots, with the following results The nitrogen in the air-dry roots and stubble was 1 per cent., and in the air-dry vines, including partially grown pods, it was 2.29 per cent.; the moisture was 6.72 and 9.52 per cent., respectively. On the basis of the yield of hay as determined by cutting and curing a sixteenth-acre plot, the nitrogen in the crop of velvet bean plants on one acre was as follows : Lbs. nitrogen per acre. In 1z58 lbs. roots and stubble, excluding fallen leaves .... ............................. In 8240 lbs. cured, coarse, hay. ........... . 12.5 188.7 In entire plants.. ........................ 201.2 These figures indicate that the amount of nitrogen contained in the entire growth of velvet beans on an acre was equal to that contained in about 2,800 pounds of cotton seed meal. As the soil was very poor, the greater part of this nitrogen must have been obtained from the air. The yield of hay on this field was unusually large, but even if half this amount be taken as an average yield, we have still a most impressive lesson as to the value of leguminous plants for storing up nitrogenous fertilizing material for the enrichment of the soil. It is evident that there will be no need to apply cotton seed meal to any crop following immediately after a crop of velvet beans, plowed under, and it is probable that on this land the mass of rich vegetable matter will render it unnecessary to use cotton seed meal for several years. 117 The above table does not do justice to the fertilizing value of velvet bean stubble, inasmuch as the dead fallen leaves, which are abundant and very rich in nitrogen, were not included with the roots and stubble in the sample analyzed. The roots and stubble alone contained only 12.5 pounds of nitrogen per acre, or about as much as is contained in 175 pounds of cotton seed meal. If the fallen leaves had been included, the value of the stubble would probably have been doubled. Our field experiments suggest that the usual stubble left after cutting the vines for hay contains sufficient nitrogen for the needs of the crop following immediately after the velvet beans. These results showing the great vanlu of the velvet bean as a fertilizer do not stand alone. They agree very closely with results obtained at Calhoun, Louisiana, by Dr. C. W. Stubbs and C. E. Mooers, and reported in Bulletin No. 55 of the Louisiana Experiment Station. The results of both investigations are brought together in the following table: Yield of vines, roots and nitrogen in crop of velvet beans on one acre. ALABAMA. LOUISIANA. Yield green vines and fallen leaves per acre Yield cured vines ........................ W e ght air-dried roots.................... Lbs. nitrogen in entire plan s on 1 acre... Per cent. nitrogen in cured vines ........ 19,040 8,240 1,258 201 2.29 22,919 7,495 173* 191 2.27 Per cent. nitrogen in air-dry roots .. 1.00 1.54 * It is not stated in Louisiana Bulltin 55 that any of the stem or stubble was included with the roots; in our tests stubble of about 3 inches in length was included with the roots; hence, probably the wide difference in the amount of roots in the two experiments. ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF VELVET BEANS. In any comparison of velvet beans with cowpeas as a renovating crop, there is one point in which velvet beans are conspicuously superior. When frost comes the vines and leaves settle down together in such a way that the force of falling rain is broken and the network of vines is so complete that, the leaves, the most valuable portion, cannot be blown or 118 washed away. With cowpeas the case is somewhat different, the bare stems standing erect and affording no means of retaining the leaves in place. On the other hand better implements are required to turn under vines of the velvet beans than to plow under cowpea vines. The work of burying velvet bean vines is, however, easily done with a rolling coulter attached to the turn plow, or by the use of the disk plow, which latter implement is not likely to come into general use on the light sandy soils where the velvet bean is most valuable. One or ange grower writes of running a caU;way disk harrow across the vines in two directions before plowing. Tiis dispenses with the necessity for a coulter. An Alabamian who planted velvet beans in his young orchard concluded that they were undesirable there on account of their habit of climbing into the trees, which he thought were thereby injured. This objection might perhaps be overcome by planting velvet beans at some distance from the trees and by occasionally cutting off the vines growing towards the trees, by the use of a plow run shallow, with rolling coulter attached, or even by moving the vines with the hands before they obtained firm hold upon the trees. Oar experim nts at Auburn show that velvet beans should not be planted, like eowpeas, between rows of corn, as the tangle of vines will cause the corn to rot and make it difficult to gather the crop. THE VELVET BEAN FOR FORAGE. As before stated both the vine and the pod are used as food for live stock. However, the seed ordinarily mature only in the southern part of Alabama, while the vine thrives at least as far north as the northern boundary of this State. Velvet bean vines can be used either for pasturage, for ,cutting and feeding green, soiling, or for hay. The writer has preserved velvet bean vines in the silo alone and mixed with corn silage. In some portions of the silo the velvet beans made good silage, in other portions 119 they spoiled. Further experiments are required before we can say that this plant is well adapted for use in the silo. As a forage plant velvet beans must be judged by (1) quality, (2) quantity (yield), and (3) cost of production. Quolity of velvet becan hay.-In the absence of chemical analysis, showing the per centages of starch, fat, etc., in velvet bean vines or hay, we cannot form an accurate idea of the value of the velvet bean plant as a forage. Both the green material and the hay are readily eaten by most farm animals. We know from the fertilizer analysis of the plant that it is rich in nitrogen and hence in muscle making material. The large proportion of leaves also suggests that the hay is highly nutritious. Until analyses are made and auonrMt experiments conducted to determine directly the digestibility and nutritive value of this forage plant, we may assume that for purposes of food the velvet bean is probably identical with its near relative, the cowpea. Yield of velvet bean hay.--The quantity of hay yielded by velvet beans is satisfactory. On this farm the yield of velvet bean hay has never been less than one and one-fourth tons per acre, and has in one instance amounted to over four tons per acre. On poor land one can safely count on a larger yield of velvet beans than of millet, sorghum, or most other non-leguminous forage crops. It is a more difficult matter to reach a correct judgment as to the relative yields of velvet bean and cowpea hay. In the table below are brought together the results of all the experiments conducted here in which direct comparisons were made between the yield of hay from velvet beans and from the "Wonderful" variety of cowpeas, which variety is oneof the most luxuriant growers. 120 Fiecld of velvet bean l'1ac as compared with hay/fo m"fWonderful co wpeas at Alabama Experimen! Station. VelWonderful Velvetbeans SOIL AND METHOD OF PL \,TINOG. cowypeas. Seed seed sown Hay per acre. sown Hay per per acre. per Sandy soil, 1897; in 2 ft drills..... in 2 ft. Sandy soil, small plots, drills, cultivated....... ........... reddish loam soil, 1898; broadFair cast56...........................0 128 Fair sandy soil, 1898; broadcast... 897; acre. Lbs 46 Lbs. 3872* acre Lbs. 64 .... Lbs. 2420 7300 4200 5183 8930 6400 96 . 4160 5477 Average 4 experiments......... * Apparently this sate pie of velvet bean hay was not so well cured .and contained more water than the corresponding sample of cowpea hay. The average yield of velvet bean hay as shown above table was 5,183 pounds, and of cowpea hay 5,477 pounds per acre. The difference in yield is so slight that -we may regard the average yields as practically identical. Harvesting velvet bean hy.-If thus far equal areas of velvet beans and cowpeas have seemed to be practically equal to each other, whether regarded as fertilizer or as forage, the in.the Apopka, Fla. cost of growing the two is by no means the same in regions where seed must be purchased. Our experience suggests that it is desirable to use at least one bushel of seed per acre. The price paid for shelled beans in 1899 was $1.00 per bushel, plus the freight from Florida. Oar supply in 1898 was brought from M. S, Moreman, Switzerland, Fla., and in 1899 -from H. K. Fuller, Assuming the cost of purchased velvet bean seed at $1.40 per bushel, we have an expense somewhat greater than the usual cost of the seed necessary for planting an acre of cowpeas. Again we have found that when using a grass blade a laborer can cut a larger area of cow- peas than of velvet beans in a day. If it should be found practicable here to cut velvet beans several times. each 121 season or before they become badly tangled, thus allowing the use of the mower, this difficulty of harvesting would be overcome. It is stated that velvet beans are in Florida cut several times during one season. It has yet to be learned whether in our climate, with irregular summer rainfall, velvet beans will make a luxuriant second growth after being cut. If practicable, this method of cutting velvet beans several times during the season will remove the chief disadvantage of this plant for hay making. If only one cutting is made, it should occur when the plants are in bloom. It has been suggested that the velvet bean may be induced to mature seed further north than is now done by planting thinly in locations where the vines may climb up on trees, fences, etc., thus exposing the pods to air and sunshine more completely than when the pods lie near the ground. In this way they may perhaps be gradually acclimatized and made to ripen seed at least as far north as the central portion of Alabama. To encourage the maturing of seed, planting should be done as early as practicable, or at least as early as the earliest planting of cotton. A few dozen plants intended especially for seed production might be given even an earlier start, by planting a month earlier under glass and transplanting with a ball of adhering earth when danger of frost is past. AMOUNT OF SEED REQUIRED. A count made by the writer showed that a bushel of 60 pounds of velvet beans contained a little over 32,000 beans. In three feet rows this would plant an acre, provided two seed were dropped every 11 inches in the drill. One correspondent writes that less than one peck of seed will plant an acre if two beans are dropped in hills five by three feet apart. This is evidently too thin for best results. Three experienced Florida growers of velvet beans, consulted on this point, reply in substance as follows: (1). "I never use less than one bushel per acre. I plant in 4-foot 122 rows, dropping three or four beans in hills two feet apart, in every fourth furrow while breaking the land;" (2). "I plant in hills three feet apart each way, two to three beans in a hill;" (3). "I get best results by planting quite thick, not less than one bushel per acre, or even two." In a test made at Auburn in 1898, velvet beans sown broadcast at the rate of 128 pounds, which is more than two bushels per acre, yielded 4,160 pounds of hay per acre as pounds when only 64 pounds of beans against only were sown. In a parallel experiment with drilled velvet beans the results were inconclusive. The amounts of seed used in some of our experiments are given in the table on page 120. It is probably best to plant in drills and to use about one bushel of seed per acre. On poor land acid phosphate and potash fertilizer, as kainit, muriate of potash, or ashes, will be desirable. Cultivate shallow--until the vines interfere with cultivation. 2,880 USES OF THE BEANS (FRUIT). Velvet beans as human food.--The shelled beans have been used as food for cattle, hogs and chickens and even as a table vegetable. The writer has up to this time made no experiments to determine the suitability of the beans for feeding to different classes of livestock. Inasmuch as there is on record one well authenticated case of injury following the use of green, immature, shelled velvet beans as a table vegetable, caution is advised in using the beans for human food. This case of apparent poisoning or acute indigestion following the eating of green velvet beans, boiled, was carefully investigated by Mr. V. K. Chestnut, of the U. S. Department of Agriculture. He has kindly permitted the writer to examine his correspondence with Mr. J. S.Sergeant, of Florida, who reported the only case on record where velvet beans proved decidedly harmful. With him green boiled velvet beans proved injurious, not only to men, but also to the poultry. Mr. Sar- 123 geant writes as follows concerning velvet beans as a substitute for coffee : "We have since used them as coffee two and three times a day for three or four months continually without observing any deleterious effect. If properly ground they make avery pleasant drink. The least bit of burning makes the beverage too bitter, and on the other hand, too little browning leaves them with an unpleasant taste and odor." Four Floridians who have had extensive experience with velvet beans were consulted on the suitability of velvet beans for food of man and beast. All hold the opinion that they contain no poisonous principles, but three of these four correspondents agree that the velvet bean is not a desirable table vegetable. The fourth, Mr. E. J. Johnson, Leesbury, Fla., writes thus: "For human food they are by all odds the richest and best vegetable I have ever tasted. If eaten in large quantities they will nauseate the stomach, not from poison, but from richness. They should be soaked in water over night. This separates the inside hull from the bean. They should then be parboiled in at least two waters. Then cook them as you do any other beans." Velvet beancs for live stock.-Here are some results of long experience in feeding the beans to live stock: Mr. E. J. Johnson writes : "I fed them ground and dry to chickens, cows, and horses. Others cook them. I have a neighbor who fattened 60 hogs by turning them into the field and allowing them to help themselves." Mr. H. K. Fuller, Apopka, Fla., writes thus: "I have fed the beans ground with hulls to my milk cows with the best of results; I think them equally as good as cotton seed meal. Some of my neighbors have tried cooking them. They claim that stock eat them readily and thrive as well as when the beans are ground into meal. * * I fattened 4 very fine hogs this year on cleaned beans ground fine and mixed with equal parts of wheat bran. The meat was very sweet and juicy. I also feed my poultry with the same mixture with the best results." 124 The statement of Mr. A. P. Newheart, Ocoee, Fla., is as follows: "All stock ind poultry are exceedingly fond of them in the green stage, but I have never persuaded a horse to eat them when ripe, neither whole, ground, nor cooked * * When the beans are too hard, I have them ground with the hulls and feed of this about 4 quarts at a meal with a little salt and find them equally as good milk producers as cotton seed, though in warm weather the butter is oily. Pigs eat them and it is said that the pork is deliciously sweet." Mr. C. L. Smith, of Pomona, Fla., writes thus: "Ground in the hull they are fine feed for horses, cows and hogs. Feed with a little wheat bran at first and at no time feed too much. Boiled (in pod) or carefully ground velvet beans are good for chickens. You can turn hogs into [a field of velvet beans] in November and the hogs will grow fat by the middle of January. Then you can turn the vines under for corn." From the experience of these men and others it seems that there is no danger in the judicious feeding of velvet beans (fruit) to cattle, hogs, and poultry. The air-dry shelled beans analyzed by Prof. H. H. Persons, (Fla. Bul. No. 35), contained 6.29 per cent. of fat, 53.5 per cent. of nitrogen-free extract (starch, etc.,) and the very large amount of 18.81 per cent. of protein or muscle-forming material. This indicates that the beans are even richer in food materials than the cowpea, which ranks especially high as a foodstuff. From the large number of pods formed on velvet bean vines grown at Auburn, it is evident that the yield of seed would be very large, if they should mature. In Florida 18 to 20 bushels of beans per acre are reported as the usual crop. Unfortunately it is only the farmers of the southern third, or at most, of the southern half of Alabama who can grow the velvet bean with the expectation of getting a crop of seed, and in the seed a very nutritious concentrated food- 125 stuff. For the deep sandy soils of the southern part of the State the velvet bean promises to be extremely useful, both as fertilizer and as food for animals. CO-OPERATIVE TESTS OF VELVET BEANS IN ALABAMA. In 1898, co-operative experiments were made with velvet beans for this Station by farmers in 14 localities in Alabama. In reporting results the great majority of experimenters reported a more luxuriant growth made by velvet beans than by cowpeas. Almost invariably 'he yield of hay as judged by the eye was estimated as much greater than the yield of cowpea hay. However our work here has convinced us that it is easy to over-estimate the yield of velvet bean hay, for the growing vines present an imposing appearance and the hay is loose and bulky. Giving due weight to these reports ofresults b sed merely on appearance and to our accurate experiments at Auburn, where the product of large plots was weighed, it appears probable that on good land the cowpea and velvet bean afford practically equal yields of hay, while on poor, deep sandy land the velvet bean may afford a larger yield. BULLETIN No 105. AUGUST, 1899, ALABAMA Agricultural Experiment Station OF THE AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE, AUBURN. WINTER PASTURAGE, HAY AND FERTILITY AFFORDED BY HAIRY VETCH. By J. IF. DUGGAR. MONTGOMERY, ALA.: THE BROWN PRINTING COMPANY, PRINTERS 1899. COMMITTEE OF TRUSTEES ON EXPERIMENT STATION. N. P. RENFRo..............................................Opelika. J. G. GILCHRIST .............. .......................... Hope Hull. T. H. FRAZER..............................................Mobile. STATION COUNCIL. WM. LEROY BROUN.......................................President. P. H. MEL........................ B. ............ Director and Botanist. Chemist. B. Ross.. F. DUGGAR. ... ............................................. C. A. GARY, D. V. M J. ............................... . Veterinarian. .. -- .......... Agriculturist. F. S. EARLE.............................Biologist and Horticulturist. J. T. ANDERSON............ ....................... Associate Chemist. ASSISTANTS. 0. L. HARE........... ... ..................... ................ First Assistant Chemist. Second Assistant Chemist. ..... Third Assistant Chemist. Superintendent of Farm. Assistant Horticulturist. J. Q. BURTON.................... A. McB. RANSOM .... ....................... W. B. FRAZER ..................................... T. U. CULVER.'........... .................... ~The Bulletins of this Station will be sent free to any citizen of the State on application to the Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama. WINTER PASTURAGE, HAY AND FERTILITY AFFORDED BY HAIRY VETCH. BY J. F. DUGGAR. SUMMARY. Hairy vetch (Vicia villosa), sown in September or October, alone or with oats, affords nutritious pasturage during the following February, March, April and May. If not grazed too late it affords a cutting of hay from April 20 to May 10. Hairy vetch is disposed of as pasturage, hay or green manure in time for quick-growing summer crops, as *cowpeas, sorghum, late corn, etc. It grows only from seed, but can be so managed as to reseed the ground continously. Hairy vetch was cut for hay at four different stages; the yield of bay increased up to the time of full bloom, when the maximum yield of 5,789 pounds of hay per acre was obtained; chemical analysis showed that, at whatever stage Cohsidering this plant was cut, the hay was nutritious. both quality and quantity of hay, it was concluded that the best time to cut vetch (growing alone) was three or four days before the period of full bloom: Hairy vetch rapidly enriches the soil in nitrogen, if the plant is plowed in for green manure. It is able to draw this nitrogen from the air and add it the soil only when the roots of the vetch plant are supplied with enlargements of definite character, and known as root nodules or tubercles. When sown in the usual way on most poor soils in Alabama the vetch plant does not have these "bumps" or nodules on the roots. If devoid of tubercles,hairy vetch does not enrich the soil, and fails completely if the land is ,poor. Such soils can be made to produce vetch plants containing tubercles by sowing, along with the vetch seed, some of 13'01 the earth from a place where the English pea or the wild vetch has been grown for several years. The process of employing suitable soil or other material containing definite kinds of tubercle-producing germs is called inoculation. Full directions for the inoculation and culture of hairy vetch are given in this bulletin. With hairy vetch natural inoculation occurred during the second year that the plant was grown on the same land. Artificial inoculation, as described in this bulletin, caused the success of the first crop of vetch, whereas reliance on natural inoculation involved the. failure of the first crop of' vetch, or else the use of expensive nitrogenous fertilizers. In order to have available for use in future years a supply of valuable inoculation material, it is important that prospective vetch growers should sow at least a small area of vetch this fall; the soil from this plot may be used for inoculating larger areas in subsequent years. A very luxuriant crop of hairy vetch, in full bloom, contained in the roots, stubble, and vines growing on one acre,. fully as much nitrogen as is contained in 1 tons of cotton seed meal. A large proportion of this came from the air. By far'the greater portion (at least four-fifths) of the fertilizing material in the vetch plant is in the top, or part for hay. However, there is considerable nitrogen in the stubble and roots, as shown here both by chemical analysis and by the satisfactory growth of corn on land where vetch stubble had been plowed in. Our tests indicated a larger profit from feeding the vetch hay, plowing in only roots and stubble, than from turning under the entire plant for green manure. Hairy vetch can be advantageously introduced as a "catch crop" into the ordinary rotations of the cotton farm, without reducing the usual area of cotton, corn, or small grain. Hairy vetch, if properly inoculated, is a profitable crop even if the farmer fails to utilize its food value and grows it only for soil improvement, which end it rapidly effects through prevention of leaching from the soil in winter and through the stores of nitrogen and vegetable matter added to the soil. out 131 WHAT IS HAIRY VETCH ? In two previous bulletins (No. 87 and No. 96) of the Alabama Experiment Station, the writer has pointed out the great value of hairy vetch as a forage plant and as a means of improving the soil. As the editions of these bulletins are exhausted and as we have recently conducted other experiments with this plant, the present bulletin is issued vwith the hope of inducing many farmers to test hairy vetch, which we may safely say is one of the most promising plants for those who desire winter pastures, :nutritious hay, or soil improvement. Hairy vetch ( Vicia villoRa) is an annual plant. This implies that its growth is, made in less than twelve months and that the plant does not spring from the roots, but that seed must be planted every year, or that the plants must be Sallowd to ripen sufficient seed for a "volunteer" crop the ,ext season. The introduction of: hiry vetch into Central Europe is comparatively recent, while in the United States few tests of this plant were made before the present decade. The plant forms numerous slender branches, which in thrifty plants are usually three to six feet long. These branches are too fine and slender to stand erect. The leaflets are small. The entire plant is covered with a coat of fine hairs, hence the name hairy vetch. This plant is also called sand vetch. The flowers, which appear in dense clusters in April, are purplish, and a field of vetch in full bloom presents a beautiful appearance. The seed, of which several are borne in each pod, are black and about the size of okra seed. The seed pods readily burst open, throwing the seed to some distance. This makes it easy for the plant to reseed itself if not grazed too closely when the seeds are forming. SPECIAL VALUE OF LEGUMINOUS PLANTS. Hairy vetch, like the clovers, cowpeas, etc., belongs to the large order of plants known to the botanists as Leguminosce. Hence we speak of members of this order as leguminous plants or legumes. 132 All the legumes with which we are concered might also properly be called soil-improving, or renovating, plants. They deserve this name because they have the power, not possessed by most other plants, to obtain from the air a large proportion of the fertilizing material that they need; and the nitrogen which they thus obtain, if given to the land by plowing in the legume, makes the soil rich in this valuable fertilizing material. Since nitrogen, if purchased in the form of cotton seed meal costs 10 or 12 cents per pound, the fertilizing value of legumes is self-evident. The great value of legumes as soil improvers may be better realized by considering the figures which show the amount of nitrogen in the tops and roots of hairy vetch grown on this station in 1898-'9. Analysis of samples of the vines and roots of hairy vetch cut May 2, 1899, when in full bloom, showed that the crop on one acre contained: Lbs nitrogen per acre. In the 5789 pounds of hay..................... In the 1052 pounds of roots and stubble........ 159.2 20.8 In the entire growth on one acre............. 180 This 180 pounds of nitrogen is equal to that contained in more than 2,500 pounds of cotton seed meal. Or, pricing the nitrogen at 10 cents'per pound, a luxuriant growth of vetch on an acre represents nitrogen the market price of which is $18. Some of this comes from the soil, a large proportion from the air. If we assume that only half the nitrogen was obtained from the air, the soil would gain, by plowing in the entire vetch crop, nitrogen to the value of $9. Granting that some of this will be washed out from the soil before a succeeding crop can appropriate it, there is to counterbalance this the mechanical improvement of the soil, due to the incorporation of about three tons of vegetable matter per acre. On poorer, sandier soil samples of hairy vetch taken May 7, '98, showed that the ton and a half of hay growing 133 on an acre contained:852 pounds of nitrogen, and the roots and stubble 20 pounds, a total of 1042 pounds of nitrogen per acre. Numerous other figures obtained in experiments here might be given, all showing the superior value of hairy vetch and other legumes as fertilizers. For example, in this experiment just alluded to, rye, growing alongside the vetch, on similar soil and with identical fertilization, was able to obtain only one-fifth as much nitrogen as vetch, because the rye plant was limited to the supply of nitrogen in the soil, while the vetch plant drew from the unlimited store of nitrogen in the air as well as from the scant supply in the soil. THE FUNCTION OF ROOT NODULES OR TUBEROLES. The above figures and the' experience of every observing farmer should raise the question, "Why can vetches, cowpeas, and other legumes, obtain nitrogen from the air while non-leguminous plants cannot ?" Let us compare the roots of the cow-pea, or other legume with the roots of rye, corn, or other grass-like plant, and we will discover the essential point of difference between soil-improving and soilexhausting plants. The legumes, or soil improvers, if thrifty and if examined at the proper time, say just before blooming, will be found to have little bumps or enlargements on the roots, slightly attached on the surface of the root. The soil exhausting plants-those which have not the power to take nitrogen from the air-have no such enenlargements on the roots. These enlargements, root nodules, or tubercles, found on all normally developed soilimproving plants, are the means by which these plants are enabled to assimilate the gaseous nitrogen of'the air. They are filled with minute vegetable organisms, germs, or bacteria, which convert the gaseous nitrogen into a form suitable for the use of the flowering plant. In one sense, each tubercle or nodule is a fertilizer factory, peopled with great numbers of industrious vegetable operatives, working constantly and manufacturing nitrogenous fertilizer, which is floated off in the sap of the host plant to be utilized in building up the stem, roots, and leaves of the higher plant. 134 WINTER-GROWING PLANTS. Hairy vetch begins its growth in September or October and occupies the ground during the winter months. It thus prevents in a large degree the leaching out in the winter rains of the nitrogen already in the soil. It retains what nitrogen is already in the soil by taking up through its roots the soluble soil nitrogen, which, if not thus utilized, would to a large extent be washed out and carried off in the drainage water, and thus utterly wasted. The nitrogen thus appropriated is restored to the soil when the plant, or its stubble, is incorporated with the soil a few months after winter ends. Soils of medium fertility in the South (as also rich soils) are more injured by leaching if left without growing vegetation during winter than:they are by the fertilizing material removed in the crop. The richer the soil, the greater this loss. Leaching even occurs, in smaller measure, on the poorest of soils left bare of green vegetation in winter. Hairy vetch checks leaching, but it is not alone in this valuable function. Rye, wheat, barley, and winter oats, in fact any crop filling the soil during winter with a tangle of live roots ready to take up the soluble nitrogen before it can escape in the drainage water, will serve to retain what fertility the soil already possesses. Often these crops, especially on rich land, save more than enough fertility in this way to pay cost of seed and labor expended in sowing them. Remember that nitrogen is worth 10 to 12 cents per pound, and that many pounds may be drained from an acre of bare soil each winter. The winter-growing small grain crops conserve present fertility, but they do not add to the supply of plant food, for when plowed in, they restore only what fertilizing materials they have obtained from the soil. It is reserved for the winter-growing legumes to perform the double service of preventing leaching and of largely increasing the supply of nitrogen in the soil. They are both conservers and accumulators of fertility, and for this reason 135 are preferable to non-leguminous plants. Among these winter growing legumes, none promise greater usefulness to the cotton farmers of Alabama and to those who are turning their attention to live stock than hairy vetch. It requires the use of the land for only the cooler portion of the year, furnishes winter pasturage, nutritions hay, and a cheap fertilizer. The culture of hairy vetch is simple and the plant has adaptability to a wide class of soils, provided the farmer utilizes the results of recent discoveries relating to leguminous plants. INCREASING THE YIELD OF RARELY-GROWN SOIL-IMPROVING PLANTS BY MEANS OF INOCULATION. When a root nodule or tubercle decays the germs which it contain are left in the soil and distributed by cultivation and by the movement of drainage water. Hence the soil on which vetch: has grown for several years has an abundant supply of that kind of germ found in the root nodules of the vetch plant: These germs are not dead but have the power of growing and of multiplying should they again come in contact With a succulent vetch root. If one of these germs becomes thus attached, a nodule is formed on the vetch root, and by the rapid multiplication of the original germ this tubercle becomes stocked with a multitude of nitrogen-storing bacteria, thus making available to the higher plant the great store of atmospheric nitrogen. By an extension of the figure used in a preceding paragraph, we may say that a single one of these operatives (nodule bacteria) is able to organize a new fertilizer factory (nodule or tubercle) and in a few weeks or months to people it with the descendents of the founder. However, a germ from a vetch tubercle would be unable to cause the growth of a tubercle on any of the clovers, cowpeas, etc. In other words, nearly every kind (genus) of soil-improving legumes has its own exclusive variety of nodule-forming bacteria, which can cause the growth of tubercles only on this particular genus, or closely related genera, ot plants. As stated above, the growth of any given legume, say 136 cowpeas, stocks the soil with myriads of germs able to cause tubercles to develop on the next year's crop of cowpeas. The soil, thus germ laden, is blown about by the winds, stocking with the cowpea germs fields where cowpeas have never grown. Hence, we count on most Southern soils having a full supply of cowpea germs, because the cowpea has been so widely grown in the South. So in the North there is probably an ample supply of clover germs, distributed from the clover fields, which are so generally to be seen. Likewise in the W est, where alfalfa fields are common, the supply of alfalfa germs, doubtless carried by winds and by irrigation water, seems ample. But a very different condition prevails over large areas of the South as regards the supply of germs able to produce tubercles on clover, alfalfa, or vetch. Take vetch, for example. In Alabama there are comparatively few fields of either common or hairy vetch. Hence, even if all these fields were abundantly stocked with tubercles and vetch bacteria, there could be no general and adequate distribution of the germs. Absence of "vetch germs" in many Alabama soils.-As a matter of fact, the writer has found, in examination of vetch plants from dozens of localities in Alabama, that when first grown, vetch fails to produce tubercles, or else has so few tubercles that they are inadequate for soil improvement. Hence we infer the absence or inadequate supply of vetch germs from the majority of soils of the extreme South. This fact has a very practical bearing. For a vetch or other leguminous plant without tubercles is cut off from the store of atmospheric nitrogen, cannot improve the soil, and cannot make a luxuriant growth except on rich land or by the use of high priced nitrogenous fertilizers. Moreover, the absence of tubercles lowers the quality of the forage, decreasing the valuable nitrogenous food materials, as well as greatly diminishing the yield. (See Ala. Expt. Sta. Bul.. No. 96, p. 206). Leguminous plants have no proper place on the farm unless their roots are well supplied with tubercles. Yet such 137 rarely-growli legumes as vetch, clover and alfalfa on many Southern soils fail to form tubercles the first year. It is the farmer's business to make them form tubercles. He can do this by supplying to his field where he wishes to sow clover, alfalfa, or vetch, the appropriate germ. This process of supplying the requisite germ is called inoculation. Inoculation by use of suitable earth.-For instance, the farmer wishing to grow vetch, should, if a patch of hairy vetch or of common vetch growing wild is to be had in hiss vicinity, examine these vetch plants. If they have tubercles, he should obtain some of the soil from the upper three inches of this old vetch field, taking the soil from near theroots of the old vetch plants or from spots where there was. a thick stand of vetch. However, as not many will be able to find a vetch field. from which to get soil, a substitute can be had in the soil from a portion of the garden where English peas grew last season, and where they developed an abundant growth of tubercles. Having the soil from the old vetch field or gard en spot proceed as follows: If the supply of inoculating soil is limited in proportion to the area to be sown with vetch, place the soil in a bucket, tub or tight barrel and add such an amount of water as will thoroughly saturate the soil and in addition will leave, afterthe settling of the soil, sufficient water to wet the amount of vetch seed to be sown. After adding the water, stir soil and water together very thoroughly. Then allow settling to occur and pour off the water on the vetch seed, stirring the seed to make sure that every seed becomes wet. Sow the seed promptly after this treatment, avoiding as far as practicable exposure to light. Cover the seed promptly. A more thorough inoculation can be secured, when there is available sufficient inoculating soil, by proceeding as above, and in addition, sowing broadcast one or two tons per acre of the uumoistened inoculating soil, harrowing it 138 in promptly and repeatedly, so as to thoroughly distribute the inoculating earth through the soil.* Commercial germ fertilizer, or Nitragin.-Thereis a prepared inoculating material, called germ fertilizer, or Nitra·gin, imported from Germany by Victor Koechl & Co., 79 Murray St., New York. There is a different brand for clover, alfalfa, vetch, etc. All brands cost about $1.25 per bottle (sufficient for $ acre), the cost with express, amounting to about $2.25 per acre. 'Directionisfor use accompany each bottle. The following extract'from Bulletin No. 93 of this station indicates that there are practical limitations to the extensive use of Nitragin, its best use being as a "starter" for inoculating a small area; the soil from this small plot, may, in ~future years, be used to inoculate extensive areas: "The greatest obstacle to the general use of Nitragin in certain 'cloverless' regions is the fact that this valuable material is perishable. It loses its inoculating property if long exposed to light, or if subjected to much heat, or if kept for morethan"two or three months. It endures longer in a cool than in a warm temperature. Nitragin shipped from Germnany early enough to reach the Southern farmer in time for use on fall-sown seed runs great risk of being exposed to a temperature sufficiently high to cause fermentation, and consequent death, of the germs which it contains. "So many bottles of Nitragin ordered in time for use in fall experiments have reached us in a worthless or dead condition that we would advise those who may wish to obtain a few bottlesof Nitragin asa "starter," to order the shipnent made from Germany about the first of February, so that the Nitragin will arrive in time for use on seed sown in March. While we have found to be dead some of the Nitragin imported in winter, the losses have been less at this season than with importations in the early fall." ,our * As inoculation material for crimson clover, earth from roots of vetch or English peas will not answer. For this purpose use earth from about the roots of the little white clovers often found in spring in old pastures and lawns or from the roots of any of the true clovers 4(Trifolium ) 139 NATURAL INOCULATION. As stated above there are two means of artificial inocula tion, (1) by use of soil from a field on which has been grown for several years, with abundant supply of tubercles, the same kind of legume that it is desired to inoculate, and (2) by the use of Nitragin or germ fertilizer, a concentrated commercial preparation, which is exceedingly perishable. Artificial inoculation pays, but it is not absolutely necessary to final success with vetch and similar rarely-grown. legumes. Nature may ~ the work of inoculation, if given do time enough. Artificial inoculation, with material sufficiently stocked with the proper germs, practically insures immediate success, or the success of the crop the first year. To wait for nature to so modify the germs now in the soil of "vetchless" regions as to cause nodule formation on the vetch plant, involves on poor land the failure of at least the first crop of vetch, or else it necessitates sowing vetch seed on rich land or the .use of the expensive nitrogenous fertilizer for the proper growth of the'first crop of vetch. Two experiments recently made by the writer suggest that with the vetch plant we can expect natural or spontaneous inoculation to occur the second season, when vetch grows during two years in succession on the land. On recently cleared, land where hairy vetch;grew in thespring of 1898 without artificial inoculation and without tubercles, vetch seed were again sown in the fall of 1898. The resulting plants become fairly well supplied with tubercles. Likewise on a fairly good upland loam soil, where in the season of 1897-'98 diligent and repeated search failed to discover a single tubercle on the roots of hairy vetch, the vetch plants of 1898-'99, produced by self seeding or shattering, had developed tubercles on about two-thirds of the plants as early as December 7, 1898. Later, the supply of tubercles was adequate. In both cases the location of the plots was such as to render it highly improbable that wind or drainage water 140 was responsible for the introduction of the requisite number of vetch germs. It seemed to be rather a case of a change in the germs already in the soil, by which they adapted themselves to the vetch plant. Experiments with other leguminous plants in one of the same fields further strengthen this conclusion. The practical importance of these results is apparent, if this conclusion is sustained by further investigation. They suggest a means by which any farmer, who may be unable to obtain suitable inoculating material or unwilling to take the pains necessary for artificial inoculation, may, by persistent planting of vetch after vetch, crimson clover after clover, alfalfa after alfalfa, and so on, in the second or third year grow vetch, clover, or alfalfa plants amply stocked with root nodules. Moreover these results explain the success that a few have already met with in growing vetch and other unusual legumes before practically anything was known about the advantages of inoculating such plants on certain soils. For those who decide to dispense with artificial inoculation and to wait for nature to do this work, failure of the first crop can be avoided by sowing vetch seed on (1) land naturally rich, or (2) on poorer land where the stubble or vines of cowpeas have recently been plowed in, or (3) by the use of nitrogenous fertilizers; especially stable manure, or even cotton seed meal. Either of the above courses should insure a fair crop of forage the first year and this fertilization with nitrogenous material need not be repeated when on the same land vetch is grown for the second or third year, the presence of tubercles then rendering the plant independent of the nitrogen of fertilizers. The soil of a field where vetch tubercles have been thus caused to develop in numbers can subsequently be used as inoculating material for the remainder of the farm. Artificial inoculation is important, but it is more important to get started at once a patch of this valuable plant, no matter how small the area. By sowing a plat this fall, the 141 farmer will have in one to three years soil filled with vetch germs, which soil can then be used as a germ fertilizer for vetch on larger aroas of poor land, needing upbuilding. Where to get seed.-Our supply of seed of hairy vetch was bought this summer from T. W. Wood & Sons, Richmond, Va., at $3.25 per bushel. A few years ago we bought of Peter Henderson & Co., New York City. Prices are apt to advance somewhat after mid-summer. At the usual catalogue prices for small amounts, a quart of hairy vetch seed, weighing 1 pounds, would cost, including postage, about 25 cents. A better investment could scarcely be made except in a larger quantity of the same seed. Nearly every extensive dealer in field seeds can supply hairy vetch. Do not accept just any kind of vetch seed the seedsnman may offer, but insist on having hairy or sand vetch ( Vicia villosa.) If the stock is exhausted, common vetch (Vicia sativa), though less valuable, is worth sowing as a means of obtaining inoculating material for use in future years. The earth from around the roots of common vetch -supplied with tubercles is suitable inoculating material for hairy vetch. MAKING A START WITH HAIRY VETCH. Artificial inoculation is important. But whether or not it is convenient to inoculate vetch at this time, every provident farmer should at once take steps to have homemade inoculating material available for use in future years. Sow a plot of vetch this fall, no matter how limited the area, so as to be able in future to use the soil from this plot as inoculating material. A lot sown now with thorough inoculation should afford a supply of inoculating earth for use on the vetch seed to be sown in the fall of 1900. If the present sowing is made without inoculation, and vetch is :grown on the same area each winter, the soil should naturally become sufficiently stocked with vetch germs for use as inoculating material for the seed which will be sown in the fall of 1901 and 1902. A very small plot runs the risk of injury by rabbits, 142 chickens, and insects. However, it is better to sow a quart this fall (on a square about 33 feet each way) than to wait until a larger area can be sown. Inoculate this small area if practicabe. If not, or if doubtful about the character of the earth used as inoculating material, use for this first sowing a moderate application of stable manure or about 200 pounds per acre of cotton seed meal in addition to acid phosphate and kainit or wood ashes. This little plot will be worth something when its soil becomes abundantly stocked with "vetch germs." DOES INOCULATION OF HAIRY VETCH PAY. Experiments already reported in Bulletins Nos. 87 and 96 of this Station show that in a poor sandy field vetch seed, inoculated by dipping the seed in a soil-extract prepared from the earth of a patch of wild vetch, afforded more than a ton of hay per acre in excess of seed sown the same day alongside, but without inoculation. The next year, by use of Nitragin, the commercial germ fertilizer, the yield of hay in another sandy field was increased by more than a ton and a quarter per acre. These results answer very plainly the above question, and show that under such conditions we were several times repaid for the pains or expense incurred in inoculating the seed or the soil. USES OF HAIRY VETCH. This plant is valuable for winter pasturage, for hay, and for soil improvement. For winter pasturage.-Hairyvetch, coming up as a volunteer crop in the early part of September, 1898, was large enough to afford pasturage by the first of January. Another field, where a mixture of turf oats and hairy vetch was sown as late as October 24, 1898, was ready for grazing by March l, in spite of the unprecedented cold weather in February. This field was grazed by a sow and pigs from April 1 until May 26. Moreover, the portions of the field grazed in April made a second growth, affording 1,041 to 1,633 pounds of hay per acre. It seems safe to count on 143 getting moderate grazing by February 1 and good grazing by March 1, when hairy vetch alone, or hairy vetch and turf oats are sown in September. As a pasture plant, hairy vetch is relished by all classes of farm animals. For hay.-Hay from hairy vetch is ready for cutting from April 20 to May 10. The hay of all the hay-producing legumes is rich in protein or nitrogenous matter, the socalled "muscle forming" nutrients. Vetch is especially rich in this valuable ingredient. The absence of coarse stems is another point of superiority with vetch hay. As the branches of hairy vetch are slender they need the support afforded by sowing with the vetch seed one of the small grains. For this purpose turf or grazing oats are most generally used. Without such support heavy rains beat the vetch plant down, reducing the yield and injuring the quality of the hay. The mixed vetch and oat hay is of excellent quality, though less rich in protein than unmixed vetch hay. The mixture is cut when the vetch is in bloom, before the oat heads have filled and before the oat stems have become very woody. Best stage for hiy.-The experiment described below was recently made here to determine the best stage for cutting vetch hay, grown without the support of any small grain or other admixture. Samples carefully taken under the writer's direction and analyzed by Mr. C. L. Hare, of the Chemical Department of this Station, show the composition of hairy vetch hay when cut at different dates. For comparison, average analyses of corn blades or "fodder" and of hay from Johnson grass, cowpeas, and red clover are inserted. 144 Uomposition of hairy vetch hay cut at different date& Composition of hay. Date and stage when cut (1899.) nP a" T 1 1 T 6 i I T 20.72 23.45 April 26 :5%0 of blooms showing. 22.83 18.97 May 2; in full bloom ....... 20 30 17.15 May 9; seed pods formed, but not ........... 22 48 18 71 April 19 ; just before blooming. Per cent. Per Per cent. cent. Per cent Per cent. 26.25 29.06 32-12 29.50 2.22 20 24 2.11 20-44 2.14 2250 2.35 19 92 1.79 3 22 3.07 2 65 32R80 25.34 24.35 21.16 7.126 59 579 7.04 6.46 6 99 8.01 8.74 filled * * * JTohnson grass hay .......... Red Glover *(jorn blades (" fodder.") 6.0 hay.......13. 46 12.28 14 Cowpea hay......... 10 . ... 42.23 38.66 14 77 39 34 14.09 10.8 42.59 9 64 in judging of the nutritive value of hay by its chemical composition, it should be remembered that protein (nitrogenous material) is the most valuable nutrient, carbohydrates and fats next in value, that ash may be left out of consideration, and that the larger the proportion of fiber (woody matter) the coarser the hay. The percentage of protein ("muscle formers") in vetch hay is higher than in the other leguminous hays, red clover and cowpea vines, which are usually taken as standards in respect, and much higher than in corn blades or "fodder ;" ,as much of these "muscle for vetch hay contains three mers" as Johnson grass hay. As regards the percentage of carbohydrates or carbonaceous material, samples of vetch hay rank below the other hays named. Yetch hay, cut at whatever stage, was highly nutritious. The several samples did not differ widely except that the hay of the earliest cutting was richest in nitrogenous mate- this times rial and poorest in starchy matter. The following table shows the results in a more practical *MeBryde ; Tenn. Expt. Sta., Bul. Vol ix, No. 3 145 shape, and gives for each cutting the yield per acreof hay, of dry matter, and of the most important food constituents in the hay. Yield of hay and principal nutrients per acrefrom hairy vetch. Yield per acre. Date and stage when cut. D Crude Carbohymatdrates matter. protein, and fat. Lbs. 2471 Lbs. 731 Lbs. 887 Hay. Hay. Lbs. 3117 April 19; just before blooming.. April 26; 5%0 blooms showing. of May 2; in full bloom..... .... May 9; seed pods formed, but not filled.....:..... ............ 3705 5789 5463 2859 4614 4235 707 993 1154 1983 1022 1740 The yield of hay was over 12 tons per acre before the plants bloomed; during the next six days and up to the time when only a few blooms had appeared, it increased by nearly a third of a ton per acre. In the week immediately preceding full bloom there was an increase of nearly a ton per acre. In the week between full bloom and the formation of pods there was a slight decrease in the yield of hay, many leaves and blooms having fallen. The total amount of dry matter produced varied in about the same proportion as the hay, the maximum of 4,614 pounds of dry matter per acre being reached May 2, when the plants were in full bloom. There was a rapid increase of crude protein (or nitrogenous material) in the week preceding full bloom, after which there was practically no increase. The two most important carbonaceous nutrients, or "fat formers," carbohydrates and fat, increased during each period until the time of full bloom, after which there was a decline. The most rapid gain was in the week preceding full bloom, dufing which week these nutrients increased 62 per cent. or 729 pounds per acre. The figures indicate that, of the four dates chosen for cutting the hay, best results were obtained from thecutting made 146 May 2 when the plants were in full bloom, this date giving the maximum amount of hay, of dry motter, and of carbohydrates and fat, with practically no sacrifice of nitrogeneous material. Judging the hay by appearances alone, the plants in full bloom were slightly too mature for hay of best color, the lower leaves having turned yellow. Judging the hay by looks alone, before chemical analyses were made, and also having regard to yield of hay, the writer deemed April 30, or the period when one-half or two-thirds of the blooms were showing, the best time for cutting the crop. Hairy vetch for green manuring, or soil improvement. The superiority of the legumes over other plants for green manuring has already been referred to. In the South, the cowpea is the standard for green manure or soil improvement. Hairy vetch seems the equal of the cowpea and has the advantage of growing in the winter, thus preventing leaching of fertilizing material from the soil, and displacing no summer crop. In an experiment which will be detailed in another bulletin, corn was planted in May and June, 1898, on adjacent plots where a few days before had been plowed in, on different plots, either the stubble of hairy vetch, the entire growth of vetch, the stubble of rye, or the entire growth of nearly mature rye plants. The yield of corn in 1898 was at least 50 per cent. and in some instances 100 per cent. greater on the plots where vetch or vetch stubble had been plowed in than on the plots where rye had grown. The same plots, uniformly fertilized, were again planted in corn in the spring of 1899. The present appearance of the crop (August, 1809), indicates that the superiority as fertilizers of vetch stubble or vines is still maintained. Still more strikingly has a crop of silage corn, planted a few days after plowing in vetch or vetch stubble, shown the great value of hairy vetch as a fertilizer or green manure, these causing nearly the quadrupling or trebling of the yield of corn on an adjoining plot. 147 In both of these experiments, here only briefly alluded to, the entire vetch plant was compared with the roots and stubble as fertilizer. With corn, the yield of grain was scarcely different, whether the entire vetch plant or only the stubble had been plowed in. With silage corn, the yield of green material per acre, grown on the vetch stubble plot was 21 tons less than on the plot where vetch vines, stubble and roots had been plowed in. This superior yield of silage corn resulting from the plowing in of the entire growth of vetch was more than offset by the 3,600 pounds of hay per acre obtained from the vetch-stubble plot. This hay contained a greater amount of dry matter of better quality than that in the 2- tons of silage corn. Fertilizing materials in hairy vetch.-The experiment to ascertain the best time to cut hairy vetch for hay,-which has been reported on a preceding page,-had also another aim, viz., to determine the stage of growth when hairy vetch is most valuable as a green manure. By the use of a frame, six feet squaresamples of tops (or hay) and of the stubble and roots were carefully taken. The roots to a depth of six inches were collected, the earth being separated from the roots by sifting. The loss of a small weight of the finer roots was unavoidable, but the error thus involved was inconsiderable and nearly constant for all samples. The stubble, two to three inches long, was collected with the roots, except on May 9, when roots were separated from stubble and fallen leaves. The following table shows the composition,from the standpoint of fertilizer value, of tops and roots and stubble of hairy vetch at different stages of growth, and for comparison, the composition of the corresponding parts of the rye plant: 148 Analyses of vines and roots and stubble of hairy vetch harvested at different dates. Fertilizing materials. Material analyzed (by 0. L. Hare.) I Date (1899) and stage when cut PhosNitro- phoric Potash. gen. acid. (K2 0). (P2 05). Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Tops ; hairy vetch.. . 'April 19; just before bloom. Tops ; April 26; 500 of blooms showing. Tops ; ''6' May 2; in full bloom........ ' ... Tops; May 9; seed pods formed, but not filled.................. . Roots Roots 3.75 3.03 2.75 2.9 2. 2.03 1.97 2.19 2.07' .52 .35 .81 .78 .79 .74 .49 .48 .48 .43 .42 2.18 2.14 2.21 2.68 1.23 .88 .88 .96 1.14 and stubble ; hairy veth. and hairy vetch... April 5% of blooms showing. Roots and stubble ; hairy vetch .... May in full bloom........ . Roots alone; hairy vetch.......... ~May 9; seed pods formed.. Stubble"& fallen leaves stubble; April 19; just before bloom.. 2; 26; and vetch......... Rye blooms; hairy Rye roots and stubble. tops......... . ~May 9; seed pods formed... May 7,1898; indough stage.. May 7,1898; in dough stage... It should be noted that the tops of the hairy vetch plant are about six times as rich in nitrogen as the corresponding portion of the nearly mature rye plant, and that the roots and stubble of vetch are also about six times as rich in nitrogen as those of rye. Tne practical points are more clearly brought out in the following table, which shows the number of pounds of nitrogen, phosphoric acid, and potash contained in the vetch crop on one acre: 149 Pounds of fertilizing material per acre in hairy vetch cut at different dates. Pounds per acre. Date when cut. Lb. Lbs. ent C1A O7- 0. Potash. April 19; vines....................3117 April 19; roots and stubble......... 850 Lbs. Lbs. 117.0 25.2 70.0 20 0 4.2 10.5 April 19; total................. 3967 137.0 112.3 29.4 28.9 4.2 80.5 April 26; vines ............ ..... 3705 April 26; roots and stubble......... 870 April 27; total .............. 4575 May 2; vines...................5789 May 2; roots and stubble...........1054 17.7 79.3 7.7 130.0 83.1 45.6 5.1 87.0 127.9 9.2 159.2 20.8 May 2; total...................6843 May 9; vines......................5463 180.0 173.3 7.0 50.7 40.4 1.5 137.1 156.4 3.4 May 9; roots alone..... .... 46 1061 May 9; stubble and fallen material. 22.0 4.5 46.4 12.1 171.9 May 9; total ................. 6870 202.8 The total amount of air dry vines, roots, and stubble in- creased at first slowly, and later rapidly, up to the time of full bloom, after which there was no increase. The maximum amount of air dry material was nearly 31 tons. This was on a stiff,reddish upland loam, thoroughly supplied with root nodule bacteria through the artificial inoculation of the preceding crop of hairy vetch. The amount of phosphoric acid attained iAs maximum at the time of full bloom, while the quantity of potash appropriated increased rapidly as the plant grew older. IS HAIRY VETCH OR COTTON SEED MEAL THE CHEAPEST 1 tTROGENOUS FERTILIZER ? Of greatest importance are the figures showing the amount of nitrogen in the Drop of vretch hay and in roots and stubble. 'the 150 As early as April 19, and before a single bloom could be seen, the entire plant contained per acre 137 pounds of nitrogen, or as much nitrogenous fertilizer as is contained in 1,957 pounds of cotton seed meal (7 per cent. nitrogen). The failure of the nitrogen to increase during the next week is only apparent and probably due to inequalities in sampling. In the week elapsing between the stages of early bloom and of full bloom (April 26 to May 2) the nitrogen increased very rapidly. When the plants were in full bloom the hay contained 159.2 pounds of nitrogen, and the roots and stubble 20.8 pounds per acre, the nitrogen in the hay alone being equivalent to that in 2274 pounds of cotton seed meal and the nitrogen in the roots and stubble to that in 297 pounds of cotton seed meal. A still further increase in nitrogen took place during the week following the period of full bloom, bringing up the nitrogen in the hay to 173.3 pounds and in the roots, stubble and fallen leaves and blooms to 29.5 pounds. The nitrogen equivalent for these maximum figures would be respectively 2,475 and 421 pounds of cotton seed meal, or nearly as much nitrogen in the entire vetch plant growing on an acre (202.8 pounds nitrogen) as is contained in one and one-half tons of cotton seed meal. Not all of this nitrogen is clear gain, for an undetermined proportion of it comes from the soil. But, as the soil is not rich and as non-leguminous crops are able to obtain only a fraction of this amount of nitrogen, it seems safe to assume that much more than half of the nitrogen contained in this heavy growth of vetch was obtained from the air, and thus was a clear gain to the soil when the vetch plant was plowed in. Proportion of nitrogen in tops and roots.-Of the total amount of nitrogen in the entire plant the roots, short stubble and fallen material contained 14.6 per cent. just before the blooms appeared, 13.6 per cent. in the earliest blooming stage, 11.6 per cent. at the period of full bloom, and 14.6 per cent. in the pod-bearing stage. 151 Thus analysis found in roots, stubble and fallen material less than one-sixth of the total nitrogen. The real proportion was somewhat greater, as, in taking the samples, portions of the finest roots were unavoidably left in the soil. Moreover the stubble was much shorter than that left by the mowing machine, stems being cut by hand two or three inches from the ground. In view of these two facts we will not be far wrong in assuming that the portion of the vetch plant used for hay contains about four-fifths of the nitrogen, and that what is left on the ground contains about one-fifth. This agrees with results of 1898, given in Bulletin No. 96, when vetch roots and stubble contained 19 per cent. of the total nitrogen. This fifth of nitrogen itself represents considerable fertilizing material, as the different samples of roots and stubble contained as much nitrogen per acre as is found in from z53 to 4z1 pounds of cotton seed meal, and enough to insure a good growth of crops following vetch stubble. These experiments teach: (1) That hairy vetch when stocked with an abundance of root nodules, is able to accumulate exceedingly large quantities of nitrogen from the air; (2) That when the entire growth is to be turned in as a green manure, the plowing should be postponed as late in the life of the plant as practicab!e; (3) That the greater portion of the fertilizing material is in the vines or tops, although the roots and stubble often contain sufficient nitrogen for the. needs of the succeeding crop; (The high value of the hay and the richness of the manure made from this hay, make it usually advisable to cut the hay and use only the stubble as green manure). DIRECTIONS FOR SOWING HAIRY VETCH. Time to sow.- September is the best month in this latitude. October 15th is not too late for the Southern half of the State, though earlier sowing is preferred. In one instance we sowed as late as November 4th, with success Most of our November sowings have partially or completely failed. Seed sown here between October 1 and October 15 152 has usually given satisfactory results. On land not liable to severe injury from, drought, August sowing, though risky, is permissible, especially when this date coincides with the last working of sorghum, late corn, etc. Preparationof land.-If the land is weedy, plow it as for wheat or oats. Having inoculated the seed, sow them broadcast. Sow acid phosphate or some potash fertilizer, or both, if the land is poor or needs either or both. Cover seed and fertilizers with any deep working harrow, or with cultivator, or with any other implement that will cover the seed 1 to 3 inches deep. If the land is in cotton, very late corn, or drilled forage plants, sow vetch seed broadcast without breaking the land. Work the seed and mineral fertilizer in with cultivator or one horse harrow. This will not materially injure the cotton if the cotton rows are as wide as they should be and if the cultivator, with short single-tree, is used immediately after the first or second picking. Amount of seed.-If hairy vetch is sown alone or with only a few pecks of oats to support the vines, one bushel of vetch seed per acre will be needed for a full crop of hay. On large areas, especially where the farmer is doubtful about his ability to thoroughly inoculate the seed, it is safer to sow nearly or quite the usual amount of fall oats, adding as many galloni to onevetch seed as the pocketbook permits, from half bushel per acre. The greater the proportion of vetch seed the greater the quantity of hay orpastuirage, the richer its quality, and the greater the improvement of the soil. At least one peck of vetch seed per acre is desirable. For hay or pasturage, or both, this may be sown with 1 to 2 bushels of turf oats, or if only p asturage is wanted it may be spown with 1 bushels of rye per acre. Red rust proof, or Texas, oats may be used where hay or grain, is desired, rather than pasturage and in localities where September and October sowings of this variety of oat usually escape winter killing. On soils of fair fertility the turf oat is preferable for hay as well as on account of its one 153 superior hardiness and suitability for grazing. On very poor soils we have found the turf oat almost too late for cutting when vetch is at its best. Our Southern rye ripens too early for cutting with heavy vetch. A more promising oat for sowing with vetch is Hatchett's Black, which, though never sown here with vetch, has, when sown alone, proved hardy here; its advantages over the red oat are its hardiness and length of straw and over the Myers turf oat, its earlier maturity. Our seed were obtained from T. W. Wood & Sons, Richmond, Va. Hairy vetch has been successfully grown for winter pasturage on Bermuda sod. To insure the germination of the vetch seed it is desirable to scarrify the Bermuda sod every fall. For this purpose we have used a narrow scooter plow, but probably a heavily weighted disk harrow might be used for this purpose with greater convenience and reduced cost. Of course stock must be removed for at least a few weeks at the time when vetch seed are being formed to insure annual reseeding of the pasture. FERTILIZERS FOR HAIRY VETCH AND OTHER LEGUMES. The legumes, if supplied with tubercles, that is, if thoroughly inoculated either naturally or artificially, need no nitrogenous fertilizers,-no stable manure, cotton seed, cotton seed meal, or ammoniated guano. By the aid of root nodule bacteria they can get their nitrogen from the air. But they are entirely dependent on the soil or the fertilizer for mineral fertilizers, that is, for phosphoric acid and shows that the hay potash. The table given on page from an acre of hairy vetch plants in full bloom removed from the soil as much phosphoric acid as is contained in 365 pounds of ordinary (122 per cent.) acid phosphate, and as much potash as would be supplied by 1,097 pounds of kainit containing 122 per cent. of potash. Although this was an exceptionally heavy crop and an unusual draft on the soil, the figures suggest that even an ordinary crop of vetch hay (indeed, of any hay), removes 154 a large amount of phosphates and potash from the soil. To grow vetch hay for several years without supplying these mineral fertilizers will exhaust the phosphates and potash in poor or medium soils and will result in reduced yields of vetch. Vetch used exclusively for pasturage or soil improvement would not thus rapidly exhaust the phosphates and potash of the soil. On the sandy and loamy soils of this vicinity we have found it profitable to use 240 pounds of acid phosphate and forty pounds of muriate of potash per acre. If kainit is used instead of the muriate, 150 to 200 pounds per acre are employed. The phosphate alone will doubtless be sufficient on many soils, especially if the vetch is used for pasturage or for soil improvement and if no hay is removed from the field. Of course, some of the soils of Alabama need no commercial fertilizer for an occasional crop of hay, but the removal of many successive crops of any kind of hay will, on almost any upland soil, finally necessitate the use of fertilizers for both leguminous and other crops. As elsewhere stated, the farmer whose land is not already supplied with "vetch germs," and who cannot or will not make use of artificial inoculation, must, on ordinary soils, go to the additional expense of applying nitrogenous fertilizers on his first crop of vetch. He may use, in addition to above-mentioned mineral fertilizers, say 200 pounds of cotton, seed meal per acre, or a liberal application of stable manure, or he may sow vetch on land recently enriched in nitrogen by a crop of cowpeas. THE WEED QUESTION. That farmer is wise who, before introducing a new plant on his farm, asks whether there is danger of its becoming a troublesome weed. The writer has never heard or read any complaint of vetch as a weed. There is a probability that if carelessly managed on a wheat farm hairy vetch might give trouble through possible admixture of early ripening of vetch seed with late ripening wheat, The grains could not be separated on the farm, and the writer does not 155 know whether they could be separated at the flouring mills. This mixture is conjectural only. Even if the seasons of maturing of wheat and vetch should occasionally thus overlap, careful management could avoid the danger by cutting vetch hay early, or by plowing in vetch before the seeds form, on any fields where wheat is to be sown the following fall. If the wheat field were terraced, care would be necessary to prevent the vetch plants on the terrace bank from seeding. Hairy vetch is strictly an annual, and hence if kept from seeding it will not re-appear. The admixture of vetch seed with oats is not objectionable in oats fed on the farm, as vetch seed has been successfully used as a grain food. ENEMIES OF VETCH. It is not intended to give a list of the diseases and insects that injure vetch. Hairy vetch is hardy as regards cold. Sowing in October or earlier, it withstood the exceptional cold of the past winter when the thermometer in February showed the phenominally low record of degrees Fahreinheit below zero. Younger plants were injured, and the stand thinned, but not killed out entirely. The most serious trouble with vetch on the Station Farm at Auburn is the nematode worm, with which our fields, and gardens and orchards in many parts of the State, are infested. It is because of the presence of this pest in the soils of this Station that we are not justified in shipping our soil for use as inoculating material. Whoever uses garden soil as inoculating material for vetch should first endeavor to make sure that this pest is not in the soil of his garden. The presence of the nematode worm, microscopic in size, may be known by the enlargements or galls which it causes on nearly all plants with tender succulent roots, especially on cabbages, turnips, beets, celery, okra, tomatoes, most legumes, and even cotton. The nematode gall, which is the result of an injury to the 156 root by a minute worm, may be distinguished from the beneficial root nodule or tubercle found on thrifty leguminous plants, by the following differences: (1) The desirable nodules are usually but slightly attached to the root, occupying a position on the side of the root, while the nematode gall, in its early stages, is usually concentric with the root; the root seems to grow through the center of the little spindle-shaped gall, the shape and location of which on the root may be compared to a sweet potato. The gall has only the diameter of a knitting needle or wheat straw; later, when the gall becomes corky or begins to rot it loses all constancy of shape and greatly enlarges; (3) The presence of enlargements on the roots of cabbage, squash, okra, tomatoes, or related plants indicates the presence of the nematode pest, for tubercles are never found on the roots of the non-leguminous plants of the farm and garden. It is not meant to say that the presence of the nematode pest prevents the growth of vetch. Doubtless the yield of vetch is greatly reduced by the presence of the nematode galls, but we have obtained heavy crops of hairy vetch hay from a loam soil badly infested with nematodes. One failure of vetch on deep white sandy soil on this farm was attributed to the joint effects of nematode injuries and late sowing. Nematodes are more often found and more injurious in light sandy soils than in those containing a fair proportion of clay. Mention must also be made here of the destruction of the green seeds of vetch, which occurred here "for the first time during the past May and June. On certain small, isolated areas, the destruction of seed by one or more unidentified insects was so great that not enough seed matured to re-seed the land. This injury was felt, but was less serious, on larger areas of vetch. 57 SUGGESTIONS ABOUT THE ESEEDING OF HAIRY VETCH. One of the reasons for giv\ preference to hairy vetch as is because of the ease with compared with crimson clov which the former reseeds L e land. When the ripe seed pods burst open they scatter the seed to considerable distances. These seed do not ordinarily germinate until the latter part of summer, so that it has been recommended to sow cowpeas on fields where hairy vetch has shed its seed in June. Sometimes the cowpeas are sown in drills and cultivated. But if the summer is wet, causing the early germination of the vetch seed, the cultivation of the peas may be at the expense of the stand of vetch. By omitting the cultivation of the cowpeas when vetch plants have come up, or by sowing the cowpeas broadcast, this danger may be avoided. Hairy vetch used as pasturage will reseed the land if stock are removed a few weeks before the time of seed formation, On the Mississippi Agricultural College farm hairy vetch and turf oats are cut for the grain crop at such a late stage as to insure the shattering of enough seed of both vetch and oats to reseed the land,-invariably with vetch, and generally with oats. By sowing hairy vetch with red oats sown early in the fall for grain, reseeding will sometimes occur by leaving a long stubble including considerable of the lower portion of the vetch plant, with attached seed. Here, by cutting quite early a mixture of vetch and oats, we have obtained a hay crop of best quality, and the vetch stubble has afterwards (in favorable seasons) made sufficient growth to reseed the land. If vetch is expected to make enough second growth to insure the reseeding of the land, cutting should occur when the plants are in the early blooming stage. Or by pursuing exactly the opposite course, cutting the vetch after some pods have matured, hay can be made from hairyvetch without interfering with reseeding. Such 158 hay is not of good quality and not marketable, but may be fairly nutritious. ADAPTING VETCH TO ORDINARY ROTATIONe. From what has just preceded it may be inferred that the self-seeding of vetch is comparatively easy in a rotation where vetch is every year the principal crop and where the intervening summer crops are those that occupy the land but a few months. Among the cro ps suitable for such use are cowpeas, sorghum, late-planted corn for grain or for the silo, Spanish peanuts, and a number of quickly maturing forage crops. However, it is still an open question whether hairy vetch can be so managed as to annually reseed itself when the rotation is one suitable for an ordinary cotton farm, needing relatively little forage. Possibly those who work terraced land, especially where the terraces are near together, may be able to effect this by having vetch on the otherwise unoccupied terrace banks and allowing it to grow there continuously, expecting it, with or without the farmer's help, to distribute its seed into the cultivated 1and on either side. It is certain that the cotton farmer needs hairy vetch in his rotation, since it will pay in soil improvement alone, leaving out of consideration the forage incidentally produced. He will have no difficulty in utilizing hairy vetch in rotation with cotton if he will sow vetch seed each fall, either purchasing or saving the seed. Let us take for example a rotation, which, even without vetch, is one of the best and most practicable for cotton farms maintaining some live stock in addition to work teams: First year, cotton; Second year, corn, with cowpeas between rows; Third year, fall-sown small grain, followed next June by cowpeas, which in turn is followed by cotton the next year. The introduction of hairy vetch (or of crimson clover) as a catch crop to occupy the land in winter would certainly 159 improve this rotation. Is its introduction practicable? It is, as may be seen by the following example of one means of utilizing vetch in a three year rotation of cotton, corn and oats: First year:-Cotton, with vetch seed worked in during September immediately after first or second picking; the vetch to be turned under in March, or if to be followed by late corn, plowing may take place later when the fertilizer value of the vetch will have increased. Second year:-Corn; the corn to be harvested in time for breaking the land in latter part of September or October for a mixture of oats and vetch. Third year:-Oats and vetch sown together; the harvesting (for hay or grain) to occur at such a time as to insure the self seeding of the vetch; broadcast cowpeas tobe grown during the summer and cut for hay in time for the volunteer vetch plants to occupy the ground. This vetch should afford grazing in February and March and be plowed under in time for cotton to be planted in April of the fourth year, thus beginning again the same rotation. The amount of vetch seed required during the entire period of rotation would be as follows for each acre: For sowing after cotton........................1 bushel For sowing with oats after cotton.......... o For volunteer vetch crop after above............0 " Total amount of seed for 1 acre for 3 years.. .1 bushel " Average annual amt. seed per acre thus cropped. In return for this outlay for seed and for the cost or working in the seed among the growing cotton plants, there would be obtained from vetch the following benefits: (1) In food; (a) February and March grazing during two seasons and (b) the vetch hay harvested with the oats; 160 (2) In soil improvement; (a) The nitrogen that is obtained from the air by two crops of immature vetch grazed and turned in; (b) The air-derived nitrogen of the half crop of vetch (with oats) stored up during an entire season, part of this fertility being represented by the vetch stubble and part by the hay or by the manure obtained from feeding this hay; (c) The soluble soil nitrogen whose escape in the drainage water of winter has been prevented by wintergrowing vetch; (d) The mechanical improvement and increased ability to withstand drought, due to the incorporation of the vegetable matter contained in the several crops of vetch. In view of these gains from sowing hairy vetch can there be any question as to whether the annual outlay for a half bushel of seed (say $1.50 per acre) is a profitable investment? These benefits are conditional upon the presence of root nodules, whether these occur as the result of natural or of artificial inoculation. BULLETIN No 106. NOVEMBER, 1899. ALABAMA Agricultural Experiment Station OF THlE AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE, AUBURN. ORCHA RD NOTES. By F. S. SARILE. MONTGOMERY, ALA.: THE BROWN PRINT[NG COMPANY, PRINTERS 1899. COMMITTEE OF TRUSTEES ON EXPERIMENT STATION. N. P. RENFRO .................................................... Opelika. Hope Hull. J. G. GIICHRIS ...................................... T. H. FRAZER....................................................Mobile. STATION COUNCIL. WM. LERoY BROUN................. ................. President. P. H. MELL........................................Director and Botanist. B. B. Ross..........................................Chemist. C. A. CARY, D. V M..............................Veterinarian. J. F. DUGGAR. --......... Agriculturist. ... .... Biologist and Horticulturist. Chemist. F. S. EARLE........................ J. T. ANDERSON.......................................Associate ASSISTANTS. C. L. HARE.......... .... ......................... Q. BURTON.............. .................... A. McB. RANSOM........ ... ............... J. T. U. CULVER.........................Superintendent CLARK....................................... First Assistant Chemist. '.....Third Second Assistant Chemist. Assistant Chemist. of Farm. Agriculturist. R. W. Assistant MOSES CRAIG ..................................... Assistant Horticulturist. ~The Bulletins of this Station will be sent free to any citizen of the State on application to the Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama. ORCHARD NOTES. The feature of the year from the point of view of the orchardist was the unprecedented cold of the middle of February. Following as it did weather sufficiently warm to start vegetation and bring the earliest blooming fruit trees into flower, the destruction was much greater than it would have been had the cold occurred earlier in the season. On the morning of February 14th the thermometer was below zero in all parts of Alabama. At Auburn it registered six and one-half degrees below, which was ten degrees lower than at any time in the thirty years during which records have been kept here. In North Alabama the temperature was several degrees lower, while at Mobile and other points on the coast it was only some four or five degrees warmer, and here naturally the destruction was greatest. Tender shrubs and trees of all kinds were killed to the ground, the long moss (Tillandsia) on the trees was killed, and the thickets of saw Palmetto were scorched, as if by fire. The live oaks and magnolias lost their leaves, and even some of the pines were injured Throughout the state the peach crop, and with few exceptions, the plum crop, was an entire failure. The effects of the freeze will be considered more in detail in the following pages in discussing the different fruits. APPLES. As apples start growth rather late in the spring the buds were not swollen and they were entirely uninjured by the February cold. So far as observed in different parts of the state the crop was an uneven one, quite a number of kinds failing to bear. At the Station, however, the old orchard set the best crop that it has in a number of years. This was due to heavy pruning two years ago, and to good cultivation so that the trees were in a vigorous condition. Nearly all the trees set a full crop, and yet except on one or two 164 early varieties, very few perfect fruits ripened. For various reasons this orchard was not sprayed this year, and consequently the Codlin moth and the summer rot destroyed what promised to be a fine crop. This serves to emphasize the necessity for fighting these pests with all the means at our command if we hope to grow satisfactory crops of apples. In the young orchard the trees as a whole made a satisfactory growth, though some of them were considerably injured by the green aphis. Apple Varieties.-As the result of the seasons observations it is advised to add Yellow Transparent for summer, and Kinnards Choice for late fall and winter to the provisional list recommended in Bulletion 98, p. 265. Some of the most experienced growers in North Alabama place these two kinds first in their lists for market planting. GreenAphis of the Apple--Duringthe winter the minute black shining eggs of this aphis were noticed abundantly on the twigs of many of the trees. On February 6th it was noted that a few of these eggs were beginning to hatch. On February 9th all young trees were sprayed with the mechanical mixture of kerosene and water, using a strength of 33 per cent. kerosene in the hope of killing the eggs. This treatment seemed to have been quite effective, for when spring opened very few lice could be found. These few, however, multiplied very rabidly, and soon on many of the trees, the young growth was literally encased by the crowded green aphids. Various lines of treatment were tried for destroying this pest. Certain trees were sprayed at frequent intervals with various strengths of tobacco decoction. It was used as strong as one pound of dried tobacco leaves and stems to the gallon of water. At this strength a few of the lice were killed but not enough of them to do any appreciable amount of good. This spray did no injury to the foliage. Other trees were sprayed with the rosin mixture recommended as a vehicle for applying Paris green to cabbages. The formula used was resin, 5 lbs.; concentrated lye, 1 lb. ; 165 fish oil or animal oil, 1 pt.; water, 5 gal. This stock solution was used up to one-half strength both with and without lime. When applied with the Bovee & Caapenter attomizer it did no harm to the foliage, but like the tobacco decoction, it killed very few lice. A considerable number of experiments were tried with solutions of whale oil soap. A strength of one-fourth pound to the gallon of water when applied with an ordinary bucket pump and a Bordeaux nozzle was found to injure the young tender leaves slightly when the spray collected in large drops. It was much more effective than either of the foregoing sprays, but not over two-thirds or three-fourths of the aphids were killed, and the remainder re-stocked the twig so quickly that in a week or two the lice were as thick as ever. Repeated applications of this strength with the coarse spray from the Bordeaux nozzle injured the foliage quite seriously without ridding the trees of the lice. Where the very fine spray from the Bovee & Carpenter attomizer was used a strength of one-half pound to the gallon of water when carefully applied, did no harm to the foliage, and a strength of one pound to the gallon injured the foliage less than the one-fourth pound solution applied as a coarse spray. This very strong whale oil soap solution was quite effective, seeming to kill all the lice with which it came in contact, even though applied as an almost impalpable mist. In previous seasons a 10 per cent. mechanical mixture of kerosene and water applied with an ordinary nozzle and knapsack pump was found to injure the foliage severely without ridding the trees of the lice. The success of the attomizer sprayer in applying the strong solution of whale oil soap suggested trying it for applying a strong kerosene emulsion. A 25 per cent. emulsion was made by dissolving one-fourth pound of whale oil soap in one quart of boiling water, and emulsifying with two quarts of kerosene, afterwards diluting to two gallons. As applied by the attomizer, this proved so satisfactory that it was adopted as the treatment for all the infested trees in the young orchard. A single application did no appreoiable damage to the foliage 166 except where enough was used so that it began to collect in little crops. Of course so strong an emulsion applied in the ordinary way would have badly burned the leaves. At this strength the slightest touch of the spray was deadly to the lice, but owing to the shelter furnished by the crumpled leaves it was often impossible to reach them all even by .taking the greatest care in walking around the tree to direct the spray against the infested twigs from every quarter. In four or five days these protected aphids would be found to have left their shelter and be collected on fresher feeding grounds near the young point of the advancing twig. A second spraying within a week of the first would thus kill most of these, and in many instances the two sprayings entirely cleared the tree. In other cases, a few lice kept re-appearing so that weekly sprayings were necessary for five or six weeks. Even then the lice were not entirely conquered till some heavy rains in August, when they suddenly disappeared. By September 1st the trees were almost entirely clear of them even in those parts of the orchard where no spraying had been done. The trees that it was found necessary to treat so often were finally a good deal injured by the frequent caustic applications. The leaves were thick and crumpled, and seemed somewhat seared. The bark of the young twigs, too, was effected in much the same way, being hard and thick. In these cases it was hard to decide which had done the more damage, the lice or the treatment. While this use of 25 per cent. kerosene emulsion applied as an impalpable mist was not fully satisfactory, it was much better than anything else that was tried, and it must be recommended for the want of something better. It must be applied with great care and only during the middle of bright, warm days when the kerosene evaporates quickly, or great harm may be done. The Bovee & Carpenter sprayer used in these experiments is a hand implement used somewhat like the ordinary garden syringe. The spray being so fine it can only be thrown a short distance. It is only useful for young trees and could not be used successfully where they were more thad seven or eight feet high. It 167 is probable that for large trees a Vermorel nozzle with an exceedingly fine apperture might answer an equally good purpose. This will be tested another season, as many of the trees in the bearing orchard suffered severely from the lice. It was noted thlat certain varieties were exempt from this scourge while others in the same blockstsuffered severely. This was probably in part at least accidental, but as it seemed that. many of those varieties with heavy hairy twigs and foliage were exempt while those with nearly glabrous twigs often suffered badly, it is deemed advisable to place on record the following notes on varietal resistance for this season. Entirely free from aphis:-Aiken, Arkansas Black, Babbit, Battyani, Black Ben Davis, Bradford, Carolina Greening, Cillagos, Coopers Early, Hames, Haywood, Horse, Hyari-Piros, Kismet, Limber Twig, Magyur, Maidens Blush, Malalyfi, Mamma; Metel, Ponyike, Red Astrachan, Red June, Selymos, Shockley, Texas Red, Thorntons Seedling, Tull, Wiuesap, Yakor, Yates, Yellow English, Yellow Transparent, York Imperial. Attacked by aphis but not serious injured:-Apple of Commerce, Benoni, Bledsoe, Buda Summer, Buncomb, Cannon Pearmain, Carters Blue, Champion, Chattahooche, Coopers Red, Dam, Duchess, Early Harvest, Eper, Equinettelee, Fall Pippin, Family, Fanny, Gravenstine, Grimes Golden, Hews Crab, Holiday, Jeffries, Jennings, Jonathan, Julian, Kinnards Choice, Mammouth Black Twig, Mangum, Moultries, Nickajack, Pasman, Pear (or Palmer), Rawls Janeton, Red Astrahan, Red Beitigheimer, Red Limbertwig, Rhodes Orange, Rome Beauty, Sabadka, Saxon, Priest, Sekula, Senator, Shackelford, Summer King, Summer Queen, Taunton, Tuscaloosa. Badly injured by aphis:-American Summer, Early Red Margaret, Elgin Pippin, Mavarack Sweet, Noble Savor, Oszi-vaj, Santa, Shockley, Summer Cheese, Summer Queen, Summer Wafer, Sweet Bough, Wealthy, Yellow English, Yellow Horse, Yopps Favorite. That part of this difference is purely accidental, is shown 168 by the fact that the same variety in several cases appears in more than one of these lists when growing in different parts of the orchard. Several years observation are necssary to determine if any of the kinds are truly resistant to the aphis. Apple Leaf Rust :-The yellow leaf rust of the apple (Roestelia pirata Thax.) which is the Accidial stage of the fungus Gymnosporangium macropus causing the galls on red cedars known as "cedar apples," often causes serious damage to the apple foliage in this state. Some varieties are very susceptible to this disease while others are entirely exempt. I know of no plant disease where different varieties of the host have such different powers of resistance. As the red cedar is abundant in most parts of the state where apples are grown, at least as a door-yard tree, it becomes a matter of some moment to select rust resisting varieties for planting. Of the lists enumerated above of the varieties growing on the Station grounds only, the following developed rust during this season. It will be noticed that none of the Russian or Hungarian varieties are included in this list. So far as I know they have always proved to be "rust proof." List of Varieties Showing Leaf Rust in 1899 :-American Summer, Carters Blue, Family, Jonathan, Mamma, Moultries, Nicajack, Rhodes Orange, Rome Beauty, Santa, Senator, Shockley, Wealthy. Of the above Family, Jonathan, Nickajack, Rhodes Orange, Santa, Shockley and Wealthy were very badly affected. The others while showing the disease were but little injured by it. The leaf spot (Phyllosticta) appeared on many of the trees and caused some of the leaves ,o fall prematurely. It is interesting to note that the following kinds were entirely free from aphis, rust and leaf spot, making a good growth and holding their leaves green and fresh to the end of the Fall:-Aiken, Arkansas Black, Babbitt, Carolina Greening, Duchess, Fanny, Hames, Haywood, Hyari Piro, Magyur, Maidens Blush, Metel, Milalyfi, Ponyike, Thorntons Seedling and York Imperial, 169 The Adaptability of Apple Trees to Changed Environment : In Bulletin No. 98 the fact was noted that apple trees brought from the North and planted here during the Winter, started into growth in the Spring a number of days earlier than similar trees from Southern nurseries. This Spring these different lots of trees were watched closely to see if the Northern grown ones still felt the effect of their early environment. Apparently not; during their one season's growth at the South they seemed to have completely adapted themselves to the changed conditions, for this Spring all lots started alike, not the slightest difference could be seen between them. CHERRIES. Cherries are very little grown in the South, but evidence is accumulating that some of the sour kinds at least can be safely planted as far south as Northern and Central Alabama, That they will fail on the coast is almost certain. Of twelve kinds planted at the Station in 1898 the following are now in good condition and give promise of fruiting next year:Montmorency, Wragg, Dyehouse, Early Richmond, Suda, Ostheimer. The Wragg trees bore a few fruits this season. In north Alabama English Morello is proving very satisfactory, and it is recommended for planting in that region. Cherries were not injured by the February cold. FIGS. The freeze killed every fig tree in the state to the ground. This is not unusual in North and Central Alabama. The trees are killed to the ground by every exceptionally hard winter, but the recuperative power of this wonderful tree is so great that only one crop is lost. Sprouts spring up from the roots and grow with great rapidity and bear freely the following year. Under these circumstances the fig is a great bush rather than a tree. On the coast well established fig trees are seldom seriously injured by the cold, but this freeze killed many noble old trees with trunks a foot or more in diameter. 170 On the Station~ grounds the figs were all killed down during the winter of 1894-5. They sprouted and grew freely during the summer of 1895, and have since born three successive heavy crops. Of course they were killed to the ground again in February, but most of them have sprouted and made a good growth during the Summer and some kinds have even set a little fruit that ripened late during September and October. The following kinds have ripened some fruit this year, and they are among the best for general planting:-Celeste or Celestial (the "Sugar Fig" of Central Alabama), White Ischia, Brown Turkey, Brunswick and White Smyrna. Of these the Celeste is the one that is most widely planted. It is hardy and vigorous and a most abundant bearer. Though small it is of the best quality. It usually ripens in July. Green Ischia seems to be avery promising kind, and should be planted much more widely since it ripens late in August and in September thus serving to greatly lengthen the season for this most delicious and healthful fruit. It is larger than Celeste,dull green when ripe with a thin skin that often cracks slightly. The seeds and pulp are dark red which makes it very attractive when cut up on the table. Its flavor is rich and agreeable though perhaps hardly as sweet as the Celeste. Figs are so easily grown and yield so regularly and abundantly and furnish so healthful an article of diet they should be planted much more widely for family use. No garden or lot is too small to afford room for one or more fig trees, and no family can afford to be without them. GRAPES. Grapes were still dormant at the time of the freeze and none of the varieties of bunch grapes on the Station grounds were injured. Many of the rotundifolia varieties however, suffered severely. The Scuppernong, which is more widely planted than any of the others, was killed to the ground in many parts of the state. Here it was severely injured but not entirely killed. Of the kinds growing at the Station, Memory proved much the hardiest. In fact it was not at all injured. This is a very vigorous grower and it is one of the 171 best of the black varieties. It ripens with the Scuppernong, Flowers proved unexpectedly tender. A number of the largest vines were entirely killed, not even sprouting from the root. The others were very badly injured and have made only a few weak new canes. Thomas, Jeter, Tenderpulp and Mish were all somewhat injured but not seriously enough to prevent their bearing nearly a full crop this season. Mish is the most valuable of these kinds The berry is rather small but it has a peculiarly rich, sweet flavor and it ripens late after Scuppernong, Memory and Thomas are nearly gone. Flowers is still, later but this season has proved it tender and the quality of the fruit is poor. The Station has no vines of these kinds for sale or distribution. KAKI, OR JAPANESE PERSIMMON. This fruit suffered severely from the freeze the trees being killed almost or quite to the ground. For a time it seemed that all were dead, but finally some of them sprouted from the crown and will be in condition to bear some fruit another year. The present condition of the different varieties is as follows:-Hyakume, dead; Imperial, small sprout on one tree; Tane Nashe, killed to the snow line, sprouted freely and has made good growth; Hachiya, one dead, one very feeble; Yeddo Ichi, killed to the snow line, has made a good growth; Tabors No. 23, killed to the snow line, has made good growth; Tabors No. 72, killed to the snow line, has made good growth; Tabors No. 129, the only kind not killed to the ground. This put out sprouts from the trunk and larger branches, and made a strong growth; Zingi, nearly killed; Tsuru, nearly killed; O kame, one dead, one sprouted freely; Yemon, killed to the ground but made a good growth; Costata, dead. PEACHES. The freeze 'killed the peach crop of nearly the entire South. In some sections the trees were much injured, but here those that were well cultivated and thrifty were not hurt, though some feeble neglected trees were killed. 172 On February 5th preceding the freeze notes were taken on the condition of the varieties in the orchard planted in 1898 as a co-operative experiment for testing the successful geographical limits for the different races of peaches. Duplicate orchards of three trees each of three varieties representing each of the five races of peaches that are cultivated in this country were planted by a number of the Experiment Stations. On the Chinese Cling, Elberta and Mamie Ross representing the North China type, the buds were still nearly dorment. On the Honey, Tabor and Pallas, representing the South China type, the buds were much swollen, but were hardly showing the pink. The Peento was in nearly full bloom and Angel and Waldow of the Peento type were beginning to bloom. Mountain Rose, Alexander and Old Mixon Free of the Persian type, were nearly dorment. Onderdonk, Coblers Indian and Imperial of the Spanish type had buds much swollen, a few showing pink. Older trees of the North China and Persian types were somewhat more advanced, the buds being conspicuously swollen and by the date of the freeze some were even showing the pink. While all the fruit buds were killed on all of the varieties, the wood was practically uninjured except in the trees of the Peento type that were so much more advanced than the others. Peento itself was killed to the ground two of the trees sprouted from near the grouhd and have made a feeble growth. Angel and Waldow had all the twigs and small brances killed, but the tranks were not injured and they have made new, vigorous tops. For Central Alabama it is doubtful if we are safe iu planting varieties of other than the Persian and North China types. PEARS. The flower buds of Kieffer and LeConte on the Station grounds were swollen enough to begin to separate at the time of the freeze. Of course, they were all killed. Bartletts and other varieties of the European type were entirely dorment and they escaped injury. The older LeConte and 173 Keiffer trees suffered but little except in loss of crop, but the trees in the young orchard (planted in 1896) were many of them, seriously injured. The bark of the trunk for a few inches above the ground, or rather the snow line, was blackened on fully half of the trees, and from one-fourth to onethird were killed outright. Some trees that looked all right and started to grow in the spring died from time to time during the summer. One of the most striking results of the complete destruction of the flowers was the almost entire suppression of the blight. A few of the old Kieffers finally made a light second blooming in April or May, and a few of these culsters contracted blight, but these were the only cases that developed in the entire orchard. It is a curious fact often noted that fruit trees of allkinds bloom later on the coast than they do one or two hundred miles farther North in the interior. This season the Kieffer flower buds on the coast were so much less advanced that quite a portion of them escaped the freeze and bore fruit. PLUMS. On February 4th the following notes were taken on the condition of the different varieties of plums in the orchard: Kelsey, showing first blooms; Berckmans, buds separating. Blood No. 3, full bloom. Blood No. 4, first blooms. Chabot, buds separating. Excelsior, buds separating. Baileys Japan, buds separating. Botan, buds separating. Gold, buds separating. Orient, buds separating. Yellow Japan, buds separating. Satsuma, first blooms. Lone Star, buds separating. Emerson, buds white. Transpaaent, buds separating. Hattankio, buds separating. All the other varieties in the orchard (see list in Bull. 98, p. 273.) were still nearly or quite dormant. During the week of open weather preceding the freeze after these notes were taken the general condition had advanced considerably. The injury done was almost exactly in proportion to the state of advancement. Blood No. 3 was killed outright. Blood No. 4, Kelsey, Satsuma and Wickson lost consider- 174 able portion of their tops, and a number of the other Japanese kinds showed some injured twigs. During the summer trees died of Kelsey, Chabot, Long Fruited, Burbank, Excelsior and Satsuma. Whether this was in all cases due to the freeze is uncertain. The flowers seemed to open normally on all later blooming kinds but the usual sequence of blossoming was disarranged, all blooming more nearly together. Only the five following kinds bore full crops:-Milton, Whitaker, Wooten, Wayland and Golden Beauty. None of the Japs had more than a few scattering fruits. Again, as with the pears the Southern part of the state fared better as the buds were more nearly dormant, and some good crops of Abundance, and other of the later blooming Japs, were reported from that section. It is worthy of note that this makes the fourth consecutive full crop for the Golden Beauty on these grounds. Wayland was planted later or its record would be equally good and it is a handsomer and rather better flavored plum. This Wayland group of plums is evidently well adapted to our conditions and they should be more widely planted. It is true they are small and not of the first quality, but they ripen late, July or August, after other plums are gone and they are very serviceable for canning and preserving. A considerable quantity of them could be sold in the Southern markets at fair prices. They would hardly pay for Northern shipment as.they. would come in competitionwith better kinds grown nearer home. SAN JOSE SCALE. During the Summer of 1897 it was discovered that a number. of trees in the old plum orchard were infested with the San Jose Scale. As this orchard was otherwise in poor condition and of but little value, no attempt was made to treat it, but it was promptly dug up and burned. The scale had spread somewhat to the adjoining apple orchard. As there are no large orchard interests in the neighborhood to be endangered, it was deemed permissible to keep these trees 175 for experimental purposes. All were pruned back heavily. A few were reserved for experiment with the scale insect fungus, Sphcerostilbe coccophila, which had been reported as destroying the San Jose Scale in Florida. The' remaining trees were sprayed during the Winter with kerosene. On some it was applied full strength, on others a 50 per cent., and on still others a 35 per cent. mechanical mixture was used. In some cases the full strength did some injury causing a dying and shelling of the outer bark. Other trees were not at all hurt. Whether this was due to the variety or the particular condition of the individual tree could not be determined. The treatment was quite effective. No spraying was done last Winter and the trees are still practically free from scale though it is planned to treat them all again this coming Winter. Sphcerostilbe coccophila is a common fungus here, growing abundantly on the water oak scale, Aspidioius obscurus. Bark from the water oak bearing the fungus, was tied in some of the infested apple trees during the winter of 1897-8. The fungus spread slowly to the San Jose Scale and has been growing on it ever since, but it works so slowly that it is evident that in this dry climate at least, it will not prove an efficient remedy. Two trees in the new plum orchard (planted in 1896) were also found to be infested. These were allowed to remain untreated to watch the normal rate of spread of the insect. This has been less rapid than was expected, During the Summer of 1898, it only found its way to four additional trees. The foliage at this writing still prevents a careful inspection, but the spread during 1899, has certainly been very little more rapid. The two trees first infested are now getting pretty well coated with the scales, but as yet they show very little signs of exhaustion from the presence of the insect. On one of the trees a natural infection of the scale with the Sphoerostilbe took place. Only a few of the red pustules have developed and it seems to be entirely inefficient. This entire orchard will be sprayed with the me- 176 chanical mixture of kerosene, this Winter, and a determined effort will be made to stamp out the scale by this means. The facts of the slow spread of the insect and the practicability of controlling it with kerosene are certainly encouraging for those who have been unfortunate enough to get it on their premises. It is unfortunately now quite widely scattered in different parts of the state, and since we have no law to prevent the sale of infested nursery stock it is likely to be still more widely scattered in the future. Parties finding it on their places are strongly urged to treat it at once, this Winter, using 35% strength of kerosene on apple and 25% on peach and plum. It can be applied either as an emulsion, or with the special pump for making a mechanical mixture. In either case, the important thing is to apply it as a fine spray and with some force, and to make certain that the spray reaches all parts of the trunk and limbs. Kerosene should always be applied during sunshine so that it will evaporate quickly in order to avoid injury to the trees. It must be remembered that though this scale works slowly it will surely kill in time every tree on which it gains a lodgment, unless held in check by vigorous and careful treatment. Planters cannot be too careful in buying nursery stock to insist on getting only that that is known to be free from scale. The extensive nursery interests at Huntsville are to be congratulated that so far their neighborhood has remained free from this pest. BULLETIN No 107.DEMBR189 DECEMBER, 1899. ALABAMA Agricultural Experiment Station OF THE AG ~ JTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE, AUBURN. RESULTS OF EXPERIMENTS ON COTTON IN ALABAMA. MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA. THE BROWN PRINTING CO. 1900. CONTENTS. List of Station Officers. Introduction. Varieties of Cotton. Culture of Cotton. Fertilization of Cotton. Diseases of Cotton. List of Fungi Recorded as Growing on Cotton. Bibliography of Cotton Diseases. Climate of Cotton Belt. Improvement of Cotton by Hybridization and by Selection. Chemistry of Cotton. Index. COMMITTEE OF TRUSTEES ON EXPERIMENT STATION. F. M. MoSESLEY............ J. .. .............. UnionSprings... G. GILc ........... *sT0............ eHull. . HARALSON......................................Selma. JONATHAN STATION COUNCIL. WM. LERoY BROUN.......................................President. ......... P. H. M .............. Director and Botanist. B. B. Ross......................................Chemist. C. A. CARY, D. V. M...........................Veterinarian. J. F. DUGGAR............. ...................... Agriculturist. F. S. EARLE............................Biologist and Horticulturist. J. T. ANDERSON ......... ................ ASSISTANTS. C. L. HARE ...... J. Associate Chemist. ........................ First Assistant Chemist. Q. BURTON.......... ............... Second Assistant Chemist. H. S. HOUGHTON....... .................. T. U. CULVER.............. .............. R. W. Third Assistant Chemist. Superintendent of Farm. .. . ...... CLARK... ............... Assistant Agriculturist. MOSES CRAIG .................... :.....Assistant Horticulturist. The Bulletins of this Station will be sent free to any citizen of the State on application to the Agricultural Experiment Station.. Auburn, Alabama. INTRODUCTION. This bulletin has been prepared at the request of the Committee of the American Association of Agricultural Colleges and Experiment Stations which has in charge the collective exhibit of the Experiment Stations at the World's Fair in Paris in 1900. The Alabama Station has been engaged in the experiments on cotton since 1883 and a large amount of valuable material has accumulated in reference to its cultivation, chemistry, botany, ,diseases, entomology and physiology, and because of the variety of experiments conducted it was deemed appropriate for this station to prepare this work on cotton. During the period covered by the experiments the following bulletins have been issued by the Station that relate to cotton: In volume 1 there are 33 bulletins and 6 of these contain the results of experiments on cotton. 122 pages. No. 5-Cotton experiments. 16 pages. No. 13-Microscopic study of certain varieties of cotton. 20 pages. No. 16-Fertilizer experiments with cotton. 20 pages. No. 17-Dry application of Paris green and London purple for the cotton worm. 18 pages. No. 21-A new root rot disease of cotton. 11 pages. No. 22-Experiments with cotton. 24 pages. No. 23-Co-operative tests of fertilizers on cotton. 61 pages. No. 27-Black rust of cotton. 18 pages. No. 33-Cotton. 1 2pages. 182 No. pages. No. No. No. No. :pages. 34-Co-operative fertilizer tests on cotton. 46 36-Some leaf blights of cotton. 32 pages. 40-Cotton experiments. 15 pages. 41- Some diseases of cotton. 65 pages. 42-Co-operative soil tests of otton. 34 No. 45-Insects of cotton. 5 pages. No. 52-Cotton experiments. 2 pages. No. 55-A new disease of the cotton; cotton boll rot. 13 pages. No. 56-Experiments in crossing cotton. 51 pages. No. 57-Fertilizers required by cotton as determined by the analysis of the plant. 16 pages. No. 62-Cotton experiments. 7 pages. No. 65-Co-operative seed tests. 4 pages. No. 69-Fungus diseases of the cotton. 1 page. No. 71-Experiments with foreign cottons. 12 pages. No. 76-Cotton experiments. 23 pages. No. 78-Co-operative fertilizer experiments with cotton in 1896. 48 pages. No. 83 Hybrids from American and foreign cottons. 32 pages. No. 91 Co-operative fertilizer experiments with cotton in 1897. 63 pages. No. 99-Cotton rust. 31 pages. No. 101-Experiments with cotton in 1898. 19. pages. No. 102--Co-operative experiments with fertilizers on cotton in 1898. 75 pages. Climatology of the cotton plant. IssUed by the United States Weather Bureau. 70 pages. The above list comprises 37; bulletins, containing a total of 986 pages. 183 In the prosecution of the work indicated by the above bulletins the following parties have been more or less intimately connected with and responsible for the results of the experiments: W. H. Chambers, Agriculturist. W. C. Stubbs, Chemist. J. S. Newman, Agriculturist. J. J. Barclay, Agriculturist. N. T. Lupton, Chemist. P. H. iMell, Botanist and Meteorologist. G. F. Atkinson, Mycologist. B. B. Ross, Chemist. A. J. Bondurant, Agriculturist. J. M. Stedman, Mycologist and Entomologist. J. F. Duggar, Agriculturist. F. S. Earle, Mycologist. J. T. Anderson, Associate Chemist. B. M. Duggar, Assistant Mycologist. James Clayton, Assistant Agrici Iturist. T. U. Culver, Assistant Agriculturist. A. L. Quaintance, Assistant Entomologist. T. D. Samford, Assistant Botanist. George Clark, Assistant Botanist. A. M. Lloyd, Assistant Botanist and Meteorologist. A number of experimenters located in different parts of the State who had charge of the co-operative fertilizer tests on cotton have also contributed much valuable material. P. H. MELL, Director. VARIETIES OF COTTON BY J. F. DUGGAR. PURPOSES OF TESTS OF VARIETIES. Variety tests of cotton have had a prominent place at nearly every experiment station in the Cotton Belt. Although these experiments have had some value, yet they do not afford a concise answer to the question so often asked "What is the best variety of cotton?" Nor can we expect experimenters or farmers to be able to answer this question with a single name. Such an answer is up to this time impossible, for diligent search has failed to find any one variety of cotton which is universally superior to all other kinds. The variety which affords the largest yield on one soil is surpassed on a diferent soil by another kind. Even on the same soil, the relative productiveness of two given varieties differs, prevailing weather conditions perhaps favoring an early variety in one year, a late kind in another season. Conditions vary, and hence the list of most productive varieties changes from year to year. Statements of results of variety tests will prove useful in proportion as they take careful account of the conditions under which each test was made, so that we may come in time to learn what class of varieties in normal seasons may be expected to yield more than other kinds on poor soil, what sort to head the list when the soil is fertile, what kinds to prefer for localities subject to early frosts what varieties best respond to liberal fertilization, and so on. Another promising field of investigation in variety 1L86 testing is the study of the characters of each so called variety with a view to fixig.a moredefinite standard of purity and uniformity, the data thus obtained being also useful in determining how many of the numerous socalled varieties of cotton stand for distinct types and how many are only useless and confusing synonyms. Our observations, made on 70 so-called varieties in 1899, witl a view to ascertaining what varieties are distinct and what names are mere synonyms..need to be repeated before publication. PRODUCTIVENESS OF VARIETIES. Tests of varieties of cotton have been made on the Station Farm at Auburn nearly every year during the past decade. The. list of varieties varied from year to year, thus making difficult a comparison of the productiveness of the. different kinds. An examination of all these lists shows that altogether 48 varieties have been tested at Auburn on plots large enough to determine the yield ,per acre. The, usual size of plots in recent years has been one-sixteenth acre. In addition, the list of varieties tested in 1899 on plots toosmall to permit an accurate determination of yield per acre contains 45 new names, making a total of 93 so-called varieties tested by the Agricultural Department of this station. In the following table is given only the data obtained in the field tests on the farm at Auburn., It indicates the rank of each variety in each test, as shown by the yield of lint cotton per acre. When the stand of plants is known to be defective, that variety is excluded from the table. The number 1 opposite any variety shows that in the test that year this variety produced more lint than any other; so the number 2 denotes second place in production of lint, and so on for other numbers. Rank of, YarietiesObf Gbttoi0" n the Ras-is Of Yid of T it~Pe/i~ Acre.- Allen Long Staple 188-9:189 0'1891'91 *f.892' 1893 11:896 f 1897 1898) 1899 14.. . . 8, .. 21.., :;f'.~....: Allen Hybrid L. S. ..... . African............ Barnett........ .. ... ... Bailey ...... Cherry Cluster :. . 6 Colthorp Pride.. . ..... . Colthorp Eureka..... Cook, 21... ..... .... 12 18.. 11 .~14 . 17 .. 1" 6 . . .. * 4.. .. . .. :.... ". 7 .. ........ 4.:.... 1. ............... ,..... :.......:.. Cook, W. A:...... .... Common .. ... ... .... Crossland..... .. .... DalkeitnhiEureka.. Dearing.:...... Dickson......... J. C..--..... ... ... ... ... ... ... 4 2... ,:.24 15 20 .... 10............. 3 Duncan.. ..... ... 9 12 ... ,. 6 1 .. Ellsworth ... .. Gold Dust. Griffin.. ........ Hawkins Improved Herlong.. ... .... 12 9 . ... .. .. 7... .... 6 .... e ".... ... 23 6 3 ... .....3.. 13 ............ 10 5 ... ... Hunnicutt. ... 17.... .... .... 3... . ... 3 .... ......... . .. 9 .... ......... . Rameses.. .... 8 1 Russell.. ...... .. .... .... 8 5...... .... 5 .... Southern Hope. '. ..... 15 2.".. .... ..... 4 .... . Storm Proof. Smith Improved.. .... 4...11 .1......... 81... Strickland. .. ... 9 52' 2 4 .... 2l 31.... Truitt.. ... .... 9" 6 15.. .. .... Tyler... ..... ... 6. 6 . .1 . . . Texas Oak... 5. ...... 2 .15 .... 11 13 Welborn .. ... ... 9 16 10.... .... ... ... Whatley Improved 11... .... ..... 16 1).... . . 14 Wonderful ... . . 1I 10 .. . . . .. . . . . . Zellner.. .. *No. varieties in 8 14 17 16 11 15. 29 513 13) test.... .. ...... Size of Seed-The data showing size of seed were obtained by taking the average of three samples of seed, each sample from a different plant. Petit Gulf...... Hutchinson.. . Jones Improved... Jones Long Staple. Jones No. 1.... Keith... ... .... . King........ Lowry... .... .... Matthews. L. Staple Okra.. .... ..... Peeler ... ... ..... Peerless ... .... . Peterkin....... . j.. .1 5 ... i ... 10"...... ...... 7 7 .... 7. .8 ......... . 11 .... 19 17 .... 11 .... 5 14 ....... 5...5... .... ... ... .... 10~ 12. .1 .... 5 .... ......... ........ ........ 8... 1 .... . 2 6 .. 8 . . .. .. 12 7 11....".... .... 8...... 8 .... ......... 6 .... 1 . 7 13, , ... 7 4 5 .... ... a 4 .. "....." .... 11 .... 8 3 4 188 .Examining, in the above table, the records of those Varieties which have been tested four or more times, we .find. "And- the..following facts: The best records are apparently those of Peterkin Truitt. Peterkin -made the largest yield of lint in one test, ranked not lower than fifth in all except two tests, -and never lower than eighth. Truitt ranked from first to fifth except in one test, where it occupied the ninth place. Inasmuch as these two varieties rank high in most tests and have been more frequently tested than any others, it is convenient to regard one of them as 'standard to which the records of other varieties may be eferred for- comparison. To determine which of the above named varieties shall be used in these pages as a standard, it is necessary that we examine more in detail the records made by each of these varieties in the seven expriments in which both ,entered: Comparison of Varieties 1 eterkin and Truitton Basis Lint in - a Seven MADE. of Yield of acre.Truitt - Years. Yield of lint cot- YEAR ton per WHEN TEST WAS 1890................................. 1891............................ 1896............................. 1892................................. .... Peterkin 786 465 338 320 783 489 302 384 1897................................... 1898...................339 246 ............ 427 1899........... 245 330 442- ......... Average for 7 years................I 417 ( 425 The difference in the average yields of tlie two varieties is only 8 pounds of lint per acre, an amount too small to demonstrate that one variety is distinctly Ibetter than the ot~her, as regards production of lint. 189 Both may be counted safe varieties, having never failed in our tests to make fair to excellent records. The value of:the total product is greater with Truitt, which affords a larger percentage of seed than does Peterkin. For this reason we shall use Truitt as the standard of comparison in this article. Cbmparing Jones' Improved with Truitt, we find that both varieties are common to five tests, in four of which the rank of Truitt is higher than that of Jones. Hawkins was compared with Truitt in five tests, and in four of these wa defeated. Dickson invited comparison with the standard in three tests, in all of which it was surpassed. King and Truitt were compared five times, and in every instance the yield of lint was in favor of Truitt. Peerless was six times compared with this standard and only once was Peerless superior. In each of five tests Welborn was surpassed in yield of lint by Truitt. Allen Long Staple, iHerlong, Hunnicutt and Jones Improved were each twice in competition with Truitt and in all cases they were beaten by this last named variety. Each of the varieties mentioned in the preceding paragraph has one or more excellent qualities, and no one of them is unproductive. It is quite probable that under' some conditions each of these would prove more productive than either of those which have made the best average at Auburn. Nor do these tests imply that Truitt and Peterkin are superior to some of the best of the recently introduced varieties, for example Russell, which, however, has been tested here only twice, or not often enough to definitely determine its value in comparison with older varieties. VARLETIES- STUDIED IN 1899. _It is, extremely desirable that varieties should be -classified according to their natural relations. A satisfactory classification should be of practical benefit to the farmer in protecting him against the purchase of old varieties under new names and at high prices. It would undoubtedly reduce the number of so-called varieties, ,of which the writer has found more than 150 mentioned in agricultural publications. The.importance of the end to be attained seems to justify an endeavor to classify the varieties in the fact of the almost insuperable obstacles. The difficulties are formidable, and among -them may be mentioned: (1) The tendency of even a pure variety to vary with its environment; (2) The multiplication of names, especially local names, of varieties; and (3) The relatively small amount of descriptive and statistical data on record showing the character of the -so-called varieties. In 1899 the writer grew a large number of varieties with a view to obtaining correct descriptions of each and additional data regarding the characteristics of all kinds tested. The collection consisted of 70 sorts, the seed in most cases being procured from the originator or from parties supposed to be most interested in furnishing seed pure and true to name. Nevertheless there was in a number of varieties great diversity as between individual plants. To overcome this, as far as possible, selection was made in each variety of those plants which showed decided similarity in habit of growth and form of stalk, and which evidently represented the prevailing itype. Later, from this number of selected plants were chosen the best three plants, as nearly as could be judged by the eye; these three twice-selected plants furnish the data as to size of plants, bolls, seed,etc., and the most representative of the 'three was photographed for use in this article. With the small plots,-which were necessitated by the large number of varieties,-and with the small number of selected plants, it was impracticable to secure any re- liable data relative to the yield of each kind. A part of the data obtained from the selected plants of each sort are recorded in the tables which follow. Fre,quently the three samples from which an average was in all cases made were not entirely accordant. When the failure to agree was considerable, the samples were re-weighed. The data which appear in the following table represent the characteristics of the several varieties as they revealed themselves under the conditions of a test made here in 1899, on sandy upland soil, well fertilized with commercial fertilizers, and with the plants allowed ample space on every side. Weather conditions were unfavorable, drougth doing considerable injury. Planting was done at a late date, May 8. It is not necessarily true that in other years or under different soil and weather conditions the data secured would exactly correspond with those obtained in 1899. Such tests as this need to be several times repeated so as to obtain averages of maximum value. Illustrations showing representative plants of nearly every variety grown here in 1889 may be seen in plates I to XII. The last plate shows the appearance and relative size of an average full-grown but unopened boll of each variety. The entire credit for all illustrations is due to the Director, P. H. Mell, who made all the photographs. 192 The following 24 varieties may be considered as having large boils, that is, requiring only 50 to 65 boils make a pound of seed cotton: Banks,,Cheise, Christopher, Coppedge, Culpepper, Japan, Jones Cummings, Drake, Duncan, Ellis, Improved, Lee, Maddox, Nancy ianks, Peerless, Russell, Scroggins, Sprueill, Strickland, Texas Storm Proof, Thrash, and Truitt. to Griffin, Pruitt, Weight of Seed Cotton in 100 Boils and Number of Boils Required to Mlake One Pound of Seed Cotton. VARIETY. rd VARIETY. 00-r"Pi 1.37 73 1.37 73 1.33 75 1.33 75 1.33 75 1.30 77 1.30 77 1.30 77 1.30 77 1.30 77 1.30 77 1.30 77 1.27 79 1.23 81 1.23 81 1.23 81 1.23 81 1.23 81 1.23 1.20 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.13 1.13 1.13 1.10 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.03 .87 .77 81 83 86 86 86 89 89 89 91 94 94 94 94 94 96 111 130 Cheise Improved. Texas Storm Proof. Drake............... Strickland .......... Banks ............... Russell .............. Lee Improved........ Japan............... Christopher Improved.. Culpepper........... Peerless............ Thrash Select........ Truitt.............. Jones Improved (Alex..... ander) .. ...... 2.00 1.97 1.80 1.80 1.77 1.73 1.70 1.70 1.67 1.67 1.64 1.64 1.64 .. 50 W. A. Cook ... ..... ..... Doughty.... ... 56 Big Boll.......... 56 Minor. ............. 57 58 59 59 60 60 61 61 61 61 63 63 64 64 64 64 64 64 65 65 65 65 67 68 68 68 71 71 Texas Oak .. ..... ... Mattis .... .... .... . Hawkins.. .. ....... . Hawkins Jumbo . . Hilliardilliard. Pinkrton........ . Petit Gulf.. .......... Allen Irpd. L. S. Bur................ . .Pikro........ King... .... 1.64 1.60 Jones Imp'd (Curry).. 1.60 Ellis.... ............. 1.57 .... ..... Duncan ..... 1.57 Scroggins Prolific. . . 1.57 Nancy Hanks .. ...... 1.57 Norris .............. 1.57 Pruitt Premium ... 1.57 . Maddox.. .. ...... 1.53 Cummings........... 1.53 .... Sprueil.. ....... 1.53 Coppedge .. ........... 1.53 Griffin........ 1.50 Parks Own .. ........ 1.47 Grayson Big Boll. 1.47 Gunn.... ............ 1.47 Matthews L. S....... Texas Bur........... 1.40 . 1.40 Smith Improved. Jackson Limbless (U. S. 1.40 Dept. Agriculture.... Herndon Select .... 1.40 ~~r~ I~ vii Lowry...... ..... ..... ... .. . Texas Wood ..... ..... Cobweb.. .... ...... Improved L. S..... .... Jackson African .... ander).... (Alex... Moon.... ........ Welborn.. ..... Tyler Limb Cluster. ... ........ ..... . Allen Hybrid L. S.. No. 12 [ (?) Herlong]. . Borden Prolific... ....... Wise....o.... Peterkin .. .......... Dickson... ....... Boyd Prolific....... . . Shine Early.. ........ Dearing. ..... 11.1.~. ..~. Bates Poor Land... 71 Excelsior ........... 71 vr. Sea Island.. .. ...... Norris. .... .... .............. . . 193 The following 21 varieties have bolls of medium size, from 65 to 80 being required to make one pound of seed cotton: Allen Improved, Big Boll, Bur, W. A. Cook, Doughty, Grayson Big Boll, Gunn, Hawkins, Hawkins Jumbo, Herndon, Hilliard, Jackson Limbless, Matthews Long Staple, Mattis, Minor, Parks, Petit Gulf, Pinkerton, Smith Improved, Texas Bur and Texas Oak. The small boll varieties, or those requiring from 80 to 130 bolls to make a pound of seed cotton, numbered 22, and were as follows: Allen Hybrid, Bates Poor Land, Borden, Boyd, Cobweb, Dearing, Dickson, Excelsior, No. 12 (the so-called Herlong), Improved Long Staple, Jackson African, King, Lowry, Moon, Norris, Peterkin, Sea Island, Shine Early, Texas Wood, Tyler, Welborn and Wise. 194. SIZE OF SEED. The data showing size of ing the average of three samples seed-were obtained by tak-' of seed, each sample. from a different plant. Average weight of cotton seed Grams. Duncan.................16.64 Banks...................15.98 Texas Storm Proof.......15.98 Russell.................15.74 Allen Improved..........15.64 Thrash..................15.52 Drake...................15.30 15.20 Ellis .................... 15.12 Maddox ................. 15.08 Strickland .............. Cheise..................14.82 Culpepper...............14.78 14.50 Christopher ............. Coppedge................14.32 Lee.....................14.32 Scroggins...............14.18 Matthews L. S...........14.06 Truitt ................ ....... of each variety. Grams. Nancy Hanks............12.42 Cummings.............12.34 Jones...................12.34 Sprueili.... ............. 12.34 Cobweb ..... ............ 12.32 Griffin..... ............ 12.10 Bur..... ....... ........ 11.98 Moon........ ..... 11.70 Allen Hybrid .... .... .... 11.56 Lowry ..... ..... ........ 11.54 Minor.................11.24 King...................10.96 Mattis...................10.86 13.78 13.74 13.54 13.44 13.44 13.44 13.26, 12.96 Sea Island.. ........... Jones ..... ....... 13.62 Petit Gulf...............10.78 Jackson (African) from Alexander .... ......... 10.54 Jackson Limbless from U. S. D. A ........ ........ 10.46 Texas Oak..............10.34 Hawkins................10.30 Peterkin ... ........... Peerless ...... ....... Grayson .. ........ ... .... ..... Japan ....... (?) Pruitt Premium .. . Doughty ...... ..... ..... Texas Wood...... ........ Hilliard .. ....... Shine..................10.16 ....... Borden ..... ............. Welborn............10.04 No. 12 (? Herlong) ...... 10.08 10.04 9.96 ........ 12.96 Cook (W. A.).............12.80 ..... ......... 12.70 Gunn ..... Improved Long Staple.. .. 12.68 Parks..... ..... .......... 12.6 6 Smith Improved .. .... ... 12.64 Norris ..... ..... ........ 12.6 2 Texas Bur .... ........... 12.52 Big Boll .... .. .......... 12.48 Hawkins Jumbo.... ...... 12.44 Excelsior ..... Dickson ................. Pinkerton .. ...... ......... Boyd ..... ............... Dearing ..... ............. Peterkin .... ............. ..... ....... ....... 9.94 9.74 9.54 9.50 9.24 9.10 Texas Wood ....... ....... 8.72 8.28 Wise.. ............ Bates (Poor Land) ....... 8.16 195 large,' medium and If we would describe the seed' small, an arbitrary division of varieties becomes necessary. The first 25. varieties in the above list, having seed be reweighing more than 13 granms per hundred, garded as having large seed. Seed weighing 10.5 to 13 as may grams per 100 may be classed as medium in size, and those weighing 8 to 10.5 grams per hundred as small seed. PROPORTION OF LINT TO SEED COTTON. The following table gives the percentage of lint seed cotton of each variety. The figures results obtained by carefully handpicking samples of seed cotton' from three plants of each variety and weighing the lint and seed on chemical balances. -are average in the VARIETY. ... ..... Pinkerton... ..... .... Bates (Poor Land) ..... .......... ..... Borden ..... VARIETY. ..... 38. 6 Dickson........... 37.6 Lowry ...... ..... ......... ............. 37.5 Scroggins ..... 32.1 31.0 31.9 .. Wise..... ..... ............ Thrash .................... 37.O Lee..................31.7 .. 36.2 Gunn ......... Peterkin (26 S.).......35.;..... Texas Wood.... ...... Peterkin (26 N.).... ...... hine ......... 35.4Mattis ....... 35.l Jones ....... Hawkins..... .... ....... Jackson...... ..... ........... Jackson ... ..... Minor ..... ... ............. No. 12 (? Herlong)..... .... .......... Cheise ..... ..... Pruitt Premium (?) ......... .... 35.0OJones Improved ........ 34.5 Norris.... ..... .......... .......... ..... 34.4lRuesell ..... ... ...... 34.4 Cummings ....... 34.l Ellis.. ................. 33.7 1-iawkins Jumbo..... ...... 34.0 Improved. ........... .. .. . ... ...... ..... .............. 31.6 31.6 31.5 31.4 Sprueill .... ..... .......... 33.8SPetit Gulf .. ........... Grayson..... 31.3 31.2 31.2 31.1 31.1 31.1 30.8 ..... .. ........ ........ 30.7 Parks ..... ..... ........... Nancy Hanks ............ .............. King ... ..... Tyler 33.7 Banks .... 33.2 Truitt..... ..... .. ..... 30.6 30.5 30.3 30.3 ............ Maddox.. ..... Texas Storm Proof .......... ..... 33.6 Smith Improved..... ...... ....... 33.3 Drake............. ........... ..... ........... 33.1lDuncan ..... .............. 33.1lTexas Bur... ... .......... 30.0 29.9 Boyd .. ... ..... ... Welborn ... Peerless.... Excelsior... ... .. .. . .33.0OCobweb ... ... .............. .............. ........ ............ 29.7 29.7 29.6 29.6 ....... ..... ..... ............... ......... ... ...... ......... Bur... ..o... 32.9 (?) 32.9 Japan..... Dearing ... L. S...... 32.SStrickland ..... Hilliard..... ..... ........ ....... Coppedge..... ..... ......... Moon .......... ....... ..... Culpepper ..... ...... Christopher.... ..... Texas Oak..... ..... ...... 29.1 32.8 Herndon... ... ............ 32.8 Improved Long Staple...28.3 28.2 .32.7 Doughty L. S....... ........ 32.5 Allen Hybrid L. S.......... 26.9 32.4 Allen Improved L. S........ 26.7 32.4 Matthews L. S.............27.6 32.8'Griffin .......... 29.2 Big Boll...... ..... ...... ...... 32.lSea Island... ....... Cook (W. A.) L. S.........25.8 125.9 196 In the list of varieties having at least 35 per cent. of lint there are only 9 names, all of these except Thrash being closely related varieties and in many respects resembling Peterkin. Only 14 names occur in the list of those having less than 30 per cent. of lint, most of these being long staple kinds. This leaves two-thirds of the varieties here tested in the class that has 30 to 35 per cent. of lint. NUMBER OF FORMS PER PLANT AND TIME OF MATURING OF VARIETIES. In order to ascertain the relative earliness of the varieties grown here in 1899, a count was made Oct. 9-11, of all bolls then open and also of all immature "forms," including blooms and unopened bolls of all sizes. The following table gives the data obtained by counting the "forms" on three plants of each variety, the percentage of open bolls being obtained by taking the total number of mature and immature forms as 100: 197 Average number of blooms, boils and open burs and percentage of open bar, October 9-11, 1899. VARIETY. - VARIETY. 44 48 38 43. 32 30 38 29 63 52 40 35 39 39 49 41 33 26 - o Nancy Hanks..........47 100 Peterkin (26 N.) ... Texas Wood...........40 100 Dickson.............. Borden.......... ..... 36 97 Piraron............ 40 Griffin............. 97 Banks............... Parks.......... 34 (?) Dearing.........37 95 Culpepper........... 55 94 Duncan.............. Boyd............ 32 94 Jones Impd. (from Alex Norris ................ 32 94 ander)............. Smith ............. 92 Mattis............. Shine.................48 Texas Bur...........24 92 Excelsior........... Hawkins Jumbo.......34 91 Hilliard............. Peterkin (26 5.).......46 91 Russell........... Moon..... ....... 31 90 Maddox.............. Bur.................34 89 Wise................ Lowry ................ 89 Improved Long Staple. Minor ................ 47 89 Herndon............. No. 12 [ (?) Herlong] 28 88 ........... Gunn ..... ..... ........ 28 86 Texas Storm Proof. 6Pels .. Texas Oak...... .... .. 29 80 79 79 79 78 77 77 76 76 75 75 75 74 74 73 71 70 36 Hawkins... Cook (W. Drake.................40 Coppedge..... ....... 48 Pruitt Premium.. ...... 34 Ellis..... ...... ....... 25 Big Boll .... ........... 37 Cheise...........25 Allen Hybrid .......... 54 Bates (Poor Land)...38 King... .-............. 43 Jones Impd. (from Curry-Arrington)...1 40 85 85 Matthews..... A.)....'..... ... ... .... .... 43 70 85 Sprueill. ......... 84 Thrash.......... ..... 84 Welborn.... ..... 84 Cummings........... 84 Strickland ........ .... 83 Tyler. ........... 82 Jackson African ander)............ 82 82 81 80 I 80 ~n (Alex- 52 36 31 39 55 62 23 35 43 45 39 51 95 69 67 64 64 62 62 58 56 50 42 36 35 29 23 Truitt............ Japan..... ............ Cobweb ..... ........... Doughty .. ............. rr- 33 37 54 40 I CIn Lee..... ............. . Christopher........ Jackson Limbless (U. . S. D.A'.).... ...... Sea ITT Island........ .. . 198 Not only was the proportion of mature and immature fruit determined by counting, but field notes were made indicating the earliness of the variety as judged by appearances only. These notes show that the data in the tables do not constitute safe guides for dividing varieties into groups of early, medium and late maturity; the table is of greater use in showing what varieties would be most injured by early frost, which under the conditions of this test would have been those that occupy a position low down in the table. For example Welborn, although an early variety (in the sense of affording a heavy picking early in the season) had nevertheless about one-third of its forms in immature condition on October 11. A still more notable instance of large proportion of immature forms as late as October 11 is afforded by the Jackson. An examination of this table shows that the following 27 varieties averaged 40 or more mature and immature forms per plant, those producing the largest number being placed first: Sea Island, Mattis, Cummings, Welborn, Allen Hybrid, Boyd, Cook (W. A.), Cobweb, Excelsior, Jackson, Improved Long Staple, Shine, Coppedge, Dickson, Minor, Nancy Hanks, Peterkin, Lee, Peerless, King, Jones, Drake, Griffin Pinkerton, Herndon, and Texas Wood. Those varieties on which the total number of forms averaged less than 30 were only 8, viz: Strickland, Texas Storm Proof, Cheise, Ellis, Texas Oak, Gunn, No. 12 (so-called Herlong), and Texas Bur. More than half of the varieties in this test averaged from 30 to 40 blooms, bolls, and mature fruit on October 9-11, 1899. Of course the number of fruit forms produced by the plant during the entire season of growth was much Hlilliard, 199, greater than the figures above would show; for the count did not include the large number of blooms and bolls which had been shed, as the result of very unfavorable weather conditions. As judged by the eye the varieties were classed in the field with reference to time of maturity, as follows ; Very early. Early. Early to medium. Miedium. Medium to late. Late. Very late. Dickson, Dearing, King, Lowry, Borden, Bur, Nancy Hanks, Parks. Cummings, Drake, Bates Poor Land, Herndon, Hawkins, Jackson Peerless, African. Shine Early, Jackson Smith Improved, Limbless, Sprueill. Texas Wood. Welborn, Griffin, Hawkins Jumbo, Minor, Texas Oak Texas Bur, Wise. Big Boll, Culpepper, Hilliard, Jones. Norris, Peterkin Limb Cluster. Peterkin, Pruitt, Truitt, Tyler. f Allen Hybrid, Cheise, Japan, Banks, Thrash, Christopher.' Improved Long Coppedge, Staple, Cobweb, Sea Island. W. A. Cook, Duncan, Doughty L. S. Excelsior, Ellis, Grayson, Gunn, Jones Improved. Mattis, Maddox, Moon , Matthews L. S. Pinkerton, Petit Gulf, Russell, Scroggins, Strickland, Texas Storm Proof 201 CORRELATION OF CHARACTERS IN VARIETIES OF COTTON. One of the ends in view in making this detailed statistical study of varieties was to learn what qualities are correlated, or what characters we may expect to find combined in one variety and what qualities are antagonistic or usually not to be found united in the same variety. This question has a decidedly practical bearing for the conclusion reached by such studies should afford a means of correctly interpreting the results of variety tests. Knowledge of the characteristics of varieties should also enable the farmer more intelligently to choose the kind of cotton best suited to his conditions. A knowledge of qualities that may easily be united in the same plant and of those that are antagonistic should be of supreme value to the plant breeder who endeavors to intelligently originate varieties having certain definite characters. A study of preceding tables shows that in general there is a fairly constant relation between the size (weight) of boll contents and the weight of 100 seed. Large seed are usually from varieties having large bolls, and vice versa. For proof of this assertion let thereader notice that of the 25 varieties classed as producing heavy seed, nearly all are also to be found in the list of large boll varieties. With one possible exception (Grayson) this is true of all short staple kinds under test. Apparently this law has little, if any, application to the long staple varieties, for Matthews, Doughty, Allen Improved and Sea Island,-all having long staple,produce large seed though bearing bolls of medium or small size. Further study of the tables shows that most small seed varieties, whether of Peterkin, Cluster, or other type, bear small bolls. These investigations afford no answer to the question 202 'whether wzithin a given variety the seeds average heavier in large bolls than in small. Is the superiority in weight large bolls over small bolls of the same variety chiefly due to heavier, more completely developed seed or to their greater number? This question invites further study. Our work thus far leads to the conclusion that .among short staple varieties those that bear large bolls are usually those that bear large seed. The writer has compiled a table showing the percentage of lint afforded by every variety in the tests published by American Experiment Station prior to 1895. compilation showed clearly that long staple varieties yield but a low percentage of lint. The results obtained in our collection of 70 varieties in 1899 affords additional evidence that great length of staple is antag'onistic to a large proportion of lint. For example, all long staple varieties in this test yield less than 30 per cent. of lint, while only two or three of the short staple varieties tested show such a small proportion of lint. Let us examine the several tables which precede this paragraph in order to ascertain whether the size of the seed has any relation to the percentage of lint. We are so accustomed to obtaining a large percentage of lint with Peterkin, a variety having very small seed, that we involuntarily associate small seed with great outturn of lint. This does seem to be the general rule, but there are possibly exceptions, as in the case of Thrash and the so-called Dearing of this test. Small seed are uisually an indication of a large per-centage of lint. -of nThat IPROVISIONAL CLASSIFICATION OF AGRICULTURAL VARIETIES. fixed characteristics. Agricultural varieties of cotton are far from showing Moreover, the points of difference between any two extreme plants within one variety are "Bulletin No. 33, Office of Experimn-nt S ations, U. S. Dept Agr. 203 ,often greater than the dissimilarity between the.average plants of two closely related varieties. Hence the impossibility of accurately separating varieties according to single definite qualities, as form of stalk alone, size of bolls alone, etc. Instead, it seems best to arrange the varieties into groups on the basis of general resemblance in several ,characters. The following attempt to arrange the varieties grown here in 1899 is merely a provisional classification, to be modified as future investigations may suggest. The short staple or upland varieties of cotton may conveniently be divided into six classes, and to these may be ,added the long staple upland varieties as a seventh. I would propose for each of these general classes a name .giving, when practicable, an idea of the manner of growth of the plant, and with each class name would associate the name of some distinct and well known variety as a type or standard. I shall designate these classes as (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Cluster varieties, or Dickson type. Semi-cluster varieties, or Peerless type. Rio Grande varieties, or Peterkin type. Short Limb varieties, or King type. Big Boll varieties or Duncan type. Long Limb varieties, or Petit Gulf type. Long Staple Upland varieties, or Allen type. The lines of demarkation between these groups are not always clear and distinct; one group often merges into another by almost imperceptible gradations, just as is the case with related varieties. Below is given a list of the varieties (as groivn here in 1899), which are included under these several groupings, and also a general description of the varieties com- 204 posing each class. Varieties of which the classification, according to this scheme, is doubtful are named in a separate list, or are discussed in connection with the class to which they seem to bear the greatest resemblance. Further work will be done with a view to improving the classification and to more definitely determining the group to which each variety belongs. CLASS I--CLUSTER VARIETIES, OR DICKSON TYPE. The transition between this and the next succeeding class is so gradual that any other than arbitrary division is impossible. In this first class we include of the varieties grown here in 1899 only Dickson, Jackson (Jackson's African or Limbless) and Welborn. With all these the most striking characters are (1) the absence of long wood limbs except at the base, and (2) the tendency of the bolls to grow in clusters, or in twos or threes from the same node of the stem or limb. The plants are usually tall, slender, and erect, though often bent down by the weight of bolls growing at the upper extremity of the main stem. The few base limbs are often long. The bolls and seed are usually small, but may be of medium size;-the seed are thickly covered with fuzz, which is usually whitish, with little or no brownish or greenish tinge. As to the time of maturity these varieties must be classed as early, for though they sometimes make a second growth of bolls in the top of the plant which may fail to mature, they afford a large proportion of their total crop at the first picking. In earliness they are surpassed by the varieties of the King type (Class IV.) In per centage of lint they present no striking peculiarity, seldom equalling in this respect the Rio Grands and usually ranging between 32 and 34 per cent. lint. 205 'CLASS II-SEMI-CLUSTER VARIETIES, OR PEERLESS TYPE. Here we include Boyd, Cummings, Drake, No. 28 N. (doubtfully labeled Dearing), Hawkins Prolific, Hawkins Jumbo, Herndon, Minor, Norris and Tyler. These varieties have in less marked degree some of the equalities which distinguish Class I, being erect and hav-ing bolls more or less in clusters. Along the main stem are very short limbs above the base limbs, which latter are usually of medium length. In size of bolls and size ,of seed and percentage of lint there is considerable diversity among these varieties. The seed are usually of :medium size, well covered with fuzz, except Tyler (which in this respect somewhat resembles Peterkin and may perhaps claim a place in Class III) ; fuzz of many .shades, whitish, greenish, or brownish. These varieties are early or medium in time of maturity. CLASS III-RIO GRAND VARIETIES, OR PETERKIN TYPE. In this class we place Peterkin, Peterkin Limb Cluster, Texas Wood and Wise. The characters which most distinctly mark this class are: (1) The large proportion of lint, usually 35 per cent. or more of the weight of seed cotton, and (2) Seeds that are bare of fuzz or nearly so, except at the tip end. The plants are well branched, and usually, on upland soil, of mediumsize. The bolls are small and the nearly bare black seed are quite small. In time of maturing these varieties are usually neither very early nor extremely late. The following varieties may perhaps be classed here to advantage, though in one or more respects they differ 206 so widely from the type that they require further study before they can be positively assigned to this class: Bates Poor Land, Borden, Excelsior, Pinkerton, Texas Oak, Tyler. The low percentage of lint would seem to exclude all these except Bates, Borden and Pinkerton, and all six of the varieties in this list have fuzz, usually thin or brownish, on the seed. In small size and in the absence of any shade of green on the seed they all resemble Peterkin. The following varieties have been mentioned in a work on cotton as related to Rio Grand, viz: Dearing and Shine, but in per cent. of lint and in some other respects they in 1899 differ widely from Peterkin, which we have taken as the type of this class. CLASS IV-SHORT LIMB VARIETIES, OR KING TYPE. King and Lowry constitute the basis of this group. Both are early, indeed the earliest varieties ever tested by the writer. The plants are small and well branched near the top as well as at the base. The limbs are short, the bolls small, the seed medium in size, and thickly covered with fuzz, usually brownish, though a greenish shade is often visible. The percentage of lint is usually 32 to 34. In the field Parks and the kind furnished us under the (probably incorrect) name of Herlong were not distinguishable from King, and we think that both these varieties belong here. Shine has some claims to a position in this group. CLASS V BIG BOLL VARIETIES, OR DUNCAN TYPE. To this group we would assign: Banks, Christopher, Coppedge, Culpepper, Duncan, Grayson, Jones Improved, Lee, Russell, Scroggins, 207 Strickland, Texas. Storm Proof, Thrash, Truitt and its equivalent, sent:to us as Pruitt Premium. The large bolls and large seed and late growth of 5Maddox seem to place it here, though its nearly bare seed are at variance with all the varieties above. The large bolls and seed characters of Sprueill and Japan would bring these two varieties to this group, but in 1899 these two matured too early to be ranked alongside of the late varieties in the list above. The character which especially distinguishes this class is the large size of bolls, of which only 51 to 68 are required to yield a pound of seed cotton. Other specially notable qualities are late maturity and vigorous growth of stalk. The seed are large or very large, and covered usually (Maddox being an exception) with a thick fuzz, generally brownish white or whitish, a part of the seed of many of these varieties being covered with a deep green fuzz. The per cent. of lint often runs rather low and is usually between 30 and 33. The bolls are never clustered; in some varieties the upper limbs are so short as to give the top of the plant the erect, slender appearance which is common among semi-cluster: varieties. CLASS VI-LONG LIMB UPLAND VARIETIES, OR PETIT GULF TYPE. Ellis, Gunn, and Petit Gulf find a place in this class: Cheise may be classed here, though it has also some of the qualities of the Big Boll group. The varieties in this class grow to large size and have long limbs, the plants presenting a straggling appearance or marked want of compactness. The bolls and seed are both of medium to large size, the latter covered with fuzz, of various shades. The per cent. of lint is. 208 low or medium. This class seems poorly suited to upland soils, and indeed, as grown here in 1899, does not impress one as pre-eminent in any specially valuable qualities. CLASS VII-LONG STAPLE VARIETIES, OR ALLEN TYPE. This group includes Allen Hybrid, Allen Improved, Cobweb, Cook (W. A.), Doughty, Griffin, Improved Long Staple (from Holloway), Matthews and Moon. The length of staple is the distinguishing characteristic. The lint usually measures 1 3-16 to 18 inches in length, or 30 to 35 millimeters. An almost invariable accompaniment to great length of staple is a low proportion of lint, which in all' varieties of this class tested here, except Moon, has been less than 30 per cent. The plants grow to large size, have limbs of great length, and usually present a straggling appearance, though in some varieties only the base limbs are long, the upper limbs bearing a number of bolls close to the main stem, and giving the upper portion of the plant the appearance of great prolificacy. The bolls are not very large, but are long, slender, tapering to a sharp point. All of these long staple varieties are late in maturing a crop. The seed are of medium to large size, usually densely covered with fuzz, from which all trace of green is absent, the color being almost pure white, or in some varieties of a brownish tint. In some varieties, as with all the seed of Cobweb and with a small proportion of the seed of Cook as grown here in 1899, the fuzz is absent, and the seed bare, these naked seeds being distinguishable from Peterkin by their larger size. If the length of staple in these long staple inland varieties were the results of hybridization between the Sea Island 209 ,and the ordinary short staple upland varieties we should expect the hybrid more frequently to inherit the inaked or bare seed from its Sea Island parent. LIST OF UNCLASSIFIED VARIETIES. In addition to the varieties enumerated in the seven classes before named, we grew in 1899 the following varieties which must remain unclassified until the observations intended to ascertain their characteristics can be repeated: Bur, Texas Burr, Big Boll (from Holloway), Japan, Mattis (a large boll straggling variety, with bare seed), Nancy Hanks and Smith Improved. CHOICE OF VARIETIES. No one variety can be universally recommended. A .knowledge of the characteristics of each variety may sometimes aid a farmer in the selection of a kind suited to his conditions. For example, in the extreme northern portion of the cotton belt, where the growing season is short, earliness is one of the qualities desired. In addition to some good new varieties we find in the list of the very early, early, and medium early varieties on page 200 the names of the following well known kinds, King, Welborn, Dickson and Peerless, which are among the safe varieties for localities where the growing season is short. For late planting, even in lower latitudes, early varieties are preferable. Other qualities besides earliness which must be taken into consideration in choosing a variety are ease of picking, ability to withstand unfavorable weather without excessive shedding of forms, relative resistance to rust, tendency to produce a clean or trashy cotton, relative freedom from boll rot, etc. The writer's observation is that the varieties bearing bolls in clusters are apt to 8 210; shed a larger proportion of their forms than those with a greater development of limbs, This probably implies that a grower of a cluster variety should be even more careful than other cotton planters to give frequent and thorough cultivation so as to avoid the excessive drying of the soil which occurs very rapidly while an unbroken crust covers the ground, and which condition of dryness often increases the tendency to shedding of forms. Ease of picking is usually in proportion to the size of the bolls. Another factor is the character of the burs, which in some varieties offer special difficulties to clean and rapid picking. Varieties having this character are often termed "storm proof," in recognition of their relative resistance to the blowing out or beating out of the cotton by wind or rain. This quality is of doubtful advantage since it is directly opposed to ease of picking. Moreover, notes made on all these varieties in the field showed that the varieties offering considerable resistance to clean picking were by no means exempt from having a part of the seed cotton blown or beaten out by wind and rain. As a rule, extreme length of limbs and want of compactness in the plant is undesirable. It is not the variety of straggling appearance that heads the list in productiveness. For upland soils the long staple varieties are scarcely to be considered, for they require good, moist soil, are less productive than the short staples, and generally mature late. Neither our tests nor those made elsewhere point to any one variety as absolutely the best. The farmer who would make use of our results can do so only by deciding for himself whether for his conditions he needs an early or late, a cluster or limbed, a large seed or small seed variety; and then, having decided on the kind of 211 cotton he wishes, he should note all the varieties that we have included on previous pages in the class which he prefers. The rank of all the varieties of this class as regards productiveness or other qualities he can study with the aid of the tables given in this article. In nearly any class he may select he will find several varieties of about equal value, for the difference in productiveness between any two pure, well established varieties of the same type is far less than is generally supposed. Let .s consider carefully what particular characters or qualities are best adapted to a given soil and method of cultivation; then there is no danger of going far wrong, whichever one of the well established varieties of this class may be chosen. EXPLANATION OF PLATES. PLATE X-An accident caused the failure to present an illustration of the Truitt plant; however, see figure in Plate X, showing Pruitt Premium, which is identical with Truitt and which probably owes its name originally to an error in spelling. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Peerless. Cummings. Drake. Mattis. Dickson. Boyd. Lee. Welborn. Jackson Limbless, from U. S. Dept. Agr. Jackson African, from Alexander Seed Co. Seed incorrectly labeled Herlong. Tyler. Scroggins. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 23. 24. 25. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. Christopher. Herndon. King. ° Lowry. Parks. Sprueill. Grayson. Hawkins Prolific. Hawkins Jumbo. Nancy Hanks. Peterkin Limb Cluster, Dearing. Texas Wood. Wise. Culpepper. Strickland. 212. 33. Norris. 34. Pinkerton. 35. Pruitt. 36. Ellis. 37. Jones Improved. 38. Bates Poor Land. 39. Bur. 40. Texas Bur. 41. Minor. 42. Smith Improved. 43. Petit Gulf. 44. Texas Oak. 45. Matthews Long Staple. 46. Griffin Long Staple. 47. Allen Hybrid Long Staple. 48. Allen Improved Long Staple 49. W. A. Cook Long Staple. 50. Doughty Long Staple. 51. Moon Long Staple. 52. Cobweb Long Staple. 53. Improved Long Staple. 26 S. Peterkin. 27 S. Gunn. 28 S. Excelsior. 29 S. Hilliard. 30S. Shine. 31 S. Culpepper. 32 S. Banks. 33 S. Norris. 34 S. Pinkerton. 35 S. Pruitt Premium. 36 S. Big Boll. 37 S. Jones Improved. 38 S. Cheise. 39 S. Borden. 40S. Maddox. 41 S. Coppedge. 42 S. Japan. 43 S. Sea Island. 44 S. Texas Storm Proof. WHERE TO OBTAIN SEED. As this Station has no seed for sale or distribution, the following list of parties supplying us with seed is given, so that intending purchasers may know where seed of each variety can be obtained: Allen Hybrid, from J. B. Allen, Port Gibson, Miss. Allen Improved, from J. B. Allen, Port Gibson, Miss. Banks, from W. H. Banks, Newnan, Ga. Bates Poor Land, from R. Bates, Jackson Sta., S. C. Big Boll, from Holloway Seed & Grain Co. Dallas, Tex. Boyd Prolific, from R. Frotscher, New Orleans, La. Bur, from R. Frotscher, New Orleans, La. Cheise, from Holloway Seed & Grain Co., Dallas, Tex. Christopher, from R. H. Christopher, Asbury, Ga. Cobweb, from W. E. Collins, Mayersville, Miss. W. A. Cook, from W. A. Cook, Newman, Miss. Coppedge, from C. S. Coppedge, Nyson, Ga. 213 Culpepper, from J. E. Culpepper, Luthersville, Ga. Cummings, from T. A. Whatley, Opelika, Ala. Dearing, from H. P. Jones, Herndon, Ga. Dickson, from Curry-Arrington Seed Co., Rome, Ga. Doughty, fron Curry-Arrington Seed Co., Rome, Ga. Drake Cluster, from M. W. Johnson Seed Co., Atlanta, Ga. Duncan, from M. W. Johnson Seed Co., Atlanta, Ga. Ellis, from G. B. Ellis, Palalto, Ga. Excelsior, from C. F. Moore, Bennettsville, S. C. Grayson Big Boll, from NV. B. Grayson, Grayson, La. Griffin, from John Griffin, Greenville, Miss. Gunn, from C. S. Gunn, Temple, Miss. Hawkins Improved., from V. B. Hawkins, Nona, Ga. Hawkins J umbo, from NV. B. Hawkins, Nona, Ga. Herlong, from Curry-Arrington Seed Co., Rome,. Ga. Herndon Select, from S. J. Thornton, Coldwater, Ga. Hilliard, from NV. A. Hilliard, Bowersville, Ga. Improved Long -Staple, from Holloway Seed Grain Co., Dallas, Tex. Jackson from Alexander Seed Co., Augusta, Ga. Jackson Limbless, from Division of Botany, U. S. & African, Dept. Agriculture. Japan, from Holloway Seed Grain Co., Dallas, Tex. Jones Improved, from Alexander Seed Co., Augusta, Ga. Jones Improved, from Curry-Arrington Seed Co., Rome, Ga. King, H. P. Jones, Herndon, Ga. & Lee from Improved, from E. E. Lee, from J. Lowry, (4. Lowry, Cartersville, Wildwood, Ala. Ga. Maddox, from J. S. Maddox, Orchard Hill, Ga. Matthews Long Staple, from J. A. Matthews, Holly Springs, Miss. 214 Mattis, from C. F. Mattis, Learned, Miss. Minor, from J. D. Minor, Meriwether, Ga. Moon, from J. M. Moon, Peytonville, Ark. Nancy ilanks, from Curry-Arrington Seed Co., Rome, Ga. Norris, from II. Steiner, Grovetown, Ga. Park's Own, from 0. F. Park, Alexander City, Ala. Peerless, from 1M. W. Johnson Seed Co., Atlanta, Ga. Peterkin, from J. A. Peterkin, Fort Motte, S. C. Petit Gulf, from H. C. Prevost, New Orleans, La. Pinkerton, from H. R. Pinkerton; Eatonton, Ga. Russell Big Boll, from -G. F. Park, Alexander City, Ala. Sea Island, from Alexander Seed Co., Augusta, Ga. Scroggins Prolific, from J. T. Scroggins, Luthersville, Ga. Shine Early, from J. A. Shine, Shine, N..C. Smith Improved, from A. J. Smith, Conyers, Ga. from A. MI. Sprueill, Brompton, Ala. Strickland, from Curry-Arrington Seed Co., Rome, Ga. Texas Bur, from Alexander Seed Co., Augusta, Ga. Texas Oak, from M. G. Smith, Lightfoot, Ga. Texas Storm Proof, from W. J. Smiley, Baileyville, Tex. Texas Wood, from D. F. Miles, Marion, S. C. I. Sprueill, Thrash Select, from E. C. Thrash, Silvey, Ga. Truitt, from Curry-Arrington Seed. Co., Rome, Ga. Tyler Limb Cluster, from Alexander Seed Co., Augusta, Ga. Welborn Pet, from M. W. Johnson Seed Co., Atlanta, Ga. Wise, from H. P. Jones, Herndon Ga. 215 PREPARATION AND CULTIVATION OF THE SOIL FOR COTTON. BY J. F. DUGGAR. The manner of preparing the seed bed for cotton varies greatly, being chiefly dependent on the amount of clay, sand, and vegetable matter in the soil. If commercial fertilizers are used preparation may be slightly different from that which is necessary for cotton receiving no fertilizer. In clay or heavy loam soils receiving fertilizers, land on which there is much vegetable matter is usually broken broadcast (flushed) with a turn plow of some corresponding plow (half shovel, turn shovel, twister, scooter, etc.). Then the rows are opened, fertilizer placed in the row and a ridge or list formed over the fertilizer with two furrows. The proceedure is the same for sandy soils, and for clean land on which cotton is the preceding crop, except that the broadcast plowing is usually omitted. The ro is completed by throwing two furrow slices on the list formed above the fertilizer, this bedding or "throwing out middles" being often delayed for several weeks after the formation of the original small ridge or list, which delay, though convenient, is of questionable wisdom on sandy soils. This question needs the exact investigation which it has not yet received. Presumably the narrow sharp ridges formed by balks ,ormiddles and lists dry out too rapidly in seasons of deficient rainfall. On the Station Farm the beds are completed as soon as fertilizers are applied. In applying fertilizers our practice differs from that of most farmers in that before the fertilizers are covered they are mixed with the soil by running a scooter plow through the line of fertilizer. 'This is probably necessary only when the fertilizer ex- w 216 ceeds 200 pounds per acre. Fertilizers are drilled in the opening or center furrow over which the ridge or bed is formed. Subsoiling.--No real subsoiling has been done on the Station Farm prior to 1900. Partial subsoiling, effected while the land was being flushed by running a scooter plow to a depth of about 4 inches in the bottom of a shallow turn plow furrow, was done on reddish loam land in January, 1896. The yield on the partially subsoiled land exceeded that on land not subsoiled by 139 pounds of seed cotton per acre in 1896. However, the next year, the same land, on which the subsoiling was not repeated, gave no increase that could be attributed to subsoiling. Partial subsoiling of the same field, as above, on Feb. 24, 1898, failed to increase the yield of cotton in 1898 to any appreciable extent. Harrowing and 'rolling.-A defective stand of cotton plants is frequently the consequence of dry weather in April and May. The effects of dry weather at this season can be largely overcome b using the harrow before planting to break the surface crust whenever it forms, thus conserving moisture which may soon be urgently needed by the germinating seed and young plants. Another method of aiding germination on sandy soils that are very loose and dry at time of planting is by the use of the roller just after the seed are placed in the ground. The most convenient means of rolling is by the use of a very small but heavy roller attached to the planter. The wooden roller on some planters is often not heavy enough. In the dry spring of 1896 rolling of the land just after planting, either with an ordinary one horse roller, or with a narrow iron pulley, which packed only the drill, caused the seed to germinate promptly and 217 thoroughly, while on unrolled ground few plants appeared until rain had fallen. Cultivating implements.-The cultivation of the cotton crop after the young plants appear usually consists. of hoeing two or three times and the use of some form of horse cultivation three to six times. The implement used by the best farmers on sandy and loam land is the heel scrape, which, properly regulated, can be made to do very shallow, and yet effective, cultivation. A practice which is deservedly falling into disuse is "barring off," accomplished by the use of the turn plow at the first cultivation of cotton. In "barring off" the young cotton plants are left, usually for several days, -in some cases for a week or more,-on a narrow ridge, which, drying rapidly, must. check growth in dry seasons, especially as it is necessarily accompanied by severe root pruning. In wet seasons or on undrained land it may do no permanent harm, but even in such cases the turn plow should be fun as shallow as possible and the hoeing should follow immediately, so that there may be no delay in throwing the dirt back against the roots. We have been able to do equally as good work in siding with a heel scrape and have thus avoided the risks always incurred when a turn plow is used as a cultivating implement. Cultivation with hell scrape should occur whenever a crust forms after a rain, the number of furrows per row being usually two, occasionally three, and sometimes towards the close of the season only one, in which case a 30 or 36-inch heel scrape is used. Late cultivation.-An experiment to ascertain the effects of an extra late cultivation showed a slight gain in yield as the result of a cultivation given two weeks after the close of the usual cultivating season. A good gen- 218 eral rule, which must be modified somewhat according to the presence or absence of weeds, is to practice late cultivation when the cotton stalks are small, and to stop at an earlier date in fields where there may be danger of excessive development of stems and foliage. Depth of cultivation.-The depth of cultivation has been studied at this station, both by examination of the natural position of the roots in the soil and by noting the effect of both deep and shallow cultivation on the yield. The danger of severe mutilation of the roots may be inferred from the fact that most of the lateral roots were found to originate at a point only 1 or 2 inches below the surface of the ground. Their position and direction was such that deep cultivation would unavoidably have broken a large proportion of the feeding roots. A single deep cultivation (at the second plowing, all other cultivation being shallow), reduced the yield of seed cotton in a test on prairie soil at Uniontown, Ala., by 85 pounds and on sandy soil at Auburn by 105 pounds of seed cotton per acre. SELECTION OF SEED. Old versus fresh seed.-The productiveness of a given seed is largely dependent, not only on the variety, but also on the individual character of that seed. Although unnecessarily large quantities of cotton seed are usually planted as the result of the low price of ordinary cotton seed, it is nevertheless important that the seed planted shall have a high germinattive ability. This is especially important when high priced seed is employed. As a rule, those that are fresh germinate more completely than old seed, and unless there is a distinct advantage in the use of the latter the farmer should plant only fresh cotton seed, that is those from the crop of the :preceding year. 219 However, at least one seed dealer has made the claim that old cotton seed are best, his idea being that in using ,old seed only the best seed germinate and that these :should produce the most vigorous and productive cotton plants. However, the average of three experiments made at Auburn in 1896 and 1897 showed no difference in yield that could be ascribed to the age of seed when all samples used had sufficient vitality to bring forth a full -stand of plants. Size and position of seed.-Size of seed, position of :seed on parent plant, and environment under which the seed was produced, are also factors that probably influence the yield of the succeeding crop. None of these subjects has been sufficiently investigated to permit of positive statements touching these points. Unpublished data obtained by the writer in 1896 indicated that under the conditions of those tests, ,seed from the top bolls afforded a smaller crop than seed from bolls growing low down on the cotton plant and that large seed produced a heavier crop of seed cotton than small seed of the same variety grown under identical conditions. The experiments pointing to the apparent superiority of seed from lower bolls, although partially confirmatory of a similar experiment in Arkansas, need to be repeated before we can safely assume that these results represent a general law. The same is true of the experiment in which large and small seed were compared. The superiority of large seed is generally acknowledged as a law applicable to many species of plants, and the superiority of large cotton seed, suggested by this experiment, is not surprising. But we must not jump at the conclusion that the larger the seed the greater the crop, for some of the most productive warieties, for example Peterkin, have small seed. 220 Effect of climate.-The effect of climate on cotton has received practically no attention. Several of the earliest varieties have originated near the northern limit of the Cotton Belt. This fact, together with the well known fact that seed of many cultivated plants as corn, garden peas, etc., grQwn in high latitudes produce plants which mature earlier than those from Southern seed, makes it probable that the season of growth of any variety could be shortened by having the seed grown for several years. in the extreme upper limit of the Cotton Belt. As shown by our experiments in 1897, this increased earliness was not effected by the use of seed grown only one year in high latitudes. It would be necessary for several generations of seed to be produced in the cooler climate before the quality of early maturity would become pronounced. Selection of seed (as a means of improving cotton. In improving a variety of cotton by selection of seed, the most careful farmers select bolls that open early and that grow on the lower portion of the plant. Since the lower bolls average larger in size and earlier in maturity,. this practice is commendable, provided choice is notmade, of the undersized bolls, some of which at the extreme lower portion of the plant are among the first to open. The whole subject of selection of seed of the cotton plant, the relative importance of size of seed, position and size of bolls, and climatic and soil conditions environing the parent seed,-are worthy of extended investigation at the Southern Experiment Stations. The danger of drawing the supplies of seed from a common pile at a public gin without regard to the character of the seed cannot be too strongly emphasized. Cotton degenerates easily and it also improves rapidly under careful selection. Hence every cotton farmer should have each year at least one small field of cotton, grown from pure and carefully selected seed, the seed of this. 221 field to be used in planting the entire area of cotton the following year. Best distance between cotton plants.-In 1886 the yield of cotton was nearly constant for distances of 1, 2, or 3 feet between plants in the drill; when the distance was increased to 4 feet the yield was reduced. These results were obtained with cotton in rows 4 feet apart and on low rich soil only recefitly brought into cultivation. The maximum yield was about 1,200 pounds of :seed cotton per acre. The name of the variety used is not on record. The results above are in essential accord with those ob-tained in 1887 on rich prairie slough land at Uniontown, Ala. In that test cotton in rows four feet apart made practically identical yields, whether the distance between plants was 1, 2, 3, or 4 feet, all yields being about 900 pounds of seed cotton per acre. At Auburn in 1889, on land which produced about 1,000 pounds of seed cotton, there was no material difference in yield when the distance between plants were 1, 2, 3, and 4 feet in the drill, the rows in all cases being 4 feet apart. In 1890, with heavy fertilization and rows four feet apart, a distance of two feet afforded a larger yield (1,131 pounds of seed cotton per acre), than did distances of 1, 3, or 4 feet between plants. With rows 3 feet apart the yield of cotton was greater when the plants were spaced 3 feet apart in the row than with closer planting. These narrow rows (3 feet wide) afforded a :smaller yield than rows 4 feet wide. In 1891, both a cluster variety and a long-limbed variety were used in a distance experiment, with rows 4 feet apart. The cluster variety, Welborn, devoid of spreading limbs, was benefited by close planting, giving its maximum yield of 2,519 pounds of seed cotton per 222. acre when the plants stood 1 foot apart in the drill, the decrease in yield being great when the distance was increased to 2, 3 or 4 feet between plants. Peeler, the variety having long spreading limbs, gave its maximum yield, 1,983 pounds, when the plants were spaced 2 by 4 feet, at which distance the yields of the cluster and longlimbed variety were practically equal. In 1896 the variety nsed in testing the best distance for planting cotton was Peerless, a variety which does not occnpy much space. In 1897, Trnitt, a variety with long limbs, was nsed. The rows were.32 feet apart, with Peerless, 31 with Truitt. The following table shows, the results in ponnds of seed cotton per acre, each being the average for at least twvo plots: figure Best distance for cotton, 1896 and 1897. Distance between plants ______________________________ Peerless. 1896. Truitt, 1897. 12 inches.................................. 18.... ...... ......................... Lbs. 770 804 Lbs. 922 912 24...................................... 30 36 .................................. ................... ............. 673 544 530 918 878 853 row tween The above table shows that with Trnitt cotton in rows there was practically no difference in yield distances of 12, 18 and 24 inches in the drill.. narbe- When the space was increased to 30 inches a decided reduction in yield followed.. When the distance became 3G inches a further reduction occnrred, which, however, was only slight. The yield per plant increased rapidly as the space allowed to each was enlarged. It should be remembered that the Truitt variety makes. a large growth, and that its originator recommends thin planting for this variety. With Peerless, a smaller variety, planted in 1896 on a more sandy soil, best re' 28 suits were obtained by spacing either 12 or 18 inches in rows 42 inches apart. The average percentages of the whole crop that were obtained at the first picking, August 26, 1897, were as follows: 42 per cent. for plants 12 inches apart; 38 per cent. for plants spaced 18 inches; 30 per cent. for plants 24 inches apart; 26 per cent. for plants spaced 36 inches apart. These averages suggest that thin planting retarded opening and that very thick planting decidedly hastened the maturity of the plants. However, different plots planted at identical distances varied considerably in the percentage of the total crop which was open at the time of the first picking. Undoubtedly much of the cotton grown in Alabama is unduly crowded in the row and in many localities the rows are too narrow for economical cultivation. With almost any variety on medium or fair soil it is probably safe to allow a distance of 18 inches between plants i n the drill. To increase this distance beyond two feet is doubtless unwise except when the variety is long-limbed, and in this case considerable risk of reducing the yield is incurred if the distance approaches or exceeds 3 feet. I or erect and short-limbed varieties we feel safe in recommending a distance of 18 inches on good land and 12 inches on poor land. The richer the land the greater the spread of the limbs and the greater the area demanded by each cotton plant. If hi some exceptional soils there is such a tendency towards producing a large cotton stalk as to require more than 10 square feet per plant, the crop will usually be most conveniently cultivated if the needed space is afforded by widening the row to 4, 42, or even 5 feet, leaving the space between plants in the drill not greater than 3 feet. Labor is economized by spacing the plants as far apart as is consistent with maximum yield, but 224 ~n the average cotton lands of Alabama, with ordinary fertilization, a distance of 12 to 18 inches is safer than vwider spacing. Topping.-This operation, which is not often practiced at the present time, consists in the removal of a few :inches of the extreme top of the cotton stalk, late in ;summer. The idea was probably to check the upward growth of the plant and to favor the more complete development of the bolls already formed. Our tests here failed to show any advantage from topping, either on rich bottom land in 1886 or on rather poor up-land in 1897. In the latter experiment the Truitt variety was used and the yield of seed cotton per acre was, on the plots not topped at all 946 pounds; topped August 19, it was 906 pounds; and only 710 pounds when topping was performed as early as July 22. Our experiments and those made at several other stations, agree in showing that ordinarily no advantage results from topping cotton. 11. \TF I. .1 44.4 , 4? t Ih4k AI ttis, I )icl: Glen Mary ......................... Hav ilan d........... ................ Hoffman ........................ 46, 46) 51 Howell ............................. Lady Thompson....44, 46. 45, 46, 48, 49, 50, 51 Meek's Early............ -- - -- ..... 47 Michel..................... ..... 44-51 Murray's Extra Early........... ..... 48. Nick Ohmer......................... 48. Patrick.. ......................... 48 Pride of Cumberland ................. Ridgeway........................... 49, Rio........................ ......... 48 Seaford.............................49, 199 TStrawberries-Con tinuied. 49 Sharpless ............................ Star ................................ 49 Tennessee Prolific................... 49 Tubbs........................... 49, 51 West Lawn Win. Belt ........................... .... 49 50 50 Suffern, J.O .............................................. 107 Tabor, G. 176 Talladega, Ala........................................ ..... 107 L ............................................... French varieties tested ............... Wilson......................... ........................... 50 Target board disease....................................... 32 Terry, W. K... ..................................... "The Survival of the Unlike"... ....... ...... ..... Thompson Station, Ten...................................107 Tomatoes...................................................5 cultivation and training Report : 4 ........ 34 of.......................... 12 7 o5 34 plant growing.............. ..... ..... ............ pruning of.........................................13 soils and fertilizers for............... .... .......... varieties of........................................33 lemon bush............. ................ Belgiver's Best.......................... 34 Ford Hook Acme,......ao............................ 34 34 First..... ........ .......... 34 Lemon Blush........................... Livingston's beauty .............. .... 34 'Trustees .......... ............ .:......... ........ Report:4 Varieties of grapes fruiting in station vineyard.................76 Agawamn (Rodgers' 15:.. .................. 77 America .................... :....................77 .... ... 77 Amina........... August Giant .......................... I........77 Bacchus...........................................77 Barry (Rodgers' No. 43).............. .............. 77 Beacon............................................ 78 Bell...............................................78 Ietrand .................................. 78 Mikado ................................ 35 Ponderosa.............................. 35 34 Stone's best ........................... No. :........ Big Extra........................................ Big 78 Hope................................C........ 78 Brighton..........................................78 200 Grapes- Continued. Brilliant.................... ...................... Campbell's Centennial ....................................... 79 Champion...................... ................... Carmen...........................................79 Catawba............... ........................... Early.................................. ....................... 79 79 79 79 79 Clinton................... Collier ........................................... 80 Delago............................................80' iDelawba .......................................... 80i Delaware..........................................80 1)elicious......................................... 80 Diana.............................................80 Duchess............................................ 81 Early Victor......................................81 Eaton.............................................8.1 Elvicand .......................................... Empire State .................................... Esther ....................... .................... Etta ....... 81 .81 81 81 ...................................... Excelsior..........................................82' 82 Geneva....................... ..................... 82 Gold Coin ........................................ 82 ................. Goethe Rodgers' No. 1)........... 82 Green Mountain (W inchell)......... ............... T. B. Hayes.......................:................82 Herbemont (Warren), (Neal) ........................ 82 8 Herbert (Rodgers' No. 41)............................ 83 ............ .................. Herman Jaeger .. Highlands.........................................83 Hopkins.............................................83 Iona.............................................83 Isabella...........................................83 84 .............. .......... Jacquez ................. Jefferson Jewell Lady Dr. Kemp...........................................8 ............. ................................ ............ ... ......... .............. 841 84 84 Washington..o............................... ...................... Laussel........................ ... .............. Lindley (Rodgers' No. 9) ........................... Long John ................. ~.85 84 85 Marguerite............................ ........... Merrimack (Rodgers' No. 19)......................... Martha............................ 85 85 .85 201 Massasoit (Rodgers' No. 3)>......................... Me Pike................................... ........ Mills ................................... 85. 85 S6 86- Moore's Diamond . ............ ..... .............. 86 Moore's Early........................... ......... 86. Mo. Riesling ...................................... 86 Monarch ......................................... Mo ntifiore................ Moyer .............. ........................ .......... ......... 86 6 RI. W. Munson......................................87' Mrs. Munson ......................................... 87* Fern Munson.................................... .. b7 Nahab .... ...................................... 87 Niagara........................................... Norfolk............................................. 87 Norton...., ................... ...... .............. Ozark........ ...................................... Palliat .............................................. Perkins..........................................88 Pren tis.......... ............................... Presley ........................................... 8787 88 88. 88 Roekwood.... 88- ...................................... 88: _................................ Rommell ......... Salem ..... ........................................ Triumph............. ..... ..... ........ Ulsters Prolific............ ....................... Vergennes..................... ....... .. ....... Wilder.................. ........... ............ ... ....... Worden ........................... Wyoming...................................90 Vitis aestivalis.................................... Bourquiniana........ ................ Labrusca....................... 89 89 89d .89 89: 89 89: .. 72' , .... .............. E.................... 72, 72, 73, 72 .73 72, 73. Lincecumii .......................................... rotuandifolia.......................................72, 74, 90, rapestris ................... -..................... vinifera .............................. 1......... ....... 72. 72 vulpina ................................................ 79 Vulpina X Lo bruscc...s...................... ................ 107 Where to get seed .................. ....................... Report : 4Whitaker, WV.C........................ ... ......... Williams, Thos .......................... 54, 94, 156, Report: 4, 5. Wood, T. W..& Sons........................................107 Woorhees, Ill................................................ 107 12 Work, miscellaneous.......................Report- BULLETIN No 108 APRIL, 1900. ALABAMA Agricultural Experiment Station OF THE AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE, AUBURN. TOMATOES. S F- By S. E ARLE. MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA. THE BROWN PRINTING CO. 1900. COMMITTEE OF TRUSTEES ON EXPERIMENT STATION. J. B. F. M. MOSELEY ................................. Union Springs. G. GILCHIST..... ............................ STATION COUNCIL. Hope Hull. JOHN HARALSON..............................................Selma, WM. LEROY BROUN..............................President P. H. MELL.................................Director and Botanist. B. Ross...................................... .................. Chemist. Veterinarian. C. A. CARY, D. V. M ............. J. F. DUGGAR......................................Agriculturist F. S. EARLE. . ........................ Biologist and Horticulturist J. T. ANDERSON..................................Associate Chemist. ASSISTANTS. C. L. HARE ........................... J. Q. BURTON............ .................. First Assistant Chemist. Second Assistant Chemist.. Third Assistant Chemist. Superintendent of Farm. Assistant Agriculturist. Assistant Horticulturist. H. A, HOUGHlTON. ... T. U. CULVER..... .................... ................. .................. R. W. CLARK.......... MosEs CRAIG............... ................. Bulletins of this Station will be sent free any citizen, of the State on application to the Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama. KA'The to NOTIGE. Bulletin No. 107 was prepared especially for the Paris Exposition, to exhibit the extent and character of the experiments conducted by the Alabama Station on the cotton plant. It is termed: "Results of Experiments on Cotton in Alabama," and is a resume of all experiments made by the Station since its foundation, covering a period of more than a decade. The contents relate to The culture of cotton. The varieties of cotton. The fertilization of cotton. The diseases of cotton. A list of fungi growing on cotton. The improvement of cotton by hybridization and selection. The climatology of the cotton plant.. The chemistry of the cotton plant. This bulletin was issued in a limited edition and will be sent to those parties who are specially interested in the cultivation of cotton, and it is therefore not for general distribution. However, it Will be mailed to any one who may apply for it until the edition is exhausted. P. H. MELL, Director. TOMATOES. Tomatoes are everywhere recognized as among the most important of garden crops. They are widely grown for home use and for local markets. They constitute one of the principal truck crops that are grown at the South for northern shipment, and in' some regions farther north they are grown in immense quantities for canning. In this State they are found in almost every garden, but as a commercial crop they have so far been strangely neglected. A few have been grown for shipment at certain points, but so far as known to the writer not in sufficient quantity to load cars. Our conditions are all fully as favorable as in neighboring states, where tomato growing is a large and profitable industry, except for the fact that our people lack the technical knowledge required for successfully handling this crop on a large scale. In the following pages it is proposed to give a brief outline of the methods employed by the best commercial growers in this latitude, and at the same time to record the more important results of the experiments with tomatoes made at this Station during the past four years. The topics discussed will include Soils and Fertilizers, Plant Growing, Cultivation and Training, Pruning, Diseases and Insects, Varieties and Marketing. SOILS AND FERTILIZERS. Any good cotton or corn land is suitable for tomatoes, Probably the best soil condition is where a red clay subsoil is overlaid by a mellow, sandy loam, but good results can be obtained on quite stiff land if deeply plowed and finely pulverized. It requires more skill to grow really fine tomatoes on very thin sandy lands than on clays, for in such locations the tendency is for the fruits to run small and to lack firmness and quality. Often the very best results are obtained in moist, but well drained branch bottoms, for while, like cotton, the tomato plant will endure drouth better than most cultivated plants, it needs a uniform supply of moisture to yield maximum crops. There are few soils in this State rich enough to grow satisfactory crops of tomatoes without fertilization, but a less quantity of fertilizers is required than for such crops as cabbage and Irish potatoes. It should be remembered that with this crop the fruit is the valuable portion, not the modified stem or leaves, and that the fertilization should be such as will promote fruitfulness, rather than a too luxuriant growth of foliage. In other words, the fertilizer for the tomato should be rich in the mineral elements, phosphoric acid and potash. but it should also contain nitrogen enough to promote a free, but not an unduly luxuriant growth. The exact proportions of these ingredients that give the best result on any given soil can only be determined by experiment. On most of our soils the formula given in Bull. 79, page 95, for a general vegetable fertilizer, will give good results. This was three parts cotton seed meal, three parts acid phosphate and one part kainit. From 600 to 1,000 pounds per acre is as much as it will usually be profitable to use. In some localities it would doubtless be better to considerably increase the proportion of kainit. The land should be plowed quite deeply early in the spring, and should be harrowed thoroughly after every rain, so as to get it in the best possible condition of tilth before planting. Furrows should be opened and the fer- tilizers scattered and bedded on just as for cotton, but the beds should be run over with the harrow until they are nearly leveled down. PLANT GROWING. Seeds planted in the open field do not come on early enough in this latitude to yield profitable crops for shipment. It is therefore necessary to start the plants in hot beds and cold frames* and to move them to the field after danger of frost is over. At Auburn this is usually from the fifth to the tenth of April. Growing plants in .cold frames requires some technical skill, and it is here perhaps that inexperienced persons would find most difficulty in producing a tomato crop. Seeds should be planted in a hot bed about the first of February. An ounce of good seed should give plants enough for one acre. The seed may be sown quite thickly, as the plants will be moved as soon as they begin to show a few rough leaves. It is best to plant the seed in drills four or five inches apart. When planted, cover the bed closely and do not open it till the plants are up. Then it will be necessary to ventilate carefully during the middle of every bright day or the young plants may be injured by too much heat. This is done by slipping the sash alternately up and down, so as to leave a three or four-inch crack first at the top and then at the bottom of the bed. Do not uncover entirely so as to expose the plants to cold winds. Glass sash are almost essential for the hot bed, but it will only take a few of them to cover plants enough for many acres. At this time of year very little water will be required. The beginner is likely to make the mistake of over-watering. This should be carefully guarded against, as it is likely to induce damping off. When it *The methods of building and managing hot beds and cold frames were discussed in Bull. 79, pp. 99-103. becomes necessary to use water it should be warmed to avoid chilling the young plants. If the disease known as damping off appears, stir the ground between the rows thoroughly and give more ventilation so as to dry out the top of the soil. Keep the bed covered closely at night and during cold cloudy days. Whenever the thermometer threatens to drop below freezing the glass must be covered with mats, sacks, corn stalks or pine straw, as any serious chilling is very injurious. In about a month, that is, by the first week in March, the plants should be big enough to transplant into cold frames. This is best done when they show two or three rough leaves. The little plants are dug up and the° roots placed in a shallow dish of water to prevent drying and to cause the dirt to stick to them closely, when they are replanted. In the cold frame the plants are set five to six inches apart each way, taking care to keep them. in straight rows. This is done by using a marker made from a stick as long as the frame is wide, with little pegs nailed on it at the right distance for the plants. By pressing these pegs into the soil an entire row is marked and by placing the end of the marker against the same side of the frame each time, the plants will row accurately in each direction. This is important in taking them up to move to the field. The little plants should be watered lightly when set and should be shaded for two or three days by keeping the cloth curtains down. After they have had time to strike root in their new location the curtains should be rolled up during every bright day to give the plants as much sun as possible, but they should be covered again before sun down. Water should be given very sparingly during cool, cloudy weather, but as the plants begin to grow rapidly and the weather gets warmer they will need much more frequent waterings. No specific directions can be given for the care of the plants. Watering and ventilation are the two important factors and these must be left to the judgment and watchfulness of the grower. It should be remembered that the tomato is a native of a warm climate, and that it should be protected from all chilling influences. In cool weather always water during the middle of the day so that the chill will be felt as little as possible. In freezing weather, of course, the beds must be kept tightly closed. Most commercial growers use cotton cloth for covering cold frames, as it is much cheaper than glass, and is much easier to handle in opening and closing the beds. Ordinary unbleached, doublewidth or ten-fourths wide sheeting is used. One side is nailed fast to the back side of the bed or in double beds to the ridge pole, and the other is nailed between two one by two-inch strips, thus making a square roller on which the curtain is rolled up when it is wished to open the bed. By starting with one short and one long piece, so as to break joints, such a roller can be made any desired length. It will be necessary to provide some extra cover for each cold frame to use on very cold nights, for the single thickness of cloth will not turn more than a. slight frost. The beds should always be well banked at the ends and sides with earth. V ' V ti I I I1 i ld i usi I I I )2! I w)) II Iw llwlI I Ii I hr~ l'I;nIII ink". A (!(:ihe 1)1 )1 Ifuel, .L 1u X I ) u bX si\1 v feet wXile, NXill _ru 11)1 a1id it' n In l Inphiw ) mi I ;)4ve I' 14c 4 ((II 11 have to be carried any great distance. Such a frame is shown in the accompanying photograph. The soil for the cold frame should be covered one to two inches deep with well rotted stable manure, and should have a liberal dressing of acid phosphate and kainit, all to be well worked in and thoroughly mixed at least ten days in advance of planting. If the stable manure is not at hand fairly good results can be secured with commercial fertilizers alone in the cold frames. Use about two buckets of the complete mixed fertilizer to each double sixty-foot bed. It will be a saving of labor to plow the ground and thoroughly harrow in the fertilizer before building the frame. If the plants have been successfully grown, by the first week in April they will be ten or twelve inches high and will be beginning to bloom. It is now necessary to rush them to the field as fast as possible. A few hours before each bed is needed, water it heavily, so as to thor-oughly soak the ground. Take off the cloth covers and -store for use another season; knock down the frames and haul off the lumber. With a long bladed butcher knife cut down between the rows of plants in each direction, thus checking the bed into six-inch squares with a plant in the center of each. Provide several light hand barrows made of two light strips seven feet long for handles with a platform of half-inch boards nailed across them. These boards should be cut thirty inches long and should cover the middle of the handles for about four feet. With a sharp spade the squares of wet with the plants are carefully lifted and are placed snugly together on this hand barrow. Two men now pick it up and carry it to the rows that are being planted. The ground having been previously fertilized and bedded, the beds are now opened deeply with a solid sweep or wide shovel, a few at a time, so that the plants nearth 12 may go in the fresh furrows. The bearers lift the plants with a flat shingle or a mason's trowel and place them about three feet apart in the furrows. Other hands follow with hoes and draw the earth carefully about the plants. When all is properly handled very few of the squares of earth will crumble enough to expose the roots and plants can be removed even in quite dry weather without wilting or scarcely checking their growth. watering the beds, as already described. CULTIVATION AND TRAINING. It is not necessary to use water when planting, except in Cultivation should begin as soon as the plants are set. Nothing seems to help them to strike root and begin to grow so much as an immediate stirring of the soil. A five-tooth cultivator is usually the best tool to use in the tomato field, though the cotton scrape is also useful. One of these tools should be run through the rows at least once a week from the time of planting till the crop is ripe. This, with an occasional hoeing to kill weeds and break any crust that forms in the row will be all the cultivation required. In the garden various devices are resorted to for supporting the vines and keeping the fruit off the ground. In the field nothing has been found practical except a light stake driven in the ground near each plant at time of planting, to which the plant is tied. Some growers keep the plants tied to these stakes from the start, tying them three or four times or more, as necessary. Others let them lie on the ground till the fruit is nearly grown, and then lift and tie them, claimbitg that besides saving labor the lifting and disturbing of the vines tends to make the fruits ripen faster. On clay soils this staking and tying is quite necessary as in 13 rainy seasons much of the fruit will rot before ripening where it touches the ground. On sandy land there is much less trouble from this rot from contact with the soil, and it is quite permissible to save the expense of staking and tying and let the plants sprawl on the ground. Where the system of pruning to a single stem is followed that is described in the next paragraph, two plants are sometimes tied to a single stake, the two plants being set about eighteen inches apart, with wider spaces between each group of two. In all cases the stakes should be driven as soon after planting as possible. If this is delayed till the roots get started, some damage may be done to them. PRUNING. By ipruning commercial growers mean the pinching out of all lateral branches as soon as they appear, thus confining the growth strictly to one stem. When about three clusters of fruit are set the vines are topped, thus stopping all farther growth of vine, and turning the energies of the plant entirely to the growth and maturing of the fruits that are already set. The advocates of this system claim that it greatly increases the size of the individual fruits and that the bulk of the crop ripens several days earlier than on unpruned plants. Of course each plant produces fewer fruits than when allowed to grow unchecked, but this is partly compensated for by increased size and by the closer planting that is possible on this system, thus allowing a greater number of plants to the acre. In several of the more important tomato growing regions this system is very widely followed. During 1897 and in 1899, pruning experiments were tried at this Station. In both years the crop was so much injured by the boll worm and by the black rot as 14 to largely vitiate the results. In both seasons, too, the plants were injured by unfavorable weather. It is therefore not deemed expedient to publish the results in detail, but in both cases the pruned rows gave decidedly heavier early pickings, and the average weight of the fruits was from five to fifteen per cent greater. The few other stations * that have experimented with this method of pruning all report earlier maturity as the result, and the opinion of commercial growers who have practiced it is so unanimously in its favor that we must admit the fact as established that pruning is profitable and advisable wherever earliness and size are of more advantage than total weight of crop. It is perhaps still an open question whether or not under southern conditions pruning does not really increase rather'than decrease the total yield aside from its other admitted advantages. In the first place it allows much closer planting, the increased number of plants per acre offsetting the supposed lighter yield per plant. Again, on lands that are infested with either the Bacterial Wilt or the Sclerotium Wilt the earlier maturity caused by the pruning may secure a partial crop before the death of the attacked vines, while without it the crop on such vines would be a total loss, and there are probably few tomato growing regions in the South where one or the other of these troubles is not present. It was hoped that the experiments mentioned above would throw some light on this question of the total yield of pruned and unpruned plants, but as in each case fully half of the crop was destroyed by the combined ravages of the black rot and the boll worm it seems unsafe to draw any conclusions from the results obtained. In fact, it is useless to attempt plot experiments with tomatoes until we learn *See Tenn. Station Bull. for Nov. 1892 and Oct. 1893, and Also Louisiana Station Bull. 22. 15 how to better control these two seriously disturbing factors. If it were possible to make plots large enough to, fairly equal commercial conditions then the losses from these sources could be safely ignored, but not otherwise, and this is beyond the means of most experiment station workers. Further experiments are greatly needed to determine the best distance to give pruned plants, in order to secure maximum yields per acre, and also to determining the results from topping at two, three or four clusters as compared with pruning, but not topping. To secure the best results from pruning it is necessary to go over the plants as often as once in five or six days in order to remove the laterals before they get more than an inch or two long, and when they can bepinched out by the thumb and finger. If they are allowed to remain until they develop leaves and woody tissues, it is of course done at the expense of the other parts of the plant, and we have in part defeated the very purpose for which we prune. Furthermore, the removal of a considerable quantity of leaves by a belated pruning may derange the balance between root and leaf surface, thus causing injury. The effect of pruning can be very quickly noticed in the increased size and deeper color of the leaves and in the rapidity with which the fruits set and grow. There is often great complaint among tomato growers that the early clusters of flowers do not set fruit. This is very apt to be the case where plants are making a rapid growth and the weather is at all unfavorable. On pruned plants this loss is very largely avoided. The first clusters almost always set perfectly and this probably explains in part at least the heavier early pickings as the result of pruning. The practice of pinching to a single stem seems to be a rather common one with experimenters on tomatoes 16 under glass, but in field culture it has attracted less attention from experiment station workers than its importance deserves. Most of the references to tomato "pruning" in horticultural literature are found to refer to topping the vines to promote branching, or to some other practice than that now under consideration. DISEASES AND INSECTS. [Under this heading only the more important tomato insects and diseases that are known to occur in this State will be discussed. Boll-worm (Heliotis armigera Hubu): This is the same insect so often found in ears of corn and that later in the season bores into and destroys the cotton bolls. It is the larva of a dull colored, inconspicuous, night flying moth. The eggs are laid on the leaves and young fruits. In a few days they hatch and the young worms for a few hours at least crawl and feed on the surface of the plant. During this time it is possible to kill some of them by spraying with Paris green or other arsenical poisons. To be effective such spraying must be done just as the eggs are hatching. No sufficiently careful experiments have been recorded to show what proportion of the worms can be killed in this way. Certainly not all of them, for they so soon bore into the young fruits, where they are safe from poisons. One or two properly timed sprayings will probably pay in combating this insect, but spraying alone can not be depended upon. In this latitude the worms begin hatching early in May. In 1899 the first were noticed on May 13th. The piercing of the cuticle of the tomato by the worm in making his entrance to the fruit usually serves to introduce germs that sooner or later cause a wet rot. This is not pleasant to the worm, as he perfers sound to trotted fruits. He soon backs out and bores into another 17 fruit, carrying, of course, the rot germs with him. This process'is repeated again and again, so that one worm often destroys a dozen or more fruits. This indicates the necessity for picking and removing from the field all wormy fruits as soon as detected, thus preventing further injury on the part of the worms thus captured. This hand-picking, if faithfully done three or four times a week, will do more than anything else to minimize the loss from this pest, which frequently amounts to a half or more of the early crop. Planting corn as a trap crop is the remedy usually recommended for this worm in the cotton fields, as it is said the female will lay her eggs in fresh corn silks in preference to any other food crop. This is also sometimes recommended for tomatoes, but it is difficult to have corn far enough advanced to give much protection from this first brood, that is the one usually causing most loss to the tomato grower. Tobacco Worm (Phlegethontius Carolina): These large green, repulsive larvoe are frequently seen on tomato plants. They are such gross feeders that if only a few are present they soon do very serious harm. They are so conspicuous that they are easily destroyed by hand picking, and this is usually the only remedy employed against them. When pruning the vines it is an easy matter to search out and kill these worms when evidence of their presence is observed. jIfParis green is used for the boll worm it will be effective against these also. Flea Beetle (Phyllotreta vitata Fabr.): This is a minute dark colored, actively jumping beetle that sometimes does considerable injury by feeding on the underside of the leaves. It eats minute pin holes in the leaves, sometimes fairly riddling them like lace. When the weather is favorable and the plants are growing rapidly they usually do but little damage, but in cold, cloudy weather early in the season they sometimes give the plants a very serious check. The most damage is usually done either in the cold frame or soon after the plants are set in the field. It is thought that their injuries to the leaves often serve to enable Alternaria solani, the fungus causing target board spots on the leaves, to gain a foothold. It has been observed that these beetles do not attack leaves that have been coated by a spray of Bordeaux mixture, so that this spray has come to be the recognized remedy for them. It does not kill the insect, but simply acts as a repellent. Cut-worms (various species): Where the 1.d i i fested with cut worms they often do great damage by cutting down the plants when first set in the field. Occasionally they are also troublesome in the cold frames, but here it is an easy matter to dig them out and kill them. If it has not been discovered that the land is infested until the plants are set in the field this hunting out and killing the worms by hand will be the only recourse. The worms feed at night and seek shelter by burrowing into the ground by day. A worm seldom travels far from the place where he had his last meal, so when a freshly cut plant is found it is usually easy to locate the worm by a little digging. It is often necessary to go over the field of newly set plants every morning to search out and kill the cut worms. Fall plowing is said to do much toward ridding the land of these pests, but in the South this is not always permissible on account of the increased washing and leaching of the soil during our heavy winter rains. Probably the best means for killing cut worms is by the use of poisoned baits scattered over the field a few days in advance of planting. Some cabbage leaves or other similar "greens" may be plentifully sprinkled with 19 Paris green and dropped over the field, or if nothing of this kind is at hand, a bran mash, poisoned with Paris green and sweetened with molasses may be used instead, dropping a spoonful at frequent intervals. To be effective this must be done in advance of planting, otherwise the worms will prefer the tomato plants to the baits. Nematode Root Knot (Hetcroderaradicicola):This dreaded pest of southern fields attacks cotton, many kinds of garden vegetables and some fruit trees. It causes little knots or swellings on the roots, finally causing them to rot and thus killing or seriously injuring the plant. It is often found on tomato roots and frequently causes their premature dying. The tomato is, however, a plant of so much natural vigor that it usually succeeds in ripening at least a part of its crop before it succumbs to the nematode attacks. Pruned plants, on account of their earlier maturity, usually suffer less than unpruned ones. Where the microscopic worm causing this trouble is established in a field no means is known for destroying it except by starving it out by not allowing any of its food plants to grow on the land for at least two years. For a further discussion of this subject see Bull. 107, under the head of cotton diseases. Black Rot or Blossom-end Rot (Bacillus sp.): In this state this well known disease probably causes the loss of more fruits even than the boll worm and should be given first place among the enemies of the tomato grower. Spraying with Bordeaux mixture has been widely recommended as a remedy for this disease. In 1896 an elaborate experiment was undertaken in which certain plots of tomatoes were thoroughly sprayed as 'many as ten times with Bordeaux mixture, beginning when the first trough leaves were formed, and continuing 2u till the ripening of the fruit. The treatment did not have the slightest effect in controlling the disease. As large a proportion of the fruits rotted on these excessively sprayed plants as on the checks that were not sprayed at all. This, and somewhat similar previous experiences led to the belief that the usually accepted theory, that the disease was caused by certain fungi frequently found in connection with it, was incorrect. A search was accordingly begun for other possible causes and as the result of studies extending over the past three years, it has been quite certainly proven that the disease is bacterial, not fungal, being caused by the growth of an undetermined species of Bacillus. The results of these studies were embodied in a paper read before the Botanical Club at the recent Columbus meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. As this paper has not been printed, it is here reproduced in full, as giving my present views regarding this disease. The "Black Rot" or "Blossom-end Rot" has been familiar to the writer since boyhood as a destructive disease of the tomato. The first careful account of it that we have seems to be by Galloway in his Annual Report, as Chief of the Division of Vegetable Pathology for 1888, pp. 339-343. He says that "specimens of this [disease] have been received from all parts of the United States where the tomato is grown." He gives a good description, of the later stages of the disease with a colored plate; and states that Macrosporium Tomato Cooke. and Fusarium Solani Mart. are so constantly associated with the disease that they must be considered as the probable cause. His cultural experiments, however, showed that the latter species could not attack the healthy tissue of a green tomato, but that it developed abundantly on ripe fruit or on injured tissue of the green fruit. The Macrosporium was unable to penetrate the uninjured epidermis, but he found that it grew abundantly when the spores were inserted beneath the cuticle of either green or ripe fruits. In his 21 report for 1889, p. 418, the same author gives some encouraging results in preventing this disease by spraying with Bordeaux mixture from some experiments at Greenville, S. C. Since this time, brief mention of this disease has been made in the publication of many of the Experiment Stations. Macrosporium Tomato has been given as the cause except where through error Macrosporium Solani has been named instead; and spraying with Bordeaux mixture has been recommended as a remedy. In a rather hasty review of the literature, I find very few instances where the results of actual experiments with this disease are recorded. In fact no new light seems to have been thrown on the subject till the investigations of Jones and Grout, published in the Annual Reports of the Vermont Experiment Station for 1895 and 1896 and more in detail in Bull. Torr. Bot. Club 24: 254-258 (May, 1897). These authors show conclusively that the so-called Mascrosporium Tomato Cke. is only a form of a widely, occurring saprophyte found on many kinds of decaying vegetable matter, and known under many names, Alternaria fasciculata, (C. & E.), Jones & Grout, being the one finally adopted for it by them. They state positively that this fungus is not the cause of the tomato rot, since when pure cultures of it are introduced under the skin of healthy green tomatoes it invariably fails to grow. Unpublished experiments of my own, made during 1897 and 1898 fully confirm this opinion. In no case have I succeeded in getting a growth of this fungus by inoculating sound green tomatoes with a pure culture. When tomatoes are attacked by this disease in the field, the first stage to be noted is the appearance of a small, irregular watery area, usually, though by no means always, surrounding the remains of the pistil. This watery spot resembles somewhat the condition known as "Water Core" in apples. On making a cross section this watery condition is found to be confined to the portion immediately under the skin. It usually aoes not involve the tissues to any great depth even after it has extended so as to cover a considerable surface area. Growth of the fruit over the infected area stops so that after a few days the spot seems somewhat sunken. If the tomato is nearly ripe, maturity will be hastened and the watery spot may dry down so as to look as if the fruit had been slightly seared with a hot iron. The greater number of infections take place when the fruit is about an inch in diameter. Such fruits are utterly ruined. The disease may invade the entire surface, causing them to fall, or the premature ripening of the lower portion may arrest it, when the partially dried diseased portion often becomes blackened by a velvety growth of the Alternaria. 22 The peculiar watery appearance of the first stages of this disease long ago suggested to me the idea that it was possibly caused by bacteria, but no steps were taken to verify this hypothesis till June of last year (1898). One morning while walking through the tomato field while the plants were still moist with dew some half grown rotted fruits were observed that seemed to be smeared with a sticky exudation. On further examinatiun,all the fruit showing the disease in about this stage of advancement, were found to show more or less abundantly drops of this sticky exudation. The appearance at once suggested the well known sticky exudate on blighting pear trees, and revived in my mind the theory of the bacterial nature of the disease. As the dew dried off the drops of exudate dried down to a hardly noticeable glaze. On taking specimens to the laboratory this exudate was found to be swarming with bacteria. As the writer was prepared for a somewhat extended absence, the rotted fruits were taken to the. Veterinary Laboratory, where my colleague, Dr. C. A. Cary, kindly undertook to make some cultures for me. The exudate yielded an almost pure culture of a bacillus. The same germ was found abundantly within the diseased tissues. Sound green tomatoes under a bell jar were inoculated with a pure culture prepared from the exudate. In all cases they showed signs of rot in twenty-four hours. When Agar containing the germs was smeared on the surface of sound tomatoes, no rotting took place even after a number of days. Puncturing the skin through the Agar would promptly induce rot. After my return the matter was not taken up till the middle of September, when an Agar tube of the pure culture from the exudate was secured from Dr. Cary and further inoculations were made under bell jars and in the field till no doubt remained that the bacillus in question was abundantly and promptly able to cause a destructive rot of tomatoes. At this time the disease was entirely absent in the fields as it was noted to be in the Fall of 1897. The rot induced by inoculation did not in all cases exactly resemble that occurring naturally, the act of inoculating seeming to introduce the disease more deeply in the tissues. A very shallow scratching of the surface was resorted to and a few very characteristic cases were secured, though such shallow inoculations more often dried down and failed to take. TlI tn it II ino uae t tIII I ~I)a. ro I~ rt frn III \Ir rto Ihdrid Myt e(t kept Oved to stad i tIN .. . till of th t Sel l I erm 1"P.i 4i A vas Uhig il C d and cor fris dowIi "re ~l 0 tofn int la and 11(1m Imc Ctest. thes~e Adl oa. 1Vi lh ti 'og tlti Iat liii were U ed fo 0ai. furitther folloN ng ilI th he da~ 10111n ea Nit lai e cutr: .e Ill ( i, not he cotra(!:,III I Ite llm1er Itrug Ilowrl a as is the lligt. t illt f J gna Ihit It he igma illc 1 ot 0at iIIl,; t Ilit ope 0. ~lIIoutiI .1. N %,ot smeared In 110 e itt Io I i wa l tlntt'ttlttt weret iruin'Ğtiol , z r in10 tir ati (1 , rI . '' ti Owl tilhe fr 10 12 N N spe e than 1 antd ob- ((ntIn 1.1 *(, i.1 I oI K lI toftt nill kNI Nith -'11r oellIhiI r P1 ) mtt ii tn a! onlit overo tihe di. to the II st112 e altl a and luh0 exudate.iOI Irutill lit \Ill 11 ' freqltntly ltpailra- stns a 1i8 11l01ele 24 tively few of the Thrips were to be seen and there was less rot than I have known for many years. In my experience, extending over a number of years, Bordeaux mixture has always failed to give any marked result in controlling this disease. It is a well known fact that when a larva of the boll worm eats its way into a tomato, the injury is often followed by a watery rot. The worm does not like this and backing out, he bores into another tomato, which rots in turn, and the process is repeated till the same worm may have destroyed a dozen fruits. This rot is caused by the same Bacillus that causes the blossom-end rot, and the injury is more like that produced by a deep inoculation in the laboratory. Where the rotting material from a wormy tomato drops on one below that is weather cracked, that will rot also. These are the main facts observed in regard to the effect of this germ on the tomato. Owing to lack of time and the pressure of many duties its botanical characters have not been carefully worked out and no attempt has been made to decide whether or not it is a described species. The following facts in regard to it have been noted: It is an actively motile rod shaped Bacillus of medium size, with :nothing peculiar in its appearance. It stains readily with all the usual stains. No spore formation has been detected. It grows readily on the flesh of sound green tomatoes, causing rot, but it can not penetrate the cuticle unaided. It grows on ripe tomatoes, but less readily than on green ones. It grows feebly and to a very limited extent on raw Irish potato, but it grows readily on boiled potato, :soon covering the surface with a yellow slime. It fails entirely to grow on strawberries, apples, Kohl Rabi, cabbage, onions, and sweet peppers. It develops rapidly on the surface of ordinary pep- tone Agar, forming a white pelicle that becomes cream yellow and develsomewhat wrinkled with age. It seems to be strictly oping only on the surface of the culture medium. It grows very slowly in litmus milk, after five or six days developing a slight acid reaction and finally separating the casine Its behavior on gelatine has not been determined. These fragmentary studies seem to point to the following conclusions: 1st. That the cause of the "Black Rot" or "Blossom-end Rot" of the tomato is a Bacillus and not any of the filamentous fungi found associated with its later stages. 2nd. That the method of infection in nature has not been fully determined, but that the agency of some minute insect is probable, since infection cannot take place through the flowers, nor by the unaided action of the Bacillus on the cuticle of the tomato. A small, aerobic, 25 rather than a large insect, is indicated since the character of the disease is such as is produced by surface abbrasion, not by deep puncturing of the fruit. The strictly nature of the germ seems to confine its injury to the surface layers, except where air is admitted to the iiterior by aeep wounds or punctures. 3rd. That some species ofTrip asfhasbeen observed in suspicious connection with the disease, but that its agency in spreading it has not been proven. 4th. That when this Bacillus is carried deeply into the tomato with an open wound, as is done by the Boll Worm, the result is a wet rot, quickly involving the entire fruit. 5th. It follows from the foregoing that in seeking a remedy for these rots, we should look among the insecticides, rather than among the fungicides, first determining fully what insects are instrumental in conveying the infection. mrobic r/ 4 Experiments are planned for the coming season to demonstrate the agency of the Thrips in distributing the bacilli and inducing the disease; and the attempt will be made to control the rot by destroying or driving away the Thrips. Bacterial Wilt (Bacillu. solanacearamn, E. F. Smith*) Also called Southern Tomato Blight and Bacteriosis. This serious disease of the tomato has so far only been observed in the southern part of the State. It is very destructive in Mobile and Washington counties. It is caused by a germ that grows and multiplies in the vascular bundles of the stem, finally plugging up the ducts so as to cut off the ascending water current and thus causing the sudden wilting of the entire plant. A plant that, to the casual glance, seems perfectly healthy today may be wilted and practically dead by tomorrow. A careful examination of such a plant will show a section of the stem usually just above the ground that looks watery and on cutting it open the water ducts of the vascular bundles will be browned and discolored. When *A Bacterial Disease of the 'omato, Egg-plant, and Irish Potato, by Erwin F. Smith, Bull, 12, U. S. Dept. of Agr. Div. of Veg., Phys.& Path., Dec 1896. 26 once established in the soil the contagion persist from year to year so that each succeeding crop suffers worse than the last. A careful rotation of crops seems to be the only remedy for this disease and in regions where it prevails great care should be taken not to plant tomatoes on land where either tomatoes, peppers, eggplants or Irish potatoes grew the year before since all of these plants and some solanaceous weeds are subject to the disease. There are no exact experiments to determine how long the contagion can exist in the soil if none of these food crops are present. There is reason to believe, however, that more than one year must elapse before it is safe to plant these crops again on soil that is once infected. Dr. Smith has shown (1. c. p. 22) that the disease may be conveyed from plant to plant by insects, their bites or punctures serving to inoculate healthy plants with germs from the diseased ones. After describing some experiments where the disease was carried to healthy plants by allowing Colorado potato beetles to feed on them that had previously been feeding on diseased plants, he says: "Just what insects are most instrumental in disseminating this parasite in any particular locality can be determined only after a prolonged and careful study of the disease in the field. No experiments have been made with other insects, but it is likely that flea beetles, blister beetles, chrysomnelids and many other leaf eating insects may act as carriers of the disease. "No experiments have been made to determine whether this bacillus can gain entrance to the plant through an uninjured epidermis. Most of the infections probably occur above ground and as the result of insect injuries. Very likely there are some underground infections." 27 As this disease does not occur at Auburn, the writer has had no recent opportunity of studying it, but as the result of rather wide experience with it in Mississippi, I am of the opinion that direct underground infections do take place as suggested by Dr. Smith in the closing sentence quoted above, and that probably they are the usual mode by which it spreads. Contagion carried by winged insects may well be the means by which the disease first becomes introduced to new fields, but this method of infection can hardly account for the spread of the disease from year to year in somewhat regular concentric circles from such new centers, especially as it usually takes almost every plant in its path. Insect infection would not either account for the facts reported by me in the 6th Ann. Rept. of the Miss. Station, pp. 53-61, where, in a large tomato field that was under observation, the disease was very largely confined to a narrow strip of wet, seepy land, running diagonally through it, while the drier land on either side was nearly exempt. As the disease is thus so markedly a soil disease, the possibility of soil treatment as a remedy at once suggests itself. Very few experiments are recorded in this direction. In the Mississippi experiments mentioned above in one case heavy applications of kainit seemed beneficial and in another case there was apparent benefit from the use of lime. Marked benefit also seemed to follow the use of lime in an experiment at Deer Park, Ala. (See Ala. Bull. 92:109.) experiments, however, need confirmation. Sulphuring the soil does not seem to have been tried. Spraying the plants and the surface of the ground with Bordeaux mixture gives no result. (See also Rolfs in Fla. Bull. 47:135.) There seems to be some slight difference among varieties in power to resist this disease. I have observed that -These JDwarf Champion seems to have some power of resist,ance, and Rolfs (1. c. p. 134) notes the same thing of Dwarf Golden Champion and Ford Hook Fancy, also in a marked degree in a tomato-egg plant hybrid. This is an interesting field for further investigation. Sclerotium Wilt (Sclerotium sp.): Also called Fungus Blight and Florida Blight. This disease manifests itself like the last one by a rather sudden wilting of the plant. Although, the effect is much the same, the cause ,of the disease in the two cases is very different. Here we have to do with a filamentous fungus, the sterile mycelium of which lives on decaying vegetable matter in the soil and under certain conditions is able to attack the underground portion of living plants. If a plant attacked by this disease is pulled up the smaller roots will be found to have rotted away and the larger ones'will be covered by a more or less conspicuous white mould-like coating. In wet weather, or when the diseased roots are placed in a moist chamber, numerous small brown balls as large as a pin head are formed on this white mycelium. These are the so-called sclerotia and consist of closely compacted fungus threads. They perform the function of reproductive bodies, and are very resistant to unfavorable conditions, retaining their vitality for long periods. In one case a rotted tomato fruit was found lying on the ground that was completely covered by these sclerotia. It was transferred to a four-inch pot tilled with soil and was placed under a bell jar on my laboratory table, where it remained for over a year. The pot was watered occasionally so as to keep a moist atmosphere in the hope that the fungus might be induced to develope some other fruit form. The sclerotia remained entirely unchanged for twelve months, when a small Irish potato was placed in the pot in contact with ,them. Stimulated by the presence of this fresh food supply they promptly germinated and quickly enveloped the C29 potato in a white coating of mycelial threads, which in turn, as the food supply became exhausted, developed a fresh crop of sclerotia. This disease was first studied by Prof. P. H. Rolfe while connected with the Florida Experiment Station, and he has written practically all that has been published regarding it.* In his experience with the fungus, both in the laboratory and in the field, covering a period of several years, he never succeeded in detecting spores or reproductive bodies of any kind other than these sclerotia. Such sterile sclerotia-forming fungi are placed in the form genus Sclerotium, but this one seems-' never to have received a specific name. This disease is by no means confined to the tomato. Rolfs has published a long list of hosts for it in Florida. In this State it has been detected on tomatoes, Irish and sweet potatoes, beans, cow peas, peanuts, beets and strawberries. It is doubtless conveyed direct from the soil to the roots of the plant. How long it may persist in the soil if deprived of any of its numerous host plants has not been determined. The fact that it attacks so wide a range of plants makes it difficult to arrange a proper rotation for soils infested by it. It does not, however, attack corn,. sorghum or the small grains. Vetch. growing as it does during the winter and early spring while this disease is dormant, will probably escape and so far it has not been detected on the velvet bean. While this is a very troublesome and probably quite a widely occurring disease in this State it does not usually wipe out entire fields as is the case with the bacterial wilt, but is scattered about in somewhat restricted areas. It seems to spread more rapidly in wet weather and where the vines are so rank as to completely shade the*See particularly Annual Report for 1896, pp. 38-47; also Bulletins No. 21 and 47. 30 Rolfs states that spraying the ground along the row with a soluble fungicide like potassium sulphide or ammoniacal carbonate of copper is effective in controlling it while the solid particles formed in Bordeaux mixture do not penetrate the earth deeply enough to do any appreciable good. In 1896, supposing that we had the bacterial wilt to deal with, a rather elaborate experiment was planned that yielded some interesting results although the expected disease did not appear and this one was present to only a limited extent. Eight plots were prepared as follows: All were fertilized alike with acid phosphate and cotton seed meal at the rate of 200 pounds of each per acre. Plots 1 and 5 received in addition kainit at the rate of 1500 lbs. per acre. Plots 2 and 6 received lime at the rate of 1500 lbs. per acre. In plots 3 and 7, Bordeaux mixture was poured along the furrows that were opened for planting. Plots 4 and 8 were checks and received no treatment. One row on each plot was planted to Irish potatoes, one to peppers and eggplants, one to Dwarf Champion tomatoes and one to Acme tomatoes. These plants were grown in specially prepared seed beds the soil in which had been treated with kainit, lime and Bordeaux mixture respectively. The plants in the seed beds had been sprayed with these substances at intervals from the time that they first came up and the sprayings were continued in the field so that each lot received in all ten sprayings with kainit solution, thin whitewash and Bordeaux mixture respectively. As stated above the Bacterial wilt did not appear but there were several cases of Sclerotium wilt especially in the potatoes. Black rot was abundant and the Alternaria leaf blight (see p. 32) was present in both tomatoes and potatoes so that an opportunity was offered for studying the effect of these treatments -on these three diseases. As stated on page 20, no appresoil. 31 ciable effect could be observed with the black rot, the ftruits on all the plots rotting freely with the greatest impartiality. The Bordeaux mixture largely prevented the Alternaria leaf blight. On May 28, only 7T% of the plants on these plots were affected by it while on the other plots there was an average of 19% affected. On April 29, one or two potato plants were observed 7o be wilting on the first kainit plot. On May 5, there were 3 wilted potato plants on the first kainit plot and 4 on the second kainit plot and 1 on one of the checks. On May 21, one wilted tomato plant on one of the checks. On May 28, out of 104 hills of potatoes on the kainit plots 30 were wilted, while of 393 hills on all the other plots only 20 were wilted, or nearly 29% on the kainit plots and only slightly more than 5% on the others. On July 23, when the potatoes were dug, only 10% of the stalks were alive on the kainit plots and an average of 38% were alive on the others. The yield of tubers was 60% less on the kainit plots. At this date 43% of the potato plants on the Bordeaux plots were still alive, thus showing them to be slightly better than the average. The predisposition on the part of the potato plants to take the disease on the plots that had been over fertilized with kainit was an entirely unlooked for result, especially as potatoes are supposed to require a fertilizer rich in potash. Curiously enough the tomatoes were not so affected. The following notes on their condition were taken on July 23. "At this date the tomato plants are beginning to fail rapidly. A few have died from the wilt and a few from nematode root knot. The foliage of the lime, Bordeaux and check plots is in about equally poor condition. The kainit plots are decidedly the best, some of these plants still growing quite vigorously. Eggplant and peppers are all healthy." "The three striking results of the experiment are the 32 beneficial effect of the kainit on the general health and longevity of the tomatoes, the marked effect of the Bordeaux in controlling the Alternaria leaf blight on the potatoes, and the totally unexpected and unaccountable failure of the potatoes on the kainit plots." Alternaria Leaf Blight (A/ternaria Solai (E. & M.) Jones and Grout.) Also called Macrosporium Blight, Targetboard disease and Early Blight. This well known disease of tomato and potato foliage causes circular deadened brown areas on the leaves that are usually marked by concentric circles of a darker color. This appearance has suggested the name of Target-board disease that is sometimes applied to it. In severe cases it causes the falling of the leaves and the consequent premature death of the plant. It has not been very troublesome at Auburn though traces of it have been observed almost every season. It was more conspicuous in 1896 than in any of the subsequent years. The injuries to the foliage caused by the flea beetle often seem to aid this fungus in gaining a foot hold on the leaves. Bordeaux mixture is the recognized remedy for this disease on either tomatoes or potatoes and three or four sprayings early in the season will usually protect the plants effectively. Septoria Leaf Blight (Septoria Lycoper'ici Speo.): This is, a comparatively new disease that first attracted attention about 1894. It appeared so suddenly and with such virulence as to practically destroy the crop in some of the Eastern trucking regions for two or three seasons. it has attracted less attention for the past two or three ~years. In this disease the leaves are thickly dotted with small irregular brown spots. These spots are not as large as in the Alternaria blight and lack the characteristic target-board markings of that disease. During a prolonged period of cold, rainy weather in the Spring of 1897, this disease was so abundant in the cold frames at Auburn as to seriously check the growth 33 of the young plants. As soon as it was observed the plants were sprayed with Bordeaux mixture. The one spraying served to check it entirely and the plants recovered. Later it appeared on some of the plants in the field but again it yielded readily to the Bordeaux treatnment. It has not since been sufficiently troublesome to attract attention. Leaf Mould (CladosporiumrfulvumOke.): Also sometimes called Leaf Blight and Mildew. The cause of this disease is a fungus that does not make definite spots on the leaves as in the last two cases, but forms mold like, greenish brown, velvety patches on the under surface, causing the leaf to turn yellow and fall. It is often a serious trouble where tomatoes are forced under glass during the winter, and at the South it frequently attacks the plants in the field. It is more troublesome on the coast and in Florida than in the latitude of Auburn, but at times it has been rather troublesome here. It usually yields readily to spraying with Bordeaux mixture. A single spraying in the greenhouse has served to check a bad attack of the disease and to protect the plants for a number of weeks. This disease is largely dependent on weather conditions, being much i ore troublesome in moist than in dry weather. Although it usually yields so readily to the Bordeaux treatment a few cases have been reported to me where repeated sprayings failed to prevent it from defoliating entire fields. It is seldom fatal to the plants but keeps them too much enfeebled to mature their fruit. VARIETIES. The requisites for a market tomato are medium to large size, smoothness, solidity, earliness, productiveness and the freedom from surface cracks in wet weather. The last, however, is something not yet fully attained. Color too is a matter of importance. In most 34 markets the light purplish red or "Acme color" is preferred to the bright scarlet red of the old fashioned varieties and any shade of red is preferable to yellow. It is not proposed to give here a detailed description of the many varieties of tomatoes now in cultivation in this country. Such information can be obtained from the better class of seed catalogues. For a discussion of the botanical relationships and the evolution of the cultivated varieties of the tomato the reader is referred to the admirable chapters on the subject in "The Survival of the Unlike," by L. HI. Bailey. The Acme was one of the first varieties to be introduced that satisfactorily fulfilled the requirements for arket tomato. It quickly became a general favorite ma and in regions where pruning is practiced it is still more planted than any other kind. Without pruning it often runs too small to be desirable especially toward the last of the season. Livingston's Beauty and Ford Hook First are much like Acme and are preferred by some planters. In those parts of Florida where pruning is not practiced Stone 'and Belgino's Best, two of the bright red kinds, are much planted on account of their large size and productiveness. The Dwarf Champion and the more recently all of which are introduced similar kinds, are spoken of as "tree tomatoes" sometimes garden on acquite popular for the home count of their stiff, erect, dwarfish growth, that largely obviates the need for staking. They have been grown to some extent for market but they are a little lacking in size and in shipping qualities and have not become general market favorites. Lemon Blush has at this Station for the past three seasons been by far the most satisfactory variety for the mid-summer and fall crops. The plants are very vigorous and withstand heat and drouth remarkably. It 35 is strongly recommended for home use as it is of delicate texture and fine flavor, but it cannot be recommended for distant markets on account of its yellow color and soft flesh. Overly large kinds like Ponderosa and Mikado are seldom fully satisfactory. Individual specimens may be very fine but there are usually many irregular ones and the yield is often poor. In planting for market it is much better to plant at least four or five of the best kinds rather than to rely on any one alone. The different seasons affect varieties differently and the kind giving the best result this year may fall from first place next year. More important than this, however, is the fact that with several varieties the average daily pick runs more evenly. No two kinds will give their biggest picking on the same day but one will be a little earlier or a little later than another thus distributing the greatest rush over a number of days. MARKETING. For a general discussion.on marketing fruits and vegetables and of the methods of transportation, see Bull. 79, pp. 103-110. There are two methods in vogue for handling the distant shipment of tomatoes. At most points in Florida the fruits are picked dead green, as soon as they reach full size and at least a week before they would begin to color. They are wrapped in paper and are packed in the well known six basket crate, the same that is used for handling the Georgia peach crop. These green tomatoes are shipped by fast freight in ventilated cars. The wrapping in paper prevents them from shriveling and by the time they reach market some of the more mature ones are usually beginning to color. The greatest drawback to this system is that when picked in that condition no one can tell the exact stage of maturity and it is impossible to so assort them that all in one package will ripen 36 together. When opened on the market some of the fruits in a basket will be fully ripe while others are dead green. Such uneven packages are less saleable than where all are evenly ripened. Again if the weather is cool during transit ripening is delayed so that none are ripe on arrival and the consignment has to be stacked up in the store and held till ripening begins. In this way stocks often accumulate enormously, and if the weather suddenly turns warm, causing all to ripen at once the entire accumulation must be forced off at once or it will be lost entirely, thus causing a disastrous glut. In Mississippi the usual plan is to allow the tomatoes to hang until they are slightly tinted. The fields are picked over every day so as to get as many as possible of them in this tinted condition. At the packing shed they are assorted into three grades as to color: ripes, mediums and greens. Usually firsts and seconds are made of each of these grades thus really making six grades besides a seventh cull grade that is not shipped but sold to canning factories or fed to stock. The tomatoes are packed without wrapping in flat, four basket crates, and are shipped in refrigerator cars. Where this plan is thoroughly carried out it ensures a very even quality of tomatoes in each package and as the goods are ripe when they arrive they can. be sold at once thus avoiding the disastrous accumulation of stocks. The cost of refrigeration makes this method slightly more expensive than the other even though the cost of wrapping the tomatoes is saved. On the whole however, it is more satisfactory and there can be little doubt that for the latitude of Alabama it will on the the average yield larger net returns. The growing of tomatoes on a large scale is an exacting business requiring constant personal care and attention from the time the seed is planted until the crop is harvested. It is not a crop that can be successfully hnuidled by ignorant tenants. It has however, proven profitable at many localities in the past when intelligently handled and there is no reason to suppose that it will not continue to be profitable in the future. As has been stated on a previous page, there seems to be no reason why Alabama should not claim a respectable share in it. Her soils, climatic conditions and transportation facilities are all sufficiently favorable, BULLETIN No 109. JULY, ALABAMA 1900. .AgriculturaI Experiment Station OF THE AGRICULTURAL AND MECHiAICAL COLLEGE, AUBURN. STTAWBE9LEI ES. IBy I'. S. F ARLE. MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA. THE BROWN PRINTING CO. 19.00. COMMITTEE OF TRUSTEES ON EXPERIMENT STATION. F. M. MOSELEY........................................Union Springs. J. G. GcraIsT ................................. JOHN HARALSON ............................................... Hope Hulk Selma. STATION COUNCIL. Wm. LEROY BROUN.................. P. H. MELL.....................................Director ............ President and Botanist. B. B. Ross......................................Chemist, C. A. CARY, D. V. M............................Veterinarian. J. F. DUGGAR................. ......................... Agriculturist F. S. EARLE ............................ J. T. ANDERSON .................................... Biologist and Horticulturist. Associate Chemist. ASSISTANTS. C. L. HAR1E ........................... J. Q. BURTON......................... H. A, HOUGHTON........................... T. U. CULVER............................... R. W. CLA.RK................................ First Assistant Chemist. Second Assistant Chemist.. Third Assistant Chemist. Superintendent of Farm. Assistant Agriculturist. Assistant Horticulturist. 0. F. AUSTIN......... ............ The Bulletins of this Station will be sent free to any citizen of the State on application to- the Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama. STRAWBERRIES. Bulletin No. 94, issued in June, 1898, gave our experience with strawberries up to that time. Besides brief notes on varieties, general suggestions were given as to "Soils and Fertilizers," "Preparation of Soil and Planting," "Cultivation and Mulching," and on "Marketing." The reader is referred to that bulletin for a discussion of these topics. The chief purpose of the following pages is to record our experience with the different varieties that have been under cultivation at the Station during the past two years. Before proceeding with this, however, a few further suggestions will be made as to the time and methods of planting strawberries best suited to different parts of the State. In Bulletin 94, p. 144, late Summer and Fall planting was recommended for South Alabama, but the difficulty of securing a supply of well rooted plants as early as August or September and of getting freshly set plants to live during the hot weather prevailing at that season was mentioned; and the suggestion was made that moving the plants with a ball of earth by means of a transplanter would serve to obviate this difficulty. This plan was tried successfully at the Station during the summer of 1899. Fully 90% of the plants moved in this way during August lived and grew although showers were so light and infrequent that where the plants were shaken out and planted in the ordinary way nearly all died. The following plan is suggested as being a cheap and practicable one for establishing a strawberry plantation in South Alabama. Plow and harrow the land thor- 40 oughly in February and lay off every fifth row of the proposed plantation. That is lay off rows fifteen to sixteen feet apart. Fertilize these rows heavily so as to insure a free growth of runners and set the plants in the ordinary way the last of February or first of March. Early in April lay off the other four rows, fertilize with potash and phosphate, only, and plant to the bunch or speckled These will mature early and will not overrrun pea. the strawberry row. Of course, cultivate the strawberry row frequently. Keep the runners cut off until rains begin in July. This will make the plants more stocky and vigorous and will considerably lessen the cost of cultivating. Besides, the runners that put out during dry weather seldom take root till it rains but grow and develop leaves at the expense of the parent plant. If runners are all kept off till about July 1, an abundant crop of them will be pushed out after the first rains and they will take root quickly during the showery weather that always prevails in mid-summer. By the middle of August they vill be large enough to move to the best advantage. The peas should be watched closely and should be plowed under before they encroach on the strawberry row. They can probably occupy the land safely until some time in June and there will be time for them to become decomposed and for the soil to be somewhat compacted before setting the plants in August. Planting may begin as soon as the runners are well rooted. This will probably be early in August and it can be continued during showery weather until the middle rows are all filled out. The distance to move the plants being so small any of the cheap transplanters on the market can be used. Those with two curved blades on handles, hinged together so that when thrust into the ground on either side of a plant pressure on the 41 handles will compress the ball of earth betwen the blades thus allowing it to be lifted out with the plant, will be found to work more rapidly than those in which bucketlike galvanized cylinders are used for lifting and carrying the plants. In the absence of a transplanter very good and fairly rapid work can be done with an ordinary garden trowel, care being taken not to crumble the ball of earth taken with the roots. Plants moved in this way arp in condition to grow off properly and if the ground is sufficiently enriched they will make good bearing stools the following spring. In this style of planting, all runners should be kept off from the young plants till after the crop is gathered, and the plantation will consist of one matted row to four rows in hills. It is believed that this plan presents several advantages for South Alabama where Fall planting is so usually practiced. It can be used almost equally well in the other parts of the State but whether it will be advisable to adopt it or not will depend somewhat on the objects for which the berries are planted. In Middle and North Alabama plants set in the Spring and allowed to form matted rows in the way so commonly practiced farther north seem to adopt to a considerable degree the northern habit of ripening nearly all of their crop during a period of three to four weeks. Summer and Fall set plants, on the contrary, develop successive fruit clusters through a much longer period, often scattering the crop through eight or ten weeks, as is the habit of the strawberry farther south. Now for home use or for a local market, this longer fruiting season is a distinct advantage and for these purposes this method of summer planting is recommended. Where berries are grown for northern shipment the heavier early pickings from the 42 spring set matted rows will be more profitable, since it is only the early berries that can be shipped at a profit. Where fields are kept over for a second crop, all will of course, be matted rows the second year. It is not intended to imply that the fruiting habit or the length of the fruiting season can be entirely controlled by the Fall or Spring planting. Much will depend on the richness and character of the soil, on the habit of the variety, and on the seasonal distribution of rainfall. The tendency will be, however, as stated above for the spring set plants to yield the bulk of their crop early and to bear through a shorter season than those set in the summer or fall. VARIETY NOTES. Most varieties of strawberries are somewhat narrowly limited as to the conditions under which they will give the best results. A few, like the old Wilson, are able to adapt themselves to a wide range of soils and climates but most of them will only thrive under the conditions to which they are particularly adapted. A berry may thrive well on one farm and fail on another only a few miles away if the soil and cultural conditions are different. It must be understood then that the following notes apply only to the conditions prevailing at the Experiment Station farm. We are within the granitic area of eastern Alabama, but our soil is of the gray, sandy type. It is a thirsty soil, drying out quickly after rains, and crops of all kinds suffer from even short periods of drought. Comparatively few varieties succeed well on it, many dying badly from drought during the summer and others failing to grow and fruit normally in the spring. The red clay soils of this region which occur within a few miles of us are adapted to a much wider range of 43 varieties. The conditions in North Alabama are very different and many kinds do admirably there that are failures here. The results obtained here will in a general way serve as a guide for planters in South Alabama, although the conditions are by no means identical. While the soils in that part of the State are usually quite sandy, they have remarkable water-holding capacity, and do not suffer from drought as badly as ours. On the other hand, strawberries rust worse there than here and it becomes more important to select varieties that are resistant to this disease. In selecting varieties, planters should, of course, remember that the pistillate kinds will not bear if planted alone. Unless otherwise started the kinds that are recommended below for general planting all have perfect flowers and so can be planted alone safely. In the following notes the term hardy is used to indicate the ability of the plant to live through the summer under our rather trying conditions. Arkansas Traveler.-Hardy, a vigorous grower and quite productive. The plant is of the Crescent type. Fruits mid. season, medium size, good color, but too soft and has the serious fault of scalding and softening quickly on the vines. It would not ship well. Possibly worth a farther trial for home use. Aroma.-Not hardy. The few plants surviving have given a fair crop of handsome berries but the fine high flavor supposed to be characteristic of this kind is lacking. As grown here, it is flat and insipid, and has no value. Barton.-Hardy, fairly productive, medium early, good color and sufficiently firm. In many respects this is a very good berry. Perhaps its greatest fault is its length. Like most very long berries, it is often knotty and defee- 44 tive, and the tip ripens unevenly, especially early in the season. It is perhaps worthy of farther trial but it can not compete with such kinds as Lady Thompson and Michel. Bismark.-One of the best of the very large kinds, but none of them are fully successful here. It is recommend for North Alabama, and for further trial here on moist well manured lands. The plant is hardier than Bubach, which is one of the best known of the very large kinds. Brandywine.-This is another of the big ones and it has the reputation of doing well further south than any of the others. The plant is fairly hardy here, and it should be planted by all who want very large berries, but it should be given good soil and high manuring. It does not seem to be very productive here, but in quality it is one of the best. Bubach.-This kind is probably more widely planted than any other of the very large berries but it is only partially successful here. It often dies badly during the summer and starts feebly in the spring, still with heavy manuring, some very fine berries may be obtained from it. The plant is not as well suited to our soil as either the Bismark or Brandywine. It is pistillate and must always be planted with other kinds. Cloud.-This berry originated in Louisiana and is a favorite market berry in that region. It is only medium in size, but it is early, a good shipper and immensely productive. It does not seem to have attracted much attention in other parts of the country but it is particularly adapted to the coast region of Southern Alabama, and is strongly recommended for planting there. Here the plant is not quite hardy during the summer. It is 45 a pistillate and should be planted with Michel as a pollenizer. Clyde.-The plant is fairly hardy, making large stools but very few runners. It sets an immense load of fruit but on our light soil it does not ripen it properly. It is recommended strongly for rich, moist soils in Northern Alabama, but it should not be planted here. Cobden Queen.-This berry originated in Southern Illinois, where it is becoming a favorite market kind. It is a complete failure here. The plants grow feebly and die badly during the summer and the fruit is small and poor. Earliest.-This is very promising. It resembles Michel quite closely, seeming to have most of the good qualities of that valuable kind while the plant is even more vigorous and withstands rust better. It is about the same in season, ripening the first or main crop very early but continuing to throw up flower clusters and produce fruit through a long season. In color and firmness the fruit is much like Michel, perhaps averaging a little large in size. Everbearing.-This variety was sent for trial by Prof. J. S. Newman of Clemson College, S. C. The plant is hardy and fairly productive, of medium size, bright red berries, of only medium quality. In season it is medium early and has the habit of throwing up additional flower clusters after the first main crop is over. This "everbearing" habit is but little more marked than in Michel, Earliest or Lady Thompson. While it is a kind of some merit, it is not as satisfactory here as the three kinds just mentioned. Gandy.-This kind was reported as worthless for this region in Bulletin 94. It has since done much better. The plant is not fully hardy but on rich land with good 46 culture it is a fairly satisfactory late kind. It is strongly recommended as a late berry for North Alabama. Gardner.-This is one of the hardiest plants in the collection and will live under conditions of drought and sterility that are fatal to most other kinds. Unfortunately, the fruit is poor in color and flavor and scanty in quality. It cannot be recommended for market and is of doubtful value for home use. Glen Mary.-This is a fine berry where it can be grown but the plant is not hardy here. We have never been able to get a respectable stand of it. It is possibly valuable for North Alabama, but is worthless on light soils in the Central and Southern parts of the State. Haviland.-Fairly hardy but the plants are not vigorous and set more fruits than they can mature. It ripens very unevenly and like most very long berries is often knotty. It is of no value here. Hoffman.-This well known kind has fully redeemed the partial failure reported in Bulletin 94. The plant is perfectly hardy, surpassing in this respect both Michel and Lady Thompson. It is not as productive as these kinds but is equally early and is a better shipper. The fruiting season is usually short, the bulk of the crop coming off very early. It is one of the best market berries for light sandy soils. Howell.-Sufficiently hardy and makes many runners but plants lack vigor and rust very badly. The berries closely resemble Minor's Prolific, if indeed our plants are not of that variety. It has no value here. Lady Thompson.-This valuable variety must still be accorded first place as a market berry for light soils in the' Middle South. It does well in all parts of this State and should be much more widely planted both for home use and for market. While not of the largest 47 size the berries average well, holding their size throughout the season, and they are remarkably smooth and free from defects The color is a little light to suit some markets, but it is bright and attractive and the fruits usualy color up evenly. It is a good shipping berry, for while not feeling as firm to the touch as some of the others, it has good qualities, both on and off from the vines. The plant is a good grower and makes runners freely, and is sufficiently hardy to withstand any but the most extremely unfavorable conditions. only one kind is to be planted no mistake will be made in selecting the Lady Thompson. Meek's Early.-This is in rnaiuv respects a remarkable berry. In.Illetin 94, it was stated that "shy bearing must be set down as its greatest fault." This fault is so pronounced as to put it out of the question as a market berry. It is, however, of such rich, fine quality when Fully ripe, and the vines are so vigorous and so remarkably hardy that it seems worthy a place in some odd keeping Where corner of the home garden, where it can remain undis- turbed from year to year as it seemis to bear better under these half wild conditions than when given high cultivati on. It is one of the few kinds hardy enough to hold its own with grass and weeds, and where once established will need no farth er care except to pull or cut down the biggest weeds occasionally, and it will yield small annual crops for a number of years. small in size and when first colored it It averages is very sour but when fully ripe it becomes dark cherry red and develops a rich flavor that is unequaled. Michel- This xvfdl known kind continues to compete with Lady Thompson for first place as a general purpose homie and market berry. Under favorable conditions 48 it will probably out yield Lady Thompson but the fruits do not average quite so large and they are rather more acid. The plants on some soils are more subject to injury from rust. It is one of our earliest kinds, usually ripening slightly in advance of Lady Thompson and Hoffman, and its first or main crop lasts longer. On rich soils, when well cultivated, and especially on young or Fall-set plants, it has the habit of throwing up new fruit stems late in the season so that it is sometimes in continuous fruiting from March till July. It is strongly recommended for all parts of the State where the rust is not too serious a factor. Murray's Extra Early.-This ripens as early as Michel. It is hardy and prolific but too small, and so hard and firm as to be of very poor quality. Possibly, heavy manuring would improve the size and quality but under ordinary conditions it has very little value here. Nick Qhmer.- This celebrated berry is a complete failure here. It has been impossible to get a stand of the plants. Patrick. The plants are sufficiently hardy making large stools with but few runners, but they do not seem quite at home under our conditions. It is an abundant bearer of medium sized berries, season rather late. It is possibly of some value for north Alabama but cannot be recommended for the light soils of the central and southern portions. Pride of Cumberland.- The plants are fairly hardy and in many ways it is a very good mid-season berry but it has nothing to especially recommend it, and there is no reason why it should be planted. Rio.-We have no new planting of this kind. The few old plants have lived fairly well but it is not adapted to our conditions. It is possibly worthy of trial in north Alabama. 49 but it is a handlhre Ridgeway.-This is oiiy half hardy some shapely berry and is worth a trial further north. heavier land. It is iet hardy Seaford.--Thlis requirs here but it is handsome berry and is worth trying on a strong soils. css.-This well knovn kind is a failure here and Sharply should not be planted. None of the very large kinds of which this-is the best known type are fully successful here but eitherBismark, Brandywine or iBubach will give better results than Sharpless. but the plant Star.-This is a berry of the Shiarpless seems much hardier. It is not very productive but the quality of the fruit is very and it perhaps worth a trial by those who want only the best. It requires a good soil and high cultivation. Tennessee Prolific. The vines arclhardy and prolific. It approaches the Sharpless type but is decidedly promis- type is fine ing for the richer soils of the State. In season it is medium to late. Tubbs.-This is tbe most promising late berry for this region that we have tested. It is very hardy and produc- tive. The fruit is of good size, shapely and of a bright rich color. It is two to three weeks later than Michel atnd Lady Thompson, coming in just as these kinds have passed their best pickings. When it once begins the crop ing season. It should be planted by commercial growers conies on very rapidly so that it has a rather short bearto supplement these early kinds and round out the season. The plant has something of the habit of ping ship- growth and appearance of the Crescent but it is much better adapted to our conditions than that kind. West Lawn.-This is fairly hardy and is in some respects a very good berry but it has nothing to particularly recomiulend it. 50 Wm. Belt.-We have only a few old plants of this kind. It is a rank grower, fairly hardy, late, large and produetive. It deserves a farther trial especially in north Alabama. Wilson.-This, the oldest of the widely known cultivated kinds, is quite hardy here and contrary to statements frequently seen in print it seems to have retained its former vigor. It can not, however, compete with such kinds as Michel and Lady Thompson for the main crop ripens two weeks later and the berries are far smaller and less abundant. The true Wilson is now seldom seen in cultivation as the variety has long passed its usefulness. The name still lingers in the South but it is applied to many widely different kinds by poorly informed growers. Six or seven French varieties imported by the U. S. Department of Agriculture were sent to this station for trial. None of them prove to be suited to our conditions and all but three are dead. Of these only one shows any vigor, the Large Fruited Leon XIII (No. 16989). These bore a few rather pretty but very soft berries of only medium quality. It has no possible value here. The other two kinds are barely alive and are not likely to survive the present summer. In conclusion I wish to strongly emphasize the fact that strawberries are too little grown in this State. In my judgment at the present time no fruit would be more profitable to the large commercial grower. It is, however, the manager of the home garden that I especially wish to interest in strawberries. Judging from rather wide observation in various parts of the State, I am certainly far within bounds in saying that not one garden in twenty-five in Alabama has a strawberry bed. I should probably be nearer the mark in saying not one 51 in a hundred. When such kinds as Lady Thompson, Michel, Hoffman and Tubbs can be grown so easily and cheaply in every part of the State there is no excuse for such neglect of what should be considered a necessity rather than a luxury in every household. BULLETIN No 110.DE.190 DEC., 1900, ALABAMA Agricultural Experiment Station OF TILE AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE, AUBURN. GRAPESO P. S. ]BY IE ARL Lh AND C. F. AUSTIN. MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA. THE BROWN PRINTING CEO. 1900. COMMITTEE OF TRUSTEES ON EXPERIMENT STATION. F. M. MOSELEY.................................Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . Springs. J. (I. GILCHRIsT,* JONATHAN Hope Hull. HARALSON..........................................Selma. STATION COUNCIL. Wm. LEROY BROUN.....................................President. P. H. B. M'ELL.................................Director and Botanist. B. Ross......................................Chemist. Agriculturist. Biologist and Horticulturist. C. A. CARY, D. V. M...........................Veterinarian. J. F. DUGGAR. ....................................... F. S. EARLE ........................... J. T. ANDERSON ................................ Associate Chemist. ASSISTANTS. C. L. HARE............................... H. First Assistant Chemist. 3. Q. BURTON............................ Second Assistant Chemist. S. HOUGHTON .......................... Third Assistant Chemist. T. U. CULVER............. .. .. .. .. . .. .Superintendent of Farm. R. W. CLARK.......................... Assistant Agriculturist. C. F. AUSTIN... ................. Assistant Horticulturist. of the State on application to the Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama. fofThe Bulletins of this Station will be sent free to any citizen *Deceased. GRAPES. iGENERAL CONSIDERATIONS. BY F. S. EARLE. SOILS AND PLANTING. Grapes can be grown with considerable success in all parts of Alabama. Certain portions of the State seem to be particularly well adapted 'to them, being comparatively free from rot and mildew and producing a grape of fine flavor and appearance, and of exceptionally good shipping quality. This is a point of prime importance, since in this latitude grapes ripen in midsummer, when the weather is hot and frequently showery, conditions that make all fruits difficult to handle. The best grape lands in the State are probably to be found in the high lying granitic region of Eastern Alabama. This extends from a little above Columbus, Ga., to within about seventy miles of the northern border and westward to a little beyond the Louisville & Nashville Rail Road in Chilton county. Almost equally good locations may be found among the high table lands of the coal measures lying to the north and west of the granitic region. In South Alabama the best grape lands .are the red soils of the LaFayette drift Which cover considerable areas extending as far south as Mobile county. Grapes will grow freely on any of the sandier lands in South Alabama, but the vines are often short lived on account of the root rot (See p. 67), and the fruit does inot ship well, being subject to the ripe rot. This 56 causes the berries to mould in transit and also by attacking the stems and rendering them stiff and brittle causes the berries even sound to "shell" or drop off the stems badly, thus presenting an unattractive appearance in market. These two enemies will be more trouble= some in Southern Alabama, even on the red lands, than in the northern part of the-State. And the number of varieties that will succeed even fairly well is much smaller. Such well known market kinds as Moore's Early, Worden and Catawba should not be planted in South Alabama, while in the cer tral and northern portions almost any of the kinds usually found in the Easttern States will do at least fairly well. Grapes can be successfully grown on land that is too steep, rocky and broken to admit of cultivation in ordinary field crops. It is doubtful, however, if such locations have any advantage for this crop over similar lands that lie suficieitly level to admit of easy and cheap cultivation, though such claims are pften made. The greater expense attending the planting and caring for a vineyard on such lands makes their utilization for this purpose of doubtful expediency under present agricultural conditions. No special preparation of the soil is necessary for planting grapes further than a good deep plowing and thorough harrowing. Rows should be run about ten feet apart. Unless the land is nearly level the rows should be carefully run on grade lines so that in cultivating the land eadh row will act as a terrace. These crooked rows circling the hill sides are unsightly and are somewhat troublesome in cultivating and trellace building, but it is the only way to prevent the wasteful washing of the land. On our light soils permanent rows running up and down the hills are certain to result in disastrous gullying and wasting of the soil. -when Most of our grape lands. are so thin as to require a small amount of fertilizer annually to produce the best results. This should be scattered along a furrow run on each side of the row in early Spring so that it will be covered by the first cultivation, or after the first season it may be broadcasted and cultivated in for the roots of the vines will occupy all parts of the land. For the first season it is best to use the side furrows, or still better, the fertilizer may be scattered along a deep central furrow run in advance of planting. The fertilizer requiremnents of our best grape lands are fairly uniform for all parts of the State and the following formulas will be found quite satisfactory: Either bone meal 4 parts and kainit 1 part, or if cheaper acid phosphate, 3 parts, cotton seed meal 1 part and kainit 1 part. About one pound of either of these mixtures per vine will be suffiscient for the first three years. After the vineyard comes into heavy bearing a larger quantity will usually be profitable. The exact amount to use must be determined ~y the condition of the vines. They should be able to carry and ripen a full crop of fruit and at the same time make a free, but not extravagat growth of wood. The distance between the vines in the row will depend to some extent on the variety. Short jointed, slow growing kinds like Delaware may be planted as close as 6 feet but Concord and similar free growing kind should have as much as 8 to 10 feet, while very rampant growers should be. given even more room. Grapes are usually propagated from cuttings and it is quite possible to grow a vineyard by simply sticking down one or more cuttings at the place where each vine is to stand permanently. Usually a better stand and more satisfactory results can be secured by planting mursery grown one year old vines. Some planters ad- 53 vocate using two year old vines, but usually fully as good results can be had with the one year old vines and the cost is considerably less. The vines should be planted about an inch deeper than they stood in the nursery row, and the dirt should be tramped firmly about the roots, then cut off the top leaving only one good bud above ground. This last is quite important for if too many shoots start the growth of all will be feeble. Here at the South where there is little or no danger of heaving from the deep freezing of the soil planting may begin at any time after the leaves fall in autumn and can be continued whenever the ground is in fit condition throughout the winter. For best results all tree and vine planting in this latitude should be finished by the first of March. True later plantings are sometimes successful. At some of the colony towns in North Alabama, owing to delay in preparing the land, vines have been held in cold storage until May and have then been planted with fairly satisfactory results, but it is doubtful if such late planting is ever really advisable. It should be remembered that root growth normally begins much earlier than leaf growth and if vines are planted so late that the weather is warm enough to force the immediate unfolding of the leaves it is done at the expense of the reserve vitality of the vine since there is no sufficient root development to support them and if dry, hot weather sets in the result will almost certainly be the death or permanent injury of the vine. TRAINING AND PRUNINGAfter the vines begin to grow the first spring they should be gone over regularly once a week or once in ten days in order to remove any surplus shoots and to pinch out the young lateral branches that will be found form- FIG. I, 3 YR. OLD DELAWA'RE VINE ON HORIZONTAL TRELLACE. UNPRUNED 60 ing in the axil of each of the older leaves. It is very desirable t'o confine the growth to a single unbranched cane until this reaches a length of about four feet. Then the terminal bud should be pinched out and the two upper latteral branches which will soon appear should be saved thus bringing the vine to the form of the letter T. After this form has been secured, which with good cultivation should be by the first of July, the weekly pinching can be discontinued and the vine allowed to grow and branch at will. During this first summer the vine may be allowed to sprawl on the ground or if preferred it can be tied to a light temporary stake. The permanent trellace should be built the following winter. For this latitude the horizontal or modified Munson trellace is strongly recommended. The method of training outlined in the preceding paragraph should be followed only where this trellace is to be adopted. It is made by setting ordinary fence posts along the row at intervals of about thirty feet. The tops are now sawed off at a uniform height of about four and a half feet, and cross bars twenty-six inches long are spiked on top of the posts so that they stand at right angles to the line of the row. Three wires are now stretched on top of these cross bars, one being stapled at the middle directly over the posts, the others about an inch from either end of the cross bars thus leaving the wires about twelve inches apart. The end posts should be braced as in fence building and the wires brought down and made fast to a "dead-man" buried two or three feet from the bottom of the post. The vines are now lifted and the two arms of the T are tied to the middle wire. This first season the arms should be cut back to about a foot each and any side branches should be cut away. In pruning grapes it must 61 be born in mind that every well developed bud on canes of the previous summer's growth will develop a fruiting shoot bearing on an average three clusters of grapes. This close pruning is therefore necessary to prevent overbearig, since not only the arms but the main stem also arein this case of the last seasons growth and hence fruit bearing. Even this close pruning would still allow overbearing if all the buds on the main stem were allowed to grow. All the lower ones should be rubbed off when they start in the spring, thus confining the growth to the buds on the arms and a few at the top of the stem. These shoots will grow rapidly and will for the most part fall over the side wires and be supported by them while their coiling tendrils will clutch the wires so firmly as to obviate the necessity for much summer tying. This is a great saving of labor over the vertical trellace system where each new shoot has to be tied one or more times during the summer. Its principal advantage lies however, in the fact that the leaves form a dense canopy sheltering the clusters of fruit which hang below from the sun and from rain and dew, yet leaving them freely exposed to the circulation of the air. This serves to a considerable extent to protect the fruit from fungus attacks, particularly from the "ripe rot" that is such a serious drawback, especially in the southern part of the State. By this system no summer pruning or training is necessary except to rub off any shoots that start on the lower part of the stem and the tying up of such shoots as fail to support themselves on the side wires. The subsequent winter pruning is also very simple. The old stem is retained but the old arms are cut away saving only one good new shoot from near the base of each, which is bent down and tied to the middle wire as before thus again brifnging the vine to the form of the letter T. FIG 2. THE SANE VINE AS IN FIG I, AFTER WINTER PRUNING; 63 Now, however, those arms must be left longer than before since the stem is no longer of young bearing wood and since the greater age of the vine will enable it to bear a larger crop. Where the vineyard is well cared for and the vines are in full vigor the arms may be left of such length that the end of one just meets the end of the one from the next vine thus providing a continuous line Of bearing wood from one end of the row to the other. However, where vines are weak from any cause the arms should be cut proportionately shorter. The accompanying cuts are from photographs of a three year old Delaware vine that has been grown according to this system, one taken before and the other after the annual winter pruning. This winter pruning can be done at any time after the leaves fall in autumn till about the middle of February. Later than this the vines become full of sap and they will bleed badly if cut. CULTIVATION. The vineyard should be cultivated sufficiently often to keep a surface dust mulch to hold moisture and also to prevent the growth of weeds. The cultivation should always be shallow since on most soils vines do not root deeply and deep plowing will break many roots, thus doing more harm than good. It may be necessary to use a one horse turning plow for the first working in the. spring but for the later workings a five toothed cultivator is the best implement. The Planet Junior with attachments for regulating the depth is a useful form of this tool for vineyard purposes. Two or three hoeings. or more will be necessary to remove grass and weeds from tihe ro where theycannot be reached by the cultivator. 64 In most cases it will probably be well to discontinue -cultivating the last of July and plant the middles to :some of the bush field peas like the whipporwill. The running kinds are likely to make trouble by climbing ,on the vines and trellaces. The peas will make a useful .mulch for the ground during the winter and will enrich the soil by supplying nitrogen so that all cotton seed meal may be omitted from the fertilizer. A still better winter protection to the soil is afforded by sowing to oats ,or rye in September. This of course must be plowed ,down early in the spring for if allowed to mature it would greatly injure the grapes. It requires some extra work in the spring to subdue a grain crop and it adds no nitrogen to .the soil as do the peas but only serves to furnish a winter cover that prevents leaching and washing of the soil. SPRAYING FOR INSECT AND DISEASES. It is not intended in this place to give a detailed ac,count of the different fungous and insect enemies of the grape. They are quite numerous and have been studied perhaps more than those of any other cultivated plant, so that there is an enormous literature treating of grape diseases. For practical purposes it is sufficient to know that the combined treatment with Bordeaux mixture and Paris green will serve to prevent serious injury from the great.er part of those that are likely to be troublesome in this State. In fact, in most seasons, good crops can be grown in our best grape regions without treatanent of any kind. In wet seasons like the present, how,ever, unsprayed vineyards are liable to considerable injury from rot and mildew even in the most favored locations, so it will probably in the long run, always pay give vineyards the following treatment. to 65 First in early spring before the buds swell spray very thoroughly with Bordeaux mixture going up and down both sides of the row and so directing the spray that every part of the vine is coated with the bluish liquid. Printed directions for making Bordeaux mixture vary considerably but the following will be found convenient and effective. Put 6 pounds of bluestone (copper sulphate) in a loosely woven gunny sack (often called croker sack in Alabama) and suspend it just under the surface in a barrel half filled with water. In this way the bluestone will be dissolved in half an hour while if thrc wn in the bottom of the barrel it will take it all day. In another barrel slack 4 to 6 pounds of good lime and pour in enough water to make half a barrel of thin whitewash. Four pounds of lime, if fresh and unslaked, will. be sufficient to combine with and neutralize the bluestone but the full six pounds does no harm and if to be applied when the vines are in leaf will be a little safer as regards burning the foilage. When the bluestone is all dissolved pour the whitewash slowly into the bluestone barrel with constant stirring. Let. it stand two or three minutes to allow any heavy particles of lime to settle and the mixture is ready for use. A better mixture and one that stays longer in suspension is made by thus combining the dilute solutions than by combining while concentrated. and then diluting. If the mixture stands for some time before using it will be necessary to stir it up thoroughly and then allow it to settle -a few minutes before dipping it out of the barrel. If possible it should be used the day it is made as it deteriorates on long standing. For spraying vineyards. some form of knapsack sprayer is often used but in large vineyards this is laborious and it is better to use a barrel pump mounting the barrel on a narrow sled that can be drawn along between the rows by one horse. If the 66 ~ump is provided with two lines of discharge hose the sides of both rows can be covered by one trip through each middle and the work will be done about as fast as a horse will naturally walk. This requires three men, two to direct the spray nozzles and one to drive and pump. A solution of the blustone, 2 pounds to the barrel without the lime is sometimes advised for this first spraying. It is perhaps a little more penetrating than the Bordeaux mixture but it is washed off by the first rain. The great advantage of Bordeax mixture over other fungicides is that it adheres to the plant and withstands washing rains for so long a time. If the vines have been previously diseased or if the locality is one xN here much trouble from black rot is to be expected the vines should be sprayed again when the shoots first start and the young leaves are the size of the thumb nail. In any case another spraying should be given after the flower buds are well formed but just before the flowers open. At this time pound of Paris green should be rubbed to a paste with a little water and mixed with each barrel of the Bordeax mixture. The next spraying should be given as soon as the flowers fall and the young grapes can be detected, and another and final spraying should follow in about ten days or two weeks, when the berries are the size of peas. Paris green should be used at both these later sprayings. After this time Bordeaux mixture should not be used till after the fruit is gathered as it is likely to presist on the clusters and disfigure them. If the season is wet another spraying will be advisable as soon as the fruit is picked in order to protect the foliage and hold it on the vines through the fall to properly ripen the wood for the next crop. Where this treatment is faithfully carried out very little trouble will be had from the black rot or from any 67 of the leaf destroying fungi or insects. Even the leaf roller will be largely held in check since the leaf surface will be covered with the poisoned spray before he draws it together with his protecting web. Any of these that escape should be picked off by hand and destroyed since they become very troublesome if allowed to multiply unchecked. OTHER DISEASES. The ripe rot (Gloeosporium fructeguenum) that has -been mentioned as being especially injurious in South Alabama will not be fully controlled by this treatment. Much can be done to avert this trouble by using the horizontal trellace (see p. 59), whiSh furnishes a root of foliage to protect the fruit from the rain and dew and from the direct rays of the sun. It is probable that spraying just as the fruit is coloring with eau celeste, liver of sulphur or some other fungicide that could be used without staining the fruit would be useful in preventing loss from this disease, but no sufficiently accurate experiments in this line have been conducted. Another serious trouble that will not be reached by spraying is the root rot. This disease was mentioned in Bull. 69, p. 272, where it was stated to be the same as the "'Pourridie" of the French, which is caused by the growth of the fungus Dematophoranecatrix on the roots. This is now believed to have been an error. Repeated attempts have been made to isolate and cultivate the organism causing the whitish discoloration under the outer bark of diseased roots, but so far without success. No fungus like the Dematophora has in any case developed and further observation on the behavior of this disease in the field shows that it works much more slowly than the European root rot, called "Pourridie," which usually kills infested vines in from one to two years. 68 The presence of this disease in the vineyard is usually first made manifest by the sudden browning of the margin of the leaves on certain vines in mid-summer, usually two or three weeks before the ripening of the fruit. This attack may be followed by the immediate death of the vine, leaving the fruit to dry and shrivel in the sun or the crop may mature and the vine linger along till fall, being found entirely dead at the winter pruning. In other cases only a part of the top will die, some branches putting out a feeble growth for two or three seasons longer. If an examination is made at the root of one of these vines a whitish mould-like coating will be found between the green inner bark and the shaggy outer-coating and the inner bark will be more or less browned and killed. This white coating can usually be traced several inches above the ground and down on to all of the larger roots. In severe cases the smaller fibrous roots will be rotted away, but they do not seem to be the original seat of the trouble, for in some cases the crown and large roots will be affected, while the snaller ones are mostly still healthy. This whitening of the inner bark is not confined to vines in which the foliage has given signs of the disease, but may frequently be found on vines that are still making a strong growth and on which the foliage is perfectly healthy. The failure of the leaves seems to come suddenly when the disease has progressed sufficiently far to cut off wholly or in part the water supply from the roots. The whitening can also often be found on old scuppernongs and on wild grapes in the woods, though these are seldom or never killed by it. Its presence on the roots of cultivated vines is by no means a sure sign of immediate death. A row of 38 Concord and Ives vines was examined in January, 1896, in which every vine showed its presende to a greater or less extent, and yet at this writing (November, 1900), 14 of those 69 vines are still alive and at least half of these are quite. vigorous. In January, 1898, in planting a lot of Delaware vines, this whitening of the roots was observed on some of the vines when received from the nursery. About forty of these were sorted out and were planted by themselves. These are now all alive but one, and seem as vigorous as their neighbors, but as will be shown below the Delaware is very resistant to this disease. The following statistics of grape planting at the Station will show that the disease is a very serious one. From the early bulletins we learn that the two first vineyards planted nearly all died, presumably from this cause, and they had been rooted up before my connection with the Station (January, 1896). Delaware, Ives, Concord and Perkins had been found to live longer than the other kinds planted, and a thil d vineyard containing 338 vines of these four kinds was planted'in 1886. In 1894 vacancies were replanted and another vineyard of 313 vines was planted. This contained a number of other kinds. The number alive in 1896 was 584. An examination showed only 83 vines in both lots that were free from this whitening of the bark. The following table shows the condition of the different varieties at the present time: 70 No. of vines planted 1886 to 1894. No. alive Nov., 1900. 12 40 12 82 10 2 1 . 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 17.6% 27.2% 10.5% 73.8% KINDS Concord. ............. Ives.. ............... Perkins. ............. Delaware .. .... ...... ilerbemont ............. .... ...... IRulander .... .... ......... Niagara.. Wyoming 147 68 114 111 5 10 15 11 100.% 100. % Red....*a.....2 ......... Diana.. ..... .... Brighton.. . .... ..... Lindley.. .. ...... Wilder.. . .. .. ...... Humboldt .... Moore's Diamond...... Elvira ............ Worden.............. Total now 4 14 11 10 14 10 6 alive...............168 Other kinds of which there were only two or three vines each are all dead. There is no proof that all these vines died from root rot, but certainly the great jority of ma- them did die from this cause, and the loss of 483 vines in six years out of the 651 alive or planted in 1894 or a little over 75% is certainly a serious matter. The most important thing to be noted in the above table are the complete exemption of Jierbemont and Rulander from the disease and the comparative immunity of the Delaware. Ives alone of the pure labrusct varieties shows any power of resistance.. The litbrusca X vini[era hybrids also all seem very susceptible. It is a point of much importance to the future of Southern grape growing to learn which of the races and varieties of grapes now in cultivation are resistant to this disease. 71 In 1896 an experiment was planned to see if different methods of fertilizing or other soil treatment would have any effect in controlling this disease. Plots of two rows were treated with different fertilizer formulas, in,cluding among other things heavy applications of kainit, lime, coal ashes and stable manure. This treatment was continued for three years, but with no marked result so far as the disease was concerned. At this writing the rows receiving a heavy mulch of coal ashes are in slightly the best general condition. The heavy applications of kainit, two to six pounds per vine in the different years, had an injurious effect on the fruit (Delaware), making it paler and causing somewhat uneven ripening. Stable manure was applied at the rate of a one horse wagon load to fifteen vines. This was considered excessive, but contrary to expectation no bad results followed and these rows have yielded more heavily than any others in the vineyard. The variety in this test was also Delaware. This disease in a general way is worse in South than in North Alabama, and it is worse on sandy lands than on clays. Some black sandy soils in Southeast Alabama seem torbe particularly subject to it, vines there usually dyihg after bearing one or two crops. At present we can only say that the cause of the disease is entirely unknown and that the remedies so far tried have proved utterly ineffective. The fact, however, that the Herbemont and Rulander vines in the old vineyard have proved perfectly resistant, standing unharmed while other kinds died on all sides of them suggests a remedy that seems to offer a simple and practical solution for the difficulty. In soils subject to root rot why not graft susceptible kinds like Niagara on resistant roots as is being done with the vinifera varieties in France and California to resist the Phylloxera. It is probable that other varieties of the Bourquiniana and ,each rutpestris races to which the ferbemont and Rulander- respectively belong will prove equally resistant, and experiments are planned to determine what varieties will make the best stocks for our leading market kinds using for the purpose the infected land now occupied by the old vineyard. VARIETIES. The.varieties of grapes usually grown in this country for table use are descended from one of the following five species or they are hybreds produced by making crosses between them. These parents species are Titis Lab rusca, the Northeastern 'Fox vinifera,, the European grape; probably of Asiatic origin; Titis Bourquinana, a race of Southern grapes of which Herbemont is best known, probably of Europeanorigin;, Vitis Lincicamii, the Texas Post Oak Titis rot andifolia, the Muscadine or The varieties descended from each of these kinds though differing widely among themselves,.all have certain traits or grape;.itis grape;,and Bullace. acteristics char- in common, hence we often speak of then collectively the Labruscas, the vinife as, the rotundifolias, etc. For wine making: descendants of other species as vitis, rupestris, T. vualpine and V. cestiv~alis are also grown.. The most widely grown market grapes of the Eastern. States belong to the Lab rasca type. This includes such well known kinds. as Concord, Ives, Perkins, Catawba and Niagara. As, a rule they are resistant to the mildews and to phylloxera or root louse, but they are. sub-. ject to black rot and as shown above they. suffer seri-ously from root, rot. We must, however, still depend. largely on them for asi market grapes. The vinitfera grapes are largely grown in California 73 and include such well known kinds as Muscat of Alexandria, Flame Tokay and Black Hamburg. Pure bred .viniferas can not be grown in this State on account of their susceptibility' to mildew and phylloxera. They are also subject to root rot and they start so early in the spring as to be often injured by late frosts. Some of the Labrusca x vinifera hybreds are fairly successful and include our highest flavored kinds, such as Brighton, Jefferson, Lindley and Wilder. The Bourquiniana grapes include a few southern 'kinds, of which Herbemont is best known. They are fully resistant to root rot though somewhat subject to mildew and black rot. They are valuable wine grapes for the South, but most of them can hardly be considered among the market table kinds. The group is of importance and is introduced here principally because the Delaware is now supposed to belong here or at least to be a hybred between this species and V. labrusca. Its great resistance to root rot would seem to strengthen this view :and from our present experience it must be considered the one best variety for general planting in this State. It is, however, a rather feeble grower and it requires heavy fertilizing, good cultivation and close pruning or it will not be satisfactory. The varieties descended from Vitis Lincecumii or the Post Oak grapes are all new-comers but some of them like America, Carmen and Fern Munson are very promising and are worthy of atcareful trial. In the able hands of Mr. T. V. Munson, of Denison, Tex., the descendants of this species are developing a remarkable number of valuable kinds well adapted to the South, some of 'which seem destined to supplant the kinds now generally cultivated in this region. They are resistant to mildew and black rot and probably also to root rot, 4 but on this point we cannot yet speak with certainty. All interested in Southern grape growing should send to the Texas Experiment Station at College Station, Tex., for Bull. 56, in which Mr. Munson gives the history of his work in producing new varieties of grapes. Vitis votundifolia includes the scuppernong and the wild muscadines. It belongs to a different division of the genus from the species discussed above, all of which are spoken of by the distinctive name of bunch grapes at the South. The rotundifolias are southern grapes, not being hardy at the North. They seem to he free from diseases of all kinds aid are very easily cultivated, their only requirement being an arbor to climb on and keep them off the ground. No pruning is required except to pinch off side shoots during the first year. They are not suited to distant shipment but are very useful for the home market and for wine. The Scuppernong is the only kind that is really in general cultivation, but some of the black kinds like Thomas, Memory, Mish and Flowers are also desirable and should be more generally planted. Memory has proved decidedly more hardy to cold than any of the other kinds. (See Bull. 106, p. 170.) A new vineyard of 100 varieties was planted at the station in January, 1898. It bore its first crop this season. Careful notes were taken on the different varieties by Mr. Austin and his report on them forms a part of this Bulletin. Some of the newer kinds seem very promising but we are as yet hardly justified in recommending them for general vineyard planting. Rockwood deserves especial mention as the best of the very early black grapes. It resembled a small Concord but ripens with Champion. Among the old well known kinds the following list includes the best for market purposes: Black; Coneord, 75 Ives. Red; Delaware, Brighton. mond, Niagara. MARKETING. Southern grown grapes are more perishable than the same kinds grown at the North, because they ripen during the heat of mid-summer. For this reason marketing must be expedited in all possible ways. Only a few hours can be allowed for wilting. Those picked in the morning should be packed in the afternoon and those picked in the afternoon packed early the following morning, and when packed they should be rushed into refrigerator cars as rapidly as possible. Prices for southern grapes are too low at present 'to justify express shipments and the business can .only be permanently successful at those points where enough are grown to load refrigerator cars. Grapes are best gathered in flat wooden trays or boxes. Twenty by thirty inches by six inches deep is a convenient size. The bunches are cut from the vines with clippers made for the purpose or with a sharp knife and are placed carefully two layers deep in these boxes. When full they may be hauled to the packing house on a spring wagon. The two layers of clusters will not fill them quite full so they may be safely piled one on top of another in hauling. At the packing house they should be stacked up in an open well ventilated space and should be crossed in piling so that the ends of each box are freely exposed to the air. In a few hours the stems will have wilted a little so that they will settle together limply. They are now ready for packing. The climax basket is more used than any other package for grapes and everything considered it is probably the best. It is an oblong basket with a board bottom, solid veneer sides, a solid veneer cover and a wooden hoop handle. White; Moore's Dia- 76 The usual sizes hold about 5 and 8 pounds. In packing it is placed in front of the packer endwise with the farther end elevated on a four-inch block. The clusters are carefully examined and all defective berries removed with sharp pointed clippers. All inferior or seriously defective bunches should be thrown out for the vinegar barrel or the wine press. The basket is filled beginning at the lower end in such a way that as smooth and compact a surface as possible is built up from the tips of the bunches, all stems being covered by the succeeding bunches. It is impossible to do this so nicely when the basket stands flat and is filled from the bottom upward. When full the grapes should stand from half to threequarters of an inch above the top of the basket as they will give down without injury by carefully pressing the cover and if an occasional berry is mashed it is better than to have the basket seem slack filled when opened. Quart strawberry baskets and crates and the six basket Georgia peach crate are both sometimes used for grapes and answer fairly well. For methods of handling refrigerator cars and for a general discussion on methods of marketing perishable fruits and vegetables see Bull. 79, pp. 103-110. NOTES ON THE VARIETIES OF GRAPES FRUITING IN THE STATION VINEYARD DURING 1900. BY C. F. AUSTIN. In discussing the varieties of grapes grown on the station grounds, we have given a few of the main points about each variety, and a note as to its value for planting. On further trial some of the varieties may give better results than is here indicated. Uinder most of the varieties the name of the race or parent species is given. When the varieties are of hy bred origin the names of both, or all of the parent species are given connected by the X mark. It should be stated that the only ground available for this variety vineyard an old washed and gullied hillside where the soil conditions are far from uniform. This is unfortunate some of the varieties have had a much poorer chance than others. The season was late this year so that the dates of ripening given below are about a week later than in average seasons at this place. AGAWAM, (Rodgers No. 15.) Labrusca X vinfcra.- vines strong and vigorous; clusters large, long, shouldered, only moderately compact; berries large, nearly vound, reddish brown, skin pulp tender, juicy, swcet, very pleasant; season first of fair- was as thick; August; pulp ly productive. AMERICA, A fine grape for home use. lnCegu anui X ripestris.-vines very vigorous. Clusters large, well shouldered, compact; berries small, round, black, with blue bloom firm, acid, quality fair; season last of July. A very producetive grape, and promises a fair market sort. AMINIA, Labrasca vinifera-Yines small, weak. Clusters small ; berries nmedium in size, black, with blue X bloom; July. pulp tender, juicy, quality poor; season last. of AUGUST A grape of no value here. GIANT,. Labrasca X vinif era .- vines small. No fruit, worthless here. IBACCHIUS, Lab rusea X -umpia.-vines fairly vigorous. Clusters, small, compact; berries very small, round, black, with blue poor ; season last of July; bloom; pulp quite firm, quality not productive; a grape of no value here. BARRY. (Rodgers' No. 48), Labrusca X viflif era. -Vines small and lacking in vigor. Clusters short, broad, compact, shouldered; berries very large, round, black, with thin blue bloom; pulp tender, juicy, quality fair; season middle of August; fairly productive. It is not a very promising grape. BEACON, Labrusca X Lincecumii.-Vines strong and vigorous. Clusters large, long, compact; berries very large, round, acid, quality fair; season first of August; very productive. It is a fair market grape. BELL, Labrusca X Bourquiniana.-Vines quite vigorous. Cluster small, compact; berries small, round, greenish white; pulp tender, juicy, quality very poor; season last of July; not productive. A grape that is worthless here. BETRAND.-Vines strong. Clusters very large, long, moderately compact; berries very small, round, black, with blue bloom, skin thick; pulp tender, juicy, slightly acid; season last of August; very productive. It gives indications of little value other than for wine. BIG EXTRA, Lincecunmii X Labrusca X vinif era.Vines large and very strong. Clusters large, long, compact; berries large, round, black with blue bloom, skin thick; pulp firm, acid, quality fair; season last of July. It is not productive enough for a market grape. BIG HOPE, Lincecumrnii X Labrusca X vinifera.Vines very vigerous. Clusters large, long, moderately compact; berries large, round, very dark red; pulp tender, juicy, quality fair; season middle of August; very productive. A promising market grape. BRIGHTON. Labrusca X vinifera.-Vines small and only fairly vigorous. Clusters medium in size, compact, shouldered; berries medium, round, dark red when fully ripe, skin thin; pulp tender, juicy, rich, sweet, quality extra good; season last of July; fairly produc- 79 tive. An excellent grape for home use here. To insure perfect pollenation, it must be planted next to other varieties. BRILLIANT, Bourquiniana X Labrusca X vinifera.-Vines small, fairly vigorous. Clusters medium in size, moderately compact, shouldered; berries medium, red, skin thin; pulp tender, juicy, sweet, quality very good; season last of July; productive. A very fine grape for table use. CAMPBELL'S EARLY-Vines strong, vigorous. Clusters large, long, loose; berries :very large, globular black, with thin blue bloom; pulp tender, juicy, very pleasant, quality good; season last of July; fairly productive. A very promising grape for home use. CARMEN, Lincecumii X Labrusca X vinifera.Vines vigorous. Clusters usually very large, and compact; berries large, round, black, with blue bloom; pulp firm, quality fair; season first of August; very productive; a fair market grape. CATAWBA, Labrusca-Vinessmall, but rather thriftty. Clusters small, compact, but withered before ripen ing. This grand grape is out of its place here. CENTENNIAL.-Vines very strong growers. Clusters large, long, moderately compact; berries large, oval, black, skin thick; pulp tender, juicy, soft, quality fair; season last of July; very productive. A fair market grape. CHAMPION, Labrusca.-Vines fairly vigorous. Clusters medium in size, very compact, well shouldered; berries medium, round, black; pulp tender, juicy, quality very poor; season middle of July; very productive. Its principal value as a market grape lies in its extreme earliness and productiveness. CLINTON, vulpina X Labrusca. Vines quite vigorous. Clusters medium in size, very compact; berries 80 small, round, black, with blue bloom, skin thick; pulp half tender, juicy, quality fair; very productive. A grape of very little value here; season last of July. COLLIER, Lincecumii X Labrusca-Vines vigorous and strong. Clusters large, compact, shouldered; berries medium to large, round, black, with blue bloom; pulp tender, juicy, pleasant, quality very good; season first of August; fairly productive. One of the best grapes for general use. DELAGO, Bourquiniana X Labrusc X vinifera.Vines only fairly vigorous. Clusters small, loose; berries medium, round, reddish; pulp tender, juicy, sweet, quality good; season first of August; not very productive. A fair grape for home use. DELAWBA, Labrusca X-Vines small, lacking in vigor. Clusters medium in size, compact; berries me,dium, round, red, skin thick; pulp tender, juicy, sweet, very pleasant, quality very good; season middle of August; productive. This grape resembles the Dela·ware very much only later. It is an excellent grape for both home use or market. DELAWARE, Bourquiniana or Bourquinana X Labusca.-Vines fairly vigorous, with slender shortjointed wood. Clusters medium to large in size, well shouldered, very compact; berries medium, round, red, skin thin; pulp tender; juicy, rich, sweet, very pleasant, quality extra good; very productive; season last of July. It is one of the most valuable grapes for both home use, and commercial planting. DELICIOUS., Lincecumii X Bourquiniana-Vines quite vigorous. Clusters medium in size, moderately compact; berries medium, round, black, with blue bloom; pulp half tender, quality poor; season middle of August; not productive. A grape of no value here. DIANA, Labrusca IX vinifera-Vines vigorous, 81 Clusters medium in size, compact; berries medium,. round, pale red, skin thick; pulp tender, juicy, sweet, pleasant, quality very good; season middle of August;. productive. A very good grape for home use, but one and market. DUCHESS, Labrusca X vinifera-Vines fairly vigorous. Clusters small, compact; berries very small,.. round, greenish white, skin thick; pulp solid, quality very poor; season last of August; productive. A very poor grape here. EARLY VICTOR, Labrusca. Vines small, lacking in vigor. Clusters small, moderately compact; berries. small, round, black; pulp tender, juicy; slightly acid, quality poor; season last of July; not productive. A grape of very little value here. EATON, Labruscac Vines strong, vigorous. Clusters large, long, shouldered, quite compact; berries very large, round, black, with blue bloom; pulp half tender, juicy, quality fair; season last of July; very productive. A promising grape for market. ELVICAND, Labrusca X candicans.-Vines vigorous. Clusters small, compact; berries medium in size, round, dark red, skin thick; pulp tender, juicy, acid, quality poor; season middle of August; productive. The. indications for this grape are not promising. EMPIRE STATE, Labrusca X vinifera .- Vines small, weak. Clusters small, compact; berries small, round, yellowish white; pulp firm; season last of July;. not productive. A grape of no value here. ESTHER.-Vines small, weak, no fruit. ETTA, Labrusca X vulpina.-Vines fairly vigorous. Clusters medium in size, compact; berries small to, medium, round, pale yellow, skin thick; pulp tender, juicy, soft, sweet, pleasant; season last of August; fairly productive. A promising grape for home use. EXCELSIOR, Labrusca X vinifera.-Vines vigorous. "Clusters medium in size; moderately compact; berries small, round, pale red, skin thin; pulp very tender, juicy, pleasant, quality good; season middle of August; productive. A promising grape for general use. GENEVA.-Vines small, weak; no fruit. GOLD COIN, aestivalis X Labrusca.-Vines large, vigorous. Clusters large, very compact, broad; berries medium to large, round, yellowish, skin thick; pulp half tender, juicy, sweet, very pleasant, quality extra good; .season first of August; very productive. One of the best yellow grapes for both home use or market. GOETHE, (Rodgers' No. 1), Labrusca X vinifera. Vines quite vigorous. Clusters medium to large, shouldered, moderately compact; berries large, oblong, pale red, skin thin; pulp tender, juicy, sweet, very pleasant, quality extra good; season middle of August; productive. One of the best late grapes for both table use or market. GREEN MOUNTAIN, (Winchell), Labrusca X vinifera.- Vines vigorous. Clusters small, shouldered, very compact; berries small, round, greenish white, skin thin; pulp tender, juicy, sweet; season middle of July; veiry productive. It is an excellent early grape for home use, but skin is too thin to be of any value as a market sort. T. B. HAYES, Labrusca-Vines small, weak. Clusters medium in size, loose; berries small, white, skin thin; pulp tender, juicy, quality poor; not productive; season last of July. A grape of no value here. HERBEMONT, (Warren), (Neal), Bourquinniana -Vines strong, vigorous; clusters medium in size, compact; berries medium, round, dark red, with blue bloom, skin thin; pulp tender, juicy, sweet, soft, very pleasant; 83season last of August; productive. A promising garden grape. Virifera HERBERT, (Rodgers' No. 41.) Labrusca Vines quite vigorous. Clusters large, moderately compact; berries very large, round, black, with blue pulp tender, juicy, pleasant, quality medium; season last of July; productive. A good grape for commercial growing. HERMAN JAEGER, Licecunii X. Bourquiniaua. Vines large, strong and vigorous; clusters very large, long, conpact; berries small, round, black, with blue bloom, skin thick, pulp firm, seeds free easily, season first of very productive. A grape of very little value other than for wine. HIGHLANDS, Labrusca vinitera.-Vines small, but fairly strong. Clusters medium in size, uoderately compact, unevenly ripened;'berries large, round, very dark red, with blue bloom, skin tough ; pulp tender, juicy, soft, slightly acid, pleasant; season last of August; fairly productive. A fair grape for home use. HOPKINS, Lincecumii aestivais.-Vines large .andl vigorous. Clusters very large, long, berries small, round, black, with blue bloom; pulp firm, X bloom; August; X X compact; acid; productive. wine. A grape of no value other than for IGNA, Lab rusca cinlfern.-Vines smuall, Cluste~rs. small, mouderately compact; berries small round, pale red ; pulp tender, juicy, quality poor; season middle of August ; not productive. A grape of no value here. IONA , Lab rausca X ' uiifcra.-Vines small, weak. ters large, shouldered, son last of X weak. compact; berries medium, round, black, with blue bloom ; pulp firm, quality medium ; seaif-left hanging on the vines until fully ripe. ISABELLA, Labrasca.-Vines small, lacking in July; very productive. ' A fair market grape 84 vigor. Clusters medium in size, berries medium, slightly oval, black, skin thick; pulp tender, juicy, compact; quality fair ; season first of August, productive. It is not a promising grape here. JACQUEZ, Borquiniana.-Vines very vigorous and strong. Clusters large, long, conpact; berries very small, round, black, with heavy blue pulp tender, juicy, slightly acid; season middle of August; very, productive. Its chief value is for wine. JEFFER SON, Labrusca vinitfera.-Vines vigorous. medium in size, shouldered, moderately compact; berries iedium, roundish ovalpaie red, skin thick; pulp tender, juicy, sweet, very pleasant, quality extra good;'season middle of August; productive. A Jpromising grape for general use. JEWELL.-Vines siall, fairly vigorous. Clusters small, moderately compact;-berries small, round, black, with blue bloom; pulp tender, juicy, pleasant; season last of August; not productive. A grape of very little value here. bloom; Clusters X very DR. KEMP, Lincecumnit X Boaurqainiana-Vines very strong and vigorous. Clusters large, long, moderately compact; berries medium, round, black, with blue bloom, skin thick; pulp firni, acid, quality fair; season middle of August ; very productive. A grape of very little value other than for wine. LADY WASHINGTON., Lab rasca X vini era.-Vines small, lacking in vigor. Clusters medium in size, comn- pact ; berries mediumi, round, pale yellow ; pulp tender, juicy, quality poor; season first of August; fairly produc- tive. A grape of very little value here. LAUSSEL, Lincecatrnii X Labrusca wstivalis.-Vines vigorous. Clusters medium in size, moderately compact ; berries medium, round, very hark red, skin thick ; pulp 85 firm, quality poor; season last of August; fairly productive. A grape of no value for general planting. LINDLEY, (Rodgers' No. 9), Labrusca X vinifera. Vines quite vigorous. Clusters large, long, compact; berries medium to large, nearly round, brick red; pulp tender, juicy, sweet, quality very good; season first of August; productive; a promising grape for both home use or market. LONG JOHN.-Vines very large and vigorous. Clusters large, long, loose; berries large, round, black, with blue bloom; pulp tender, juicy, quality poor; productive; season first of August. A fair market grape. MARGUERITE, Lincecunmii X Bourquinana.-Vines strong growers. Clusters medium in size, very compact, broad; berries medium, round, reddish, with a thin blue bloom, skin thin; pulp tender, juicy, soft, slightly acid, quality fair; season last of August; very productive. A promising late grape for general use. MERIMACK, (Rodgers' No. 19), Labrusca X Vinifera.-Vines very small, weak, no fruit. A grape of no value. MARTHA, Labrusca.-Vines small but thrifty. Clusters small, shouldered, compact; berries small, round, pale yellow, skin thin; pulp tender, juicy, sweet, very pleasant, quality very good; season first of August; fairly productive. It is an excellent grape for home use. MASSASOIT, (Rodgers' No. 3), Labrusca X vinifcra.-Vines small, lacking in vigor. Clusters small, shouldered, moderately compact; berries medium, roundish, light red; pulp tender, juicy, pleasant, quality good; season last of July; not very productive. A fine grape where it does well, but of little value here. McPIKE, Labrusca. Vines quite vigorous. Clusters large, compact; berries medium to lage, round, black, with blue bloom, skin thick; pulp tender, juicy, pleasant, 86 quality very good; season first of August; very productive. A grape resembling the Worden in flavor and color, and a very promising late variety for both home use or market. MILLS.-Vines all died. MOORES DIAMOND, Labrusca X vinifera.-Vines strong and vigorous. Clusters medium in size, well shouldered, very compact; berries medium, round, white, skin thick; pulp tender, juicy, quality fair; very productive; season middle of July. A very fair white grape for both home use or market. MOORES EARLY, Labrusca.YVineN small, lacking in vigor. Clusters small to medium, shouldered, compact; berries medium, round, black with thin blue bloom; pulp tender, juicy, pleasant, quality fair; season middle of July; not very productive. The indications for this grape are not very promising. MO. RIESLING, Labrusca X vulpina.-Vines fairly vigorous. Clusters medium in size; compact; berries medium, round, white, skin thin; pulp tender, juicy, soft, pleasant, quality good; season last of August; productive. A fair grape for both home use or market. MONARCH.-Vines vigorous and a strong grower. Clusters large, compact; berries large, round, black with blue bloom, skin thick; pulp half tender, pleasant, quality good; season last of August; productive. A promising market grape. MONTIFIORE, Labrusca X vulpina.-Vines vigorous. Clusters very small, loose; berries small, round, black with blue bloom; pulp firm, quality poor; season last of July; not productive. A grape of no value here. MOYER, Labrusca X .Vines small, weak. Clusters small, loose; berries small round, reddish; pulp tender, juicy, soft, quality poor; not productive; season last of July. A grape of very little value here, 87 R. W. MUNSON, Lincecumii X Labrusca X inifera. Vines large, and a strong grower. Clusters medium to large, fairly compact; berries large, round, black, with blue bloom, skin thick; pulp tender, juicy, quality good; season first of August; fairly productive. A grape promising to become a fair market sort. MRS. MUNSON, Lincecumii X Bourquiniana.-Vines strong and vigorous. Clusters large, long, fairly compact; berries large, round, black, with blue bloom; pulp tender, juicy, quality good; season first of August; fairly productive. This variety resembles the R. W. Munson very much and it is doubtful if any marked distinction can be made between them. FERN MUNSON, Lincecumii X Labrusca.-Vines strong and vigorous. Clusters large, long, compact; berries large, round, very dark red, with blue bloom, skin thick; pulp tender, juicy, slightly acid, quality good; season last of August; very productive. A very promising late grape for f.eneral use. NAHAB.-Vines lacking in vigor. Clusters medium in size, compact; berries medium, round, white, skin thin, pulp tender, juicy, slightly acid; season middle of August; not productive. A grape of little value here. NIAGARA,Labrusca.-Vines vigorous and a strong grower. Clusters large, very compact, well shouldered; berries large, round, greenish, or yellowish white, skin rather tough; pulp tender, juicy, rich, musky, very pleasant, quality extra good; season last of July; very productive. A very promising grape here. The Niagara is one of the best, if not the best white grape for both home use or commercial growing. NORFOLK, Labrusca.-Vines vigorous. Clusters 88 large, compact; berries very large, round, dark red; pulp tender, juicy, pleasant, quality good; season last of July; productive. A fair market grape. NORTON, cestivalis. Vines very vigorous. Clusters large, long, shouldered, compact; berries very small, round, black, .with blue bloom; pulp half tender, slightly acid, quality fair; season middle of August; very productive. Its chief value is for wine. OZARK.-Vines small, weak, no fruit. PALLIAT.-Vines vigorous and a strong grower. Clusters large, long, shouldered, compact; berries small, round, black, with blue bloom, skin thin; pulp tender, juicy, soft, slightly acid; season last of August; fairly productive. Its chief value is for wine. PERKINS, Labrusca.-Vines very strong and vigorous. Clusters large, long, shouldered, compact; berries large, round, yellow, skin thick; pulp tender, juicy, sweet, pleasant, quality good; season last of July; very productive. A very good grape for home use, but one which shells too much for market purposes. PRENTIS, Labrusca X vinifera.-Vines very small, and weak. A grape of no value here. PRESLEY, Labrusca X vulpina.-Vines only fairly vigorous. Clusters small, moderately compact; berries very small, round, dark wine color; pulp tender, juicy, quality poor; season last of July; not productive. A grape of no value here. ROCKWOOD, Labrusca.-Vines slow growers, but fairly vigorous. Clusters large, long, shouldered, compact; berries medium, round, black with thick blue bloom; pulp tender, juicy, pleasant, quality fair; season middle of July; fairly productive. A grape of some 89 promise for both garden and market planting; ripens with Champion but of much better quality. ROMMEL, Labrusca X vulpina X vinifera.-Vines strong and vigorous. Clusters large, compact; berries medium, round, greenish white, skin thin; pulp tender, juicy, quality fair; season last of July; productive. A fair grape for garden planting. SALEM, (Rodgers' No. 22), Labrusca X viaifera. Vines very vigorous. Clusters large, long, loose; berries large, round, dark dull red, skin thick; pulp tender, juicy, pleasant, quality very good; season first of August; fairly productive. It is one of the best for the home garden. TRIUMPH, Labrusca X vinifera.-Vines strong and healthy. Clusters large, shouldered, long, compact; berries medium, round, white, skin thick; pulp tender, juicy, pleasant, quality good; season middle of August; fairly productive. A very promising grape for general planting. ULSTERS PROLIFIC, Labrusca X very small, weak. A grape of no value. VERGENNES, Labrusca.-Vinesvery small, weak. WILDER, (Rodgers' No. 4), Labrusca X vinifera. Vines vigorous and strong. Clusters large, long, shouldered, moderately compact; berries large, round, black, with thin blue bloom; pulp tender, juicy, soft, pleasant; quality very good; season first of August; productive. A valuable grape for home use. WORDEN, Labrusca.-Vines only fairly vigorous. Clusters large, long, moderately compact; berries large, round, black, with heavy blue bloom, skin thin; pulp ten- - .Vines 90 der, juicy, rich, pleasant, quality very good; season first of August; productive. One of the best for home use, but does not ripen even enough to make a good grape for market growing. WYOMING, Labrusca X vinifera.-Vines small, 6lender, fairly vigorous. Clusters medium in size; compact; berries medium, round, dark wine color; palp tender, juicy, sweet, quality good; season last of July; fairly productive. A fair grape for home use. SCUPPERNONGS (Vitis rotundifolia. MEMORY.-Vines large, strong, vigorous; berries large, round, dark brown, with white specks over the surface, skin very thick; pulp tender, juicy, soft, pleasant; season later part of August; very productive. This is the earliest variety here, and a very fine one for eating out of hand. SEEDLING.-Vines rather small and not very vigorous. Berries very large, smooth, nearly round, very dark red; pulp tender, juicy, pleasant, slightly acid; productive; season first of September. JETER.-Vines strong and vigorous. Berries large, round, dark brown, skin very thick; pulp tender, juicy, soft, pleasant; season later part of July; very productive. THOMAS.-Vines somewhat lacking in vigor. Berries medium in size, very dark red, smooth, slightly bblong, skin medium; pulp very tender and juicy, nearly sweet, rich; very productive; season last of July. It is a choice fruit for home growing. FLOWERS.-Vines very strong and vigorous, berries medium, round, smooth, shinny black, skin leathery; 91 pulp firm, acid, quality poor; very productive, and hangs on the vine a long while; season middle of September. MISH.--Vines large and strong growers. Berries small, nearly round, smooth, black with very small brown specks over the surface, skin medium; pulp tender, juicy, soft, very sweet; exceedingly productive; season early September. This is the only variety we have which has a distinct sweet taste. It is very fine for eating out of hand. TENDERPULP.-Vines very large and vigorous. Berries medium, round, smooth, black, skin leathery; pulp tender, very juicy and soft, seeds free easily, quality very poor; very productive; season middle of September. A variety of very little value. Of the above kinds the following list seems worthy of farther trial for market and general purposes while the second list are of especially fine quality for home use. VARIETIES WORTHY OF FARTHER TRIAL FOR MARKET. America, Delawba, Herbert, Monarch, Beacon, Diana, Jefferson, R. W. Munson, Big Hope, Eaton, Lindley, Fern Munson, Carmen, Excelsior, Long John, Norfolk, Centennial, Gold Coin, McPike, Rockwood, Collier, Goethe, Mo. Riesling, Triumph. VARIETIES OF VALUE FOR HOME USE. Agawam, Etta, Highland, Rommel, Brilliant, Green Mountain, Martha, Salem, Delago, Herbemont, Riqua, Wilder, Wyoming. BULLETIN No 111. DECEMBER, 1900. ALABAMA Agricultural Experiment Station OF THE AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE, AUBURN. CORN CULTURE. Bly 5~. I. DUGGAII. MONTGOMERY, THE ALABAMA. BROWN PRINTING CO. 1900. COMMITTEE OF TRUSTEES ON EXPERIMENT STATION. THOS. WILLIAMS............................Wetumpka. JONATHAN HARALSON.............................Montgomery. STATION COUNCIL. WM. LEROY BROUN.....................................President. P. H. MELL. .. ....... ;... ... ............... Director and Botanist. ............. B. B. Ross........ C. A. CARY, D. V. M..........................Veterinarian. ASSISTANTS. .................. Chemist. J. F. 3. T. DUGGAR ........................................ Agriculturist. and Horticulturist. Chemist. F. S. EARLE..........................Biologist ANDERSON..................................Associate C. L. HARE............................... First Assistant Chemist. J. Q. BURTON ..... H. S. .. . .... .. .. .. .. . .... ... Second Assistant Chemist. Third Assistant Chemist. HOUGLITON............................ T. U. CULVER............................ R. W. CLARK.............................. C. F. Superintendent of Farm. Assistant Agriculturist. Assistant Horticulturist. AUSTIN-.*.......... . . . . .. of the State on application to the Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama. fAPThe Bulletins of this Station-will be sent free to any citizen CORN CULTURE. BY J. P. DUGGAR. SUMMARY. During the last five years thirty-six varieties of corn have been tested from one to five years. In no two of these five years did the same variety stand at the head of the list. Of the varieties tested five years, Mosby made the highest average yield; among those tested four years, Shaw led; of the varieties tested three years Cocke was most productive; at the head of the list of those tested two years, stand Renfro and Higgins. Mexican June corn did not afford a satisfactory yield of grain. In five years tests seed corn from Illinois afforded yields averaging .45 of a bushel more than seed from the Gulf States region. Satisfactory yields were obtained with seed from both the South and the North. Late -varieties from the North made good yields at Auburn, but the smallest yields obtained were from early varieties of northern origin. Seed corn from Virginia gave an average yield of 4 bushels per acre higher than seed corn of the same varieties from the Gulf States and Georgia. No material difference was found as the result of planting kernels from the middle, butt, or tip portion of the ear. In the wet season of 1900 planting corn in the water furrow decreased the yield. Corn planted late or after small grain failed to make a satisfactory yield. Relatively thick planting was most advantageous with an early, small-stalked variety. Frequent rains obscured the results of cultivation experiments made in 1900 with late corn, but the slight differences in yields were in favor of (1) Making first cultivation deep. (2) Continuation of cultivation late into the season. (3) Frequent cultivation. There was a reduction in the yield of corn in 1900 as the result of either stripping the blades, or cutting the tops, or cutting and shocking the entire plant. This loss was greater when topping or cutting was done than when the blades were stripped. The total value of grain and harvested forage was greatest when the stalks were cut and shocked. Lime was useless on sandy upland poor in humus; it was apparently slightly effective, but not profitably so, on soil where there was considerable vegetable matter. The stubble alone .of velvet beans proved an affective fertilizer for corn. Still more effective was the plowing under of the entire growth of velvet bean vines, the corn crop following the vines yielding 11.9 bushels per acre more than the corn on the plot where only the roots and stubble of velvet beans were used as a fertilizer for corn. Beggar weed, used as fertilizer, increased the yield of corn, but in this respect proved decidedly infeiior to velvet beans. Cowpea vines, from which the peas had been picked, increased the yield of corn by 17 per cent. in spite of the fact that nitrate of soda was applied to the corn. The fertilizing effect of cowpea vines and velvet bean vines was more permanent than was the fertilizing 97 f tliehe stubble of these two plants The average increase in the yield of the corn crop of 1900, grown two years after these legumes, was 3.2 bushels per acre on the -plots where the vines had been plowed in and only .9 of a bushel on the plots where only the roots and stubble of ~owpeas and velvet beans had been left on the land in 1898. In a second experiment the residual fertilizing effect of velvet beans, grown in 1898, was represented by an increase of 7.5 bushels of corn in the crop of 1900. In this test the residual effect of velvet bean stubble was considerable, but less than that of the entire growth of the same plant. Hairy vetch, hairy vetch stubble, rye, and rye stubble were compared as green manures for corn. Corn planted June 16, which was more than a month after harvesting the vetch and rye hay, yielded 8.4 bushels per acre where the entire rye plant was plowed under and 17.5 bushels where vetch had been used as a green manure. This is an increase of 98 per cent. attributable to vetch. When the fertilizing effects of the stubbles of these two plants are compared the differences are somewhat less, but decidedly in favor of vetch stubble. Vetch vines and stubble were nearly on an equality as fertilizers if measured by the yield of corn following these crops in the same year; however, the benfit from plowing in the vines was more permanent, as indicated by the increase in the second corn crop on the same land. It was more profitable to harvest vetch for hay and utilize only the stubble as fertilizer. Two hundred pounds of cotton seed meal and 434 pounds of cotton seed produced practically equal increases in the yield of corn, that is, a pound of nitrogen was of equal value in cotton seed and in cotton seed ffet meal. 98 Unfavorable weather rendered inconclusive the results of experiments with nitrate of soda and cotton seed meal applied to corn at different dates. Cowpea stubble afforded sufficient nitrogen for corn planted late in the season. On exceedingly poor, gray sandy soil at Auburn fertilizer tests, or soil tests, with corn were repeated for three years. Phosphate gave no increase, kainit an inconsiderable one, and cotton seed meal an increase of only 2.3 bushels per acre, or not enough to be profitable. On a slightly better sandy soil at Auburn the average results of an experiment repeated for two years show no gains from the use of phosphate or kainit and only a moderate increase with cotton seed meal. On "mulatto" land in Big Wills Valley, DeKalb County cotton seed meal was highly effective and profitable, increasing the yield 7.9 bushels of corn per acre; phosphate and kainit were useless. Commercial fertilizers are not so well adapted to corn as to cotton. If used for corn the amounts should not be large. A formula for corn should contain a smaller portion of phosphoric acid and potash and a much larger percentage of nitrogen than a formula for cotton growing on the same land. That is, it should be made up largely, if not entirely, of some nitrogenous material, like cotton seed meal. Cowpeas, velvet beans, vetch and other leguminous plants and coarse home-made manures are safer and better for corn than are commercial fertilizers. 99 TESTS OF VARIETIES OF CORN. Results of variety tests of corn made by the writer in 1896 and 1897 were published in Bulletins'Nos. 75 and 88 of this Station. The results for 1898, 1899, and 1900 are presented in the tables below. The figures are the actual-yields of shelled corn. There was an equal number of plants on all plots, except in 1900, when on a few plots there was a slight deficiency in the stand. The varieties are arranged in order of yield. Yields of varieties of corn in 1898. Yield per acre. Variety.Bushels. Higgins..................................20.0 .. . ... .. .... .. .. .. .. .... .. .. 17 .5 Btid.en.......................16.9 Shaw.. osby Prolific .. ...... St. Charles (from Ill.) ................ ............. 16.3 15.5 Experiment Station Yellow..................14.9 Farmer's Pride ... .................. 14.0 Golden Beauty ......... Locke Prolific (fromt Cuban Giant ............. ". .. .. Ga.) ...................... ..... ,.... ......... 13.3 12.9 .. . ... . ... . . . .11'.8 Hickory King (from Ga.) ..................... Blount Prolific (from Hickory King (Av. Ill, and Ga. seed)............10.9 Ga.)...................11.0 .. .... ... . . .. . 11.4 Blount Prolific (Av. Ill. & Ga. seed).... ........ Blount Prolific (from Ill.) .................... Hickory King '(from Ill.) ...... ... ... 10.8 10.5 10.4 100 Yields of varieties of corn in 1899. Yield per. acre. Variety.Bushels. Experiment Station Yellow ................... Jones Pearl Prolific.........................18.2 Mosby....................................18.0 Golden Dent..............................17. Blount Prolific (Ga.) ....................... Evans.........................16.7 19.5 17.1 Blount Prolific (Av. Ill, and Ga.).............16.2 16.1 St. Charles (from Ills.) ..................... Red Cob (from Jones)......................;6.0 1. ShawV.................. ........... St. Charles (A. Ala. and Ill.)................15.7 St. Charles (from Ala.)......... ........... 3 15.2 ............. Blount (from Ill.) ........ Hickory King (from Ga.)....................14.9 .14.5 ...... Champion White Pearl........ Hickory King (Av. Ga. Ill.)..................14.2 ...... 13.5 Hickory King (Ill.)............ & Yields of varieties of corn in 1900. Yield per acre. Bushels. .. .. . . . .. "........41.7 Variety. ....... 40 .1 ...... ........ ......... Mosby ...... 39.6 ................. Arnold ............... Bradberry.........................................39.1 Cocke Prolific (from. N. Ga.) ........ Cocke Prolific (from Va.). Cocke Prolific (from S. Ga.)......... Cocke Prolific ... 38.6 .....:..38.4 .. 37.8 (av. 4 plots) ....................... Blount Prolific (from Va.) ..... Sanders ................. Red Cob ............. .... .. ........ 36 .8 ...... ....... ...... .... .:...:...36.5 Expt. Sta. Yellow (av. 4 plots)......... Blount Prolific (av. 3 plots)............... Cary Klondyke.............................34.0 Farmer's Pride..... .............. St. Charles (av. 3 plots).... .... ... 34'.8. 34.3 33.7 33 35. 0 ......... ............ .7 Shaw.. . . Cocke 1201 ....... 9.. 0........ 33.2 St. Charles (from Ill.).....................33.1 Giant Broad Grain ......................... Prolific (from. S. Ga. [J.]) .............. Blount Prolific ,(from S. Ga.).................32.2 Early Mastodon............................31.9 Poor Man . .......... ....... (from Del.)....................30.4 Hickory Hickory King (from Va.)..................29.8 Golden Beauty......... .................. 32. 32 King 31.3 28.9 28.4 28.2 Evans .................. ............ Hickory King (av. 3 plots) .................. White Sheep Tooth.........................26.2 Creole.........................25.9 Hickory King (from Ill.)...................24.5 Champion White Pearl.............. Learning...............................19.9 .24.4 RELATIVE RODUCTIV.ENESS OF VARIETIES. and Since all five of the variety tests of corn made during the, last five years have been on a uniform plan continuously under the same management and since fertilization and culture have been substantially the same each year, we are able to use these data in determining the relative productiveness of varieties. However, available. land and other considerations have made it impracticable to test the same list of varieties each year. Instead,' we have in all tests used the variety Experiment Station Yellow as a standard with which the yields of all other varieties may be compared. First let us ascertain how this variety, our standard, compares in' productiveness ,with the other four varieties,. that have entered into all of our recent tests. 10 2 Yield of varieties of 'corn tested for 5 years at Auburn Yield of shelled corn per acre. [896 1897 1898 1899 [900 Mosby............ ............. 15.5 Ch'rles (av of seedfromS.&N) 25.1 16.9 Experiment Station Yellow Blount (av. of seed from (S.& N.) 22.3 Hickory King (av. of seed from S. & N.) ......... .. .. Average 5 years. 23.1 21.6 St. 25.4 [6.3 18.0 40.1 18..15.515 733.7 18.4 14.9 19.5 35.0 19.0 [0.8 16.2 34.3 20.9 20.5 174 .0.713.2109142282 From this table we see that Experiment Station Yellow, though a safe variety, has not given the highest .average yield for the five-year period. It has been sur- passed by Mosby, averaging 23.1 bushels, and even by Saint Charles, which gives 21.6 bushels, againet 20.9 bushels for Experiment Station Yellow. Blount closely follows with a record of 20.5 bushels, while iickory King falls considerably below the other varieties, averaging only 17.4 bushels per acre for the five-year period. Since it is not permissible to compare even the age yield of one variety with that made by another aver- variety in different years, we are led to adopt some :means of comparison which will eliminate the influence of varying seasons and' place all varieties on the same basis, whatever may be the years in which they were tested. This can be done by representing the yield in any year of our standard, Experiment Station Yellow,. by the member 100. The yield of any other variety can then be 'calculated in percentages of this number. By this means the figures in the following table are obtained; the figures are percentages, and if greater than 100 show, that the variety opposite the figure afforded a larger yield for a given year than did, the Experiment Station YXellow. A smaller than 100 indicates a figure !yield less than that. of the standard variety just referred to. 103 Relativc yields varieties of corn at -Auburn,' taking the yield of Experiment Station Yellow as 100. 1896 of 1897 1898 1899 1900 Average. Tested 5 years. Mosby.................91 St Charles ............... ........ Experiment Stat on Yellow....... Blount ............................ Hickory King..................... Tested 4 years. Shave............. 138 109 92 115 98 104 81 96 1000 100 100o 13 2 103 72 83 98 122 72 73 73 80 148 100 . 109 105 100 98 84 98 Champion White Pearl............. 126 Tested ................. ......... ........... . 99 Cocke................. 3 79 129 101 117 .. . 81 95 74 70 108 96 87 108 97 years. .1Jones' Pearl Prolific ................ EarlyMastodon Farmers' .... 99 134 87 ... 94 . .... ... Pride ......... ... .................... ........ 97 60 93 .. 96 91 95 Tested 2 tyeats . Rlenfro............................ Higgins Red (Job .......................... Golden Beauty .................. 8b 128 7.7 .... 134.. ..... 107 103 Evans............. ............... 1 year. Tested ............. .... ........... .... ... .. ....... 82 89 ... 99 83 81 91 86 84 86 Golden Giant.......... ............ 125.............125 (J:ade Prolific...................... Yellow Dent .... ............. Arnold ................. Baden ................... ......... Bradbury............... ..... 124.. ......... 117...... ........ ........ 113 ... .... 113 .. ...... .... .. .... 112 124 117 113 113 112 ....... Peabody .......................... 108... .. ......... 108 Sanders......... ........... .. .... 104 104 Cary Klondike........................ " .. .... 97 97 Strawberry ...... ..... ........... ..... 97.... ..... 97 94 .... ... .... 94 Giant Broad Grain....... ,.... 93 ............ 93 Chester Co. Mammoth ............. ......... ... .. 92 .. 92 Golden Dent............. Poor M1an......................... ... ... .... ... 89 89 Welborn ............... Cuban Giant ..... Sheep Creole........... .................... lea ni ng .................... SilverMin ..... Tooth ................ ............... .. .......... 87 .... .... ....... 79 .7 87 9 .......... 75 75 ..... .... .... .... 48 .. .. 74 57 74 57 48 104 Among the varieties tested for or inire years in thils series of experiments, Mosby and Cocke take first rank, their yields exceeding those of the standard by 9 and 8 per cent. respectively. Both are prolific varieties, having usually two ,or more small ears per plant. They are desirable varieties for bottom lands or for rich unlands provided the supply of moisture is abundant. They are not to be recommended for rather poor or dry upland, where there is a tendency to make nubbins instead of ears. Varieties with larger ears and a smaller number,, as Experiment Station Yellow, Farmer's Pride, Shaw, Higgins, etc., are probably safer, or less likely to make an occasional failure on such lands, and the three last named are also suitable for bottom land. No early variety has averaged well here, though a, medium early kind has sometimes given a large yield.. The late varieties contain less weevil eaten corn when harvested. The late date at which frost occurs in theGulf States makes earliness a consideration of no special importance for corn planted at the usual time. THE RELATION OF THE RAINFALL TO THE, YIELD OF VARIETIES. It will be noticed that the relative rank of varieties differs greatly in each year. Weather conditions, and especially rainfall, may be one year in favor of one class of varieties, and the next in favor of another type. For example, in 1896 the early varieties as a rule surpassed the late varieties. In 1897 the opposite condition occurred, the late varieties leading. In 1898 and 1899 the influence of season was less marked. In 1900 weather conditions were decidedly favorable to the late varieties. The chart of the rainfall (see opposite p. 108), during 105 the past five years was prepared to throw light on the relation between the distribution of the rainfall and the yields of the early and of the late varieties. The dates of planting of all varieties were as follows: March 28, 1896; April 8, 1897; April 1, 1898; April 3, 1899, and April 6, 1900. This makes the period between planting time and the beginning of the relatively abundant rains of midsummer 100, 74, 96, 107, and 112 days respectively. Those interested in such problems and with sufficient leisure for such investigations may, by the use of the ,chart, trace other important relations between the rainfall and the yield of each variety. Here we need only observe that the distribution of the rainfall is the most important climatic factor in determining the yield of corn in the Gulf States. Since this is beyond control we must depend for uniformly satisfactory yields of corn on frequent, well timed and judicious shallow cultivation of corn amn on so preparing the soil and supplying it with decaying organic matter by rotations embracing cowpeas and other humus-forming crops, that the soil will be enabled to retain a sufficiency of moisture during periods of drought. The rainfall chart was prepared under the writer's direction by T. Bragg, a student of the agricultural course, from the weather records at Auburn kept by Dr. J. T. Anderson. This chart shows the rainfall for the six months from April to September inclusive. The rainfall in the other six months has less influence on the yield of corn. However it is given below. 1C6 Rainfall in 1896 inches. 1897 1898 3.88 5.06 1899 1900 January.................. ........ 3.47 February................. ....... 6.31 March.. .'................ ..... 10.68 April.................... 174 5.82 May....................2.55 1.09 June ....... 1.60 7.17 1.25 ....... 3.69 2.20 11.09 4.45 5.48 1.77 .26 1.18 6.79 2.51 3.06 1.92 8.71: 1.62 8.95 3.46 July ..................... 9.29 August .................. 2 26 September............... 5.78 October...................5 November ............... 7 37 December ................ 2'3 I 5.0[ 6 37 .44 23t 10.13 1.93 4.78 11.73 .14 3 42 6.69 3.50 4 87 3.22 2(9 6.74 Ot91 08 2.39 5.17 4.75 4 73 MEXICAN JUNE CORN. This variety has been highly recommended for very late planting, especially for occnpying field after crop of small grain is cut. have grown for several years, but the late date of planting has made it imprac ticable to compare the yields with those of other varieties. It may be said, however, that the average yield of Mexican June corn planted late has been less at Aubnrn than that of the most other varieties planted earlier. For exaimple in 1899 it was grown on soil that would easily have produced 20 to 25 bushels of the standard. varieties planted early. The yield of the Mexican June. wxas only 9 bushels per acre and it was scarcely dry enough for harvesting October 19, although planted April 21. In 1900, it was planted July 3 and yielded far less than other varieties planted early. It makes an immense growth of. stalks and leaves. On poor or medium land there is a tendency to prodnce only nubbins, though the shncks are of full length. . It is probably valuable for forage, if fed green. We have not found mucih use for it. W'e a it a WHERE TO GET SEED. The Alabama Experiment Station has no seed for sale or distribution. With many varieties growing near together we could not keep varieties pure. We refer inquirers wishing any of' these varieties to the parties from whom we obtained seed, as follows:. Curry-Arrington Seed Co., Rome. Ga.: Shaw, Cade, Hickory King, Farmer's Pride, Golden Dent, Cocke, Higgins. Alexander Seed Co., Augusta, Ga.: Cocke, Bradberry, Poor Man's, Mexican June. H. P. Jones, Herndon, Ga.: Jones Pearl, Red Cob, Cocke, Blount, Welborn. E. G. Packard, Dover, Del.: Chester, Hickory King, Early Mastodon ,White Sheep, Tooth. J. C. Suffern, Woorhees, Ill.: 'Champion, White Pearl, St. Charles, Hickory King, Blount, Golden Beauty, Learning, Cuban Giant, Silver Mine. T. W. Wood & Sons, Richmond, Va.: Cocke, Hickory King, Blount, Giant Broadgrain, Klondyke. W. H. Arnold, Thompson Station, Tenn.: Arnold, Red Cob. Mississippi A. & M. College., Starkville, Miss.: Mcsby and Evans. Louisiana Experiment Station, Andubon Park, La. Creole. W. S. Sanders, Danielsville, Ga.: Sanders. Dr. J. O. Boykin, Talladega, Ala.: Baden. SEED CORN FROM DIFFERENT LATITUDES. The following table gives the yields obtained in five years experiments in planting at Auburn seed corn from different latitudes. The Georgia seed were from Curry-Arrington Seed Co., at Rome, in North Georgia and from Alexander Seed Co., Augusta, and P. H. Jones, Herndon, Ga., seed from both the latter sources being designated as front South Georgia. 108 Seed corn from~ dift'erent latitudes. Yield per acre.' Seed from -Del. In crease per acre from Variety., }Region. Seed from Seed from Seed' from Il. Gulf & Va. Reg'.n seed Gulf Va. Del Ioverover .& . Seed Ill. 1896 do Hickory Bus. King Alabama.... . 16 5.........--2.8 ... Bus. do Illinois. .. . .19.3... . .. .. ... .. do'...........Delaware.. 15.6 ..........- -3-7 1896 Blount Prolif Ga. (South) ......... 14 2 Illinois .. do 1897 Hickory King Alabama .. do Illinois. .. do 14 3...... 13.1 .;.: 1.1 .. 21...........12.1 ......... .18 9 .2 1897 Blount Prolif. Ga. (South)......... 19.1 (Illinois. ... do do ...........-- ... 1898, Hickory KingGa. (North) do Ilinis... do 1898 Blount Prolif. Ga. (North) Illinois,. do do 1899 Blount Prolif.'Georgia .. do 'Illinois..... do 1899 St. Charles... Alabama... I Illinois. do do 140C: Charles.. St. Ala. (I year) 10 4 1. It....... 0.. 0..... 17.1 ........ ... 0.. .10(. ...... 10 ....... 15.2 16.1 5 .3. 1 9 . . 8 . . 15.3 ........... ... 34.2 do do Illinois.... a 33i1 . 1900 Blount Prolif. Ga. (South)........ Illinois..34.1 do do . do Virginia... do 1900 Cocke Prolif.. do do do Ga. Gai. 32.2......49 . . 368 . 2.7 do do G.do Ga (South; J.).. (south; A.) ...... (North)........38.6~ 384- 6.. )...... .... ... .. ~....... Virginia.... ............. 41.7 r.. . 5.2 ......... 29. 1900 King Hlickory Virginia.... ..... .......... 30 4 Dlaehware.. do do 24 5.:. Illinois.... do do ... 5.4 5.9. Mah~ 109 'slightly In six separate tests seed from Illinois afforded a larger crop than seed corn from the latitude of ,the Gulf States; the average excess in these tests in favor of Northern seed was 1.5 bushels pr acre. In four tests seed from the far South proved superior to Illinois seed, the average excess being 1.1 bushels. Averaging the ten comparable tests in which Illinois corn .was compared with the same varieties from Alabama and Georgia, we have an average difference of only .45 of a bushel per acre in favor of Northern seed, thus placing them practically on an equality with Southern seed. The data in the preceding table enable us to compare Illinois and Delaware seed in two instances, the Illinois seed in King. variety' being Hickory 1896 gave an excess of 3.7 bushels per acre, but in 1900, a much more valuable season for corn on the Station farm, seed of the same variety from Delaware proved superior to Illinois seed to the extent of 5.9 bushels per acre, making the average for .the two tests 1.1 bushels in favor of Delaware seed. In a comparison of Illinois seed corn with that from Virginia, the latter afforded larger yields with both varieties, averaging 4 bushels per acre in excess of Illinois seed under the favorable conditions of 1900. Seed from Alabama and Georgia has been compared with seed from Virginia several times and in the case of both varieties, Cocke Prolific and Hickory King, there has been a large advantage with the seed from Virginia; its average superiority was 4 bushels per acre. There is further confirmation of the apparent superiority of Virginia seed of these varieties in the fact that in none of the four instances where comparison was possible did the Georgia or Alabama seed closely approach the seed from Virginia in the yield afforded. On the whole our experiments relative to the effect of 110, climate on corn seem to favor seed from Virginia more prodnctive here in the case of Cocke, Blonnt and Hickory King than seed from any othersource. However, numerous repetitions will be necessary before this tentative conclusion can be accepted as positive. Meantime the results suggest that, with snitable ties, seed from latitude, from Illinois southward, can be made to afford satisfactory crops in Doubtless purity of seed is even more important than cland it is quite possible that some of the rather poor showings made by Alabama and Georgia seed be due to impurity of variety, the result of the seed having been grown in fields adjacent to of common corn, where mixing or cross fertilization would naturally occur. as any varie- Alabama. mate may fields BUTT, MIDDLE AND TIP KERNELS FOR SEED In 1898, kernels from the middle of the ear of the variety Experiment Station Yellow, from space of about one inch at the butt end, and from an equal space at the tip end of the ear were planted, April 1, on six a plots. The yields follow: Yield obtainedfrom planting middle,. butt and tip kernels. Yield- of shelled corn per acre. Bus. From middle kernels, (average of two plots),.............1)6.3 Kind of seed From butt (average of two plots)................ From tip kernels. (average of two plots) ................ kernels,, 16 1.4 8 The differences in yield are too slight to indicate any real superiority of seed from any particular portion of the ear. The same thing was true in our test of this matter in 1896. feel justified in' repeating the conclusion reached in Bulletins Nos. 75 and as the We result of a careful study 88, of the experiments made on this point, both in Alabama and in other States. 111 '"Taken as a whole, the experiments thus far made in several widely separated States fail to show any decided advantage in planting kernels from any special portion of the cob. This has been true even when the tip, butt and middle kernels planted had been propagated for several generations from tip, butt and middle kernels respectively." In these experiments the tip kernels used were all sound. In the tip of the ear there is often a larger percentage of weevil eaten or defective kernels than elsewhere and in such cases the tip kernels should be rejected. PLANTING CORN IN WATER FURROW VERSUS ON A LEVEL. Only two plots were used, lying adjacent; on a deep sandy soil, where sorghum had grown in 1899. April 5, 1900, on one plot beds five feet wide were formed by using a one-horse turn plow. On the same date the other plot was flushed, or plowed level with the same plow. On the same day, April 5, Evans corn, a rather early variety, was planted in rows 5 feet apart, the com plete fertilizer having first been applied in the drills where corn was to be planted and mixed with soil by means of a scooter plow. On the plot which had been bedded fertilizers and corn were placed in the waterfurrow. On the other plot planting was done by opening a furrow in the level, flushed ground. The plots were so thinned as to leave an equal number of plants on each. The yield of shelled corn per acre was 19 bushels when planting was done in the water furrow and 22.2 bushels when on a level. Planting in the water furrow is common in this locality and it is thought to increase the ease of cul- 112 tivation and to enable the plants to better resist drought. There was so much rain in April and June, 1900, that this method was at a disadvantage and the result under these abnormal conditions cannot be accepted as conclusive. Planting corn in the water furrow lengthens the period during which cultivation with the harrow is possible. It is practicable to plant corn in the water furrow only in well drained, light soil. TIME FOR PLANTING CORN. No direct experiments have been made here to determine this point. Our first planting is usually about the middle of March and extending up to the middle of April, most of it being done about the first of the last named month. A smaller amount of injury from the bud worm that preys on the root is noticed when planting is very early or very late than when done in midseason. Our experimental work here has been almost entirely on poor upland. On such soils very late planting, after he removal of wheat or oats,, has resulted in almost entire failure of the crop except in 1898, when St. Charles planted June 16, a month after plowing in vetch vines or stubble, afforded a satisfactory yield. In 1900, Experiment Station Yellow corn planted May I on ordinary upland averaged nearly 30 bushels of corn per acre, but this is apparently an unusual result, arising from the peculiar distribution of the rainfall in 1900. Overflows late in June in 1900 made it necessary to plant considerable corn in July in numerous localities in Alabama. Such reports as we have received of these plantings have been chiefly from the bottom lands of the western part of the State. As a rule failure seems to have attended these efforts, whether the common late 113 kind or one of the early varieties from the North has been employed. To ascertain whether any variety would succeed when planted very late, we planted the following list of varieties July 13, 1900, on good branch-bottom soil: St. Charles, Evans, Mosby, Hickory King, Blount, Golden Dent, Champion White Pearl, Cocke & Experiment Station Yellow. All proved to be absolute failures, making low, slender stalks, no large ears, and few and poorly filled nubbins. Smut was unusually abundant and this excessive injury from smut we have every year observed in most of our late planted corn. Corn planted after small grain has generally proved a failure, except, perhaps, on very fertile land, and even on rich soil cowpeas or sorghum grown as forage usually pays better than corn planted very late. DISTANCE FOR UPLAND CORN. In 1898 on a sandy loam soil, containing numerous rather small flint stones, three varieties of corn were used in a test of thick planting as compared with ordinary distances. All rows were 4 feet 8 inches apart. In the plots where the corn was "rather thick," the intervals between single plant, in the row was 2.5 feet, giving 11.6 square feet per plant, which is really considerably closer than farmers usually plant corn on thin upland of this character, with a productive capacity of 12 to 20 bushels per acre. The corn designated as "thick planting" was left in thinning at average intervals of 18 inches along the row, or practically 50 per cent. thicker than in the other case. Planting was done April 1. Experiment Station Yellow is a rather large southern variety. St. Charles seed for this test was obtained from 114 Illinois; the stalks are rather small, but considerably larger than those of Golden Beauty, and the variety is internmediate in earliness between the other two varieties. Golden Beanty is well known as a very early yellow variety, with very small stalks. The seed was from Illinois. The following table gives the results: Mcdi umn vcrsuas thick planting of corn. Yield of shelled corn per acre. Mc with thick' latick. Mhckedium ihicnessplaning.planting. Increase Bus Experiment Station Yellow. St. Charles........16 Golden Beauty....................10 Average, 3 varieties........ Bus. 21.2 4 5 16.1 Bus 22 8 1 6 17 7 12 8 17 8 1.3 2.3 1 7 With all varieties there was an advantage in close spacing. This benefit was nattirally most marked in the case of Golden Beauty, the variety having the smallest plants, best able to bear crowding.. No cowpeas were grown between the corn rows, though this double cropping is generally advisable on thin land where- wide rows are a necessity. The following quotation from Alabama Experiment Station Bulletin No. 88 gives the results of our earlier work relative to the best thickness for corn; the of 1896 and 1897 were made on sandy, poorer land ments experi- than was the test detailed above, and in that sandy land there were no stones. 115 "Yield of corn when plants stood at different distances apart. DISTANCE YIELD PER ACRE N_ _ umber Between rows. 5 feat .5 sect 5 feet 6 feet 4 feet 10 in. 4 feet of plants Between plants. per acre. 1896 Bus. 1897 Bus. Averg Bus. 4 feet 3 feet 2 feet 2feet6 in. 3 feet 116 in. 3 feet 9 in. 2,178 2,904 4,356 2,904 2904 2.904 12.4 12.9 9.8 13.1 15 6 16.9 15 3 157 16.7 155 16.7 17.8 13.9 14.3 13.3 14.3 16.7 17.4 In both seasons the yield was largest when the constant area devoted to each plant approached a perfect sqnare in shape. In other words, a plant having 15 square feet of space was most productive when so planted that the distance in the drill nearly equaled the distance between rows. This distance of 4 feet by 3 feet 9 inches affords the largest average yield for two years, but for cheapness of cultivation rows 5 feet wide, with plants about 3 feet apart, are to be preferred to .narrower rows on such soil that used for this test. On poor land a row of cow peas should usually be planted betweeli the corn rows, as was not done in this experiment. at least 5 feet on such lands as this."~ which With a row of cow peas between the corn rows the distance should be In none of these seasons was there a sufficiency of rai. Doubtless if cultivation had been somewhat neglected, or delayed long after a rain, the corn that was planted close together would have made a less favorable ~showing. Thin planting of corn is safest, so far as mak- ing a medium yield,. but somewhat thicker planting than usual seemis advisable where a maximum yield is desired and where cultivation is prompt and thorough. 11 CULTIVATION EXPERIMENTS. Two series of experiments with cultivation were conducted in 1900, one with corn planted early, the other with corn planted late. The results of the test withearly corn were rendered worthless by want of uniformity in the soil, and are omitted here. The experiment here reported was made with Experiment Station Yellow corn planted May 1, on a field where cowpea roots and stubble had been plowed in a few weeks before this date. The fertilizer per acre consisted of 209 pounds of acid phosphate and 24 pounds of muuriate of potash. The same number of plants, in rows 4 feet 3 inches apart, was left on all plots. 'Deep versus shallow first cultivation. Three plots (Nos. 37, 40, 41) were cultivated deep May 17, which required 5 trips per row,-2 with a scooter running near the plants and 3 with a straight shovel, breaking the middles to a depth of about 4 inches. All subsequent cultivations, given at the same time as in the other plots mentioned in this paragraph, were shallow. Plots 42 and 48 received shallow cultivation throighout, using, as in. all shallow culture plots, the heel scrape. The dates of cultivation of both series were May 17, 3 furrows (5 for deep culture plots); June 2, 2 furrows; June 6, 2 furrows; June 15, 2 furrows, June 20, 2 furrows; June 30, 2 furrows;. July 11, 2 furrows. There were 15 cultivation furrows for the shallow culture plots and 17 for the deep. The unusually frequent cultivation was due to the frequent rains, the aim in this series of plots being to stir the soil whenever a crust should begin to form. Rain fell immediately after the cultivation of June 2' and June 6,and' almost immediately after that of June' 15, thus. requiring their repeti- 11T tion, in other, words causing us to give several cultiva-tions in excess of what is necessary in ordinary seasons. The following table gives the yields in bushels of corn. per acre: First cultivation deep, others shallow. All cultivation shallow. Bus. Plot 37.......,..............27.4 40. . .............. .... .... 30.1 41 .................... 31.8 Average. .............. 29.8 PIot 42......................0.7 " 48......... ............ Average.. Bus. 27.3 . ....... 29.0 The average difference is .8 bushel per acre in favor of making the first cultivation deep. This is no greater than the error which may arise from slight variations in. the fertility of the plots.. We must conclude that in a season of frequent rains deep cultivation when confined to the first working of corn was not notably injurious. It should be said, however, that on the Station farm, both on light gray and stiffer reddish soils, we cultivate shallow from the first, and think that in so doing we get better results than by the deep "running around" with a scooter, which is so customary. Effects of late cultivation. Plots 39 and 43 were cultivated in the same manner and at the same dates asp plots 42 and 48 in the preceding section, except that they were "laid by" June 30, while the latter received' one additional cultivation, July 11. 118; per acre: Thfollowing table .gives the yields of corn in bushels Last cultivation, June 30. [Bus. Plot 39................... 27.5 Last cultivation, July 11. Bus. Plot 42................... 30.7 Plot 43................27.i Averave ............ .. 27.,5 I IIII1Y IILrl I. 1 Plot 48 .................. Average ............... 27.3 29.0 Here is a gain of 1.5 bushels per acre apparently attributable to the last cultivation of 2 furrows per row. This is the more noteworthy in view of the absence of any considerable rain after the early "laying by" and before the late "laying by." Observation suggests that corn is frequently laid by too early. We -doubt that the appearance of tassels is indication that cultivation, in all cases, should cease. we do not hesitate to cultivate tasseled corn if a crust is forming.. course late cultivation is only advisable when thewrkis very shallow. Frequency cultivattion.-This experiment embraced four series of plots, all cultivated shallow from the be-ginning, the heel scrape being the only implement used. The plan, from which rains, and the writer's occasional absence, made some deviation necessary, was as follows : an Of of Plots. To be cultivated Vf. Actually cultivated. 42 & 48 When crusting...... 45 & 50... Every 7 days ....... . 44 & 49 Every 14 days.... 46, 47, . 17; M. 17, 2330; J'e 6.15,20.30; J'y 11 J'e. 2,6, 15.20, 30; J'y 11 51 Every 14 days, in natemiddles only._ M. 17 30; J'e 6& 15; alter- M. 17&& 30;J'e20;J'y4J'y 11 On all plots the cultivation of May 17 required 3 fur- rOWS, and each subsequent cultivation 2 furrows per 119 row. The total number of furrows per row during the entire season as follows : 15 furrows for cultivation when crusting; 17 for weekly cultivation; 9 for cultivation every 2 weeks; and 6 for working of alternate middles every 2 weeks. was Effects of frequency NO of ctitation of Separate yields. respectively, Bus[bus. 30.7-27 3 31 co;n. Aver Plots. Then cultivated trips (approximately.) per yip acre. 29.0 30.3 42 48.... crusting.. 45 &50 .. ...... ;. 44 & 49 Every 14 days .. , 46, 47 & Every 14 days in alternate middles & When Weekly 15 51. 17 9 6 0-29.5 30 4-27.0 260-25.9-29.1 28.7 27.3 The best yield was made with the greatest number of furrows, that is with weekly cultivation. Working only when a crust was forming saved 2 furrows and apparently lost 1.3 6iushels of corn. Cultivation at intervals of about two Nweeks lacked .1.6 bushels of affording the same yield as weekly working. The loss when only -alternate middles were stirred infrequently was 3 bushels as com-= pared with the stirring of entire soil are-as at the sam~e .dates. No experiments in methods of cultivation can be expected to be conclusive in a wet year like 190) for the ,effect of frequent rains is to equalize all plots, effecting for both poorly and well tilled plots just what judicious cultivation ordinarily does, viz, providing an adequate supply of moisture. While awaiting the results of a repetition of these experiments we may infer that since the effects of good cultivation were apparent in a wet year that they would be much more marked in a dry or even in an ordinary season. 120 NUMBER OF FURROWS PER ROW FOR CORN. Lest some'should misunderstand the preceding experiment and asume that we ordinarily give as much cultivation to corn as 15 furrows, we give the number of furrows per row in other fields of corn, planted at the usual timge. Let it be remembered that the several yields given do not represent differences due to the frequency of cultivation, because soils, fertilizers, dates of planting, etc., vary. Seven furrows per row durilig the entire season, in 4 cultivation, 1 rolling and 1 harrowing before planting, 1 harrowing after corn came up, and hoeing and thinning, constitute the work of cultivating the corn in the ,"methods of harvesting" experiment of 1900, where the yield averaged 45.3 bushels per acre on upland. The number of furrows in some other experiments was,-7 (in 4 cultivations) in the variety test in 1900, where the yields ranged between 19.9 and 41.7 bushels per acre; 7 in the test of cowpeas as fertilizers for corn, where the yields ranged from 18 to 28.9 bushels of corn; and 9 (in 4 cultivations) for the corn grown in the rotation experiment in 1900. In all these cases the harrow was used for the first cultivation, thereby decreasing the number of furrows with one-horse implements. In 1899, with a very different season, the number of furrows per row required by corn averaged higher. For example the corn in the variety test that year had 12 furrows (distributed through 6 cultivations), besides 1 harrowing. It is false economy to omit a cultivation' when the ground is crusting; it pays to be liberal in' the number cf cultivations, even though six be required. But it pays to be sparing in the numbef of trips per row at I 121 each separate cultivation. Never, except possibly at the first cultivation, use an 18-inch scrape where a 24-inch or larger one will do equally effective work. As for the use of the scooter and narrow straight shovel as cultivating implements, they are time killers and profit consumers, even if the injury to the roots is repaired by seasonable rains. With the heel scrape for mellow land, shallow working wing shovels for hard soils, and among more expensive implements a vast array of cultivators, we fail to find the reason for employing the scooter and its kind in cultivation. METHODS OF HARVESTING CORN. The experiment described below had two ends in view, (1) to ascertain the productive capacity of sandy, stony upland for corn when the corn was highly fertilized and the crop worked in the best possible manner, and (2) to compare the yields of grain and forage resulting from stripping the blades, topping the stalks, cutting and shocking the entire growth, and leaving all the forage in the field, harvesting only the ears. Let us first consider the productive capacity under favorable conditions of this grade of land, the average yield of which in this vicinity is usually less than 12 bushels per acre. In the years immediately preceding this test it had been used for various experiments, as follows: In 1896 it was quite poor, having been in constant cultivation for many years. At that time it was overrun with Bermuda grass. The chief aim in the treatment of this land during the next few years was to destroy Bermuda grass, and incidentally to use the land for experiBients with small grain and cotton. The improvement of the soil was kept in view, but was subordinated to the aimsi just mentioned. 122 In January, 1896, this field was sown to oats, which, with the aid of 240 pounds of commercial fertilizer, yielded only 10.4 bushels per acre, which may serve as a measure of the productiveness of the land at that time. Cowpeas were sown broadcast after the oats, making but a poor growth. The peas were picked and the vines plowed under, and rye sown in November, 1896. The rye was cut and threshed and in the summer of 1897 broadcast cowpeas were again grown, this time making a luxuriant growth. After the peas were picked, cattle grazed on the vines. Twice in the early months of 1898 the land was plowed, using scooters both times in preference to turn plows so as to leave the Bermuda roots exposed on the surface of the ground. In 1898 cotton was the crop, and there was used a mixture of acid phosphate, cotton seed meal, and kainit, the mixture being employed at the rate of 480 pounds per acre, applied by various methods. The average yield of seed cotton was 1,270 pounds per acre, the best plot making 1,454 pounds. In 1899 cotton was again grown and the cultivation of these two cotton crops, with the winter treatment adopted, exterminated. the Bermuda grass. The fertilizers used under this piece of cotton in 1899 averaged per= acre 212 pounds of phosphate and 1,792 pounds of stable manure. The average yield was 1,329 pounds, or nearly a bale, of seed cotton per acre. The preparation of the land for corn in 1900 and the fertilization of the corn, which was several times heavier than is our custom, were as follows: March 22 the land was plowed with a one-horse turn plow to a depth of 4 inches. A Chattanooga subsoil plow, drawn by two mules, followed in this furrow, loosening the soil to an additionaldepth of 6 inches. The subsoil plow left undisturbed strips of hard soil between each pair of subsoil 123 furrows. Cotton seed, which had been killed, was scattered broadcast at the rate of 732 pounds per acre, and after the first rain was cultivated in. Just after the land was subsoiled it was rolled and harrowed and the harrowing was repeated after every rain to hold the moisture. Just before planting there was applied in the drill and thoroughly mixed with the soil 256 pounds of acid phosphate per acre, an equal quantity of cotton seed meal, and 64 pounds of miuriate of potash. April 9 Mosby corn was planted about 21 feet apart in rows 4 feet 4 inches apart. Before covering the corn nitrate of soda was dropped about 8 inches from the hill of corn, using it at the rate of 100 pounds per acre. Cultivation consisted of one harrowing across the rows, April 26, of 4 cultivations with a heel scrape, the total number of furrows per row being 7, and of one hoeing, which also served for thinning. The cultivation was so timed as to come soon after a rain, thus preventing the long continuance of a surface crust, which would have wasted the moisture. The average yield of shelled corn was 45.3 bushels per acre. The corn was grown under field conditions,-that is solid, or without any spaces between plots or any outside rows. This yield of 45.3 bushels of corn per acre on high sandy, rocky soil was obtained only by exceptionally favorable weather conditions, thorough preparation, timely and judicious shallow cultivation, and what would generally be excessive fertilization. On every fourth row the corn plants were stripped of their blades August 8, when in the late "fodder-pulling" stage. August 16 the tops just above the ear were cut from every fourth row, the lower leaves (then badly "fired") being undisturbed, and the corn was pulled September 22. 124 August 18, on every fourth row the entire plants were 'cut and immediately shocked. The shocks were left in the field until September 22, when the ears were pulled. "The stalks, which showed some dampness towards the lower end which had been in contact with the ground, weighed 1,759 pounds per acre. September 22 the ears were pulled from another set of rows on which neither leaves nor top nor stalk had been harvested, and also on the same date the ears were pulled from the topped stalks standing in the field and the shocked corn. Let us consider first the yield of forage obtained by the different methods of harvesting. The blades, or "fodder," pulled August 8 were cured in fair weather in the usual way, the green blades being immediately tied into "hands," and these tied into bundles and weighed on August 10, the actual number of hours of sunshine required in curing being 12. The -yield of this cured "fodder," weighed in its fresh condition, or just after being bundled, was :615 pounds per acre. The tops, cut August 16, were weighed immediately after curing, which consisted in leaving them exposed in "small loose piles or "hands" to 15 hours of actual sunshine. Their weight was 711.4 pounds per acre. As stated above the yield of cured stover (entire plant after the ear is removed )was 1,759 pounds per acre. Negro laborers, not in any way pushed, "pulled fodder" at the rate of one acre in 19.8 hours, or practically half an acre a day. With thinner, smaller, less leafy corn, and more active laborers about twice this area can be stripped in a day. One of these same hands, entirely unaccustomed to handling shocked corn, pulled the ears, about 45 bushels, from the shocked corn at the rate of one acre in 10 -from 125 hours and 8 minutes. It is probable that with practice this speed could be considerably increased. The time required in topping,-much less than in stripping,-in cutting corn, in "tieing fodder," in pulling the ears in the field and in hauling was not recorded. Apparently the labor of cutting corn required no more time than topping, and less than fodder pulling. The following table gives the yields of corn in 1900 accompanying the several treatments of the corn forage. Yield per acre of corn and forage from different methods of harvesting in 1900. METHOD OF HARVESTING. Corn per acre. Forage per acre. Bus. Only ears harvested-................... 46.9 Lbs. 00 Tops cut and ears harvested ................ Entire stalks cut and ears afterwards harvested ................... ........ ..... Blades stripped and ears harvested......... 44.2 44.3 45.9 711 (tops) 1759(stalks) 615(blades) In 1900, with a luxuriant growth and an abundance of only one bushel per acre in the yield of corn as the apparent result of stripping the blades. Contrary to the results of previous experiments here and elsewhere the yield of grain was slightly less. when the plants were topped or cut and shocked than when stripping was practiced. The apparent effect of all these methods of utilizing corn forage was to slightly reduce the yield of grain, stripping by 1 bushel, cutting by 2.6 bushels, and topping by 2.7 bushels per acre. The following table gives the yield per acre both of grain and forage for 3 years on the plots differently treated: ,of moisture, there was a reduction 3 126 Yield per acre of corn and-forage from 1 different metk. Aver- ods of harvesting. Corn per acre. METHOD OF HARVESTING. 1896 Bus. 34.4 1897 Bus. 31.0 1900 Average, age. Bus. 46.9 3 yrs. Loss Bus. Bus. 37.6 Only ears harvested ............... Tops cut and ears harvested........ 30.2 29.2 Entire stalks cut and ears afterwards harvested....... ......... 29.2 29.5 Blades stripped and ears harvested.1 . . . . . . . 44.3 44.3 45 9 34.6 34.3 3.0 3.3 Our average results for three years show a loss of 3.3 bushels per acre when corn is cut and shocked, and 3 bushels per acre when it is topped, taking as a standard the yield of corn where no forage is harvested. The yields of forage are given in the following table Yields of cared corn tops, stover,, and blades. Yield per acre Assumed Value Value value of forage forage and forage per per 100 lbs. acre. *$ 189c, 1897 1900 Aver'ge __________________3 corn.* 19.34 23.22 yeas.____ Lbs Lbs Lbs Tops................. Stover ............... Lbs. Cents. 312 509 711 2103 13551759 6.15... 511 1739 40 30 .... .... 2.04 5.22 ........... ....... No forage harvested ..... Blades, or fodder ...... 50 cents per bushel. *Corn estimated at ....... 18 80 The average yield for three years is 511 pounds of cured corn tops per acre against 1,739 pounds of cured stalks or stov er. Assuming-in the absence of exact experiinents in feeding tops and stalks,-that tops are worth 40 cents, stalks 30 cents per 100, and corn 50 cents per bushel, we find that the topped acre gives a combined value of tops and corn only 54 cents above 127 the value of the corn alone on the acre from which no forage was harvested. This makes topping unprofitable under these conditions, for the labor of topping would cost more than 54 cents per acre and the tops if left uncut would have some slight value when eaten by cattle turned into the corn fields after corn is harvested. Comparing cutting and shocking with harvesting only the ears, we find the value of the cut stalks and ears borne by them give a total value of $23.22 per acre, against $18.80 when only the ears are pulled. The difference in favor of cutting the stalks is therefore $4.42 per acre. This is sufficient, after defraying the cost of cutting, shocking, and hauling the stalks and the extra expense of pulling the ears from shocked corn, (which we find to be a slower operation than pulling ears from the standing stalks),--to leave a balance in favor of cutting the stalks. Where a shredding machine capable of removing the ear by machinery is arVailable, there is a decided advantage in cutting the stalks over any other method of handling corn. It should also be borne in mind, in any comparison of cutting corn with the more usual methods of harvesting the crop, that there is a decided advantage in the matter of convenience in cutting corn. This can be done before cotton picking begins, a merit that will be generally recognized. Moreover the cutting .of the stalks leaves the land in better condition for plowing, and enables the farmer to begin the plowing for small grain at an earlier date than is practicable when the ears are allowed to cure slowly on the living plants. The removal of the stalks is somewhat more exhaustive to the land than is.burying them with the plow, but this is on most soils more than counterbal- 128 anced by the greater convenience of preparing and cul.tivating land that is free from stalks. The single experiment made here in 1900 relative the effect of stripping the blades from the corn plant is not sufficient to show the usual effect of that process. In this case the yield was reduced by only one bushel per acre when the blades were stripped off, while the Eaverage of many experiments made in the South gives an average loss of nearly three bushels per acre when "fodder" is pulled. to LIME AS A FERTILIZER FOR CORN. March 11, 1898, on plowed land 2,000 pounds of lime per acre was applied broadcast and harrowed in. The ~above figure refers to the weight of the quicklime, which was water-slacked before being applied, so that the actual amount of slacked lime employed was much greater. An adjacent plot was not limed. Both received the same fertilizer, viz.: 231 pounds of acid phosphate and 78 pounds of cotton seed meal per acre. The land had .grown up in broom sedge and bore also a rather light ;growth of Japan clover or Lespedeza striata in 1897. Corn was planted March 21, 1898, and at the next to last cultivation Wonderful cowpeas without the izers fertil- were drilled in the "middles" between the corn 'Corn on rows. The yields per acre were as follows : limed plot .. ~Corn on plot not -sults With cowpeas limed-,................11.8 bushels. . .. ............... 10.8 bushels. growing between the corn rows the re& were even more unfavorable to the application of lime, the yield of peas without lime being 11.1 bushels and with lime only 8.7 bushels per acre. The soil on which the above experiment was conducted 129 was a sandy loam, containing many small flint stones. This field was selected for the experiment with lima because it was thought that the presence of the vegetable matter in the broom sedge and lespedeza would allow the lime to exert its maximum effect. However, it might be claimed that the application of this amount of lime was made too late and that the apparent injury was the result of caustic action which would have been avoided if the lime had been applied some months before planting. In a second experiment with lime the application was made to very sandy gray soil 17 months before the corn was planted and the amount used was only 1,200 pounds per acre of air slacked lime. This was spread broadcast on plowed ground in November, 1898, and harrowed in. The ground remained practically bare all winter and the following summer was planted with beggar weed and drilled velvet beans,' fertilized with acid phosphate and muriate of potash. On some plots the entire growth of velvet beans was used as a fertilizer, on others only the light second growth of bean vines, and on others only the stubble. March 31, 1900, all plots were plowed and on April 5 Mosby corn was planted and fertilized with 240 pounds of acid phosphate and 40 pounds of muriate of potash per acre. The soil is very sandy, free from stone, and naturally poor and thirsty. It occupies an elevated hilltop. The following table is arranged in such a way as to show the effect of lime (applied 17 months before, planting corn) in connection with the different amounts of vegetable matter that had accumulated in the soil after the application of the lime and before the planting of corn. X30) Effects of lime on corn, with various amounts of vegeIncrease .table matter in the soil. Yield of corn per acre. Amount and kind of vegetable matter llowed under in March, 1900. Not .17 Limed mos. lte ie.,before Bus. Bub. 15.7 on llmed plots. Bus . 0.2 Very little; stubble of velvet beans.......15.5 Little; 2nd growth of velvet beans.. beggar weeds....... ..... Medium Large amount; velvet, bean vines, entire amount; 16 8 20 2 28.9 15.7 17.2 26.1 1.1 2.8 3.0 ,The results showv that where only small amouits of the effects of lime were there was present a considerable very slight. When of vegetable matter there was an average increase of 2.9 bushels of corn per acre on the limed plots. The benefit derived by corn from lime, applied nearly two years before, may have been due to the fact record for favored the growth of velvet beans, (as corn plants 1899 plainly shows) , thus leaving for larger anlount of vegetable matter on the limed plots. Or1- it may have been due to more rapid and complete devegetable matter were present amount the the thatlime a cay and nitrification of tile vegetable matter effected by the lime tihat remained in thme soil. On tile whole these experiments suggest that corn is not especially a lime-loving plant and that only when large amounts of vegetable nlatter are present is it a desirable- fertilizer for corn on our sandy upland of soils, which are not sour. Stubble corn. velvet beans as fertilizers for The first experiment mentioned below is the versus vines same as one of the tests discussed under the head of On. a very sandy soil there was liming. planted in the late spring and early sununer of 1899 velvet beans in drills on certain plots and beggar weed, (See p. 129). 131 sown broadcast, on others. The beggar weed and a por tion of the velvet beans was used exclusively for fertilizer. On other plots velvet beans were cut once, the li ght second growth being left for fertilizer. On still other plots two cuttings of velvet beans were made, thus leaving only the stubble as fertilizer for corn. These various fertilizing materials were all plowed under March 31, 1900, and Mosby corn planted April 5, using per acre 240 pounds of;acid phosphate and 40 pounds of muriate of potash. As stated elsewhere, half before the .the plots had been lightly limed 17 corn was planted. months cersas stubble of .velvet beans as fertilizer for corn Ties vs in, 1Q00. Yield of corn per acre. Bus. Plots Material used for green manuring, Increase over stubble plot. Bus. ..... 1.2 11.9 3.1 4 & 9 Stubble of velvet beans......... ......... ,5 & 10 Second growth of velvet beans............ ~3 8 Entire growth of velvet beans..... ....... & 2 & 7 Entire growth of beggar weeds..... 15.6 16.8 27.5 18.7 The entire growth of velvet beans afforded a yield of corn greater by 11.9 bushels per acre than the yield where only the stubble was .employed as fertilizer. In this case it was more profitable to use velvet bean vines for fertilizers than to harvest them for hay, for the average yield of hay in 1899 was only 2,800 pounds per acre, and this was cured with great difficulty and considerable cost, and the hay was not of good quality in this particular instance. Unfortunately there was not room for a plot entirely without green manure, that might .serve as a basis for 132 ascertaining the extent of the fertilizing effect of both the stubble and vines. However the yield of a plot similarly fertilized and on similar soil, about 100 yards away, was less than 5 bushels per acre, and though the varieties were different (but of nearly equal productiveness in the variety test of 1900) we are able to conclude that even the stubble of velvet beans greatly increased the yield, probably about 8 bushels per acre and that the vines of velvet beans enormously increased the yield, probably by about 20 bushels. COWPEAS AS A FERTILIZER FOR CORN. In 1897, on reddish loam soil, a test was made of the Wonderful or Unknown, Clay and Whippoorwill varieties of cowpeas, planted in drills and cultivated. On one plot soja, or soy, beans were planted, but as no stand of soy beans was obtained this plot was cultivated without a crop, that is, kept clean or fallow. The varieties of cowpeas occupied five comparable plots lying on both sides of the fallow plot. The peas were picked at the usual time and in April, 1898, the vines were plowed in as fertilizer for corn. The yields of corn on the five plots where pea vines had been plowed in did not vary widely and the average yield of these plots was 20.1 bushels per acre. The corn having no cowpeas preceding it,-the plot having been cultivated but kept bare in the summer of 1897,yielded 17.1 bushels. This is an increase of 3 bushels per acre, or 17 per cent., attributable to the use of peavines as fertilizer. The increase would doubtless have been still greater but for the fact that nitrate of soda at the rate of 67.5 pounds per acre was used on corn on all plots. 133 RESIDUAL FERTILIZING EFFECTS OF VELVET BEAN AND COW- PEA STUBBLE AND VINES. We are concerned not only with the fertilizing effect exerted by cowpeas and velvet beans on the crop of corn which immediately succeeds them, but also with learning whether this beneficial effect extends to a crop grown the second year after these soil-improving plants. Naturally the permanency of the improvement effected by plowing under leguminous plants varies with the kind of soil, the most lasting effect being obtained on stiff soils and the least permanent benefit occurring where the soil is sandy. The soil on which the following experiment was made belongs at neither extreme. It is a sandy loam, containing many small flint stones, and is a little stiffer than the soil on which the first-year effects of velvet .beans as a fertilizer for corn were tested in 1900. (See p. 130). In 1898 eight uniform plots, separated by alleys 3. feet wide, were planted, 2 plots with velvet beans, 5 with Wonderful cowpeas (most plots broadcast), and 1 with drilled Orange sorghum. The growth of the several plots was either cured for hay or used as a fertilizer, as indicated in the next table. March 9, 1899, all plots were plowed and in due time sorghum was planted in drills on all plots, and this crop at the proper season was cured for hay. March 17, 1900, the sorghum stubble was turned with a one-horse plow and March 29 corn was planted on all plots. The fertilizer for corn consisted of 240 pounds of acid phosphate and 32 pounds of muriate of potash per acre. No nitrogenous fertilizer had been used hereon any plot during 1890, 1899, or 1898, except on one plot in 1898, where 125 pounds of cotton seed meal peracre was used as a part of the fertilizer for sorghum. 131 With this exception the fertilization of each of the plots has been uniform during all of the last four years, consisting of phosphate and potash, as mentioned above. Fertilizing effects in 1900 of stubble and vines of cowpeas and velvet beans grown in 1898. Corn per acre in 1900. Plot. Crop in 1898. Portion used for fertilizer. increase Increase, Yield.over sorgvines over hum plot stubble. of 1898. Bus. Bus. 1.6 3.6 0.2 2.6 Bus. 8 4& 7 .3 & 6 2 1 Sorghum..... Stubble........... owpea . .... Stubble........ ..... 25.7 Vines, after picking. 27.7 Cowpeas .... Velvet beans. Stubble............ 23.9 26 8 Velvet beans. Entire growth .... 2.0 2 4 Let it be noted that the heavy growth of sorghum in 1899 did not utilize all of the fertility derived from the preceding crop of legumes. 'Although sorghum is a plant that is especially exhaustive to soil fertility, there still remained for the corn crop of 1900 a residue of nitrogen from the cowpea and velvet bean vines of 1898 sufficient to increase the yield of corn to the extent of 3.6 bushels per acre where cowpeas had grown two years before, and 2.6 bushels where velvet beans had grown. This is an average of 3.2 bushels per acre as the residual fertilizing effect of these legumes. The fertilizing effects, of the stubble and roots of these two plants was far more transitory, the first succeeding crop, sorghum, practically exhausting them, leaving sufficient in the soil to increase the corn crop of 1900 by only an inconsiderable amount, viz.: 1.6 bushels and .2 bushel, an average of .9 bushel per acre. This accords with other experiments which we have made, in showing that on our sandy soils the fertilizing effects of 135 the stubble and roots of leguminous plants, while highly favorable to the immediately succeeding crop, do not extend in any considerable degree to subsequent crops. This fact has an important bearing on the question of rotation. RESIDIUAL EFFECTS OF VELVET BEAN STUBBLE AND VINES AS FERTILIZERS FOR CORN; SECOND EXPERIMENT. An experiment similar to the preceding was made by growing velvet beans in 1898 on soil similar to, but somewhat poorer than that on which the last-mentioned test was made, and planting adjacent and similar plots in cotton in 1898. In 1899 cotton, fertilized uniformly, was grown on both sets of plots and the average yield following velvet heans was 1,578 pounds of seed cotton per acre against only 918 pounds where cotton followed cotton. Here was a gain of 660 pounds of seed cotton per acre as the immediate, or first-year, result of using velvet bean vines as a fertilizer. The residual, or second-year, effects were tested on corn planted March 29, 1900, without any nitrogenous fertilizer. Where cotton had grown in 1898 the yield of corn in 1900 was 18 bushels per acre; on the next plot, where velvet beans had been grown for fertilizer in 1898, the yield of corn in 1900 was 25.5 bushels. This gain of 7.5 bushels per acre represents the residual or second year effect of using the entire growth of velvet beans as a fertilizer. As a fertilizer the entire growth of velvet beans of the crop of 1898 proved superior to the stubble and vines to ihe extent of 112 pounds of seed cotton per acre in 1899 .and to the extent of 2.2 bushels of corn per acre in 1900. 136 Vetch versus small grains as green manure for corn.. In the fall of 1898 on gray sandy soil, a number of plots, each one-twelfth acre, were sown with hairy vetch, rye, oats; and a mixture of vetch and oats. In April and May, 1898, certain of these plots were cut so as to compare the yield of forage made by these different plants. We are concerned here not especially with the yields of hay, but rather with the fertilizing effect of the vetch vines, vetch stubble, rye, rye stubble, etc. The following table gives the data for the crops sown November 4, 1897, as fertilizers for the corn crop of the following summer, and also the yields of hay on plots harvested, and of the two succeeding corn crops on each plot, both in 1898 and in 1899. A clearer presentation of the fertilizing effects of the several crops is afforded in a shorter table following the one below. No nitrogenous fertilizer was used on any plot in the fall of 1897, but all plots except the two vacant ones and except Nos. 15 and 16, received at that time 240 pounds of acid phosphate and 40 pounds of muriate of potash per acre. In 1898 St. Charles corn from Illinois was planted June 16 and fertilized, on all plots, with 240 pounds of acid phosphate and 40 pounds of muriate of potash per acre. The corn that was planted March 20, 1900 (variety St. Charles) was fertilized with 200 acid phosphate and 100 pounds of cotton seed meal per acre. 137 Yields of corn 1 following vetch, vetch stubble, rye, rye stubble., etc. Seed sown Nov 4, 1897. iPlot Ani' t per acre. 1 2 3 4 Yield of Yield of corn per Portion used hay in acre. as Ap ril& fertilizer. May, In In 1898. 1898l1[899 Kind. Rye................ Qts. Lbs. Bus. Bus. SStubble.. 36 1980 11.4 [8.8 36 Rye................ Whole plant ........................ 4 21 0 30 Hairy vetch......... Whole plant. ............................ 16.6 22.9 ...... Left bare, & fall plowed 1.Weeds ... ........................... [5.0 1S 2 521 Hairy vetch........ 5 stubble.... 3000 [1.1 19.9 30 Turf oats........... 30 16.8 21 7 6 vetch .......... Stubble... 2784 .... 7r 60 Turf oats ........ Stubble... 1920 6.1 18.7 S 30 dairy vetch, not .inoculated ...... ....... failure.) ............................ 14.2 19.6 9 30 Hairy Jretch .......... . Whole plant. ........................... 15 8 121.7 10 30 Hairy vetch....... 3180 14.5 [9 2 Stubble... 11 Hairy vetch, not inoc*Stubble ulated ........ ..... 564 180 19.7 12 30 [lairy vetch. ........ Stubble... 19 1 22.6 3300 13 30 dairy vetch. ... .o..... Whole plant.. ............................ 17.2 24.1 14 .. Left bare, & fall plowed ............................ 15.4 [8.6 15 30 H. 12 fertilizer. 2604 16.2 [8.6 Stubble... 16 30 H. retch ; no fertilizer. 2244 15.9 19 6 " H-airy 030 vetch; 1Weeds..... I~lrlll)l)ll r In the following table the preceding one is summ - rized so far as concerns the fertilizing effects of the sev,eral plants used as green manures, as determined by the yield of corn in 1898, that is, by the corn crop immediaately following the green manuring plants. 138 Average results from use of vetch, etc., as green manure for corn. Corn per acre, in 1898. percent. Plots. Green manuring plant. April and May, 1898. Yield. Bus. 11.4 8.4 1 2 7 5 4 & 14 6, 10, 12 3, 9, 13 Rye stubble . . ............ Rye, entire plant.............. Oat stubble ...... ........ 6 1 Increase Increase over P. 2, rve. Bus, 36 3 0 ................. 2.3 27 Oats and vetch stubble mixture Left vacant & fall plowed, weed s Hairy vetch stubble . ..... Hairy vetch, entire plant. 11.0 15.2 17 5 16.6 2.6 6.8 9.1 8.2 31 81t 108 98 The above table shows that vetch was superior to rye as fertilizer to the extent of 8.2 bushels of corn per acre, an increase of 98 per cent.; that vetch stubble afforded a still larger yield of corn the first season, or 9.1 bushels more than was obtained on the rye plot. If it be asked why the stubble of both vetch and rye was more favorable to the succeeding corn crop than was the entire growth, the answer would seem to be found in the statement that the stubble of the vetch afforded sufficient nitrogen for the corn and that the plowing in of large masses of vegetable matter in May into a sandy soil may have made the ground too loose and dry, interfering with the capillary movement of moisture in the soil. Notice, in this connection, that there was a smaller yield of corn after oat stubble and after rye than after rye stubble. There is every reason for assuming that these smaller yields were due to dryer soil, resulting from the fact that the oats and uncut rye continued to exhaust the moisture of the soil up to the time when the land was plowed, May 10, while the rye on the "rye stubble plot" was removed a month earlier, thus checking the loss of moisture from this latter plot by removing the 139 plants which would have exhausted it in transpiration. If we take as a basis the yield of corn in 1898 on the, plot where rye stubble was plowed in, we have this yield increased by 54 per cent on the "vetch stubble plots" and by 46 per cent on the plots where the entire growth of' vetch was used as green manure. On page 206 of Bulletin No. 96 is a statement of the amounts of nitrogen in the green manuring material on an acre in this experiment, viz: 26 pounds in the entire growth of rye, 105.5 pounds in the entire growth of vetch, and 19.9 pounds in the roots and stubble of vetch. Residual, or second-year, fertilizing effects of vetch and rye.-It was desired to ascertain whether the various: plants (vetch, rye, etc.) used as green manures had exhausted their fertilizing effect the first year, or whether the second corn crop would also be helped by any unused fertilizing material which they might leave in the soil To ascertain the full amount of this residual effect no nitrogenous fertilizer should have been used on the second corn crop, planted March 20, 1899. However, we were dependent on that field for part of the corn needed to feed the farm teams and could not well afford the low yield of corn which would undoubtedly have been obtained on some plots if nitrogenous fertilizers had been withheld. Hence, in 1899 there was used on all plots 100 pounds per acre of cotton meal as well as 200 pounds of acid phosphate per acre. The yields of the second crop of corn after vetch, etc.,, that is of corn in 1900, averaged as follows After rye stubble ............. 18.8 bushels per acre. After rye plowed in, May, '98 .... 21.0 bushels per acre. After vetch stubble.............. 21.2 bushels per acre. After vetch, plowed in, May, '98...22.9 bushels per acre. The use of cotton seed meal on the corn obscures the results, making the superiority of vetch as a fertilizer 140 less than it would otherwise have been. However, even at this disadvantage, 'the plots on which the entire growth of vetch had been plowed in yielded 1.9 bushels of corn more than did the plot where at the same time the entire rye plant had been used as green manure. All plants, whether vetch or rye, that supplied much vegetable matter in 1898, were advantageous to the corn crop of 1899, after the rotting of this organic matter. The residual effect of vetch was superior to that of rye, in spite of the fact that the use of cotton seed meal on the corn crop doubtless made the difference in yield considerably smaller than it would have been had none of the corn plots received nitrogenous fertilizer. The residual fertilizing effect of the entire vetch plant was greater than that of vetch stubble. COTTON SEED VERSUS COTTON SEED MEAL AS FERTILIZER FOR CORN. On poor sandy soil, abounding in small stones, cotton seed and cotton seed meal were compared as fertilizers for corn in 1900. Preceding crops were cotton in both 1899 and 1898, and in 1897 oats, followed by broadcast cowpeas, of which only a thin stand was obtained; the peas were cut for hay. In 1896 corn, (with drilled cowpeas between the rows), occupied these plots. On all plots in 1900 a mixture of 240 pounds of acid phosphate and 32 pounds of muriate of potash per acre was applied. On plots 1 and 4 cotton seed meal at the rate of 200 pounds per acre was employed. On Plot 2 cotton seed at the rate of 434 pounds or 13 bushels per acre were used, first taking the precaution to kill the . germs without loss of fertilizing material. All fertilizers were applied in the drill immediately before planting corn--that is in the plant- 141 ing furrow, and mixed with the adjacent soil by the use of a scooter plow. The date of plant ing and fertilizing was March 29, 1900, and the variety used was Experiment Station Yellow, of which 3,168 plants per acre were allowed to reach maturity, there being the same number of plants on every plot. The 200 pounds of cotton seed meal and the 434 pounds of cotton seed contained equivalent amounts of nitrogen. Plot 3 received no nitrogen. The results follow: Cotton seed and cotton seed meal as fertilizers for corn in 1900. Fertilizer (plus minerals.) No nitrogenous fertilizer ................... 434 lbs. cotton seed (killed) per acre........ 200 lbs. cotton seed meal per acre........... Yield of corn per acre. Increase per acre. Bus. 15.4 18.3 18.5 Bus. .......... 2.9 3.1 The differences in yield are so slight that we may say that in this test a pound of nitrogen in cotton seed was just as valuable as in a pound of cotton seed meal. The average increase with these fertilizers was 3 bushels per acre, which is not quite sufficient. to balance the cost of the fertilizer. It does not follow that nitrogen was not needed, but the results suggest that too much nitrogen was used for profit. Cotton seed meal versus nitrate of soda; intercultural fertilization. It was on this same portion of this same field that the special nitrogen experiment referred to on page 34 of Bulletin 75, for 1896, was conducted, the crop being ruined by drouth. 142 In 1896, the soil, the variety, the date of planting and the mineral portion of the fertilizer were practically the same as in 1900. The great difference in the yields is due almost entirely to the difference in the rainfall of the two years. Cotton seed versus nitrate of soda; and intercultural application of each. (1896.) Plots. 2& 6 4 &8 3 &7 1&5 Fertilizer per acre, (plus minerals.) 180 lbs. c. s. mealat planting ................. 80 lbs. nitrate of soda at planting.... ...... 90 lbs. c. s. meal at planting....... .... 40 lbs. of nitrate of soda at planting ... 90 lbs. c. s. meal at planting ............. 90 lbs. e.s. meal at 3d plowing, June20... Yield corn per acre. Bus. 7.9 8.4 8.7 6.9 The failure of the crop due to drought prevents the drawing of conclusions. DOES COWPEA STUBBLE FURNISH CIENT NITROGEN FOR CORN? SUFFI- The corn for this experiment was not planted until May 1, 1900. The variety was Experiment Station Yellow. The preceding crop drilled cowpeas, cut for hay. It was known that a very small quantity of nitrate of soda, 20 to 40 pounds per acre, gives early corn a prompt start and rapid growth, thus serving to shorten the time during which the bud worm can injure the root of the young plant and destroy the stand. We desired to ascertain whether this undoubted advantage of nitrate of soda would hold good with corn planted very late and also whether the cowpea roots and stubble had furnished enough nitrogen for the needs of the corn plant. Hence after drilling and mixing the phosphate and muriate of potash and after dropping the 143 corn, a little nitrate of soda was dropped in the open furrow about five or six inches away from the seed corn, the nitrate being used at the rate of 36 pounds per acre. The average yield on the two plots receiving no nitrogen in the fertilizer was 29 bushels per acre; on the other two plots it was 29.1 bushels. This practical equality in yield indicates that nitrate of soda was not needed with corn where the preceding pea crop had left in the soil the nitrogen that was contained in its roots and stubble. Nitrate of soda was at a further disadvantage here by reason of the excessive rainfall in June, which doubtless leached out much of the nitrogen of this fertilizer. On silage corn and on all of the grains we have had a considerable increase from the use of nitrate of soda. Its value when employed at the rate of about twenty pounds per acre for the purpose of causing early planted corn to grow off promptly and rapidly has been demonstrated elsewhere. The pea stubble, under these conditions, furnished sufficient nitrogen. small FERTILIZER EXPERIMENTS WITH CORN.. The fertilizer experiments, or soil tests, with corn presented below have been made on three farms: (1) On the Experiment Station Farm at Auburn on a hilltop where the soil consists of a deep bed of gray sand nearly free from stones and pebbles. (2) On the farm of J. D. Foster, just south of his house and on a sandy soil not quite so poor or coarse as the preceding; the Foster Experiment at Auburn is distant about one mile from the fertilizer experiment on the Station Farm. (3) On "mulatto" soil, with deep red subsoil, on the farm of W. F. Fulton, Larimore, DeKalb County, Ala. 144 Fertilizer experiments with corn on Experiment Station Farm in 1898, 1899, 1900. During all the three years the experiments were conducted on the same character of soil, a deep gray sand, selected on account of its extreme poverty. Each year (except 1898) the fertilizer applied on any plot was exactly the same as that applied to the same plot (but to a different crop), the preceding year. Hence the experiments, except that of 1898, are really a test, not only of the immediate or first-year effects of each fertilizer, but also of the cumulative effect, (if any on this porous soil), of similar applications in 1898 and 1899. Every year the same variety of corn, Experiment Station Yellow, was employed. The dates of planting were March 25, March 27, and April 7 respectively for the several years. In 1898 and 1899 the stand was uniform and perfect, 2790 plants per :acre on each plot. In 1900 the stand was uniform on most plots, but slightly defective on Plots 7, 10, and 5. The percentages of missing plants on these plots are too small to materially affect the results or to make any corrections necessary. All fertilizers were applied in the drill and mixed with the soil by means of a scooter plow. No cowpeas were planted between rows of corn. This field had borne no leguminous or nitrogen-collecting plants since 1895, when it was used for a variety test of cowpeas, the vines of which were plowed under. In 1896 and 1897 the crops were small grains fertilized with a moderate amount of a complete commercial fer- tilizer. Corn in 1898 followed oats; in 1899 and 1900 it was preceded by cotton, which had received the same fertilizers as were applied to corn on the corresponding plots. 145 Fertilizer experiments with cornu on Experiment Station farm, in 1898, p 1899 and 1900. Yield of corn 6o a Kind of Fertilizers A-) Lbs. Increase per acre, over unfertilized _____plots. 891891900 Average. Bus. 2.2 -. 2 1898 1899 1900 1 2 3 4 Bus. Bus Bas fBus Bus.Bus 200 Cotton seed meal. 15.2141 13 4 .9-.8 6.4 240 Acid phosphate...12.5 15.8 6.2 -. 8 .9-.8 00 No fertilizer ..... .... 14.3 14.9- 7.0 200 Kainit........... .... 16.6 12.9 5.6 2.9 3.3-1.2 5200 Cotton seed meal.. "16.218.4 12.7r 3.0 6.2 240 Acid phosphate.. 6 200 Cotton s: ed meal...16.0 19.2 103 3.4 4.0 S240 Kainit ..... ......... 7240 Acid phosphate 200 8 Kainit .......... ..... .... "12.7 19.4 .4 4.3 .6-.5-1.7 5.8 J9 3.4 2.6 00GNo fertilizer .......... 1J.5 21.5 (200 Cotton seed meal. 9240 Acid phosphate.....15.2 24.1 11.5 2.7 2.6 5.7 (200 Kain it .......... .... 200 Cotton seed meal 10 .240 Acid phosph ate 6.2. . [ 2.0 . (100 Kainit............... 3.7 ...... The following figures give an analysis of the average results for 3 years : Increase of shelled corn per acre when cotton seed meal was added. To unfertilized plot.................. 2.2 bushels. To acid phosphate plot................1.9 bushels. To kainit plot.........................9 bushels. To acid phosphate and kainit plot........4.2 bushels. Average increase with cotton seed meal, . 2.3 bushels. 146 Increase of shelled corn per acre when acid phosphate was added. .2 bushels. To unfertilized plot ................... bushels. To cotton seed meal plot................1.2 To kainit plot ....................... 2.2 bushels. To cotton seed meal and kainit plot ....... 1.1 bushels. Average increase with acid phosphate, 'To . 0. 0 bushels. Increase of shelled corn per acre when kainit was added. 1.7 bushels. unfertilized plot .................... To cotton seed meal plot .................. .4 bushels. .3 bushels. To acid phosphate plot ................ To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot. .3 bushels. Average increase with kainit, . . . . . 0.5 bushels. In 1898 with an excedingly dry May and June there was very little increase with any fertilizer, the average increase for each fertilizer applied under four different conditions being as follows: Cotton seed meal, 1.8 bushels; Acid phosphate, decrease, .5 bushel. Kainit, 1.6 bushels. In 1898 none of the fertilizers, in the amounts used, were profitable. In 1899 there was a greater yield on all plots (except Plot 4) than the preceding year, but the increase from commercial fertilizers was no greater than before, averaging under four different conditions as below: Increased yield with cotton seed meal, 1.9 bushels. Increased yield with acid phosphate, 1.8 bushels. Decreased yield with kainit, .5 bushel. In 1900 there was almost a complete failure of the corn crop on deep sandy land, every plot falling below its yield in previous years. And yet the increase attributable to cotton seed meal in 1900 is far greater than in 147 any previous year, this fertilizer reclaiming the plots to which it was applied from absolute failure. The average increase in 1900, with four different combinations for each fertilizer, is stated below: Increase with cotton seed meal, 6.5 bushels. Increase with acid phosphate, .1 bushel. Decrease with kainit, 1.2 bushels. In 1900 cotton seed meal at the rate of 200 pounds per acre paid a profit. This favorable result occurred in a year when the rainfall in the first half of the growing season was excessive, and when doubtless much of the nitrogen was leached out and lost to the crop. It is an open and interesting question whether the very low yields of the plots receiving no cotton seed meal were due to the peculiar season and consequent exhaustion through leaching of the small supply of nitrogen of the soil, or whether the absolute failure on these plots was attributable to the nitrogen removed in the two preceding crops, viz: cotton in 1899 and a light crop of spring oats in 1898. The experiments on these same plots, with corn, cotton and oats, which have already been under way for three years, will be continued and future results will doubtless throw light on this question. The main practical conclusion to which we wish now to direct attention is the unprofitableness of large applications of commercial fertilizers to corn on land deficient in humus and hence unable to resist extremes of drought and leaching. Note, in contrast the very large increased yield of corn where rotting velvet beans furnished the humus and nitrogen (see p. 130) and recall that the two experiments were on the same hilltop, a few yards apart, and that weather condition did not ruin the crop fortified by an abundance of humus. 148 Fertilizer experiments on Foster farm at Auburn, in 1899 and 1900. Both experiments were made in the same field, which has a soil that is apparently uniform. The soil is sandy but somewhat less so and somewhat richer than the Station soil on which similar tests were conducted. In both these Foster experiments there is no test of the cumulative effect of fertilizers, since no fertilizer experiment on this soil had preceded the test of 1899 or 1900. The tests were made by J. D. Foster in accordance with detailed written directions from the Agriculturist of the Experiment Station. The weighing of fertilizers, the harvesting of the crop, and the shelling of the corn were performed by T. U. Culver, of this department of the Station. Common corn of the usual type in this locality was used. The dates of planting were March 27, 1899, and March 31, 1900. The stand was good and practically uniform. It was noted that the corn on Plots 5,9, and 10 was later in tasseling and maturing than on the other plots. In 1898 the crop on this field was corn, very lightly fertilized, with drilled cowpeas between the corn rows; the peas were picked, and the vines grazed. In 1899 cotton was the crop ,on the entire field, and fertilization was then uniform and moderate on the portion of the field which the following year was used for the fertilizer experiment with corn. 149 Results of fertilizer experiments with corn on Foster farm, Auburn, in 1899 and 1900. 1899 u Kind of fertilizers. 1900 Q Bus.Bus.Bus.Bus.Bus. Lbs. 9.6 2.2 15.4 200 Cotton seed meal............ 13 6.4 .6 .2 240 Acid phosphate..............111.6 5.8.......... 1. 1.1.4.... No fertilizer ................ 0O 1.5 7.2 200Kainit............10.8 200Cotton seed meal............16.0 5.8 8.0 2.4 240 Acid phosphate............. 6 2000Cott )n seed meal.........12.0 2.4 10.0 4.5 200 Kainit...................... 240 Acid phosphate......... ..... 9.6 .6 4.2 .8 200 Kainit.... ................ . 5.3 00No fertilizer.................8.4. 8 200 Cotton seed meal............ 9 240Acid phosphate. ..... ........ 8.8 4. 7.1 1.8 (200 Kainit...... ..... ......... 200 Cotton seed meal............. 9.0 3.7 2.6 10 240Acid phosphate .............. 11.0 l100 Kainit....................... 1 2 3 4 6 5.9 .4 .0 8. 4.1 3.5 .7 1.1 3.2 In 1899 this soil, though poor, failed to respond to acid phosphate or kainit when these fertilizers were ap plied to corn. The yield was somewhat increased, but not to a profitable extent, by cotton seed meal, the truevalue of which, however, was doubtless obscured by the cowpeas grown between the corn rows in 1898. In 1899 the average increase for fertilizers, each applied in four different combinations, was as follows : Increase with cotton seed meal, 2.5 bushels. Increase with acid phosphate, .6 bushel. Decrease with kainit, 1.2 bushels. In 1900 the results are similar, a complete failure of corn to respond to acid phosphate and kainit, and a slight, though usually unprofitable, increase with cotton seed meal. 150 In 1900 the average results for each fertilizer were as follows : Increase with cotton seed meal, 3.8 bushels per acre. Decrease with acid phosphate, 2.5 bushels per acre. Decrease with kainit, 1.0 bushel per acre. An analysis of the average increase for both years is given below: Increase of shelled corn per acre when cotton seed meal was added. To unfertilized plot .................. 5.9 bushels. To acid phosphate plot.................3.7 bushels. To kainit plot.........................2.7 bushels. To acid phosphate and kainit plot.........4 bushels. Average increase with cotton seed meal, . . 3.2 bushels. Increase of shelled corn per acre when acid phosphate was added. To unfertilized plot .................... bushels. To cotton seed meal plot>...............1.8 bushels. 4 To kainit plot ........................ To cotton seed meal and kainit plot....-2.4 .1 bushel. bushels. . . Average decrease with acid phosphate, 1.0 bushels. Increase of shelled corn per acre when kainit was added. To unfertilized plot.................. .8 bushels.: To cotton seed meal plot ............... 2.4 bushels. To acid phosphate plot ........... 3 bushels. °To cotton seed meal and 'acid phosphate plot .. ............................ 3.0 bushels. Average decrease with kainit, . . . . .1I bushels. 151 Fertilizer experiment in DeKalb County. This experiment was made in a most careful manner by W. F. Fulton, at Larimore, near Collinsville, with fertilizer materials furnished by this Station. The composition and amount of fertilizer was the same as in both of the Auburn experiments. The soil was reddish, or mulatto, with a deep red subsoil. It was the characteristic stiff red soil of Big Wills Valley, and was deficient in vegetable matter, and doubtless amply supplied with lime. The original forest growth was poplar, oak, hickory, and mulberry. Cotton in 1898 and corn in 1899, both without fertilizers, constituted the preceding crops. Corn was planted April 5, the fertilizers having been drilled in and mixed as usual with the soil a few days before planting time. The very full notes recorded by the experimenter indicate that between July 2 and 17 the lower blades "fired," or dried up, on all plots receiving acid phosphate. August 10, the corn on Plot 1 was green "from top to bottom, and on Plot 6 nearly so," while on the other fertilized plots all blades up to 3 or 4 feet were then dead. "The season was the wettest ever known, frequent and heavy rains falling in April and from May 8 to the middle of July. It was impossible to do justice to crops and yet the corn flourished and pushed on ahead of grass and weeds." The blades were stripped from the plants at the usual time and the yields in lbs. per acre of cured blades or fodder, are given below, beginning with Plot 1: 296, 448, 440, 376, 440, 520, 408, 448, 544 and 592. The table gives the yields and the increase attributable to fertilizers. 152 Fertilizer experiment with corn in 1900 at Larimore., .DeKaib County. Yield of Increase shelled over Z Kind of fertilizers. corn per unfertilized acre. 1 2 3 4 Lbs. 2000Cotton seed meal..................... 240 Acid phosphate....................... 00 No fertilizer.......... ............... 200 Kainit.............................. 55200 plots. Bus. 11.8 0.6; 0.4 8.2 7.3 2.8 Cotton seed meal....................... 240 Acid phosphate ........................ 6 200 Cotton seed meal....................... . 29.4 18.2 17.6 18.6 27.0 26. 22.8 20.7 26.7 30.8 200 Kainit .... 7240 200 Kainit................. ............... 00 No fertilizer ..... .... ........ ........ . (200 Cotton seed meal................ ..... . 09 240 Acid phosphate ........................ (200 Kainit ...................... ......... (200)Cotton seed meal .... ........ . 10 . 24OAcid phosphate ............. (100 Kainit .................... ............ 8 Acid phosphate ................... ........... ............ . .... ,,.... . 6.0 10.1 The lessons of the preceding table are made plainer below : Increase of shelled corn per acre when cotton seed. meal was added To unfertilized plot .................... 11.8 bushels. To acid phosphate plot .. ............... 7.9 bushels. To kainit plot............ ............ 6.9 bushels. To acid phosphate and kainit plot........5.4 bushels. Average increase with cotton seed meal, . . 7.9 bushels. 153 Increase of shelled corn per acre when phate was added. To unfertilized plot ................... To cotton seed meal plot ............... To kainit plot .. ..................... To cotton seed meal and kainit plot ...... acid phos0.6 3.6 2.4 1.3 bushels. bushels. bushels. bushels. Average decrease with acid phosphate, . . 0.5 bushels. Increase of shelled corn per acre when kainit was added. To unfertilized plot ................... To cotton seed meal plot .............. To acid phosphate plot ................. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate ............ plot ................ 0.4 bushels. 4.5 bushels. 2.2bushels. 2.2bushels. Average decrease with kainit, . . . . . 1.0 bushels. In whatever combination cotton seed meal was applied it greatly increased the yield, the average increase with this fertilizer being 7.9 bushels, which affords a fair profit. Apparently leaching did not to any great extent occur on this stiff soil, notwithstanding the phenomenal rainfall of April, May and June. Neither acid phosphate nor kainit was needed by corn on this red calcareous soil. Conclusions from fertilizer experiments on three farms. (1) Heavy applications of acid phosphate or kainit were useless. (2) Cotton seed meal was the only commercial fer tilizer tested that ever paid a profit when applied to 154 corn, and in the large amount used, 200 pounds per acre, this was not always profitable. (3) A fertilizer for corn should contain much more nitrogen, and much less phosphoric acid and potash than a fertilizer for cotton on the same land. (4) Leguminous plants, whether only the roots and stubble or the entire growth of vines are plowed under, constitute a safer and more profitable fertilizer for corn than do commercial fertilizers, or even cotton seed meal. A similar superiority of stable manure for corn may be reasonably expected. BULLETIN No, 112. DECEMBER, 1900. ALABAMA. AgriculturaI Experiment Station OF THlE AGRICULTURAL. AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE, AUBURN. OLCUARD NOTES. BY F. S. E ARLE. MONTGOMERY, ALA. BROWN PRINTING CO., PRINTERS & BINDERS. 1901, COMMITTEE OF TRUSTEES ON EXPERIMENT STATION. THOS. WILLIAMS................. .. JONATHAN HARALSON.......................................Selma. ............. Wetiipka. STATION COUNCIL. WM. LEROY BROUN......................................President. P. H. MELL ................................. B. B. Ross...........................................Chemist. C. A. CARY, D. V. M ................................ J. F. DUGGAR .................................... F. S. EARLE........................Biologist J. T. ANDERsON ................................. Director and Botanist. Veterinarian. Agriculturist. and Horticulturist. Associate Chemist. ASSISTANTS. C. L. HAE............................. J. Q. BURTON........................... First Assistant Chemist. Second Assistant Chemist. H. S. HOUGTITON......................... Third Assistant Chemist. T. U. CULVER............................. R. W. CLARK............................... C. F. AUSTIN............................... Superintendent of Farm. Assistant Agriculturist. Assistant Horticulturist. The Bulletins of this Station will be sent free to any citizen of the State on application to the Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama. ORCHARD NOTES. The season of 1900 has been on the whole a favorable one for the orchardist. At Auburn the earliest blooming plums and peaches were killed by a sharp freeze on Feb. 18, when the thermometer dropped to 12. The latest blooming plums like Wayland and Golden Beauty were'injured by continued cold rains during the last of March that prevented pollination, causing the first nearly complete failure of the crop on these kinds in five years. The ,medium blooming plums and peaches set heavy crops notwithstanding a cold snap on March 17, when the thermometer dropped to 28 ° . It was 300 the morning of the 16th and had dropped to 32° by 9 p. m., so that the open flowers were exposed to a freezing temperature for at least ten hours., Many blossoms were killed but as stated, enough survived to make a very full crop. Unusually rainy weather during June and July caused serious loss from brown rot in peaches and plums, the falling of grape foilage from the attacks of downy mildew, and a more than usually heavy loss from summer rot of apples. APPLES. The condition of the new orchard (planted 1897-1900) continues to be very satisfactory. Our experience proves that it is entirely possible even on such thin drouthy land as ours to grow thoroughly thrifty, vigorous apple trees. Part of the land was seeded to hairy vetch in the Fall of 1898 and the remainder was seeded to vetch and oats in Oct., 1899. In March a strip three or four feet wide was plowed on each side of the row and was culti- 158 vated after every rain so as to keep a dust mulch about the trees. The middles were not plowed till the first of June in order to allow the vetch to ripen its seed so as to re-seed the land. Frequent cultivations were continued till the middle of July when peas were broadcasted and cultivated in. The peas made a good growth during the late Summer and Fall and have been allowed to lie and rot on the ground. As the peas begun to die down the self-sown vetch seed began coming up and by spring the orchard will be a solid vetch field. The same treatment will be continued another year, plowing strips next the trees in March, allowing the vetch to stand in the middle till the seed is ripe and then cultivating the entire land thoroughly till middle of July and again broadcasting to peas. By this method two crops of rich leguminous vegetable matter are added to the soil each year so that it is rapidly gaining in fertility. The mechanical condition is already greatly ameliorated. Last Spring each tree was given two pounds of fertilizer consisting of a mixture of five parts each 'of cotton seed meal and acid phosphate to one part of muriate of potash. The soil is now so much improved and the trees are growing so rapidly that no more fertilizer will be required until the orchard comes in to heavy bearing. The bearing orchard received the same treatment as the growing orchard except that each tree was given ten pounds of the mixed fertilizer and it was sprayed twice with Bordeaux mixture, once on April 13 and again on April 28. At the last spraying one-half pound of Paris green per barrel was added to the Bordeaux mixture. At the time of the first spraying many of the trees were in full bloom and a number of the flowers were killed, showing that it is not advisable to spray during the blooming season. The first spraying should have been done earlier but pressure of other work prevented. The 159 treatment served to lessen the number of wormy apples very noticeably and it held the rot in check till about the first of July. After that owing to continued rains it developed rapidly and finally destroyed a large proportion of the crop on many of the trees. Two or three additional later sprayings would probably have partially prevented this trouble but it seems doubtful if, in unfavorable seasons like the present, it would have entirely prevented it. This rotting of the fruit on the trees before maturity seems to be the most serious problem that confronts the apple grower in this latitude. It will probably have to be met by more frequent sprayings than are necessary at the North, and especially by the selection of resistant varieties. Among the kinds fruiting at the Station this year, the following were comparatively free from rot: Carter's Blue, Horse, Pine Stump, Red June, Steven's Winter, Thornton's Seedling, and Terry's Winter. Those noted as rotting very badly were American Golden Russet, Ben Davis, Elgin Pippin, Golden Pippin, Kittageskee, Oconee Greening, Romanite, Shannon Pippin, Summer Red and Winesap. Apple Leaf Rust (Roestelia) : Notes taken on Aug. 1, show the following varieties to be more or less effected by this disease.* Carter's Blue, slightly. Chattahooche, slightly. Cooper's Red, moderately. Dam, slightly. Equinettelee, slightly. Ey. Red Marguerite, badly. Family, very badly. Hames, slightly. Horse, moderately. Jonathon, very badly. * For these notes and for other help in preparing this Bulletin, I am indebted to my assistant, Mr. C..F. Austin. 2 160 Mamma, slightly. Red June, slightly. Rhodes' Orange, slightly. Rome Beauty, moderately. Sabadka, slightly. Santa, badly. Senator, badly. Shockley, moderately. Texas Red, slightly. Thornton's Seedling, slightly. Wealthy, slightly. Winesap, slightly. Yahor, slightly. Yopp' Favorite, slightly. The following kinds were entirely free from rust: Aikin, American Summer, Apple of Commerce, Arkansas Black, Babbitt, Benoni, Ben Davis, Black Ben Davis, Bledsoe, Bradford, Buncomb, Champion, Carolina Greening, Cooper's Early, Duchess, Early Harvest, Elgin Pippin, Fall Pippin, Fanny, Grimes' Golden, Grayenstein, Hews' Crab, Jefferson Everbearing, Jennings, Julian, Kinnard's Choice, Limbertwig, Maiden's Blush, Mam. Black Twig, Mangum, Mavarack Sweet, Moultries, Oszi-vaj, Pear (or Palmer), Rawls' Janeton, Red Astrachan, Red Beitigheimer, Red Limbertwig, Saxon Priest, Sekula, Selymes, Shackleford, Summer Cheese, Summer King, Summer Queen, Sweet Bough, Taunton, Tuscaloosa, Yates, Yellow English, Yellow Horse, Yellow Transparent, York Imperial. This agrees very well with last year's experience (See Bull. No. 106, p. 168) but American Summer and Moultries that showed rust last year escape, while fourteen kinds are affected this year that escaped last. A few of the Hungarian kinds are slightly affected this year for the first time, but in the main native American kinds 161 are more susceptible than foreign kinds. This is rather anomalous since 'the disease is indigenous, occurring freely on our wild crab apples. Green Aphis of the Apple-In Bulletin No. 106 p. 166, it was noted that after being very abundant and troublesome the aphids suddenly disappeared during a period of heavy rains in August. The circumstances were such as to suggest that they had been carried off by some epidemic disease, but unfortunately no proof of this was secured. In any event the disappearance was so complete that in the Spring of 1900 the trees were almost clear of them and they have caused less damage than at any time in five years. Their numbers gradually increased so that by Fall they were again quite abundant but as the growing season was over they did comparatively little harm. A new treatment was tried 'this season that proved much more satisfactory than the strong kerosene emulsion used last year, since it was equally effective in killing the insects and did no harm whatever to the foliage. Though home made decoctions of tobacco were unsatisfactory (See Bulletin 106, p. 164), the commercial product known as "Rose Leaf" proves to be by far the best insecticide yet tried for controlling this aphis. It is best used at a strength of one part to fourteen of water and should be applied as a very fine spray. Since it is impossible to reach all the lice at a single spraying on account of the shelter furnished by the crumpled leaves it is alw ays best to spray two or three times at intervals of four or five days, since in that time those that escaped the first spraying will have moved out of their shelter seeking a fresher food supply. Three such sprayings within two weeks time should clear even badly infested 162 trees. Whether it will pay to go to this expense must be determined by the condition of the trees and the abundance of the lice. It wasEhoped that spraying the trees with crude petroleum in winter might destroy the eggs of this insect. On March 12, a number of young trees that had been badly infested the year before were thoroughly sprayed with crude petroleum taking pains to direct the spray against the ends of the twigs where the eggs are usually deposited. The buds were still quite dormant. No injury resulted to the trees. The effect on the lice, if any, was obscured by the general scarcity of them during the early part of the season. By the first week in May a few lice could be found on each of these treated trees though none of them were badly infested. It was much later than this before they became numerous in any part of the orchard, so the treatment seems to have had no result so far as the aphids are concerned. The question of varietal resistance to this pest is still .an open one but as was noted last year, kinds with thick, hairy twigs seem to be less infested than those in which the young twigs are slender and comparatively smooth. Notes taken on Aug. 1, show the following kinds to have been more or less infested with aphis: Apple of Commerce, badly. Bledsoe, badly. Chattahooche, slightly. Jennings, badly. Mamma, moderately. Maverack Sweet; moderately. Oszi-vaj, moderately. Pear (or Palmer), moderately. Red Beitigheimer, moderately. Rhodes Orange, badly. Summer Queen, badly. Sweet Bough, moderately. Tuscaloosa, badly. Yellow English, badly. 163 B; Nov. 1 , the following additional kinds were more or less infested: Black Ben Davis, Bradford, Buncomb, Carolina Greening, Carter's Blue, Early Harvest, Equinettelee, Family, Fall Pippin, Gravenstein, Hominy, Jeffries, Limbertwig, Magnum, Mam. B ack Twig, Moultries, Nickajack, Pasman, Rawl's Janeton, Santa, Senator, Shackleford, Shockley, Summer Cheese, Tull, Winesap, Yakor, Yates, Yopp's Favorite. Of these kinds 21 have smoothish twigs, 16 are medium, and 10 rather hairy. Of the kinds not infested with aphids, 8 have smoothish twigs, 18 medium and 28 hairy twigs. This list does not coincide very closely with that given last year, showing that infestation or immunity is in part at least accidental. A List of Hardy varieties.-The following kinds have been entirely free from rust, aphis and leaf spot and have made a perfectly satisfactory growth both in 1899 and 1900. Aiken, Babbitt, Hyari Piros, Magyur, Maiden's Blush, Metel, Ponyike and York Imperial. It is interesting to note that of these eight kinds four are among the new Hungarian varieties sent out by the Department of Agriculture that have not yet fruited in this country. Of the other kinds in last years' select list, Arkansas Black, Duchess, Fanny, Haywood, Milalyfi,. and Thornton's Seedling lost some foliage from leaf spot late in the season, while Carolina Greening was slightly attacked by aphis, and Hames developed a little rust. Among the kinds not included in the above list that are in very satisfactory condition this Fall may be mentioned Battvani, Benoni, Bledsoe, Buda Summer, Carter's Blue, Champion, Elgin Pippin, Hames, Herschal, Cox, Horse, Julian, Keskemet, Kinnard's Choice, Limbertwig, Red Astrachan, Red June, Saxon Priest, Summer Wafer, Texas Red and Yellow Transparent. Promising New or Little Known Varieties. For the 164 last three years an effort has been made to secure trees or grafting wood of all promising local seedlings in the hope of finding kinds better suited to our conditions than those now in general cultivation. A number of such kinds have been secured and the Station earnestly request all who are interested in apple growing in this State to co-operate by reporting any promising kinds that may come to their notice. Among little known kinds deserving of special mention are the Hackworth and Herschal Cox. The Hackworth originated in North Alabama and has been grown there locally for twenty or thirty years. It is a vigorous, erect growing tree with large, healthy leaves. The fruit ripens in August. It is large subconic yellowish white, heavily striped with red. It seems to be free from rot and to be a very desirable late Summer apple. Herschal Cox is of the Romanite type, small and not of the best quality, but the latest keeper we have in North Alabama, surpassing even the Shockley in this respect. The tree is a better grower than Shockley and it should perhaps replace that variety for general planting. Revised List of Apples for General Planting in Alabana :-The following list named in the order of ripening will give a good succession of fruit from the first of June till early winter. Yellow Transparent, Early Harvest, Red June, Red Astrachan, Horse, Hackworth, Carter's Blue, Thornton's Seedling, Kinnards Choice, York Imperial, Yates, Shockley, Herschal Cox. Unfortunately few, or perhaps none, of the above are fully satisfactory under our conditions and it is hoped that in the future better kinds may be substituted for them. Yellow Transparent is a poor grower and the foliage is somewhat subject to leaf spot. It is an abundant and early bearer and the handsome yellow fruit is free from scab and rot. For market it is the most promising of 165 the very early kinds. Early Harvest is rather better quality than the above and is nearly as early. It is to be preferred for home use. The tree is a fairly good grower but often suffers severely from aphids, and it is not free from leaf spot. Red June is a strohg growing thrifty tree but unfortunately late in coming in to bearing and subject to rust. The fruit ripens through a long season and it is one of the most desirable for family use. On young trees and with good care and cultivation it is a fine market apple but with age and neglect it is too }small for market. It should be in every family orchard. iRed Astrachan is a vigorous, healthy, strong growing tree that comes early into bearing. The fruit is large and .showy but too acid to suit most tastes, and is inclined to rot badly. Where this trouble can be controlled it is one of the most profitable of the early market apples. At Auburn it begins ripening about June 10 though some :specimens can be gathered earlier. It does not all ripen at once like the Yellow Transparent but the trees need to be picked 'over several times. The Horse is a well known kind doing well in all parts of the South. The tree is healthy and a free grower. The large greenish yellow fruits are too sour for eating out of hand but are excellent for cooking. At Auburn it begins ripening early in July. The Hackworth has been mentioned on a previous page. It is unknown outside of Alabama, but seems very promising here. It ripens through a long season beginning the last of July and continuing throughout August. The tree is very thrifty and the large handsome fruits are of good quality and attractive. It is recommended for both home use and market. Carter's Blue is also an August apple, but averages a little later than Hackworth. It is a large green apple with dull red stripes and a heavy white bloom. It does not rot badly. The tree is healthy and a vigorous grower. 165 It is one of the few kinds that succeeds well at the far South. Thornton's Seedling is a good sized greenish apple with red stripes ripening in September. It is of good quality and its comparative immunity from rot marks it as valuable for an apple ripening at this season. The tree is healthy and productive. Kinnard's Choice has not been fruited at the Station but in North Alabama it is one of the most satisfactory kinds for late Fall and early Winter. The trees in the young orchard here are remarkably strong and healthy. York Imperial has also not been fruited here but it has made a good record in North Alabama and it is one of the few kinds in the young orchard that have been spotless and free from enemies of all kinds during the last two seasons. It is confidently expected that this will prove one of our very best late market apples. Yates is a favorite apple with many growers especially in Chambers, Tuscaloosa and Clay Counties. It is a good keeper and of the best quality but is too small for general market purposes. The tree is only a medium grower and is subject to leaf spot and to injury from green aphis. Shockley; this well known kind is valued chiefly for its keeping qualities. The apple is small and of rather poor quality and the tree is apt to be rather short lived. It is attacked badly by both rust ahd aphis and is only retained in the list for the want of something better that will keep as long. Herse.hal Cox is included here with some doubt. It is a better tree than Shockley but the fruit is about equally poor. However it keeps perfectly all winter in North Alabama which is a point of prime importance. It has not been fruited here. It will be noted that Ben Davis Winesap and Limbertwig have been omitted from the above list although included in the list given in Bulletin 98, p. 265. It is 167 thought that Kinnard's Choice and York Imperial will fully take their places and be better suited to our conditions. As a result of several years observation and study it seems prudent to strongly urge the increased planting of apples in Middle and Northern Alabama. It must be fully understood, however, that apples will succeed here only with the best and most intelligent care and cultivation. FIGS. The following eleven kinds fruited on the Station grounds this season: Adriatic. Large, yellowish white, flesh light red, late, beginning to ripen middle of August and continuing till frost; tree vigorous, fairly hardy, starting rather late in Spring. While not as sweet as Celeste it is pleasant in flavor and its large size makes it very attractive. It should be more widely planted. Black Ischia. Large roundish, shinning black, flesh deep red, season last of August. Of no special value. Brown Turkey. Small, light brownish, sweet, ripening during a long season. A fairly good fig but not equal to Celeste. With us the tree is feeble and a poor grower. Brunswick. Large, pyriform, greenish yellow, nearly overspread with dark brown, flesh reddish brown, rich, season middle of August till frost, tree fairly. vigorous 'and productive. With us this year the last of the crop did not ripen well. Not fully satisfactory. Celeste (or Celestial). Small, pyriform, light brown, often with purplish tinge, flesh reddish, soft, very sweet, season July, tree thrifty, very hardy, starts early in Spring. This is by all odds our best early fig and the one in most general cultivation. On vigorous trees it 168 often sets a small late :crop but these late fruits are inferior and many of them fail to ripen. DuRoy. Small, much like an inferior Celeste. This much advertised kind has nothing to recommend it. Our trees were from Mr. Normand, the introducer. Green Iscliia. Medium size, rounded, yellowish green, skin thin, flesh deep rich red, sweet, high flavor, tree thrifty, fairly hardy, very productive, season last of August till frost. This is our best and most reliable late fig and should be widely planted. It does not begin ripening till the-main crop of Celeste is entirely over. Madeline. Large, light yellow, flesh yellowish white, rather soft, sweet, rich, reason last of July and August, trees fairly vigorous and productive. This is a good fig and is valuable as ripening between Celeste and Green Ischia. New French. Small, rounded, white, of medium quality, rather firm, tree a fairly good grower. It will take farther experience to :decide whether or not this kind has any special merit. White Nerii. Large, roundish, greenish yellow, flesh reddish, rather soft, good quality, begins ripening middle of August, tree feeble, not very productive. White Smyrna. Medium and large, somewhat flattened, greenish white, overspread with a tinge of brown, flesh light red, firm, sweet, rich, season middle of August till frost, tree only moderate grower but fairly productive. This is a good fig and keeps remarkably well after picking. Recommended for General Planting: Celeste, Green Ischia, Adriatic, White Smyrna and Madeline. 169 KAKI (JAPANESE PERSIMMON). As was noted in Bulletin 106, p. 171, the freeze of February, 1899, killed these trees all to the ground. Part were killed outright and part sprouted from the ,crown. The following kinds were sufficiently recovered to bear some fruits this season: Tabors No. 23, Tabors No. 72, Tabors No. 129, Tane Nashi, Yeddo Ichi. This fruit is well adapted to the conditions in South Alabama and should be more generally planted in that region. The trees often begin bearing the year after they are planted and the crop is a very sure one. The fruits are large and handsome. Though too rich for ,some tastes most people are fond of them and they are gradually winning a place in the large markets. ORANGES. Mr. H. J. Webber of the Department of Agriculture, Washington, has succeeded in making a number of hybreds between the cultivated sweet oranges and the hardy, deciduous hedge orange, Citrus trifoliata. His hope, of course, is to find among them some kinds that will combine the hardness of the one parent with the desirable fruit of the other. As these interesting productions have not yet reached bearing age it is impossible to foretell the result. Wishing to test their hardiness in this latitude the Department sent trees of fifty-one of these hybreds to this Station last Spring. They have nearly all made a very vigorous growth during the Summer but at this writing (Jan. 3) there has been no cold sufficient to test their hardiness. It is interesting to note that of these kinds three have died, thirty have :small trifoliate, deciduous leaves like the hedge orange, ,only nine have large simple, evergreen leaves like the 170 sweet oranges, while nine have larger, variously modified trifoliate leaves that are evergreen. Their continued behavior will be watched with great interest. PEACHES. The co-operative experiment orchard planted in 1898 bloomed abundantly but for some reason set a very light crop. The few older trees planted in 1896 bore heavily but the fruit rotted very badly on account of continued wet weather during the ripening season. Owing to the exceptional character of the season, it is thought best not to express an opinion as to the merits of the different varieties at this time. Notes on the season of blooming are given below. This subject is not as important with peaches as it is with plums as all the varieties are supposed to be self-fertile, but since a difference of even a very few days in the blooming period may decide the safety or loss of the crop from cold it is a matter worthy of consideration. Notes on the blooming of peaches. in 1900. Yarieties. ___________________ Feb. 18. Thermometer 120 March 6. _____ March 10. March 14. NIarch 17. Thermometer 280. 'March 25. Matthe'ws' Beauty. ........ McKinney Marks.. Ovido ...... Gray.........:.... Reeves ..... Carmen .. "...... .......... .... buds pink. ir st blooms..... ........... a y . full bloom .. first bloom ..... full bloom. mostly fallen. ..... a nearly dormant. but pink ... ds nearly dormant. bun pink.... ds nearly full ful11 bloom bloom........an( dfallinig ... l y z-;Z4- "'+ P ....... °. first blooms. buds pink...,. firsst blooms . past full b oom. "1 " b u d s ss wo wol e n n. . f ll ifibu blooms r st s buds swollenfr some pink ... .. full bloom... full bloom.. Chinese Cling Elbherta ._............ firs sthblooms ... buds pink ... -buds Mamie Ross... Pallas Tabor ............. .... ______________ pink .. st blooms .. firs st blooms .... firs st blooms.. a D full bloom. full bloom. full bloom.... full bloom... mostly buds pink..firs ____ Honey .............. much swollen, not show'g pink first blooms... buds pink...... blc coming.... nearly full bloom... ...... full bloom... 1 fallen... Notes on the blooming of peaches in 1900. Varieties. Peento ............ Angel .... . Feb. 18. Thermometer 120. March 6. _______ March 10. _______ March 14. ______________________ March 17. March 25. IYVLfull bloom full bloom . first blooms.... I --1 i blooming.. leaves 1 in. long full bloom, 14crop left. bloom fallint. nearly full crop. bloom falling... buds swollen first blooms grown...... leaves half.. full bloom full bloom . 1, iu~r Valdow......... Old Mixon Free Mt. Rose. Alexander....... Onderdonk ..... (Coler's Indian . Imperial first blooms.... blooming...... buds swollen...J first blooms .... buds hardly nearly dormant first blooms past full bloom full first blooms.... blooming ... blooming.. first buds pink .. blooms... bloom..... . .. .. . . ...... first blooms.... buds full bloom... past full bloom. .. . Victoria........ Triumph.......... first blooms.... blooming... full bloom... swollen.. . buds pink .. first blooms... first bloom..... J buds 1Y open 3 OichardLady Ingold... old v Sneed............ i C lrrvn buds pink.. swollen, some pink ......... h rmn nearly full bloom .... nearly full bloom... k'd flowers 50 %6 Notes on the blooming I of peaches in 1900. r- . Yarieties. Tillottson .......... Early Crawford. Feb. 18, Thermometer ......... .-. r March 6. March 10. swollen, some pink. ...... swollen, some pink .... swollen. swollen, some pink..... .. nearly dormant .... swollen, some pink....... swollen, some pink........ March 14. first blooms ...... .. March 17. buds open. flow's 10-20% k'd 4 M1arch 25. ............... . first blooms...., 10 open, flow- ~.............. ers half killed Hale's Early ...... Mt. Rose..................... buds hardly 'none opened. pink.........none killed... .~buds buds 14 open, first blooms.... first blooms .... flowers 40 % k'd Alexander ......... Stump .............. Elberta......... .. .......... buds hardly.. none open, pink none killed very few open, 40-50 00 ................ -~ -I - blooming.. .. flow's buds killed.. 0o k' d 14 open, 20 4 0 - I-~~-------------I '~' IILLLIV ~---------- 174 Classified according to the season of blooming we have the following: Earliest Blooming :-Peento, Angel, Waldow, all of the Peento type. Very Early Blooming :-Ovido, Honey, Onderdonk, of the Honey and Spanish types. Early Blooming :-Imperial, Victoria; Spanish type. Medium Blooming :-Matthews Beauty, Gray, Reeves, Carmen, Chinese Cling, Elberta, Mamie Ross, Pallas, Tabor, Old Mixon Free, Mt. Rose, Coblers Indian, Sneed, Lady Ingold, Tillottson, Ey. Crawford, Stump; including all of the North China type, most of the Persian and representatives of the Spanish and Honey types.. Late Blooming :-McKinney, Marks, Triumph, all Persian. Very Late Blooming :-Alexander, Hales Early, both Persian. The varieties of the Peento race all bloom so early as to be practically worthless for planting in any part of this State. They are the best peaches for the orange belt but should not be planted much farther North. Some at least of the varieties of the Honey and Spanish types bloom late enough to be comparatively safe and there is no question but what in South Alabama the trees will be found thriftier and better adapted to the soil and climate than most varieties of the North China and Persian types. Unfortunately as yet we have no varieties among them fine enough to compete in market with Elbertas and Crawfords and none as early as Alexander. A race of peaches combining the thriftiness and fruitfullness of the Honey with the late blooming of Alexander and the fine market qualities of the Elberta would indeed be a boon to the Southern fruit grower. Such a combination of characters is not beyond posibility to the skillful plant breeder and our originators of 175 ~ew varieties should set themselves the task of producing it. PEARS. Kieffer pears in the old orchard bore a heavy crop, wvhile the LeContes made less than half a crop. Only a portion of the trees in the new orchard fruited. In Bull. 106, p. 173, itwas noted that one result of the February freeze (1899), which killed all the bloom buds was almost complete immunity from blight during that season. This immunity was so complete that the disease seemed to have entirely disappeared from the Station orchard. This Spring the Kieffers and LeContes although blooming very heavily were entirely free from blight. A few Bartlett trees blooming two or three weeks later received the contagion from some source and nearly all the flower clusters developed the blight so virulently that notwithstanding repeated prunings the trees were nearly killed before it could be checked. These blighting Bartletts caused a few "growing tip" infections in the Kieffers and caused the blighting of some clusters of apple blossoms. PLUMS. Most of the varieties of plums in the Station orchard bore a full crop this year and it is now possible to form an estimate as to their value for this region. Some light has also been obtained on the vexed question of the nomenclature of the Japanese varieties. The trees for this orchard were obtained from a number of prominent nurseries in different parts of the West and South and in Bulls. 98 and 106 the names under which they were purchased were used in all cases. It now appears that .as represented here (trees purchased in Jan. 1896), the following are all Abundance: 3-112 176 Botan from T. V. Munson & Son, Denison, Tex. Yellow Fleshed Botan, P. J. Berckmans Co., Augusta, Ga. Berger, from Stark Bros., Louisiana, Mo. The following while differing slightly among themselves are for all practical purposes the same as Chabot. This kind like Abundance is quite variable and seems to be represented by more or less distinct strains. Babcock, from G. L. Tabor. Baileys Japan, from G. L. Tabor. Hattankio, from T. V. Munson & Son. Munson, from P. J. Berckmans Co. Yellow Japan, from G. L. Tabor. Red Nagate, from G. L. Tabor seems to be the same as Red June from Stark Bros; and Botan of Tabor is the Berckmans. As plums are now usually classified our varieties belong to five different races or types, the Japanese and four n'atives. These are the Americana type, the Wild Goose type, the Wayland type and the Chicasaw type. The domestica type which includes the European plums and prunes does not succeed here and none were planted. The Americana Plums: The plums of this type have been developed from the wild plum of the North and East. They are useful for planting at the far North on account of their great hardiness to cold but they are not at home here. So far as we have tried them the trees are poor growers, very short lived and unproductive. At present they are represented in the orchard only by Hawkeye and Rockford though several other kinds were planted that have since died. Although blooming very late long after danger from frost is over, they bore no fruit at all this season. The planting of varieties of this type is not advised for this State. 177 The Wild Goose Plumis: The ancestry of this group of plums is still a matter of doubt. Some authorities have supposed them to be hybreds between the Ameri canas and Chicasaws but there is no proof of this theory except their somewhat intermediate characters, and on the whole it seems more probable that they are descended from some of the Southern wild plums. The native plums of our. Southern woods have been strangely neglected by botanists 'and as yet we have very little knowledge of their number or relationships. It is certain that in the red clay soil of the granitic hills north of Auburn, a wild plum occurs abundantly that has all the characteristics of this group of cultivated kinds. Botanists to whom specimens of it have been submitted unite in pronouncing it Prunns hortulana,the supposed bybred parent of the Wild Goose plums, but there is no conceivable reason for supposing that this commonly occurring native plum is a hybred. It has so far been impossible to determine its true botanical position. Before the introduction of the Japanese kinds this race of plums was our chief dependence at the South for market sorts. While they have been largely supplanted in popular favor by these new introductions they have some very good qualities and should not be overlooked in planting for home use and local markets. For distant shipment they are doubtless inferior to the best of the Japs, still they are likely to long continue to hold a recognized place in the market. As a rule they bloom rather late so as to be comparatively free from injury from frost. They succeed admirably in Middle and North Alabama, but are not so well adapted to the coast region. The following kinds are in the Station orchard: Charles Downing.-Thisis a medium sized plum of very fine quality, fairly productive, late, ripening July 10 and a very late bloomer. Unfortunately the tree is rather 178 a feeble grower and it does not seem quite at home. It would succeed better farther North. It is worth planting for home use on account of its fine quality and because it extends the season for this class of plums. Milton: This is a fine plum blooming a day or two later and ripening three or four days earlier than the Wild Goose. This season the first picking was on June 9. It is an oblong plum, darker, richer red than Wild Goose and marked with large white dots. The flesh is firmer and it hangs on the tree better than the Wild Goose. It is clearly superior to that well known kind and is, every thing considered, the best variety of its class that we have tested. It was one of the very few kinds carrying a full crop in 1899. President Wilder: This is a high flavored, medium sized red plum, ripening late in June. It does not seem to be very productive and like Charles Downing would probably do better farther North. It can not be recommended here except, perhaps, to keep up a succession and fill the gap between Wild Goose and Charles Downing. Whitaker: This is much like Wild Goose and ripens at about the same season, possibly averaging two or three days later. It is hardy and productive, bearing a full crop in 1899 and also this season, but it is so much like Wild Goose that there is no need to plant both kinds. It will take farther experience to decide which of the two is preferable. Wild Goose: Too well known to require extended comment. It succeeds well in Central and North Alabama and is very prolific when planted near other kinds. It requires cross pollination and does not bear well if planted by itself. It begins ripening here early in June in ordinary seasons and continues in season for nearly three weeks. It failed to bear in 1899 though others of this class carried a full crop. 179 Wooten: A small oblong red plum, ripening ten days later than Wild Goose. It has little to recommend it except hardiness and productiveness as the quality is poor. It ripened a full crop in 1899. The Wayland Plums: These resemble the Wild Goose type somewhat closely but they bloom later and ripen decidedly later than most of those kinds and seem adapted to a range of country a little farther South. What wild species they are descended from is uncertain. They cannot be recommended for shipment but are desirable for the home orchard on account of the sureness of the crop, an entire failure being almost unknown, and because of their late ripening which will prolong the plum season till the first of September. In quality they are not equal to the best kinds of the Wild Goose type, but they are useful for canning, jellies and preserves. They are represented in the Station orchard by two kinds, Wayland and Golden Beauty. The former is bright cherry red, and rather milder in flavor and is probably preferable where only one is to be planted but the Golden Beauty is very prolific and it is a few days later. Both kinds ripen in August, often lasting to early September. The crop was lighter this year than it has been in five years owing to heavy and continued rains during the blooming season that prevented pollintion. A failure from Spring frosts is almost or quite unknown. The Chicasaw Plums: The varieties of this type in cultivation are simply selections from the best of our native "old field" plums and have little to recommend them for general planting. They mostly bloom so early as to be in great danger from Spring frosts and they are too soft and small to be of much value for shipment. A few trees of the earliest kinds may be useful in the home garded as they ripen before the other kinds. They are 180. represented in the Station orchard by the following three kinds :-Emerson: A small red plum, very early but of no great value. This season the crop all rotted when half grown. Lone Star: Much like Emerson of no value. Transparent : A medium sized yellow plum of nice sweet, delicate flavor. It is the best of the lot bupt cracks badly in wet weather. The Japanese Plums : This is by far the most important type of plum for this region. For commercial orchards they are second in value only to peaches and with properly selected varieties the crop is surer than peaches, being less liable to injury from Spring frosts and from rot. There has been much confusion in regard to the names of the varieties and as noted on page 175, several of the supposed kinds in the Station orchard prove to be identical. The following sixteen kinds seem to be sufficiently distinct. They are mentioned in alphabetical order. Abundance (this equals Botan of some, Yellow fleshed Botan, and in our orchard Berger) : This is the best known and most widely planted of any of the Japanese plums. It blooms with peaches but usually holds a number of buds in reserve that open if the first blooming is killed so that an entire failure of the crop is rare. It is a handsome red plum with clear transparent skin that is yellow under the red, of very fine sweet flavor, the flesh becoming soft and juicy when fully ripe. Picked when still firm it ships well. It began ripening this year the middle of June and lasted two weeks. It it usually free from rot. Perhaps its greatest fault is a tendency to overbear, making it necessary to thin freely to secure good sized fruit. It is the best plum of its season and is strongly recommended for general planting. Berckmans (Botan of some) : This is another large 181 red plum very similar to Abundance in tree and fruit. It was formerly confused with it under the name of Botan. The color is a little duller, being underlaid with green instead of yellow, the size averages a little larger, but the quality is not so good. It ripens at about the same season. It is a plum of some merit but not so good as Abundance. This contests with Abundance for Burbank: the first place in popularity as a market plum. It is a little larger and even richer in color, has firm, high flavored flesh and ripens an average of a week to ten days later than Abundance, although occasional specimens ripen nearly as early as that kind. The tree is thrifty with a spreading habit of growth quite different from that of most of the Japanese plums. Like Abundance it is a great bearer and needs heavy thinning. In some seasons it rots badly which is its only fault. It is recommended for general planting. Blood plum No. 4: This is of the Satsuma type but inferior to that kind. It 'is not worth planting. Chabot (Babcock, Bailey, Hattankio, Munson and Yellow Japan of our orchard belong here): This is a large red plum with yellow under-color. It is late, ripening here about July 10. It is a good shipper, having firm flesh of fairly good quality and it is usually free from rot. The tree is a good grower. It is recommended for general planting though possibly it should be replaced by Orient. Hale: Young, only two years planted, but they did not fruit well this season. The few fruits secured were rather disappointing. Final judgment will have to be suspended. Kelsey: This is the largest and in some respects the finest of the Japanese plums but it has two such serious faults that its planting cannot be advised in this State. 182 It blooms so early that the crop is usually killed, and it rots very badly. Its season is late, middle to last of July. Kerr: This is a remarkably good plum whose valuable qualities seem to have been overlooked by nursery men and orchardists. It is the earliest of our really good plums ripening here about the first of June. It is large, rich yellow, with firm flesh of high quality. It blooms rather late and the tree is a good grower. It is strongly recommended for both home use and market. Long Fruited: This is a small red plum with very firm flesh. It ripens a few days earlier than Kerr. The tree with us has not been thrifty. The quality is fairly good but the size is too 'small for market. Maru: This is a red plum bout the size of Abundance and ripening a few Idays later. The quality is poor and it rots very badly. It is not worth planting. Normand: This is a large yellow plum of good quality, ripening the last of June or first of July, between Burbank and Chabot. Its color is somewhat against it for market, but it is useful in filling the gap between these two kinds, and it is in every way worthy of planting. Orient: This is very much like Chabot but it seems to be distinct, and to be an improvement on that kind, being brighter colored, slightly larger and two or three days earlier. It is strongly recommended especially for market planting. Red June (RedNagate of some) : This is a very showy, handsome red plum ripening at least a week earlier than Abundance. It is a good shipper and very free from rot. It is not as good in quality as the Abundance but it combines more desirable qualities for a market plun than any of the others. It blooms late and the tree is vigorous and productive. 183 Satsuma: This is a large plum with dull red mottled skin but bright blood red flesh. When fully ripe the quality is,very fine. It cannot be recommended for market on account of its early blooming habit which makes the crop too uncertain, but it should be included in plantings for home use on account of its superior quality especially when cooked. It is one of the finest fruits grown for canning and for jelly on account of its brilliant color and peculiarly rich, pleasant flavor. It ripens about the first of July. Willard: This plum has nothing to recommend it but elarliness. With us it is no earlier than Kerr and not nearly as good. The tree here is a poor grower and unproductive. Yosebe: This is the earliest Japanese plum we have tested, ripening a few days earlier than Keer and slightly in advance of Longfruited. It is a small bright red plum with firm flesh, free from rot and of very fair quality. The tree blooms late-and is thrifty and productive. It is probably too small for a profitable market fruit, yet its earliness, high color and other good qualities make it at least worth a farther trial. Hybred Plums: The following kinds are hybreds between the Japanese plums and some of the other races. While they are very interesting and suggest great possibilities for future improvement it cannot be said that any of them fully come up to the standard for a market plum. Golden (Gold of Stark Bros.) : This is a hybred between the Japanese and the Chicasaw plums. It turns golden yellow long before it is ripe and the loaded trees are very showy and beautiful. When ripe it is a light bright red at least on the side toward the sun. The quality is poor and watery, and this season much of the crop was lost through sunburn and rot. On the whole it is a disappointment. 184 Excelsior: Said to be a hybred between the JapIt is a good :anese and Wild Goose races. .sized, early, dull red plum of better quality than Golden. The tree is a fine grower and very productive. It is said to do well at the far South. It is perhaps worthy of farther trial. The Wild Goose characteristics :seem to predominate in the fruit of this plum as the Chicasaw does in that of Golden. Wickson: A hybred between Kelsey and Prunus Simmoni, which latter parent the tree greatly resembles. This is truly a magnificent plum, larger and handsomer than any of those mentioned above. Its one great fault is that it blooms too early for safety. It ripens about the first of July, but this year there were only two or three specimens to the tree. In fact we have never secured a full crop from it. Lists of Plums for General Plantingin Alabama. As .- short list including only the very best plums for mara ket we suggest the following mentioned in the order of ripening. They will cover the period from the first of June to the middle of July with a short break about the first of July. Kerr, Red June, Abundance, Burbank, and Orient. A large orchard of these five plums, if properly managed, could hardly fail to be profitable. Abundance and Burbank bloom together and should be planted near each other in order to secure cross pollination, while Kerr, Red June and Orient all bloom about together but a few days later. For a longer list add Yosebe for very early, Berckmans, Normand and Chabot. For a full list for home use and local market, plant .all of the above and add Transparent, Milton, Wild Goose, Satsuma, Wickson, Wayland and Golden Beauty. The Blooming Season of Plums: As has been noted in previous Bulletins the blooming season of plums is especially import since many, or perhaps most, of the 185 varieties are infertile to their own pollen and require cross pollination in order to bear fruit. For this reason plums should not be planted in large blocks of one variety but rows of one kind should be alternated with rows of one or more others, taking care to mate together kinds that bloom at approximately the same season. The notes given below on the blooming season for 1900 show a rather close agreement in the sequence of varieties with observations recorded for other seasons at this place, indicating that there is but little variation in this respect from year to year, although the actual season of blooming varies quite widely in different seasons. The sequence observed here however is not the same that is recorded for the same varieties in more northern localities, (see particularly the Vermont Bulletins and Reports). It is hard to see what should cause this difference in the comparative behavior of varieties in the two sections. Notes on the blooming of plu ms in 1900. March 6. Abundance ....................... March 10. March 14. full bloom ... March 25. Mostly fallen............... March 29. April 6. buds .F . . . . . . . . white. Babcock*. Bailey* ......... Berckmans....... Berger ....... Wlood No. 4 .... Wotan (Tabor) * ... buds separ'ated - ful hloom... buds separated buds buds falling .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. full bloom.. full bloom. full bloom. flowers falling. full bloom. full bloonm.. blooming. . failing . ..... ... .. .. ... falling.......... mostly .. .. .... .... .. white.. white. white. ......... fallen.............. . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . ... ........... ....... first blooms... nearly full bloom.. buds buds fallen . . . . fallin Y . . . Botan (Munson) t... urbank ............. Chabot .. . .... .... white.. . . mo~stly fallen... fall ing falling ... . first blooms. . . . . buds ...... ... separated. blooming... . . ..... nearly Chas. Downing.,.... Earliest of all........ Emerson .......... . first blooms .. . . dormant... buds separating buds separated first blooms.... full bloom. nearly nearly full dormant. full bloom. dormant. ... first blooms.:.. bloom . Excelsior... .................. first boms. fallen, falling....... .. fruits setting. lull bloom falling. fllen........ Golden-(Gold) Golden Beauty. HaleF!......... Il-attankio*. Hawkeye. Kelsey........... Kerr.......... TlnnA 's.i" buds separated. blooming...... dormant....... nearly full bloom . first blooms.... buds separated badfirst bloom Feb. nearly full ly killed in dlormant. .... mostly fallen... . buds separating buds separated. buds white.. blooming. ... .. . .. mostly fallen. ... ........... .. ..... blooming dormant mostly fallen bloom ...... separated buds . dormant...dormant nearly full bloom........ ;fallen..................... nealy .. nearly dormant... nearly fll bloom ... full bloom ..... . .. .. .. . . buds white ... dormant dormant . nearly dormant .. TLong f~l Long fruited.. Marti.............. M~ilton . . . .. . . .. .... full bloom...... fallen.... .. ,......................... first blooms many buds still dormant first blooms dormant.. ..... niearly dormant........dormant buds separating .. full bloom ... .... first blooms, most nearly full buds not separat'd bloom. .. first blooms. .. full bloom............ .. . Munson Orient '... buds separated. hiooming. buds .. ,.. .. .. . . .. .. .. Normand .. white...full bloom . falling .... Pres. Wilder.... lied nagate ..... ...... blooms . mostly fallen.. buds separa ed. nearly blooms... blooming.. dormant.. . buds separating nearly dormant .:.. buds white.... full bloom...full bloom first ... .. ... first ) full bloom I first blooms . Notes on the blooming of plums in March 6. i 1900.-Con'd. March 25. March 29. nearly dormant March 10. i March 14. April 6. Rockford . . . dormant Satsuana Transparent..... Wayland ........ Whitaker Wickson Wild Chicasaw ... first blooms bady killed in Feb. ... dormant.. nearly full bloom. .... dormant. full bloom and falling dormant.. leaves grown..... half .... first blooms ...... ... .. ........... budg separated first blooms . . buds separated buds mostly fallen........................""... separated. first blooms nearly full .. . first blooms .. full bloom ... first blooms badly killed in Feb. buds separating buds separated first blooms ... ....... nearly, full bloom full bloom full bloom and falling. ... bloom full bloom ..... fallen.............................. Wild Gtoose.. Willard ....... ... .. Woolen ......................... Yellow Botan Yellow ........ nearly . buds separating buds separated. full bloom ... . full bloom......... nearly nearly nearly first blooms .. blooming.. dormant.. dormant. . ..... dormant. nearly full bloom...... ........ buds separating buds separated full bloom nearly lull bloom .. buds white. ... falling buds separated. blooming.. dormant.... dormant .... falling. ...... first blooms, most buds not separ'ted first blooms 1 nearly full .. Japan~.. .. ......... Yosebe ............ * Equals Chabot. ħEquals Abundance . tEquals Berckmans. bloom. 189 SAN JOSE SCALE. In Bulletin 106 it was noted that in the plum orchardl planted in 1896 two trees proved to be infested with scale, and that from this center of infection it was slowly spreading to other trees in the orchard. At the close of the growing season of 1899 it had developed sufficiently to conspicuously whiten large areas on the trunk and larger branches. It had not spread to the twigs and smaller branches and it had so far interfered but little with the growth and vigor of the trees. During February, 1900, this entire orchard was thoroughly sprayed with a 20% mechanical mixture of kerosene and water,. A little later one of the originally- infested trees was again sprayed with undiluted crude petroleum. The crude petroleum was also applied to two infested peach trees and to a number of apple trees. In no case did it do any injury. The result of this treatment simply goes to confirm. the truth of the following two propositions: 1st, that. when a tree is once infested with scale it is almost impossible to entirely eradicate it. 2nd, that by spraying. with kerosene or crude petroleum its numbers can be soA reduced that it does the trees no harm. The spraying has probably not exterminated the scale on a single tree where it had gained a lodgment, but there are left only a few scattered individuals on any of the trees. Thesefacts have come to De quite widely recognized and they should be made the basis for the treatment of every outbreak of the scale. When it is first discovered in a new locality, if it is confined to a few trees or even to oneor more entire orchards, by all means cut them out at once and burn them, for this is the only sure way of" stamping out the pest. On the other hand in communi- 190 ties where it is known to occur somewhat widely it is needless to cut down infested trees for if taken in time the scale can be so controlled by annual or even biennial sprayings that it will do little if any harm. Of course the spraying is a rather heavy expense and the occasion for it should be avoided by taking every precaution to keep the premises clear of this pest. BULLETINS OF ALABAMA Agricultural Experiment Station. AUBURN. iNTDE X. VOL. IX. 113-117. BULLETINS AND 14TH ANNUAL REPORT. FEBRUARY 'TO )ECEMI3ER. 1901. MONTGOMERY, ALA PRINTING BROWN CO., PRINTERS k BINDERS. 1902. CONTENTS. BULLETINS. 113. 114. 115. 116. 117. Co6peratiie Experiments with Cotton in 1899-1900. Commercial . . Feb. 1901 Feeding Experiments with Dairy Cows........... May, 1901 Fertilizers...... .................. August, 1901 Sept., 1901 Dec., 1901 ......................... 1891 Texas or Acclimation Fever ..................... Orchard Notes ............................ Annual Report, Fourteenth t b. INDEX. Abbeville Fertilizer, xp. at, with cotton ........... Abercrombie, J. 'WW.......................................327 Acclimation fever.........................................227 Acid phosphates, analysis...................5 ... 52° Analysis, miscellaneous reports by State Chemist.............143 54, 81, 82, 83, 228, 291 Anderson, J. T.........................2, Angus grade heifer, No. 1...............73 2......................273: 2733.................................. Calves, temperature record of..........................275 Apples, varieties of affected by leaf blight...............292, 293 Aikin, Babbitt, Battyani, Buncomb, Bledsoe, Bradford, Benoni, Cillagos, Cannon Pearmain, Carolina Greening, Cooper's Red, Carter's Blue, Chattahooche, Dam, Early Harvest, Elgin Pippin, Equinettelee, Family, Grime's Hands, Homing, Haygood, Jeifries' Everbearing, Jonathan, Julian, Keeskemet, Moultries, Mangum, Marvina, Nickajack, Mavarack Sweet, Oszi-vaj, Pear (or Palmer), Red Limbertwig, Rawis Janeton, Red June, Rome Beauty, Red Beitigheimer, Rodes Orange, Sekula, Summer Wafer, Shockley, Senator, Santa, Sweet Bough, Thornton's Seedling, Taunton, Texas Red, Walalyfi, Yellow English, Yopp's Favorite, Yellow Horse, York Imperial. Golden, Varieties free from rust. ............................ 295 Apple of Commerce, Arkansas Black, Buda Summer, Black Ben Davis, Champion, Cooper's Early, Epir, Fanny, Fall Pippin, Garvenstein, Ryani Piros, Hershall Cox, Hew's Crab. Jennings. Kennard's Choice. Maggar, Metell, Mammoth Black Twig, Maiden Blush, Noble, Savor, Pasman, Ponjik, Red 'Astrachan, Early Red Margaret, Sabadka, Summer Queen, Saxon Priest, Selymes, Summer Cheese, Shackleford, Tuscaloosa Seedling, Winesap, Yakor, Yates. 145 Ashes, analysis ......... . ........ .......................... Austin, C. F ................... 326, 339, 291, 292, 443, 228, 82, 54, 2 Babcock test...............................................-57 Ballard, J. L ..... ........................ ... 3 Barnes, R. B......................................... 116, 276 Baroness of Ala, Angus heifer........................... 116, 267 Bat Manure, analysis...................................... 145 Beaumont oil... .............................. :......116, 240 Beef, value of cowpea stubble as pasturage for................ 80 Beets, fertilizer for.......................................... 91 44A 8 Berney's Ala. fertilizer exp. at, with cotton.................. Betts, Tancred ............................................. Bevill, W. Bilbro, J. A.............................................. Boligee, Ala., fertilizer exp. at, with cotton................... Boophilus Bovus................. ...................... Borland, T. M C...............................................3, ............................................. 50 327 38 327 50 116, 238 3, 46 Bragg, T ...................................... 82, 228, 291, 326 Broun, Win. LeRoy..... ............... 21, 54, 82, 228, 291, 326, 329 Broun, Dr. Win. LeRoy, death of ............................ 324 Bulletins, contents of..................................... .332 Burt corn, Ala. fertilizer exp. at, with cotton ................. 34 Bureau of Animal Industry............................. 116, 240 Burton, J. Q.........................................2, 334 Butter, cost of production .................................. 62 production from cotton seed meal and hulls.......... 55 different rations.................... 73 Carmichael, J. M................................. 327 Carrots, fertilizer for....................................... 91 Cary, C. A........................2, 54, 82, 228, 289, 291, 326, 440 Cattle inoculated with defibrinated blood ..................... 278 Cereals, fertilizers for................................ Charley Gardner, Angus .... 90 265 3 267 Champion of Alabama, short horn bull....................... Chappell, C. A ............................................. bull.... .. .. .. .. .. . .............. ............................ Cherries, varieties of...................................... 3: Dyhouse ............. Governor 301 .... Wood........................... Oztheimer .................................... 301, 302 301, 302 302 302 302, 302 302 302 302 301 Suda ..... ........ ........................... Abbasse......................................... Black Tartarian.................................. Dyehouse........................................ Early Richmond................................. English Morrello ................................. Governor Wood................................. Mont. 0. King .............................. Napoleon ........................................ ...... 302 ............... 302 Wrogg........................... Chism, W. F............................. .. .. .. ...... 203 Clark, R. W ............ 2, 53, 54, 82, 228, 291, 55, 286, 326, 339, 442 "Clemintino," registered red poll heifer........... ........ 264 Clinical records of inoculated animals ....................... notes on Dumas short horns........................ 262 279 449 Columbian University ...................... ............ 326, 334 Connoway, Dr.......... .............................. 248, 249 Corn meal, price of ................................. 58 Cory, A. F................ ................ .......... 3 Cotton, amount of fertilizer for.............................. 90 Black rust ............ ........................ 24 injury .............. ............ 43 prevented by Kanit .................... 25, 44 prevented by kainit.....................25, 44 co6perative fertilizer experiments ..................... 3, 86 effect of acid phosphate. .9, 10, 12, 15, 16, 18, 18, 21, 22, 26, 28, 30, 31, 33, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 41, 43, 45, 46 cottonseed meal. .10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22, 26, 28, 30, 31, 32, 34, 36'37, 38, 39, 41, 43, 45, 46 cottonseed meal, acid phosphate and kainit .... 37 and acid phosphate .......... 37 kainit....9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 26, 29. 30, 31, 32, 35, 36, 37, 38, 40, 41, 44, 45, 47 fertilizer exp. at Abbeville, Ala........................ 52 at Auburn, Ala., Experiment Station ...... 24 at Auburn, Ala...................... 27 at Berney's ............................. 50 in Bibb county ........................ 20 at. Boligee, Ala.......................... 50 at Burnt Corn, Ala...................... -34 in Butler county ........................ 43 at Calhoun ......................... 42, 52 in Chambers county .................... 30 in Cherokee county ..................... 13 in Clark county ........................ 40 at Collinsville, Ala. ...................... 8 at Cusseta, Ala ........................ 33 in DeKalb county ...................... 8 at Dillburg, Ala.......................... 51 at Dothan, Ala.......................... 48 in Escambia county .................... 44 at Evergreen, Ala....................... 52 in Fayette county..................... 19 at Furman, Ala.......................... 11 at Garland, Ala .......................... 48 at Gordo, Ala .......................... 16 at Greensboro, Ala........................ 51 at Greenville, Ala ....................... 52 at Hamilton, Ala ....................... 50 in Henry county ........................ 46 at Hugent, Ala.......................... 23 450 Cotton-Continued. 42 at Hurtsboro, Ala ....................... 42 at Jackson, Ala........................ 33 at Kaylor, Ala.......................... 8 fertilizer exp. at Larimore, Ala......................... 36 in Lowndes county...................... 21 in Macon county ....................... 14 at Maple Grove, Ala.................... 51 at Marvyn, Ala........................ 33 in Monroe county....................... 42 ............ at Naheola, Ala............. 23 at Notosulga, Ala........................ 51 at Oak Bowery, Ala...................... 32 at Opelika, Ala........................... 15 in Pickens county ........................ 29 in Randolph county ..................... 35 in Russell county ....................... 11 at Snow Hill, Ala....................... 51 at Sterrett, Ala......................... 50 at Tuscumbia, Ala...................... 17 in Tuscaloosa county .................... 23 at Tuscaloosa, Ala....................... 52 at Union Springs, Ala.................... 23 ................ at Vick, Ala .......... 10, 12 in Wilcox county ...................... at Wilson, Ala ........................ 48 8 increased by use of cotton seed meal ................. injured by lice ..................................... 46 . . 24 .................. Peerless ...... ......... 5 plan of experiment with................... 17 ......................... red rust .................. ......... ......... 58 seed, price per ton............ 58 .................... hulls, price per ton .......... ............ 58 m eal, price per ton ..................... 5, 143, 144, 145 analysis ........................ ash, analysis ............................. 146 55 72 vs. raw cotton seed for butter.................. and hulls vs. cotton seed and sorghum hay for production of stable manure ............ and hulls vs. cotton seed and hay for butter production ............................. 60, 61, 63, 64, 66, 71, 73, Cows, Ada........................59, 60, 61, 63, 64, 66' Annie...........................59, HIauron ............................................. ............ Hypatia............... Ida .................................................... 64 76 71 79 59, 60, 61, 63, 64, 66, 71 79 451 Cows-Continued. cue(en......... lozena.... Susan . .59, 6 61, 63, 64, 66, 71, 73, 76 60, 61, 66, 67, 71, 73, 76 63, 64, 65, 66, 67,. 71, 79 ................................ ........................ 59, 78, 79, 80 dairy value of pasturage on cowpea stubble. digestible nutriments in food for.................77 green vs. dry food for rich milk............... 76 green food for rich milk.......................75 Jersey, butter from....................................56 Cowpeas, value of stubble as a pasture...................78, 79, 80 Culver, J. W .................................... 3, 40 T. U..............................2, 54, 82, 228, 291, 326 iCusseta, Ala., fertilizer experiment at, with cotton.............33 Daffin, E. J ............................................. 3, 17 Dairy cows, amount of food consumed per day.................64 cotton seed meal vs. raw cotton seed................61 daily cost of food.............................1, 64 different foods for milk and butter production 61 effect.of rations on weight........................66 feeding experiment...........................55, 59 amount, kind and cost of food 60 rye as a substitute for, hay.......................73 and hulls...............74 -purchased vs. farm grown rations..............57, 58, 62, 65 soiling...............................................74 value per acre of corn and cowpea stubble............. 57 IDllburg, Ala., fertilizer exp. at, with cotton...................51 ,green Dothan, Ala., fertilizer exp. at, with cotton...................48 Duggar, J. F....1, 2, 3, 53, 54, 55, 82, 86, 228, 291, 326, 337, 442, 339 Duncaa, J. S .............................................. 3, 13 Earle, F. S .. ............. .................... 524, 326, 334, 339 Evergreen, Ala., fertilizer exp. at, with cotton................ 52 Farmers' Institute ........................ 116, 289 Institutes, List of ............................... Feeding standard........................................... Ferilizer, commercial analysis of............................ A KA,............ .............................. A. A. P.......................................... and 4 per cent. potash............ 338 76 81 109 109 A. A. P. bone with ammonia...................... .101 Acid.........................................129, 136 Acid phosphate 127, 128, 129, .130, 133, 134, 135, 137, 138, 141 with potash..............120, 122, 123, 124 121, 123 452 Fertilizer, Commercial-Continued. 98 Adair's Am. Dis. Bone .......................... Formula.................................127 147 high grade dissolved bone ............... 118 African Cotton Grower, 292. ....................... Alabama acid phosphate........................131, 137 Fertilizer ......... 93, 104, 106, 109, 110, 115, 116 Guano...........................98, 102, 111 Phosphate............................93, 137 pure high grade phosphate................ 137 127 Alkaline acid phosphate, 4 per cent. potash .......... bone, with 2 per cent. potash...............124 113, 115 Alliance soluble...........................107, 117 Ammoniated bone................................ dissolved bone.......101, 105, 109, 113, 115, 118 superphosphate ......................... 102 Animal ammoniated ......... bone fertilizer .......................... Armour's 271.......................................96 272 .................................... 722 ............... ....... ........... Ashcraft's formula ............. ........... Atlas acid phosphate ............. ........... Aurora ............................. .......... Am. phosphate .......................... Baltimore soluble bone ................... 103, 107, Bear acid ...................... ................ beef, blood and bone.........105,107, 115, 116, bone and potash ............................ Bone and potash .................... 121, 122, 124, brand potash mixture ...................... dissolved bone ......................... 134, guano .................................... high grade dissolved bone................... Beef blood and bone................101, 103, 108, 111, Big Hit ...... ... ......... . .............. 94, B. D. sea fowl guano ............................ phosphate .................... A. P. & muriate of pot. mixture ...... acid phosphate with potash 120, 121, 123, bone and potash ............... 98, 99, ash ........................... dis. bone, Am. potash.......... 93, 107, and potash................95, guano ............................. 9.............. 99 100 108 107 122 131 97 100 115 141 117 125 127 123 140 117 135 118 103 105 131 120 124 105 120 111 123 10( 453 Fertilizer, Commercial-Continued. high grade acid phosphate........ 128, 129, 131, 134, 140~ blood, bone and potash. .95, Birmingham acid............................134, high grade fertilizer..............99, 111 120 potash bone ......................... mixture......................127 soluble guano........................95 Standard grade fertilizer.............95 phosphate.............128 100, 103, 107, 111 blood and bone...................96, guano.........94, 95, 97, 101, 105, 112, 113 bone and potash.... 97, 101, 102, 108, 109, 111, 115 guano........................117 Black Diamond acid.141 108, 109 Blood formula............................99, acid phosphate................121, 123 compound..................................99 Bone and potash mixture.........................124 Bone and potash phosphate........................121 Boss Cotton Grower..............................111 Bull acid........................................138 136 Cahaba acid phosphate.......................135, and potash mixture..121, 125, 127 dissolved Am. & potash..................110 high grade acid phosphate.................142 119 blood, bone and potash ........... fertilizer.............111 phosphate........................ Standard grade phosphate................. 142 105 .................. Capital City guano .... Standard fertilizer......... 113, 97, 114 guano... ...... 113 C. C. Standard fertilizer....................... :.......106, 116 Champion Farmers' Choice ............ 115. ............. Clayton fertilizer.................. Coley & Sandlin's special, bone and potash......... 127 119~ guano ............... Complete fertilizer........ 96, 101, 108, 112, 116, 118, 124 118, 125& Cotton Queen guano ........................... 13& Cow acid......................................... 121 Coweta dis. bone and potash ....................... 136 9G 130 C. Cow guano ....................................... 112 454 Fertilizer, Commercial-Continued. 140 Coweta high grade acid ......................... 122 dis. bone and potash ......... 100 fertilizer .................... 97 guano ........................ 121 Standard.............................. 135 Crescent City acid phosphate .................... guano ............. ............. 105, 107, 114 Dale Co. Standard guano ...................... 93, 115 ....................... 129 Diam ond ..... 113 Soluble guano ........................ 116 ............. Dismond guano ................... Dissolved bone .......................... 130, 133 137 acid .............................. 131 and potash. :120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126 Dixie acid phosphate .............................. 139 and potash.................... 121 Dundee guano .............. ............ 95 Eagle acid phosphate..............................141 Am. bone .............. ............ 117 dis. bone .................................. 141 and potash ......................... 127 guano ...................................... 117 Earle, Terrell & Co's. high grade acid phosphate.. 142 fertilizer... 119 Early Bird ..... ............................... 96 high grade acid phosphate ............ 139 soluble guano ......................... 114 Eddystone ......................... ............. 118 bone and potash, No. 1.............125, 127 dissolved bone ................ 133, 137, 141 soluble guano ........... 104, 110, 111, 117' English acid phosphate ...... 126, 128, 131, 137, 140, 141 dissolved bone phosphate ............ 128, 131 Excelsior ........................................ 96 acid phosphate ....................... 132 Farmers' Alliance guano ...................... 94, 105 special guano ...................... 96, 112 Fertilizer ........................... 95, 104, 105, 112 No. 7................................ 145 Florence acid .................................. 135 King Cotton guano .................. 117 Georgia bone compound ........................... 123 Farmer ...................... 96, 101, 103, 109 State Grange ......................... 103, 117 Fertilizer, Commercial-Continued. 129, 132, 136 Georgia acid phosphate ......... 98, 101 fertilizer ................... guano ................. 96, 106, 109 Standard .................... 96, 104, 137 131 acid phosphate ................ 99 superphosphate ............... 97, 105 Goldsmith's Improved Mixture ................. Good Luck soluble guano.........................113 103 Gossypium phospho ............................. Goulding's bone compound............. ... 101, 110, 115 132, 137 high grade acid phosphate ......... 102 Special compound .................... 95 Gray's high grade guano ..... ..................... 139 Griel Bros. English acid phosphate ................ 93, 95, 123, 125 ............ Guano ................... 111 No. 1. ................................... No. 3 ................................... 111 26, 27, 35, 38, 37, 96 H elmet.......................24, 271............. ....... .............. 99, 106 108 272 ...................................... 282 .......................... 103 Brand ............... .............. 99 bone and potash .................... 99 potato fertilizer .................... 98 Helm's bone, blood and potash, Nos. 3 and 4 ........ 116 Hems Special Guano, No. 1...................... 93 2...................... 94 High Grade acid phosphate..................... 128, 129, 131, 132, 133, 135, 138, 139, 140 blood, bone and potash................ 110 bone and potash ..................... 127 dissolved bone ...................... 133, 139 and potash ........... 121 English acid phosphate ........ 133, 134, 139 fertilizer ......................... 104, 113 potash guano ....................... .97 Patapsco guano ...................... 115 home mixture guano .................... ........ 95, 108 Howle Bros. acid phosphate ....................... 141 bone compound ....................... 117 phosphate and potash ................ 127 Howell's fruit food ............................ .101 Hume's Am. dis. bone ................ 94, 101, 103, 105 456 Fertilizer, Commercial-Continued. Imperial..........122 acid.........134 dis. bone.................................133 I. X. L. acid phosphate........................133, 137 138 J. C. Adkins & Son's acid phosphate No. 1.132, Jones' formula....................................96 101, 102 special formula......................95, analysis..................................145 Kainit, 107, 117 King Cotton Grower........................99, Lee fertilizer.....................................109 Magic Cotton Grower.......................110, 111, 116 138 Magnet acid ...................................... soluble guano............................111 Marietta Guano Co.'s H. G. dis. bone...............121 141 high grade acid........................140, phosphate and potash............125 Mastadon.......................................97 Matchless. acid phosphate....................... Maxwell's home mixture..........................107 96, 108 Meridian blood and bone ....................... Southern acid.136 111 Merrimon's cotton boll guano.................101, Mobile Standard guano............99, 107, 109, 110, 116 Mlontgomery acid phosphate and potash............126 146 Muriate of Potash, analysis...................145, blood and bone guano...................113 130 phosphate........................... 105 Nancy Hanks guano...........................94, 94, 112 Neal's mixture ................................. and phosphate compound................... 113 117 New Brand, No, 721............................. 125 No. 1............................................. 126 ..................... No. 129 Oil mill phosphate............. .................. 104 Old Dominion ................................... ..................... 118 Hickory guano .112 Homestead guano..........................94, 104's................. Time guano ................. ............. .... 109 Opelika phosphate and 2 per cent. potash...123, 126 Our Best fertilizer, bone and potash........127 114 Cotton Queen guano.......................... Ox acid phosphate................135 Cotton grower...................... ......... 103 guano.................. .96, 98, 100, 109 457 Fertilizer, Commercial-Continued. 140 ........... dissolved bone .................. high grade dissolved bone ........... 130, 131, 135, 136 .......... .......... 124 potash mixture .... 105 .......... slaughter house bone ............ Ozark guano, No. 2...........................93, 117 93 high grade guano ....................... Pacific guano............. ................. 107 Patapsco ........................... 108 122 acid phosphate .......................... Am. dis. bone ........................... 115 bone and potash........................... 127 guano .......................... 95, 101, 103, 111 high grade guano ........................ 115 phosphate ................................ 123 Peidmont acid phosphate ... ... ........... 138 Perfection guano ............. ........... 103 Phosphate ........... ........ .............. 129, 141 Excelsior bone compound................137 No. 3 ................................ 141 with potash ............. ........... 122 with 2 per cent. potash ................. 124 P. & H. Royal acid phosphate .................... 130 Pike's Pride.................................94, 112 Pinkard's home mixture ......................... 113 Planters' Pride guano ........................ 114 Plow Brand guano...............................114 Pon Pon Crop Grower ........................... 96 Port Royal dissolved bone ....................... 137 Potash acid ............................ 121, 123, 127 phosphate ........ ...... ............ 126 Prolific acid phosphate ......................... 137, 142 Pure dissolved bone and potash, Nos. 1, 2, 3...... 125 high graue acid phosphate ................. 133 Randolph's fertilizer ............................. 106 guano ........................... 96, 103 Read's alkaline bone ........................... 122 blood and bone, No. 1..................... 100 high grade Am. dis. bone .................. 98 Matchless acid ................ .............. 130 phosphate ................ ............. 135 Roanoke guano ........................... 98, 103, 106 Rock City ..................................... 107 Sample No. 1 ........................... 98, 102, 123 No. 2................................98, 102 458 Fertilizer, Commercial-Continued. Bro's. high grade bone and potash..113, 126 XXX grade bone and potash ... 113, 126 & Co'.s high grade bone and potash.123, 125, 126 beef, blood and bone .......... 104, 113 H. G. English acid phosphate..133, 139 Scott's ........................... ............. 109 acid............... ................ 141 animal Am. dis. bone ..................... 107 blood formula ......................... 99, 117 Gossypium guano ........................ 117 phospho ........................ 99, 109 high grade acid ................ 130, 131, 133, 135 Sea Bird guano ................ .............. 100, 115 foul guano ................................. 116 gull compound 100 guano ............... ........ 102, 103, 11a soluble guano....................113, 114 S. & K. Am. dis. bone .......................... 113 English acid phosphate ................. 139 S. & 0. high grade acid phosphate ................ 139 Solid South guano ............... ............ 101, 115 Soluble blood and bone ........................... 95 guano ............................... 117, 119 Southern Pacific guano ........................ 114 Special blood mixture ............................ 110 formula ............ ...... .... ........ 113 potash mixture .......................... 126 Stable manure, analysis ......................... .145 Standard acid phosphate ...................... 139, 140 guano ................... ............ 111, 119 home mixture ............... ............ 99 Star Brand ........................ .......... 107 acid phosphate ........................ 139 guano ....... ................ ....... 113 guano..................................... 102 Stern's Amn. raw bone ............................ 106 high grade acid phosphate ................. 134 Stone & Johnson's high grade guano .............. .95 Stono acid phosphate ............................ 121 dissolved bone ........................... 121 Sunny South .................. .................. 136 acid phosphate ................. 135, 140, 141 Swift's Eagle ...................... 105 Schuessler 459 Fertilizer, Commercial-Continued. Talladega acid phosphate..........................136 Am. dissolved bone.....................104 Tallapoosa dissolved bone.........................137 and potash..............127 high grade acid phosphate.............141 'Tariff Reform soluble guano......................114 Teague's acid phosphate..............131 beef, blood and bone.....................99 bone and potash .......................... 122 Tenn. special wheat grower.......................123 Valley acid phosphate......................139 Thompson's English acid phosphate.................139 Tiger acid.......................................141 Brand guano...............................125 Tip Top..................106, Troy acid phosphate.........................128, 131 high grade acid phosphate.................129 Perfect .............. 94, 96, 101, 102, 103, 105, 111 Tuscaloosa acid phosphate....................131, 135 guano.............101 Vanderver's Am. dissolved bone .................... 113 XX acid phosphate......39 Wando........................................129 Water's high grade dissolved bone and potash Special guano.............................119 Wet guano, No. 3................................106. phosphate Nos. 1 and 2....................134 Winkler's Am. dissolved bone..................... high grade acid phosphate 125 109 136. ................. Wilson's Special compound....................... W. L. & Co.'s high grade acid phosphate............ 97, 99, ............ W. 0. C. guano ................. pure blood guano......................... XXX Am. dissolved bone .......................... blood and bone guano................... 114 139 100, 115 109 105, 109, ... dissolved bone..........................136, Fertilizer, Analysis reported by State Chemist..... 138 9 Calculation of commercial value...........92 Experiment with cotton at Union Springs........... Vick, Ala............23 German Kainit analysis.................145, 146, Guaranteed analysis by manufacturers............ Laws, analysis.................. ................ criminal.......................225 manufacturers and dealers................... 52: 147 158 226 227' 460 Fertilizers-Continued. Laws regulation of sale...........................221 samples.........................227 License for sale of...............................203 Reliability of tests...............................6 Selection and use.................................84 27 Foster, J. D.............................................3, 248, 250, 255 Francis, Dr. M...............................240, .Frazier, T. H........................ 327 334 G. F........................................326, 4, 13 Freeman, G. W ......................................... 3, 15 French, J. W ............................................ Fruit crops, fertilizer for..................................91 7 Fulton, W. F..............................................4, Funke, F...................................................4 Furman, Ala., fertilizer expt. at, with cotton..................11 Garland, Ala., fertilizer exp. at, with cotton..........48 German Kainit, analysis, analysis....................145, 146, 147 German kali works..........................................6 328, 329 ..................... Glen, E. T....................... Gordo, Ala., fertilizer exp. at, with cotton......................16 fertilizers for......................................90 Green aphis of apples, varieties offected by...................297 Greensboro, Ala., fertilizer exp. at, with cotton...............51 Greenville, Ala., fertilizer exp. at, with cotton.52 Hamilton, Ala., fertilizer exp. at, with cotton.................50 .Agricultural school..................................3 Freeman, Grasses, Haralson, Jonathon..........2 82, 228, 291, 54, 326, 327 Hare, C. L .................. ...... 2, 54, 82, 228, 291, 326, 335, 339 Harris, John T. Jr .......................................... 4 Herbarium ............................................... 444 Houghton, H. S ........................................ 2, 54, 334 Hugent, Ala.,. fertilizer exp. at, with cotton.................. 23 llurtsboro, Ala., fertilizer exp. at, with cotton................ 42 Ingram, W. N.................. .......................... 2, 54 Inoculation of cattle, remarks on............................ 268 Jackson, Ala., fertilizer exp. at, with cotton ................... ........ 42 Japan walnuts..................... ............ Jarett, H. H........ ...... ................................. Jeiks, W. D., Governor, letter...... .................. Jones, T. K.................................................. Jones, Weborn ............. .............. .......... Kainit analysis................... .......................... Kainit, analysis ............................. _Kaylor, Ala., fertilizer exp. at, with cotton..................... ............. 302 4 2, 325, 327 4 329 5 5,147 33 461t Ala., fertilizer exp. at, with cotton..................8 fertilizer for.....................................90 J...........................................3 334 G...............................................277 F.......................... ............ 327 Experiment station...............................200 fertilizers for..... ................................ 91 Maple Grove, Ala., fertilizer exp. at, with cotton..............14 146 .................................. Marl, analysis...... Marvyn, Ala., fertilizer exp. at, with cotton..................51 Mason, C. H............................................4, 44 Matthews, Fred G........................................280 4 McAlpine, J. R .............................................. 4, 43 McClure, G. L .......................................... McIntyre,, P. M.............................................4 Larimore, Legumes, Lide, M. Little, W. Ligon, R. Louisiana Mangels, Meadows, T. T.............................................. 30 Melilotus, a soil renovating plant................... ........ Mell, P. H........................ 2, 54, 82, 228, 291, 326, 334, Melton, E...............................................4, Metamorphic region contains sufficient potash.................31 Milk, nutritive sources of...................................77 per cent. of fat ................................. Mississippi Experiment Station..................250 Missouri Experiment Station...........................248, Moody, F. S.. ...................................... Naheola, fertilizer exp-. at, with cotton......................42 Nitrate of soda, for grasses..................................90 Nitrogen, ammonia, equivalent of.............................6 principle fertilizer needed for cereals and grasses.... Nixon, C. W 13 335 19 76 250 17 .................................. ,........ 90 282 78 54, 82, 228, 291, 326 Northern-bred cattle in Alabama, summary of ................. Notasulga, Ala., fertilizer exp. at, with cotton ................ Nutritive ration .. ............... ...... Oak Bowery, fertilizer exp. at, with cotton.......... ........... ...... ..23 .......... .51 Opelika, Ala., fertilizer exp. at, with cotton............. Orchard notes .......................... Peaches, notes on blooming of. ..................... Peento Race....................................... 290 311, 306 .302 North China..........................................304 South China................... ..................... Spanish Race ..................................... Varieties of............................... Alexander......... ................ Mt. Rose..............................'303 Old Mixon...............303 Peento.................303 304 305 303 303 462 Peaches -Continued. Waidro.................303 303 ................ Angel................. 304 Chinese Cling.... ..................... .... 304 Elberta..................... 304 ..... Mamie Ross..................... 304 ................ Pallas............... 304 Tabor ................................. :........304 .......... Honey ............. 305 ...... Imperial .................... Onderkook.......................305, 305 ......... :.... Cable's Indian ...... 308 .... Carmen....... ................ Early Crawford..:...............308 308 ............... Grey ................... Hale's Early ......... .... ........ 308 Matthew's Beauty.................. ........ McKinney ............ Stump ............................. ......... ........... 309 309 309 Ovido ................... 309 Sneed........ ......................... .......... Triumph.................... '.......309 Victoria ................. varieties for general 309 309 planting. ... :.............310 Alexander ................ :..310 310 Cormer .............. Chinese Cling........... Elberta..........310 Grey........ Hale's Early ............ Mamie Ross.............. 310 .... 310 .319 310 :.....310 McKinney ....... :.:..310 Mountain Rose ..... Pallas ........ r........310 Tabor...........310 :...............310 Sneed ..... Stump................310 Imperial............310 Phelps, J. C ................ ...................... 335. ............................ Purser, J. F.... Phosphate Rock, analysis ................. Plums........................ notes on blooming of.................... condition of orchard................................. ...... ....... :.............146, ............... .... ..... 327 147 312 313 317 Poole,* R. R................ ................................ 83 463 Potatoes, fertilizer for.......................................91 Purifoy, W. M...........................................4, 10 Quarantine for Texas fever.................................236 Report of Agriculturist....................................341 Biologist and Horticulturist......................343 Botanist.....................334 Chemist.......................................335 Chemist, associate...............337 Director................................ 330 Treasurer. ..................... ... 328 Veterinarian............... . . .... 338 Rhodes, N. M. & Co........................................93 Rivers, C. E ........................................... 4, 35 Roestelia................................................292 Root and tuber crops.......................................91 Ross, B. B..........................54, 228, 82, 291, 326, 336, 337 Rouse, D. H.................................................4 Rye, greea, effect on richness of milk.........................76 as substitute for hay..........................56, 73 value as cow food..............................74 Shorthorn grade heifer....................................272 Sixth Gazelle, shorthorn heifer..............................266 Slaton, J. P.............................................421 Smith, 0. D...............................................325 Snow Hill, Ala., fertilizer exp. at, with cotton.................11 Soil, analysis........................................145, 146 Soil, plan of fertilizer test for.............................75 necessity of chemical analysis..........................85 Sorghum hay, price........................................ 58 Southeast Alabama Agricultural School...................... 40 Southern cattle tick ........................................ 238 Sphorropsis Malevum............ .......................... 299 Stable manure, composition from different foods .............. 56 analysis.............................. .... ... 70 from different foods................ 72 production from different foods ... 70, 71, 68, 69 per cow .......... .......... 56 proportion of total execrement dropped in stable......... ........... ...... ....... 71, 72 Station council.................... ................... 2 Sterrett, Ala., fertilizer exp. at, witlj cotton.............. .... 51. Summer rot......... ...................... ................ 299! Tankage, analysis................. .... ...... .... ........ 145, Temperature of registered Northern bred cattle, inoculated 256, 272; bulls which had Texas fever...2601 records of Angus calves..... ..................... 27S 464 327 ............... W. K...................... z48 Experiment Station............................... 250 Experiment Station................................. 227 ....... ............ ............. fever ........ 235 changes that occur in the blood with ............. defibrinated blood method of producing, im250 ............ munity to ............... 245 examination after death from . .............. fever ...................................... 242 how to recognize and to distinguish ............ instructions concerning...................... 247 methods of producing immunity to ............ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233 What is Texas Fever? ..... 238 Tick, the Southern cattle ......................... 239 extermination of, in Alabama ........................ 239 extermination of, in the South ....................... Turnips, fertilizers for .................................... 91 Thomason, Judge T. J........ ............. ............. 4, 29 Tobacco Stems, analysis ................................ 147 Troyer, A. M..................... ....................... 4, 36 Trustees, committee on exp. station ........................... 2 Tuscaloosa, Ala., fertilizer exp. at, with cotton ................ 23 Tuscumbia, Ala., fertilizer exp. at, with cotton ............... .50 Watkins, J. C............................................4, 33 Weather Bureau, Alabama section .......................... 6 conditions in 1899 and 1900.......................... 6 Weems, J. A................ ......... ......... ........... 4 Wheat bran, price of ....................................... 58 Whitterker, W. C.......................... 327 Terry, Texas Texas Texas ............... Wilcox, E. M................ . ................ 228, 291, 326, 334 J.H.......................................... 45 W illiams, Thos..........................2, 54, 82, 228, 291, 326, 327 Wilson, Fertilizer exp. at, with cotton ....................... .48 Wolff-Lehman feeding standard ......................... 76, 77 BULLETIN No, 113. ALABAMA. FEBRUARY, 1901. Agricultura1 Experiment Station OF THE AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE, AUBURN. Co-operative Experiments with Cotton in 1899-1900. By J. F. DUGGAR, Agriculturist. MONTGOMERY, ALA. BROWN PRINTING CO., PRINTERS & BINDERS 1901, COMMITTEE OF TRUSTEES ON EXPERIMENT STATION. THOS. WILLIAMS......................... JONATHAN . . etunpka HARALSON.....................................Selma. STATION COUNCIL. WM. LEROY BROUN...................................President. P. H. MELL .............................. B. B.Ross............................................Chemist. C. A. CARY, D. V. M................................Veterinarian. J. Director and Botanist. F. DUGGAR .................................... Agriculturist. F. S. EARLE........................Biologist and Horticulturist. J. T. ANDERSON..............................Associate ASSISTANTS. C. L. HARE............................. J. Q. BURTON ......................... Chemist. First Assistant Chemist. Second' Assistant Chemist. H. S. HOUGHTON....................... Third Assistant Chemist. T. U. CULVER ........................... R. W. CLARK ............................. C. F. AUSTIN........................... Superintendent of Farm. Assistant Agriculturist. Assistant Horticulturist. The Bulletins of this Station will be sent' free to any citizen of the State on application to the Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama. CO-OPERATIVE FERTILIZER EXPERIMENTS WITH COTTON IN 899 and 1909. BY J. F. DUGGAR. These experiments were conducted under the direction of the Agricultural Department of this Station in 1899 and 1900. These tests in 1899 were made by farmers in nineteen localities; the tests made in 1900 were conducted in eighteen localities, not including in this count the few experimenters who failed to report results. The method of conducting the experi'meuts was the sameas in former years. The plots were each oneeighth acre in'area. The following is the list of those who made experireported results. ments in 1899 an'd 1900 and County. Page Post Office Name, Agricultural School.... Hamilton........Marion-50 who Autrey, A ............ Ballard J. L.......... Berneys........ Jackson.. ..... Talladega-50 Clarke-49 .Bevill........... Choctaw-38 Bevill, W.'C.....' Borland, T. M......... Dothan........... Henry-46 Chappell, C. A........Dillburg........Pickens-51 Vick.............. Bibb-20 Chism, W. T......... Clarke-40 Culver, J. W.......... Jackson .......... Cunningham, E. L......Furman......... Wilcox-li Cory, A. F..........Evergreen ......... Daffin, EJ.... Conecuh-52 Cherokee-13 7 '..Tuscaloosa..Tuscaloosa-1 Duncan, J. S...... Maple Grove........ Experimen't Station .... Auburn............. Lee-24 Fo'ster, J. D.......... Auburn............ Lee-27 French, J. W. ... ..... Gordo.......... Pickens-15 4 Name Fulton, W. F...... Funke, F Post Office County Page. 7 ........... Tuscumbia..........Colbert-.5O Collinsville......... DeKaib- Freeman, G. WV.Maple Grove....... Cherjokee--13 Harris, Jno. Jr.... Oak Bowery...Chambers--51 Ingrain, W. N......... Marvyn ......... Russell-5i Ingram, W. N......... Opelika ............. Lee-32 Jarrett, R. H..... Sterrett.......... Shelby-5i Jones, T.K..... Greensboro............ Hale-Si1 T., Mason, C. H........ Wilson...... .... Escambia-44 McClure, G. L ........ Garland........... Butler-43 Melton, E ........... Hugent........... Fayette-1J McAlpine, J. RH...... Boligee............ Greene 50 McIntyre, P. M ... Abbeville .......... Henry-52 Purifoy, W~. M.......Snowv Hill.....:.... Wilcox-lO Rivers, C. E...... Hurts'boro.......... Rouse, D. H ...... Greenville.......... Butler 52 Russell-35 Maccon-2i Slat-on, J. P Thomason, T. J... Kaylor or R~anburn ... . Randolph-29 Troyer, A. M.........Calhoun...... Lowndes. 36, 52 Watkins, J. C....... Burn Corn......... Monroe 33 WeenmsJ. A.......Union Springs ...... Bullock-52 ...... .. Notasulga.......... THE FERTILIZERS USED. These consisted of ligh grade acid phosphate teed to contain at least 14 per cent. of available phosphoric acid. The table gives the plan and the composition of the fertilizers guaran- following of employed: the experiment Pounds per acri of fertilizers, nitrogen, phosphoric acid, and potash used, and conposition of each mixture. FERTILIZERS. MIXTURE CONTAINS. U a) Q) p L O>D. KIND. U) Pc 0 Lbs Lbs. 1358 200 Cotton seed meal..... In 100 lbs. s. c. meal. N 6.79 2 240 Acid phosphate........... In 100 lbs. acid phos.......... .................... 4 200 Kainit In 100 lb kainit............ 13.58 5 200 Uotton seedreal...) 240 Acid phosphate..4 3.09 In 100 lbs. above mixt. 13.5 6 200 Cotton seed meal...) 5 2600Kainit........... 3.39 In 100 lbs. above mixt 240 Acid phosphate... .( 200 Kainit .. ............ ... In-100 lbs. above mixt 200 Cotton seed meal... . 13.58 240. Acid phosphate .. 9 . 200 Kainit 1 In Lbs. 5.76 2 88 15.05 ....... 41.88 9.52 ....... .~. Lbs. 354 I 77 24 60 12.30 3.54 .80 24 7.03 $ 19.00 12.50 13.75 15.45 16 38 13. 09 .6 5.6 1.44 8.21 41. 88 6.54 5.59 28.1.4 4.39 110 200 Cotton seed meal.... 240 Acid phosphate ..... 100 Kainit In 100 lb.obove mist 100 lbs above mixt 2.12 14 94 13 5 5 18 18 2.59 7.75 2.93 58 58 15 11 *Countingof many analyses. Average + all the phosphoric aci4 available. 2)-1113 in cotton seed meal as Those farmers who are more accustomed to the word ammonia than to the term nitrogen, can change the figures for nitrogen into their ammonia equivalents by multiplying by 1 4. The phosphate and cotton seed were purchased at market prices. Most of the kainit was donated by the German Kali Works. In determining the increase over the unfertilized plots, the yield of the fertilized plots, Nos. 4, 5, 6 and 7, is compared with both unfertilized plots, lying on either' side, giving to each unfertilized plot a weight inversely proportional to its distance from the plot under comparison. This method ,of comparison tends to compen sate for variations in the fertility of the several plots. It should be remembered that seasons, as well as soils. determine the effects of fertilizers, so that to be absolutely reliable a fertilizer experiment should be repeated for several years on the same kind of soil. Abnormal weather conditions in 1899 and 1900 resulted in an unusually large proportion of inconclusive experiments. THE WEATHER IN 1899 and 1900. The following data are taken from the records of the Alabama Section of the Weather Bureau for 1899 and 1900 and give average results of a number of stations: Rainfall Rainfall Rainfall Rainfall Rainfall Rainfall Rainfall 1899. for April, inches ........ 2.80 2.03 for May, inches. ......... inches .......2.54 for June, 6.76 for July, inches ......... for August, inches..... ... 3.68 for September, inches........ .66 for October, inches. ... 1900. 9.06 2.64 11.80 . .2.18 4.93 2.89 4.00 5.64 3.8S Rainfall for November, inches.........3.04 It will be seen from the above that the spring and early summer of 1899 were very dry. Complaints of drought in that year- were general. In 1900 an excessive precipitation in April and June greatly injured crops, and in addition there was in many localities a severe drought in August. Two more unfavorable seasons. in immediate succes- sion -seldom occur. EXPERIMENTS MADE BY W. F. FULTON, LARIMORE COLLINSYILLE, DEKALB COUNTY. OR Dark gray, Tulatto, or reddish, stiff soil; subsoil red clay. An experiment with 'cotton has been conducted on this farm in Big Wills Valley for three years in succession on land cleared 'about three-quarters of a century ago. in The crop preceding the cotton experiments of b'oth 1899 and 1900 was corn. The early part the summer of 1899 was rather dry ; in 1900 "from time the cotton was until was laid by my notes show almost 'continuous rain,-the wettest season the knowledge the planted it of the The results for 1898 were printed in Bulletin No. 102. Th'ose for 1899 'and 1900 are given in the following table : -oldest inhabitant." of 8 Larimore or Collinsville experiment with cotton. FERTILIZERS.1899 CIC1 I. 1O0 o o 4-) *j - 0 - 6KIND.y . seebes.*~ 2 240 Acid phosphate... 6 200 Cotton seed meal.2 200 7 240 200 8 00 200 9~ Lbs. 6 Lbs. Lbs. 8 Lbs. 3 55 2 Kainit.... .... Acid phosphate .... "" Kainit..... ... No fertilizer............ Cotton seed meal. ... Acid phosphate ... Cotton seed meal. .. . 86 456 976 44 16 608 .... 6 10 240 200 520 S200 Kainit .............. 1208 1032 600 10 240 Acid phosphate... 100 Kainit........... 912 456 424 Increase of iseed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal 1899 1900 0 lbs. 214 lbs. 230 lbs. was added : To unfertilized plot.............208 lbs. To acid phosphate plot...........114 lbs. To kainit plot .. :.......... ... 82, lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot.. 116 lbs. 132 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal....................... 130 lbs. 144 lbs. 9 Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot ............. 320 126 To cotton seed meal plot ......... To kainit plot...................233 To cotton seed meal and kainit 233 plot .. . .................... lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. 336 lbs. 550 lbs. 263 lbs. 263 lbs. Average increase with acid phos378 lbs. 219 lbs. phate.. .................. Increase of seed cotton .per acre when kainit was added: 205 To unfertilized plot .............. 79 To cotton seed meal plot ......... 84 T'o acid phosphate plot... ...... To cotton seed meal and acid phos86 phate plot ................... lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. 107 lbs. 337 lbs. 132 lbs. 50 lbs. 157 lbs Average increase with kainit..... 116 bs. The principal need of this soil, clearly shown in each of three tests, is for phosphate, which has paid a large profit, whether employed alone or in combination with any of the other materials. The increase 'attributable to phosphate in each of the three years is respectively 464, 219, and 378 pounds of seed cotton per acre. Cotton seed meal usually increased the yield more than enough to cover its cost, the averages for the 3 years being respectively 152, 130, and 144 pounds of seed cotton. Its relatively slight effect suggests the advisability of reducing the amount of cotton seed meal, of which about half as much as of phospha'te might be used for cotton. Kainit was the least beneficial on this soil of the ingredients of the complete fertilizer and the, figures indicate that its addition to the mixture of phosphate and kainit was not profitable. 10 -EXPE RIMENT MADE BY W. M. PURIFOY, 2 MILES NORTH- EAST OF SNOW HILL, WILCOX COUNTY. White bald prairie;subso iI, white rotten limestone. This experiment was made in on land especially favorable to the 'development of black rust of cotton. The land was not broken until May 25, when it was bedded with a one-horse plow. "Many had on account of coming up too late. Exnothing ton treme 'drought ruined the experiment." The table on page 11 gives the yields and the subjoined analysis of results of Mr. Purifoy's'tests, both in 1898 and 1899, shows the increase attributable to each fertilizer, when used alone or in combinations under cotton growing 'on poor white prairiesoil. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: 1899 .them stalks 1898. V899. 144 lbs. 16 lbs.' 144 lbs. 128 lbs. To unfertilized plot...........128 To acid phosphate plot .......... To kainit plot................ To acid phosphate and kainit plot. 141 lbs. 27 lbs. 227 lhs. lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal ...................... 131 lbs. Increase ,of seed cotton per acre 100 lbs. when acid phosphate 200 lbs., 99 lbs. 209 lbs. lbs. was added : To To To T iIo unfertilized plot ............. cott'on seed meal plot ......... kainit plot.................. cotton seed meal and kainit plot. 123 208 lbs. 48 lbs. '240 lbs. 224 lbs. Average increase with acid phos158 lbs. phate...". ........... 180 lbs. 11 Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot........ 27 lbs. 0 lbs. 0 lbs. 72 lbs. To cotton seed . meal plot... To acid phosphate plot..........18 lbs. 32 lbs. To cotton seed meal and 'acid phosphate plot...................96 lbs. 176 lbs. Average increase with kainit......41 lbs. In 'the above paragraphs the results of Mr. Purifoy's 52 lbs. experiment in 1898 are republished to show the ;close 'corbetween the results ,of the two years, both tending to indicate that the ph'osphate was more beneficial than cotton seed meal and that kainit was of least effect. Snow Hill and. Furman, experiments with cotton on white bald prairie. respondence FE RTILIZERS. SNOW THILLT. i an FURMMAN. U1"r, 1899. o 0. KINDh. 0 1900. + J.C a ) v o z 0 0 2 3 4 Lbs. 200 240 4V0 200 200 240 2C0 2C0 Cotton seed meal. Acid phosphate. No fertilizer......... Kainit.............. Cotton seed meal... Acid phosphate.. Cotton seed meal.... Kainit.......... Lbs 144 208 00. 0 144 240 Lbs. 144 208 0... 400 376 192192 66.1 144 488 616 416 624 616' 48 0 .. . . -27 258 79 204 240 :8. 200 00 240 200 240 Acid phosphate.... ...... Kainit ...... No fertilizer....... Acid 240 368 416 200 Cotton seed meal.. 200 Kainit........ Cotton seed Acid phosphate ...... 368 . 416 208 200 10 phosphate... ... mea..., 100 Ka init ...... ... ' I~ 12 EXPERIMENT MADE IN 1900 BY E. L. CUNNINGHAM, 6 MILES EAST OF FURMAN, WILCOX COUNTY. White prairie, the surface dark gray; sub-soil white rottenl limestone. The original growth, cleared about 30 or 40 years ago, is reported as oak sand hickory with some short-leaf pine. The field was in cotton in 1897 and 1898 and vated in 1890. The depth of plowing was 5 or 6 inches. On Plot considerable black rust, but very little on there 10,' where a complete fertilizer containing Plots 9 used. The stand was full and uniform. kainit was There was too much rain. The yields are given in the table above. unculti- was 5 and Increase of seed cotton meal was added: per acre when cotton seed . .. 80 lbs. ".178 lbs. :.106 To unfertilized plot ............. To acid phosphate plot .................. To kainit To acid phosphate and kainit plot.... ....................... - plot. .......... lbs& 4 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal, 92 lbs. Increase of -seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was used. .80 lbs. To unfertilized plot .. ............. 178 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot ................... 231 lbs. To kainit plot ........................... To :cotton seed meal 'and kainit plot..........129 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate, - 130 lbs.. 13 Increase of seed cotton per added : acre when kainit way, 27lbs.. To unfertilized plot ......................To cotton seed meal plot ..................1 lbs. To acid phosphate plot ................... 124 lbs. To seed cotton meal and acid phosphate plot.-50 lbs. Average increase with kainit, - 12 lbs. Mr. Cunningham's experiment, like both the test made by Mr. Purifoy,ion the same class land, white prairie, indicates that phosphate was most needed. largest yield was made with a mixture of cotton seed meal and phosphate. did not increase the yield, though it did seem to somewhat -restrainthe rust on Plots 9 and 10. not. It should be noted that white prairie soil and that none very responsive to commercial of-these paid a very large profit. Although phosphate was undoubtedly useful in each of these experiments, its effects were far less notable than the favorable influence that is exerted by adding thi's class ,of. soils. We :cansuitable vegetable matter of of The Kainit -fertilizers was to not yet recom'mend the use of. phosphate on these soils, W. FREEMAN'S believing that the same money invested in the seed ofmelilotus or 'of 'other renovating plant would be more profitably spent. EXPERIMENTS MADE BY J. S. DUNCAN ON G. FARM, .14 MILES SOUTHWEST OF MAPLE GROVE, CHEROKEE COUNTY. In 1899 the test was made ion gray sandy upland, with red 'subsoil; in .1900 on light alluvial sec'ond bottom of a dark gray color, with red subsoil. Both fields. had been -cleared for more than a quarter of 'a century. The 14 cotton experiment of 1899: of 1900 by corn. In -1899 the sumnmer was preceded by cotton, that was excessively dry, in 1900 exMAPLE GROVE. S'APLE GROVE. cessively wet. Iliaple Grove experiment with cotton. FEV.TIIZ ERS. 1899. 0 0 O- 1900. H (12 Q (12 O L~Z00 O 0 ;3 o 1 2 3 4 :5 Ls O Cotton seed meal ... . Acid pho~phate . No fertilizer......... Kainit........ .... Cottonseed meal.... Acid' phosphate.. Cotton seed meal.... iKainit ..... ........ Ai phosphate .. Kainit .. I I Lbs. I 200 240 00 200 200 240 200 60 200 7 240 200 800 752 624 Lbs. 176 128 -43 266 175, Lbs. 1036 932 816 920 992 1032 1024 804 Lbs. 220 116 106 181 223 218 '8 9 00 200 .......... . No fertilizer...... meal..) 4 Cotton seed Acid 776 800 1024 992 224 192 10 200 Kainir,...... S200 Cotton seed 240 Acid phosphate .. 100 Kainit........ ( 240 phosphate,.... 1080 1032 276 meal...) 228 Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed mleal was added : 1899. 1900. To nnfertilized plot............176 lbs. 220 lbs. acid phosphate plot.........138 lbs. 65 lbs. To kainit plot ................. 218 lbs. 117 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot. 212 lbs. 58 lbs. To Averaqe increase with cotton seed meal .......... ... 186 lbs. 115 lbs. 15 Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: 128 lbs. 116 lbs. To unfertilized plot .. .......... To cotton seed meal plot .......... 90 lbs. -39 lbs. To kainit plot..................55 lbs. 112 lbs. " To cotton seed meal and kainit plot. 49 lbs. 53 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate......................81 Increase of seed cotton per acre added: lbs. 61 Ibs. when kainit was lbs. lb. lbs. lbs. 106 lbs. 3 lbs. 102 lbs. 95 lbs. To unfertilized plot ......... -43 To cotton seed meal plot ..........1 To acid phosphate plot .........116 To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot .................42 Average increase (or decrease[-]) with kainit ............. --51 77 lbs. In both years cotton seed meal was the most important fertilizer for cotton; phosphate afforded a small increase, possibly because of abnormal weather conditions; kainit was useless on upland in 1899 and scarcely profitable in 1900 on second bottom land. EXPERIMENT MADE BY J. W. FRENCH, 3 MILES NORTH OF GORDO, PICKENS COUNTY. This test was conducted in 1899 on gray upland, and in 1900 on dark sandy upland, both having red subsoils, rather retentive of water. The cotton experiment of 1899 was preceded by corn, that of 1900 by cotton. In both cases the tests were on old fields, cleared of pines and reclaimed four to seven years before the experiments began. The former season was exceedingly dry; the latter, "the most unfavorable ever known, first too wet and then too dry." The stand was reported as excellent 1V Gordo experiment with cotton. FER rIIIZIERS. 0 0 CC 1899. 0 . 1900. 0 2a 20A p h . . 1 3 4 7 6 7 8 9 10 LsLs Lb 200 4 Cotton seed meal .. 536200 aint 20 ....... . -60 38 2 240 Acid phosphate ...... 848 00 No fertilizer.m...........336384 200 Kainit................360 200 [Cotton seed meal.. . 240 Acid phosphate94..3. 7 200 ICotton seed eal .... : 5f28 23 '200 IKainit......... 40 bs 6968 Ls 335 768 2 58 52 13 16 19 5 20 200 00 200 240 200 200 240 100 IAcid phosphate :::i 736 Kainit............ No fertilizer....... ..... 264 Cotton seed meal... Acid phosphate 1032 Kainit...... ...... Cotton seed meal... Acid phosphate...... 9 Kainit__ __f_ 45 . 868 408 888 480 _ Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: 1899.. 1900. To unfertilized plot...............200 lbs. 312 lbs. To acid phosphate plot....... .... 125 lbs. 151 lbs. To kainit plot..... To acid ............. 197 lbs. and kainit -phosphate plot. .410 175 lbs. lbs. 331 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal, 238 lbs. 242 lbs. Increase seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added : To unfertilized -plot .. ...... .. 512 lbs. 184 lbs. To -cotton seed meal plot ............ 437 lbs. 23 lbs. of To kainit plot .. . ................. 420 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plot.. 633 lbs. 501 lbs. 1381lbs. 294 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate, 160 lbs. 17 Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: 38 lbs. 11 To coltton seed meal plot ...........35 lbs.-126 To acid phosphate plot............ .54 lbs. -35 To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate 231 lbs. 145 ................ plot........ .... To unfertilized plot .. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. Average increase with kainit, - 63 Ibs. -I lb. Phosphate was the material of most importance for the gray soil and it was also needed on the darker soil. Cotton seed meal was first in importance in 1900 and second in 1899. Kainit was useless except in a complete fertilizer, in which combination it was slightly profitable, but never so important as phosphate cotton seed meal. or EXPERIMENT CONDUCTED BY E. J. DAFFIN, 3 MILES S. OF TUSCALOOSA, TUSCALOOSA COUNTY. This test was made in 1900 on the F. S. Moody farm. The soil is described as second bottom, sandy, and of a reddish gray color; the subsoil, as red clay. The original growth, removed more than half a century ago, is sweet gum, black gum, persimmon,. and sassafras. The preceding crop was cotton. June and July brought an excessive rainfall, interfering with cultivation and August was very dry. There were 1,065 plants per eighth-acre plot. "Red rust" was reported as injurious alike on all plots. Both cotton seed meal and acid phosphate, whether used alone, or in any combination, greatly increased the yield and afforded a good profit. Kainit was practically ineffective except in combination with the other two fertilizers, where it seems to have increased the yield to a profitable extent; the complete fertilizer, con- 18 taming kainit (Plot 9) affording an increase greater by 236 pounds of seed'cotton per acre than the increment where only phosphate and meal were used together. (Plot 5.) Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added : To unfertilized plot ...................... 216 lbs. To acid phosphate plot....................3 lbs. To kainit plot ............................ 259 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot...........529 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal.......340 lbs. Increase of seed- cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot......................152 l To cotton seed meal plot...................292 lbs. To kainit plot..........................189 lb To cotton seed meal 'and kainit plot.........459 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate.........273 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added : To unfertilized plot ................ ........ 26 lbs. To cotton seed meal .plot .. .................. 69 lbs. To acid phosphate plot ..................... 63 lbs. To cotton seed nmeal and acid -phosphate....236 lbs. ... 99. Average increase with kainit ... ........... Mr. Daffin also conducted similar tests in 1897 and 1898 on red sandy upland, with red clay 'subsoil, two and one-half miles east of Tuscaloosa. In both ye'as phosphate was by far the chief need of 'that soil, bu't both cotton seed nieal and kainit afforded considerable increase, so that the greatest profit was obtained by the use. of a complete. fertilizer containing all three of these materials. lbs. 19 ExPERIMENT MADE IN 1899 BY E. MELTON, ONE MILE WEST OF IIUGENT, FAYETTE COUNTY. Dark or "mulatto" soil, with reelclay subsoil. The original growth, removed about 50 years ago, is reported as short-leaf pine, oak, and hickory. The three preceding crops were corn. The pl-ants were free fro rust. As shown in the detailed statement below, phosphate was the fertilizer chiefly-needed by this soil, its use, alone and in every combination, was highly profitable, the average increase attributable.to.phosphate bein 364 pounds of seed cotton per acre. Cotton seed average inuwal was next in importance, affording crease of 168 pounds per acre. The most profitable fertilizer a mixture of acid phosphate and cotton seed meal. Kainit was not needed. Increase of seed cotton per acre whencotton seed meal was used: unfertilized plot ... ......... .......... 128 lbs, 160 lbs.. To acid phosphate plot .. .................. and an was wa sd.To To kainit plot ............... 176 lbs.. To acid phosphate and kainit plot............208 lbs.. Average increase with cotton seed meal......... 168 lbs.. lbs.. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added : To unfertilized plot ....................... To cotton seed meal plot .............. .432 ........... 400 lbs.. 296 lbs. 328 lbs. To kainit plot ........................... To' cotton seed meal and kainit plot Average increase with acid phosphate.......... 364 lbsa 20 Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: lbs. To unfertilized plot.......................72 ......... 120lbs. To cotton seed meal plot........ To acid'phosphate plot....................-32 lbs. 16 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot'. .Average increase with kainit....... .EXPERIMENTS .... 1 MILE 44 lbs. SOUTH- CONDUCTED BY W. T. CHISM,, EAST OF VICK, BIBB COUNTY. Both -experiments ,were conducted on dark gray sandy or loamy branch bottom soil, rather retentive of -ture. The earlier experiment was preceded by corn, the later one by cotton. The field had been cleared about 75 years and the original growth is reported as sweet gum, red and white oak, -hickory, ash, poplar, cucumber tree, and a few short-leaf pines, and, chestnuts. The latter part of the season of 1899 was dry and un:favorable 'and in 1900 there was almost 'continuous wet weather during the season of cultivation. The soil was worked June '25, 1900, when too wet, by which the experimenter reports that the crop was greatly damaged. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was used. mois- 1899., To unfertilized plot ........ To 1900. acid phosphate plot............. ...... To kainit plot .................... To acid phosphate and kainit plot. ... 256. lbs. 96 lbs. 244 lbs. 92 lbs. 62 lbs. 77. lbs. 100 lbs. 15 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal, 172 lbs. 64 lbs. 21 Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot .............. 104 lbs. 24 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot.......... -56 lbs. 39 lbs. To kainit plot .. ........... ..... 116 lbs. 78 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plot .- 24 lbs. -7 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate, 35 Ibs. 34 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added : To unfertilized plot ............ 24 lbs. -1 lb. To cotton seed meal plot ..........32 lbs. 37 lbs. To acid phosphate plot ...........12 lbs. 53 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot .. ........................ 16 lbs. -9 lbs. Average increase with kainit........-20 lbs. 20 lbs. In 1900 cotton seed meal was the only fertilizer that was very effective. In 1899 none of them were decidedly beneficial. On account of the extremely unfavorable weather in both years, it is probable that neither experiment indicates the real needs of this soil, so that we must place these tests in the class of inconclusive experiments. EXPERIMENT MADE IN 1899 BY J. P. SLATON, 7 MILES SOUTHI OF NOTASULGA AND 7 MILES N. E. OF TUSKEGEE, :IACON COUNTY. Gray sandy upland, with retentive red clay subsoil. The field was originally cleared and cleared of the second growth The original growth was long leaf preceding crop was cotton. The cotton did not come up until 3-113 about 75 years ago, about 12 years ago. pine and oak. The the first of June and 22 this late start may have kept the fertilizers from exerting their full effect. The stand was good. As shown in the table on page 23 and in the statements below, phosphate and cotton seed meal were both effective in nearly every combination. Kainit was not needed. Mr. Slaton conducted an experiment in 1898 (see Bulletin No. 102) on similar soil. In that year acid phos profitable phate and cotton seed meal were even than in 1900 and kainit was useless. It seems that this gray soil, with a clay subsoil near at hand, needs only a mixture of acid phosphate and cotton seed meal to pro duce a profitable cotton crop. detailed more Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was addedd: lbs. To unfertilized plot.......................192 lbs. To acid phosphate plot.....................43 110lbs. To kainit plot ........................... To acid phosphate and kainit plot...........123 lbs. Average increase with cotton seedmeal.......117 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre'when acid phosphate was added : lbs.. To unfertilized plot.......................176 27 lbs.. To cotton seed meal plot..................... lbs., To kainit plot............................145 To cotton seed meal and kainit plot.......... 158 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate......... 127 IbsoIncrease of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added : 20 lbs.To unfertilized plot ........................ lbs.. plot..................62 To cotton seed meal lbs. To acid phosphate plot....................-11 To 'cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot .... 69 lbs. Average increase with kainit.............. .. 4 lbs.. Tuscaloosa, Ilugent, Vick and Notasulga FERTILIZERS. TUSCALOOSA. 1900. U 0 0 experiments with cotton. VICK. 1899. VICK ___ VrUGENT. 1899. > 1900. uV .rd NOTASIJLG1. 1899. U > 4 ~U 0 4-D 0 C) ~ -q a Lbs. 200 Cotton seed meal....................680 ............. 240 Acid phosphate ........ 00 No fertilizer .... 200 Kainit .............. ............... 205Cttn'ed"ea............984 240 Acid phosphate Lbs. 1 2 3 4 ................ "" Lbs. Lbs. 464 128 616 736 400 44...................464 336.73 . 496 26 400 72 508 880 560 768 496 285 ... 744 544 560 296 248 Lbs. 216 152 Lbs. 992 840 668 848 824 51..... 6 Lbs. 256 104 -24 200 220 .... Lbs. 526 488 464 452 544 532 412 504 496 Lbs. 62 24 .... --1 101 99 ..... 92 84 Lbs. 592 576 400 544 724 616 448.. 736 744 Lbs.192 176 .. C3 20 219 130 6t 8 200 Cotton seed meal...... ............. 200 Kainit............ ............ 00 No fertilizer .................. ...... 200 Cotton seed meal ............. 9 . 240 Acid phosphate........ ........... 200 Kainit........................ 200 Cotton seed meal........ ..... 10~ 240 Acid phosphate ......... ........ '. ( 100__Kainit..._____________________.__ 1240 1040 872 752 576 456 700 840 184 324 288 296 24 AUBURN EXPERIMENTS IN 1898, 1899, & 1900, ON EXPERIMENT STATION FARM. These tests were made on three adjacent areas set apart for permanent fertilizer experiments with cotton, corn, and oats. The soil is of the same character on all three areas, as was also the previous fertilization of each plot. All three of the cotton crops were preceded by oats fertilized like the corresponding cotton plot. In 1900 each plot received the same fertilizer as in 1898 and 1899. Hence the results should show not only the immediate effects of fertilizers, but the residual on cumulative effects, if there are any on this light soil. Contrary to our usual custom, cowpeas were not sown after the oats, but instead a 'thin growth of crabgrass, rag weed, and poverty weed covered the ground during the summer and fall following the harvesting of each oat crop. Commercial fertilizers, !chiefly acid phosphate, had been liberally, though not lavishly, employed annually for a number of years before the experiment began. The soil is a deep sand bed nearly free from stone or gravel, and the plots occupy the crest of a hill. The dates of planting were April 15, 1898; April 11, 1899; and April 24, 1900. The stand was nearly perfeet except in 1900, when there was some slight want of uniformity, so that the figures for 1900 represent the yields after being corrected on the basis of an equal number of plants on each plot. The Peerless variety was used each year. In 1898 black rust was quite injurious. September 23 it was estimated that the plants on the plots on which kainit had been used had shed 50 to 70 per cent. of their leaves while 25 the plants receiving no kainit had shed 75 92 per cent of 'their leaves. The prevalence of black rust probably accounts, at least in lart, for the very favorable showing made by kainit in 1898, for numerous experiments recorded in the bulletins of this Station show that kainit generally decreases the injury from black rust. Fertilizer experim ents with cotton at Auburn,,1 81899vand 1900 on Experiment Station farm. FERTILIZERS. I) to 1898. 1899. 1900. 4)) 'KIND. j> ar C c CI cs b1 t a CO Lbs. Lbs Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. 1 2 3 4 .200 240 00 200 5 200 240 6 200 Cotton seed meal...889 214 1008 Acid phosphate ........ 853 178 819 No fertilizer........... 675 ... 774 Kainit.... ........... 783 122 1049 Cotton seed meal .. 10133612 Acid phosphate .. 1. 4612 Cot tn.s.d.. eal ,, 1192 529 1075 8 15 655 ... 240 Acid phospha te...... 8 9 . 234 379 35 161 145 266 -78 82 .. 344....... 262 360 46 143 3 9 0 2 2133 0 265 434 180 325, 4 2 . 262 194 ... 241 Lbs Lbs. 00 No fertilizer.......... 833.... (200 Cotton seed meal... . ...... 361 ...... ( 240 Acid phosphate...... 200 Kainit .. )... 1177, 522 1152 10,55 319 435 200 Cotton seed meal 10 240 phosphate . .1________.___ 100 Kn.init Acid .. 422.... ... 26 Increasein yield from cotton seed, acid phosphate, and kainit on Experiment Station Farm in 1898, 1899 and 1900. Increase; Increase of seed cotton per acre where cotton seed meatl was added To To To To unfertilized plot....................214 acid phosphate plot..................168 kainit plot...........................407 acid phosphate and kaiiiit plot........36 lbs. seed cotton per acre. 1900. Average, 1898. 1899 Lbs. Lbs. 234 88 3 90 206 103 3 years. Lbs. 161 147 181 115 Lbs. 35 187 134 219 144 Average increase with cotton seed meal. _.Increase of seed cotton per acre where phosphate was added To To To To unfertilized plot.....................178 cotton seed meal plot................132 ......... kainit plot........... ... cotton seed meal and kainit plot.... 151 145 -78 194 -3 364 -33 -- 24 61 54 -7 167 41 38 82 80 102 36 82 Average increase with acid phosphate... Increase of seed cotton per acre where kainit was added To unfertilized plot.....................122 TO cotton seed meal plot................315 To-acid phosphate plot...308 To cotton seed meal and acid phos. plot 262 31 84 46 145 100 143 164 164 176 S8 116 132 106 132 152 Average increase with kaiit......... . .235 In 1898 the greatest increase in yield was obtained by the use of a mixture of cotton seed meal and kainit. This mixture was a close second 'to the complete fertilizer in 1899 and 1900 and its average increase for the three years lacked only 36 pounds of seed cotton per acre of equalling the increase due to a -complete fertilizer. Quite unexpectedly, acid phosphate has not been very effective. If this is due to the accumulation of a sufficient supply of phosphoric acid in the soil from the phosphate applied annually for many years before the 27 beginning of the experiment, the value of applications of phosphate should become more marked in future as this supply is exhausted. It would be safe to estimate the amount of phosphate applied annually during the decade before the test began at 200 pounds per 'acre or less. Results on most soils seem to indicate that phosphate is the most important single fertilizing material for cotton. EXPERIMENTS CONDUCTED BY J. D. FOSTER, 1 MILE SOUTH OF AUBURN, LEE COUNTY. Light sandy loam, gray' upland; subsoil yellowish clay or loam, not compact. The experiments of 1899 and 1900 were conducted in different parts of the same field, on identical soil. The field, on which the original growth was reported as long-leaf pine, had been in cultivation for a great many years. The crop preceding the experiment of 1899 was corn, with drilled c'owpeas between the rows. The peas made only a moderate growth and were grazed in the fall of 1898. The stand of cotton was uniform. In 1900 cotton was planted May 25. The cotton experiment in 1900 occupied the plots that had been used in 1899 for a similar fertilizer experiment with corn, (having no cowpeas between the rows.) Hence the results of the cotton experiment of 1900 should show not only the immediate effects of each fertilizer, but also the residual or secondyear effects, if there were any lasting benefit from commercial fertilizers used on this light soil. 28 Auburn experiment with cotton on J. D. Foster farm. FERTILIZERS. 1899 1900. a) I )3 0 0O' -~ 0 O O- S O KIND. C ~ md a a) a)_y__ P 0 - Lbs. 1 2 3 4 5 200 Cotton seed meal 240 Acid phosphate ......... 00 No fertilizer........... 200 Kainit.........520 200 Cotton seed meal 240 Acid phosphate. * 200 Cotton seed meal.... 200 Kainit.......... 200 Kaiit...p........4 240 Acid Lbs. Lbs 616 528 336 280 192 .360 Lbs. Lbs. 600 488 432 744 240 128 79 397 744 648 568 183 405 6 7 phosphate""" 0 225 8 528 4 194 8 9 102 _ No fertilizer... ......... Cotton seed meal.... Acid phosphate.. Kainit............ 200 Cotton seed meal.... 240 Acid phosphate... 100 00 200 240 200 344 664 656 320 312 726 688 398 Kainit.............. 360 Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added : 1899. 1900. To unfertilized plot ... :........ ,....280 lbs. 240 lbs. To acid phosphate plot............213 lbs. 269 lbs. "...124 lbs. 268 lbs. To kainit plot.. .............. To acid phosphate and kainit plot.... 95 lbs. 204 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal, .178 lbs. Increase 245 lbs. of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To' unf ertilized plot ................ To cotton seed meal plot ............ To kainit plot To cotton seed meal and kainit plot Averageincrease with acid phosphate, ............ ........ 192 lbs. 125' lbs. 42 lbs. .. 128 lbs-. 157' lbs. 115 l~bs. 13 lbs. 93 lbs. 51 lbs. 113 lbs. 29 Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: 79 lbs. 183 lbs. To unfertilized plot .............. To cotton seed meal plot ............ 27 lbs. 107 lbs. To acid phosphate plot ............. 33 lbs. 66 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate 1 lb. 85 lbs. plot .. .........................Average increase with kainit..........39 Ibs. 63 lbs.. The figures for the two years agree closely and show that a larger increase was afforded by cotton seed meal than by any other single material. The most profitable of all the fertilizers was a mixture of cotton seed meal was unprofitable. and phosphate. Kainit EXPERIMENT CONDUCTED BY JUDGE T. J. RANDOLPH COUNTY. THOMASON, 2 MILES SOUTH OI' RANBURNE (NEAR KAYLOR), This experiment was made in 1899 on gray land, with yellow subsoil. The soil is described as table land rather retentive of moisture. The preceding crop was cotton. This is the third experiment on a uniform plan conducted by Judge Thomason. (See Bulletin No. 107; p. 274). If we take the average increase of each fertilizer under all conditions we have for the entire period of three years an average increase of 187 pounds of seed cotton per acre attributable to cotton seed meal, 197 to phosphate, and only 31 to kainit. The inference is plain' that a mixture of cotton seed meal and phosphate was all that cotton needed on this soil, and that the addition of kainit, at the rate of 200 pounds per acre, was usually unprofitable. The results for 1899, when kainit afforded a slight profit, were more favorable to potash than were the results of the two previous tests on this soil. 30 The following statements show the average increase in yield for the entire period of three years. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: 217 lbs. To unfertilized plot ....................... lbs. To acid phosphate plot.....................137 156 lbs. To kainit plot ........................... To acid phosphate and kainit plot..........238 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal........187 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate -was added: 264 lbs. To unfertilized plot .. .................... To cotton seed meal plot...................184lbs. lbs. To kainit plot..........................128 To cotton seed meal and kainit plot..........210 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate.........197 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was .added : 90 lbs. To nnfertilize'd plot ..................... 29 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot ................ 80 lbs. plot ...................To acid phosphate To acid phosphate and cotton seed meal........ Average increase with kainit........ ........... 54 lbs. 31 lbs. MILE EXPERIMENT CONDUCTED BY T. T. MEADOWS NORTH OF CUSSETA, CHAMBERS COUNTY. Soil, red, stoney; subsoil red clay. 1899, is the third experiment conThis test, made dncted on similar soil by Mr. Meadows. (See Bulletin -n ~No. 107, p. 274.) Giving attention to the average results for the. three Tears we find that the principal need of this soil was for 31 acid phosphate, which gave an average increase of 202 pounds of seed cotton per acre. Cotton seed meal was added to the phosphate with profit, kainit was not needed. The red clay soils of the Metamorphic Region in this part of the State seem to contain sufficient potash for the ordinary needs of the cotton crop, though when black rust is prevalent kainit is beneficial even here. but Statemenits of the average increase in yield for the three years follows: Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: lbs. To unfertilized plot.......................109 To acid phosphate plot....................156 lbs. To. kainit plot............................164 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot...........128 lbs. Average lncrease with cotton seed meal........139 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added : To unfertilized plot......................192 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot ................... 239 lbs. To kainit plot............................217 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plot ........... 189 lbs. ... 202 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate...... Incease~ of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added : To unfertilized plot ................ ......8 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot................... 43 lbs. To acid phosphate plot ...................... 15 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate -9 lbs. plot.... Average increase with kainit................. 10 lbs. 32 EXPERIMENT CONDUCTED IN 1900 BY W. N. INGRAM, MILES EAST OF OPELIKA, LEE COUNTY. 8 The description of the land seems to indicate that the soil was a yellowish loam, with subsoil of somewhat the same character, and not compact. The original growth is reported as oak and hickory, which been removed about forty years before. The rainfall excessive in June. The preceding crop was corn. The results.are not entirely conclusive, but on the whole they show that 'cotton seed meal was profitable and that the returns from the other fertilizers this wet year were not satisfactory. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: added: Tio unfertilized plot.......................248 lbs. To acid phosphatepl0ot........bs. To kainit plot.............................242 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot............180 lbs. had was Average increase with cotton seed meal.........160 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: 96 lbs. lbs. T'o unfertilized plot......................... To cotton seed meal plot.........-182 To kaini't plot ............................ To cotton seed meal and kainit plot............ 87 lbs. 25 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate............ added: To unfertilized plot .. ..................... To cotton seed meal plot.................... To acid phosphate plot ............ To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate 7 lbs. 29 lbs. 23 lbs. 20 lbs. lbs. Increase -of seed cotton per acre when kainit was plot. .. .,230 ....... ..... Average increase with kain it ........... 75 lbs. 33 Kaylor, Casseta and Opelika experimnrts with cotton. FERTILIZERS. KAYLOR. 1899. 4.j OUSSETA. OPELIKA. 1899 -4-D 0 - 1900. 4-j o .ND o a)--J -4 d P ;-4 (ad) Lbs. 1 2 200 240 Acid Cotton phosphate...848 seed meal.. Lbs. 888 Lbs. 112 72 Lbs. 296 456 Lbs. 104 264 Lbs. 1000 Lbs. 248 96 3 200 K ainit.nt .sl. .z. 4 . .. . . . . . . 804 00 N o t e e .r 074 20 4Acotphosphate. .. e) l )S 848 8006 85 3490 . . 15 22 5 1 4 304 472 --.34 5 . 2 97 260 29 6 271 116 7 8 9 10 200 Cotton seed meal. nit.......... 240 Acid phosphate ... < 3 944 872. 232 182 1080 944 848 . 200 Kainit.......... 00 No fertilizer........ 200 Cotton seed meal. 240 cid phosphate ... 200 Kainit...... ...... 200 Cotton seed meal. 240 Acid phosphate... _ ........... 100 Kainit__ 663..... 1124 4 472 __ 216....... 640 424 344 1144 1112 296 264 1140 ___ 560 EXPERIMENT CONDUCTED BY J. C. WATKINS 12 MILES NORTH OF BURNT 1899 and 1900 were made on poor The ,experiments yellowish or chocolate-colored upland sandy soil, with red subsoil. This soil The rainfall in -of 1900 CORN, MONROE COUNTY. 'bakes (badly. was excessive. 'There was no black rust in either year. 1900. This is the fourth experiment made by Mr. Watkins according to 'the present plan. (See Bulletin No. 197, p. 274). Most of the tests have sho'wn that phosphate was more important than cotton seed meal and that kainit only increased the yield; however in 1900 kainit was the most effective fertilizer. The table on page 3 4 gives the yields for 1899 and 34 The average results for 4 years show that phosphate gave an average increase of 207, seed meal of 151, and kainit of 70 pounds seed cotton per acre. -of cotton Burnt Corn experiments with cotton. FERTILIZERS. 0 1899. 1900. 0P 00rd Q(2) -U 0 F40 : m ; ;-rd rd KIND.NN j C W ' O 1 2 3 4 Lbs. 20J 240 00 200 200 .240 200 7 8 9~ 10 0 200 240 200 00 200 240 200 200 Lbs. 480 Cotton seed meal...... Acid phosphate......... 556 No fertilizer............264 K~init.......... ...... 280 Cotton seed meal. 768 Acid phosphate...... Cotton seed meal.... 5 4 Kainit .......... Acid phosphate...... 684 Kainit............ 208 No fertilizer........... Cotton seed meal. .. 828 Acid phosphate...... Kainit...... ........ Cotton seed meal.... Acid Lbs 216 292 . 2 526 293 465 .368 Lbs. 348 456 408 2 492 588 476 Lbs. -60 48 2 100 204 100 620 736 648 532 280 164 100 Kainit .... phosphate-., ..... 944 tained in 1900, similar statement for other years having ;previously Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal been published : The following figures refer only to the results ob- was added : To unfertilized plot .....................- 52 lbs. ............... phosphate plot ....... To _.... 76 lbs. To kainit plot......................... To acid phosphate and kainit plot............180 lbs. acid "60 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal......... 62 lbs. 35 Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was aidded: lbs. To unfertilized plot........................48 To cotton seed meal plot...................160 lbs. 28 lbs. To kainit plot .........................To cotton, seed meal and kainit plot..........76 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate...........64 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: 128lbs. To unfertilized plot ...................... Toocotton seed meal plot ................... 264 lbs. lbs. To acid phosphate plot.....................52 To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot.....180 lbs. Average increase with kainit............... EXPERIMENT MADE BY 155 lbs. S. OP C.-E. RIVERS, 6 zMILES HURTSBORO, RUSSELL COUNTY. Dark sandy soil, with yellow subsoil. This test was made in 1900 on flat land that might.be designated as second bottom. The land had been cleared about 40 years ago of its original growth of long leaf pine, but for many years before the experiment. began it had been uncultivated planting and had grown up in broomsedge. The date was late and it was noted that many boll's, especially on. of Plots 9 and 10, did not mature. Phosphate under all' conditions was highly profitable. The average increase 'with 'cotton meal was not quite sufficient to yield a profit ; this poor showing oof cotton seed meal i's probably due to the fact that considerable 'and nitrogen must have accumulated vegetable on tile land while it was uncultivated. On fields in matter 36. constant cultivation 'some cotton seed meal would doubtless have been profitable. Kainit was slightly helpful and as a part of a complete fertilizer, containing all three materials, kainit paid a fair profit. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilizedplot;......................154 lbs. To acid phosphate plot ...................... 30 lbs. To kainit plot ........................... 14 lbs. To acid phosphate and kaini't plot............27 lbs. increase with cotton seed meal.........56 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot.......................240 lbs. 'To cotton seed meal plot .................. 116 lbs. lbs. To kainit plot...........................274 To cotton seed meal and kainit plot..........287 lbs. Average Average increase with acid phosphate..........229 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added : To unfertilized plot....................... 83 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot,...................-57 lbs. To acid phosphate plot ..................... 117 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot......114 lbs. 64 lbs. ~Average increase with kainit.................. EXPERIMENT MADE IN 1899 BY A. M. TROYER, 4 OF A MILE N. OF CALHOUN, LOWNDES 'COUNTY. The soil is described as a loam fairly retentive 'of water and 'as being of a very light reddish color, with bright red su~bsoil. The second growth of trees, removed about :5 years ago, was short leaf and old field pine. In 1896 and 1897 'this field was not cultivated, and in 1898 the crop was oats. Under all conditions acid phosphate was highly profitable, the average increase attributable to phosphate being 434 pounds per acre. Cotton seed meal was generally profitable, but not to the same extent as phosphate. Kainit was not needed. By far the larger profit was obtained on the plot containing both acid phosphate and cotton seed meal. Mr. Troyer also conducted an experiment in 1900 om similar soil, the results 'of which were entirely inconclusive. They may be found in the table on page 52. In 1900 he also 'tested the most promising 'combinations 'of fertilizers on an adjoining farm, on very sandy soil. The fertilizer for this last test was not furnished by the Experiment Station and a detailed report of the amounts \cid 20)3{Cotton seed meal.... ........ 832 126 24. Lb s. 368 36 2s6 4.18 418 480 Lbs. 72 72 15: 200 197 283 Lbs 568 .... 240 Acid phosphate ..... 200 Cotton seed meal........ . 552 528 575 968 704 760 52 0 624 560 Lbs. 40 24 *49 4413 181 239 ILbs. 562 600 416 568 680 668. 808 552 808 818 Lbs. 136 181 125 210 171 283 Lbs. 752 728 568 784 568 410 456 392 352 544 Lbs. 184 160 252 71 -22 28 Lbs. 600 536 360 296 312 272 264 168 Lbs. 240 176 -24 30 28 60 QI. 200 240 8 200 4 K.a in it .......... 200 00 Acid phosphate........... Kainit.......... ......... No fertilizer............... Cotton seed cdpopae...... £ 528 49 448 meal .......... 560 272 461 432 -48 192 160 104 40 256 -40 480 432 312 200 Kainit 200 . .... .... 278 -208 Cotton seed meal.......... 10 240 Acid phosphate.......... 100 Kainit.......'.... ........ 1152 1 264 Sterrett, Dillbinrg, iiarvyn, Oak bowery and Greensboro experiments with. cotton. i r. FERTILIZERS. _________________ STERJIETT. STERRETT. DILLBURG. MARVYN. 0_. BOWERY. GREENSBORO. 1899., I 1900. 1900. 1899. 1900. 1899. 4. IND C5 0(L~~ V00. 0 00.N ON 0N 0 40N V. ~Lbs 328 0 0- 0 0- ~) Lbs. 120 -- 0 Lbs. I. Lbs Cotton seed meal............. 640 S 240. Acid phosphate .............. 3 No fertilizer .. .............. 200 752 00 Lbs ........ 11 10 928 Li's. -184 Lbs.' 976 Lbs. 508 Lbs. 376 264 Lbs. Lbs. 100 Lbs. 584 56 216 1128 16 0 872 .............. 58 501 20 -16 C6 392'. -24 1C Lbs. 168 2W0 00 95 424 . 280...204!6400Kit..........2888 4 8 200 Ctosedma......744 240 Acid phosphate 275 221 ... 1128 1056 656 199 218 816 816 368 448 448 400 432 36 392 75 85 -0 384 416 08 . 117 156 15 088 T0 0 54 520 285 32 32 1 136. 152 .......... 6 20otnsedma......712 ... S S200 Kainit..... ......... 240 Acid phosphat.... ainit...............8 7 200 536 .......... 8 0(0 No fertilizer ...... 200 Cotton seed meal.... 240 (200 9 Acid phosphate Kainit............... . .. ..... 192 400 152 768 232 936 280 876 488 584 10 200 Cotton seed meal.. .... 240 Acid phosphate............ 100 Kainit........ ~ 760 224 912 256 680 312 688, 296 240 -8 536 Calhoun, Greenville, KIx I. .Evergreen, Union Springs and Abbheville experiments with cotton. GREENVILLE 1900. O ON 0 0 C1 FE RTI LI ZERS. N U C) CALHOUN. EVERGREEN. UNION SPRINGS. ABEVILLE. ABBEVILLE. 1900. 1899.. 0 0 O- 1899. O O ON 1899. G 0 0 . O N 0 1900. 0 O 0Q U0 z. 0 C P4 O N 0 0~4 0 . 0134 0d1 04.-4 fl. 4 4- 2 3 4 10 Lbs. 200 240 00 200 200 240 200 240 240 200 00 200 240 200 200 240 100 Cotton seed meal........... Acid .phosphate....... No fertilizer..... ......... ....... Kainit ........... . Cotton seed meal ........ Acid phosphate ............ Cotton seed meal........... Acid phosphate ............ Kainit.......... .......... Lbs. Lbs. 444 80 300 -64 364 408 -7 256 -210 640 123 96 Lbs . 1016 968 960 1144 848 576 448 Lbs. 563 520 52 696 400 128 Lbs. 882 764 612 808 840 896 1016* 904* 1420* 1137"6"1 4244 270 152 196 228 284 404 Lbs. 152 20 70 Lbs. 320 216 137 274 276 276, 184 144 208 456 469 368 336 608 568 912 496 568 704 376 -96 -80 656 440 552 661 640 416 31[2 Lbs-. 152 40 27237 21t 71 L . 664 620 624 79 272 400 No fertilizer..... .......... Cotton seed meal..... Acid ii ........ phosphate ............ . 4 880 768 432 320 516* 776 944 72 240 584 712 272 232 Cotton seed meal........ Acid phosphate ......... Kainit ........ 6441 24 462* *Not comparable with Plots 1-6, being in different part of field. BULLETIN No. 114. MAY, MY 1901. 91 ALABAMA .Agricultural Experiment Station OF THE AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE, AUBURN. Feedin Experiment with Dairy Cows. F. By J. DUGGAR AND R. W. CLARK. MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA. THE BROWN PRINTING 0O. 1901. COMMITTEE OF TRUSTEES ON EXPERIMENT STATION. THOS. WILLIAMS........................................Wetunpka. JONATHAN HARALSON.......................................Selma. STATION COUNCIL. WM. LEROY BROUN.................... .......... ........... Director President. P. H. MELL................... and Botanist. Agriculturist. B. B. Ross......................................Chemist. C. A. ,CARY, D. V. M...........................Veterinarian. J. F. DUGGAR ...................................... F. S. EARLE.........................Biologist J. T. ANDERSON ............................... and Horticulturist. Associate Chemist. ASSISTANTS.. C. L. HARE...............................First W. C. Assistant Chemist. NIXON........................... H. S. HOUGHTON...... ..... .............. Second. Assistant Chemist. Third Assistant Chemist. ".....Assistant Agriculturist. T. U. CULVER......................... Superintendent of Farm. R. W. CLARK......................... C. F. AUSTIN. ... . ... . ... . . ... . .. .. .. .. .. . .. A s sist ant Horticulturist. The Bulletins of this Station will be sent free to any citizen of the State on application to the Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama. Feeding Experiments with Dairy Cows BY J. F. DUGGAR and R. W. CLARK. Summary. With cotton seed at $8 per ton, cotton seed meal at $20, cotton seed hulls at $4, and sorghum hay at $6.67, butter was produced at a lower cost per pound on a ration consisting chiefly of raw cotton seed and hay than on one made up principally of cotton seed meal and hulls. The cows did not greatly relish cotton seed and hence ate less than was desirable of the ration containing this; hence on the larger amounts eaten the oil mill ration afforded a larger daily yield of both milk and butter than did the farm-grown ration. In two experiments the average daily amount of milk per cow was 17.5 pounds from the cotton seed ration and 24.3 pounds from the cotton seed meal ration; the daily production of butter per cow averaged .93 of a pound with the cotton seed and 1.19 with the oil mill ration, this being an increase of 38 per cent in milk and 28 per cent in butter. Nevertheless the low cost of the cotton seed ration made it the more economical, the average cost of the food required to make a pound of butter being only 10.4 cents when this ration was given and 15.3 cents when the hulls and meal ration was employed. On account of the larger amounts of food consumed, the cows while receiving the cotton seed meal ration gained nearly half a pound a day in weight, while the cows eating cotton seed in smaller amounts lost .8 of a pound per day. The cheapest butter was made by a Jersey heifer with her first calf, the food to make one pound of butter costing in this case only 6.4 cents when cotton seed was fed and 11.2 cents when cotton seed meal was given. The manure (liquid and solid) dropped during the 16 hours of each day which the cows passed in the barn was carefully saved, analyzed, and applied to various crops. The amount of manure, including sawdust bedding, per cow per night (of 16 hours) averaged 33.9 pounds when cotton seed was fed and 48.3 pounds when cotton :seed meal was fed. The manure made from the cotton seed and sorghum hay ration contained 10.7 pounds of nitrogen per ton; that from cotton seed meal and hulls contained 16.6 pounds, an increase of 55 per cent. in the amount of nitrogen per ton. In percentages of phosphoric acid and potash the two manures were practically identical. For one or two days the cows were kept stabled during the entire 24 hours and the amount of manure thus obtained (exclusive of bedding) was about double the amount secured by stabling the cows for 16 hours per day. About one-half the manure was dropped out of doors. Green rye at the rate of 52 to 54 pounds per day proved a satisfactory substitute for either sorghum hay or cotton seed hulls. While the cows ate green rye the amount of milk slightly increased but the milk was slightly poorer than during the preceding period when only dry food was consumed. An upland corn field from which the ears had been harvested, and in which cowpeas had been drilled between the corn rows, was grazed first by milk cows and 57 later by dry cows, the milk cows meantime receiving 3 pounds of cotton seed meal per day. On this pasturage the yield of milk was 15.8 per cent greater and of butter 9.5 per cent greater than when the cows with the same grain feed ran on a good pasture of bermuda grass, carpet grass, lespedeza, etc. The value of the product of butter and of the increase in live weight of the cows averaged $4.47 per acre of corn and pea field grazed, after deducting the cost of the cotton seed meal fed at the same time. INTRODUCTORY. Under some conditions it is practicable for the dairyman to purchase a considerable proportion of the food which his cows consume. However, the temptation is to rely to too great an extent on purchased foods. These can be profitably used to a certain extent but rather as supplements to foods produced on the farm than as substitutes for farm-grown food. It is believed that any marked development 'of dairying and of beef production in the South is conditioned on the increased reliance on the foods which the fields and pastures produce. The, feeder who buys thin cattle at a low price and, after a few months feeding, sells them at a higher price per pound, relies almost wholly upon cotton seed meal and hulls, but the stock raiser cannot afford to make the oil mill his principal depot of supplies. Bearing in mind this necessity for avoiding large expenditures for purchased foods, we have planned a line of experiments intended to ascertain the extent to which farm-grown foods can be relied on in the feeding of dairy cows and the best crops for use as food in effecting this end. The first experiments here reported are preliminary to this investigation and involve a comparison of a rations 58 :nade up chiefly of the most economical of all purchased foodstuffs, cotton seed meal and hulls, with one consistchiefly of cotton seed and sorghum hay, both of which latter materials can be grown on every farm in the cotton belt. dng PURCHASED VS. FARM-GROWN RATION IN 1900. The farm-grown ration consisted of cotton seed and .sorghum hay, with small amounts of wheat bran and corn meal added to improve the palatability and to increase the amount of cotton seed consumed. The enwas to make each cow eat daily at least 9 pounds raw cotton seed, 10 pounds sorghum hay, 3 pounds wheat bran, and 3 pounds corn meal;.and the foods were mixed these proportions. As much of the mixture was ;given to each cow as she would eat clean. The purchased, or "oil mill" ration consisted of a mixture of 5.25 pounds of cotton seed meal, 10 pounds of cotton seed hulls, 3 pounds of wheat bran, and 3 pounds ,of corn meal. This mixture was also fed in amounts as large as the cows would eat and the quantity consumed cwas greater than had been expected when the experiment was planned. The following prices for food stuffs used in calculating the cost of butter are assumed as average prices in this State for a series of years, except that sorghum hay, for which there is no market, is charged at a price somewhat above its average cost of production: $ 8.00 per ton. ,Cotton seed ..................... . 20.00 per ton. Cotton seed meal ................... 4.00 per ton. 'Cotton seed hulls ................... 18.00 per ton. Wheat bran ...................... d PT 7027 7028 7029 7030 7031 7032 7033 7034 7035 919................... 920................... 921....... ........... 922...................{ 923 ... :............... 924................... 925..... ............. 926 ................... 927................. 1. 70 1.62 2.77 18.27 1.36 19.17 15.99 1.R 17.07 1. 6C 1.34 .96 1.56 16.55 2.24 14.49 .87 16.63 7036 7037 7038 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 928 .................... 929............ 930 .......... 931 '.......... 932............. 933...................... 934...................... 935....................... ...... .13.50 .. . ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 9.35 2.70 2.18 1l8O 1.64 2.06 18.70 15.68 12.58 2.28 15.09 1.49 17.50 2 32 16.46 1.49 16.82 1.87 18.32 1.76 17.89 .... 18.741 1.72 ......... 1.32 ......... 6.04....... 7.46 4.54 4.04 1.76 2.76 1.40 1.60 1.58 2.02 1.46 6.25 6.85 6.00 5.85 6.45 8.15 8.15 13.40 8.50 7.60 6.33 5.96 6.09 3.81 4.46 2.64 3.89 5.34 5.34 2 90 7031) 7040 7041 7042 7048 74 936........... .. . .. .. .. ~7045 7046 7047 .. .. 937..... ............... 938..................... .. .. . 1.06....... 2.66 3.20 1.10 2.20 1.12 18.04 2.11 18.77 .939........... .. Guaranteed Analyses of Commercial Fertilizers, Filed in the Office of the Commissioner of Agriculture by Dealers andf Manufacturers. UUARAħ\TEED ,xPIIOSPDORIC . Z ANALYSIS. ACID j Name of Fertilizer or Chemical, by Whom Manufactured, and Manufactured.oZ ~~Where C) r"i2 CW y M0 Ow U - 19X0 Oct. 1 Mobile Acid Phosphate & Potash, manufactured by Mobile Phosphate Company, Mobile, Ala ... ........... ........ Mobile Dissolved Bone and Potash, manufactured by Mobile o3 Phosphate Company, Mobile, Ala ........... ... Mobile Alkali Bone Phosphate, manufactured by Mobile Phosphate Company, Mobile, Ala....... Mubile Ammoniated Fertilizer, manufactured by Mobile Phosphate Company, Mobile, Ala ..... Genuine German Kainit, manufactured by Mobile Phosphate ..... . .. ..... Company, Mobile, Ala ........... Mobile 446 Special Truck, manufactured by Mobile Phosphate ................... Company, Mobile, Ala. Mobile H. G. Truck Fertilizer, manufactured by Mobile Phosphiate Company, Mobile, .... [. X. L. Acid Phosphate, manufactured b 200 200 200 200 2.06-3 200 8-10 8-10 6-8 2-4 2-4 2-3 2-3 2-3 15-2 1-2 2-3 4-5 1-2 12-l3 11 16 12 17 12 17 15 7723 40 12 13 19 26 28 36 12 2460 4840 14 2-4 7-9 2-4 1-2 2-3 2-3 200 3.30-4.50 3-4 1-2 1-2 2-3 4-8 200 6.60-8 4-5 obile Phosphate Company, Mobile, Ala ...................... .... 200 10-K2 English Acid [hosphate, manufactured by Mobile Phosphate Company, Mobile, Ala ........................ . 200.......12-13 Mobile Standard Guano, manufactured by Mobile Phosphate Company, Mobile, Ala .............................. 200 1.65-2.05 6-7 .......... Ala..... 4-6 2-3 2-3 2-3 1.50-21 2-3 14 16 20 00 14 62- Oct. 1 KKK Ammoniated Soluble Bone, manufactured by Mobile Phosphate Company, Mobile, Ala ...... .... . .............. Eclipse Soluble Guano, manufactured by Mobile Phosphate Coipany, Mobile, Ala.......................................200 Mobile Soluble Bone and Potash, manufactured by Mobile Phosphate Company, Mobile, Ala .............................. 20085-1.25 8-10 7-8 2-3 2-3 1.50-2 1.50-? 1-2 1-2 13 38- 1.65-2.05 200 ....... 18 50 14 62- CD Mobile Double Eagle Guano, manufactured by Mobile Phosphate Company, Mobile, Ala Rhodes Blood and Bone, manufactured by Mobile, Phosphate Company, Mobile, Ala.................................. Mobile Blood Bone and Potash Compound, manufactured by Mobile Phosphate Company, Mobile, Ala ....... Patapsco Guano Co's XX Acid Phos and Potash, manufactured by Georgia Chemical Works, Augusta, Ga........... ....... Acid Phos and 4% Potash, manufactured by Georgia Chemical Works,. Augusta, Ga .. ................ Bone and Potash, manufactured by Georgia Chemical Works, Augusta, Ga.........................................200........8 Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Georgia Chemical Wcrks, Augusta,Ga.. ............. . ................... ....... Dissolved Bone Phosphate, manufactured by Georgia Chemical Works, Augusta. Ga ............... . Mastodon Ammo. soluble Phos., manufactured by Georgia Chemical Works, Augusta, Ga...... .. ............. ...... Georgia Formula, manufactured by Georgia Chemical .Works, AugustaGa.............................................. Mascot Soluble Bone, manufactured by Georgia Chemical Works, Augusta, Ga ....... ... .......... ..... XX Acid Phosphate with Potash, manufactured by Georgia Chemical Works. Augusta, Ga.... ... 8-10 2-3 2-3 3-4 2-3 20 00 13 001700 15 62- 2001.65-2.50 7.508.50 2001.65-2.50 6-7 201.65-2.50 200 .. 2.501.50=2 3 50 2-3 1.50-2 2-3 1.50-2 2 3 2 2-3 2-3 4 4 2 6-7 8 2 2 2 21 14 20 14 20 14 00 6200 6000 00 200........5 12 00 12 00 200..... 10 2 2 2 2 1 1300 13 00 200........11 200 200 200 200 1.65 1.65 .82 7 7 8 8 3 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 4 16 62 14 62 13 30 14 00 Acid Phosphate with 4% Potash, manufactured by Georgia Chemical Works. Augusta, Ga ............................. 200......... Bone and Potash, manufactured by Georgia Chemical Works, Augusta, Ga ............ ............................... 200....... ................ ... 5 8 3 2 2 2 4 2 12 (0 12 00 Guaranteed Analyses of Commercial Fertilizers, Filed in the Office of the Commissioner of Agriculture by Dealers and Man ufacturers. I Name of Fertilizer or Chemical, by Whom Manufactured. and Where Manufactured.° G 1900- GUARANTEED ANALYSIS. PHOSPHORIC ACID. a G '' 0 U1 0 U1 0 GA0 e o Oct. 1 Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Georgia Chemical Works, Augusta, Ga................................ ..... ....... 200. .. Dissolved Bone Phosphate, manufactured by Georgia Chemical Augusta, -G...... ............. 200........11 MRuriate of.Potash, manufactured by Georgia Chemical Works, 10 2 2 2 2 1 .... $1300 13 00 48 00 Works, Augusta, Ga....200......................48 Genuine German Kainit, manufactured by Georgia Chemical Works,, Augusta, Ga....... .......................... 200. . .. . Patapsco Guano Company's Patapsco Guano, manufactured bye Georgia Chemical Works, Augusta, Ga...........200 i . 6~ 7 3 2 Ammoniated Dissolved Bone, manufactured by Georgia Chemical Works, Augusta, Ga ........................ .......... .. 200 1.65 7 1 1 Baltimore Soluble Bone, manufactured by Georgia Chemical Works, Augusta, Ga...... ............................. 200 .82 8 2 2 Muriate of Potash, manufactured by Georgia Chemical Works, Augusta, Ga.... .................... ... ............. 200 ....... ....... ..... Genuine German Kainit, manufactured by Georgia Chemical I Works. Augusta, Ga ............. 290............ .... .... .. Pon Pon Crop 12 2 2 1 48 12 12 00 16 62 14 62 13 30 48 00 12 00 Georgia Chemical Works, Augusta, Ga....... .............. Grower-Patapsco Guano Co's, manufactured by ............. 200 1.00 7 3 1 2 14 80 Sea, Gull Guano, manufactured by Georgia Chemical Works, Augusta, Ga......................................... .. 200 1.00 1A.1d. Am. Diss. Bone and Potash, manufactured by Georgia Chemical Works, Augusta, Ga ................................... 200 1.65 1o2% Dissolved Bone and Potash, manufactured by Georgia Chemical Works, Augusta, Ga..................... .......... 200........10 High Grade Blood and Bone, manufactured by Armour Fertilizer Works, Kansas City, Kas ............................... .. 200 7 manufactured by Armour Fertilizer Works, Kansas City, .... 200 7.50 Fine Ground Beef Bone, manufactured by Armour Fertilizer Works, Kansas City, Kas........................... ....200 2.50 ° ure Raw Bone Meal, manufactured by Armour Fertilizer Works, Kansas City, Kas.....................................200 4 A-cidulated Animal Bone, manufactured by .rmour Fertilizer 7 6 3 3 2 1 1 2 1 1480 14 62 00 1.50......12 Special, Kas............................................ Works, Kansas City, Kas............. 3 2 50 3 2.50 22 60 23 50 1950 17 20 .... 12.50 12.50 7 6 ... Ammoniated Bone and Potash, manufactured by Armour Fertilizer Works, Kansas City, Kas... ........................... 200 Blood, Bone and Potash, manufactured by Armour Fertilizer 'Uorks, Kansas City, Kas.................. ............. 167 Fertilizer No. 583, manufactured by Armour Fertilizer Works, Kansas City, Kris .... .. .... ... .. 167 ..... "200 2 2.50 12.50 4 4.50 3 3 1 2260 15 00 3 4 4 2.50 1.50 6 5 5 .5.50 3 3 3 2.50 2 2.501 2 1.50 7 3 6 5 2720 22 20 21 Go 17 62 Fertilizer No. Fertilizer 386. Fertilizer No. 285, manufactured by Armour Fertilizer Works, Kansas City, Kas manuafactured by Armour .............................. Fertilizer Works, 167 Kansas City, 167 No. 282, manufactured by Armour Fertilizer Works, Kas ............................ ...... Kansas City, Kas ........... ........................ ... 167 Fertilizer No. 281, man ufactured by Armour Fertilizer Works; Kansas City, RKa:............ .......... ...... ... 167 Fertilizer No. 212, matnfactured by Armour Fertilizer Wor~ks; Kansas City, Kas 'ertiizera Nob271, mnufactuired 1.50 1.50 5.50 5,-50 2.50 2.50 2 1.50 1.50 1150 2 1 2 . 14 62 1362 by ..... itour Pert11Zer 1Xans~i y as Werkd, . 167 16 1 ... ..... ! ,....leele:!!l~eea!t7 o a 5 13 62 12 62 180 2 j. Guaranteed Analyssc of Co~riercial Fertilizers, Filed in the office of the Manufacturers. Commissioner of Agriculture by Dealers and GUARANTEED ANALYSES .PHOSPHORIC ACID. Name of ertilizer or Chemical, by Whom Manufactured, and Where Manufactured. 04-a,~2 _____ ____ ____ _____Z 0 0 CZS 1900 Oct. 1 African Cotton Grower, manufactured by Armour Works, Kansas City, Kansas......................167 Fertilizer 2.50 3.50 5 3.50 4 2.50 1 1 3 4 1 $ 19 (0 19 40 12 20 Potato Fertilizer, manufactured by Armour Fertilizer Works, Kansas City, Kansas... ................................ 167 Fertilizer No. 721, manufactured by Armour Fertilizer Works, Kansas City. Kansas.......................................167 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 4 4 4 5 3 1.50 Fertilize~r No. 722, manufactured by Armour Fertilizer Works, Karnsas City. Kansas... ................ .................... 167 Fertilizer No. 821, manufactured by Armour, Fertilizer Works, " 3 3 3 1.50 1.50 1.50 2 1 2 13 20 13.20 14 20 ""Acid and Potash, manufactured by Armour Fertilizer Works', Kansas City, Kansas City, Kansas.......... ........ ..... ................ 167 822, manufactured by Armour Fertilizer Works, Kansas City, Kansas ............... ............... 167 Ammo D. B. and Potash, manufactured by Armour Fertilizer Works, Kansas City, Kansas. ....... ............. 167 Fertilizer No. 1.50 6.50 7 3.50 3 2 1.50 2 2 16 20 12 00 Acid and Potash manufactured by Armour Firtilizer Works, Kansas City. Kansas ........................ ................. 467 6 "Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Armour Fertilizer Works, Kansas City, Kansas .......................... 200..;...... 8 Kansas. ........ ............... ............... 167........ 2 4 1 2 4 .:. 12 00 12 00 Old Plantation Guano, manufactured by Union Fertilizer 167 .... ......... na. ....... , Co., Atlnta, G Union Cotton Grower, manufactured by Union Fertilizer Co., 200 ....................... Atlanta, Ga.................. Dixie Guano, manufactured by Union Fertilizer Company, AtAnimal Bone and Peruvian Compound, manufactured by Union ... Fertilizer Co., Atlanta. Ga.............. Merrimac Guano, manufactured by Union Fertilizer Co., Atlanta, ............................... Ga.......... Blood, Bone and Potash, mnufactured by Union Fertilizer Co., Atlanta, Ga .......................................... Free Silver 16 to 1 Compound, manufactured by Union Fertilizer Co., Atlanta, Ga .. . U. C. Dis: Bone, manufactured by Union Fertilizer Co., Atlanta, ..... .. ........ G........ Union Potash Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Union Fertilizer Co., Atlanta, lanta, Ga. ........... ... 1.64.7 1.64.7 6 6 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1461 14 61 200 164.7"6 1461 200 200 200 200 82.4 1.61.7 82.4 82.4 7 6 7 7 3 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 13 1 1461 13 31 13 31 200........7 3 3 7 7 9 9 3 2 2 2 22 2 1200 Merrimac Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Union Fertilizer Co. .................. Atlanta, Ga............ 200 . . . . Bone and Potash Mixture, manufactured by Union Fertilizer Co., 20......7 Ga...................................... 209).... Co., AtlantaGa........................................... Merrimac 1Potaush Acid Phosphate, manufacture by Union Fer200 ....... ........ Ga............. tilizer Co Atlanta, Co., 200. Atlanta. Ga ........................................... Co., .200....... Atlanta, Ga............... ...................... Dixie Potash Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Union Fertilizer :........:..... } Union Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Union =Fertilizer Dixie Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Union Fertilizer 1200 12 00 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 .. 2 12 00 12 00 . :.12 00 , '9 12 00 Atlanta, Ga .............................................. 200....... 6 2 2 4 12 00 Guaranteed Analyses of Commercial Fertilizers, Filed in the Office of the Commissioner of Agriculture by Dealers and Manufacturers-Continued. GUARANTEE]) ANALYSIS. PHOSPHORIC ACID. a a Name of FErtilize- or Chemical, by oP-4 Whom Manufactured, and o '.m.i 4 Where Mian ifactured i"00 Oct. 1 Union High Grade Acid Phosphate and Potash, manufactured by Union Fertilizer Co., Atlanta, Ga ....................... 200....... Taylor's Anti-Sharp-Shooter, manufactured by Union Fertilizer 82.4 Co., Atlanta, Ga.................200 Star Brand, manufactured by Union Fertilizer Company, Atlanta,, Ga.............................200 82.4 . U. 6 7 7 2 3 3 2 2-3 2 2 2 2 1-2{ 2 1 1 4 2-3 $1000 13 31 1331 12 00 14 61 C. Potash Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Union Fertilizer Co., Atlanta, Ga............................................ 200 .. 6 1.647Read's Soil'Food, manufactured by Read Phosphate Co., Nashyulle, Tenn .................. .............. 2c0.. 2.47 6-8 Farmer's Special Manure, manufactured by Read Phosphate Co.,I Nashville, Tenn .. ....... ........... .................... 200 82-1.64 8-10 1.647-1 Read's Cotton Flower. manufactured by read Phosphate Co., 2-3 1-2 1-2 3-4 3-4 15 30 16 60 Wynn's Pacific Guano, manufactured by Read Phosphate Co., Nashville. foi Nashville, Tenno.. ................ ............ 200 2.47 6-8 Nashville, Tenno.................... ... .......... 200 Read's Blood and Bone, manufactured by Read Phosphate Co., '.ead's Matchless Cotton Grower, manufactured by Read Phog1 hat e Co., Nashville, Tenn. ... ,,. 200 i................. 1.6472.47 1.6472.47 3-4 2-3 2-3 6-8 6-8 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-~2 13 60 13 60 .. .. ,.. .. 200 1.6472.47 6-S 2-3 1-2 1-2 13 61 1,647 Phos, Read's Farmers' Friend Fertilizer, manufactured by phate Co., Nashvile, Tenn ............................... 200 , 82"2.47 6-8 Read's Blood, Bone and Potash, manufactured by Read Phosphate 1.647 200 .. ........ Co., Nashville, Tenn......................... ' 1.647Read's Blood and Bone and No. 1, manufactured by Read Phosphate Co., Nashville, Tenn.... ............................ 200 .82- 2.47 6-8 Read's Blood and Bone Special, manufactured by Read Phosphate 7-10 1.647 200 .......... Co., Nashville, Tenn..................... Read's Alkaline Bone, manufactured by Read Phosphate Co., 200........8-10 ... Nashville, Tenn...................... Read's Bone and Potash, manufactured by Read Phosphate Co., 8-10 . :200 ...... Nashville, Tenn............................. manufactured by Read Phosphate Read's Special Potash Read 3.4 1-2 1-2 1481 13 30 6,.8 23 1-2 1-2 2-3 3-4 1-2 1-2 2-3 1-2 14 61 13 30 2-3 Mixture, ..... 2-3 1-2_2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3 1-2 2-3 12 00 12 00 Read's Acid Phosphate and Pot., manufactured by Read Phosphate 6-8 200 Co., Nashville, Tenn................................ Read's Matchless Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Read Phos200........10-12 phate'o., Nashville, Tenn.... ....... ............... Read's XXX Dissolved Bone, manufactured by Read Phosphate 200.......10-12 . . Co., Nashville, Tenn .......................... Read's High Grade Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Read Phos200"....".... 10-12 phate Co , Nashville, Tenn.................. ........... 1.647Read's H. G. Amo. Dissolved Bone, manufactured by Read Phos-. 2.47 8-10 ... 200 phate Co., Nashville, Tenn............................ 2 .05Satin Staple Guano. manufactured by Read Phosphate Co., Nash3.07 6-8 200 ville, Tenn................ ............................. 1.02Mu~sing Link Guano, manufactured by Read Phosphate Co., Nash1.53 6-8 200 .. ... ... .......... .... ville, Tenn ...... . 823Up to Date Guano, manufactured by Read Phosphate Co., Nash1.23 6-8 200 ............... yulle, Tenn ... ........... Peterkin's Improved Formula, manufactured by Read Phosphate Dissolved Bone and Potash, manufactured by Read Phosphate Co., Nashville, Tenn ........................ Co., Nashville, Tenn...... ............................. . .200....... 200. 6-7 Co., Nashville, Tenn ..... ... .. 200.......8-10 1-2 1-2 2-3 4-6 4-6 14 00 12 00 12 00 3 4-5 2-3 4-6, 4-6 4-6 4-6 2-3 2-3 1-2 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3 1-2 13 00 14 00 16 61 17 75 14 85 13 30 14 00 12 00 8-10 4-5 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3 Guaranteed Analyses of Commercial Fertilizers, filed in the Office of the Commissioner of Agriculture, by Dealers ana Manufacturers, GUARANTEE ANALYSIS.m1 PHOSPHORIC ACID.: " 'Name of Fertilizer or Chemical, by Whom Where Manufactured. Manufactured, and 4Q 02) 0 1960 Oct. 1 Alvailable Bone Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Read Phosphate Co,~ Nashville. Tenn. ... ............... 200....... Electric Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Read Phosphate Co., 9-10 5-6 4-5 2-3. 2-3........12 $ 14 00 00 Nashville, Tenn ....................................... Read's Bone and Potash, manufactured by Read Phosphate Co., 200........8-9 200........ Nashville. Tenn , ................... ............. Adair's Acid Phosphate, manufactured by A. D. Adair and Mc200....... Bros., Atlanta, Ga.................................. Acid Phosphate and Pot., manufactured by A. D. Adair and McCarty Bros.. Atlanta, Ga .................. ................ 200 .. ..... 200 McCarty Bros., Atlanta, Ga ............................... "Adair's Soluble Pacific Guano, manufactured by A. D. Adair and McCarty b'4McCarty's 8-10 2-3 10-12 2-3 12 Carty 7-9 7-9 5-8 7-8 5-8 3-4 3-4 3-4 3-4. 2-4 2-4 2-4 2-4 .. Ammoniated Dissolved Bone, manufactured by A. D. 1-2 2-3 2-3, 11 0014 00 14 90- 101300 004v 00 17 OQ~ 16 60, 19 001 Adair and .. ... 200 1.75- Planters' Soluble Fertilizer, manufactured by A. ID.Adair and Mc- Bros.., Atlanta, Ga.... .................... 2.50 1.752.50 Carty Bros., Atlanta, Ga. ................................ Soluble Bone. manufactured by D. Adair and Mc' 200 CJarty Bros., Atlanta, Ga.. ............... .............. Adair's special Potash manufactured bcy D. Adai McCrty Brostoiintl%.dbl bb dtdb bd dbd bd be bb ., 20 A. 300 1.752.50 831125 e e 3-4: and Mixture,. A. 20 7-8 3-4 - 5i8.3-4 g=4 !13 2-4 2-3' 1--2 4-F! 14.90-; 17 ('11 888 13 011 t0- 4 R;12 15 0C lAdair's Formula, manufactured by A. D. Adair and McCarty112-00 Bros,, Atlanta, Ga...... .... ............... 200 *. McCarty's Potash Formula, manufactured by A. D. Adair and McCarty Bros., Atlanta, Ga ......................... Potash Compound, manufactured by A. D. Special Bone Adair and MlcCarty Bros., Atlanta, Ga.........200.7-8 Adair's Soluble Bone and Potash, manufactured by A. D. Adair and McCarty Bros., Atlanta, Ga............................200.........7-8 Adair's H. G. Dissolved Bone, manufactured by A. D. Adair and ... McCarty Brcs., Atlanta, Ga...................... Furman Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Furman Farm Tmprovement Co., Atlanta, Ga............................200....... Furman Acid Phosphate and Potash. manufactured by Furman Farm Improvement Co., Atlanta, Ga.........................200 manufactured by Furman Farm Furman High Grade Improvement Co ,Atlanta, Ga ................................ Buffalo Bone Fertilizer, manufactured by Furman Farm Improve.................................. ment Co., Atlanta, Ga.. Furman Soluble Bone, manufactured by Furman Farm Improvement Co., Atlanta, Ga..................................... Farish Furman Formula, manufactured by Furman Farm Im- . .7-9 7-9 3-4 3-4 3-4 3-4 2-4 2-4 2-4 2-4 2-4 2-4 2-4 2-4 2-. 2-4 2-4 2-3 2-3 4-6 2-3 15 00 12.0015 00 and 200...... 17 00 12 0014 00- 200 9-12 7-9 7-9 1 75- 3-4 3-4 3-4 3-4 3-4 3-4 3-4 Fertilizer, 1-2 2-3 2-3 1-2 2-3 15 00 12 0015 00 10 oo13 00 Ii oo14 16 90- 00 200 200 2.50 1.752.50 7-8 5-8 7-8 7-9 200 88-1.25 2C......... provement Co., Atlanta., Furman's H. G. Dissolved Bone, manufactured by Furman Farm .... ............. Improvement Co., Atlanta. Ga........... Swifts Special G. Guano, manufactured bySwift's Fertilizer W'ks, .............. ................................. Atlanta, Swvift's Monarch H. G. Guano, manufactured by Swift's Fertilizer .............. .......... Works, Atlanta, Ga ... ............. G. Guano, manufactured by Swift's FerSwift's Cotton King .... .......... ........ tilizer Works, Atlanta, Ga............ Swift's Eagle H. G, Guano, manufactured by Swift's Fertilizer .... ........... Works, Atlanta, Ga ...................... Swift's Golden Harvest S. G. Guano, manufactured by 'Swift's . ... :.... . . .. A . Fertilizer Works, Atlanta) Ga.. Ga.............................. 19 00) 14 9000 13 3816 00 12 00-, 17 15 00 12 00200........9-12 200 200 200 200 200 4.12 3.29 2.47 1.65 1.65 7-9 6-8 7-9 7-9 6-8 3-4 2-4 2-4 2-4 2-4 2-4 2-4 1-3 1-3 1-3 1-3 1-3 .. 15,00 Ga 3 4 2 2 2' 24.03 21.21 17 92 16 62 14 62 H. ~6taa~eieed A.alyg~a oi Co ranrrci 1 ittiliz~s af Fled hI theg OfgIESB Cot 6b Manufacturer's. nei t~ ~~&o9 ANALYSIS, GUARANTEED PHOSPHORIC ACID. Name of Fertilize. or Chemical, by Whom Manufactured, and Where Manufactured. biD X4 4.l . . 0 B0 ID 0 u1 + . 1900 Oct. 1 Swift's Pioneer S. G. Guano, manufactured by Swift's Fertilizer Works, Atlanta, Ga.. ................................ 200 1.24 Swift's Cotton Plant S G. Guano, manufactured by Swift's Fer-00 200 1.65 ....... tilizer Works, Atlanta Ga........ ............... Swift's Plow Boy S G. Guano, manufactured by Swift's Fertilizer 200 .82 ..................... Works, Atlanta, Ga.......... Swift's Homestead H. G. P. P., manufactured by Swift's Fer200........ .. .......... tilizer Works, Atlanta, Ga.... Swift's Plantation S. G. P. & P., manufactured by Swift's Fer- 7-9 7-9 7-9 8-10 8-10 8-10 2-4 2-4 2-4 2-4 2-4 2-4 1-3 1-3 1-3 1-3 1-3 1-3 1 $ 14 47 1 1 4 4 2 14 62 13 30 14 00 14 00 12 00 & tilizer Works, Atlanta, Ga........................ tilizer Works, Atlanta, Ga ..... 200....... 200....... Swift's Wheat Grower S. G. P. & P., manufactured by Swift's FerSwift's Atlanta L. G. P. & P., manufactured by Swift's Fertilizer 200....... 8-10 . ....... Works. Atlanta, Ga..... Swift's Capital H. G. A. Phos., manufactured by Swift's Fertilizer Works,. Atlanta, Ca....0 ................. 20........ 010-12 Swift's Chattahoochie S. G. A. Phos., manufactured by Swift's 200........ 10-12 Fertilizer Works, Atlanta, Ga............................ .................. 2-4 2-4 2-4 1-3 1-3 1-3 ,.. 1 11 0014 00 12 00 J3t. 1900 Swift's Empire Std. Guano, manufactured by Swift's Fertilizer .......... 200 1.65 Co., Atlanta, Ga........................... Swift's Dixie Std. Phos. and Pot., manufactured by Swift's Fertilizer Co., Atlanta, Ga.200.......8-40 Swift's German Kainit, manufactured by Swift's Fertilizer Co., 1 ...... ... Atlanta, Ga ........... Swift's Ground Bone and Blood, manufactured by Swift's Fer............ 200 13.18 ............. tilizer Co., Atlanta. Ga. Swift's Muriate Potash, manufactured by Swift's Fertilizer Co.. Atlanta, Ga..............200......... Swift's Ground Tankage, manufactured by Swift's Fertilizer Co.. I 6-8 2-4 1-3 2-4 1.-3 2 2 14 62 1200 1 6 % 6 ........ Ano.. 12 ...... 50 11 00 36 00 ......... Amo.......9% 50 00 22 46 Atlanta, a.............. 200 7.31 CD Swift's Nitrate of Soda, manufactured by Swift's Fertilizer Co., ............... Atlanta, Ga........................ Bone and Potash, manufactured by Louisville Fertilizer Co., Lou............................. isville, Ky ............ Eagle Ammoniated Bone, manufactured by Louisville Fertilizer Co., Louisville, Ky ................ Eagle Beef, Blood and Bone, manufactured by Louisville Fertilizer Co., Louisville, Ky ............................... Teague's Beef Blood and Bone, manufactured by Louisville Fertilizer Co., Louisville. Ky.............................200 Teague's Bone and Potash, manufactured by Louisville Fertilizer Co., Louisville, Ky...................................... Teague's Acid Phos., manufactured by Louisville Fertilizr Co., Louisville. Ky..................... ........ ............ Eagle Guano, manufactured by Louisville Fertilizer Co., Louis... ................ ville, Ky........................ Eagle Dissolved Bone, manufactured by Louisville Fertilizer Co., Louisville, Ky............ ................................. Eagle Acid Phos., manufactured by Louisville Fertilizer Co., Ox Potash Formula, manufactured by Tennessee Chemical Co., 1.ashville, Louisville, Ky .............................. ... ......... 200 15.65 200....... 200 165 Amo....... 4 1 ... 2 43 83 1200 6 7 7 7 8 7 10 8 200 .82 .82 3 3 3 1 3 4 4 3 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 . 1 1 2 .. 13 29 13 29 12 00 12 00 16 62 14 00 12 00 200........ 200........ '200 1.65 2 . . 200........ 200......... 200......... Tenn,..... .............. .... ....... ...... 7 4 14:00 Guaranteed Analyses of Commercial Fertilizers, Filed in the Office of the Commissioner of Agriculture Manufacturers. GUARANTEED ANALYSIS. by Dealers and ada ' PHFOSPH-ORICl ACITD Name of Fertilizer or Chemical, by Whom Manufactured, and Where Manufactured. P. ; nc z a 19(0 Oct. 1 Ox Potash Special, manufactured by Tennesee Chemical Co., ...................................... Nashville, Tenn Ox Potash Formula, manufactured by Tennessee Chemical Co., Nashville, Tenn.......................................200.......8 Amnoniated Bone, manufactured by Tennessee Chemical Ox H. Co.,Nashville,Tenn .................................. Ox Cotton Grower, Manufactured by Tennessee Chemical Co., .... ......... ......... ....... Nashville. Tenn ........... Ox Special Wheat and Corn Guano, manufactured by Tennesee ............. Chemical Co., Nashville, Tenn............... Ox Bone with Ammonia and Potash, manufactured by Tennessee U. 200........6 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 2 1 1 1 $ 12 00 14 00 1662 15 62 15 38 13 38 200 200 200 200 1.65 1 65 .85 .85 6 6 9 6 4 4 3 4 Ox Slaughter House Bone, manufactured by Tennessee Chemical .. 200 Co., Nashville, Tenn..... .............................. )x H. G. Diss Bone, manufactured by Tennessee Chemical Co., Nashville, Tenn Chemical Co., Nashville, Tenn ..... ............... ..... .. 1.65 6 2 6 1 1 2 14 62' 14 00 Ox Alkaline Bone, manufactured by Tenne3ssee Chemical Co., ......... ......... ..... 200....... Nashville, Tenn ................ Ox Bone and Potash, manufactured by Tennessee Chemical Co.,1 200....... ... ......... ...... .. ...... Nashville, Tenn ............ ..................... ...... ....... ...... 200.....5 9 7 3 5 1 1 2 1 I 14 00 130 130 Ox Potash Mixture, manufactured by Tennessee Chemical Co., Nashville, Tenn ..................................... 200. Ox Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Tennessee Chemical Co., .................... 200. Nashiville Tenn............. Ox Potash Acid, manufactured by Tennessee Chemical Co., ........ ............ ville. Tenn................... Ox Special Truck Guano, manufactured by Tennessee Chemical 200 ....................... Co., Nashville, Tenn...... Complete Fertilizer, manufactured by Schoize Bros., Chatta)2G0 8 2 5 2 2 2 2 2 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3 1 1 1... 2 12 00 12 Nash- 7 8 3.30 1.70 00 1. 4 11 00 23 24 15 76 17 8. 7 7 12 Truck Farmer's Friend, manufactured by Scholze Bros., Chatta....................... nooga, Tenn........... Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Schoize Bros., Chattanooga, Tenn............................. Marietta H. G. Acid Phosphate, manufacturedby Marietta Guano ............ Co., Atlanta, Ga................. Marietta H. G. Acid Phosphate with Potash, manufactured by Marietta Guano Co., Atlanta, Ga...................... Piedmont Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Marietta Guano Co., ............................... Atlanta (a...... Magic Cotton Grower, manufactured by Marietta Guano Co., At........ .......... ......................... lanta, Ga. Beef Blood and Bone Compound, manufactured by Marietta Gu. ano Co., Atlanta, Ga.......... ......................... Disolved Bone with Potash, manufactured by Marietta Guano Co., ....... Atlanta, Ga.................................. Same for Wheat, manufactured by Marietta Guano Co., Atlanta, ............... Ca...................................... Wheatjand CloversGroweri manufactured by Marietta Guano, Co., Golden Grain~ Growezrnahueactured b nooga, Tenn. ..................... 200 200 .2 2. 1. 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3 2. 4 1.70 . 76 200'.. 200 200.. 200 ... 12-14 8-10 . 10-12 1.252.251 16 10 13-13 13 80 8-10 200 .. 200 ... 200 ... 8-9 7-9 >2-3 1-3 2-3 2-3 1-2 1.252'25 2-4 2-4 2-4 16 00 16 65 :1295 12 95 2-3 7-9 2-3 _2-3 Atlanta) Ga Nt Vt.H~ / lanta, ...... r ......... ..... . Marietta Guano Co., Ga . .. i.Ss, ~c~t ::ii1.,.+ :'. qaa3....!.j. y{, At- 200 . 200 10=x12 :2-3 8. o 4o .eo g 14 10 ... dda~artee d atyd of i naiilait e tlisr ,iiec1 lithe (Aice o&the bol ils~ i of Manufacturers. S # giliutire bbeeii ANALYSIS. GUARANTEE) .PHOSPHORICACID. a Name of Fertilizer or Chemical, by Whom Manufactured, andG Where Manufactured.0 a) 4-4 46 1900 Oct. 1 Planters Pride Guano, manufactured by Marietta Guano Co., 200 ............. ...... Atlanta, GA .... ........... Solid South Guano. manufactured by Marietta Guano Co., N 200 ................. ..... lanta, Ga. .......... Lee Fertilizer, manufactured by Trawick & Jernigan, Opelika, 200 .......... ................. Ala .. ..................... XX;Blood and Bone, manufactured by Trawick & Jernigan,Opelika, High Grade Guano,' manufactured by Traa ick & Jernigan,Opelika, Ala ... .................... At-*.5 1.75 1.75 1.00 1.75 7 7 8 8 2 2 1 1 1-3 1-3 2 2 1.252.25 2.25: 2.00 1.00 17 50 17 58 15 90 12 80, Ala........................... .................. ... .. .200 200 1.50 7 2' 2 1.75 14 95- Old Time Guano, manufactured by Trawick & Jernigan, Opelika, ...... .200 ................. Ala"......................... XXX Ammoniated Dissolved Bone, manufacturedby Trawick & .... .... 200 Jernigan, OpePka, Ala.......... ......... ... Dissolved Bone, manufactured by Trawick & Jernigan, Opelika, Ala....................................... ... 200 1.25 .82 7 8 12 1 1 1 2 2 2.....13 1.00 1.00 [2 50 12 29 00 Dissolved Bone and Potash, manufactured by Trawick & Jernigan, 200........ ............... Opelika, Ala..................... Dissolved B~one and Potash, manufactured by Trawick & Jernigan, ........ " 10 2 2 1 13 00 ~Opelika, Ala 1.. . . 1/. . . f. . i... 16 . .1. t/1. . .. 200 . .... 10 2 1 1 12 00 Dissolved Done and Potash, manufactured by TraWick &Jernigan, Opelika, Ala......200.9 Dissolved Bone and Potash, manufactured kb Trawick & Jernigan, Opelika, Ale.........................................200....... Dissolved Bone and Potash, manufactured by Trawick & Jernigan. Opelika, , ..................... ...... 200...... Dissolved Bo: e and Potash, manufactured by Trawick & Jernigan, Aa.............. 2 9 9 .8 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 13 0 1200 13 00 12 00 1 1 1 1H-G. English Acid,. manufactured by Trawick & Jernigan, Opelika, Ala............. .............. .................... Dissolved Bone, manufactured by Trawick Jernigan, Opelika, Ala............ ........................ Dale County Standard Fertilizer, manufactured by Ozark Cotton Seed Oil M.ill Fertilizer Co., Ozark. Ala.....................200 Ozark High Grade Fertilizer, manufactured by Ozark Cotton Seed Oil Mill Fertilizer Co.. Ozark, Ala.............. .. Complete Cotton Fertilizer, manufactured by Ozark Cotton Seed Oil Mill Fertilizer Co., Ozark, .......................... Ozark High Grade Phosphate, manufactured by Ozark Cotton Seed Oil Mill Fertilizer Co., Ozark, Ala,............. .. English Acid Phosphate, McDonald, imported'by Troy Fertilizer Co., Troy. Ala. ....................... .......... Blood and Bone, McDonald, imported by Troy Fertilizer C. Troy, Ala..................................... ........... English Dissolved Bone, Buford Co., imported by Troy Fertilizer Co., Troy, Ala ..... ... ..... Dissolved Bone and Potash, manufaptqlred by The Troy Fertilizer Co., Troy, Ala.... ... _.................... ............. Acid Phosphate and Potash, manufactqr al by The Troy Fertilizer Opelika, A 'a ................................ 200 .. . . & 20 12 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 1400 1200 20........11 1.20 200 200 7 7 6 2 2 1.70 2 2 21 16 80 16 80 14 62 1.20 1.65 Xla 200 200........11 200 1.65 3 3 7 2 11 2 ..... .. . 2 14 00 14 00 15 62 & 200........11 0... ...... .... German Kainnit, manufactured by tho T'oaAid......t ~ Co., Troy, Ala...... .. .. . .. ... The Troy Fe ti~izer Co. Troy, .. . . . . .. ........ .200!... ~ ) 3........1400 2 ... 7 7 12 00 3120 8 .200.,".......... ... 12 1200o l~' =~rit ii ofl .. II _ .. d~e~P~ he t ti hv~ QUAR ih tl 1 XT9EP iy ANiAsi§. 0 0 PHOSPHORIC ACID. Q Name of Fertilizer or Chemical, by Whom Manufactured, and Where Manufactured. F' 0 0 Oct. 1 1900 G. Acid Phosphate, manufactured by the The. Troy Fertilizer 11 . 200 .... . . Co., Troy, Ala... Pelican R. B Guano, manufactured by Standard G & C. Mfg. Co., 100- 1.652.50 4-5 200 .......................... New Orleans., La.. ..... 1.65Ms.Hm Guano, manufactured by G. & G.. Mfg. do.; New 100Orleans, La ........... El. B. Stern's Am. 14. Sup. Phos , manufactured by Standard G, & C. 100.............. 200 Mfg. Co.,New Orleans, La................ 0. 100Standard Am. Sol. Guano, manufactured Eby Standard G. 200 ............. Mfg. Co., New Orleans, La .......... ° Champion Farmers' Choice, manufactured by Standard G. & C, 100- ""Blood, Bone and Meat Guano, manufactured by Standard New Orleans, * ..... 3..........$14 00 4-5 1.50-3 . ........ Mfg. Co., 1a..............................200 ................ 200 G. & C. 100- 3.29 1.702.67 4-6.505-6.50 4-8 4-5 4-5 4-5 4.254-5 24.25 6.25..24.25 & ,..... 1.652.50 1.653.50 1.6F2.50 5.005.50..1.50o-3 . 1.50-3 1.50-3 Mfg. Co., New Orleans, La................................... 200 ... 4-5 ... Ground Bone, manufactured by Standard G. & -C. Mfg Co., New 100-Orleans, La ........................ 200 2.503.25.......21.00 18 50-.. ... . Dissolved Bone, manufactured by Standard G. &C. Mfg. Co., New 100... 200.....13-14 ............... Orleans, La.............................. " Aid Phosphate, manufactured by Standard G. & C. Mfg. Co., New 100....... 200 ...... ...... Orleans, La.................. .............. 2-5 10-12 2-4 .. ....... IiKainit, Troy, Ala.... Troy,A200 Manufacturedby Standard G. & C. Manufacturing Co.,1200.............. . ................. ,,'New Orleans, La....... Farmers Alliance, man ufoctured by The Troy Fertilizer Company, Troy, Ala...........................................200 1.65 Blood and Bone, manufactured by The Troy Fertilizer Company, 200 1.65 .... 7 6.50 12-14 2 15 62 14 62 2 1.50......2 Dundee Guano, manufactured by The Troy Fertilizer Company, Troy, Ala ................ ... ...... 200 Old Homestead, manufactured by The Troy Fertilizer Company, Big Hit Guano, manufactured by The Troy Fertilizer Company, Troy, Afl...........................................200 Troy Perfect, manufactured by The Troy Fer"tilizer Company. Troy, Al ........................................... 200 Nancy Hanks, manufactured by The Troy Fertilizer Company, .82 .82 8 8 2 2 . 1 1 13.30 1330' .82 1.65 1.65 8 7 7 2..... 2..... 2.........2 1 2 1330 15 62 15 62 a Meal Mixture, manufactured by The Troy Fertilizer Company, Troy, Ala ......................... 200 Hume's Am. Dissolved Bone, manufactured by The Troy FerPike's Pride, manufactured by The Troy Fertilizer Company, Troy, Ala ....... ....... ...... Troy, Ala......................................... tilizer Company, Troy, Ala......... .... 200 1.65 1.65 1.65 7 7 7 2 2 2 .... .... 2 2 2 15 62 15 62 15 62. 200 200 Soluble Blood and Bone Guano, manufactured by The Troy Fertilizer Company, Troy, Ala.............. ......... ...... .. 200 Meridian Homde Mixture,, manufactured by Meridian Fertilizer Factory. Mieridian Miss........................... .. 200 Meridian Blood and Bone, manufactured by Fertilizer Meridian Farmers' Friend, manufactured by Meridian Fertilizer Factory, Meridian, Miss ................. ................ 200 Meiidian Southern Phosphate, manufactured by Meridian Fertilizer Factory, Meridian, Miss..............200....... Factory, Meridian, Miss.. Soluble Pacific Guano, manufactured by the Pacific Guano Co., Boston, Mass., and Charleston, S. C.... ................200 .. .82 1.75 1.6i5 8 6.50 7.50 2 2.00 1.50 1.50 ... 2.00 .75 .75 1 1:00 2.00 2.00 13 30 14 40 15.12 15 12 ...... ... ........ 'Meridian ............ 200 1.65 7.50 1.25 7.50 12.00 1.50 2.00 .75 1.00- 1.00 .... 13.12 14 00 Guaranteed Analyses of Commercial Fertilizers, Filed in the Offlce of the Commissioner of Agriculture by Dealers and Manufacturers. I SName of Fertilizer or Chemical, by Whom Manufactured. andA c3 OO o Where Manufactured. U) i GUARAN"RzRD ANALYSIS. PHOSPHORIC ACID. m bi 0 4 4QCl 1900 Oct. 1 Meridian English Phos. manufactured by Meridian Fertilizer Factory, Meridian, Mississippi ............ Bowker Cotton Fertilizer, manufactured by Bowker Fertilizer, er.Fertilizer.., 200 Co., Elizabeth, N. manufactured...... Bowker Naston Guano. manufactured by Bowker Fertilizer Co., 200 Elizabeth, N. J ....................... o " Bowker Crown Guano, manufactured by Bowker Fertilizer Co., ..... 200 .......................... Elizabeth, N. J...... Bowker Sure Crop Fertilizer, manufactured by Bowker Fort. Co., Elizabeth, N. J...................200 Bowker Dis. Bone Phos., manufactured by Bowker Fort. -Co.,ElizaBeth, N.J..................................200.... Bowker Dis. Bone with Potash, manufactured by Bowker Fert.Co., ...... 2... Elizabeth, N.J......................... Kainit, manufactured by Bowker Fertilizer Company, Elizabeth, nufa.u...... ..... .... .......................... .. N;..Ft by Ashepoo Fertz. Co., Charleston, Ashepoo Fert., anfcue 200........8.00 1.65 1.65 1.65 1.65 ... 6 2.00 1.00. $1200 6 6 6 10 8 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 14 62 14 62 14 62 14,62 12 00 .......... 2 12 00 .... 1.75 .62 ........ 2.25 2.00. 12 1.00 12 00 14 40 "Eutaw Fertilizer, manufactured by Ashepoo Fertz. Co., Charles- S .C...........................200 ton, S.C. ............ ... ,,,~............. . 5 200 1.75 6.25 2.25 2 00 1.001 14 40 Oct. 1.Ashepoo Guano, manufacturad by Ashepoo Fertz. Co.,Charleston S. C ............ . .................................. C areson 20.210 6.0..0.100 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.25 1.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 48 11 38 11.38 11 38 15 40 Eutaw Blood and Bone Guano, manufactured by Ashepoo Fertz. Co., Charleston, S.C............... .. ... .......... 200 .85 6.00 Ashepoo Blood and Bone Guano, manufactured by Ashepoo Fertz Co., Charleston, S. C................... .............. 200 .85 6.00 Ashepoo Dis. Bone with Am. and Potash, manufactured by Ashepoo Fertz. Co., Charleston,'S. C ............... ............... 200 .85 6.00 5 Eutaw Guano, manufactured by Ashepoo Fertz. Co.,,.Charleston, S. ................... 200 1.75 6.25 Enon Acid Phos., manufactured by- Ashepoo Fertz. Co., Charleston, S. C........ ........... .... 2008.50 Pioneer Acid Phos,, manufactured by Ashepoo Fert.. Co., Charleston, S.C .................... ........ 200.8.50 Ashepoo Bone Ash, manufactured by Ashpoo Fertz. Co., Charleston, S.C......... ....... ... :......... 200...... 8.50 Ashepoo XX Acid Phos., manufactured by Ashepoo Fertz.Co., Charleston, S..C.200 ........ 9.50 Eutaw X1 A.cid Phos., manufactured by Ashepoo.Fertz Co., Charleston, S. C ......... .... 2...0. 0...... 9.50 Bronwood Acid Phbs., by Ashepoo Fertz. Co., Charleston, S. C.. ... , .. . . .. . 200....... 6.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 C 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 12 50 11 50 11.50 2.50 2.50 2.00 2.00 .. . 4.00 1.00 12 00 12 00 11 50 it 00 "manufactured 2.00.......12 00 .2.00 Eutaw Acid with Potash, manufactured by Ashepoo Fertz. .... Co., Charleston, S. C.................. ................. 200 ....... German Kainit. manufactured by Ashepoo Fertz. Co ., Charleston, S C..200................................ : . 20 ... 8.50 2 00 . . 2.00 . Carolina Acid Phos., manufactured by Ashepoo Fertz. Co., Charleston, S. C........................ ......... 200....... 6.00 Coomassie A. P. with Potash, manufactured by Ashepoo Fertz. Co., Charleston, S.C ................................. 20........ 9.50 Ashepoo Acid Phos. with Potash, manufactured by Ashepoo Fertz Co., Charleston, S. C. ... ...................... 200........ 8.50 -Ashepoo Arid Poach, manufactured by Ashepoo Fertz. Co., Chareston, S. ......... ........ . . .. . . .......... 1. 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 4.00 2 00 1.00 2.00 2.50 2.00 12 00 14 00 11 50 208.501 2.0 1.00......JO0 the Commissioner of Agriculture by Dealers G-uaranitepd Analyses. of Commercial Fertilizers, Filed in the Manufacturers-Continued. GUARANTEED ANALYSTS. Crs n h ,0e PHOSPHORIC ACID. bEn tuesl7ntT4 l Office of nd 0 bE ~fie 0 Name of Fertilizer Or Chemical, by Whom Manufactured, and Where Manufactured. O oy -e 5E r , .. 1900 Oct. 1 Eutaw Acid Phosphate,.manufactured by Ashepoo Fertilizer Co., ,.. ......... ......... Charleston, S. I Coomassie Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Ashepoo Fertilizer Co., Charleston, S. C....... ....................... Blood and Bone and Potash, manufactured by New Orleans Acid and Chemical Co., New Orleans,. La.................. Acid Phosphate with Potash, manufactured b3 Potapsco Guano Co., Baltimore, Mid.. .... ........ .... ... :... Ammoniated Dibsolved Bone and Potash, manufactured by Dothan 0) 200 8.50 9.50 7.00 823 5.00 2 00 2.50 3 3 2 1 .00) 2.00 2 1 4 2 2 1 10 50 200 200 200 200! 1.65 1.65 12-00 13 30 4% 2 2 12 00 14 30 15 6 215 2 Standard Grade Corn and Cotton ComPo., manufactured by Guano Co., Dothan, Ala 209 .. ..... .......... Guano Co., Dothan, Ala......... Standard Grade Grange Mixture., manufactured by Dothan Guano 200 ...... ... Co., Dotban, Ala...................... .- than .. ................... Do- 7.00 5.50 8,00 0.50 2 2 2 1 25 1.00 200 .82 Grange Mixture, manufactured by Dothan Guano Company, Do200 1.65 than, Ala.... .... .... ...... .................... Corn and Cotton Compound., manufactured by Dothan Guano Co., . 2001 1.65 Dothan, Ala ................. .......................... Peterman's Leader, ............. manufactured by Dothan Guano Co., Dothan, Ala... .... .... ............... 3 1 3 2 1. 1 1 13 30 14 37 7.00 14 62 Hovw olY Fruit 1ood, ...... manu~factured by tothan .. Guano Ocm' pang,' . Dothan, Ala . .... ..... .... ... Phosphate with 3% potash, manufacture' by D~othan Guano Co, y..q"...".. 200 1.50 5.50 2.00 1 3.1x~2 15 20 * High Grade Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Dothan Guano Co.. Dothan, Ala ........ ........ ...... .......... .... 200 Dothan, Ala .. .200 ........ 8.001.50 Blood and Bone Fertilizer; manufactured by Dothan Guano Co , Dothan, Ala ........ ................ ... ..... ..... 200 1.65 2.00 Ammoniated Dissoived Bone, manufactured by Dothan Guano Co., Dothan, Ala ...... .......................... 200 .82 8.00 2.00 Genuine German Kainit, manufactured by Dothan Guano Co., Dothan, Ala. ............... ...... ................. 200.... .. ;..... B. D. ... 1 ] 3 12 50 13 00 11.00 7.00 2.00 1 1 . 2 1 12% 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .. 15 62 13 30 12 00. 15 18 15 18 13 62 13 62 200 Bradley's Patent Superphosphate, manufactur. d by Bradley Fertilizer Co., Clharleston. S C.............. ............... 200 Ammoniated Dissolved Bone, manufactured by Bradley Fertilizer Co., Charleston, S. C.... 200 Eagle Amn Bone Superphosphatte, manufactured by Bradley Seafowl Guaano, manufactured by Charleston, S. C.................................... tilizerCo., Charleston, S C ...... Bradley Fertilizer Co.. 1.85 1.85 1.65 6.50 6.50 6.00 6 00 2.50 2.50 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2,00 2.00 ..................... Bradley's Palnweto Acid Phosphate minufacturedbyBradley tilie oCaretn .C ...................... 200....... FerFer... 200 1.65 Cow Phosphate Acid, manufactured by Cullman Cotton Company. Cullman, 9.00 300 1213 1-2 2 00 12 00 13 00 Bull Phosphate Acid, manufactured by Cullman Cotton Company, Cullman, Ala ...... ... .... ......... ...... ... 200....... 12-14 .82-100-d Corn and Cotton Guano, manufactured by Cuilman Cottun Co., Cullman, Ala.......................... ............. Ala .......................... .... 200..... .. 2-3.. 1-2 .. i-11,1.1-15 10-12 1.1-15 2-4 ..... 11 00 13 Cow Guano, manufactured by Cullnan Cotton Company, Cullman, Ala...... ....................................... 200 manufactured by Cullman Cotton Company, Guano No. Cullman, Ala........................................... 200 1... 30 8-P., 1.65-2 ....... ....... 8 2 15 62 14 00 Guano No. 3-S, manufactured by Cullman Cotton Company, Cuilman, Ala ...................... .................... 200 200 .* 4 1.65 6 2 ..... 2 14 62 Guaranteed Analyses of-Commercialertilizsers, Filed in the Office of the Commissioner of Agriculture, Manufacturers. C) by Dealers and GUARANTEED ANALYSIS. ACID. PC% '~ °aPHOSPHORIC Name of Fertilize, or Chemical, by Whom Manufactured, and Where Manufactured, C) ' ' .cC bC 0 N0.4 be p C ° Urj bCU)rn a 0 0 C) 4;0 8 2 1900 Oct. 1 Best Made, manufactured by Cullman Cotton Co., Cullman, Ala 200 1.65 Cow Cotton Guano, manufactured by Cullman Cotton Co., Cullman, Ala ................................................ 200 1.65 Corn and Cotton Guano, manufactured by Cullman Cotton Co., Cullman, Ala . 200 .82 'Cow Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Cullmnan Cotton Co , Cullman, Ala . ...................... 200....... Bull Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Cullmnan Cotton Co., CullAgo. 5 B Phosphate, manufactured by Cuilman Cotton Co., Cullman, Ala ............................................ 200 aNo. 6 A., manufactured by Cullman Cotton Co., Cullman, Ala.................... ... ....... .............. 200 No. 9 C., manufactured by Cuilman Cotton Co., Cuilman, Ala . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 Guano 16. P.. manufactured by Cullman Cotton Co., Cullman, 1.65 1.50 1.65 1.17 2 $1662 8.21 7.5 12% 1.79 2.65 1% 1.32 1.83 1 1 15 62 13 80 2% ..... 15 00 15 62 15 20 15 62 60 7 2 2 2 .. 2 2 1 7 8 ~Ala;........... ... Mountain Cullman City;Lint, manufactured ,Ala . ........ .. b%"lman . ...... ............... "1...4 Cotton Co.1......, 60 6 4 1 4 16 30 00 .82 01t. 1 Mountain City Lint, No. 2, manufacturedby Cuilman Cotton Co., Cullman, Ala. a ........ .. ** ........... Cuilman, Ala .................................... 200 Corn and Cotton Lint No. 2, manufactured by Cullman Cotton Co., ,o. 1024, manufactured 1.65 1 65 1.65 6 10 8 4 2 2 1 4 2 18 60 16 60 1860 H No. 735, manufactured by Cullman Cotton Co., Culiman, Ala............. ................... ................... No. 1034, manufactured by Cullman Cotton Co., Culiman. Ala.....0 . ..... ................... No. 1023, manufactured by Culman Cotton Co., Cuilman, 200 Ala ....................................................... No. 823, manufactured by Cuilman Cotton Co., Cullman, Ala................... ............... .................. 200 No. 822, manufactured by Cullman Cotton Co., Cullman, Ala ........................ 200 No. 1022, manufactured by Cuilman Cotton Co., Culiman, N Ala ................................ ................... 200 No. 922, manufactured by Cullman Cotton Co., Culinian, ......................... by Cullman Cotton .... 200 Co., Cullman, 200 ................. 1 4 2.50 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 4 1900 2100 17 62 8............... 2 1.65 1.65 165 1.65 1.65 8 6 6 8 7 2 2 2 2 1.50 3 2 2 2 1562 1462 1962 15 12 0 No. Ala ...... ........................................... No. 1014, manufactured by Cullman Cotton Co., Ala....................... Co., Columbus, ................ . .............. ................ Ala ..... 1021, manufactured by Cullman Cotton 200 Co., Culiman, Acid and Potash No. 2, manufactured by Home Mixture Guano Acid Co,Columbus, Ga -' **... Culman, 200 200 1.65 .82 8 8 2 2 2 4 1 1 2 2 1 4 1562 16.30 12 00 14 00 Acid and Potash No. 4, manufactured. by Home Mixture Guano Co., Columbus, Ga ................... .......... ....... 200.... ... Home Mixture No 1, manufactured by Home Mixture Guano ............. 200 1.65 Co., Columbus, Ga........ ............... Home Mixture No. 2, manufactured by Home Mixture Guano Co.. Columbus, Ga.........:........................... 200) 1.65 anLPotash No. 12-2, manufactured by Home Mixture Guano ... 20...... ............................... 0 G a............................ 200....8 . 2 2 .. 8 6 7 6 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 1 2 12 00 14 62 14 62 Guaranteed Analyses of Comnmercial Fertilizers, Filed in the office of the Commissioner of Agriculture by Dealers and Manufacturers. dl GUARANTEEI) ANALYSES PH~OSPiIORIC ACID. SName of Fertilizer or Chemical, by Whom Manufactured, and Where Manufactured. 1900 0 d m Oct. 1 Home Co., Columbus, Ga ............... ...... .................. 200 Home Mixture No 4, manufactured by Home Mixture Guano Co ,Columbus, Ga....... ....................... ........ 200 Acid Phosphate No. 1, manufactured by Home Mixture Guanot Co., Columbus, Ga................ ...................... 200 Acid Phosphate No. 2, manufactured by Home Mixture Guano~ CJo., Mixture No 3, manufactured by Home Mixture Guano 1.65 1.65 . .. . . .10 8 6 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 . ... $ 16 62 16 62 12 00 14 00 Columbus, Ga. ... ....................... 200.... Potatoe Mixture, manufactured by Home Mixture Guano Co., Columbus, Ga............................ .... ..... .. Kainit, 'manufactured by Home Mixture Guano Co.. Columbus, 12 2 200 200 1.65 .... 4 2 1 6 12 1.0(1 1.00 1,00 d 16 (2 1200 Ga ........ ...... ..... ........ ................... 200.... Goldsmith Imported M ixture, manufacture by New Orleans Acid and Fertilizer Co,Gretna, La.. ........ ........ ...... 200 Gold Dust, manufactured by New Orleans Acid and Fertilizer' Co., Greta, La........ ........................... 200 Blood, Bone and Potash, manufactured by New Orleans Acid and Fertilizer(Co., Gretna, La....................... .......... GodGLuck, manufactured by New eOrleanse Acid and1 Fertilizer , 201/( ........... 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.C0 2.00 2.0( 1.6~ 7.00 1.65 1.65 7.00 7.00 14 62 14 62 14 62 46ies, .576-2 o2 o(f Dixie Soluble Bone and Potash with Ammonia, manufactured by New Orleans Acid and Fertilizer Co., Gretna, La............200 Diss. Bone and Potash, manufactured by New Orleans Acid and 1.6i 6.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1262! 12 00 w Fertilizer Co., Gretna, La....... .................. 200 ..... 8.00 Acid and Potash, manufactured by New Orleans Acid and Fertilizer Co., 8.00 Black Diamond Acid Phosphate, manufactured by New Orleans Acid and Fertilizer Co., (iretna, La.........200.. 10.00 Crescent city Acid Phosphate, manufactured by New.Orleans Acid and Fertilizer Co., Gretna., La...................200 10.00 V. 0. C. A. Pure Blood Guano, manufactured by Coweta Fertilizer Co., Newnan and Columbus, Ga.......................167 165 8 by Coweta Fertflizer Co., Coweta H. G. Fertilizer. manufacturedl Branch Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co., Newnan, Ga.. .. 200 1.65 Coweta Animal Bove, manufactured by Coweta Fertilizer Co., Branch Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co., Newnan, Ga.........200 1.65 6 Sea Bird Guano manufactured by Coweta Fertilizer Co., Brarch Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co. N\Tewnan, Ga.................200 1.65 6 Aurora Amo. Phosphate, manufactured by Coweta Fertilizer Co., Branch Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co., Ga..... 200 1.65 7 Coweta Stand,' Dis. Boie and Potash. manufactured by Coweta Fert. Co., Branch Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co., Newnan, Ga. 200.......8 Coweta Wheat and Grass Grower, manufactured by Coweta Fert. Co., Branch Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co., Newnan, Ga. 2001 . ,.. 8 Coweta H. G. Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Coweta Fert. Co., Branch Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co., Newnan, Ga.........260. 12 Coweta Standard Acid Phosphate, manufactuied by Coweta Fert. Co., Branch Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co.. Newnan, Ga...200...10 Coweta Diss. Bone, manufactured by Coweta Fertilizer Co., Branch Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co., Newnan, Ga.......... 200...10 200 4.00 Gretna,La...................X00. 14 00 12 00 12 00 16 62 16,62 14 62 14 62 1462 2.00 200 2 2 2 2 2 2.00 2.00 1 1 1 1 1 . 2. 2 2 8 Newnan, 2 1 2 2' 2 2 2 2 2 1, 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 ... .... 12 00 12 00 14 00 12 00 12.00 13 31 I. A. P. Bone ""13 with Amonia and Potash, manufactured by Coweta .... 1 4 Chemical Co. Branch Virginia-Car Chemical Co., Newnan, Ga. 200 Diss. Bone and Potash. manufactured by Coweta Fert. Co., Branch Virginia-Carolina Chemical Ga...... ,.... 200 & 14 .83 ... 8 11 Co., Newnan, 1. 1'.00 guaranteed Analyss of ommiiercial Fertilizers, riled in the Office of the Commissioner of Agrculture by Manufacturers. S GUARANTEED AnALYSI .4PHOSPPORIC ACID.: Healers and by WhmMnfctrd n Name of Fertilizer or Chemical, by Whom Manufactured, and Where Manufactured. 0 1900 Oct. 1 10 & 4 Dissolved Bone and Potash, manufactured by Coweta Vert. Co., branch Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co., Newnan, Ga....... 00 8 & 4 Dissolved Bone and Potash, manufactured. by Coweta Fert. Co.. branch Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co., Newnan, Ga..... Coweta Dissolved Bone acid Potash, manufactured by Cow-ta Fert. Co., branch Virgiria-Carolina Chemical Co., Newnan, Ga. German Kainit, manufactured by Coweta Fert. Co., branch Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co., Newnan, Ga................ Muriate of Potash, manufactured by Coweta Fert. Co., branch Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co., Newnan, Ga ................. Old Dominion Guano, manufactured by Old Dominion Guano Co., Atianta, Ga............ ................................. Southern Amd. Dissolved Bone Guano, manufactured by Old Dominion Guano Co., Atlanta, Ga........................... Patent Pacific Guano, manufactured by Old Dominion Guano Co.. Atlanta, Ga. .... ............ ....... Etowah (guano, manufactured by Ol Doinin GanoCoAtlanta, Ga . ....... ... ... ... Blood and Bone Guano, manufactured by.Od oino Guano 200........8 200........6 200 ........ 2 2 10 2 1 1 1 4 4 2 12 48 $ 14 00 12 00 14 00 12 00 48 00 14 12 13 62 13 62 12 38 12 38 200 .. 200 ... .... ........ 1.65 .... ....... ..... 6 6 6 6 6 2 2 2 3 8 2 2 2 2 2 1.50 1 1 1 1 200 1 65 2016 20 16 200 200 .85 .85 Co., Atlanta, Ga .................. ............ ......... Old Doxnon (U manufactured by Old Dlesolved tone, . Giiaano Co, ABtantR, Ga Old Dominion Dissoved Bone and Potast Dominion, Guano Co., Atlanta, Ga........................200 Old Dominion Dissolved Bone and Potash, manufactured by Old Dominion Guano Co., Atlanta Ga...........................200 Old Dominion Dissolved Bone and Potash, manufactured by Old Dominion Guano Co , Atlanta, Ga........................200 er H. i. Dissolved Bone, manufactureetlFtlizer Co,, Nashvill, Tenn...................................200 Bear H. U. Beef Blod and Bone, manufactured by Continental Ferr,ilier Co . Nashville, Tenn......................... Bear Special Wheat and Corn Grower,manufactured by Continen Co , Nashville, Ten...........................200 tal Fertilizer by Bear Bone and Potash, manufactured Tenn......... ............................. Co., Nashville, manufactured by Continental Fertilizer Bear Potash mixture, Co , Nashville, Tenn..... .......................... Eddstne Solble Guano, manufactured by Continental Fertilizer Co., Nashville, Tenn.......................................200 .. ... ........... Eddystone Dissolved Bone, manufactured by Continental FertilizCo., Nashville, Tenn ................... Eddystone Bisoe dPotas, manufactured by Continental Fer................ tizer Co., Nash ille, Tenn................... Eddystone Bn Potashtr, manufactured by Continental Fer...... tilizer Co., Nashville, Tenn......................... manufactured by Continental FerSunysnotaishospate, Dominion 200..,, TO 2 8 2 6 2 8 8 6 2 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 4 4 12 00 12 00 12 00 14 00 14 00 16 62 13 00 13 00 12 00 14 62 13 00 13 00 12 00 13 00 11 00 13 38 13 00 200 1.65 Continen 200 200 1.65 200 200 200 200 9 S 3 2 2 3 5 3 3 2 4 2-3 7 10 7 7 10 8 6 tilizer Co., Nashville, Ten................................ i dPts, BearSut Phosphate manufactured by Continental Fer- 200 ............. ... tilizer Co.. Nashville, Tenn.. Eddystone Cotton Guano, manufactured by Continental Fertilizer .85 200 Co., Nashville, Tenn ........................................ Etiwan H. G. Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Etiwan Fertil izert 200 )1. Co., Charleston, S. C........................................1 11-13 Guaranteed Analyses of Commercial Fertilizers, Filed in the Office of the Commissioner of Agriculture by Dealers Manufacturers. S GUARANTEED ANALYSIS. PHO)SPHORIC ACID. and 14 Name of Fertilizer or Chemical, by Whom Manufactured, and -I Where Manufactured. a'°o o 1900 Oct. 1 Etiwan Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Etiwan Fertilizer Co., 10-12 .. 200 Charleston, S. C.......................... Plow.Brand haw Bone Superphosphate, manufactured by EtiC-S 200 1.64 ...... . wan. Fertilizer Co., Charleston, S. C .... Diamond Soluble Bone, manufactured by Etiwan Fertilizer Co., 200........11-13 ... Charleston, S. C.............................. Plow Brand Soluble Fertilizer, manufactured by Etiwan Fertilizer American Ammnoniated Bone Superphosphate, manufactured by Williams & Clark Fertilizer (o., Charleston, S. C............ Cumberland Bone Superphosphate of Lime, manufactured by Cumberland Bone Phosphate Co., Charleston, S. C........200 Goulding's Vegetable Compound, manufactured by The Goulding Fertilizer Co. .Liinited, Pensacola, Fla................... Goulding's H. (i. Acid Phosphate, manufactured by The Goulding .......... Fertilizer Co. Limited, Pensacola , Fla..."... Goulding's Atlas Acid Phosphate, manufactured by The Goulding ................. Fertilizer C~o Limited, Pensacola, Fla: Goulding's M\ixture,, manufactured by The Goulding Fertilizer Co., Limited; Pensacola; Fla....................200....... Co., Charleston, S. C........ ........ .... .. .... .... 200 1.64 7-9 2 2-3 2-3 2-3 2 2 2 2 1-2 12 00 2-3 14 60 13 00 14 60 200 1.65 1.65 6.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1 -1......15 1.00 1 .00 4 13 62 13 6.00 .2.00 5 12 10 10 2 .3 62 00 200 3.30 20 24' 200....... 209.. .... .3 2 1l 1 ... 13.00 I..... (14 00 Genuine German Kainit, manufactured by The Goulding Fertilizer Co.. Limited, Pensacola, Fla.................. ..... ...... 200 ........... Goulding's H. G. Phosphate and Potash, manufactured by The Gouling Fertilizer Co., Limited, Pensacola, Fla. ............ 200.... Gould ing's Bone Compound, manufactured by The Goulding Fertilizei Co., Limited, Pensacola, Fla .... ....... .. 12 1 1 1 12 00 13 00 15 12 10 6 2 3 200 1.65 .. Goulding's Special Compound, manufactured by The Goulding Fertilizer Co., Limited, Pensacola, Fla.......... ............. 200 Goulding's Ammoniated Bone, manufactured by The GouldingFertilizer.Co., Limited, Pensacola, Fla....... ................ 200 Goulding's English Bone Compound., manufactured by The Goulding Fertilize. (o , Limited, Pensacola, la. ..... 200 Goulding's St. George Guano, manufactured by The Goulding Fertilizer Co., Limited, Pensacola, Fla. ........ ........ 20 Winkler H. G. Acid Phosphate, manufactured by The Goulding Fertilizer Co., Limited, Pensacola. Fla. .................. 200 A. "G. Winkler's Ammoniated Dissolved Bone, manufactured by The Goulding Fertilizer Co., Limited, Pensacola. Fla..... 200 Co Gem Guano, manufactured by The Goulding Limited. Pensacola Fla............ .. 200 English Acid Phosphate, manufactured by The Go uiding Fertilizer Co., Limited, Pensacola F la200 Samson Ammoniated Bone, mnfcue by The Goulding Fertilizer Co., Limited, Pensacola, Fla....... 200 Samson Acid Phosphate, manufactured b he Goulding Fertilizer Co., Limited, Pensacola, Fla... .. ....... 200 Goulding's Potash Acid, manufactured by The Goulding Fertilizer Co.. Limited, Pensacola, Fla.................... 200 Goulding's 4%o Potash Acid, manufactured by The Goulding Fer-~ 1.50 1.65 1.65 165 .85 . 1.65 1.65 6 6 6 3 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1. 1 1 1 1 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 15 12 15 12 15 12 12 38 15 00 12 6 5 9 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 3 Fertilizer 150 2 1.50 15 12 11 62 12 00 15 12 13 00 11100 115 0 16 0 15 3 0 1.65 .. .. .. 6 10 6 6 12 1.50' ... 3% 3 4 2 3 tilizer Co., Limited, Pensacola, Goulding's XXX Potash Acid, manufactured by The Goulding Fertilizer Co., Limited. Pensacola, Fla.......................... F la ................ 200 Tucker, Willinghanmi Co's Special H. G. Potash Guano, manufactured byThe Qxoulding Fevtili ev Cg.initect, PensacQja, Fla. & 0 200 .85 7 Guaranteed Analyses of Commercial Fertilizers, Filed in the Office of the Commissioner of Agriculture by Dealers and Manufacturers. S GUARANTEED ANALYSIS. SPHOSPHORIC ACID. d Name of Fertilizer or Chemical, by Whom Manufactured, and Where Manufactured. a 0 -~j y) m U +D o - -~ S *-43 1900 Oct. Earle Terrell & Co. H. G. Fertilizer, manufactured by Birmingham Fertilizer Co., Birmingham, Ala.................. Earle Terrell & Co. H. G. Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Birmingham Fertilizer Co., Birmingham, Ala........ Earle Terrell & Co. Bonie and Potash, manufactured by Birmingham Fertilizer Co.. Birmingham, Ala .. .................. ~adeville Oil Mill H. G. Acid Phosphate, manufactured. by Birmingham Fertilizer Co., Birmingham, Ala ... ................ Cahaba Acid Phos. and Pot Mixture, manufactured byBimnhamr Fertilizer Co., Birmingham, Ala.. ........ ....... Cahaba Potash Bone, manufactured by Birmingham Fertilizer Co., Birmingham, Al.....................20 Cahaba Bone Ash, manufactured by Birmingham Fertilizer Co., Birmingham, Ala............ ....... .................... ."Cahaba Soluble Bone, manufactured by Birmingham Fertilizer .......................... Co., Birmingham, Ala. ......... Cahaba Dis. Bone Am. and Potash. manufactured by Birmingham ........ ......... Fertilizer Co., Birmingham, Ala .......... Cahaba H. G. Blood, 1 1.642.46 200.......8-10 200.......11-13 200..........8-10 200'..... .. 200........ 2-' 2-3 2 2 2-3 16 60 100as -3 12 00 12 00 2-3 4-5 2-3 2-3 2 2 2 2 10-12 8 -1 0 6-8 6-8 8-10 8-10 8-10.2-3 2-3 12 00 14 00 0.. .. .... 200........ 200 ... 1.64- 2-3 2 2 2 2 4-;5 1-2 1-2 2-3 12 00 11 80 13 30 16 60 2-3 2-3 Bone and Potash, manufactured by Birmingham Fertilizer Co., Birmingham, Ala......................... 200........ 200 2.46 2-3' e Cahaba H. G. Fertilizer, manufactured by Birmingham Fertilizer ..... ........ Co., Birmingham, Ala....... ..... Cahaba Soluble Guano, manufactured by Birmingham Fertilizer 'Co., Birmingham, Ala................................... Cahaba Star (lard Grade Fertilizer, manufactured by Birmingham Fertilizer (o., Birmingham, Ala ..................... G. Blood, Bone and Potash, manufactured by BirBirmingham .. mingham Fertilizer. Co, Birmingham, Ala.............. Birmingham 'H. G. Fertilizer, manufactured by Birmingham Fer........... tilizer Co., SBmingham, A .............. 'Birmingham Soluble Guano, manufactured by Birmingham Fertilizer Co., Birmingham, Ala...................200 SBirmingham Standard Grade Fertilizer, manufactured. by Birmingham Fertilizer Co , Birmingam, Ala... .................... Birmingham Dis. Bone A. M. and Potash, manufactured by.Birm ............ ingham Fertilizer Co., .Birmingham, Ala..... Jefferson County Standard Guano, manufactured.by Birmingham , H. 1.642.46 1.642.46 200 1.642.46 200 1.64200 200 200 -2.46 8-10 7-9 7-9 8-10 -C 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3 2 2 2 2 2 2-3 1-2 1-2 2-3 2-3 16 60 14 SO 14:60 16 60 1660 1.64- 1.642.46 1.642 46 200 200 .82-100 1.64- 246 7-9 6-8 8-10 8-10 2-3 2-3 2-3 2 2 2 2 2 2 1-2 2-3 1-2 2-3 . 14 60 14 60 13 30 16 60 12 00 13.00 . Cah'aba Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Birmingham Fertilizer Cahaba H. G. Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Birmingham-FerCahaba Dissolved Bone, manufactured by Birmingham Fertilizer .. .............. Co., Birmingham, Ala ........ ........... Cahaba H. G. IDiss. Bone, manufactured by Birmingham Fertilizer ............... Co , Birmingham, Ala................... Cahaba Acid Phosphate with Potash, manufactured by Birmingham Fertilizer Co., Birmingham, Ala....................... Birmingham Acid Phosphate, manufacitrred by Birmingham Fer................ ... tilizer Co., Birmingham, Ala Birminghamr H. G. Acid Phosphate, manufactured by Birmingham Fertilizer Co., Birmingham, Ala........................ Birmingham Dissolved Bone, man ufactured by Birmingham Pertilizer Co.,Birminghamn, Ala............. ....... . ... ,d.. tilizer Co , Fertilizer Co., Birmingham, Ala..... ..... ...... 200 2.46 2-3 2-3 2-3 Co., Birmingham, Ala2............... Birmingham, Ala ... :.....00.......10-12 ................. 200........ 11-13 ,.. .. 200 ........ 200........ 200....... 10-12' 11-13 8-10 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-S 2-3 2-3 2 2 2 2 2 2 12 00 13 ... 00 1-2 .. .. ' ... 11 00 12 00 13 00 00 1 200.....10-12 200........ 11-13 10-12 200.... 1..112 GIuaiahteed Analyses of tommercial. ertiliers, Iiled n the tOfice of the Coinissiomer of Agriculture Manufacturers-Con tinued. ____ by Dealers and __ _________ GUARANTEED ANALYSIS. U PHOSPHORIC ACID. -: I ~. N I-ame of Fertilizer or Chemical, by Whom Manufactured, and Where Manufactured. _ 0 1900) G. Dissolved Bone, manufactured by BirthingOct, 1 Birmingham ............. hem, Fertilizer Co., Birmingham, Ala... Birmingham Acid Phosphate with Potash, manufactured by Biro ............ S Fertilizer Co., Birmingham, Ala... Birmingham Acid Phosphate and 'Potash mixture, manufactured by Birmingham Fertilizer Co., Birmingham,, Ala .............. Birmin' ham Potash Bone, manufactured by Birmingham Fertilizer Co., Birmingham, Ala......................200...... Birminghham Bone and As~h, manufactured by 'Birmingham Fer..... ......... ....... Birmingham, Ala. tilizer Birmingham 1) Bone and Muriate Potash mixture, manufactured by Birmingham Fertilizer Co., Birmingham, Ala.............. Birmingham Soluble, Bone, manufac~ured by Birmingham Fer...... tilizer Co., Birmingham, Ala......................... Navassa Cotton Fertilizer, manufactured by Navassa Guano 1-1, 200..... 200 ........ 11-13 8-10 2-3 2-3 2 2 . 1-2 $13 00 mingham 11 00 1200 14 00 12 00 14 00 11 30 14 62 200. .. 8-l 8-10 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3 2.00 2 2 2 2 2 2 2-3 4-5 4-5 2-3 1-2 C~o., 200... .... 200........ 200 82-100 200 1.65 6-8 10-12 6-8 Wilminghton, N. C ............................. Co, 6.00 ""Navassa Bone and Ash, manufactured by Navassa Guano Co, :..... 2.0......7.00 .... ................... Wilmington, N. C....... Dissolved Bone with Am. and Potash, manufactured by Navassa .82 00 Guano Co,, Willnington, N. C.................................2 00 2.00 3.00 7,00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 12 00 13 30 3.00 °" Nav3.ssa Acid Phosphate, manufactured .. ... .:........ WilmingtonN. C 9.00 3.00 .:...........20 Xaid Phosphate with Ptash, manufactured by Navassa Guano 200........7.003.00 ................... Co., Wilmington, N C.............. Navassa Complete Fertilizer, manufactured by, Navassa Guano 6C0 3.00 200 165 Co., N C ................................ Navassa Wheat Mixture, manufactured by Navassa Guano Co., 3.00 N. -C ..................................... 200.......7.00 Nvssa Grain Fertilizer, manufactured by Navassa Guano Co., :...... by Navassa Guano G., 2.00.. 2.00 2.00 1 01200 1100 14 62 Wilnmington, Wilmington, 1.00 2.00 2.00 .... 4.00 2.00 14 00 14 62 Genuine Geriian Kainit, manufactured by Navassa Guano Co., vilmingt a, N. C...... .......... . Wilmington, NWC............ :... .................... .. 200 1.65 6.00 2.00 .... ............ 200............... 6 6 2 3 12.00 2 1 1200 14 Giant Guaro, manufactured by Rasin Monumental Co., , Rich[.65 mond, Va................................:...........200 Soluble Sea Island, manufactured by Rasin Monumental: Co,, Charleston, S. C ....................... ............ 200 1.65 " Rasin's Empire Guano, manufactured by Rasin MonumentalCo.; Atlanta, Ga .......................................... 200 1.65 Rasin's Dixie Guano, manufactured by Rasia Monumental Co., , .'.200 20....................... 1.65 Atlanta, Ga ........ Kainit, manufactured by R:sin Monumental Company, Atlanta, 2 2 62 6 6 3 2 14 62 2 2 1 2 14 62 14 62 Ga............................................... . 200 .......... "" Acid Phosphate, ma ufactured by Rasin Monumental Company, ................................... 200........ 10 Atlanta, Ga .......... " Bone and Potash, manufactured by Rasin Monumental Co , At200........ 7 .. lanta, Ga.... Rasin Monumental Company, manufactured Dissolved Columbia Guano, manufactured by Columbia Fertilizer Co., lumbia, .... 4 3 ... 2 2 12 ... 2 . 1200 14 00 12 00 by Bone, Atlanta, Ga.............. A la .. . ................... Co-. 200 200 1 .65 1.65 7 6 3 1i 1 2 2. 2 1- ......... 2 Farmer's Friend, manufactured by Columbia Fertilizer Company, .. ...... 200 1 00 ... ...... Columbia, Ala.... Columbia II. G Acid Phos , m'f'd by (col. Fert. Co., Columbia,A Ia. 200........ ... Die. Bone and Potash, m'f'd by Col. Fert. Co., Columbia, Ala..200 .1612 14 62 6 10 6 1 1 1 3 3 15 0013 00 13 00 Guaranteed Analyses of Commercial Fertilizers, Filed in the office of the Commissioner of Agriculture by Dealers and Manufacturers. GUARANTEED ANALYSIS . PHOSPHORIC ACID. SName of Fertilizer or Chemical, by Whom Manufactured, and Where Manufactured. ° U a)0 a c o 03 a Oct. 1 ,German ainit, manufactured by Columbia Fertilizer Co., Columbia, Ala........................200.............12 K Sipsey H. G. Oil Co., Sipsey H. G. Acid Phos. and Potash, manufactured by Ga20......1n2 ...... 200....... ..... S. Oil Co., Gadsden, Ala...... ................ G~raham's Best Guano', manufactured by Gadsden C. S. Oil Co., 2 ........ ... 200 ....... ...................... Gadsden, towah Fertilizer, manufactured by Gadsden C. S. Oil Co,, Gads- Acid Gadsden, 'Ala.............. $12 00 30 .Phosphate, manufactured by Gadsden .. ......... C. S. 20...... 1 Ala 9 7 9 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1C0 12 00, 16 60, 13 80 den, Ala.................... .... .. King Cotton, manufactured by Gadsden C. S. Oil Co., Gadsden, ........ 200 ............................ ~Ala.... ......... Poash, manufactured by Tallapoosa yr Best Fert. Am. D. -B. .. 200 .... ...... Oil Co., Alexander City, Ala.... otton Queen Guano, manufactured by Tallapoosa. Oil Co., Alex- ...... ... 200 1 & 1 .80 2.06 9 6150 6.50 1 2.50 2.00 1 .50 .50 1 2.00 1.00 13 80 13j,24 15 05 Cotton Queen Guano, manufactured by Tailapoosa Oil (Jo, Alex.. 167 .............. ............. ander City, Aa Waters Special Guan), manufactured "by Tallapoosa Oil Co, Alex- { ander City, Ala,, Ala .................. ... ,6 .. .. 167 2.00 ".1.50 6.00 1.50 .50 .00 2.00 15 10 150 1ander City, , 0 1 0 ..... 8.8 , .. 046, , . 1.. . , 4 6.j 6200 7.501 100 2.80 0 Walters Special Dis. Bone and Potash, manufacxtured by Tallapoosa Oil Co, Alexander City, Ala.........................200........10.00 Coley's & Sandlin's Spe. D. B. and P., manufactured'by Tallapoosa 2.00 200 ........ 10.00 1.00 1.00 200 2.00 1.00 .50 1.00 1.00 . 1.00 1.00 1.00 13 00 13 00 135 1300 1400 15 GA Tallapoosa H. G. Acid, manufactured by Tallapoosa Oil Co., Alex- Oil Co., Alexander City, Ala. 2.00 2.50 2.00 2.00 2.30 200.......11.00 ander City, Ala.. .................... Tallapoosa Dis. Bone and Potash, manufactured by Tallapoosa Oil .20C 10.00 Co., AlexanderCity, Ala............................. Our Best Fertilizer D. B. and P., manufactured by Tallapoosa Oil 200........11. Co,Alexander City, Ala ............................... Standard Guano, manufactured by Tallapoosa Oil Co., Alexander Soluble Guano, manufactured by Tallapoosa Oil Co., Alexander 2.00 6.50 City,'Ala..............................................200 Coley & Sandlin'3 Special Guano. manufactured by Tallapoosa Oil 1.50 7.50 200 ............................... Co., Alexander City,Ala. Ober's Sol. Am. Sup. Phos. of Lime, manufactured by G. Ober & 200.......6.50 .................. Sons & Co., Baltimore,Md Farmers Standard Am. Phos.,-manufactured by G.-:Ober & Sons & 1.70 6.50 200 Co., Baltimore,id ...................................... Ober's Special Am. Dis. Bone, manufactured by G. Ober & Sons & ".Ober's Dis. Bone with Am. and Potash, manufactured by G. Ober & Sons--& Co.,--Baltimore, Md .... Ober's Farmers Mixture, manufactured by .......... Baltimore, Md............... ....... City, Ala............................................. .... 200 1.50 7.50 2.00 2.30 1.50 1.50 3 2 2 .50 .50 2 1. 3 1.50 1.50 1.00 1.00 2 2 2 2 2 15 10 1500 15 04 1476 15 62 13 80 13 10 ca Co., Baltimore, Md... ................................ 200 1.65 6 7 7 2.00. 1.00 G. Ober & Sons ............. Co., 200 .... Ober's Dis. Bone Phos. and Potash. manufatured by G. Ober & 200....... .. Sons & Co, Baltimore, Md ........................ Ober's Acid Phos. with Potash, manufactured by G. Ober & Sons 200....... ....... & Co., Baltimore, Md .............. Ober's Acid Phos. with Potash, manufactured by G. Ober & Sons 200....... ..... ~&Co., Baltimore, Dis. Bone, manufactured by G. tir's Standard Am.Md.......................... Ober & SonsI oc .75 8 6 8 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 12 00 12 00 14 00 ia1 a iteeci Ana yes of Commercial e 1e~iis, iljed n the Offie o1~te dllliissioner of Manufacturers. Agriculture by £eaje s ANALYSIS. hd GUJARANTEED C 4).. VU 4) A) C Name of Fertilizer 0-1 PHOSPHORIC ACID. C or Chemical, by Whom Manufactured. and Where Manufactured. ~O c 0 CL 1 , U1. 0 Oc't. O~a m -190 ___._ l Ober's Ibis. Bone Phosphate, manufactured by G. Ober & 46 I-e Randolph e, Ala Loanol Roaa .>i Co.. B6,400 ........... 6)4O0 5,600 Plot No. 4 Broadcast.. .... ........................... 7 Broadcast.. .................. ......... 5 Drilled ............................... In this test broadcast sowing afforded 800 pounds of more .than'drilling. hay dicate that the season was per acre favorable The yields inand the rainfall large 12 records show that a large amount of rain fell in July and August. The drilled peas were cultivated twice with scrapes, the total number of furrows per row being three. In addition to experimental plots we plant every year considerable areas of cowpeas, both broadcast and in drills. In deciding on the best method of planting in this "general crop" we are governed by the price and available supply of seed and labor. We use four to six pecks of seed sown broadcast and two or three pecks in drills. In 'sowing broadcast we seldom plow in the 'seed, as in the above-described experment, but sow them on plowed land and cover seed and fertilizer with disc harrow or with one-htorse cultivator. In planting in drills we open the drills in plowed or unplowed ground, and are careful either to apply the fertilizer in the covering furrow or else to mix it with the soil before the 'seed are dropped. Where the ground has 'been plowed, the combined grain =drill and fertilizer distributor would doubtless be satisfactory, stopping most of the tubes .ifit is desired to drill the seed in rows wide enough for cultivation. Our observations lead to fthe belief that in unfavorable seasons drilling and cultivation gives the largest yield of hay (and always of seed) and that in seasons of abundance of rainfall broadcast planting affords the greater amount of hay, but not of seed. VARIETIES. the During each of the past six years one or more tests of varieties of 'cowpeas have been undertaken. Some of these tests have been vitiated by agencies that need not be stated here, and only those are here reported -which have been free from inequalities and errors. 13 of cowpeas have, been tested both with reference to the yield of seed and to the yield of hay. The variety Whippoorwill (a speckled bunch pea) has com its yield has been taken as peted in all these tests a basils by which rthe yield -of any other variety may be Thns, taking the yield of grain conveniently stated. from Whipporwill il 1897 as 100, that of Wonderful for the same year is 106, or cent. greater. The grain yield varieties eowpeas. The follow- Varieties and of 6 per of ing table gives the results of four tests of varieties on, the basis of seed production, all varieties planted in drillsi and cultivated. In dl cases bushel of shelledpeas is assumed to -weigh 60 pounds. Yields a of grain of varieties of cowpeas. VARILETY. Relative yield taking Yield per acre in \t hipporwill yield as 100 per cent. 97 '9 '00 01'97 '98 '00 01 Av. Bus. Bus. Bus.,Bus 00%00 00 00 Clay .......... 9 1 T Crowder, Brown-eye Crowder, Large ....... .. TT-7 White.. ... Crowder, Yellow. Brown-eye, White .. Black, from 5 0....f 63 58 7.6 .... 14.0.. ..... .. 19.3 .... .... ...... 87 .... ...17.5 .... .... ...... 116 .... .... .... ................... 23.3 .... I 105f.... ......... 17 Black, Black, Wood.from Ala. Ex. St . from Hastings... 2.5S.... ........... ... 21.0 .... 21.2f.... ... 140 9.6 .... .... ...... .... .... .... .f 6f 118 64. .... .... .... ... ..... Black, Large Early, from Packard ... Black-eye. Large 7.8 .... .... ...... 52 .... .... Black-eye, Early (Wood) .... .... 19. . . .. .. ... 15.0 .... 9.0...... ... 130 .... 100 .... ! .... 86 .... 19.0 .... 92 Large White from Willett......... Bakee, Extra Early...16.2 Early Brown Dent..... .... Iron....................14.9...............99............ .............. 53......... Jones White................8.0 91...........59............ ..... Lady................. Lealand ......... Bullock..... .... 60.........-e .... 16.6 ....... 108 . 75. 92 23.41...........1561............ .... 145..... .... .... .... .... 21.81..... .... 54 ............ 17.6 .... ........ 1117 ....... .... 104 125 122.0....122.01....1 146 79........... Ross White...........1....111.91............. Red Ripper ........... 1.... 118.51.... .120.11... .1 1231. .. .1 91 107 Miller...................8.2............. Mush ...... .......... ..... New Era . .................. Taylor ...... ......... ..... ..... 17.51........1......116 .... .... ... . .... i....1....1....123.6!....1....1.....1 .....-- 1071... . White Giant .......... Unknown .............. Wonderful...... ...... Whippoorwill...... ... 10.8115.91....1....1 7Sf 721 74 I17.4115.21. 8.31..........1061........1........ ... 12.6194! 101 .... .j 98 98 7..8(15.0l414.4122.01 1l01 f01 10l1f100 100 14 Varieties averaging large yields of seed have been New Black (from Wood), ,and Red Rpper. Wonderful wants only per cent. of equalling the average yield of Whi pppoorwill. Varieties making large yields, but which have been tested only once, are Early Brown Dent, Early Bullock, Large Early Black (from Packard) Lealand, and Lire, White Crowder. Additional tes'ts must be made before conclusions can be drawn as to the relative values of these varieties for seed production. There is need for a variety of covpeas that in addition to the good qualities of Whipporwill, prolificacy, upright growth, and earliness, shall be more resistant to mildew or rotting of the pods than is this standard kind. The writer will glad-ito test any local varieties for which this quality is -claimed. Si e of seed.-The following table gives the weight of 10 cowpeas of varieties grown in 1901, also the calculated number of seed in a bushel of 60 Era, 2 'be (the and pounds: o VARIETY.Wg.o Taylor ....................................... White Giant.................................. Brown-eye Crowder ........................... Yellow Sugar Crowder........................ Black ....................... Red Ripper......................... ......... Extra Early Black-eye ......................... Large Black-eye ............................... Whippoorwill ....... .......................... No. sedof sedi 1 bush. (60 100 seed 28.72 25.45 24.74 23.16 22.07 20.89 20.74 20.04 17.98. lbs.) 9,3 106,797 109,858 117,314 123,153 130,110 131,051 135,638 Wonderful ....................... 'Clay ......... ................................ Jones' Perfection White ......................... New Era..................................... Small Blck...... ................... 18.86 1786 13.97 11.49 11.30 150,621 144,117 151,629 194,560 236,545 240,531 1.YeloSga ?. 00w,-e Crowder 4. 5. Crwd New Hra W oefl '*-'*' ,-r*~ gam 9. 40. 11. Wo od. Large. }]laI ee e. Lx. Early' filael{ eye. NlaR. from 16. 12. ('lax. 14. Red Ripper. 15. White Giant Jones White. 17 Taylor had the largest seed, of which only 94,634 were required to make a bushel. New Era has the smallest seed of any kind in the variety test, having 236,545 seed in a bushel. In rows three feet apart, and three seed per foot of drill, an acre would require about 11 pounds of New Era or about 28 pounds of Taylor seed. Small Black, grown in another field, had seed slightly smaller than those of New Era. WHERE TO GET SEED. The Station cannot undertake to supply seed. The addresses of the parties from whom this Station has obtained seed, given below, will enable intending buyers, who cannot get seed nearer home, to correspond with seed'smen or growers. New Era, from J. C. Little, Louisville, Ga. Numerious varieties from H. P. Jones, Herndon, Ga.; Alexander Seed Co., Augusta, Ga.; Willett Seed Co., Augusta, Ga.; !ark W. Johnson Seed Co.) Atlanta, Ga.; Curry-Arrington Seed Co., Rome, Ga.; H. C. Hastings, Atlanta, Ga.; E. G. Packard, Dover, Del.; and T. W. Wood & Sons, Richmond, Va. The hay yield of varieties of cowpeas.-These tests were all made on poor 'sandy u-pland, though the land used for this experiment in 1897 was richer than that occupied by this test in the other years. In 1897 the seed was sown broadcast; in 1898 and 1899 the seed was planted in drills about 21 feet apart. The yields are lower than we usually obtain in our fields sown for hay, which may be partly due to the fact that the peas in the experiments were sown late,-the last week in June,-and that the product was weighed only after the hay had become extremely dry. (as 18 Yields of hay of varieties of cowpea. VARIETY. Relative yield, Yield per WhipprowillAcre in 100 per cent. '97 '98 '99 '97 '98; 99 Av. lbs. lbs. lbs.00 o0 Black-eye, Extra Early.......... .1416........ . .. .. . Black-eye, Large................ Black......................... 222012880 1618 89 105 83 92 Black, Large Early......................1383.........68 Clay .............. ............ 3975 3373 1209 160 121 59 113 Crowder ................................ 1308.........64. Crowder, Large White..............1280(2034. 47 100 73 Iron.............................4080 2154. 150! 106 128 Lady..................................1401.......(.69.... Lealand ..............................2206.......119 .... Miller..... .............................1623......... 79 ... Mush................1929.........95 .... New Era...............................2310..........113.... Ross White.............................2430!........I(119 Red Ripper ..................... 3720!.... ..... Whippoorwill...................2485 2720j2030j(100 l001 100 Wonderful ........... 370014160(15691 126 . 1361........ 1481 1531 771 1001 The largest average for three years was made by the Wonderful (or Unknown) variety, followed by Clay. Iron, which tested only two years, surpassed all other varieties in the average yield for tho'se two years. The'ease of harvesting varies greatly with different varieties, the running kinds affording greatest difficulty. The quality of the hay differs 'somewhat with different varieties. For example, Wonderful has larger stems was the than any other variety tested and hence its hay ap- pears coarser. Nevertheless, the large yield a very popular variety for hay. summnner. .and erect stem make this It is too late to mature seed in a high latitude or when planted very late in On the, whole, as a. general purpose cowpea, suitable for either grain, forage, or fertilizer, we may safely plant the Wonderful or Unknown in the central and southern parts of the 'state until sonme other variety is 73l proved to be superior. Perhaps an exception should be of the Central Prairie Rlegion where there is complaint that there is an extreme tendency for cowpeas to run to vine and fail to fruit properly. It is suggested that the early bunch varieties, especially New Era, planted late in June, be tried on these soils; also that when seed are desired from medium'and late varieties, that'they be planted early and thick in the drill. made unshelled cowpeas. seed and Proportion The following table give's the number of pounds of seed in 100 pounds 'of unshelled cowpeas. In 'all cases the peas were not beaten out until a't least 'several weeks after the -date of picking, thus giving time for thorough drying. 4 of halls in Pounds seed ins on~e htundred pounds co wpcas. lYrs. Lbs. Brown-eye, White. iBlack, from Wood .. Black, from Ala. Ex. Staf Black, Large Early, from Packard .... ........ Black-eye, Large, from ......... Wood ...... :... from Willett ..... Black-eye, Large White, Black-eye, Extra Early, Black-eye, Extra Early, from Wood ......... Clay .................. Crowder .............. 'Crowder, Brown-eye .... Crowder, Yellow Sugar. Crowder, Large White of unshelled Dent.. IYrs. Iabs. 1 '(7 82 1 11 otI 2 3 70 Early Brown 76!Early Bullock........ 69'Iron .................. Jones, White .......... 76 Lady.............. 21 Lealand.............. 77 Miller....... ......... 73 Mush................ New iEra ............. Ross White ........... Red Ripper.......... 21 ~l ii 76 Taylor ... ............ 67 'White Giant .......... 75 Unknown........... 85 Wonderful ............. 84 Whippoorwill..... .... 83 I 2j 69 1 I 31 77 1ii 77 I i 83 I 21 '(3 1 69 I 4 71 11' 77 I 21 71 1 j 21 jI 69 67 I41 'r -seed 'and hull's varies according to The proportion In our tests it is' highest with the several the variety. Crowder varieties, and lowest with Wonderful and Clay; thoroughly dry unhulled peas in number of poun'ds the pod required to make ,a bushel (60 poun'ds)of shelled peas was only 78 pounds with Brown Eye Crowder of of 20 and 90 pounds with Wonderful. To get corresponding figures for any other variety the reader can divide 6,000 by the, figure opposite each variety. It should.be percentage of grain in the same stated here that variety varied greatly in different 'the years. EFFECTS OF LIME ON COWPEAS. Two tests were made on this pointt, using drilled cowpeas of the variety Wonderful, fertilized with acid cultivated 'sever-al times. phosphate stiffer than that in In 1897, on reddish loam soil, 5.6 bushels of pea's without yield the later tests, only 5.2 bushels where slaked lime at the lime rate 'of 640 pounds per acre had been 'applied bro'adcast in February of the preceding year. Whatever lime renaied in the 'soil was evidently of no benefit of 'cowpeas. used as a In March, 1898, water slaked lime on gray sandy soil. It was used at top dressing on oats the unslaked lime, the rate of 1,000 pounds per -acre which is equivalent to 'a much larger weight of the and and the was and was of 'slaked material. After the ots were cut the land was plowed and cowpeas drilled and cultivated a's necessary. The yield follows : in Plot not limed, 13 bushels :cowpe'as per 'acre. Limed plot, 10.2 bushels cowpeas per 'acre.. Clearly liume was of no benefit, bu't apparently injuriou's-a's regards seed There was no notable difference in 'appearance 'of the vines. the formation. FERTILIZER EXPERIMENT. This test was nmade in 1898 with Whipporwill cowpeas' on gray or white 'sandy soil on hilltop. Two -cultivations were given, requiring altogether three- furrows per row. The result's follow: .a Results (of I 21 fertilizer experiment with cowpeas in 1898. FERTILIZER. Plot No. Per acre. Lbs. 2 3I 4 .5 6 1 KIND. Yield of seed per acre. Bus. 13.9 240 Acid phosphate.................. K1] 00 X240 51] 240 .... Muriate of potash ........... No fertilizer.................... Acid phosphate................. Muriate of potash . 15.9 16. 15.4 Acid phosphate................. 151 Muriate of potash............... ............ Nitrate of soda ..... 210 Acid phosphate............. Muriate of potash ................ ................ 19.1 . 16.7 15.2 7 8 9 Av. Av. Av. A'v. 10 3& 8 1& 7 2 &10 4, 6 &9 240 00, 240 51 51 00 240 51 ............ Acid phosphate ...... No fertilizer .................... Acid phosphate................ Muriate of potash............... Muriate of potash............... No fe~rtilizer........................ ............... .... Acid 14.3 14.9 M criate of potash ............ Phosphate and muriate............ phosphate ... . 15.1 15.1 14.1 14.5 15.3 Apparently none of the mineral fertilizers was decidedly advantageous, though with the complete fertilizer there was'anl increase of four bushels per acre. The infailure of 'acidphosphate and muriate of potash crease the yield is surprising, and the only explanation we can suggest is the fact that both phosphate during potash salts had been liberally used on this each of the preceding five years, and probably these ma~terial's had been applied annually f'or 'about fifteen years. This view implies, that even on this gray light sandy soil, containing s'ome flint 'stones, and unde~rl'aid by 'a rather stiffer sandy sub-so il,acid phosphate and potash are not wholly used up or lost during the year when they to field and ,are applied but exert'a considerably residual or cumu- lative effect. 22 Is NITROGEN ADVANTAGEOUS IN A FERTILIZER FOR COWPEAS? Cowpeas are able Ito grow on poorer soil than is cotton or corn. This is because the cowpea plant, through the agency of the specific enlargements or tubercles or nodules on its roots, is able to draw a part of its nitrogen from the air, while ,corn, cotton, grasses, etc., are entirely dependent for their nitrogen on the soil and fertilizer. Since the cowpea plant possesses this source of supply it is reasonable to assume that nitrogen can be omitted from its fertilizer, thus reducing the cost of fertilization. On ithe other hand it has been stated that during the early period in the life of this plant the tubercles ,afford no nitrogen, and that nitrogenous fertilizers are beneficial during this early period. One writer has recorded as his observation that cotton seed meal is a suitable fertilizer for cowpeas. To put this latter statement to a test, four plots of drilled cowpeas in 1898 were employed. All were fertilized with 240 pounds of acid phosphate and 48 pounds of muriate of potash per acre. Two plots received in addition cotton seed meal at the rate of 100 pounds per acre. The cured hay averaged practically 2% tons per acre, the plots with cotton seed meal affording only 40 pounds of hay per acre in excess of the others. There was a practical equality in yield, and a failure of cotton seed meal to exert any appreciable effect. This is in accord with nearly all of the published fertilizer experiments with cowpeas. We have found the tubercles on cowpea's when the plants were only a few inches high and a few weeks old. Apparently the nitrogen in the seed and that which even a poor soil yields is usually sufficient for the little 23 plants up to the time when the root tubercles begin to eyei t se their function of supplying nitrogen. The fertilizer test detailed in a preceding paragraph shows thait with a complete fertilizer the yield of peas 3.8 bushels per acre greater thal where only phosphate and potash were used together. This increase seems to be attributable to the use of 80 pounds of nitratte of soda. with the one The majority of experiments where cotton seed meal was used in indicting that nitrogen is not a profitable constituent of the fertilizer for cowneas. was agree FoRMs OF PHOSPHATE FOR ICOWPEAS A test was made in 1896 of acid phosphate, crude Florida. soft phosphate, and a moistened mixture of these two, which mixture shound have a produced reverted phosphate. The crop failure, probably because of injuries to the roots by nematode worms, and there were only slight differences in the yields of seed on the plots differently fertilized. This was on very poor white sandy soil. In 1898, co-operative tests of acid phosphate in comparison with equal weights of Florida soft phosphate was (crude) were made f'or Gregor, on a. loam with clay sub-soil1, at Town Creek, Ala., and by Mr. J. P. Slaton, on sandy soil 'between Notasulga and -Tuskegee. Apparently the at Town soil this Station by Mr. A. A. Mc- Creek was soil in rich in lingme, the other poor lime. Unfortunately there was a failure to pick the peas in both the tests, but the notes mnade by both of the perimenters ex- have no doubt as to tile superiority of (acid phosphate over insoluble phosphate as a fertilizer for 24 cowpeas. At Town Creek, where pods did not mature, the vines made the best growth where acid phosphate was applied; no difference could be detected between the growth of the unfertilized plot and that on the plot where Florida soft phosphate was employed. On the sandy soil near Notasulga "the plot fertilized with acid phosphate seemed to me one-third better" than the 'one with the r'aw phosphate. These observations as to the superiori'ty of acid phosphate agree with the results of experiments made at the Georgia Experiment Station and with a test made at Auburn in 1898, the results in our test being as follows: Bus. seed per acre. 9.4 13.9 15.2 Cowpeas, with no phosphate ................................ Cowpeas, with 240 lbs. Florida soft phosphate .............. Cowpeas, with 240 lbs. acid phosphate ..................... Apparently the raw or Florida soft phosphate was beneficial, and the acid phosphate still more so, the increase with the latter being 5.8 bushels of seed per acre, w'hic'h gives 'a 'fair profit after deducting the cost of the 2409 pounds of acid phosphate used on an acre. Fertilizing cowpeas between corn rows.-In 1900 on one plot only half of the acid phosphate was applied to corn, the remainder (12.9 pounds per acre) being reserved and drilled with Whippoorwill cowpeas July 7. There was practically a failure of both the corn ,and cowpeas on this series of plots, so that the products of the several plot's were not harvested separately. However, so far as 'could be judged by the eye, there was never any difference in the growth of the vines directly fertilized with phosphate and those which must have drawn sorhe of their phosphate from the fertilizer that was applied to the corn some months before. 25 NUTRITIVE VALUE OF COWPEAS AND COWPEA VINES. The high nutritive value of the seed, the green vines 'of the cowpea plant may be seen from the following figures adapted from Prof. W. A. Henry's book on "Feeds and Feeding:" the hay, and Lbs. digestible. Muscle Starch, Ft formers et Fat 100 lbs. cowpeas (shelled seed) contain*..l17.3163.1f.7 1.1 38.6 100 lbs. cowpea hay contain............10.8 8.7 .2 100 lbs. green cowpea vines contain. 1.8 *Assuming same digestibility as for meal from Canada field peas. Cowpea. hay contains almost exactly the same amounts and-proportions of digestible materials as wheat bran. far The seed 'is more nutritious than wheat bran richer in protein,-the so-called "muscle formers," than is corn. In our feeding experiments with pigs it has proved itself better than corn when constituting only a, portion 'of the grain ration. By feeding farm teams on a liberal allowance of peavine hay the amount and of corn necessary can be reduced much below that usually 'consumed. Cow peais ison can beversus velvet beans as [orage.-Thi's comparmade on the basis of (1) palatability and nutritive value, (2) cost of growing The numiber ton -of each, (3) productiveness., and (4) hardiness. and harvesting a of analyses of velvet bean hay is insuffi- cient to give an accurate 'of its exact nutritive value, in which, however, it is probably about equal to peavine hay. In palatability the advantage is decidedly with peavines. We have found it practically impossible to use the mower in cutting velvet beans and when both crops are cut with the scythe our -records show that the velvet determination 26 beaus require more labor than cowpeas. have not yet found a thoroughly Indeed we practicable and econom- ical means of cutting and handling velvet bean vines. In regard to the yields of hay from the two plants, when groawn side by aside, the following are the resuliti thus far at Auburn, the variety of cowpeas employed being the Wonderful or Unknown. hay CopaVelvet CopaIbean 1hy Drilled crop, 1897, lbs. hay per acre..............2420 Drilled crop, 1897, lbs. hay per acre.................8930 Broadcast crop, 1898, lbs. hay per acre...........4160 Broadcast crop, 1898, lbs. hay per acre...........4160 6400 Broadcast crop, 1898, lbs. hay per acre........ *128 lbs. velvet beans sown broadcast per acre; beans sown broadcast per acre. 3872 7300 4480* 280t 5360 t64 lbs. velvet On the score of productiveness our experiments are soils this slightly in favor of cowpeas, though result might be reversed. to the relative hardiness of the two plants, the It suffers less velvet beau is undoubtedly superior. from the attacks of leaf eating 'insects, and, though the young plants of the velvet bean are not exempt from the attacks of a fungous root rot, characterized by whitish to. brownish, small, spherical, sclerotia, on the stem near the surface of the ground, yet the velvet beans are much more resistant to it than are eowpeazs, which some parts of the Station farm are ahuosit ruined by on other As in this disease. (owp eas were For example, in 1899, on adjoining plots, ruined by Septeumber .12, at least half the yield per the plants see(d having died prematuirely, of being reduced to less than two bushels acre, while velvet beans were perfectly healthy and extrenmely still more important as regards the relative hardiness 27 of the two plants is their susceptibility to injury the attacksof the microscopic nematode worms that infest the soil, especially in gardens and orchards, in parts of the Gulf States. These worms enter the roots of Jinlay plants, cowpeas, c'tton, peaches and numerous c-geta es, causing swellings, which, as they become lariger, result in depriving t'he infected root of its fun;lton supplying water and food to the plant. It is important for farmers to distinguish these nematode injuries from the beneficial tubercles naturally present. Speaking generally and disregarding the advanced cr corky stage of the nematode swelling, tubercles am ne~matode bumps may be by their positiou.The beneficial tubercles are located outside of the outer surface of the. root, and to the side of the same; the injurious enlargements are usually spindle shaped and their posi tilon is such that the root seem to be growing through the center of the swelling. In other words, the root is enlarged symmetrically on all sides in the early stages of nematode injuries. front hi ().' distinguished Cowpeas bodes. beans are highly resistant to such if not entirely exempt fronm them. We have been able to find no plain indications of nematode injuries on the roots of velvet beans. Velvet are very susceptible to injuries from nema-. attacks, This is a matter of much importance, especially when a choice must be made between these two legumes forgrowing in old garden spots, which are likely be infested with nematodes, or with a fungus root di'sease. In this land -to connection it shoild be -said that Or- ton ment of Webber, of the United States DepartAgriculture, found the Iron variety of' 28 ccowpeas to.be resistant both to nematode attacks and to cowpea wilt, the latter being a fungus disease differthat is most destructive at Auburn. The remedy for all these troubles consists in.practicing such a rotati-on as will keep susceptible plants off years. the infested o'r infected fields for at least In brief, the, cowpea as a forage plant is superior to the velvet bean in palatability and ease of curing and only inferior in hardinesis or resistance towards the tacks of certain insects and fungous diseases. Gowpeas versus beggar weed and soja beans as forage. At Auburn the yield :cowpea hay has greatly exceedted that of beggar weed hay and has been superior in quality. The advantages in favor beggar weed are its greater ease of curing, resilting from its more erect and its practical or complete exemption from neinatode injury. Beggar weed also seems resistant to the fungus root rot. Compared with sojia or soy beans, at Auburn have averaged 'a heavier yield of hay and have sur- ent from the one ,of a few at- of of .growth, cowpeas passed only in the greater ease with which the soy been bean, on 'account .of its erect growth, can be harvested. The cowpea ha's been able to make a fair growth land too poor for soy beans. on COWPEAS IN VARIOUJS MIXTUTRES FOR IIAY. The leaflets easily drop from the vines in curing unless speci'al care is exercised. This loss can be avoided and and the curing process facilitated by growing the peavines in 'combination with grass that cures -readily and which serves with its blades, fine stems to tie the sonie whole mass together 'so that 'the leaflets of the legume are not lost. For this purpose crabgrass is one of the best, and the only 'disadvantage is that as a volunteer 29 growth must be relied on, there is some uncertainty as to the stand and as to the grass growing to sufficient height on the poorer spots. We have found German millet useful in this respect. This grass makes it for fair and good soils. necessary to choose an early variety of cowpeas to sow it with, else the millet will be ready for the mower while the peas are entirely too immature. Whipporwill 'cowpeas and German millet make a fairly saitisfactory combination, and the qualities of 'the New Era lead us to the hope that it will make a still more- desirable comnbination with German millet. The usual quantity of millet 'seed is one peck, wi'th a bushel of peas, per 'acre. Possibly the later varieties might also be suitable for sowing with German millet, if the seed of the latter could be put in the ground a few weeks 'after the peas had germinated. In one case we tried this, drilling a row of millet within six inches of the pea row. The millet was sown 17 d'ays after the peas were planted and yet it ripened before the Wonderful cowpeas were ready for haying. This was also true in the lcase of Japanese millet, 'and with two millets which were untrue to name, and which seemed to be Hungarian millet and 'common fox tail millet, the latter very much like German millet. Apparently the millets did not add to the yield of hay, but in the same test the yield of hay was materially increased when Amber sorghum 'and Wonderful peas were drilled together May 14. These two plants were ready for mowing at the same d'ate. In the following table are given the yields of hay afforded by cowpeas alone and in various combinations, all such mixtures being sown broadcast June 24, 1898, the peas, sorghum and corn at the rate of 64 pounds, the millet at the rate of 16 pounds per acre. The soil was a light sandy upland and no nitrogenous fertilizers were used. 30 Yields of hay from cow peas alone and various cow-peas in mixtures. MIL LET, Etc. eYield hay pr acre~ 4560 4240 4240 3860 4320 3840 3520 3780 3780 5440 5040 ° COWPEAS. 3N IWhippoorwill. ,3 S Whippoorwill. 4N Clay............. 4S Clay ............. 5N Whippoorwill... German millet.................... Texas millet...................... Japanese barnyard millet......... Japanese barnyard millet .......... White Kafir corn................. Texas millet...................... Stowell's sweet corn.............. Texas millet ...................... Early Amber sorghum............ 5N Clay............. S Clay............. I4720 6 S IClay ............. 7NIClay ............. 7 SJBlack............ 8N Clay .............. :8 SBlack........... Early Amber sorghum ............ the nilhlets and of sweet corn and The stand of very poor. The Japanese and German Kafir cornw as Kafir corn -millet ripened earlier t'han all (a non-saccharine was desirable. and Amber sorghum) sorghum were the only kinds which added to the yield of hay produced by cowpeas alone. Even this increase may have been chiefly water, for our n oltes show that the hay from the sorghum mixture was iorenoist than the other would kinds and donbtless in unfavorable weather have been mztore difficlt to cure. it We hope to continue the search for a grass-like plant prenilnently suitable for sowing with cowpeas. Such a plant should have a fine stem like German millet and a longer period of growth. would Until this ideal plant ' is found German millet as an aid in curing the early varieties of peas and possibly as suitable for drilling in or working we recommend in with a weeder several weeks after the later var:eties have been sown. Amber sorohum is recommended as a mpe ins of increasing 'the yield on good land, but not as Eameans of making curing easier. 31 MOST PROFITABLE MTHIOD OF STOCK FOOD. UTILIZING CowPEAs AS by It may be of interest to record here the fragmentary data rellative to this ploint that are afforded our experiments at Auburn. Only with the variety Wonderful or Unknown have we accurate determinations of tle amount of seed and the amount of hay when the condition's of soil, fertilization, and culture were absolutely identical, this being done by making hay of the entire growth 'on certain plots and by harvesting only the seed on adjacent plots. made produced Relative yields of seeds and hay cowp2eas. made by Wonderful Bus. seed. 11.0 In 1897, drilled cowpeas yielded per acre. In 1898, broacast cowpeas yielded per acre..........6.7 In 1899 broadcast cowpeas yielded per acre..........7.9 Average three years I6400 2004 3608 Lbs. bay. 2420 8.5 hulls, The 8.5 bushels of seed, with would weigh only about one-fifth as nlch as tie weight accompanying is to of hay recorded 'ahove. Hence, it evident that the mlost profitable use of tile cr'op as stock foo'd would be utilize the hay rather than to. wait for all the seed to ripen. If, however, it should be impracticable to harvest and utilize the cowpea as hlay, our next reconluendation would be pasture -hogs or cattle -on the pea fields., of to course reserving a sufficient area 'to produce seed for tile next year's planting. Wi+'th nearly ulature cowpeas utilized in this way we obt'ained Auburn the following returns foran acre of cowpea pasturage, after first deducting the cost of the additional f'oo'd fed 'while tile aninlals were grazing on cowpeas : at 32 Net return from 1 acre. stalks and Bul. With milch cows in 1900 grazing drilled cowpeas between on corn (Ala. corn rows butter at 20c. and beef on foot at 2 1-2c per lb . With milch cows in 1901 grazing on drilled cowpeas between corn rows . ..... 114); $4.47 corn stalks and (only butter con- sidered) ... ............ ... .................... $5.28 $10.65 $4.90 With shoats sold at 3 cents per pound, grazed in 1897 on cowpeas yielding about 13 bush. per acre (Ala. Bul. 93) With shoats in 1900, sold at 4c per lb. grazed on drilled cowpeas (about 10 bus. per acre) .............. ripe When the cows grazed on parts of the corn and pea field where the 'peas were few or small and overripe the value ,of the pasturage on an acre fell far below the figures given 'above for 1901. We have successfully preserved peavines in the silo, and at all stages of grow'th from early bloom until first pod's 'color. They should be run through a silage cutter, and the silo heavily weighted. If the vines are put in without cutting the silage is often inferior and always difficult to remove. Special care in packing and weighting uncu't peavines is necessary. METHODS OF HARVESTING COWPEA SEED. Picking cowpeas is slow and expensive work. The charge 'for picking is frequently half the crop. If picking cannot be done promptly the crop is frequently ruined by mildew or rot of pods and seed. Hence some more rapid method is desirable. Possible methods are (1) cutting the vines with scythe or reaper when most of the pods are ripe, and latter running the product through the threshing machine or beating the peas out by the slow process of flailing; (2) pulling the vines when the crop is thoroughly mature and beating out the seed with a flail; and (3) the use of a peavine picking machine. 33 While the latter is a possibility, we are unable to report any test made here of a pea-picking machine. It is to be hoped that the pea picker may be further simplified and especially that its price, which, as quoted to us, was prohibitive, being several times that of a mower, may be greatly reduced. In 1898 we made a test of pulling Wonderful cowpeas when 'fully matured and beating them out with a flail. Even with hands unaccustomed to the work, pulling was much more rapid than picking, the rate per man being one and one-fourth acres per day. The process of beat_ing out the peas was much slower, a.nd this tedious work, together with the increased loss from shattered peas when the vines were pulled, and the removal of the plant -food contained in the roots, were serious objections to this method. Apparently under some conditions it can be used to advantage as compared with picking. Cutting the mature vines with a scythe early in the morning when there was least 'danger from shattering, was quite satisfactory, especially with the New Era ,variety, as it doubtless, would be with any bunch pea on which the pods all ripen at about the same time and from which the leaves are dropped by the time the pods are mature. Scything will doubtless be more satisfactory with peas sown late because of their more erect and less tangled condition. The blade should be kept sharp to avoid shattering. We have not tried the mower in harvesting cowpeas for seed because so mnany of the peas after cutting would be trampled over by the team in making its next round. The work of the reaper in green peavines indicated that it would be a 'satisfactory machine for harvesting mature cowpeas where the vines are not tangled. Preliminary tests in running peavines through a grain thresher with concave removed resulted in breaking about half the seed. 84 The very limited tesits made here several years ago of two patterns of pea threshers, or hand machines, for beating out peas after the pods had been picked by hand, failed to show any great saving by the machines tested as compared with flailing. As the particular machines employed were afterwards claimed to be not fair represetatives of those now ,on the market, we must await the results of further tests before drawing conclusions. Our purpose is to continue the experiments as to the beslt methods o'f harvesting cowpeas. CURING COWPEA HAY. Long exposure to sunshine causes the leaflets, the most nutritious portion of the plant, to drop. Hence cowpea hay should be cured largely in its own shade, that is, with 'as little exposure as practicable of the mass of the hay. This is. the foundation principle in haycuring, but its application will vary greatly according to the state of the weather and the succulence of the vines when cut. No definite rule can be given as to the necesisary number of h'ours of sunshine, but a few examples, will show the methold pursued at this Station under same conditions: 1898- Sept. 13, A. M. Cut with scythe, leaving vines in small loose windrows. Windrows turned over with fork, having received about 8 hours of bright sunshine, and exposed leaves having become just crisp enough to rustle when touched, but not dry enough to cause any perceptible loss of leaves in handling; weather during preceding 24 hours had been dry but partly cloudy. Sept. 14, 4-5 P. M. Piled vines in large cocks, where, the weather being fair, they were left until Sept..21, when the vines, now dryer than necessary, were hauled and stored in barn. If rain had been threatened hauling would have occurred about Sept. 15, or else canvas haycaps would have been placed on the cocks. 1899-Sept. 12. Mowed Wonderful variety. Given 12 hours sunshine while spread in swath; then raked 35 and immediately cocked, in which condition was left 48 hours lbefore hauling. hauled the hay contained somewhat more moisture than was thought safe for storing in large masscs, though not too much for storing thin layer. 1900-Sept. 24, . M. Mowed Wonderful cowpeas in bloom and having 'a few colored pods, growth not rank and containing some crabgrass. Received in swath 24 hours' exposure, including about 10 of bright sunshine. Sept. 25, A. m. Raked into windrows and eight hours afterwards, or before night the same day, hauled. Ordinarily it is safest not to haul direct from the windrow's, but to leave the partially cured hay in cocks for several -days and, if necessary, to open out these cocks an hour' or two before hauling. A part of the same field of cowpeas last referred to was employed in testing the practicability of very rapid curing and of storing hay in barn in very green condition, a's is sometimes done with clover in the North, and a's has been advocated for cowpeas in the South when When it in a full threatening wea-ctt herr hastens hauling. 1900-Sept. 24. Immediately after the morning dew dried off, or about 8 to 9 A. i1~., the vines were mowed and left undisturbed and exposed on dry ground to bright sunshine for eight hours; then immediately raked, hauled, pounds of half-cured hay in small tight house. and stored 1,525 It i's claimed th'at when hay is stored in 'a very green condition it should be 'tightly packed and not a'fterwards moved, 'however much heat it may develop. This was packed in three feet deep and 'covered with other dryer hay, and the hay house ;closed.; The weather remained fair and dry for two weeks after this hay was stored. In five days, the tempera- 36 ture had risen to 122 degrees at a point fifteen inches from the wall. This seemed to be the maximum temperature and by October 4 the thermometer had dropped to 110 degrees and white mould was abundant. When the material was opened April 4, 1901, the entire mass, except for a space of about six inches next to each wall, was entirely rotten, and not simply blackened, as sometimes happens with an inferior but serviceable article of peavine silage. The amount 'of 'material taken out was only 545 pounds, or about one-third as much as was put in, part of the loss being moisture, but a large part of it being dry 'matter driven off by fermentation. This is an extreme case, but ,other instances where heat and white mould have developed in hay, field cured for 'several days, 'but stored too green, raises the suspicion that in our moist climate hay cannot be stored in as moist a condition 'as is sometimes done in the North. We should avoid both extremes, of storing hay when too green, and of exposing it too long in the field at the expense of color and nutritive value. If urged to outline a general course of procedure founded on average results here, we would suggest cutting one day, and 24 hours later raking into windrows, where the hay may remain 24 hours; then cocking, and, if practicable, leaving these cocks in the field .for two or three days, at the end of which time they may be opened for a few hours before hauling, or hauled without opening, according to the condition of the hay. SSpecial devi'ces, for example, frames on which the stack or rick is to be built, or small poles with horizontal base on which the cock is built, have been recommended for use in curing peavine hay. Our experience with canvas hay caps as covering for hay cocks during .a 37 wet weather is very satisfactory, though the first cost is considerable. By cutting the crop little at a time and at intervals of a week or more, the hay caps may be repeatedly used, and a few dozen caps may thus serve in the curing of a considerable area of.cowpeas. Additional experimental work in curing peavine hay is planned. COMPOSITION OF THE DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE COWPEA PLANT. To obtain data as the relative value of leaves, stems, and other parts of the plant, both as food and as fertilizers, samples were taken of 'six of the varieties grown in 34-inch drills in the variety test of 1899. These plants had been sown in drills 'on June 23, so that when samples were taken September 12 they had been growing not quite three months, and in some varieties none of the pods had colored. The roots were dug out to a depth of six inches, which depth seemed to contain all the larger ,roots and nearly all of the smaller ones. If harvesting had been delayed a week or two, which, with all these varieties could have been done without their getting too old to make good hay, the yields would doubtless have been larger. The average yield of the six varieties sampled was 1,745 pounds of hay per acre on the basis of the weights of the samples 41 days after the vines were cut, or 1,628 pounds of the same degree of dryness as the samples when analyzed two years later. The following table shows in percentages what proportion of the entire plant consists of leaves, pods and blooms, coar se 'stems, fine stemls, fallen leaves and stems, and roots with attached stubble about two inches long. 38 -Percentages in entire air-dried and blooms, fine ste ins, coarse and roots and stubble. plant of stens, fallen leaves, leaves, pods G;3 Variety. % A: 0 I%l Miller ........................ 0 21.01 1.6 17.0123.3 Whippoorwill ................. 17.0 23.3 Iron ......................... Wonderful .................... 18.7 7.8 Jones White .................. 21.3 13.0 Clay .......................... 19.9 5.9 00 % 00%100% 19.9 14.8 157.31117.7 25.0 16.4 16.4 15.3 30.5 13.0 18.7 18.7 18.0 16.2 12.3 75.4 3.7 21.6 75.4 I 3.7 21.6 59.8 19.2 20.3 71.0 14.3 14.5 51.1 22.9 26.0 Average, 6 varieties........... 19.1 12.0 16.2116.41 63.6 15.5 21.0 The chief difference among varieties as shown in the above table is in the percentageof pods and blooms. Naturally this was greatest in the Whippoorwill, for this was the earliest variety, and when cnt September 12 it had more large pods than did any other. This showvthe earlier natnrity also makes the animal highest percentage of its weight available food, viz : 75.4 per cent. On the other extreme is Clay, which, when cut 'at this stage immaturity, (only about 2 per cent. of pods having colored), had only about half the weight of the plant available for hay. Taking the average of all varieties, 63.6 per cent. of the air-dry weight of the plant was contained in the hay. The leaves, the most valuable portion except perhaps the pods, constituted per cent. of the weight of the entire plant, or 30 per cent. of the of the hay. Of the hay cut at 'a stage when on some varieties from 2 to 10 per cent. the pods had colored, and w"hen Whippoorwill for of 19 weight of on others no pods had colored, the pods and blooms averaged 12 per cent. of its weight. The leaves of all six varieties were mixed together after being weighed, and in like manner'compositeaples of the other parts of the plants obtained. The table below gives the composition of leaves, a mixture of stems, etc., each sample being made up the corresponding parts of all six varieties. The analyses were made by the Chemicatl Department of this Station. In noting the -small amounts of moisture it should been kept in an be borne in mind that the saniples office building for two years -before the analyses were made. Weevil injured the pods so they were antilyzed. presence of considerable sand on roo and fallen leaves explains the high percentage of ash. were of had The that not Con position of the parts of the cowpea plant, cut Sept. Average of 6 varieties. Leaves .... .......... 10.65 0II I10.98 22.44131.69I16.78 7.46 4.92 0 0 00 0 Fine stems, etc................. 8.97] 6.87 Coarse stems .................. Fallen leaves, ........... Roots and stubble.............. etc.. 8.47 11.88130-74143.591l 9.44133.12 42.19 1.75 1.86 6.62 1.48 9.75 20.78 10.44131.96 20.45 5.25 24.75] 8.63] 3-.82156.25 40 Let the reader note that the leaves were nearly twice as rich in protein !as the fine sters ; we may also infer from the small amount of crude fiber in the leaves that they are much more digestible than any other parts analyzed. These considerations emphasize the importance of retaining. the leaves during the curing of peavine hay,. (SCIENCE CONTRIBUTIONS.) BULLETIN No. 119. ALABAMA. APRIL, 1902. Aogricultura1 Experiment. station ,or THr AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE, AUBURN. THE FLORA OF THE METAMORPHIC REGION OF ALABAMA. By F. S. EARLE. BROWN PRINTING CO., PRINTERS MONTGOMERY., ALA. & BINIbIS. 1902. COMMITTEE OF TRUSTEES ON EXPERIMENT STATION. THios. WILLIAMS . ....................................... ....................................... Wetumpka. Selma. JONATHAN HARALSON. STATION COUNCIL 0O.D. P. H. SMITH. MELL. .................................... ................................. Acting President. Director and Botanist. B. B. Ross C. A. J. F. CARY, .......................................... Chemist. D. V. M...............................Veterinarian. ................................... DUGGAR. Agriculturist. E. M. WILCOX...........................Biologist and Horticulturist. Associate Chemist. J. T. ANDERSON . ................................ ASSISTANTLS. C. L. HARE................................ TI. First Assistant Chemist. Second Assistant Chemist. BRAGG.................................... J. C. PHELPS............................... T. R. U. W. CU VER.................................. CLARK................................... Third Assistant Chemist. Superintendent Assistant of Farm. Agriculturist. C. F. AUSTIN.................................Assistant Horticulturist. The Bulletins of this Station will be sent free to any citizen of the State on application to the Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama. THE FLORA OF THE METAMORPHIC REGION OF ALABAMA. BY F. S. EARLE. The following list 'of the ferns and flowering plants of the Metamorphic Region of Alabama is based on the collections in the herbarium of the Alabama Polytechnic Institute at Auburn. The Alabama material in this herbiarium was secured as follows: First, a few plants collected prior to 1895 by Dr. P. HI. Mell and his assistants. (The bulk of this earlier material was destroyed by fire) ; second, a few plants collected during the Fall of 1895 by Dr. L. M. Underwood; third, plants collected during the Spring and Summer of 1896 by L. M. Underwood and F. S. Earle; fourth, plants collected during the Fall of 1896, during 1897, and the Spring and Summer of 1898 by C. F. Baker and F. S. Earle; fifth, 'plants collected from the Fall of 1898 to the Summer of 1901 by F. S. Earle and Mrs. F. S. Earle. Prior to 1897 attention had been devoted mainly to the fungi, flowering plants being taken only incidentally. Prof. Baker first suggested the systematic 'collection of the flowering plants, and the greater part 'of the species enumerated below were taken during the period of his residence at Auburn. As Dr. Charles Mohr was known to be working on a flora of Alabama, the 'collections made prior to midsummer of 1897 were all sent to him for 'determination, and he was permitted to retain 'a full set, including all uniques, for his own herbarium. These plants are frequently referred to in his recent work ,on The Plant Life of Alabama that was published first by the United States Department of Agriculture as Volume 6, of the Con- 44 tributions from the National Herbarium (issued July 31, 1901), and later (October, 1901), was reissued as a report from the Alabama Geological Survey. After midsummer of 1897 Dr. Mohr 'became so occupied in the preparation of the manuscript for this great work that at his request the sending o'f plants w'as discontinued, except as he occasionally asked for material in some special group. The later collections have been determined by Dr. J. K. Small, Mr. G. V. Nash, Dr. Edward L. Greene and other specialists, and by the writer, who has recently had an opportunity to compare some of the more doubtful material with the rich collections in the herbarium of the New Y'ork Botanical Garden. Some fifty species are reported by Dr. Moh'r of our collecting that are not represented in the harbarium of the Polytechnic Institute; )or at least are not represented under the name by which Dr. Mohr reports them. These species are included in this list, Dr. Mohr being cited in each case as the authority. These specimens will be 'found either in the herbarium of Alabama plants .deposited by Dr. Mohr at the State University at Tuscaloosa, or in 'his private herbarium, which is now incorporated with the National Herbarium at Washington. In part, at least, these species represent uniques that did not chance to be again collected by us. There are, however, too many to be wholly accounted for in this way, and it seems probable that some of them represent cases where Dr. Mohr found 'occasion to change his original determination of the specimens. It has not been possible to trace these cases, for since the publication o'f Dr. Mohr's work I have not had access to the collections. It has seemed best to include these names, but with this word of warning as to the possibility of error through including two determinations for the same plant. 45 It so 'chanced that Dr. Mohr did very little collecting in that part of the State covered by this list. He, however, made one visit to the rugged mountainous region in Clay county and ,secured a number of plants that were not taken by us. A few plants have also from time to time been collected in this region by various members of the State Geological Survey. Fifty-two plants from these sources are recorded by Dr. Mohr from this region that do not appear in our collections. These are includeid in this list, the proper credit being given. It is probable that the specimens representing them are all in the herbarium at ,Tuscaloosa. The Metamorphic region of Alabama as mapped by the State Geological Survey, is a triangular area lying on the eastern side 'of the State. It extends from near the southeast corner of Lee county at a point nearly opposite Columbus, Ga., dortherly along the State line for about a hundred miles to a point in the northern part of Cleborne county. From this point the second side of the triangle extends southwestwardly for about the same distance, to point in Chilton 'county, some three miles east of the line of the Louisville & Nashville railroad, and from here another hundred miles east-southeast to the point of beginning. This area 'comprises the southernmost extension of the Appalachian mountain 'system. It is underlaid by granite and other metamorphic rocks which exert their usual influence on the topography, giving high, rugged hills and frequent exposures of bare rock. There are, however, few vertical 'or overhanging cliffs, such as are frequent to the north and west in the region underlaid by the 'coal measures. The soil varies from a light and rather coarse sandy loam to the red hornblendic soil so ,characteristic of the Piedmont region of Georgia. In many places it is much incumbered with angular fragment of quartz and 'other hard resistant ,a 46 rocks. The original timber growth varied from almost pure long leaf pine forests at the southern border and along the bluffs of the Tallapoosa, to pure hardwood forests on the ric'her areals, especially to the northward. The greater p'art of the area was, however, a mixed forest of hardwolods and long or short leaf pines. The region is divided into nearly equal parts by the Tallapoosa river, the portion to the south and east being the high, broad ridge that forms the divide between this stream The northwestern portion and the Chattahoochee. forming the 'divide between the Tallapoosa and the Coosa is more rugged and broken, and in the Talladega Mountains reaches the highest elevations to be found in the State (2,300 feet). This is one of the most interesting parts of the State, and deserves much more extended study. It was visited only once by Dr. Mohr 'and 'once by the writer. This metomorphic region is of special interest botanically since it constitutes the southernmost extension of the 'Carolina Life Zone. Many of the characteristic plants of the Ap palachian system find here their most southerly stations while mingling with these northern representatives are many plants that have pushed up from the Gulf region. This mingling of the two floras accounts for the large number of species found. Of the 1146 species and varieties ennumerated in the following list, 94 are new to the State, and are not included in Dr. Mohr's work. These are indicated by an asterisk (*). There are 76 others that were previously known in Alabama only from the northern part of the State. These represent an extension of the known range in the State to the southward, and are marked by a dagger (t). There are 'also 167 species that represent a northerly extension of the known range within the State. These are indicated by a double dagger ($). The larger number 47 in this latter class is accounted for by the fact that Au- burn, where the greater part of the collecting was done, is on the extreme southern border of the metamorphic Region. In fact the more sandy lands of the central pine belt extend at one point to within half a mile of the College building. All the plants collected in the neighborhood of Auburn have been included in the list whether they were taken from ,one side or the other of this rather vaguely defined line. While most 'of the plants that are marked with the double dagger are undoubtedly characteristic of the central pine belt rather than of the metamorphic hilly; still it is probable that almost or quite all of them are to, be found at some point on the more sandy lands that are clearly within this region proper. The ecological relations of the flora have not in all cases been critically studied. The topographical features of the country will, of course, limit the plant societies or formations. The following situations have each a more or less clearly marked flora, and the brief note on 'habitat following each species in the list will, in most cases, indicate the nature of the locality where the plant should be sought. Beginning with the hydrophytes we may distinguish, first, the plants of the rapidly moving streams with which the region is 'abundantly supplied. Second, plants of pools and ponds. Ponds are -not frequent, those found being mostly artificial. Third, marsh plants, inhiabiting 'certain open miry places, and the open boggy banks of streams. Such areas are restricted and "rather infrequent, but certain plants are found only in such localities. Fourth, 'swamp plants of the poorly drained timbered land along streams. In clay land there are likely to be 'alder swamps," the prevailing growth being alder (Alnus ru- 48 gosa) and willow (Salix nigra) frequently with a -lense undergrowth of cane ( Irandinaria tecta). In sandy land swamps are more o-ften "bay heads" with.a'prevailing growth )of white bay ( Magnolia Virginiana), red bay (Persea pabesceos) and -maple (Accrrabrant.) places these "bay heads' 'develop into "Sphagnum bogs," where the ground is carpeted with peat moss (Sphagnum sp.). Each of these varieties 'of swamp has its own peculiar association of plant's. Of mesophyte associations we have, 1st, the plants of the better drained"creek and river bottoms, and, 2nd, the ioiste r and richer northern slopes of the uplands. Such locations are usually heavily timbered mostly with hard occasionally mixed loblolly pine (Pinas Iaeda) in the lowlands, 'and with the short leaf pine (Pines echinata) in the uplands. These associations are rich in the number of species and include most the more northern types. The plants from the Gulf region are to be sought on the dryer, * more sandy uplands, and in the sandy bay heads and Sphagnum bogs. More or less 'distinctly zerophytic associations the greater part of the upland area.. Here we may distinguish. lst, plants of the dry hard-wood forests. These are usu!found on the 'south slopes the red clay hills ; 2nd, plants 'o'f 'mixed woods, including long or short leaf pine's and h'ard -woods. This type of forest is the. prevailing one over a large part of the entire region ; 3rd, plants the long leaf pine (Pinas palucsiris) forests. with woods, but of occupy ally of These are confined of to the extreme southern bor'der and to a strip along the hills bordering the Tallapoo'sa river. A large number of southern species are 'found in this, long leaf pine associati'on ; 4th, an extremely zerop'hyti'caussociation -found on expo'sed granite outcrops. Occasionally granite occur where they are somewhat outcrops moisted 49 by a 'stream or 'spring and here we find still a different association of-plants. Besides these which may be consildered as constituting the natural plant covering of the region we have other associatlons whose advent determined by the presence of man. Among these we may distinguish, 1st, the weeds of cultivated fields and roadsides and waste gardens; 2nd, the weeds of of abandoned or "turned out" places; 3rd, the plants fields, and, 4th, the plants of the second growth woods that ultimately reclothe these ablandoned fields. The loblolly pine (Pinus Tacda) usually plays the leading part in this forlestization, though with it are associated sweet gum (Liquidaubar) black gum ( Nyssa sylvatwa), persimmon (Diospyros) and occasional individuals of numerous other trees. is pastures, OPHIOGLOSSACEAE. 4Botrychium biternatum (Lam.) Underw. A single specimen, upland pasture, Auburn, Herbarium.), (in Underwood Botrychium obliquum. Muhl. Frequent, creek-bottom woods. Botrychium, Virginianum (L.) Sw. Occasional, creek-bottom woods. Ophioglossum crotalophoroides Walt. Occasional, grassy creek-bottom pastures. OSMUNDACEAE. Osmunda cinn'amo'mea L. Osmunda regalis L. Common, swampy places. Common, swamps. 50 POLYPODIACEAE. tAdifantuil pedatum L. Asplenium Moist, shaded hillsides, river hills, Tallapoosa county. IBradleyi, I). C. Eaton. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life.) Aspleniunm Filix-foeniina (L.) Bernl. Common, moist woods, variable. nMart. Asplenium parvuluni &Gall. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life.) Aspleniuni platyneuron (L.) Oakes. Common, rocky hillsides, granite outcrops. Aspleniumi Irichonianes L. Clay county (Mohrs Plant Life.) Cheilanthes ia'nosL (Miclix.) -Watt. Common, cliffs, granite .outcrops. Dryopteri's Floridana (Hook.) 0. Kuntze. A single station, a swamp 6 miles south of Auburn, Lee co. Dryopteris marginalis (L.) Clay county, creek bottoms. A. Gray. Clay county (Mohrs Plant Life.) t-Dryopteris Noveboracensis (L.) A. Gray. tDryopteri-s 4 0noclea Occasional, creek bottoms, moist rich woods. Thelypteris (L.) A. Gray. senisibilis L. Occasional, creek bottom g p e i e a o oPet s, r clay M c land. x) F e IPolypodiuni -Pteridiui Occasional, moist woods, creek bottoms. polyp'odioides (L.) A. S. Hitchcock. Common, rocks, tree trunks. Common, rocky hillsides in woods. Polystichum acrostichoides (Mic'hx.) Schott. aquilinum pseudocaudatuni Ciute. Common, dry pine woods. Frequent, rocky banks, granite outcrops. tWoodsia, obtusa (Spreng.) Torr. Woodwardia lareolata (L.) Moore. Common, creek bottom swamps. 51 iWoodwarldia Virginica (L.) Smith. LYCOPODIACEAE. A single collection, Auburn. Lycopodiuni pinnatum (Chapm.) Frequent, sphagnum bogs. Lloyd &Underw. SELAGJNELLACAE. Selaginella apus (L.) Spring. Frequent, on the ground in swamps. PINACEAE. Juniperus Virginiana L. Frequent, especially along roadsides. The short leaf pine; common in mixed upland woods. Pinus echinata Mill. Pinus palustris Mill. The long leaf pine;, the prevailing timber on sandy lands, Lee county, and on dry rocky ridges bordering the Tallapoosa River. Pinus Taeda L. pine, swamp pine; common, swamps Loblolly pine, old and uplands, especially as a second growth in abandoned field fields. TYPHACEAE. Typha latifolia L. Frequent, marshy places and shallow ponds and ditches. SPARGANIACEAE. Sparganurn androcladum (Engelnm.) Moi-ong. Occasional, marshy places. ALISMACEAE. Somoitn, mai arshes and d. 52 tSaittaria pubescens Muhl. A single collection, swamp in river hills, Elmore county. POACEAE. Elliottiana Schult. Common, dry open places. Common, dry open places. PAgrosti Agrostis hyemali's (Walt.) B. S. P. jAgro'stis intermedia Scribn. A single collection, Auburn. Aira caryophylla. L. Common, dry open places. Alopecurus geniculiatu's L. Occasional, wet open places. Andropogon argyraeu's Schultes. Common, dry woods and fields. - Andr-opoggon coryinbosus (Chapm.) Nash. Occasional, wet swampy places. TAndropogon Elliottii Chapm. Occasional, dry woods. Andrupogon furcatus Muhl. Infrequent, dry woods and roadsides. :jAndropogon glomneratus (Walt.) B. S. P. Frequent, wet swampy places. A smaller form with narrow panicles occurs in moist, upland woods. Andropogon scoparius Mich~. Very common and variable. As here recognized it probably includes more than one species. Andropotgon Frequent, sandy uplands Tracyi Nash. fields or thin woods. (Broom sedge). Variable. Andropogon Virginicus L. Very common, especially in old jAnthaenatia villoisa Aristida lanosa B eany. fields. Occasional, moist sandy lands, south of Auburn. Muhi. Frequent, dry sandy lands, south of Auburn. Ari stida purpurascens Ihoir. A single collection, Auburn. 53 Arrhenatherurn elatius (L.) Beauv. A single collection, Auburn. Arundinaria tecta (Walt.) Mull. Common, creek bottom swamps Occasional, fields, roadsides, etc. Occasonal, rich upland woods. (Cane.) (escaped.) Br'onus unioloides (Wilid.) H. B. K. tBrdihyelytruni erectulm (Sclreb.) Beauv. Campulosus arlomaticuss (Walt.) Scrib. 0. Kuntze. Gold Hill, Lee county (Mohr's Plant Life.) Cfapriola Dactylon (L.) T.Cenchrus echinatus L. Occasional, sandy fields. Abundantly introduced (Bermuda grass.) Chaeto chloa glauca (L.) S-cribn. Common, cultivated fields. *,ChaetochlOa perennis (Curtiss) Bicknell. A single collection, Auburn. Chrysopogon avenaceus (Miix.) Beath. Common. upland woods and open places. jrChrysopogon nu-tans (L.) Benth. Common, upland woods and open places. Cinna :arundinacea L., Occasional, wet swampy places. Dactylocteniuni Aegypticum (L.) Wilid. ,Common, cultivated fields. Danthonia sericea Nutt.. Frequent, dry woods and open places, clay or sand. tDanthonia spicata (L.)- Beauv. Rocky hillsides, clay land, north of Auburn. Eatonia fiiformis (Chapm.) Vasey. Frequent, dry woods. Eatonia nitida (Spreng.) Nash. Common, dry woods. xEatonia Penn'sylvanica (D C.) A. Gray. Dry open hillsides, Auburn. *Eatonia Pennsylvanica (D C.) A. Gray. A single collection, Auburn, creek bottom woods. 54 Echinochloa Crus-galli (L.) Ieauv. Occasional, gardens and barnyards. Eleusene Indica (L.) Gaertn. Common, cultivated fields. *Elymus galbriflo'rus (Vaisey) Scribn. & Ball. Occasional, dry woods. Elyrnus Lee county. Earle & Baker (Molr's Plant istrictu!s Wili~d. (Mohrs Plant Life.) Life.) Elymus Virginicus L. Lee County, JEragrostis hirsuta (Micix.) Nash. Frequent; dry, open places. Eragrostis major (L.) Host. Common, cultivated fields. Eragrostis pectinacea (Micihx.) Steud. Common, dry open places. Eragrostis Purshii Schrad. Occasional, cultivated fields. 1:Era rostils reftaetat (Muhl.) Sgerih Common, dry open places. Erianthus alopecuroides (L.) Eli. Common, upland woods, usually on clay. *Erianthus compactus Nash. Common, upland woods, usually on clay. J Erianthuls icontortus Eli. Common, poor usually sandy woods. Festuca nutaus Wilid. Frequent, moist woods. *Festuca A single collection, Chambers county. lobtusa Spreng. Festuca octoflora Walt. Common, dry open places. Festuca octolora aristata (Torr.) Dewey. Lee county, Earle & Baker (Mohr's Plant Life.) Festuca sciurea Nutt. Lee county, Earle & Baker (Mohr's Plant Life.) Festuca Shortii Knuth. Lee county, Earle & Baker (Mohr's Plant Life.) 55 ~Gylrnopogoll alibiglls (Michx.) B. Frequent, dry sandy woods. Frequent, wet swampy places. S. P. lom'alocenclrus Virginicus (Willd.)Britt. Panicularia Ilervata (Wili-d.) 0. Kuntze. Occasional, cultivated fields. Melica mutica Wall., Frequent, upland woods. Muhlenbergia !capillaris (Lam.) Tril. Frequent, dry open places. IMuhienbergia diffusa S'chreb. A single collection, Auburn. Oplismnenus hirtellus (L.) R. & S. Occasional, moist sandy places in shade. Panicularia nervata (Wilid) .0. Kuntze. Common, .wet shady places. Panicuni agrostoides Mull. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life.) .*Panicum Alabamense Ashe. Collected once, Auburn, swamp. This is very close to P. lucidum Ashe, and is probably identical with that species. Panilcum tPanicum Auburne Ashe. Very angustifolium Eli. common, dry upland woods and roadsides. Collected once, Auburn, uplands. This is probably only a small form of P. sphaerocarpon. Eli. Common, wet, swampy woods. Pani-cum barbulatuLni Michx. -- Pani'cum I7ogueanum Ashe. Collected once. Auburn, uplands. Panicuin clandestinum L. Occasional, alder swamps, clay land. Panic'unicounn11utatum Schult. Common, dry sandy uplands, roadsides, old fields and thin woods; often forming a dense sod. Panicuin depauperatum Muhl. Common, dry uplands. 56 Panicum dichotomurn L. Very common, moist or dry land. Panicum- Earlei Nash. Occasional, sandy swamps. Panicum elongatuiii Pursh. Occasional, damp places. --- Paniicum hians Ell. Frequent, low, wet places. Paniculm lanuginosuml Ell. Collected once, Chambers county. tPanicum laxiflorun Lam. A form has been called P. can- Very common, moist places. cifolium Scribn. Panilcum lucidui Ashe. Frequent, wet places, sphagnum bogs, etc. Panicurn meliicariui Michx. Lee county, Earle & Baker (Mohr's Plant Life.) been deter- Panicum microcarpon Muhl. Frequent, moist uplands. - Panicuni inutabile Scribn. & Merrill. Occasional, dry woods. These specimens have mined as P. Joori Vasey. Panicum neuranthum Greiseb. Collected once, Auburn. Panii cam oligantbi es Schult. Occasional, sandy uplands. Panicuni Porterianum Nash. Common, rich uplands.- Panicum pseudopubescens Nash. Very common, dry uplands. Panicum pubifolium Nash. Frequent, sandy uplands. Paniculil pyrifornie Nash. Lee county, Earle & Baker (Mohr's Plant. Life. ) Panicum Ravenelii Scribn. & Merrill. Frequent, sandy uplands. Panicum rostratum Mull. Common, uplands. 57 Panicum scoparium Lai. Common, open sandy creek bottoms. tPanicunl Scribuerianun Nash. Collected once, Auburn. Panicum sphaerocarpon Ell. Frequent, ditch banks and uplands. Panicuni Texinun Buckl. Common, fields, introduced. Panicum trifolium Nash. Frequent, swamps. TPanicum verrucosum Mihl. Common, shaded swamps. Panicum virgatum L. Common and variable, uplands and creek oottoms. _Panicum Webberianum Nash. Common, dry exposed uplands, clay or sand. -- Panic um Yadki nensis Ashe. Collected once, creek bottom, Auburn. - Pasp'alum august-ifolium Le Conte. Frequent, upland woods, often confused with P. Zaeve. Michx. Paspalum B-oscianum Floeugge. Common, cultivated fields. Piaspalur ciliatifolium Michx. Common, upland woods. Paspalum cornpres'sum (Sw.) Nees. Common, wet pastures (Carpet grass.) $Paspalum dilatatuniiPoir. Frequent, wet pastures and roadsides. Paspalum distichumn L. Occasional, wet creek bottoms. .j.Paspalu'm Fkoridanulm Miclix. Occasional, sandy uplands. Pasp'alun laeve Miclix. Occasional, upland woods. iPa~paluni longipedunculatum Le Conte. Occasional, sandy uplands. Poa annua L. Common, dooryards, pastures and waste places. 2 58 P'oa autumnallis Muhl. Frequent, swampy woods. tPoa pratensis L. Occasional, roadsides and open woods. iSorghum Halapense (L.) Pers. Frequent, fields and waste places, (Johnson grass.) Sporobolus asper (Michx.) Spolroolus Indieii's (L.) Kunth. R. Br. (Smut Frequent, sandy woods and roadsides. Common, pastures and door-yards, grass.) ' Sporobolus punceus (Mi-chx.) Kuntl. Frequent, dry sandy woods south of Auburn. Stipa avenacea L. Frequent, upland woods, sand or clay. ~Syntherisnia fiumbriatum (Link) Nash. Common, cultivated fields, (Crab grass.) Syntheri'sia villosuni Walt. Occasional, cultivated fields. Tricuspis scslerioides (Miclx.) Torr. fields. Common, upland woods and open places. Tripsacuin dactyloides L. Frequent, ditch banks and borders of moist Trisetuuiaiistaltului (S-ciibn. & Merrill) Nash. Dry clay woods, Tallapoosa county. tTrisetuui Pennsylvanicum (L.) Bean.uv Freq~uent, moist woods. Uniola latifoliz Miclix. Frequent, rich upland woods. Uniola laxa (L.) B. S. P. Collected once. Auburn. Uniola, longifolia Scribn. Frequent, upland woods and creek bottoms. CYPERACEAE. Carex Atlautica' Bailey. Frequent, rich woods. Carex ceiphalopliora Muhl. Frequent, dry wooded hillsides. 59 Carex crinita Lam. A single collection, Auburn. Carex debills Mi!chx. Frequent, wet woods. Carex granularis Muhl. Lee county, Earle & Baker (Mohr's Plant Life.) *Carex gynandra S'chw. Occasional, upland woods, Lee county, Tallapoosa county. Carex interior Bailey. Lee county, Earle & Baker (Mohr's Plant Life.) Carex intumesseens IRudge. Frequent, swamps and ditch banks. Carex laxiflora La. Common, upland woods. Carex laxiflora varians Bailey. Lee county, Earle & Baker (Mohr's Plant Life.) Carex leptalea Wahl. Common, swamps. Carex lurida Wahl. Frequent, swamps and marshy places. tCarex nigro-1inarginata Schw. Carex oblita Steud. Frequent, swamps. Frequent, dry rocky hillsides and granite outcrops. southerly known station for this rare Carex. The most *Carex p tychio'carpa Steud . Frequent, creek bottom swamps. Carex sterilis Wilied. Frequent, swampy creek bottoms. Carex stipata Mull. Frequent, wet open places. *Carex tenera Dewey. Common, rich woods. tCarex Texensis (Torr.) Bailey. Occasional, Auburn. Common dry upland woods. Carex triceps Midlix. 60 Carex verrucosa Muhl. Frequent, swamps, matures in midsummer. cens Eli. of Mohr's Plant Life.) (=C. glances- Carex vuipinoidea Miclix. Common, wet places, ditch banks, etc. Cyperus cylindricus (Eli.) Britt. Frequent, sandy fields, etc. Cyperus echinatus (Eli.) Wood. Common, sandy uplands. Cyperus fiicuimis Vahl. Frequent, sandy lands. Cyperus Haspan L. Frequent, marshy grass lands. Cyperu's Lancastriensis Porter. Occasional, Lee county, Tallapoosa county. Cyperus-ovularis (Mielix.) Torr. Frequent, dry uplands. Cyperus pseu'dovegetus Steud. Frequent, swampy places. Cyperus retrufractus (L.) Torr. Common, dry sandy uplands. Cyperus rotundus L. Nut grass, a garden pest, locally abundant. Cyperus stenolepis Lee County, Earle & Baker. Torr. (Mohr, Plant Life.) Cyperus strigosus L. Common, Schuites. Eleocharis prolifera Torr. Eleocharis obtusa Common, marshy places. Occasional, marshy places. Occasional, marshy places. fields and marshy' pl'aces. Eleocharis tuberculosa (Michx.) RI. & S. Fimbristylis autumnalis (L.) R. & S. Common, marshy places and sandy A single collection, Auburn. *FjJI brj5stylij5 axa Vahl. fields. 61 *Fuirena JPuirena Common, marshy places. siquarrosa Michx. squarrosa hispida (Eli.) Chapm. Frequent, sphagnum swamps, etc. Hemicarpi micrantha (Vahi) Britt. Frequent, marshy places. Kyllinga pumila Michx. Common, wet places. Rynchospora axillaris (Lam.) Britt. Occasional, marshy places. lRynchospora corniculata (Lam.) A. Gray. Frequent, borders of ponds, etc. Rynchospora cymosa Ell. Frequent, marshy places.. Rynchospora fiifol'ia Torr. A single collection, Auburn. Rynchospora glonmerata (L.) Vahl. Occasional, marshy places. Ryncholspora golmerata paniculata (A. Gray) Chapm. Common, moist ur dry open places, roadsides, etc. *Rynchospora miorocephaia Britt. A single collection, Auburn. *RYInchospora patula A. Gray. A single' collection, Macon's Mill, Lee county. Ryreh -:Sci Occasional, marshy places. Occasional, wet places, clay land. Frequent, upland woods. ospora rariflora Eli. rpus Erifophiorum Michx. Scieria ciliata Michx. Scleria oligantha Michx. Frequent, upland woods. Sicieria pauciflora Mull. A single collection, Auburn. I Scieria pauciflora giabra Chapm. Frequent, moist woods. Scieria trigiomerata Michx. Frequent, upland woods. 6'2 Stenophyllus, capillari's (L.) Britt. Frequent, sandy fields and marshy places. PALMACEAE. Rhapidophyllun t Kabal hystrix (Fraser) Wendl. & Drude. Rare, swamps, Lee county, clay and sand. Adansoni (querns. AR C EAE. 4 Rare, swamps, Lee count, in sand. Arissaeni'a quinatun (Nutt.) Schott. Torr. Occasional, swamps and wet woods. Arisaema triphyllum (L.) Occasional, wet woods. Orontium aquaticum L.. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life.) Peltandra Virginica (L.) Kuntl. Occasional, swamps and wet woods. MAYACAEAE. T \iayaca Aubletii Miclix. Frequent, sandy swamps, usually with sphagnum. XYRJDACEAE. . Xyris anibigua Beyri'ch. A single collection, Auburn. Xyris Caroliniana Walt. Frequent, sandy borders of ponds, -etc. Xyris conuiunius flexuosa Kunth. Lee county, J. D. Smith (Mohr, Plant Life.) Xyris Muhl. Occasional, sandy swamps. Xyris iridifolia Chapm. Occasional, sandy swamps. Frequent, sandy swamps. Xyris torta Smith. 63 BROMELIACEAE. :Tillandsia usneoides L. Occasional on trees in creek bottoms. All killed by the "freeze" of February. 1899. COMMELINACEAE. Conimelina collilunis L. Escaped, ditch banks, Auburn. Commelina erecta L. Frequent, dry 'hillsides. Commelina hfrtella Vahl. Frequent, swampy creek bottoms. 'Tradescantia hirsuticaulis Small. River hills, Elmore county; also sandy woods, Lee county. Tradescantia 'montana Shuttiw. Rich upland woods, Clay county, Coosa county. Tradescantia retlexa Raf. Frequent, dry rocky hillsides, granite outcrops. JUNCACEAE. Juncoides echinatum Small Frequent, 'wooded hillsides. Juncus acuminatus Mi'chx. Frequent, wet open places. Juncus acunilnatus Frequent, wet open places. debilis (A. Gray) Engeim. Juncus Canadensiss A. Gray. Occasional, Auburn. $Junculs diffusissirnus Thicki. Shallow pool in swamp, Auburn. *Jundus Dudleyi Wieganid. Frequent, dry woods and roadsides. Juncus effusus L. Frequent, wet, open places. Juncus marginatus Rostk. Frequent, wet, open places. 64 Juncus marginatus aristulatus (Miclx.) Coville. Common, wet open places. Juncus polycephal-us Michx. Frequent, wet, open places. Juncus repens Michx. Sandy borders of ponds, in or out of water. *Julcus robustus (Engl.) Covilie. A single collectibn, Auburn. ~Juncus scripoides Dam. Common, wet open places. Juncus setac us Rostk. Common, wet open places. Juncus tenois Wilid. Common, especially along paths and woods roads. Juncus Torreyi Coville. Lee county, Earle & Baker (Mohr, Plant Life.) Juncus trigonocarpus Steud. A single collection, Auburn. LILIACEAE. _Aletris farinosa L. Occasional, borders of sandy swamps. Allium mutabile Miclix. Common, creek bottoms, clay land, often in fields. Allium veneale L. Introduced, fields,. etc., Auburn. *Chamaeliriunl obovale Small. Occasional, rich upland woods. Chrosperma uiuscaetoxicum (Walt.) 0.' Kuntze. Rare, taken once near Auburn. Lilium Carolinianum Michx. Occasional, rich upland woods. Medeola Virginilca L.. Occasional, moist, rich woods. Melanthium Virginianum L. Rare, taken once near Auburn. (=Allium stratum.) Common, dry rocky hillsides, granite outcrops, etc. Nothoscordium bivalve (L.) Britt. 65 Polygonatum biflorum (Walt.) Eli. Frequent, moist rich woods and creek bottoms. -Polygon~atum -com-mutatulm (I. Occasional, moist, rich woods, creek bottoms, etc. & S.) Dietr. Trilantha glutinosa (Miclix.) Trillium stylosum Nutt. Baker. (=Tofeldia glutinosa Michx.) Occasional, open marshy places. Frequent, rich, moist woods,'uplands or creek bottoms, usually on clay Trillium Underwoodii Small. Common, wooded creek bottoms, clay land north of Auburn, the type locality. A taller form with less conspicuously mottled shorter leaves occurs in sandy swanmps south of Auburn. Uvularia perfoliata L. Frequent, rich,. moist woods, uplands or creek bottoms. Jlvularia sessilifolia L. Frequent, rich, moist woods, creek bottoms, etc. Vagnera racemosa (L.) Morong. Frequent, rich, moist woods, creek bottoms, etc. Yucca filamentosa L. Occasional, roadsides and waste places. SMILACACEAE. Smilax Bona-nox L. *Smilax cinnamon iifolia Frequent, Occasional, fcnce rows and thickets. Small. In dry woods and old fields. Smilax (Engeim.) Wats. ecirrhata rich upland woods. Smilax glauca Walt. Upland woods and old fields. t Smilax herbacea L. Frequent, rich woods. Smilax hispida Mu'hl. Frepuent, thickets, etc. ~Smilax lanceolata L. Frequent, moist thickets. (Jackson vine.) 66 iSmilax laurifolia L. Common, swamips (Bamboo vine.) Smilax Pseudo-China L. Occasional, fence rows and thickets. Smilax punla Walt. Frequent, dry hillsides. Smilax rotundifolia L. Common, fence rows and thickets. Smilax Walteri Pursh. Occasional, swamps, sandy land. AMARYL.LIDACEAB. jAtamosco Ataniasco (L.) Greene. Common, creek bottoms. Hynienocallis 'occidentalis Kunth. Rare, sandy creek bottoms. ilypoxis hirsuta (L.) Coville. Common, upland woods. Manfreda Virginica (L.) (=Agave Virginica Salisb. L.) Frequent, dry rocky hillsides and granite outcrops. DIOSCOREACEAE. Dioscorea villosa L. Common, a climbing vine in rich woods. IRIDACEAE. Gemnmingia Chinensis (IL) 0. Kuntze. Occasional, roadsides, etc. -Iris cristata Ait. Long-leaf pine woods, Tallapoosa county. :Iis verna IL. Long leaf pine woods, Tallapoosa county. Sisyninchiurn Carolinianuni Bicknell. Frequent, upland woods. (67 * Sisyrinchium flaccidum. Bicknell. Occasional, banks of streams. Frequent, upland woods. BURMANNIACEAE. .Sisyrinchium grammoides Bicknell. .Burnlannia biflora L. A single collection, swampy creek bottoms, sandy land. ORCIIIDACEAE. Aclroanthies uni-folia (Miclx.) Raf. Rare, creek bottom swamps. t Coralllorhiza odontor'hiza (Wilid.) Nutt. A single collection, Auburn. Cypripedium parviflorum Salish. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life). Gyrostachys cernua (L.) 0. Kuntze. Frequent, moist places, creek bottoms, etc. Gyrostachys gracilis (Bigel.) 0. Kuntze. Common, dry pine woods. *Gyrostachys simplex (A. Gray) 0. Kuntze. A single collection, Auburn, dry pine woods. *Gyrotachys vernalis (Engei'm.) Small. Occasional, pine woods. ilabenaria ciliaris (L.) R. Br. Frequent, creek bottom woods, usually sand. Habenaria- clavellata (Michx.) Spreng. Frequent, creek bottom woods, clay or sand. ilabenaria cristata (Michx.) R. Br. Frequent, creek bottoms, sandy land. ilabenaria flava, (L.) A. Gray. Lee county, Underwood & Earle (Mohr's Plant Life.) ilabenaria lacera (Michx.) RI. Br. A single collection, Auburn. tilabenarila quinquiseta (Michx.) Mohr. A single collection, Auburn. 68 ilexalectris aphyllus (Nutt.) Raf. Occasional, wooded hillsides, Lee county, Clay county, Elmore county. Leptiorchis lilifolia (L.) 0. Kuntze. Rare, creek bottom swamps. Leptorchis Loeselii (L.) MacM. Rare, creek bottom swamps, clay. Linodorum tuberosum L. *Listera australis Occasional, swamps, sphagnum bogs, etc., sand. Lindl. A single speciment, sandy swamp, south of Auburn. Frequent, sphagnum bogs, etc. Pogonia ophiloglossoides (L.) Ker. Tipularia unifolia (Muhi.) B. S. P. Occasional, moist woods, Lee county, Elmore county. SAURURACEAE. Saururus cernuus L. Frequent, swamps. JUGLANDACEAE. Hi-coria alba (L.) Britt. Occasiconal, uplands. ilicoria glabra (Mill.) Britt. Common, dry upland woods, clay or sand. Juglans nigra. L. Occasional, rich woods, usually clay. MYRICACEAE. Myric'a cerifera L. Occasional, sandy swamps.: SALICEAE. Populus deltoides Marsh. Occasional, creek and river: bottoms. Salix nigra Marsh. Common, alder swamps, etc. 69 BETULACEAE. Alnus rugosa (Du Roi) Koch. Very common in wet, swampy creekbottoms, the characteristic growth in such locations. Betula lenta L. Clay county.(Mohr's Plant Life). Betula nigra L. Frequent along streams, clay land. Carpinus Caroliniana Walt. Frequent, creek bottoms. &strya Virginiana (Mill.) Frequent, creek bottoms. Willd. FAGACEAE. Castanea dentata (Marsh.) Borkh. Rare near Auburn, frequent further north, Chambers county, Tallapoos-a county, etc. Castanea purmila (L.) Frequent, dry thickets. Mill. (Mohr's Corylus rostrata Alt. Clay county, Tallapoosa county, Randolph county Plant Life). It does not occur near Auburn. Fagus Americana Sweet. Common, moist woods, usually creek bottoms. Quercus acuuiinata (Michx.) Sargent. On high hills, Clay county; not seen about Auburn. Quercus alba L. Frequent, rich upland woods, clay land. Quercus brevifolia (Lam.) Sargent. Occasional, dry white sands south of Auburn. t Querdus coccinea Wang. Occasional, clay uplands, more abundant. northward. Quercus digltata (Marsh.) Sudw. Very common, uplands, sand or clay. *Quercus Margareti a Ache. Common, white sandy soils south of Auburn, but strictly conto such locations.' Very distinct from Q. minor, with which it has been confused. fined 70 Quercus Marylandica Muench. Quercus minor (Mrsh.) Sargent. Very common, dry uplands, sand or clay. (=Q. nigra of authors.) (Black Very common, dry, sandy uplands, also on clay. jack.) Quercus Phellos L. Common, creek bottoms. *Querdus prinoides Wili~d. Occasional, creek bottoms. t Quercus rubra L. Occasional, moist clay uplands. Quercus Schneckii Britton. Common, uplands, clay or sand. (=D. Texana Sargent, not Buckl.) Quercus velutina Lamz. Occasional, clay uplands, frequent in upper counties. ULMACEAE. *Celtis Georgiana Small. (Mohr's Plant Life). Common, dry woods, fence rows, etc., a shrub. Celtis ilccidentalis L. Clay county Ulurns alata Michx. Common, dry uplands. Ul~mus Americana L. Occasional, moist woods, creek bottoms. MORACEAE. Momus rubra L. Occasional, rich woods, thickets. URTICACEAE. Adicea pumila (L.) Raf. Occasional, swamps. lRoehlueria cylindrica (L.) Wilid. Occasional, swamps. Urtaicastrum divaricatum (L.) 0. Kuntze. A single collection, Clay county. 1 7d LORANTHACEAE. Phorodendroll flavescens (Pursh) Nutt. Frequent, usually on oaks. SANTALACEAE. Nestronia ulmbelluliata af. (=Darbya umbellulata. A. Gray.) A single station, creek bank, 3 miles northwest of Auburn. ARISTOLOCHIACEAE. Arilstolochia Nashui Kearney. Occasional, moist, rocky banks. Aristolochia Serpentaria L. Occasional, moist rocky banks. 11exastylis arilfolium (Mi-cx.) Small. (=Asarum arifolium Michx.) Common, rich upland woods. Occasional, rich woods. (Specimen in Herb. N. Y. Bot. *Hexastylis Ruthii (Asihe) Small. jrHexastylis Slinttlel w orthu i (J. Britt.) Small. Frequent, borders of sphagnum swamps. POLYGONACEAE. Gard.) Brunnichia -cirrhossa Banks. A single collection, Tallapoosa county, river bank Polygonum Convolvulus L. Single collection, Opelika, on the railroad. Occasional, wet places, Lee county, Clay county. f Polygonum ilydropiper L. Polygonum Opelousanum Riddell. Common, moist Common, Polygonumi Peunsylvani-cum L. fields, ditch banks, etc. moist cultivated fields, etc. Polygonumn punctatum Ell. Common, swamps and wet water. fields, often growing in standing 72 Polygonum sagittaturn L. Frequent, moist places, ditch banks. Polygonum setaceun Bdalldw. Common, swamps. Polygon= Virginianulm L. Occasional, swampy woods. Rumex Acetocella L. Infrequent, pastures and waste places. Rurnex crispus L.. Common, roadsides and waste places. T.Rumex hastatulu-s Muhl. Very common, fields and waste places. in abandoned fields. A characteristic growth Rumex obtusifolius L. Occasional, fields and waste places. . Rumex pulcher L. Streets of Auburn. -CHENOPODIACEAE. Chenopodium albunm L. Frequent, a weed in gardens and rich fields. Chenopodium anthelmintitcum L. Occasional, a weed in waste places. AMARANTHACEAE. Aniaranthus hybrid-us panicullatus. (L.) U. & B. fields. Ainaranthus -spinoisus L. Frequent, a weed in gardens and rich fields. Common, a weed in gardens and rich PHYTOLACCACEAE. Phytolacca decandra L. Common, rich fence rows and waste places. NYCTAGINACEAE. :tBoerhaavia erecta L. Frequent, a weed in gardens and waste places. 73 ALZOAC AE. Mollugo verticellata L. Common, a weed' in gardens and fields. PORTULACACIAE. tlaytonia Virginica L. One locality, wet, swampy woods 6 miles south of Auburn. Portulacca oleracea L. Occasional, a weed in rich gardens, not found in poor fields. T-alinum teretifolium Pursh. Locally common, dry granite outcrops. CARYOPHYLLACEAE. Alsine media L. Common, a winter weed in gardens and waste places. tAlsine pubera (Micix.) Britton. Rich wood, river hills Tallapoosa county. Anychia dichotoma Michx. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life). tArenaria brevifolia Nutt. Locally common, granite outcrops. *Cerastiui brachypodum (Engeli.) Robinson. Occasional, fields. tCarastiurn Occasional, ingipedunculatnni Muhl. fields. Cerastium1 viscosum L. Common, gardens, Cerastiuni vulgatuni L. fields and. waste places. Common, gardens, fields and waste places. Common, Sagina decumbens (Eli.) -T. & G. fields and Saponaria off Occasional, roadsides, introduced. Silene L. Occasional, fields and waste places. icinalis L. gardens. antirrhina Silene stellata (L.) Ait. Occasional, rich woods, rocky banks of streams. 3 74 Silene Virginica L. Frequent, rich upland woods, clay. tSpergula aarvensis L. A single collection, Auburn (1894). NYMPHAEACEAE. Brasenia purpurea (Miichx.) Nyniphaea acvena Gasp. In pond south of Auburn (Vaughn's Mill). Soland. Frequent, ponds and slow streams. MAGNOLIACEAB. jlllicium Floridanum Ell. Occasional, banks of streams, Lee county, south of Auburn. Liriodendron Tulipiifera L. Frequent, moist hillsides and creek bottoms. Magnolia na.crophylla Miclix. Frequent, river hills, Tallapoosa county, Clay county. Magnolia Virginiana L. Common, sandy swamps. ANONAECAE. Asi-mnliia, parvifioi a (lMiclix.) Dunal. Frequent, dry or moist places. Banks of Tallapoosa river, Elmore county. LRANUNCULACEAE. .Actaea aiba (L.) Mill1. Lee county, Baker & Earle (Mohr's Plant Life). tAnemone Caroliniana Walt. Rare, rocky hillsides (Wright's Mill.)S Anemone quinquefolia L.S Frequent, moist wooded hillsides. Anemone Virginiana L. A single collection, Chambers county. 75 tClematis crispa L. Occasional, sandy swamps. * Clematils glaucophylla. Small. Occasional, dry banks, Tallapoosa county, Elmore countyb.The leaves are less glancus than in the type and the achenes are narrower. t-Clematis -reticulata Walt. Rocky banks, Tallapoosa river, Elmore county. Clematis Virginiana L. Frequent, swamps, clay land. Delphinium Carolinianum Walt. Occasional, dry wooded hillsides. tilepaica Hepatica (L.) Ranunculus abortivus L. Karst. Occasional, rich wooded hillsides. Frequent, fields and waste places. Ranunculus hispidus Michx. Frequent, moist or dry woods. tRanunculus parvifiorus L. Occasional, wet, swampy places. Ranunculus pusillus Poir. Occasional, wet, swampy places. Ranunculus pusillus Lindheimeri A. Gray. Frequent, wet swampy places. Ranunculus recurvatus Poir. Occasional, creek bottom woods. Ranunculus tener Molir. Lee county, Baker & (Mohr's Plant Life). Earle tSyndesulnon thalietroi-des (L.) lloff-mg. Frequent, moist wooded hillsides. Thalicetrum clavatuni D. 'C. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life). Thalictrum purpuraiscens L. Swampy places, Chambers county, Tallapoosa county. tTrautvetteria Carolinensis (Walt.) Vail. A single collection, shaded spring branch, river hills, Elmore county. Xanthorrhiza apiifolia L. Her. Frequent,' along streams, often on rocky banks. 76 BERBERIDACEAE. t Caulophyllum thalictroides (L.) Michx. Moist, wooded One locality, 3 miles northwest of Auburn. hillside. Podophyllurn peltatun L. Occasional, creek bottoms. MENISPERMACEAE. Calycucarpumu Lyoni (Pursh) Nutt. Rare, creek bottoms. Cebiatha Carolina (L.) B1ritt. Frequent, thickets, tivated fields. becoming a troublesome weed in cul- -Butneria CALYCANTHACEAE. florida (L.) Kearney. moist, rich woods (Mohr's Plant Life credits Lee county, but this seems to be an Frequent, error.) Butneria fertilis to LAURACEAE. tPerse'a pubescens (Pursh) Sargent. Frequent, swamps, usually sand Sassafras Sassafras (L.) Karst. Occasional, mixed woods and cultivated PAPAVERACEAE. fields. Sanguinaria 0Canadensis L. Occasional, rich woods. CRUCIFERAE. tArabis Canadensis, L. Occasional, rocky creek banks, granite outcrops. Arabis Virgini ca (L.) Trelease. Very common, a winter weed in cultivated Streets .of Auburn, introduced. *Brassica juncea (L.) Cosson. fields. 77 Bursa Bursa-pastoris (L.) Britt. Common, fields and waste places. Cardarnine bulbosa (Schreb.) B. Occasional, swampy woods, Lee county, Tallapoosa county. S. P. - Cardauline Pennsylvanica Muhl.. Occasional, rocky hillsides, granite outcrops. Coronopus didymus (L.) Draba bradhycarpa Nutt. J. E. Smith. Common, upland fields and gardens. Common, upland fields, granite outcrops. *Draba verna L. Common, upland fields (Draba Carolinia is credited to Lee county in Mobr's Plant Life. This is an error, as the species is clearly D. verna.) Lepidiumi Virginicum L. Common, a weed in fields and gardens. CAPPARIDACEAE. Polanilsia trachysperma T. & G. Tallapoosa county (Mohr's Plant Life). DROSERACEAE. Drosera brevifolia Pursh. Frequent, borders of sphagnum bogs. PODOSTEMACEAE. Podostemon ceratophylluni Miclix. Earle (Mohr's Plant Life). Lee county, Baker & CRASSUJLACEAE. t-Dialnorpha pusilla (Michx.) Nutt. Locally abundant,- granite outcrops. PENTHORACEAE. Penthoruni sedoides L. Occasional, swamps. 78 SAIXFRAGACEAE. --Heuchera Americana L. Frequent, dry rocky hillsides, granite outcrops. ileuchera hispida Pursh. Metamorphic, hills, Talledega county (Mohr's Plant Life). Parnassia asarifolia Vent. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life.) Phladeiphus grandifiorus Willd. Lee county Underwood & Earle (Mohr's Plant Life). rare, seen only once. Very fS'axifraga Virginiensis Miclix. Tiarella cordifolia L. Rare, in rock crevices, a single locality two miles northwest of Auburn. Occasional, moist, rocky woods, near springs. HY1JRANGEACEAE. Decumaria barbata L. Frequent, a high climbing vine in moist woods. lydrangea arborescens L. Occasional, moist woods and rocky banks. lydrangea arborescens cordata (Pursh) T. & G. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life). llydrangea quercifolia Bartr. Frequent, moist or dry woods. ITEACEAE. Jtea Virginica L. Frequent, sandy swamps. HAMAME1LIDACEAE. ilamiamelis Virginiana L. Frequent, moist woods. Liquidambar Stryaciflua L. Common, a tree in mixed woods, both swamps and uplands, also in old and second growth timber. fields 79 PLATANACEAE. Platanus occidentalis L. Occasional, a large tree in creek bottoms. ROSACEAE. -Agirnonia mollis (T. & G.) Britt. Common, moist woods. Agrimonia parviflora Soland. .jAgrimonia pumila Moist woods, Clay county. Not seen at Auburn. Muhl. Frequent, sandy creek bottoms. Occasional, moist woods, Lee county. county, Clay county, Coosa JAgrimonia 'striata Miclx. tAnielanchier Botryapium (L.) D C. Occasional, creek banks and borders of swamps. *Amygdalls Persica L. Freely escaped, roadsides, old fields and second growth woods. (Peach.) Aronia arbutif'olia (L. f.) Ell. Common, swamps. tAruncus Aruncus (L.) Karst. Rare, moist woods, Auburn. 'Cotoneaster Pyracanthla (L.) Spach. Sparingly escaped, roadsides, Auburn. Crataegus apiifolia (Marsh.) Miclix. Occasional, creek bottoms. Crataegus collina Common, dry woods, usually sand. C'haprn. Crataegus punetata Jac~q. Lee county, Baker &Earle (Mohr's Plant Life). *Crataegus rubescens Ashe. Frequent, dry woods, Auburn-the type locality. Crataegus sipathulata Michx. Common, upland woods and. granite outcrops. Urataegu's uniflora Moench. Frequent, dry woods, sand or clay. 80 -IDuchesnea Indica (Andy.) Common, creek bottoms. Focke. Fragaria Virginiana L. Common, dry open woods, usually on clay. Jacq. tGeumiCanadense A single collection, Clay county. Mains augustifolia (Ait.) Frequent, along streams. Mlichx. 0. Kuntze. Ri tt. Opulaster opulifolius (L.) Porterant li Locally abundant, creek bottoms, Wright's Mill. s stipulatus (L.) A single collection, Tallapoosa county. Potentilla Canadensis L. Frequent, dry banks and open woods. *Potentilla humuil s Poir. A single collection, river hills, Tallapoosa county. Prunus AmlericanatMarsh. Clay county (Mohrs Plant Life). Prunus augustifolia Marsh. Very common, old fields, roadsides tree (Old field plum.) sparingly escaped Prunus Caroliniana (Mill.) Ait. Planted as an ornamental ("mock orange.") and Prunus gracilis Eugehu. Lee county, Baker & (Mohr's Plant Life). Earle A large :Prunus hortulana Bailey. Frequent, rich clay woods, upland or creek bottoms, tree with loose, shelling bark. Prunus inj ucunda Siuall. Common, dry land, sand or clay. dark bark. (Southern sloe.) A small tree with close Prunus serotina Ehrh. Frequent, rich woods, clay or sand. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life). Prunus serotina neo-nionbana. Sudw. IRosa hullulis Marsh. Common, -dry woods and roadsides. Rlosa llaevigata Miclix. Occasional, roadsides, introduced. 81 Rosa rubiginosa L. Roadsides, Chambers county, introduced. sLink. Eubus arguts Rubus Very common, creek bottoms, also uplands. ble, the common high bush olackberry. Exceedingly varia- argutus floridlus (Tratt.) Bailey. Occasional, dry uplands. Riubus cuneifolius Pursh. Very common, sandy uplands, the "old field" blackberry. iRubus Enslenii Tratt. Frequent, pine and mixed woods in shade. Rubus invisus Bailey. Frequent, rich woods andopen places (dewberry). Rubus trivialis Michx. Common, roadsides and fields, evergreen Plant Life credits Rubus hispicas to Lee county. This is certainly a mistake. The specimens so determined being forms of R. trivialis.) IIMOSACEAE. dewberry.,(Mohr's "Albizzia Julib'rissin Durazz. Abundantly escaped, roadsides and woods. A good sized tree. Morongia augustata (T. & G.) Britt. Common, dry sandy woods. CESALPINACEAE. Cassia Marylandica L. Occasional, fields and roadsides, Clay county. Cassia occidentalis L. Cassia Tora L. Very common, Very common, a weed in cultivated fields. a weed in cultivated fields. Cercis Canadensis L. (Th ainacrista Occasional, rich woods. nrnltipinn'ata (Pollard) Greene. Common, moist or dryish woods and thickets. t Ch-aniaecrista nictitans (L.) A single douotful specimen, Clay county. Moench ? 82 Chamaecrista mobusta Pollard. Common, moist woods and thickets, creek bottoms. Gleditsia, triacanthos L. Occasional, rich woods. PAPILIONACEAE. Amorpha friticosa L. Banks of Tallapoosa, Elmore county. Amorpha virgata Small. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life). Apices Apios (L.) MacM. Occasional, rich woods and thickets, usually clay. Baptisia illegacarpla Chapm. Tallapoosa county (Mohr's Plant Life). TBradburya Virginiana (L.) 0. Kuntze. Frequent, thickets, etc.. usually sand. Chrysaspis dubia (Sibth.) Greene. Occasional, roadsides and waste places. tChrysaspis procumbens (L.).Desv. Occasional, roadsides and waste places. Clitoria Mariana L. Common, dry woods. Cracca spicata (Walt.) 0. Kuntze. Common, dry woods. Cracca Virginiana IL. Common, dry woods. ~Crotalaria Purshii D. C. A single collection, dry pine woods, Auburn. Crotalaria rotundiffolia (Walt.) Poir. Frequent, dry woods and open places. Crotalaria sagittalis L. Dolicholus erectus Occasional, dry woods and open places. (Walt.) Vail. Frequent, dry pine or mixed woods., tiDolicholus simplicif olius (Walt.) Vail. Frequent, sandy pine woods. tDolicholus tormentosus (IL.) Vail. Occasional, sandy pine woods. 83 Falcata Pitcheri (T. & G.) '0. Kuntze. Cleburne county (Mohr's Plant Life.) Galactea volubilis (L.) Britt. Common, dry woods andthickets. Lespedeza capitata Miclix. Occasional, sandy open woods. tLespedeza frutescens (L.) Britt. Common, dry open woods. Lespedeza hirta (L.) Ell. Common, dry open woods. Lespedeza Nuttalii Darl. A single collection, Auburn. Lespedeza procunbens Michx. Common, dry open woods. Lespedeza repens (L.-) Hart. Common, dry open woods. Lespedeza striata (Thunb.) H. & A. Common, old fields,: roadsides and waste places (Japan clover). *Lespedeza Stuvei Nutt. Common. dry open woods. Lespedeza Virginica (L.) Britt. Common, dry open woods. Medicago Arabica All. Sparingly introduced, fields and roadsides (Bur clover. ) Meihomia areni cola Vail. Frequent, dry sandy or- rocky woods. * Meibomia Dillenii (Danl.) 0. Kuntze. Common, Meibomia granditlora (Walt.) 0. Kuntze. Rich woods, Coosa county. Common, rich shady woods. Not seen at Auburn. fields and open woods. Meibomia laevigata (Nutt.) 0 . Kuntze. tMeibomia Marylandica (L.) 0. Kuntze. Occasional, moist woods. Meibomia Michanxii Vail. Frequent, dry woods, usually on rocky. hillsides. Meibomia nudiflora (L..) 0. Kuntze. Occasional, moist' rich"woods, usually clay. 84 Meibomia obtusa (Muhl.) Vail. Frequent, dry sandy woods. Mleibomiia paniculata (L.) 0. Kuntze. Common, moist to dry woods. *Meibbomia paniculata Chapnani Britt. Frequent, moist to dry woods. *Meibolmia paniculata pubens (T. & G.) Vail. Occasional, dry woods. t Aleiboulxia rhoIbifolia Frequent, dry woods. Occasional, dry woods. (Eli.) Vail. Meibornia rigida (Eli.) 0. Kuntze. lMeibouila stricta. (Pursh) 0. Kuntze. Occasional, sandy woods and roadsides. Meibouia viridiflora (L.) 0. Kuntze. Occasional, pine or mixed woods. Melilotus alba I)esv. Sparingly introduced, roadsides. Phaseolus polystachyms (L.) 1. S. P. Occasional, rich woods. Psoralea pedunculata (Mill.) Vail. Common, pine or mixed woods. Robinia hispida L. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life). R3obinia. Pseudacaciaa L. ? Rare, a shrub in dry woods (Wright's Mill). :jSesban niacrocearpa Mulil. Introduced, an occasional weed in sandy Frequent, dry open places. fields. Strophostyles umbellata (Muhl.) Britton. Stylosaunthes biflora (L.) 13. S. P. .Frequent, dry woods and open places. Stylosanthles riparia Kearney. Frequent, woods and banks. .Trilfoliulm Carolinianuni Michx. Common, roadsides and grassy places. Trif olium Sparingly introduced, streets of Auburn. pratense L. 85 Tri-folium reflexuml L. Occasional, dry woods, often in rocky places. Trifolium repens L. Sparinginly introduced, streets and roadsides. Vicia ilugeri Small. Frequent, rich mixed woods. (V. niicrantha Nutt in credited to Lee county, Mohr's Plant Life. This error, the plant being a narrow leaved form of V. Vicia Introduced, streets of Auburn. GERANIACEAE. sativa L. HugerL) Isan Geranium Caroliniaum Geranium maculatun Common, fields and waste places. L. L. Occasional, swampy woods. OXALIDACEAE. Oxalis recurva Eli. Very common, dry pine and mixed woods, (Oxalis cymosa and 0. grandis are both credited to Lee county, Mohrs Plant Life. Probably in each case this is an error.) Oxalis stricta L. Very common, fields and waste places. Oxalis ViOlacea L. Common, dry open woods and rocky hillsides. LINACEAE. Linuin Floridanuin (Plaucsh.) Trelease. Occasional, open sandy places. Linunt striatumt Walt. Occasional, moist woods, usually clay. RUITACEAE. SPtelea trifoliata Occasional, L. river banks, Tallapoosa : county, Clay county. 86 SIMAROUBACEAE. Ailanthus glandulosa Desf. Occasional, roadsides, etc., introduced. MELIACEAE. .Melia Azederach L. Abundant, roadsides, fence rows and old POLYGALACEAE. fields, introduced. Polygala ambigna Nutt.. Frequent, dry woods, Clay county, Tallapoosa county. Polygala Boykini Nutt. A single collection, Clay county. in Mohr's Plant Life.) (Not Lee county, as stated Polygala cruciata L. Occasional, sandy swamps. Polygala -Curtissii A. Gray. Occasional, pine woods, Lee county, Clay county. ~Polygala grandiflora Walt. Frequent, dry pine and mixed woods. Polygala incarnata L. Occasional, dry pine and mixed woods. Polygala Ma riana Mill. A single collection, Auburn. TPolygala nana (Miclix.) Polygala Nuttallii T. Occasional, sandy land sputh of Auburn. A single collection, Auburn. D C. & G. Polygala -polygama Walt. Frequent, rich woods, usually clay. Polygala verticillata L. A single collection, Auburn. (S. M. Tracy.), EUJPIORBIACEAE. Acalypha gracilens A. Gray. Common, dry woods. :Aca lypha ostryaefolia IRiddell. fields and gardens. Occasional, 87. Acalypha Virginica L. One collection, Clay county, one Lee county. Croton glandulolsu septentrioualis iMuell. Arg. Occasional, roadsides and waste places. Croton Texensis (Klotsch.) Muell. Agr. Tallapoosa county (Mohr's Plant Life.) °Crotonops-is linearis Mielx. Frequent, dry roadsides and granite outcrops. *EuIphorhia apocynifolia Small. corollata, panic iata Eli. Common, moist woods. .Euphorbia corollata L. Common, dry woods. .*Eupho bia Common, dry woods. lEuphorbia maculata L. Common, dry fields and waste places. *Euphlorbia oliva cea ,Snmall. Occasional, Common, dry woods. Euphorbia Preslii Guss. cultivated fields. 4Jatroph'a stiumulosa Miclx. Frequent, dry open woods, usually sand. Banks of Tallapoosa river, Tallapoosa county. 4Stillingia sylvatica L. Common, dry sandy land. Tragia nepetaef olia Cay. Frequent, rocky turned out fields. 4Tragia urens L. Occasional, dry open places. CALLITRICACEAE. Callitrilche Austini Engeim. Callitriche Frequent, bare ground in old fields. heterophylla Pursh. Frequent, floating in running water. 88 ANACARDIACEAE. Rhus arornaticaa Ait. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life). Rhus copallina L. Common and variable, poor to rich soil, clay or sand. Rhus glabra L. Frequent, rich woods and thickets. Rhus radicans L. (poison ivy, poison oak). Frequent, dry rocky or sandy hills, a low shrub. Common, a high climbing vic, hus Toxiclodendron L. Rhus vernix L. Frequent, sandy swamps, (Thunderwood). CYRILLACEAE. jTCyrilla raceniflora L. Frequent, creek bottom swamps, sand or clay. AQUJIFOLIACEAE. *Jlex leladlei Ashe. Occasional, dry sand hills, south of Auburn. Hex decidu.a Walt. Occasional, moist thickets. :Iflex glabra (L.) A. Gray. 1. Frequent, sandy swamps. IJlex glabra (Li.) A. Gray. 2. Occasional, banks of steas Ilex opaca Ait. clay land. Common, moist to dry woods, usually sand. Ilex nionticola mollis (A. Gray) Britt. A single collection, south of Auburn, sandy swamp. CELASTRACEAE. Enonyinus Aniericanus L. Frequent, moist thickets. 1. Mohr's Plant Life, 604, credits Ilex coreaceat (Pursh) Chap. to Lee county . This seems to be an error. The specimens cited prove to be a broad leaved form of I. glabra. 89 ACERACEAEI. $Acer Floridanurn (Chapni.) Pax. (Wright's Mill). Occasional, moist creek banks Acer leucowderme Small. Frequent, moist rocky banks, etc., not in swamps. tAcer Negundo L. Local, Wright's Mill. Lee county. Acer rubrum L. Common, swamps. Acer ssaccharull barbatum (Michx.) Trelease. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life). HIPPOCASTANACEAE. Aesculus parviflora ;Walt. Occasional, northern edge of Lee county and northward, clay. Aesculus Pavila L. Common. dry woods. BALSAMMACEAE. Inpatiens biflora Walt. Frequent, swamps. clay land. SAPPINDACEAE. Cardiospermum halicacabum' L. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life). RIIAMNACEAE. ilBerchemia scanderis (lull) Trelease. Frequent, moist thickets. Ceanothus Americanus L. Common, dry woods. Rhaninus Caroliniana Walt. Clay county (Mohrs Plant Life). jAinpelopsi s arborea (L.) ilusby. Occasional, south of Aubcrn (Wright's Mill). Parthenocissus quinquefoliaa (L.) Planch. Frequent, moist woods and thickets.. 90 Vitis aestivalis Michx. Frequent, dry or moist woods. Vitis bicolor LeConte. Clay county (Miohr's Plant Life). Vitis cordifolia Michx. Frequent, uplands, usually clay. -Viitus rotunldifoolia Mir~ichx. Common, moist woods, creek bottoms, etc. TILIACEAE. Tr;ilia heterophylla Vent. Occasional, creek banks. MALVACEAE. _Malvastruin angustum A. Gray. Don. also Lee county, sandy land. Tallapoosa county (Mohr's Plant Life). t4-Modiola Caroliniana (L.) .- Frequent, roadsides and waste places. Sida Elli'ottii T. & G. Frequent roadsides, Tallassee; land. Sida spinosa L. Common, gardens and cultivated fields. HIYPERICACEAE. LAslCy1 in1 hypericoides L. dry Ascyriuii Occasional, woods." nulticaule Michix. Frequent, dry woods. Asicy1LLmscans Michix. Occasional, dry woods. .ilypericuni Druinmondii (Grey. Hypericumi iladulatilni Frequent, rich woods. Common, dry open places, roadsides, old & fields,T. & G. Hook.) etc. Walt. ilypericum mumtilum. L. Common, ditch banks, open moist places. 91 *Hypericunj nudifloruni Miclx. A single collection, Auburn. *llyperidulm virgatum Lam. county, Clay county. Occasional, creek banks, Lee Sarothra geti-anoides. L. Common, dry open places, roadsides, old fields, etc. tTria'denuni petiolatunl (Walt.) Britt. A single collection, Tallapoosa county. {Triadenunl Virginicum (L.) Raf. A single collection, sandy land south of Auburn. 'CLSTACEAE. tilelianthemuni Carolinianum Miclix. Lechea Leggettii Britt. & ilollick. Frequent, sandy lands. Occasional, dry open places, sandy land. Lechea racemulolsla Michx. Occasional, dry open places. Lechea villosa Ell. Common, dry open places, roadsides, old VIOLACEAE. Cubeijuin concolor (Fo-.rst.) Rich woods, Clay county. fields etc., iaf. ~Viola Common, sandy woods and open grassy places. Caroliniana Greene. *Vi~ola cucullata Ait. & Britt. G.) Viola palmata dilatata Ell. Frequent, rich upland woods. Viola papilionacea Pursh. Common, creek bottoms and moist ditch' banks. Viola mlulticaui~is (T. Occasional, moist upland woods, clay. A single collection, river hills, Tallapoosa county. Viola pedata L. Common, dry upland woods, clay or sand. Viola pedata bicolor Pursh.' Occasional, with the last. 92 Viiola primulaefolia austrails Pollard. Locally common, open marshy places, Lee county, Tallapoosa county. Viola Rafinesquii Greene. Very common, fields and waste places. Viola striataAlt. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life). ~Viola vicinali: Greene. Frequent, open sandy woods, not found on clay. Viola villosa Walt. Rare, dry pine woods, Auburn. PA SSIFLORACEAE. Passiflora incarnata L. Common, a troublesome weed in especially clay. white flowered form is occasionally seen. fields, A Passiflora lutea L. CACTACEAE. Occasional, dry thickets. Opuntia humifusa Raf. Frequent, roadsides and sandy land. LYTHRACEAE. ~Lagerstroemia Thdica L. Rotala ramosior (L.) Rhexia Frequent, roadsides escaped, (Crape mayrtle.) Koehne. A single collection, Clay county. MEILASTOMACEAE. : Rhexia ciliosa Mi'chx. A single collection, south of Auburn. lanceolata Walt. Occasional, wet sandy places. Frequent, wet sandy places. Rhexia Mariana L. Illhexia stricta Pursh. A single collection, Auburn. (P. H. Mell.) Rhexia Virginica L. Frequent, wet sandy places, also on clay GNAGRACEAE. Epilobium Cleburne county (Mohr's Plant Life). coloratum Muhl. G-aura.Michauxii Spach. Frequent, dry woods and roadsides. H1-artrnnannia speciosa (Nutt.) Common, roadsides escaped. Small. Jsnardia palustris L. Occasional, ditches and running streams. Jussiaea decurrens (Walt.) D. C. Frequent, ditches and wet open places. Jugsiaea leptocarpa Nutt. Frequent, ditches and wet open places. tKneiffia linearis (Michx.) Spach. *Kneiffia linifolia (Nutt.) Spach. single collection, Lee county. *Klleiffia longipedicellata Common, *Kneiffia Ludwigia alternifolia L. .A A single collection, Chilton county." dry open mixed woods, also in second growth woods, clay or sand. subglobosa Small. Frequent, moist open sandy places. Common, wet places, clay or sand. Small. JLudwigia huirtella R~af. Swampy margins of ponds, sandy land. $Ludwigia linearis Walt.. Frequent, wet places, sandy land. fields and roadsides, a winter weed. Oenothera laciniata grandis Britt. A single collection, fields near Auburn. Onagra bienniS (L.) S-op. fields Common, Common, and roadsides. ~Oenothera laciniata ilill. HALORAGIDACEAE. Myriophyllum sp. Immature plants from a stream south of Auburn. Proserpinaca pectinata Lam. ARALIACEAE. A single collection, roadside ditches, sandy land. Aralia spinorsa L. UMBELLLFERAE. Frequent, rich woods and thickets. Angelica villosa (Walt.) B. S. P. Frequent, dry pine and mixed woods, clay or sand. Chaerophyllum Tainturieri Hook. Common, a street and roadside weed, also in sandy swamps. Centella Asiatica (L.) Urban. Lee county (S. M. Tracy.) Bot. Garden. Specimen in herb. New York *ICicuta maculata L. Common, swamps, etc. ~Daucus pusillus M/lichx. Frequent, fields, roadsides and waste places Deringa -Canadensis (L.) 0. Kuntze. Rich woods, Clay county, 'Coosa county. .llydrolc'otyle verticellata Thumb. Frequent, shaded thickets, clay or land. Eryngium vucrcae'folium Michx. Common, dry woods and Oxypolis fields. rigidus, (L.) ilaf . Frequent, sandy swamps. Frequent, open marshy places. j-Ligustilcum -Canadense (L.) Britt. 1. This is included under E. integri f oum Walt. in Mohr's Plant Life, 644, but it seems to differ from. pine-barren plant in more diffuse habit and broader leaves. the 935 Oxypolis rigxidus (L.) Britt. Frequent, open marshy places. Polybiaenia Nuttallii D. C. Lee county. Baker & Earle) (Mohr's PlantLife). iPtililnium capillaceui (Michx.) Common, sandy swamps. olick. Sanicula Canadensis L. Common, moist to rather dry woods. * Sanicula Floridana Bicknell. 1. Frequent, dry upland woods. Occasional, moist woods. Sanicula Marylaildica L. Sanilcula Smalii Bicknell. Frequent, creek bottom woods. Thaspium barbinode (Michx.) N utt. Occasional, moist thickets, etc Thaspiun trifoliatum aureum (Nutt.) Britt. Occasional, creek bottom woods. *Zizia aurea (L.) Koch. A single collection, Clay county. Zizia cordata (Walt.) D C. Frequent, upland woods, sand or clay. CORNACEAE. Cornus Amomum Mill. Common, along streams. Cornus stricta Lam. Lee county Earle & Baker (Mohr's Plant Life). Cornus florida L. Common, upland woods, clay or sand. ItNyss'a biflora Walt. Common, swamps. 1.- Mohrs Plant Life, 645, includes this with S. Canadtensis. The two seem sufficiently distinct. The shape of the leaves and the general aspect are so different that they can be distinguished at a glance. 96 Kyssa sylvatica Marsh. PYROLACEAE. Common, upland woods, usually clay. tChinlaphila i iaculata (L.) Pursh. Occasional, dry pine woods. MONOTROPACEAE. Monotiropa uniflora L. Occasional, rich woods. ERICACEAB Azalea arboresicens Pursh. Rare, along streams, clay land Azalea nudiflora IL. Common, rich woods. Azalea vilscosa L. Common, swamps, variable. Azalea viscosa glauca (L.) Micix. Lee county, Earle & Underwood (Mohr's Plant Life). Bathodedon arhoreun Common, dry woods (Marsh.) Nutt. (Vaccinum Arboreum Marsh.) Epigaea repens IL. Rare, dry hillsides, Lee county, Tallapoosa county. O aylussav'ia duniosa (Andr.) T. Common, dry hillsides. &G. Ga ylussacia f rondosa (IL.)' T. & G. Frequent, dry rocky hillsides. *C ay ussacja nana (A. Gray) Small. Frequent, dry rocky hills. Kaliia lbtifolia IL. Common, along streams. tILeucothoe raceinosa (IL.) A. Gray. Border of ponds, sandy land. Oxydendrcn arbore.un (IL.) Frequent, dry or moist woods. Frequent, sandy swamps. ID C. :.Pieri s nitida (Bartr.)- B. & HI. 97 Polyc'odiun llmelalnocarp (_Molir) Greene. Greene. Occasional, dry upland woods. Polycodiurn rnelanoarpmn candicans (Mohr). Occasional, dry upland woods. Polycodiurn stainineum (L.) Frequent, dry woods. *RhodOdelldron punctatun Andr. A single collection, river hills, Talapoosa county. tValcciniuiu arnoenum Ait. Occasional, dry hillsides. Vacciniunl corymbosumn Occasional, open woods. L. Vaccinins Elliottii Chapn. Common, banks of streams. VAaciniu' fuscatum Ait. Myrsinites Lam. Common, sphagnum bogs. Vaceciniun Common, dry rocky hills. Vaccinium lMyrsinites glandum A. Gray. Occasional, with the type. Vacciniumn Vaccini un tenellum Ait. vacillans K a.lln.. Occasional, moist hillsides. Frequent, dry rocky hills.- Yacciniuiu virgatuum Ait. Occasional, banks of streams. Xolisna ligustrina (L.) iBritt. Frequent, moist woods, banks of streams. PRIMUIJACEAE. tLysiiuachia. quadrifolia IL. Frequent, swamps. A single collection, Talladega county. Sainolus floribundus HI. B. K. Steironenia ciliaturn (L.) IRaf. Frequent, moist woods. Steironeina lanceolatuni (Walt.) A. Gray. Occasional, moist woods. 98 Steironema. lanceolatum augustifolum A. Gray. Lee county. (Earle & Baker) (Molr's Plant Life). *StelironeIla quadriflorum (Sims) A. S. Hitchcock. A single collection, moist woods, Auburn, clay land. Steironema tonsum (Woold) Bicknell. A single collection, Clay county. EBENACEAE. Diospyros Virginiana L. Common, dry woods (=Vaccinum Arboreum Marsh.) SIMPLOCACEAE. Symplocoas trnctoria (L.) L'ller. Frequent, moist hillsides and along streams. STYRACEAE. Mohrodendron Carolinuml (L.) Common, along streams. Britt. ft11' ohrodendron dipter'um (Ell.) Iritt. Banks of Tallapoosa river, Elmore county, Tallapoosa county. Styrax Americana Lam. Common, along streams. Styrax grandiflorila Ait. Rare, upland woods, clay land. OLEACEAE. Chionanthus Virginica L. Occasional, moist woods and along streams. Fraxinus lanceolata Borick. Occasional, creek and river bottoms. t Osmanthus Americanus (L.) B. & HI. Frequent, along streams and moist hillsides. " LOGANIACEAE. *Buddleia Japuniceallems1. Sparingly escaped, roadsides. Gelse'niim sempervirens (L.) Ait. Frequent, climbing over trees in moist or dry thickets, sand or clay (Yellow jasmine.) 99 Polypremumi procumbens L. Spigelia Marylandica L. Frequent, rich, 'hady woods. GENTIANACEAE. Common, dry field and waste places. Bartonia Virginica (L.) 1. S. P. Rare, sphagnum swamps. t Gentiana Saponaria L. Frequent, along creek banks. Gentiana villosa L. Occasional, dry woods, usually clay. Sabbatia angularis (L.) Pursh. Occasional, dry rich woods, usually clay. Sabbatia Boykinii A. Gray. Rare, dry woods, Clay county, Coosa county. MENYANTHACEAE. Linmantheru'm ladunosum (Vent.) Griseb. Ponds south of Auburn. APOCYNACEAE. Anisonia Asisonia (L.) Britt. Frequent; creek bottom woods. Apocynuni Rare, sandy cannabinum L. fields, south of Auburn. ASCEPIADACEAE. ~Asclepias amplexicaulis Miclix. Occasional, dry sand hills south of Auburn, never in clay. Asciepias obtusifolia Miclix. Occasional, thin upland woods, clay or sand. Asciepias tuberosa L. Common, dry woods and roadsides. Asciepias variegata L. Frequent, dry woods and roadsides, sand or clay. Asciepias vertici11aita L. Frequent, dry woods and roadsides, sand or clay. 100 Vincetoxicun hirsutum (Micihx.) Britt. Occasional, rich woods, usually clay. CONYOLVULACEAE. TBreweria humistrata (Walt.) A Gray. Frequent, dry sandy pine woods. Convolvulus repens L. Frequent, dry woods, sand or clay. Ipomoea harbigera (Don.) Sweet. Common, upland fields. Ipornoea heder'acea Jacq. Lee county, Earle (Mohr's Plant Life). lponioea lacunosa L. Occasional, creek bottom fields. Jpomioea pandurata (L.) Meyer. Frequent, dry woods and roadsides. Jpomoea purpuea (L.) Roth. Lee county, Earle (Mohr's Plant Life). :Jacqueniontia talnifOlia (L.) Common, a weed in fields. Griseb. tQuainolclit coccinea (L.) Moench. Occasional, cultivated fields. CUJSCUTACEAE. Beryrich. Cuscuta Lee county, Earle (Molir's Plant Life). arvensis Cusicuta sp. Other species occur, but the specimens have not been deter- mined. POLE.MONIACEAE. Phlox auioena Sims. Frequent, dry pine and mixed woods. Phlox glaberrima L. Frequent, dry mixed woods. Phlox maculate, L. Occasional, upland woods. 101 Phlox paniculata L. A single collection, Coosa county. Phlox paniculata a'cuminata (Pursh) Chapm. Lee county, Baker & Earle (Mohr's Plant Life). Phlox pilosa L. Frequent, moist mixed woods. HYDROPHYLLACEAE. iNana quadrivalvis (Walt.) 0. Kuntze. Margin of pond south of Auburn. Phacelia dubia (L.) Small. Locally abundant, dry granite outcrops. BORAGINACEAE. ieliotropium Indicum L. Occasional, roadsides and waste places. Lappula Virginica (L.) Greene. Occasional, moist woods, clay land. (ollinsonia Occasional, open grassy places. scabriusdula Alt. Onosmodium Carolinianum (Lam.) A. D C. Occasional, dry sandy fields and open woods. VERBENACEAE. Callicarpa Americana L. Common, dry woods, sand or clay. occurs. A form with white fruit Verbena Michx. Occasional, roadsides and waste places. iVerbena Miclix. Frequent, dry sandy woods. bracteosa Caroliniana *Vitex Agnus-eastus L. Freely escaped, roadsides, etc. 1. Immature, specimens of this plant were determined as Myosotis Virginica and were so reported in Mohr's Plant Life, 691. The true M. Virginica has not so far been found. 102 LABIATAE. tBlephila ciliata (L.) Raf. Frequent, dry hillsides, clay land. t-Clin'opodium Nepeta (L.) 0. Kuntze. A single4collection, Clay county. Clinolpodiurn Carolinianum (Michx.) ieller. Locally common, dry sandy flats, banks of Tallapoosa river, Tallapoosa county. Collinsonia -anisata Pursh. Common, dry pine and mixed woods. *Iollinsonia Canaffensis punctata A Gray. A single collection, swamp south of Auburn. -Collinsonia ascahiuscula Ait. (Mohr's Plant Opelka, Lee county Life). Hiedeoma pulegioide's (L.) Pers. Tallapoosa county, Clay county, not found at Auburn. IKoellia albescens (T. & G.) 0. Kuntze. A single collection, Clay county. Koellia flexuosa (Walt.) Mac M. Occasional, moist open places. *Koellia incaala (L.) 0. Kuntze. Common, dry open woods. Koellia. pycnantheinoides (Leavenw.) Common, dry open woods. 0. Kuntze. Lanliun amplexicaule L. Common, fields and gardens, a Winter weed. Lycopus Virginicus L. Common, wet swampy thickets. Mentha piperata L. Spring branches, Tallapoosa county. tMes'osphaeruui rugosuui (L.) Pollard. Frequent, sandy swamps. *Mlionarda mollis L. Frequent, Clay county, not seen at Auburn. Monairda punctata L. Frequent, dry thickets. Nepeta cataria L. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life). 103 Prunella vulgairis L. Frequent, moist places. Salvia lazurea Lam. Frequent, open sandy places, roadsides, etc. Salvia lyrata L. Common, dry or moist woods. Salvia urti-cifolia L. Frequent, dry open woods. Scutellaria .cordilfolia Mull. Occasional, mited woods,.clay land. Scutellaria integrifoila Frequent, moist .creek bottoms, usually sandy land. -iajor Chapin. *Sdltellaria hyssopilfolia L. A single collection, Auburn. Scutellaria laterifolia L. A single collection, Auburn. Scutellaria pilosa Michx. Frequent, dry mixed woods. Collected once, Tallapoosa county. * Scutellaria venosa Kearney. Triclostema. di-clho-tomun L. Frequent, Clay county, not seen at Auburn. 4Trichostema lineare Nutt. Frequent, open sandy woods. SOLANACEAE. IDatura Ttttula L. Common, barnyards and rich gardens. Physalis angulata L. Occasional, gardens and fields. *Physalis Occasional. This is a striking species, the plant covered with long whitish hairs. Dr. Rydberg considers it new and will soon publish a description. An unnamed fragment of the same thing colleted by Dr. Chapman is in the Columbia University herbarium. IPhysalis. Virginiana Mill. Frequent, dry open woods, clay or sand. 104 Physalodes Physalodes (L.) Solanum Carolinense L. Common, fields and gardens. Britt. Occasional, gardens and rich fields. Solanurn nigrum L. Common, rich fields and gardens. Sol-anum pseudocapsicum L. Occasional, roadsides. SCROPIULARIACEAE. 4.Afzelia cassinoides (Walt.) Gmel. A single collection Clay county. Afzelia pectinata (Pur'sh) 0. Kuntze. Frequent, dry pine or mixed woods. Bu:chnera Americana L. Rare, moist open places. Chelone glabra L. Rare, moist thickets. *Dasystonla bignonifora Small. A single collection, Clay county. Dasystoma flava (L.) Wood. Frequent, dry woods. Dasystoma pectinata (Nutt.) Lee county, Baker & Earle Benth. (Mohr's Plant Life). Dasystoma laevigata (Raf.) Chapm. Frequent, dry woods. t Dasystoma Virginica (L.) Britt. Frequent, rich woods. *Gerarldia microphylla (A. Gray) Small. Occasional, sandy pine woods. Gerardia. Plukenetii Eli. Frequent, dry upland-woods, clay or sand. Gerardia purpurea L. Occasional, wet swampy places. Frequent, dry woods. Gratiola Floridana Nutt. Locally abundant, swamps. Lee county, Tallapoosa county. 105 Gratiola pilosa Miclx. Frequent, moist open places. I&ratio1'a sphaerocarpa Eli. Frequent, boggy places. Ilysaanthes attenuata (Mul.) Small. A single collection, bank of pond south of Auburn. tIlysan thes refracta (Eli.) Beth. Occasional, moist granite outcrops. Dumort. Linaria Canadensils (L.) Common, fields and gardens. iMicranthemum emarginatum Eli. A single collection; border of pond south of Auburn. *jl\finfllus ringers. L Frequent, wet ditch banks, etc., clay land. Monuier acuminaita (Walt.) 0. Kuntze. Frequent, wet, swampy woods. Pedilcularis Canadensis L. Occasional, moist pine or mixed woods. Penstemon hirsutus (L.) Common, dry woods. Willd. Scrophularia Marylandica L. Infrequent, the only collection from Coosa county. Verb! scum Blattaria L. Rare about Auburn, becoming common farther north. Verbascumn Thapsus L. Occasional, roadsides and waste places. ~Veronica arvensis L. Occasional, Veronica peregrina L. fields and waste places. Frequent, fields and waste places. LENTIBJARIACEAE. In mud border of pond south of Auburn tUtricularia fibrosa Walt. tUtri cu]laria subulata L. Frepuent, sandy swamps. 106 OROBRANCIIACEAE. iConlopholis Irequent, moist woods, growing on oak, beech and sweet gum roots. Americana (L.) Walt. Raf. "Leplamniu-m Virginianum (L.) Frequent, moist woods. -tThalesia uniflor'a (L.) Britt. Rare, mixed woods. BIGNONIACEAE. Bignonia crucigera L. Frequent, along streams. OCampsis radicans (L.) Seem. (=Tecoma radicans D C.) Common, thickets, roadsides and fields. -Catalpa Catalpa (L.) Kar'st Occasional, along streams. ACANTIIACEAE. Pianthera Americana L. Frequent, in running streams. iuellia ciliosa iRuellia hybrida (Pursh) A. Gray. Britt. clay land, also on Lee county, Baker & Earle (Mohr's Plant Life). ciliosa parviflora (Nees) Ruellia strepens L. Occasional, roadsides and mixed woods, granite outcrops. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life). PLANTAGINACEAE. Pllantago aristata Miclix. Common, roadsides and waste places. * PlantagO elongata Pursh. Collected once, creek. bottom pasture,, Auburn. Plantago heterophylla Nutt. Common, fields and waste places. 107 Plantago lanceolata i. Occasional, roadsides and grassy places. Plantago Rugelii Dce. Occasional, moist pastures and roadsides. Plantago Virginica L. Common, fields, pastures and waste places. IRIBIACEAE. Cephal.anthus occidentalis L. Common, swamps and moist thickets. Diodia teres Walt. Very common, old fields, roadsides, etc. Diodia Virginiana L. Common, ditch banks and wet fields. Galium aparine L. Occasional, gardens and moist places. Galium circaezans Michx. Collected once, Auburn, not typical. Galium pilosum Ait. mixed Frequent, pine and Michx. *Gaiium Collected once, shaded spring bog, Auburn. Claytcni ,Galium woods. pilosuim puncticuloisur (Michx.) T. & G. Frequent, dry pine woods. tGalium uniflorum Miclix. Collected once, moist, rich woods, Auburn. *GaliuuI tinctoriuni L. Occasional, moist woods. tGaliuni trifloruni Miclix. Occasional, rich woods, Lee county, Clay county. Hou. itolia calycosa (Shuttly.) Molir. Tallapoosa county (Mohr's Plant Life). Roustonia coerulea L. Common, -open pine and mixed woods. iloustonia longifolia Gaertn. MHoustoniaa Occasional, moist, rocky banks. minor (Miclix.) Britt. Common, pastures and open places. 108 iloustonia purpurea L. Common, rich woods, usually on clay. ioustonia tenuifolia Nutt. Frequent, dry open, diciduous woods clay land. Mitch ella repens L. Common, moist creek banks and sandy swamps. -Oldenlandia uniflora L. Frequent, borders of sphagnum swamps. IRichardia scabra L. CAPRIFOLIACEAE. Common, sandy cultivated fields, Lee county, Elmore county. Lonicera flava Sims. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life). Lonicera Japonica Thunb. Abundantly escaped roadsides, fields and thickets. Lonilcera sempervirens L. Frequent, climbing in moist thickets. Sambcus Clanajensis L. Common, thickets and roadsides. t'Symphoricarpus Symphoricarpus (L.) MacM. Collected once, Clay county. Viburnumi acerifolium L. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life). Viburnum nudlum L. Common, sandy swamps. Viburnum rufotomentosum Small. Occasional, moist or dry, open woods. VALERIANACEAE. Valerianella radiata (L.) Dufr. Common, creek bottom fields. CAMPANIJLA.CEAE. Campanula Americana L. Collected once, Coosa county. Campanula divaricata M~ichx. Frequent, granite ledges Lee county, Tallapoosa county. 109 ~Specularia biflora (R. & P.) A. Gray. Common sandy pastures and roadsides. Common, fields and roadsides. LOBELIACEAE. Specularia perfoliata (L.) A. DC. Lobelia amoena Michx. Frequent, sandy swamps. Lobelia cardinalis L. Frequent, swampy creek bottoms, often on clay. Lobelia inata L. Creek bottoms, Clay county, rare at Auburn. Lobelia leptostachys A. D C. Lobelia iNuttallii Roeni. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life). & Schult. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life). Lobelia puberula Michx. Common, open woods, often near streams. Lobelia spicata Lam. Dry woods, Elmore county Coosa county Clay, county not seen at Auburn. Lobelia Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life). syphilitica L. CHICORIACEAE. Carolinianuim (Walt.) Britt. fields, roadsides. and waste places. Britt. IHieracium Greenii Porter & '(Baker Adopogon Common, Lee county. & Earle.)' Mohr's Plant Life.) Hieracium Gronovii L. Frequent, dry pine and mixed woods. ilieracium Marianum Willd. Occasional, dry hillsides. llieraciurii cribueri Small. Tallapoosa county (Mohr's Plant' Life) . ilieracium venosum L. Common, dry rocky wooded hillsides. 110 Lactuca Canadensis L. Common, pine woods and open places. Lactuca Floridana (L.) Gaertn. Collected once, Auburn. Lactuca graminifoli'a Miichx. Occasional, sandy pine woods. t-Lactca hirsuta Muhl. Occasional, pine woods. Lactuea Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life). sagittifolia Ell. tLactuca villosa Jueq. Occasional, roadsides. tNabalus 'altisisimus (L.) Hook. Occasional, moist, rich woods, usually creek bottoms. Nabalus Serpentaria (Pu'rsh) Hook. Frequent, moist, dry woods, often uplands. *Nabulus trifoleatus Cass. Collected once, Auburn. in a garden. Serinea oppositifolia (Raf.) 0. Kuntze. Occasional, creek bottom fields. Sitilias Caroliniana (Walt.) Raf. Common, fields, roadsides and open places. form occurs. A white-flowered S onchus asp er (L.) All. Frequent, fields and waste places. ,IAcanthospermum Ambrosia Common, CARDUACEAE. australe (L.) 0. Kuntze. Frequent, along railroad embankments. arteniisiaef olia L. *:Antennarianenoralis Greene. Frequent, dry rocky hillsides and granite outcrops. fields, etc. (dog weed). Antennaria plantagini folia (L.) Richards. Lee county (Mohr's Plant Life). Anthemis Cotula L. Occasional, roadsides and waste places, usually not abundant. 111 Aster Common, shaded, rocky hillsides. Camptosorus Small. Aster concolor L. Common, dry sandy roadsides and open woods. -Aster divaricatus L. Collected once, Clay county. Aster durnosusL. Occasional, borders of fields and thickets. Aster ericoides L. Common, swamps and waste places. Aster ericoides platyphyllus T. & G. Lee county. (Baker & Earle.) (Mohr's Plant Life.) Aster ericoides pilosus (Wilid.) a,*Aster hirsuticaulis Lindl. Collected once, Auburn. Collected once, Auburn. Porter. Common, fields, roadsides and waste places. "'Aster iaunthinus Burgess. Aster-laevis L. Lee county Mohr's Plant Life). Aster lateriflorus (L.) Aster oblongiolius Nutt. Britt. Common, alder swamps, wet thickets and borders of Lee county (Mohr's Plant Life). fields. Aster patens. Ait. Common, roadsides and dry woods, clay land. Aster puniceus L. Common, alder swamps and moist thickets. iAster purpuratus Nees. Frequent, clay roadsides. Aster sagittifoliuls Wilid. Collected once, Auburn. Aster Shortii Hook. Rocky_ banks, Tallapoosa river, Elmore county., Aster 'Tradescanti L. 1 Frequent, moist, shady woods. 112 lster dunrnsus cordifolium (Mich..) T. & G. Very common, dry rocky hillsides. Exceedingly variable. Our collections probably include several of the named varieties. Aster vinuleus foliosus (it.) A. Gray. Lee county (Mohr's Plant Life). Aster undulatus L. Common, cultivated fields and waste places. Bidens frondosa L. Common, fields and swampy places. ti-ra.uneria 'purpurea (L.) Britt. Collected once, clay roadsides, Chambers county. Carduus altissimus L. Common, moist thickets, etc. *Carduus disiolor (Mulil.) INutt. Occasional, moist thickets and open woods. Carduus lanceolatus L. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life.) ~Carduus spinosissimus W17alt. Rare, open sandy land. Carduus spinosissimus Elliotti (T. &.0.) Porter. Common, old fields, rcadsides and open woods, mostly on clay. Worthy of specific rank, often reaches more than three feet in height. Carduus irginilanus L. Occasional, sandy roadsides. Occasional, deciduous woods, clay land. Chysopsis granutnifoiia (Miclx.) iNutt. Very common, pine and mixed woods, especially on sand. Chrysopsis Mariana (L.) Nutt. Common, pine and mixed woods. (rd cus b~~citsL Collected once, railroad tracks, Auburn. rColeo santhuls cordifolius (Eli.) 0. Kuntze. Occasional, sandy woods and roadsides. Coreopsis auriculata L. Common, moist pine and mixed woods, clay or sand. *(ioreonsis bicolor. Collected once, fields south of Auburn, escaped. 113l Coreopsis deiphinifoliaa Lam. Collected once, fields, Chambers County. Coreopsis grandiffora Hogg. Locally abundant, moist granite outcrops. Coreopsis lanceblata L. Frequent, open pine woods, usuallysand. Coreopsis major Walt. Common, dry p:ne and mixed woods. Coreopsis Oemlleri Ell. Coreopsis pubescens Ell. It intergrades freely woods. Frequent, dry -pine and with the last species and can hardly be considered distinct. mixed Collected once, Tallapoosa County. Coreopsis tiripteris L. Occasional, ditch banks and margins of creek bottom clay land. fields, Coreopsis verticillata. L. Lee county, (Mohr's Plant Life). Dloellingeria61 humilis (illid.) Brit -- Doellingeria Occasional, creek bottom woods. infirma (Miclx.) Greene. Collected once, Lee County; once, Clay County. Elepihantopus sCariolinianu's Wilid. Frequent, creek bottom woods and thickets, clay or sand. *Elephantopus elatuLs Bertol-. Collected once, A uburn; once Macon County. Elepantopus nudatus A. Gray. Common, shaded creek bottoms, sandy land. Elepha ntopus tomlentosus L. Common, creek bottoms and dryer locations, in shade or exposed, clay or sand. Ere'chtites hieracifolia (L.) Raf. fields and waste places. Frequent, rich newly-cleared Erigeroi ann us (L.) Pers. Occasional, moist creek bottom fields and waste places. Erigeron Phuladeiphicus L. Collected once, Auburn; moist woods, clay. -'Erigeron puircheilus Miclix. Frequent, rich woods. 114 -E igeron ramosuds (Walt.) P. S.-P. Common, fields roadsides and waste places. Erigeioo ianuosLs Be3ychii (F. M.) Smith & Pound. Lee county. (Baker & Earle.) (Mohr's Plant Life.) & flupatolriulm ageratoides L. Occasional, creek bottom swamps. Eupatoriurmalbum L. Common, dry woods, clay or sand. Eupatoriumi amoenum Pursh. Clay county, (Mohr's Plant Life.) Eupatoriurn aromaticum L. Common, dry pine and mixed woods. Eupatriun ;capillifoliumil (Lam.) Small. Very common, pastures, Old usually in moist land. Occasional, swamps. fields, roadsides and waste places, jEupatoriun co-elestinum L. Eupatorium compositifolium Walt. Frequent, dry old fields and open woods. Eup.atorium mcuneifolium Willd. Frequent, dry sandy pine woods. Eupatorium hyssopifolium L. Occasional, dry sandy woods. Eupatorin linearifolium Walt. (Baker & Earle.) (Molir's Plant Lee county. Life.) Eupatoriuim perfoliatum L. Common, swampy places, clay or sand. *Eupatoriuum petiiloideuui Collected once, Auburn. Eupatorium Rare, dry open woods. Lee count. Britt. pinnatifidum Ell. Eupatorium pubescens Mulil. (Baker & Earle.) (Molir's Plant Life.) Eupatorium purpureum L. Common, creek bottoms and swamps, especially clay land. Eupateriulu rotundifolium L. Common, creek bottoms, usually sandy land. 115 LEupatorium semiserratum D C. Frequent, sandy pine woods. Eupatoriuin serotinum Michx. Occasional, moist roadsides and waste places. Eupotorium Smithii Greene & Molr. Chambers County. (Mohr, Plant Life.) *EupatOrillm Torreyanum Short. Clay roadsides, Chambers county. .Eupatorium tortifolliur Chapm. Frequent, dry sandy pine woods. Eupatorinin verbenaefolium Michx. Common, swampy woods, sandy land. TGailardia lanceolata Michx. tGnaphaliun ilelileri Britt. Common, open sandy pine woods, etc. Common, open pine and mixed woods. Ghaphalium purpureum L. Common, a winter weed in fields and waste places. Gnaphalium obtusifolium L. Lee county. (Baker & Earle.) (Mohrs Plant Life.) Gnaphaliurn ielleri Britt. Collected once, banks of Tallapoosa river. ileleniuni autumnale L. Common, with the last. H ieleniurn Nuttalliji A. Gray. Frequent, alder swamps and creek bottoms. t lleneiuui tenuifoliurn Nutt. Very common, fields, pastures and roadsides; (bitter weed.) Helianthus angustifolius L. Common, open swampy places. ilelianthus atrorubens L. Occasional, roadsides and woods, clay land. ilelianthus divaricatus L. Frequent, dry woods and roadsides. ilelianthus, hirsutus Raf. Frequent, dry woods and roadsides. ilelianthus hirsutus trachyphyllus T. & G. Clay county. (Mohr's Plant Life.) 116 ilelianthus microcephalus T. & G. Common, dry woods and roadsides. ielianthus Sweinitzii T. & G. Ilelianthus tomentosus Milchx. Frequent, rich mixed woods. Lee County, (Mohr, Plant Life.) ieliopsis gracilis Nutt. Occasional, moist upland woods. ieliopsis helianthoides (L.) B. S. P. Collected once, Tallapoosa County. Ionacti linariifolia (L.) Greene. Common, roadsides and open pine woods, sandy land. Isopappus divaricatus (Nutt.) T. & G. Very common, old fields, pastures and roadsides. Kuhnia eupatorioides L. Common, dry open woods, usually on sandy land. *Lacinaria Earlei Greene. -Lacin'aria Auburn. (F. S. Earle, 1896.) elegans (Walt.) 0. Kuntze. Locally abundant, sandy pine woods, south of Auburn. Auburn. (F. S. Earle, 1896.) A form with white a; Lacinaria elegauntula Greene. tLacinaria grarninifolia (Walt.) 0. Kuntze. Common, dry pine and mixed woods. flowers occurs. tLalcinaria s~cariosa squarruilosa (Michx.) Small. Collected once, Auburn. :llacinaria spicata (L.) 0. Kuntze. Occasional, pine woods. Laciriaria squarrosa (L.) Hll. Occasional, dry woods. Leptilon Canadense (L.) Britt. Common, cultivated fields. SMariana Mariana (L.) Collected once,, streets l. of Auburn. Marshallia lanceolata Pursh. Frequent, open pine and mixed woods. Marshallia trinerva (Walt. ) Porter. Occasional, thickets along small streams. L17 Mesadenia atriplicifolia (L.) tMpsadenia ovata (Walt.) Frequent, moist mixed woods. IRaf.- Banks of Tallapoosa river, Tallapoosa county. tMesadenia renifornis (Muhi.) Raf. Collected once, Clay county. Parthemium integrifolium L. Clay county, Tallapoosa county, Life.) Lee county, (Mohr, Plant tPluchea foetida (L.) B. S. P. Occasional, swamps and creek bottoms. Pluchea petiolata Cass. Common, creek bottoms and swamps. Polymnia Canadensis L. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life.) Polymmni-a Top !of Talladega mountains, Clay county. Canadensi's radiata A. Gray. Polymnia Uvedalia L. Occasional, roadsides and moist open woods. Rudbeckia fulgilda Mft. Frequent, moist upland woods. Rudbeckia hirta L. Common, dry open woods. Rudbeckia laciniata L. Frequent, creek bottoms and swamps. Rudbeckia spathulata Michx. Clay county, Talladega county, Lee county, Life.) (Mohr's Plant iRudbeckia triloba L. Collected once, northern Lee county. Rudbeckia truncata Small. Collected once, Auburn. Senecio Earlei Small. Very common, dry open woods and waste places. Seneejo lobatus Pers. Very comon, creek bottoms. Senecio Memniingeri Britt. Lee county. (Underwood & Earle.) (Mohr's Plant Life.) 118 Senecio Lee county. obovatus Muhl. (Baker & Earle.) (Mohr's Plant Life.) (Mohr's Plant Senecio Snialii Britt. Clay county, Tallapoosa Sericoicairpus asteroides county, Lee county, (L.) B. S. P. Common, dry pine and mixed woods. Sericocarpus bifolilatus (Walt.) Porter. Occasional, dry sandy pine woods. Sericocarpus linifolius (L.) B. S. P. Common, dry pine or mixed woods. Silp'hium asperimurn Hook. Clay county. (Mohr's Plant Life.) Sil-phium aasteriscus L. Common, upland woods, clay or sand. Silphium compositum Miix. Common, upland woods, clay or sand. Silphium deutaturn Ell. Lee county. Lee county. (Baker & Earle.) (Baker & Earle.) (Mohr's Plant (Mohrs Plant Life.) Silphium laevigatum Pursh. Silphium trifolatum L. Clay county (Miohr's Plant Life.) Life.) t Solidago a'rplexicaulis Solidago arguta Ait. Clay County. T. & G.. Life.) Frequent, rocky hillsides, mixed woods. (Mohr, Plant Solidago Boottii Hook. Common, creek bottom woods. Solidago brachyphylla Chap. Lee county. (Earle.) (Mohrs' Plant Life.) j-Solidago -caesia L. Common, moist rich woods. Solidago Very common, fields and waste places. Canadeniss L. j-Solidago erecta Purshi. Frequent, dry sandy creek bottoms. t Solidago fistulosa Mill. Collected once, Clay county. 119 Solidago neglecta T. & G1. Lee county. (Baker & Earle.) (Mohr's Plant Life.) Solidago neiloralis Alt. Very cdmmon, dry roadsides, old fields and dry open secondgrowth woods. Solidago oldora Ait. Very common, dry pine and mixed woods. Solidago palieslcens Mohr. Common, dry rocky hill-sides, mixed woods. Solidago patula strilctula T. & G. Frequent, moist woods, creek bottoms, etc. Solidago petiolfafis Alt. Common, sandy pine woods. ,Solidago rugosa Mill. Common, creek bottoms, :Solildago salicina Ell. alder swamps. Lee county (Mohr's Plant Life.) Siolid'ago, serotina Ait. Common, creek bottom fields and moist places. .Solidago ulmifolia Mull. Common, creek bottom woods. Solidago Vaseyi ileller. Clay county (M'ohr's Plant Life.) : Tetragonotheca helianthoides L. Verbesina alternifolia (L.) Britt. Verbesina ari'stata (Eli.) ileller. Clay county (Mohr's Plant Life.) Common, dry open woods and roadsides, usually sandy land. Common, dry pine and mixed woods. Frequent, dry open creek bottom woods. jiTferbesina Virginica. L. Vernonia ailgustifolia Miclix. Common, sandy pine woods, occasional on clay. W5ernonia13aldwini Torr. Collected once, Auburn., 120 *Vernonia flaccidlifolia Small. Occasional, upland clay woods. 1. *\ernonia glauca (L.) Collected once, Auburn. ftVernonia Britt. maxima Small. 2. Noveboralcensis (L.) Wilid. *Vernonia Frequent,:alder swamps, etc., reaching 10 or 12 Occasional, fields, pastures and roadsides. fee,. *Vernonia ovalifolia. T. & G. 3. 0. Kuntze. Common, dry sandy woods. Willouglbia scandens (L.) Common, climbing in swamps. Xanthiurn glabratum (D C.-) B3ritt. (=X. strumosum.) determined as TVer1.-Some of these specimens were at nonia fascicularis Miclix. and are so reported by Mohr, Plant Life, 758. 2.-This is the Vernonia gigantea (Walt.) Britt, reported from Clay county, Mohr, Plant Life. 3.-Distributed as Vernonia Drummondli. first BULLETIN No. 120.API,10 APRIL, 1902 ALABAMA. Agricultural Experiment Station OF THE Agricultural and Mechanical College, AI B URN. THlE COW PEA AND THE VELVET BEAN AS FERIIZERS. By J. F. DUGGAR. MONTGOMERY, ALA.. 1HE BROWN PRINTING CO., PRINTERS ANI) IIINO)ERMS 1902. COMMITTEE OF TRUSTEES ON EXPERIMENT STATION. THOS. WILLIAMS....... ....... ..... .... .......... Wetumpka. Selma. JONATHAN HARALSON. ..................... STATION COUNCIL. 0. D. SMITH... ................................... Acting President. and Botanist. P. H. MELLL.....................................Director B. B. Ross...........................................Chemist. C. A. CARY, D. V. M...............................Veterinarian. J. F. DUGGAR. ........................................ Agriculturist. E. M. WILCOX........................Biologist and Horticulturist. J. T. ANDERSON..................................Associate Chemist. ASSISTANTS. C. L. HARE .......... ....................... First Assistant Chemist. Second Assistant Chemist. Assistant Chemist. Superintendent of Farm. T. BRAGG................................... J. C. PHELPS.................................Third T. R. U. W. CULVER................................. CLARK..................................Assistant Agriculturist. C. -F. AUSTIN................................ Assistant Horticulturist.. The Bulletins of this Station will be sent free to any citizen of the State on application to the Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama. THE COWPEA AND- THE VELVET BEAN AS FERTILIZERS. BY J. F. DUGGAR. Sununary. than fifty exThis bulletin records the results perinents conducted at Auburn during the past.five years, to ascertain.the effects of cowpeas and velvet beans in the. improvement't of the soil..The amount soil improvement has been determined by the increase in the yields of cotton, corn, oats, wheat and sorghum, grown as first, second, third or fourth crops after the stubble and roots of cowpeas or velvet beans or after vines, 'stubble and roots these plants have been plowed increase under. The basis for determining been the yield of each 'criop on plots where no leguminous plant has recently grown. scowThe fertilizing value of different varieties peas was found to vaty considerably, and is probably in of more of o'f this has of proportion to the luxuriance of growth. In. two tests there .was a slightly larger yield of corn from plowing in 'cowpea vines very late in the fall than from postponing the plowing until Ap'ril ; but it is regarded as, generally best to plow in the vines not more than a few weeks before the next 'crop is planted. The average for six varieties -showed that when lcowpeas were (at 'a suitable stage for mowing 36.6 per cent. an'd in another case 39 per cent. of the dry weight of the plant was available for fertilizing uses in stubble, root's 'and fallen leaves. In the entire growth of there wa~s contained in one case 53.7 peas on one another nitrogen, in another 69.8, and pounds nitrogen per acre, 87.2, 'an aver'age of 70.2 pound~s of acre cow- o'f in 124 which is equivalent to the nitrogen in 1,003 pounds of cotton seed meal. In the roots, stubble 'and fallen leaves on an 'acre there were, respectively, 11.65, 16.2 and 31.4 pounds of nitrogen, an average of 19.75 pounds of nitrogen per acre, which is equivalent to that contained in 282 pounds o'f 'cotton seed meal. The average of three tests 'shows that 28 per cent. of the total nitrogen was contained in the roots, stubble and fallen leaves after the removal of the hay. The average increase in the yields of succeeding crops was practically identical whether the fertilizing material was supplied by icowpeas or by velvet beans. Equal areas of these two plants were of practically equal value for :soil improvement. The word vines ins here used as synonymous with the entire plant of the velvet bean, and with the entire plant of the cowpea after the pods are picked. The increase in the yield o'f seed cotton produced in the year immediately following the plowing in of the vines of cowpe'as or velvet beans averaged in four tests 567 pounds per a'cre, worth (,at 6 cents per pound for lint and $7.50 per ton for seed) $14.17. The increase in the first 'cotton -'crop 'after the use as fertilizers of the vines of the summer legumes was never less than 32 per cent. and averaged 63 per cent. In one test with corn the increase in the first crop where velvet bean vines had been plowed in was 81 per cent., of 12.3 bushels, worth at least $6.15 per acre. With oats the 'average increase from the vines of the summer legumes in three tests 'averaged 17 bushels per acre, and with wheat the corresponding increase in two tests vas 5.65 bushels per acre. The increase in the yield of sorghum hay after cowpea and velvet bean vines averaged 87 per cent., or an 125 average gain of 2.1 tons of hay per acre, worth, at $6.67 per ton, $14.02. When the vines of the cowpea or velvet bean were utilized as hay and ,only the roots and stubble employed as fertilizer the increase in the yield per acre of the crop immediately succeelding the stubble was as follows: 208 pounds of seed cotton, or 18 per cent., worth $5.20. 4.3 bushels of corn, or 32 per cent.; 28 bushels of oats, or 334 per cent.; 6.7 bushels of wheat, or 215 per cent.; 2.08 tons of sorghum hay, or 57 per cent. The largest percentage increase from either the vines or stubble of cowpeas or velvet beans was made by wheat and fall isown oats, probably because these best prevented the washing away or leaching out of the fertilizing material in the stubble or vines of the legumes. Generally on sandy soil those crops most completely utilize the fertilizing value of the legumes which leave the land unoccupied for the shortest interval. It is generally unadvisable for legumes to immediately succeed legumes in the rotation 'o'f crops, for non-leguminous plants like cotton, ,corn, the small grains, grasses, etc., make better use of the nitrogen of the fertilizing crop. The value of the increased product resulting from the use of the entire legume for fertilizer was greater with cotton and sorghum than with corn, oats or wheat. These experiments emphasize the importance of such a rotation of crops as will require a large proportion of the cultivated land of every farm to be devoted to some leguminous plant. Comparing the fertilizing effect of the vines with that of the stubble of the cowpea and the velvet bean, the excess in the next crop in favor of the vines averaged as. follows: 126 6.6 bulshels of corn per acre, or.......... 49 per cent. .5 ton of sorghum hay, or ............... 9 per cent. 452 pounds of seed 'cotton per acre, or .... 40 per cent. With these 'three 'crops the average increase in value per acre was $5.98 greater from vines than from stubble. With oats and wheat the vines of these summer legumes were not superior to the lstubble when the small grains were sown immediately 'after the legumes m'atured. The fertilizing effect of the stubble of cowpeas or velvet beans was very transitory on sandy land, the average increase in the 'second crop of corn after the stubble being only 1.34 bushels per acre, or 12 per cent., as ,compared with the yield of a -plot that had not borne legumes. The fertilizing effect of the vines of cowpeas and velvet beans was less transitory than that of the stubble, land the increase was 24 to 54 per cent. in the second crop, 14 per cent. in the third crop (oats), and the favorable effect was even perceptible 'in the fourth crop (sorghum) grown in the same year as the third. The total increase in value of the four crops occupying certain plots during the three years after the plowing under of the vines of 'cowpeas and velvet beans was $42.97 per acre, an 'annual increase of $14.32 per acre. On the other hand, on very light soil the fertilizing effects of both stubble vines 'had practically disappeared within twelve months after the plowing in of the legumes. Corn as the second crop yielded 14 per cent., or 2.1 bushels more after legume vines than after legume stubble, this representing a value of $1.05. The permanency of effect of legumes in soil improvement seems to be in proportion to the 'stiffness of the 'soil ,and 'to the mass of vegetable matter afforded by the legume, and the favorable influence of leguminous vines is apparently not less permanent than that of stable manure. land 127 INTRODUCTORY. The improvement of the soil should be one of the chief aims of every farmer. Every increase in productiveness brings an even more marked increase in profits. Given rich 'soil, and almost 'any crop will pay if adapted to the local conditions and markets. Labor spent in the 'cultivation of corn or cotton on extremely poor soil usually earns scant reward or none. Fortunately much of the poorest worn land can be brought to a fair degree of productiveness. The means of soil improvement are various. Most thoroughly tested by long experience in Europe and America is that 'system of f'ar'ming which depends for soil enrichment on the manure from a large number of livestock maintained on the 'farm, partly for immediate profit, but largely for use as manufacturers of fertilizers. This system should be much more generally followed in Alabama.: However, its introduction will be gradual because of limited capital, inexperience, and the ,small number and poor quality of the native livestock that must serve as a foundation for stock raising. Meantime the most immediately available method of increasing the fertility o'f the soils of the South consists in the free use of that class of leguminous plants, or legumes, which embraces cowpeas, velvet beans, soy beans, beggar weed, peanuts, hairy vetch, crimson clover, and numerous others. When these plant's 'are grown under suitable conditions specific enlargements occur on their roots and these are called root tubercles, or, root nodules. The microscopic organisms which live within these tubercles are able to assimilate the nitrogen of the air that circuthrough the upper layers o'f the soil. This nitrogen while a part of the 'air was useless to plant life, but lates 128 within the tubercies it is changed into available fertilizer and is carried by the sap to every part of the legnminons plant. Hence we may speak of these tubercles as fertilizer factories where nitrogenons fertilizers are mannufactnred and -whence they sent to every part of the cowpea velvet bean, or other-legnminons plant. The plowing in of the legume gives this nitrogen to the s:oil for the nse of other plants. Nitrogen.when of 'cotton'seed 'meal 'costs 12 to purchased in the 15 cents per pound, but when it is furnished legumes principal outlay being for it is -many tires cheaper, the seed and labor. Great as is the need of the South for varied indnstrial development, the factories most urgently needed and paying l'argest dividends are those which every farmer can bring into 'being by the million the roots of snch legumesa's cowpeas, velvet beans, vetch, crimson clover, nielilotus, b'nr clover,'and 'alfalfa. These crop's afford nitrogen and vegetable matter, thns snp'plying the principal deficiencies of sothern soils, an'd they may be either nsed directly and exwith greater profit the lusively for this purpose, tops may first 'fed to livestock, thns affording 'a twofold profit in animal prodncts and fertilizer, while the stubble and roots are immediately ' ivail'ab'le 'fo'r soil im- .or are for~rm by on be or provement. 'The 'stubble alone usually causes !a sufficient in'crease pay the 'following crop to more of seed, fertilizer, and cultivation of the legnme, co'st a net gain. leaving the food valne of the tops The principal part of this bniletin is 'ocnupied with d'ata obtained at A'bnrn 'dnringthe past five years and bearing on the extent arnd permianency 'of the fertilizing 'cowpeas an'd velvet beans. effect The following 'conditions prevailed in all of these tests, unless otherwise specifically stated : in the yield of 'the than as of 129 The legumes. were grown, in drills and cultivated and moderately fertilized with acid phosphate or with phosphate and some potash salt. The crops, corn, cotton, oats, wheat, sorghum, and rye, used to measure the fertilizing effects of the legumes, have received no application of nitrogen, but have been fertilized with phosphate and potash. The soil in all tests is rather poor to extremely poor deep sandy upland, t'he white or gray being almost 'a pure Isand and the reddish soil approaching a loam with clayey loam subsoil in the latter case. stubble of the legumes have been plowed The vines under just before the planting of the next crop. The variety of ceowpeas employed was the Wonderful or Unknown. In valuing the crops the endelavor has been made to use conservative 'average price's, the error, if 'any, being in putting them too low rather than too high. Lint cotton hass been rated at 64 'cents per pound, cotton seed at $7.50 per ton, sorghum hay 'at $6.67 per ton, corn at 50 cents, oats 40 cents, and wheat 80 cents per bushel. No record is here made of the increase in the yields of grain, straw or corn stover, assmuing that this has been about sufficient to cover the increased cost of harvesting and threshing. .or TIME TO PLOW IN COWPEA VINES. On a gray sandy upland soil the vines of drilled cowpeas were plowed under in the late fall o'f 1898 and 1900, while on other plots plowing was deferred until nearly planting time. The yields of corn were as follows: 130 Iushels of corn per acre following cowpea vines plowed under in late fall or early spring. 11899 23.8 Bus. per acre. (1901 IAv. 2yr. 30.6 27.2 Fall plowed.................. Spring plowed........................20.8 Difference.............3.0 29.7 0.9 25.3 1.9 The results are slightly in favor of plowing under peavines in the latter part of the fall rather than in spring. As the plots were not strictly uniform, further experiment's are needed 'before definite conclusions can It 'should be said that on July 5, 1899, the be daw. foliage of the corn plant was much greener where the vines had been turned under in the fall than on the other plots, though -the ears were not discernably different. It is usually rega'rded as 'best to'avoid fall plowing on sandy land in the South unless a winter cropis to be grown. On heavy soils whereifall plowing may otherwise be desirable, the legumes should first be allowed to mature. Unless otherwise stated the time of plowing under coxvpea and velvet bean vines referred to in this bulletin is 'a few days or weeks -before the planting of the new crop that is to occupy the ground. RELATIVE FERTILIZING_ VALUES OF COWPEAS, OF DIFFERENT VARIETIES cowpeas 'Corn was grown in 1898 and 1901 immediately foblowing different varieties. of 'drilled which had been picked and in spring the vines plowed under. 131 Excess of yield of corn in bushels per acre on vine plots tpared in 1898 with ivo-legumes plot and in as corn 1901 with plot where only pea stubble had been plowed under. Variety ot cowpeas Wonderful (or Unknown)................2.7 Whippoorwill.......... ............... Clay.........4.3 Black, from Hastings...............-2.9 Red Ripper...............................5.9 New Era ....... ....White Giant..............................0.6 Jones White ................ Large White Crowder.....................5.3 Lady........6.8 Average 1 1898. Bus I 1901. 0.6 Bus. -1.5 0.7 3.2 1.9 2.9 3.3 1.4 These figures are given merely as a matter of record, and no ,conclusions are yet warranted..A's.a.matter of common experience any Variety of cowpeas affords in its vines as much or more nitrogen than the following corn crop can utilize. For crops requiring a larger amount of nitrogen or for larger supplies of vegetable matter we may safely value the numerous varieties of cowpeas in proportion to the yeil'd of hay which- they would afford if thus utilized. As noted in Bulletin 118 Wonderful (or Unknown), Clay, and Iron are among the. varieties making large yields of hay, and hence of by reason of its fertilizing material. The large yeild, large 'stems and roots, and varied usefulness, i's especially riecommen'ded for fertilizing purposes. It is possible, however, that future investigations may show some advantage for varieties, that. run along the ground and thus 'by the itangle of runners hold in place on 6loping ground in winter 'a larger proportion of .the leaves than is d'one 'by an erect :variety like Wonderful, -Whippoorwill. or. Wonderful. 1632 COwiPE VINES, EFFECT ON FOLLOWING COTTON CROP OF 1899. On a reddish loam upland ,soil of fair quality drilled Wonderful Fcowpeas and cotton, ,similarly fertilized were grown in 1898. The peais were picked, yielding 11.8 bushels, per acre, and the vines were plowed under the next spring, when both areas were planted ton. The corrected yield of cotton in 1899 was 367 pounds, or 32 per cent. greater on the area where the peavines had been plowed in than on the plots where the preceding crop had been cotton. Coopea vines, residual fertilizing effect on second crop, viz., oats grown in 1900.-Burt oats were sown in February, 1900, on the same plots as above to test the residual or 'second-year effects of cowpea vines. On some plots the oatsi received no nitrogenous fertilizer, on others 76.ppounds of nitrate of soda was used per acre. The yields of oats, in bushels per'acre, were as follows : with-cot- Fertilizing effects on oats of cowpeas grown two years before. After cotton in '98 and '99 Bus. 19.7 I Yield of oats per acre withinitrate of After cowpeas in Increase attribu'98 & cotton able to cowpeas of '98. in '99. Bus. I Bus. % 25.5 5.8 29 Yield of oats per acre without nitrogenous fertilizer............. soda. . 12.3 22.0 9.7 79 In this ,case 'we have an increase of 9.7 bushels, or 79 per cent, as the effect of 1cowpea vines on oats grown as the second crop after 'cowpeas. So strong was this 133 fertilizing effect of cowpeas that it was not entirely obiscured even when ni'tr'ate of soda was also employed, the increase in the yield of oats under these conditions being 29 per cent. Cowpeas as fertilizer on. lime land.-A co-operative fertilizer experiment w'as conducted for this Station by Capt. A. A. McGregor on lime land at Town Creek, in North Alabama. In his experiment the cowpea was the legume employed. In 1898 cowpeas were grown on certain plots and cotton on others. The 'cowpea vines, on which no fruit had matured, were plowed under in the spring of 1899. Cotton was planted on plots which had borne a crop of cotton in 1898 and on others which had grown cowpeas for 'fertilizing purposes. All cotton plots referred to in this paragraph were unfertilized in 1899, and the fertilization of cow.peas and cotton in 1898 had been identical, only phosphate having been used with either crop. The weather was exceedingly unfavorable in 1899, so that the full measure of the fertilizing value of cowpeas was not revealed in this test. In this case the .average increase in the yield of seed cotton, which we may attribute to the co'wpea vines is, even under very adverse conditions, 58 per cent., or 125 pounds, worth at 21 cents per pound, $3.92 per acre. Doubtless later crops have 'also been benefited by the fertilization with cowpeas. There is reason to expect a larger increase than the above when cowpeas are plowed under on the lime lands of either the Tennessee Valley or of the Central Prairie Region of Alabama. Especially in the prairie soils the principal need is for vegetable matter to lighten the soil and to add nitrogen, and for these purposes the choice must usually be made between melilotus (the so-called lucern) and cowpeas. 134 FERTILIZING EFFECTS OF VINES OF COWPEAS AND VELVET BEANS AS SHOWN BY SORGHUM IN 1897. In 1897 sorghum was grown on three plots following, respectively, velvet bean vines plowed under, cowpea vines plowed .under, ,and fallow, or clean cultivation without crop in 1896. In 1897 the yields of sorghum hay per acre were as follows: Yield. Lbs. I 3,792 7,008 7,064 Increase Lbs. % 3,216 3,272 85 86 After fallow ........................ After cowpeas, plowed in ............. After velvet beans, plowed in .......... The effect of the legumes was to nearly double the crop of sorghum hay. FERTILIZING MATERIALS IN LEAVES, STEMS, AND ROOTS OF THE COWPEA. In September, 1899, just 81 days after the planting of the seed, samples were taken ,of six varieties of cowpeas growing in 34-inch drills on poor gray sandy land. The sample in each case comprised the entire growth on a measured area of land, including the roots growing in the upper 6 inches of soil, which stratum contained nearly all the roots. After curing, the leaves, blooms and pods, coarse stems ,fine stem's (including runners, leafstalks, etc.), fallen leaves and leafstalk ,and roots with attached stubble about two inches long, were 'carefully separated. Analyses were made in the chemical department of a composite sample representing all six varieties, the material analyzed being extremely dry. (For analysis of same 'samples showing food value see Alabama Station Bulletin No. 118, page 37.) 135 The following table shows what percentage of the total air-dry weight of the plants of each variety was available for fertilizing purposes after the removal of the hay. Per cent. of the entire weight of the eowpea plant in stubble and roots and in fallen leaves and leaf stalks. Fallen Variety, Miller..................7.7 Whippoorwili....................3.7 Iron .......................... W\onderful ............ ........ Jones White ................... Clay .. .. ... .. Average, 6 varieties ........... I leaves, etc. Roots and 2-inch stubble. 25.0 21.6 19.0 20.3 14.5 26.0 21.1 Total. 42.7 25.3 34.4 39.5 28.8 48.9 .... 15.4 19.2 14.3 22.9 11.5 36.6 'The -average for the six varieties'show's that in each pounds of dry plants there were 15.5 pounds of fallen leaves and leaf stalks, and 21.1 pounds roots and stubble, making a 'total 'of 36.6 pounds, more than one-thir'd of the entire plant being'thus left on the ground for fertilizer after the hay was cut. 100 of Analyses of the different parts of the plant made by Prof. C. L. Hare, of the chemical department o'f this station, are recorded in the following table. Comtposition of parts of the air-dry eowpea. plant. Phosp'ric .78 .64 .42 .37 .26 Water. 'Nitrogen. Leaves........ ........... 10.65 Fine stems.........8.97 Coarse stems.............. 8.47 Fallen leaves and leaf stalk-9.75 Roots and 2-inch I1% IAcid. I1 IPotash. %% 1.49 .68 1.49 1.09 1.11 stubble. . 3.59 1.90 1.51 1.67 1.38 5.25 is the only one of the three p'recious elements that the Let us direct our attention to the nitrogen, since this plant obtains (in part) 'from the air, and 'the only one in 136 which the soil is enriched by the growing of 'cowpeas. The growing leaves in the airdry condition contain ne'airly twice as large a percentage of nitrogen as the fine stems, and more than twice as much as the coarse stein's and roots and fallen material. 4nto ants of air-dry material and nitrogen afforded by IAir dry material. Lbs. different parts of the cowpea plant on one acre (average lof six varieties) I In In In In In In leaves retained on vines..................501.0 fine stems...................01.6 coarse stems...................38.8 pods,'blooms, etc ......................... fallen leaves and leaf stalks ............. roots and 2-inch stubble ................. Nitrogen. Lbs. 18.00 7.66 6.61 *9*75 325.0 357.3 411.7 5.97 5.tb 53.67 Total..................................2435.4 *Assuming 3% of nitrogen in thoroughly air-dry pods. The amount of nitrogen stored up by a poor crop of an 'acre, 53.67 pounds, is equivalent cowpeas growing 'cotton seed meal. It that -contained in 767 pounds should be remembered that an undetermined portion of to on o'f though on a 'soil as this nitrogen came from poor as this the nitrogen derived from the pair probably the soil, constituted by far the larger portion of the total nitrogen utilized 'by the -plant. In the stubble, roo'ts, 'and fallen umaterial there was 11.65 pounds of nitrogen per acre or the 'same amount as is 'contained in 162 pound's Of the total nitrogen in the entire plant 22 per cent. was found in tile roots, 'stubble and 'fallen material. An experiment 'somewhat similar to the preceding made in 19003, using only a single variety, Wonderful. or Unknown. The. seed were planted in drills 2~ was of' cotton seed meal. 137 feet apart on p-ooi gray sandy soil. Four samples were taken from two plots, each sample consisting of the entire growth on an .area of four square yards; the roots w Tere obtained by digging and sifting the soil to a depth of six inches, to which sr-tnra all the principal roots werc apparently confined. That the samrples we're accurately'htken is indicated by the close agreement of the duplicate samples; hence only 'average results are given below. The vineswere cut, the fallen leaves and leaf stalks collected; and the roots sifted ,olut on September 5. This was 106 days after after plantthe date of planting on one plot and 78 ing on the other. slightly When harvested the more mature sample pas't its prime for hay, as shown by the unduly large amount of fallen leaves, while the other sample was too immature 'and succulent for easy curing. The yields per acre of extremely dry hay according te the weight of the taken after being stored in an were 2,269 pound's on the plot office for seven cut at a late stage, and 2,087 pounds of less mature material. These are equivalent to about 1 . and 1 s tons per 'acre of hay with the u'ual amount ,of moisture. days was months, samples the cowpea Weights- (air-dry) per acre of hay, and fallen leaves of the roots, and stubble, cowpea.. Air dry material, per acre. Ripening Blooming stage. stage. Lbs. Lbs. 2,087 Vines, including stems, leaves, pods, etc 2,269 Roots, and stubble about 2 in. long. 714 502 Fallen leaves and leaf stalks .... 1,385 804 Total.................................4,368 3,393 138 The following table sihows what proportion of the en- tire plant consisted of roots, fallen material, and hay, in the plants harvested when ripening or when in bloom. Ripening stage. Tops....................................52 Roots and stubble.........................16 Fallen leaves, etc ........................... IBlooming 1stage. 61 15 32 24 hay was made of cowpeas past their pie there was left on the ground in roots, stubble, and fallen material 48 per cent. of the weight of the plant, and When mowing occurred when the vines were in bloom 39 per cent. of the total weight remained as fertilizer material. When Analyses made by Prof. J. T. Anderson, Associate Chemist of this Station, are recorded below: Composition of hay, fallen nmaterial, and roots and stubble of the eowpea. In ripening Hay........ ........ Fallen leaves and leaf stalks.......... Roots and stubble .. Inbomn .... stage: IWater. %I Nitrogen. IAcid. 1 Potash. 9.05 7.80 7.77 2.46 1.83 1.17 2.57 .85 .64 .48 .81 2.14 1.45 1.51 2.86 ............. tg:Hay .. .. Fallen leaves, etc. Roots and stubble 58.15 6.80 7.00 1.36 1.05 .59 .41 1.15 2.11 From this table it may be 'that the hay is more than twvice as rich the roots and 'stubble in nitrogen, as seen and also richer in phosphoric potash. The amounts of nitrogen contained in the hay, 'fallen acid and material, 'and roots and stubble on one acre were as follows: 139 Ripening stage. Lbs. nitrogen. In hay.......................... In fallen leaves, etc............... In roots and stubble ................. Total per acre ................... 5.8 23.1 .8.3 87.2 Blooming stage. Lbs. nitrogen. 53.6 10.9 5.3 69.8 The total amounts of nitrogen stored up by the pea plant on one acre was in one case 87.2 pounds, in the other 69.8 pounds, equuivalent, respectively, to the nitrogen in 1,246 997 pounds of cotton seed meal. Of this amount there was left in and on the soil when cow- and mowing occurred late 31.4 pounds of nitrogen; and from the younger plant's 16.2 pounds per acre. This is equivalent to the statement that the nitrogen per acre remaining 'after the vines were removed wasequal to the amount contained in 446 or 231 pounds of cotton seed meal. Of tile total nitrogen in the plant, the roots, stubble, and fallen material containe'd 34 per cent. at the ripening stage, and 23 per cent. at the blooming period. Considering the three tests together the total amounts of nitrogen per acre of was 70.2 pounds in the entire growth, stubble was 19.75 pounds, or 28 per cent. COWPEA STUBBLE VERSUS 'COWPEA VINES AS FERTILIZER FOR CORN IN .of cowpea's which the average amount in the 1901. 'Corn wa's grown in 1901 on 'sandy loam land, which, in 1900 had borne light crop of 'drilled cowpeas, planted after the removal of the oat 'crop of 1900. Three plots 'were employed. On one the peavines had been cut the previous September, yielding 1,648 pounds of h'ay per acre. On the other two plots no vines nor peas were harvested 'but the entire growth, which was a 140 only about half of a normal yield, was plowed under Msarch 14, at which time the stubble plot was also plowed. On the stubble plot and on one of the others corn was fertilized with 100 pounds of acid phosphate per acre, which fertilizer was omitted from the third plot. The stand was uni'form. The yields of corn in bushels per acre were as follows: Bus. Pea stubble and phosphate as fertilizer ................. Pea vines and phosphate as fertilizer ................... 11.40 20.28 Pea vines as fertilizer, no phosphate .................... 21.74 The yield of corn following pea vines was 78 per cent. greater than the yield on the plot where the stubble only had been plowed under, the increase being 8.88 bushels per acre. In the presence of a considerable amount of rich vegetable matter furnished by pea vines, phosphate was not needed on this soil where acid phosphate had been applied annually for many years. In a different field on more permeable gray sandy soil corn grown in 1901 on a plot where the stubble of Wonderful cowpeas had been plowed under for hay The average yield of yielded 25.3 bushels per acre. corn on two 'adjacent plots-where cowpea vines of the varieties Lady and White Giant, both luxuriant growers, had been plowed under, was 25.9 bushels per acre. Here there was practically no superiority of vines over stubble as a fertilizer for corn. Note should also be taken of the increase in the corn crop due to plowing in either stubble or vines of a number of varieties as recorded in the table on page 131. 141 VELVET BEAN STUBBLE AND VINES AS FERTILIZERS FOR CORN IN 1901. The fertilizing effect of velvet bean stubble, of velvet bean vines, and of velvet bean vines in connection with acid phosphate, was tested in 1901 on four plots of very On one plot the procedpoor, deep whitesandy soil. ing crop had been corn. On the other three plots drilled velvet beans planted June 13, after the harvesting of the oat crop, had made only a moderate growth in 1900. On one of these plots the velvet 'bean vines were cut September 10, 1900, yielding 3,632 pounds of hay per acre. On the other two plots the vines were left on the land all winter. In the latter part of the winter all four plots were plowed, a disc harrow having first been run over the field while the vines were frozen in order to cut them and thus render it easier to plow them in. 'The corn on three of the plots was fertilized with 100 pounds of :acid phosphate per acre, but this fertilizer was omitted on one of the plots where velvet bean vines had been plowed in. Yield of corn in 1901 following corn, velvet bean stubble, or velvet bean vines. Bus. Phosphate (but no legume), as fertilizer...... 13.58 Velvet bean stubble and phosphate as fertilizer.. 17.93 Velvet bean vines and phosphate as fertilizer... 25.90 Velvet bean vines (no phosphate), as fertilizer.. 21.48 The increased yield per acre, as compared with the yield on the plot on which the previous crop had been corn, was 4.35 bushels, or 32 per cent., with velvet bean stubble, and 12.32 bushels, or 81 per cent., with velvet bean vines. 142 The increase attributable to 100 pounds of acid phosphate was 4.42 bushels, which made the use of this mineral fertilizer decidedly profitable for corn on very poor white sandy soil, when used in connection with a large mass of ,rich vegetable matter. On the other hand, on a spot about 100 yards distant, where the soil was less sandy ,and in better condition, phosphate did not increase the yield of corn when added to pea vines plowed under. (See page 140.) IMMEDIATE FERTILIZING EFFECT ON SORGHUM OF COWPEA AND VELVET BEAN VINES AND OF COWPEA VELVET BEAN STUBBLE. AND 'The soil on which the following experiment was made is a sandy loam, containing many small flint stones, and underlaid by a stiffer isubsoil. In 1898 eight uniform plots were planted, 2 plots with velvet beans, 5 with Wonderful c'owpeas (most plots broadcast), and 1 with drilled Orange sorghum. The growth 'of the several plots was either cured for hay or used as a fertilizer, as indicated in the next table. March 9, 1899, all plots were plowed and in due time sorghum was planted in drills on all plots, and the two cuttings of this crop at the proper season were cured for hay. The yields per acre of sorghum hay at two cuttings, the first growth having become too coarse, but the seeond being of good quality, averaged as follow's: First year effects on sorgh-um of stubble or vines of cowpeas or velvet beans. Yield per acre. Tons. 3.65 5.66 5.80 5.72 6.76 Increase from legumes. Tons. 2.01 2.15 2.07 3.11 Sorghum Sorghum Sorghum Sorghum Sorghum hay after sorghum stubble.. hay after cowpea stubble.. hay after velvet bean stubble hay after cowpea vine, pckd hay after velvet bean vines 143 As a fertilizer for sorghum velvet bean vines proved superior to cowpea vines, and to velvet bean stubble. of The stubble co'wpe'as and of velvet beans practically equal fertilizing value. ,of was Residual fertilizing effect of legumes on corn grown as the second crop after cowpea, and velvet bean vines and cowpea and velvet bean stubble. March 17, 1900, the sorghum stubble in the.experiment just discussed was turned with a onerhorse plow and March 29 corn was planted on all plots. "Fertilizing effects in 1900 'of stubble and vines peas and velvet beans grown in 1898. of cow- Corn per acre in 1900. Plot. Crop in 1898. Portion used for fertilizer. Increase Increase, over sorgvines Yil"hum plot over _________________of 1898. Bus. 5 ISorghum .. tubble ............ 241.......... & 6 Cowpeas 8 4&7 Cowpeas m ... .Vines,b after 3 ... Co p . S rh atu tubble......... picking . tu be..2 e... 27.7 241.&7 .. 2 Velvet stubble. Bus. Bus. 1.6 3.062.0 1 Velvet btans. Entire growth ... beams. Stubble........... 23.9 26.8 0.2 ...... . 2.6. Let it be noted that the heavy growth of sorghum in 1899 did not utilize 'all of the fertility derived from- the preceding crop of legumes. Although 'sorghum is: a plant that i's especially exhaustive to soil fertility, there still remained for the 'corn crop of 1900 a residue nitrogen from the c'owpea and velvet 'bean vine's, of 1893 sufficient to increase the yield of 'corn to the extent of 3.6 bushels per acre where -cowpeas had 'grown two years before, and 2.6 bushels w~here velvet beans had grown. Thi's is of an average 'o'f 3.2 bushel's per acre as, the residual fer- tilizing effect of these legunmes. 144 The fertilizing effects of the stubble these two plants was far more and transitory, the roots of suc- first ceeding -crop, sorghum, practically exhausting them, leaiving in the soil to increase the corn crop of 1900 by only an inconsiderable amount, viz.: 1.6 bushels and .2 bushel, an average of .9 bushel per acre." (From Bulletin No. 111, Alabama Experiment siufficient Station.) IMMEDIATE FERTILIING OF COWPEA AND EFFECT VELVET ON a CORN IN 1900 BEAN VINES. white, sandy soil, This experiment was made on poorer than that used in the last mentioned experiment. In the late spring and early summer of 1899 velvet beans had been planted in drills on certain plots begweed head been sown broadcast onothers. gar weed and a portion of the velvet beans was used exclusively for fertilizer. On other plots velvet beans fertilizer for were cut, thus leaving only the stubble corn. "These various fertilizing materials were all plowed begga r The and as under M'arch 31, 1900, and Mosby corn planted April 'and 40 5, using per acre 240 pounds of pounds 'of muriate acid phosphate of potash. Y Ines versus stubble of velvet b~eans as fertilizer for Jncrease over stubble plot. Bus. 11.9 3.1 corn in 1900. Plots . Material used for green manuring, Yield of corn per acre. .Lus. 15.6 27.5 18.7 4 & 9 3 &8 2 &7 Stubble of velvet beans................ Entire growth of velvet beans.......... Entire growth of beggar weeds......... 145 The entire growth of velvet beans afforded a yield of corn greater by 11.9 bushels per acre, or 76 per cent., than the yield where only the!stnbble was employed as fertilizer." (Alabala Station Bulletin No. 111.) Residual fertilizing effects of velvet bean vines and stubble on the second crop of corn grown in 1901. The same poor,, white, 'sandy hilltop was again planted in corn in 1901 withont any nitrogen'The yield of corn per acre were 15 ous 'fertilizer. where velvet bean vines growing in 1899 had bnushels been plowed under and only 11.1 bushels where velvet bean stubble had been turned nnder at the same time. The residnal or isecond-year fertilizing effect of the vines was greater than that 'of the stubble by 3.9 bushels per a-cre, or 33 per cent. The total fertilizing value of the vines during the sea-sons following the date 'when they were plowed in the exceeded that eoaf stubble to the extent of 59 per cent., of corn 15.8 bushels off corn per acre. This would usually be worth more than the net value of the 2,809. pounds velvet bean hay obtained from the stubble plot at considerable expense for curing. two or affint of vet bean- ines 1n this case it was more profitable 'to plow under vel- bay. from other corresponding tests it would have been still more profitable to 'have grazed cattle on the vines, either in their green or' winter-killed condition. Judging for fertilizer than to harvest them for COWPEA AND VELVET BEAN VIN ING EF FECTS ON ES, IMMEDIATE FERTILIz1899. COTTON GROWN IN In 1898 on 'a reddish loam 'soil, abounding in flint stones 'and underlaid by a -red loam 'subsoil there were grow n on adjacent 'plots -coxvpeas, velvet bean's, and 'cot- 146 ton, all fertilized alike with acid phosphate and kainit. The cowpeas and velvet beans were planted thickly in drills, using per acre 112 pounds of cowpe'as and 120 pounds of velvet beans. The variety of cowpeas used was the Unknown or Wonderful. Both cowpeas and velvet beans were piicked and removed from the field, though the latter did not fully mature. The vines were turned under in March, 1899, and all plots were planted to cotton; each plot of cotton was fertilized at the rate of 240 pounds of acid phosphate and 96 pounds of kainit per acre. The yield of sleed cotton per acre in 1899 was 1,533 pounds following cowpeas, 1,373 pounds following velvet beans, 'and 837 pounds following cotton. These figures show that the increased yield of seed cotton 'attributable to manuring with cowpea vines was 696 pounds per acre; the gain apparently due to the fertilization with velvet beans was 546 pounds per acre. In percentages the increase is 83 and 64 per cent., respectively. Valuing seed cotton at 22 cents per pound (which is equivalent to 64 cents per pound of lint and $7.50 per ton of seed), the gain with cowpeas and velvet beans is worth, respectively, $17.40 and $13.65 per acre. Surely it was 'more profitable to grow cotton every alternate year at the rate of a bale per acre than to grow continuous cotton crops of about one-half bale per acere. Additional proof of this is found in the fact that one of these plots afforded in 1898 a yield of 18- bushels of cowpeas per acre, besides increasing the cotton crop of the following year to the extent of $17.40 per acre. 147 Residual fertilizing effects of cowpeas and velvet beans on sorghum, oats, and late sorghum grown as second, third and fourth crops after legumes. these These same plots were planted with drilled sorghum with without any nitrogenous fertilizer in April, 1909; red oats without nitrogenous fertilizer in November, 1900, and again with drilled sorghum without any nitrogenous fertilizers, July 18, 1901. Fertilizing effects of cowpeas and velvet bean vines grown in 1898 on sorghum in 1900 and as a second crop in 1901. Sorghum hay per acre, 1900. Tons. 5.1 8.1 8.2 Sorghum hay per acre, 1901. Tons. 1.0 1.5 1.6 Total increase after legumes. Tons. 3.5 3.7 Preceding crop, Cotton in '98 and '99............ Cowpeas in '98 (picked), and cotton in '99 ................. Velvet beans in '98, and cotton in '99 .. . . . ... . . .. As compared with the plot not recently in legumes the increase of sorghum hay per acre in 1909 from coawpeas grown two years before was 3 tons per acre, or 59 per cent. ; from velvet two years before the increase in 1900 3.1 tons ,of hay, or 61 per cent. wa's beans The increased yield with late 'sorghum, which was the fourth crop after tile plowing in 'of the vines of the legumes, was, after cowpeas, .5 a ton, and af ter velvet beau .6 of ton. In the two sorghum crops the total 'increa~se in yield 'attributable to legumes was, with cowpeas, 3.5 tons hay, and with velvet beans 3.7 tons of sorghum per acre. a of of 148 Now let us go back a few months and note the yield of the oat crop coming between the sorghum 'crops of l900 and 1901. Yield of oats in 1901 grown as the third crop after legumefls. Yie sIncrease Preceding crops: Cotton in '98; cotton in '99; sorghum in 1900 Cowpeas in '98; do do Velvet beans in '98; do do YielJoats per acre. after legumes. Bus. 23.3 26.5 37.2 IBus. 00o 13.91 3.21 14 59 The fertilizing effect 'of the legumes in the third :crop after tie legumes, the increase where cow,-peas had once grown being 3.2 bushels of oats per acre, or 14 per The increase where velvet beans had been is suspiciously large, and in subsequent calcu= la.tions it will be a~su'med that the increase in the yield wasapparent cent. on would 'have this plot if not influenced by !accidental 'conditions been no greater than 'that on the plot once in cowpeas, viz., 3.2 bushels per acre. Financial results of using cowpea vines as fertilizers for cotton, sorghumn, oats, and late sorghuam. Let ns convert these yields of cowpeas, cotton, sorghum, and oats into their money values to learn whether the introduction cowpeas or velvet 'beans into the rotation has been profitable. of 1 V lie 9 a of crops per acre in three years (1) following cotton and (2) following cowpea vines. (18 Value of crops per acre in 99. 1900. 1901. Total for 4crops Jin 3 years. Plot 3-No legumre in 5 In '99, 837 lbs. seed cotton, at 2l/c* $20.92 In '00, 5.1 tons sorghum hay, at years: I In 1901, 23.3 bus. oats, at 40c... In 1901, 1 ton sorghum hay.. $6.67 per ton.............. $33.02 $9.32 $6.67 $69.93 Plot 1, cowpeas in '98, picked and vines plowed under: In '99, 1,533 lbs. seed cotton at $38.30 212 c .......................... In 1900, 8.1 tons sorghum hay.... $54.00 $112.90 In 1901, 26.5 bus. oats, at 40c.... $10.60 1 In 1901, 1.5 tons sorghum hay .... 1$10.00 Diference in 3 years.............. I Average difference per year peracre(I($14.32 I $42.97 *Equal to 6 3/ cents per pound of lint, and $7.50 per ton of seed. The-total value of the products grown in three years on an acre was $69.93 on the plot no legume had been grown for -many years and $112.90 per acreon the plot where one crop of cowpeas had been grown once where in four year's, and where the vines, after the the peas, had been plowed under at the beginning of the had been grown -pcigof three-year period under consideration. The difference in the value of the crops for three years is $42.97; the average annual difference is $14.32 per acre in favor of the plot ,where cowpeas The figures showing the financial advantages 1of using one crop of velvet beans for 'fertilizer during the same period so nearly correspond with those for cowpeas that the calculation need not be repeated. On this land the plowing under of the vines of the cowpeas and velvet beans was exceedingly profitable. The 150 soil of these plots is a reddish, clayey loam, stiffer and probably more retentive of fertilizer nitrogen and humus than the greater portion of the soil on the Station Farm. Lest any should misapprehend the lessons of this experiment it is necessary to state that at no time in the three-year period was any nitrogenous fertilizer applied to any crop on any of these plots, but that each crop was supplied with phosphate and potash. The yearly application of cotton seed meal would have lessened the differences between the plots, as it has done in our unpublished rotation experiments, and would have m'ade the advantage in favor of legumes less 'striking than in the exhibit above. IMMEDIATE FERTILIZING EFFECTS ON COTTON OF VELVET BEAN VINES. On poor soil at Auburn an effort was made in 1898 and 1899 to 'ascertain the manurial value of the vines and stubble of velvet beans. In 1898 cotton was grown on certain plots and velvet beans on others. The fertilization of all plots in 1898 was not identical, but for a given fertilizer applied to cotton there was ,a plot of velvet beans receiving the same fertilizer. The velvet beans grew in drills 3 feet apart; the vines formed a dense mat of vegetation, but did not mature seed. In March, 1899, velvet beans and cotton stalks were plowed in and soon afterwards all plots were fertilized alike with a mixture of 240 pounds of 'acid phosphate and 40 pounds of muriate of potash per acre. Russell cotton was planted in 3 feet drills on all plots on April 21. From midsummer forward there was a remarkable difference in the appearance of the two 151 sets of plots, the cotton plants being much larger, greener, and more luxuriant on the plots where velvet beans had grown the year before. Av. yield of seed cotton per'acre following velvet bean vines......................1,578 lbs. Av. yield of seed cotton per ,acre-following cotton..............................918 lbs. Increase from velvet bean vines........660 lbs. The average increase 'attributable to velvet beans used as a fertilizer was 660 pounds of seed cotton acre, a gain of per cent. as compared with the average yield on plots where the preceding crop had been cotton. At 2z cents per.pound of 'seed cotton (equivalent to 6g cents per pound for lint and $7.50 per ton for this increase is worth $16.50 per acre. 72 per seed) Residual fertilizing effects oa corn vinzes. of velvet bean ,The residual ,or second-year, effects were tested on corn planted on these plots March.29, 1900, without nitrogenous fertilizer. Where cotton had grown in 1898 the yield of corn in 1900 wa's 18 bushels, per acre; on the next plot, where velvet beans had been grown for fertilizer in 1898, the yield of corn in 1900 wa's 25.5 bushels. This gain of 7.5 bushels per acre, or 42 per cent., represents the residual or 'second-year effect of using the growth of as a fertilizer. velvet beans entire .IMMEDIATE AND RIESIDUAL EFFECTS OF VELVET BEAN STUBBLE ON COTTON AND 'CORN. field the velvet beans on one plot were The stubble roots In the same cut for hay October 12, 1898. ,and 152 were plowed in at the same time as the vines on the other plots referred to above. Clotton on the plot where only roots and stubble were plowed in yielded in 1899 1,126 pounds of seed cotton per acre, an increase when compared with the plots where cotton had grown the previous year of 208 pounds, o'r 49 per cent. Comparing velvet bean vines with velvet bean stubble the difference in favolr of the vines was 452 pounds of seeld cotton per acre in the first crop. Corn in 1900 on this plot yielded 14 per cent., or 2.6 bushels per acre more than did corn on the nearest plot where in 1898 cotton instead of velvet beans had grown. As the stubble plot was slightly lower down on the hillside we suspect that the increase was partly due to this disturbing condition and not wholly to the residual effects of the velvet bean stubble of 1898. It was on this stubble plot that in 1898 the velvet bean hay (8,240 pounds per acre) contained 188.7 pounds of nitrogen and the roots and stubble and fallen leaves only 12.5 pounds of nitrogen per acre. (See Alabama Station Bulletin, No. 104, page 336.) IMMEDIATE FERTILIZING EFFECTS OF COWPEAS ON OATS IN 1897. "On sandy soil in 1896 several plots were sown broadcast with the Wonderful variety of cowpeas, and an adjacent plot was sown broadcast with German millet. The millet was plowed under, as were also the peavines, the peas having been previously picked. February 18, 1897, Red Rust Proof oats were sown after the above mentioned crops, using in both cases 100 pounds of acid phosphate and 80 pounds of nitrate of soda per acre. German 153 After cowpeas the oat straw grew to be three to four inches taller than on the plot preceded by German millet. The yields were as follows: Oats following cowpeas and German millet, 1897. Yield per acre. Bus. Grain. 22.8 12.4 10.4 Lbs. Straw. 788 559 229 Oats after cowpeas, vines plowed under..... Oats after German millet, plowed under..... Difference per acre ...................... In this case cowpeas were more valuable than German millet as fertilizer for the following oat crop, the difference in favor of 'cowpeas being 10.4 bushels of oats per acre and 229 pounds of straw." (From Bulletin No. 95, Alabama Experiment Station.) This is an increase of 84 per cent. in grain. IMMEDIATE FERTILIZING EFFECT OF COWPEA AND VELVET BEAN VINES AND STUBBLE ON OATS IN 1898. This experiment is descibed in the following quotation from Bulletin No. 95 of this Station: "May 14, 1897, on poor sandy soil Wonderful cowpeas were sown on two plots., velvet beans on two plots, and German millet on a fifth plot. A sixth plot was prepared and fertilized but left without seed, to grow up in crab grass, poverty weed, etc. Cowpeas and velvet beans were isown in drills two feet apart, German millet broadcast. The millet was cut for hay July 16, yielding 994 pounds per acre. The cowpeas on one plot were picked September 10, yielding 11 bushels per acre. The velvet beans did not mature seed. In September, 1897, 1cowpeas on one plot and velvet 3 he1lw, l114 4 m Iu i' ,,3 i nns LapP I0h'v 1 ("U>:~j nu14 1 t he s41lwde1 441 m11414 1 e e aI X v , 't > lie 1. of X(J reb :I 1:'4 4 1 ,', P 4 (!e !;J 1 11111 (41 II144!4T oi %cl 4 i 1he 21hl44ve IltI' ii iii d (lat . 1 fIi'. I II; s 4 (Il vl 141 a\ nt 1 Eu12 1111 1 1 ph4s iw "Jo 1414c wh~e 11(1 1 "t the4 on1 (W11111I tilL 11lie 4one wlw V 1411124. iX 4 I U 14 i 2Vwy lXX ta le 41 X~n v l t i,',4,!; ru "lt s h444 peen'1 (?l (r< 01 .1 11.1;,; er 1t 1(1i1 i 4 w ilh 220 ( X X luni mis per 14r 1)4411181, taIille4 in 44f lucd 4 th I4148111 h 's lul eing (l ( -1 1H1111d8 -1 sli1p144 plie e 44f l 14luiilte of n144 flitroge411l 1 11 1111 4441 1- rie lml111ills o11 j4 I44edill ci - 441 of~ 444XX Xeve he1X 411411 Fi 444-t. 1. 4)ats following 444' (oNpca oa 44 a 4s 1 iircrbra '444 bl oA1I i 44 r B'ig t; o414th44 1ft 155 Yield per acre of oats grown immediately after stubble or vines of cowpeas, velvet beans, etc. Sj o 1 Grain. Bus. 6 38.7 33..6 28.8 34.4 31.6 7.1 .9.7 8.4 Yield per acre. I Straw. Lbs. 1206 1672 1439 1463 2013 1738 231 361 296 1 Oats after velvet bean vines...................28. 6 Oats after velvet bean stubble.............. Average after velvet bean vines and stubble 4 Oats after cowpea vines.................. 3 Oats after cowpea stubble .................... Average after cowpea vines and stubble.... 2 Oats after crab grass and weeds ............ 5 Oats after German millet .................. Average, after non-leguminous plants...... From early spring there was a marked difference in the appearance of the several plots, the plants being much greener and taller where either the stubble or vines of cowpeas had been plowed under. When the oats began to tiller, or branch, the difference increased, the plants supplied with nitrogen, through the decay of the stubble or vines of cowpeas and velvet beans, tillering freely 'and growing much taller than the plants 'following German millet or crab grass. The difference in the height and thickness of the oats on some of the plots is shown in figures 1 and 2. May 18, 1898, oats on all plots were cut. In this experiment the average yield of oats was 33.6 bushels after velvet beans, 31.6 bushels after cowpeas, and only 8.4 bushels after non-leguminous plants (crab grass, weeds and German millet.) is a gain of 24.2 bushels of oats and nearly three-fourths of a ton of 'straw as a result of growing leguminous or soil-improving plants, instead of nonleguminous plants, during the preceding season. Hlere 156 Undoubtedly this is an extreme, and not an average, case. If cotton seed meal, or other nitrogenous. fertilizer, had been used on all the plots of oats, the plants on plots 2 and 5 would have made better growth, and the difference in favor of the leguminous plants would have been reduced. A gain of five to fifteen bushels of oats per acre as a result of plowing under cowpea stubble or vines would make the growing of cowpeas for fertilizer a profitable operation, and it is far safer to count on such an increase as that obtained in our first experiment (10.4 bushels), rather than to expect such an exceptional increase as that obtained in this last experiment. An unexpected result of this experiment i's the larger crop on the plots where 'only the stubble was left than on those where the vines of cowpeas and velvet beans were plowed under. The plots were of nearly uniform fertility, as judged by the location 'and by the uniform growth of cotton on all plots in 1896. While admitting the possibility that the two west plots (plots 3 and 6) were slightly richer than the two on the east (plots 1 and 4), the writer thinks that the difference in yield was almost wholly due (1) to the fact that the vines (especially those of the velvet beans) were not properly buried by the small plow employed, and (2) that the seed bed for oats was more compact where only stubble was plowed under, a point of advantage, doubtless, in such a dry winter as that of 1897-98. It does not follow that the land will be permanently benefitted by cowpea stubble to a greater extent than by cowpea vines. The reverse is probably true." (From Bulletin No. 95, Alabama Experiment Station.) 157 Residual fertilizing effect on late corn of cowpea and velvet bean vines and stubble. On June 20, 1898, or a month after the harvesting of the oats in the last mentioned experiment, all six of these plots were planted in corn without nitrogenous fertilization, which crop, 'as usual with very late corn on poor upland, was a failure. The yields were as follows: Yields of late corn grown as the second crop after legumes. SYield Increase after Crop in 1897: Crab grass, plowed in ................ German millet, stubble plowed in ....... Cowpeas, stubble plowed in ......... Velvet beans; stubble plowed in ........ Cowpeas, picked; vines plowed in ....... Velvet beans; vines plowed in .......... per acre. Bus. 4.3 7.3 6.2 7.7 6.7 7.9 legumes. 4 1.9 .9 2.1 The fertilizing effects of both stubble 'and vines of cowpeas was scarcely perceptible in the late corn planted eight months after 'and harvested thirteen months after the plowing under of the large amounts of nitrogen furnished by the legumes. Apparently the crop failure jwas not due to deficient rainfall, for this was ample except for about two weeks about the middle of August. The small size of stalks leads to the suspicion that there was a deficiency of nitrogen on all plots. If this nitrogen was lost by being leached out in the draining water this loss must have occurred almost entirely after corn was planted or in July and August; for in 1898 April, May, and June were unusually dry months. On the other hand there was a period of excessive rainfall July 4 to 11 and of still greater excess July 28 to August 6. During this latter 158 period 7.59 inches of rain fell in a space of ten days. The experiment seems to teach that on very light, gray, sandy upland, subject also to surface washing, the fertilizing effects of even large amounts of nitrogen furnished by preceding crops of legumes may be removed from the soil within twelve months after the legume has been plowed in. The lesson might also be drawn that on such soils the planting of any non-leguminous crop after small grain is risky, but that if such a crop is employed the seed should be put into the ground as soon as possible after the removal of the grain crop. An experience like this in 'which the fertilizing effect of the entire or nearly entire growth of the legume was no greater than that of the stubble on either the first or on the second succeeding crop emphasizes the wisdom of utilizing the vines of cowpeas, etc., for food, leaving only the roots and stubble to fertilize the next crop. IMMEDIATE FERTILIZING EFFECT ON WHEAT OF COWPEA AND VELVET BEAN VINES AND STUBBLE. All the plots of the last mentioned experiment were in oats from February to June, 1900. June 23, 1900, certain plots were planted with drilled cowpeas, certain others with drilled velvet beans, and yet others were merely plowed and fertilized with minerals, as were the legumes. Of the two plots of cowpeas, one was cut 'for hay, yielding 2,004 'pounds per acre; on the other 7.9 bushels of seed per acre were picked. One plot of velvet beans was cut for hay, while on the other the vines were left on the ground for fertilizer. The cowpea plants, variety Wonderful, were s'omewhat injured by a fungous disease of the roots; velvet beans, by reason of late date of planting and deficiency in stand, did not make an entirely satisfactory growth. November 9 all plots were plowed, turning under either volunteer grass and rag weeds, or cowpea vines, or velvet bean vines, or cowpea stubble, or velvet bean stubble. The plowing was poorly done with a onehorse turn plow and in sowing the wheat a few days later some of the velvet bean vines were pulled up. The wheat received only mineral fertilizers, and, indeed, practically no nitrogen had been applied to these plots for three years. The yields of wheat in 1900 were as follows: Bushels of wheat per acre after leguninous and nonleguminious crops: Crop in 1899. Crab grass and weeds; plowed in ...... Cowpeas; stubble plowed in. ......... Velvet beans; stubble plowed in........ Cowpeas, picked; vines plowed in .... Yield per Increase by use acre. of legumes. Bus. I Bus. 3.1 280 8.7 11.8 151 4.7 7.8 9.0 5.9 190 Velvet beans; vines plowed in......... 8.5 5.4 174 Both the stubble and the vines ,of the legumes practically trebled the yield obtained on the plots where no legume .had grown. The stubble was at least as effective as the vines, pointing to the greater economy of utilizing the vines for h'ay or pasturage. June 19, 1900, all these plots were planted with Mosby corn, fertilized only with phosphate and muriate of potash. The crop was a failure on all plots, the yield of cured fodder corn ranging from 1,540 to 2,200 pounds per acre, the plots where vines had been plowed in the previous fall showing no superiority over the stubble plots, and very little increase as compared with the plot where no legume had grown. It is impossible to ascertain whether the failure with corn was due to the 160 protracted drought during almost the whole of July or to the leaching out of the nitrogen of the legumes during the latst few days in June, when 5.20 inches of rain fell within a period of four days. The latter explanation seems more probable in view of the fairly favorable rainfall after August 1, 1900, and because of similar failure of the late corn crop on the 'same field in 1898, when there was no long period of drought, but a brief one of even more excessive rainfall. 'The history of these six plots for these four years ending with 1900 as just detailed shows very plainly that the fertilizing effects of nitrogen very quickly disappear on this light sandy sloping field, not underlaid by a clay' or clayey loam subsoil; and that on such soils the stubble of cowpeas or velvet beans was as efficient as the vines, not only for the immediately succeeding crop, but for later ,crops as well. This narrative should add force to the recommendation we have so often given that as far as possible the stems, foliage 'and seed of legumes be utilized as food for animals and only what remains be employed as fertilizer. FERTILIZING EFFECTS OF VELVET BEANS, AND PEANUTS; AS COMPARED WITH CORN, SWEET POTATOES AND CHUFAS. On 'a gray sandy upland 'soil, free from ?stones and underlaid by 'a sandy subsoil, various crops were grown in 1899, for the double purpose of comparing them as to the amount of hog f'ood produced and as to their effeet in enriching or 'depleting the soil. The chufas and a part of the Spanish peanuts were consumed by shoats penned on the field. As the running variety of peanuts failed this season to make any nuts the luxuriant growth of vines was plowed under in the fall, as was also done with the vines of velvet beans and with 161 cowpea vines after the latter had been picked. Only the ears off corn were removed from the land, and the roots of sweet potatoes. Rye, sown broadcast on November 13, 1899, on all what plots, was employed as the crop for effect the varilous 'summer crops had exerted on the fertility of the soil. The fertilizer for rye consisted of the following amount's per acre: 80 pounds of 'cotton seed meal. 160 pound's of 'amo'niated acid phosphate. 64 pounds of muriate 'o'f potash. The effects of the legumes as fertilizers for rye would have been more striking if no cotton seed meal or ammoniated guano had been employed, but the poverty of abthis 'sandy soil made ,some nitrogen avoided on the plots Solute failure of crop was to where sweet potatoes, chuf as and corn had grown. only determining be indispensible if and the green The rye was cut April 13 and April 16, forage at once weighed. No cutting 'of 'rye second made, but the land was turned to other uses. Yields 'was of rye following swxeet potatoes, corn, chuf as, peanuts, cowpeas and velvet. beans. Preceding crop. Yield per acre. Increase from legumes as compared with sweet potatoes. Lbs. % 1080 2200 1080 4280 2600 3360 2360 2852 41 93 41 181 110 142 100 121 INilllrrCr\ C~~ h-C hVZT\I - rY~T\ Cr\rr~ Rye, after sweet potatoes dug (av. 2 Rye, after corn, ears pulled............... Rye, after chufas, eaten on the land. Rye, after Spanish plots) .... . nuts removed.................. Rye, after Spanish peanuts; eaten on the land Rye, after Whippoorwill cowpeas, drilled and picked (diseased)...................... Rye, after velvet beans, entire growth plowed .. ....... in (av. 2 plots)................ Rye, after velvet beans, nearly mature pods . picked, vines plowed in................ Rye, after running peanuts, entire growth )... plowed in (av. 2 plots) ... peanuts; Lbs. 2360 3440 4560 3440 6640 4960 5720 4720 5212 dug and only F~IGURE t.l.' 'rl ful areasL. tf)]lO,inh4 (" Velvt loans: and cliiifas Ilo,,, ( I G !'. C I, Fl im-: I c. l n ,d a u a. ' l wi ) tipaI I is Ii N.) rllnninn N. & IJ 163 The legumes increased the yield in every case as compared with sweet potatoes, the excess ranging from 41 to 181 per cent. Among the non-leguminous plants sweet potatoes was most exhausting to the soil, and chufas, when consumed on the land, the least. This agrees with common observation. In this case the exhausting effects of the sweet potatoes were not due to leaching of the disturbed soil, for all plots were plowed soon after the potatoes were dug. Among the legumes the greatest increase, 181 per cent. was 'obtained on the plot where Spanish peanuts had been consumed on the land by hogs. Since the yield of peanuts here was not excessive, since the growth of tops was only moderate, and since the vines of Spanish peanuts on an !adjoining plot did not greatly increase the yield, we can attribute the increase where hogs had grazed, only to an assumed quicker nutrification of the material that had passed through animals. This view finds further support in the fact that chufas consumed by hogs on the land left the soil in better condition than did either corn or sweet potatoes. Wherever the entire growth of the several legumes was left on the land, with or without being utilized as hog food, the 'succeeding yield of rye was more than doubled. Cotton was grown in 1899 on a plot adjacent to the The rye following cotton yielded 5,560 legumes. pounds per acre, but it is not fair to compare this yield with that following the legumes, because the cotton had been very heavily fertilized, and some of this fertilizer probably remained in the soil to be utilized by the rye. 164 Fertilizing effects of legufles on sorghum grown as the second crop. existed in the soil of 1899, as a result of legumes grown in sorghum wa's sown in drills on this'same field June 19, To 'ascertain what differences'still the summer 1900, all plots being uniformly-fertilized with'acid pholsphate. So that sorghu'm thus becomes the second crop after the various legumes, 'and is intended to reveal the residual or "left over" effects of the summer on sorguhm,, crops of 1899. Residual fertilizing effects of peanuts, cowpeas and velvet beans. Prece~ding crops. Winter, 199, 1900. Summer of 1899. . ... . . . . Sweet potatoes, dug ............. Corn, ears pulled....................... Spanish peanuts, dug; nuts removed. Rye Rye Rye Rye on land........... Spanish peanuts; Rye Cowpeas, picked ......................... . Rye Velvet beans, all plowed in .............. Rye Velvet beans, pods picked................. . Rye Running peanuts, all plowed in .......... Rye Cotton, heavily fertilized................. eaten Increase Yield from legumes as sorghum compar'd with hiay per sweet acre. potatoes. Lbs. Lbs. 5360 400 5760 loss. 4480 loss. 4000 400 5760 1750 7110 2240 7600 960 6320 loss. 4000 5040 6697 1657 . Rye Av., potatoes, corn, cotton.... ........ Av., velvet beans, cowpeas, running peanuts Rye Evidently rye had not exh'austed 'all the fertilizing value of the legu'mes. This second'crop was favorably affected by all the legumes except by Spanish peanuts, the 'benefits of which had disappeared. The average in'crease on the plots where all the other legumes had grown the preceding summer wa 33 per cent. a's compared with the yield on the plots where corn, cotton and sweet potatoes had constituted the summer crops in 1899. 165 RELATIVE FERTILIZING VALUES OF THE COWPEA AND VELVET BEAN. When tested on a number of crops, each grown immediately after the legumes, the percentage increase as compared with corresponding plots that had borne no legume was 128 per cent. from peavines, and also 128 per cent. from velvet bean vines. Additional weight is given to these figures since they represent the average of six tests with each plant. Continuing the inquiry as to their comparative value, we find that the second crop after cowpea vines showed an increase of 37 per cent. and the second crop after velvet bean vines an increase of 48 per cent. This is the average result of two comparable tests with each plant. Comparing these two plants with reference to the fertilizing effect of the stubble on the first crop we find three tests an in crease that is as the average of practically the same fo'r 'the two plants. Combining the results for the vines of each legume as shown in the first and second' succeeding crops with the immediate results from the stubble of each we must conclude that at Auburn the fertilizing values of the This cowpea and velvet bean are practically equal. is true for an acre of each. In the stubble plots the average yield of velvet bean hay has been the greater, that is 4,781 pounds per acre of velvet bean -hay against 3,278 pounds of cowpea hay, so that apparently pound for pound the cured tops of cowpeas have been somewhat more effective than the vines of velvet beans. This is in practical accord with the results of chemical analyses made at this station by Dr. Anderson, who analyzed peavine hay and velvet bean hay from plots where the stubble was used as fertilizer. He found 2.29 per cent. nitrogen in velvet bean 166 vines and 2.46 per cent. of nitrogen in the cowpea vines, both 'samples containing 9 per -cent. moisture. The -nitrogen in the two stuhbles was practically equal, 1 per cent. Let us now consider the results as a whole, combining those for the two plants and 'assuming that the fertilizing value of cowpea vines and of velvet bean vines are equal, and that the stubble of the one plant is as effective as that of the other. In what follows the figures express the average results for cowpeas 'and velvet summer beans considered together under the name legumes. of INCREASE IN THE FIRST 'CRop AFTER PLOWING IN THE VINES OF SUMMER LEGUMES. With cotton as the first crop the increase in seed cotton per acre at Auburn was respectively 367, 546, 696, This is an and 660 pound's of seed cotton per acre. average increase of 567 pounds, worth at 2: cents (equal to 64 cents for lint, $7.50 per ton for $14.17. The yield of seed cotton 'following the vines of the summer legumes exceeded that on plots -where the preceding crop h'ad been cotton to the extent of 32, 64, 83, and 72 per 'cent.' The average increase in the yield of seed) seed cotton attributable to the vines was 63 per cent. (of the legs nes With corn as the first .crop, the increase per acre attributable to plowing in the entire growth of velvet bean's was 81 per cent. or 12.3 bushels, wo'rth, 'at 50 cents per bushel, $6.15. With oats as the first 'crop, the effect Hof the vines of the su'mmer legumes is seen in 'an increase per acre of 10.4, 20.2, 'and 20.4 bushels respectively. The average 167 49 cents per increase per acre was 17 bushels,, worth bushel, $6.80. The icrease in the first crop oats after sunmter lequones twas 81, 240 and 242 per cent., an acerage of 189 per cent. With wheat the incresase 5.4 and 5.9 bushels, an -average of 5.65 bushels per acre, worth at 80 cents per bushel, $4.53. The itcremn et was 174 and 190 per cent. respectively, an average gain of 182 per cent. With sorghuant grown as the first crop after the plow.ing under of the vines of cowpeas and velvet beans, the increase in hay per acre was 1.6, 1.6, 2.07, 'and 3.11 tons, at of was an average gain per acre of 2.1 tons of hay, worth, at $6.67 per ton, $14.02. The percentage gains were 85, 86, 57, and 86, respectively, an avirage of 78 pcr cent. INCREASE IN THE FIRST CROP AFTER PLOWING IN THE STUBBLE COWPEAS AND VELVET BEANS. OF With cotton the yield was greater after velvet bean ,stubble than after cotton to the extent of 18 per cent., or 208 poufinds of seed';cottoln per at 2 acre, worth, o'f -cents per pound, $5.20. With cornt, the stubble of velvet beans afforded a gain of 32 per -cent. or' 4.3 bushels, worth $2.15. With oats grown after the plowing in the stubble -of these summer legumes the increase was 30.3 and 26 bushels, or an average of 28.1 .bushels per 'acre, worth $11.24. This is 'an average gain of 334 per cent. With wheat following the stubble of and velvet beans the increase was 4.7 and 8.7, ant average .{6.7 busitels per acre, twortit $5.36. The gain anmounted to 151 and1 280 per cent. respectively, 'an average of 215 per cent. With soryha'nu the yield of hay increased by the -cowpeas of w'as 168 stubble of the legumesto the extent of 2.01 2.15 tons, an average of 2.08 tons of hay per acre, valued at $13.87. The average increase was 57 per cent. WHAT 'CROPS WERE MOST FAVORABLY AFFECTED BY THE VINES OR STUBBLE OF COWPEAS AND VELVET BEANS. The data in the following table answer this question. and Increase in first crop attributable to vines or stubble cowpeas and velvet beans. of InTests. creaseIn Cotton.................4 63 Corn................ 1 81 Oats.. ......... .3 189 Wheat... . .... 2 182 4 78 Sorghum............1 TEST CROP. of After Legume Vines. After Legume Stubble. No. % Value of of InIncrease Tests, crease. crease. $14.17 1 49 $11.30 6.15 1 32 2.14 6.80 2 334 11.24 No. 0 Value of 4.53 2 215 5.36 14.0211 2(57 ( 13.87 The percentage increase attributable to eitherthe vineis or stubble of co:wpeas and velvet beans was greater with fall 'oats and wheat than with cotton, corn or sorghum. In other words, the crop that was best able to utilize the nitrogen of the legumneswas that one which left the land unoccupied for the shortest tinme between the mnaturing of the legumne and the, beginning of the new growth. Unpublished parallel experiments with hairy vetch employed. as fertilizers confirm. this latter conclusion. indicate that after gume are plowed, under in a sandy soil the seed of -the All the facts before. a us, vines or stubble of succeeding crop should be planted before the lapse of many weeks. The early occupation of the soil by roots of the young plants will serve to retain much nitrogen, which. would be leached out and carried away in the drainage water if the ground should remain unoccupied for several months. the. le- 169 From what has ju'st been said it should not be inferred that we 'are advocating the sowing of the small grains or of any small seed immediately after plowing in a large mass of vines. Instead, sufficient time should be given.for the sloil to become somewhat settled by the action of the rain or of harrow, drag, or roller. Small grain and still 'smaller seed can usually be sown after a shorter interval where the vines of the legume are utilized for hay or pa:sturage, leaving only the roots and stubble to be incorporated, than where the entire growth of the legume is turned under in the fall for fertilizer. If plowing under 'of cowpea vines takes place after Christmas the mtass of vegetable matter will have become so diminished and the stems so weak that the delay in sowing to permit of the compacting of the earth around the vegetable matter will be less necessary, or perhaps unadvisable. But this interval may be quite necessary with velvet belan vines at whatever time they are plowed under, for the mass of matter will be con,siderable and the material is apt to 'be buried in large wads. Referring again to the last table, we see that while the small grains gave the largest percentage increase from the use of a preceding summer legume as fertilizer, the value of the increase was greatest with cotton and sorghum hay. In other words, cotton made more profitable use of either the vines or stubble of the summcr legumes on sandy land than did either corn, oats, or wheat. Sorghum responded freely to the 'abundant supply of nitrogen in the legumes, and it may be accepted as a thoroughly tested proposition that on poor or medium soil any hay plant of the grass 'family will return a large profit for a judicious applicatio. of nitrogen, 170 whether this be in the form of a preceding crop of cowpeas, velvet beans, melillotus, hairy vetch, or crimson clover, or in 'an application of stable manure, cotton seed, cotton seed meal, or nitrate of soda. ROTATION OF CROPS THEIFIRST STEP IN SOIL IMPROVEMENT. 'The general 'statement m'ay be safely made that any ordinary crop (except peanuts, cowpeas and most other legumes) can usually be pro'duced with far greater profit when it fbllows ,some leguminous, plant than when its predecessor is 'some non-leguminous plant, as cotton, corn, the small grains, etc. It may also be added that many, if not most, poor tracts ,of land can be cultivated in the usual farm crops at a profit only when a legume is occasionally grown to supply the necessary nitrogen, vegetable matter, and improvement in texture and resistance to drought. A more general use is urged of some rotation that requires all the cultivated upland of the farm to bear cowpeas or ,other soil-improving plant every second, third or fourth year or oftener. The growing of legumes constitutes the cheapest means of obtaining nitrogenous fertilizers, and on farms where 'a large proportion of the land is devoted to legumes, the fertilizer bills can be reduced by the discontinuance of purchases of cotton seed meal and by the substitution of high grade acid phosphate for the higher priced ammoniated guanos. A highly satisfactory rotation for cotton plantations, which has been widely tested, consists of the alternation in the order named of cotton, corn, and any one of the small grains, with cowpeas between the corn rows and also immediately following the small grains. This three-year rotation gives one-third of the land 11 each year in cotton, the cotton imiediately following cowpeas sown after small grain. One-half the total area be devoted to cotton by-a four-year rotation on this plan, assfollows: Corn with cowpeas, small grain followed by cowpea s,cotton, and 'cotton. ;can THE AVERAGE IMMEDIATE FERTILIZING EFFECTS OF VINES AS COMPARED WITH STUBBLE OF COWPEAS AND VELVET BEANS. Although in the last table comparison of the percentage increase after vines with that after stubble is not strictly legitimate since the number of testswas unequal, yet that table throws.s some light on the mat- ter. A 'strictly accurate of the fertilizing effects of vines and stubble as measured by the crop immediately -following is shown below; in this table'only those experiments are recorded'where 'corresponding ine stubble plots were under identical conditions of soil, date of planting, etc. viomparison !and Increased percentage of With cotton as With corn vine plots over stubble plots. No. of tests. firstdocrop................1 ................... do................2 do........................... % 40 49 With oats With wheat 4' 2 [31] * [20]* With sorghum do....................... ... 2 9 *Yield after legume stubble 31 and 20 per cent. respectively greater than after vines, the latter leaving the land too loose, a condition that could probably have been avoided by better preparation. In the crop immediately following the legumes the vines" afforded the larger yield except circumstances reverse'd this result w'ith when 'acecidental This excess in the first crop due to whe'at and oats. plowing under the 172 vines was here- considerable, but was it sufficient to make this method of disposing of the vines more profitable than to use them for hay? Of the several factors on which the:answer depends, we will first consider the value per acre o'f the increase in the first crop 'immediately 'succeeding the legume, using the values for unit of each crop heretofore assumed (see p....) and omitting results with small grains, for reasons given in the footnote. .a Average superiority of vines over stubble of legumes as Value of inincrease crease 40 49 9 shown, in first crop. No. of tests. With cotton as first crop. ..... With corn as first crop........ With sorghum as first crop... 1 4 2 Increase per acre. 452 lbs. seed cotton $11.30 3.30 6.6 lbs. corn. .5 ton hay.......3.34 Average in favor of vines over stubble.$5.98 The average increase of $5.98 in the value of an acre of the first crop in favor of plowing in the vines as compared with utilizing 'only the stubble for 'fertilizer is evidently so low as to be much less than the value of the 4,030 pounds of legume h'ay per acre obtained from the stubble plots, which should be priced. at not leis than corresponding $10 per ton. As 'a partial offset we must bear in mind that in 'four of the experiments in, plowing under 'cowpea vines the peas were first picked, the aver'age yield in these tests being 11.1 'busihels per acre. There is no off set with velvet beans, fo'r the 'seed such do not -mature in the latitude of Aubur'n. usually we value cowpeas 'at 50 cents per 'bushel, plus the cost of hand-picking, we have a second 'credit for the If vines, the sum being $5.55. Adding this 'to $5.98, the 173 extra value of the first crop after vines, as compared with stubble, we have a total credit for the vines when used as fertilizer of $11.53 per acre in comparison with the value of the ,cowpea and velvet bean hay when utilized as stock food. The average yield of cowpea hay from the stubble plots was 3,278 pounds per acre, and of velvet bean hay 4,781 pounds, or a collective average of 4,030 pounds of legume hay per acre. At $10 per ton, this would be worth $20.15 per ,cre. Subtracting from this, $9.50 as above, we have $8.47 as the difference in the first year's profits in favor of utilizing the vines as hay. However, other factors must be considered before we have satisfactorily determined whether it was most profitable to use the vines after picking the peas or to utilize the tops of both cowpeas and velvet beans for hay; chief 'among these factors are the relative residual fertilizing values of vines and stubble as 'show'n by differences in the yield of the second and subsequent crops after legumes. WHAT IS THE FERTILIZING EFFECT OF VINES AND STUBBLE OF COWPEAS ON THE SECOND 'CROP AFTER THE LEGUME? 'The )answer is found in the following table: Average increase in second crop after legumes. After vines. I After ,tubble. No. of Amt. % No. of Amt. % tests. increase., intests. inIncrease. crease. crease. With corn .......... 5 3.36 bus. 2411 5 1.34 bus. 12 With oats .......... 1 7.75 bus. 54 With sorghum ...... 4 2.15 tons 41 In the second crop after the legumes there was in every case a considerable increase attributa'ble to the use of the vines as fertilizer, 174 The fertilizing effect of the stubble as shown by the second crop of corn is much less than the increment due to the vines plowed under many month's before. There is a sixth test with lorn not belonging in the preceding table, that gives additional data for a comparison of the second-year effects of vines with stubble. we find that the Oombining the results of the six corn grown 'as the 'second crop after legumes afforded a larger yield on the vine plots than on the stubble plots to the average extent of 2.1 bushels per acre, or 14 per cent. tests, THE DURATION OF THE FERTILIZING EFFECTS OF STUBBLE AND VINES OF COWPEAS AND VELVET BEANS. The stubble of these legumes repeatedly so slight effect on -corn grown a's tie 'second crop, (an average of only one and one-third bushels peracre), that we reasonably conclude that two crops mark the limit to, which the benefit's of legume stubble extends in cases w here the soil is sandy and perm b an may exerted as at, Auburn. It is quite possible that the advantages using stubble as fertilizer might have been 'slightly from more enduring in a stiffe'r soil, but in no ,case can such a relatively small amount of vegetable matter and nitrogen 'afforde'd by the -r'oots and stubble influence the succeeding 1crops more than a. few years. It is quite a different matter 'when the vines, representing the entire growth of the legume (except in some cases the pods) are plowed un'der. We have learned from the data in previous tables that the yield where the vines were use'd 'fertilizer was in the first crop, as 63 to 189 per cent. greater than the yield of the crop immediately preceded by 'a non-legumenous and th'at in the second cr'op the increase sponding corre- plant; 175 ranged from 24 to 54 per cent. The effect exerted by the vines of the legumes on the third succeeding crop was tested in only one field, the increase in oats as the third crop after cowpea vines being 3.2 bushels per acre, or 14 per cent. With sorghum planted in 1901 as the fourth crop immediately after the oats were cut, there was a perceptible increase on the plots where the vines of ,cowpe'as and velvet beans grown in 1898 had been plowed under; extremely unfavorable conditions and partial failure of late sorghum detract from the reliability of the percentage figures for this, the fourth crop. For three years or four ,crops the large mass of vines continued to exert some influence. This experiment was condu'cted on a soil of 'the 'stiffest type found on the station farm, which, however, is fairly permeable to water, and which might be described as a reddish loam containing an abundance of large flint stones. We should expect 'an equal mass of leguminous vegetatilon elmployed a's fertilizer on clay or prairie soils to exercise a favorable influence for at least three years, or probably for 'as long 'a period as d'o heavy applications of coarse 'stable m'anure. Local experiments to determine the permanency of the action of the legumes are greatly needed, and cor'respondence is invited from parties wishing to make such tests. It is our expectation to ,continue work along the lines indicated in this bulletin, and it is highly desirable that these investigations should be extended to include soils of a character different from that at Auburn, though the means of doing this in a thoroughly satisfactory manner are not now in ight. In conclusion the writer would reaffirm his previous statement, made in Bulletin No. 107 of this station, as follows: 176 A RATIONAL SYSTEM OF FERTILIZATION. Considering permanency of effect; as well as influence on the crop immediately following, the cowpea and other a cheaper source leguminous plants must be ranked of nitrogen than iis any nitrogenous material which may be bought as comimercial fertilizers. The aim of the cotton farmer should be to grow such 'areas of legumes as will enable him to dispense with the purchase of nitrogenou's fertilizers for cotton, using the funds thus saved to purchase increased amounts of phosphates or other necessary non-nitrogenous fertilizers. The money that would have been necessary to purchase one pound of nitrogen will buy about three pounds of phosphoric acid, or plotash, whic'h larger purchases'of phosphate and potash will enable the farmer to grow heavier crops of legumes. And heavier cropsof legumes trap larger 'amounts of otherwise unavailable'atmospheric nitro- as of gen and result in further 'soil enrichment. In the writer'sopinion the rvost promiising method of increasing the yield cotton per acre and the profits cotton culture is by a more general ase .leguminous of of of plants as fertilizers. These invaluable 'allies are by utilized and appreciated, 'but 'their u'se some might be increased twentyfold with advantage to the current -crop, to the perm'anent upbuilding 'of the soil, farmers an'd to the filling of the farmer's pocket. per cent. Alabama It is putting the case very mildly 'to say that the 'average yield of might be increased by at cotton per acre in least fifty through the general use of legumes as fertilizers. APPENDIX.. Condensed statement of effects of using cowpea and velvet bean vines or stubble as fertilizers at Auburn. Tes tcrop. Amt. per acre, increase. Legumes. Vines or stubble. Plant. -L° _____________ Per cent increase. Yield of Superiority of vines legumes per acre. over stubble Per cnt. 78 1st or 2nd Year From From after grown vines, stubble. legumes 1 I -1 I--Y From Ain't From vines, stubble. per acre. 8 88 Lbs. Bus. bay. vowpeas. 1648 .. 2 1 .... 11.8 I 1.6 1 Cowpea ... Cowpea. Cowpea. Cowpea.... Cowpea... Velvet Velvet Velvet Velvet Velvet bean.... bean.... bean.... bean.... bean.... ( Cowpea... Cowpea. Velvet be.n..... Velvet bean .... Velvet.bea.... SCowpea... Velvet bean .... C owpea. . Velvet bean .... SCowpea.... V. &-S. V. & S. V. V. V. V. V. V. S. V. & S. V. & S. V. S. V. S. V. S. V. S. V. V. V. V. V. .V. Corn. Corn. Cotton Oats. Oats -. Sorghum. S orghum.. Corn. Corn .. . Corn . Corn.. Sorghum. Sorghum. Sorghum. Sorghum . Corn. . Corn . Corn Corn. Cotton . Cotton. . Sorghum . Sorghum . Oats. Oats. 1st 1st 1st 2nd 2nd 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 2nd 1st 1st 1st 1st 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 1st 1st 2nd 2nd 3rd 3rd '01 '01 '99 '00 '00 '97 97 '01 '01 '00 '01 '99 '99 367 5 8* 9.7 32 29* 79 1.6 1.6 12 3 4.3 2.1 ...... .2 86 85 81 32 5.0 11Rn 11 28.............I 32 50 0r 57 ..... .. . . 1 . 3.9 0.1 ... v 33 1 6400. '99 '99 '00 '00 '00 '00 '99 '99 '00 '00 '01 '01 20 ... . 55 3.1 . .. 86 '01 2.2 ....... .. 3.6 . .. . 15 1 6....... 11 2.6 .... .. ...... 546 696 ...... 3.1 3.0 . .. . 3 2**........ 3 2 .... 64 83 61 59 14 14 5360.. 8 .... 2.0 24 10 Velvet bean... V. V. Velvet ben... V. !Velvet bean... S. Cowpas.. Sorghum. 4th '01 '01 '99 0.5 ......... 0.5.........50...... 60......... .... 72.... 72 .............. .... .... Velvet bean... V. Cowpea........V. Velvet bean_ V. Veve ben..S Sorghum. 4th Cotton. . 1st . 1st Corn. .2nd 2d .... .... ..... .. . T. . Cotton. 'ats. Oats. Co... 660 '99 ......... '0 '0') ..... 7.5 .... 208 . .... 18 C. .C 452 40 42.... ...... 14............ 2.6 10.leban..S ............... T. C. F. 1st .1st IVelvet Cowpea........ '97 '98 10.4 20.2 ..... 8......................M. 24 0..... .... 76 bean... V. Oats....1st as. 1t Oats....1st Corn, late 2nd. '98 '8... 20 4...........242........................11 6 3 .. '98......... 26.0......309 '98 21 Velvet bean... S. Cowpea.......V. Cow pea........ V. . v t b a .. b a V Corn, late 2nd. Corn, late 2nd Corn, at . ~ 2nd. W a late st t Wheat Wheat Rye.1st 1st 1st '98......19.........33 '98 0916 '98 .1. .1.7Vlv .. '0 00 . .. . '98 '00 '00. 7 37Cowpea........V. F. 10.1 35 2420..F. 36........ .. 0 7 9 ..............F. .... .... .... ....... F, ...... .... .... ........... F. ~h 190 ...... . 1 .... . 0. 2 6. ... 6Ve ..... F. Cowpea.... . . Cowpea......... V. (Sp. Peanuts ... ft CoRn'gpeanus..A.l.V. Co wpv tea . n.. . . V V V l e .e . A 5.9 4280 2852 32 6 260. ...... 87........ 7 . 28 0 ........... 7 9 F. 31 2004..F. do. nuts remv'd... ent. l.. y e.... . .. Rye ...... 1st [.ly e . . . . . . . 11 t st Sp VevePeans. ... V Sreum y..- 1st s '00 0 '00 '000 ' 1080 82............ ..... 181.......................F. ...... ...... 10.........12 . .... . ...... .... .. F. Fu' F. ............................... 1std 2nd 2nd 2nd '00 '01 '01 . . . . . 110. .. . . . . . . ... 0 2360100..Los........... ....... . . . ... . . . ..... F . ................ .... ..... ............ F. F. F. Run'g Peanuts. ' 11. SCowpeas....V Vel. beans (av.) V *Nitrate Sorghum. Sorghum. Sorghum '01 960 .......... 16 16.. ...... ...... 400 7 7...... .... .... .... 1995........- -37..................................F. of soda used both on non-legume and legume plot. the increase to that on corresponding cowpea plot. Stubble afforded the larger yield. j"f Peanuts eaten by hogs on land where grown. *Reducing BULLETIN No. 121.NOEBR192 NOVEMBER, 1902. ALABA MA. Agricultural Ixperiment Station OF THlE Agricultural and Mechanical College, AUB URN. DAIRY HERD RECORD AND CREAMERY NOTES. By R. W. CLARK. MONTGOMERY, ALA.. riR BROWN PRINTING CO., PRINTERS AND 1902.* BJNI)ERS. Tiios. C. COMMITTEE OF TRUSTEES ON EXPERIMENT STATION. WILLIAMS..............................................Wetumpka. JONATHAN HARALSON.................................Selma. STATION COUNCIL C. THACH................................................President. B. B. Ross. ...... ......................... ........................ Chemist. C. A. CARY, D. V. M.. Veterinarian. Agriculturist. Biologist and Horticulturist. Associate Chemist. J. F. DUOGAR...... .................................... E. M. WILCOX ............................ J. T. ANDERSON .................................. ASSISTANTS. C. L. HARE.................................. First Assistant Chemist. T. BRAGG.................................... J. C. PHELPS.............................. T. U. CULVER............... ................. R. W. CLARK................................. Second Assistant Chemist. Third Assistant Chemist. Superintendent of Farm. Assistant Agriculturist. The Bulletins of this Station will be sent free to any citizen of the State on application to the Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama. DAIRY HERD RECORD AND CREAMERY NOTES BY R. W. CLARK. Can dairying be made profitable in Alabama is a cuestion often asked. Short, mild winters, long pasture seasons, and a great variety of soiling crops, along with the output of the oil and rice mills, afford a 1arge field from which toselect food stuffs. The State is b-idly in need of such profits as accrue froim dairying and live stock in general. The appearance of out rural communities, the ilnpoverislhed condition of our the tremendous growth of the commercial fertilizer trade, and the vast aniou n t of money (the pr'oceeds of our only money crop, cotton) spent every year for hays, grains, meat and dairy products, are convincing arguments against the exclusive growing of corn and'cotton and a strong one in growing soils, favor of diversi fled farming. Dati vi ng builds ti) the soil.. of the fertilizing returned in the From 75 to 90 per cent. constituents of the food consumed is manure. Dairying makes the farmer indlelpendent by giving him, daily, a salable product. Food consumed one day is turned into cash the next, and much of the risk incident to making a crop of corn or cotton is avoided. No line of farming in the South is so certain of returns as dairying when intelligently pursued. The long growling season makes the dairyman quite independent of drought, a great menace at times in, some sections, especially where the summers are short. Our climate is most salubrious. Many of the cattle diseases common in other sections, caused by close 184 housing are almost unknown. Cattle can be turned out every day so far as temperature is concerned, but they should be housed at night during the winter. The demand in the South for good dairy products is always strong and especially so at the present time it is likely to continue so for many years. Cheese sells for 12 to 20 cents per pound, butter 20 to 35 cents per pound, and whole. milk for '20 to 40 cents per gallon reretail. In calculating the cost of food for each animal in the station herd the value of home-grown stuff was estimated. Bought stuff is figured at its market price. and Price per ton for the year .1900-01. Hay .... ... ... . ... .. .. . ... .. .. .. .. . . . . $10 00 Ensilage ................. ............ 2 00 Oat straw............ ................ 5 00 Cotton seed hulls. ................... 4 00 2 00 Soiling crops (fed green)............. Wheat bran .. .... .... ............ 20 00 .9 00 Cotton seed........ ........ ..... . .. ... Cotton seed meal.20 00 Rice polish............................... Skim milk ......................... 25c per cwt. Price per ton for the year 1901-02. $10 00 2 00 5 00 6 00 2 00 25 00 12 (0O 22(0 20 00 30c per cwt. The value placed on oat straw in the above table is too low. Pasturage is estimated at fifty cents per month for cows and grown animals and thirty cents per month for young animals. 1 185 The following record shows what the station herd did for the two years ending September 1, 1902: SEPTEMBER 1, 1900, TO SEPTEMBER 1, 1901. ."- ca 0 0 NAME OF Cow. 0'5 bQH I i O rd rd O CL4 .v 0 ca Ada ... Annie Jersey. . .... Jersey.. Ida ....... Houron Susan ... .... Jersey.. 6 .Jersey .. j2 Jersey.. 110- Yr Mo 7 2 I P Cents In C0nt Queen Hypatia .... ... Holstein Jersey.. Average ........... I......782 767 810 4,665.7 3,095.6 2614 5,065.8 9- ħI1003 4,676.3 5- 1 4,218.6 4,136.4 1 828 168S.4$2.9 804 3,740.4 205.41,21.'09 yin' "nn nip nn " 61 1lo4 232.71 216.5 331.7 215.3 246.0 230.81 14.4 10.2 24.90 10.7 20.69( 9.5 24.28 28.15 13.01 23.561 9.5 $23.851 10.6 I G 5.7 $17.85 4.6 30.39 4.4 33.27 5.3 33.55 3..8 4.9 58.71 25.83 '1.3 4.6 38.13 4.71.. Average per cent. of fat, 4.7. SEPTEMBER 1, 1901, TO SEPTEMBER 1, 1902. Ada ...... Jersey.. 7-10 80514,581.3 234.7 Annie ... Jersey.. 11 880 4,806.6 264.8 Ida....... Jersey.. 7- 1 847 3,519.9 193.5 Houron ... Jersey.. 3 786 2,271.2 159.11 Susan .... Jersey.. 3- 8 676 4,316.0 297.9 Hypatia .. Jersey.. 6 814 4,290.9 225.0 Hazena ... Jersey.. 2 662 3,321.5 217.7 Lukie .... Jersey.. 3- 2 6921 4,586.51286.0 Clementina. (Red Proil( 2-11(1131 2,262.2 (113.1 $30.97( 13.2 30.21 11.4 22.74 11.7 15.43 9.6 26.31 24.931 22.49 24. 15 20.90 8.8 11.0 5124.50 4.9 4.7 5.5 $27.69 5.1 35.99 5.31'25.73 48.25 31.50 Average ........ (...(810.3 3,772.9j221.3($24.30( 10.3 8.6 18.4 11.415.4. 5.5 32.00 4.9 47.01 7..5 7.46 Average per cent. of fat, 5.00. The greater profit for the year 1900 and 1901 is due ing to lower prices of foodstuffs, more copious feeding of ensilage during the winter and better summer pasture. The amount of grain in the ration usually depended upon the character of the grain, the character of fodder and the condition of the animals. AUl things bethe same, a well developed cow several months along in lactation received less grain per 1000 pounds live a the 186 !eight than a cow not so well developed and not-so far along in lactation. With cow pea hay and ensilage thp grain part of the ration rarely exceeded 6 and 7 lbs. per day, and often dropped to 2 and 3 lbs. per day. Indiscriminate feeding of grain and poor cows are usually the cause of losses and of small profits to the dairyman. Liberal, judicious feeding and kind treatment go hand in'hand. Ada, although possessing good dairy type, carries considerable flesh, and during the year 1900 and 1901 gave a small profit, it being an off year with her. Clementina is the poorest cow. She is of the beef type and is well covered with heavy flesh. The food cost of Houron for the year 1901 and 1902 is light. She milked heavily when fresh, but began to dry off early and then cow pea hay was partially substituted for grain. Her cost of keep ($15.43) for the year 1901 and 1902 is low because she calved in the summer, did her best on grass and was far along in lactation by winter. This allowed light feeding of grain during the wintcr (2 lbs. per day), cow pea hay, sorgum hay and oat straw forming the greater part of her ration. The advisability of so light a grain ration is questioned. A long pasture season means cheap production. Young cattle are usually turned to pasture the latter part of March and are not taken up until about the middle of December. Cows are turned to pasture the middle of April, and then receive grain only while in milk. They are soiled in late fall but depend more or less on pasture until the first of December. On the whole the yearly productions are smaller than they ought to be. A cow should give from 5000 to 7000 lbs. of milk per year and make not less than 300 lbs. of butter. 187 COST OF RAISING HEIFER CALVES. Hazen a, a registered Jersey was dropped October 22, 18-9, and 56 lbs. The year she consumed lbs. whole milk, 2738 lbs. of skim milk, 66 lbs. bran, 224 lbs. of hay and was on pasture 161 clays. When one year old she had cost $12.86 and weighed lou ndS. The second year she received sorghum l y, ensilage, oat straw, cornStover and a little cotton seed and bran, and was on pasture 224 days. The cost of keep the second year was $9.09 and she weighed 665 lbs. She dropped her first calf when lacking sevenlays of eing two years to the time of calving was old. T1'otal cost of keep $21.95. Ella, a, registered Jersey, was dropped August 12, 1900, and weighed 50 lbs. The first year she consumed 259.5 poundsof whole milk, 1195 pounds skim milk, 180 pounds bran, 63 pounds of corn mel, 405 pounds hay and was on pasture t1 days. She cost, including when pasture, during her first year, $11.65, and 12 months old 340 pounds. 159 weighed first 4'5 up weighed The second year, asidle from pastuire,. she received cotton seed, cornstover, oat straw and ensilage. She dropped her first calf when 22 months old. The cost of keep the second year up to time of calving was $7 .61, making a total cost of $19.26. dropped July 23, 1900, Peggy, another Jersey, and weighed 36 pounds. The first year she consumed was 287.5 poundcs wlhole milk, 1097 pounds skim milk, 191 .6 Lds hay pounds bran, 6 7.8 pounds corn meal, 399 poun and was on pasture 91 days. She cost $1 1.49 and weighed 350 pounds when one year old. The second year she received the same kind of feed as Ella. She dropped her first calf when just two year old. The cost 188 of keep the second year was $7.99, and the total cost of keep was $19.48. Jenny, a registered Jersey, was dropped November 24, 1900, and weighed 38 pounds. The first year she consumed 52 pounds whole milk, 1740 pounds skim milk, 45.5 pounds bran, 175 pounds hay and was on pasture 217 days. She cost $9.60 and weighed 295 pounds at one year old. The second ydar she received the same kind of food as Ella and Peggy. By reason of an accidental service she dropped her first calf June 24, 1902, at nineteen months of age, and then weighed 445 pounds. The cost of keep for the second year was $7.61, and the total cost of keep for nineteen months was $17.21. Alamarzena, another registered Jersey, was dropped April 16, 1901, and weighed 50 pounds. She received the same kind of food as the others mentioned above. When one year old she weighed 350 pounds and cost $13.66. Mabel, Hazena's first calf, was dropped October 15, 1901, and weighed 43 pounds. She consumed 92 pounds whole milk, 1191.2 pounds skim milk, 322.7 pounds hay, 204.2 pounds bran, and was on pasture 165 days. The total cost of keep at one year old was $11.40. Sumnmary of Cost of Raising Heifer Calves. Total Cost of Cost of cost of keep the keep the keep to time of first year. second year. calving. $9 09 $21 95 $12 86 Hazena ........................... 17 21 7 61 [ 9 60 .................. Jenny .......... 7 99 19 48 11 49 Peggy ............................. 19 26 7 61 ....................... I 11 65 Ella ...... 13 66 ..................... ........ .... Alam arzena ........... .......... ........ 11 40 M able .......... ................... NAME. Average ......................... I $11 77 $8 07 $19 47 189 Ella, Peggy and Jenny are undersize and would not have been bred so early as they were had not a neighbor's bull, in an enjoining pasture, broken into the Station herd. They are very small, due mainly to early breeding and to a small consumption of skim milk when very young calves. There can be no set age at which young dairy heifers should be bred. If they are well developed, strong and thrifty they should drop their first calf when 24 to 30 months old. Heifers should be kept growing from the time they are born until they reach maturity. A shortage of a few dollars worth of feed on the calf will mean a loss of many dollars at the pail when the calf becomes a cow. If material advancement is to be made in animal breeding the pregnant mother must be well fed. The foetus should be well nourished from the time the dam conceives until it is dropped and has reached the goal to which it is destined. REMOVING BITTER WEED TASTE FROM CREAM. During the last three years considerable effort has been made to find a means by which the odor and taste of wild onion and bitter weed may be removed from milk and cream. In the spring of 1901 the writer was requested to try a patent compound claimed to remove all kinds of weedy taste from milk. It was fed to the Station herd according to the directions of the manufacturer for four weeks, in which time it proved to be an absolute failure. Cooking soda (saleratus) was also given a like trial but failed of the purpose claimed for it by some people. Having failed so far to find anything that when 190 fed to the cows would remove weedy taste in the milk, the next step was treating the milk and cream. The following are creamery notes taken in the carrying out of this work Treatment of cream before run- Notes on treated cream after coming from the separator; the ning tEirough the separator. untreated cream being very bitter One gallon of cream was thoroughly mixed with 2 gallons of ° water, at a temperature of 150 Bitterness removed, but flavor F., in which one ounce of salt- of cream not good, rather soapy. peter had been thoroughly dissolved. Not a trace of bitterness in the Same as above, but no saltpeter washed cream. used. One gallon of cream was thoroughly mixed with 2 gallons of Not a trace of bitterness in the water at a temperature of 1600 F. cream, and of a fine flavor. One gallon of cream was thoroughly mixed with 2 gallons of Bitterness removed, but cream water at a temperature of 1600 F., not very good. and containing 1 oz. of saltpeter. One gallon of cream was thoroughly mixed with 2 gallons of water at a temperature of 1600 F. One gallon of cream was thoroughly mixed with 2 gallons of ° water at a temperature of 74 F. Bitterness removed. Bitterness removed. One gallon of cream was thor- Excellent cream, not a trace of oughly mixed with 2 gallons of bitterness. ° water at a temperature of 74 F. One gallon of cream was thor- A slight trace of bitterness in oughly mixed with 2 gallons of the cream, but this would not ordi1 ° water at a temperature of 68 F. narily be detected. One gallon of cream was thoroughly mixed with 2 gallons of Slight trace of bitterness in the cream. water at a temperature of 69° F. 191 Bitter weed taste was removed entirely from cream by thoroughly mixing it with two or more parts of water at any temperature above 70 deg. Fahrenheit, and then running the whole through the separator. Saltpeter dissolved in water was tried as in removing the bitterness, but as good results were secured without it as with it. Rapidly and slowly heating milk and cream to various high temperatures. did not remove bitterness but often imparted a cooked taste. Butter made from washed an'aid cream (as above) was pronounced free of all bitterness by the Station customers. Butter made from unwashed cream was decidedly bad and was often rejected by the customers. No means were taste from whole milk found to remove the bitter In the spring of 1902 milk and creame were treated for the wild onion01 flavor the same as in the previous year for the bitter weed taste. weed 192 The following are the creamery notes taken in the course of this work Treatment of cream before run- Notes on the treated cream ning it through the separator. after coming from the separator. One gallon of cream was thoroughly mixed with three gallons Flavor not removed; cream still of water at a temperature of 900 bad. F. One gallon of cream was mixed with two gallons of water, at a Flavor bad, and made more so temperature of 900 F., in which by the use of saltpeter. was dissolved one ounce of saltpeter. Same as preceding treatment. Same as preceding treatment, except temperature of water 1000 F. Same as preceding treatment. One gallon of cream was mixed with two gallons of water at a temperature of 2120 F., in which was dissolved one ounce of saltpeter. Same, as preceding treatment. Flavor still bad. Flavor still bad. Flavor bad. Flavor still bad. Flavor very bad, and butter from this cream was rejected by the station customers. Same result as above. Same as preceding treatment. One gallon of cream was mixed with two gallons of water, at a temperature of 950 F. Cream bad. 193 The odor and taste of wild olnion was not removed from the milk and cream by any method of treatment employed. Cream was washed as above with and without saltpeter, and at different temperatures, but the onion taste and flavor were not removed. Butter made from the treated cream was rejected by the Station customers, Rapidly and slowly heating milk and cream to various high temperatures did not remove the objectionable qualities imparted by the onion. Cream was thoroughly mixed with ether and carbon bisulphide and these were then evaporated. The onion flavor was partly removed in both cases, but the cream retained enough of the ether and carbon bisulphide to render it unfit for use. The compound in the bitter weed which gives milk a bitter taste is held very largely, if not entirely, in the milk serum. The more completely the serum is separated from the fat the less is the degree of bitterness in the cream. The compound in the wild onion which gives milk a bad flavor is held very largely, if not entirely, by the fat, and the more completely the serum is separated from the fat the more concentrated is the onion flavor in the cream. Washing cream makes it thick and necessitates adding considerable skim milk, which may be a starter, to bring it to a proper consistency before churning. If a large amount of starter is used to thin with, a shorter length of time is required for ripening, therefore the cream should be watched closely until the proper degree of ripeness is reached. The term'starter as used above means sour milk that is used to sour the cream. Cream containing bad flavors but not sour enough to be clabbered, can often be improved by washing. The thicker the cream the less likely is it to sour and clabber 194 DIFFERENT SYSTEMS OF CREAMING. The question is often asked, does it pay to run a separator for small amount of milk. The following table gives the average per cent of fat left in the skim milk by the different systems of cream inrg, but at different temperatures. As the use of ice, on tlhe average farm in Alabama, is generally out of the question, it was not used, but conditions were taken as they exist on the average farm, and the results secured are believed to be fairly representative of practical conditions. This work was when the weather was hot, except that one of the deep setting tests was made in April. a cream done in August SEPARATOR VERSUS DEEP SETTING VERSUS SHALLOW PANS. Temperature, Degrees F. 'Per Average. .03 .54 1.30 cent. of fat in System. Separator .......... :.81.0 Deep setting.............. Deep setting...............83.6 Shallow pans .................. 50.0 .85.7 skim milk. Min. Max., .01 .20 .30 1.10 .80 1.80 .60 .35 1.00 There is a heavy loss in- creaming milk by the gravity system. During hot weather the loss may be one-fourth to one-third of the total butter fat. Shallow pans give better results than deep cans. With the separator the loss of fat in the skim milk was very slight, hardly worth consider~ing, where facilities for handling cream and butter can be had, and where the skim milk is practically wasted, it will pay,, according: to thee data in the above table, to have a separator for ,even. as small a num~ ber as two good cows. These cows together ought to produce 12,000, pounds of milk per year. One-eighth two of. the whole milk being' cream, there will be 10,500 195 pounds of skim milk. As the separator leaves only .03 of one per cent. of fat in the skim milk, there will be a loss during the year of 3.1 pounds of butter fat, the equivalent of 3.6 pounds of lutter. With deep set ti ng, at a temperature of 83.6 degrees Fahrenheit close approximation to our summer temperature), there will be a loss of 159 l ounds of butter the skim milk, between one-third and one-fourth of the total. shallow pan setting at temperature degrees Fahrenheit, the loss ;will be 73.5 pounds of butter in the skim milk. Along with the saving of butter fat a sepagives better cream, a better butter and better ski in milk. The cream separator is indispensable to the dairyman of the'Gulf States of the South. (a in a of 85.7 With rator THE E-EFFECT OF FOOD ON THE MELTING POINT ATILE ACIDS OF BUTTER. AND VOL- In the year 1901 feeding experiments were carried on to ascertain the effect of different amounts of cotton seed, -cotton seed. meal and cotton seed hulls, in combination with -bran and sorghum hay, on the comlposition of btitter, and for this purpose six cows were divided into two lots of three each. They were fed in the barn' all that they would eat up clean twice, a dray, and were confined to stalls during the night. for four weeks. One week of preparatory which feeding preceded the experiment proper, 'lasted 196 FOOD AND AVERAGE COMPOSITION OF BUTTER FROM EACH KIND OF FOOD. Group. Ration. 9 pounds cotton seed I II 3 pounds bran 10 pounds sorgum hay 51/4 pounds cotton seed meal 41.1 40.7 13.2 13.47 3 pounds bran 10 pounds cotton seed hulls There is practically no difference in the melting point and volatile acids of the butter made from the above rations. Analysis of a sample of Northern butter, made at the same time, in which no cotton seed products were fed, gave a melting point of 24.5 degrees (centigrade), and required 13.5 c. c. of alkali to neutralize the volatile acids in 2.5 grams of fat. During April and May nine cows were divided into four lots of two cows each and one lot of one cow. They were fed grain night and morning and confined to the barn only while eating their grain and being milked. Pasture was the only forage received and consequently all received of it alike. The feeding period proper lasted three weeks. 197 FOOD AND AVERAGE COMPOSITION OF BUTTER FROM EACH KIND OF FOOD. Group. Ration. - 3 pounds cotton seed 1 pound bran I 3 pounds couon seed meal II 1 pound bran 5 pounds cotton seed meal III I 1 pound bran 8 pounds cotton seed meal IV 1 pound bran V 4 pounds bran I 41.76 41.92 39.6 40.84 38.6 10.6 ' 9.6 10.37 f 10.1 9.65 Feeding cotton seed and cotton seed meal to cows on pasture, had a slight effect in hardening the butter, increasing the melting point from 1 to 3 degrees centigrade. Three pounds of cotton seed meal and one pound of bran gave as hard a butter as eight pounds of cotton seed meal and one pound of bran. The volatile acids in the butter were not materially affected by the different rations. MILK PRESERVATIVES. A study of milk preservatives for composite testing, was made in order to ascertain the one best suited to our conditions. Potassium bichromate., mercuric chloride and formalin were used. Each cow's milk was sampled as soon as drawn, and the sample taken was put into a 198 glass jar. At the end of the week these composite samples of milk were tested for butter fat and notes taken, which are herewith 0 presented. c 0 x 41 Remarks. W 0c 20 3.08 3.82 .. .. 4.62 5.35 .. ... . .. . 3.85 4.62 6.16 ...+ 7.7 .. . . . .. .. ... . . .... .Winter... Test very good. ... . 3.08 3.82 4.62 5.35 .. . ... .. . . . . . ... ........ 3.85 4.62 6.16 ...... 7.7 11/2%mixture Winter... Test fairly good. W inter ... Test fairly good. .. ....... Winter ... Test very poor. . . Test not satisfactory .... .Winter. ....... Winter.. . Test not satisfactory ....... Winter...ITest not satisfactory ....... ISummer.. Test not Satisfactory ......... Summer .. _Test not satisfactory .. Summer. Test not satisfactory ....... Summer.. Test not satisfactory ....... Summer.. Test not satisfactory Summer.. ........ not satisfactory ........ Summer.. Test not satisfactory ....... Summer.. Test not satisfactory lSummer.. Very satisfactory test, clear, no sediment below fat line. Test Three to four grains of potassium biebromate in a pint of milk served fairly well as a preservative, this material being best in the winter but requiring too frequent duplication of test in the ,summer when the weather is hot. It causes a more or less leathery condition of the cream which is difficult to re-emulsify, and in hot weather the milk often undergoes a fermentation which causes a loss of butter fat. The milk should not be over one week old before being tested. Mercuric chloride proved unsatisfactory in nearly -199 every test with composite samples. ashy. The tests were very One-half per. cent. formalin (40 per cent. formaldehyde) proved the most satisfactory of the three preservatives tried and is now being used entirely at the Station. Half a teaspoonful of formalin to one pint of milk akes one-half per cent. mixture. Potassium bichl'omate, mercuric chloride and formaline are poisonous when taken internally and should be handlled with care. One-half teaspoonful of formalin wil] keep a pint of milk in good condition for testing for one month in any season. a CHURNING EXPERIMENTS. During the winter of 1900 and 1901 experiments were carried on to ascertain the degree to which cream should ripen before being churned. It has usually been assumed that a fairly high per cent. of acid and a high temperature are necessary in churning the cream of milk from cows receiving cotton seed or cotton seed meal. Mloderate acidity and high temperate'-e comtpared with low acidity and low teamperature. a 410 4-4 - a . 4 -m a 14 18 3 3702 ~. o .7 .~~ aa4a4 0 167 5 3. t0 18 6 314 .173. 200 In the 14 trials with an acidity of .37 per cent. and a temperature of 70 degrees Farenheit, the minimum and maximum per cent. of fat in the buttermilk was .1 and 2.5 per cent. respectively. In the ten trials with an acidity of .25 per cent. and a temperature of 63 deg. Fahrenheit, the minimum and maximum per cent. of fat in buttermilk was .05 and .5 per cent. respectively. The most exhaustive churning was made in 40 minutes at a temperature of 67 deg. Fahrenheit, with an acidity of .49 per cent. A ten gallon churn was used in this work. All of the cream was from cows receiving a heavy ration of uncooked cotton seed. The tests were made during the time when cows were on dry food. In connection with this work notes were taken on the churnability of cream containing high and low percentages of fat. Cream containing 50 per cent. fat or more stuck to the sides of the churn and usually had to be thinned with water before the churning was complete. The best churnings were made with cream containing 33 per cent. fat. Cream containing less than 25 or 30 per cent. fat did not churn well, it being too thin. The cream containing 50 or 60 per cent. fat had better keeping qualities than the cream containing 25 or 30 per cent. fat, because a large per cent. of the bacteria that cause trouble in the latter was eliminated in the skim milk. In ripening thick cream a large quantity of a weak starter should be used. This will give good consistency to the cream and consequently a better churning will be secured. Churning whole milk with dash and barrel churns. Ap nearly all of the butter made in Alabama is made from whole milk by the use of the dash churn a few trials of comparing the dash churn with the barrel churn were considered expedient. 201 DASH CHURN VS, BARREL CHURN. 12-GALLON BARREL CHURN. Temp. of milk Pounds of when churned, milk churned. Degrees Fah. 16.2 66 Fer Minutes churning. 55 cent. of fat in Buttermilk. .55 14. 12. 85 85 23 13 .42 1. 25. 27. Ave. 18.8 70 75 76.2 60 16 33.4 1. .5 .69 3-GALLON DASH CHURN. 11. 11. 8. 75 80 85 16 15 15 .5 .5 1. 11. 11. Ave. 10.4 85 66 78.2 j 40 10 1 37.4 .4 .55 .59 According to, the above reported trials, with their wide variations, the dash churn gives practically the same results as the barrel churn, and vise versa. In the tests reported above the milk, when churned, was in good condition, and was well clabbered. With the barrel churn the buttermilk can be drawn off from the bottom, and the butter washed better and more easily than with the dash churn. This is the only advantage that the author can see of the barrel churn over the dash churn for churning whole milk. The method of churning whole milk is practicable and advisable in the South during the summer months when the weather is hot and ice can not be had, and when all of the buttermilk is consumed by the family. Fairly good butter for local and immediate consumption can be made if the milk is cooled as much as possible when drawn, and sour milk (starter) of good quality added immediately. When the temperature can not be controlled to any extent the ripening (souring) should begin at once. 2, Modern lair if it vanta gesv "receives the iethods must be adopted by full. .benefit'ofits the.Soutfh natural dairy a- The average yearly prodction per cow in the Station herdt, for the two years endi ng September 1 1902, 3954.6 punds of milk andpounds of ter-. The average yearly cost of keep per cow was $24.07 the average cost of butter per pound 11 cents, and the average cost per gallon was 5.5 cents. 2. The average cost of raising a heifer calf the first year was $11.77, the second year $8.07 and the total cost to time of calving was $19.47. Bitter weed taste was from cream by mixing it with two or more parts of vater at any tern,perature above 70 deg. Fahrenheit and then running it through a cream separator. means were found by which bitter weed taste could be removed from milk. The compound the bitter weed which gives milk a bitter taste is held very largely, if not entirely, in the milk serum. The more completely the serum is separated from the fat the less is the degree of in the cream. .4 Wild onion flavor not removed from cream if. was 2 but- of milk was 3. removed No in bitterness was by mixing it with water and then running it through the cream separator. Saltpeter dissolved in the xvater thus used was of no value. No method was found largely, by which the onion flavor could be removed from either milk or cream. rfhe compound in the wild onion which gives milk a bad flavor is held very if not entirely, by the fat, and the more completely the serum is separated fron the 'fat the more concentrated is the onion flavor In the cream. 5. The average percentages of fat left in the skim mniilk by .the separator, deep cans and shallow pans were .03, 1.3 and 6 respectively. Shallow pans gave decidedly better results than deep cans. The separator is to the dairymen of the'South. 6. ration consisting of lb-s.cotton seed. Blbs. wheat bran and 10 lbs. sorghum hay gave a butter practically equal in firmness and volatile acids to a butter from. a ration consisting of .5-1 lbs. cotton seed meal, 3 lbs. wheat bran, and 10 lbs. of cotton seed hulls. Feeding cotton seed and cotton seed meal to cows pasture increasecl the ielting point of the butter 1 degrees centigrade. Three pounds of cotton seed meal and one of wheat bran gave as hard a butter as eight pounds of cotton seed meal and one pound of bran. The volatile acids in the butter were not materially affected by the different rations. 7. Potassium bichromate, mercuric chloride and formalia were tried as preservatives for composite sampling. One-half per cent. mixture of formalin (40 per cent. formaldehyde) gave the best results, teaspoonful of formalin will keep a pint of milk in :good .. pensable indis- A 19 to'3 on pound One-half condition for testing for one month. 8. In churning cream from cows receiving- cotton seed and cotton seed meal .25 of per cent, lactic acid in the cream, with a temperature of 63 deg. Fahrenheit, gave a more exhaustive churning than .37 of one per cent, of lactic acid with. a temperature of 70 degrees Fahrenheit. 9. In a churning experinent of five trials, the dash churn proved as satisfactory as the ,barrel churn for churning whole milk. I