,# Ji P ) 05 > HO \ |^4 ' a /<2 \?ctC> OaJ THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY le'SOA * it ¥ $1 fin OfWVBBUV U; Ei»-m J.lTf I ~B J-sc^A. .‘ J " NON CIRCULATING CHECK FOR UNBOUND CIRCULATING COR^ Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2016 https://archive.org/details/somecommonspraym1551 watk CIRCULARS of the AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS CIRCULARS 155-184 JANUARY 1912-1915 URBANA 1 feSO.I 1 . .V) NS'S — \ A TABLE of contents 155 — Plant food in relation to soil fertility by C. G. Hopkins 156 — Rice blight by J. S. Collier 157 — Soil fertility: Illinois conditions, needs, and future prospects by C. 0. Hopkins 158 — Tuberculosis by International Commission of the American Veterinary Medical Asso- ciation on the Control of Bovine Tuber- culosis 159 — Tests of lime sulfur, bordeaux mixture and other sprays by 0. S. Watkins 160 — Some common spray mixtures by 0. S. Watkins 161 — Crowing and marketing wool by W. C. Coffey 162*— Care of milk in the home by B. R. Rickards and H. N. Parker 163 — Economic factors in cattle feeding: I. Relation of the United States to the world’s beef supply by H. W. Mumford and L. D. Hall 164 — Economic factors in cattle feeding: II. Argentina as a factor in international trade by H. W. Mumford 165 — Shall we use "complete" commercial fertili- zers in the com belt? by C. G. Hopkins 166 — Method for the improvement of buttermilk from pasteurized cream by LeRoy Lang 167 — Illinois system of permanent fertility by C. G-. Hopkins . . . • . . . . . . : . 168— Bread from stones by C. G. Hopkins 169 Economic factors in cattle feeding: III Review of beef production in the United States by H. W. Murnford and L. D. Hall 170 — "Illinois Way" of beautifying the farm by Wilhelm Miller — bound separately 171 — Late broods of the codling moth by B. S. Pickett 172 — Blight of apples, pears, and quinces by B. S. Pickett 173 — Onion culture by J. W. Lloyd 174 — Testing for fat in milk by the Babcock test by Department of Dairy Husbandry 175 — Economic factors in cattle feeding: IV Cattle feeding conditions in the corn belt by H. W. Murnford and L. D. Hall 176 — Practical help on landscape gardening by Wilhelm Miller 177 — Relation between yields and prices by Eugene Davenport 178 — Crisis in the foot and mouth disease situa- tion by a committee of the Experiment Station 179 — Four aphids injurious to the apvle by B. S, Pickett 180— San Jose Scale by P. A. Glenn 181— How not to treat Illinois soils by C. G* Hopkins 182— Fertilizer problem from the vegetable grower 1 standpoint by C. E. Durst 183 — Bibliography of recent literature coneeming plant-disease prevention by C. C. Rees and Wallace Macfarlane and Bibliography of non-p&rasitic diseases of plants by C. W. Lantz 184 — Prairie spirit in landscape gardening by Wilhelm Miller UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Agricultural Experiment Station URBANA, JANUARY 1912 CIRCULAR NO. 155 PLANT FOOD IN RELATION TO SOIL FERTILITY" By Cyril G. Hopkins I take it that the only justification for me to review the sub- ject of plant food in relation to soil fertility or crop production is the fact that recent publications from the federal Bureau of Soils have strongly affirmed that there is no necessity of applying plant food in the restoration and maintenance of soil fertility. Two principal questions are raised: First, Does p’ant food ap- plied increase crop yields in harmony with recognized soil de- ficiencies and crop requirements? Second will the rotation of crops maintain the productive power of the soil by avoiding in- jury from possible toxic excreta from plant roots? I shall try to present facts and data and exact quotations rather than my own opinions concerning these questions of such fundamental im- portance in relation to systems of permanent agriculture. In 1804 DeSaussure, the French scientist, first gave to the world a correct and almost complete statement concerning the sources of the food of plants, including not only the confirma- tion of Senebier’s discovery of the fixation of carbon in the for- *An address read before the Botanical Society of America and the Botanical Section of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, in joint session, at Washington, December 27, 1911. 2 mation of carbohydrates, but also the evidence of plant require- ments for the essential mineral elements secured from the soil. Sir Humphrey Davy and Baron von Liebig did much to pop- ularize this information during the following half century; and they were followed by Lawes and Gilbert, whose extensive and long-continued investigations furnished the needed proof that the soil must furnish nitrogen as well as the mineral elements; and finally, only twenty-five years ago, Hellriegel discovered the symbiotic relationship between legumes and bacteria which gives access to the inexhaustible supply of atmospheric nitrogen for soil enrichment. Briefly, it might be said that for nearly a century the world of science has accepted and taught, and the world of advanced agricultural methods has practiced, the doctrine that soil fertil- ity maintenance and soil enrichment require the restoration or addition of plant food, including particularly phosphorus and nitrogen, which are most likely to become deficient in normal soils, potassium where needed, and sometimes lime or limestone, which always supplies calcium, and magnesium as well if dol- omitic limestone be used. Of the other five essential elements, carbon and oxygen are secured from the carbon dioxid of the air, hydrogen from water, and iron from the inexhaustible sup- ply in the soil; while the sulfur brought to the soil in rain and otherwise from the atmospheric supply, resulting from combus- tion and decomposition of sulfur-bearing materials, supple- mented by the soil’s supply and by that returned in crop residues, appears to be sufficient to meet the plant requirements and the loss by leaching. After nearly a century of the increasing agricultural practice of this doctrine on much of the farm land of Germany, France, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, and the British Isles, those coun- tries have approximately doubled their average acre-yields. The ten-year average yield of wheat in the United States is 14 bushels per acre, while that in Europe has gone up to 29 bushels in Ger- many, to 33 bushels in Great Britain, and to more than 40 bushels per acre in Denmark. The annual application of phosphorus even to the soils of Italy has already become greater than the phosphorus content of all the crops removed. The exportation of our highest grade phosphate rock from the United States to Europe now exceeds a million tons a year, carrying away from our own country twice as much phosphorus as is required for the annual wheat crops of all the states, and millions of acres of farm land in our own Eastern States have already been agri- culturally abandoned, because of depleted fertility and reduced productive power; so that it is now impossible for our Congress- men to enter the Capitol of the United States from any direction without passing abandoned farms. Ultimate analysis has shown that the most common loam soil of southern Maryland,* almost adjoining the District of Columbia, contains only 160 pounds of phosphorus, 1,000 pounds of calcium, and about 900 pounds of nitrogen in two million pounds of surface soil, corresponding approximately to an acre of land 6 2 / 3 inches deep. The clover crops harvested from the rich garden soil at Rothamsted in eight consecutive years re- moved more phosphorus and calcium from the soil than the total amounts contained in the plowed soil of this wornout Maryland land, whose total nitrogen content is also less than would be required for seven such crops of corn as we harvest on good land in the central west, which, however, contains ten times as much of these plant foods as the depleted Maryland soil. During the last ten years our population increased 21 percent, the same as during the preceding decade, while the acreage of farm lands increased less than 5 percent, and the federal govern- ment reportsf all future possible increase in farm land at only 9 percent of our present acreage. Average crop yields for four '10-year periods are now re- ported by the United States Department of Agriculture. A com- parison of two 20-year averages shows increased acre-yields of 1 bushel for wheat and % bushel for rye, while the yield of corn has decreased IV 2 bushels and the yield of potatoes has decreased 7 bushels per acre, by 20-year averages. These crops represent our greatest sources of human food, even our supply of meat be- ing largely dependent upon the corn crop. Less than 20-year ‘See “Leonardtown loam”, Bureau of Soils Bulletin 54, and “Field Operations of the Bureau of Soils” in Reports for 1900 and 1901; or see pages 138 to 142 of Hopkins’ “Soil Fertility and Permanent Agri- culture”, Ginn & Company, Boston. tSee Circular No. 38, Office of the Secretary, United States Depart- ment of Agriculture. 4 averages are not trustworthy for a consideration of any small in- crease or decrease in yield per acre. It should be noted that dur- ing the last forty years vast areas of virgin wheat land have been put under cultivation, including the Dakotas, which now produce more wheat than all the states east of the Mississippi, save only Indiana and Illinois. A comparison of the last five years with the average of the five years ending with 1900 shows that our wheat exports de- creased during the decade from 198 million to 116 million bushels, and that our corn exports decreased from 193 million to 57 million bushels. Thus we have fed our increasing population not by increas- ing our acre-yields, but by a slight increase in the acreage of farm land and by a large decrease in our exportation of food stuffs; and the fact must be plain that before another decade shall have passed we shall reach the practical limit of our relief in both of these directions. Indeed, a most common subject already discussed in the press and investigated by national, state and city authorities dur- ing the last three or four years is the high cost of plain living. With these facts and statistics before us, let us consider the actual results secured from field and laboratory investigations : Where wheat has been grown every year since 1844 on Broadbalk Field at Rothamsted, England, the average yield for fifty-five years has been 12.9 bushels per acre on unfertilized land, 35.5 bushels where heavy annual applications of farm manure have been made, and 37.1 bushels per acre where slightly less plant food has been applied in commercial form. Barley grown every year on Hoos Field at Rothamsted has produced, for the same fifty-five years, an average yield of 14.8 bushels on unfertilized land, 47.7 bushels with farm manure, and 43.9 bushels where much less plant food was applied in commer- cial form. Potatoes grown for twenty-six consecutive years, also on Hoos Field at Rothamsted, produced, as an average, 51 bushels per acre on unfertilized land, 178 bushels where farm manure was used (reinforced with acid phosphate during the first seven years), and 203 bushels where plant food was applied in commer- cial form. The first year of this investigation the unfertilized 5 land produced 144 bushels, land receiving farm manure alone produced 159 bushels, and land fertilized with commercial plant food produced 328 bushels per acre. Director A. D. Hall, of the Rothamsted Experiment Station, makes the following statement on pages 95 and 96 of his book on “The Rothamsted Experiments”: “On the plots receiving farmyard manure, and even on those re- ceiving only a complete artificial manure, the crop was maintained in favorable seasons. No falling-off was observed which could be attrib- uted to the land having become ‘sick’ through the continuous growth of the same crop, or through the accumulation of disease in the soil.” In commenting upon these same experiments, Milton Whit- ney, Chief of the United States Bureau of Soils, makes the fol- lowing statement in Farmers’ Bulletin No. 257, page 14 : “One of the most interesting instances going to show that toxic sub- stances are formed and that what is poisonous to one crop is not neces- sarily poisonous or injurious to another is a series of experiments of Lawes and Gilbert— the growing of potatoes for about fifteen years on the same field. At the end of this perioc^ they got the soil into a condition in which it would not grow potatoes at all. The soil was ex- hausted, and under the older ideas it was necessarily deficient in some plant food. It seems strange that, under our old ideas of soil fertility, if the soil became exhausted for potatoes, it should grow any other crop, because the usual analysis shows the same constituents present in all of our plants, not in the same proportion, but all are present and all necessary, so far as we know. This field was planted in barley, and on this experimental plot that had ceased to grow potatoes they got 75 bushels of barley.” If, now, we turn to the actual records of the Rothamsted ex- periments we find that the first crop of barley grown after twenty-six years- of potatoes* was 33.2 bushels per acre on unfer- tilized land, only 24.8 bushels where minerals alone had been used and the soil depleted of nitrogen by the potato crops, 67 bushels per acre where minerals and nitrogen had been used, and 72.4 bushels where farm manure had been applied for twenty-six years. We also find, in strict harmony with Director Half's state- ment, that the largest average yield of potatoes from the farm manure plots (3 and 4), either for one year or for five years, was secured after potatoes had been grown on the same land for more than fifteen years. On permanent meadow land at Rothamsted, the average 6 yield of hay for fifty years was 1% tons per acre on unfertilized land', and more than 4 tons per acre on land heavily fertilized with commercial plant food. During the last ten years of this fifty-year period the unfertilized land has produced an average yield of 1863 pounds of hay, while the fertilized land has pro- duced 8490 pounds per acre. On Barn Field at Rothamsted, mangels were grown for thirty years. The average yield per acre was 4% tons on unfertilized land, 19% tons where farm manure hac( been applied, and 29 tons per acre where the farm manure had been reinforced with nitro- gen and phosphorus in commercial form. In 1902 the University of Ilinois began a series of experi- ments on the common corn-belt prairie land in McLean county, on a field which had grown no wheat for thirty-two years. We first grew wheat in 1905. Four plots not receiving phosphorus produced respectively, 28.8 bushels, 30.5 bushels, 33.2 bushels and 29.5 bushels of wheat per acre; while four other plots which dif- fered from these only by the addition of phosphorus, at the rate of 25 pounds of that element in 200 pounds of steamed bone meal per acre per annum, produced 39.2 bushels, 50.9 bushels, 37.8 bushels, and 51.9 bushels, respectively per acre. Six year later wheat was again grown on this land, when the four plots not re- ceiving phosphorus produced, respectively, 22.5 bushels, 25.6 bushels, 21.7 bushels, 27.3 bushels, per acre, and the other four plots, which differ from these in treatment only by the phos- phorus applied during the ten years, produced 57.6 bushels, 60.2 bushels, 54.0 bushels, and 60.4 bushels, respectively, of wheat per acre, this being the second crop of wheat grown on this land in forty years. This most common prairie land of the Illinois corn belt con- tains 600 pounds of phosphorus and 18,000 pounds of potassium per million of surface soil, while one million pounds of the sub- soil contain 450 pounds of phosphorus and 27,000 pounds of potassium. This is the type of soil on which, as an average of four different tests each year under four different conditions of soil treatment, the addition of phosphorus produced an increase in yield per acre of 9.6 bushels of corn in 1902, of 17.8 bushels of corn in 1903, of 14.8 bushels of oats in 1904, of 14.4 bushels of wheat in 1905, of 1.46 tons of clover* in 1906, of 18.8 bushels of * Average of two tests (See Illinois Soil Report No. 2, pages 17, 39). 7 corn in 1907, of 17.3 bushels of corn in 1908, of 15.2 bushels of oats in 1909, of 2.56 tons of clover* in 1910, and an average in- crease of 33.8 bushels of wheat per acre in 1911. As an average of four similar tests during the ten years, ap- plications of potassium (costing the same as phosphorus) in- creased the yield of corn by 3.1 bushels, decreased the yield of oats by 2.3 bushels, decreased the yield of clover by 70 pounds per acre, and increased the yield of wheat by .1 bushel per acre, these being the general average results from the four years of corn and from two years each of oats, clover, and wheat. If now we turn to the extensive peaty swamp soil of northern and north-central Illinois, we find by analysis that it contains in one million pounds of the surface soil 1960 pounds of phosphorus and 2930 pounds of potassium, or more than three times as much phosphorus and less than one-sixth as much potassium as the common prairie. We also find that, as an average of triplicate tests each year, potassium increased the yield of corn per acre by 20.7 bushels in 1902, by 23.5 bushels in 1903, by 29.0 bushels in 1904, and by 36.8 bushels in 1905; while the addition of phos- phorus produced a decrease of .1 bushel in 1902, and an increase of .9 bushel in 1903, of 3.9 bushelsf in 1904, and of .3 bushel in 1905. As an average of the results from twenty plots of unfertilized land in the Pennsylvania rotation experiments with corn, oats, wheat, and hay (clover and timothy mixed), the crop values in two consecutive 12-year periods decreased by 26 percent; while, as an average of the twenty-four years, the crop values were in- creased 62 percent by farm manure and 65 percent with commer- cial plant food, as compared with the results from unfertilized land. The records from the Agdell rotation field at Rothamsted show that as an average of the turnips, barley, clover (or beans), and wheat the yields decreased on unfertilized land by 42 per- cent measured by the results from two consecutive 32-year periods ; and, if we span a 60-year period, we find that the yield of turnips on unfertilized land was 10 tons per acre in 1848 and less than % ton in 1908; that the barley yielded 46.5 bushels in 'Average of two tests (See Illinois Soil Report No. 2, pages 17, 39). \ -{-Irregular insect injury in 1904 (See Illinois Bulletin 123, pages 251, 252). 8 1849 and only 10 bushels per acre in 1909; the clover produced 2.8 tons in 1850 and less than 1 ton per acre in 1910; while the wheat following clover produced 29.7 bushels in 1851 and 24.5 bushels in 1911. The application of plant food (for. the turnip crop only) in the same rotation over a period of sixty-four years increased the average yield of turnips from 1% tons to 17% tons per acre, in- creased the yield of the barley following from 24.4 to 38.5 bushels, then increased the average yield of legumes from 1945 pounds to 4413, and increased the yield of wheat after legumes from 25 to 34.8 bushels, as compared with the unfertilized land. If, again, we span the sixty years, we find that on the ferti- lized land the yield of turnips was 12% tons in 1848 and 17% tons in 1908; that barley produced 35.9 bushels in J 849 and 33.4 bush- els in 1909; that clover produced 3% tons in 1850 and 4% tons in 1910; while wheat yielded 30.3 bushels in 1851 and 38 bushels per acre in 1911. Thus, the records show that during the last four years, fol- lowing a sixty-year period, the plant food applied has increased the yield of wheat by 55 percent, increased the barley by 234 per- cent, and the clover by 340 percent; while the yield of turnips on the fertilized land was 49 times as great as on the unfertilized land. With these facts in mind we may well consider the following statements from Whitney in Farmers’ Bulletin 257: “Apparently, these small amounts of fertilizers we add to the soil have their effect upon these toxic substances and render the soil sweet and more healthful for growing plants. We believe it is through this means that our fertilizers act rather than through the supplying of food to the plant.” (Page 20.) “There is another way in which the fertility of the soil can be main- tained; viz., by arranging a system of rotation and growing each year a crop that is not injured by the excreta of the preceding crop; then when the time comes around for the first crop to be planted again the soil has had ample time to dispose of the sewerage resulting from the growth of the plant two or three years before Barley will follow potatoes in the Rothamsted experiments after the potatoes have grown so long that the soil will not produce potatoes. The barley grows unaffected by the excreta of potatoes, another crop follows the barley, and the soil is then in condition to grow potatoes again. 9 “In other experiments of Lawes and Gilbert they have maintained for fifty years a yield of about 30 bushels of wheat continuously on the same soil where a. complete fertilizer has been used. They have seen their yield go down where wheat followed wheat without fertilizer for fifty years in succession from 30 bushels to 12 bushels, which is what they are now getting annually from their unfertilized wheat plot. With a rotation of crops without fertilizers they have also maintained their yield for fifty years at 30 bushels, so that the effect of rotation has in such case been identical with that of fertilization.” (Pages 21, 22.) If we turn to the Rothamsted data, we find the first recorded yield of wheat on the unfertilized plot on Broadbalk Field was not 30 bushels, but ony 15 bushels ; that the average of the first eight years was 17.4 bushels; that the best fertilized plot on the same field has averaged not 30 bushels, but 37.1 bushels for fifty-five years; that, as stated above, the wheat grown in rotation, fol- lowing a leguminous crop, has averaged not 30 bushels, but 25 bushels on unfertilized land, and 34.8 bushels where fertilizers were applied for turnips three years before. The following pertinent quotations are from Whitney and Cameron in Bureau of Soils Bulletin 22 : “In England and Scotland it is customary to make an allowance to tenants giving up their farms for the unused fertilizers applied in pre- vious seasons. The basis of this is usually taken at 30 to 50 percent for the first year, and at 10 to 20 percent for the second year after applica- tion; but, in the experience of this Bureau there is no such apparent continuous effect of fertilizers on the chemical constitution of the soil.” (Page 59.) “It appears further that practically all soils contain sufficient plant food for good crop yield; that this supply will be indefinitely main- tained.” (Page 64.) In Bureau of Soils Bulletin 55, by Whitney, entitled “Soils of the United States”, issued in 1909, we find under the heading “Permanency of Soil Fertility as a National Asset”, the following summarized statements : “The soil is the one indestructible, immutable asset that the na- tion possesses. It is the one resource that cannot be exhausted; that cannot be used up.” (Page 66.) “From the modern conception of the nature and purpose of the soil it is evident that it cannot wear out, that so far as the mineral food is concerned it will continue automatically to supply adequate quantities of the mineral plant food for crops.” (Page 79.) “As a national asset the soil is safe as a means of feeding mankind for untold ages to come.” (Page 80.) 10 As stated in the beginning, I have not planned to discuss the subject of plant food in relation to soil fertility; but I felt it a duty as well as an honor to be permitted to accept a place on your program; and I have placed before you some most important and trustworthy data bearing upon the question. I have presented some statistics for consideration in connection with the gravest problem which now confronts America; namely, the problem of restoring American soil and of maintaining American prosperity. I have quoted accurately and fairly from the teachings of Whit- ney and Cameron; and I also submit for your information the fol- lowing quotation from Director A. D. Hall, of Rothamsted : “I cannot agree with Professor Whitney’s reading of the results on the Agdell field in the least. The figures he quotes for wheat are hardly justifiable as approximations, and are in spirit contrary to the general tenor of the particular experiment In my opinion the results on the Agdell rotation field are directly contrary to Professor Whitney’s idea that rotation can do the work of fertilizers.” (From Report of the Committee of Seven, appointed by the Association of Official Agricul- tural Chemists “to consider in detail the questions raised”, published in full in Circular 123 of the University of Illinois Agricultural Experi- ment Station.) A thousand additional proofs of the practical value and of the evident necessity of supplying plant food in systems of per- manent agriculture could easily be cited. All long-continued investigations and, likewise, all practical agricultural experience show that great reduction in crop yields ultimately occurs unless plant food is restored to the soil; and, as a rule, the chemical composition of normal soil is an exceed- ingly valuable guide in determining the kind of material which should be supplied in practical systems of soil enrichment and preservation. UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Agricultural Experiment Station URBANA, ILLINOIS, FEBRUARY, 1912 CIRCULAR NO. 156 RICE BLIGHT By John S. Collier Rice field in Arkansas, 1911. This field had an average yield of 76.2 bushels per acre. 1500 pounds per acre of limestone was added. This was aerated three weeks at the time the head was forming in the “boot”. This publication is preliminary to a doctor’s thesis which is under preparation in the graduate school of the University of Illinois, It is issued in response to a considerable request for early data. E. Davenport, Director. RICE BLIGHT By John S. Collier Introduction The condition called blight, or straight head , is found to a greater or less extent in all rice growing regions. It is esti- mated that at least twenty percent of the rice in the United States is blighted annually. A careful estimate of the amount of blight in the rice region of Arkansas, where all these experiments have been carried on, was made in 1910 and 1911, and it was found that out of 8000 acres of rice the crop was injured to the extent of at least 12 to 15 percent. In a blighted condition the heads do not fill and hence remain straight (Fig. 1) and green, while the well filled heads droop from the weight of the grain (Fig. 2). Blight occurs in both Hon- duras and Japan rices, more extensively, however, in Honduras. Many fields were noticed where the damage was so great that the rice was not harvested. Fig. 1— Blighted Rice. The Water Was On This For Twelve Weeks Averaging Three Inches Deep. Notice the Straight Posi- tion of the Heads As Compared With Fig. 2. 4 Fiq,. 2 — Unblighted Rice. This Was Aerated Three Weeks. Observe That the Heads Droop From The Weight of The Grain. Blight is not the so-called “white blast”, caused by the larvae of a moth which bores into the stem, nor should it be confused with “rotten neck”, a fungous disease which attacks the plants and causes the stem to break just below the head. Both of these diseases are entirely different and their causes are well known. But very little “rotten neck” has been found in the rice on Grand Prairie, Arkansas, where these experiments were conducted. The following experiments were undertaken to determine, if possible, the cause of blight. The circular here presented is only a preliminary statement, hence much data is not included. In a later publication the entire data and the results accomplished, including experiments with fertilizers, will be given. In a previ- ous publication (1910)* it was shown that blight is neither a bac- terial nor a fungous disease. During the season of 1911 the conclusions of 1910 were veri- fied, in which it was stated: “It seems possible that blight may be caused by improper aeration of the soil.” In this circular it is shown that the cause of blight is a purely physiological one; and the conditions under which blight occurs ♦Report of Investigations Concerning Rice, by John S. Collier to the Rice Growers’ Associa- tion of Arkansas. Copies may be had of J. A. Kenney. Secretary of the Rice Growers’ Associa- tion , Stuttgart, Arkansas. 5 and the manner of conducting the experiments are described, with suggestions of available methods by which the disease may be controlled. Plots. Depth of Water In 1910 and 1911 two hundred plots, each twenty-five feet by twenty-five feet, were laid out in a number of rice fields. Some were made by setting twenty-four-inch gully tin twelve inches in the ground, thus leaving twelve inches above the level of the soil (Figs. 3 and 4), while others were staked out in lands where the depth of water could be controlled. By this means different depths of water could be maintained with comparative accuracy for any desired length of time. It was found by checking up these experiments four times a week that a relatively uniform depth of water was maintained in each plot. The water was turned on about June 14, and drained off about August 28 each year for harvest. Fig. 3— Shows a Plot Surrounded by Gully Tin. The Water Here is From Three to Five Inches Deep. 6 Thirty plots were lost by over- flooding or drainage, and therefore are not included in this data. The heads of the rice of each plot were cut, weighed and compared with those of a plot the same size selected from the field at large, representing the aver- age condition of the field. This gave fairly accurate data for comparison. Relation of Air Content of Soil and Depth of Water to Blight The percent of air in the soil in this region gives some idea as to its physical nature and its value to rice growing. In the following table the amount of water in the soil was de- termined just before flooding. The maximum amount of air in the soil was found to be on an average 52.8 per- cent. Then the amount of air in the soil was found after the water had been on one, two, three, four, and five days respectively, and once a week thereafter. Since the air at first seemed to be trapped in the soil by the sudden covering of the soil by the Fig. 4 — Shows a Plot Surrounded by Gully Tin. The Height of the Rice Compared With a Meter Stick (Nearly 40 Inches) and the Stooling. 7 water, any small degree of rise in temperature would cause a de- crease in the air content of the soil. The air was analyzed each time for the different gases. The term “aerated”, as used in this circular, means draining off the water and letting the soil dry so that the air can get thru it to the roots. In the following table the terms “excellent”, “good”, “fair”, and “poor” are used with reference to percentage of air in the soil. Excellent 45 — 52.8 percent Good 35 — 45 percent Fair 25 — 35 percent Poor 15 — 25 percent TABLE 1.— Depth of Water Had no Relation to Blight. Eyen Tho the Soil was in Poor Physical Condition, If Prop- erly Aerated the Rice Yielded Fairly Well Depth of water, inches Number of plots Condition of soil based on amount of air at time of seeding Blighted, percent Un- blighted, percent Injured by rice maggots, percent Aerated, weeks Group 1 1 10 Excellent 2 98 0 3 2 10 1 Fair 46 34 20 0 3 10 Fair 61 39 0 0 6 10 Poor 95 5 0 0 Group 2 1 10 Poor 8 92 0 3 2 10 Fair 60 34 6 0 4 10 Good 80 12 8 0 6 10 Excellent 0 95 5 3 Group 3 1 10 Good 15 85 0 3 2 10 Excellent 80 16 4 0 4 10 Good 25 74 0 3 6 10 Excellent 70 30 0 0 I 8 Physical Condition of the Soil To determine the relation of the physical condition of the soil to blight, thirty of fifty plots were spaded up when the soil was very wet, and then raked with a garden rake. The other twenty plots were worked when sufficiently dry. To these latter limestone was added at the rate of 1500 pounds per acre. Fig. 5— Effect of Correcting Acidity, Proper Aeration, and Fertilizer. Japan Rice. Table 2 —Effect of Working the Soil When too Wet and of Liming No. of plots Physical condition Weeks water was on Weeks aerated Result 10 Worked wet 12 0 Blight 42 percent 10 Worked wet 9 3 Scarcely any blight 10 Limed 12 0 Blight *70 percent 10 10 Worked wet Limed 11 (stagnant) 8 0 Twice, 2 Blight 80-90 percent weeks each time Excellent crop, No. 1 rice 9 Acid Soil In the report previously cited (1910) it was shown that of the samples of soil taken from the 203 plots, representing 23 different farms, 91 samples showed strong acid reaction July 19 and 20, and from this time on until the water was turned off before harvest- ing. In 79 cases out of 91 where there was this strong acid reaction, blight was found in more or less abundance. The re- maining 12 showed heads partially filled out. Of the 102 places which gave no acid reaction, 92 had no trace of blighted heads. The following year (1911) 50 plots were taken which showed strong acid reaction July 15. These were checked as nearly as possible in groups of five. Table 3.— Effect of Acid Soil on Blight Number of plots Acid Weeks aerated Weeks water was on Bu. of 1 rice per acre Result 5 Yes 0 12 14.2 Heavily blighted 5 No 4 8 52.0 Scarcely any blight 5 Yes 4 8 44.0 Scarcely any blight 5 Yes 2 10 38.0 Some blight 5 No 0 12 16.0 Heavily blighted 5 No 1 11 40.0 Some blight 5 Yes 4 6 55.0 No blight Fig. 6— A. Blighted Rice. B. Unblighted. “Lands” About SixFeet Apart. 10 The other fifteen plots were similar in result to the above. When the soil, even tho aerated, was very acid there was not the yield in the field at large that there was when the acidity had been corrected by the addition of limestone. Analyses of Soil and Water Some observers have found that in irrigated regions there is a rise of black alkali to such a degree as to injure the stalk and cause it to turn black. In order to determine whether this condition affected the rice, the water that was pumped on the soil was analyzed just as it came from the wells and also after it had remained on the soil for periods of two and four weeks re- spectively. Since fresh water is added about the third or fourth week, it is about this time that the maximum concentration of salts in the water, due to evaporation, is reached. Analysis of water when first pumped from wells Total solids Loss on gentle ignition. . . Silica Iron and aluminum oxids Calcium Magnesium Sodium chlorid (NaCI) Potassium chlorid (KC1) Total chlorin Sulfur Ammonia nitrogen Organic nitrogen Nitrite nitrogen Nitrate nitrogen 361.00 per million 144.00 “ 14.20 “ 18.00 “ 50.05 “ 11.95 “ 42.00 “ “ 22.60 “ “ 1.20 “ 0.03 “ *• 0.196 “ “ None Trace Analysis of water after it has been on the soil four weeks Total solids 446.00 per million Loss on gentle ignition 144.00 “ “ Silica ; 38.40 “ Iron and aluminum oxids .. 43’00 “ Calcium 65.05 “ “ Magnesium 15.21 “ “ Sodium chlorid (NaCI) \ % 49.00 “ “ Potassium chlorid (KOI) i" ’ ' Total chlorin 23.10 “ “ Sulfur 1.20 “ “ Ammonia nitrogen 0.03 “ “ Organic nitrogen 0.195 “ Nitrite nitrogen None Nitrate nitrogen Trace 11 Fig. 7— A. Blighted. B. Unblighted. B. Made Nearly 80 Bu. per Acre 1911, altho Badly Blighted (80 per cent) 1910. Fig. 8— A. Blighted. B. Unblighted. 12 The analysis of the second week is practically the same as that of the fourth week, so need not be given here. The soil was taken at a depth of 7 inches. The elements in an acre of soil before and after being flooded, in terms of pounds, were found to be as follows, the soil on an acre taken to a depth of 6| inches weighing 2,000,000 pounds: Analysis of soil before being flooded Insoluble Organic matter, water, etc. Silicon Iron Aluminum Phosphorus Manganese Calcium Magnesium Sodium Potassium Sulfur 1,809,000 pounds 79,600 “ 1,480 “ 15,500 “ 36,680 “ 610 “ 700 “ 680 520 2,400 2,000 “ 320 “ ( Analysis of soil after being Hooded for four weeks Insoluble 1,772,200 Organic matter, water, etc 86,600 Silicon 2,240 Iron 24,600 Aluminum 44,620 Phosphorus 436 Manganese 1,200 Calcium. 800 Magnesium 960 pounds << << <( n u it 1 1 Sodium 2,800 “ Potassium 2,800 “ Sulfur 380 “ The analysis for the two soils is a fair average of many analy- ses. The differences are not great and may be due more or less to sampling, or error of analysis. Effect of Moving Water In the plots for experiment with moving water, the water was changed as indicated in the following table. These plots were also twenty- five feet square and some were surrounded by gully tin as in the work on depth of water. The water was let in at one corner of the plot, thus forcing out the old water at the opposite corner. In this series of experiments the water was kept on the soil for fourteen weeks. The temperature of the water when it first comes from the wells is about 66 degree F. (The average depth of the rice wells is nearly 150 feet. ) After the water flows in the canals two or three hours the temperature rises to 70 degrees F. or more. * The water turned on the plots was al- ways 74 degrees or over. The amount of blight was estimated as mentioned on page 5. 13 Table 4.— Moving Water Decreases the Amount of Blight Depth of water, inches Num- ber of plots Water was changed Blight- ed, per- cent Un- blighted, percent Condi- tion of soil, See Table 1 Injur- ed by other causes Group 1 1 20 Each week for first ten weeks 15 85 Fair 0 2 20 Every 2 weeks 37 60 Good 3 4 20 Every 3 weeks 40 54 Good 6 6 20 Every 4 weeks 40 60 Good 0 Group 2 1 10 Once every 5 weeks 35 60 Good 5 2 10 5 times in 10 weeks 25 85 Good 0 4 10 3 times in 10 weeks 36 50 Good 14 6 10 10 times in 10 weeks 35 o2 Good 13 Group 3 1 10 Not changed 75 25 Good 0 2 5 8 times in first 10 weeks 26 70 Good 4 4 10 Not changed 81 10 Good 9 Sub-aeration Three plots twenty-five feet square were surrounded by twenty-four-inch gully tin set fifteen inches deep before the rice was sown. Six pipes one-half inch in diameter and fifteen feet long running parallel and three feet apart were laid three to four inches deep in the soil. These had several one-eighth inch holes every inch. To keep out the fine soil they were covered with cheese cloth. The pipes were connected at each end with solid pipe which had another piece of pipe connected to it and which stood up out of the water about twenty inches. This had an air-tight cap which could be removed whenever it was necessary to force air into the pipes below. These pipes were tested before the water was turned on to see if air could be forced thru them. This was done by means of a large force pump such as is used for inflating auto- mobile tires. As the pipes in Group 2 became clogged with soil and had to be removed, the water was off this group for nearly two days. Table 5.— Result of Sub-aeration Depth of water, inches Weeks water was on Aeration Results Plot 1 3 10 Air was pumped in for three hours once every two weeks About 30 percent blighted Check 1 3 6 Aerated four weeks Scarcely any blight Check 2 3 10 Not aerated Badly blighted, 45 to 50 percent Plot 2 3 10 Air pumped in for three hours once each week for ten weeks About 40 percent blighted Check 1 3 6 Aerated four weeks Scarcely any blight Check 2 3 10 Not aerated Badly blighted, 55 to 60 percent Plot 3 3 10 Air pumped for one hour four times a week for ten weeks About 40 percent blighted Check 1 3 6 Aerated for three weeks the first time and one week the second time Excellent yield Check 2 3 10 Not aerated Nearly all blighted Relation of Pore Space in Soil to Blight A cubic foot of soil on Grand Prairie, Arkansas, has about 52.8 percent pore space and 4 percent organic matter, thus indi- cating a fairly good physical condition. When the water is turned on to a depth of about three inches, there is a sudden fall (see Chart 1) during the first two or three days in the amount of soil air and a gradual decrease until the sixth or seventh week, when the soil is found to be practically devoid of air. It is near this time that the rice roots are found to become abnormal. If the water is left on for a longer period, the percentage of blight may increase quite rapidly. This is shown by the lower part of the chart, which gives the summary of many experiments. The sudden rise of the line, near the sixth or seventh week, indi- cates a corresponding increase of blight. It is nearly impossible to tile the land in this region because of the impervious substratum at a depth of about eight or ten in- 15 ches. Surface drainage is, therefore, the only practical way and can be accomplished very easily by a few open side ditches. Effects of the Addition of Mineral Salts The plots in the following experiments were twenty- five feet by twenty- five feet and controlled as in previous experiments. The plots that had mineral salts put on them in 1910 were noticed and checked, so far as the same plots had rice on in 1911, to see the effect the second season. No salts were added to these in 1911. The increase with the use of fertilizers each season will be given in a later publication. On some of the plots the mineral salts were disced into the soil before seeding, while on others they were raked in by means of a garden rake. The water, in each case, was kept at an* average depth of three inches. In no case was it found that mineral salts had any influence on blight. Other mineral salts were tried singly and in combination. %of PORE SPACE WEEKS 1 2. 3 4 < 7 8 9 10 11 1 2. 1 3 1 4 5 2,80 4 7.5 2 \ 42.24 \ 36.96 k 3 1.68 V \ 26.40 2 1.12 13.84 1 0.36 5.28 0.00 To of BLIGHT lOO 90 ao 70 60 50 j ±Q T 2 Q 2 D ID 0 3Art 1. Uppfr Half Shows Relation between Length of Flooding and Air Content of the Soil. Lower Half Shows Relation between Length of Flooding and percent of Blight. 16 Table 6.— Addition of Mineral Salts Mineral salt, ratio per acre. Aeration Weeks water was on Result Group 1 Plot 1 NaCl 200 lb. 0 12 Blighted Plot 2 NaCl 200 lb. 3 9 No blight Check None 0 12 Blighted Group 2 Plot 1 MgSCh 200 lb. 0 12 Some blight Plot 2 MgSCh 200 lb. 3 9 No blight Check None 3 9 Some blight Group 3 Plot 1 Acid phosphate 2001b. [2001b. 0 12 Over half blighted Plot 2 Acid phosphate 3 9 Good yield Check None 3 9 Scarcely any blight Group 4 Plot 1 K 2 SO 4 100 lb. 0 12 Quite a little blight Plot 2 K2SO4 100 lb. 3 9 Excellent yield* Check None 0 12 Three-fourths blighted Group 5 Plot 1 NaNOs 100 lb. 0 12 Good stalk, f blighted Plot 2 NaNOs 100 lb. 3 9 Fine yield Check None 0 12 Over one-half blighted * See Fig. 5. Practical Results of The Experiments That the results of these experiments could be made practical was quite evident to the writer in 1910, when several lands (a land being the ground between two levees) were placed under experi- ment and gave very definite results. In 1911 the results were even more striking (Figs. 7 and 8), when, under practically the same condition of soil, seed, and planting, the lands under experi- ment produced a yield of from 65 to 70 bushels per acre, while land six feet away had 70 to 80 percent of blight. The following table gives the data concerning these “lands.” There were from three to eight acres in each “land.” Table 7.— Efect of Proper Aeration Land number Water three inches deep was on, weeks Aerated, weeks Bushels per acre Results 1 12 0 17.2 75 percent blighted 2 11 1 55.1 15-20 percent blighted 3 10 2 62.3 Less than 10 percent blighted 4 9 3 74.2 No blight, excellent yield Three groups like the above were run with the same definite results. 17 Fig. 9— A. Blighted. B. Unblighted. Notice the Arrows Showing the Direction of Blight to a Line. Nothing but Gully Tin Sepa- rates the Two Plots. B. was Areated for Three Weeks. In A. the Water was on for Twelve Weeks Continuously and Averaged Three to Four Inches Deep. Fig. 10— The Water Turned on When the Rice is About Eight Inches Tall. 18 Rice Structure In the previous report mentioned, it was stated that there was no difference in the structure of the blighted and unblighted rice stalk. More recent investigations confirm this. In the case of the roots, however, there are some distinctions to be noted. After the sixth week, if the water has been on continuously and not moving, there is a strong indication of suberisation; that is, a thin layer of cork is formed in the outer region of the root, that gives a yellowish color to the root in comparison to the normal root. In the strongly suberised roots, the interior structure is broken down completely after the eighth week; while if aerated about the fifth week, the roots seem to take a new hold and grow longer; in some cases the stalk will put out new roots. The number of root hairs is also noticeably decreased after the fourth week. About the time the head was being formed in the “boot”, where the soil was aerated for three weeks a large number of new roots were put out by the plant and the older roots seemed to be healthier than if the soil had not been aerated. Conclusions 1. Rice Blight (straight head) as found in Arkansas rice fields is not caused by deep flooding. 2. Moving water diminishes the amount of blight. 3. The soil should be in good physical condition. This re- quires that it should not be worked when too wet. Aeration is aided by good physical condition. 4. Mineral salts have no effect on blight. 5. The addition of ground limestone has no effect on blight. It, however, produces better physical, chemical, and biological conditions that may be favorable to the growth of rice. About a ton of ground limestone per acre should be added to the soil at least once every three years. 6. Blight seems to be a purely physiological condition, the root being the part affected, thereby impairing nutrition and re- ducing the vitality of the plant, so that the grain does not develop. 7. Analyses of gases taken from the soil at any time after the second week of flooding, show a high percent of carbon dioxid and a low percent of oxygen. 19 8. All results show that good physical condition of the soil, with aeration at the proper time, will prevent blight. (Figs. 6, 7, and 8.) 9. No relation exists between blight from year to year. It is not a fungous or bacterial disease. 10. From the results of the experiments the following sug- gestions are made for growing rice: (a) Prepare the soil and seed the rice when the soil is in good condition to work. (b) Flood the rice for the first time when it is about eight inches high, barely covering the soil with water for from 6 to 7 weeks. If the land is foul, the first flood- ing should be deep enough to kill the weeds. (c) Drain and aerate for two or three weeks at the time the head is being formed in the “boot”. (d) Flood again about three inches deep for from 4 to 5 weeks. (e) Drain off gradually until time to dry for harvest. UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Agricultural Experiment Station URBANA, MARCH, 1912 CIRCULAR NO. 157 SOIL FERTILITY* Illinois Conditions, Needs, and Future Prospects By Cyril G. Hopkins In the first chapter of the book of books it is written: ’’And God said unto them, be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and Subdue it.” Of these four commandments we have obeyed the first two, but we have disobeyed in America, since 1607, the last two of these commandments. When our own fathers were born (and many of them are still living), there were 17 million people in the United States, — in 1840; but the census of 1910 reveals a population of 92 millions in contiguous continental United States. Yes, we have multiplied, — multiplied by 500 percent during the full time of one life. But have we replenished the earth and subdued' it? Have we increased our acre-yield by 500 percent? No, we have not. For three centuries we have taken from the earth and have not replenished it. Neither have we subdued the earth, but we have been subdued by it. As tillers of the soil, men made in the image of God, we have been defeated by the inanimate earth, driven out from our eastern states and forced to ‘Address before the Illinois State Farmers 5 Institute at Centralia, February 20, 1912. surrender back to nature millions of acres of once fertile farm lands, now agriculturally abandoned, to such an extent that the congressmen of the United States can not enter the capital of this great nation from any direction without passing abandoned farms. Within the last twelve months a five -hundred- acre farm of gently undulating upland loam soil (which I selected because of its special advantages) has been purchased for $10 an acre, within 15 miles of the District of Columbia, within an hour’s ride of Bal- timore, and within two miles of a railroad station on two railroads. A good tract of this farm which had been “rested” for several years made an average yield of 12^2 bushels of corn per acre in 1911. This is beautiful farm land, which, lying at the door of our greatest markets, ought to be worth, not $10 but $300 an acre, when we consider that our rich, almost virgin soil nearly a thous- and miles farther west is now selling for $200 to $250 an acre. And yet that land, and, likewise, the depleted lands of southern Illinois can be made worth $300 an acre. How? By the profit- able investment of money in a rational system of soil improve- ment, — in an economic system of positive and permanent soil enrichment, based upon established science, rather than upon the advice of some fertilizer agent who has some high-priced soil stimulant to sell, which enriches not the soil but the seller. Across the face of the agricultural building of the University of Illinois are these words: “The wealth of Illinois is in her soil, and her strength lies in its intelligent development.” Those words were spoken by Andrew S. Draper, then President of the University of Illinois, now Commissioner of Education for the State of New York. Truer words than these were never spoken, for the very life of the state and nation rests upon the soil. While manhood and womanhood of high moral character and strong intellectual power constitute the attainment desired, it is also true that the possibility of this attainment depends in part upon material prosperity. Poverty does not build, equip, and man consolidated high schools in country districts. The general intelligence and wide-spread education of the American people 3 are the result of our past prosperity, and they should be both the result and the cause of the future prosperity of our people. The foundation for Illinois prosperity is her soil, and the future prosperity, educational advantages, and general intelli- gence of her people will depend in large measure upon the improvement and preservation of the soil. It is the farmer who labors together with God in the creation of food and clothing materials. Other people may live by transporting, milling and trading, but the renewal, the yearly supply, must always come from the soil. “Public prosperity is like a tree; agriculture is its roots; industry and commerce are its branches and leaves. If the root suffers, the leaves fall, the branches break, and the tree dies.” (This is the philosophy of the Mongolian people who have maintained some of their soils for more than 4,000 years.) Daniel Webster gave us the following words of wisdom: “Unstable is the future of a country which has lost its taste for agriculture. If there is one lesson of history that is unmistakable, it- is that national strength lies very near the soil.” Even James J. Hill, himself a railroad man, financially inter- ested almost solely in the commerce of the country, recently made the following statement: “The farm is the basis of all industry, but for many years this country has made the mistake of unduly assisting manufacture, commerce, and other activities that center in cities, at the expense of the farm.” All must admit that the states and the nation turned their lands over rapidly and generously to private ownership, and hitherto the federal and state governments have also left largely to private interests the matter of soil preservation; but all must likewise admit that, with the exception of the market gardens largely maintained with waste fertility from the cities, private interests have not preserved the soil of America. No longer can it be said that “Uncle Sam is rich enough to give us all a farm”. In his address before the recent National Conservation Congress, the President of the United States re- ported that, while our population increased by 21 percent during the last decade, the area of farm land increased less than 5 per- cent; and that a further increase of 9 percent will include all the remaining public land that is capable of cultivation. 4 When we became unable properly to feed our increasing population by increasing our acreage of farm land, we began de- creasing our exportation of foodstuffs, and the average of the last five years, compared with an average of the five years ending with 1900, shows that during the ten-year period our exportations decreased from 198 million to 116 million bushels of wheat, and from 193 million to only 57 million bushels of corn. That the limit of our relief is near in this direction must be plain to all. Now we must increase our acre-yields, or the cry from an ever increasing population against the high cost of plain living will just as surely bring distress and disgrace upon this great nation as it has upon 400 million people in India and Russia, where famine is now looked upon as a permanent feature in the life of our own Aryan race. Intelligent optimism is admirable; but blind bigotry parad- ed as optimism is condemnable. There seems, however, to be al- ways a few people who can live, in a sense, on “hotair”; but you .will agree that something more substantial will be required to feed and clothe in reasonable comfort the progeny of 92 million people, and added millions of immigrants; and this grave question needs grave consideration by men and women of influence. If there is any material thing which should be guarded and pro- tected by the sovereign power of the state, it is the soil, — the breast of Mother Earth from which her children must always draw their nourishment, or perish. Who is responsible for the fact that the ten-year average yield of wheat is 29 bushels per acre for the German Empire and only 16 bushels in Illinois? Is it the farmer who works the land for all that’s in it, from early till late, year in and year out? Is he solely responsible for soil depletion? No, the responsbility rests largely with the people of influence, whether they live in town or country. The teacher, the preacher, the banker, and the statesman are more responsible than is the average farmer for safe-guarding the foundations upon which rests the future prosperity of the state and nation. The combined area of Germany and Illinois is equal only to that of Texas, but in Germany agriculture is taught is 23 univer- sities and in 415 other colleges and schools. Were the present farmers and landowners of Illinois taught the principles of soil 5 improvement in the schools which they attended, or were they left largely to the teaching and influence of the commercial fertilizer trusts, their agents, promoters, advertisements, and widely circulated pamphlets and newspaper articles whose publica- tion is paid for even in some of the cheap agricultural journals? Average crop yields for the past 46 years are now reported by the United States Department of Agriculture. The details for individual states are not available to make two 23-year aver- ages, but it is possible to make one average of 24 years, followed by another average of 22 years. These averages for the entire United States show that the yield of wheat has increased by 1 V 2 bushels per acre and the yield of oats by -J- bushel, while the average yield of corn has decreased by V 2 bushel and that of potatoes by f bushel per acre. The fact that half of all the wheat crop of the United States is produced in the five states of Minnesota, Kansas, Nebraska, and the Dakotas, emphasizes the important place that virgin soil has occupied in maintaining our wheat yield. Less than 20-year averages are not at all trustworthy for the consideration of small changes in yield per acre. Thus, if we interchange .the highest average yield of corn (30.8 bushels in 1872; and the lowest aver- age yield (16.7 bushels in 1901), then the above comparison would show an average increase of 0.7 of a bushel instead of a decrease of V 2 bushel per acre in the corn crop of the United States. I present these figures because they furnish the best statis- tics the United States affords concerning the question as to whether our crop production is keeping pace with our needs. You will recognize these as the most important vegetable and grain crops grown in this state. These figures show an average increase in acre yield of less than 1 percent in 23 years, while the United States census shows an increase of 47 percent in our population during 20 years; and yet the cities, the states, and the national government are still seeking the cause of the increased cost of living in this country. If we examine the corresponding federal crop statistics for Illinois, we find increased yields of 5 bushels per acre for corn and 1 . 4 bushels for wheat, while the yield of oats has decreased by 1 . 4 bushels and that of potatoes by 2.4 bushels. The increase in yield of corn is to be attributed largely to two 6 factors: First, to the change from deep to shallow cultivation; and, second, to the substitution of recognized standard varieties of corn for most of the scrub varieties formerly grown. Better drainage and better crop rotations have also helped to hide the fact that, as a general average, the corn-belt soils of Illinois are being rapidly depleted of their fertility, a fact which is revealed to some extent in the average decreases of 1.4 bushels of oats, 2.4 bushels of potatoes, and .08 ton of hay per acre in Illinois during the 23 years. On the other hand, the increase in yield of wheat in this state is largely due to the system of soil improvement already inaugu- rated in the great wheat belt of southern Illinois. I think it is safe to say that some effort to enrich the soil is now made on at least one-third of the land annually seeded to wheat in southern Illinois. For ten years the Experiment Station has demonstrated and recommended definite soil treatment for improving the wheat crop of southern Illinois. Under the conditions existing on most southern Illinois farms we have advised the use of steamed bone meal at the rate of about 200 pounds per acre, as initial treat- ment; and the use of this material reached such proportions in southern Illinois that several years ago one of the principal pro- ducers withdrew the sale of steamed bone from all other states in order to supply the demand in Illinois. As an average of ten crops of wheat grown in a 3-year rota- tion of wheat, corn, and cowpeas, on the Cutler Experiment Field, in Perry county, the increase from steamed bone meal has been 3% bushels per acre in live-stock farming and 5 bushels in grain farming. As an average of 9 years, steamed bone meal applied to the Odin Experiment Field in this county has increased the yield of wheat by 8 bushels per acre in duplicate tests in grain farming in a 4-year rotation of corn, cowpeas, wheat, and clover. On the DuBois Experiment Field in Washington county, two wheat crops have been grown during the ten years in a 4-year ro- tation of corn, oats, wheat, and clover; and, as an average of duplicate tests, 13 bushels increase per acre was the effect pro- duced by steamed bone. As a general average of these forty-two tests extending over ten years in three different counties on the common prairie land in this section of Illinois, the yield of wheat has been increased by 6.6 bushels per acre; and where both bone meal and lime or lime- stone have been applied the average increase on the same experi- ment fields has been 11.7 bushels of wheat per acre. These definite results plainly show the possibility of increas- ing the yield of wheat in this section by the use of phosphorus and limestone, the two materials which have been used by a very considerable number of farmers in southern Illinois during recent years. The crop statistics show, also, that the increase in yield of wheat in Illinois has practically all taken place since the be- ginning of soil investigations and the establishment of soil ex-‘ periment fields in southern Illinois. Thus the federal statistics furnish the following averages for the yield of wheat in Illinois: For 24 years 1866 to 1889) 12.8 bushels For 11 years <1890 to 1900 ) 13.0 bushels For 11 years (1901 to 1911) 15.7 bushels. Furthermore, the crop statistics collected independently by the Illinois State Board of Agriculture furnish the following averages: For 24 years 1866 to 1889 13.2 bushels . For 11 years 1890 to 1 900 .13.3 bushels For 11 years (1901 to 1911) 16.4 bushels On the other hand, the principal increase in the yield of corn in this state occurred before 1900, as is shown by both federal and state statistics, and these facts support the opinion that the corn belt has increased the yield of corn by improved methods of cultivation, influenced directly by the manufacturers of the shallow cultivators, which were quite generally adapted some twenty years ago, following the early and conclusive experiments of Morrow and Hunt along that line; and later by the use of better seed corn. That the increase in the corn belt has been made at the expense of the soil, is shown by the decreased yields of both oats and hay. These data support another opinion which is based upon even more definite facts; namely, that if southern Illinois farmers continue their work of soil improvement to the extent of adopting truly permanent systems, and if the corn-belt farmers continue 8 their past and present methods of soil depletion, then the time will come when the people from the north will again go down in- to “Egypt” to buy corn. Since the farmers of southern Illinois began the extensive use of steamed bone meal, two very important things have hap- pened: First, the price of steamed bone has gone up, and, second, the quality of the steamed bone sold in this state has gone down, — its average phosphorus content being now distinctly less than ten years ago. In one sense, however, these changed conditions with respect to bone meal are likely to result in greater ultimate benefit to southern Illinois farmers, because they are added inducements for them to adopt more economical and truly permanent systems of soil improvement, by making large use of ground limestone and clover jmd other legume crops and crop residues, plowed under directly in grain farming, or in farm manure in stock farm- ing; and by gradually discontinuing the use of high-priced bone meal and substituting therefor at less expense two or three times the quantity of fine- ground natural rock phosphate, which becomes available when plowed under with plenty of vegetable matter, such as clover, cowpeas, or farm manure. Let us remember that three things are necessary for the most profitable improvement and permanent preservation of our most common upland prairie and timber soils, not only in south- ern Illinois, but also in the central and northern parts of the state. These are limestone, organic matter, and phosphorus. Limestone is needed both to correct the acidity of the soil and to supply the plant-food element called calcium; and if dolo- mitic limestone is used, both calcium and magnesium will be sup- plied. The organic matter, or vegetable matter, is needed to supply nitrogen which can be secured from the inexhaustible supply in the air by the legume crops, such as clover and cowpeas, and as this vegetable matter decays in the soil it liberates potassium from the practically inexhaustible supply of that element contain- ed in all our common soils, and it also liberates phosphorus from the low-priced natural rock phosphate. Finally, the phosphorus must be applied because the supply 9 in the soil is small, and it is constantly being removed by the crops grown. For southern Illinois this is the order in which they should be used in the most economical methods: First, apply 2 to 5 tons per acre of ground limestone. Second, grow clover or cowpeas. Third, apply 1,000 to 2,000 pounds per acre of very finely ground natural rock phosphate, to be plowed under with the clover or cowpeas, either directly or in the form of farm manure. In central and northern Illinois the same materials are need- ed, but there the limestone may take third place, while it is of first importance in this part of the state. The average cost of ground limestone delivered in bulk in carload lots at the farmer’s railroad station in southern Illinois is about $1.25 per ton; and 2 tons per acre every four years, which is sufficient to keep the soil sweet, would cost $2 . 50. The de- livered price varies from 85 cents to about $1.15 per ton with- in 100 miles of the Southern Illinois Penitentiary, and about the same from other plants. This amounts to less than $1.00 per acre a year for limestone applied. During the last eight years, we have made 318 tests to deter- mine the effect of lime or ground limestone on crop yields in southern Illinois. These tests were made at Odin, Edgewood, Mascoutah, DuBois, Cutler, Ewing, Raleigh, and Vienna, — in the counties of Marion, Effingham, St. Clair, Washington, Perry, Franklin, Saline, and Johnson. They include 79 tests on legumes (clover, cowpeas, and soybeans), 122 tests on corn, 55 tests on oats, and 62 tests on wheat, these crops being grown in the rota- tions practiced. As an average of all tests the yield per acre has been increas- ed by V 2 ton of hay (exactly .54 ton), by 5.0 bushels of corn, by 6.6 bushels of oats, and by 4.0 bushels of wheat. The data secured and here reported are amply sufficient to justify the con- clusion that, in practical economic systems of farming on the common prairie and timber soils of southern Illinois, limestone, at less than $1.00 per acre per year, will produce % ton more clover or cowpea hay, 5 bushels more corn, 6 bushels more oats, and 4 bushels more wheat per acre. Where one is able to put on 4 or 5 tons per acre for the first 10 application it will be wise to do so, but subsequent applications need not be more than 2 tons per acre every four years. As an average of the first two years’ work on two different experiment fields (Ewing and Raleigh) where the initial applica- tion was about 5 tons per acre, the average increases were % ton of hay, 9Vi bushels of corn, 8.9 bushels of oats, and 3% bushels of wheat; and, as the increased farm manure or increased crop residues from these larger crops are returned to the land, the effect becomes more marked in subsequent years. On the Vienna experiment field in Johnson county about 9 tons per acre of ground limestone were applied ten years ago. At a cost of $1.25 a ton this would amount to $11.25, and the returns for this investment have thus far amounted to 90.3 bush- els of corn, or to 42.2 bushels of wheat, or to 3% tons of clover. Any one of these will pay for the limestone three times over; and, in addition, two- thirds of the legume crops grown have been plowed under as green manure, and at the end of nine years with no further application, the land treated with limestone is produc- ing 5 bushels more wheat, 9.3 bushels more corn, and 1.4 tons more clover hay per acre than the land not so treated. Indeed, as an average of the last two years, this old worn hill land has produced larger crops where limestone had been applied than the average yield for the state of Illinois, for each of the crops, corn, wheat, and hay. It should never be forgotton, however, that phosphorus must also be included and applied with the vegetable matter if a per- manent system of soil improvement and preservation is to be adopted. While liberal use of limestone and the return of the increased vegetable matter will make marked and profitable improvement in southern Illinois soils, yet the improvement will be temporary unless phosphorus is also applied, because this element is present in the soil in small amount and it is removed in crops and sold from the farm not only in grain and hay, but also in bone, in meat, and in milk. The only exception to be made to this general plan for the upland soils of southern Illinois is the rolling or steeply sloping hill lands where marked soil erosion occurs. On such lands only limestone and vegetable matter are necessary, because the supply of phosphorus is naturally renewed from the subsoil, which grad- 11 ually becomes surface soil owing to the surface washing. On the common land of southern Illinois, where the soil is poor in decaying vegetable matter, the effect of phosphorus is not marked on corn, oats, or cowpeas, but it markedly benefits the wheat and also helps the clover; and the cumulative effect of the increased supply of clover or manure is then seen in ail crops. In order to reduce to the simplest terms the results secured from soil improvement, it is necessary to assign a money value to each kind of produce; and it should be kept in mind that while the increase in yield is produced in the field with no extra labor till harvest, it is not taken from the field and delivered at the market free of expense; consequently, it is important that con- servative prices shall be used in making computations to show the value of the increase from soil treatment The standard prices used by the Illinois Experiment Station for such computations are as follows: Corn 35 cents a bushel Oats 30 cents a bushel Wheat 70 cents a bushel Hay $6 . 00 a ton Clover seed $6.00 a bushel Cowpea or soybean seed $1.00 a bushel In computations of this character we do not include any value for straw or corn stalks. At these conservative prices for the farm produce, and as an average of . the ten years from 1902 to 1911, the use of lime, phos- phorus, and organic matter at Cutler has increased the value of the produce from four acres of land in a rotation of corn, wheat, and legumes from $23 . 81 to $47 . 64 in grain farming, and to $49 . 05 in live-stock farming, the organic manures being dependent upon the crops grown on the land, in both systems. A similar comparison for grain farming in a rotation of corn, cowpeas, wheat, and clover (or soybeans) on the Odin Experi- ment Field shows the crop values to have been increased from $29.62 to $44.51 by lime, phosphorus, and organic matter pro- duced on the land. At both Cutler and Odin the phosphorus is supplied in the form of steamed bone meal, but on the Fairfield Experiment Field, 12 in Wayne county, raw rock phosphate and ground limestone are used. As an average of the last four years, the limestone and phos- phate at Fairfield have increased the crop values on four acres from $27.30 to $40.30 in grain farming, and from $35.02 to $55.60 in live-stock farming. We have no land on the Fairfield field to which neither crop residues nor farm manure is applied, and this experiment field has been in progress for only seven years. Since we lack three years for the ten-year record at Fairfield, we also omit the first three years’ records, and thus compare the results of a four- year period, with the rotation well underway, with the ten- year aver- ages from Cutler and Odin. We thus find that lime and bone meal have increased the value of crops from four acres as follows: Odin, grain farming $11.89 Cutler, grain farming 17.43 Cutler, live stock farming 12.20 Cost of lime ($2.50) and bone meal ($10) 12.50 We likewise find that limestone and rock phosphate have produced the following results: Fairfield, grain farming $13.00 Fairfield, live-stock farming 20.58 Cost of limestone ($2.50) and phosphate ($7 . 50) 10.00 It should be stated that the application of manure at Fair- field was begun seven years ago, the first applications having been made at the rate of 8 tons per acre, whereas the plowing under of the crop residues in the grain system has been prac- ticed only during the last two or three years. This probably ac- counts for the better utilization of the phosphate in the live-stock system at Fairfield, although where the addition of organic mat- ter is fairly comparable in the two systems the added phosphorus usually gives the greater gain in grain farming, as at Cutler, be- cause there is less phosphorus returned in the crop residues than in the farm manure. As a general average these prices show $13.84 returned at a cost of $12.50 where bone meal was the source of phosphorus; while the average return was $16.79 at a cost of $10.00 where rock phosphate was used. In addition we have the fact that we are enriching the soil in phosphorus two 13 and one-half times as much where raw rock phosphate is used as where bone meal is applied; and of course the annual expense for rock phosphate will be greatly reduced after the soil becomes sufficiently rich in phosphorus to produce the most profitable crop yields. As an average of the four years at Fairfield, the limestone and phosphate costing $2.50 per acre per annum have increased the yield per acre by 4.8 bushels of corn, by 13.7 bushels of wheat (three years; oats increased by 6.3 bushels one year), by 3.4 bushels of cowpeas (or soybeans), and by .93 ton of hay. During the last eight years on typical corn-belt prairie soil on the South Farm of the University of Illinois, at Urbana, we have practiced on four different fields a 4-year rotation including wheat, corn, oats, and clover. On each field we have four differ- ent plots which receive 1 ton per acre of raw rock phosphate in comparison with check plots which are otherwise cropped and cultivated the same. As an average of the eight years the phosphate has increased the crop yields per acre by 8.1 bushels of wheat, by 4.7 bushels of corn, by 4.0 bushels of oats, and by .42 ton of clover hay (or bushel of clover seed). The cost of the phosphate applied is not more than $7 . 50 per acre for each four years, and, at present prices for the farm pro- duce, it has paid for itself several times, and the plowed soil of the treated land is now one-fourth richer in phosphorus than the land not treated with phosphate. But if we figure the value of the increase at 35 cents a bushel for corn, 30 cents for oats, and 70 cents for wheat, and at $6.00 a ton for clover hay (or $6.00 a bushel for clover seed), the phos- phate costing $7 . 50 paid back $9.04 during the first four years, and $13.13 during the second four-year period. This shows very substantial profit at most conservative prices, but of even greater importance is the fact that the system is one of positive soil enrichment and permanent preservation. The phosphorus content of the plowed soil has increased from 1100 to 1500 pounds per acre during the eight years in spite of the larger crops removed, whereas the untreated soil has grown poorer by about 65 pounds of phosphorus per acre. 14 Attention is called to the fact that in the oldest continuous fertilizer experiments of the United States, which are in progress at the Pennsylvania State College, there are four different fields and the same four crops are grown but in the order of corn, oats, wheab, and clover. In these experiments $5.04 worth of acid phosphate per acre is applied every four years, but this paid back only $11.84 during the first eight years, at prices mentioned above. Thus the actual return per dollar invested was less than in these Illinois experiments with raw rock phosphate; and while the raw phosphate furnishes 250 pounds of phosphorus for $'7.50, the acid phosphate, which would cost $5.04 in Illinois, would supply only 42 pounds of phosphorus, and this is less than we actually remove in the crops from our well- treated land. In addition, I would only emphasize the fact that accumulat- ing results from Illinois soil investigations support the conclusion that for the most economic and profitable systems of permanent agriculture in general farming, we should make large use of natural materials including for normal soils ground limestone, raw rock phosphate, and organic matter to be supplied by plow- ing under legume crops and other crop residues, either directly or in farm manure. In closing, I beg the privilege of expressing to the Illinois State Farmers’ Institute my own appreciation of the honor of hav- ing been invited for ten consecutive years to occupy a place on your program. I also appreciate, and I want you to understand and appreciate, that I come only as the spokesman for those who, as investigators and advisers, have been working together in unity for a decade to discover and demonstrate, and to bring about the adoption of, systems of permanent profitable agriculture in this state. The original conception of the need and possibilities of the work was not mine, but only one of many fundamental and far- sighted conceptions of Eugene Davenport. In the formation and gradual completion of definite plans of procedure, the Soils Advisory Committee from this Institute has had large part; and the names of Allen and Mann, of Abbott, Mason, and Burroughs are honored by all who know of the help- ful, serious thought, the vital energy, the weeks of time, and the personal sacrifice that these patriotic citizens of the common- 15 wealth have annually devoted to this work. In some respects it has been pioneer work, and, as most of you know, we have at times been compelled, by the force of truth and fact and interest in permanent agriculture, to break away from some of the teach- ing of other investigators, and from some of the practice in other states and countries; and I cannot fully express to you the grati- tude and admiration we hold for those progressive and influential farmers of Illinois who, with judgment and with effect, have stepped out when necessary into public view, in the press or on the platform, have placed their shoulder under the load, and sup- ported the truth by their own knowledge of methods applied in practice. And the success thus far attained in carrying forward the detailed investigations in this great movemen t, for the restoration , improvement, and permanent preservation of Illinois soils, is very largely due to the accuracy, integrity, and almost tireless energy of my own associates. Without such men as Readhimer, Pettit. Eckhardt, Gustaf- son, Logan, Fisher, Van Alstine, Whitchurch, Hoskins, and others, no such progress would have been possible in this service for the people of Illinois. Note: For greater details concerning Illinois soils and methods of soil improvement see the following publications; Circular 110, “Ground Limestone for Acid Soils” Circular 127, “Shall we use Natural Phosphate or Manufactured Acid Phosphate for the Permanent Improvement of Illinois Soils?” Circular 129, “The Use of Commercial Fertilizers” Circular 141, “Crop Rotation for Illinois Soils” Bulletin 123, “The Fertility in Illinois Soils” Soil Reports Nos. 1 and 2, which report the detail soil survey for Clay county and Moultrie county, respectively, which are largely representative (1 of the great wheat belt of Southern Illinois, and (2) of the still greater whe^t belt of the central and northern parts of the State. ^ or 16 State Advisory Committee ox Soil Investigations Ralph Allen, Delvan 1 F. I. Mann, Gilman A. N. Abbott, Morrison J. P. Mason, Elgin E. W. Burroughs, Edwardsville Agricultural Experiment Station Staff on Soil Investigations Eugene Davenport, Direclor Cyril G. Hopkins, Chief in Agronomy and Chemistry Soil ^Survey — J. G. Mosier, Chief A. F. Gustafson, Associate S. V. Holt, Assistant H. W. Stewart, Assistant H. C. Wheeler, Assistant F. A. Fisher, Assistant P. E. Karraker, Assistant F. M. W. Wascher, Assistant Soil Analysis — J. H. Pettit, Chief E. Van Alstine, Associate J. P. Aumer, Assistant Gertrude Niederman, Assistant W. H. Sachs, Assistant W. R. Leighty, Assistant F. W. Muncie, Assistant J. T. Flohil, Assistant, Soil Experiment Fields — J. E. Readhimer, Superintendent Wm. G. Eckhardl, Associate 0. S. Fisher. Assistant J. E. Whitchurch, Asssistant E. E. Hoskins, Assistant F. W. Garrett, Assistant F. G. Bauer, Assistant Soils Extension — C. C. Logan. Associate UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Agricultural Experiment Station URBANA, MARCH, 1912 CIRCULAR NO. 158 TUBERCULOSIS A PL/AIN STATEMENT OF FACTS REGARDING THE DISEASE, PREPARED ESPECIAEEY FOR FARMERS AND OTHERS INTERESTED IN EIVE STOCK BY THE International Commission of the American Veterinary Medical Association on the Control of Bovine Tuberculosis This presentation of facts concerning tuberculosis in live stock was prepared by an international commission of the American Vet- erinary Medical Association (see page 24) and was published by the United States Department of Agriculture as Farmers’ Bulletin 473 and by the Canadian Department of Agriculture under date of 1911. It is now republished as University of Illinois Agricul- tural Experiment Station Circular No. 158, because the matter is of such vast importance and is so plainly and authoritatively set forth. The compilation accurately represents the best existing in- formation upon the subject. g Davenport, Director. Contents. page. Nature of the disease 3 History 3 Importance 4 Symptoms 6 Post-mortem appearances 9 The tubercle bacillus io How the disease spreads 13 How a herd is infected 15 The tuberculin test 16 What is tuberculin? 17 Reliability of the test 17 Limitations of the test 17 Protective inoculation 18 Suppression of the disease 18 Sanitation 20 Illustrations. PAGE. Fig. 1. An apparently healthy cow affected with tuberculosis 4 2. An apparently healthy cow affected with tuberculosis 5 3. An apparently healthy cow affected with tuberculosis 6 4. An apparently healthy cow affected with tuberculosis . . 5. A cow affected with long-standing, advanced tuberculosis 6. A cow in an advanced stage of tuberculosis 9 7. A tuberculosis bull in apparently healthy condition 10 8. Section of a tuberculosis udder from a cow 11 9. Section of a tuberculosis liver from a cow 12 10. Section of a tuberculosis lung from a cow 13 11. Sections of a tuberculosis heart from a cow 14 12. Tuberculosis of the omentum or caul 15 13. Tuberculosis of the omentum or caul 16 tx 00 TUBERCULOSIS A Plain Statement or Facts Regarding the Disease Tuberculosis is a widespread disease affecting animals and also man. Human beings and cattle are its chief victims, but there is no kind of animal that will not take it. Hogs and chickens are quite often affected ; horses, sheep, and goats but seldom, while cattle are the most susceptible of all animals. Nature or the Disease Tuberculosis is contagious, or “catching.” It spreads from cow to cow in a herd until most of them are affected. This may not attract much notice from the owner, as the disease is slow to de- velop and a cow may be affected with it for several months and sometimes years before any signs of ill health are to be seen. This slow development is the chief reason for the great loss it causes to the farmer. He does not suspect its presence in his herd until perhaps a large number are diseased. If the disease developed rapidly and caused death in a few days, the owner would soon take steps to check its progress and protect the rest of his herd. Tuber- culosis is slow and hidden in its course and thus arouses no sus- picion until great damage is done. History Where did tuberculosis come from? We do not know. History records it from the earliest times. Over a century ago its contagious nature was suspected and many facts were recorded to prove that it must be “catching.” Doc- tors differed about it and for a long time the question was hotly disputed. Finally it was settled by Dr. Robert Koch, a distinguished German physician, who discovered the germ of the disease in the year 1882, and named it Bacillus tuberculosis. He proved by ex- periment that the disease is produced by these germs and without them the disease can not be produced. It is now universally ad- mitted that tuberculosis is a contagious disease and may be trans- mitted from animal to man. In America the disease was introduced with early importations of cattle and has been with us ever since. Modern methods of transportation by rail and water have spread the disease from one end of the continent to the other. No part of the country is en- tirely free from it, but it is more prevalent near the great centers of population than in the remoter parts. Importance: The importance of the disease must be estimated from two points of view, first, the loss it entails upon the cattle owner, and, second, the danger of communication to human beings. Fig. 1. — An apparently healthy cow affected with tuberculosis. She does not cough, her appetite is good, she seems strong and vigorous, and gives an un- usually large quantity of milk. At the time the picture was taken it was known that she had been tuberculous at least four years and that she had been passing large numbers of tuberculosis germs from her body at least three years. Since it first became known that the cow was diseased she has given birth to four calves. Consider first its effect upon the pocket of the owner ot cattle, whether farmer, breeder, or dairyman. A serious percentage of the dairy cows of the continent are affected, and the disease is found in even a larger percentage of dairy herds. The disease is commoner in some regions than in others. It is no uncommon thing to find as many as 70 or 80 percent of the cows in a herd diseased. These animals will be in various stages of the disease, some recently infected showing no sign of ill health, others badly diseased, but outwardly appearing healthy, while a few are evidently breaking down and wasting away. The loss to the owner is evident when a cow dies of the disease, or when an apparently healthy cow is slaughtered for beef and found so badly affected as to be unfit for food. The calves in such a herd do not long remain healthy. They catch the disease before they are many months old and are a source of loss instead of gain. 5 Although the disease is most frequently found in herds that are more or less closely confined, such as dairy herds and purebred cat- tle, other herds are by no means free from it. Even range cattle are sometimes affected, and the infection spreads in spite of the open-air life of the cattle. Tuberculosis is common among hogs. The public abattoirs re- port that a serious percentage of all hogs inspected is found to be tuberculous. The aggregate of these losses among cattle and hogs is enor- mous, amounting to millions of dollars every year, besides materi- ally decreasing the food supply of the country. Fig. 2. — An apparently healthy cow affected with tuberculosis. She does not cough, her appetite is good, she gives a large quantity of milk, and is in ex- cellent general condition for a dairy cow. At the time the picture was taken it was known that she had been affected with tuberculosis at least four years and that she had been passing tuberculosis germs from her body at least three years. The mixed dung of this cow and of the cow shown in figure 3 caused tuberculosis in hogs that were permitted to eat it. Turning to the other aspect of the case, the danger of infection of human beings with tuberculosis from cattle, we have only to con- sider a few facts to realize its vital importance to every community. Milk is the staple food of infants and young children and is usually taken in the raw state. If this milk is from a tuberculous cow, it may contain millions of living tubercle germs. Young chil- dren fed on such milk often contract the disease, and it is a fre- quent cause of death among them. 6 Meat from tuberculous cattle is not so likely to convey the in- fection, for several reasons. It does not so frequently contain the germs, cooking destroys those that may be present, and, lastly, meat is not consumed by very young children. Fig. 3. — An apparently healthy cow affected with tuberculosis. She does not cough, her appetite is good, and her general condition is excellent for a milch cow that has recently calved. At the time the picture was taken it was known that she had been affected with tuberculosis at least four and one-half years and that she had been passing tuberculosis germs from her body for a long time. The calf by her side is the fourth she has produced in the last four years. Small quantities of her dung caused tuberculosis in guinea pigs when it was placed under their skin. The mixed dung of this cow and of the one shown in figure 2 caused tuberculosis in hogs that were permitted to eat it. Symptoms Before describing the symptoms or signs by which tuberculosis is recognized or suspected in a living animal it is well to state that there is no symptom that can be relied on with certainty. Any of the symptoms may sometimes be caused by some other disease, and not one of them is characteristic of tuberculosis alone. Many of the symptoms that are relied on by the human physician in reaching his opinion are not available in examining cattle. The thickness of the skin and chest wall, for instance, makes it difficult to detect a diseased condition of their lungs by listening to the sounds made in breathing, whereas this is comparatively easy in human beings. 7 It must also be clearly remembered that cattle may be very badly diseased and yet show no symptoms of ill health. They may be fat and sleek, looking the picture of health, while their lungs and other organs are full of tubercles. Such cases can only be detected by the tuberculin test. As tuberculosis may attack almost any organ of the body, we may have in each case the symptoms connected with the part af- fected as well as those affecting the general state of the body as a Fig. 4. — An apparently healthy cow affected with tuberculosis. This cow is in excellent condition for an animal that has been affected with tuberculosis more than four years. Three years before the picture was taken tuberculosis germs were found in her dung, and hogs that were permitted to eat it be- came tuberculous. About two and one-half years before the picture was taken it was found that her milk contained tuberculosis germs. There was nothing visible about the udder to show that it was diseased, and it was only after two months of the most careful tests of her milk that an expert could tell from which of the four quarters of the udder the disease germs were being passed. whole. We will take up in detail each of the more important symp- toms suggestive of the disease: Unthriftiness . — The animal is not doing as well as it should for the care and feed it is getting. Its coat is rough and its skin has lost its suppleness and feels harsh and thick. Loss of -flesh . — Along with the unthriftiness is noticed a grad- ual loss of flesh; the animal gets thinner from week to week. It appears to be pining away, and such cows have been known to dairymen for a long time under the name of “piners” or “wasters.” After a time they are reduced almost to skin and bone. 8 Cough . — This symptom is only present when the disease is at- tacking the lungs or some part of the breathing organs. It is not a loud, sonorous cough, but rather a subdued and infrequent one, and may be heard only at such times as when the stable is first opened in the morning or when the animal is driven. At a later stage of the disease it may be heard at any time of the day. Cows do not usually appear to cough up anything. This is because they do not spit. Most of the material coughed up from, the lungs is swal- lowed, but many tuberculosis germs escape from the mouth in the form of spray or are discharged from the nose. Enlarged glands . — Enlargements in the region of the throat, especially when they cause difficulty in breathing, are very apt to be due to tuberculosis. Fig. 5. — A cow affected with long-standing, advanced tuberculosis, with large tuberculous swellings in the udder. A year before the picture was taken the cow was discovered to have udder tuberculosis. This discovery was made by injecting some of her milk into guinea pigs; there was nothing in the ap- pearance or external condition of the udder at first to show that it was dis- eased. How very dangerous such cows are may be judged from the fact that calves that are permitted to drink milk from tuberculous udders only a single time are almost certain to have tuberculosis. A small amount of milk from cows like those in the above picture and in figure 4 mixed with the milk of other cows will make the whole of it dangerous for both persons and lower animals. Loss of appetite . — This symptom is not seen until the later stages of the disease when the animal is evidently wasting. Bloating . — Sometimes the diseased glands in the chest prevent the usual passage of gas from the paunch to the mouth by pressing on the gullet. In this case the cow suffers from bloating, and the paunch is often greatly distended with gas. This, however, is not a very frequent symptom. 9 Diarrhea . — Looseness of the bowels or “scouring” is seen in cattle affected with the disease in the bowels. This kind of scour- ing cannot be cured by any known treatment. Hard lumps in the udder . — When tuberculosis attacks the udder no change can be detected at first, but after a time hard lumps can Fig. 6. — A cow in an advanced stage of tuberculosis. She is very weak and thin, but is a heavy milker and in her weak condition cont'nues to give an abundant quantity of milk. Cows of this kind are unfortunately too numer- ous in dairy herds. The temptation to keep such cows and to use their milk is greater than some persons can resist. Such cows are a great danger to other animals that may come in contact with them, and the use of their milk in a raw state is very apt to cause tuberculosis alike in young persons and lower animals. be felt in some parts of the organ after it is milked out. Milk from such an udder must not be used, as it is almost certain to be teem- ing with germs of the disease. Post-mortem Appearances When the carcass of a cow affected with tuberculosis is opened the disease may be found in any part of the body. Lumps (tuber- cles) may be present in the substance of an organ such as the lung or liver, or they may be growing on the surface. These lumps may be so small as to be scarcely noticeable, or they may be as large as the closed fist, or even larger. If one of the lumps is cut open, the inside is yellowish and grits on the knife like sand, or else is of a cheesy nature, soft and creamy, or hard and dry. The lung is a favorite place for tubercles, and should always be examined. Lymph glands are often the seat of tuberculous changes 10 When healthy a lymph gland is a little rounded body not much larger than a good-sized bean, the largest only the size of one’s thumb. They are found all through the body, and when healthy are so small as to attract very little attention. Tuberculosis may cause them to grow to an enormous size, sometimes as large as a child’s head. In this condition they are similar to the tuberculous lumps already described. Those lying between the lungs and in the throat are the most frequently affected. Fig. 7. — A tuberculous bull in apparently healthy condition. The picture was taken nearly four years after he was first known to be tuberculous and three years after it was known that he was passing tuberculosis germs from his body. Directly after his picture was taken he was killed, and in addition to numerous nodules of tuberculosis in his lungs it was found, when his body was opened, that nearly all the lymph glands connected with his bowels and liver were diseased. At the time of his death the bull weighed 1,850 pounds, and his apparent condition was excellent for an animal that was fed only rough forage and no grain in any form. The presence of tubercu- losis in his body would never have been suspected before his death without the help of the tuberculin test. Tubercles may be found in any part of the body — glands, lungs, liver, bowels, kidneys, womb, ud,der and even bones. The muscles and skin are seldom affected. The Tubercle Bacillus The germ of the disease, the tubercle bacillus, is a tiny, slender, rod-shaped body. Several thousands of them placed end to end would be needed to measure an inch, so that they are quite invisible to the naked eye. A powerful microscope is needed to see them. 11 Once the bacillus has gained lodgment inside the body of an animal, it begins to grow and multiply. It gets longer, and when full grown divides crosswise, making two out of one. Each of these goes through the same process, the two become four, the four eight, the eight sixteen, and so on indefinitely. Fig. 8. — Sections of a tuberculous udder from a cow. Practically the whole of the udder was changed into tuberculous material. Long before tuberculous udders become as badly diseased as the condition shown in the picture the milk contains large numbers of tuberculosis germs and is very dangerous. A tuberculous udder may contain only a single small tuberculous swelling through which the milk becomes dangerously infected with tuberculosis germs. This multiplication takes place quite rapidly when conditions are favorable, a few hours only being required for the birth of each generation. Nature, however, does not permit this process to con- tinue long without offering some resistance. The forces of the body are roused to action and a battle begins between the tissues of the body and the army of the invaders. 12 thicker and forms a little hard lump or tubercle, from which the disease gets its name. If this wall is complete and successfully imprisons the bacilli, these gradually die and the disease in that particular spot is arrested. Frequently, however, both these safeguards are overcome. The germs break through the barriers and are carried in the blood stream or lymph channels to other parts of the body. New points of attack are selected and the process begins again but with less chance on the side of the animal. As the tubercles increase in num- ber the power of the body to grapple with them becomes less and less, and gradually the animal falls a prey to the disease. The first line of defense is composed of the white cells of the blood, which hurry to the scene of action and endeavor to destroy the invaders by eating them up. Sometimes they are successful and the bacilli are destroyed, the infection checked. Often they fail in their object and, are themselves destroyed and the multiplication of the germs continues. The second line of defense is formed by the cells of the tissue invaded by the germs. These cells arrange themselves in a circle around the germs and try to form a living wall between them and the rest of the body. This barrier gradually becomes thicker and Fig. 9. — Sections of a tuberculous liver from a cow. The light-colored parts show the disease. 13 The tubercle bacillus does not multiply outside the body of an animal. It can live for a long time in favorable surroundings, such as dark and dirty stables. Sunlight soon destroys it. Freezing does not hurt it, but it can only stand a moderate amount of heat. Ex- posure of 1 49 0 F. for 20 minutes kills it. Protected by a layer of dried mucus, such as is coughed up from the lungs, it withstands drying, light, and ordinary disinfectants, but is readily killed by steam or boiling water. Fig. 10. — Section of a tuberculous lung from a cow. The picture shows num- erous nearly round tuberculous nodules, one large tuberculous cavity, and several air tubes that extend from tuberculous nodules that are softening and breaking down. When tuberculous nodules in the lungs break down the material of which they are composed, and which contains millions of tuber- culosis germs, is coughed up. Some of the germs are sprayed from the mouth and others are swallowed and discharged with the dung. How the Disease Spreads Sooner or later the tuberculous cow begins to give off the germs of the disease. The germs escape by the mouth and nose, the bow- els, in the milk, and in discharges from the genital organs. When the germs are being given off in any of these ways, the disease is known as open tuberculosis. Germs discharged from the mouth and nose are coughed up from the lungs and are sprayed over the food in front of the cow or are carried in the air for a time until they fall to the ground. 14 Cows in adjoining stalls may take in these germs in the air they breathe or in the food they eat and so contract the disease. Germs discharged from the bowels are mixed with the manure, and may infect cattle and hogs that are allowed to pick over the dung heap. The practice of having hogs and cattle together in the same yard is sure to result in the infection of the hogs if any of the cattle are affected. The germs in the manure come from matter that is coughed up and swallowed, and in some cases from tuber- Fig. 11. — Sections of a tuberculous heart from a cow. The light parts are tu- berculous. The heart muscle is greatly reduced in volume and is prevented from working properly by the tuberculous material by which it is surrounded. The picture shows how badly an animal may become diseased with tubercu- losis before it dies. One reason why tuberculosis is so common among persons and cattle is that many persons and cattle pass tuberculosis germs from their bodies before anyone knows or suspects that they have tuberculosis and can give the disease to others. culosis in the bowels themselves. Manure containing tubercle germs may easily infect the milk. Particles of dried manure may fall into the milk pail from the skin of a dirty cow or be accidentally flicked off from the tail and fall into the milk. Straining the milk after- wards only removes the larger particles. The smaller ones, includ- ing the germs, remain in the milk. 15 When the udder is tuberculous the milk contains the germs in vast numbers. Such milk may look and taste perfectly good, but readily transmits the disease to young animals. It is very danger- ous to children. Hogs and calves are very readily infected by it. Fig. 12. — 'Tuberculosis of the omentum or caul, or the net covering the bowels. This form of tuberculosis is known as “pearl disease,’’ because the tubercu- lous tumors look like pearls. How a Herd is Infected Tuberculosis may be introduced into a healthy herd in a num- ber of ways : 1. By the purchase of a bull or other animal that is infected with the disease. This animal may be apparently healthy at the time of purchase, but if it contains the germs, the disease may de- velop and spread to other cattle. New animals should only be bought from a herd that is known to be healthy. 2. By feeding calves with milk, buttermilk, or whey that has come from tuberculous cows. A farmer may have a healthy herd, but if he brings home skim milk from a creamery and feeds it to 16 his calves he may give them the disease. Such milk should be ren- dered safe by boiling or pasteurizing it. 3. By showing cattle at fairs and exhibitions where no proper care is taken to keep out diseased stock or to disinfect the stables. 4. By shipping animals in cars that have not been disinfected, as these may have recently carried diseased cattle. 5. By allowing cattle to graze with diseased ones, or to come in contact with them over fences. Fig. 13. — Tuberculosis of the omentum or caul. The picture shows another form of “pearl disease,” in which each nodule is about the size of a grape and is composed of a large number of smaller nodules which have grown together. The Tuberculin Test Tuberculosis develops so slowly that in many cases it is months and sometimes years before any symptoms are shown. During this period the infected animals cannot be distinguished from the healthy in any ordinary way. There is a test, however, which does no harm to the healthy yet detects the diseased practically without fail. This 17 is known as the tuberculin test, because the substance used in mak- ing it is called tuberculin. WHAT IS TUBERCULIN? Tuberculin is a fluid containing the products of the tubercle germ without the germs themselves. As it contains no living germs, it cannot convey the disease. Great skill is required in its prepara- tion. A special fluid (or culture medium) is prepared and the tu- bercle bacilli planted in it, great care being taken to keep all other germs out. The fluid is then placed in a special kind of incubator and kept at the temperature of the animal body. Under these con- ditions the germs grow and multiply. Gradually the fluid becomes filled with the products of the germs. When the right point is reached the fluid is heated sufficiently to kill the germs, which are then strained out. The remaining fluid is tuberculin. Tuberculin does not harm healthy cattle, even in large doses, but on diseased animals it produces a marked effect. This is shown, by a feverish attack which comes on about 8 to 12 hours after the tuberculin is administered, lasts a few hours, and then subsides. This temporary fever is called the reaction, and animals which show it are called reactors. The value of the test lies in the fact that dis- eased animals react, while healthy ones do not. RELIABILITY OB THE TEST The tuberculin test in the hands of a competent and experienced man is much more accurate than any other method of detecting tu- berculosis. The records of large numbers of tests made by Govern- ment officials show that with certain precautions it is accurate in 98 percent of the reactions obtained. This gives a margin of a pos- sible 2 percent of error, and this small number may be still further lessened by care in making the test. For practical purposes any animal that reacts must be considered tuberculous. LIMITATIONS OB THE TEST The test should) not be applied to cows that have just calved or are about to calve, as the temperature at this time is apt to vary con- siderably from the normal. For this same reason it should not be applied to any animal that is in a feverish condition from any cause. The test fails to detect the presence of the disease in the animal that is very recently infected. The disease has to make a little progress before the test reveals its presence, and in the beginning of each case there is a period between the entrance of the germs into the body and the time when they have multiplied sufficiently for the 18 test to reveal their presence. This is called the period of incuba- tion and lasts from ten days to two months. When the disease is far advanced and the animal is wasting, the test sometimes fails to detect it. This is not of much practical im- portance, as such cases can generally be recognized without the aid of tuberculin. Protective Inoculation For some years efforts have been made to discover a method of rendering cattle immune to the disease in such a way as men are protected from smallpox by vaccination. Up to the present these efforts have been only partially successful, and until the methods in use have been perfected by further investigations they cannot be recommended as of practical use in the suppression of the disease. Suppression oe the Disease The first step in getting rid of the disease is to find out how many of the herd are affected by it. This is done by applying the tuberculin test. This will show a larger or smaller number of the herd to be affected, and the proper course to pursue will depend largely upon the proportion of the reactors in it. Suppose that only a few cattle react, say 15 out of 100, or in that proportion. In this case the reactors are first carefully exam- ined, and if any of them show symptoms of the disease by cough- ing, loss of condition, or any other of the signs by which the disease is recognized without the test, such animals should be slaughtered. The other reactors should then be entirely separated from the healthy cattle. If possible they should be put in a separate build- ing, but if this cannot be done a tight partition should be built be- tween the diseased and the healthy cattle and! separate ventilation provided. The person who attends to the reactors should not go near the healthy animals, as he may carry the infection to them on his hands, clothes, or boots. For the same reason the feeding and watering must be done with separate utensils. When at pasture the reactors must not be put into a field where they can reach across a fence to healthy cattle. Whenever a calf is born among the reactors it should be immediately separated from its mother and brought up by hand or on a healthy cow. The calf is usually born healthy, but would soon catch the disease from its mother if allowed to remain with her. The milk of reacting cows may be used if it is first boiled or heated to a point sufficient to kill the germs. This heating to a point less than boiling is called pasteurizing, and is safe provided all the milk reaches the required degree of heat and is kept there 19 sufficiently long. For this it is necessary to keep the milk for 20 minutes at 149° F. or for 5 minutes at 176° F. This system of dealing with tuberculosis in a herd was planned by Prof. Bang, of Denmark, and has been very successfully followed in that country for some years. It has the advantage of allowing the reactors to be made use of while a sound herd is being built up. Under this system the sound herd increases in numbers as healthy calves are added to it, while the diseased herd becomes smaller as the reactors die off or are killed as open cases of tuberculosis. Finally a point is reached where only a very few reactors remain, and the owner will then find it to his interest to kill them rather than have the trouble of keeping them isolated. Some time is required for the successful carrying out of the Bang system, and the owner must be prepared to follow it steadily and faithfully for the whole time that is needed, which may be sev- eral years. During this time the healthy herd must be tested every six months and any reactors removed to the diseased herd. At the same time a sharp lookout must be kept for animals showing defi- nite symptoms of the disease. These should be destroyed promptly, as they are the most dangerous source of infection. Dealing with a badly infected herd . — Where the test shows more than half the number diseased, a somewhat different plan is required from the Bang system. This herd is so badly affected that the non- reactors cannot safely be considered healthy. Many of them are sure to have been infected with the disease quite recently, so that the test fails to detect it. These will react at the next test, and in the meantime may develop the disease so rapidly as to infect others. This will repeat the difficulty occurring at the first test, and it would be a long and tedious process of weeding before even a small but perfectly healthy herd could be established. For these reasons it is better to treat such a herd as if it were entirely diseased and to begin with the newborn calves to build up a healthy herd. The method from this point is exactly the same as the Bang system, except that as there are no healthy cows to act as foster mothers the calves must be raised on pasteurized milk. At 6 months old the calves are tested and reactors are transferred to the other herd. This plan was devised by a German veterinary surgeon named Ostertag, and is known as the Ostertag system. It is very successful when carefully carried out. While getting rid of the disease by whatever system mav be adopted, an animal should never be bought for the healthy herd unless known to be healthy. The tuberculin test should be applied, and if possible the animal should be selected from a herd that is known to be free from tuberculosis. New purchases should be iso- lated or kept apart from the healthy herd, and if possible from each 20 other for at least three months, when they should be retested to make sure they are healthy before putting them with other cattle. Sanitation Dark, dirty, crowded stables are favorable to tuberculosis. Un- der these conditions the disease spreads rapidly and is only kept out with difficulty. Clean, airy, well-lighted stables, on the other hand, are unfa- vorable to the development of the disease. If brought into such a stable it does not spread so rapidly and is not so difficult to get rid of as in the first case. A well-built, sanitary stable need not be made of expensive ma- terial or of elaborate design, but should have plenty of light, air, and drainage. Light is very important. Direct sunlight is a great destroyer of germ life. Tubercle bacilli soon die if exposed to sunlight. It is a disinfectant, always ready to work without cost. Sunlight is also necessary to the health of animals. Men deprived of it for any length of time, as prisoners in jail, become pale and lose the appear- ance of health. Cattle that are constantly confined in dark stables become lowered in vitality and are ready to catch any disease with which they come in contact. For these reasons the cow stables should have plenty of windows, on two or more sides, if possible, so that the sunlight can reach every part of the interior some part of the day. Pure air is also very important. In badly ventilated stables the air is breathed over and over again until it becomes more or less poisonous. Animals kept in such conditions become gradually re- duced in vitality. This change may not be noticeable to the ob- server, but becomes apparent if the animal is exposed to disease. It easily contracts disease and does not recover from it readily. Stables should therefore have plenty of air space for each ani- mal. This requires the ceiling to be high, the stalls roomy, and the passages wide. In addition to this ample air space some way of changing the air in a stable must be provided. This is done by means of suitable openings in the walls and roof and comprises the system of ventilation. Ventilation to be successful must provide for two things — first, the removal of the foul air from the inside, and, second, the bring- ing in of fresh air from outside the building. No system is good that fails to accomplish these objects without causing unnecessary drafts. The usual way is to bring in fresh air through open windows, and in cold weather through ventilating shafts, which may be con- cealed in the walls or beneath the floor. The foul air is removed 21 by open windows and by ventilating shafts from the ceiling to the roof, where they are usually protected by a hood. When both in- lets and outlets are proportioned to the size of the building there should be a constant circulation of air and no sensation of closeness should be perceptible in the stable. Drainage removes the liquid refuse from the stable by suitable gutters and drains. It cannot do this unless the floor is water- tight, and concrete flooring is therefore recommended. Urine leak- ing through cracks in the floor until the soil beneath is saturated is a frequent source of foul odors and unhealthy stables. Cleanliness . — Since the manure of tuberculous cattle often con- tains living tubercle germs in vast numbers, the importance of keep- ing it well cleaned out of the stable is readily seen. Such manure is not only dangerous to other cattle in the .stable, but may be the means of conveying the disease to children. Often cows are seen with their flanks incrusted with dry dung. Parts often break off while the cow is milked, and some of it is likely to fall into the milk pail. The larger lumps are strained out, but the smaller par- ticles remain, and also the tubercle germs, which are small enough to pass through any strainer. These stay in the milk and make it a fruitful cause of the disease in the young. Stables should be cleaned out often and the manure put where it cannot be picked over by hogs or cattle. These animals are easily infected in that way. Cleanliness also includes keeping the walls and ceilings free from dirt, dust, and cobwebs. These are all good resting places for disease germs. Whitewashing the interior of the Stable at least twice a year is a great aid to cleanliness, and also has a distinct effect in destroying disease germs. In many municipalities dairy stables are required to be whitewashed at regular intervals, and it is a practice that should be universal. 22 Members of the International Commission on the Control of Bovine Tuberculosis J. G. Rutherford, C.M.G., V.S., H.A.R.C.V.S., Veterinary Director Gen- eral and Live Stock Commissioner of the Dominion of Canada, Ottawa, Canada; Chairman. M. H. Reynolds, D.V.M., Professor of Veterinary Science, College of Agriculture and Experiment Station, University of Minnesota, St. Anthony Park, St. Paul, Minn. ; Secretary. Hon. W. C. Edwards, Senator, Canadian Parliament, Ottawa, Canada. J. J. Ferguson, B.S.A., head of the Animal Foods Branch, Swift & Co., Chicago, 111. J. W. Flavelle, LL.B., Governor, University of Toronto; President, William Davies Packing Co. ; Toronto, Canada. Hon. W. D. Hoard, ex-Governor of Wisconsin; Editor of Hoard’s Dairyman; Fort Atkinson, Wis. Charles A. Hodgetts, M.D., C.M., L.R.C.P., Chief Medical Adviser, Commission on Conservation for Canada, Ottawa, Canada. J. N. Hurty, M.D., Secretary, State Board of Health of Indiana, In- dianapolis, Ind. ^ John R. Mohler, A.M., V.M.D., Chief of the Pathological Division, Bureau of Animal Industry, United States Department of Agri- culture, Washington, D. C. Veranus A. Moore, B.S., M.D., Director of the New York State Veter- inary College, Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. Mazyck P. Ravenel, M.D., Professor of Bacteriology University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis. E. C. Schroeder, M.D.V., Superintendent of Experiment Station, Bureau of Animal Industry, United States Department of Agriculture, Bethesda, Md. T. W. Tomlinson, Secretary, American National Live Stock Associa- tion, Denver, Col. * Frederick Torrance, B.A., D.V.S., Director of the Faculty of Compara- tive Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada. UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Agricultural Experiment Station URBANA, ILLINOIS, MAFLCH, 1912 CIRCULAR NO. 159 TESTS OF LIME SULFUR, BORDEAUX MIXTURE AND OTHER SPRAYS By 0. S. Watkins Associate in Horticultural Chemistry CONTENTS Introduction ... Method of Obtaining Records Weather Conditions Spray Dates Lime Sulfur versus Bordeaux Mixture — . . . . Tests in 1910 Effect on Foliage . Effect on Fruit , Table 1 Tests in 1911 — Effect on Foliage. .... ! Effect on Fruit .. . . . . Table 2.. . ... Substitution of Lime Sulfur for Bordeaux Mixture in One or Two of the Three Applications Effect on Foliage Effect on Fruit Table 3 Attempts to Reduce the Injury Following the Use of Bordeaux Mix- ture . '. Tests in 1910 Effect on Foliage Effect on Fruit Table 4 Tests in 1911 Table 5 Lime Sulfur Used at Various Strengths Table 6 Tests of Commercial Brands of Arsenate of Lead Table 7 Tests in 1910 Arsenates of Lead with Bordeaux Mixture Table 8 Arsenates of Lead with Lime Sulfur Table 9 Tests in 1911 Arsenates of Lead with Bordeaux Mixture Table 10 Arsenates of Lead with Lime Sulfur Table 11 .Certain new Fungicides and Insecticides Effect on Foliage Effect on Fruit Table 12 Summary 3 3 5 0 6 6 / 8 9 9 10 11 11 14 15 15 15 17 17 17 18 18 19 20 20 21 22 99 23 23 24 24 25 27 27 27 28 29 30 30 31 32 33 TESTS OF LIME SULFUR, BORDEAUX MIXTURE AND OTHER SPRAYS INTRODUCTION Among Ihe problems with which the apple grower of today is confronted is the protection of the trees and fruit from the ravages of insect pests and fungous diseases. In order to be able to assist the growers of Illinois in the proper selection and appli- cation of spray mixtures, the Illinois Agricultural Experiment Station has carried on spraying experiments for a number of years. During the summers of 1910 and 1911 experiments were undertaken at Neoga, Illinois, the chief lines of work being tests to determine (1) the relative efficiency of lime sulfur mixtures and Bordeaux mixture ; (2) the comparative value of different com- mercial brands of arsenate of lead; and (3) the value of certain new fungicides and insecticides. The orchard used for these experiments is owned by H. A. Aldrich and Company of Neoga, and is situated two miles south- west of town. It consisted of 300 fifteen-year-old Ben Davis trees. The orchard was divided into plats of four to six trees each, and the various plats sprayed differently. Scattered thruout the orchard check trees were left which received no treatment, with which tlo compare the sprayed trees. Problems of a similar nature were grouped together and in no group were there more trees than could be sprayed in a single day. Owing to the large number of different sprays which were used, and the small amount of each which was required, the material was applied by means of a barrel pump at 100 to 125 pounds pressure. Method of Obtaining Records Foliage notes were taken from time to time thruout the entire season and the windfalls picked up, counted and examined. All fruit upon the trees at picking time was gathered, counted, weighed, and a definite number from each plat examined. In 1910 practically the entire crop of fruit was examined but owing to the abundant yield of 1911 it was impossible to examine the whole crop. In selecting the samples for examina- tion, care was taken to secure apples which would show Ihe (rue value of the treatment given. A representative tree in each plat was chosen, and all the apples on a certain porlion of it 4 Fig. 1 — A Well Sprayed Orchard, September 1. 1910 Fig. 2 — A Neglected Orchard Adjoining the Orchard Shown in Fig. 1, September 1, 1910 5 including those on the lowest and uppermost branches and those on the outermost and innermost branches of the tree, were picked and placed on the sorting table. From these, two samples of 100 each were chosen and examined separately and the records compared. In case the records were not approxi- mately the same another sample of 100 apples was selected and examined, and this process was repeated until records were obtained upon an average sample. The results recorded are the average of all samples examined. In examining the apples for blemishes, a record was kept of all markings, however small, altho in grading the standard adopted by the Illinois State Horticultural Society was adhered to.* The grade records were taken from the samples examined and the percentages are based on the number of apples in each grade. This makes the percent- age of Number twos and culls somewhat larger than would be the case had the grading been in terms of bushels. Weather Conditions The season of 1910 was quite abnormal. March was a warm month, and as a result the trees came into bloom early in April, at least a month before the average normal blooming date. There was a very heavy bloom and an excellent set of fruit which had reached the size of hazel-nuts by April 23, at which time many of the small apples were frozen. Perhaps 15 to 20 percent of the crop in the experimental orchard survived the cold. The season was normal as regards rainfall, seldom more than ten days intervening between rains of one-half inch or more. The infection of apple scab could not have been worse, altho the fungus did not appear until about the middle of May, when the apples were the size of hickory nuts. There was also an abundance of insects. Neighboring: orchards which received no care pro- duced no fruit and were defoliated before the first of September. The conditions of 1911 were abnormal as regards rainfall. The summer was exceptionally dry, very little rain falling between the middle of June and the first of September ; while both * For Ben Davis, a No. 1 apple shall not be less than 2 Vo inches in diam- eter, shall be practically free from action of worms, or not over 10 per- cent of the apples affected by scab or other defacement of surface; shall be handpicked from the trees and not bruised or skin-broken; shall be of a bright and normal color and shapely formed. No. 2. apples may be 2% inches in diameter, and not over 20 percent of the apples affected by defacement of surface by dry rot, scab, worms, or other defects ;shall be hand-picked from the trees and not bruised or skin-broken; shall be of a bright and normal color and shapely formed. Adopted December 17, 1903. 6 September and October were wet months. The trees came into bloom early in May, and during most of the blooming period there was a cold rain which continued for several days. In spite of these conditions, unfavorable as they were for polli- nation, there was a good set of fruit. The injury caused by insects was very slight, and the only serious infection of scab came during the blooming period. The foliage and fruit on neighboring unsprayed orchards did not fall prematurely, as was the case in 1910, and at the close of the season the check trees in the experimental orchard were as healthy in appearance as the sprayed trees. Spray Dates In 1910 the entire orchard received a winter application of lime sulfur the latter part of March, just as the buds were beginning to swell; and from one to six summer applications were made upon or near the following dates: 1. April 7 4. May 27 2. April 2(5 5. June 21 3. May 10 6. July 22 In 1911 a winter application of lime sulfur was given the entire orchard about the middle of April; and from one to five summer applications were made upon or near the following dates : 1. April 20 4. June 23 2. May 18 5. August 15 3. June 3 LIME SULFUR VERSUS RORDEAUX MIXTURE During the last few years lime sulfur has been attracting attention as a fungicide for the summer treatment of apples. To determine the adaptibility of this spray for Illinois orchards, the following experiments were planned and carried out. Tests in 1910 Plat A. Homemade lime sulfur. — This was made by boiling together until all the sulfur was in solution, 10 pounds of lime, 20 pounds of sul- fur, and about 15 gallons of water. This solution was diluted so that in each 50 gallons of the spray there were four pounds of sulfur in solu- tion.* This material was made up immediately before each application. Plat B. Home concentrated lime sulfur. — This was made by boiling together until all the sulfur was in solution, 50 pounds of lime, 100 pounds of sulfur, and (50 gallons of water. This solution was diluted so that in each 50 gallons of the spray there were 4 pounds of sulfur in * Based on analyses of similarly made solutions. 7 solution.* This material was prepared early in the season and kept as a stock solution, some of it being used for each application. The records obtained upon the fruit in these plats were to be compared with those obtained upon the fruit in the A plats, to determine whether or not there was any deterioration of the home concentrated lime sulfur solution upon standing. Plat C. Self-boiled lime and sulfur. — This was made from 32 pounds of lime, 32 pounds of sulfur, and 200 gallons of water. The preparation of this spray differs from that used on plats A and B, as the only heat used to cook it is that which is furnished by the slaking lime. Plat D. Commercial lime sulfur.— This was a clear solution and was diluted so that each 50 gallons of the spray contained 4 pounds of sulfur in solution.* Plat E. Standard Bordeaux Mixture. — This was made from 4 pounds of copper sulfate, 4 pounds of lime, and 50 gallons of water. For the control of chewing insects arsenate of lead was added to each of the above mixtures at Ihe rate of 2 pounds per 50 gallons of spray. In Ihis group each plat, A, B, G, D and E, consisted of 10 trees, which were subdivided into plats of four trees each. These subplats were designated A 4 ,- A 2 , A 3 , A 4 , B 4 , B 2 , etc. A 4 . B 4 , C ]7 D 1? and E] each received three applications; A 2 , B 2 , C 2 , D 2 and E 2 , four applications; A 3 , B 3 , C 3 , D 3 and E 3 , five applications; A 4 , B 4 , C 4 , D 4 and E 4 , six applications. Effect on Foliage The first, infection of scab did not occur until several days after the third application had been made, so that the early effects of the first three applications were quite similar. Shortly after the third application had been made, there was considerable rain, which washed off much of the spray, and ati the same time afforded excellent conditions for the germination of scab spores. At the time the scab appeared there was very little spray mate- rial visible upon any of the trees which had been sprayed with the lime sulfur mixtures, while there was a large amount visible on the trees in Plat E, which had received the Bordeaux mix- ture. Plals A, B, G and D were almost as badly infected with scab as were the check trees, which had received no spray, hut plat E showed very little scab. With the exception of the self-boiled lime and sulfur, the later applications of the lime sulfur sprays checked to a consid- erable extent the work of the scab, but at the same time caused much foliage injury. The injury was along the edges and at the tips of the leaves and in the scab spots, and the later the application the more severe was the injury. The influence of the self-boiled * Based on analyses of solutions used. 8 lime and sulfur in the control of scab was very temporary ; how- ever, no spray injury followed its use. The Bordeaux mixture proved very adhesive, controlled the scab almost perfectly and caused very little foliage injury. Of these five sprays, Bordeaux mixture proved the most efficient in protecting the foliage from scab, and self-boiled lime and sulfur the least effective. All of the cooked lime sulfur sprays possessed considerable fungicidal value, but because of their lack of adhesiveness their action was only temporary. In spite of the fact that self-boiled lime and sulfur possesses very little fungicidal value in the control of apple scab, special attention must be called to the plats sprayed with this material, since the general appearance of the trees at a distance was much better than that of any of the others in this experiment, owing to the large size, dark color and abundance of foliage. ' These trees did not suffer so severely from the freeze as did the others, since the application of lime and .sulfur made April 22 formed a coating over the fruit and foliage which acted in some way as a shield against the cold. Effect on Fruit All plats had some fruit survive the freeze of April 23 excepting plat E, upon which Bordeaux mixture had been used. These trees were situated in the western part of the orchard, adjoining an open field, and only a very few apples escaped being frozen. The following table shows the relative fungicidal value of the different lime sulfur sprays in the control of scab on the fruit, and also the benefits derived from three, four, five and six applica- tions. These results fully corroborate those secured upon the foliage as stated above. Unfortunately there were no Bordeaux sprayed apples directly comparable with these, but-judging from the effect upon the foliage much less scab might have been expected upon the fruit. The apples from the B plats (sprayed with home concentrated lime sulfur) showed somewhat less scab than those from the' other plats, but even upon these the amount of scab was exceptionally large. It must be understood, however, that the infection of scab could not have been worse, for check trees which received no spray yielded no sound fruit and lost their foliage early in September. In order to have any. picked fruit for examination from the unsprayed trees, it was necessary to gather it three or four weeks before the fruit on the sprayed trees was ready to harvest. At that time many of the apples were rotting on those trees, and nearly all of them were Table 1. — Examination of Picked Fruit from Trees Sprayed with Lime Sulfur Mixtures, 1910 Plat Treatment Applica- tions made Total No. ap- ples Per cent scab Per cent cur- culio Per cent cod^ ling moth Percent russet Ai . A 2 A 3 A 4 Bi b 2 b 3 b 4 Cl C 2 C 3 C 4 Di D 2 d 3 d 4 Check 10-20-13 lime sulfur di- luted 1 in 18 with 2-50 arsenate of lead 50-100-50 lime sulfur di- luted 1 in 28 with 2-50 arsenate of lead 32-32-200 self-boiled lime and sulfur with 2-50 arsenate of lead Commercial lime sulfur diluted 1 in 35 with 2-50 arsenate of lead No treatment 1,2,3 1,2, 3, 4, 1 , 2 , 3, 4, 5 1,2,3, 4, 5, a 1,2,3 1 , 2 , 3, 4 1,2, 3,4, 5 1 , 2 , 3, 4, 5 , 6 1,2,3 1 , 2 , 3, 4 1 , 2 , 3, 4, 5 1 , 2 , 3, 4, 5 , 6 1,2,3 1 , 2 , 3, 4 1 , 2 , 3, 4, 5 1 , 2 , 3, 4, 5 , 6 None 139 33 42 77 96 140 237 140 438 323 510 660 343 160 127 203 210 94 81 60 32 68 39 45 15 98 96 98 00 87 73 55 60 100 16 24 17 24 25 15 19 15 38 16 16 29 26 32 22 35 100 3.6 3.0 2.5 2.6 4.0 2.8 4.0 2.7 8.0 0 2.0 4.0 1.0 5.0 0 3.5 28.0 13 18 10 5 13 15 14 7 8 10 6 19 10 8 9 10 20 deformed and undersized. Much of the injury as shown by the russet column was no doubt caused by the cold weather. An examination of the codling moth injuries shows that the action of the arsenate of lead in the control of this insect was about the same when used in any of the four sprays. It must, be concluded from these data that none of the lime sulfur sprays are efficient fungicides in the control of apple scab in seasons when there are severe attacks. If the danger of spray injury could be eliminated, any of the cooked solutions might prove efficient when only light attacks of scab are exper- ienced. Under no conditions would it seem wise to use self- boiled lime and sulfur for diseases of the apple. Tests in 1911 From the experiments in 1910 it was learned that self-boiled lime and sulfur would not control apple scab, and also that the home concentrated solution was as efficient as the ordinary homemade; so it was deemed unnecessary to repeat the treat- ments given plats A and G in 1910. Treatments tested in 1911 were therefore as follows: 10 A. Home concentrated lime sulfur solution. — This was made from 50 pounds of lime, 100 pounds of sulfur, and sufficient water to bring the final volume of the solution to 66 gallons. This was diluted so that each 50 gallons of the spray contained 4 pounds of sulfur in solution. 1 B. Commercial lime sulfur solution. — This was a clear solution and was diluted so. that each 50 gallons of the spray contained 4 pounds of sulfur in solution 1 . C. Standard Bordeaux mixture. — This was made from 4 pounds of copper sulfate, 4 pounds of lime and 50 gallons of water. In this group each plat consisted of 16 trees, and was sub- divided into plats of four trees each. These subplats were desig- nated A x , A 2 , A 8 , A 4 , Bj, Bo, etc. It was the original intention to give A l7 Bj and C 4 , three applications; A 2 , B 2 and C 2 , four appli- cations; A 8 , B 3 and C 3 , five applications; and A 4 , B 4 and C 4 , six applications ; the plan was changed, however, so that A x , A 2 , B b B 2 , C 4 and C 2 each received three applications ; A 8 , B 3 and C 8 , four applications; A 4 , B 4 and C 4 , five applications. Effect on Foliage The only serious infection of scab came before many of the leaves were out, and as the amount was small in all cases it was impossible to detect any difference between the three plats. This lack of scab no doubt reduced the amount of foliage injury caused by the spray, as infected leaves are the first to turn brown when spray is applied 2 . At no time during the season did any yellow leaves appear upon the trees sprayed with Bor- deaux mixture. The first two applications of lime sulfur to plats A and B caused no injury whatever, and the amount fol- lowing the third application was very small. The fourth appli- cation burned about 30 percent of the leaves at the tips and along the edges, and the fifth application affected about 50 per- cent in the same way. The injury was more severe in plat B. upon which the commercial lime sulfur had been used, than upon plat A, which had received the home concentrated solution ; but in each case the trees rapidly recovered. The adhesiveness of the Bordeaux mixture was much better than that of either of the lime sulfur sprays, and the amount of spray injury caused by it was negligible. mased on analyses of similarly made solutions. 2 C. S. Crandall. Illinois Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 135. page 225 (1909). 11 Effect on Fruit The fruit in these plats was picked October 16 and 1/. and examined, with the following results: Table 2. — Examination of Picked Fruit from Trees Sprayed with Lime Sulfur and Bordeaux Mixture, 1911 Apples cS O C-t CD « 1 Plat Treatment Appli- cations Total No. To- tal bu. Per- cent CO C) 9 co — CO C ci P 3 rt .q made 1 9 CO 3 5 Ck a> -2 5 n — G G G (X) Vh G •> 1 X 34 Bordeaux-arsenate 1,2,3, 4085 174 78 1 20 2 14 2 18 2 drenched 35 Bordeaux-arsenate 1,2,3, 3640 16f 65 27 8 26 2 ■ 12 14 30 Bordeaux-arsenate 1,2,3, 5505 20f 80 17 3 2 5 lime after 3rd 39 37 Bordeaux-arsenate 1 , 2 ; 3, 8985 33i 86 13 1 32 0 1 O; lime after 2nd The results given in this table show that the heavy applica- tion of Bordeaux-arsenate was much preferable to the usual lighter application. The efficiency of the mixture was not only greater in controlling scab, but the amount of russeting for which the spray was no doubt responsible was much less. The results from plats 36 and 37 seem to indicate that it matters very little whether the lime follows the second or third application. The apples in plat 37 graded slightly better than those in plat 36. Since these results are not entirely in accord with those obtained in 1910, this subject needs further investigation. LIME SULFUR USED AT VARIOUS STRENGTHS In the preceding experiments, where lime sulfur has been used, the solution in all cases was one in which there were 4 pounds of sulfur in solution in each 50 gallons of the spray. To determine the efficiency and safety of lime sulfur solutions of varying strengths, the following experiment was carried out in 1911. Commercial lime sulfur was used. Plat 42. 1 gallon lime sulfur to 50 gallons of water Plat 43. 1 gallon lime sulfur to 40 gallons of water Plat 44. 1 gallon lime sulfur to 20 gallons of water Plat 46. 1 gallon lime sulfur to 30 gallons of water. 21 Arsenate of lead was added to each at the rate of two pounds to 50 gallons of the spray. Very little difference was noted in the foliage in the different plats. In each case there was a slight injury following the third application, but in no plat did it prove permanent. The records upon the fruit, which was picked and examined October 13, were as follows : Table 6. — Examination of Picked Fruit from Trees Sprayed with Lime Sulfur of Various Strengths, 1911 | Apples C3 P Plat Treatment Appli- cations made 'Total No. Per cent CJ C/j j C £ cd j-; GO ■4-S 75 > o 1 9 Gulls Percen || P 11 2-50 Swift arsenate with 4-4-50 Bordeaux 1,2,3 8365 36y 8 75 22 3 1 8 19 12 2-50 Vreeland arsenate with 4-4-50 Bordeaux 1,2,3 7835 32% 61 23 16 3 5 13 2-50 Yreeland dry arse- nate with 4-4-50 Bor- deaux 1,2,3 15565 62% 77 18 5 3 5 11 14 1-50 Yreeland dry arse- nate with 4-4-50 Bor- deaux 1,2,3 10200 40 60 28 12 7 7 30 15 2-50 Hemingway arse- nate with 4-4-50 Bor- deaux 1,2,3 5245 22 57 33 10 \ 7 8 16 2 t 50 Sherwin-Williams arsenate with Bor- deaux 1,2,3 3132 13% 71 20 9 0 7 7 Check No treatment 937 4 10 30 60 6 6 0 Here again very little can be determined by such results, since the table shows a variation of only 7% in curculio injury botween the different plats, and but 3% in codling moth injury. The variation in the percentage of russeting between (he differ- ent plats may be due in part to the arsenate of lead which was used, as other conditions were the same. 28 Arsenates of Lead with Lime Sulfur Solution To further test the action of the various arsenates of lead when applied in combination with lime sulfur solution, the fol- lowing brands w'ere added to commercial lime sulfur and tested, the number of pounds in each 50 gallons of spray being as indi- cated : Plat 1. Yreeland dry arsenate .2-50 Plat 2. Yreeland dry arsenate 1-50 Plat 3. Yreeland arsenate 2-50 Plat 4. Eagle arsenate 2-50 Plat 5. Grasselli arsenate alone 2-50 Plat 6. Swift arsenate 2-50 Plat 7. Sherwin-Williams arsenate . 2-50 Plat 8. Grasselli arsenate 1-50 Plat 9. Hemingway arsenate. 2-50 Plat 10. Summer strength lime sulfur alone. These plats were given the three regular applications. There was some foliage injury on all plals from time to time thruout the summer, but only in plat 5, which received Grasselli arsenate of lead alone, was it of a permanent nature. In this plat there was very little injury until about the middle of September, at which time the leaves turned brown along the edges and at the tips. These trees retained this frost bitten appearance thruout the remainder of the season, and about 25% of the leaves fell prematurely. The materials used on plats 7, 8 and 9 appeared to be slightly more adhesive than those used on the other plats. These plats all had an abundance of fruit, which was picked October 24 and 25, and examined with the results shown in Table 11. The thing most noticeable in this table is the variation in the amount of scab. Plats 7, G and 3, which were sprayed with Sherwin-Williams, Swift, and Yreeland arsenates of lead, respectively, were least infected with scab, having 16, 18 and 19% of the apples scabby. Owing to the small amount of insect injury, little can he said as to the comparative insecticidal value of Ihe different brands. There was a varying amount of russet and ‘‘burn” credited to the different plats, but the difference is not great. However, since neither arsenate of lead nor lime sulfur when used alone caused any “burning,” this inj ury is undoubtedly due to the reaction resulting when the two are combined. Attention is called especially to the records obtained in plat 5, which received arsenate of lead only, and plat 10, which received lime sulfur only. It will be seen from these results that lime sulfur solution and arsenate of lead when used alone 29 Table 11. — Examination of Picked Fruit from Trees Sprayed with Lime Sulfur and Various Arsenates of Lead, 1911 GO Apples o O 3 © Percent Percent scab o C — d ' t - 3 Percent burn Plat Treatment Total No. Total bu. 1 2 Culls - p— ’ O -j Oh g CD P be .£ n 73 O o u 2- & o P 4431 U - S - Dew- of Agr.. Bureau of Statistics, 13ul. 39- personal communications. ’ 10 Distribution of Exports The countries to which beef cattle and beef products are principally exported from the United States are shown in the fol- lowing table, together with the relative importance of each. Table 5. — Exports of Cattle and Beef from the United States, 1910 1 Country Cattle, number Beef products, pounds Total value Percent Great Britain 122 139 90 551 837 $20 596 056 84.32 Canada 10 283 1 676 773 453 147 1.86 Newfoundland & Labrador 5 213 053 364 264 1.48 Germany 4 150 754 299 927 1.23 South America 129 3 448 541 298 055 1.22 British West Indies 79 3 146 318 277 998 1.14 Mexico 5 149 110 847 265 958 1.09 Belgium 270 2 550 879 250 925 1.03 Norway and Sweden 1 409 885 126 148 .52 Cuba 207 262 182 39 218 .16 All other countries 1 174 14 884 506 1 454 362 5.95 Total 139 430 127 405 575 $24 426 058 100.00 1 U. S. Dept, of Com. and Labor, Rept. on Commerce and Navigation, 1910. The importance of Great Britain as a factor in our export beef trade is here made plain, that country taking about 85 percent of our total beef exports. Under their free-trade policy American live cattle and meats are received free of duty. Other European countries bar our cattle and fresh beef, and their duties on cured and canned meats are so heavy as to limit the trade to the com- paratively small amounts noted above. Growth and Decline op our Beef Surplus Altho the United States held first rank in respect to exports of cattle and second in exports of beef in 1910, the surplus is now diminishing at a rapid rate owing to the rapidly increasing population and inadequate supplies of beef cattle. The general tendency of our export beef trade may be judged from the fol- lowing table, in which t,he decrease during the past five years should be especially noted. The significance of the data given in Table 6 will be more readily seen by referring to the graphic illustration of the same data in Fig. 4. 11 Table 6. — Exports of Live Cattle and Beef from the United States 1 Year Cattle, number Beef, pounds 1851 1 000 18 000 000 1861 9 000 26 000 000 1870 28 000 27 000 000 1880 183 000 130 000 000 1890 395 000 354 000 000 1900 397 001L 435 000 000 1905 568 000^- 359 000 000 1906 584 000 414 000 000 1907 423 000 361 000 000 1908 349 000 272 000 000 1909 208 000 183 000 000 1910 139 000 127 000 000 HJ. S. Dept, of Agr., Yearbook 1909, pp. 608,9; U. S. Report on Commerce and Navigation, 1910. Fig. 4. Exports of Live Cattle and Beef from the United States From these figures it is evident that unless a rapid increase in cattle raising occurs in this country, we shall very soon cease to export beef cattle and beef. Indeed, unless ample encourage- ment is given beef producers, it is quite possible that we shall shortly become an importing nation, so far, at least, as the lower grades of beef are concerned. Small shipments of South American beef have already been brought to New York, and un- der certain market conditions this trade may now be carried on with profit. UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Agricultural Experiment Station URBANA, ILLINOIS, SEPTEMBER, 1912 CIRCULAR No. 164 (Reprinted February, 1915) ECONOMIC FACTORS IN CATTLE FEEDING II. ARGENTINA AS A FACTOR IN INTERNATIONAL BEEF TRADE By Herbert W. Mumford Large beef herds are seen which are practically pure bred. Beef making is a pasture proposition. Alfalfa grows luxuriantly, and to any one unacquainted with the possibilities of the country the degree of fatness which cattle acquire without grain is a marvel. Summary 1. INTRODUCTION. — The Argentine Republic recently has superseded the United States of America in the amount of surplus beef produced and sold abroad. Recognizing the important bearing of the Argentine cattle industry upon foreign and domestic markets for beef cattle produced in the United Stmtes, the author, on behalf of this experiment station, made a thoro investigation and personal inspection of beef production in Argen- tina. Page 3 2. NATURAL ADVANTAGES FOR CATTLE RAISING.— Climatic conditions are such that cattle can be raised and fattened out of doors without shelter and generally Without shade. Abundance of alfalfa and other nutritious legumes and grasses, together with cheap land and labor, makes it possible to produce beef cattle cheaply. They fatten readily without grain. Should corn-fed beef become profitable, an ample supply of corn can be produced. Page 4 3. QUALITY OF CATTLE. — Great improvement in the common stock of the country has been effected by importations of high-class pedigreed cattle from Great Britain during the last twenty-five years and particularly during more recent years. Several large beef herds were seen which were practically pure bred. Page 5 4. DISTRIBUTION OF CATTLE. — Five provinces, Buenos Aires, Corrientes, Entre Rios, Santa Fe, and Cordoba, known as the pampa grass region, contain over 80 percent of the cattle in Argentina. 222,000 establishments occupying 288 million acres were engaged in the cattle business in 1908. Many individual land holders and land companies own very large tracts. Page 7 5. SLAUGHTERING FACILITIES. — A municipally controlled market and slaught- ering establishment in Buenos Aires is creditable. Efficient government veterinary inspec- tion is conducted. Convenient locations and sanitary conditions have been provided, with reference to both local and export beef trade. Page 10 6. CONSUMPTION AND EXPORT. — Approximately 5 million cattle were slaught- ered in 1911, of which approximately one million were shipped abroad as dressed beef and a considerable proportion of the remainder were prepared for export in other forms. The per capita consumption of beef is about equal to that in the United States. Exports of beef have increased from 64 million pounds in 1885 to 193 million pounds in 1900 and 580 million pounds in 1910. Argentine grass-fed beef sells in the English market within two to five cents per pound of corn-fed beef from the United States. Page 10 7. DIFFICULTIES SURROUNDING THE INDUSTRY. — British ports have been closed against Argentine live cattle since 1900 (except a short time in 1903) owing to an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease, altho there is little, if any, of this disease in Argentina at the present time. Texas fever ticks, anthrax or ‘‘carbuncle,’’ and tuberculosis are prev- alent. Droughts and locusts are plagues which are more or less localized. Nevertheless, cattle raising is a favored and favorite industry in the Republic. Page 13 8. THE OUTLOOK. — Argentina’s natural advantages enable her profitably to com- pete with the grass cattle and lower grades of native beef produced in the United States. North American corn-fed beef, so long as the supply lasts, doubtless will continue to com- mand a premium over Argentine grass beef in the markets of the world, but domestic demand in the United States will soon absorb practically the entire amount of beef pro- duced here, thus rendering foreign competition abroad an unimportant factor in the industry. The chief concern of beef producers in this country, so far as Argentine competition is concerned, should be the effect of possible importation of South American beef to the United States upon the production of beef cattle here. That corn and likewise corn-fed cattle can be produced in Argentina, Uruguay and some other SoutlvAmerican countries is an assured fact. The extent to which it will be fed to cattle, however, is limited by the relatively small production of corn and further by the fact that it is a new industry and will not gain favor rapidly because it involves more cropping and labor and considerably more expense. Expansion of the cattle-raising industry in Argentina has ceased, largely because grain growing is proving more profitable than cattle raising. The beef product will be much improved but the available supply for export doubtless will not increase more rapidly than the combined factors of increased population there and among nations consuming her surplus and the relative decrease of beef production elsewhere. Again, the cost of beef production will increase with increased cost of labor and land. On the whole it is not anticipated that the business of raising beef cattle in the United States will be perma- nently menaced by Argentine competition. Pages 14-15 BIBLIOGRAPHY. Page 16 Note. — This is the second of a series of circulars dealing with economic factors in cattle feeding. (I. Relation of the United States to the World’s Beef Supply.) Following publications will treat of beef production in the United States, cattle-feeding conditions in the corn belt, and cattle feeding in its relation to farm management and soil fertility. ARGENTINA AS A FACTOR IN INTERNATIONAL BEEF TRADE 1 By Herbert W. Mumford, Chief in Animal Husbandry Notice has been taken in a preceding discussion (Circular 163) of the fact that Argentina now outranks the United States with respect to the surplus of beef produced, and that the change in relative posi- tions of the two countries as beef-exporting nations has occurred since 1905. So marked has been the development of this trade that the at- tention of the entire world has been called to Argentina as a rapidly growing and exceedingly important factor in the world’s supply of beef. For many years the United States of North America was the chief factor in the export trade of this commodity, and an especially important factor because supplying beef of high quality. Today the Argentine Republic must be looked upon as the most important factor in the world ’s market as regards the amount of surplus beef sold ; and, furthermore, the quality of her beef product is fast improving. Notwithstanding the embargo against the importation of live cat- tle from Argentina into Great Britain which, on account of foot-and- mouth disease, has been in force since 1900, 2 aggregate exports of cattle and beef from Argentina have risen from $8,000,000 in 1900 to $24,000,000 in 1905, and $29,000,000 in 1910 ; while corresponding figures for the United States were $68,000,000 in 1900, $72,000,000 in 1905, and $24,000,000 in 1910. (See Circular 163.) With only twenty-nine million cattle, as compared with seventy- one million in the United States (1910), 3 Argentina is in a position to maintain her export trade in beef by reason of her small population (seven million) and the consequently limited domestic consumption of beef. Whether or not expansion of beef production in Argentina J In confining this discussion largely to the production of cattle in Argentina, the writer does not overlook other possible sources of beef in South America, such as Uruguay, Brazil, Bolivia, Paraguay, Venezuela, and possible others which, with the exception of Uruguay and parts of Brazil, are only partially exploited. Opera- tions in Argentina may be taken as a type and indicative in a general way of the de- velopment which is likely to follow in other countries. Argentina is and will re- main for some time to come the largest producer and most important single factor in the export trade in beef from South America. ^Except a short period in 1903. 3 The U. S. Census Bureau estimates the number of cattle in the United States in round numbers at 64 million, April 15, 1910, and 67 to 69 million, June 1, 1910. The U. S. Dept, of Agriculture estimates 71 million, Jan. 1, 1910, and 60 million, Jan. 1, 1912. 3 4 takes place in the future will depend largely upon market conditions. In the United States, on the other hand, a rapidly growing population of 92 million renders it doubtful whether our production of beef will equal our demand unless a rapid expansion of the cattle-raising indus- try occurs in the near future, which is improbable. It is evident, therefore, not only that the condition and possibil- ities of beef production in Argentina have a vital bearing upon our beef trade in foreign markets, but also that the Republic even may become a competing factor in the beef supply of our own country. Recognizing the importance of this factor, the author, on behalf of this experiment station, made a thoro investigation and personal inspection of the beef -cattle industry in Argentina, upon which the following statements are based. Natural Advantages for Cattle Raising Cattle raising for beef in Argentina, especially in the temperate zone, is a much more favored industry than in the United States. The climate makes it possible for the entire life of the cattle to be spent out of doors without shelter and generally without shade of any kind. Alfalfa grows most luxuriantly, and the suitability of a very large acreage for the growth of that crop and of other nutritious indigenous and introduced legumes and grasses, together with cheap land and Fig. 1. — Baled Alfalfa in the Stack 0 labor, makes it possible to produce beef cheaply. To any one un- acquainted with the possibilities of the country, the degree of fatness which the cattle acquire on grass or alfalfa alone is a marvel. Corn feeding as a supplement to pasture for beef production is extremely rare. Beef-making in Argentina at present therefore is practically a strict pasture proposition. There is quite an extensive area well suited to, and at present partially used for, the growing of corn, but as yet, and probably for some years to come, this product will be either exported or used for horse, dairy cow, and pig feeding. Only the flint varieties are grown generally. If the time ever comes when slaughterers will pay a suffi- ciently high premium for corn-fed beef, it is believed the country can produce ample for this purpose. Quality op Cattle One of the most striking features of the recent development of beef production in Argentina is the great improvement in quality or breeding of the cattle. Many Argentine estancieros have spared no trouble nor expense in effecting improvement of the common stock of the country. This has been accomplished chiefly by importations of high-class pedigreed beef and dairy cattle from Great Britain. It is Fig. 2. — An Argentine-bred Shorthorn Bull that Would Find Favor in the Show Rings of any Country 6 an historical fact that the cattle breeders of Argentina, and more especially the breeders of registered beef cattle, have bought the best that Great Britain has produced, without much reference to their cost. In the herdbook of the Argentine Rural Society in 1909 there had been registered about 50,000 pedigreed cattle of beef breeds, some 4,000 of which were imported ; and not all pedigreed cattle are regis- tered in the Rural Society’s book. During the period from 1880 to 1907, 16,156 pedigreed cattle were imported into Argentina, 14,624 of which were brought from the United Kingdom ; and in the two years, 1907 to 1909, over 9,000 head were imported from England alone. 1 The extension of fencing has been an important factor in making systematic, selective cattle raising possible. At present, in place of the old native cattle, estancias are stocked with mestizo (half breeds), and in many cases more highly improved stock. In several instances large beef herds were seen which were practically pure bred. Shorthorns (more frequently called “Durhams” in the Republic) are by far the most numerous and popular, altho some fine herds of Herefords and Aberdeen- Angus exist. Of the 50,000 registered cattle mentioned above, about 37,000 were Shorthorns, 10,000 Herefords, and 2,500 Aberdeen- Angus. A still larger proportion of the grade cattle of the Fig. 3. — An Imported Shorthorn Bull Doing Service in the Argentine. Estancieros Have Bought the Best that Great Britain Has Produced, Without Much Reference to Their Cost ^Census of the Nation: Stock Breeding and Agriculture in 1908, Vol. 3, pp. 97, 371. i country than of registered animals are Shorthorns. There is consid- erable rivalry among the leading breeders of pedigreed beef cattle in their attempts to bring out prize winners at the live-stock shows, the chief one of which is an annual exposition at Palermo, Buenos Aires. Of the cattle produced for slaughter the best are sold to the f?'igorificos, where they are either chilled or frozen for export. There is no absolute standard set by these establishments as to the quality and condition necessary for their trade, as considerable variation in the quality and degree of fatness occurs, depending upon available supplies and foreign demand. Demands in the way of breeding and finish in cattle for consump- tion in the Argentine Republic are not exacting, and a cheaper, less improved, half-fat class of cattle is slaughtered to supply local butch- ers. Discarded cows, young stock, and work oxen in many instances are important factors in this trade. Fig. 4. — Good Herds of Herefords are Occasionally Seen Distribution of Cattle A statement of the distribution of cattle thruout the various provinces of the Republic will serve to show what parts are considered best adapted for cattle raising. In some instances these statistics OCEAN Fig. 5. — Map of Argentine Republic Showing Distribution of Cattle 9 might be misleading ; for example, in the province of Bnenos Aires and other favored sections of the country still more cattle might be kept, but agriculture is more profitable. According to the live-stock census of 1908 (see Table 1 and Fig. 5), the five provinces, Buenos Aires, Corrientes, Entre Rios, Santa Fe, and Cordoba were the leading cattle sections, containing upward of 80 percent of the cattle in the Argentine Republic. This portion of the country, known as the pampa grass region, is naturally the most favored section for grazing, and with the introduction of improved beef cattle and of foreign grasses and legumes, chief among which is alfalfa, the industry has advanced rapidly. Cattle growing has radi- ated from the pampa grass region with the more extensive cultivation of alfalfa. Table 1. — Number of Cattle by Provinces and Territories, According to the Last Live-Stock Census, in Argentina (1908) 1 Buenos Aires 10 351 000 Mendoza 330 000 Corrientes 4 276 000 Rio Negro 279 000 Santa Fe 3 413 000 Catamarca 268 000 Entre Rios 3 146 000 Chaco 265 000 Cordoba 2 639 000 Formosa 234 000 S. del Estero 629 000 Neuquen 194 000 San Luis 579 000 Jujuy 113 000 Salta 560 000 Misiones 94 000 La Pampa 465 000 San Juan 82 000 La Rioja 417 000 Santa Cruz 25 000 Tucuman 404 000 Tierra del Fuego 12 000 Chubut 335 000 Los Andes Total 1 000 29 111000 Agricultural and Pastoral Census of the Nation (Argentina) : Stock Breed- ing and Agriculture in 1908, Yol. 1, p. vii. The number of establishments engaged in the cattle business in 1908 was estimated at about 222,000, and these occupied more than 288 million acres, or an average of about 1,300 acres. Many individual landholders and companies own very large tracts, a number of which range in size from ten to fifty square leagues (about 75,000 to 385,000 acres) . Some of the smaller esiancias are set largely to alfalfa. These extensive areas are stocked with literally thousands of cattle. Besides 29 million cattle in Argentina, there were in 1908 about 67 million sheep, 7 million horses, 1 y 2 million hogs, 4 million goats, a half million mules, and 285 donkeys. The total length of wire on grazing lands amounted to 1,015,500 kilometers (631,000 miles). 1 It has been esti- mated that the inclosing of rural properties in Argentina during the last twenty-five years has cost one hundred million dollars for wire alone. 2 Uleport on “ Cattle Breeding in the Argentine Republic, ” Pan American Union, Washington, D. C. *U. S. Consular and Trade Report, Nov. 16, 1910, p. 621. 10 Fig. 6. — Some Prominent Breeders Maintain Good Herds of Aberdeen- Angus Cattle Slaughtering Facilities The municipally controlled mataderos, or market and slaughter- ing establishment, in Buenos Aires is creditable. The government vet- erinary inspection at this plant, as well as that at the frigorificos and fabricas, is to be commended as contrasted with the slovenly methods in common use in isolated sections where competent government in- spection is unknown. Ample provision has been made for slaughter- ing cattle for domestic consumption and for export, and these estab- lishments are located conveniently both to care for the bulk of the city and export trade and to provide sanitary conditions. The number of packing houses owned and operated by North American companies is on the increase. Consumption and Export With its relatively large production of beef and its small popula- tion, Argentina has a very considerable beef product for export. It is estimated 1 that in 1911 five million head of cattle were slaughtered, of which approximately one million were shipped as dressed beef to markets abroad, and a considerable proportion of the remainder were prepared for export in the form of canned meat, jerked beef, beef ex- TJ. S. Consular and Trade Report, May 18, 1912, p. 669. 11 tract, and other products. Statisticians differ as to the per capita consumption of meat in the Argentine Republic, but Mulhall 1 estimates it at about 140 pounds per annum. The per capita consumption in the United States is estimated at 185 pounds. One would think from cas- Fig. 7. — Four-year-old Steers Bred in Northern Santa Fe and Being Finished on Alfalfa Pasture in Southern Santa Fe ual observation, however, that the per capita consumption of meat in the Argentine Republic is much larger than in the States, and it is quite possible that the available statistics on the subject are not very reliable. At any rate, of the total meat consumed in Argentina a much larger percentage consists of beef than in the United States. This would be true if for no other reason than the scarcity of swine pro- ducts. Relatively speaking, only a very small percentage of the meat consumed by the better classes is pork or bacon. Mutton is used ex- tensively. From some points of view, it would seem that the Argentine Re- public is not favorably located for developing an extensive and profit- able export trade in beef. Closer study, however, shows that their slaughtering establishments can be and are located within easy access to the most favored cattle-producing sections, and also at or near sea- ports having direct and frequent communication with British and qVlulhall’s Dictionary of Statistics, 1890. 12 European ports. That exports of beef have increased rapidly is shown by Table 2 and the accompanying graphic illustration (Fig. 8). The decrease shown in exports of live cattle is due, as already stated, chiefly to the closing of English ports against them. Table 2. — Exports of Beef and of Live Cattle from Argentina 1 Year Beef 2 Cattle lbs. No. 1885 64 280 000 1890 88 288 000 312 150 3 1895 113 352 000 408 126 1900 193 492 000 150 550 1905 398 223 000 262 681 1910 580 142 000 90 000 ^rom Census of the Nation (Argentina) 1908; U. S. Dept, of Com. and Labor, Statis. Abstr. of Foreign Countries, Part 3 ; U. S. Dept, of Agr., Bureau of Statis., Bui. 39; U. S. Consular Rept., Nov. 15, 1910. including chilled, frozen, jerked, and canned beef. 3 1889. Great Britain being by far the leading buyer of dressed beef, the amounts shipped to that country from Argentina and from this coun- try during recent years are significant of the trend of trade conditions. The following table includes chilled and frozen beef. Table 3. — Dressed Beef Imported into Great Britain from Argentina and the United States 1 Year From United States From Argentina cwts. 2 cwts. 1905 2 232 000 2 582 000 1906 2 427 000 2 796 000 1907 2 418 000 2 692 000 1908 1 432 000 3 571 000 1909 857 000 4 208 000 1910 477 000 4 899 000 1911 174 000 6 111000 Annual Statement of Trade of the United Kingdom with Foreign Countries. 2 112 pounds. These figures show how rapidly Argentina has practically monopolized the British beef market. Of the total dressed beef imported by Great Britain in 1911, 84 percent was shipped by Argentina and but 2 per- cent by the United States. 13 It should not be expected that the beef produced in the Argentine Republic on grass alone will grade in the market as high as English, •Scotch, or corn-fed beef from the United States of North America. Fig. 8. — Exports of Beef and of Live Cattle from Argentina, 1855 to 1910 Notwithstanding this, beef is being produced, and in the manner spoken of, that sells in the English market within two cents per pound of the corn-fed beef from the United States. The bulk of the Argen- tine product sells at three to five cents per pound below North Ameri- can dressed beef. Difficulties Surrounding the Industry Some discouragements confront the Argentine beef producer, altho they may be of quite a different character from those elsewhere experienced. For example, since 1900, owing to an outbreak of foot- and-mouth disease and the consequent supposed prevalence of this disease in the Argentine Republic, the ports of Great Britain have been closed against the importation of Argentine live cattle, except for a few months in 1903. There is very little, if any, of this disease in Argentina at the present time. In fact, it does not seem to be a seri- ous handicap to cattle raising there, except as mentioned. Argentine cattle raisers have even gone so far as to suggest the possibility of its being prevalent in a herd without its presence or effect being espe- cially manifest. Other discouragements are found in the way of Texas fever ticks, a form of anthrax commonly spoken of as carbuncle, and 14 Fig. 9. — Not Infrequently Two-year-old Steers that Have Been Largely Developed on Alfalfa Pasture Make Acceptable Killers for Export Chilled Beef tuberculosis. Added to these diseases, other obstacles to be reckoned with are droughts and locusts, which seem to be more or less localized. But notwithstanding all that may be said with reference to the dif- ficulties encountered in cattle raising, it is still a favored and favorite industry in the Argentine Republic, as indicated by the number of men engaged in it and their prosperous condition. The Outlook On the whole, it appears evident that the natural advantages of Argentina will enable her cattle products profitably to compete, as they are already doing, with the grass cattle and lower grades of native beef produced in this country. North American corn-fed beef, so long as the supply lasts, doubtless will continue to command a premium over Argentine grass cattle in the markets of the world. Altho Argen- tina eventually may develop the production of corn-fed cattle, which her soil and climate render quite possible, it is probable that the do- mestic demand in the United States by that time will absorb, as it in- deed already absorbs, practically the entire amount of beef produced here, thus rendering our export trade, and consequently foreign com- petition abroad, an unimportant factor in the industry. The chief concern of beef producers in this country should be, not what effect will South American competition have upon our export 15 trade, but what effect will the possible importation of South American beef to the United States have upon the production of beef cattle here. That corn, and likewise corn-fed cattle, can be produced in Argen- tina, Uruguay, and some other South American countries is an assured fact. The extent to which it will be fed to cattle, however, is limited by the relatively small production of corn and further by the fact that it is a new industry and will not gain favor rapidly because it involves more cropping and labor and considerably more expense. Fig. 10. — A Former Californian ’s Attractive Home in the Argentine It it significant that the expansion of cattle raising in Argentina has ceased, and largely because grain growing is proving more profit- able than cattle raising. The beef product will be much improved but the supply available for export doubtless will not increase more rap- idly than the combined factors of increased population there and among nations consuming her surplus, and the relative decrease of beef production elsewhere. South American beef surplus will be in strong demand; obviously countries willing to pay the highest premium for it will secure it. Again, the cost of production is sure to increase with increased cost of labor and land. Under such conditions it is not antici- pated that the business of raising cattle in the United States will be menaced permanently by Argentine competition. 16 BIBLIOGRAPHY Alfalfa and Beef Production in Argentina. U. S. Dept, of Agr., Report No. 77. By F. W. Bicknell. 1904. Animal Industry of Argentina. U. S. Dept, of Agr., Bureau of Animal Industry, Bui. 48. By F. W. Bicknell. 1903. Argentine International Trade; Its Development. Pan American Union, Bui. 85. Buenos Aires, 1911. Argentine Meat Production and Export, U. S. Daily Consular and Trade Reports for 1910: Cattle raising, old and new. Bui. 118, p. 673. Character and volume of the trade. Bui. 114, p. 605. Chilled and frozen beef. Bui. 115, p. 618. Cold storage companies. Bui. 116, p. 634. Evolution of the beef industry. Bui. 115, p. 620. Increasing prices and expanding markets. Bui. 115, p. 617. Pastoral life in the republic. Bui. 118, p. 673. Present position and outlook. Bui. 114, p. 601. Rising price of cattle. Bui. 116, p. 633. Stock on the ranch. Bui. 119, p. 684. Summary of conditions. Bui. 119, p. 685. Argentine Plains and Andine Glaciers; Life on Our Estancia and an Expe- dition into the Andes. By W. Larden, London, 1911. Argentine Republic. Agricultural and Pastoral Census of the Nation; Stock Breeding and Agriculture in 1908. Yols. 1-3. Argentine Republic. International Bureau of American Republics, Wash- ington, D. C. (now the Pan American Union), Bui. 67. Argentine Republic. International Bureau of American Republics, Wash- ington, D. C. (now the Pan American Union). Review Bulletin, July, 1910. Argentine Republic in 1911. A geographic, agricultural-zootechnic and economic summary. Pan American Union. Bui. 103. 1911. Argentine Shows and Live Stock. By Prof. Robert Wallace. 1904. Argentine Trade Notes. U. S. Daily Consular and Trade Reports. Bui. 118, p. 669. 1912. Argentine Yearbooks. Bibliography of South America, arranged by order of dates, in Mulhall’s Handbook of the River Plate, p. 101. 1885. Cattle Raising in the Americas. Pan American Union bulletin, April, 1910. Handy Guide to the Argentine Republic. Buenos Aires, 1909. Improvement of Herds. Yearbook U. S. Dept, of Agr. 1896, p. 25. Live-stock Breeding in Argentina. South America Journal, London, Janu- ary 14, 1911. Meat in Foreign Markets. U. S. Dept, of Agr., Bureau of Statistics, Bui. 39, pp. 65-70. 1907. Meat Making Prospects in Tropical America. John Barrett, Director Gen- eral of the Pan American Union. Breeder’s Gazette, Chicago, December 6, 1911. Meat Supply and Surplus. U. S. Dept, of Agr., Bureau of Statistics, Bui. 55, p. 98. By Geo. K. Holmes. 1907. Modern Argentina. W. H. Koebel. 1907. Notes on Animal Industry of Argentina. 25th Rept., U. S. Bureau of Ani- mal Industry, pp. 315-333. By Geo. M. Rommel. 1908. Sketch of the Argentine Republic as a Country for Immigration. Argentine Republic, Dept, of Agr. 1904. Story of an Estancia. By George Crampton, London, 1900. The Argentine Estancia. By Fernandez, Buenos Aires, 1903. Through Five Republics of South America. By Percy F. Martin. 1905. Trade and Travel in South America. By F. Alcock, London. 1903. Trade Conditions in Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay. By Lincoln Huch- inson. U. S. Dept, of Commerce and Labor, Bui. 31. 'It is as truly the duty of science to protect agriculture from error as it is to afford new truth.” UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Agricultural Experiment Station URBANA, ILLINOIS, OCTOBER, 1912 CIRCULAR NO. 165 (Fourth Edition, Revised, May, 1913) SHALL WE USE “COMPLETE” COMMERCIAL FERTILIZERS IN THE CORN BELT? By Cyril G. Hopkins Chief in Agronomy and Chemistry Mr. H. R. S. of Livingston county, Illinois, writes as follows : “I have a question in soil fertility which I would like to have refer- • red to Doctor Hopkins. “I find a sentiment growing in favor here for the use of commercial fertilizers. I know of two corn planters sold here last spring with fer- tilizer attachments, but have been unable to find out what fertilizer was used in them. I also know of some who are using a special brand of ‘complete’ commercial fertilizer. This is contrary to the recommenda- tions of our experiment station, I know, but I would like the arguments summarized for and against commercial fertilizers. Would the use of the more soluble fertilizers be recommended for the tenant farmer who leases from year to year from an improvident landlord, but who wishes to improve his crop yield immediately and without leaving a large part of his investment in the ground for a possible successor?” This inquiry, received thru The Breeder's Gazette , involves a very big and very complicated question, but it is a question (hat is already upon us in the great corn-beltslates ; and it is due both to the tenant farmers and to the landowners that the question be answered honestly and in the light of the most complete infor- mation, in the interest of food consumers as well as of food pro- ducers. The real question is, Shall the corn-belt farmer pay ten times as much as he ought to pay for plant food to enrich his soil? Shall he buy nitrogen at 15 to 50 cenls a pound when the air above every acre contains 70 million pounds of free nilro- gen? Shall he buy potassium at 5 to 20 cenls a pound and apply four pounds per acre when his plowed soil already con- tains 30,000 pounds of potassium per acre, with still larger quan- tities in the subsoil ? Because his soil needs phosphorus, shall he employ the fertilizer factory lo make it soluble and tihen buy it at 12 to 30 cents a pound in an acid phosphate or “com- plete” fertilizer when he can get it for 3 cents a pound in the fine-ground natural rock phosphate, and when, by growing and plowing under plenty of clover (either directly or in manure) , he can get nitrogen with profit from the air, liberate potassium from the inexhaustible supply in the soil, and make soluble the phos- phorus in the natural rock phosphate which he can apply in abundance at low cost? The bigness of this question'can best be appreciated from the fact tliat the farmers of the United Stales paid out 104 million dollars for commercial fertilizers in 1909, according to the report of the United Slates Bureau of Census; and the complicated char- acter of the question may be seen from ihe fact tliat there are in the United States about 550 fertilizer manufacturers organized chiefly into great fertilizer trusts and employing thousands of fertilizer agents, with dealers, traveling salesmen, advertising men, etc., reaching into almost every town and hamlet in the United States. Even “leading” farmers are often commissioned to encourage the sale of fertilizers to their neighbors, and are financially rewarded both by commission and by reduced prices on fertilizers purchased for their own use. The National Fertilizer Association has also established the “Middle West Soil Improvement Committee” to encourage the use of commercial fertilizers in the middle west. This commit- tee has established headquarters in Chicago , and has gone to agri- cultural colleges and employed men who, because of their pre- vious connection with public institutions, were thought lo have sufficient knowledge and sufficient reputation to bring large in- fluence to bear upon the agricultural press and upon the agricul- tural people directly, particularly thru the publication of bulletins by the “Middle West Soil Improvement Committee” and the giv- ing of addresses at farmers’ meetings where their names might be placed upon programs with the title of “Professor” from the “Middle West Soil Improvement Committee,” sometimes with the omission of the fact that this is a committee of the 3 National Fertilizer Association. Enormous sums of money are also provided to be used in publishing and advertising and en- couraging the use of ‘‘complete” commercial fertilizers. It is impossible to discuss this question intelligently without first giving an explanation as to what is meant by the ‘‘com- plete” commercial fertilizer. A “complete” commercial fertilizer is one which contains some of each of the three elements nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium, which are usually expressed in terms of the compounds ammonia, “phosphoric acid," and potash. The most common “complete” commercial fertilizer in the United States has a composition known as 2-8-2, which means that it contains in 100 pounds the equivalent of 2 pounds of ammonia, 8 pounds of available “phosphoric acid,” and 2 pounds of potash ; or, in terms of actual plant-food elements, one ton of such fertil- izer contains about 33 pounds of nitrogen, 80 pounds of phosphorus, and 33 pounds of potassium; and, as a general aver- age, such a fertilizer is sold at retail for $20 to $30 per ton. A fifty-bushel crop of corn takes from the soil 75 pounds of nitrogen, 12 of phosphorus, and 36 of potassium; and, in pro- portion to the total yield, other grain crops have approximately the same requirements. Such a crop would require more than a ton per acre of such fertilizer to supply the potassium, or more than two tons to furnish the nitrogen, or from $4 to $6 worth of “complete” fertilizer to provide even the phosphorus for one acre of corn yielding 50 bushels. We should also understand that the air contains an abso- lutely inexhaustible supply of nitrogen wdiich can be freely util- ized by clover, alfalfa, cowpeas, soybeans, vetch, and other legu- minous crops, — all of which are well worth raising for their own sake because they are valuable both for forage and for seed pro- duction. while the nitrogen which they contain can be very largely returned to the soil either in the manure produced by feeding the crops to animals or in the residues that remain after the seed is removed. This is particularly true with the clover crop, the total yield of which may be from tw T o to five tons per acre, while the amount of seed itself may vary from one to five bushels per acre. The normal soils of the north-central states contain an inex- haustible supply of potassium, the amount of that element in the plowed soil of an acre of corn-belt land being about 35,000 pounds, while the subsoil, which gradually becomes the top soil wherever the surface drainage permits even slight washing, contains still more. On the other hand, phosphorus is present 4 in normal soils in limited amounts, and, as a rule, it should be purchased and applied in order to positively enrich the soil in that element. The great source of phosphorus is the natural phosphate rock which is found in vast deposits laid down in beds somewhat the same as limestone. Immense beds of high-grade phosphate rock are found in Tennessee, South Carolina, and Florida ;< and vastly more extensive deposits have been discovered and quite fully investigated by the United States Geological Sur- vey in Wyoming, Utah. Idaho, and Montana. From the measure- ments and computations already made it is safe to say that there are at least 5 billion tons of high-grade natural phosphate rock in the United States (enough for 5 tons per acre for all our farm land) , and probably the amount far exceeds this figure. In addi- tion, there are still more extensive deposits of lower-grade phos- phate found not only in the states mentioned but in many others also. The ordinary “complete” fertilizer is made by taking one ton of ground phosphate rock and adding to it about one ton of sulfuric acid and two tons of “filler,” together with a small amount of nitrogen and potassium; thus producing four tons of “complete” fertilizer of the average composition noted above, with no more phosphorus in the four tons than was contained in the one ton of raw rock phosphate. Fine-ground natural rock phosphate can be delivered at the farmers’ railroad stations in most parts of the corn belt for less than $8 per ton, while the four tons of “complete” fertilizer containing the same amount of phosphorus would cost the same farmer more than $80, as an average. About a year ago I found one farmer in Illinois who had purchased four tons of such a “complete” fertilizer at a cost of $114 ($28.50 per ton) , whereas for $7 he could have purchased in raw rock phos- phate delivered at his railroad station the same amount of phos- phorus as was contained in the four tons of “complete” fertilizer ; and long continued investigations clearly establish the fact that by growingand plowing under leguminous crops, either directly or in manure, he could have secured plenty of nitrogen from the air and have liberated, not only abundant potassium from the inexhaustible supply contained in his soil, but also phosphorus, as needed, from fine-ground natural rock phosphate plowed under in connection with the decaying organic manures. I have given the above figures in order to show something of the enor- 5 mous profit from the manufacture and sale of commercial fer- tilizers. as well as to show that it is not necessary for the farmer to buy small amounts of three different elements of plant food, but rather that he should buy large amounts of one element— so far as we can judge from these broad facts concerning the sup- ply of the plant-food elements in normal soils and in the air, the requirements of the staple farm crops for these elements, and the composition and cost of ‘'complete” commercial fertilizer as well as of ground natural rock phosphate. If now we turn to the question as to what the farmer should do from the standpoint of immediate profit, we have two sources of advice and information for our guidance: First, the fertil- izer manufacturers and dealers and Iheir advertising agents ; and. second, the experiments conducted by agricultural experiment stations established for the sole purpose of discovering the truth. For example, the Smith Agricultural Chemical Com- pany of Columbus, Ohio, publishes a little magazine called Plant Food , attractively printed on excellent paper, which con- ' tains some interesting anecdotes, stories, well-written articles on subjects having no connection with business, and a limited amount of “educational” advertising for “complete” .fertilizers. Thus in the September number for 1912 we find the following: “Soils differ in the plant-food elements required, but in general group themselves as follows : “CLAY SOILS rarely contain much humus even in the natural state. They are generally supplied with Potash, but the supply of Phosphoric Acid is fairly well limited, and varies as to the Ammonia or Nitrogen. Clay soils should have the amount of plant food increased by the addi- tion of a complete fertilizer supplementing farm manure. “SANDY SOILS are usually deficient in all three plant-food ele- ments. especially Potash, and are generally acid. “MUCK SOILS as a rule do not need Ammonia or Nitrogen, but Phos- phoric Acid and Potash are especially needed. “LIMESTONE SOIL is the original rich soil, but its stock of plant food has been depleted by cropping and needs a fertilizer containing Ammo- nia or Nitrogen, Phosphoric Acid and Potash. “Observing the foregoing general statements regarding soils the farmer should be sold a fertilizer that will fit the particular soil he will plant.” Of course, this “educational” mockery is to the effect that a “complete” fertilizer should be applied to all soils except the muck or peat soils, which at most constitute only a fraction of one percent of the cultivated land. On page 11 of Bulletin No. 2 published by the “Middle West Soil Improvement Comjnittee” of Hie National Fertilizer Associ- ation, occurs the following tabular statement: 6 “Paying Results from the Use of Fertilizers’’ Address Crop Amt. Fert. Results Yield Bu. Un- fert. Bu. Gain Bu. (1) Montgomery Co., O Corn 300 90 60 To (2) Medina Co., O Corn 300 80 60 20 (3) Fayette Co., O Corn 300 100 70 30 (4) Camden Co., O Corn 250 60 40 20 (5) New. Vienna, O Corn 100 78 70 8 (6) New Vienna, O Corn 200 85 70 15 (7) Van Wert, O Oats 200 73 33 40 : 8) Van Wert. O Oats 200 70 43 27 It will be found that these figures show an average gain of 20 % bushels of corn per acre from the use of 242 pounds of fertilizer, and 33% bushels of oats per acre from the use of 200 pounds of commercial fertilizer. They constitute the only data (?) represented in the bulletin, and no information is given as to how or by whom these data (?) were secured, but the loca- tions are referred to in a general way by merely naming certain counties or towns in Ohio. The composition of the fertilizer used is not given, but the following statement appears in the bulletin: “A suitable oat fertilizer is one carrying about 2 percent of ammo- nia, 8 percent phosphoric acid and 2 percent potash.” Again, on the title page of Bulletin No. 1 published by the ‘'Middle West Soil Improvement Committee” of the National Fertilizer Association occurs the following statement: “Wheat Grown by H. A. Waggoner, Lindsay, Ohio “Yield, 40 bushels per acre. Complete Fertilizer used — 200 lbs. per acre. “Average Ohio Yield — 16.2 bushels. “Mr. Waggoner's gain — 23.8 bushels per acre. “23.8 bushels wheat at $1.00 $23.80 “Cost of fertilizer 2.80” It will be noted that Mr. Waggoner’s “gain” of “23.8 bushels per acre” is found by subtracting the average yield of wheat for the state of Ohio from the yield of 40 bushels per acre repre- sented to have been secured by Mr. Waggoner on this particular field in some particular year. The composition of the fertilizer used is not represented, but the cost is shown to be $28 per ton. On the title page of Bulletin No. 3 of the “Middle West Soil Improvement Committee” of the National Fertilizer Association is found the following statement : “Wheat On a Darke Co., Ohio, Farm “Yield=-42 bushels per acre. “Average yield of Ohio=16.2 bushels per acre. “Fertilzer analyzed 2% per cent ammonia : 8 per cent available phos- phoric acid; 2*4 per cent potash. “Amount used=300 lbs. per acre.” I quote this because the composition of the fertilizer used is represented. Of course, the sole purpose of the employes of the National Fertilizer Association in publishing these various statements is to influence farmers and landowners to use such ‘'complete'’ commercial fertilizers as they describe and advise, and the enor- mous amounts of money paid by the farmers for such materials certainly indicate that such advertising accomplishes the pur- pose for which it is disseminated. The president of the National Fertilizer Association made the following statement at the last annual convention of that association, as will be seen from the American Fertilizer , issue of July 27, 1912, page 29: “The launching of the Middle West Soil Improvement Committee un- der the auspices of the National Fertilizer Association, has been of more good within the time than any movement made in recent years. I have received regularly from Dr* Bell a report of their activities, and a few weeks ago it was my pleasure to attend one of their business meetings in Chicago, and have never seen a group of business men so thoroughly engrossed in any good 1 work. Mr. Ailing, the untiring chairman and Prof. Bell, our agronomist, hardly take time for a meal when a business session is on/’ I have followed with much interest and with great care the publications and articles prepared for the agricultural press and other work put out by those in the employ of the “Middle West Soil Improvement Committee,” and I should certainly agree that they are working for the “good” of their employers. If now we turn to the results of definite experiments by ag- ricultural experiment stations, we have a right to expect to learn the truth, at least concerning the temporary effect of using such fertilizers. The Agricultural Experiment Station of Indiana published in April, 1912, Bulletin No. 155 entitled “Results of Co-Opera- tion Fertilizer Tests on Clay and Loam Soils,” by J. B. Abbott and S. D. Connor, of the Department of Soils and Crops. The authors have used reasonable prices for farm products and have also been fair to the fertilizer industry in regard to the cost of fertilizers. They report 15 different tests in 11 different counties witn Ttalics mine, C. G. H. 8 the use of the ordinary “2-8-2” fertilizer for corn, and they show that, as a general average, for every dollar invested in such fer- tilizers the value of the increase in the corn crop amounted to $1.59. They also report 18 different tests in 16 different counties with the use of “4-8-4” fertilizer on corn, and show that for every dollar invested in “complete” fertilizer of this composition the value of the increase in the corn crop was worth only 83 cents. Furthermore, they report 19 different tests in 13 different counties with the use of “4-8-4” fertilizer on wheat, and for every dollar invested in the fertilizer the value of the increase produced amounted to $1.30. They report 6 different tests in 4 different counties with the use of “complete” commercial fertilizers of different composi- tion on oats, and, as an average, every dollar invested in the fer- tilizer produced an increase in the oat crop valued at 31 cents. Finally, they report 13 different tests in 7 different counties with the use of “4-8-4” fertilizer on potatoes, and for every dol- lar invested in the fertilizer the increase produced in the potato crop was worth $1.04. It will be seen that as a general average of the fertilizer tests on corn, wheat, and oats, the investment of $1 in “complete” commercial fertilizer paid back only 94 cents. In the summary of this Bulletin occurs the following sig- nificant statement: “Phosphoric acids and potash gave a greater profit, per dollar invested in the fertilizer, than complete fertilizer, on both corn and wheat." “In nearly all experiments with all crops on clay and loam soils phos- phoric acids was found to be the most effective of the fertilizer elements.” Thus the data reported show that while 4-8-4 fertilizer for corn paid back only 83 cents out of each dollar invested, when the nitrogen was omitted from the fertilizer it then paid back $1.19 for each dollar invested. In other words, by omitting the nitrogen the net loss of 17 cents was changed to a net profit of 19 cents. Furthermore, as may be seen from the results mentioned above, when both the nitrogen and potassium were reduced by one-half (from 4-8-4 to 2-8-2) , the net return per dollar invested was changed from a loss of 17 cents to a profit of 59 cents; and, in harmony with the above quotation, the authors of this bulle- tin show that when the nitrogen was entirely omitted from the 2-8-2 fertilizer used for corn, the net profit per dollar invested rose from 59 cents to $1.24. 9 This series of experiments did not include any tests wi th the use of phosphorus atone;, but Circular No. 10 of the Indiana Station gives the results from a comparative test with acid phos- phate and raw rock phosphate conducted in Scott county over a period of four years with a two-year rotation of corn and wheat. If we allow $15 per ton for the acid phosphate and $7.50 per ton for the ground natural phosphate, and figure the crops at the same prices as were used by the Indiana Station (35 cents a bushel for corn and 80 cents for wheat) , we find that for each dollar invested the acid phosphate paid back $2.45 and the raw phosphate $3.41. as net profit. In commenting upon these experiments in Indiana Circular No. 10, Director Goss emphasizes the fact that the acid phosphate gave better results for the first two years, but that ‘"during the third and fourth season, however, the rock produced very strik- ing results, even forging ahead of the acid.” Attention should be called to the fact that where land is rented on shares, from one-third to one-half of the crop goes to the landlord; and this, of course, would include his^share of the total crop, even tho the tenant made some use of “complete” com- mercial fertilizer, hoping thereby to overcome the difficulty of having to deal with an improvident landlord. According to Bulletin No. 155 of the Indiana Experiment Station, the increase, as an average, was never sufficient to justify the tenant in paying for the fertilizer and depending upon one-half of the increase for his profit, and in only one case was two-thirds of the average increase sufficient to pay for the cost of the “complete” fertilizer. Director Charles E. Thorne of the Ohio Experiment Station has reported the results from seven years of investigation where steamed bone meal has been used “side by side withffour brands of factory-mixed, ‘complete’ fertilizer. These brands represent some of the most reputable manufacturers in the state and range from 4 percent ammonia, 10 percent phosphoric acid, and 4 per- cent polash, to 1 percent ammonia, 6 percent phosphoric acid, and 1 percent potash. The fertilizers are all applied at the rate of 20o pounds per acre to corn and wheat grown.in rotation and followed by one year in clover.” As a general average, the “complete” commercial fertilizer increased the yield of corn by 5% bushels per acre, while the steamed bone meal increased the yield by 11 bushels. The “complete” fertilizer increased the yield of wheat by 10 9% bushels per acre, while the steamed bone meal increased the yield by 14% bushels. The “complete” fertilizer increased the yield of hay by 535 pounds per acre, as an average, while the steamed bone meal increased the yield by 1300 pounds. In no case did any one of the four different “complete” fer- tilizers produce as large an average increase in any crop as was produced by the steamed bone meal. The steamed bone meal contains from 3 to 5 times as much phosphorus as the “complete” commercial fertilizer and costs, as a rule, not more than $28 per ton, which is the same as was paid for the “complete” fertilizer used by Mr. Waggoner in accordance with the statement quoted above from Bulletin No. 1 of the “Mid- dle West Soil Improvement Committee” of the National Fertilizer Association. These Ohio investigations show that, as an average, the “complete” fertilizer was used with at least temporary profit. It should be remembered that the increase in the yield of a crop from the use of a fertilizer is produced standing in the field and not delivered at the market, and that the expense of getting the crops from the field to the market must be deducted from the market price. Even unavoidable loss from exposure to weather conditions, destruction by animals, etc., should also be deducted. If we allow 35 cents a bushel for corn, 70 cents for wheat, and $8 a ton for hay, we are probably using at least as high prices as can be justified for these crops standing in the field in Livingston county, Illinois, considering a ten-year average. Each computation on this basis will show that $5.60 invested in “complete” fertilizer at $28 per ton produced (as an average of Ihe Ohio investigations mentioned above) a net profit of $5.23, while the same investment in steamed bone meal produced an average net profit of $13.60. In other words, the net profit was 2% times as great from the use of steamed bone meal as it was where the same amount of money was invested in “complete” fertilizer. These results show that if a tenant farmer had paid for the “complete” fertilizer and retained one-half of the increase, he would have scarcely got back the money spent for “complete” fertilizer, while $5.60 spent for steamed bone meal would have paid back $9.60 in his half of the increase. (Steamed bone meal is a good phosphorus fertilizer. It is more readily available but much more expensive than raw rock phosphate.) . 11 Attention should also be called to the fact that in another experiment conducted by the Ohio Agricultural Experiment Sta- tion, with the same rotation of corn, wheat, and clover, the aver- age of all crops harvested during a period of fifteen years where manure alone was used, in comparison with the crops grown where manure and raw rock phosphate were both used, shows that for every dollar invested the raw phosphate was used with much greater profit than the steamed bone meal in the seven- year experiment noted above. These experiments also included a comparative test with the use of acid phosphate applied at about twice the cost of the raw rock. If we accept the prices used by the Ohio Station for these materials and for the value of the crops produced, and follow the Ohio method of computing the increase produced by the phosphorus, the latest report from Director Thorne (Ohio Cir- cular No. 120) shows that for every dollar invested the acid phos- phate paid back $5.10 and the ground rock phosphate $6.20, net profit. In these experiments some rational economic provision was made for supplying nitrogen and organic matter by including clover in the rotation and applying farm manure to be plowed under for corn, carrying the added phosphates in intimate con- tact with the decaying organic manures; but of course the same kinds and amounts of manure were always applied without phosphate to other similar land for comparison with the phos- phated manure. The results given above represent the averages of tests made with two different kinds of manure (exposed barnyard manure and fresh stable manure) ; but, because of the great waste of manure from exposure in the barnyard, we are of course most interested in the results secured by the addition of phosphorus to fresh manure. The same methods of computation (those used by the Ohio Station) show that for every dollar invested the acid phosphate paid back $5.03, while the raw rock phosphate paid back $6.76, net profit, when used in addition to fresh manure, these results representing the net value of the increase produced by the phos- phorus over and above that produced by the manure alone. It may be added that as an average of all crops harvested dur- ing the fifteen years, the yields per acre were as follows : Soil treatment Corn, bu. Wheat, bu. Clover, tons None 33.0 11.2 1.30 Manure alone 54.6 21.0 1.80 Manure and acid phosphate 62.4 25.7 2.28 Manure and rock phosphate 62.0 26.1 2.25 By using these data and the prices commonly used by the Illi- nois Experiment Station, it is figured that each dollar invested in raw rock phosphate paid back §6.42 net profit; while the acid phosphate, costing twice as much money altho containing only one-half as much phosphorus, paid back only §2.69 net profit for each dollar invested. In commenting recently upon these Ohio investigations (Prairie Farmer, December 15, 1912,), Director Thorne makes the following statements: “When manure is reinforced by materials carrying phosphorus to make up for its inevitable deficiency in this element, and is then applied directly to the field or protected from the losses due to exposure to the weather in open barnyards, or to heating in piles, either in stable, yard or field, there is nothing better for keeping up the fertility of the soil. The assertion is made that on most farms not enough manure is produced to keep up the fertility, which is true. In this case the manure must be reinforced with whatever elements are not supplied in sufficient quantity. Phosphorus in the form of raw rock phosphate or acid phosphate is gen- erally the essential element. In our experiments 40 pounds of rockphos- phate costing 17 cents, added over a dollar to the crop- producing value of a ton of manure, because it supplied the element lacking in the ma- nure.” For more complete details of these and other investigations where raw phosphate has been used in comparison with other fertilizers, the reader is referred to Illinois Experiment Station Circulars 127 and 130 and Soil Report No. 2, which will be sent free of charge upon request to the Agricultural Experiment Sta- tion, Urbana, Illinois. Since the publication of the first edition of this circular (No. 165) by the Illinois Experiment Station, there has appeared in the agricultural press an advertisement a photographic repro- duction of which is shown on the opposite page. This advertis- ing statement by the “Middle West Soil Improvement Committee" (of the National Fertilizer Association) is reproduced here in order to do full justice to the subject, with respect both to the farmers and to the advocates of “complete” fertilizers. 13 Soil Improvement Talks No. 1. DR. CHAS. E. THORNE, DIRECTOR OF THE OHIO EX- PERIMENT STATION has made actual farm tests for 18 years on a rotation of corn, oats, wheat and hay (circular No. 120.) He found that the liberal application of suit- able, complete fertilizers, at an average cost for fertilizer of $19.78 per acre per rotation, gave an av- erage gross return of $32.84 per acre per rotation, or an average net profit of $13.06 per acre per rotation. This is an average profit of over 66% on the money spent for fertilizers. For full information how such results are being obtained by others, mail coupon below today. l WEST E SOIL IMPROVEMENT 9 16^9 l^Poftal Tel. Bldg. CHICAGO, ILLINOIS rmmmmmCUT OUT AND MAIL - - Send me without Cost or obligation your Special Crop Bulletins. Name One highly commendable feature and also some questionable points in this advertisement deserve special mention: (1) The figures are truthfully reported from Circular 120 of the Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station, and they represent the actual average results of eighteen years of careful investi- 14 / gation with ‘‘complete” fertilizers by Director Thorne, at Wooster, in a five-year rotation of corn, oats, wheat, clover, and timothy, grown on five different series of plots, so that every crop may be represented every year. As a general average, the “complete” fertilizers have cost the Ohio Station $19.78 per acre for the ro- tation, and the increase in crops (at the prices used by Director Thorne) has been worth $32.84, thus showing a profit of $13.06. or 66 cents for each dollar invested. Of course these figures are in striking contrast with those reported on pages 6 and 7, where, for example, a gain is indicated of $23.80 from an investment of $2.80 by Mr. Waggoner. (2) In comparison with “complete” fertilizers, phosphorus was used alone in these Ohio experiments; and the same Ohio circular (No. 120) shows that $2.60 invested in phosphorus gave a net profit of $13.93 per acre per rotation. In other words, as an average of these most trustworthy investigations covering eighteen years, the actual profit per acre from $2.60 invested in phosphorus was 87 cents greater than that from $19.78 invested in the “complete” fertilizers. The fact is that the expenditure for nitrogen and potassium was worse than useless; for, when the net returns are computed as above, it is seen that the actual prof- its were reduced 87 cents per acre by the purchase of nitrogen and potassium. It will be noted that for every dollar invested in phosphorus alone there was a net profit of $5.36, compared with the average of 66 cents from “complete” fertilizers. Of course the profit from phosphorus would have been, still greater if the increased crops produced by the phosphorus had been returned to the soil to a considerable extent, either in farm manure or in green manures and crop residues, as they would be in rational systems of farming. If one invests $2.60 in phosphorus and receives $16.53 there- from in increased crops, then it would seem that the man who has any more money to invest in fertilizers would buy more, phosphorus,. rather than spend it for nitrogen and potassium, which fail to pay even their cost. II may be added that where nitrogen was .used alone in these same Ohio experiments, it paid back only 58 percent of its cost, while nitrogen and potassium together paid back only 52 percent of their cost. Potassium alone did not pay its cost, but when used in addition to phos- phorus each dollar invested in potassium paid an apparent profit of 22 cents in five years, which is less than 5 percent per annum. (3) Another very important point to consider is that the Ohio Experiment Station did not buy the “complete” fertilizers used in these experiments, but bought the ingredients and mixed them at about two-thirds the average cost of the rbady-mixed “complete” fertilizers. If we figure the cost of the ‘'complete” fertilizers used at the ordinary price (such, for example, as Mr. Waggoner p a id_ S ee paged), then the average profit drops at once from 66 percent to 11 percent, or to about 2 percent per annum on the money invested. (4) Stilt another point needs careful consideration : Thisis the price of farm produce. In all of these computations by the Ohio Experiment Station the prices allowed are 40 cents a bushel for corn, 30 cents for oats, 80 cents for wheat, $8 a ton for hay, $2 for straw, and $3 for corn stalks. It should be remembered that these prices are for the products in the field, and that they must bring enough more in the market to cover unavoidable losses and the cost of binding twine, shocking, stacking, thresh- ing. husking, baling, and hauling to market. The judgment of the farmer in regard to such losses, expenses, and average crop values in his locality is usually better than that of either the ex- perimenter or the fertilizer agent. The crop values used by the Ohio Station are about 30 per- cent higher than those which have been commonly used for aver- age conditions in Illinois, where straw and corn stalks standing- in the field may have no market value. Such a change in values would reduce the average profit from “complete” fertilizers 66 to 28 percent for the five years, or to less than 6 percent per annum, even at Ohio prices for home-mixed fertilizers. (All of the fertilizers used in these experiments are applied during the first eighteen months of the five-year period.) These very valuable Ohio experiments furnish additional definite proof of the need of purchasing phosphorus in profitable systems of permanent soil improvement; but the results do not justify advising the use of “complete” fertilizers in general farm- ing on normal corn-belt soils; and, for the sake of maintaining general industrial prosperity, as Well as for their own sake, farmers and landowners should be encouraged to invest their money in the positive and permanent improvement of their soils, rather than to spend it for small amounts of high-priced “com- plete” fertilizers in systems of ultimate land ruin, which will finally leave them too poor ever to adopt systems of permanent agriculture. When we consider the widespread practice which prevailed 16 among farmers only a few years ago of planting crops and per- forming many other farm operations in accordance with the “signs of the moon,” a-nd the practice of “witching for water,” it is not so strange that in the older states they should use the widely advertised “complete” commercial fertilizers with small temporary profit in systems of ultimate land ruin, instead of basing their practices upon definite, practical, scientific infor- mation which is already easily available to any man who will study the existing trustworthy data and the long continued in- vestigations conducted by such public-service institutions as the agricultural experiment stations. Such information clearly shows to the careful reader that in profitable systems of general farming nitrogen should be secured from the air. potassium should be liberated from the inexhaustable supply naturally con- tained in all normal corn-belt soils, and that phosphorus should be purchased and applied liberally in low-priced fine-ground natural rock phosphate, ground limestone (likewise alow-priced natural fertilizer) also being used where needed. NOTES Natural Rock Phosphate Fine-ground raw rock phosphate, containing from 10 to 14 percent of phosphorus, can be obtained from the following companies, delivered in bulk on board cars at the mines in Tennessee for $2.50 to $5 per ton, the price varying with the quality. The freight rate from Tennessee per ton of 2000 pounds in carload lots varies from $2.50 to points in southern Illinois, to $3.58 to northern Illinois points. Of course, these addresses are given solely as a matter of information, and the Experiment Station makes no recommendation or guarantees as to reliability. Mt. Pleasant Fertilizer Co., Mt. Pleasant, Tenn. Robin Jones, Nashville, Tenn. Natural Phosphate Co., Nashville, Tenn. Farmers Ground Rock Phosphate Co., Mt. Pleasant, Tenn. Ruhm Phosphate Mining Co., Mt. Pleasant, Tenn. Powdered Rock Phosphate Co., Columbia, Tenn. Farmers Union Phosphate Co., Birmingham, Ala. Southern Lime & Phosphate Co., Birmingham, Ala. Blue Grass Phosphate Co., Mt. Pleasant, Tenn. Federal Chemical Co., Columbia, Tenn. Central Phosphate Co., Mt. Pleasant, Tenn. Central Kentucky Phosphate Co., Wallace, Ky. American Fertilizer Co., Santa Fe, Texas. It should be borne in mind that rock phosphate varies much in quality. Consequently, it should always be purchased upon a guaranteed analysis, and it is advisable for the purchaser to take an average sample of the carload when received and have it analyzed both for phosphorus and for fineness, even tho the analysis cost him $2 or $3. To collect an average sample take a small teaspoonful from about fifty different places in the car, not only from the surface but also from different depths. These fifty spoonfuls well mixed together will make atrustworthy sample and about one pound of this should be sent to some commercial chemist for analysis. 17 If 12 % -percent rock, containing 250 pounds of phosphorus per ton, costs $7.50 including freight), then 10-percent rock, containing 200 pounds of the element per ton, is worth $6, a difference in value of $1.50 per ton, which, on a 30-ton car, amounts to $45. The important phosphorus compound in rock phosphate is calcium phosphate, Gas P04)2. The percentage of this compound in the rock phosphate marks the purity of the rock. Thus, if the rock phosphate contains 60 percent of calcium phosphate, it is 60 percent pure, with 40 percent of impurities. Sometimes the guarantee is given as “phosphoric acid," meaning phosphoric oxid, P 2 Os. This also is a definite compound and always con- tains 43% percent of the element phosphorus. Thus it will be seen that the same sample of rock phosphate maybe guaranteed to contain 62 per- cent of calcium phosphate, Cas (P04)2, or 28.4 percent of “phosphoric acid" {P 2 Os), or 12.4 percent of phosphorus (P). Raw’ rock phosphate should be very finely ground, so that at least 90 percent of the material can be washed thru a sieve with 100 meshes to the liuear inch, or with 10,000 meshes to the square inch. Of course, anyone can test for fineness by sifting ten ounces and then drying and weighing what will not wash thru the sieve. As a rule, it is more satisfactory to purchase in bulk rather than in bags (see page 15 of ^Circular 110) . Bone Meal A good grade of steamed bone-meal (about 12% percent phosphorus can be obtained delivered in Illinois for about $25 a ton, from the local agents of Morris & Go., Swift & Go., Armour & Co., the American Glue Co., or the American Fertilizer Co., Chicago. 111., or from the Empire Carbon Works, National Stock Yards, East St. Louis, 111. Potassium Salts Potassium chlorid (so-called “muriate of potash"), containing about 42 percent of potassium, can be obtained for about $45 a ton from Armour & Co., Swift & Co., or Darling & Co., Union Stock Yards, Chicago, 111., from the German Kali Works or the Nitrate Agencies Co., Chicago, 111., from A. Smith & Bro., Tampico, 111., or from the American Agricul- tural Chemical Go., New York, N. Y., and kainit, containing about 10 per- cent of potassium, together with some magnesium sulfate, magnesium chlorid, and sodium chlorid, can also be obtained from Armour & Co., Darling & Co., Swift & Co., Hirsch, Stein & Co., the Chicago Fertilizer Works, or the German Kali Works, Chicago, 111., for about $13 a ton. Ground Limestone Ground limestone can now be obtained at 60 cents a ton ($1 in bags, to be returned at purchaser’s expense and risk’i from the Southern Illinois Penitentiary, Menard,. 111., and at different prices from the follow- ing companies. Casper Stolle Quarry & Contracting Co., East St. Louis, 111. (quarry at Stolle, 111.) Southwestern Contracting & Engineering Co., East St. Louis, 111. Ellis Bros., Elsberry, Mo. Carthage Superior Limestone Co., Carthage, Mo. Mitchell Lime Co., Mitchell, Ind. John Armstrong Lime & Quarry Co., Alton, 111. Lehigh Stone Co., Kankakee, 111. Elmhurst-Chicago Stone Co., Elmhurst, 111. East St. Louis Stone Co., East St. Louis, 111. Columbia Quarry Co., St. Louis, Mo. (quarry at Columbia, 111.) McLaughlin-Mateer Co., Kankakee, 111. West Side Quarries Co., Kankakee, 111. 18 Lockyer Quarry Co., Alton, Mo. Western Whiting & Mfg. Co., Elsah, 111. Eldred Stone Co., Eldred, 111. Marblehead Lime Co., Masonic Temple, Chicago, 111. (quarries at Quincy, 111.) United States Crushed Stone Co., 184 LaSalle St., Chicago, 111. Dolese & Shepard Co., 184 LaSalle St., Chicago, 111. Fruitgrowers Refrigerating & Power Co., Anna, 111. Biggsville Crushed Stone Co., Biggsville, 111. Hart & Page, Rockford, 111. McManus & Tucker, Keokuk, Iowa. Moline Stone Co., Moline, 111. John Markman, Gladstone, 111. Superior Stone Co., 218 Hearst Bldg., Chicago, 111. Brownell Improvement Co.,' 1220 Chamber of Commerce, Chicago, 111. Dolese Bros. Co., 128 N. LaSalle St., Chicago, 111. Ohio & Indiana Stone Co., Indianapolis, Ind. (quarry at Greencastle, Ind.) 0. M. Fulwider, Bloomington, Ind. Some of these companies furnish fine-ground limestone and some furnish limestone screenings, which include both vqry fine dust and some coarse particles even as large as corn kernels. In carload lots the price on board cars at the plant varies from 50 cents to $1 a ton according to fineness. The freight charges are one-half cent per ton per mile, with a minimum charge of 25 cents per ton by each railroad handling the car, and with a minimum carload of 30 tons. At most points in Illinois the cost delivered in bulk in box cars should be between $1 and $2 a ton. Sometimes one can get one and one-half tons of material containing one ton of fine dust and half a ton of coarser particles, varying in size from less than pinheads to corn kernels, at no greater expense than would be required for one ton of fine-ground stone containing no coarser particles. The coarser particles will last in the soil longer than the finer material, which is rapidly lost by leaching; and a product that will all pass thru a sieve with 8 or 10 meshes to the linear inch, and that contains all of the fine dust produced in the process of crushing or grinding, is very satis- factory. Portable machines for crushing and grinding limestone, using thresh- ing engines for power, can be obtained from — Williams Patent Crusher & Pulverizer Co., St. Louis, Mo. Universal Crusher Co., Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Pennsylvania Crusher Co., Pittsburgh, Pa. Wheeling Mold & Foundry Co., Wheeling, W. Ya. Jeffrey Manufacturing Co., Columbus, Ohio. TO ILLINOIS BANKERS In its publication entitled ‘“Create a Soil as Well as a Bank Reserve,'’ the Illinois Bankers’ Association Committee on Agri- culture and Vocational Education renders the following verdict: “It is wisest to follow the teachings of the University of Illinois College of Agriculture in the purchase and use of fertilizers. Advice given by so-called “Soil Improvement Committees, M representing private individuals or those who have something to sell, is not always the best." 10 Clover on Southern Illinois Soil: Fairfield Experiment Field, 1910. Manure Alone on Left; Manure, Limestone and Raw Rock Phosphate on Right.- . Clover Seeded Alike on Both Sides.) Wheat on Illinois Corn-Belt Prairie Soil at Urbana. As an average of four Years, Rock Phosphate has Increased the Yield by 10 ]■> Bushels per Acre. RESOLUTION (Adopted by the Illinois State Farmers’ Institute at its Annual Meeting, February, 1913.) '‘Resolved, That we endorse the Illinois system of permanent agricul- ture and recommend its adoption throughout the state. We disapprove the action of the Middle West Soil Improvement Committee of the Na- tional Fertilizer Association, posing as an educational institution, and by so doing trying to enlist the aid of farm papers, country newspapers, and bankers in distributing its misleading information, in an effort to create a sentiment in favor of mixed commercial fertilizers in Illinois. The State Farmers’ Institute hereby advises editors, farmers, bankers and others against accepting the teachings of, or assisting in any way, this or any other organization whose teachings are contrary to the facts estab- lished by our State Experiment Station." From Ohio Experiment Station Bulletin 183 THE PRODUCE OF ONE TON OF MANURE i v, ’4 From one ton of barnyard From one ton of fresh From one ton of stable manure manure stable manure reinforced with raw phosphate UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Agricultural Experiment Station URBANA ILLINOIS, MAY, 1913 CIRCULAR NO. 166 A METHOD FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF BUTTERMILK FROM PASTEURIZED CREAM By LeRoy Lang Assistant in Dairy Manufactures At the present time there is a general demand for pasteurized dairy products, showing that the public appreciates clean, safe food. The pasteurization of cream for butter-making is becom- ing more general, and while this process enables the buttermaker to produce uniform butter, it has a subsequent detrimental effect upon the buttermilk. The buttermilk from pasteurized cream is thin and watery, usually lacking in flavor, and wheys off very readily; it may also lack the desired buttermilk acidity which the trade demands. Because of these defects, many creameries are losing the oppor- tunity to supply the current demand for good buttermilk. Some creamery operators insist that the loss due to the decreased de- mand for buttermilk from pasteurized cream is equal to two cents per pound on the butter. The economical disposal of the by- product of the creamery is more important than the development of creamery side lines. The method described in this circular for improving butter- milk from pasteurized cream has been tried at the University of Illinois Creamery and has proved to be very successful. It con- sists in adding to the pasteurized buttermilk about 10 percent of a starter prepared from a culture sold under the commercial name of Bacillus Bulgaricus. When properly made, this preparation both furnishes a pleasant acid and changes the thin pasteurized buttermilk into a heavy-bodied product with all the pleasing characteristics of raw buttermilk. In ordering the commercial culture of Bacillus Bulgaricus, ‘ the purpose for which it is to be used should be specified and the culture which makes the milk viscous should be requested. Since this product is made from nine parts of buttermilk and one part of skim milk, it should not be sold under the name “buttermilk” unless the other ingredients are also named on the label. 1 It differs from the ordinary commercial buttermilk, which is made by ripening two equal amounts of skim milk, one with a commercial butter culture and the other with a com- mercial culture of Bacillus Bulgaricus, and churning the two lots together. This preparation of pasteurized buttermilk will be of interest to many creameries where the manufacture of the ordinary com- mercial buttermilk is impossible. Apparatus The Bacillus Bulgaricus culture developes best at a tempera- ture between 95° and 100° F. This is 20° to 30° above the best temperature for the growth of the cream-ripening cultures. It has been found convenient to hold the quart bottles or eight- gallon cans in which the cultures are being developed in a wash sink 30 x 20 x 16 inches deep. By means of water and steam con- nections, the sink is kept full of water at a temperature between 95° and 100° F., thus serving the purpose of an incubator. The quart bottles are supported by a rack so that they are immersed within three inches of the top. With this arrangement it is necessary to warm the water by the admission of steam about every six hours in order that the temperature may be maintained between 95° and 100° F. Besides the bottle rack, this sink holds an eight-gallon can for the bulk culture. 1 Ruling of Board of Food and Drug Inspection, Bureau of Chemistry, U. S. Dept of Agr. 3 Wash Sink Equipped for Growing Bacillus Bulgaricus Culture i 4 The sink and bottle rack are also used for pasteurizing milk in bottles for culture propagation. Preparing Skim Milk for the Culture Care must be exercised in the selection of skim milk for the propagation of the first mother culture. If the skim milk is fresh and clean and pasteurized twice at a temperature of 185° F. for thirty minutes, and an interval of six to ten hours is allowed between pasteurizations, during which the milk is held at 90° F., a good milk for the culture is insured. With ordinary creamery milk, which often has an acidity approaching .2 percent, or is not clean, it is advisable to pasteurize the milk three times at in- tervals of six hours before inoculating the first culture. The pasteurization may be made either in quart bottles or in the starter can. If in bottles, they should be thoroly scalded with boiling water before the milk from the starter can is placed in them. (Quart bottles should be filled only three-fourths full.) The time of pasteurization should be counted from the time the milk reaches a temperature of 185° F. When pasteurizing milk in quart bottles set in a vat of water, from twenty-five to thirty minutes are required to heat the milk to 185° F. after the water surrounding the bottles attains a temperature of 190° F. When using cans set in water at 190° F., from fifteen to twenty minutes are required to bring the milk temperature to 185° F. Creamery skim milk, thoroly pasteurized and containing less than .2 percent acidity, furnishes milk of a satisfactory quality for all propagations except the first one. However, if there is any doubt as to the thoroness of the pasteurization, the milk should be re-pasteurized; or, if the pasteurized milk is to be held six to ten hours before it is inoculated, the periodic pas- teurizations always insure better results. Since the spore forms vegetate in a few hours, very poor milk may result from one pasteurization, and when creamery pasteurized milk is held several hours in the starter can and not cooled, a sweet curd is a common result. This is caused by organisms which are in a dormant condition when heated but which vegetate and multiply rapidly after the pasteurization is finished and the temperature has not been sufficiently reduced to check their growth. 5 If the milk for the mother culture or bulk culture cannot be inoculated at once, it should be cooled and then warmed to a temperature between 95° and 100° F. just before the inoculation is made. The temperature for the best growth of Bulgaricus is also favorable for gas organisms and the dormant forms before mentioned, but if the Bulgaricus is given opportunity, it will predominate and produce a fine, heavy-bodied culture. Preparation of Mother Cultures As a matter of convenience it is desirable to develop cultures in quart bottles, especial care being taken to keep them pure and active; these are called “mother cultures.” In order to obtain sufficient material for adding to the buttermilk, similar cultures are developed in cans and referred to as “bulk” cultures. After the milk in the bottles is cooled to 100° F., it is inocu- lated with the commercial culture of Bacillus Bulgaricus, which may be obtained from any dairy bacteriological laboratory. After the addition of this culture, the temperature is maintained between 95° and 100° F. for twenty-four hours. If the first propagation of B. Bulgaricus is made carefully, the desirable characteristics will be more evident in the first cul- ture of the mother starter than they will be in a first transfer of the ordinary butter culture. The Bulgaricus Bacillus grows rapidly and produces acid much faster and in larger quantities than does the common lactic acid germ. Several of the Bulgaricus propagations produce 2% percent acid in forty-eight hours. Of 150 mother cultures grown from four primary cultures, an average acidity of 1.49 percent was produced in twenty-four hours. This production of acid is so rapid that the first culture acquires 1 percent or more of acid in twenty-four hours, and the curd formed is viscous and ropy. The second propagation is made on the day following the first inoculation. Milk from the starter can that has been pas- teurized to 185° F. for thirty minutes may be used, but if pasteurized twice, better results are assured. The quart bottle is thoroly scalded and the milk placed in it as on the previous day. A milk-testing pipette of 17.6-cc. capacity, dipped in boiling 0 water before being used, serves as a very convenient instrument for inoculating the second bottle from the first. The first mother culture is shaken with a rotary motion, and the pipette of cul- ture is removed and placed in the bottle of pasteurized milk, thus inoculating the second culture with 17 to 18 cc. from the first culture grown. This second culture is also shaken with a rotary motion and then placed in the bottle rack. This rack may be kept permanently in the sink of water, or improvised incubator, at a temperature between 95° and 100° F. The next day the sec- ond propagation is inoculated into the third mother culture just as on the previous day the first propagation was inoculated into the second culture. The remainder of the second mother culture is then ready for use in ten to twenty gallons of milk, for the production of a bulk culture of Bulgaricus. Preparation of Bulk Culture In making the bulk culture, use a pint or a pint and one-half of mother culture for every ten gallons of pasteurized milk. Mix the culture thoroly thruout the milk and hold at a tempera- ture between 95° and 100° F. for eighteen to twenty-four hours, or until it has an acidity varying from 1.2 to 1.5 percent. The body of the culture should be viscous and heavy. The average acidity produced in the bulk cultures which were used at the University Creamery for buttermilk improvement was 1.58 per- cent in twenty-four hours. The characteristic of the Bulgaricus culture is the heavy, viscous consistency of the curd which is formed. The viscosity of the culture which is necessary for buttermilk improvement is obtained when the proportion of acid approximates 1 percent. The viscosity is not increased by holding a culture and producing acid above 1.5 percent. Furthermore, if the acid exceeds this amount, a sharp acid flavor is likely to result. However, there may be trade conditions making it advisable to use a high acid bulk culture. The cultures do not always develop alike. The rapid grow- ing ones are most desirable, and are fully developed in eighteen hours. If the bulk culture is not to be used at once,*it should be cooled to 50° F., or lower, to check further acid development. 7 If possible, it should be placed in the refrigerator; in this way it may be kept for three days without injury, altho the acid gradu- ally increases. The bulk culture may be propagated in ordinary five- or ten- gallon milk cans. However, after the culture is developed it should not be held for any length of time in metal containers but should be placed in earthen or enamel ware in order to avoid a metallic flavor caused by the action of the acid upon the metal. Mixing Bulgaricus with Pasteurized Buttermilk The amount of bulk culture which should be mixed with the pasteurized buttermilk depends upon the acidity and the body of the buttermilk the trade demands, and the quality of the pas- teurized buttermilk which is to be improved. Ordinarily, by mixing from ten to fifteen gallons of bulk culture with one hun- dred gallons of pasteurized buttermilk a very satisfactory product is obtained. When the culture is poured into the buttermilk, it should be mixed thoroly by stirring; it is not at all necessary to churn the mixture, in fact, churning will reduce the viscosity. The acidity of this treated buttermilk will range from .65 to .85 percent. At the University Creamery, the buttermilk as sold is a mix- ture of one gallon of culture to nine gallons of pasteurized but- termilk. The bulk culture is added to buttermilk fresh from the churn. The acidity of this buttermilk when prepared varies from .7 to .8 percent, and it does not whey off appreciably in forty- eight hours. Cultures Made from Skim-Milk Powder Where it is impossible to get good clean skim milk, it may be necessary to use skim-milk powder. In making the mjlii, imo three-fourths of a pound of skim-milk powder to a gallon of pure water. Proceed with this milk the same a e with ordinary skim milk, pasteurizing it at a temperature between 185° and 190° F. for thirty minutes. The cultures made from skim-milk powder have a distinct caramelized flavor; however, after the bulk culture is added to the buttermilk, this flavor is scarcely noticeable and not objectionable. UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Agricultural Experiment Station URBANA, ILLINOIS, MAY, 1913 CIRCULAR NO. 167 THE ILLINOIS SYSTEM OF PERMANENT FERTILITY 1 By Cyril G. Hopkins Chief in Agronomy and Chemistry I have been invited to speak upon the Illinois system of permanent fertility ; but I wish to state in the beginning thaL in complying with this request, I am speaking in a representative capacity. Many have contributed to the development of this system, including both able investigators in other states and countries, my own colleagues in the investigation of Illinois soils, and the truly scientific farmers of this state, some of whom have kept their own farm practice so close up to the work of the Experiment Station as to exert great influence upon the adoption of systems of permanent fertility. It is more than fifty years since Liebig wrote the following words : “Agriculture is, of all industrial pursuits, the richest in facts, and the poorest in their comprehension. Facts are like grains of sand which are moved by the wind, but principles are these same grains cemented into rocks.” An important part of the work performed in Illinois has con- sisted in assembling the facts the world affords and cementing these into concrete forms which serve as a firm foundation upon which to build systems of permanent agriculture. 1 Address before the Illinois State Fanners Institute at Sterling, February 19, 1913, 9 The main problem of permanent fertility is simple. It con- sists, in a word, in making sure that every essential element of plant food is continuously provided to meet the needs of maximum crops ; and of course any elements which are not so provided by nature must be provided by man. The whole subject has been greatly and unnecessarily complicated, not only by erroneous theories commonly held by farmers and sometimes advocated by falsely so-called scientists holding official positions, such as the theory that crop rotation will maintain the fertility of the soil, but also by the ruinous policy of most commercial fertilizer interests in urging and often persuading farmers to use small amounts of high-priced so-called “complete” fertilizers which add to the soil only a fraction of the plant food actually required by the crops removed, with the inevitable result that the land it- self is steadily impoverished. The more rational system makes use of abundant quantities of all essentials but at a cost low enough to be within reasonable reach. Those materials which are naturally contained in the soil in inexhaustible amounts are liberated from the soil and Ihus made available for crop production; those contained in the air are likewise drawn upon as needed ; while those materials which must be purchased are bought and applied in liberal quantities, but in low-priced forms, and then made available on the farm by economic natural methods. Four Fundamental Facts Nearly 150 years ago Senebier of Switzerland found that the carbon of plants is derived from the carbon dioxid of the air, and it is more than a century since DeSaussure of France first gave to the world a correct and almost complete statement con- cerning the essential mineral food of plants. Later, Lawes and Gilbert of England established the fact that for most plants the soil must furnish the nitrogen as well as the mineral elements; and more than a quarter-century has passed since Hellriegel of Germany discovered that bacteria living in symbiotic relation- ship with legume plants have power to gather nitrogen from the inexhaustible atmospheric supply. These are the four great fundamental facts upon which the science of plant growth and permanent fertility must be based, and they were all discovered before the Illinois Experiment Station was established. 3 Illinois Contributions There remained, however, two very important general’ problems, and in the solution of these Illinois has made some contributions. One of these relates to the amount of nitrogen taken from the air by legumes under normal field conditions; and the other concerns the liberation of mineral plant food from insoluble materials. It is not enough to know that clover has power to secure ni- trogen from the air; we should know how much nitrogen is thus secured in order that we may plan intelligently to provide nitro- gen for the production of corn, oats, wheat, and other non- legumes^ instead of using clover merely as a soil stimulant in systems of ultimate land ruin, as is still the most common prac- tice. It is also a matter of the greatest economic importance that definite information should be secured in regard to the practical means of utilizing mineral plant food from the abundant natural supplies nearest at hand, such as Tennessee phosphate rock, Illi- nois limestone, and the potassium minerals already present in our normal soils. Plant-Food Elements In brief, there are ten elementary substances which bear the same relation to the making of crops as brick and mortar bear to a wall of masonry. If any one of Ihese ten elements is entirely lacking, it is impossible to produce a grain of corn or wheat, a spear of grass, or a leaf of clover. Two elements, carbon and oxygen, are taken into the plant from the air thru the leaves; hydrogen is secured from water absorbed by the roots; and iron and sulfur are also supplied by nature in abundance. But the other five elements require careful consideration if lands are to be kept fertile. These are potassium, magnesium, calcium, phosphorus, and nitrogen ; and every land- owner ought to be as well acquainted with these five elements as he is with his five nearest neighbors. Instead of making this acquaintance and gaining a knowl- edge of important facts and principles, the average farmer in the older states, with failing fertility, has made the acquaintance of the fertilizer agent; and instead of purchasing what he needs for the permanent improvement of his soil, he buys what the agent 4 wants to sell, with the common result that the seller is enriched while the soil is merely stimulated to greater poverty. Potassium . — A careful study of the facts shows that potas- sium is one of the abundant elements in nature; that the average crust of the earth contains 2 J /2 percent of this element; and that normal soils bear some relation in composition to the average of the earth’s crust. If normal soil had the same percentage, then the plowed soil of an acre 6% inches deep (corresponding to 2 million pounds of soil) would contain 50,000 pounds of potassium. In Illinois, the normal soils actually do contain from 25,000 to 45,000 pounds per acre of this plant-food element in the first G % inches, while less than 4 pounds of potassium would be added in an applica- tion of 200 pounds of the most common commercial fertilizer. The Illinois system of permanent fertility does not provide for the purchase of potassium for normal soils, but it does provide for the liberation of an abundance of that element from the prac- tically inexhaustible supply in the soil. This liberation is ac- complished by the action of decaying organic matter plowed un- der in the form of farm manure or crop residues, including clover or other legumes. Only where the soil is positively deficient in potassium sus- ceptible of liberation, as is the case with some sand soils and with most peaty swamp lands, need potassium be purchased in permanent systems of either grain farming or live-stock farming ; but in market' gardening, or in raising timothy hay for the mar- ket, commercial potassium may be required; and, on some worn soils especially deficient in decaying organic matter, temporary use of kainit is often advisable. Magnesium and Calcium . — As a general average, the normal Bloomington Experiment Field, 1902: Corn, Bushels soils of Illinois contain more than four times as much potassium as magnesium, while the loss by leaching and cropping in ration- al systems of grain or live-stock farming may be actually greater for magnesium than for potassium, so that magnesium is more likely to become deficient in soils than is potassium. The calcium supply in normal soils is also only one-fourth that of potassium, while the average loss by cropping and leach- ing is four times as great, so that 16 to 1 expresses the relative importance of calcium and potassium in the problem of perma- nent fertility on normal Illinois soils. All limestones contain calcium; and the common dolomitic limestone in the almost measureless deposits of northern Illinois contains both calcium and magnesium in very suitable form both for plant food and for correcting or preventing soil acidity. In the Illinois system of permanent fertility, ground natural limestone is applied, where needed, at the rate of about two tons per acre every four years. With the same price and purity, probably the dolomite is preferable to the high calcium stone of southern Illinois, altho both kinds have been used with very good results. Further data from investigations now in progress are expected to furnish definite information as to the relative value of these materials. Phosphorus . — Attention was called to the fact that 2 million pounds of the average crust of the earth contains 50,000 pounds of potassium; but compared with this we find only 2,000 pounds of phosphorus. Likewise, the plowed soil of an acre of average 60.3 59.5 73.0 56.4 77.6 58.9 74.8 80.9 Bloomington Experiment Field, 1903: Corn, Bushels 6 Illinois land contains about 35,000 pounds of potassium but less than 1,200 pounds of phosphorus. When grain is sold from the farm, about equal amounts of phosphorus and potassium are carried away, while in independent systems of live-stock farm- ing much more phosphorus than potassium leaves the farm. At 3 cents a pound for phosphorus one can double the amount of that element contained in the plowed soil of our $200-land at a cost of $35 an acre, while to double the potassium in the same stratum would cost more than $1000 an acre. Phosphorus can be purchased, delivered at the farmer’s rail- road station in Illinois, for about 3 cents a pound in the form of fine* ground natural rock phosphate, for 10 to 12 cents a pound in steamed bone meal, or for 12 to 15 cents in acid phosphate. It can be used with profit in any of these forms, but the data thus far secured in comparative experiments plainly indicate that, with equal amounts of money invested, the natural rock phosphate will give the greatest profit in rational permanent systems. At least 1,000 pounds per acre every four years should be applied, and for the first application even three or four tons per acre is not considered too much phosphate by those who best under- stand the need and value of phosphorus on normal Illinois land. Nitrogen and Organic Matter . — There is a rather common opinion that the growing of clover enriches the soil in nitrogen, and many even believe that clover in crop rotation will maintain 60.8 69.8 72.7 62.5 85.3 66.4 70.3 90.5 Bloomington Experiment Field, 1904: Oats, Bushels 7 the fertility of the ^oil. These same people are likely to think that the application of limestone and phosphate involves much expense and work, and that the returns are much less certain than those from other labor and money investments. Such opinions are largely erroneous. The mere growing of clover on normal land does not enrich it. Even the nitrogen is not increased unless the clover crop is returned to the soil either directly or in farm manure. Rotation with such crops as corn, oats, and clover depletes the soil of all important elements of fer- tility, and on normal soils always results ultimately in land ruin, unless some system of restoration is practiced. Glover takes large amounts of calcium and phosphorus from the soil, and does not increase the nitrogen content if only the roots and stubble are left because they contain no more nitrogen than the clover itself will take from soils of normal productive power. To increase or maintain the nitrogen and organic matter of the soil is the greatest practical problem in American agriculture. In an hour’s time one can spread enough limestone or phosphate on an acre of land to provide for large crops of wheat, corn, oats, and clover for ten or twenty years, while to supply the nitrogen for the same length of time would require from 20 to 40 tons of clover, or from 80 to 160 tons of farm manure, to be added to the same acre of land, even tho one of the four crops harvested secured its nitrogen from the air. Certainly we are making no such additions to the soil in average Illinois agriculture, and one may well ask, How then is it possible to grow the crops now produced in this state? In the simplest language the answer to this question is: By “skinning” the soil, — by working the land for all that’s in it, — by following the example of our ancestors, who brought agricultural ruin to 28.8 30.5 39.2 33.2 50.9 29.5 37.8 51.9 Bloomington Experiment Field, 1905: Wheat, Bushels 8 millions of acres of once fertile farm land in the original thirteen states. To provide nitrogen in the Illinois system of permanent agri- culture requires the use of common sense and positive knowledge, the same as in providing limestone and phosphorus. For the live-stock farmer I would suggest a five-field system, — a four-year rotation of corn, corn, oats, and clover grown upon four fields for five years, while the fifth field is kept in alfalfa. At the end of the fifth year the alfalfa field is brought into the ro- tation and one of the four fields seeded to alfalfa for another five- year period, and so on. If the crop yields are 50 bushels each of corn and oats, 2 Ions of clover, and 3 tons of alfalfa ;■ if the straw and half the corn stalks are used for bedding and all other produce for feed, and if 60 percent of the nitrogen in the manure is used for the pro- duction of crops, then a system is provided which will perma- nently maintain the supply of nitrogen. For the farmer who sells grain and hay, a 25-bushel wheat crop may well be substituted for the first corn crop, clover being seeded on the wheat for plowing under the next year before planting corn. If the fall and spring growths oif this clover aggregate 1% tons, and if only the grain and clover seed and the alfalfa hay are sold, all clover, stalks, and straw being returned to the land, this also provides a system for the permanent mainte- nance of nitrogen. If the crop yields are all increased by 50 percent, or even by 100 percent, these systems still provide for the nitrogen supply, un- less with the larger yields on richer land a somewhat greater amount is likely to be lost by leaching than is added in the rain .58 .46 1.65 .51 .00 .81 2.36 .00 Bloomington Experiment Field, 1906: Clover, Tons “(N)” means nitrogen applied for previous crops. Where the wheat “lodged” in 1905, the clover was smothered.) 9 and by the azotobacter and other non-symbiotic bacteria. While these systems are distinctly for live-stock farming or for grain and hay farming, they should be considered as only suggesting the basis for solving the nitrogen problem. In diversified farming a combination of these systems will often be preferred to either one alone. The important point is that the landowner should know the essential facts and base his practice upon them in order to provide for permanent fertility with respect to both nitrogen, phosphorus, and limestone. Application op Principles Established From the definite information already secured in the investi- gation of Illinois soils, including the general soil survey of the entire state and the detailed survey of more than forty counties, it is safe to say that at least two-thirds, and probably three-fourths, of all the cultivated soils of Illinois are already in need of phosphorus and organic manures, and most of this vast area is also deficient in limestone. The facts thus far presented are derived chiefly from the in- vestigations relating to the formation of soils, the requirements of crops, and the composition and possible supply of natural fer- tilizing materials, such as limestone, phosphates, and organic 63.1 64.3 82.1 64.1 78.9 64.3 81.4 88.4 Bloomington Experiment Field. 1907 : Corn, Bushels 10 manures, including animal excrements, legume crops, and crop residues. I wish now to cite some typical illustrations giving the proofs or results from the actual application of these prin- ciples in the production of field crops in the most rational and trustworthy field investigations in the world’s record of agricul- tural science. tiothamsted Experiments . — At Rothamsted, England, a four- year rotation of turnips, barley, clover, and wheat has been prac- ticed for sixty-four years. To reduce the results to the simplest terms, I have computed the value of the four crops at conservative prices 1 for Illinois farm conditions. On the unfertilized land, the value per acre of the four crops amounted to $74.84 for the years 1848 to 1851, and to $28.50 for 1908 to 1911, sixty years later. Bear in mind that these] data represent no mere opinion or theory : they represent the facts from the first and last four-year periods in sixty-four years of farming on normal soil where the crops were rotated, where clover was grown (with beans substituted whenever clover failed) ; and where half of the turnips were fed on the land, thus supplying a limited amount of farm manure. This soil was also abundantly supplied with limestone. On another part of the same field, the treatment of which differed from the unfertilized part only by the addition of mineral plant food, the crop values were $74.57 for the years 1848 to 1851, and $77.57 for 1908 to 1911. These are indeed remarkable facts, but they are supported by twenty-year averages, the average values of the four crops hav- ing been $70.06 for the first twenty years and $76.83 for the third 1 $1.40 a ton for turnips, 50 cents a bushelfor barley, $6 a ton for hay, and 70 cents a bushel for wheat. 35.3 36.9 47.5 36.2 45.8 31.0 57.2 58.1 Bloomington Experiment Field, 1908 : Corn, Bushels 11 twenty-year period, where mineral plant food was applied. Barley, which is grown three years after clover, is the only one of the four crops to show actual decrease in yield, and the in- crease in clover and of the crops which follow soon after the clover is still more than sufficient to counterbalance the decrease in barley. Of course, this system is perfect and permanent, so far as clover is concerned, because the clover bacteria have power to secure nitrogen from the air; while in the case of wheat and turnips, sufficient nitrogen to maintain the yields has been provided thus far by some growth of clover not harvested for hay, the leguminous weeds which grow in both barley .and wheat, the manure from the turnips, and the depletion of the soil’s supply. Where additional supplies of nitrogen were provided together with the mineral plant food, the crop values per acre were $77.21 for the years 1848 to 1851, and $93.79 for 1908 to 1911. Thus the crop values from the best fertilized land have been more than three times as great as those from the unfertilized land during the last rotation of this sixty-four-year period. Louisiana Experiments . — The longest record of a rational permanent system o.f agriculture conducted in America is fur- nished by the Louisiana Experiment Station. As an average of nineteen years, the values per acre of three crops were $29.79 from unfertilized land, and $92.04 where organic manures and phos- phorus were regularly applied 1 in a three-year rotation of (1) cotton, (2) corn and cowpeas, (3) oats and cowpeas. Here the 1 In addition, 5 pounds per acre of potassium were applied every three years. 0 R P K RP RK PK RPK 53.6 49.4 63.8 45.3 72.5 51.1 59.5 64.2 Bloomington Experiment Field, 1909: Oats, Bushels 12 crop values from the well-fertilized land average more than three times as great as those from the unfertilized land under the same rotation and with two legume cover crops grown every three years. Ohio Experiments . — The Ohio Experiment Station has re- ported sixteen years’ results from a three-year rotation of corn, wheat, and clover, both from unfertilized land and from land treated with farm manure and phosphorus. As a general aver- age, the values per acre of the three crops at Illinois prices were $27.07 on untreated 1 land, $44.65 where farm manure was ap- plied, $53.82 where manure and rock phosphate were used, and $53.61 where manure and acid phosphate were applied, practi- cally the same yields having been secured whelher the phos- phorus was applied in raw rock phosphate or in acid phosphate, costing twice as much. The well-fertilized land has produced nearly twice as much as the land where no manure and phos- phate were used, altho clover was grown every third year in the rotation and all of the land was limed. On the basis of these figures, 8 tons of manure were worth $17.58, or $2.20 per ton; and the rock phosphate, costing about $7.50 or $8 per ton, was worth $57.31 ; or, if we use the Ohio methods of computing the amount and value of the increase pro- duced, each ton of raw phosphate was worth $65.63 : and it may 1 Except for lime and clover. 1.09 (. 83 ) 4.21 1.26 ( 1.671 (. 33 ) 3.27 (. 42 ) Bloomington Experiment Field, 1910 : Glover, Tons of Hay or (Bushels of Seed). 13 well be added that to obtain the same amount of phosphorus in the common high-priced mixed manufactured commercial ferti- lizer, such as farmers are advised by the fertilizer manufacturers and advertising agencies to use, would cost about $75. Illinois Experiments.-*— hi the last annual meeting of the Illi- nois Farmers’ Institute at Gentralia, I presented the averages from many of the Illinois soil experiments, especially the results from our southern Illinois experiment fields, where limestone is the material of first importance in the beginning of systems of per- manent soil improvement; and I also reported the average results from the oldest experiments in the state where raw rock phos- phate has been used. 1 These results show, for example, that as an average of 318 tests conducted in southern Illinois during a period of eight years, two tons of ground limestone, applied once in four years at a cost of about $2.50 per acre, has produced an increase of 5 bushels of corn, (3% bushels of oats, 4 bushels of wheat, and % ton of hay. They also show that where one ton per acre of fine-ground rock phosphate was applied on the com- mon corn-belt land on the University farm at Urbana in a rota- tion of wheat, corn, oats, and clover, the value of the increase produced paid back more than 100 percent for the first crop rotation and nearly 200 percent for the second four-year period, and in addition to this the soil has grown 25 percent richer in phosphorus, while the untreated land has grown poorer Two. years ago I gave a summarized report of all the Illinois soil investigations that have been conducted since this organiza- tion secured from the Illinois legislature the first appropriation to the state experiment station for this work. Thus the general plans and progress of the Illinois soil investigations, and many 1 See Circular 157. O R P K RP RK PK RPK 22.5 25.6 57.6 21.7 60.2 27.3 54.0 60.4 Bloomington Experiment Field, 1911: Wheat, Bushels 14 of the details, are already contained in your annual reports, and more complete data are easily available in the bulletins and soil reports from the Illinois Experiment Station. (See also Circu- lars 110, 127, and 165.) In closing this paper I shall direct your special attention only to the detailed data and illustrations from one of our oldest experiment fields on the typical prairie soil' of the corn belt, where phosphorus is usually the element of first importance in the beginning of soil improvement, especially where clover and manure have been used in the past in a way to maintain in the soil a fair supply of decaying organic matter. It should be stated, however, that on some farms on the same type of soil, where corn has been grown almost continuously for many years, with perhaps an occasional crop of oats and with little or no use of clover or manure (not even by pasturing) , the active organic matter may already be so reduced as to be the first factor which limits the crop yields. Under such conditions clover is the only crop which phosphorus is likely to benefit. This soil experiment field was established near Bloomington, McLean county, in the fall of 1901, soon after the first state ap- propriation for soil investigations became available; and the re- sults presented are from eielit contiguous and very uniform plots of ground. A five-year rotation is practiced, including two crops of corn and one each of oats, clover, and wheat. All these plots received one small uniform application of lime at the beginning of the experiment, so that the treatment of the plots has differed 0 R P K RP RK PK RPK 47.9 62.5 74.5 57.8 86.1 58.9 79.2 83.4 Bloomington Experiment Field, 1912: Gorn, Bushels 15 only as indicated in the diagrams, with the exception that during the first four years, commercial nilrogen( u N”) was applied lo the four plots which have subsequently received nitrogen additions only in crop residues, as indicated by “R” in the diagrams. Phosphorus is indicated by “P,” and its total cost in steamed bone meal is indicated by that part of the last diagram (see page 20) which stands above the four short cross marks. Potas- sium is represented by “K,” and its cost was the same as the cost of phosphorus. In computing the values, corn is figured at 35 cents per bushel, oats at 30 cents, wheat at 70 cents, hay at $6 per ton, and clover seed at $6 per bushel. These are very conservative prices, but they are probably as high as it is safe to use for the value of increase from soil treatment, because of the additional expense for harvesting, shocking, stacking, threshing, husking, and market- ing. Computation will show that during the last four years the value o f the produce from the land receiving phosphorus has been twice as much as that from Ihe untreated land. In other words, $2.50 invested in phosphorus has brought the same gross income as $250 invested in land; and even the interest on the land investment is five times the annual cost of the phosphorus. Furthermore, the addition of phosphorus tends toward enrich- ment and consequently toward the protection of the capital in- vested in the land. Another very important point is that up to the time of harvest, practically no extra work is required to pro- duce the increase from phosphorus. The effect of the crop residues (“R”) in 1911 and 1912 indi- cates that the value of clover plowed under may ultimately reappear in subsequent grain crops. Finally, the fact should be emphasized that ordinary farm- ing is not a very profitable business financially, but that intelli- gent permanent soil improvement is both the safest and the most profitable investment that farmers can make. 10 NOTES Natural Rock Phosphate Fine-ground raw rock phosphate, containing from 10 to 14 percent of phosphorus, can be obtained from the following companies, delivered in bulk on board cars at the mines in Tennessee for $2.50 to $5 per ton, the price varying with the quality. The freight rate from Tennessee per ton of 2000 pounds in carload lots varies from $2.50 to points in southern Illinois, to $3.58 to northern Illinois points. Of course, these addresses are given solely as a matter of information, and the Experiment Station makes no recommendations or guarantees as to reliability. Mt. Pleasant Fertilizer Co., Mt. Pleasant, Tenn. Robin Jones, Nashville, Tenn. Natural Phosphate Co., Nashville, Tenn. Farmers Ground Rock Phosphate Co., Mt. Pleasant, Tenn. Ruhm Phosphate Mining Co., Mt. Pleasant, Tenn. Powdered Rock Phosphate Co., Columbia, Tenn. Farmers Union Phosphate Co., Birmingham, Ala. Southern Lime & Phosphate Co., Birmingham, Ala. Blue Grass Phosphate Co., Mt. Pleasant, Tenn. Federal Chemical Co., Columbia, Tenn. Central Phosphate Co., Mt. Pleasant, Tenn. Central Kentucky Phosphate Co., Wallace, Ky. American Fertilizer Co., Santa Fe, Texas. It should be borne in mind that rock phosphate varies much in quality. Consequently, it should always be purchased upon a guaranteed analysis, and it is advisable for the purchaser to take an average sample of the carload when received and have it analyzed both for phosphorus and for fineness, even tho the analysis cost him $2 or $3. To collect an average sample take a small teaspoonful from about fifty different places in the car, not only from the surface but also from different depths. These fifty spoonfuls well mixed together will make atrustworthy sample and about one pound of this should be sent to some commercial chemist for analysis. If 12% -percent rock, containing 250 pounds of phosphorus per ton, costs $7.50 (including freight), then 10-percent rock, containing 200 pounds of the element per ton, is worth $6, a difference in value of $1.50 per ton, which, on a 30-ton car, amounts to $45. The important phosphorus compound in rock phosphate is calcium phosphate, Ca 3 (P04)2. The percentage of this compound in the rock phosphate marks the purity of the rock. Thus, if the rock phosphate contains 60 percent of calcium phosphate, it is 60 percent pure, with 40 percent of impurities. Sometimes the guarantee is given as “phosphoric acid,” meaning phosphoric oxid, P 2 O5. This also is a definite compound and always con- tains 43% percent of the element phosphorus. Thus it will be seen that the same sample of roek phosphate may be guaranteed to contain 62 per- cent of calcium phosphate, Cas (P04)2, or 28.4 percent of “phosphoric acid” (P2O5), or 12.4 percent of phosphorus (P). Raw rock phosphate should be very finely ground, so that at least 90 percent of the material can be washed thru a sieve with 100 meshes to the linear inch, or with 10,000 meshes to the square inch. Of course, anyone can test for fineness by sifting ten ounces and then drying and weighing what will not wash thru the sieve. As a rule, it is more satisfactory to purchase in bulk rather than in bags (see page 15 of Circular 110). 17 Bone Meal A good grade of steamed bone meal (about 12 Vo percent phosphorus) . can be obtained delivered in Illinois for about $25 a ton, from the local agents of Morris & Co., Swift & Co., Armour & Co., the American Glue Co., or the American Fertilizer Co., Chicago, 111., or from the Empire Carbon Works, National Stock Yards, East St. Louis, 111. Potassium Salts Potassium chlorid (so-called “muriate of potash”), containing about 42 percent of potassium, can be obtained for about $45 a ton from Armour & Co., Swift & Co., or Darling & Co., Union Stock Yards, Chicago, 111., from the German Kali Works or the Nitrate Agencies Co., Chicago, 111., from A. Smith & Bro., Tampico, 111., or from the American Agricul- tural Chemical Co., New York, N. Y., and kainit, containing about 10 per- cent of potassium, together with some magnesium sulfate, magnesium chlorid, and sodium chlorid, can also be obtained from Armour, & Co., Darling & Co., Swift & Co., Hirsch, Stein & Co., the Chicago Fertilizer Works, or the German Kali Works, Chicago, 111., for about $13 a ton. Ground Limestone Ground limestone can now be obtained at 60 cents a ton ($1 in bags, to be returned at purchaser’s expense and risk) from the Southern Illinois Penitentiary, Menard, 111., and at different prices from the follow- ing companies. Casper Stolle Quarry & Contracting Co., East St. Louis, 111. (quarry at Stolle, 111.) Southwestern Contracting & Engineering Go., East St. Louis, 111. Ellis Bros., Elsberry, Mo. Carthage Superior Limestone Co., Carthage, Mo. Mitchell Lime Co., Mitchell, Ind. John Armstrong Lime & Quarry Co., Alton, 111. Lehigh Stone Co., Kankakee, 111. Elmhurst-Chicago Stone Co., Elmhurst, 111. East St. Louis Stone Co., East St. Louis, 111. Columbia Quarry Co., St. Louis, Mo', (quarry at Columbia, 111.} McLaughlin-Mateer Co., Kankakee, 111. Lockyer Quarry Co., Alton, Mo. Western Whiting & Mfg. Co., Elsah, 111. Eldred Stone Co., Eldred, 111. Marblehead Lime Co., Masonic Temple, Chicago, 111. (quarries at Quincy, 111.) United States Crushed Stone Co., 184 LaSalle St., Chicago, 111. Dolese & Shepard Co., 184 LaSalle St., Chicago, 111. Fruitgrowers Refrigerating & Power Co., Anna, 111. Biggsville Crushed Stone Co., Biggsville, 111. Hart & Page, Rockford, 111. McManus & Tucker, Keokuk, Iowa. Moline Stone Co , Moline, 111. John Markman, Gladstone, 111. Superior Stone Co., 218 Hearst Bldg., Chicago, 111. Brownell Improvement Co., 1220 Chamber of Commerce, Chicago, 111. Dolese Bros. Co., 128 N. LaSalle St., Chicago, 111. Ohio & Indiana Stone Co., Indianapolis, Ind. (quarry at Greencastle, Ind.) 0. M. Fulwider, Bloomington, Ind. Some of these companies furnish fine-ground limestone and some furnish limestone screenings, which include both very fine dust and some coarse particles even as large as corn kernels. In carload lots the price on board cars at the plant varies from 50 cents to $1 a ton according to 18 fineness. The freight charges are one-half cent per ton per mile, with a minimum charge of 25 cents per ton by each railroad handling the car, and with a minimum carload of 30 tons. At most points in Illinois the cost delivered in bulk in box cars should be between $1 and $2 a ton. Sometimes one can get one and one-half tons of material containing one ton of fine dust and half a ton of coarser particles, varying in size from less than pinheads to corn kernels, at no greater expense than would be required for one ton of fine-ground stone containing no coarser particles. The coarser particles will last in the soil longer than the finer material, which is rapidly lost by leaching: and a product that will all pass thru a sieve with 8 or 10 meshes to the linear inch, and that contains all of the fine dust produced in the process of crushing or grinding, is very satis- factory. Portable machines for crushing and grinding limestone, using thresh- ing engines for power, can be oblained from — Williams Patent Crusher & Pulverizer Co., St. Louis, Mo. Universal Crusher Co., Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Pennsylvania Crusher Co., Pittsburgh,. Pa. Wheeling Mold & Foundry Co., Wheeling, W. Va. Jeffrey Manufacturing Co., Columbus, Ohio. Machine for Spreading Limestone and Phosphate Directions for making a machine for spreading ground limestone and ground rock phosphate are given in Circular HO. which will be sent to anyone upon request. This is a homemade machine, using the wheels of an old mower, and it can be made by any good blacksmith and carpen- ter. There is no regular manufactured machine on the market that has given as satisfactory service in our experience as these homemade machines. They are made upon order by many blacksmiths in different parts of the state, and the following parties usually keep machines in stock for sale : George Kubacki, DuBois, 111. Pana Enterprise Manufacturing Company, Pana, 111. 20 $ 165.52 $ 173.17 $ 255.44 $ 169.66 $ 251.43 $ 170.57 $ 256.92 254.76 Bloomington Experiment Field: Crop Values For Eleven Years “R” means residues of crops (corn stalks, straw, and clover) plowed under to maintain nitrogen and organic matter. “P” means phosphorus, the cost of which is represented by that part of the diagram above the short cross marks. It has paid back $3 for each dollar invested. “K” means potassium, which has paid back 3 cents for each dollar spent for it. UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Agricultural Experiment Station URBANA, ILLINOIS, SEPTEMBER, 1913 CIRCULAR No. 168 (Second Edition, Illustrated, October, 1913) BREAD FROM STONES By Cyrii, G. Hopkins An Acre of Wheat, l^nd treated with Manure, Limestone it takes nearly 175,000 to set an acre. Altho the individual plants can be set quite rap- idly and there is no particular difficulty in making them live, the setting of even one acre involves a very large amount of tedious labor. No one should ever undertake to grow a large area of transplanted onions until after giving the method a thoro trial on a conservative scale. One difficulty likely to be encountered in trying to grow onions by the transplanting method is that the plants often fail to reach transplanting size at the time they should be trans- planted. To get the full benefit of this method in earliness, it is necessary to set out the plants very soon after it would be possible to plant seeds in the open. Altho it is sometimes claimed that plants can be grown to transplanting size in six weeks, it is more likely to take double that time during the short, dark days of February and March. In localities where outdoor gardening usually begins about April 1, onions should be transplanted not 11 later than April 15. and the seeds for growing these plants should be sown in a greenhouse or fire hotbed not later than January 15. Otherwise the size of the plants is likely to be disappointing. The seeds should be sown in rows 3 to 4 inches apart in the hotbed or on the greenhouse bench. The soil of the seed bed should be thor- oly manured and well prepared. The watering should be very carefully done in the dark winter weather. A fairly low temper- ature should be maintained, and plenty of ventilation given; otherwise the seedlings are likely to damp-off. When the time for transplanting arrives, the field should be prepared the same as for sowing onion seed. Rows should then be marked out one foot apart and the seedlings set in the freshly worked soil. Usually both the roots and the tops of the plants are trimmed to a considerable extent. A whole bunch of plants is trimmed at two strokes of the knife, so that very little time is required for this operation. The reason for trimming the roots is to facilitate planting and to avoid having any long roots curl upward. The tops are trimmed to reduce transpiration and make the growth of the plant more certain. The transplanting is usu- ally done with dibbers, tho in loose soil the workmen’s fingers are sometimes substituted for the dibbers. After transplanting, the crop is immediately tilled, and there- after the treatment is essentially the same as for a crop grown from seed sown directly in the field, except that no thinning is ever required and the necessity of early weeding is eliminated. The success of this method depends primarily upon good plants and extra early planting. In the hands of beginners, this method of onion culture is likely to be a failure. Growing Ripe Onions from Sets The surest way for a beginner to grow a good crop of ripe onions is to plant sets. These are miniature onions grown from seed the preceding year. Their method of production will be de- scribed later. They can be procured from almost any seedsman, and are technically known as “bottom sets.” These are offered in the three colors, red, yellow, and white, but usually no variety names are mentioned. If a person wishes to grow onions of a given variety from sets, he can purchase seed and grow the sets 12 uae year, and then store them over winter for the next spring’s planting. The essential factors in growing a large crop of ripe onions from sets are practically the same as for growing a large crop of onions by either of the other methods; viz., very rich soil, ex- tremely early planting, thoro tillage, plenty of moisture. The distinct advantages of using sets as compared with the trans- planting method are that the sets can safely be planted consider- ably earlier; that it is never necessary to delay planting while waiting for the plants to attain the proper size; that the planting can be done much more rapidly; that the expense and trouble of growing the seedlings are obviated; and that the bulbs are surer to attain large size. As compared with growing onions from seed sown directly in the field, the set method is more expensive on ac- count of the high cost of sets and the labor of planting, but is much surer to produce a profitable crop, especially under un- favorable weather conditions. The sets may sometimes be planted even earlier than it is safe to plant onion seeds. The stored-up food material in the sets gives the plants a strong start, and they are able to make a much larger proportion of their growth than plants started from seed, during the period in which the weather is certain to be cool and the soil moist. This makes the onions from sets a much surer crop than onions from seed. The bulbs are usually larger and the crop matures nearly a month earlier than when grown directly from seed. When large ripe onions of the preceding year’s growth are planted out in the spring, they send up seed stalks and the bulbs become inedible. If large, over-grown sets are planted, many of them behave like large onions and send up seed stalks. The bulbs produced by these sets that run to seed are worthless as ripe onions. They are tough, exceedingly strong, and will not keep. Small sets, on the other hand, do not form seed stalks, but produce normal, well-matured bulbs that cannot be distinguished from those grown directly from seed. Very small sets do not make as vigorous a start as larger ones. It is therefore advisable to plant as large sets as can be depended upon not to run to seed. Experience has shown that sets % to % inch in diameter are of satisfactory size for use in the production of ripe onions. This size is secured by screening the sets first thru a three-quarters 13 inch sieve, then passing them over a half-inch screen. Only a small percentage of sets of this size will send up seed stalks, and they are large enough to make a quick start and produce large bulbs before the weather is very hot. For growing a crop of ripe onions from sets, the land should be prepared the same as for sowing onion seed, then marked out in rows 12 inches apart, and the sets planted by hand. The only precaution necessary in planting sets is to place them right side up and push them far enough into the ground so that the base from which the roots are to start will be in close contact with moist soil. For the production of large onions the sets are planted about 3 inches apart in the row. After the sets are placed, soil is drawn lightly against them with a rake. The tillage and general care of a crop of onions grown from sets are essentially the same as for a crop grown from seed, ex- cept that comparatively little weeding is required. The crop may be harvested and cured in the same way, but usually should be sold soon after the harvest, before onions grown from seed are available, for prices are likely to be good at that time, and the onions grown from sets are not considered as good keepers for winter use as those grown directly from seed. Growing Onion Sets When an onion seed is planted, the normal thing for it to do is to produce a bulb. The size of the bulb produced will depend upon circumstances. If the plant has undisputed access to an abundance of food, moisture, and sunlight, and the temperature is congenial, the bulb is likely to attain normal size for the va- riety — perhaps two, three, or even four inches in diameter. If the soil is poor or the season dry, or if the plants are crowded, the bulbs will be smaller; and the more pronounced any or all of these unfavorable conditions, the more strikingly small will be the bulbs. Onion sets are merely miniature onions that have re- mained small because of the conditions under which they were grown. In growing onion sets it was formerly the practice to sow the seed late in the season on poor soil. About thirty pounds of seed were used to the acre. The lack of plant food and moisture, and the hot weather during which the plants had to make their 14 principal growth, combined with the fairly thick seeding, were depended upon to keep the bulbs small. The practice now among many commercial growers of onion sets is to sow the seeds on rich soil at the usual time for sowing onion seed, and to depend primarily upon the thickness of seeding to keep the bulbs from growing too large. From 80 to 100 pounds of seed are used per acre. This is at the rate of about 200 seeds per foot of drill. Un- der these conditions it is impossible for the bulbs to become too large for sets except in seasons particularly favorable to their growth. Then the largest bulbs can be screened out and used for pickling, in the case of white and even yellow varieties. In sowing seeds for onion sets, the rows are usually made 12 inches apart and the seed is sown with a regular drill the same as for large onions. Sometimes a special attachment is used to spread the seed out in a wide row, so that the individual seedlings will have a little more space at the start*. Onion sets are cultivated with wheel hoes the same as large onions, and require as careful weeding. If sown at the same time as other onions, they ripen earlier, and can thus be har- vested and out of the way before the large onions are ready to harvest. Under modern methods of handling onion sets, they are harvested as soon as the necks begin to ldse their sap and while the tops are still green and erect. If the soil is compact, an onion harvester may be run under the rows, or each workman may be furnished an iron hook with which to loosen the soil on each sicte of the row. The sets are pulled by the handful, the tops im- mediately twisted off, and the bulbs dropped into a half-bushel basket or measure. When filled, the measures are emptied into crates similar to those used in curing large onions, except that the slats forming the bottom are closer together. The crates of onion sets are left in the field exposed to the sun for a few hours; then they are hauled to a curing shed, or more often stacked up in tiers in the field, each tier being covered with a temporary roof of boards. Here the sets are allowed to cure until time to put them into winter storage. If the soil contains considerable mois- ture at the time the sets are pulled, they are sometimes run over a screen before being placed in the crates, and the surplus dirt thus shaken off. 15 The growing of onion sets is an important industry, and is especially well developed in the vicinity of Chicago, Illinois, and Louisville, Kentucky. From these points onion sets are shipped by the carload to all parts of the country. Before being shipped out, the sets are cleaned by being run thru a machine similar to a fanning mill. Green Bunch Onions While ripe onions constitute the more important crop, green onions are included in the majority of home gardens, and are also quite extensively produced by market gardeners. They are called “bunch onions” because they are tied in bunches when placed on the market. The simplest way to grow green onions, and the method employed by most home gardeners, is to plant ordinary onion sets early in the spring and pull the green onions when they have attained the desired size. The larger the sets, the quicker they will produce green onions of edible size; however, unless green onions grown from large sets are pulled promptly they usually start to send up seed stalks, and soon be- come strong and tough. Large sets will produce green onions ready for eating in about four weeks from the time of planting; small sets require from six to eight weeks. The earliest green onions in spring are obtained by the fall planting of multiplier, perennial, or potato onions. In all cases, small bulbs are planted. These produce green onions early in the spring, and if allowed to continue growth, the multiplier and potato onions will develop large ripe bulbs. If these large bulbs are planted, they break up into clusters of small bulbs, which in turn may be planted for the production of green onions or large bulbs. In the case of the perennial or “tree” onions, as they are sometimes called, a cluster of little bulbs is produced at the top of the stalk, where seed is produced in an ordinary onion. The little bulbs are known as top sets. The bottom also divides as in the case of the multiplier and potato onions, but no large bulbs are ever produced. Both the top sets and the divided bottoms may be planted for the production of green onions. The divided bottoms produce larger and earlier green onions than the top sets. In central latitudes, the perennial or tree onions should be planted about September 1. Furrows about 4 inches deep should 16 be made in rich, thoroly prepared soil, and the bulbs planted in the bottom of the furrows, which should then be filled with loose soil or very fine compost. If compost is not used at the time of planting, it is a common practice to mulch the bed with this ma- terial late in the fall. In either case only sufficient tillage is given to keep down weeds. The onions grow nearly to edible size in the fall, and the deep planting insures long white “stems.” As soon as the frost leaves the ground in spring and the tops of the onions start to grow, those produced from the divided bottoms will be ready to use, and those from the top sets will follow shortly after. Any of the onions not used while green may be allowed to remain for the production of top sets and divided bot- toms for planting the next fall. They usually mature by the first of August and should be cured before being planted. These perennial or tree onions, also the multiplier and potato onions, may be planted later in the fall than September 1, if de- sired, but in that case they produce a later crop, since their prin- cipal growth is made in the spring instead of the fall. The method of growing green onions from sets of multiplier and potato onions is essentially the same as from perennial or tree onions. The variety of perennial onion most extensively grown is known as the Egyptian, or the perennial tree onion. It is also re- ferred to by gardeners as the “winter onion,” because it will sur- vive the winter without protection. Green onions for late use may be grown from seed sown the same as for the production of ripe onions; but usually the de- mand for green onions is not so great at that season of the year, and seed is seldom sown especially for the production of green onions. It is customary in the home garden, however, to pull green onions from the growing crop at any time they are de- sired for the table. Also, market gardeners sometimes harvest part of their onion crop at this stage if the demand is good. If the plants stand rather thick, this pulling of some of the green onions amounts only to a thinning of the crop that remains. UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Agricultural Experiment Station URBANA, ILLINOIS, JULY, 1914 CIRCULAR No. 174 TESTING FOR FAT IN MILK BY THE BABCOCK TEST Department of Dairy Husbandry The Babcock test is the most satisfactory and practical means of determining the amount of butter fat in milk. It is the test generally used as a basis of payment for milk. Commercial plants, altho buying milk by the hundredweight, may test a sample from each can or they may make but one average test for a longer period of time. In the latter case, a representative sample of the product delivered for a one- or two-week period is made by mixing small samples from each de- livery. The test of this sample is the average test for the period covered. When making the Babcock test to determine the butter-fat pro- duction of a cow, a representative sample is the first and most impor- tant item. The fat content of milk varies so greatly that a sample from a single milking will not give an average test. The sample, therefore, 2 should be “composite” ; that is, it should be a mixture of samples taken from a number of milkings, usually for a period of one to seven days. Mason jars or bottles with close-fitting covers (Fig. i) should be provided for each cow that is to be tested, and each bottle should be marked with the number of the individual animal. After the milk from a cow is thoroly mixed by being poured from one vessel to another four times, the sample is taken with a small dipper (Fig. 2) and placed in the proper bottle. It is important that the same amount of milk be dipped each time a sample is taken. Some of the milk in the sample jar will be several days old and will require a preservative to prevent its souring. No. 2 corosive sublimate tab- lets, sold by creamery supply houses, or powdered potassium bichromate (K 2 Cr 2 0 7 ) may be used for this purpose. In the latter case, half a gram, or from 7 to 8 grains, of bichromate (the amount that can be held on the point of a knife) will be sufficient. 1 The jars containing the com- posite samples should be gently shaken after each addition of milk. At the end of the period which the test is to cover, the composite sample for each cow is tested for butter fat. Covered Bottle for Milk Sample Apparatus The apparatus used in making the test is as follows: a milk pi- pette of 17.6 cc. capacity for measuring the milk (Fig. 3) ; a milk test bottle (Fig. 4) ; an acid measure of 17.5 cc. capacity (Fig. 5) ; and a tester in which to whirl the test bottles (Figs. 6, 7, and 8). The apparatus for farm use may be purchased at prices varying from $4 to $14. A cup as is shown in Fig. 9 is convenient for adding the hot water to the test bottles. Dividers may be used to measure the length of the fat column (Fig. 10). The necessary commercial sulphuric acid may be secured from any creamery supply house, or small amounts may be purchased from any druggist. • 1 Both chemicals mentioned are poisonous and should be used with caution. Figs. 2, 3, 4, and 5 (2) Small Dipper for Taking Sample; (3) Pipette for Measuring Milk; (4) Milk Test Bottle; (5) Acid Measure 4 Fig. 7. — Covered Hand Tester Fig. 8. — Steam Tester 5 TESTING WHOLE MILK The sample to be tested should be at a temperature of 55 0 to 65° F. Mix the milk thoroly by pouring it a number of times back and forth from the sample bottle into a clean vessel, taking care that all curd or undistributed lumps of cream are broken down. Immediately after mixing, draw the milk up above the mark on the pipette and hold it there by quickly placing the forefinger over the end of the stem ; release the pressure of the finger slightly, allow- ing the milk to run down to the mark (this is easier to do if the finger is dry). Then transfer the pipette of milk to the test bottle, allowing the milk to flow slowly down the neck of the bottle and blowing the last drop into the bottle. The best results are obtained when the pipette and the test bottle are held at a slight angle during this transfer. Fig. 9.T— A Convenient Cup for Adding Hot Water to the Test Bottles Do not lose any of the milk sample in the process of mixing, measuring, or transferring, for the Babcock test is essentially quanti- tative and any loss affects its accuracy. After transferring the milk to the test bottle, measure out 17.5 cc. of commercial sulphuric acid into the small glass cylinder (Fig. 5) and pour it into the test bottle. The acid should be about the same tem- perature as the milk. Hold the bottle slanting and rotate it slowly so that the acid will run down the narrow neck and carry down any milk adhering to it. After the acid is added, mix the milk and acid with a rotary motion, being careful not to force any of the mixture in,- to the neck of the bottle. Keep up the rotary motion until all the curd has been dissolved and the liquid is of a dark brown color. 6 When the samples to be tested have been prepared, put the bottles in the tester, taking care to place them opposite each other so that they balance. Turn the crank the required number of turns per minute for five minutes; then without removing fill each of the bottles to its neck with hot water and whirl them again for two minutes. Add more hot water to each bottle until the neck is filled to within half an inch of the upper limit of the graduation marks ; then whirl the bottles again for one minute. If the foregoing instructions have been carefully followed, the neck of each test bottle will contain a column of fat which should be of a clear yellow color. The test is now ready to read. Reading t^e Test The extremes of the fat in the neck of the test bottle are the limits of the reading. The most accurate reading is made when the temperature of the contents of the bottle is 130° F. It will be noticed that the scale on the neck of the test bottle has ten large divisions, and that each of these is subdivided into five small divisions. Each of the ten large divisions represents one per- cent, and each small division, 0.2 percent. If the fat column covers two of the large spaces and eight of the small ones, as illustrated in Fig. 10 (four small spaces on either side of the large spaces), the read- ing is 3.6 percent. This means that there are 3.6 pounds of butter fat in every 100 pounds of the milk being tested. The use of a pair of dividers to measure the limits of the fat column will aid in securing greater accuracy in reading the test. 8 Use of the Test in Determining Production In order to determine the amount of butter fat produced by a cow, it is necessary to know the amount of milk produced and the average fat test of the milk. To ascertain the milk produc- tion, daily weighings should be taken, and the weights set down immediately on a milk sheet and totaled at the end of each month. The most convenient scale for weighing the milk is a spring balance graduated to pounds and tenths of pounds, with two hands, one of which is adjustable so that it may be set at zero with the empty pail on the hook. Such scales (Fig. n) may be obtained from any dairy supply house for about $3.50. Most of these houses also carry suitable milk sheets in stock. When the scale and milk sheet are in a convenient place, the time necessary for taking and recording these weights is negligible. Records which have been kept show that the yearly production of a cow can be closely estimated from the weight and the fat test of the milk on one or two days of each month. The weights and com- posite samples should be taken from two or four consecutive milkings at the middle of each month. In using this method of weighing, the total milk weight should be divided by the number of days during which weighings were made, and the results multiplied by the number of days in that particular month. The pounds of milk and the average test for the period during which the milk was produced, having been determined, the pounds of fat are obtained by multiplying the pounds of milk by the fat test. This is illustrated by the following yearly record of a cow freshening December 16. Fig. 11 Milk Scale 9 Milk Test Butter fat Month lbs. percent lbs. December 540.3 4-7 254 January 915.5 5-5 50.4 February 880.4 4-5 47-5 March 866.3 5-1 44-2 April 7639 5.6 42.8 May 812.1 5-6 45-5 June 746.0 5-2 38.8 July 747-8 5-0 374 August 612.3 5-3 32.5 September 465.6 5.8 27.0 October 1 295.0 5-8 17.1 November ,dry December dry 7645.2 5-34 408.6 x Milk for 2 i days. TESTING SKIM MILK Skim milk for testing should be caught at the separator in clean cans. Utensils that have just previously contained whole milk or cream should not be used unless they have been thoroly cleaned, as the test will be increased by particles of fat adhering to the sides of the can. The sample should be taken from the bulk of the skim milk after it has been well mixed. The apparatus used is the same as that for testing whole milk, except that a test bottle of different construction is required. As the amount of butter fat in skim milk is of course small, it is necessary that the test bottle have a neck in which a very small amount of butter fat may be read in terms of percent. A skim-milk bottle, therefore, is made with two necks, a large one thru which the skim milk and acid are added, and a small, graduated one in which the fat is finally se- cured and read (see Figs. 12 and 13). Mix the sample carefully, as described for the whole-milk test. Measure 17.6 cc. of the sample in the pipette and transfer to the test bottle, allowing it to flow down the large neck. Then add the acid as in the whole-milk test, using about 20 cc. instead of 17.5 cc. If the acid is added in small quantities, and the sample is carefully shaken after each addition, better results will be obtained than if the total amount is added at once. Care must be exercised to avoid forcing small lumps of curd into the calibrated neck when mixing the acid with the milk. Figs. 12 and 13— Skim-Milk Bottles II When putting the bottles into the tester, place the large filling tube toward the center. Unless this is done, a portion of the fat will not gather in the calibrated neck, and the test will thereby be rendered in- accurate. Whirl the bottles and add water as in the test for whole milk, but run the centrifuge from two to five minutes longer. The test should be read at 130° to 140° F. In the type of test bottle shown in Fig. 12, each of the graduation marks has a value of 0.05 percent. In the type shown in Fig. 13, each small graduation has a value of 0.01 percent and each large graduation represents five small graduations, or 0.05 percent. It is difficult to get an absolutely accurate test of skim milk. At best the results should be considered only as approximations. Butter- milk and whey may be tested by this same method, except that in mak- ing the whey test only three-quarters of a measure of acid is added. SUGGESTIONS The fat column should be a clear yellow color, and free from charred material or curd. The limits should be well defined. If the fat column is not uniform and has pieces of dark material in it, it is evident that the acid was too strong, or that the milk and acid were too warm. When repeating the process, use less acid or cool the acid and milk to 55°-65° F. If the fat column is gray and cloudy, with pieces of undissolved curd in it, use more acid. It is best to use rain water for filling the bottles ; if hard water is used, it is advisable to add several drops of sulphuric acid in order to precipitate the minerals present. Sulphuric acid is very active, attacking all organic matter with which it comes in contact. Keep it in a glassrstoppered bottle. If some accidentally gets on the hands or clothing, wash immediately with cold water. Read the tests before they have cooled, or warm them to i30°-i40° F. by setting them in water at that temperature. Keep the test bottles clean. Empty them before the fat has solidified in the necks. Shaking the bottles while emptying them will aid in removing the sediment in the bottom. In washing them use a testrbottle brush. . UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Agricultural Experiment Station URBANA, ILLINOIS, JULY, 1914 CIRCULAR No. 175 ECONOMIC FACTORS IN CATTLE FEEDING IV. CATTLE FEEDING CONDITIONS IN THE CORN BELT By Herbert W. Mumford and Louis I). Hall Total Cattle Other Than Milch Cows in Corn-Belt States * MILLIONS 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 1870 1880 1910 1911 1912 1913 Summary 1. Introduction. — Seven corn-surplus states — Ohio, Indiana, Illi- nois, Missouri, Kansas, and Nebraska — embrace the corn belt, which is the natural center of beef production. About one-third of the cattle of the country other than milch cows are contained in the states named, and their value is equal to about two-fifths of the total value of such cattle in the United States. Page 5 2. Rapid Evolution of the Industry. — Twenty to fifty years ago, the corn belt as a whole was a combined breeding, grazing and fattening ground for beef cattle, but now it is so generally devoted to corn raising that little grazing land — consequently few breeding cattle — remain; and a large proportion of the cattle fattened for market are purchased as feeders from the West or elsewhere. The number of cattle other than milch cows appears to be diminishing thruout the corn belt, and in some typical districts is now no greater than it was forty years ago. Page 5. 3. Influence of Dairying. — Statistics of cattle in corn-belt states indicate a proportion of milch cows amounting to about one-half of the total cattle in the eastern section, one-fourth in Kansas and Nebraska, and corresponding proportions in intervening states. Dairying has in- creased enormously as a. factor in the cattle industry. The introduction of dairy cattle and indiscriminate breeding has deteriorated the quality of beef cattle, and at the same time tlxe actual number of cattle worthy of the name of milch cows has increased but little. Relatively more steers are found in the western than in the eastern portion of the corn belt. Page 10 4. Fattening Steers. — Four-fifths to nine-tenths of the beef cattle marketed from typical corn-belt localities are cattle that have been purchased as stockers or feeders. The number of stockers and feeders shipped to the country from Chicago and Missouri river markets shows a considerable increase by decades. The fattening of cattle has passed largely from the hands of general farmers to those of profes- sional cattle feeders, and in some sections has been abandoned to a considerable extent by the latter. Among the chief factors responsible for this tendency are relatively high prices for grain compared with those for fat cattle, increase in land values, extension of cattle feeding operations in the West, increase in farm tenancy, and neglect of soil fertility. Page 12 5. The Outlook.— The undeveloped state of beef-cattle produc- tion in proportion to population and area justifies the expectation of an ultimate extension and development of cattle raising and feeding. Corn- fed beef cattle doubtless will continue in demand by a class of trade in which the grass beef of the West can not compete. The grazing lands of the West may be expected to furnish a partial supply of stockers and feeders to the corn belt for many years to come; however, an increasing proportion, and eventually a large proportion, of the cattle matured in the corn belt must be reared there. Page 15 Improved and intensified farming methods, the introduction of corn silage, alfalfa and other forage crops, the more complete utilization of waste roughage, and increased attention to manure as a means of main- taining fertility will tend to render cattle production more practicable. Nevertheless, those upon whom the cattle feeder is dependent for his market must consider the increasing cost of producing cattle and pay prices commensurate therewith; the resumption and extension of beef production will come only as a result of higher relative prices for fat cattle. Page 17 Note . — This is the fourth of a series of circulars dealing with eco- nomic factors in cattle feeding. The circulars that have been published are: No. 163, Relation of the United States to the World’s Beef Supply; No. 164, Argentina as a Factor in International Beef Trade; No. 169, A Review of Beef Production in the United States. The next circular in the series will treat of cattle feeding in its relation to farm management and soil fertility. CATTLE FEEDING CONDITIONS IN THE CORN BELT By Herbert W. Mumford, Chief in Animal Husbandry, and Louis D. Hall, Assistant Chief in Animal Husbandry Seven “corn-surplus states” — Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, Kansas, and Nebraska — embrace the great corn-pro- ducing area and constitute the natural center of beef production in the United States. As shown in Circular No. 169, about one- third of the cattle of the country other than milch cows are con- lained in the states mentioned, and their value is equal to about two-fifths of the total value of such cattle in the United States. Furthermore, large numbers of cattle are shipped into these states to be fattened and forwarded to market, and are not included in the estimates of annual cattle population. Corn-fed cattle are the distinctive feature of the cattle industry of the United States, and this circular deals primarily with problems and methods of cattle feeding in the corn belt. It is therefore proper to consider some- what fully the trend of general conditions surrounding the indus- try in that section and the fundamental economic factors that affect it. Rapid Evolution of the Cattle Feeding Industry During the period of settlement and the earlier years of cul- tivation of corn-belt lands — a period extending from the fifties to the nineties inclusive, of the last century, — these lands gen- erally were stocked with cows of beef type ; and while the coun- try was being brought into cultivation* they became a combined breeding, grazing, and fattening ground for cattle. Such local- ities were admirably suited to beef production because of the abundance of cheap grass and cheap corn they afforded. A most vivid and concise illustration of cattle-feeding conditions and methods in Illinois about 1880 is contained in the following statement quoted from one of the most widely known stockmen of that day, Mr. John D. Gillette: 1 l Feeds and Feeding, W. A. Henry, 1st ed., p. 389. 6 Cost of Steer Twelve Months Old Value of calf at birth $3.00 Expenses of dam of calf, chargeable to calf for one year as follows: 8 percent interest on $50, value of cow 4.00 Keep of yearling and feed of cow 12 months 12.25 Insurance on cow 1.00 Risk of failure of cow to breed 1.75 Loss of calves by death, etc 1.00 No corn fed up to 12 months. Value of pasture and keep up to 12 months 6.00 Total 29.00 Weight of calf at 12 months, 700 pounds, at 5 cents 35.00 Profit at 12 months of age 6.00 Cost From Twelve to Twenty-four Months of Age Value of steer at 12 months of age 35.00 Value of shock corn, 110 bushels, at 35 cents 38.50 Pasture 12 to 24 months 3.00 Interest and risk 2.80 Total 79.30 Less 500 pounds of pork made on droppings of steer, at 5 cents. . 25.00 Net cost 12 to 24 months. . 54.30 Weight of steer at 24 months, 1,600 pounds, at QV 2 cents 104.00 Profit at 24 months of age 49.70 Cost From Twenty-four to Thirty-six Months of Age Value of steer at 24 months of age 104.00 Value of shock corn consumed in entire year, 125 bu., at 35 cents. 43.75 Pasture, May 1 to Nov. 1 4.00 Interest and risk 8.32 Total 160.07 Less 500 pounds pork at 5 cents, made on droppings of steer. . . . 25.00 Cost at 36 months of age. . 135.07 Weight at 36 months of age, 2,200 pounds, at 7 cents 154.00 Profit at 36 months of age 18.93 / As the remarkable corn-growing possibilities of the soil and climate in the corn belt became more and more evident and the demand for corn grew greater, the westward movement of agri- culture naturally stimulated the growing of corn and, to a cor- responding degree, diminished the area of grazing land. Grad- ually, but surely, the plow drove out the cow until in the heart of the corn country but few females of the beef type remained. For thirty years or more in some such sections, it has been a proverb that “it does not pay to keep a cow a year for the chance of a calf.” At the same time that conditions within the corn belt were tending to reduce the rearing of beef cattle there, the industry was extending on the great breeding ground of the Southwest and the grazing lands of the West (see Circular No. 169). Thus an increasing supply of cheap stockers and feeders from the range was a further large factor in causing the abandonment of cattle raising by many farmers, who reasoned — and logically so — that calves could be produced and grown more econom- ically on the cheap grass lands of the West than on corn-belt farms. Moreover, the attractive opportunities which the range country offered the cattleman induced many live-stock farmers of the Mississippi valley to migrate west, thus diminishing still further the proportion of cattle feeders to grain growers in the central states. The extent to which this change in conditions has affected beef production is indicated somewhat accurately by the results of inquiries that have been made on an extensive scale among cattle feeders of Illinois and Indiana. In 1902 this experiment station secured reports of methods used by 509 cattle feeders in Illinois, and found that only 12 percent raised their entire supply of feeding cattle. 1 It was estimated that only about 15 percent of the native steers marketed in Chicago from Illinois were carried from birth to maturity without changing hands. 2 The Indiana Experiment Station in 1906 investigated the methods of 929 cattle feeders in Indiana, and reported that “only 6 percent are really beef producers, that is, breeding their own 1 111. Agr. Exp. Sta., Circ. No. 88, p. 1. 2 IH. Agr. Exp. Sta. Circ. No. 79, p. 6. 8 Corn-Belt States, Showing Number of Beef Cattle in Each in 1913 9 cattle and feeding them out.” About one-half of the total number raised a part of their feeding cattle, and 42 percent made a prac- tice of purchasing all their feeders. 1 It is significant that a considerably smaller proportion of breeders was found in Indiana than in Illinois. AJtho the data are not strictly comparable, owing to possible differences in the class of. cattle feeders represented and an interval of four years between the two investigations, it is undoubtedly true that the decrease in the proportion of breeders to feeders of beef cattle has moved gradually from the eastern to the western border of the corn belt. Notwithstanding the abandonment of cattle breeding by a majority of the more extensive beef producers, the aggregate number of cattle in the region under consideration shows an increase from 1870 to 1910, altho in but few instances did it keep pace with the population. This is due mainly to the large num- ber of farmers who keep only a few cattle to furnish the family supply of milk and beef and to consume the waste roughage and forage of the farm. The statistics for the years 1911, 1912, and 1913 show an actual decrease in the number of cattle in the corn belt. In order to illustrate this point more fully, Table 1 is pre- sented. Table 1. — Number of Cattle Other than Milch Cows in the Corn -Belt States States 1870 1 1890 1 191 0 2 1911 s 1912 s 1913 4 Ohio Indiana. .. Illinois.... Iowa.. . . Missouri . Kansas. . . Nebraska. 801 000 750 000 1 224 000 815 000 731 000 346 000 55 000 918 000 1 054 000 1 765 000 2 680 000 1 819 000 1 921 000 1 346 000 978000 1 020 000 1 974 000 3 611 000 2 165 000 3 260 000 3 040 000 942 000 744 000 1 391 000 2 919 000 1 67 1 000 2 202 000 2 225 000 885 000 707 000 1 266 000 2 773 000 1 50'. 000 1 872 000 2 002 000 814 000 686 000 1 228 000 2 607 000 1 444 000 1 778 000 1 902 000 Total... 4 722 000 11 503 000 16 048 000 12 094 000 11 009 000 10 459 000 1 U. S. Dept, of Agr., Bur. An. Indus., Ann. Rept. 1897, pp. 267-289. 2 U. S. Dept, of Agr., Yearbook 1909, p. 572. 3 U. S. Dept, of Agr., Yearbook 1911, p. 630. 4 U. S. Dept, of Agr., Yearbook 1912, p. 682. l Ind. Agr. Exp. Sta., Circ. No. 12, p. 11. 10 Influence of Dairying The remarkable growth of large and small cities thruout this fertile section resulted in a corresponding demand for milk and butter. This could be met only by the establishment of dairy farms within comparatively short distances from the cities and an increased production of dairy products on general farms; whereas the supply of beef could readily be secured from greater distances, especially in view of the increasing beef pro- duction of the range country at this time. Table 2 shows the actual number of milch cows and also the proportion of milch cows to total cattle in the corn-belt states by twenty-year periods since 1870, including 1913. Table 2. — Number of Milgh Cows in the Corn-Belt States 00 ^jf © 1890 1 191 0 2 191 3 3 States Number Pet. of total cattle Number 1 Pet. of total | cattle Number Pet. of total cattle Number Q r— . 03 Ohio 734 000 48 783 000 46 947 000 49 869 000 52 Indiana... 435 000 37 608 000 36 687 000 40 634 000 48 rilinois. . . 083 000 36 | 1 094 000 38 1 232 000 38 1 007 000 45 Iowa.. .. 465 000 36 1 1 279 000 32 1 570 5 000 30 1 337 000 34 Missouri.. 371 000 34 1 813 000 31 925 000 30 789 000 35 Kansas. . . 162 000 32 1 758 000 28 737 000 18 698 000 28 Nebraska. 35 000 39 1 424 000 24 879 000 22 607 000 24 1 U. S. Dept, of Agr., Bur. An. Indus., Ann. Rept. 1897, pp. 267-289. 2 U. S. Dept, of Agr., Yearbook 1909, p. 572. 3 U. S. Dept, of Agr., Yearbook 1912, p. 682. Passing from the eastern to the western states of the corn belt, the percentages in the right-hand column show a remark- ably uniform decrease in the proportion of milch cows. Approx- imately one-half of the cattle of Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois are classified as milch cows, while only about one-fourth of those of Kansas and Nebraska are so classified. As in the case of beef cattle, the increase in the number of milch cows has been much less marked during the last twenty years than in the previous period, owing to the less pronounced changes in population and industrial development. The slight increase in the proportion of milch cows to the total number of cattle in Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois during forty years does not 11 adequately represent the increased importance of dairying as a factor in the cattle industry, nor the extent to which the dairy type predominates in the cattle stock of the states mentioned. It is a result of the extension of general farming and the neglect of systematic beef-cattle breeding, together with a great tendency on the part of the average farmer to cross-breed cattle of the beef and dairy types, thereby deteriorating the quality of both. In this way the relative number of animals worthy of the name of milch cows has been limited, and at the same time in most corn-belt localities, the production of steers suitable for the feed lot has very nearly approached the vanishing point. The marked decrease in the proportion of milch cows to the total number of cattle in the four states west of Illinois, in spite of a large increase in their actual numbers, is explained by the general movement of range cattle into those states from the Southwest and West. It is likely with increased population and the adoption cf intensive systems of agriculture, the proportion of milch cows will approach mure nearly that of the states farther east. Further light may be thrown on the types and classes of cattle kept on corn-belt farms by summarizing the returns of the United States Census relating to age and sex of cattle. Figures from the Twelfth Census are presented because of the more minute classification it affords in this particular. Table 3. — Relative Proportion of Various Classes of Cattle in the Corn -Belt States in 1900 1 States M c, 1 1 13 QJ CS > ~C 13 cS ^ Steers 1 and under 2 years Steers 2 and under 3 years Steers 3 years and over Bulls 1 year and over Heifers 1 and under 2 years Dairy cows 2 years and over Other cows 2 years and over Total nerct. perct. perct. perct. perct. perct. perct. perct. perct. Ohio 23.6 10.6 6.9 1.4 1.9 10.4 41.0 4.2 100 Indiana 25.0 11.9 8.3 2.1 1.7 10.7 35.2 5.1 100 Illinois 22.8 11.4 9.5 3.7 1.9 10.4 33.1 7.2 100 Iowa 23.8 13.5 11.2 3.2 1.7 10.9 27.2- 8.5 100 Missouri 21.1 12.7 12.0 5.2 1.4 10.3 26.6 10.7 100 Kansas 20.5 12.4 11.7 9.5 1.4 9.9 15.7 18.9 100 Nebraska 23.6 12.5 9.9 3.9 1.6 10.8 16.7 21.0 100 Average 22.7 12.4 1 10.4 4.6 1.6 10.5 26.1 11.7 100 l Calculated from Abstract of Twelfth Census, 1900, pp. 238, 240, 246, 247. 12 The smaller proportion of milch cows in the more westerly states, as previously shown, is here verified, and a correspond- ingly larger proportion of other cows is noted. Relatively more steers are found in the western portion of the corn belt, and the difference is more marked in the case of the older than in that of the younger steers, thus showing the natural tendency to keep cattle longer in those sections of the country where pasture lands are both cheaper and more abundant. With respect to the proportion of calves under one year, heifers under two years, and bulls, the data show no striking differences; and likewise, with regard to the proportion of bulls to cows and the proportion of calves to cows, the various sections of the corn belt appear comparatively similar. Table 4 gives available data from the Thirteenth Census. While these data are not in all respects comparable with similar data from the Twelfth Census, they show the same general ten- dencies. Table 4.— Relative Proportions of Various Classes of Cattle in the Corn-Belt States in 1910 1 States Calves Steers and bulls Year- ling heifers Dairy cows Other cows Unclas- sified animals Total perct. perct. perct. perct. perct. perct. perct. Ohio 13.9 16.3 12,8 49.3 7.7 . 100 Indiana 13.5 16.9 13.3 46.5 9.8 100 Illinois 13.3 19.5 12.6 43.0 11.6 100 Iowa . 12.8 29.1 12.7 31.6 13.8 100 Missouri . . . 1 1.6 31.0 12.0 33.4 12.0 100 Kansas 2 12.4 34.1 10.9 23.9 18 1 0.6 100 Nebraska 2 . . . 12.5 30.0 12,4 21.0 24.0 0.1 100 Average. . . 12.8 ! 26.9 12.3 33 2 14.7 0.1 100 1 Calculated from Abstract of Thirteenth Census, 1910, pp. 316, 317. 2 Includes unclassified animals. Fattening Steers in the Corn Belt Notwithstanding the rapid extension of the acreage devoted to corn growing, and the great demand that has arisen for corn for other than feeding nurposes, the crop is still fed chiefly to farm animals. As nearly as can be estimated. 80 percent of the ‘ecrn produced in the United States is fed to live stock. 1 It is. of *111. Agr. Exp. Sta. Circ. No. 140, p. 9. 13 course, more largely sold off the farms of the corn-belt states than those of other sections of the country, but probably not far from one-half of the crop of Illinois is fed on the farm. 1 A temporary curtailment of one branch or another of the live-stock industry, especially cattle and hog feeding, is so promptly reflected in a reduced corn market that stock feeding is quickly resumed to a greater or less extent, tho with increasing reluctance and mis- givings. This applies especially to fattening cattle, as this branch of live-stock production offers the most immediate and ready means of disposing of large quantities of corn, and at the same time utilizes much otherwise wasted roughage, such as stalk fields, corn stover, and straw. That beef production in the corn belt has become largely a steer-fattening enterprise apart from breeding is clearly demon- strated by the investigations of the Illinois and Indiana Experi- ment Stations quoted in a preceding paragraph. In Illinois it was found that in 1902 more than one-half of the cattlemen from whom reports were obtained were feeders who purchased the cattle they finished for market; in addition, more than one-third were both feeders and breeders, but even the latter purchased most of their feeding cattle. 2 About 85 percent of the native beef steers marketed in Chicago were fattened after having been pur- chased as stockers and feeders. 3 In Indiana in 1906, 929 reports were received from cattlemen in that state, of whom 42 percent were found to purchase all their feeding cattle and 52 percent grew only a part of them and bought the remainder. 4 The extent and tendency of this important phase of the in- dustry are also shown in a measure by the shipments of stockers and feeders from the large cattle markets during recent decades (see Table 5) . In the evolution, or transition, of corn-belt beef production from a cattle-raising to a steer-feeding proposition with a large proportion of the feeders purchased at the large markets, the business, to a considerable extent, has gravitated into the hands of men who handle comparatively large numbers of cattle — from a few carldads to several hundred head. Tho these professional cattle feeders in most cases are farmers, they usually buy all mi Agr. Exp. Sta., Circ. No. 140, p. 8. 2 I11. Agr. Exp. Sta., Circ. No. 88, p. 1. , 3 I11. Agr. Exp. Sta., Circ. No. 79. p. 6. 4 Ind. Agr. Exp. Sta., Circ. No. 12. p. 12. 14 Table 5. — Shipments ofStockers and Feeders from Various Markets 1 Markets 1880 1890 1900 1910 1913 Chicago 2 300 000 724 000 4 294 000 75 000 8 i 51 000 9 114 000 176 000 4 406 000 i 631 000 431 000 ! 102 000 60 000 251 000 178 000 380 000 914 000 405 000 159 000 67 000 262 000 220 000 Kansas City.. Omaha 5 130 000 3 647 000 3 266 000 6 St. Louis 7 . . . St. Joseph 2 . . St- Paul 5 130 000 10 Sioux City 2 . . . Indianapolis 11 . Louisville 7 .... 42 000 Ft. Worth 12 . . . 493 000 Denver 11 Buffalo 11 1 1 From reports of Stock Yards Companies. 2 Statistics for .1880 and 1890 not obtainable. 3 Estimated. 4 1905. Statistics for 1900 not obtainable. 5 Statistics for 1880 not obtainable. 6 1897. Statistics for 1890 not obtainable. 7 Statistics for 1880, 1890, and 1900 not obtainable. 8 1908. Statistics for 1900 not obtainable. 9 1901. Statistics for 1900 not obtainable. 10 1898. Statistics for 1890 not obtainable. 11 Cattle shipments not classified as to Stockers and feeders. 12 Statistics for 1880, 1890, 1900, and 1910 not obtainable. their feeding cattle and a large part of the corn they feed, use but little of the manure produced, and freely admit the large element of speculation incurred. The capital, risk, business skill, and distance from markets involved in cattle feeding necessarily deter many farmers from converting their corn into beef. The proper place and purpose of beef production in the corn belt, however, is to provide a profitable market for the crops grown on the farm and at the same time conserve the fertility of the soil. These con- siderations are of greater consequence to the small farmer than to the “big feeder.” It is therefore essential to the welfare of agri- culture that the business should be distributed more generally 'among farms of average size instead of being concentrated in the hands of a few farmers and capitalists whose farms, as well as their fortunes, are frequently enriched at the expense of the neighbors whose corn they buy. With a reasonable degree of skill in buying, feeding, and marketing, it is ordinarily safe and usually profitable for the general farmer to engage in the fatten- ing of steers. In some sections of the corn belt, cattle feeding has not only 15 passed largely from the hands of general farmers to the large feeders, but has also been abandoned to a considerable extent by the latter. This tendency may be assigned to several causes: (1) Prices of grain have been relatively higher than those of cattle j and inducements to sell corn for cash at the elevator in- stead of feeding have therefore been strong. (2) Land has increased rapidly in value, and it is a prevalent idea that high- priced land prohibits profitable cattle feeding. As a matter of fact, the actual influence of this factor is usually insignificant as compared with prices of corn and cattle in determining the profit in feeding cattle. Increased value of farm lands has made it pos- sible for many cattlemen to retire or to relinquish active manage- ment of their farms to others less competent to engage profitably in the business. (3) Opportunities for cattle feeding in vari- ous portions of the West have attracted many successful cattle feeders from the older sections of the corn belt. The opportun- ities for exclusive grain growing in these newer regions have not been equally attractive; hence there has been a tendency for a large exodus of live-stock producers, while the grain growers more generally have remained. (4) The farms in many of the older, more prosperous communities have become occupied largely by tenants. The prevailing system of short-term leases and a lack of experience in feeding cattle on the part of tenants have resulted in a marked decrease not only in cattle feeding but in the production of live stock of all kinds. (5) The apparent continuation of satisfactory crop yields in a large part of the corn belt has resulted in a failure to appreciate the value and necessity of manure. This fact has blinded most farmers to an important factor in cattle feeding. (6) The fact that cattle, ready for the feed lot, could be produced cheaper in the West than in the corn belt has caused the general farmer, who pro- duced his own feeders and did not use enough cattle to pay to buy them from the western country, to go out of the live-stock busi- ness. That is, at the prevailing prices he could not compete in the production of beef with the “big feeder,” who was able to place his cattle in the feed lot at a lower cost than they could be produced in the corn belt. The Outlook In the light of conditions set forth in this and foregoing cir- culars, a few general deductions may safely be drawn relative to 16 the probable future trend of beef production in the corn-growing section of the United States. The undeveloped state of cattle production in proportion to the population and the area of the United States as compared with the condition of the industry in older countries justifies the > expectation of an ultimate extension and de velop ment of cattle raising and feeding in this country. Tin rapid increase of pop- ulation and the slower rate of increase in the number of cattle have rendered the export beef trade a relatively insignificant fac- tor; but with a large domestic demand in proportion to the supply, and limited competition from abroad, the industry should be practically independent of foreign trade. General market con- ditions are now and promise to remain favorable to the producer, for he has a domestic market as a regular outlet and a foreign market as an influential regulator of prices and as an elastic con- sumer of surplus. The “passing of the range” has not diminished the number of western cattle entering the markets, but the growing popula- tion of the West and, consequently, the increased amount of beef slaughtered and consumed in that section have reduced the rela- tive importance of western cattle as a factor in corn-belt markets. Further, corn-fed beef cattle, which can be properly and profit- ably finished only within a limited section of the country, doubt- > less will continue in demand by a class of trade in which the cheaper grass beef of the West cannot compete. Notwithstanding the general subdivision of western ranges and ranches by settlers, the fact that large areas of the West and Southwest are adapted only to grazing indicates that these sec- tions w T ill continue to produce a considerable number of feeding cattle. As Ireland with her abundance of grass has grown “store” or feeding cattle for the farmers of England and Scot- land for many years and continues to do so, similarly the grass lands of our great West and South may reasonably be expected to supply stockers and feeders to large markets of the corn belt for many years to come. An increasing proportion, and eventually a large proportion, of the cattle matured in the corn belt, however, must be reared there; because, as explained in Circular 164, the quality of west- ern cattle will be adversely affected by an increased proportion of cattle of the dairy type, and at the same time the development of agriculture will facilitate the finishing of a larger proportion of feeding cattle on western farms. Certain sections of the corn belt, and some farms in all sections, are partially or wholly un- suited to grain growing, and these lands, in many instances, may be most profitably used for grazing purposes. With the development of more intensive farming methods, the introduction of corn silage, alfalfa, and forage crops in gen- eral will tend to render both cattle raising and feeding more prac- ticable and profitable. Also, regardless of the price of land or of grain, a considerable amount of roughage and aftermath remains to be either fed or wasted on every farm, and this factor will con- tribute largely toward maintaining beef production in the corn belt. Eventually, manure will be regarded more highly by corn growers in the Middle West than it is now. Long continued crop- ping without adequate rotation and fertilization will ultimately compel such attention to manure as it now receives from cattle feeders, not only in Great Britain and Continental Europe, but also in certain parts of Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. Cattle feeding will be found to be one of the most convenient and satis- factory means of obtaining this valuable fertilizer. This factor is of sufficient importance to be treated at some length in a sub- sequent circular. Over against what has been said in the foregoing paragraphs, it must also be clearly understood that a remunerative and rea- sonably stable market will be indispensable to the further development of the beef-cattle industry. Farming in gen- eral. and stock raising in particular, must henceforth be recog- nized as a capitalized business, the products of which must sell above the cost of production in order to render the enterprise profitable. Those upon whom the cattle feeder is dependent for his returns must consider the increasing cost of producing cattle un- der present and future conditions, and pay prices commensurate therewith. Unfortunately, the cattle feeder frequently has been compelled to accept very inadequate returns, and seldom has his profit been in full proportion to his outlay if all elements of cost be figured at their just value. lu The important fact connected with the cattle-raising in- dustry is a marked shortage, the extent and far reaching effects 18 of which the public has by no means fully realized. The con- suming public have complained of the high cost of meats. At times they have accused producers of securing too great profits from the business. There should be no mistake or misunderstand- ing. The present shortage is due primarily to the fact that farmers have found meat production, and primarily beef production, less profitable than other agricultural enterprises. Over-production and cheap meat, while possible, are extremely remote. An increased supply will come, not as a result of lower prices, but only as a result of higher prices. Consumers generally do not appreciate the fact that for a generation or more they have been able to buy meat products at a price which does not cover the cost of production under present-day conditions. It is obvious that the conditions which have brought about the increased cost of meat products will continue to operate even in greater force in the future than in the past. “The public will ultimately come to understand that the pro- ducer must receive more rather than less for his product if an ample supply of meat is to be assured. In the past the price of cattle has been based, so far as it has been based upon anything, upon free or cheap range, cheap land and labor, and. cheap corn. Even the cattle feeder of the corn belt has been guilty at times of relying for his profit upon sharp practice in buying feeding cattle for less than the cost of production when the producer, thru drouth or misfortune or possibly a lack of knowledge, has been forced to sell. Few, if any, of these conditions surround the industry today. “All will readily agree that the producer is entitled to a mod- est profit in cattle production. No business which depends upon sharp practice, or upon depriving some necessary factor in the trade from its just proportion of the profits of the industry can long survive. It may well be asked, What is a modest profit? In the past, with rapidly changing conditions, it has been next to impossible to answer this question. Conditions are now likely to be more stable; that is, changes will be less frequent and less radical. A business-like beef production which extends over such a vast area of country where conditions surrounding it are so variable naturally presents a most difficult problem. One thing, however, is certain, and that is that if there is any con- i Extract from an address by Professor Mumford before the Illinois State Farmers’ Institute at Galesburg, February 18, 1914. 19 siderable increase in the production of beef cattle in the United States, it will come from the establishment of small herds on many farms rather than of large herds on extensive areas. This means, if it means anything, that the price will be fixed by the cost of producing cattle on improved farms, so that ultimately the producer will be by far the most important factor in fixing the price of beef. This does not mean that producers will be per- mitted to fix a price altogether out of proportion with the cost of production, but one entirely consistent with it. “Obviously, beef will be most extensively produced where conditions favor its economical production. Gan it be denied that any considerable area in this or in any other country offers more favorable conditions for beef production than the corn belt? If not, then the corn belt holds the key to the solution of the cattle situation. Conditions surrounding the industry and the cost of producing beef cattle in the corn belt, therefore, will likely be a large factor in determining the answer to the question of a price basis which will represent the cost of production and a modest profit. Fortunately, nowhere in the country has the cost of production been more carefully worked out or more accu- rately determined. The largest and most advantageous use of these data is one of the problems of the corn-belt cattlemen. “No price basis can prevail which does not represent the greatest use of the best methods in cattle production. The cattle raiser who does not and will not avail himself of the most eco- nomical practice must be content to accept lessened or, in many instances, no profits. This means that ultimately he must change his ways or go out of business. “The resumption of cattle raising on many of the smaller corn-belt farms will present problems of marketing which will need adjustment. The producer of less than a carload is now distinctly handicapped, and yet it has just been predicted that the bulk of the cattle in the future will be produced by men who have considerably less than a carload of cattle ready for market at any one time during the year. There will need to be developed, there- fore, some method of marketing which gives to the smaller oper- ator substantially the same advantages enjoyed by the larger operators.” ■ ' , Circular No. 176 October, 1914 Illinois Agricultural Experiment Station PRACTICAL HELP ON LANDSCAPE GARDENING HOW TO GET ILLUSTRATED LECTURES, ADVICE, AND PLANS FOR HOME GROUNDS, STREETS, ROADS LIBRARY, SCHOOL AND OTHER PUBLIC GROUNDS By WILHELM MILLER DIVISION OF LANDSCAPE EXTENSION, DEPARTMENT OF HORTICULTURE A characteristic view from an Illinois roadside, showing some of the most valuable local color in the “Prairie state” — the prairie crab apple. Restoration of the birds, crab apples, and hawthorns is a favorite motive in the “Illinois way of roadside planting.” College of Agriculture UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS URBANA PRACTICAL HELP ON LANDSCAPE GARDENING By Wilhelm Miller 1. How to Get a Country Road Plan One of the best ways to beautify Illinois is to plant trees, shrubs, and vines native to the state along the roadsides. One and one-half miles were planted in the “Illinois way” during the spring of 1914. This work is done in full sympathy with the needs of farmers, en- gineers, and all other road users. The requirements of the Illinois State Highway Commission will be squarely met. Practically all dif- ficulties have been overcome. Open spaces are left to permit the ro#d to dry out and to allow views. These grassy spaces are long enough to be mowed by the machinery now used. They also reduce the cost. Near Chicago, people have spent from $1200 to $1500 a mile for road- sides planted solidly. In the open country the cost is about $400 to $600, or about 10 percent of the cost of constructing good, hard roads. The road leading to the cemetery is often the one which all parties 1. Illinois Roads as We All Want Them to be Good hard roads lined with trees and shrubs native to Illinois, like the prairie rose. (A country road near Madison, Wisconsin, where the native vegetation has been preserved, and more of the kind planted. Photograph by C. N. Brown.) "P^oposep T^OApsipE. "PbArsTirse Heai? SiptLL, 1 ll PlV'ISIOIN OF LANP5CAPE PE51SH 2. The First Roadside Plan Made in the ‘‘Illinois Way” Half a mile planted near Sidell, Illinois, spring of 1914. Two and a half miles have been guaranteed there, four miles near Barrington, etc. will agree to improve first. Other favorite projects are the main en- trances to a city, the roads to the country club, and roads thru large farms. In some cases, several miles have been planted without wait- ing for hard roads. For illustrations, see cover and Figs. 1 and 2. APPLICATION for road plan Division of Landscape Extension, University of Illinois, Urbana, 111. Will you send a man to give the illustrated lecture on ‘ ‘ The Illi- nois Way of Roadside Planting, ’ ’ and tell us how we can get a plan by state aid, thru the University of Illinois? Name Address 2. How to Get a Plan for Your School Grounds Perhaps the surest way to make Illinois one great garden is to teach school children to know, love, and cultivate the trees, shrubs, vines, and flowers native to Illinois. For when the children come to make homes of their own, they will choose material which is permanent, appropri- ate, and characteristic rather than temporary, gaudy, and imitative. To accomplish such results, one township high school is planning for an “Illinois Arboretum.” 4 The ideal is a comprehensive plan including sanitation, play- grounds, and gardening. The phrase “school gardening’ ’ now covers three distinct ideas : 1. An outdoor laboratory for teaching horticulture at school. 2. The temporary beautifying of back yards by means of penny packets of seed sold to children at school. 3. The permanent decoration of the school building and grounds. The ideal is to give the children a share in all these activities. A playground without a garden, or a garden without a playground, is less desirable than a good plan embodying both, part of which you can realize every year. Ordinarily we give only informal advice to school boards and rec- ommend some one else to make the plan, as there is no desire to com- pete with landscape gardeners or nurserymen. Sometimes, however, private designers cannot be secured, or a new style must be worked out, or there is an exceptional opportunity to stimulate a whole com- munity to do more and better planting. In such cases it may be pos- sible to secure a plan thru the Division of Landscape Extension, but every application must be approved by Professor J. C. Blair, Head of the Department of Horticulture. 3. A New Way of Beautifying School Buildings Instead of putting shrubbery against the wall of a large building, place it about ten feet away. This arrangement admits light and air to the basement windows, prevents dampness, and makes it easier to handle coal and snow. It looks better because it makes a broader foundation, such as a tall building requires. (Normal School, Salem, Mass. Harlan P. Kelsey, landscape architect). Even when little land is available, some- thing worth while can be done. The sim- plest, cheapest, and quickest improvement is foundation planting. Shrubs and vines enough to transform the front of the build- ing may cost from $10 to $50. They will mature in three or four years and often create enough public interest to secure funds for a comprehensive plan, and a liberal yearly appropriation until the whole scheme is realized. “The Illinois Way of Foundation Planting” is elabor- ated in “Arbor and Bird Days for 1914,” published by Hon. F. G. Blair, State Super- intendent of Public Instruction, Spring- field. This illustrated article has been shown by public-spirited citizens to mem- bers of school boards and has stimulated several requests for state aid in planning school grounds. See Figs. 3 and 4. 4. Salem’s School Garden Inside the foundation plant- ing. Bushes at right are lilacs. Imagine their beauty when in bloom I Better than concrete? APPLICATION FOR HELP ON SCHOOL GROUNDS Division of Landscape Extension, University of Illinois, Urbana, 111. Will you send a man to give the illustrated lecture on ‘ ‘ The Il- linois Way of Planting School Grounds?” If so, I will guarantee his traveling expenses, furnish a lantern and operator, and get the school board to attend — also the citizens who would be likely to give financial aid to a unique and better comprehensive plan, including playgrounds and school gardens. Name Address 3. How to Stop Tree Butchery Every street tree is worth $1 a square inch in cross section four feet above ground, according to the “Parker standard.” provided it is a permanent species, well located, and in perfect health. The above estimate is based on a town of 100,000 inhabitants. In small cities and villages the rate is reduced, but the total value is still high. This figure represents the “scenic and recreative value” of the trees to 6 the city. Money spent on planting and maintaining shade trees may not make such a spectacular appeal as money spent on the best mag- azines for advertising your town as a desirable place to live, but the “pulling power” of fine old trees is a large and permanent item. Thus trees add to the prosperity of your town and the value of your property, to say nothing of the added health, comfort, and beauty. Unfortunately, the trees have to run a terrible gauntlet — tree butchers, damage by storms, gnawing by horses, smoke, gas, electric- 5. Tree Butchery This is against the laws of Illinois. It has been done everywhere, but it can be prevented by having a shade tree com- mission or city forester, as Urbana does. 6. One Way to Prevent it It is never necessary to mutilate trees. There are eight different things the wire- using companies can do. These are shown by lantern slides in the lecture. ity, underground pipes, wires, amateur pruners, insects, diseases, and people who cut down trees for fuel, or thru ignorance of their value. To solve all these problems there seems to be only one way, viz., to have a city forester or shade tree commissioner. The former is gen- erally a paid official ; the latter is a public-spirited citizen serving with- out pay. In Urbana the trees are under the general supervision of Professor Hottes. No one can cut down, plant, or prune a tree with- out his permission, and the city pays the actual cost of pruning, which is done under his direction. In every community in Illinois, large or small, there is some public-spirited citizen who believes in his town suf- ficiently to undertake this work. If he does not possess the technical knowledge, he can acquire it thru books which the town library will secure, thru correspondence with the University of Illinois, and by experience. The work can be spread thruout the year. It can be done in such a way as to prevent antagonism, please the people deeply, and build a better and more beautiful city. See Figs. 5 and 6. APPLICATION FOR HELP ON STREET TREES Division of Landscape Extension, University of Illinois, Urbana, 111. Will you send a man to give the illustrated lecture on 1 ‘ The Il- linois Way of Street Tree Management ? ’ ’ If so, I will guarantee the traveling expenses, furnish a good lantern and operator, and get the mayor, aldermen, and park commissioners to attend, or any other citizens who are likely to help the new movement. Name Address 4. Special Help for Farmers The smallest rural communities can now have an evening’s enter- tainment with colored lantern slides of exceptional quality, at a total cost of about five cents a person. If you can supply the hall, light, janitor service, lantern, and operator, it is possible to reduce the cost to half a cent a person. The “ self-explanatory lecture” does away with the traveling ex- penses of a lecturer. The captions are printed directly under each lantern slide, so that the audience can read them. It is much better, however, for you or some one to read the captions, as this is quicker, more spirited, and more personal. The slides will be sent you in time to “rehearse” the lecture alone or before a few friends, e. g., the ed- itor of the newspaper, the school superintendent, etc., and you can keep the slides about ten days. See Fig. 7. 7. The Self-Explanatory Lecture Here is the box of lantern slides which farm communities may borrow. The ballots serve as programs and every person who signs one will get a free copy of Circular 170 (at the right) which contains 112 illustrations. 8 The subject is “The Illinois Way of Beautifying the Farm,” the same title as Circular 170. The pictures are the same as in Circular 170, but are more impressive, because they are hand-colored by artists. This lecture is in such demand that seven sets of slides are almost con- stantly in use. At the conclusion of your lecture you will And that about one-fourth of the families present will sign a promise to do some permanent or- namental planting within a year. Can you think of any easier, quicker, and cheaper way to make permanent improvements that will add greatly to the attractiveness of your community? APPLICATION FOR THE SELF-EXPLANATORY LECTURE Division of Landscape Extension, University of Illinois, Urbana, 111. Will you send a box of sixty lantern slides, so that I may give the self-explanatory lecture called “The Illinois Way of Beautify- ing the Farm?” If so, I will pay the express charges both ways (about $1.00) on a box of sixty lantern slides. I will furnish lan- tern and operator and pay for any slides damaged while in my care. Also, please send me ballots to serve as programs, which our people can sign, thus enabling them to get Circular 170, entitled “The Illinois Way of Beautifying the Farm. ’ ’ Name Address 5. Foundation Planting for Farmers A new type of county organization is being formed, which promises to accomplish more high-grade ornamental planting at reasonable cost and with better prospects that the shrubs will live than any other method with which we are acquainted. A single township may be taken as the first unit for the fall cam- paign in 1914. Every family is given a chance to see colored lantern slides of the best Illinois shrubs for foundation planting. The county agent or advisor plays an important part, giving many of the lectures and sometimes acting as treasurer. The organization plans to have at least one home out of every four planted. The buying is all done thru the treasurer in accordance with a plan approved by all the members. The plan provides that every farmer is to have shrubs and per- ennial flowers enough to decorate the entire front of his house and to turn two corners. He gets twenty-five shrubs and fifty perennials at a cost of forty cents a bush, and five cents for each perennial plant - a total of $12.50. This includes the planting of all material, and the shrubs are guaranteed for three years, which means that any bush that dies will be replaced. When one remembers that nurserymen often charge seventy-five cents a bush for furnishing shrubs to individuals 9 and planting them (the only guarantee being that they are true to name and will leaf out), the great advantages of collective buying are apparent. Such a plan seems to solve four great difficulties that have hitherto seemed insuperable. As stated by the farmers themselves these diffi- culties are: 1. Farmers have no time for ornamental planting in spring. 2. Farmers are so scattered that the cost of transportation is too high. 3. Farmers do not know what to plant, or where and how. 4. Farmers have been victimized so often by dishonest nurserymen that they have a general distrust of all nurserymen. To overcome these difficulties, the first country improvement associa- tion proposes: (1) to plant in the fall, using materials that can be safely planted then; (2) to use a motor truck to deliver the bushes in the autumn, when the roads are in better condition than in spring; (3) to educate the members of the organization thru lantern slides and literature furnished by the Division of Landscape Extension ; and (4) to deal with some nurseryman of national reputation and proved financial standing, so that the guarantee will mean something, and to have the contract approved by legal and horticultural experts. The final arrangements made by the first county improvement association cannot be announced at the time this circular goes to press, nor is it necessary. Doubtless other good arrangements can be made with va- rious nurserymen. The important thing is for farmers to realize the great advantage of collective buying and of doing as much planting as possible in the fall. From the landscape gardener’s point of view, foundation planting is the best thing for farmers to undertake first, because money spent at this point will give greater results than anywhere else on the farm- stead. Foundation planting takes away the bare look and transforms a house into a home. It need not interfere with any comprehensive plan made later and it creates a general desire for such plans. It sat- isfies the universal demand for “ quick results” better than trees do. since shrubs mature in three or four years. To make plans for these foundation plantings would cost too much, but the element of design enters into the scheme to the following extent: (1) The material is permanent, appropriate to the country, and will help to make Illinois different from other states. (2) No two places are exactly alike, since each farmer can choose his own varieties. (3) The shrubs are arranged by a competent foreman who is accustomed to placing bushes with or without plans. From the nurseryman’s point of view it is practical to plant and guarantee bushes only when the homes are reasonably numerous and close together. For example, a motor truck can go about one hundred miles in one day to the scene of operations. A chauffeur and two 10 experienced men can make about six foundation plantings in a day, or thirty-six in a week, provided the homes are contained within a single township, or thirty-six square miles. Where the average farm is 160 acres, there are about 144 homes. If one family in every four joins the improvement association, there are thirty-eight plantings. At $12.50 each these amount to $475. If $25 is added for the school, the total will reach $500. This is the minimum order for a truck load of nurs- ery stock. Individual orders may exceed $12.50, and a farmer may plant his entire farmstead in this way if he desires, but no order for less than $12.50 is received under this plan. By cooperation of this sort it is possible to plant one-fourth of the homes in an entire county in three to five years, and one county organization is now planning to win national fame by being the first county in the United States to beautify its farm homes by concerted effort. APPLICATION FOR HELP ON COUNTY PLANTING Division of Landscape Extension, University of Illinois, Urbana, 111. Will you send a man to give the illustrated lecture on “ Founda- tion Planting for Farmers, ’ ’ and tell us how we can get a unique scheme of county planting at a cost we can well afford? If so, I will pay traveling expenses and furnish lantern and operator. Name Address The Division of Landscape Extension will aid all county and town- ship organizations on request by lectures, literature, advice, and loan of lantern slides. This and all other phases of its work are, of course, entirely educational, no commissions or profits of any kind being re- ceived from materials, labor, or any other source. 6. How to get Nursery Stock Thousands of letters are received from residents of Illinois asking where ornamental plants may be secured, especially the ones pictured and recommended in Circular 170. Some cheap and efficient means of answering these requests must be found, and the best interests of each individual should be considered, without showing favoritism to any commercial interest. It seems impossible, however, to publish a complete list of even the Illinois nurserymen, because of changes in the trade, and other difficulties. An absolutely complete list would hinder, rather than help, because it would contain many addresses of wholesale dealers who will not take retail business and many small growers who cultivate only a few varieties. The following list is based on the American Florist Company ’s Directory which is supposed 11 to give a complete list of all Illinois nursery firms that issue retail catalogs. If any Illinois nurseryman who issues a retail catalog has been omitted, he will know that it is by accident, not design, and if he will notify us, correction will be made in the next edition. The University of Illinois cannot guarantee dealings with any nurseryman. Illinois Nurserymen Who Issue Retail Catalogs A. M. Augustine, Normal; Aurora Nursery Co., Aurora; Austin Nursery Co., Downers Grove; Barnard Company, 233 W. Madison St., Chicago; Beaudry Nursery Co., 1747 Railway Exchange Bldg., Chicago; Bradley Brothers, Makanda; H. Burton, Upper Alton; H. W. Buckbee, Rockford; Corn Belt Nursery & For- estry Assn., Bloomington; Cotta Nursery Co., Freeport; L. F. Dintlemann, Belle- ville; R. Douglas & Sons, Waukegan; W. E. Gallner & Sons, Vienna; J. W. Griesemer, Hopedale; S. E. Hall, Cherry Valley; D. Hill Nursery Co., Dundee; Home Nursery, La Fayette; Joliet Nurseries, Joliet; James King, Elmhurst; Klehm & Sons, Arlington Heights; Leesley Brothers, N. Fortieth and Peterson Avenue, Chicago; Maywood Nursery Co., Maywood; The Naperville Nurseries, Naperville; Swain Nelson & Sons, 941 Marquette Bldg., Chicago; Northfield Nursery, Northfield; Onarga Nursery Co., Onarga; Peterson Nursery, 30 N. La Salle St., Chicago; Phoenix Nursery Co., Bloomington; Porter & Son, Evanston; Spaulding Nursery & Orchard Co., Springfield; Vaughan’s Seed Store, 31-33 W. Randolph St., Chicago; B. J. Wakeman & Son, Chebanse; C. H. Webster, Centralia; The Geo. Wittbold Co., 739 Buckingham Place, Chicago. Why not try the Illinois nurserymen first ? — Some of these firms take interest enough in the “Illinois way” to assemble and propagate more species of Illinois plants than nurseries outside the state can be expected to do, and all should have a fair chance to share in a move- ment for the good of Illinois. Again, nurseries are to a large extent lo- cal institutions. No nurseryman, at present, handles all the woody plants of Illinois. Why not encourage your nearest nurseryman by or- dering a dozen shrubs of some one kind that is pictured or recom- mended in Circular 170? Why not try Illinois species first ? — We do not ask anyone to deny himself any of the old-time favorites of foreign origin, such as garden roses, lilacs, snowballs, mock orange, and deutzia, but do you want to make foreign plants exclusive or even dominant? Don’t you prefer, at least in your front yard, to help make Illinois look different from every other state? The following catalogs, so far as we know, offer the greatest variety of shrubs and vines native to Illinois : Swain Nelson and Company, Chicago, 51 kinds ; A. M. Augustine and Company, Normal, 45 kinds ; Leesley Brothers, 40th and Peterson avenue, Chicago, 40 kinds ; Wm. A. Peterson, 164 La Salle street, Chicago, 30 kinds. One of these catalogs has all the species native to Illinois marked by a star. All nurseries have some species native to Illinois and many have promised to offer more species in greater quantity in the fall of 1914. Neighborhood organizations and individuals can get their plantings insured against failure at reasonable cost. For example, on orders 12 amounting to $200, one nursery firm will furnish, plant, and guaran- tee for three years shrubs and vines at forty cents each, provided or- ders are given thru one person and no order amounts to less than $10. The Division of Landscape Extension will be glad to cooperate with every nurseryman who wishes to handle more plants native to Illinois. 7. How to Plan Your Home Grounds One of the largest free publications on landscape gardening ever issued is Circular 170, “The Illinois Way of Beautifying the Farm.’' (See Fig. 7.) Altho written primarily for farmers, it contains many suggestions for dwellers in cities, suburbs, and villages. It has 112 illustrations, which serve to give this circular a decorative as well as a practical interest. These pictures are mostly in pairs, contrast- ing commonplace with better ways of planting home grounds. Some of the topics discussed are : The ‘ ‘ Illinois way ’ ’ of farm architecture. How to screen unsightly objects the year round. Why shrubbery borders are better than hedges or beds. The value of a background for your farmhouse. How to make flat prairie interesting. How to make your place look 1 1 different. ’ ’ Every tree worth $1 a square inch. Bird gardens for Illinois farmers. The 1 ‘ Illinois way ’ ’ of planting school grounds. The circular also explains why permanent planting adds much more to the value of property than temporary planting; why bushes and vines planted against the foundations of the house are more effective than flower beds in the lawn ; why the native materials of every state are preferable to foreign and artificial varieties; how to frame the view to and from every house ; how to save coal by planting wind- breaks ; and how to make a flower garden that is really adapted to our climate, soil, labor conditions, and life, instead of copying some- thing Eastern, English, or Italian. APPLICATION FOR A FREE COPY OF CIRCULAR 170 Division of Landscape Extension, University of Illinois, Urbana, 111. Please send me a copy of Circular 170, entitled “The Illinois Way of Beautifying the Farm.” I promise to do some permanent ornamental planting within a year. Name Address 13 Lists are given of the best shrubs for the shady side of the house ; for feeding the birds the year round ; for light and sandy soils ; for high foundations; for the prevention of cutting across lots, etc. Also the permanent vines are arranged according to their season of bloom. To prevent waste of this expensive publication it is requested that everyone sign a promise like the above application. 8. Free “Ballots” to Organizations You can get a copy of Circular 170, “The Illinois Way of Beauti- fying the Farm,” for your friends and for every member of any or- ganization in which you are interested, provided they are willing to sign an “Australian Ballot for Illinois People,” which is really a promise to do some permanent ornamental planting within a year. A reduced facsimile of this ballot is shown in Fig. 7. These ballots are sent free to any organization in Illinois. A package of 250 ballots can be sent by express collect to any point in Illinois for about twenty- five cents. Thousands of them have been distributed at little or no cost by women’s clubs and chambers of commerce at their regular meet- ings. Banks hand them out to depositors. Farmers’ organizations are mailing them to their members. Schools use large quantities. Mine and factory owners have joined in the movement. These ballots are effective at any season — not merely in the spring and fall. APPLICATION FOR BALLOTS IN QUANTITY Division of Landscape Extension, University of Illinois, Urbana, 111. Please send me ballots by express collect and I will distri- bute them to members of the organization named below T , and to my friends, explaining how they can get free copies of Circular 170 by signing this ballot. Name Organization Address 9. How to Get Your Front Yard Planted You can add about $500 to the value of your lot in four years by cooperating with your neighbors for three to five blocks in getting a street plan. See Fig. 8. The plan generally provides for: 1. A uniform, permanent kind of tree at uniform distances. 2. Foundation planting for every home. 3. Connecting shrubbery to make the street a park. 4. Different color scheme for every street. 14 5. Every yard different from every other. Every family can make changes in the plan before it is accepted. The cost is always within the means of the property owners, e. g., $10 to $20 for a 50-foot lot, or 20 to 40 cents a front foot. After your neighbors have had the scheme explained to them, you will find it easy to get nine-tenths of the property owners to join an organization. The minority will gradually convert itself. Sometimes the members specify the amount they are willing to spend, and agree to have their temporary, misplaced, or diseased trees cut down when rec- ommended. APPLICATION FOR NEIGHBORHOOD HELP Division of Landscape Extension, University of Illinois, Urbana, 111. Will you send some one to give the illustrated lecture on 1 1 The Illinois Way of Neighborhood Planting” and explain how we can get a street plan by stats aid? If so, I will guarantee the traveling ex- penses of the lecturer, and furnish a good lantern and operator. Name Address 10. How to Get Our Best Popular Lecture Our best introductory lecture is ‘‘The Illinois Way of Landscape Gardening.” To this title you may add “adapted to ,” in- serting the name of your community, as this lecture is never given twice alike, but the illustrations used are those best adapted to each particular community as determined by our representative after per- sonal investigation. Outline of Lecture 1. The money value of beauty. — Signed stories of big profits made by plant- ing in the 1 1 Illinois way. ’ 1 2. The Prairie school of artists. — How the middle West has produced the first genuine American style in all the fine arts — The leaders, their fundamental idea, and their masterpieces. 3. How to malce your state unique. — The Illinois way of landscape gardening will make the “ Prairie state” different from any other in the union — The most inspiring examples — The best “ repeaters of the prairie.” 4. How to malce your town unique. — A city or county planting motive based upon the trees, shrubs, vines, and perennial flowers adapted to your soil and conditions by ages of experiment on the part of nature. 5. How to malce your street unique. — A different color scheme for every street in town — Four crops of beauty, or one big show of color for each season. 6. How to make your home unique. — Every front yard a different set of bushes and vines and a different arrangement, but all contributing to the street, town, and state style. 15 8. A Street Plan Made in the “Illinois Way” This simplified plan suggests what neighborhood associations can get by cooperating with the University of Illinois. The detailed plan shows where every bush is to be planted, and gives both the common and nursery names of all planting material. Here it is possible to show only the outlines of foundation planting and connecting shrubbery. (Portion of plan made for La Salle, 111. Proposed trees shown by X.) 7. Can your community get international fame? — Can your city, village, or county be the first to undertake some new scheme of beautification or city plan- ning? Its advertising value and cost — How many new residents will it bring, and how much will it increase the value of your property? 8. Your greatest opportunity. — What you can do now to make the biggest im- provement in the appearance of your community, in the shortest time, and at the least cost — Whether you can get state aid and on what terms. 9. How to plant your home grounds. — Practical, specific help on your own in dividual problem — What, where, and how to plant. How the lecture is adapted to your conditions . — Our representative will try to spend a whole day with you. He carries about 600 slides, and is prepared to illustrate many conditions that he finds. No im- provement is recommended in the lecture that is not endorsed by the local committee. To reduce expenses and save time it is necessary to group the lec- tures — not scatter them over the whole state. This lecture will draw and hold thousands, if properly advertised. Such personal service can be given to few communities during 1915 where an audience of 300 or more cannot be guaranteed, unless there is some reasonable assurance 16 that funds are available for some important public improvement con- nected with landscape gardening. Some net results . — This lecture was given in twenty-minute form in Peoria before 2600 business men and resulted in 750 signed promises to do some permanent planting within a year. The citizens invited the Division of Landscape Extension to assist in a week’s gardening revival, as a result of whidh over $10,000 were spent on permanent planting in the spring of 1914. One landscape gardener made plans for improvements costing $4000, of which $2500 were spent within a few weeks. APPLICATION FOR OUR BEST POPULAR LECTURE Division of Landscape Extension, University of Illinois, Urbana, 111. Will you send a man to give the illustrated lecture, ‘ ‘ The Illi- nois Way of Landscape Gardening, ” adapted to ? If so, I will guarantee traveling expenses and furnish lantern and op- erator. We will advertise the lecture thoroly and believe we can fill a hall with a seating capacity of . A committee representing the commercial and women’s clubs and city government will meet you and take you quickly over our town to see w 7 hat you can do for us. Name Organization Address Acknowledgments Cover and Fig. 7 by A. G. Eldredge; Fig. 1 by C. N. Brown; 2 and 6 by F. A. Aust; 3 and 4 by Robb; 5 by L. E. Foglesong; 8 by F. A. Aust and L. E. Foglesong. Organization of the Division of Landscape Extension Eugene Davenport, M. Agr., LL.D., Dean of the College of Agriculture, Univer- sity of Illinois and Director of the Illinois Agricultural Experiment Station. Joseph Cullen Blair, M.S.A., Dead of the Department of Horticulture. Wilhelm Miller, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Landscape Horticulture. In charge of the Division of Landscape Extension. Franz August Aust, M.S., Assistant in Landscape Design. Herbert Wardwell Blaney, M.L.A., Assistant in Landscape Extension. John Raymond Van Kleek, M.L.D., Assistant in Landscape Extension. Edwin Deal, B.S., Half-time Assistant in Landscape Extension. UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Agricultural Experiment Station CIRCULAR No. 177 THE RELATION BETWEEN YIELDS AND PRICES By E. Davenport URBANA, ILLINOIS, OCTOBER, 1914 The State Bankers Association has furnished the Experiment Station, thru the different banks, with a list of names of progressive farmers of the state, and has asked that publications of special interest be sent to their addresses from time to time. Responsive to this request this circular is issued and is being sent not only to the names furnished by the Bankers Association but also to the regular mailing list of the Experiment Station. If parties to whom this circular is sent care to receive the regular publications of the Experiment Station and will notify the Director to that effect, their names will be added to the regular mailing list. This circular is issued to call attention to certain financial aspects fre- quently overlooked in discussions pertaining to an improved agriculture. Tt is designed to be studied rather than hastily read. THE EELATION BETWEEN YIELDS AND PRICES By-E. Davenport, Director Introduction The following points are generally assumed without argument by writers and speakers discussing agriculture : 1. That large yields are always profitable and that the best farmer is the one who raises the most per acre. 2. That large yields are a natural antidote for the high cost of living. 3. That when, prices are low the farmer should raise his yields to protect his income. 4. That everybody is suffering because of the “slipshod and wasteful methods of the American farmer.” 5. That we should now copy the intensive methods of older countries and that more capital is needed for the best results. As a matter of fact, there is truth in all these propositions, but it is mixed with an amount of error and of misconception concerning the economic laws governing agricultural production that is dangerous both to the farmer and to the consumer. Cheap Food and Low Yields We are just emerging from a pioneer agriculture, in which land had little value, because it was abundant, and labor was the principal element in the cost of production. If the American farmer has been wasteful of fertility it is because he has had it to waste, but he has been exceedingly economical of labor, which was costly, and has pro- duced the cheapest food the world has ever eaten, or ever will eat. tho the yields per acre have been little more than half those of older countries. Our question has been not how much per acre but how much per man, and in this the American farmer has been right even tho his average yields have been low. We are, however, approaching old-country conditions. Land is growing scarce, and therefore costly, so that elements other than 3 4 labor have begun to enter into the cost of production and food is necessarily higher. Under pioneer conditions the highest yields have been the most profitable because they were the result, not of expensive methods of farming, but of especially rich spots of land or of favorable seasons, costing nothing extra beyond the increased expense of harvesting. It is still true that high yields are profitable if they can he cheaply produced , hut the general principle is ' that the higher the yield the greater the cost, not only per acre, hut per hushel. This natural operation of the economic law of diminishing returns in farming is best illustrated by an experiment begun many years ago by Lawes and Gilbert at Rothamsted, England, the oldest experiment station in the world. They applied, every year for twelve years, dif- ferent amounts of complete fertilizer to adjoining fields of wheat, with the following results : Fertilizer applied 1 Av. 12 yrs. Increase Increase per 200 lbs. None 200 lbs. 18.4 bu. 28.4 bu. 10.0 bu. 10.0 bu. 400 lbs. 36.4 bu. 18.0 bu. 8.0 bu. 600 lbs. 38.0 bu. 19.6 bu. 1.6 bu. By this we see (fourth column) that as an average of the twelve years the first 200 pounds of fertilizer returned 10 bushels, but that a second 200 pounds increased the yield only 8 bushels above the first, and that a third 200 pounds returned but a little over a bushel and a half above the double dose, showing that increased outlay is not always followed by correspondingly increased yields. The experiment was continued, and at the end of fifty-two years the results were as follows: Fertilizer applied 1 Av. 52 yrs. Increase Increase per 200 lbs. None 200 lbs. 14.8 bu. 23.9 bu. 9.1 bu. 9.1 bu. 400 lbs. 32.8 bu. 18.0 bu. 8.9 bu. 600 lbs. 37-i bu. 22.3 bu. 4-3 bu. These figures for half a century show the same principle of diminishing returns in a modified form. Due to soil exhaustion, the Nitrogenous fertilizer with abundance of mixed minerals. 5 yields from the unfertilized land decreased during the fifty-two years. On account of a few bad seasons, the average effect of the first dose (200 pounds) was slightly decreased. Owing to the accumulation of residues of fertilizer, the effects of the second and third doses were relatively larger than for the twelve-year period, tho subject to the same law of diminishing returns. That is to say, the last dose of fertilizer was less than half as effective as the first; or, what is the same thing, the last increment of increase cost more than twice as much per bushel as the first. Prices and Yield In the more intensified agriculture that is just ahead of us, the question is, therefore, not how much the farmer can produce per acre, but how much he can afford to produce. His yield must depend, not mainly upon his knowledge of production, but upon the price of the product. For example, in the tables quoted, each 200 pounds of fertilizer cost $7.50. With wheat at a dollar a bushel, a little computation will show that both the single and the double applications would pay, but that the triple application would swallow all the profits and more. At eighty cents a bushel, only the first dose would make money ; while at fifty cents a bushel, none of the treatments would pay, and both the farmer and the public would have to be contented with the lower yields from untreated land until such time as the consumer was willing to pay a higher price for his food. In this way is yield de- pendent upon price, and it is the natural way in which supply adjusts itself to demand as expressed in price. Of the same tenor is the experience of the University, which is producing corn yields varying from 26 bushels per acre on continu- ously unfertilized land, to an average of 93 and a maximum of 120 bushels per acre on land which is excessively fertilized. It is making no money on either extreme: in the one, because the yield -is not suffi- cient to pay the labor ; in the other, because the fertilizers are so cost- ly as to swallow all the profits. The problem of the farmer, therefore, is to determine at what point between these extreme yields he must aim to fix his average yield, and in determining this point he must take into consideration the value of his land, the cost of labor, the cost of fertilizer, and the probable price he will receive for his product. 6 From this we see the impossibility of “doubling yields without increased expense,” and also that when prices drop, the income of even the best farmers must decline, for extreme yields are profitable only with high prices. It must be clear that we cannot recklessly increase the yield per acre. On the other hand, we cannot continue the old-time wasteful methods of soil exhaustion, cheap and effective tho they were in their day, because they are resulting in decreasing yields in the face of increasing demands. If our declining yields, due to soil exhaustion, are to be arrested and turned into even a slight increase to meet the growing demands, it is clear that new methods must be employed, but the object must be a moderate increase in yield by economic methods and not extreme yields, which are bound to result in loss to the farmer or in prohibitive prices for food, or both. Our farming is now in a transition stage between the “extensive agriculture” of the pioneer, in which fertility is disregarded and there is no investment but labor, and the “intensive agriculture” of old and densely populated countries, in which the main question is yield per acre, resulting either in high cost of food or in poorly paid labor. (China produces the most per acre but pays its laborers the least.) Our present yields are below what the climate and the general situation ought to produce, owing mainly to certain adverse conditions that can be cheaply and easily corrected, and money put into this channel will well repay the investment because it will increase the yield without being subject to the law of diminishing returns. This is where our present duty and opportunity lie in establishing the foundations of a permanent agriculture. It must be remembered that we have not yet reached the intensive stage , where it will pay either the producer or the consumer to attempt maximum yields on American land. Rational Procedure In this transitional stage, in which our yields are kept down by certain adverse conditions, the first step in a rational procedure is the correction of these conditions by relatively inexpensive methods, such as the use of lime to correct acidity, the application of cheap forms of phosphorus or of potassium to balance fertility, keeping nitrogen always the limiting element, a better adjustment of crops to soil and 7 to locality, and the organization of more economic systems of farming, with special attention to live stock, the distribution of labor, and the investment of capital. All the advice given out by the University of Illinois at this juncture is based upon this principle, because invests ments of this character, whether of labor or of capital, are certain to increase the yield with relatively slight expense. Having done what we can in this way, we may await with confidence the intensive stage, the coming of which will be characterized by a permanent rise in prices. The Handicap of the Small Farmer The greatest hazard in farming is the season, against which im- proved methods are only a partial protection. The farmer with little or no capital must confine himself to practices that will pay every year, while the man with considerable means is free to follow those more expensive methods which pay best in the long run, even tho an adverse season now and then might show a loss. This lack of capital cannot be remedied by short-time loans to the small farmer, nor by loans of any kind to the farmer whose yields are limited by bad culti- vation or to the one incapable of managing his business upon the more complex and, to him, more dangerous basis that will be at once established when he attempts to increase his yield by a larger use of capital. Farming on Credit It is commonly said that not enough floating capital is invested upon American farms, and it is doubtless true, but it must be remem- bered, both in extending credit and in making loans, that the American farmer has had little experience in handling capital. Manifestly, therefore, when he borrows, both he and the lender must be satisfied that the loan will be judiciously used, or it may result disastrously. The student of agriculture cannot fail to see the danger of over- capitalization in attempts to secure abnormally high yields, a danger which increases as the practice spreads, for altho one man may safely increase his yields without depressing the price, if all farmers were to follow his example the price would drop and all would lose money. Under this principle a few farmers will always be practicing methods not practicable for the mass. By this we see that in the long run the chief results of better farming will be realized by the consumer rather 8 than by the farmer. All attempts to hold down production with the purpose of raising the price are as unavailing as they are unwarranted. The world wants food, and the principles herein presented are the ones that will guarantee its cheapest production. Conclusion It is relatively safe, therefore, to invest capital freely upon the farm for the sake of correcting abnormal conditions and raising the yield to the normal, but beyond that point it will pay only when prices rise. As we approach this point by reason of increased population with its increased demands, either the cost of food must rise or labor be greatly degraded, else the farmer cannot afford to produce the increase needed. As population increases, therefore, but one alterna,- tive will present itself — each human unit must become more efficient in production, or it must deny itself much of what is now enjoyed. This circular is issued not as an argument for poor farming nor for the continuance of old-time methods , but to point out that we are not to step at once and blindly into expensive forms of intensive agri- culture. We should ascertain and practice those relatively inexpensive methods belonging to a transition stage that correct bad conditions and thereby considerably increase the yield without seriously raising the price, so that the results may be profitable alike to the farmer and to the public whom he serves. In this good work there is no danger of doing too much. UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Agricultural Experiment Station URBANA, ILLINOIS, JANUARY, 1915 CIRCULAR No. 178 A CRISIS IN THE FOOT AND MOUTH DISEASE SITUATION 1 There are two sides to every question upon which men differ honestly, and at present there are differences of opinion between many of the cattle owners on one side and the federal Bureau of Animal Industry and the Illinois State Live Stock Commission on the other regarding the best method of combating foot and mouth disease. The Agricultural Experiment Station recognizes that this is a crisis and feels that a clear statement of both sides may aid the public generally to a better understanding of the present situation. A brief outline of preceding events may serve as an introduction to this statement. Spreading from a single point in Michigan, the foot and mouth disease was distributed from New England to Mon- tana within a month, and it was plain that if not checked it would reach practically every herd in the country within a short time. The federal Bureau of Animal Industry and the various state live- stock commissions who are charged with handling such matters were not organized to control an outbreak of such magnitude. At that time there were but few men in the United States available as inspectors who had ever seen a case of this disease. Under such circumstances it might be expected that mistakes in diagnosis would be made. Start- lThe following material, prepared by a committee of the Experiment Station and pub- lished first as a press bulletin, is now republished as a Station circular in order to give it greater publicity. in g in late October with what seemed a practicaliy hopeless situation, the centers of infection have been located and removed until the general situation is now well in hand and there is little uncertainty as to the outcome except in the state of Illinois. Here the infection has been heaviest and something over five hundred herds have been destroyed in combating the disease. Of the herds reported diseased, less than twenty-five remained alive on January 12, in addition to the National Dairy Show cattle held in quarantine for experimental purposes. Where even, a single animal has been found diseased, the entire herd has been slaughtered, and the federal authorities have agreed to pay one half of the appraised value of the slaughtered animals, there being an understanding, but no legal provision, that the state would pay the other half. The large financial loss incident to this slaughter and the uncertainty created in the minds of other cattle owners as to the possibility of their being the next victims have created a very panicky feeling in many communities. The cattle owners feel that they have been made to bear unneces- sary burdens by this program of universal slaughter. They point out that in many of the herds, particularly the National Dairy Show cattle, the effect of the disease is so slight as to be hardly noticeable to the -casual observer and that the death rate has been extremely low. They urge that a way be provided for saving the cattle, particularly in the cases where the herds represent the results of years of careful breeding. There is also dissatisfaction on the financial side. The appraised values, while not seriously below the market value of the ordinary animal, do not cover the breeding value of the animal or the disorganiz- ation of the farm business which has resulted from the destruction of the herds. The latter is especially important upon the dairy farms where the farm plan calls for a herd to consume the forage. Where the cattle are destroyed they cannot be replaced under present con- ditions both because the traffic in cattle is stopped and because it would be unwise to at once restock the infected farms. Accordingly the crops cannot be consumed upon these farms as usual. Moreover, there is no market for these forage crops because of the danger that they may transmit the disease. As a result of the loss of their cattle and a market for their crops, the affected dairy farmers are losing heavily, if not facing actual financial ruin. Neither does this valuation cover the accessory expense and inconvenience incident to the destruction of the herds. In some instances weeks have elapsed between the date of diagnosis and slaughter and another long period before the final disinfection of the premises. During this time a strict quarantine has been maintained, which has hampered the people upon the farm and prevented them from obtaining assistance for the necessary farm operations. This quaran- tine has been continued in a modified form long after the final disin- fection. Finally the money promised by the government has not yet been paid, and the state has as yet had no opportunity to provide for payment of the other half. However, the foot and mouth disease must be recognized as one of the most costly animal scourges. In many herds in this state the disease has appeared in a mild form and consequently many stockmen have not realized the seriousness of the outbreak. The fact is that when stripped of all exaggeration it far exceeds either tuberculosis or contagious abortion in the havoc which it works and the ease with which it is spread. It produces little or no immunity, so that ravages of the disease recur at short intervals. With the present narrow mar- gin of profit in the meat and milk business, the carrying of the addi- tional burden of foot and mouth disease would be impossible without a rise in the price of both milk and meat. Accordingly, if the disease became general, the burden of this new state of affairs would fall not only upon the farmers but upon the consumers as well. Since the various elements of cost have now forced meat to an almost prohibitive price, there is reason to expect that this added cost would seriously cripple, if not practically destroy, the fat-stock industry of this country. There is no question, therefore, but that it would be good business policy to spend vastly more than the present struggle has cost rather than settle down to foot and mouth disease as an added burden to the animal industry of the United States. The objection to quarantine as a method of combating the disease is that it is both difficult and expensive to maintain, especially since the disease is so extremely contagious. Such a quarantine is now being maintained in connection with the Dairy Show cattle at Chicago, and notwithstanding the unusual value of the animals the expense has been so great that it is a question whether the owners would not have been better off had they accepted the appraised value of the cattle in the regular way and submitted to slaughter at the beginning of the out- break. On an ordinary dairy farm the expense of maintaining an efficient quarantine, coupled with the difficulty in marketing the prod- uct, would make the quarantine method of handling this disease more expensive than the present slaughter method. The apparent recovery of the Dairy Show herd has been so frequently referred to as a suc- cessful result of the quarantine method of handling the disease that it seems desirable to point out that the careful and rigid quarantine main- tained and the sanitary and professional care with which the cattle have been surrounded would be absolutely impossible on the average farm. Even where quarantines are carefully conducted they become a menace to the surrounding farms because the infection can be carried in a mechanical way by birds and by hunters, as well as by cats, dogs, rats, mice, and rabbits. The difficulty of maintaining an effective quar- antine is such that any attempt to do so on a large number of farms would be practically equivalent to abandoning the effort to eradicate the disease. The present outbreak of foot and mouth disease does not differ from those which have preceded it in any way except in being origi- nally more widespread and consequently more difficult to suppress. The method of procedure which is now being employed is precisely that which has been successful in suppressing previous outbreaks, and the results thus far attained indicate that the present outbreak can be con- trolled by this means. Under such circumstances it seems the plain duty of all who have the welfare of the live-stock interests at heart to unite in supporting the efforts of the federal and state authorities to eradicate the foot and mouth disease from this country. UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Agricultural Experiment Station URBANA, ILLINOIS, APRIL, 1915 CIRCULAR No. 179 FOUR APHIDS INJURIOUS TO THE APPLE By B. S. Pickett Assistant Chief in Pomology- Aphids infesting the apple buds appeared in serious numbers during the present season (1915) in the University orchards, when the buds began to swell. They were also observed in neighboring orchards and in the experimental orchards of the Department at Olney and Neoga. In 1914, apple aphids caused serious damage in certain coun- ties in Illinois, and some damage was reported from many sections of the state. With a view to finding the extent of the present season’s infestation, the writer telegraphed to six orchardists in representative parts of the state for information as to the occurrence of the insects. The replies were as follows : From Johnson county. — Aphis worse than ever before. Something must be done quickly or crop is ruined. From Marion county. — Aphis situation much more serious this morning (April 10). From Union county. — Find some aphis but not in alarming numbers. From Washington county. — Do not find any aphis. From Jersey county. — Green aphis very bad on almost all orchards. From Tazewell and McLean counties. — The aphids are very bad at Lilly. At Normal there are some aphids on some trees. The replies indicate a serious infestation more or less widely spread over the state, and the Department of Horticulture is therefore preparing this brief circular in order to provide information regarding the insects and to suggest measures for their control. Character of Injury The aphids attack the opening buds, the young fruits, the growing shoots, and the leaves, sucking the plant juices from the succulent parts by means of long, very slender, tube-like beaks which they thrust thru the skins of the affected organs into the soft tissues beneath. They weaken the blossom buds by removing the sap; they dwarf and de- form the apples so that varieties of ordinary size frequently fail to grow larger than small crab apples, and the fruits have a puckered appearance about the calyx end; they suck the juice from the growing shoots, dwarfing them; and they cause the leaves to curl, and if the insects are present in large numbers, to dry up and fall off. They are more injurious to the growth of young trees than of old trees. In old trees their chief injuries are on the fruit. Description of the Aphids Four kinds of aphids attack the apple, the Apple Aphis ( Aphis pomi DeG.), the Rosy Apple Aphis ( Aphis sorbi Kahl.), the European Grain Aphis ( Siphocoryne avencie Fab.), and the Clover Aphis ( Aphis bakeri Cowen). All kinds are small, soft-bodied, sucking insects re- producing themselves with great rapidity in dry, warm weather. Cold, heavy rains are detrimental to the propagation and development of the insects. The various species differ, however, in their appearance and habits in some important respects. The Apple Aphis eggs are deposited in the fall on the new shoots and at the base of the bud scales. The eggs are small shining black objects and are often to be found in great numbers. The eggs hatch about the time the buds begin to open, and the aphids may be found infesting the young shoots, expanding leaves, and flower buds. The adults are one-twelfth of an inch long, and bright green in color. This species is particularly partial to the young shoots and tender terminal leaves, but it also deforms and stunts the fruit when present in large numbers during and immediately following the blooming period. The Apple Aphis lives on the apple trees thruout the year. The Rosy Apple Aphis eggs are deposited in the same manner as those of the Apple Aphis and hatch at the same time in the spring. The adults are slightly larger than those of the Apple Aphis, one- tenth of an inch long, and are variable in color, usually rosy, but some- times gray, purplish, or black. This species is particularly partial to the fruit spurs and destructive to young fruits, tho it also attacks the young shoots and causes the leaves to curl as does the Apple Aphis. Unlike the Apple Aphis, this species, after producing three generations on the apple, migrates to some unknown food plant, where it passes the summer, returning to the apple trees in the fall. The European Grain Aphis lays its eggs on the apple in the fall and produces two generations on the apple in the spring, after which it migrates to grass and grain crops for the summer, returning to the apple in the fall. The adults are smaller than the previous species and green in color. It infests the flower buds and blossoms to an even greater extent than the Apple Aphis or the Rosy Apple Aphis, but. owing to its earlier migration, it is less injurious to the leaves and young shoots. The Clover Aphis lays its eggs in the fall on the shoots of the apple. The eggs hatch a week or more before the Apple Aphis. Most of the aphids migrate to clover or alfalfa in June, tho a few appear to remain on the apple thruout the season. The adults are light yellow or pink in color. All the species described occur in Illinois, and more than one of them may be found the same season in the same orchard. In fact it is quite possible that all four species are sometimes present in the same orchard. Information as to the relative seriousness of the different species is, unfortunately, incomplete ; orchardists are advised to observe carefully the habits and appearance of these insects as they have op- portunity in their orchards, in order to identify the species and to determine whether or not the particular species present is causing suf- ficient injury to call for remedial measures. During the present season orchardists should make an immediate examination of their trees and if aphids are found in large numbers, should take immediate steps to combat them. Growers whose orchards suffered in 1914 should be especially prepared to fight these pests this spring. Remedial Measures The species of aphids above described are easily killed in the adult stage by certain contact sprays. Winter applications of lime sulfur cannot be depended on to destroy the eggs. Poison sprays such as arsenate of lead are not eaten by this type of insect, and consequently are ineffective remedies for aphids. Kerosene emulsion is effective but is uncertain in its effect on the foliage of the trees. The best avail- able sprays are the tobacco decoctions, of which the one most widely in use is “Black Leaf 40,” a proprietary tobacco extract, made by the Kentucky Tobacco Products Company, Louisville, Kentucky. This material is used at the rate of one gallon in one thousand gallons of spray. It may be combined with lime sulfur, lime sulfur arsenate of lead, Bordeaux, or Bordeaux arsenate of lead, not with arsenate of lead alone. The ideal time to spray for these aphids is just as soon as all or nearly all the eggs appear to have hatched. Observations made in the University orchards this season indicate that all the eggs hatched before the blossom buds began to separate. After the leaves expand some- what and the blossom buds separate, the aphids are provided with more hiding places and are more difficult to hit with the spray. Unfortu- nately, spraying at this time would require an extra application in addition to the cluster bud spray (made for scab, curculio, bud moth, spring canker worms, etc.), and would thus add seriously to the cost of the season’s operations. Spraying for aphids at the time of the cluster bud spray is, however, highly effective, and in general it is advised that this method be followed. If, however, previous expen- I ence has shown serious losses from aphids, or if they are present in extremely large numbers, the extra application may be well worth while. Fruit growers will confer a favor on the Department of Horticul- ! ture if they will write us the results of their observations on the behavior of the aphids during the present season. The points on which information is particularly desired are the time of appearance and extent of the infestation, the color of the adults, the duration of the attack, the disappearance and reappearance of the aphids, if these I occur, and the success or failure of any remedial measures tried. Such information will be very helpful in determining the extent of the need for treatments and the character of the treatments themselves. UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Agricultural Experiment Station CIRCULAR No. 180 THE SAN JOSE SCALE By PRESSLEY A. GLENN, Chief Inspector State Entomologist’s Office URBANA, ILLINOIS, APRIL, 1915 CONTENTS PA(iE Origin and Distribution 5 Dangerous Character of the Scale 8 Life History and Appearance 8 Food Plants 15 Means of Distribution 16 Means of Control 17 Natural Checks 17 Preventive Measures 18 Artificial Means of Control 19 The Lime-Sulphur Wash 20 Directions for Making 21 Commercial Solutions 22 The Miscible Oils 22 Apparatus and Equipment 22 Miscellaneous Directions 23 THE SAN JOSE SCALE ( Aspidiotus perniciosus Comstock) By PRESSLEY A. GLENN The San Jose scale is capable of doing more injury in Illinois to fruit-trees and many other valuable trees and shrubs than any other insect in the state, and as no general article on the species has ever been printed in the State Entomologist’s report or in the Bulletin of the Illinois Agricultural Experiment Station, it is believed that a com- prehensive discussion of the subject, brought down to date, will have a considerable practical value. This insect is so inconspicuous that it may easily be overlooked ; and its power of multiplication is so great that, in a comparatively short time, it may overspread the trunk, limbs, twigs, leaves, and even the fruit, of the trees or shrubs which it infests, either killing the plants outright, or so injuring them that they become worthless. (See PI. I., Figs. 1, 2; PI. II., Fig. 1 ; and PI. III., Figs. 1, 2.) It is primarily an orchard pest, and is most important in large commercial orchard dis- tricts; but it is also very injurious in parks and private grounds, and on lawns in cities and towns. Its control is much more difficult in towns than in orchard districts, because in the former the values in- volved in each case are commonly too small to make it seem worth while for the property owner to go to the trouble and expense of getting the information and equipment necessary for its destruction; while in the latter the interests involved warrant the expenditure of money and time necessary to its effective control. Origin and Distribution The San Jose scale is a native of China, and it was probably introduced into the United States direct from that country about 1870, on trees imported by James Lick, of San Jose, Cal., for plant- ing on his private grounds. By 1873 it had become destructively abundant in orchards surrounding the premsies of Mr. Lick, and it soon became known as the San Jose scale. In 1893 it was discovered at Charlottesville, Va., and by 1895 it had been found at various points in thirteen of the eastern and central states. In nearly every instance the infestation was traced directly or indirectly to one or the other of two large nurseries in New Jersey, from which it had been sent out on infested stock. 6 This discovery created a general alarm thruout the country; and state legislatures were asked to enact laws for the prevention of the further spread of the scale and for its eradication in localities already known to be infested. Some states responded promptly, but in others practically nothing was done to arrest its progress ; and even in those which provided suitable laws it had already become too firmly estab- lished to make its eradication possible. It was hoped, however, that its further spread could be prevented by a rigid inspection of nurseries, but this hope has been only partially realized. Its spread has been strongly checked by this means, however, and thousands of premises are free from it which would otherwise now be infested. It has nevertheless spread to practically all the fruit-growing sections of the United States, and has become established in forty or more of the states. The San Jose scale was first discovered in Illinois in the fall of 1896*, when it was found on about a dozen peach and apple trees which had been lately received by Mr. Valentine J. Kiem, of Quincy, from a large New Jersey nursery. Dr. S. A. Forbes at once undertook to learn whether it had been introduced elsewhere in Illinois. Lists of shipments of nursery stock into the state made by all New Jersey firms in whose nurseries the San Jose scale had been detected, were secured thru the courtesy of the proprietors, and the imported stock at each place on these lists was carefully inspected. By this means the scale was definitely located at 17 other points, scattered thru 13 Illinois counties. In some cases the infestation was apparently still confined to the imported trees ; in others it had spread to trees near by ; and in 2 cases it had spread to adjoining orchards, to an extent to show that it must have been introduced several years before. By July, 1899, it had been detected in 30 places scattered thru 18 coun- ties, and by October, 1900f, the number of its known localities had increased to 44, 5 in the northern, 9 in the central, and 20 in the southern part of the state. In most cases the local distribution was still very limited, being confined in many cases to a single orchard; but in a few it had become so extensive that Dr. Forbes expressed the opinion, in his report of 1900, that eradication was probably no longer possible without a destruction of all infested property. By February, •Twentieth Rep. State Ent. 111., p. 1. fRep. 111. State Ent. concerning Operations under the Horticultural Inspec- tion Act. Oct. 31, 1900. 1 1903*, it had been found in 64 Illinois localities ; and very thoro insec- ticide operations in nearly all of them had exterminated it in only 8. In 1906f, 51 of the 102 counties of the state were known to be more or less infested; but 43 per cent of the infested orchards were in 2 of these counties. Even in these 2 counties the scale had not yet become general, and in 30 of the others listed the average number of infested orchards was only 3RS. In 1908 the San Jose scale was known to be present in 79 counties, in 10 of which, all in the southern part of the state, the infestation had become general. In 10 counties it was limited to 3 centers; in 17 counties, to 2 centers; and in 22 counties, to 1 center. In the same year, 1007 farm orchards lying in two belts, each half a mile wide, one extending north and south, from Rockford to Centralia, and the other east and west, from Danville to East Hannibal, were inspected to see to what extent they were infested by the San Jose scale. Thirty- nine of these orchards or 3.87 per cent, were found infested; from which fact we may infer that about 4 per cent of the farm orchards of the state were infested at that time. No attempt has been made since 1908 to collect data of its spread, or to seek out new centers of dispersal. At least eight counties more have nevertheless been added to the list, and it probably might be found to some extent in nearly every county in the state. Many southern, and some central and western counties are quite generally infested, and in some of these counties the Osage orange hedges are commonly infested as well as the orchards. The infesta- tion is by no means general, however, in all the southern and western counties. In 1912, of 78 orchards averaging over 1000 trees each, inspected in Pike county, 37 per cent were found infested ; of 55 orchards in Jefferson county averaging over 500 trees each, 96 per cent; and of 85 orchards in Wayne county averaging over 600 trees each, 14 per cent were infested. The San Jose scale is to be found in prac- tically all the towns and villages of the southern part of the state. It has also reached many towns and orchards in northern Illinois, but in much smaller proportion than farther south. It also multiplies less rapidly, and is hence far less destructive, in the northern counties with their cooler climate and shorter growing season. *Rep. 111. State Ent. on the Horticultural Inspection Law. Nov. 1, 1900- February 1, 1903. fBull. 62, Bur. Ent., U. S. Dept. Agr., p. 23. 8 Dangerous Character of the Scale It is difficult for one to realize fully the dangerous character of the San Jose scale unless he has seen its work. It feeds on the sap of the host plant. The amount of sap that a single individual, or even several hundred individuals could extract could not injure a healthy tree or shrub, but the species multiplies so rapidly, that from a few scattered parents millions of progeny may be produced in a season or two, sufficient to cover completely the bark of parts, or even all, of the tree (PI. I., Figs. 1, 2; and PI. II., Fig. 1.) Most of our insect pests have natural enemies which so restrain their multiplication that they become destructively abundant only now and then; but those of the San Jose scale are inadequate to its control. A young tree or shrub may be killed by the scale in two or three years ; older trees withstand the attack longer, but sooner or later are likewise destroyed. Young orchards are killed out more quickly than old ones ; and where young trees are set in old infested orchards, they also become infested and die before they are old enough to fruit. Where this insect is present, orchards or other plantations containing trees susceptible to its injury can only be preserved by spraying. The scale does not confine its attack to the bark of the tree, but infests the leaves and fruit also. The fruit of apple, peach, and pear frequently become as badly infested as the bark. (See PI. III., Figs. 1, 2.) It is comparatively easy to prevent serious injury to the tree by the use of proper measures of control; but it is very difficult to pre- vent some spotting of the fruit. Scaly fruit is unsightly and unsalable, and does not keep well, and the annual loss in Illinois from this cause is very large, even in orchards which are fairly well sprayed. The small size and inconspicuous character of the San Jose scale add very greatly to its economic importance. The best-trained in- spector can not be depended upon to detect it in every case of slight infestation, and those unfamiliar with it rarely distinguish it until it has done much harm, and has had time to become so widely dis- tributed that its eradication is impossible. Life History and Appearance The female San Jose scale does not lay eggs, as most insects do, but brings forth living young, which are just visible to the unaided eye as yellow crawling specks. They move about for periods varying with the temperature from twelve to forty-eight hours. An experi- ment made in New York by Lowe and Parrott shows that the crawling young may travel at the rate of 2.1 inches an hour as a six-hour aver- 9 age. They then insert their bristle-like beaks into the bark and begin to feed. A day or two after settling down they are completely cov- ered by white waxy filaments secreted by glands scattered over the body; and these filaments soon run together to form a continuous waxy covering. At this stage of development the insect is easily de- tected; but in a few days the waxy covering becomes dark and very difficult to detect with the unaided eye, especially on a dark surface. When viewed with a hand lens, however, it looks not unlike a minia- ture volcano, having the shape of a very low cone with a circular ridge at the apex, inside of which is a nipple-like elevation. As the insect grows the scale enlarges, the female scale remaining almost circular with the nipple near the center (PI. II., Fig. 2), and the male scale becoming about twice as long as wide, with the nipple near one end (PI. II., Fig. 3). In summer or fall, examples of all these stages may be seen on the bark of an infested tree, but in winter and early spring only the small, dark, immature scales and the mature males and females are found. Scattered specimens of the San Jose scale are difficult to find, but they may be discovered with the aid of a good pocket-lens. When numerous, the crawling young and those in the white stage may be readily detected with the unaided eye; when the bark is heavily in- fested with mature insects it becomes completely incrusted with then' waxy coverings and has a rough, ashy-gray appearance which is easily recognized. Parts of trees so infested are usually seriously injured. The unhealthy appearance of a tree or limb during the growing sea- son is therefore an indication of the possible presence of the scale, and should lead at once to a careful examination. On fruit and on tender bark the scale produces a conspicuous red spot, and by watching the fruit the orchardist may usually detect its presence in bearing trees before it has caused serious injury. When mature, the male comes out from under its waxy covering as a very delicate two-winged insect (Fig. 1). The female (Fig. 2) remains alive under her covering for about six weeks after reaching maturity, gives birth to a new generation, and then dies. The winter is passed in an immature stage, on the bark of the host plant. In spring the hibernating individuals continue their growth and mature usually about the latter part of May, and by the first of June the young of the first generation begin to appear, the time varying greatly with the latitude and character of the season. In an experi- ment made by James A. West, of the State Entomologist’s stafif, at Urbana in 1908, the first young appeared May 30, and reproduction 10 Fig. 2. San Jose scale: a, mature female scale,, showing general form of the insect and the threadlike mouth-bristles with which it pierces^ the bark and sucks sap from the tree; b , caudal end of female scale, showing lobes and spines. 11 continued for 1 52 days, closing October 28. The following table shows the dates of birth and of maturity of the first-born and the last-born of each generation . Generations Time of appearance Time of maturing First-born Last-born First-born Last-born First May 30 July 10 July 15 October 1 October 28 October 28 July 10 August 16 September 18 October 29* August 19 Hibernate Hibernate Hibernate Second. . Third August 16 September 18 Fourth A new generation of young began to appear every thirty-seven days, and the average period during which each female reproduced was forty-three days. The average number of young produced by the over- wintering females was 147.5, and the averages for the females of the first, second, and third generations were 472.5, 509, and 247.5 respec- tively. Two full and two partial generations were produced, and the first representatives of a fifth generation were due to appear when reproduction ceased. All of the first and nearly all of the second generation reached maturity before the close of the season, but the larger part of the partial third and nearly all of the partial fourth generations were still immature at its close, and thus entered the win- ter in this stage. This record may be considered as typical for the latitude of Ur- bana. In the southern part of the state, where the season is some- what longer, and in any season lengthened by an unusually early spring or a late autumn, a partial fifth generation is no doubt produced. In the northern part of the state, where the season is shorter, the fifth generation probably never appears, and the fractional parts of the third and fourth generations are much smaller than in the latitude of Urbana. A small variation in the length of the season affects very greatly the abundance of the scale. This is true of all insects having a short life-cycle, with several generations in a season, especially if each female produces many young, unless, indeed, natural checks effectually re- strain the species. The enormous fecundity of such insects is one of •Date computed. 12 the most interesting and important features of their economy. Pre- vious attempts to estimate the possible number of offspring descending, under ideal conditions, from a single female San Jose scale during a season, have not taken sufficient account of the many complex factors of the problem. The writer has here attempted to make such an esti- mate with some degree of accuracy, having in view the percentage of males, the periods of growth, and the rate of reproduction in each generation. The data relative to the percentage of females are from Mr. Pergande’s Washington experiment of 1896, and the others are from Mr. West’s experiment. They are summarized in the following table. Reproducing females Per cent of females Growth period, days Repro- ducing period, days Av. No. of young Daily rate of reproduc- tion Overwintering female. . . 44 147 3.102 1st generation 35 ii 43 473 11. 2d generation 35 37 44 509 11.57 3d generation 70 34 39 247.5 6.346 4th generation CO 40* 39 From these data were obtained the number of young that would be produced for periods of 142 days, 152 days, and 162 days, respec- tively, as shown in the following table. Generations Number of descendants during a repro- ducing season lasting 142 days 152 days 162 days First 147 24,123 1,510.908 10,465,685 147 24.123 1,871.025 30,896,177 147 24,123 2,181,684 69,133.639 1,572,637 Second Third Fourth Fifth Total 12,000,863 32,791,472 72,912,230 The figures in the middle column are for the season of Mr. West’s experiment, which began May 30, and closed October 28. Taking the growth period of the males as twenty-five days, and their adult period •Assumed. Plate 1 Fig. 1. Plum bark incrusted with San Jose Scale, enlarged eight diameters to show the individual scales. Fig. 2. San Jose Scale on peach. X S. Plate II Fig. 1 . San Jose Scale incrusting apple bark. X 8. Fig. 2. San Jose Scale on peach, showing mature female scales and young in different stages. X 8. Fig. 3. San Jose Scale on peach. The large circular scales are females; the smaller, elongated scales are males; and the small circular scales are young in different stages of growth. X 8. Plate Fig. 1. Pear infested with San Jose Scale. (Kansas State Entomological Commission.) Fig. 2. A part of the pear (Fig. 1) enlarged to show the individual scales. (Kansas State Entomological Commission.) Plate IV Parasitized San Jose scales showing the characteristic holes in the scales through which the adult parasites escaped. X S. Classification of Product as to Stages of Development 13 ■ -i a w ~ M 0.^3 H A o CO rH CO r~ CO 1 O’T'-'O t -1- Cl rt oo''cTr- r 1.0 O co LO © coo oo i-Too cT 1—1 1—1 o fn co o co i— i LO Cl GO o i— LO CO co co ^ LO ^© lOM® lO r— 1 CO 1.0 co O CO & CM* cm' f ' r-< CO o >o CO o QO © H © C0 5 ^ Cl p C3 LO'co' go' 43 c- io co GO rt Cl o HT* a © ’ erT cT a 1—1 Vi 0..0 tr~ i— 0) O rH CM ,0 CO Cl co CM a © CO'r-T co' CO CM 00 p CM O CM % (of of T—l CO O CO -f CO co io l- CO Cl TJ . © 1— OH LO_ C c3 lo'-nT-^jT H* c3 C a i.O CO co CO r p‘> © 33 r° V p >1 O r- CM 00 r- a5 O CO CM Cl CO r— 1 CM Cl CM„ . o CD -th'cm' r-' o £ rt lO Cl CM CM CO hNOO CO O lO o T3 © CO G c3 CM cm' be a -o c o 'C ct; © 2 V V P 3 003 43 O l W S-H CO CO Cl CO r< ^ ft a © © .TO V Cl to CO CM co co ^© lO t— CM ‘O'eTriT o o' o rt r— 1 1.0 00 LO fc CM CO 43 £ o >- be QJ be a 43 TJ1 O CM co CO rH TH T-i CM co CO Cl GO r— Cl rH rH C1Q o co'oo' •o' CO GO LO CO CO cf Cl 1 — 1 t- GO Hr GO GO CM © 5 si ^ s 31 14 General Summary as to Mortality Condition Males Females Total 2s umber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Dead Living Total 350,034 12,585,521 1.067 38.03 2,403 19,853,514 .008 60.895 352,437 32,439,035 1.075 98.925 12,935,555 39.097 19,855,917 60.903 32,791,472 100. as five days; the growth period of females as thirty-seven days and their reproductive period as forty-two days; and assuming that Per- gande’s percentages of males and females in the various generations hold true thruout the season, a classification of the product as to stages of development at the close of the season may be made as shown, above. The most interesting inferences from this computation are the enormous number of offspring theoretically possible under optimum conditions, the large variations in the total product due to slight differ- ences in the length of the reproducing season, and the surprisingly large per cent of the progeny which are still alive at the close of the season. No account could be taken of the many mishaps which must pre- vent many of the young from reaching maturity and many of the adult females from producing their full quota of young; hence it is not really possible that the number of young produced ever equals that here shown to be possible theoretically. On the other hand, these results have been worked out with mathematical accuracy from averages actually secured in breeding experiments, and must serve to convince any one that the San Jose scale, if allowed to multiply unchecked on any favorable host plant or in any community, will prove to be a very destructive pest, and they must also make it clear that spraying to control it must be done so thoroly as to destroy nearly or quite every living insect. Under the conditions which obtained in Mr. West’s experiments, the addition of ten days to the reproducing season would have more than doubled the theoretical product. This serves to explain why the scale is so much more abundant and destructive in the southern part of the state than in the northern, and why it increases so much more rapidly in some seasons than in others. 15 The continuous multiplication of the insect is greatly checked, however, in our latitude by the fact that when cold weather overtakes it, nearly 97 per cent of the total product is still immature and must pass the hazards of winter before its multiplication can begin. Our computation of the relative numbers of males and females was based on averages determined from the first representatives of each genera- tion. Males predominate in the early part of the season, and it is quite certain that they, also predominate in the latter part, especially in view of Marlatt’s statement that in the hibernating group “The male scales are normally vastly in excess of the females, often representing 95 or more per cent.”* On this basis, out of 31,777,142 immature, according to my computation, at the close of the season, only 1,588,857 would have been females; and these must pass the winter successfully before becoming capable of further increase. Food Plants The San Jose scale is known to infest about a hundred and fifty kinds of trees and shrubs. On some it multiplies rapidly and causes serious injury; on others it rarely becomes abundant enough to be dangerously injurious; and on still others it can not permanently main- tain itself. The following are some of the more important kinds of trees and shrubs which are likely to be seriously injured; apple, peach, pear, plum, and sweet cherry, with their nearly related wild and ornamental species; currant, dogwood, Japan quince, June-berry, lilac, hawthorn, European purple-leaved beech, flowering almond, rose, snowberry, buckthorn, young poplar, young elm, willow, mountain-ash, linden, and Osage orange. The following become infested when surrounded by badly in- fested trees, but are rarely seriously injured : sour cherry, Kiefifer pear, blackberry, raspberry, dewberry, mulberry, grape, maple, chest- nut, horse-chestnut, birch, catalpa, ash, locust, walnut, Virginia creeper, Deutzia, Spiraea, persimmon, Althea, globe-flower, California privet, honeysuckle, sumac, smoke-tree, and Wisteria. The following seem to be exempt from attack: redbud, yellow- wood, Kentucky cofifee-tree, hickory, butternut, sweet gum, tulip, iron- wood, buttonwood, oak, Ailanthus, pawpaw, barberry, Mahonia, trum- pet-vine, sweet-scented shrub, bittersweet, button-bush, filbert, hazel- nut, weigela, huckleberry, witch-hazel, English ivy, hydrangea, gold- flower, matrimony-vine, mock-orange, and evergreens. ♦Bull. 62, Bur. Ent., U. S. Dept. Agr., p. 43. 16 The statement is frequently made that the forests are full of the scale, but this is a mistake. It will be seen from the above lists that many forest trees are not liable to attack, and few of those that are so, will support the scale in any considerable numbers. Our native dogwoods are apparently less subject to infestation than some of the imported species. Wild crab-apple and hawthorn and a few of the other more or less susceptible trees and shrubs are likely to become infested when growing near orchards, and it is possible that in some localities these susceptible species are harboring the scale in forests. Osage orange hedges are very apt to become heavily infested and form great highways for the dispersal of the scale. They should there- fore be grubbed out or kept trimmed so low that they may be thoroly sprayed. Means of Distribution By Birds , Squirrels , Insects, Wind, etc . — It is only while in the crawling stage, during the first few hours of its life, that the San Jose scale can be transferred from one food plant to another, because as soon as it begins to feed it becomes fixed to the bark for the rest of its life. In most cases the young do not travel more than a few inches from the place of their birth ; and one part of a tree may con- sequently become heavily infested while another part is comparatively clear. The larvae can not pass from tree to tree unaided unless the twigs touch or the trees stand very close together, as in the nursery row; but they may be carried to neighboring trees by a variety of agencies, the principal of which are birds, squirrels, insects, men, do- mestic animals, and the wind. They may also be carried on fruit or on cuttings from trees. In this way they pass from tree to tree and from orchard to orchard. In communities where orchards are close together, the scale may spread from a single center over a very large area in the course of a few years. In towns, also, it gradually extends its range until all premises become infested. The rate at which it spreads depends, of course, upon the num- ber of crawling young. When nothing is done to keep them down, they become very numerous, and every bird or insect that flies from a tree so infested may carry some of them with it, and drop them, perhaps, many rods, or even miles, away. But when the number of young is kept down by proper treatment, their dissemination is corre- spondingly slow. In farming communities where the orchards are small and half a mile or more apart, there is little danger that the scale will be carried from one to another if hedges are removed or cared for and if proper methods of control are used. 17 On Nursery Stock . — In the dormant state, the San Jose scale may be carried to any distance on nursery stock, cuttings, and scions. It is thus that it was transported from its original home in China to the shores of California, and thence to all the principal fruit-growing sec- tions of the United States. Means of Control Natural Checks . — Several natural agencies very materially check the multiplication of the San Jose scale, but it multiplies so rapidly that its numbers increase greatly notwithstanding. The chief of these checks are climatic conditions, predaceous and parasitic insects, and fungous diseases. Under adverse climatic conditions may be included winds, rains, and extremes of heat and cold. Blustering winds and dashing rains sweep many of the crawling young from the bark. Not infrequently more of them may be found on the ground under badly infested trees than on the trees themselves, and very few of these ever get back to the tree on find other food plants. The scale does not thrive in those parts of our country where the summers are long and excessively hot and dry; and it has failed to establish itself in some of the northern states, where the winters are long and severe. In a few instances a very heavy mortality, resulting from these unfavorable conditions, has been noticed in Illinois. In St. Clair county in the spring of 1902, from 21 to 69 per cent of the scales which might have been expected to live were found to be dead. This loss was attributed to the hot, dry weather of the preceding summer, when temperatures reached 109° F. in the shade. Again, in the spring of 1911, counts of dead and living scales made from different parts of Illinois showed that from 45 to 98 per cent of the hibernating insects were dead — a mortality due, for the most part, to the severity of the preceding winter, during which temperatures of — 24° F. were reached at various places in the state. Such extremes, however, are so rare in Illinois that the San Jose scale ordinarily suffers little from such causes. Several lady-beetles and their larvae feed on the San Jose scale; a number of hymenopterous insects parasitize it ; and it is also attacked by fungous diseases. These natural enemies have controlled it very effectively in a few regions, but only where climatic conditions are favorable to their rapid and continuous multiplication, as in Florida and California. In Illinois, and in nearly all the interior states, the cli- mate is adverse for so much of the time that little assistance can be expected from these natural enemies. 18 In some of the eastern states, however, hymenopterous parasites of the San Jose scale have been notably more abundant during the last two or three years than formerly, and in some localities the percentage of parasitism has been very high. (See PI. IV.) Apparently however, this high percentage has not remained permanent. In some localities, at least, where parasites were very abundant for one year, scarcely any could be found the next, tho the scale itself continued to be destructively numerous. We may confidently expect, however, that as the number of species of parasites which attack it increases, and as they become better adapted to it as a host, they will prove more and more effective ; and they may indeed come to control it in time as thoroly as they now control our native species. To learn whether the eastern parasites of the scale are present in Illinois, twigs bearing it were collected in the fall of 1913 from thirty localities in central and southern Illinois, and kept in breeding- cages. From about half of them no parasites were secured; from the other half a small number were obtained, all of one species ( Aphelinus fuscipennis ) . This is one of the species found in the East, but it is not the most abundant there ; and an attempt has been made this season to introduce parasites from the eastern states into Illinois. This has been at least partially successful, but only enough scales thus parasitized have been found to show that the transfer was actually made. From San Jose scales collected in northern Illinois last fall (1914), large numbers of parasites emerged, examples of which were identified by Dr. L. O. Howard as belonging to the following species : Perissop- terus pulchellus How., Aphelinus diaspidis How., Micropterys sp., Signiphora nigrita Ashm., Prospaltella aurantii How., and Prospaltella perniciosi Tower. This list includes all the more important species found in the East. The first three were not plentiful enough to be im- portant, but the last three were abundant, and may be of practical use if we can secure a more uniform distribution of them thruout the state. For the present, however, spraying is our only means of defense. Preventive Measures. — To prevent the dissemination of the San Jose scale by way of the nursery trade, all states now require an inspec- tion of nursery stock, and prohibit the shipment of such stock unless accompanied by an inspection certificate. All Illinois nurseries are inspected each year; and those which are at all likely to be infested by the San Jose scale are inspected at least twice annually. All nursery stock found infested in them is immediately destroyed, and all stock which, on account of its proximity to infested trees and shrubs, is at 19 all likely to be infested at the time, or to become infested before the end of the nursery season, is fumigated with hydrocyanic acid gas before it is sent out from the nursery. By these precautions the dan- ger of distributing the scale on nursery stock is reduced to a mini- mum, but they nevertheless do not afford complete protection because the scale is so inconspicuous that the most careful inspector will some- times overlook it. The buyer should consequently inspect carefully all trees and shrubs purchased, and, as an additional safeguard, should either fumigate them with hydrocyanic acid gas or dip them in, or spray them with, a solution of lime and sulphur — to be described later — before setting them out. In parts of the country where the San Jose scale is prevalent, nursery grounds should be placed half a mile or more from orchards or other trees which may harbor the scale. Even a quarter of a mile will afford much protection, if not absolute security to the nursery stock, especially if near-by orchards are properly treated annually. The common practice of growing nursery trees on vacant city lots or •close to infested orchards should be discontinued. Whenever trees, shrubs, or hedges in or near growing nursery stock are found to be infested with the San Jose scale they should be at once removed. This insect is very often brought into nurseries on scions taken from infested trees; and these should not be used if it can be avoided. If used, they should be very carefully inspected, the infested sticks should be discarded, and all the rest fumigated ; and as a further pre- caution, the stock should be thoroly sprayed in spring while still dor- mant. To guard against an introduction of the scale from infested nur- series, nurserymen should be very careful to buy only from firms which have the reputation of handling clean stock ; and as an extra precau- tion stock bought elsewhere should be fumigated, unless the buyer is sure that it is clean. To avoid trouble with the San Jose scale in cities and towns, only trees and shrubs that are not subject to its attack should be chosen for lawns and parks. A yard or park containing only trees and shrubs of the second and third lists given above will seldom, if ever, suffer any serious injury from the San Jose scale. Artificial Means of Control . — The most effective way to destroy the scale is to grub out the tree or shrub which it infests or to cut it off three or four inches below the surface of the ground. If the infested plant is not cut off low enough, some scales will probably be left on the stump, and from these, shoots which grow up around the stump will become infested. 20 If the scale is discovered in any locality before it has spread to any considerable extent, it can usually be eradicated by grubbing out ail trees found to be infested, and by spraying thoroly all others in the vicinity; but if it has had time to spread to a number of trees, its eradication will in many cases be impracticable. Even then, however, it may be controlled by spraying annually with one of the solutions described below. Spraying for this scale should be done when the trees are dormant, for solutions strong enough to kill the insect after it has formed its protecting scale will seriously injure the foliage and the tender growth of many trees. Spring treatment is most effective; fall treatment is only slightly less so; but midwinter spraying should be avoided, and spraying operations suspended whenever the temperature in the shade approaches freezing. When the leaf-buds swell and begin to show plainly the green within, the season is over for spraying and it should generally be stopped. If, however, the infestation is bad, and injury by the scale threatens to be serious, it may be advisable to spray even at the risk of some injury to foliage. Summer spraying for the San Jose scale is not practicable so far as destroying the scale that is already on the tree is concerned; for, owing to the weakness of the spray that must be used, only the very young insects can be killed at best, and since these are appearing con- tinually thruout the season, spraying, to be effective, would have to be repeated every two or three days. Summer spraying, however, with the lime-sulphur is no doubt of much value, since its presence on the bark prevents newly hatched young from setting. The Lime-Sulphur Wasi-i The “California wash,” of lime, sulphur, and salt, and the “Oregon wash,” of fime, sulphur, and blue vitrol, were used successfully against the San Jose scale on the Pacific coast for several years before they came into use in the central and eastern states. They had been tried in the Atlantic States, but with so little promise of success that their use was almost abandoned until in 1902 it was demonstrated by Mr. E. S. G. Titus, working under the direction of Dr. Forbes, that the lime-sulphur washes were even more effective than the other washes in general use. Since then, the results obtained by Dr. Forbes have been verified by workers in all the states, and the lime-sulphur wash is now the standard insecticide for the San Jose scale. The formula has undergone some change, however, neither the salt nor the blue vitriol being now used. 21 A lime-sulphur solution of the proper strength will kill all scales with which it comes in contact, and it is also a useful fungicide. It may be purchased ready-made, or one may prepare it himself by simply boiling the ingredients together until they are dissolved. It is applied with an ordinary spray pump such as is commonly used in orchard work. These facts bring the San Jose scale within the control of the owner of infested premises, and make it, in fact, one of the most easily managed of the serious insect pests of horticulture. Directions for Making . — The mixture may be boiled either over a fire or with a steam cooker. For boiling over a fire, two iron kettles are necessary, one with a capacity of at least fifty gallons for making the solution, and another, which may be smaller, for keeping a supply of warm water at hand. Cold water is also needed when the mixture threatens to boil over. If a steam cooker is available, the solution may be made in a fifty-gallon barrel. Smaller vessels may be used for preparing smaller quantities of the solution. To make forty gallons of a concentrated solution, provide thirty pounds of the best stone-lime procurable,* sixty pounds of either flour or flowers of sulphurf, and water enough to make forty gallons when boiling is finished. First mix the sulphur with water to make a thick batter, beating well to break up all lumps. If the sulphur is lumpy when dry, it should first be rubbed thru a wire sieve. Put about ten gallons of warm water in the cooking vessel, start the fire under it, and add the sulphur and the lime. Stir constantly, adding warm water, if necessary, as the lime slakes, to keep it from burning. After the lime is completely slaked add enough water to make forty gallons, and boil gently, keeping it well stirred, from forty to sixty minutes, or until the lime and sulphur are practically all dissolved. Add a little warm water occasionally, to keep the amount up to forty gallons. To make the wash on a large scale, more elaborate equipment will be needed, but the process to be followed will be the same. After the boiling is done, the solution may be used at once, or it may be kept indefinitely in air-tight barrels. It should not be stored where it will freeze. For spraying dormant trees, use one gallon of the above solution to four gallons of water. Stir the solution thoroly, and pour it into tMany use finely ground brimstone. It is cheaper than either the flour or the flowers of sulphur, but does not enter into solution quite so readily. ♦Forty pounds of steam hydrated lime may be substituted for thirty pounds of stone-lime. clog the nozzles. Commercial Solutions . — Solutions of lime-sulphur, which may be purchased from retail dealers or from the manufacturers ready for use after dilution with eight parts of water, may be substituted for the home-made preparation described above. The commercial solutions cost about seven dollars a barrel. A barrel contains about fifty gallons and when diluted will make four hundred and fifty gallons of spray, making the cost about one and a half cents per gallon. The concentrated solution is also put up in smal- ler packages at somewhat higher cost; in gallon lots at fifty cents a gallon. The materials for the home-made solution, when bought at wholesale, cost about one cent a gallon for the dilute spray ready to apply. The Miscible Oils The so-called miscible oils are made of crude petroleum so treated as to remove some of the deleterious products and to cause it to mix readily with water. They are very effective scale-destroyers; some- times, on account of their better penetrating qualities, a little more effective than the lime-sulphur on trees that are heavily incrusted with the scale. They have the further advantage that they are less disagreeable to handle than the lime-sulphur solution. They are more expensive, however, and if applied too freely, may cause serious injury to the tree. They may be purchased in fifty-gallon-barrel lots, freight prepaid, at $25 a barrel. In smaller lots they may come a little higher. They should be diluted with fifteen parts of water. One barrel will thus make eight hundred gallons of spray, costing about three cents a gallon. They are applied the same way as the lime-sulphur. Apparatus and Equipment When the lime-sulphur wash is cooked by steam, no kettles are necessary, as the cooking of the mixture may be done in fifty-gallon barrels, or in tanks if large quantities are to be made. Portable steam- cookers are now made for such purposes. Those used for cooking stock-food will serve to cook the sulphur wash. Steam cookers are not essential, however, and for ordinary orchard work the kettle and the open fire are just as good, altho less convenient. The solution should be strained as it is poured into the spray- tank. Strainers are made for the purpose from brass, to prevent cor- rosion by the liquid. If such a strainer is not at hand, burlap may be used instead. Either bucket or knapsack pumps may be sufficient where only a few small trees or shrubs are to be sprayed. For very extensive or- chard treatment, however, power-sprayer outfits are necessary ; but the small fruit-grower may best use a good hand-power pump, fitted securely to a barrel or tank. For the lime-sulphur washes these pumps should have no copper about them, but the working parts should be made of brass, and should be easily accessible and easily replaced if broken. All valves must be of brass, and ground to fit perfectly. Each pump should have an agitator with both vertical and horizontal move- ment. Jet agitators are not satisfactory with any kind of hand-power pumps. Have each pump fitted with a cut-off cock for each line of hose used. Twenty-five to thirty-five feet of best black four to five- ply half-inch hose are needed for a hand outfit, or seven-ply hose for a power outfit. Extension poles are necessary. Bamboo poles with iron or brass lining, eight to twelve feet long, fitted with good cut-off valves at their base, will be found the best. Nozzles of the double Vermorel or of the Friend type are very satisfactory with these sprays. The latter is the better of the two, since it has no projections to catch on the branches. A good hand-pump with fittings complete, as just de- scribed, will cost from $18 to $25, according to the size of the pump and the number of accessories. Miscellaneous Directions Very large trees, and those with brushy tops, should be pruned before spraying; and thickets of plum, peach, and the like, along fences and beside roads, should be cut out and destroyed. It is better that all infested Osage orange hedges be destroyed, as the scale breeds as freely on this plant as on any orchard tree, and it is difficult to spray such a hedge effectively. Trees so heavily infested as to be practically worthless should be dug up and burned, since it will not pay to spray them. Even tho the scale insects may be killed, their in- juries will usually be fatal to the trees. Any premises which have once been infested by the San Jose scale should be carefully examined from time to time, especially late in fall, no matter how thoroly and effectively they may have been treated; and so long as living scales can be detected, the infested trees should receive an annual treatment, care being taken to extend the treatment far enough to include adjacent trees to which the insect may possibly have spread. Concerted action by all the people of an infested district is very important, since unless all act together an orchard virtually freed from the scale will gradually become reinfested from adjacent premises. 24 It is true that even under the most unfavorable circumstances each fruit-grower may protect his trees from injury by careful observation and methodical work, but by no amount of care and work can he pre- vent his fruit from being spotted by scales carried to it by birds and insects from near-by infested trees. Do not spray against paint. When trees to be sprayed stand near painted buildings, these should be protected by a canvas while spraying is being done. It is well to blanket horses used in the spraying opera- tions, when a lime-sulphur solution is used. Persons preparing or ap- plying the lime-sulphur spray should avoid getting it on the bare hands or face, as it is very caustic. Leaky hose should be repaired at once. See that all barrels and all apparatus are thoroly cleaned before using the mixture in them, otherwise the nozzles are likely to clog. Thoroly clean kettles, hose, barrels, pumps, nozzles, and all spraying apparatus when the work is over for the season. Thoroly coat the trees, being careful to cover the smaller twigs and branches and to get the mixture in all the forks and crevices. Spray every part of each tree from two sides. If a heavy rain follows soon after spraying, the treatment should be repeated. UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Agricultural Experiment Station CIRCULAR No. 181 HOW NOT TO TREAT ILLINOIS SOILS By Cyril G. Hopkins / URBANA, ILLINOIS, APRIL, 1915 HOW NOT TO TREAT ILLINOIS SOILS 1 By Cyril G. Hopkins, Chief in Agronomy and Chemistry That the soil responds generally and generously to good treatment is common knowledge, and that bad treatment of the soil leads ulti- mately to impoverishment, land ruin, and farm abandonment is like- wise an established fact. Abandoned Farms The United States Bureau of Census reports a decrease in the area of improved farm land during the last census decade (1900 to 1910) of 224,747 acres in Old Virginia, 161,585 acres likewise agri- culturally abandoned in Maryland, 173,706 acres in New Jersey, 535,- 664 acres in Pennsylvania, 755,947 acres in New York, and 879,499 acres in New England. The aggregate area of improved farm land agriculturally aban- doned in New England, New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania from 1880 to 1910 was 9,809,834 acres. The area of improved farm land which has thus been abandoned during the last generation in New England and three Middle Atlantic states exceeds the total land area of both Maryland and Delaware ; it is more than twice the area of New Jersey; it is greater than the combined area of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut; and more than one-third the total area of improved farm land in Illinois. It is said that a school boy, when asked to describe the ant, an- swered that the ant is not like the elephant ; and so, if I am to tell how not to treat Illnois soils, I feel like saying, not like the soils of our Eastern states have been treated. Show me productive land, and I will show a prosperous people; and conversely, an impoverished soil produces inevitable poverty among the masses, including not only the farmers but all industrial people whose business depends upon farm products. During the last census decade, the area of improved farm land in Illinois increased by 349,104 acres; but we are approaching the limit of the total possible acreage of land to be cropped in this state, and any future increase in Illinois crops must be largely along the line Address before the Illinois State Farmers 1 Institute at Harrisburg, Feb- ruary 23, 1915. 4 of soil improvement and bigger acre-yields. Soil improvement re- quires investment; and unless the farm yields an income above the living and other fixed expenses, the average farmer has no money to invest in soil improvement. Cause of Land Abandonment The two primary causes for the decrease in productive power and the final agricultural abandonment of vast areas of farm lands in our older states are lack of knowledge and lack of profit in farming as compared with industrial and commercial enterprises. To be sure, many have become wealthy by holding title to farm lands while they increased rapidly in value, even while they may have received as farm- ers only a living and fixed expenses, with perhaps smaller wages for themselves than they paid their hired help. Of course even 3 percent interest on the value of 160 acres of $200 land, received free from the government three generations ago, may enable the present owner to accumulate enough in a few years to buy an automobile, tho his own labor income may be less than a dollar a day; but this does not justify the conclusion that farming itself is a highly profitable busi- ness. From 1890 to 1910 the population of Illinois increased from 3,826,- 352 to 5,638,529, but the towns and cities received more than 100 per- cent of the total increase; while the real country population living outside of all cities, towns, and villages decreased from 1,630,960 to 1,486,160. Thus, owing chiefly to the growth of cities during the twenty years, the country population decreased from 42.6 percent to 26.4 percent of the total population of Illinois ; and I repeat that this decrease of country population is largely due to lack of knowledge and lack of profit in farming as compared with industrial and com- mercial enterprises. Southern Illinois Lands Even the central Illinois farmer who has had only the privilege of helping to wear out rich land may not understand the problem, nor appreciate the difficulty and expense of building up poor land, nor realize the possibilities of changing the value of southern Illinois land from $40 to $200 an acre by the application of knowledge and the in- vestment of moderate capital in soil improvement. It so happens that I have been in forty-eight different states, usu- ally upon invitation to secure or to impart some information concern- ing soils, soil problems, and rational methods of soil improvement. I have at least had opportunity to acquire a somewhat definite knowl- edge of many soils in many states. During the past year I carefully examined many large areas of land, some of which have been almost constantly on the market for about two centuries; while some others had been farmed for two centuries and then agriculturally aban- doned; and others are still being farmed and their owners are seek- ing for information as to how to improve them. Now I feel that it is your right and my duty that I should state to the people here from northern and central Illinois, as well as to those from this end of the state, that in my judgment there is no bet- ter opportunity in American agriculture for the investment of money and mind, of science and sense, of brain and brawn, than in the farm lands of southern Illinois ; and I should add that there are few better opportunities in the United States to lose money in agricultural in- vestments than in the attempt to profit from continuing to wear out these same lands. If you are thinking of buying a southern Illinois farm and are ex- pecting to make money out of it merely by cropping with good rota- tion and cultivation, then you are planning for your own failure. I realize, of course, that there are northern farmers sufficiently ignorant of southern Illinois, or sufficiently rich in their own conceit, to think that if they could only put their hand to the plow they would make the southern Illinois prairie produce the same bountiful crops as the black corn-belt land produces. I know a landowner of central Illinois who bought a section of the common level upland in a county not far from Saline; and he imparted the secret that the only farm difficulty in southern Illinois was that the soil was ‘ ‘ water-logged , 9 9 and that all it needed to make it the equal of the $200 corn-belt land was tile-drainage. The fact that southern Illinois lands had been settled from the beginning by intelligent white people, many of whom had tried tile-drainage, at least in a small way, and had derived little or no benefit from it on the common upland, made no difference in the opinion of this man; and he took but little interest in the fact that long-continued careful investigations conducted by the State University on experiment fields in several counties of southern Illinois had not yet shown sufficient benefit from tile-drainage on the most common upland soil to pay interest on the money invested in the tiling. A good corn-belt farmer once said to me that all the southern Illi- nois land needs is to grow clover, and thus, as he expressed it, “get the yellow color out of the soil.” Another northern man who held the same opinion bought a farm of common upland in southern Illi- nois, and actually seeded clover and lost it for twelve successive years before he became convinced that he had something to learn about growing clover in this end of the state. Common Commercial Fertilizers If you are trying to enrich your soil by applying 100 to 200 pounds per acre of ordinary commercial fertilizer, then I would re- 6 mind you that you may deceive yourself, for a time, but you cannot deceive the soil. Don’t try to teach a cow how to produce milk on quarter rations ; she may die before she learns the secret. A boy found a drunkard lying on the sidewalk, and he called thru the saloon door to the barkeeper that his sign had fallen down. Thru lack of fundamental knowledge, the general farmer of the East has been led to depend upon mixed commercial fertilizers, and ten million acres once classed as improved farm land but now agriculturally aban- doned represent the sign for Illinois farmers to look upon before adopting the fertilizer system now so extensively advertised in the Middle West. The commercial fertilizer interests, especially Eastern fertilizer manufacturers, after having sucked the life-blood out of Eastern agriculture, now seek new worlds to conquer, attracted by the agricultural earnings of the corn belt. Fertilizers and Crops in New England The fertilizer advocates boast that New England produces larger acre-yields of certain cereal crops, such as corn and wheat, than are produced in Illinois ; but they ignore the fact 'that 44.8 percent of what was improved farm land thirty years ago has been agricul- turally abandoned in New England under the fertilizer system. The fact is that the area devoted to cereal crops in New England de- creased from 746,128 acres to only 468,617 acres during the last thirty years. If the production of cereal crops with commercial fertilizers is profitable in New England, then why has New England reduced her area of cereals to less than half a million acres and agriculturally abandoned 5,893,562 acres of improved farm land? If wheat can be grown with profit by use of mixed fertilizers in New England, then why has the New England wheat acreage decreased from 79,003 acres to only 4,893 acres in thirty years? In New England the area of abandoned land is more than twelve times the acreage of all cereal crops grown. Why does not the Boston fertilizer manufacturer restore these abandoned lands and thus multi- ply the cereal production in New England by twelve, instead of per- mitting this enormous shrinkage at his own door while he sends broad- cast into the Middle West misleading advertising and thousands of copies of letters to agricultural editors, to farmers’ institute lectur- ers, to agricultural college teachers, to experiment station workers, to county agricultural advisers, and others, in the endeavor to secure their influence to persuade our farmers to use these same fertilizers in general farming? Listen, — the decrease in area of improved farm land in New Eng- land since 1880 is equal in acreage to the ten largest counties in Illi- nois ; but listen, — there are five counties in Illinois any one of which produces more bushels of cereal crops than the combined total cereals 7 of the six New England states. These facts are from the latest re- ports of the United States Bureau of Census. The truth is that the corn and wheat of New England are com- monly grown in small patches in market gardens or in feed lots con- nected with commercial dairies. The 1910 census reports 186,958 as the total acreage of corn and wheat in New England, while 388,841 acres were used for vegetables, including potatoes. In other words, the market-garden crops occupied twice as much land as corn and wheat, which are grown more or less after potatoes or other vegetables in order to provide a rotation of crops. The vegetable crops have, of course, high acre-values, and mixed fertilizers are used with profit for such crops ; and furthermore, such use of commercial fertilizers is and always has been approved and recommended by this station and by practically everybody, wherever the supply of farm manure is limited. But to teach that mixed fertilizers should be used for the growing of corn in Illinois because of the acre-yields produced on highly fer- tilized market-garden land when corn happens to be used in the rota- tion, in part to give opportunity to clean the land of weeds by thoro cultivation of the corn, is an attempt to deceive and mislead the Illi- nois corn grower; and I repeat that in general farming we should not treat Illinois soils as most of the soils have been treated in the older Eastern states. Fertilizer Experience and Experiments Just now the “Try-a-Bag” propaganda is under way, and strenu- ous efforts are being made by the fertilizer interests to get the corn- belt farmers at least to “try a bag.” This calls to mind that we^are commonly urged to “try a package” of patent stockfood, and to “try a bottle” of patent medicine; and it all reminds us that experience is a dear teacher. Many trials of mixed commercial fertilizers have al- ready been made in the Middle West states. Thus, the Indiana Agri- cultural Experiment Station conducted seventy-three cooperative trials with such fertilizers, extending into thirty-eight different coun- ties in that state. The average result shows 13 cents as the farmer s profit from each dollar paid for mixed complete fertilizers; and of course the soil grows poorer, because the crops harvested removed much more plant food than the fertilizers supplied. The Ohio Experiment Station has for many years conducted fer- tilizer experiments at Wooster with a five-year rotation of corn, oats, wheat, clover, and timothy, five different fields or series of plots being used, so that every crop might be represented every year. As an aver- age of eighteen years’ work, an investment of $3.96 per acre per an- num in complete fertilizers paid a net profit of $2.61, — and these re- sults have been widely advertised and their application strongly urged upon the farmers of the corn belt by the National Fertilizer Associa- 8 tion ; whereas, in the same series of Ohio experiments, 52 cents an acre a year invested in phosphorus alone paid a net profit of $2.79, — and this result, even tho reported on the same page of the same Ohio pub- lication, 1 was carefully ignored by the fertilizer advertisers. Why spend $3.96 for complete fertilizer when 52 cents worth of phosphorus brings greater net profits per acre ? In the Breeder’s Gazette of January 21, 1915, the “Try-a-Bag” propaganda of the manufacturers of mixed commercial fertilizers is discussed, and the following conclusions are there presented: “We urge no man who has not satisfied himself as to commercial fertilizers to spend a large sum of money in their purchase this spring or at any other time; but the ‘Try-a-Bag 7 proposal of the manufacturers can not be fairly criticised. Their proposition to ‘put in a dollar and take out three 7 can be tried out at trifling cost. They propose to make the way easy this spring for all who wish to give these goods a trial. A bag or two can do no harm, and may lead somebody into more profitable ways. It looks like an experiment well worth while. 7 7 This is very plausible and very falacious doctrine. Many farm- ers once tried land-plaster as a fertilizer. It produced sufficient in- crease to more than pay the cost, and so they continued to use it until they discovered after ten or twenty years that what they had counted as profit was really drawn from their own capital. Their increased yields had been made by robbing their own soil by means of a stimu- lant. At the famous Rothamsted Experiment Station, Lawes and Gil- bert demonstrated more than fifty years ago that sodium salt had power to increase the yield of wheat by 5 bushels per acre. Here, too, the effect is not at all to enrich the soil, but to produce larger crops temporarily by more rapid soil depletion; for sodium does not feed the crop, but only forces the soil. In 1902 the University of Illinois began a series of field experi- ments in McLean county on the common corn-belt prairie land, whose chemical analysis showed less than 1200 pounds of phosphorus and more than 35,000 pounds of potassium in the plowed soil of an acre. The first year phosphorus alone produced 6.8 bushels increase in the corn crop, while phosphorus and potassium together gave 15.4 bush- els increase. Thus the actual field trial showed the “bone and potash” mixture to be more than twice as effective as phosphorus alone, and except for the chemical analysis, these results would deceive the ex- perimenter as well as the farmer. During the first ten years, however, phosphorus increased the value of crops grown on this field by $76.50 per acre, while potash applied at the same expense produced a total increase of only 86 cents, its effect having sometimes been detrimental after the earlier stimulating action. Thus, results in continued farm- *01110 Agr. Exp. Sta. Circ. 120. For further discussion see Illinois Experi- ment Station Circular 165. 9 ing by rational methods soon showed that the first year’s trial was very misleading ; and, as already explained, the farmer can easily de- ceive himself for some years if he depends upon his own trial of some- body’s fertilizer. A hundred other trustworthy investigations could be cited to show the danger of putting into use what may seem to be a good fertilizer from the “try-a-bag” farmers’ experiment. Value of Principles in Practice As a principle, it is best to diagnose the case before trying a rem- edy. There are medicines that seem to do good for a time, but as an 1 1 after effect ’ ’ they leave the patient worse instead of better, the tem- porary strength being secured at the expense of his own vitality. I beg to suggest also another principle that deserves consideration; namely, that it is not sufficient merely to prove that an investment is profitable. As already stated, the farmer’s funds for investment in soil improvement are usually limited ; and he should be satisfied that the investment is not only profitable but that it is the most profitable, and that it does not impair but protects his capital, which means the permanent productive power of his land. The Illinois Experiment Station has analyzed many thousands of soil samples collected from all of the more extensive soil types in the state by men of special training in this work; and forty experiment fields are being conducted in various parts of the state. Thousands of the most progressive farmers of Illinois are already applying the definite information thus secured in the practical and permanent im- provement of their soils. In other words, they are placing their farm practice upon a truly practical scientific basis, with a satisfying knowl- edge of the facts and the principles involved. In the older eastern states the “try-a-bag” system has largely prevailed for forty years; and ten million acres of agriculturally abandoned land in ten states certainly does not indicate that the “try- a-bag” plan is likely to solve the soil problems of the corn belt. In the Middle West, not only in Illinois, but also in Wisconsin and in many other states, especially those west of the Mississippi, both the farmers and the agricultural press are rightly depending upon their experiment stations — their own public-service institu- tions — to investigate the needs of the soil, in order that agricultural practice may be established upon a permanent and practical basis; and because of the positive information already secured with regard to the normal soils of the Middle West, the Breeder’s Gazette and other leading farm journals consistently advocate the use of ground limestone, phosphorus, legume crops, and farm manure, with under- drainage where practicable. The common so-called “complete” commercial fertilizers contain a small amount of each of the three elements, nitrogen, phosphorus, 10 and potassium, sometimes incorrectly reported as ammonia, “phos- phoric acid,” and potash. Two hundred pounds of such a fertilizer | applied to an acre at a cost of $2 to $3 would furnish less than 4 pounds of nitrogen, 8 pounds of phosphorus, and 4 pounds of potas- sium; whereas a 50-bushel crop of corn would remove from the soil j 75 pounds of nitrogen, 12 pounds of phosphorus, and 36 pounds of potassium. A farm system based upon such practice must lead ulti- mately to the impoverishment of the soil. Long-Time Fertilizer Experiments Attempts to produce the ordinary farm crops by supplying com- mercial nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium in approximately the proportions required by the crops, have resulted in distinct loss for nitrogen and potassium but with large profit for phosphorus on soils of normal composition. Thus the Ohio and Pennsylvania Experiment Stations have re- ported long-continued investigations with the use of these different elements, singly and in combination. Let us consider in some detail the Ohio experiments, which have now covered twenty years at Wooster and nineteen years at Strongs- ville, as shown in the latest published report, Ohio Experiment Sta- tion Circular No. 144, dated April, 1914. In this circular (pages 79 and 97) Director Thorne reports that, as an average of twenty years at Wooster, $2.60 invested in phos- phorus paid the cost and a net profit of $13.92 in increased yields of corn, oats, wheat, clover, and timothy; while, as an average of nine- teen years at Strongsville, $2.60 invested in phosphorus paid its cost and a net profit of $14.88. Thus, $2.60 in phosphorus has returned a net profit of $14.40, as a general average of these long-time experi- ments on two Ohio Experiment Station farms selected and operated for many years for the benefit of Ohio agriculture. On the same pages, Director Thorne reports that $14.40 invested in nitrogen (applied in addition to the phosphorus) paid 42 cents above its cost at Wooster and $10.40 less than its cost at Strongsville, making an average net loss of $4.99. Again, Director Thorne reports on these same pages that $6.50 in- vested in potash (applied in addition to the phosphorus and nitrogen) paid $1.44 above its cost at Wooster and $4.27 less than its cost at Strongsville, making an average net loss of $1.41. As a general average of these Ohio data, for each dollar invested in the respective elements, phosphorus paid back $6.54, nitrogen (in addition to phosphorus) paid back 65 cents, and potassium (applied in addition to both phosphorus and nitrogen) paid back 78 cents. Each of these figures represents the gross returns for a dollar in- vested, and each is based upon the average results from nearly two 11 hundred harvested crops. The 35 percent loss for nitrogen and 22 percent for potassium represent average net losses. I have seen no recent detailed report of the long-continued Penn- sylvania experiments at State College, but I do have the complete data for the twenty-four years from 1885 to 1908. If we follow one method used by the Pennsylvania Station in computing the increase, — the same method as is used by Director Thorne of Ohio, as well as by myself, — and count 12 cents a pound for phosphorus (about 5 cents for so-called “phosphoric acid”), 6 cents a pound for potassium (about 5 cents for potash), and 15 cents a pound for nitrogen (about 12 cents for ammonia) ; and then value the crops, standing in the field ready for harvest, at 50 cents a bushel for corn, 43 cents for oats, $1 for wheat, and $8.60 a ton for hay (mixed clover and tim- othy), we find, as an average of 96 crop yields (each of the above- named crops in a four-year rotation for twenty-four years), that, for every dollar invested in the respective elements, phosphorus paid back $3.44, nitrogen (in addition to phosphorus) paid back $1.01, and potassium (applied in addition to both phosphorus and nitrogen) paid back 6 cents (average of Plots 9 and 17). Thus, as a general average of these results from two states, we have a gross return of 83 cents for nitrogen and 42 cents for potas- sium for each dollar spent for these elements under the conditions specified, while each dollar spent for phosphorus paid back $4.99. On page 91 of Ohio Circular 144, Director Thorne reports results from soil experiments at Wooster covering seventeen years with a three-year rotation of corn, wheat, and clover (excluding the corn crop of 1909). He shows that 80 pounds of acid phosphate, 80 pounds of muriate of potash, and 160 pounds of nitrate of soda, costing $7.45, paid back $10.71 gross; but that when the phosphorus was increased and the potassium and nitrogen reduced, by the use of 80 pounds of acid phosphate, 10 pounds of muriate of potash, and 100 pounds of 7-30 tankage, the cost was reduced to $2.30, but the gross returns were increased to $11.21. Whether the crop returns would have been rendered still more profitable by further increasing the phosphorus and by eliminating the remaining 4 pounds of potassium and 6 pounds of nitrogen per acre (applied once in three years) is not fully estab- lished ; but Director Thorne reports that $2.24 invested in 320 pounds of acid phosphate, applied in addition to farm manure in this same series of experiments, produced an average increase of $15.04, and that the same amount of acid phosphate when used by itself in the five-year- rotation experiments at Wooster increased the crop value by $16.52. These are not my computations, but those of the Ohio Experiment Station, as may easily be verified. They are surely convincing as to the value of phosphorus, but they afford no such support for the con- tention that at least a little nitrogen and a little potash should be 12 purchased and applied with the phosphorus for the production of staple farm crops on the normal soils of Pennsylvania, Ohio, and the Middle West. While there are some trials, as mentioned above, in which nitrogen and potash seem to have paid their cost and some interest on the in- vestment, yet when full consideration is given to these long-time ex- periments at State College, Wooster, and Strongsville, they clearly do not show the greatest profit when commercial nitrogen and potash are included in the fertilizer. Thus, on Plot 11 at Wooster $20.90 spent for nitrogen and potash paid back $1.86 above the original cost for the five-year rotation, but 6 percent interest on $20.90 for half of five years would amount to $3.13. Moreover, for sixteen years Plot 27 received the same com- plete fertilizer as Plot 11, unless we count that acid phosphate made from bone black (used on Plot 27) is essentially different from that made from rock phosphate. As an average of the sixteen years, the net profits reported by Director Thorne in Ohio Circular 104 were $13.88 from $2.60 in phosphorus alone, $15.83 from $23.50 in complete fer- tilizer on Plot 11, and $10.34 from $23.50 in the complete fertilizer on Plot 27 ; thus giving an average net profit of $13.09 from $23.50 in the complete fertilizer, compared with a net profit of $13.88 from $2.60 in phosphorus alone. Of course we must not draw conclusions from Plot 11 and ignore Plot 27 in the same series of experiments, nor should we emphasize results from Wooster and ignore those from Strongsville, all reported by Director Thorne in the same publication (Ohio Circular 144). Kational Soil Improvement On abnormal soils, such as the peaty swamp lands of the North Central states and the sandy soils of the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains, potassium should be regularly supplied in systems of soil im- provement. In Illinois a very large part of the commercial potassium used is for the improvement of peaty swamp lands, following the con- clusive information secured by the Illinois Experiment Station dur- ing the past dozen years. (See Bulletin 157.) The facts are that the air contains an inexhaustible supply of nitrogen, and the normal soil contains an inexhaustible supply of potassium, — from 25,000 to 50,000 pounds in the plowed soil of an acre of the common soils of Illinois, the only exceptions found being the peaty swamp lands and some limited areas of residual sand. Thus the problem with nitrogen is to get it from the air by means of legume crops ; and the problem with potassium is to liberate it as needed from the soil by means of decaying organic matter, such as crop residues and farm manure. As a rule, limestone must be purchased and applied, because most 13 Illinois soils are acid, or sour, and the most valuable legume crops will not thrive on sour soils. As a common rule, also, Illinois soils are poor in phosphorus; and hence most upland soil should be liberally enriched in phosphorus, altho this is not necessary on the rolling hill lands where sufficient erosion is sure to occur so that the subsoil re- news the surface supply. Thus the golden tripod for the man who farms with both head and hand, on normal soil, is not the commercial nitrogen, “ phosphoric acid, ’ ’ and potash, of the fertilizer sack, but ground natural limestone, legume crops grown upon the farm, and some form of phosphorus, the fine-ground natural rock phosphate probably being most practical in permanent economic systems. Kainit is sometimes helpful at least tem- porarily, but it is not essential and is not likely to be profitable when sufficient limestone and organic matter are provided. Soil Experiments in Southern Illinois I wish now to call attention to the complete data thus far secured from the soil experiment fields which have been conducted by the University of Illinois for the past five years at Ewing, Franklin county, on the ordinary prairie land, and at Raleigh, Saline county, on the common upland timber soil of southern Illinois. It should be kept in mind in connection with these results, first, that the wheat crop of 1912 was commonly a failure in this state, and that the drouths of 1913 and 1914 were perhaps the most severe ever known in two consecutive years in southern Illinois ; and second, that even slight variations in the topography, drainage, and quality of land, combined with possible irregular injuries from rodents, insects, plant diseases, et cetera, may produce local or temporary differences in crop yields, and hence that no conclusions should be drawn from field experiments until the results are fully verified. At the beginning of these experiments, ground limestone (L) was applied at the rate of 5 tons per acre at Ewing and 6 tons per acre at Raleigh, but the regular subsequent applications will be 2 tons per acre every four years, beginning in 1915 at Ewing and in 1917 at Raleigh. Rock phosphate (P) was applied at rates varying from 500 to 2000 pounds per acre on the different series at the beginning, with subse- quent applications of 2000 pounds every four years, altho this may ultimately be reduced to one-fourth of this amount. The kainit (K) was applied at the beginning at rates varying from 200 to 800 pounds per acre on the different series, with subsequent applications of 800 pounds every four years. Farm manure (M) has been applied, beginning for 1911, in such amounts as could be produced from the crops grown the previous sea- son. 14 The crop residues (R) returned to certain plots consist of com stalks, the straw of wheat and oats, and of cowpeas or soybeans, all clover except the seed, and some cover crops. The limestone to some extent, and the phosphate to a large extent, should be considered as additions to the cost or value of the land. Thus, 6 tons of limestone costing $12 spread on the land and 1 ton of phosphate costing $8 would add $20 an acre to the cost of the land. To pay interest on these investments and on the additional applica- tions for maintenance would require per acre per annum about $1.25 for limestone and $1 for phosphate, while the annual expense for 200 pounds of kainit at $15 per ton would amount to $1.50 per acre; or, as the annual expense for the four crops (1 acre each) we may count $5 for limestone, $4 for phosphate, and $6 for kainit, understanding that these amounts will vary with freight rates, with the distance of the farm from the railway station, and with changes in prices. In the tabular statements presented (Tables 1 to 10), the prices allowed for the increase produced are 70 cents and $1 a bushel for wheat, 35 and 50 cents for corn, 28 and 40 cents for oats, 70 cents and $1 for cowpeas or soybeans, $7 and $10 for clover seed, and $7 and $10 a ton for hay. Of course the lower values are very conserva- tive prices, and perhaps they are too low — some would advise that they be doubled ; but it should be stated that they are prices for crops standing in the field before harvest, and that higher prices would have to be secured to pay for harvesting, stacking, baling, threshing, stor- ing, and marketing, and for possible losses. The treatment applied to the soil does not deliver the increased produce at the market, but only ready for the harvest. The double system of computing values is used to emphasize the influence that may be exerted upon farm practice by the prices received for farm produce. The ten tabular statements show all the yields secured during the five years, and give the financial results of twenty trials with lime- stone, twenty with phosphate, and ten with kainit, each trial repre- senting a season’s record with four crops. On the basis of the lower values named, the limestone failed to pay its annual cost the first year in the residue system and during the first two seasons in the live-stock system of farming, on the field at Ewing; but in the other seventeen trials it always paid a profit; and, as an average of the twenty trials, limestone estimated to cost $5 a year has returned $12.69 in the increased yield of four crops. Or, if we count $2 a ton as the cost of the limestone spread on the land, then the average initial expense for Ewing and Raleigh is $11 per acre, while the return for the first five years is $15.86, — and it is safe to say that half the value of the limestone still remains in the soil for the benefit of future crops. In only three cases out of twenty has the phosphate paid its esti- mated annual cost of $4 for four acres, but the average annual re- 15 turn of $1.03 for the first three years and $2.54 for the last two are suggestive of progress. These results only confirm those of many other experiments, which have led me always to counsel against the use of raw phosphate except in connection with plenty of decaying organic matter. The Experiment Station constantly advises southern Illinois farmers first to make liberal use of limestone, legume crops, and organic manure, even tho they delay the addition of phosphorus for several years. In three cases out of ten the kainit has paid its annual cost of $6, Table 1. — Crop Yields in Soil Experiments, Ewing Field, 1910 Gray Silt Loam on Tight Clay (Prairie Soil) (Yields per acre) Series 100 200 300 400 Value of four crops Value for each addition Plot Treat- Wheat, Cowpeas, Oats, Corn, Lower Higher Lower Higher No. ment bu. tons bu. bu. prices prices prices prices 1 0 10.4 .89 37.1 30.8 $34.68 $49.54 2 *M 14.2 .97 43.1 35.1 41.08 58.69 3 *ML 9.9 1.05 42.6 36.4 38.95 55.64 L -$2.13 -$3.05 4 *MLP 8.0 1.19 45.3 40.4 40.75 58.22 P 1.80 2.58 5 0 6.8 1.02 32.8 37.3 34.13 48.77 6 *R 8.6 Turned 37.8 38.4 30.04 42.92 7 *RL 8.5 Turned 39.2 51.7 35.02 50.03 L 4.98 7.11 8 *RLP 10.7 Turned 35.6 50.7 35.20 50.29 P .18 .26 9 *RLPK 17.9 Turned ~36.7 47.6 39.47 56.38 K 4.27 6.09 10 0 9.7 .87 44.2 43.6 40.52 57.88 *No manure or crop residues for 1910. Table 2.— Crop Yields in Soil Experiments, Ewing Field, 1911 Gray Silt Loam on Tight Clay (Prairie Soil) (Yields per acre) Series *100 200 300 400 Value of four crops Value for each addition Plot Treat- Corn, Wheat, Cowpeas, Oats, Lower Higher Lower Higher No. ment bu. bu. tons(bu.) bu. prices prices prices prices 1 0 16.2 10.7 .25 17.7 $19.88 $28.38 2 26.8 12.8 .23 29.2 28.12 40.18 M $3.71 $5.30 3 *ML 27.5 17.3 .34 31.3 32.88 46.97 L 4.76 6.79 4 *MLP 30.2 23.8 .38 32.0 38.85 55.50 P 5.97 8.53 5 0 12.7 11.9 (1.6) 23.9 1 20.59 29.41 6 R 13.2 9.9 (1.2) 21.8 18.49 26.42 R -2.10 -2.99 7 RL 23.0 20.5- (2.4) 42.7 36.03 51.48 L 17.54 25.06 8 RLP 20.8 23.7 (3.2) 36.7 36.39 51.98 P .36 .50 9 RLPK 26.0 28.1 (4.0) 42.8 43.55 62.22 K 6.16 10.24 10 0 15.8 12.0 (1.3) 23.9 21.53 30.76 ' Manure on Series 100 only. 16 but tbe average animal return of $3.85 for the first three years and of $3.74 for the last two suggest a decreasing effect, as would be expected from rational systems with increasing use of organic manures pro- duced upon the farm. It may be noted, however, that the effect of kainit shows a decrease only on the timber soil, at Raleigh, while at Ewing, on the prairie land, kainit has paid its estimated annual cost and still shows increasing benefit. If we compute the value of the increase in crops at the present market prices, both the phosphate and the kainit would show profit Table 3. — Crop Yields in Soil Experiments, Ewing Eield, 1912 Gray Silt Loam on Tight Clay (Prairie Soil) (Yields per acre) Series *100 *200 300 400 Value of four crops Value for each addition Plot Treat- Oats, Corn, Wheat, Cowpeas, Lower Higher Lower Higher No. ment bu. bu. bu. tons prices prices prices prices 1 0 12.0 24.7 1.8 .76 $18.59 $26.55 i 2 *M 19.1 39.8 2.3 .66 25.50 36.44 M $7.27 $10,39 3 *ML 28.3 52.1 4.9 1.26 38.40 54.87 L 12.90 18.43 4 *MLP 34.4 50.7 3.0 1.38 39.13 55.91 P .73 1.04 ~ 5" 0 14.4 ~so7f~ .8 .90 21.63 30.91 6 R 16.4 33.1 .8 Turned 16.73 23.91 R -4.90 -7.00 7 RL 30.8 48.3 4.3 Turned 28.53 40.77 L 11.80 16.86 8 RLP 33.4 45.0 3.2 Turned 27.34 39.06 P -1.19 -1.71 9 RLPK 37.2 51.5 4.3 Turned 31.45 44.93 K 4.11 4.87 10 0 11.4 31.7 2.8 No wt. 16.24 23.21 *Manure on Series 200 for 1912. Table 4. — Crop Yields in Soil Experiments, Ewing Field, 1913 Gray Silt Loam on Tight Clay (Prairie Soil) (Yields per acre) Series *100 *200 *300 400 Value of four crops Value for each addition Plot Treat- Clover, Oats, Corn, Wheat, Lower Higher Lower Higher No. ment tons (bu.) bu. bu. bu. prices prices prices prices ~Y 0 .20 1.7 6.0 .8 $4.53 $6.48 2 .24 3.9 10.3 .8 6.93 9.91 M $2.40 $3.43 3 *ML .40 7.3 20.8 11.8 20.38 29.12 L 13.45 19.21 4 *MLP .81 6.9 23.9 11.3 23.88 34.11 P 3.50 4.99 5 0 .19 .6 5.6 .9 4.09 5.84 6 R (.00) 2.5 6.2 1.1 3.64 5.20 R - .45 - .64 7 RL (.50) 8.4 22.5 16.0 24.92 35.61 L 21.28 30.41 8 RLP (1.08) 9.2 21.8 14.9 28.20 40.28 P 3.28 4.67 9 RLPK (.75) 12.5 ~26.8“ 27.2 37.17 53.10 K 8.97 12.82 10 0 .31 3.3 6.1 2.5 6.98 9.97 *Manure on Series 300 for 1913 0 17 during the later years of the experiments, but this would require the farmer to work for about as low wages in the improvement of his soil as he usually receives in the practice of soil depletion. As an average of both fields for the last four years, the value of the increase from four acres has been $3.84 from farm manure, $14.41 from residues and limestone, and $17.52 from manure and limestone. To these amounts the phosphate has added $2 with the residues and $1.81 with the manure. The kainit (used only in the residue system) has made a further increase of $3.97. Table 5. — Crop Yields in Soil Experiments, Ewing Field, 1914 Gray Silt Loam on Tight Clay (Prairie Soil) (Yields per acre) Series 100 200 300 400 Value of four crops Value for each addition Plot Treat- Wheat, Soybeans, tons (bit.) Oats, Corn, Lower Higher Lower Higher No. ment bu. bu. bu. prices prices prices prices 0 1.7 .27 3.0 4.3 $5.42 $7.75 2 M 3.4 .23 3.4 4.5 6.51 9.31 M $1.09 $1.56 3 ML 16.2 .47 5.6 7.6 18.86 26.94 L 12.35 17.63 4 MLP 22.5 .53 6.4 6.3 23.46 33.51 P 4.60 6.57 T 0 .9 (2.0) 1.4 3.5 3.64 5.21 6 R .8 (2.3) 3.3 2.7 4.03 5.77 R .39 .56 7 RL 12.8 (4.0) 5.9 3.1 14.50 20.71 L 10.47 14.94 8 RLP 17.6 (4.0) 5.3 3.6 17.86 25.52 P 3.36 4.81 ~~9~ RLPK 25.8 (4.2) 6.6 6.4 25.09 35.84 K 7.23 10.32 10 0 1.2 (2.0) 1.4 2.7 3.58 5.11 Table 6. — Crop Yields in Soil Experiments, Raleigh Field, 1910 Yellow-gray Silt Loam (Timber Soil) (Yields per acre) Series 100 to o o 300 400 Value of four crops Value for each addition Plot Treat- Wheat, Cowpeas, Oats, Corn, Lower Higher Lower Higher No. ment bu. tons bu. bu. prices prices prices prices 1 0 9.5 .86 18.1 24.1 $26.17 $37.39 2 *M 6.9 .75 17.3 18.1 21.26 30.37 3 *ML 9.8 1.38 26.8 40.1 38.06 54.37 L $16.80 $24.00 4 *MLP 11.6 1.35 26.0 37.4 37.94 54.20 P - .12 - .17 5 0 7.3 .74 15dT 24.9 23.20 33.15 6 *R 9.0 Turned 20.9 31.1 23.03 32.91 7 *RL 11.0 Turned 25.1 42.8 29.70 42.44 L 6.67 9.53 8 *RLP 10.7* Turned 25.1 44.5 30.09 42.99 P .39 .55 9 *RLPK 12.7 Turned 29.3 43.0 32.14 45.92 K 2.05 2.93 10 0 5.7 1.09 22.9 26.8 27.41 39.16 *No manure or crop residues for 1910. 18 To summarize more briefly, the average annual returns of the last four years from four acres with crops grown in rotation on untreated land were $15.19 (or $21.70 with the higher values) ; the value of the increase from manure, limestone, and phosphate was $19.33 (or $27.61) ; while $20.38 (or $29.11) was the value of the increase from the residues, limestone, phosphate, and kainit, altho the crop residues alone gave insufficient increase to balance the extra crops harvested from the check plot. (So far as practical, the crop residues are left on the land so as to avoid hauling them off and back.) Table 7. — Crop Yields in Soil Experiments, Ealeigh Field, 1911 Yellow-gray Silt Loam (Timber Soil) (Yields per acre) Series *100 200 300 400 Value of four crops Value for each addition Plot Treat- Corn, Wheat, Clover, Oats, Lower Higher Lower Higher No. ment bu. bu. tons bu. prices prices prices prices 1 0 28.0 12.1 .44 25.6 $28.51 $40.74 2 *M 41.0 12.7 .43 19.2 31.62 45.18 M $4.55 $6.50 3 *ML 45.8 17.5 .61 38.0 43.19 61.70 L 11.57 16.52 4 *MLP 46.7 19.0 .68 35.5 44.34 63.35 P 1.15 1.65 5 0 24.9 9.5 .23 18.4 22.12 31.61 6 E 24.4 12.3 Turned 24.1 23.90 34.14 E 1.78 2.53 7 EL 36.8 19.9 Turned 38.6 37.61 53.74 L 13.71 19.60 8 ELP 31.1 22.7 Turned 35.3 36.66 52.37 P - .95 -1.37 9 ELPK 39.5 22.8 Turned 32.8 38.97 55.67 K 2.31 3.30 10 0 17.8 14.7 No wt. 25.0 23.52 33.60 *Manure on Series 100 only. Table 8. — Crop Yields in Soil Experiments, Ealeigh Field, 1912 Yellow-gray Silt Loam (Timber Soil) (Yields per acre) Series * i—* o ° o o CM 300 400 Value of four crops Value for each addition Plot Treat- Oats, Corn, Wheat, Cowpeas, Lower Higher Lower Higher No. ment bu. bu. bu. tons prices prices prices prices 1 0 11.9 20.5 ~~3A 1.44 $22.97 $32.81 2 *M 15.2 36.5 2.3 1.05 25.99 37.13 M $6.52 $9.32 3 *ML 23.4 55.1 7.1 2.79 50.33 71.91 L 24.34 34.78 4 *MLP 22.7 53.9 7.8 2.56 48.60 69.43 P -1.73 -2.48 5 0 14.1 20.4 2.0 .93 19.00 27.14 6 E 12.8 29.9 2.8 Turned 16.00 22.87 E -3.00 -4.27 7 EL 20.9 45.2 7.4 Turned 26.85 38.36 L 10.85 15.49 8 ELP 23.0 55.1 9.9 Turned 32.65 46.65 P 5.80 8.29 9 ELPK 25.8 56.5 14.1 Turned 36.87 52.67 K 4.22 6.02 10 0 8.1 25.2 4.7 No wt. 14.38 20.54 *Manure on Series 200 for 1912. 19 These are the results from 1911 to 1914, after one season’s crops had been grown to enable us to begin the application of manure and the turning under of some crop residues ; and it should be clearly un- derstood that the increasing benefit of limestone and phosphate is in part due to the increasing amounts of organic matter returned to those plots as compared with plots receiving residues or manure alone. Of course we may reasonably expect better results during the second rotation of crops, in part because of the cumulative effect of the phos- phate and organic matter and in part because the seasonal conditions Table 9. — Crop Yields in Soil Experiments, Raleigh Field, 1913 Yellow-gray Silt Loam (Timber Soil) (Yields per acre) Series o o r-l * *200 *300 400 Value of four crops Value for each addition Plot Treat- Clover, Oats, Corn, Wheat, Lower Higher Lower Higher No. ment tons bu. bu. bu. prices prices prices prices 1 0 .22 .6 5.7 6.2 $8.04 $11.49 2 *M .23 2.0 12.9 4.2 9.62 13.75 M $2.98 $4.26 3 *ML .72 3.1 17.2 20.7 26.41 37.74 L 16.79 23.99 4 |*MLP .68 3.0 17.1 23.8 28.24 40.35 P 1.83 2.61 5 0 No wt. 1.7 4.5 6.4 6.70 9.58 6 R Turned 2.0 9.4 8.5 9.80 14.00 R 3.10 4.42 7 RL Turned 4.4 17.5 29.8 28.21 40.31 L 18.41 26.31 8 RLP Turned 5.2 17.9 32.9 30.75 43.93 P 2.54 3.62 9 RLPK Turned 7.2 15.9 29.8 28.44 40.63 K -2.31 -3.30 10 0 No wt. 2.7 7.4 4.7 6.63 9.48 *Manure on Series 300 for 1913. Table 10. — Crop Yields in Soil Experiments, Raleigh Field, 1914 Yellow-gray Silt Loam (Timber Soil) (Yields per acre) Series 100 200 300 400 Value of four crops Value for each addition Plot Treat- Wheat, Soybeans, Oats, Corn, Lower Higher Lower Higher No. ment bu. tons(bu.) bu. bu. prices prices prices prices 1 0 11.8 .28 2.5 7.6 $13.58 $19.40 2 M 10.9 .30 5.0 13.2 15.75 22.50 M $2.17 $3.10 3 ML 27.5 .26 8.1 16.3 29.04 41.49 L 13.29 18.99 4 MLP 26.8 .23 7.8 14.1 27.49 39.27 P -1.55 -2.22 5 0 9.4 (.7) 2.0 8.5 10.60 15.15 6 R 9.2 (2.5) 4.1 10.7 13.08 18.69 R 2.48 3.54 7 RL 25.1 (2.5) 9.5 14.4' 27.02 38.60 L 13.94 19.91 8 RLP 27.2 (2.7) 11.2 16.4 29.80 42.58 P 2.78 3.98 9 RLPK 30.0 (1.8) 10.3 16.4 30.88 44.12 K 1.08 1.54 10 0 7.2 (.7) 5.0 4.6 8.54 12.20 20 will probably be better than those that have prevailed in southern Illinois during the last three years. The fact that soil treatment has more than doubled the crop val- ues at Ewing and Raleigh during the four-year period is both signifi- cant and encouraging. During the last two years the untreated land has averaged 4.5 bushels of wheat, while Plot 4 has averaged 21.1 bush- els, and Plot 9, 28.2 bushels. The live-stock farmers, as well as those who are unable to feed their crops on the farm, should profit from the fact that in the live-stock system limestone produced three times as much increase as farm manure, and that the residue system with lime- stone, phosphate, and kainit produced as large yields and is as perma- nent as the live-stock system with limestone, phosphate, and manure. Phosphorus Fertilizers Some further discussion of the subject of phosphorus fertilizers seems appropriate at this time. In time of drouth, moisture may be the limiting factor in plant growth, and under such conditions no amount of any kind of phosphorus can produce much effect. Thus, where steamed bone meal has been applied with crop residues on the Odin experiment field on the common prairie soil in Marion county, at one and one-half times the expense for rock phosphate, the value of the increase, as an average of the last four years, has not been suf- ficient to pay its cost ; in fact, the bone meal has paid less per dollar invested than has the rock phosphate in the same system at Ewing and Raleigh. During the last four years there was one complete failure of wheat (in 1912) on the South Farm at the University of Illinois, the wheat being winter-killed, even where phosphate was applied ; but, as an average of four tests each year during the other three years, rock phosphate increased the yield from 30.7 to 43.6 bushels per acre. Of course where nitrogen becomes the limiting element, additions of phosphorus may produce little or no benefit. It should be noted, too, that ground limestone, especially when applied liberally, tends to convert some of the natural soil phosphates of iron and aluminum into the more easily available phosphate of calcium, thus reducing the immediate need for applying phosphorus. In an address before the State Farmers’ Institute at Centralia three years ago, I made the following statements concerning limestone, organic matter, and phosphorus : "For southern Illinois this is the order in which they should be used in the most economical methods: 1 ‘ First, apply 2 to 5 tons per acre of ground limestone. "Second, grow clover or cowpeas. "Third, apply 1000 to 2000 pounds per acre of very finely ground natural rock phosphate, to be plowed under with the clover or cowpeas, either directly or in the form of farm manure. 21 f< In central and northern Illinois the same materials are needed, but there the limestone may take third place, while it is of first importance in this part of the state. ” Six years ago, I made the following statements in Circular 127 of the Illinois Experiment Station : “As to the value of non-acidulated finely-ground natural rock phosphate, I consider this as a material which gives great promise of extensive use in the econ- omic and profitable improvement of poor soils and in the maintenance of large crop yields on good soils, especially in the states thruout the great Central West. It should be distinctly understood, however, that repeated experiments have shown that this material gives practically no immediate returns if used in the absence of decaying organic matter. On the other hand, when used in intimate connection with liberal amounts of farm manure or green manures or both, we have conclusive evidence that it is one of the most economical and profitable forms of phosphorus, especially where the crop returns for a series of years are to be taken into account. ’ ’ ‘ ‘ On soil very deficient in decaying organic matter I always advise the use of steamed bone meal or acid phosphate in preference to raw rock phosphate.” I have also repeatedly called attention to the fact that, in the ab- sence of abundance of decaying organic matter, kainit may be used in connection with rock phosphate to increase its availability. In Soil Report No. 1, issued in 1911, it is pointed out that when kainit was so used on the Fairfield experiment field on typical prairie soil of south- ern Illinois, it paid for itself. At the present time, however, its cost is prohibitive on account of the European war. I cannot too strongly emphasize the statement that limestone and organic manures are of primary importance for southern Illinois. “It should never be forgotten, however,- that phosphorus must also (at some time) be included and applied with the vegetable matter if a permanent system of soil improvement and preservation is to be adopted. While liberal use of lime- stone and the return of the increased vegetable matter will make marked and profitable improvement in southern Illinois soils, yet the improvement will be tem- porary unless phosphorus is also applied, because this element is present in the soil in small amount and it is removed in crops and sold from the farm not only in grain and hay, but also in bone, in meat, and in milk. 1 This statement I also made at Centralia three years ago. At that time I mentioned that the cost of steamed bone meal had so advanced as to discourage its use. Altho this price has remained high, I am glad now to say that the cost of acid phosphate has been so reduced in recent years that I should advise it in preference to steamed bone meal where one wishes to make use of available phosphorus. Thus, if one desires to do more than use limestone and organic manures at the beginning, in order to hasten the increase of crop yields, he may use either acid phosphate, or raw phosphate and kainit, or acid phosphate and kainit ; and with the decreasing price of acid phosphate, it may even be used in place of raw phosphate in per- ‘111. Exp. Sta. Circ. 157. 22 manent systems of soil improvement. Unquestionably a pound of phosphorus is worth more in soluble acid phosphate than in the in- soluble rock phosphate ; and possibly one pound of soluble phosphorus is worth as much as two of the insoluble ; but certainly the informa- tion thus far secured from all trustworthy investigations does not justify paying four or five times as much for phosphorus in soluble form as it costs in fine-ground raw rock, if organic manures can be provided for its liberation in rational farm systems. Because of the low price per ton of rock phosphate, Illinois farmers almost invariably purchase it in carload lots, while the higher price for acid phosphate and its control by fertilizer agents have usually compelled its pur- chase in smaller quantities by those who desired to use it. The prices which have actually prevailed in past years in southern Illinois have been from $6 to $7 a ton for rock phosphate and about $18 for acid phosphate. It should be remembered that one ton of raw phosphate and one ton of sulfuric acid make two tons of acid phosphate, so that, at these prices, a pound of phosphorus would cost the farmer five or six times as much in acid phosphate as in the fine-ground na- tural rock. Ohio Experiments with Manure and Phosphates In a recent statement from Director Thorne regarding the long- continued investigations of the Ohio Experiment Station with raw phosphate and acid phosphate, the estimated cost of raw phosphate has been increased to $10 per ton, while that of acid phosphate has been reduced to $14 per ton. I have reported on different occasions the progress of these important Ohio investigations, and have noted that the yields were practically the same whether raw phosphate or acid phosphate was used; altho the method usually followed by the Ohio Station of computing the increase in yield showed greater profit per acre from acid phosphate, while, per dollar invested, greater re- turns were shown from the use of raw phosphate. However, with raw phosphate at $10 and acid phosphate at $14 per ton, the Ohio compu- tations now show greater profit from acid phosphate than from rock phosphate, both per acre and per dollar invested. In reference to these experiments the following statements were made in Ohio Experiment Station Circular 104, published in 1910: “On Section C, Plots 1 and 11, which, it will be observed, are continuous, have regularly given yields so much larger than those of the other unmanured plots of this section as to suggest the possibility that the land covered by these plots may have been at one time occupied by a fence-row, the tract lying near a barn, and for this reason it has been deemed best to calculate the increase on the general average of all the unfertilized plots. By this method of calculation the average increase on Plots 2 and 3 combined (with raw phosphate) is found to be practically the same as on Plots 5 and 6 combined (with acid phosphate) but when the larger cost of the acid phosphate is deducted the net gain is a little greater on Plots 2 and 3 .” 23 In previous and subsequent years the Ohio Station has followed a different method of calculating the increase, which, together with the changes in cost of materials, has, in the opinion of Director Thorne, placed the acid phosphate in the lead, as stated above ; but by his courtesy I am permitted to give the average actual yields secured in these experiments during the entire eighteen years, and also the averages for the last three years, including 1914 (see Table 11). By this method of computation, the same as was used by the Ohio Sta- tion in 1910, the average profits are slightly larger from the raw phosphate, both for the eighteen years and for the last three years, even at Illinois prices for produce and Ohio prices for the phosphates used. (For a more detailed discussion of these experiments see Illi- nois Experiment Station Circular 130.) Table 11. — Crop Yields per Acre in Ohio Manure-Phosphate Experiments Treatment Corn, bu. Wheat, bu. Hay, tons Value of 3 crops Net gain fo From 3 acres r phosphate From $1 Average of 18 Yeans: 1897 to 1914 None Manure Manure, rock phosphate Manure, acid phosphate 34.7 56.4 65.2 64.0 11.6 21.2 25.8 26.7 1.37 1.91 2.36 2.34 $29.85 47.95 57.40 57.47 $7.85 7.28 $4.91 3.25 Average of 3 Years: 1912 to 1914 None Manure Manure, rock phosphate Manure, acid phosphate 42.9 65.5 78.9 74.0 13.5 22.4 26.3 29.3 1.63 2.31 2.65 2.67 $35.87 54.77 64.58 65.10 $8.21 8.09 $5.13 3.61 Note. — Rock phosphate applied cost $1.60 at $10 per ton; acid phosphate applied cost $2.24 at $14 per ton. Interpretation of Experiments In conclusion, I beg to ask some consideration of the difficulties involved in the interpretation or discussion of the results of field ex- periments in soil investigations. From the standpoint of the investi- gator, it is most satisfactory to report only the actual data secured, stating the kinds and amounts of materials applied and the crop yields harvested ; and then to leave every individual to figure for himself as to whether he can make use of the record of facts in the improvement of his own farm practice. On the other hand, the first question asked by most farmers and landowners is, “Does it pay?” thus almost com- pelling the investigator to report some estimate of the cost and profit or loss. And of course similar estimates are commonly made in most 24 other lines of investment, such as construction work, mining, lumber- ing, manufactures, and mercantile business. What is the cost of a ton of limestone spread on the land ? With a price of 60 cents at the plant and 25 cents freight for 50 miles, the cash expense is 85 cents a ton; and with the farm near the station, and the hauling and spreading done when men and teams have little else to do, one might count $1 per ton as the total necessary expense ; whereas, with a price of $1 at the plant, 75 cents freight for 150 miles, and $4 a day for a man and team to haul it five or six miles to the farm, the cost may easily reach $3 per ton. What is the value of a bushel of wheat, a bushel of corn, or a ton of hay? The ten-year average price for wheat in Illinois is 90 cents, but we sold for 75 last summer and are now offered $1.50. The Year Book of the United States Department of Agriculture reports 44 cents a bushel as the average farm-price of corn in Illinois, on Decem- ber 1, for the ten years 1903 to 1912 ; and 35 cents is probably not far from the average value of corn on the stalk. The ten-year average farm-price for No. 1 timothy hay is $10.84 ; but, for average farm hay lying in the swath, $7 is not below a reasonably safe value. We are commonly assured that future prices will average higher for all farm products. They will have to, if the farmers of the United States are to have adequate funds for investment in soil improvement ; but past facts covering a ten-year period are a safer guide than fu- ture predictions, and there is grave danger that the United States of America may continue the policy recently condemned by the great railroad builder, James J. Hill, in the following words: “The farm is the basis of all industry, but for many years this country has made the mistake of unduly assisting manufacture, commerce, and other activities that center in cities, at the expense of the farm. ” Which is better — to tax the man who farms the land, or the man who owns the mortgage? Which is better — to increase freights, or to reduce railroad ex- penses until agriculture can compete with commerce? Which is better — to fix a minimum wage in the city to attract more people from the farms, or to fix a minimum price for country wheat to feed our increasing population ? Which is better — to build a Panama Canal for the world and oper- ate it at a loss, or to rebuild the millions of acres of abandoned farms in our older states ? Which is better--to erect more coast defenses and construct more warships with which to frighten or to fight other nations, or to — “Stop building national warships and coast defenses and unite the national navies of the world into an international or world navy to be controlled by a rep- resentative international commission or congress, and thus maintain world peace with world power; for not until the dawn of the millennium can we hope for per- 25 manent peace from sentiment and treaty. The union of all navies at the close of the present war into one international naval power for the preservation of per- manent international peace should be less difficult of achievement than was the union of the states into the United States at a time when battles were sometimes fought a month after peace was declared. Surely nations may trust for justice to the wisdom and fairness of such a representative international congress, just as our states must trust our national Congress; and such a project should hasten the termination of the international war. ’ n When we take down our coast defenses and cease building war- ships for destruction, we may thereby save a quarter-billion dollars a year, to be devoted so far as needed to agricultural investigation, in- struction, extension, and demonstration; to the encouragement and control of the production and transportation of limestone and phos- phate, in order to insure the possible use of these basic materials where needed ; and, if possible, to a sufficient control of markets and market- ing to encourage production with reasonable profit, to discourage spec- ulation in human foods, and to prevent unreasonable expense and ex- cessive profits by those who stand between producer and consumer. If Illinois were to receive her “share” of this quarter-billion dol- lars, it could adequately endow a school within easy reach of every home in this great state, for the purpose of teaching the oncoming generations not only how not to treat Illinois soils, but how most econ- omically to make them permanently richer and more productive for the prosperity of all the people and to the honor of the commonwealth. H’rom an address by the author before the Annual Convention of the Amer- ican Bankers Association, at Eiehmond, Virginia, October 15, 1914, previously suggested in a letter, dated August 5, 1914, addressed to the Hon. William J. Bryan, Department of State, Washington, D. C. 26 ADDED NOTE On page 664 of the Breeder’s Gazette of April 1, Mr. Henry G. Bell (Agronomist of the Middle West Soil Improvement Committee of the National Fertilizer Association) quotes a statement from my article in the Gazette of February 25, relating to fertilizer experi- ments “ conducted by the Ohio Experiment Station at both Wooster and Strongsville, ’ ’ and he then makes the following comments : "This quotation purports to give in essence the findings of the Ohio Station relative to the profit of using nitrogen, potassium and phosphorus True, on the basis of the low figures for crops quoted neither the use of nitrogen alone, nor of potassium alone, paid, while phosphorus gave an excellent return. From this fact your correspondent concludes that the use of either nitrogen or potas- sium in combination with phosphorus, or all of the three elements in combination, does not pay, which conclusion is absolutely at variance with Director Thorne’s own statement as to the profit of the different methods of treatment, which quota- tion follows: 1 1 1 Every complete fertilizer has been used with a profit, since the first period, but when either nitrate of soda or muriate of potash has been used unaccom- panied by some carrier of phosphorus there has been a net loss in each period (except from the muriate of potash in the third period) and in the average of the 20 years.* "Director Thorne’s own figures on the plots to which a complete fertilizer was applied show that an average investment of $19.29 ($19.78) per acre for fer- tilizer gave a net profit of $12.97 Your correspondent was correct so far as he quoted, but, as we have pointed out, a further examination of the table of tests quoted shows that the use of nitrogen, phosphoric acid and potash in combination paid handsomely at the Ohio Experiment .Station. ’ * For the benefit of tbe reader who cares to do his own thinking, I am presenting in the accompanying tabular statement the results from all the plots receiving corresponding commercial fertilizers in the five- field rotations, representing averages of twenty years at Wooster and nineteen years at Strongsville. It will be seen that $2.60 invested in phosphorus paid a profit of $14.40, while $19.78 invested in complete fertilizers paid a profit of $7.43, as an average of the results from the twelve plots. Mr. Bell states that “the plots to which a complete fertilizer was applied show that an average investment of $19.29 for fertilizer gave a net profir of $12.97.” During the last three or four years, Director Thorne has changed the fertilizer applied to Plot 27 so as to reduce the expense from $23.50 to $17.60, and with this change the present average cost of complete fertilizers for the twelve plots is $19.29, as Mr. Bell re- ports ; but in computing the average profit for the entire period, Di- rector Thorne still continues to deduct $23.50 instead of $17.60 as the annual cost for this plot. The “net profit of $12.97,” mentioned by Mr. Bell, is not the gen- eral average from both Wooster and Strongsville, but only the aver- age from the twelve plots at Wooster where complete fertilizers were used. Of course the average of both series of experiments, showing 27 $7.43 profit from an investment of $19.78, is far more trustworthy as a basis for advising farmers what they may expect from the use of such complete fertilizers ; but even if we ignore the Strongsville data and consider only the $12.97 mentioned by Mr. Bell, we may well in- quire why a farmer should invest $19.78 in complete fertilizer in the hope of getting a profit of $12.97 when the same “ table of tests’ ’ (page 79 of Ohio Experiment Station Circular 144) shows that $2.60 invested in phosphorus alone gave a profit of $13.92. Why should the farmer reduce his profit by 95 cents by spending $17.18 for nitrogen and potassium ? Fertilizer Experiments by Ohio Experiment Station With Five-Field Rotation, Corn, Oats, Wheat, Clover, and Timothy Plot No. Fertilizing elements per year for 5 years Average from 5 value of increase acres (5 crops) Annual cost of ferti- lizers for 5 acres Average profit Nitro- gen, lbs. Phos- 1 phorus, lbs. Potas- sium, lbs. 20-year aver, at Wooster 19 -year aver, at Strongs- ville |General average From 5 acres From $1 2 20 $16.52 $17.48 $17.00 $ 2.60 $14.40 $5.54 3 108 5.73 -.17 2.78 6.50 Loss Loss 5 76 8.37 1.77 5.07 14.40 Loss Loss ’ 6 76 20 3L34 21.48 ~ 26.41 17.00 9.41 [55 8 20 108 24.69 18.87 21.78 9.10 12.68 1.39 9 76 108 11.07 4.76 7.92 20.90 Loss Loss Ml 7 76~ 20 108 39.28 23.71 31.50 23.50 8T00 ^34 26 76 20 108 32.37 22.85 27.61 23.50 4.11 .17 27 76 20 108 33.42 19.71 26.57 23.50 3.07 .13 29 76 20 108 33.42 23.12 28.27 23.50 4.77 .20 17 38 30 108 35.23 23.21 29.22 17.60 11.62 .66 21 38 30 108 33.50 21.20 27.35 17.60 9.75 .55 23 38 30 108 31.75 21.80 26.78 17.60 9.18 .52 24 38 30 108 31.91 22.21 27.06 17.60 9.46 .54 30 38 30 108 30.40 27.99 29.20 17.60 11.60 .66 12 112 20 108 39.98 24.72 32.35 30.70 1.65 .05 14 50 15 74 30.14 18.44 24.29 16.05 8.24 .51 15 25 10 | I 41 21.66 11.10 16.38 8.60 7.78 .90 Average of last twelve plots $32.75 “$2L67 _ $27.21 $ 7.43 $ .38 Note. — The increase produced by fertilizers, as it stands in the field ready for the harvest, is valued at 40 cents a bushel for corn, 30 cents for oats, 80 cents for wheat, $8 a ton for hay, $3 for corn stalks, and $2 for straw. A still more trustworthy basis of comparison is between Plot 2 and the average of Plots il, 26, 27, and 29, which shows that $2.60 invested in phosphorus gave $16.52 increase in the crop values, while $20.90 invested in nitrogen and potassium (applied in addition to the phosphorus) produced an additional gross increase valued at only 28 $18.10, thus showing $2.80 net loss from the investment in nitrogen and potassium, even when used in combination with phosphorus. The statement that the use of “all of the three elements in com- bination does not pay” is incorrectly credited to me by Mr. Bell. I am in full accord with the statement which he quotes from Director Thorne ; and in my article of February 25 I made the following state- ment concerning the use of complete fertilizers for the common grain and forage crops on normal soils : “Such fertilizers are not likely to yield even a temporary profit, excepting on soils where phosphorus is the limiting element, and in this case the phosphorus may yield a sufficient profit to pay for the loss from the use of commercial nitro- gen and potassium. ” Thus, in these Ohio Experiments, as a general average of results from Wooster and Strongsville, the profit of $14.40 from phosphorus alone was not entirely wiped out in paying for the loss on nitrogen and potassium, but it was reduced to $7.43 ; and the profit per dollar invested was reduced from $5.54 with phosphorus alone to only 38 cents as an average of the twelve plots on which complete fertilizers were used. Mr. Bell’s statement that “the use of nitrogen, phosphoric acid and potash in combination paid handsomely at the Ohio Experiment Station” may be true from his viewpoint ; but from the viewpoint of a farmer with limited capital the matter presents a different aspect, the more especially, when, by reference to “the first period” (mentioned by Director Thorne in the above quotation from Mr. Bell’s article), we find by “ a further examination of the table of tests, ’ ’ that during the first five years of the Ohio experiments, these complete fertilizers paid as an average a profit of only 3 percent at Wooster and 1 percent at Strongsville. The man who desires to use both head and hands in the business of farming may well preserve and study the information afforded by the table of results presented herewith. The footnote gives the values assigned to the farm produce. Are they high enough for the increase of crops standing in the field ? At the prices used by Director Thorne for the three elements (see Plots 2, 3, and 5), a 2-8-2 fertilizer would cost only $17.45 per ton. Can the reader purchase locally for less money ? As a general average of the twelve plots, the complete fertilizers supplied less nitrogen, less phosphorus, and less potassium than was removed in the crops harvested. The average acre-yields at Wooster where $19.78 worth of fertilizer was used were 45 bushels of corn, 45 of oats, 24 of wheat, iy 2 tons of clover, and 1% tons of timothy. From a study of the table, the effect of each element may be found under four different conditions. Thus $2.60 in phosphorus alone paid back $17, but where used in addition to potassium, the $2.60 invested 29 in phosphorus paid back $19 (compare Plots 2 and 8). Where used in addition to nitrogen, the $2.60 in phosphorus returned $21.34: (see Plots 5 and 6) ; and where applied with both nitrogen and potassium, the $2.60 spent for phosphorus paid back $20.57 (compare Plot 9 with the average of Plots 11, 26, 27, and 29). Soluble phosphorus on Plots 11 and 27 produced about the same average results as bone meal on Plot 26 and slag phosphate on Plot 29. Likewise the nitrogen produced about the same effect whether applied in sodium nitrate (17), in oil meal (21), in dried blood (23), in ammonium sulfate (24), or in tankage (30). With a decrease of nitrogen (from 76 to 38 pounds) and an in- crease of phosphorus (from 20 to 30 pounds), the profit was increased, but with an increase of nitrogen (Plot 12) the profit was decreased. Nitrogen and potassium produced some increase in yield, and this the farmer should secure, not by buying those elements at a loss, but by securing more nitrogen from the inexhaustible supply in the air thru a larger use of legumes (with limestone if needed), and by liberating potassium from the inexhaustible supply in the corn-belt soils by means of decaying organic manures. The information reported in this tabular statement is based upon the actual weights from about five thousand harvested crops from measured areas of land, and the established facts thus recorded should help to put the agriculture of the Middle West on a permanent and more profitable basis. MATERIALS FOR SOIL IMPROVEMENT Natural Rock Phosphate: Fine-ground raw rock phosphate, containing from io to 14 percent of phosphorus, can be obtained -from the following companies, delivered in bulk on board cars at the mines in Tennessee for $2.50 to $5 per ton, the price varying with the quality. The freight rate from Tennessee per ton of 2000 pounds in carload lots varies from $2.50 to points in southern Illinois, to $3.58 to northern Illinois points. Of course, these addresses are given solely as a matter of information, and the Experiment Station makes no recommendations or guarantees as to reliability. Mt. Pleasant Fertilizer Co., Mt. Pleasant, Tenn. Robin Jones Phosphate Co., Nashville, Tenn. Natural Phosphate Co., Nashville, Tenn. Farmers Ground Rock Phosphate Co., Mt. Pleasant, Tenn. Ruhm Phosphate Mining Co., Mt. Pleasant, Tenn. Blue Grass Phosphate Co., Mt. Pleasant, Tenn. Southern Lime & Phosphate Co., Birmingham, Ala. Federal Chemical Co., Columbia, Tenn. 30 Central Phosphate Co., Mt. Pleasant, Tenn. Central Kentucky Phosphate Co., Wallace, Ky. American Fertilizer Co., Santa Fe, Tenn. It should be borne in mind that rock phosphate varies much in quality. Consequently, it should always be purchased upon a guaranteed analysis, and it is advisable for the purchaser to take an average sample of the car- load when received and have it analyzed both for phosphorus and for fine- ness, even tho the analysis cost him $2 or $3. To collect an average sample, take a small teaspoonful from about fifty different places in the car, not only from the surface but also from different depths. These fifty spoonfuls well mixed together will make a trustworthy sample, and about one pound of this should be sent to some commercial chemist for analysis. If 1234-percent rock, containing 250 pounds of phosphorus per ton, costs $7.50 (including freight), then 10-percent rock, containing 200 pounds of the element per ton, is worth $6, a difference in value of $1.50 per ton, which, on a 30-ton car, amounts to $45. The important phosphorus compound in rock phosphate is calcium phos- phate, Ca 3 (P 0 4 ) 2 . The percentage of this compound in the rock phos- phate marks the purity of the rock. Thus, if the rock phosphate contains 60 percent of calcium phosphate, it is 60 percent pure, with 40 percent of impurities. Sometimes the guarantee is given as “phosphoric acid,” meaning phos- phoric oxid, P 2 O s . This also is a definite compound and always contains 43% percent of the element phosphorus. Thus it will be seen that the same sample of rock phosphate may be guaranteed to contain 62 percent of calcium phosphate, Ca 3 (P 0 4 ) 2 , or 28.4 percent of “phosphoric acid” (P 2 ^5)> or 12.4 percent of phosphorus (P). Raw rock phosphate should be very finely ground, so that at least 90 percent of the material can be washed thru a sieve with 100 meshes to the linear inch, or with 10,000 meshes to the square inch. Of course anyone can test for fineness by sifting ten ounces and then drying and weighing what will not wash thru the sieve. As a rule, it is more satisfactory to purchase in bulk rather than in bags (see page 15 of Circular no). Bone Meal A good grade of steamed bone meal (about 1234 percent phosphorus) can be obtained delivered in Illinois for $25 to $30 a ton, from the local agents of Morris & Co., Swift & Co., Armour & Co., the American Glue Co., or the American Fertilizer Co., Chicago, 111 ., or from the Empire Car- bon Works, National Stock Yards, East St. Eouis, 111 . Potassium Salts Potassium chlorid (so-called “muriate of potash”), containing about 42 percent of potassium, can be obtained for about $45 a ton from Armour & Co., Swift & Co., or Darling & Co., Union Stock Yards, Chicago, 111 ., from the German Kali Works or the Nitrate Agencies Co., Chicago, 111 ., from A. Smith & Bro., lampico, 111 ., or from the American Agricultural Chemi- 31 cal Co., New York, N. Y. ; and kainit, containing about io percent of potassium, together with some magnesium sulfate, magnesium chlorid, and sodium chlorid, can also be obtained from Armour & Co., Darling & Co., Swift & Co., Hirsch, Stein & Co., the Chicago Fertilizer Works, or the German Kali Works, Chicago, 111., for about $13 a ton. Ground Limestone Ground limestone can now be obtained at 60 cents a ton ($1 in bags, to be returned at purchaser’s expense and risk) from the Southern Illinois Penitentiary, Menard, 111., and at different prices from the following com- panies : Casper Stolle Quarry & Contracting Co., East St. Louis, 111. (Quarry at Stolle, 111.) Southwestern Contracting & Engineering Co., East St. Louis, 111. Ellis Bros., Elsberry, Mo. Carthage Superior Limestone Co., Carthage, Mo. Mitchell Lime Co., Mitchell, Ind. John Armstrong Lime & Quarry Co., Alton, 111. Lehigh Stone Co., Kankakee, 111. Elmhurst-Chicago Stone Co., Elmhurst, 111. East St. Louis Stone Co., East St. Louis, 111. Columbia Quarry Co., St. Louis, Mo. (Quarry at Columbia, 111.) McLaughlin-Mateer Co., Kankakee, 111. Lockyer Quarry Co., Alton, 111. Western Whiting & Mfg. Co., Elsah, 111. Eldred Stone Co., Eldred, 111. Marblehead Lime Co., Masonic Temple, Chicago, 111. (Quarries at Quincy, 111.) United States Crushed Stone Co., 108 S. LaSalle St., Chicago, 111. Dolese & Shepard Co., 108 S. LaSalle St., Chicago, 111. Fruitgrowers’ Refrigerating & Power Co., Anna, 111. Biggsville Crushed Stone Co., Biggsville, 111. Hart & Page, Rockford, 111. McManus & Tucker, Keokuk, Iowa. Moline Stone Co., Moline, 111. John Markman, Gladstone, 111. Superior Stone Co., 218 Hearst Bldg., Chicago, 111. Brownell Improvement Co., 1220 Chamber of Commerce, Chicago, 111. Dolese Bros. Co., 10 S. LaSalle St., Chicago, 111. Ohio & Indiana Stone Co., Indianapolis, Ind. (Quarry at Greencastle, Ind.) C. F. Gill & Co., 6709 Lakewood Av., Chicago. 111. (Quarry at Joliet, 111 .) Riverside Lime & Stone Co., 131 W. 63d St., Chicago, 111. Carrico Stone Co., Rockford, 111. Logansport Stone & Construction Co., Huntington, Ind. Some of these companies furnish fine-ground limestone and some fur- nish limestone screenings, which include both very fine dust and some 32 coarse particles even as large as corn kernels. In carload lots the price on board cars at the plant varies from 50 cents to $1 a ton according to fine- ness. The freight charges are one-half cent per ton per mile, with a mini- mum charge of 25 cents per ton by each railroad handling the car, and with a minimum carload of 30 tons. At most points in Illinois the cost de- livered in bulk in box cars should be between $1 and $2 a ton. Sometimes one can get one and one-half tons of material containing one ton of fine dust and half a ton of coarser particles, varying in size from less than pin- heads to corn kernels, at no greater expense than would be required for one ton of fine-ground stone containing no coarser particles. The coarser particles will last in the soil longer than the finer material, which is rapidly lost by leaching; and a product that will all pass thru a sieve with 8 or 10 meshes to the linear inch, and that contains all the fine dust produced in the process of crushing or grinding is very satisfactory. Machines for Grinding Limestone Portable machines for crushing and grinding limestone, using thresh- ing engines for power, can be obtained from — Williams Patent Crusher & Pulverizer Co., St. Louis, Mo. Universal Crusher Co., Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Pennsylvania Crusher Co., Pittsburgh, Pa. Wheeling Mold & Foundry Co., Wheeling, W. Va. Jeffrey Manufacturing Co., Columbus, Ohio. Allis-Chalmers Mfg. Co., Milwaukee, Wis. Gardner Crusher Co., Cleveland, Ohio. Power & Mining Machinery Co., Cudahy, Wis. Machine for Spreading Limestone and Phosphate Directions for making a machine for spreading ground limestone and ground rock phosphate are given in Circular no, which will be sent to anyone upon request. This is a homemade machine, carried on the wheels of an old mower, and it can be made by any good blacksmith and car- penter. There is no regular manufactured machine on the market that has given as satisfactory service in our experience as these homemade machines. They are made upon order by many blacksmiths in different parts of the state, and are usually kept in stock by the following makers: George Kubacki, DuBois, 111 . Pana Enterprise Manufacturing Co., Pana, 111 . UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Agricultural Experiment Station CIRCULAR No. 182 THE FERTILIZER PROBLEM FROM THE VEGETABLE GROWER’S STANDPOINT By C. E. Durst URBANA, ILLINOIS, MAY. 1915 Contents op Circular 182 PAGE Introduction 3 The General Principle^ of Plant Nutrition 4 Losses of Fertility in Vegetable Growing 5 Losses in Crop Removals 5 Losses by Drainage and Leaching 6 Losses of Organic Matter and Nitrogen by Oxidation 7 How to Check the Losses of Fertility 8 Probable Losses of Fertility Annually 9 Supplying Fertility to the Soil 9 Nitrogen and Organic Matter 10 Manure, Its Care and Use. . . 10 The Use of Crop Refuse and Cover Crops 14 The Use of Commercial Forms of Nitrogen 20 Phosphorus , 23 Potassium 25 Limestone 26 Drainage and Crop Rotation 27 Summary 27 THE FERTILIZER PROBLEM FROM THE VEGETABLE GROWER’S STANDPOINT 1 By C. E. Durst, Associate in Olericulture INTRODUCTION The general principles of soil fertility apply with equal signifi- cance in both vegetable and farm-crop production, but there are marked differences respecting the specific manner of their application. In general farming, the quantity and proper maturity of the crops are the only objects involved; in vegetable growing, these are im- portant, but added to them are such factors as earliness, quality, and appearance of the products. In fact, the latter are the sole factors in determining the profits from certain crops. A few days’ gain in early cabbage or spinach, for instance, may mean an increase of 50 or 100 percent in the profit. Relatively small differences in the quality or flavor of such crops as melons, lettuce, and celery, often cause wide differences in the returns. The size and appearance, or “finish,” of nearly all vegetables play a large part in the prices received. In other words, looking at the question from a practical point of view, soil fertility is one thing from a general farmer’s standpoint, and quite another thing from the vegetable grower’s standpoint. In the first place, vegetables as a class require much richer soil than farm crops. Land capable of producing admirable farm crops will ordi- narily produce only mediocre vegetables. We have in Illinois plenty of land that will produce 50 to 75 bushels of corn or 30 to 40 bushels of wheat in a favorable season. But plant this land to cabbage or onions and what would be the result? As every practical gardener knows, only fair crops of these vegetables would be produced. The best general farming land needs much building up before it will grow vegetables successfully, and three or four years of persistent effort are generally required to accomplish the result. Where vegetables are grown on a very intensive basis, as on the high-priced land near the larger cities, tilled crops are grown prac- tically all the time during the growing season. There is no “sowing down” as in general farming. The almost continuous stirring of the soil and the fact that vegetables, as a rule, shade it very little, per- mit a large loss of nitrogen and organic matter by oxidation. In fact, intensive vegetable gardening occasions a condition which approaches bare fallow; and it has been conclusively proved that bare fallow, while usually bringing about increased yields in the crops immedi- ately following, results eventually in decidedly decreased yields, be- 1 A revision of a paper read at the Forty-first Annual Convention of the Horticultural Society of Central Illinois, at Peoria, Illinois, November, 1913. 4 cause of its destructive effect on the nitrogen and organic matter of the soil. The market gardener usually operates on land of high fertility. Within recent years, it has become well understood that the organisms living in the soil play a far greater role in its fertility than has been heretofore supposed. It is also known that the prodigality of this life increases with the amount of actively decaying organic matter, other things being equal. That this factor alone adds many compli- cations to the problem cannot be disputed. Experienced gardeners realize the importance of rich soil, and do not hesitate to fertilize heavily. Applications of 20 to 40 tons of manure to the acre annually are not at all uncommon. Besides this, large expenditures are often made for commercial fertilizers. The statistics of Massachusetts show, for instance, that during a period of ten years the market gardeners spent, on an average, $76 per acre annually for manures. Many individual gardeners thruout the coun- try spend several times this amount. Such large outlays in fertilizers are not feasible in general farming, where the product is commonly not worth more than $25 to $50 to the acre ; but they are feasible and profitable in intensive market gardening, where the product is some- times worth $500 to $1000 per acre. The gardener can profitably use amounts and forms of fertilizers and methods of applying them that the general farmer could not possibly afford. The fact is that in long- continued successful market gardening, the original fertility content of the soil is often a matter of minor importance in comparison with the fertility applied. The various factors mentioned, and others which might be enu- merated, make the fertility problem in vegetable growing a distinct one in itself. THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF PLANT NUTRITION Ten elements, or fundamental substances, are necessary for the growth of plants. These are carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, calcium, mag- nesium, sulfur, iron, nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium. None of our agricultural plants can grow without all of these. The three ele- ments carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen constitute 90 to 95 percent of the bulk of most mature crops, yet plants are able to secure these in unlimited amounts (except during drought) from air and water. Cal- cium, magnesium, sulfur, and iron are used by garden plants in small quantities, and as most garden soils contain them in relatively large amounts, their importance becomes insignificant. The elements nitro- gen, phosphorus, and potassium, however, are used in considerable quantities, and as the supply of these is usually limited, they become the controlling factors in crop production. Indeed, it is generally con- ceded that the supplying of these three elements to the soil in sufficient amounts and proper forms, together with favorable physical condi- tions, constitutes the entire problem of soil enrichment. 5 LOSSES OF FERTILITY IN VEGETABLE GROWING In order to comprehend fully the nature of the fertility problem as related to vegetable growing, it is well to consider first the extent and sources of the losses of fertility from vegetable soils; for it is recognized that for continued successful crop production, it is neces- sary to return to the soil, in some way or other, as much fertility as is removed by the various agencies at work. Losses occur thru crop removals, by drainage and leaching, and by oxidation of the nitrogen and organic matter. Losses in Crop Removals In Table 1, the amounts and commercial values of the three limit- ing elements removed per acre by several important vegetable and farm crops are presented. Table 1. — Fertility Removed per Acre by Important Vegetables and Farm Crops 1 Crop Estimated yield Plant food removed Value of fertility removed 2 Nitrogen Phosphorus Potassium lbs. lbs. lbs. Potato 150 bu. 30.6 6.3 43.2 $ 9.34 Sweet potato 200 ” 24.0 3.5 30.7 6.99 Turnip 800 ” 79.2 13.2 105.6 23.50 Carrot 500 ” 55.0 12.5 62.5 15.00 Parsnip 600 ” 160.0 24.0 135.0 42.90 Onion 600 ” 92.3 20.6 72.2 24.85 Lettuce 10000 lbs. 23.0 3.0 30.1 6.71 Asparagus 3600 ” 11.5 1.4 3.6 2.66 Cabbage 12 tons 72.0 12.0 86.4 20.78 Tomato 500 bu. 48.0 6.6 67.2 14.29 Cucumber 500 ” 40.0 12.5 50.0 12.25 Corn 100 ” 100.0 17.0 19.0 22.84 Wheat 50 ” 71.0 12.0 13.0 16.18 Oats 75 ” 49.5 8.3 12.0 11.45 Compiled chiefly after Wolf and Goessman. 2 In computing the values, 20 cents per pound has been allowed for the nitro- gen, 10 cents for the phosphorus, and 6 cents for the potassium. These are the approximate prices prevailing at present for the three elements in nitrat^ of soda, steamed bone meal, and potassium sulfate. It should be noted that the yields assigned to the vegetables are for the most part conservative, while in the case of the three farm crops, maximum yields have been allowed. But even comparing the figures as they stand, it will be seen that vegetables remove large amounts of the three limiting elements from the soil, — in all proba- bility more than the ordinary farm crops. Generally speaking, vege- tables do not remove as much nitrogen as the farm crops; there is practically no difference in the amounts of phosphorus used; and vegetables remove much more potassium than general farm crops. 6 Parsnips are particularly heavy feeders, the money value of the fer- tilizing constituents contained in a 600-bushel crop being, at com- mercial prices, $42.90. Turnips, cabbage, and onions are also rather heavy feeders. Lettuce and asparagus, which are often a gardener’s most profitable crops, are very light feeders. The root crops, in gen- eral, remove large amounts of potassium from the soil. The figures in Table 1 account for the removal of but a single crop in a season. The vegetable grower, however, commonly removes two, and sometimes three, crops in a season. For instance, the grow- ing of a crop of both early cabbage and late turnips is perfectly feasible and often practiced. These two crops, with the yields given in the table, would remove from the land, 151.2 pounds of nitrogen, 25.2 pounds of phosphorus, and 192 pounds of potassium, the total value at current prices being $44.28. A 100-bushel corn crop, on the other hand, would remove in the grain 100 pounds of nitrogen, 17 pounds of phosphorus, and 19 pounds of potassium, worth $22.84. It is apparent, from these figures, that vegetables make heavy drains upon the fertility of the soil. Losses by Drainage and Leaching If the fertility removed in the crops constituted the total loss from the soil, the problem would not be so difficult, but unfortunately serious losses occur thru other channels as well. Any fertility exist- ing in soluble form is likely to be lost at any time in drainage waters and by leaching downward thru a loose subsoil. The amount lost in this way depends upon the soluble fertility present, the amount of water leaving the land, either by surface or tile drainage, and the character of the subsoil, — whether * ‘ open ” or 11 tight. ’ ’ More soluble fertility exists in summer than in winter, and, except in places where the winters are fairly mild and open, as in southern Illinois, drainage and leaching are most active at that time. The amount of phosphorus lost by drainage and leaching is gen- erally conceded to be small, as little of it exists in soluble form at any time. Potassium is lost in larger amounts. Most soils contain large amounts of this element, but practically all of it exists in very insoluble forms ; hence the loss of even part of the small amount ex- isting in soluble condition, which is the only kind plants can use, is of vital significance to the gardener. The greatest loss of fertility by drainage and leaching is in the nitrogen. This is the most deficient of the three elements in a great many vegetable soils, and especially in those which have been cropped without much attention to fertilizing. It is also the most ex- pensive to supply, costing in commercial forms about twenty cents a pound. That much nitrogen is lost in this way is proved by experi- mental evidence from several sources. The most complete tests have been made by Lawes and Gilbert at Pothamsted, England. During 7 four years they found that the drainage thru 40 inches of soil from land receiving 15.7 tons of manure annually contained, on an average, 16.27 pounds of nitrogen per million pounds of water. Unfortunately, the amount of drainage from this land was not measured. From un- cropped land, however, the average drainage for 31 years was 14.73 inches, but it was not likely so great as this from the cropped land. Granting a drainage of 10 inches, which is their estimate from the or- dinary cropped land at Rothamsted, the above amount would result in a loss of 36.6 pounds of nitrogen per acre annually. The average an- nual rainfall at Rothamsted is 28.02 inches, while in Illinois it varies from 33.48 inches in the northern part to 42.19 inches in the southern part, the average for the state being 37.39 inches. 1 Thus the drainage from Illinois soils is likely much greater than from those at Rotham- sted. Furthermore, a greater quantity of manure than 15.7 tons per acre annually is often used on garden soils in Illinois. There is, there- fore, a probability of much greater loss of nitrogen from Illinois gar- den soils by drainage and leaching than occurred in the investigations described above. Losses of Organic Matter and Nitrogen by Oxidation Besides the losses of nitrogen in crop removals, in drainage waters, and by leaching, there is a large loss by oxidation of the humus of the soil, which is organic matter in an advanced stage of decay. The loss by this means can best be understood and appreciated by re- flecting how quickly a pile of weeds or other organic substance dis- appears. We say it “rots.’’ In chemical terms we call the process “oxidation,” and it consists in a combining of the substances com- posing the rubbish with the oxygen of the air. Most of the com- pounds formed are gases and pass off into the air. All dead plant and animal substances, including the humus of the soil, are subject to oxidation. The more contact there is with the air, other things being equal, the more rapidly oxidation proceeds. Humus contains from 90 to 95 percent of the nitrogen of the soil, and about one- sixteenth of the humus is nitrogen ; hence, anything which affects the humus affects the nitrogen also. The immense amount of tillage nec- essary in vegetable growing is constantly bringing the humus, nearly all of which is contained in the surface, or plowed soil, into contact with the air, about one-fifth of which is oxygen. Under these condi- tions the loss of humus and nitrogen by oxidation must proceed at a rapid rate. Furthermore, vegetable crops shade the ground but little, and the free movement of the air and the direct action of the sun aid Til. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. 86. 8 the process. It would be difficult to determine just how much loss occurs in this way, but that it is large there can be no doubt . 1 How to Check the Losses of Fertility The losses of fertility in crops sold from the land cannot be checked, and no one desires that they should be. Losses in drainage waters and by leaching, however, can be checked to a certain extent by proper methods. The land should be so handled that surface drain- age will be reduced to a minimum. On rolling land, plowing should be done in contour fashion, so that the furrows will extend crosswise of the slope rather than up and down it. In planting, the rows should also extend crosswise of the slope. It is a good plan to plow the land (unless it is hilly) in the fall, and to leave it “ rough ” thru the winter , 2 as this will lessen the surface drainage. When the land is not needed for a regular crop, it is far better to sow it to a cover crop than to leave it bare. Tliruout the grow- ing season, the soil organisms are constantly converting nitrogen into soluble forms by a process called nitrification ; and other plant food is becoming soluble because of other influences. Much of this plant food, as it becomes soluble, will be absorbed by a growing crop, but if the land is left bare, this plant food is largely lost by drainage and leaching. The Rothamsted drainage experiments cited show that a much larger amount of nitrogen existed in the drainage waters when the land was bare than when occupied by a growing crop. From an- other source , 3 it is reported that the loss of nitrogen was twenty times greater from bare land than from land occupied by rape or grass. These differences were no doubt due to the fact that the growing crops had absorbed most of the soluble nitrogen, while it was largely lost from the bare land by drainage and leaching. The fertility gath- ered in this way by cover crops will, of course, be returned to the soil when they are plowed under. Not a great deal of the loss of organic matter by oxidation can be prevented. Crops must be well cultivated ; however, there should lr rhese losses of fertility are partly balanced by small gains thru natural causes which should be mentioned, but which, so far as is known, are of no practical significance in solving the problem. Investigations from a number of sources indicate that probably from 5 to 10 pounds of nitrogen are brought to the earth in rain water annually. There are some indications that where legumes are grown the tubercle barteria continue to fix a small amount of nitrogen in the soil after the death of their hosts. Soil organisms called azotobacter fix some atmospheric nitrogen besides that collected by the legume bacteria. While the gain from these sources is a help, it is generally believed to be of little signifi- cance in solving the nitrogen problem. 2 There would be exception to this in the case of land to be devoted to early crops, which will dry out earlier if worked to a smooth surface after plowing in the fall. 3 Del. Exp. Sta. Bui. 60, p. 29. 9 be no more cultivation than is necessary to conserve moisture and de- stroy weeds. Cover crops, besides locking in their tissues soluble plant food, as mentioned above, will aid in checking oxidation by shading the soil and by hindering the movement of the air at the surface. Furthermore, when turned under, they will aid in replen- ishing the supply of organic matter in the soil. Probable Losses of Fertility Annually After all feasible precautions have been taken to check the losses of fertility from the soil, it will be found that large losses still occur. Minnesota experiments (Minnesota Bulletin 53) indicate that for 24.5 pounds of nitrogen removed annually per acre in the crops in con- tinuous wheat raising, a total of 171 pounds per acre was lost from the land. There were certain circumstances in these experiments which might admit of the figures being somewhat at error, but even granting some discrepancy, the results are very significant. After further tests by the same station (Minnesota Bulletin 94), it was con- cluded that from three to five times as much nitrogen is lost from the soil annually as is removed in crops. In Canada 1 Professor Shutt found that in twenty-two years, during which time six crops of wheat, four of barley, and three of oats were grown, with nine fallows inter- posed, practically one-third of the nitrogen content of the soil to a depth of eight inches was lost. There are no investigations known to the writer which indicate the loss of fertility in vegetable growing, and it is more or less hazard- ous to make an estimate. Taking everything into consideration, how- ever, it will certainly be within the facts to assume that where vege- tables are grown on an intensive basis, there is an average annual loss per acre of 200 pounds of nitrogen, 25 pounds of phosphorus, and 100 pounds of potassium. The stock of these elements, especially that of nitrogen and phosphorus, is none too large to begin with, even in our best soils. Plants can use each year only a very small part of that which is present, probably not over % to 1 percent. Hence, it re- quires only the simplest kind of reasoning to convince one that for the continued production of profitable crops, we must supply to the soil, in some way, as much fertility as is removed. If we are to in- crease the productivity we must supply, at least for a while, more than this amount. • SUPPLYING FERTILITY TO THE SOIL The supplying of fertility to the soil is not merely a matter of furnishing fertilizers carrying a sufficient amount of the elements to offset the needs, either in vegetable or any other kind of crop pro- Tleport of Dominion Experiment Farms, 1905. 10 duction. The amount and form of fertilizer used and the type and condition of the soil have an important bearing on the matter. This is especially true in vegetable gardening, where so many of the plants grown are peculiarly sensitive to surrounding conditions. Nitrogen and Organic Matter The nitrogen and organic matter are so closely associated that they can scarcely be discussed separately. Nitrogen has much to do with the vegetative growth or size of a plant. Organic matter has many offices in the soil. It gives ‘ ‘life ” to the soil; it improves the texture ; it increases the water-holding capacity ; it makes soils more resistant to drought; it darkens the color of light soils and makes them warmer in early spring; it promotes the growth of organisms engaged in making insoluble plant food soluble ; it contains from 90 to 95 percent of the nitrogen of the soil ; and thru its decay it renders mineral forms of fertility available for plant use. Its presence in large amounts is absolutely imperative if success is to be attained in the use of commercial fertilizers. The excessive use of commercial fertilizers on soils deficient in organic matter is responsible in a large degree for “soil sickness,” “malnutrition,” and the “physiological diseases” that are becoming so common in some trucking sections of the country. In view of the importance of organic matter and nitro- gen, and the fact that large amounts of these are lost from vegetable soils, as already explained, gardeners should direct especial attention toward maintaining a plentiful supply of both in the soil. Organic matter and nitrogen may be provided by plowing under manure, crop refuse, and crops grown for that purpose. Peat, muck, and other materials rich in organic matter may be used where available. In addition, nitrogen may be furnished by commercial fertilizers. MANURE, ITS CARE AND USE Manure is without doubt the best general fertilizer for vegetable crops, tho it can usually be supplemented profitably by such fertilizers as bone meal, rock phosphate, and potassium sulfate. A ton of ordi- nary barnyard manure contains about 10 pounds of nitrogen, 3 pounds of phosphorus, and 8 pounds of potassium. Its composition varies much, according to its moisture* content and to the kind of animals and the feed they receive. Besides the fertilizing elements, manure supplies a large amount of the very best kind of organic matter. A small quan- tity of actively decaying organic matter, as is furnished in manure, is often more effective in the soil than a much greater amount of older and less active organic matter. Manure also exerts a marked stimulat- ing influence on soils at times. There are instances on record in which the increase alone in the yields caused by manure contained mere of 11 certain elements than was supplied by the manure. Such occurrences are no doubt due to its effect in releasing insoluble forms of fertility in the soil. Manure, therefore, is valuable both for the elements it carries and for its favorable physical and chemical effects. While every gardener recognizes the value of manure, the proper care of it is not always understood. The waste of manures in vege- table growing is tremendous. It is a common practice to haul manure from cars or from the city and to place it in great piles along the roadside or in fields, leaving it there for weeks ; to allow it to lie on the soil for a long time before plowing it under ; and to throw it out in the barnyard to lie over winter. These practices are all very waste- ful and should be avoided. The Ohio Experiment Station 1 found that in three months (from January to April) 38.75 percent of the organic matter, 30.29 percent of the nitrogen, 23.76 percent of the phosphorus, and 58.84 percent of the potassium were lost from manure piaced in flat piles in the barnyard. At the Maryland Station 2 eighty tons of manure allowed to lie in an uncovered pile were reduced to 27 tons at the end of the year’s time. At the New York Cornell Sta- tion 4000 pounds of horse manure decreased to 1770 pouncte from April 25 to September 22, and its fertilizing elements decreased in value during the same time from $5.48 to $2.03. In another Cornell test lasting six months, exposed manure lost 56 percent in weight of dry matter and 43 percent in plant-food value. In Canada, two tons of manure, containing 1938 pounds of organic matter, were exposed from April 29 to August 29, — four months. The organic matter was reduced during that time to 655 pounds, and the nitrogen content decreased from 48.1 pounds to 27.7 pounds. Thus it is seen that manure deteriorates rapidly under improper methods of management. Fortunately, most of this loss can be pre- vented. Broadly speaking, the greatest proportion of fertility is con- served when the manure is applied in the freshest condition possible and plowed under immediately. It would be unwise, however, to use fresh manure in large quantities just before planting in spring or summer. The ideal method is to apply and plow under all manure in the fall, for it will then rot before spring and no evil results are likely to follow. But it is rarely possible to follow this plan exclu- sively, for in practical market gardening, manure must be secured when available, which may be at any time of the year. The horse manure produced at home should not be allowed to ac- cumulate in the stalls for longer than a few days at a time. Prefera- bly it should be applied as soon as possible after being made and should be plowed under at the first opportunity. At times when the land is occupied by growing crops, the manure is best conserved by placing 1 Ohio Exp. Sta. Bui. 183, . p. 205. 2 Md. Exp. Sta. Bui. 122, p. 137. 12 it under cover or in a basin or pit in the barnyard. If, in addition, it can be firmly packed, and saturated with water occasionally, the losses will be reduced to the minimum under the circumstances. It is well to apply and plow under such manure as soon as possible. Manure obtained during the winter should not be stored in large piles. Neither should it be dropped in small piles about the fields, as is so often done. It is best to broadcast it as hauled. Preferably, it should be used on land that is not to be planted to early spring crops, for manure applied during winter often greatly interferes with the drying out and warming of the soil in the spring and delays the planting. Land intended for early crops should be manured in the fall and plowed in narrow ‘ ‘ lands, ” in ridge fashion. It is also well Fig. 1. — Manure Left Lying by the Roadside — a Too Common Practice in Southern Illinois to use manure secured in winter on level rather than on rolling lands, for less loss by drainage will then occur. Rolling lands are usually best treated by manuring and plowing in the fall. It often becomes necessary, because of contracts and other reasons, to haul manure during the summer. Its handling at this time is an important matter, and one in which many costly mistakes are made. If possible, the manure should be applied to a vacant area not needed for another crop, and plowed under immediately. But all the land is sometimes occupied with crops, and some other disposition must be made. The best way to treat such manure is to place it in flat piles not over three or four feet in depth, pack it down thoroly, and soak it with water every week or two. Crop remains and other refuse are often mixed with the manure in composting. Sometimes, soil and 13 manure are placed in alternate layers. These treatments aid in check- ing fermentation and probably effect a saving in the manure. In traveling thru the trucking district of southern Illinois, one often sees great piles of manure along the roadside. It is placed there as hauled from the cars, usually when the roads are bad or during summer when the land is occupied. Sometimes, when the hauling distance is great, it is unloaded a short distance from town in order to empty the car in the required time. But the significant point is that it is often left in such places for weeks. This is a very wasteful practice and should be avoided when at all possible. If the manure cannot be hauled directly to the field and spread out, it should be piled inside the field in preference to unloading it on the roadside. If it must be placed on the roadside, it should be left there for the short- est time possible. When the supply of manure is limited, the question arises as to how to make the best use of the amount at hand. This is often the case the first two or three years vegetables are being grown on a piece of land, and before there has been sufficient time to build it up in fertility. In such cases, better results as a whole will ordinarily be secured by spreading the manure out thinly over a relatively large area than by applying it heavily to a small patch. With some crops, chief among which are melons and cucumbers, the manure can be made to reach much further by applying it under the hills. In ex- periments conducted by this station 1 with muskmelons in southern. Illinois, larger yields were obtained from 4.5 tons per acre of rotted manure applied under the hills than from 16.5 tons applied broad- cast before plowing. It should be emphasized that manure used in this way should be thoroly rotted, for undecomposed manure applied under hills almost invariably causes injury by its “ burning’ ’ effect. There may be exception to this, however, during a cool, moist season. Manure used under hills should always be thoroly compacted before planting the crop. The composting of manure is such a common practice among vege- table growers that it warrants specific attention. Many of the older publications on vegetable gardening place great emphasis on the super- iority of composted manure, and we find many gardeners composting all or nearly all of the manure used. The process consists in placing the manure in flat-topped piles three or four feet in depth (just deep enough to prevent heavy rains from soaking thru and leaching out the plant food), and forking it over every week or two. Water is often used in addition. The result is that fermentation is greatly increased for a time, and that a uniform degree of decay is secured thruout the pile. The rotted manure obtained by 1 this treatment is very valuable for hotbed and greenhouse work and for use under the hills of some TIL Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. 155. 14 ^rops in the field, and it may be applied during spring and summer with less danger of injury than fresh manure. One should bear in mind, however, that even with the best management a large loss of fertilizing value occurs in composting, as already shown. It is no doubt advisable for gardeners to compost sufficient manure (and it is best to use manure secured during summer, since this is the most dif- ficult to conserve) to meet their needs for the purposes above men- tioned, for even tho quite a loss of plant food occurs, nothing can take its place for such work. From the standpoint of the most economic use of the fertilizer at hand, however, composting is very wasteful of plant food and should be avoided as a general practice. THE USE OF CROP REFUSE AND COVER CROPS Manure is without doubt the best general fertilizer for the vege- table grower; and where it can be obtained at a reasonable figure, it is best to depend chiefly upon it, tho in any case its value may usually Fig. 2. — The Disk-harrow is a Useful Implement for Cutting Up Crop Ee- mains Preparatory to Plowing Them Under be enhanced by the use of the proper commercial fertilizers in con- junction, as will be described later. In intensive market gardening, where the land is nearly always high in value and must be occupied by money crops thruout the growing season, manure is also one of the cheapest sources of fertility. However, in less intensive work, as in truck farming, it is not always feasible to obtain a sufficient amount of manure to meet the needs, and it becomes necessary to turn to other sources for the nitrogen and organic matter requirements. Fortu- nately, there are other ways by which these may be secured. 15 Many gardeners remove crop remains and weeds from the land or burn them. Whatever may be said in favor of these methods from other standpoints, they are bad procedure from the fertility stand- point. All the nitrogen and organic matter contained in the growth is lost to the soil by either method. Unless it is absolutely necessary, in order to control some serious disease, injurious insect, or weed, crop refuse and weed growth should never be removed from the land. Instead, they should be plowed into the soil, and in such cases it is well to plow early in the fall, in order that the vegetation will have opportunity to rot before spring. In the case of tomato vines, cab- bage stumps, and other refuse which rots slowly in the soil, it is better to mix them with manure and compost them until disintegrated, than to burn them or cast them into a ditch. Fig. 3. — Weeds Can Sometimes Be Used as a Source of Organic Matter The amount of organic matter and nitrogen obtainable from crop refuse and weeds (in good gardening) is at best small, and it is usu- ally necessary, where the manure supply is limited, to grow cover crops in addition in order to maintain the supply of humus in the soil. Many gardeners go to great trouble and expense in hauling manure, and neglect splendid opportunities to grow cover crops. With a little attention in this direction they could easily make possible the use of less manure. The nature of the gardening business makes the use of cover crops an extremely practicable and inexpensive method of maintaining the supply of organic matter in the soil. Many of the reg- ular crops will admit of cover crops being sown at the time of their last 16 cultivation, while others mature early enough in the season to allow plenty of time for growing a cover crop afterward. There are a number of cover crops well adapted for growth in connection with vegetables in Illinois. Perhaps the most important of these are oats, rape, rye, cowpeas, soybeans, and hairy sketch. From the standpoint of their value as cover crops these are divided into two classes, leguminous and non-leguminous. Oats, rape, and rye are non-leguminous crops, and in this con- nection are valuable only for the organic matter they furnish. Oats grow rapidly, but of course die with the first freeze, and should there- Fig. 4. — Cowpea Foot Showing Nodules in Which Live the Nitrogen- gathering Bacteria 17 fore be planted early enough to permit them to make a good growth. Rape requires practically the same conditions as oats. It is best to plow under both of these crops as soon as destroyed by frost. Rye possesses certain advantages which make it a valuable cover crop. It may be sown later than any of those mentioned, making a fair growth when planted as late as October 1 to 15. It thrives even on poor soils, and it lives thru the winter without difficulty. When rye is used for soil improvement, it should be turned under in early spring, for it robs the soil of moisture if allowed to remain too long and in addition locks in its tissues plant food that will not again be available for plant use until the vegetation has rotted. Cowpeas, soybeans, and hairy vetch 1 are legumes. These crops not only furnish organic matter when turned under, but they are capable of adding nitrogen also. Thru bacteria living in nodules on their roots (see Fig. 4) they are capable of appropriating free nitro- gen from the air, of which about 75 percent is nitrogen. They are, therefore, more desirable cover crops than oats, rape, and rye when they can be grown. The amounts of organic matter and nitrogen contained in crops of these legumes are shown by tests conducted at the Delaware and New York Cornell Experiment Stations. In the Delaware tests, sowings of these three legumes, among others, were made on July 22. Table 2 shows the amounts of dry matter and nitrogen contained in the growth per acre in November of the same year. The tests show that soybeans made practically twice as much growth and contained twice as much nitrogen as cowpeas. Vetch made less than half as much organic matter as soybeans, but contained nearly as much nitrogen, since it was richer in that element than the soybeans, Table 2. — Dry Matter and Nitrogen in Growth per Acre: 1 Delaware Experiments (Expressed in pounds) •Legume Dry matter Nitrogen In tops In roots In tops and roots Soybeans 6790 756 140.2 Cowpeas 3718 310 69.5 Hairy vetch 3064 600 121.2 Compiled from Del. Exp. Sta. Bui. 60. The Cornell tests include comparisons of cowpeas and vetch only. The following amounts of dry matter and nitrogen were contained in the growth per acre from seedage on July 18, the samples being taken November 10. Naturally, the conclusions were that vetch was the better crop to grow for soil improvement purposes. 1 Crimson clover is an admirable cover crop in some parts of tne country, but unfortunately this plant cannot withstand the severe winters in Illinois. 18 Table 3. — Dry Matter and Nitrogen in Growth per Acre: Cornell Experiments 1 (Expressed in pounds) Legume Dry matter Nitrogen In tops In roots In tops and roots Hairy vetch 6824 567 256.1 Cowpeas 2622 454 52.6 Compiled from N. Y. Cornell Exp. Sta. Bui. 198. The results obtained in the two places are not consistent, but the differences are no doubt due to differences in soil. At any rate, the results from both places serve to show that these legumes are capable of supplying large amounts of organic matter and nitrogen to the soil. Which of the three is the best to grow will no doubt be deter- mined largely by local conditions. There are, however, some points in favor of vetch which are not brought out by the above figures. It should be noted that in both cases the samples of all the crops were taken in the fall. But vetch lives thru the winter and makes some growth during mild periods and in early spring before it is turned under, while cowpeas and soy- beans die in the fall with the first hard frost. Thus, in the above tests, cowpeas and soybeans had completed their growth and ceased opera- tions, while vetch had not. Another point in favor of vetch is that it is better adapted for sowing between many vegetable crops before the last cultivation, for it grows slowly at the start, and therefore offers little, if any, competition before the crop reaches maturity. Furthermore, vetch will stand the tramping necessary in harvesting the regular crop. Everything considered, it appears that hairy vetch is one of the very best crops which can be grown in connection with vegetables in Illinois for soil improvement. The hairy vetch (Vicia villosa) is the only one that will live thru the winter, and it is there- fore the only one which should be planted in this state. The one dis- couraging feature about the use of vetch is the high price of the seed. It is impossible to draw any direct conclusions as to whether cow- peas or soybeans are the better. Where soybeans will grow well, they are the better crop of the two, for they make a larger growth, bear about ten bushels more seed to the acre, and are not so injured by light frosts as cowpeas. On soils fairly rich to begin with, and in the north- ern half of the state, soybeans are no doubt the better crop to grow. Ebony is a good variety for the southern part of the state, and Medium Yellow (also called Iota San) for the northern part. Whippoorwill and New Era are good varieties of cowpeas. Legumes do not secure all the nitrogen they contain from the air, but they secure a larger percentage when the soil is poor in that ele- ment than when it is rich in it. Cowpeas appear to be able to obtain 19 as much as 73 percent of their nitrogen from the air under certain conditions, according to tests made by this station. 1 Soybeans do not appear capable of appropriating such a large percentage. 2 It may be Fig. 5. — Whippoorwill Cowpeas safely assumed that, as a rule, legumes secure from one-third to two- thirds of their nitrogen from the air under favorable conditions. 1 I11. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. 94. 2 Wis. Exp. Sta. Rpt., 1907. 20 The three crops mentioned — cowpeas, soybeans, and hairy vetch— seem capable of appropriating some nitrogen from the air when grown in soils which contain some acid, but they make a distinctly better growth, and undoubtedly collect more nitrogen, in soils which have been limed. The soil must be well inoculated with the proper bacteria if legumes are to accomplish the best results in gathering nitrogen. Fre- quently the large seeds of those mentioned have sufficient bacteria clinging to them for this purpose; but it is wise, when a legume is being grown on the land for the first time, to introduce these organ- isms artificially. This may be readily accomplished by securing soil from an area which has recently grown a well-inoculated crop of the legume (indicated by an abundance of nodules on the roots), and scattering it over the land to be planted. It is well to do this on a cloudy day, and to harrow or disk the land as soon as possible after the application, for the bacteria are quickly killed by the sun. It is generally held that legumes contain as large a percentage of nitrogen when they are in full bloom as they ever will contain. So far as their nitrogen-gathering power is concerned, therefore, it is as well to turn them under at this time as at any other. No disad- vantage results, however, from allowing them to grow longer. The amount of nitrogen which legumes can collect from the air depends, therefore, upon the legume used, the amount of growth made, the amount of nitrogen in the soil, the character of the soil, — whether acid or neutral, — inoculation with the proper bacteria, and the time the crops are plowed under. Under favorable conditions, the legumes which might be grown in connection with vegetables (if all the growth is plowed under) could probably be depended upon to add to the soil from 50 to 100 pounds of nitrogen per acre in a season. In addi- tion they will add large amounts of organic matter. Thus it will be seen that these crops are of very great value to the gardener in main- taining the high state of fertility so necessary for successful vegetable growing. THE USE OF COMMERCIAL FORMS OF NITROGEN Besides using liberal quantities of manure and paying close at- tention to crop refuse and cover crops, the gardener will often find commercial forms of nitrogen profitable. The following are among those in most common use. Table 4. — Important Commercial Forms of Nitrogen Pounds nitrogen 1 per ton Cost per ton Cost per pound Nitrate of soda 310 $60.00 $ .193 Dried blood 280 54.50 .194 Sulfate of ammonia 400 75.00 .187 1 The amount of nitrogen varies, of course, with the grade. 21 Generally speaking, nitrate of soda is the most desirable form of commercial nitrogen to nse. In tests by Voorhees 1 it was found that a number of plants recovered from the soil, on an average, 62.09 per- cent of the nitrogen applied in nitrate of soda, 43.26 percent of that applied in sulfate of ammonia, and 40 percent of that applied in dried blood. Several other prominent investigators report similar re- sults. These figures, besides favoring nitrate of soda, show that a con- siderable part of the nitrogen applied in commercial forms is never recovered by the crop. Another advantage of nitrate of soda not possessed by other com- mercial forms of nitrogen is that it tends to correct the acidity of the soil. While its help in this direction is not great, it is well to know that its influence is on the right side. Marked benefit commonly follows the use of nitrate of soda early in the spring in connection with very early crops. This is due to the fact that plants can make use of nitrogen in nitrate form immedi- ately, and that there is little nitrate nitrogen in the soil at this time of the year. The soil organisms engaged in changing organic and other forms of nitrogen to soluble or nitrate form are practically in- active at the soil temperatures commonly prevailing in early spring. Below 50° F. their action is practically at a standstill, but their ac- tivity increases with the temperature up to about 100° F. Thus, little nitrogen is becoming available during early spring, and, as practi- cally all of the small amount existing in the soil in soluble condition the fall before has been lost by drainage and leaching during the winter, nitrate of soda will supply this element in proper form at a time when plants cannot obtain a sufficient amount of it from other sources for the best growth. Nitrate of soda is often applied in relatively large amounts for general fertility purposes before planting the crops, but it is better economy to use this form for top dressing to the growing plants. It is instrumental in hastening the development and in increasing the size of the specimens in certain crops. In New Jersey 2 it was found that in soil already very fertile, and to which liberal amounts of complete commercial fertilizer were applied in addition, nitrate of soda applied at intervals to the growing crops caused very marked increases in the yields of cabbage, celery, tomatoes, turnips, and pep- pers. Experiments conducted by this station, at Urbana, on brown silt loam heavily manured each year but receiving no other fertilizer, indicate that nitrate of soda may be used with benefit on early cab- bage, cauliflower, radishes, beets, turnips, and spinach. Tests made in several places indicate that lettuce is markedly improved by the nitrate except when the soil has received heavy applications of manure. Fresh 1 N. J. Exp. Sta. Bui. 221. 2 N. J. Exp. Sta; Bui. 157. 22 horse manure contains organisms which decompose nitrates and con- vert their nitrogen to gaseous forms. It is advisable, therefore, to avoid its use in large quantities immediately before planting when nitrate of soda is to be used for top-dressing purposes. In order to secure the best results from nitrate of soda, it should be applied to the growing plants in from two to four top dressings, depending upon the length of the growing season of the crop treated. The first application should be made when the plants are well started, and succeeding applications should be made at intervals of about ten days to two weeks. From 80 to 100 pounds per acre should be used each time. The nitrate should be ground or pounded into small parti- cles. To prevent “burning” the leaves of the plants, it is best to apply it in such a way that it does not come into direct contact with the foli- age. There are machines on the market made especially for handling this fertilizer; they apply it in drills and cover it at one passage. A very satisfactory way to use the nitrate on a small scale is to scatter it about the plants by hand. Some report success from broadcasting the nitrate over the patch when the foliage is completely dry, claim- ing that the particles bounce off the plants. Others state that they distribute it during a rain and that the nitrate washes off before any damage has resulted. Where an overhead system of irrigation is at hand, two additional methods present themselves. One is to apply the nitrate broadcast and irrigate immediately; the other is to dis- solve it in a storage tank and apply it directly thru the system. One should finish with clear water when using the latter method. The use of the irrigation system, however, is not always practicable, since it is sometimes not advisable to irrigate at the time one wishes to apply the fertilizer. Whatever the method of application, nitrate of soda should be worked into the soil as soon as possible. It is far better to use the nitrate in small amounts at intervals, as explained, than to apply the full amount at one time early in the season. Applied in the latter fashion there would not only be danger of injury to the plants, but there would likely be an excessive waste of the nitrate as well, for nitrate of soda is very soluble and much of it would be lost by drainage and leaching before it could be utilized by the plants. In the case of some crops, particularly those which produce fruit, it is usually not advisable to continue the application of nitrate of soda until too near the time of maturity, for it may con- tinue to stimulate vine growth at the expense of the fruit. Dried blood is probably the best form of commercial nitrogen to use when it is desired to make relatively heavy applications before planting the crops. It is not likely to be injurious to plants when used in this way, and its nitrogen, which exists in organic form, is not so subject to loss by drainage and leaching as that in nitrate of soda. Again, thru the action of the soil organisms, its nitrogen is 23 changed to nitrate form gradually and can be utilized by the growing plants thruout a longer period. Sulfate of ammonia has become low enough in price for consid- eration as a fertilizer only within late years, and not a great deal is known about its use. Some persons have employed it with success, while others make very unfavorable reports. It seems essential that the soil contain plenty of lime for success with this form of nitrogen. In view of the conflicting information concerning its effect, it is well for gardeners to proceed cautiously with its use, for the present at least. Phosphorus Applications of phosphorus do not usually prove of very great value until the soil has been fairly well built up in organic matter and nitrogen. Nearly all of our soils are low in phosphorus content ; manure furnishes this element in relatively small proportions; and. since it cannot be obtained from the air, as in the case of nitrogen, we must turn to other sources for our supply. Phosphorus appears to have an intimate relation with life itself, for it is found in very considerable amounts in the reproductive cells of plants and animals. It plays an important part in the development of fruits and seeds. The principal commercial forms of this element, are given in Table 5. Table 5. — Important Forms of Phosphorus Pounds phosphorus per ton Cost per ton Approximate cost per pound Acid phosphate 125 $15.00 $ .12 Steamed bone meal 250 25.00 .10 Rock phosphate 250 7.00 .03 For the quickest results, acid phosphate is the best form to use, for it supplies phosphorus in more soluble condition than the other two forms mentioned. However, it is also the most expensive, and it adds acidity to the soil. While its use may be more justifiable in vegetable growing than in general farming, it should be employed with caution. Steamed bone meal is a much safer form, and furnishes phosphorus somewhat more cheaply as well, and in a form which plants can use almost as quickly as that in acid phosphate. Bone meal tends to correct soil acidity, but its influence in this direction cannot be great because of the relatively small amount used. Besides the phosphorus it contains, steamed bone meal also carries about twenty pounds of nitrogen to the ton. As a source of phosphorus, it is preferable to raw bone meal. The above forms of phosphorus are valuable for use where im- mediate results are desired, but if the gardener will provide for his phosphorus needs a year or two in advance, he may make use of rock 24 phosphate, which supplies the element far more inexpensively than either acid phosphate or bone meal. The chief requirement for success with this form of phosphorus is a large amount of actively decaying organic matter in the soil. The large amounts of decaying organic matter and manure used by vegetable growers, therefore, can be made of very great service in changing the insoluble phosphorus in rock phosphate to soluble forms. The beneficial effects occurring two or three years after the application of rock phosphate, especially where it can be applied in connection with large amounts of actively de- caying organic matter, are so well established that no detailed dis- cussion nor data need be presented on this point. There is evidence to indicate that some of our vegetables are able to utilize phosphorus from rock phosphate almost immediately. To- mato experiments were conducted by this station 1 in Union county, for five years. The data presented in Table 6 show the average annual re- sults secured from supplementing manure with rock phosphate, as compared with other treatments. Table 6. — Fertilizer Experiments with Tomatoes: Union County, Illinois Treatment : acre basis Pounds of market- able fruit per plant Number of crates per acre increase over check Net profit per acre over check Check Manure, 10 tons 2.68 3.16 58 $10.79 Manure and 545 pounds bone meal 3.52 94 12.69 Manure and 545 pounds rock phosphate 3.72 122 33.55 In these experiments the tomatoes were grown on different . land each of the five seasons; hence the gains made were derived entirely from an immediate use of the fertilizer. The results show that rock phosphate in connection with manure caused a larger yield of fruit than a similar quantity of bone meal used in the same way, and it gave a very much greater net profit because of the lower cost of the phosphorus. The Department of Agronomy of this station reports that in ex- periments conducted with potatoes at Dixon and Mt. Morris, Illinois, during the season of 1913, there were marked increases in yield where rock phosphate was used in addition to manure and lime. In these cases the materials were all applied in the fall of 1912. It is very likely that some other vegetable crops besides tomatoes and potatoes can make immediate use of the phosphorus in rock phos- phate, but it is probable that many of them would not be markedly benefited by it the first year. For the majority of vegetable crops it would in all probability be advisable to use acid phosphate or steamed Til. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. 144. 25 bone meal for an immediate source of phosphorus and to apply at the same time the much cheaper rock phosphate for the needs two or three years hence. Where it is believed that the phosphorus content of the soil is low, and this is usually the case, the first application should consist of about one ton of rock phosphate per acre. If this is followed by applications of 1000 pounds per acre every two years, the phosphorus needs of vegetable crops will be met and the soil will gradually grow richer in this element. It is a very good practice to apply rock phosphate in connection with manure or crops turned un- der for soiling purposes. Potassium Potassium is abundant in all Illinois soils except in some small areas of peat and sand lands, tho practically all of it exists in very insoluble form. Manure and organic matter are the most instrumental agencies in rendering these insoluble forms soluble, and, except in the peat and sand soils referred to, vegetables will ordinarily obtain sufficient amounts of potassium from that existing in the soil for good growth. However, applications of potassiums often prove profit- able. This element is used in considerable proportions by root crops, and, as a rule, may be employed more profitably with them than with other crops. Table 7 shows the principal forms of potassium which may be used. Table 7. — Important Forms of Potassium Pounds potassium per ton Cost per ton Cost per pound Muriate of potash 850 $50.00 $ .06 Sulfate of potash 850 55.00 .065 Kainit 200 13.00 .065 Wood ashes 100 7.00 .07 Sulfate of potash is probably the most satisfactory form of po- tassium for general use. The majority of investigations reported favor this form, tho some of them favor the muriate as strongly. The kind of crop grown appears to make some difference; some of them succeed better with sulfate of potash while others are able to use the muriate to better effect. The large quantity of chlorids carried by the muriate is injurious to some plants, especially when applied im- mediately before planting. This is also true of kainit. Another ob- jection to kainit is the high percentage of foreign substances, for which unnecessary expense must be incurred in the freight and hand- ling. Wood ashes are an extremely good form of potassium, and they also contain a large percentage of lime. It is unfortunate that their 26 supply is limited. If any are produced at home, they should be kept under cover until they can be applied and immediately worked into the soil; for when exposed in the open, the potassium content is quickly reduced by leaching. Buying wood ashes in preference to sulfate or muriate of potash will not pay unless the ashes can be bought at a lower figure than that named in Table 7. The amount of potassium they contain varies from about 3 to 8 percent, and in buying them due consideration should be paid to this point. It should be mentioned in this connection that coal ashes have no value as a fertilizer. Whether or not it will pay gardeners in Illinois to use commer- cial forms of potassium must be determined largely by local condi- tions. Certainly this element will not give the increases in this state (except in the peat and sand soils mentioned, where it commonly gives large gains) that it gives in some other sections of the country, and it is no doubt best for gardeners to test it on a small scale before investing heavily in it. If applications seem profitable, an amount of fertilizer supplying about 100 pounds of potassium per acre an- nually will suffice under ordinary circumstances. Potassium sulfate or wood ashes should be applied in the spring after plowing, and harrowed into the soil thoroly before planting the crop. If muriate of potash or kainit is used, it will be better, as a rule, to apply it the preceding fall. Limestone Besides having a sufficient stock of the limiting elements and or- ganic matter in the soil, it is necessary, for the best growth of nearly all vegetables, that the soil be free from acid. This condition is best imparted by the application of ground limestone, which costs from $1 to $1.50 per ton delivered in almost any part of Illinois. The presence of lime in the soil is directly beneficial to most vegetables; it is necessary for the welfare of soil organisms engaged in changing tfther forms of nitrogen to nitrate form; and it is essential for the best results with legumes. Practically all vegetables grow best in a limed soil. Potatoes, sweet potatoes, sweet corn, and turnips appear capable of growing fairly well in soils containing some acid, tho they are usually bene- fited by applications of limestone to a greater or less extent. Carrots seem to grow equally well in limed or acid soils. Watermelons are injured by liming. It should be mentioned in this connection that potato scab is fa- vored in its development by liming. This is because the disease flour- ishes best in an alkaline condition of the soil, while an acid soil checks its development. In contrast to this, the club root of cabbage, a serious disease in some places, is checked by lime ; in fact, the most sat- isfactory method of treatment known for it is the application of lime. 27 As a general proposition, the application of limestone in vege- table growing is a profitable practice, unless, of course, the gardener specializes on such crops as carrots or watermelons. If the soil has received no lime before, about t,wo tons per acre should be applied the first time ; after that one ton every two or three years will usually suffice, except in some of the strongly acid soils in the southern part of the state. There are a number of forms of lime, but the most satisfactory for general use is ground natural limestone. Besides being one of the safest forms, it is one of the lowest in price. Air-slaked lime may often be secured, especially near lime kilns, for a lower figure than the ground limestone. This is also a satisfactory form. Un- slaked or lump lime is undesirable, being very destructive to the or- ganic matter of the soil. Drainage and Crop Rotation Good drainage and proper crop rotation are essential factors in the production of any crop, however well the land may be fertilized. If the land is not naturally well drained, it should be tile drained. Even on rolling land, tile drainage often proves highly beneficial. An adequate system of crop rotation is as necessary in vegetable growing as in general farming. Continuous planting to the same crop, or to the same class of crops, is not only unwise practice from the fertility standpoint, but it allows serious diseases and insects to become estab- lished in the soil as well. Gardeners should so arrange their planting that the same crop or class of crops does not occupy a given area more than once in three or four years. SUMMARY The fertility problem in vegetable growing is one of the most important of the many difficulties confronting the gardener. The general principles underlying the fertilizing of farm and vegetable crops are the same, tho on account of the wide differences in the two branches of agriculture, there are marked differences with respect to the specific manner and degree of their application. Vegetable crops remove large amounts of fertility from the soil, and comparatively large losses occur also thru drainage and leaching and by oxidation of the nitrogen and organic matter. These latter losses may be checked to a certain extent by careful methods, but even with the best attention there will still be large losses. Hence, the maintenance of the highly fertile condition necessary for successful vegetable production is not a simple matter. The organic matter content of the soil can be maintained by plowing under manure, crop refuse, and cover crops. Nitrogen can 28 be furnished by manure, by leguminous crops, and by the various commercial forms of this element. Manure is without a doubt the best general source of fertility for the vegetable grower, tho it is somewhat low in content of the mineral elements. Large losses in manure occur thru improper handling, and its proper treatment un- der the circumstances met with in practical vegetable gardening is a rather difficult problem, and one in which many serious mistakes are made. It is practicable for gardeners to utilize cover crops as a source of organic matter. If legumes, such as cowpeas, soybeans, and hairy vetch, are grown, they will serve as sources of nitrogen also. Commercial forms of nitrogen, even tho expensive, can often be used with profit by the vegetable grower. Nitrate of soda appears to be the most satisfactory form when used in the right way. On ac- count of its soluble condition and the fact that plants can use it directly, it is particularly helpful in forcing the growth of early spring crops. However, it must be applied in proper amounts, at proper times, and by proper methods, or serious harm to the plants will almost certainly result. Since the amount of phosphorus contained in most soils is small, and since manure is low in that element, applications of some commer- cial form usually prove profitable. For immediate results, acid phos- phate and steamed bone meal are the best forms to use, but if the gardener will provide for his needs two or three years in advance, he can employ the very much cheaper raw rock phosphate. The phos- phorus in this form is insoluble, but the large amounts of manure, crop refuse, and cover crops ordinarily plowed under in vegetable growing will be instrumental in changing it to soluble forms. There are even some experiments on record which indicate that certain vege- table crops give marked increases in yields the season immediately following its application. Potassium is abundant in nearly all Illinois soils, but applications of it sometimes prove profitable. Sulfate of potash appears to be the most satisfactory form for general use, tho muriate of potash seems to give equally good results with some crops. Unleached wood ashes are a most satisfactory form of potassium, but unfortunately the sup- ply is limited. Lime benefits practically all vegetable crops and should be used in liberal amounts by gardeners. Ground limestone is the cheapest form and one of the most satisfactory as well. Finally, the land should be well drained, either naturally or arti- ficially, and an adequate system of crop rotation should be practiced. The factors mentioned each bear an important relation to the welfare of the plant. It is only after all of them have received proper attention that maximum crops of high-quality vegetables can be pro- duced. UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Agricultural Experiment Station CIRCULAR No. 183 A Bibliography of Recent Literature Concerning Plant-Disease Prevention By Charles C. Rees and Wallace Macfarlane And A Bibliography of Non-Parasitic Diseases of Plants By Cyrus W. Lantz URBANA, ILLINOIS, MAY, 1915 A Bibliography of Recent Literature Concerning Plant-Disease Prevention BY Charles C. Rees and Wallace Macfarlane Preface In assembling this bibliography, an attempt has been made to include refer- ences to every article relating to plant diseases in which control measures are given, the abstract of which has appeared in the Experiment Station Record during the years 1909-14 inclusive. The classification of the citations, about a thousand in number, has been made under headings of the various hosts arranged in alphabetical order. Under each host the references have been arranged alphabetically according to the common name of the disease when given. No attempt has been made to supply these names, and where they were missing the references are listed under the generic name of the fungus ; for instance, an article discussing Pleospora graminea, which gave no common name to the disease, is listed under Pleospora. In every case where the generic name of the fungus was given, or where it could be supplied with reasonable certainty, it is included in parentheses after the common name of the disease. In many instances authors in discussing a disease caused by a certain fungus gave to the disease different common names; for instance, the disease of Irish potato caused by the fungus Synchy- trium endobiotica was found referred to by different authors as wart, canker, black canker, and black scab. In such cases it was necessary- to select the name most generally accepted and list the various references thereunder. Under each disease the citations have been placed in alphabetical order according to the name of the author. In order to include as many pertinent references as possible, a general host classification under the headings of citrus fruits, field crops, et cetera, has also been employed. In addition to this there appears a set of references pertaining to fungicides. Each article includes reference to the original article and to the Experiment Station Record in which the article was found abstracted. The latter reference, in which the first number indicates the volume and the second the page, is placed in parentheses. A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RECENT LITERATURE CONCERNING PLANT-DISEASE PREVENTION By CHARLES C. REES, Assistant in Floricultural Pathology Re- search, and WALLACE MACFARLANE, Fellow in Agronomy 1 ACACIA Root Disease ( Armillaria-F omes ) Petch, T. Circs, and Agr. Jour. Roy. Bot. Gard., Ceylon, 5 (1910), 10, 89. (25, 47) Uproot and burn the diseased trees. ALFALFA Diseases, General Stewart, F. C., French, G. T., and Wilson, J. K. N. Y. (Geneva) Sta. Bui. 305. (20, 846) Blight ( Pseudomonas ) Sackett, W. G. Colo. Sta. Bui. 158. (23, 546) Introduce resistant varieties that will stand late spring frosts. Clip off frosted alfalfa as soon as danger of frost is passed, which will afford an early growth of a new cutting. Club Root ( Urophlyctis ) Korff, G. Prakt. Bl. Pflanzenbau u. Schutz, n. ser., 7 (1909), 21, 157. (23, 248) Salmon, E. S. Jour. Southeast Agr. Col. Wye, 1907, 16, 267. (20, 845) Rust ( Uromyces ) Pam mel, L. H., and King, C. M. Ia. Sta. Bui. 131. (27, 445) Stem Rot ( Rhizoctonia ) Laurer, G. Illus. Landw. Ztg., 30 (1910), 46, 439. (23, 741) Liquid manure, quick- lime, and creosol recommended. 1 Working under the direction of Dr. F. L. Stevens, Professor of Plant Pathology, University of Illinois. ( 3 ) 4 ALMOND Diseases, General Arnaud, G. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 30 (1909), 15, 451. (21, 245) APPLE Diseases, General Brooks, C. N. H. Sta. Bui. 144. (22, 747) McCormack, E. F. Ann. Rpt. State Ent. Ind., 3 (1909-10), 128. (25, 45) Morse, W. J., and Lewis, C. E. Me. Sta. Bui. 185. (24, 745) Prillieux, E. Bui. Soc. Nat. Agr. France, 68 (1908), 5, 286. (20, 453) Reed, H. S., Cooley, J. S., and Rogers, J. T. Va. Sta. Bui. 195. (27, 152) Stevens, F. L. N. C. Sta. Bui. 206. (23, 453) Stewart, F. C. West N. Y. Hort. Soc. Proc., 56 (1911), 61. (26, 55) Keep trees in vigor- ous condition and spray regularly and thoroly. Swingle, D. B. Mont. Sta. Circ. 37. (31, 644) Anthracnose ( Glooosporium ) Cordley, A. B. Better Fruit, 4 (1909), 4, 13. (22, 349) Spray with Bordeaux soon after fruit is gathered. Spray again after the leaves have fallen with Bordeaux or lime sulfur. Jackson, H. S. Ore. Sta. Bien. Crop Pest and Hort. Rpt. 1911-12, 178. (29, 153) Con- trol measures given in Exp. Sta. Rec., 29, 249. Ore. Sta. Circ. 17. (27, 249) Apply 4-4-50 Bordeaux in fall before rains, and 6-6-50 Bordeaux as soon as fruit is picked. Give an additional spraying earlier in the season if disease is bad. Cut out cankers. Lawrence, W. H. Bien. Rpt. Bd. Hort. Ore., 12 (1911-12), 93. (31, 53) Repeated spraying recommended. Spray in autumn following maturity of fruit. Bordeaux-petro- leum emulsion gives promise. Lownsdale, M. O. Better Fruit, 5 (1910), 1, 44. (23, 745) To prevent new infection during the succeeding year, spray in September with a solution of 1 gallon of lime sulfur in 18 gallons of water. Bitter Rot ( Glomerella ) Laubert, R. Deut. Obstbau Ztg., 1910, 14, 175. (23, 548) Lounsbury, C. P. Agr. Jour. Cape Good Hope, 37 (1910), 4, 355. (24, 348) Wolf, F. A. Proc. Ala. State Hort. Soc., 9 (1912), 69. (27, 546) Blister Canker (Nmnrnularia) Gloyer, W. O. Ohio (Wooster) Sta. Circ. 125. (27, 749) Remove and destroy all diseased parts. Cover wounds after pruning with asphaltum or grafting wax. Pam mel, L. H., and King, C. M. Ia. Sta. Bui. 131. (27, 445) Blotch ( Phyllosticta ) Lewis, D. E. Kans. Sta. Bui. 196. (31, 53) 3-4-50 Bordeaux recommended. Lime sulfur found to be less effective than Bordeaux except in wet weather, when Bordeaux has a tendency to russet the fruit. Scott, W. M., and Rorer, J. B. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Bui. 144. (20, 1044) Apply 5-5-50 Bordeaux three weeks after petals have fallen. Follow with three applications at intervals of two weeks. Canker ( SpJurropsis ) Brooks, C., and DeMeritt, M. Phytopath., 2 (1912), 5, 181. (28, 548) Plow under diseased leaves. Apply Bordeaux and lime sulfur. Ducloux, A. Rev. Hort. (Paris), 82 (1910), 21, 506; 22, 520. (24, 450) Evans, I. B. P. Transvaal Agr. Jour., 7 (1908), 25, 62. (20, 848) Destroy all decayed fruit, prune out cankers, and spray with Bordeaux. Hesler, L. R. Proc. Ind. Acad. Sci., 1911, 325. (29, 752) Prune off diseased limbs below point of attack. Select for planting nonsusceptible varieties. McCready, S. B. Ann. Rpt. Ontario Agr. Col. and Expt. Farm, 35 (1909), 41. (23, 351) Good cultivation, thoro spraying, careful cutting out of all cankers, and destruc- tion of diseased rubbish recommended. Salmon, E. S. Gard. Chron., 3 ser., 47 (1910), 1217, 258. (23, 549) Wolf, F. A. Phytopath., 3 (1913), 6, 288. (30, 650) Spray early in season with Bor- deaux. 6 (Anon.) Bd. Agr. and Fisheries (London) Leaflet 281 (1913). (30, 650) Re- move dead branches and leaves and spray with half-strength Bordeaux a week after petals fall, and again one month later. Crown Gall ( Pseudomonas ) Hedgcock, G. G. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Bui. 186. (24, 249) To keep nursery free from disease, leave all diseased trees in the field at the time of digging and burn them as soon as dry. Scions from healthy trees and stocks from seed of sound trees only should be used. Avoid wou.iding of trees during cultivation. Fire Blight ( Bacillus ) Hall, J. G. Wash. Sta. Popular Bui. 56. (29, 848) Remove and burn all diseased parts. Jackson, H. S. Ore. Sta. Circ. 7. (23, 454) Lawrence, W. H. Bien. Rpt. Bd. Hort. Ore, 12 (1911-12), 107. (31, 53) Pickett, B. S. 111. Sta. Circ. 172. (31, 644) Remove infected trees, which carry disease over winter. Swingle, D. B. Mont. Sta. Circ. 2. (23, 352) (Anon.) Queensland Agr. Jour, 26 (1911), 5, 266. (25, 455) Spray tr?es several times during winter with red oil. Follow after foliage appears with a weak kerosene oil emulsion, applied with a brush to cankers on trunk. Fruit Spot ( Cylindrosporium ) Brooks, C. N. H. Sta. Sci. Contrib. 2, 423. (20, 847) To prevent disease, apply Bor- deaux in June or July. Fruit Spot ( Phoma ) Brooks, C. N. H. Sta. Bui. 157. (27, 849) Lewis, C. E. Me. Sta. Bui. 170. (22, 547) Leaf Spot ( Cladosporium ) Chittenden, F. J. Jour. Roy. Hort. Soc. (London). 33 (1908), 2, 500. (20, 547) To check germination of fungus spores, apply dilute Bordeaux. Mildew, Powdery (Podosphcura) Ballard, W. S, and Volck, W. H. U. S. Dept. Agr. Bui. 120, 26. (31, 748) Spray foliage with iron-sulfid solution or with precipitated sulfur. Prune in winter. Boll, J. Deut. Obstbau Ztg, 1912, 3, 47. (26 750) Lime sulfur, 1-20, recommended. 7 Eriksson, J. Prakt. Bl. Pflanzenbau u. Schutz, n. ser., 7 (1909), 6, 73; 7, 96. (22, 349) Burn all old leaves and affected shoots. Spray with 1-percent copper-sulfate solution. One-percent potassium-sulfid solution also recommended. Mix lime in soil around trees. Lustner, G. Ber. K. Lehranst. Wein, Obst u. Gartenbau Geisenheim, 1909, 120. (24, 156) Destroy diseased branches on which perithecia are found. Sulfur and lime-sulfur spray recommended. Volck, W. H. Better Fruit, 5 (1911), 8, 39; 9, 60. (25, 145) Iron sulfid recommended as a summer spray. Rust (Gymno sporangium) Bartholomew, E. T. Phytopath., 2 (1912), 6, 253. (28, 748) Bordeaux recommended. Fulton, H. R. N. C. Sta. Rpt. 1912, 62. (29, 49) For prevention, spray: (1) just after leaves emerge from bud, (2) just before blossoms open, (3) just after petals fall, and (4) ten days later. Giddings, N. J. W. Va. Crop Pest Com. Bui. 2, 7. (30, 651) Destroy all cedars within a mile of apple orchard. and Neal, D. C. Phytopath., 2 (1912), 6, 258. (28, 748) Bordeaux recommended. Heald, F. D. Nebr. Sta. Rpt. 1908, 103. (22, 47) Hein, W. H. Insect Pest and Plant Disease Bur. Nebr., Div. Bot. Circ. 1. (21, 644) Remove cedar trees and plant resistant varieties of apple. Reed, H. S., Cooley, J. S., and Crabill, C. H. Va. Sta. Bui. 203. (30, 450) Coppejr lime sulfur and lime sulfur both found to be effective. Wolf, F. A. Proc. Ala. State Hort. Soc., 9 (1912), 69. (27, 546) Scab ( Venturia ) Beattie, R. K. West. Fruit-Grower, 20 (1909), 1, 6. (21, 244) Lime sulfur superior to Bordeaux. Solution of 1 pound of sulfur, y 2 pound of lime, and 5 gallons of water recommended. Phytopath., 4 (1914), 1, 42. (31, 346) Spray thoroly with lime sulfur under heavy pressure, twice during the season. Blodgett, F. M. Phytopath., 4 (1914), 1, 44. (31, 449) Dust with sulfur and treat host with sulfur suspension in water. 8 BRETSCHN EIDER, A. Wiener Landw. Ztg., 59 (1909), 100, 980. (22, 650) Darrow, W. H. Phytopath., 3 (1913), 5, 265. (30, 542) The disease may be carried over on young shoots, and the application of some strong fungicide to these before the opening of the leaf buds will reduce infection from this source. Fischer, F. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 19 (1909), 7, 432; abs. in Riv. Patol. Veg., 4 (1910), 7, 97. (23, 151) No immune' varieties. Apply Bordeaux in spring before leaves appear. McCready, S. B. Ann. Rpt. Ontario Agr. Col. and Expt. Farm, 36 (1910), 42. (25, 549) Apply home-boiled lime sulfur just before leaves open; give second application of commercial lime sulfur at the opening of blossom buds; and spray for the third time with 1-30 commercial lime sulfur when blossoms fall. Mally, C. W. Agr. Jour. Cape Good Hope, 35 (1909), 2, 202. (22, 50) One application of 6-4-50 Bordeaux gave 60 percent sound fruit ; two applications gave 90 per- cent sound fruit ; and three applications rendered fruit practically free from disease. Morris, H. E. Mont. Sta. Bui. 96. (31, 645) Plant resistant varieties and spray thoroly. Nicholls, H. M. Agr. Gaz. Tasmania, 21 (1913), 10, 387. (30, 541) Plow fallen leaves under early, harrow surface, and leave undisturbed until after November 15. Spray trees early in October with Bordeaux, Burgundy, or lime-sulfur mixture, adding one pound of wheat flour to each gallon of solution in order to pro- mote spreading and adhesion. Salmon, E. S. Jour. Bd. Agr. (London), 15 (1908), 3, 182. (20, 950) Wash trees in winter with strong solution of copper sulfate. Apply 4-4-50 Bordeaux in spring. Jour. Southeast Agr. Col. Wye, 1907, 16, 267. (20, 845) Jour. Southeast Agr. Col. Wye, 1909, 18, 267. (25, 247) Judicious spray- ing with 4-100 copper-sulfate solution in February followed by two or three sprayings with Bordeaux controls the disease. Jour. Southeast Agr. Col. Wye, 1911, 20,. 408. (28, 448) Bordeaux recom- mended over lime sulfur. Schander, R. Deut. Landw. Presse, 36 (1909), 7, 63. (21, 54) Bordeaux (2 percent) more efficient than carbolineum {]/ 2 percent). Voges, E. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 20 (1910), 7, 385; rev. in Gard. Chron., 3 ser., 48 (1910), 1250, 432. (24, 450) Apply Bordeaux in spring. 9 Wallace, E. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Bill. 335. (30, 848) Lime sulfur recommended. Rpt. Niagara Sprayer Co. Fellowship, 2 (1909), 10. (22, 650) Lime sul- fur, 1-30, as efficient as 3-4-50 Bordeaux and does not cause injury to leaves or fruit. (Anon.) Ore. Agr. Col. Bui. 48, 1 ser. (25, 247) Spray with 1-15 lime sulfur when blossoms show pink. ARROWROOT Diseases, General (Anon.) Agr. News (Barbados), 10 (1911), 237, 174. (25, 654) Destroy diseased plants. Aerate soil thoroly. Rotate with cotton. ASPARAGUS Foot Rot ( Zopfia ) Farneti, R. Riv. Patol. Veg., 4 (1910), 18, 273. (25, 44) Burn diseased plants. Dis- infect beds with carbon disulfid. ASTER Milowia Massee, G. Roy. Bot. Gard. Kew, Bui. Misc. Inform., 1912, 1, 44. (26, 551) Sterilize seed bed with formalin or steam. Apply coal ashes. AZALEA Diseases, General Hartmann, J. Gartenwelt, 14 (1910), 19, 217. (24, 252) Destroy diseased limbs. Sprav with copper sulfate, IJ 2 percent. Gall ( Exobasidium ) Laubert, L. Handelsbl. Deut. Gartenbau, 24 (1909), 466; abs. in Bot. Ztg., 2 Abt., 67 (1909), 20-21, 285. (22, 351) Use Bordeaux or sulfur. Remove and destroy diseased parts. BANANA Banana Disease (Unnamed) Levy, H. Q. Jour. Jamaica Agr. Soc., 14 (1910), 7, 241. (23, 747) Blight McKenney, R. E. B. Abs. in Science, n. ser., 31 (1910), 802, 750. (23, 455) IO Smut ( Ustilagenoidella ) Essed, E. Ann. Bot. (London), 25 (1911), 98, 363, (25, 350) mended. Copper sulfate recom- BARLEY Late Blight ( Helminthosporium ) Bakke, A. L. Proc. Ia. Acad. Sci., 19 (1912), 93. (29, 750) Keep soil in sanitary con- dition. Treat seed with formalin. Edinburgh and East of Scotland College of Agriculture Rpt. 30 (1913), 15. (31, 147) Formalin and copper sulfate treatment of seeds greatly reduces late blight. Johnson, A. G. Phytopath., 4 (1914), 1, 46. (31, 446) Soak seed five hours in cold water, and then for fifteen minutes in water at 52° C. Pleospora Mortensen, M. L. Tidsskr. Landbr. Planteavl, 16 (1909), 1, 110. (22, 246) Dip seed 20 times in five minutes in water at 57° C. Smut ( Ustilago ) Appel, O. Illus. Landw. Ztg., 29 (1909), 55, 521. (22, 48) Hot-water treatment recommended. — and Riehm, E. Arb. K. Biol. Anst. Land u. Forstw., 8 (1911), 3, 343. (26, 546) Soak seed in water at 50° C. for seven to ten minutes, then expose to air at 50° C. for five minutes only. Broili, J. Naturw. Ztschr. Forst u. Landw., 8 (1910), 7, 335. (23, 741) Naturw. Ztschr. Forst u. Landw., 9 (1911), 1, 53. (24, 647) Heald, F. D. Nebr. Sta. Rpt. 1907, 45. (20, 450) Formalin, 1-25, hot water, and copper sulfate recommended. Gisevius, P., and Bohmer Illus. Landw. Ztg., 30 (1910), 77, 725. (24, 346) Drying apparatus to be used in hot-air method described. Kuhle, L. Illus. Landw. Ztg., 28 (1908), 67, 578. (20, 947) Soak seed in water at 65° C. for twelve minutes. Sperling, J. Illus. Landw. Ztg., 30 (1910), 9, 66. (23, 46) Soak seed in water at 25° C. for four hours, and then expose to air at 50° C. for thirty minutes. Tepin, H. Sveriges Utsadesfor. Tidskr.. 19 (1909), 2, 119. (22, 246) Hot-water treatment recommended. II BEAN Diseases, General Whetzel, H. H. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Bui. 255. (20, 546) Select clean seed. Anthracnose ( Collet otrichum ) Edgerton, C. W. La. Sta. Bui. 116. (21, 549) Select clean seed. Muncie, J. H. Mich. Sta. Special Bui. 68. (31, 542) Querner, H. Ztschr. Landw. Kammer Braunschweig, 77 (1908), 31, 367. (20, 648) Good drainage, clean seed, and application of ammoniacal copper carbonate as a preventative, recommended. von Diakonoff, H. Geisenh. Mitt. Obst u. Gartenbau, 24 (1909), 4, 57. (22, 546) Wilcox, E. M., and Temple, C. E. Insect Pest and Plant Disease Bur. Nebr., Div. Bot. Circ. 6. (21, 642) Remove and burn diseased plants. Blight ( Alternaria ) Ferraris, T. Riv. Patol. Veg., 3 (1909), 16, 241. (20, 1138) Bordeaux or soda Bordeaux recommended. Blight ( Pseudomonas ) Edgerton, C. W., and Moreland, C. C. La. Sta. Bui. 139. (28, 846) Select clean seed and treat with corrosive sublimate before planting. Muncie, J. H. Mich. Sta. Special Bui. 68. (31, 542) Mildew, Downy ( Plasmopara ) Jarvis, C. D. Conn. Storrs Sta. Rpt. 1908-09, 31. (22, 743) 2-2-50 Bordeaux recom- mended. Rust ( Uromyces ) Fuschini, C. Revista (Conegliano), 4 ser., 17 (1911), 19, 443; abs. in Internat. Inst. Agr. (Rome), Bui. Bur. Agr. Intel, and Plant Diseases, 2 (1911), 11-12, 2600. (27, 47) Apply iron sulfate to soil. Gassner, G. Rev. Secc. Agron. Univ. Montevideo, 1908, 4, 125. (22, 746) BEET Diseases, General Busse, W., and Ulrich, P. Mitt. K. Biol. Anst. Land u. Forstw., 1909, 8, 21. (23, 348) SCHANDER, R. Deut. Zucherindus., 35 (1910), 5, 110; abs. in Centbl. Bakt. (etc.), 2 Abt., 27 (1910), 10, 307. (23, 745) Stift, A. Centbl. Bakt. (etc.), 2 Abt., 23 (1909), 6, .173. (22, 347) Storm er, K. Bl. Zuckerrubenbau, 15 (1908), 16, 247; 17, 264; 18, 279. (21, 52) WOHANKA & Co. Ann. Amer. Rpt. Sugar Beet Seed Breeding Sta., 3 (1910), 30. (26, 648) Club Root ( Urophlyctis ) Griffon' and Maublanc Bui. Trimest. Soc. Mycol. France, 25 (1909), 2, 98. (21, 642) Damping-off Stift, A. Osterr. Ungar. Ztschr. Zuckerindus. u. Landw., 40 (1911), 2, 211. (25, 349) Stormer, K., and Eichinger, A. Fiihling’s Landw. Ztg., 59 (1910), 12, 393; abs. in Bl. Zuckerrubenbau, 17 (1910), 14, 229; 15, 245. (24, 248) Lime, phosphoric acid, and either table salt or potash recommended. Heart Rot ( Phoma ) Busse, W., and Ulrich, P. Mitt. K. Biol. Anst. Land u. Forstw., 1909, 8, 21. (23, 348) When tested, ammonium salts showed no advantage over saltpeter. Griffon and Maublanc Bui. Trimest. Soc. Mycol. France, 25 (1909), 2, 98. (21, 642) Hegyi, D. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 21 (1911), 5, 269. (26, 548) Dry the seed, fertilize plants, and cultivate properly. Kappeli, J., and Morgenthaler, O. Landw. Jahrb. Schweiz, 27 (1913), 8, 432. (31, 344) Employ least suscep- tible varieties. Plant other and non-susceptible crops between beets and dusty roadside. Kruger, W. Bl. Zuckerrubenbau, 16 (1909), 24, 369. (23, 248) Apply to soil humus and a nitrogenous fertilizer that will give an acid reaction. Labbe, G. Bui. Assoc. Chim. Suer, et Distill., 28 (1910), 1, 119. (24, 155) The addi- tion of nitrogenous fertilizers increases the disease. Heart rot is more intense during dry periods and less active with plants low in sugar content. Phosphoric acid, humus, and lime in various proportions recommended. Lin hart, G. Monatsh. Landw., 1 (1908). 356; abs. in Bot. Centbl.. 110 (1909), 18, 473. (23, 248) Peters, L. Mitt. K. Biol. Anst. Land u. Forstw., 1909, 8, 25. (23, 248) 13 Ruhland, W., and Albrecht, K. Mitt. K. Biol. Anst. Land u. Forstw., 1910, 10, 16. (23, 648) Sc HANDER, R. Deut. Zuckerindus, 34 (1909), 6, 121; abs. in Centbl. Bakt. (etc.), 2 Abt., 26 (1910), 8, 309. (23, 348) Fertilize with liquid manure and calcium nitrate. Stift, A. Osterr. Ungar. Ztschr. Zuckerindus. u. Landw., 40 (1911), 2, 252. (25, 349) Leaf Spot ( Cercospora ) Griffon and Maublanc Bui. Trimest. Soc. Mycol. France, 25 (1909), 2, 98 Pool, V. W., and McKay, M. B. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Circ. 121, 13. from the field while still green and make into silage fungus. Mildew, Downy ( Peronospora ) Griffon and Maublanc Bui. Trimest. Soc. Mycol. France, 25 (1909), 2, 98. (21, 642) Stormer, K. Bl. Zuckerrubenbau, 17 (1910), 5, 88. (23, 348) Root Rot ( Pythium ) Busse, W. Bl. Zuckerrubenbau, 15 (1908), 19, 297. (20, 546) Hegyi, D. Bui. Trimest. Soc. Mycol. France, 27 .(1911), 2, 153; abs. in Bot. Centbl., 119 (1912), 1, 19. (26, 747) Maintain water content of 10 percent or less. Riehm, E. Bl. Zuckerrubenbau, 16 (1909), 10, 145. (22, 347) The soaking of seed for various lengths of time in phenol, formalin, Bordeaux, copper-soda mixture, or copper sulfate is better than hot-water treatment. Stormer, K. Bl. Zuckerrubenbau, 17 (1910), 5, 88. (23, 348) Lime recommended. Root Rot ( Rhizoctonia ) Briem, H. Ztschr. Zuckerindus, Bbhmen, 36 (1911), 1, 23. (27, 47) Keep plenty of available lime in the soil and aerate by stirring the soil with a hoe. Eriksson, J. Rev. Gen. Bot., 25 (1913), 298, 14. (29, 50) Remove from the field all infected plants, disinfect seed, examine and destroy all stored roots that are diseased. Practice long rotation, four years or more. Rust ( Puccinia ) Pool, V. W., and McKay, M. B. Phytopath., 4 (1914), 3, 204. (31, 842) Destroy salt grass, which is quite common along roadsides and ditches. (21, 642) (29, 48) Remove tops This process kills the 14 Rust ( Uromyces ) Griffon and Maublanc Bui. Trimest. Soc. Mycol. France, 25 (1909), 2, 98>. (21, 642) Yellows ( Bacillus ) Malaquin, A., and Moitie, A. Engrais, 29 (1914), 9, 241. (31, 243) Dry seed at from 40° to 55° C. to a water content of about 7 percent. A rigorous selection of the roots to be used for the production of seed is advised. BLACKBERRY Anthracnose ( Glceosporium ) Lawrence, W. H. Wash. Sta. Bui. 97. (23, 452) To check disease, cut and burn all infected canes. As a preventative, spray with 4-4-50 Bordeaux before leaves appear. Give second application when leaves are expanded. Crown Gall ( Pseudomonas ) Swingle, D. B. Mont. Sta. Circ. 37. (31, 644) Rust ( Gymnoconia ) Wilson, G. W. N. C. Sta. Rpt. 1912, 56. (29, 50) BREADFRUIT Disease, Unnamed Stockdale, F. A. Jour. Bd. Agr. Brit. Guiana, 6 (1912), 1, 14. (28, 153) Collect and burn all diseased fruits. Spray trees with 4-percent copper-sulfate solution or Bordeaux. BRUSSELS SPROUTS Club Root ( Plasmodiophora ) Worcester County Experimental Garden, Droitwich Ann. Rpt. 1912; abs. in Jour. Bd. Agr. (London), 20 (1914), 11, 1010. (31, 149) Gas lime or quicklime dug in or left on surface, recommended. CABBAGE Diseases, General Bos, J. Ritzema, and Quanjer, H. M. Tijdschr. Plantenziekten, 16 (1911), 4-6, 101. (26, 546) Harter, L. L. U. S. Dept. Agr., Farmers’ Bui. 448. (27, 249) Blackleg ( Phoma ) Manns, T. F. Ohio (Wooster) Sta. Bui. 228. (25, 653) To control disease, treat seed with formalin, use new seed beds each year, and destroy all diseased plants. Rotate crops. Club Root ( Plasm cdiop horn ) Lawrence, W. H. Wash. Sta. Bui. 5, spec. ser. (23, 647) Reed, H. S. Va. Sta. Bui. 191. (25, 845) Apply lime at the rate of 100 bushels per acre for one or two years before planting cabbage. Rotate crops. Wilt ( Fusarium ) Harter, L. L. Science, n. ser., 30 (1909), 782, 934. (22, 453) Manns, T. F. Ohio (Wooster) Sta. Bui. 228. (25, 653) To control disease, treat seed with formalin, use new seed beds each year, and destroy all diseased plants. Rotate crops. CACAO Diseases, General Hart, J. H. West India Com. Circ. 24, 289, 509 ; 290, 533. (22, 151) Stockdale, F. A. Imp. Dept. Agr. West Indies Pamphlet 54. (20, 1046) von Faber, F. C. Arb. K. Biol. Anst. Land u. Forstw., 7 (1909), 2, 193. (21, 749) Canker ( Phytophthora ) Rorer, J. B. Bui. Dept. Agr. Trinidad, 9 (1910), 65, 79. (23, 748) Bd. Agr. Trinidad and Tobago Circ. 10, 1913, 13. (29, 851) Bordeaux better than severe cutting back. See Exp. Sta. Rec., 20, 1141. van Hall, C. J. J., and Drost, A. W. Rec. Trav. Bot. Neerland., 4 (1908), 4, 243; Jour. Bd. Agr. Brit. Guiana, 2 (1909), 3, 126; Roy. Bot. Gard. Kew, Bui. Misc. Inform., (1909), 5, 223. (20, 1141) (Anon.) Agr. News (Barbados), 9 (1910), 214, 222. (23, 748) Bordeaux recom- mended. Dieback ( Diplodia ) Bancroft, C. K. Roy. Bot. Gard. Kew, Bui. Misc. Inform., 1910, 3, 93. (23, 354) Cut out and destroy the diseased branches and parts. Cover wounds with coal tar and clay. Manure and cultivate carefully. CARNATION Leaf Disease ( Heterosporium ) Blin, H. Rev. Hort. (Paris), 82 (1910), 5, 104. (23, 153) i6 Rust ( Urotnyces ) Fondard, L. Rev. Hort. (Paris), 82 (1910), 14, 336. (23, 751) Dust thoroly with sulfur and spray with copper sulfate. Stem Rot ( Fusarium ) Wright, C. J. Pomona Col. Jour. Econ. Bot., 2 (1912), 3, 315. (28. 851) Use cuttings from healthy plants ; change soil from year to year ; protect against extreme heat and moisture ; do not injure plants in transplanting. Stem Rot ( Rliisoctonia ) Blake, M. A., and Farley, A. J. N. J. Sta. Rpt. 1910, 78. (27, 752) CARROT Stem Rot ( Rhizoctonia ) Eriksson, J. Rev. Gen. Bot., 25 (1913), 298, 14. (29, 50) Remove and destroy all infec- tion. Disinfect seed. Practice four-year rotation. CASSAVA Root Rot DE KrUIJFF, E. Teysmannia, 21 (1910), 3, 147. (23, 547) Use lime on soil. CELERY Blight, Early ( Cercospora ) Streight, E. M. Veg. Grower, 2 (1912), 3, 4. (27, 849) Bordeaux. Winters, R. Y. Fla. Sta. Rpt. 1908, 97. (21, 342) Fla. Sta. Rpt. 1909, 79. (23, 451) Dry Bordeaux and air-slaked lime both effective. Blight, Late ( Septoria ) Klebahn, H. Jahrb. Hamburg. Wiss. Anst., 30 (1912), 3, 1. (30, 847) Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank, 20 (1910), 1, 1. (22, 746) Bordeaux recommended. Osborn, T. G. B. Jour. Dept. Agr. So. Aust., 16 (1912), 4, 402. (28, 847) Apply dilute Bordeaux or potassium-sulfid solution (1 ounce to 3 gallons of water). Keep storehouse dry and well ventilated. Destroy affected refuse and purchase only fungus-free seeds. Rogers, S. S. Cal. Sta. Bui. 208. (24, 551) Apply 5-6-50 Bordeaux at the rate of 35 gallons per acre when the plants are young. Apply same strength at the rate of 100 gallons per acre when the plants are over 15 inches high. Spray seedlings. 7 Salmon, E. S. Gard. Chron., 3 ser., 53 (1913), 1382, 414; 1384, 3. (29, 846) Dip plants in Bordeaux while planting and spray with Bordeaux once in June, in July, and in August. Streight, E. M. Veg. Grower, 2 (1912), 3, 4. (27, 849) Bordeaux. (Anon.) Jour. Bd. Agr. (London), 16 (1910), 12, 1010. (23, 148) Apply Bordeaux, one-half strength, as soon as disease appears and give one application each week thereafter for three weeks. (Anon.) Gard. Chron., 3 ser., 55 (1914), 1418, 150. (31, 344) Copper sprays ineffec- tive. Manuring has no effect. Dry weather and artificial watering are prob- ably beneficial. Winters, R. Y. Fla. Sta. Rpt. 1908, 97. Foot Rot ( Sclerotinia ) (21, 342) Fla. Sta. Rpt. 1909, 79. (23, 451) Dry Bordeaux and air-slaked lime both effective. Scab ( Phoma ) Klebahn, H. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 20 (1910), 1, 1. (22, 746) Disinfect soil. CHERRY Brown Rot ( Sclerotinia ) Barna, B. Abs. in Internat. Inst. Agr. (Rome), Bui. Bur. Agr. Intel, and Plant Diseases, 3 (1912), 7, .1681. (28, 244) Keep orchards clean and spray. Salmon, E. S. Jour. Southeast Agr. Col. Wye, 1907, 16, 267. (20, 845) Canker ( Cytospora ) Wormald, H. Jour. Southeast Agr. Col. Wye, 1912, 21, 367. (30, 352) Remove and burn diseased parts. Gummosis ( Pseudomonas ) Barss, H. P. Ore. Sta. Bien. Crop Pest and Hort. Rpt. 1911-12, 198. (29, 154) Use resistant stock. Cut out cankers and remove small infected twigs. i8 Leaf Scorch ( Gnornonia ) Marre, E. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre) , 31 (1910), 4, 121 (23, 151) Burn leaves in fall and spray in spring with Bordeaux. Salmon, E. S. Jour. Southeast Agr. Col. Wye, 1907, 16, 267. (20, 845) Leaf Spot ( Cylindrosporium ) Stewart, V. B. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Circ. 21 (1914). (30, 848) Bordeaux 5-5-50 and lime-sulfur solution, 1 gallon to 50 gallons of water, recommended. The addition of granulated iron sulfate prevents burning. Mildew, Powdery ( Podospluera ) Hein, W. H. Insect Pest and Plant Disease Bur. Nebr., Div. Bot. Circ. 2. (21, 643) Shot-Hole Disease ( Cercospora ) Russell, H. L. Wis. Sta. Bui. 218. (27, 45) Lime sulfur inefficient. CHESTNUT Diseases, General Metcalf, H. Trans. Mass. Hort. Soc., 1912, pt. 1, 69. (27, 753) Blight ( Endothia ) Anderson, P. J., and Rankin, W. H. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Bui. 347 (1914). (31, 751) Briosi, G., and Farneti, R. Abs. in Bot. Centbl., 110 (1909), 19, 489. (22, 749) Brooks, A. B. W. Va. Crop Pest Com. Bui. 2 (1913), 12. (30, 653) Carleton, M. A. Amer. Fruit and Nut Jour., 6 (1912), 97, 78. (28, 153) Metcalf, H., and Collins, J. F. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Bui. 141 (21, 748) Cut out and burn all infected trees. U. S. Dept. Agr., Farmers’ Bui. 467. (26, 146) Destroy all infected trees. Mickleborough, J. Harrisburg: Penn. Dept. Forestry, 1909. (22, 652) Prunet, A. Bui. Soc. Nat. Agr. France, 69 (1909), 10. 926: Rev. Vit.. 33 (1910), 838, 21. (23, 49) Sterling, E. A. Engin. News. 60 (1908). 13. 332. (20. 757) 19 (Anon.) Forest Leaves, 13 (1911), 6, 88. (27, 252) CHRYSANTHEMUM Crown Gall ( Pseudomonas ) Laubert, R. Moller’s Deut. Gart. Ztg., 28 (1913), 41, 486. (30, 354) Destroy or prune deeply. Rot ( Botrytis ) Crepin, H. Jour. Soc. Nat. Hort. France, 4 ser., 11 (1910), 52. (22, 750) CINERARIA Rust ( Coleosporium ) Chittenden, F. J. Jour. Roy. Hort. Soc. (London), 33 (1908), 2, 511. (20, 550) Spray with potassium permanganate. CLOVER Anthracnose ( Gloeosporium ) Bain, S. M., and Essary, S. H. Science, n. ser., 31 (1910), 802, 756. (23, 448) Fulton, H. R. Science, n. ser., 31 (1910), 802, 752. (23, 448) Rotation of crops and early mowing of infected fields recommended. Stem Rot ( Rhizoctonia ) Eriksson, J. Rev. Gen. Bot., 25 (1913), 298, 14. (29, 50) Remove from field all infected plants ; disinfect seed ; examine and destroy all stored roots that are diseased ; practice long rotation, four years or more. COCONUT Bleeding Stem ( Thielaviopsis ) Petch, T. Brit. Mycol. Soc. Trans., 3 (1908), pt. 2, 108. (22, 248) Cut out diseased tissue, scorch interior with torches, and paint with hot coal tar. Bud Rot ( Bacillus ) Ashby, S. J. Jour. Jamaica Agr. Soc., 17 (1913), 11, 20. (30, 652) Horne, W. T. Estac. Cent. Agr. Cuba Bui. 15, English Ed. (21, 245) Burn out all suspected cases and spray with Bordeaux for protection of healthy trees. Ollson-Seffer, R. Rev. Trop. Agr., 2 (1912), 4, 295. (27, 353) Destroy diseased buds early and apply fungicide promptly to points of new infection. 20 Rorer, J. B. Dept. Agr. Trinidad and Tobago, Bui. 11 (1912), 70, 68. (27, 751) Ob- serve proper sanitary measures. Wates, L. A. Jour. Jamaica Agr. Soc., 13 (1909), 12, 434. (23, 49) Dieback ( Diplodia ) Ashby, S. J. Jour. Jamaica Agr. Soc., 17 (1913), 11, 20. (30, 652) Fredholm, A. Proc. Agr. Soc. Trinidad and Tobago, 9 (1909), 3, 159. (21, 150) Observe proper sanitary precautions. Leaf Disease ( Pestalozzia ) StockdalE, F. A. West Indian Bui. 9 (1909), 4, 361. (21, 150) Root Disease (Botryo diplodia) Stockdale, F. A. West Indian Bui. 9 (1909), 4, 361. (21, 150) Root Disease ( Fomes ) Petch, T. Circs, and Agr. Jour. Roy. Bot. Gard., Ceylon, 4 (1910), 24, 323. (23, 549) Dead or badly diseased trees should be dug up and the butt end and two or three feet of the trunk above the ground should be burned. Wates, L. A. Jour. Jamaica Agr. Soc., 13 (1909), 12, 434. (23, 49) Cut out diseased parts of roots and cauterize parts with hot tar or by burning. COFFEE Leaf Spot {Splicer ostilbe) Massee, G. Roy. Bot. Gard. Kew, Bui. Misc. Inform., 1909, 8, 337. (22, 51) Treat soil with carbon bisulfid. (Anon) Agr. News (Barbados), 8, (1909,) 193, 292. (21, 749) Remove affected plants, spray, and give careful attention to tillage. Phythora Vastatrix D’Herelle, F. H. Ann. Soc. Rural Argentina, 44 (1910), 68, 40. (23, 749) Lime soil heavily, use non-acid fertilizers, and prune trees to obtain a better circulation of air and to get more sunlight on the ground. Root Rot ( Rosellinia ) Patouillard, N. Jour. Agr. Trop., 10 (1910), 104, 58. (23, 251) Infected trees should be dug up and their roots completely burned in the hole from which they were removed. Rust ( Hemileia ) Dybowski, J. Agr. Prat. Pays Chauds, 9 (1909), 71, 159* (21, 150) von Faber, F. C. Tropenpflanzer, 13 (1909), 5, 235. (22, 51) Silver Thread Blight Kuijper, J. Dept. Landb. Suriname Bill. 28, 1912, 11. (29, 351) Bordeaux recom- mended. COLOCASIA Blight ( Phytophthora ) Butler, E. J., and Kulkarni, G. S. Mem. Dept. Agr. India, Bot. Ser., 5 (1913), 5, 233. (31, 52) Spray; remove and destroy all spotted leaves. CORN Ear Rot ( Diplodia ) Burrill, T. J., and Barrett, J. T. 111. Sta. Bui. 133. (21, 146) Destroy all old stalks from infected field and cease planting corn in this field for at least two years. Smut ( Ustilago ) Collens, A. E. Dept. Agr. Trinidad, Bui. Agr. Inform., 1909, n. ser., 61, 33. (22, 47) Johnston, T. H. Agr. Gaz. N. S. Wales, 21 (1910), 1, 43. (22, 745) COTTON Anthracnose ( Colletotrichum ) Barre, H. W. S. C. Sta. Circ. 1. (27, 446) S. C. Sta. Rpt. 1909, 89. (22, 648) S. C. Bui. 164. (27, 446) Use clean seed and rotate. S. C. Sta. Rpt. 1911, 23. (26, 647) S. C. Sta. Rpt. 1913, 14. (30, 538) and Aull, W. B. Science, n. ser., 40 (1914), 1020, 109. (31, 643) Soak seed in water at 70° C. for 15 minutes before planting. Fulton, H. R., Winston, J. R., and Cromwell, R. O. Abs. in Phytopath., 4 (1914), 1, 42. (31, 344) 22 Gilbert, W. W. U. S. Dept. Agr., Farmers’ Bui. 555. (29, 751) Use resistant varieties. Clean seed. Plow in fall. Rotate. Blight ( Bacterium ) McCall, J. S. J. Nyasaland Agr. and Forestry Dept. Bui. 2 (1910). (23, 347) Soak seed in bichlorid of mercury or formalin for an hour before planting. Texas Root Rot ( Ozonium ) Heald, F. D. Texas Dept. Agr. Bui. 22 (1911). (30, 538) Rotate with wheat, corn, and sorghum. Plow in fall. Lewis, A. C. Ga. Bd. Ent. Bui. 34. Wilt ( Fusarium ) (25, 44) Ga. Bd. Ent. Bui. 28. (21, 51) COWPEA Wilt ( Fusarium ) Arnaud, G. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 31 (1910), 43, 517. (24, 347) Disin- fect soil with carbon bisulfid and formalin. Plant resistant varieties and rotate. CRANBERRY Blight Shear, C. L. Proc. Wis. Cranberry Growers’ Assoc., 22 (1909), 4. (21, 52) Bordeaux recommended. CUCUMBER Canker ( Mycosphcerella ) Massee, G. Roy. Bot. Gard. Kew, Bui. Misc. Inform., 1909, 7, 292, pt. 1 ; Jour. Bd. Agr. (London), 16 (1909), 7, 579. (22, 50) Bordeaux recommended. Middleton, T. H. Bd. Agr. and Fisheries (London), Ann. Rpt. Intel. Div. 1910-11, pt. 2, 54. (27, 353) (Anon) Gard. Chron., 3 ser, 54 (1913), 1393, 167. (30, 148) Leaf Spot ( Corynespora ) Altheimer Prakt. Bl. Pflanzenbau u. Schutz, n. ser., 11 (1913), 9, 109. (30, 450) Treat seed with 2-percent copper-sulfate solution before using or shipping. 23 Grosser, W. Illus. Schles. Monatschr. Obst. Gemiise u. Gartenbau, 2 (1913), 8, 137. (30, 149) Before planting, soak seed four hours in .5-percent formalin solu- tion. Spray with ,4-percent Bordeaux. Laubert, R. Deut. Landw. Presse, 38 (1911). 71, 819. (26, 447) Destroy all infectior and spray with Bordeaux. Quanjer, H. M. Tijdschr. Plantenziekten, 14 (1908), 78; abs. in Meded Rijks Hoogere Land. Tuin en Boschbouwsch., 1 (1908), 159. (22, 346) Bordeaux recommended. Mildew, Downy ( Plasmopara ) Jarvis, C. D. Conn. Storrs Sta. Rpt. 1908-09. 31. (22, 743) 2-2-50 Bordeaux recommended. Kock, G. Ztschr. Landw. Versuchw. Osterr., 12 (1909), 2, 67. (23, 47) Rot Burger, O. F. Fla. Sta. Bui. 121 (1914). (30, 648) CURRANT Leaf Spot ( Gloeosporium ) Lustner, G. Amtsbl. Landw. Kammer, Wiesbaden, 91 (1909), 15, 102; 16, 107. (22. 746) Bordeaux recommended. Rosenthal, H. Deut. Obstbau Ztg., 1910, 14, 172. (23, 650) Apply ^-percent soda Bor- deaux eight days after blossoming and again after berries are gathered. Mildew ( Sph&rotheca ) Lustner, G. Amtsbl. Landw. Kammer, Wiesbaden, 91 (1909), 15, 102; 16, 107. (22, 746) Apply solution of 1 kilogram of potassium sulfid to 100 liters of water. Spray every ten days; five to eight applications per season. Rust ( Cronartium ) Ewert, R. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank.. 23 (1913), 8, 463. (31. 346) deaux. Apply 1-percent Bor- DAHLIA Root Rot ( Botrytis ) Cook, M. T., and Schwarze, C. A. Phytopath., 3 (1913), 3, 171. (30, 151) Keep storage room dry, cool, and well ventilated. 24 Wilson, G. W. N. C. Sta. Rpt. 1912, 56. DEWBERRY Rust (29, 50) ELM Twig Disease ( Exosporium ) Eriksson, J. Mycol. Centbl., 1 (1912), 2, 35. (27, 451) Inspect nursery stock and burn all diseased twigs. EUONYMUS Mildew, Powdery Foex, E. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre) , 30 (1909), 46, 614. (22, 351) Bor- deaux or potassium permanganate recommended. Janey, P. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre). 30 (1909), 43, 499. (22, 351) Dust shrubs with sulfur. FIG Canker ( Libertella ) Dallimore, W. Jour. Bd. Agr. (London), 17 (1910), 1, 47. (23, 454) Cut out infection and burn. Coat wounds with tar. Macro phoma Wolf, F. A. Ann. Mycol., 9 (1911), 6, 622. (26, 449) Remove and burn all diseased twigs and branches early in the season. FLAX Wilt ( Fusarium ) Dallimore, W: Roy. Bot. Gard. Kew, Bui. Misc. Inform., 9 (1913), 335. continual rotation of crops is recommended. (30, 648) A GINSENG Black Rot ( Rhizoctonia ) Osner, G. A. Proc. Ind. Acad. Sci., 1911, 355. (29, 751) Destroy affected parts and apply Bordeaux. Rankin, W. H. Spec. Crops, n. ser., 8 (1909), 87, 208. (22, 246) Blight ( Alternaria ) Howitt, J. E. Ann. Rpt. Ontario Agr. Col. and Expt. Farm, 38 (1912), 29. (30, 649) Whetzel, H. H. Spec. Crops, n. ser., 11 (1912), 117, 91. (27, 446) 3-3-50 Bordeaux recom- mended. Lime sulfur found injurious. and Rankin, W. H. Spec. Crops, n. ser., 9 (1910), 93, 327. (23, 547) Bordeaux and Paris green found effective. and Rosenbaum, J. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Bui. 250. (27, 649) Fiber Rot ( Thielaiia ) Whetzel, H. H. Spec. Crops, n. ser., 8 (1909), 88, 229. (22, 454) Spec. Crops, n. ser., 8 (1909), 84, 143. (21, 643) Reduce alkalinity of the soil. and Osner, G. Spec. Crops, n. ser., 9 (1910), 97, 411. (24, 153) Reduce alkalinity of the soil by applying acid phosphate. Root Rot ( Sclerotinia ) Rankin, W. H. Phytopath., 2 (1912), 1, 28. (27, 247) Eradicate affected roots. Disin- fect soil with steam or formalin. GOOSEBERRY Dieback ( Sclerotinia ) Salmon, E. S. Jour. Bd. Agr. (London). 17 (1910), 1, 1. (23, 453) Remove and burn all diseased bushes. Leaf Spot ( Glceosporium ) Lustner, G. Amtsbl. Landw. Kammer, Wiesbaden, 91 (1909), 15, 102; 16, 107. (22, 746) Bordeaux recommended. Mildew ( Spharotlieca ) Dorogin, G. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 23 (1913), 6, 334. (31, 546) Remove and destroy in autumn all parts of plants suspected of being diseased. Follow immediately and again in early spring by spraying plants and earth with 3-percent iron- sulfate solution. Eriksson, J. Prakt. Bl. Pflanzenbau u. Schutz, n. ser.. 6 (1908), 11, 121. (20, 1044) Deut. Obstbau Ztg., 1909, 22-23, 340; abs. in Centbl. Bakt. (etc.), 2 Abt., 26 (1910), 4-5, 110. (22, 747) Select resistant varieties, and prune and burn infected shoots in fall. Foex, E. Jour. Soc. Nat. Hort. France, 4 ser.. 14 (1913), 775; abs. in Jour. Agr. Prat., n. ser., 26 (1913), 49, 717. (30, 750) Cut and burn all affected parts; 26 turn the soil ; spray in autumn with 3-percent Bordeaux and in spring and sum- mer with .2-percent potassium sulfid. Fron, G. Ann. Inst. Nat. Agron., 2 ser., 8 (1909), 1, 131. (21, 448) Hegyi, D. Rev. Phytopath. Appl., 1 (1914). 22-23, 30. (31, 843) Bordeaux applied once or twice during winter at 5-percent strength and in early spring at 1-per- cent strength recommended. Hiltner, L., and Korff Prakt. Bl. Pflanzenbau u. Schutz, n. ser., 11 (1913), 6, 73. (29, 850) Kock, G. Verhandl. K. K. Zool. Bot. Gesell. Wien, 59 (1909), 1-2, 48; 3-4, 49; abs. in Centbl. Bakt. (etc.), 2 Abt., 25 (1909), 19, 519. (22, 743) Separate from Obstziichter, 8 (1913). (31, 749) Cut and burn all infected shoots in autumn. Spray with lime sulfur in autumn and again just before foliage appears. Apply sulfur liberally to the disease at any time. Lemcke, A. Separate from Georgine, Land u. Forstw. Ztg., 1909, 39. (22, 348) One- half percent solution of potassium sulfid recommended. Lind, G. K. Landtbr. Akd. Handl. och Tidskr., 48 (1909), 1, 33. (22, 247) Long, H. C. Gard. Chron., 3 ser., 52 (1912), 1354, 421. (28, 650) In autumn cut and burn all infected parts. Early in season spray with copper-sulfate solution and later with potassium sulfid. Lustner, G. Amtsbl. Landw. Kammer, Wiesbaden, 91 (1909), 15, 102; 16, 107. (22, 746) Bordeaux recommended. Marchal, E. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 20 (1910), 4, 234. (23, 551) Spray with 35-per- cent solution of lime sulfur and burn badly diseased branches and canes. Middleton, T. H. Bd. Agr. and Fisheries (London), Intel. Div. Ann. Rpt. Proc. 1909-10, 5. (25, 247) In fall or winter remove and burn all infected parts. Bd. Agr. and Fisheries (London), Ann. Rpt. Intel. Div. 1910-11, pt. 2, 4. (27, 353) Spraying and pruning effective. Oberstein, O. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 20 (1910), 8, 449. (24, 649) Salmon, E. S. Jour. Southeast Agr. Col. Wye, 1907, 16, 267. (20, 845) Jour. Southeast Agr. Col. Wye, 1909, 18, 271. (25, 248) To prevent spread of disease in summer time, spray with potassium sulfid. 27 Salmon, E. S. Proc. Assoc. Econ. Biol., 1 (1909), 4, 150. (21, 748) and Wright, C. B. W. Jour. Bd. Agr. (London), 19 (1913), 12. 994. (29, 249) Steffen Prakt. Rathgeber Obst u. Gartenbau, 1909, 257 ; abs. in Ztschr. Landw. Versuchsw. Osterr., 13 (1910), 1, 58. (23, 353) Cut and burn affected canes. Spray every ten days with solution of 700 grams potassium sulfid and 100 liters water. Just before leaves, appear apply mixture of Bordeaux and potas- sium sulfid. Swingle, D. B. Mont. Sta. Circ. 37 (1914). (31, 644) Vinson, R. S. Jour. Southeast Agr. Col. Wye, 1911, 20, 427. (28, 448) Spray and prune. Wagner Landw. Ztschr. Rheinprovinz, 11 (1910), 35, 527. (24, 452) During winter cut and burn all infected parts. Williams, C. M. Ann. Rpt. Quebec Soc. Protec. Plants (etc.), 3 (1910-11), 80. (26, 345) Lime sulfur recommended. Potassium sulfid and Bordeaux to be relied upon. (Anon.) Dept. Agr. and Tech. Instr. Ireland Jour., 8 (1908), 3, 479. Remove and burn affected parts and spray with Bordeaux. (Anon) Jour. Bd. Agr. (London), 16 (1909), 2, 117. (21, 447) Spray thoroly; prune and burn all affected shoots. GRAPE Diseases, General Bioletti, F. T. Cal. Sta. Bui. 197. (20, 548) DE CASTELLA, F. Jour. Dept. Agr. Victoria, 9 (1911), 6, 394; 7, 462; 9, 651; 10, 673. (26, 244) Molz, E. Ber. K. Lehranst. Wein, Obst u. Gartenbau Geisenheim, 1907, 316. (21, 52) Nazari, V. Staz. Sper. Agr. Ital.. 42 (1909), 9, 609. (23, 650) Anthracnose Degrully, L. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 35 (1914 j, 2, 33. (31, 346) Spray with solution of 8 parts of sulfuric acid and from 10 to 15 parts of iron sul- fate to 100 parts of water. Zacharewicz, E. Rev. Vit., 39 (1913), 1015, 760. (29, 849) Powdered lime, cement, and mineral superphosphate (2-1-1 by weight) applied three times at intervals of ten days has been found effective. 28 Anthracnose ( Glcoosporium ) Bos, J. Ritzema Tijdschr. Plantenziekten, 15 (1909), 3-5, 95. (23, 353) Anthracnose ( Sphaceloma ) Hawkins, L. A. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Circ. 105. (28, 649) Prune and spray with lime sulfur when dormant. Apply Bordeaux after winter spraying. Perold, A. I. Agr. Jour. Cape Good Hope, 37 (1910), 4, 370. (24, 350) Dust mixture of lime and sulfur on vines in summer. Apoplexy ( Polyporus ) Ravaz, L. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 30 (1909), 45, 574. (22, 247) Cut out diseased tissues and cover wounds with tar. Vi net, E. Rev. Vit., 32 (1909), 835, 676. (22, 651) Cut out diseased tissues and cover wounds with tar. Black Rot ( Guignardia ) Capus, J. Bui. Mens. Off. Renseig. Agr. (Paris), 10 (1911), 4, 456. (25, 550) Bor- deaux and Burgundy mixtures recommended. Hawkins, L. A. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Circ. 65. (24, 50) Disease can be controlled with five applications of 4-3-50 Bordeaux, soap being used in final application. Lerou, J. Rev. Vit., 37 (1912), 957, 526. (27,546) P RUNET, A. Rev. Vit., 39 (1913), 1000, 228. (29, 349) Spray with solution of copper sulfate or solution of sulfuric acid until bloom appears. Ravaz, L. Ann. Sci. Agron., 3 ser., 3 (1908), 2, 179. (20, 949) Spray with copper fungicides every ten days during early part of season. Reddick, D. West N. Y. Hort. Soc. Proc , 54 (1909), 127. (22, 651) Shear, C. L., Miles, G. F., and Hawkins, L. A. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Bui. 155. (22, 50) 4-3-50 Bordeaux or copper acetate, 1 pound to 50 gallons of water, recommended. Soursac, L. Ann. fLcole Nat. Agr. Montpellier, n. ser., 8 (1908), 2, 151; 8 (1909), 3, 161. (21, 52) Taft, L. R. Mich. Sta. Rpt. 1909, 152. (22, 651) Spray with 4-4-50 Bordeaux in early spring. If necessary apply 2-1-50 Bordeaux after July 15. 29 Wilson, C. S., and Reddick, D. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Bui. 266. (21, 344) Plow to cover all rotten clusters and leaves, keep down weeds, keep vines off ground, and spray thoroly with 5-5-50 Bordeaux. Chlorosis Bernatzky, J. Bui. Inst. Cent. Ampelol. Roy. Hongrois, 1 (1906), 8. (21, 551) Chancrin, E. Jour. Agr. Prat., n. ser., 23 (1912), 22, 683; 23, 715. (27, 850) Crown Gall Hedgcock, G. G. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Bui. 183. (23, 650) Remove and burn diseased vines. Deep planting in arid regions recommended. Gray Rot ( Botrytis ) Istvanffi, G. Ann. Sci. Agron., 3 ser., 3 (1908), 2, 196. (20, 949) Lafforgue, G. Rev. Vit., 39 (1913), 1001, 245; Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 34 (1913), 30, 104. (29, 349) Powdered lime, 85 percent, and powdered potas- sium permanganate recommended. Thouret, A., and Vidal, J. L. Rev. Vit., 40 (1913), 1023, 117. (29, 849) Total, E. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 30 (1909), 43, 499. (22, 349) Apply Bordeaux and soap when grapes reach full size. Zacharewicz, E, Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 30 (1909), 48, 664. (22, 454) Alternate applications of a liquid fungicide (copper sulfate, powdered soap, and water) followed when dry by sulfur, recommended. Rev. Vit., 34 (1910), 887, 671. (24, 649) Mildew Andre, S. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 31 (1910), 33, 198. (24, 51) Brunet, R. Rev. Vit., 34 (1910), 879, 421. (24, 452) Alternate spraying with Bordeaux and dusting vines and fruit with sulfur to which has been added 10 percent of copper sulfate, proved efficient. Burns, W. Dept. Agr. Bombay Bui. 36 (1910). (24, 649) Three applications of 3-2-25 Bordeaux followed by a fourth application of 3-2-40 Bordeaux recom- mended. Cadoret, A. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre). 31 (1910), 31, 137. (24, 50) 30 Cadoret, A. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre) , 34 (1913), 18, 557. (29, 551) For early attack spray with Bordeaux or copper acetate twice at intervals of fifteen days. For June attacks follow the above spraying with a powder of bolted lime, sulfur, and copper sulfate, 60-30-10 respectively. Gervies, A. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 31 (1910), 35, 256. (24, 51) Alternate spraying with copper-sulfate solution and dusting with mixture of copper sulfate and sulfur recommended. Labergerie Jour. Agr. Prat., n. ser., 20 (1910), 38, 369. (24, 250) Bordeaux recom- mended. Maisonneuve, P. Rev. Vit., 34 (1910), 889, 709. (24, 649) Bordeaux recommended over copper oxychlorid. Szigethi-Gyula, A., and Dupuis, L. Bui. Inst. Cent. Ampelol. Roy. Hongrois, 1 (1906), 13. (21, 551) Vermorel, V., and Dantony, E. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre) , 31 (1910), 30, 101 ; abs. in Rev. Vit., 34 (1910), 866, 71. Spray with solution of 20 grams of silver nitrate and 300 grams of white soap in 100 liters of water. Zacharewicz, E. Rev. Vit., 34 (1910), 887, 671 (24, 649) Mildew, Downy ( Plasmopara ) Belle and Fondard Rev. Vit., 32 (1909), 812, 47. (21, 644) Bolle, J. Ztschr. Landw. Versuchsw. Osterr., 16 (1913), 4, 299. (30, 448) Bretschneider, A. Ztschr. Landw. Versuchsw. Osterr., 13 (1910), 3, 135. (23, 651) Ztschr. Landw. Versuchsw. Osterr., 14 (1911), 5, 806. (25, 751) Monatsh. Landw., 5 (1912), 5, 138. (27, 652) Ztschr. Landw. Versuchsw. Osterr., 15 (1912), 2, 147. (27, 652) Burns, W. Dept. Agr. Bombay Bui. 45 (1911). (27, 49) Thoro and timely spraying with Bordeaux recommended. Caors, C. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 33 (1912), 5, 140. (26, 750) Spray, taking care to reach under sides of leaves. Capus, J. Rev. Vit.. 39 (1913), 1013, 693. (29, 849) Chappaz, G. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre) . 30 (1909), 10, 285. (20, 1139) Chuard, E. Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. (Paris), 150 (1910), 13, 839. (23. 453) Bor- deaux, 2-percent strength, recommended. Faes, H. Chron. Agr. Vaud., 21 (1908), 8, 189; 9, 207. (20, 548) Spray with 2-percent Bordeaux every fifteen days First application, 50 gallons per acre subsequent applications, 75 to 100 gallons per acre. Terre Vaud., 1 (1909), 9, 85. (23, 251) Rev. Vit., 36 (1911), 933, 489; 934, 517; 935, 545. (26, 550) Direct fungi- cide to under sides of leaves. Gerneck, R. Weinbau u. Weinhandel, 30 (1912), 47, 498. (29, 449) Early and timely spraying with 1-percent Bordeaux, repeated whenever rain falls, is recommended. Gouthiere, H. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 30 (1909), 17, 507. (21, 245) Guichard, J. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 30 (1909), 21, 621. (22, 349) Copper oxychlorid applied (1) about flowering period and (2) immediately after flowering period, is very effective. Hein, W. H. Insect Pest and Plant Disease Bur. Nebr., Div. Bot. Circ. 4. (21, 643) Heron, G. Jour. Agr. Prat. Vit. et Leon. Rurale Midi France, 109 (1913), 5, 192 (31, 151) Burgundy mixture recommended. Krankoff, J. J. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 33 (1912), 11, 334. (27, 49) Early and repeated spraying with Bordeaux recommended. Lerou, J. Rev. Vit., 37 (1912), 957, 526. (27, 546) Lustner, G. Ber. K. Lehranst. Wein, Obst u. Gartenbau Geisenheim, 1908, 111. (22, 349) One-percent Cucasa or copper soda recommended. Meissner, R. Weinbau u. Weinhandel, 26 (1908), 43, 387. (20, 549) Two-percent Bor- deaux recommended. Muller, K. Grossh. Bad. Landw. Vers. Anst. Augustenb. Flugbl., 1 (1913), 12; in Ber Grossh. Bad. Landw. Vers. Anst. Augustenb., (1912). (31, 346) Muller, H., and Thurgau Weinbau u. Weinhandel, 29 (1911), 29. 346; 46, 521 (26, 450) Spray under sides of leaves with Bordeaux. 32 Perold, A. J. Agr. Jour. Cape Good Hope, 37 (1910), 4, 370. (24, 350) Apply flowers of sulfur. Sauret, L. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 35 (1914), 19, 582. (31, 544) Apply liquid fungicide containing 2 kilograms copper sulfate and 1 kilogram of lime or carbonate of soda. SCHELLENBERG, H. Landw. Jahrb. Schweiz, 22 (1908), 5, 284. (20, 757) Landw. Jahrb. Schweiz, 26 (1912), 6, 420. (28, 152) Bordeaux recom- mended. Thiebaut, V. Rev. Vit., 33 (1910), 862, 691. (23, 746) Apply mixture of 1 part quick- lime, 2 parts sublimed sulfur, and 2 parts copper sulfate. Zacharewicz, E. Rev. Vit., 34 (1910), 887, 671. (24, 649) Rev. Vit., 40 (1913), 1025, 171. (30, 150) Copper-sulfate mixtures recom- mended. (Anon.) Weinbau u. Weinhandel, 26 (1908), 20, 193. (21, 54) Tenax, (consisting of equal proportions of copper sulfate, clay-treated sulfuric acid, and soda) in a 1-percent solution is recommended. Mildew, Powdery ( Uncinula ) Chappaz, G. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 30 (1909), 18, 532. (22, 247) Combinations of treatments of sulfur and copper recommended. DE ISTVANFFI, G. Bui. Inst. Cent. Ampelol. Roy. Hongrois, 1 (1906), 14. (21, 551) A mixture of bisulfite of ‘soda and sulfur recommended. Bui. Inst. Cent. Ampelol. Roy. Hongrois, 1 (1906), 9. (21, 551) Late autumn spraying recommended. Lerou, J. Rev. Vit., 37 (1912), 957, 526. (27, 546) Necrosis ( Fusicoccum ) Reddick, D. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Bui. 263. (21, 148) Eradicate disease by removing and burning all diseased parts. To prevent new infection, spray -in May or June. Pourridie Szigethi-Gyula, A. t Bui. Inst. Cent. Ampelol. Roy. Hongrois, 1 (1906), 16. (21, 550) Lime at the rate of 2 kilograms or 10 liters of milk of lime to a vine recommended. 33 Red Spot ( Pseudopeziza , ) Dummler Wchnbl. Landw. Ver. Baden, 1910, 415; abs. in Ztschr. Landw. Versuchsw. Osterr., 13 (1910), 6, 597. (24, 351) Two-percent Bordeaux recommended. Lustner, G. Ber. K. Lehranst. Wein, Obst u. Gartenbau Geisenheim, 1910, 175. (26, 144) Manure applied to light sandy soil increases resistance. Muller-Thurgau, H. Landw. Jahrb. Schweiz. 26 (1912), 6, 313. (28, 55) Bordeaux recom- mended. Root Rot ( Pestalozzia ) Wolf, F. A. Nebr. Sta. Rpt. 1907, 69. (20, 451) Sun Scald Pacottet, P. Rev. Vit., 32 (1909), 813, 57. (23, 48) Prune judiciously and whitewash glass of greenhouse. White Rot ( Coniothyrium ) Degrully, L. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 34 (1913), 36, 289. (30, 247) Spray with fungicide high in copper content. Istvanffi, G. Ann. Sci. Agron., 3 ser., 3 (1908), 2, 183. (20, 950) Apply 3-percent Bordeaux. Later dust with powder containing copper and sulfite of soda. Begin application immediately after flowering. GRAPE FRUIT Scab Fawcett, G. L. Porto Rico Prog., 6 (1914), 22, 6. (31, 152) Remove and burn infected parts. Bordeaux will control disease but destroys beneficial fungi which hold scale insects in check. HEMP Anthracnose ( Colletotrichum ) Shaw, F. J. F. Agr. Jour. India, 8 (1913), 1, 65; abs. in Agr. News (Barbados), 12 (1913), 289, 174. (29, 346) Collect and burn diseased leaves and spray with Bordeaux. HEVEA Dieback ( Gloeosporium ) Petch, T. Circs, and Agr. Jour. Roy. Bot. Gard., Ceylon, 4 (1910), 23, 307. (23, 552) Cut out diseased shoots and paint wounds with tar. 34 Leaf Disease ( Fusicladium ) Kuyper, J. Rec. Trav. Bot. Neerland., 8 (1911), 3-4, 371. (26, 651) Bordeaux recom- mended. Pink Disease ( Corticium ) Butler, E. J. Ann. Rpt. Bd. Sci. Advice India, 1911-12, 124. (30, 845) Root Disease ( Sph<£rostilbe ) Petch, T. Circs, and Agr. Jour. Roy. Bot. Gard., Ceylon, 5 (1910), 8, 65. (25, 46) Dig up and destroy all diseased trees and roots. • Isolate infected area by trenches one foot deep and treat ground with quicklime. HOLLYHOCK Rust ( Puccinia ) Webb, G. Gard. Chron., 3 ser., 50 (1911), 1288, 174. (26, 750) Dust powder on plants, in morning while dew is still on, three or four times during growing season. Powder should contain 1 bushel slaked lime, 1 bushel soot, 4 pounds flowers of sulfur, and 2 ounces finely powdered copper sulfate. HOP Mildew ( Sphcerotheca ) Blodgett, F, M. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Bui. 328. (29, 346) Observe proper sanitation. Sul- fur recommended. HYACINTH Yellows ( Bacterium ) Smith, E. F. Carnegie Inst. Washington Pub. 27, 2 (1911). (27, 44) IMMORTEL Canker South, F. W. Agr. News (Barbados). 11 (1912), 263, 174. (27, 451) Cut out and burn diseased bark. Apply tar to wounds. LARCH Canker, European ( Peziza ) Borthwick, A. W. Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinb., 1909, 21, 23. (22, 548) Scab ( Cladosporium ) Fiori, A. Bui. Soc. Bot. ltal., 1912, 8, 307. (29, 156) Remove and burn diseased parts and spray with Bordeaux. 35 LAVATERA Anthracnose ( Colletotrichum ) Chittenden, F. J. Jour. Roy. Hort. Soc. (London). 35 (1909), 2, 213. (22, 454) Repeated sprayings with Bordeaux checked the disease. LEBBEK Balls, W. L. Cairo Sci. Jour., 4 Diseases, General (1910), 41, 42. (23, 552) LEMON Cottony Mold Smith, C. O. Cal. Cult., 35 (1910), 9, 196. (24, 48) Copper sulfate. Gummosis ( Botrytis ) Fawcett, H. S. Mo. Bui. Com. Hort. Cal., 2 (1913), 8, 601. (30, 51) Bordeaux mixture or paste recommended. LETTUCE Drop ( Sclerotinia ) Burger, O. F. Fla. Sta. Bui. 116. (29, 846) Remove and destroy diseased plants. Drench infected area with Bordeaux or copper sulfate. Rotate. Stevens, F. L. Abs. in Science, n. ser.. 33 (1911), 850, 941. (25, 548) N. C. Sta. Bui. 217. (25, 846) Remove and destroy diseased plants. Apply Bordeaux or copper sulfate to places from which plants have been re- moved. and Hall, J. G. Abs. in Science, n. ser., 31 (1910), 802, 752. (23, 452) Prevent formation of sclerotia by early destruction of affected plants. N. C. Sta. Tech. Bui. 8, 89. (26, 448) Mildew, Downy ( Bremia ) Schneider, N. Rev. Hort. (Paris), 84 (1912), 21, 493. (28, 446) Cover ground with light dressing of charcoal. LILAC Leaf Disease ( Pseudomonas ) Giissow, H. T. Gard. Chron., 3 ser., 44 (1908), 1146, 404. (20, 850) Cut and burn all diseased shoots. Trunk Disease (Poly poms) VON ScHRENK, H. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard., 1 (1914), 2, 253. (31, 750) Disease enters thru holes made by borers. Kill borers, treat holes with antiseptic and plug. Burn diseased trunks. LOGANBERRY Hendersonia (Anon.) Jour. Bd! Agr. (London), 19 (1912), 2, 124. (27, 448) Cut and burn all diseased canes. Spray with Bordeaux. MAGUEY Diseases, General Gandara, G. Mem. y Rev. Soc. Cient. “Antonio Alzate,” 25 (1908-09), 9-12, 293. (23, 151) MAIZE Mildew, Downy ( Sclerospora ) Butler, E. J. Mem. Dept. Agr. India, Bot. Ser., 5 (1913), 5, 275. (31, 51) Prevent the formation of oospores. Remove and burn all diseased plants before they wilt. Smut ( Sorosporium ) McAlpine, D. Jour. Dept. Agr. Victoria, 8 (1910), 5, 290. (23, 647) Disinfect seed with copper sulfate or formalin. MANDARIN Black Spot (Anon.) Agr. Gaz. N. S. Wales, 25 (1914), 8, 684. (31, 843) Prune and spray trees and ground with Bordeaux. MANGO Bloom Blight ( Gloeosporium ) Cardin, P. P. Cuba Rev., 8 (1910), 5, 28. (24, 49) Two applications of Bordeaux at intervals of two weeks recommended. MELON Canker ( Micosphcerella ) Middleton, T. H. Bd. Agr. and Fisheries (London), Ann. Rpt. Intel. Div. 1910-11, pt. 2, 54. (27, 353) Spray with Bordeaux and disinfect houses thoroly in winter. 37 Mildew ( Pseudoperonospora ) Jarvis, C. D. Conn. Storrs Sta. Rpt. 1908-09, 31. (22, 743) 2-2-50 Bordeaux recom- mended. Kock, G. Verhandl. K. K. Zool. Bot. Gesell. Wien, 59 (1909), 1-2, 48; 3-4, 49; abs in Centbl. Bakt. (etc.), 2 Abt., 25 (1909), 19-25, 519. (22, 743) Wilt ( Bacillus ) Troop, J., and Woodbury, C. G. Ind. Sta. Rpt. 1908, 30. (20, 1044) MUSKMELON Rust Troop, J., and Woodbury, C. G. Ind. Sta. Rpt. 1908, 35. (20, 1044) Five applications of 5-5-50 Bordeaux recommended ; first application when rust spots begin to appear, followed by others at ten-day intervals. Soft Rot ( Bacillus ) Giddings, N. J. Vt. Sta. Bui. 148. (23, 349) Spray with Bordeaux. Support melons above ground and remove all traces of infection. MINT Rust ( Puccinia ) Noffray, E. Jour. Agr. Prat., n. ser., 19 (1910), 5, 150. (23, 350) Spray with Bor- deaux and burn infected leaves late in the fall. MULBERRY Leaf Spot ( Sphcerella ) Aver n a- S acc A, R. Bol. Agr. (Sao Paulo), 12 ser., 1911, 9-10, 727. (27, 547) Both Bordeaux and copper sulfate recommended. NARCISSUS Dry Rot ( Fusarium ) Massee, G. Jour. Bd. Agr. (London), 20 (1914), 12, 1091. (31, 646) Kill secondary spores during germination by working into soil a dressing of kainit or potas- sium sulfate. Rotate with non-susceptible plants. OAK Mildew ( Oidium ) Cuif, E. Bui. Soc. Sci. Nancy, 3 ser., 12 (1911), 1, 102. (26, 451) Dust seedlings with sulfur two or three times during season. d' Almeida, J. V. Rev. Agron. (Portugal). 6 (1908), 3, 42. (23, 50) Kirch ner, O. Allg. Forst u. Jagd Ztg.. 85 (1910), 158. (23, 50) Kock, G. Osterr. Forst u. Jagd Ztg., 28 (1910), 3, 18. (23, 50) Dust trees with powdered sulfur or spray with Bordeaux. Kovessi, F. 1. Cong. Internat. Pathol. Comparee (Paris), 1912, 2, Comp. Rend., 924. (31, 845) Flowers of sulfur recommended. Neger, F. W. Tharand. Forstl. Jahrb., 62 (1911), 1, 1. (27, 253) Spray once or twice with lime sulfur. von Tubeuf, K. Naturw. Ztschr. Forst u. Landw., 7 (1909), 2, 119; abs. in Bot. Centbl., 110 (1909), 24, 627. (23, 50) Hot-water treatment of seeds recommended. Yellow Spot Maige, A. Bui. Sta. Forest Nord. Afrique, 1 (1912), 1, 10. (31, 247) OATS Diseases, General Stormer, K., and Kleine, R. Illus. Landw. Ztg., 32 (1912), 51, 471. (28, 149) Blight (Pseudomonas) Manns, T. F. Ohio (Wooster) Sta. Bui. 210. (22, 453) Select resistant varieties. “Dry Leaf” Edinburgh and East of Scotland College of Agriculture Rpt. 30 (1913), 22; abs. in Jour. Bd. Agr. (London), 20 (1914), 11, 1010. (31, 243) The use of such fertilizers as ammonium sulfate, superphosphate, and manganese sulfate, lessens disease. Mildew ( Erysiphe ) Stormer, K., and Kleine, R. Deut. Landw. Presse, 39 (1912), 51, 599. (28, 346) The use of phos- phorus, potassium, and calcium salts recommended. Scolecotrichum Nilsson-Ehle, H. Abs. in Bot.’ Centbl., Ill (1909), 7, 165. (23, 46) Smut (Ustilago) Goss, A. Ind. Sta. Rpt. 1908, 17. (20, 1043) The use of formalin recommended. 39 Yellows Clausen, H. Mitt. Dent. Landw. Gesell., 25 (1910), 44, 631. (24, 449) A direct appli- cation of lime should be omitted ; ammonium sulfate should be used in place of nitrate of soda; phosphoric acid should be in form of superphosphate in place of “Thomas slag’’ ; and soil after planting should be thoroly rolled down. OLEANDER Bacteriosis Tonelli, A. Ann. R. Accad. Agr. Torino, 55 (1912), 383. (30, 751) Cut out cankers and cover wopnds with some good fungicide. OLIVE Diseases, General Cuboni Ann. Agr. (Italy),. 1908. 256, 83. (20, 950) Sooty Mold ( Meliola ) Vidal, D. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 30 (1909), 24, 730. (23, 250) Spray trees twice during season with 2-percent Bordeaux, To every 100 liters of Bor- deaux add 1 liter of turpentine. ONION Mold ( Macrosporium ) Ramirez, R. Bob Dir. Gen. Agr. (Mexico), Rev. Agr , 2 (1912), 5, 413. (29, 245) Lime sulfur, 1-1-100, recommended. Smut ( Urocystis ) Jones, L. R„ and Vaughn, R. E. Wis. Sta. Bui. 240 (1914). (31, 840) Disinfect seed with formalin. Pam mel, L. H., and King, C. M. Ia. Sta. Bui. 131. (27, 445) Reddick, D. West N. Y. Hort. Soc. Proc., 58 (1912), 194. (29, 245) Stone, G. E. Mass. Sta. Circ. 21. (23, 743) Treat seed before planting with solution of 1 pound of formalin to 30 gallons of water. ORANGE Diseases, General Gandara, G. Estac. Agr. Cent. (Mexico), Bob 31, 1, 43. (24, 157) 40 Floyd, B. F. Fla. Sta. Rpt. 1913, 27. Bordeaux. Dieback (31, 749) Spray twice in spring with 5-5-50 Exanthema Bittlebank, C. C. Jour. Dept. Agr. Victoria, 10 (1912), 7, 401. (27, 850) Avoid nitrogenous manures. Plow under green crops previously manured with superphosphates. Rot Savastano, L. R. Staz. Sper. Agrum. e Frutticol. Acireale, Bol. 9 (1912). (31, 646) Timely tree surgery and substitution of sound young trees recommended. ORCHID Bacterial Disease ( Bacillus ) Hori, S. Centbl. Bakt. (etc.), 2 Abt., 31 (1911), 1-4, 85. (26, 650) Apply 1-percent solution of corrosive sublimate with soft sponge. Avoid excess of water. Leaf Spot ( Hypodermium ) Brooks, F. T. Gard. Chron., 3 ser., 50 (1911), 1281, 27. (25, 755) Sponge leaves with a dilute solution of potassium permanganate. PALM Diseases, General Coleman, L. C. Ann. Mycol., 8 (1910), 6, 591; Dept. Agr. Mysore, Mycol. Ser. Bui. 2, 1910. (24, 650) Bud Rot (Pyt hium) Butler, E. J. Mem. Dept. Agr. India, Bot. Ser., 3 (1910), 5, 221. (24, 351) Systematic cutting and destruction of all diseased trees recommended. PEACH Diseases, General Essig, E. O. Mo. Bui. Com. Hort. Cal., 1 (1912), 8, 337. (27, 652) Norton, J. B. S. Rpt. Md. State Hort. Soc.. 13 (1910), 138. (28, 148) Rolfs, F. M. Ann. Rpt. Mo. Bd. Hort., 2 (1908), 63. (22, 150) Worsham, E. L., and Reed, W. V. Ga. Bd. Ent. Bui. 26. (20, 757) 4i Brown Rot ( Sclerotinia ) Barre, H. W. S. C. Sta. Rpt. 1910, 27. (24, 745) Two applications of self-boiled lime sulfur (8-8-50) recommended. McCue, C. A. Del. Sta. Bui. 85. (21, 244) Lime-sulfur wash recommended. Morris, O. M. Okla. Sta. Rpt. 1908, 16. (20, 950) Four applications of Bordeaux recom- mended. Oklahoma Okla. Sta. Rpt. 1908, 78. (20, 950) Both Bordeaux and ammoniacal copper carbonate recommended. Scott, W. M., and Quaintance, A. L. Better Fruit, 5 (1910), 1, 19. (23, 745) Apply solution of 2 pounds of arsenate of lead to 50 gallons of lime sulfur. Repeat one month after petals fall and again one month before fruit ripens. Stewart, J. P. Proc. State Hort. Soc. Pa., 52 (1911), 181; Proc. Amer. Pomol. Soc., 32 (1911), 281. (25, 352) Crown Gall ( Pseudomonas ) Swingle, D. B. Mont. Sta. Circ. 37 (1914). (31, 644) Leaf Curl ( Exoascus ) Arnaud, G. Rev. Phytopath., 1 (1913), 2, 24; abs. in Riv. Patol. Veg., 6 (1913), 7, 218. (30, 353) Bordeaux or lime sulfur recommended. Blake, M. A., and Farley, A. J. N. J. Sta. Rpt. 1908, 53. (22, 150) Remove and destroy affected parts. Apply Bordeaux or lime sulfur. Bolle, J. Ztschr. Landw. Versuchsw. Osterr., 16 (1913), 4, 299. (30, 448) Farley, A. J. N. J. Sta. Circ. 29. (30, 750) Thoro application of lime sulfur before buds open recommended. Gassner, G. Rev. Asoc. Rural Uruguay, 37 (1908), 10, 546. (22, 748) Manaresi, A. Coltivatore, 56 (1910), 7, 208. (23, 151) Quinn, G. Jour. Dept. Agr. So. Aust., 15 (1911), 1, 58. (26, 144) Two applications of Burgundy or Bordeaux recommended Jour. Dept. Agr. So. Aust., 17 (1913), 1, 28. (30, 50) Burgundy most effective. Swingle, D. B. Mont. Sta. Circ. 37. (31, 644) 42 Wallace, E. Rpt. Niagara Sprayer Co. Fellowship, 1 (1909). (22, 652) Lime sulfur better than Bordeaux. Weeks, C. B. Mo. Bui. Com. Hort. Cal., 1 (1912), 8, 359. (28, 152) Bordeaux 7-7-50 in late fall, 4-4-50 in spring, and 2-2-50 after leaves appear, recommended. Zauli, G. Bui. R. Soc. Toscana Ort , 3 ser., 12 (1907), 11, 325. (20, 548) Apply solution of copper sulfate, lime, and ammonium chlorid at time buds open. If rainy give a second application. Little Peach Blake, M. A. N. J. Sta. Bui. 226. (22, 748) Caesar, L. Ont. Dept. Agr. Bui. 185. (24, 250) Destroy affected trees. Rust ( Puccinia ) Perronne, P. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 35 (1914), 2, 57! (31, 53) Scab ( Cladosporium ) Barre, H. W. S. C. Sta. Rpt. 1910, 27. (24, 745) Blake, M. A., and Farley, A. J. N. J. Sta. Bui. 236. (25, 455) Lime sulfur 1-150 or 1-175 recommended. Stronger solutions unsafe. Evans, I. B. P. Agr. Jour. Union So. Africa, 1 (1911), 5, 696. (25, 752) Bordeaux 5-5-50 three weeks before buds open, 4-4-50 just after fruit is setting, and 4-4-100 when fruit is half grown. Scott, W. M., and Ayres, T. W. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Bui. 174. Lime sulfur recommended. Stewart, J. P. Proc. State Hort. Assoc. Pa., 52 (1911), 181; Proc. Amer. Pomol. Soc., 32 (1911), 281. (25, 352) Bordeaux or lime sulfur and lead arsenate recommended. Yellows Blake, M. A. N. J. Sta. Bui. 226. (22, 748) Hutchins, E. Better Fruit, 5 (1910), 1, 64. (23, 746) For three years uproot and burn all trees showing signs of yellows. PEANUT Diseases, General South, F. W. West Indian Bui. 11 (1911), 3, 157. (25, 348) 43 PEAR Diseases, General Stevens, F. L. N. C. Sta. Bui. 206. (23, 453) Stewart, F. C. West N. Y. Hort. Soc. Proc., 56 (1911), 61. (26, 55) Swingle, D. B. Mont. Sta. Circ. 37 (1914). (31, 644) Chlorosis Riviere, G., and Bailhache, G. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 33 (1912), 11, 340. (27, 48) Application of solution of pyrophosphate of iron with ammonium citrate thru holes in the base of trunk change chlorotic appearance to healthy one. SCHELLENBERG, H. Landw. Jahrb. Schweiz, 26 (1912), 6, 432. (28, 151) Fire Blight ( Bacillus ) Gammon, E. A. Mo. Bui. Com. Hort. Cal., 1 (1912), 2, 37. (27, 353) Prune carefully and disinfect thoroly. Hall, J. F. Wash. Sta. Popular Bui. 65 (1914), postcard. (31, 749) Hall, J. G. Wash. Sta. Popular Bui. 56. (29, 848) Remove and burn all diseased portions of trees. Jackson, H. S. Ore. Sta. Circ. 7. (23. 454) Pickett, B. S. 111. Sta. Circ. 172 (1914). (31, 644) Remove and destroy all infected trees, which carry disease over winter. Sackett, W. G. Southwest Stockman, 28 (1909), 15. (22, 46) Swingle, D. B. Mont. Sta. Circ. 2. (23, 352) Remove and burn all infected parts. Avoid watering to excess. Rust (Gymno sporangium) OSTERW ALDER, A. Schweiz. Ztschr. Obst u. Weinbau, 1912, 311 ; abs. in Ztschr. Landw. Versuchsw. Osterr., 15 (1912), 12, 1303. (29, 50) Destroy all neighboring junipers. Scab ( V enturia ) Lounsbury, C. P. Agr. Jour. Cape Good Hope, 33 (1908), 1, 16. (20, 452) 44 Nicholls, H. M. Agr. Gaz. Tasmania, 21 (1913), 10, 387. (30, 541) Plow under fallen leaves early in fall, harrow surface and leave undisturbed until November 15. Spray leaves early in October with Bordeaux or Burgundy mixture or lime sulfur, adding one pound of wheat flour to each gallon of fungicide to pro- mote spreading and adhesion. Perronne, P. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 35 (1914), 2, 57. (31, 53) Smith, R. E. Northwest Pacific Farmer, 39 (1909), 51, 1. (22, 350) Spray trees in February or March with lime sulfur; when buds begin to swell spray with strong Bordeaux; after fruit sets give two applications of 5-5-50 Bordeaux to which a little arsenic has been added. Sun Scald Lustner, G. Ber. K. Lehranst. Wein, Obst u. Gartenbau Geisenheim, 1909, 123. (24, 156) PECAN Diseases, General Miller, H. K. Amer. Fruit and Nut Jour., 7 (1913), 99, 12. (31, 245) Scab ( Fusicladium ) Waite, W. D. Science, n. ser., 33 (1911), 837, 77. (24, 452) Bordeaux recommended. Grow scab-resisting varieties. PEPPER Anthracnose (Co lie to trie hum) Bancroff, C. K., and Hunte, R. L. Jour. Bd. Agr. Brit. Guiana, 7 (1914), 3, 139. (31, 542) Bordeaux recom- mended. Ridley, H. N. Agr. Bui. Straits and Fed. Malay States, 10 (1911), 10, 320. (26, 448) Remove and burn all infected spikes. Spray with Bordeaux. PINE Blister Rust ( Cronartium ) Spaulding, P. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Bui. 206. (25, 457) Import no five-leaf pines or Ribes stock. Remove and burn all diseased trees. Stewart, F. C. West. N. Y. Hort. Soc. Proc., 58 (1912), 122. (29, 249) Isolate Ribes and other susceptible varieties; destroy promptly any signs of disease; pre- vent distribution of diseased pines, and do not plant black currants in the vicinity of nursery. 45 Leaf Cast ( Lophodermium ) Haack Ztschr. Forst u. Jagdw., 43 (1911), 4, 329; 5, 402; 6, 481; abs. in Hedwigia, 51 (1911), 3, Beibl., 202. (26, 651) Spray in spring with weak solution of copper sulfate. Remove and burn all infection. Herrmann, E. Naturw. Ztschr. Forst u. Landw., 8 (1910), 2, 105. (23, 751) Maire, E. Rev. Eaux et Forets, 49 (1910), 15, 458. (24, 53) Copper sulfate recom- mended. Mayr, H. Forstw. Centbl., n. ser., 33 (1911), 1, 1; abs. in Hedwigia, 51 (1911), 3, Beibl., 204. (26, 651) ScHANDER, R. Vortrage Pflanzenschutz, Abt. Pflanzenkrank. Kaiser Wilhelms Inst. Landw. Bromberg, 1910, 1, 33. (23, 152) Rust ( Peridermium ) Haack Ztschr. Forst u. Jagdw., 46 (1914), 1, 3, (31, 153) Remove and destroy infection. PINEAPPLE Decay (Anon.) Agr. News (Barbados), 13 (1914), 318, 222. (31, 844) Cut off and sear stems with wax. Cool and dry fruit twenty-four hours before packing. Fumigate with formalin. PINK Bud Rot ( Sporotrichum ) Molz, E., and Morgenthaler, O. Ber. Deut. Bot. Gesell., 30 (1912), 9, 654. (28, 750) Ventilate hot-houses and destroy all infected buds. Avoid too high moisture content of air and soil, likewise use of swamp soil. PLUM Diseases, General Whitmarsh, R. D. Mass. Sta. Rpt. 1909, pt. 2, 65. (24, 252) Black Knot ( Plowrightia ) Coons, G. H. Mich. Farmer, 140 (1913), 14, 425. (29, 155) Dilute commercial lime sulfur recommended. Brown Rot ( Sclerotinia ) Morris, O. M. Okla. Sta. Rpt. 1908. 16. (20, 951) Four applications of half-strength Bordeaux recommended. 46 Stone, G. E. Mass. Sta. Rpt. 1909, pt. 2, 65. (24, 252) Leaf Spot ( Cylindrosporium ) Stewart, V. B. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Circ. 21 (1914). (30, 848) Bordeaux, 5-5-50, or lime- sulfur solution, 1 gallon to 50 gallons of water, recommended. Burning is pre- vented by the addition of granulated iron sulfate. Rust ( Puccinia ) Brooks, F. T. New Phytol., 10 (1911), 5-6, 207; Gard. Chron., 3 ser., 50 (1911), 1295, 292; abs in Internat. Inst. Agr. (Rome), Bui. Bur. Agr. Intel, and Plant Diseases, 2 (1911), 11-12, 2603. (27, 48) Eradicate Anemone coronatia, upon which the aecidium stage is found. Scab ( Cladosporium ) Macoun, W. T. Canada Expt. Farms Rpts., 1909, 126. (22, 350) Spray early with Bor- deaux. When fruit sets use ammoniacal copper carbonate to prevent staining. Silver Leaf ( Stereurii ) Pickering, S. W. Woburn Expt. Fruit Farm Rpt., 12 (1910) ; rev. in Gard. Chron., 3 ser., 48 (1910), 1246, 356. (24, 349) Remove and destroy all infection. POPLAR Canker Hoc, P. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 30 (1909), 30, 116. (21, 645) Remove and destroy infected branches. POTATO Diseases, General Cook, M. T. Ann. Rpt. N. J. Bd. Agr., 40 (1912), 155. (30, 539) N. J. Sta. Circ. 18. (29, 549) and Martin, G. W. N. J. Sta. Circ. 33. (31, 52) Coons, G. H. Mich. Sta. Special Bui. 66 (1914). (31, 543) Foex, E., and Perret, C. Vie Agr. et Rurale, 3 (1914), 5, 129. (31. 51) Jack, R. W. Rhodesia Agr. Jour., 11 (1914), 3, 399. (30, 847) Jones, L. R. Wis. Sta. Circ. Inform. 36. (28, 53) Lutman, B. F. Vt. Sta. Bui. 159. 225. (26, 53) 47 McAlpine, D. Melbourne: Dept. Agr. Victoria, 1912, 111: rev. in Nature (London), 92 (1913), 2289, 27. (30, 48) Orton, W. A. U. S. Dept. Agr., Farmers' Bui. 544. (29, 549) Pethybridge, G. H. Dept. Agr. and Tech. Instr. Ireland Jour.. 12 (1912), 2, 334. (27, 446) Dept. Agr. and Tech. Instr. Ireland Jour., 10 (1910), 2. 241; abs. in Farm- ers’ Gaz., 69 (1910), 7, 130. (22, 746) Stewart, F. C., and French, G. T. Abs. in Phytopath., 2 (1912), 1, 45. (27, 151) and Sirrine, F. A. N. Y. (Geneva) Sta. Bui. 307. (20, 948) Stift, A. Centbl. Bakt. (etc.), 2 Abt . 23 (1909), 6-9, 173. (22, 347) Tidswell, F., and Johnston, T. H. Dept. Agr. N. S. Wales, Farmers’ Bui. 31. (23, 47) Agr. Gaz. N. S. Wales, 20 (1909), 11, 998. (22, 453) Bacterial Rot ( Bacillus ) Osborn, T. G. B. Jour. Dept. Agr. So. Aust., 17 (1913), 1, 19. (30, 48) Remove and burn infected plants, use clean seed, and rotate crops. Blackleg Morse, W. J. • Me. Sta. BuL 174. (23, 248) Use clean seed and treat with corrosive sublimate or formalin before cutting. Me. Sta. Doc. 375. (23, 548) Disinfect seed. Me. Sta. Bui. 194. (26, 546) Corky Scab ( Spongospora ) Boyd, D. A. Glasgow Nat., 3 (1911), 3, 82. (26, 748) Evans, I. B. P. Transvaal Agr. Jour., 8 (1910), 31, 462. (23, 548) Johnson, T. Econ. Proc. Roy. Dublin Soc., 1 (1908), 12, 453. (20. 450) Disinfect seed with Bordeaux or 2-percent copper-sulfate solution. Cultivate thoroly and treat soil with sulfur. (Anon.) Jour. Bd. Agr. (London), 15 (1908), 8, 592. (20, 649) Soak seed before planting for two hours in solution of ^2 pint of formalin in 15 gallons of water. 48 Dry Rot ( Fusarium ) Evans, I. B. P. Transvaal Agr. Jour., 7 (1908), 25, 64. (20, 847) Longman, S. Jour. Linn. Soc. (London), Bot., 39 (1909), 270, 120. (22, 149) Lounsbury, C. P. Agr. Jour. Cape Good Hope, 35 (1909), 1, 42. (21, 643) Destroy all diseased tubers, use only healthy seed, and rotate crops. Manns, T. F. Ohio (Wooster) Sta. Bui. 229. (25, 653) Use only sound tubers for seed, practice five- or six-year crop rotation, and avoid the use of infected barnyard manure as a fertilizer. Morse, W. J. Me. Sta. Doc. 375. (23, 548) Orton, W. A. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Circ. 110. (28, 848) Select clean seed rotate crops, and use care in storing tubers. Pethybridge, G. H., and Bowers, E. H. Econ. Proc. Roy. Dublin Soc., 1 (1908), 14, 547. (20, 846) Destroy all suspicious tubers when harvesting; examine stored potatoes from time to time and remove those affected. Take care to prevent wounding when handling the crop. Wilcox, E. M., Link, G. K. K., and Pool, V. W. Nebr. Sta. Research Bui. 1. (29, 47) Before storing potatoes treat with lime sulfur, formalin, or formalin vapor. Early Blight ( Alternaria ) Milward, J. G. Wis. Sta. Circ. Inform. 3. (22, 247) Only standard, medium late, and late varieties are benefited by Bordeaux spraying. Spray not less than four times, beginning not later than August 15. Sandsten, E. P., and Milward, J. G. Wis. Sta. Bui. 168. (20, 948) Bordeaux recommended. Stuart, W. Va. Sta. Bui. 179 (1914). (31, 643) (Anon.) Dept. Agr. and Tech Instr. Ireland Jour., 9 (1909), 4, 745. (21, 746) Late Blight ( Phytophthora ) Allen, W. J. Agr. Gaz. N. S. Wales, 21 (1910), 7, 571. (24, 47) Bordeaux recom- mended. Barcus, M. F. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Circ. 19. (29, 549) Spray with Bordeaux. Batsy, F. Petite Rev. Agr. et Hort., 18 (1912), 421, 135. (27, 748) Bordeaux or copper-sulfate solution recommended, 49 CUTHBERTSON, W. Gard. Chron., 3 ser., 49 (1911), 1261, 122. (25, 44) Finardi, E. Avven. Agr., 20 (1912), 7, 290; abs. in Internat. Inst. Agr. (Rome), Bui. Bur. Agr. Intel, and Plant Diseases, 3 (1912), 10, 2310. (29, 246) Gandara, G. Bol. Soc. Agr. Mexicana, 33 (1909), 20, 394; 21, 412; 22, 425. (21, 747) Bordeaux recommended. Haywood, A. H. Agr. Gaz. N. S. Wales, 21 (1910), 1, 63. (22, 746) Apply 6-4-40 Bor- deaux at the rate of 50 gallons per acre. Jones, L. R., Giddings, N. J., and Lutman, B. F, U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant. Indus. Bui. 245. (27, 544) Lea, A. M. Agr. Gaz. Tasmania, 19 (1911), 7, 357. (26, 143) Bordeaux recommended. McAlpine, D. Jour. Dept. Agr. Victoria, 7 (1909), 11, 698. (22, 453) Treat seed tubers to dry heat at 120° F. for four hours. Such treatment destroys fungus and increases germinating power. Spray with Bordeaux. Jour. Dept. Agr. Victoria, 8 (1910), 6, 358. (23, 744) Dept. Agr. Victoria Bui. 27; Dept. Agr. So. Aust. Bui. 49. (24, 46) Morse, W. J. Me. Sta. Doc. 375. (23, 548) Me. Sta. Bui. 169. (22, 546) Apply 5-5-50 Bordeaux when plants are about eight inches high and every ten days thereafter until frost. Mortensen, M. L. Tidsskr. Landbr. Planteavl, 17 (1910), 2, 293. (23, 744) Spray with Bor- deaux about July 20 and one month later. Oldershaw, A. W. Dept. Agr. and Tech. Instr. Ireland Jour., 11 (1911), 3, 450. (25, 455) Pethybridge, G. H. Dept. Agr. and Tech. Instr. Ireland Jour., 13 (1913), 3, 445. (29, 549) Bordeaux better than Burgundy. Ravn, F. K. Tidsskr. Landbr. Planteavl, 17 (1910), 2, 271. (23, 744) Reed, H. S. Phytopath., 2 (1912), 6, 250. (28, 747) Seymour, G. Jour. Dept. Agr. Victoria, 10 (1912), 12, 745. (28, 849) Stevens, H. E. Fla. Sta. Rpt. 1912, 93. (29, 242) Stuart, W. Va. Sta. Bui. 179 (1914). (31, 643) 50 Turner/ D. Agr. Student’s Gaz., n. ser., 15 (1910), 2, 38. (24, 252) Late spring spraying with 14-9-100 Bordeaux recommended. Leaf Roll Appel, O. and Kreitz, W. Mitt. K. Biol. Anst. Land u. Forstw., 1909, 8, 15. (23, 148) Hedlund, T. Tidsskr. Landtman, 31 (1910); abs. in Bot. Centbl., 114 (1910), 22, 567 (24, 552) A loose seed bed, sound seed tubers, not too deep planting, and liming of the soil are recommended. Lang, W. Wiirttemb. Wchnbl. Landw., 1909, 23, 420; 24, 444. (24, 46) Breed resistant varieties. Orton, W. A. U. S. Dept. Agr. Bui. 64 (1914). (30, 649) U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Circ. 109. (28, 848) Select clean seed; rotate and improve culture. Osterspen Mitt. Deut. Landw. Gesell., 26 (1911), 18, 222. (25, 455) Remy, T., and Schneider, G. Fiihling’s Landw. Ztg, 58 (1909), 6, 201. (21, 243) Bohutinsky-Krizevci, G. Ztschr. Landw. Versuchsw. Osterr., 13 (1910), 7, 607. (24, 154) Formalin proved worthless in controlling the disease. SCHANDER, R. Fiihling’s Landw. Ztg., 58 (1909), 8, 273. (22. 346) Jahresber. Ver. Angew. Bot., 7 (1909), 235. (24, 46) Use only sound tubers for seed. Schleh Fiihling’s Landw. Ztg., 58 (1909), 18, 641. (22, 347) Steglich, B. Sachs.' Landw. Ztschr., 57 (1909), 17, 296. (22, 246) Stormer, K. Jahresber. Ver. Angew. Bot., 7 (1909), 119. (24, 47) Vanha, J. Monatsh. Landw.. 3 (1910), 9, 268. (24, 154) Lohsol, a carbolineum prepa- ration, 20 to 40 cc. to every square meter of soil, was very effective either when mixed with soil or used for disinfecting seed tubers. von Zedtwitz, W. Wiener Landw. Ztg., 59 (1909), 83, 818; abs. in Centbl. Bakt. (etc.), 2 Abt., 26 (1910), 4-5, 117. (23,249) (Anon.) Ztschr. Landw. Versuchsw. Osterr., 14 (1911); 7, 911. (27, 351) Use only healthy tubers for seed. Rhisoctonia Eriksson, J. Meddel. Centralanst. P'orsoksv. Jordbruksomradet, 1912, 67 ; K. Landtbr. Akad. Handl. och Tidskr., 51 (1912), 7-8, 550. (29, 152) Use clean seed and rotate three to four years. Gloyer, W. O. N. Y. (Geneva) Sta. Bui. 370 (1913). (30, 539) Soak seed tubers in solution of corrosive sublimate, 1-2000. Scab Bernhard, A. Deut. Landw. Presse. 38 (1911), 15, 168; 16, 179. (25, 245) Sulfur recom- mended. Holmes, E. S. Jour. Dept. Agr. Victoria, 8 (1910), 9, 570. (24, 247) Soak seed tubers for two hours in a 1-30 solution of formalin before cutting. Seymour, G. Jour. Dept. Agr. Victoria, 8 (1910), 6, 360. (23, 744) Stone, G. E., and Chapman, C. H. Mass. Sta. Rpt. 1912, pt. 1, 84. (30, 150) von Wahl, C. Ber. Grossh. Bad. Landw. Vers. Anst. Augustenb., 1910, 58. (26, 342) Soak seed tubers for one and one-half hours before planting, in either 2-percent solution Bordeaux or .05-percent solution corrosive sublimate. Scab ( Oospora ) Bernhard, A. Deut. Landw. Presse, 37 (1910), 18, 204. (23, 744) The use of sulphur is beneficial, as it disinfects the soil, improves physical conditions, and causes quicker and more intensive action of commercial fertilizers. Henderson, L. F. Maritime Farmer, 14 (1909), 13, 291. (21, 51) Treat seed tubers with solution of either formalin or corrosive sublimate and plant in virgin soil when possible. Scab, Powdery ( Spongospora ) Johnson, T. Sci. Proc. Roy. Dublin Soc., n. ser., 12 (1909), 16, 165. (22, 149) Treat scabby tubers with 2-percent Bordeaux and plant seed whole. Melhus, I. E. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Circ. 127. (29, 347) Morse, W. J. Me. Sta. Bui. 227 (1914). (31, 243) Wart ( Synchytrium ) Bos, J. Ritzema Tijdschr. Plantenziekten, 16 (1910), 1-2, 59. (23, 347) CUTHBERTSON, W. Gard. Chron., 3 ser., 49 (1911), 1261, 122. (25, 44) 52 Eriksson, J. Jour. Bd. Agr. (London), 21 (1914), 2, 135. (31, 842) The use of a 1-percent solution of formalin at the rate of one quart per square foot of soil as a disinfectant has been found beneficial. Gussow, H. T. Canada Cent. Expt. Farm Bui. 63. (22, 545) Clean infected land of tubers and rubbish and apply 4 to 5 tons of unslaked lime per acre. Johnson, T. Sci. Proc. Roy. Dublin Soc., n. ser., 12 (1909), 14, 131. (22, 149) Jostung, H. Deut. Landw. Presse, 36 (1909), 88, 941. (23, 347) Use only healthy seed, rotate crops, burn diseased tubers, and after cooking, feed slightly infected tubers to stock. Deut. Landw. Presse, 36 (1909), 68, 725. (22, 246) Kitley, F. Gard. Chron., 3 ser., 46 (1909), 1175, 362. (23, 744) Malthouse, G. T. Field Expts. Harper-Adams Agr. Col. and Staffordshire Joint Rpt. 1908, 19. (24, 449) The use of sulfur at the rate of pound per square yard of soil is recommended. Harper-Adams Agr. Col. Bui., (1910), Nov. (24, 648) Riehm, E. Centbl. Bakt. (etc.), 2 Abt., 24 (1909), 8-12, 208. (22, 650) Gas lime, quicklime, or sulfur applied to soil have been found beneficial. Salmon, E. S. Jour. Southeast Agr. Col. Wye, (1909), 18, 294. (25, 245) Schneider, G. Deut. Landw. Presse, 36 (1909), 88, 940. (22, 545) Rotate crops and burn all infected tubers. Spieckermann Illus. Landw. Ztg., 34 (1914), 2, 7; 3, 16. (31, 149) Apply sulfur to soil. ZlMMERMANN, E. Naturw. Ztschr. Forst u. Landw.. 8 (1910), 6, 320. (23, 744) (Anon.) Dept. Agr. and Tech. Instr. Ireland Jour., 8 (1908), 3, 441. (20, 649) (Anon.) Gard. Chron., 3 ser., 55 (1914), 1416, 106. (31, 149) (Anon.) Jour. Bd. Agr. (London), 17 (1910), 7, 556. (24, 347) Use only resist- ant varieties. (Anon.) Dept. Agr. and Tech. Instr. Ireland Jour., 13 (1913), 4, 661. (30, 537) (Anon.) Jour. Hort., 60 (1908), 3136, 457. (20, 545) POTATO, SWEET Black Rot ( Sphceronema ) Harter, L. L. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Circ. 114. (28, 849) Dry Rot ( Diaporthe ) Harter, L. L., and Field, E. C. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Bui. 281. (29, 153) Cook diseased potatoes before feeding to stock ; sterilize seed beds ; use care in selection of seed. Stem Rot ( Fusarium ) Harter, L. L. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Circ. 114. (28, 849) QUINCE Fire Blight ( Bacillus ) Pickett, B. S. 111. Sta. Circ. 172 (1914). (31, 644) Remove and destroy infected trees, which carry disease over winter. RASPBERRY Anthracnose ( Glceosporium ) Lawrence, W. H. Wash. Sta. Bui. 97. (23, 452) Apply 4-4-50 Bordeaux before leaves appear. Cane Blight ( Coniothyrium ) Howitt, J. E. Canad. Hort., 36 (1913), 10, 237. (30, 246) Remove and burn all dis- eased specimens and plant only healthy plants. O’Gara, P. J. Off. Path, and Ent. Rogue River Valley, Bui. 4, 1911. (27, 250) Remove and burn all infected canes. Spray in fall before rains with strong Bordeaux. Give three applications of Bordeaux in spring before blossoms appear. If roses are near, give them attention also. Crown Gall ( Pseudomonas ) Swingle, D. B. Mont. Sta. Circ. 37 (1914). (31, 644) Hender sonia (Anon.) Jour. Bd. Agr. (London), 19 (1912), 2, 124. (27, 448) Cut and burn all diseased canes. Spray with Bordeaux. Rust ( Gymnoconia ) Wilson, G. W. N. C. Sta. Rpt. 1912, 56. (29, 50) Yellows Howitt, J. E. Canad. Hort., 36 (1913), 10, 237. (30, 246) Melchers, L. E. Ohio Nat., 14 (1914), 6, 281. (31, 545) Plant red raspberries secured from uninfected regions, in light or medium heavy soil. Manure well and drain adequately. Remove and burn all diseased plants. RICE Blight Collier, J. S. Rpt. of investigations concerning rice. Stuttgart, Ark., 1910. (24, 743) 111. Sta. Circ. 156. (27, 47) Good physical condition of soil with areation at the proper time will prevent the blight. Hewitt, J. L. Ark. Sta. Bui. 110. (27, 248) Rotate crops. Plow late in fall and burn stubble. Smut ( Pleospora ) Ramirez, R. Bol. Dir. Gen. Agr. (Mexico), Rev. Agr., 2 (1912), 5, 413. (29, 245) Dis- infect with formalin. ROSE Diseases, General Laubert, R., and Schwartz, M. Rosenkrankheiten und Rosenfeinde Jena, 1910. (24, 748) Black Spot ( Diplocarpon ) Wolf, F. A. Ala. Sta. Bui. 172. (29, 552) Cultivate properly and spray with am- moniacal copper carbonate. Mildew, Powdery ( Spharotheca ) Norton, J. B. S., and White, T. H. Md. Sta. Bui. 156. (26, 450) Apply vaporized sulfur. Schmidt, H. Osterr. Gart. Ztg., 4 (1909), 7, 249; abs. in Centbl. Bakt. (etc.), 2 Abt., 26 (1910), 16-17, 482. (23, 654) Put air-slaked lime around each bush in fall. Dust foliage with sulfur. Rot ( Botrytis ) Beauverie, J. La Pourriture des Roses, Lyon, 1910, 8. Reprint from Les Amis des Roses, 1910. (24, 351) Lime water, lime sulfate, bisulfite of magnesia, nickle sulfate, copper sulfate, or formalin recommended. 55 RUBBER Diseases, General Gallagher, W. J. Dept. Agr. Fed. Malay States Bui. 6. (21, 749) Ridley, H. N. Agr. Bui. Straits and Fed. Malay States, 8 (1909), 7, 310. (22, 248) and Derry, R. Agr. Bui. Straits and Fed. Malay States, 9 (1910), 8, 289. (24, 158) Leaf Spot ( Passalora ) Bancroft, C. K. Jour. Bd. Agr. Brit. Guiana, 7 (1913), 1, 37. Spray with lime sulfur; de- stroy all affected leaves before transplanting. Pink Disease ( Corticium ) Anstead, R. D. Planters’ Chron., 6 (1911), 8. 98. (25, 46) Apply 6-4-45 Bordeaux. (Anon.) Agr. Bui. Straits and Fed. Malay States, 9 (1910), 2, 59. (23, 152) Root Disease ( Forties ) Gallagher, W. J. Dept. Agr. Fed Malay States Bui. 2. (21, 749) Agr. Bui. Straits and Fed. Malay States, 7 (1908), 11, 515. (20, 849) Apply lime and destroy fungus by exposure to sunlight. RYE Dry Rot ( Fusarium ) • Hiltner, L. Prakt. Bl. Pflanzenbau u. Schutz, n. ser., 11 (1913), 8. (30, 242) Cor- rosive sublimate recommended. Foot Disease ( Ophiobolus ) Stormer, K., and Kleine, R. Illus. Landw. Ztg., 32 (1912), 62, 564. (28, 51) Careful selection of seed and the use of lime, potash, and phosporous in fertilizers lessens injury from the fungus. Smut ( Urocystis ) Ravn, F. K. Tidsskr. Landbr. Planteavl, 19 (1912), 2, 214. (28, 546) Soak seed in water at 54° C. for five minutes and cool immediately. SEA-KALE Rliizoctonia Salmon, E. S. Gard. Chron., 3 ser.. 44 (1908), 1123, 1. (20, 451) 56 SNAPDRAGON Leaf Spot ( Septoria ) Chittenden, F. J. Jour. Roy. Hort. Soc. (London), 35 (1909), 2, 216. (22, 455) Spray with Bordeaux or potassium sulfid. SORGHUM Head Smut ( Sorosporiutn ) Potter, A. A. U. S. Dept. Agr. Jour. Agr. Research, 2 (1914), 5, 339. (31, 747) SPINACH Mildew ( Peronospora ) Schneider, N. Rev. Hort. (Paris), 84 (1912), 21, 493. (28, 446) Distribute sulfur well over plants. New Disease ( Heterosporium ) Jennison, H. M. Mass. Sta. Rpt. 1910, pt. 1, 146. (26, 55) Select clean seed, prevent injury, and employ first-class cultural methods. SPRUCE Dieback ( Sphceropsis ) Petri, L. Ann. Mycol., 11 (1913), 3, 278; abs. in Internat. Inst. Agr. (Rome), Bui. Bur. Agr. Intel, and Plant Diseases, 4 (1913), 10. 1660. (30, 751) Spray with 1- percent Bordeaux. Leaf Rust ( Chrysomyxa ) Delforge, P. Bui. Soc. Cent. Forest, Belg., 15 (1908), 9; noted in Rev. Gen. Agron., n. ser., 3 (1908), 10, 424. (20, 849) Provide better air circulation and reduce humidity by thinning out trees. Remove and burn all infection late in season. STRAWBERRY Leaf Spot (Mycosphcorella) Swingle, D. B. Mont. Sta. Circ. 37 (1914). (31, 644) Spur maria Mangin, L. Rev. Hort. (Paris), 81 (1909), 24, 568. (23, 151) Spray with potassium sulfid, 3-1000. SUGAR CANE Diseases, General Edgerton, C. W. La. Sta. Bui. 120. 57 Maublanc, C. Agr. Prat. Pays Chauds, 10 (1910), 88, 43; 89, 143; 90, 232; 91, 312; 92, 379; 93, 502. (25, 847) Blight ( Mycosphcerella ) Wilbrink, G., and Ledeboer, F. Meded. Proefstat. J ava-Suikerindus., 1910, 39, 443. (24, 648) Reject all diseased canes as seed and plant resistant varieties when possible. Red Rot ( Colletotrichum ) Butler, E. J., and Hafiz, A. Mem. Dept. Agr. India, Bot. Ser., 6 (1913), 5, 151. (30, 649) Secure only sound canes for seed, remove and burn all plants showing infection, and prac- tice long periods of rotation. Edgerton, C. W. La. Sta. Bui. 133. (26, 548) Fawcett, H. S. Fla. Sta. Rpt. 1910, 45. (25, 452) Dip the seed canes in 5-5-50 Bordeaux just before planting. Plant in fall and introduce immune varieties. Kulkarni, G. S. Dept. Agr. Bombay Bui. 44 (1911). (27, 48) Use only cuttings showing white pith at ends. Discard cuttings showing slightest reddening. Root Disease ( Marasmius ) Cobb, N. A. Hawaiian Sugar Planters’ Sta., Div. - Path, and Physiol. Bui. 6. (22, 49) Stockdale, F. A. West Indian Bui. 9 (1908), 2, 103. (21, 147) SWEET PEA Streak Disease ( Bacillus ) Manns, T. F., and Taubenhaus, J. J. Gard. Chron., 3 ser., 53 (1913), 1371, 215. (29, 352) Mulch heavily with straw. Streak Disease ( Macrosporium ) (Anon.) Gard. Chron., 3 ser., 51 (1912), 1308, 36; 1309, 52; 1311, 84. (27, 354) Treat seed before planting with solution of potassium permanganate. Streak Disease ( Thielavia ) Chittenden, F. J. Jour. Roy. Hort. Soc. (London), 37 (1912), 3, 541. (27, 45) Secure good active growth, as fungus attacks only weakened plants. Massee, G. Roy. Bot. Gard. Kew, Bui. Misc. Inform., 1912, 1, 44. (26, 551) Fumigate seed bed with formalin or steam. The use of coal ashes or volcanic scoria for seed beds may be advantageous. 5 « TEA Blister Blight ( Exobasidiurn ) Tunstall, A. C. Indian Tea Assoc., Sci. Dept. Quart. Jour., 1913, 2, 50. (31, 56) Spray dormant bushes with solution of 2 pounds of sodium hydrate to 10 gallons of water. To green bushes apply solution of 6 pounds of copper sulfate and quick- lime to 100 gallons of water. Copper Blight ( Lcestadia ) Shaw, F. J. F. Agr. Jour. India, 6 (1911), 1, 78. (25, 46) Remove and burn all infection. Apply Bordeaux. TIMOTHY Rust ( Puccinia ) Johnson, E. C. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Bui. 224. (26, 52) Abs. in Science, n. ser., 31 (1910), 803, 791. (23, 450) Pammel, L. H., and King, C. M. la. Sta. Bui. 131. (27, 445) TOBACCO Diseases, General Johnson, J. Wis. Sta. Bui. 237 (1914). (31, 448) Damping-off ( Pythium ) Russell, H. L. Wis. Sta. Bui. 218. (27, 45) Sterilization of seed bed by steam recom- mended. Gummosis Honing, J. A. Meded. Deli-Proefstat. Medan, 5 (1910), 1, 24. (24, 248) Meded. Deli-Proefstat. Medan, 5 (1911), 6, 169. (25. 654) Mildew, Downy ( Phytophthora ) Jensen, H. Jaarb. Dept. Landb. Nederland. Indie, 1909, 192. (25, 145) The use of cai- bon bisulfid or potassium permanganate recommended. Mosaic Perreau Bui. Soc. Bot. France, 56 (1909), 1, 53. (23, 649) Use only seed from healthy plants. 59 Phelipcea Constancis Jour. Agr. Prat., n. ser., 18 (1909), 43, 565. (22, 348) Root Rot ( Thielavia ) Gilbert, W. W. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Bui. 158 (22, 49) Sterilize seed beds with steam. Sooty Mold ( Fumago ) Inglese, E. Bol. Tec. Coltiv. Tabacchi (Scafati), 10 (1911), 2, 81. (25, 455) Wilt ( Bacillus ) Hutchinson, C. M. Mem. Dept. Agr. India, Bact. Ser., 1 (1913), 2, 67. (30, 50) Conserve the moisture and develop root system ; avoid alkaline manures ; remove and burn all diseased plants. Smith, E. F. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Bui. 141. (20, 948) TOMATO Diseases, General Edgerton, C. W., and Moreland, C. C. La. Sta. Bui. 142. (30, 50) Fulton, H. R. N. C. Sta. Circ. 19 (1914). (31, 644) Hewitt, J. L. Ark. Sta. Circ. 21 (1914). (31, 644) Webb, T. C. Jour. Agr. (New Zeal.). 7 (1913), 1, 46. (30, 244) Bacteriosis ( Bacterium ) Finardi, E. Avven. Agr., 20 (1912), 7, 290; abs. in Internal. Inst. Agr. (Rome), Bui. Bur. Agr. Intel, and Plant Diseases, 3 (1912), 10, 2310. (29, 246) Rolfs, P. H. Fla. Sta. Bui. 117. Black Spot ( Alternaria ) (29, 847) Blight, Bacterial ( Bacillus ) Rolfs, P. H. Fla. Sta. Bui. 117. (29, 847) Blight, Fungous ( Fusarium ) Rolfs, P. H. Fla. Sta. Bui. 117. (29, 847) 6o Blight, Sclerotium ( Sclerotinia ) Rolfs, P. H. Fla. Sta. Bui. 117. (29, 847) Blossom-end Rot Brooks, C. Abs. in Phytopath., 4 (1914), 1, 49. (31, 447) Disease worse on heavy than on light soil. Application of sodium nitrate beneficial. Lime a partial preventative. Stone, G. E. Mass. Sta. Bui. 138. (26, 649) Subirrigate and shade plants. Stuckey, H. P., and Temple, J. C. Ga. Sta. Bui. 96. (26, 648) To control the disease, keep an abundance of water in the soil. (Anon.) Agr. News. (Barbados), 13 (1914), 315, 174. (31, 644) Give attention to water supply and prevent excessive transpiration. Canker ( Mycosphcerella ) (Anon.) Gard. Chron., 3 ser., 54 (1913), 1393, 167. (30, 148) Proper temperature and humidity in the houses and spraying with Bordeaux should tend to prevent occurrence of disease. Leaf Mold ( Cladosporium ) (Anon.) Jour. Bd. Agr. (London), 18 (1912), 11, 920; abs. in Mycol. Centbl., 1 (1912), 6, 181. (27, 651) If plants are young, cover entire surface with half- strength Bordeaux. If flowers and young fruit are present, use potassium- sulfid solution (1 ounce in 4 gallons of water). (Anon.) Agr. News (Barbados), 13 (1914), 315, 174. (31, 644) Spray frequently with 4-4-50 Bordeaux. (Anon.) Bd. Agr. and Fisheries (London) Leaflet 262, 1912. (27, 249) Leaf Spot ( Septoria ) Long, H. C. Gard. Chron., 3 ser., 54 (1913), 1407, 417. (30, 749) Remedial measures recommended by Giissow in Exp. Sta. Rec., 20, 346, approved. Reed, H. S. Va. Sta. Bui. 192. (25, 548) Three to four applications of 4-5-50 Bordeaux recommended. Vera, V. Prog. Agr. y Pecuario, 15 (1909), 613, 64. (20, 1139) Rolfs, P. H. Fla. Sta. Bui. 117. Rot ( Macrosporium ) (29, 847) TULIP Sclerotium Elenkin, A. A. Abs. in Internat. Inst. Agr. (Rome), Bui. Bur. Agr. Intel, and Plant Dis- eases, 3 (1912), 4, 1066. (27, 851) Uproot and burn affected bulbs. Disinfect soil with carbolineum. TURNIP Club Root ( Plasmodiophora ) Colli nge, W. E. Jour. Cooper Research Lab., 1909, 1, 15. (21, 747) Manson, A. North of Scotland Col. Agr. Expt. Leaflet 24 (1913), 24. (30, 848) Pardy, A. North of Scotland Col. Agr. Expt. Leaflet 25 (1913), 52. (30, 848) Chlorid of lime and lime water have proved beneficial. WALNUT Bacteriosis ( Pseudomonas ) Smith, R. E. and C. O., and Ramsey, H. G. Cal. Sta. Bui. 231. (28, 349) WHEAT Diseases, General Giissow, H. T. Canada Expt. Farms Rpts. 1911, 239, 244. (27, 349) Take-All ( Ophiobolus ) Mangin, L. Jour. Agr. Prat., n. ser., 24 (1912), 32, 174. (27, 748) Burn straw over field ; treat seed with solution of copper and dust with lime ; sow late. Pridham, J. T. Jour. Dept. Agr. Victoria, 9 (1911), 4, 250. (25, 454) Reuther Deut. Landw. Presse, 40 (1913), 65, 780. (30, 242) Select clean seed; use nitrogenous manures sparingly ; suppress weeds ; rotate ; and drain properly. Richardson, A. E. V. Jour. Dept. Agr., South Aust., 14 (1910), 5, 466. (24, 551) Stormer, K., and Kleine, R. Illus. Landw. Ztg., 32 (1912), 62, 564. (28, 51) Careful selection of seed and the use of lime, potash, and phosphorous in fertilizers lessens injury. (Anon.) Bd. Agr. and Fisheries (London) Leaflet 273 (1913). (30, 148) Super- phosphate of lime 1^2 hundredweight per acre applied while crop is young is effective. Iron sulfate 1 hundredweight per acre checked disease in Australia. 6 2 (Anon.) Agr. Gaz. N. S. Wales, 23 (1912), 11, 934. (28, 646) Grow oats and fallow between crops. Rust ( Puccinia ) Biffen, R. H. Jour. Bd. Agr. (London), 15 (1908), 4, 241. (20, 648) Fuschini, G. Rivista (Conegliano), 4 ser., 17 (1911), 19, 443; abs. in Internat. Inst. Agr. (Rome), Bui. Bur. Agr. Intel, and Plant Diseases, 2 (1911), 11-12, 2600. (27, 47) Iron sulfate in soil increases plant vigor and may aid in resisting rust. McAlpine, D. Jour. Dept. Agr. Victoria, 7 (1909), 4, 255. (21, 641.) Tonnelier, A. C. Trab. 4. Cong. Cient. Santiago de Chile, 16 (1908-09), 136. (28, 242) Apply repeatedly fungicides having copper as a basis. Vernet, E. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed: l’Est-Centre), 30 (1909), 40, 428. (22, 49) Smut, Flag ( Urocystis ) ■ Darnell-Smith, G. P. Agr. Gaz. N. S. Wales, 25 (1914), 4, 285. (31, 746) Before planting dip seed in 2-percent copper-sulfate solution for five minutes, then in lime water for five minutes. Schmitz, N. Md. Sta. Bui. 147. (24, 47) Smut, Loose ( Ustilago ) Appel, O., and Riehm, E. Arb. K. Biol. Anst. Land u. Forstw., 8 (1911), 3, 343. (26, 546) Long, W. Centbl. Bakt. (etc.), 2 Abt, 25 (1909), 1-4, 86. (22, 745) Smut, Stinking ( Tilletia ) Darnell-Smith, G. P. Agr. Gaz. N. S. Wales, 21 (1910), 9. 751. (24, 347) Heald, F. D. Insect Pest and Plant Disease Bur. Nebr. Bui. 2. (21, 642) Formalin recommended. Hecke, L. Ztschr. Landw. Versuchsw. Osterr., 12 (1909), 2, 49. (23, 46) Humphrey, H. B. Wash. Sta. Popular Bui. 48. (28, 745) Before planting seed, treat with solution of copper sulfate or formalin. Jordi, E. Jahresber. Landw. Schule Riitti, 1908-09, 89; abs. in Centbl. Bakt. (etc.), 2 Abt., 26 (1910), 16-17, 498. (23, 546) Several immersions of seed in Bordeaux before planting recommended. Me Alpine, D. Jour. Dept. Agr. Victoria, 8 (1910), 1, 53. (23, 47) Copper solution, 10-50, and formalin solution, 1-40, recommended. Muller, H. C., and Morganthaler, O. Fiihling’s Landw. Ztg., 62 (1913), 14, 481, (30, 351). Soak seed in water at 55° C. for ten minutes before planting; plant deeply. Orton, C. R. Proc. Ind. Acad. Sci., 1911, 343. (29, 750) Treat seed before planting with 1-percent solution of formalin. Reynolds, M. H. Agr. Gaz. N. S. Wales, 24 (1913), 6, 461. (29, 750) Richardson, A. E. V. Jour. Dept. Agr. So. Aust.. 13 (1910), 6, 491. (23, 47) Roberts, H. F., and Graff, P. W. Kans. Sta. Circ. 12. (24, 153) Jensen modified hot-water treatment recom- mended. Soutter, R. Queensland Agr. Jour., 28 (1912), 1, 1. (26, 746) Stormer, K. Deut. Landw. Presse, 38 (1911), 80. 917; 81, 929. (26, 447) Sutton, G. L., and Downing, R. G. Agr. Gaz. N. S. Wales, 21 (1910), 5, 382; abs. in Jour. Dept. Agr. So. Aust., 13 (1910), 11, 960; Gard. Chron., 3 ser.. 48 (1910), 1128, 22. (23, 742) Treat seed before planting with a solution of copper sulfate and salt. ( Anon. ) Landw. Ztschr. Rheinprovinz, 10 (1909), 40, 585. (23, 349) (Anon.) Agr. Gaz. N. S. Wales, 23 (1912), 5, 396. (27, 649) WILLOW Armillaria Brooks, F. T. Gard. Chron., 3 ser., 49 (1911), 1260, 100. (24, 748) Replace diseased willows with ash, as ash are immune. MISCELLANEOUS CITRUS FRUITS Diseases, General Rolfs, P. H., Fawcett, H. S., and Floyd, B. F. Fla. Sta. Bui. 108. (26, 549) Ross, C. Queensland Agr. Jour., n. ser., 1 (1914), 1, 48. (31, 244) 6 4 Blight Fawcett, H. S. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc., 22 (1909), 75. (22, 350) Canker Stevens, H. E. Fla. Sta. Bui. 122 (1914). (31, 54) Careful inspection of nursery stock, destruction by burning of small infected trees, and pruning off and burning of all diseased parts of larger trees recommended. Foot Rot Fawcett, H. S. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc., 22 (1909), 75. (22, 350) Gummosis Fawcett, H. S. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc., 22 (1909), 75. (22, 350) Phytopath., 4 (1914), 1, 54. (31, 449) Avoid conditions favorable for infection ; make all new plantings with trees budded high on sour stocks ; and trim out and paint trunks with concentrated Bordeaux. Floyd, B. F. Fla. Sta. Rpt. 1913, 27. (31, 749) Knot ( Spluzropsis ) Hedges, F., and Tenny, L. S. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant. Indus. Bui. 247. (27, 652) Remove and burn all diseased limbs. Fawcett, H. S. Fla. Sta. Bui. 109. Scab ( Cladosporium ) (27, 653) Ammoniacal copper carbonate recommended. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc., 22 (1909), 75. (22, 350) Scaly Bark ( Colletotrichum ) Essig, E. O. Pomona Col. Jour. Econ. Bot., 1 (1911), 1, 25. (24, 747) Bordeaux 4-4-50 recommended. Fawcett, H. S. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc., 22 (1909), 75. (22, 350) Fla. Sta. Rpt. 1909, 44. (23, 446) Fla. Sta. Rpt. 1910, 45. (25, 450) Scrape off diseased bark, paint surface with carbolineum mixture consisting of 1 gallon of carbolineum and 1 gallon of water in which 1 pound of whale oil soap has been dissolved. Fla. Sta. Bui. 98. (20, 1045) Bordeaux recommended. 65 Fawcett, H. S. Fla. Sta. Bui. 106. (25, 551) Bordeaux recommended. Rolfs, P. H. Pomona Col. Jour. Econ. Bot., 1 (1911), 3, 107. (27, 50) Stem-end Rot ( Phomopsis ) Fawcett, H. S. Fla. Sta. Bui. 107. (26, 449) Destroy infected branches and fruit and spray against scale insects. Cull fruit to be shipped and keep cool in transit. Stevens, H. E. Fla. Sta. Rpt. 1913, 72 (31, 750) Bordeaux recommended. Fla. Sta. Bui. 111. (28, 651) Prune out dead branches, spray with Bordeaux or ammoniacal copper carbonate, and destroy all infected fruit. FIELD CROPS Diseases, General Jackson, H. S. Del. Sta. Bui. 83. (20, 946) Whetzel, H. H. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Bui. 283. (24, 550) CEREALS Diseases, General Bolley, H. L. N. D. Sta. Bui. 87. (22, 744) Foex, E. Rev. Phytopath. Appl., 1 (1914), 18-19. 13; 20-21, 17; 22-23, 25. (31, 841) Hoffmann, M. Jahresber. Landw., 24 (1909), 203. (24, 345) Ho WITT, J. E. Ann. Rpt. Ontario Agr. Col. and Expt. Farm, 37 (1911), 47. (27, 746) Kirch ner, O. Wiirttemb. Wchnbl. Landw., 1913, 29, Beilage, 439; 30, Beilage, 445. (29, 845) Muller, H. C., Molz E., and Morgenthaler, D. Ber. Agr. Chem. Kontroll u. Vers. Stat. Pflanzenkrank. Prov. Sachsen, 1912, 67. (30, 148) Muller, H. C., Stormer, K., et. al. Ber. Agr. Chem. Kontroll u. Vers. Stat. Pflanzenkrank. Prov. Sachsen, 1910, 71. (26, 142) Stormer, K. Landw. Wchnschr. Sachsen, 12 (1910), 2, 10; 3. 19; 4, 27. (22. 741) Anthracnose ( Collet otrichum ) Selby, A. D., and Manns, T. F. Ohio (Wooster) Sta. Bui. 203. (21. 745) 66 Foot Disease ( Ophiobolus ) Guerrapain, A., and Demolon, A. Betterave, 23 (1913), 597, 386; 598, 402; 24 (1914), 599, 7. (30, 747) Mildew Reed, G. M. Bui. Torrey Bot. Club, 36 (1909), 7, 353. (21, 641) Rust ( Puccinia ) Freeman, E. M., and Johnson, E. C. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Bui. 216. (25, 651) Breed resistant varieties. Jordi, E. Jahresber. Landw. Schule Rutti, 1909-10, 108. (24, 345) La mont, W. J. Agr. Jour. Cape Good Hope, 37 (1910), 3, 243. (24, 346) McAlpine, D. Jour. Dept. Agr. Victoria, 8 (1910), 5, 284. (23, 649) Smut Appel, O. Mitt. Deut. Landw. Gesell., 24 (1909), 16, 256. (21, 549) Jahrb. Deut. Landw. Gesell., 24 (1909), 2, 319. (21, 642) and Riehm, E. Mitt. K. Biol. Anst. Land u. Forstw., 1910, 10, 7. (23, 646) Soak seed for five hours in water at 25° C. Then dry for 25 minutes at 60° C. Broz, O. Monatsh. Landw., 4 (1911), 10, 289; 5 (1912), 1, 17. (27, 246) Sterilize seed with formalin or copper sulfate. Burmester, H. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 18 (1908), 3, 154. (21, 242) DTpollito, G. Bol. Quind. Soc. Agr. I tal., 16 (1911), 19, 680; abs. in Riv. Patol. Veg., 5 (1911), 9, 133. (27, 149) Hot-water treatment of seed recommended. Eriksson, J. K. Landtbr. Akad. Handl. och Tidskr., 47 (1908), 4, 274. (22, 246) Falck, R. Jour. Landw., 56 (1908), 2, 173. (20, 648) Freeman, E. M., and Stackman, E. C. Minn. Sta. Bui. 122. (25, 144) Sterilize seed with formalin, copper sulfate, or hot water. Gussow, H. T. Canada Central Expt. Farm Bui. 73. (30, 47) Hughes, H. D., and Taft, P. C. Ia. Sta. Circ. 11 (1913). (31, 344) Johnson, E. C. U. S. Dept. Agr., Farmers’ Bui. 507. (28, 51) 6 7 J0RDI, E. Jahresber. Landw. Schule Riitti, 1909-10, 108. (24, 345) Breed resistant varieties. Kirch ner, O. Illus. Landw. Ztg., 29 (1909), 30, 305. (21, 446) Lang, H. Illus. Landw. Ztg., 28 (1908), 70, 603. (20, 947) Soak seed from 6 to 12 hours in water at ordinary temperature. Then subject to air heated to 60° C. McAlpine, D. Jour. Dept. Agr. Victoria, 8 (1910), 5, 284. (23, 649) Melbourne Dept. Agr. Victoria, 1910, 288. (24, 45) Murray, J. Canada Expt. Farms Rpts. 1909, 275. (22, 345) Pye, H. Jour. Dept. Agr. Victoria, 7 (1909), 6, 368. (21, 641) Reed, G. M. Ann. Rpt. Mo. Bd. Agr, 44 (1911), 253. (28, 51) Riehm, E. Deut. Landw. Presse, 36 (1909), 35, 373. (21, 446) Deut. Landw. Presse, 40 (1913), 10, 107. (29. 47) Stevens, F. L. N. C. Sta. Bui. 212. (24, 246) Stewart, R, and Stephens, J. Utah Sta. Bui. 108. (23, 742) Stormer, K, et al. Deut. Landw. Presse. 38 (1911), 88, 1005. (27, 246) Modified hot-water treatment recommended. Wilcox, E. M. Nebr. Sta. Bui. 131. (28, 445) Zavitz, C. A. Ann. Rpt. Ontario Agr. Col. and Expt. Farm, 34 (1908), 183. (21, 341) Immerse seed in formalin solution (1 pint of formalin to 42 gallons of water) for 20 minutes. Smut, Loose ( Ustilago ) Appel, O. Ber. Deut. Bot. Gesell, 27 (1909), 10, 606. (23, 46) Flot-water treatment of seeds recommended. Illus. Landw. Ztg., 30 (1910), 15, 126. (23, 148) and Riehm, E. Mitt. K. Biol. Anst. Land u. Forstw., 1909, 8, 9. (23, 247) Min. Bl. K. Preuss. Verwalt. Landw., Domanen u. Forsten, 7 (1911), 5, 118. (25, 453) Apparatus for hot-air and hot- water treatments described. 68 Arthur, J. C., and Johnson, A. C. Ind. Sta. Circ. 22. (23, 147) Formalin recommended. Cook, M. T. N. J. Sta. Circ. 36. (31, 446) Detken, W. Illus. Landw. Ztg., 29 (1909), 83, 783. (22, 345) Soak seed in cold water for several hours ; then dry at 60° C. Freeman, E. M., and Johnson, E. C. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Bui. 152. (21, 445) Loch head, W. Ann. Rpt. Quebec Soc. Protec. Plants (etc.), 3 (1910-11), 67. (26, 341) Schander, R. Landw. Centbl. Posen, 1910, 5; abs. in Centbl. Bakt. (etc.), 2 Abt., 28 (1910), 9-11, 302. (24, 346) Deut. Landw. Presse, 37 (1910), 30, 333. (24, 346) Hot-water method of treatment described in full. Mitt. Kaiser Wilhelms Inst. Landw. Bromberg, 6 (1914), 2, 132. (31, 147) Stormer, K. Landw. Wchnschr. Sachsen, 10 (1908), 35, 306; 38, 331; 39, 340; 40, 347 (20, 1042) Landw. Wchnschr. Sachsen, 12 (1910), 12, 91. (23, 346) Smut, Stinking ( Tilletia ) Appel, O. Mitt. Deut. Landw. Gesell., 28 (1913), 16, 1. (30, 449) Cook, M. T. N. J. Sta. Circ. 36. (31. 446) Ditzell, F., and Downing, R. G. Agr. Gaz. N. S. Wales, 22 (1911), 4, 341. (25, 750) Copper sulfate, copper sulfate and lime-water, copper sulfate and sodium chlorid, Fungusine, and Bordeaux paste all recommended. Loch head, W. Ann. Rpt. Quebec Soc. Protec. Plants (etc.), 3 (1910-11), 67. (26, 341) Orton, C. R. Proc. Ind. Acad. Sci., 1911, 343. (29, 750) Stewart, R., and Stephens, J. Utah Sta. Bui. 108. (23, 742) Straw Blight Fron, G. Abs. in Internat. Inst. Agr. (Rome), Bui. Bur. Agr. Intel, and Plant Diseases, 3 (1912), 4, 1054. (27, 747) (Anon.) Ann. Uffic. Agr. Prov. Bologna, 18 (1911-12), 194. (30, 349) 6 9 TREES, GENERAL Diseases, General Forbes, A. C. Dept. Agr. and Tech. Instr. Ireland Jour., 10 (1909), 1, 35. (22, 549) Kock, G. Sep. from Landes Amtsbl. Erzherzogt. Osterr. unter der Enns, 1909, 4-5, 36 (23, 553) Massee, G. Diseases of Cultivated Plants and Trees. New York and London, 1910. (24, 44) Mer, E. Bui. Soc. Nat. Agr. France, 70 (1910), 7, 652. (24, 251) von Schrenk, H., and Spaulding, P. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Bui. 149. (21, 448) Root Rot ( Agaricus ) Adespeissis, A. Jour. Dept. Agr. West Aust., 17 (1908), 1, 534. (20, 1141) TREES, CONIFEROUS Damping-off ( Pythium ) Hartley, C. P. Science, n. ser., 36 (1912), 933, 683. (28, 246) Gray Mold ( Botrytis ) (Anon.) Bd. Agr. and Fisheries (London) Leaflet 234. (23, 653) Burn all diseased seedlings and spray with a solution of 11 pounds copper sulfate, 16 pounds copper carbonate, 1 pound potassium permanganate, and 3 pounds soft soap in 100 gallons of rain water. Phoma Mer, E. Bui. Soc. Sci. Nancy, 3 ser., 9 (1908), 2, 104. (20, 849) TREES, FRUIT Diseases, General Bethune, C. J. S. Ann. Rpt. Ontario Agr. Col. and Expt. Farm, 35 (1909), 34. (23, 351) Collinge, W. E. Rpt. Econ. Biol, 2 (1912), 41. (26, 445) Giissow, H. T. Canada Exp. Farms Rpts. 1911, 239. (27, 349) Heald, F. D. Texas Dept. Agr. Bui. 22 (1911). (30, 537) Kirch ner, O. Wiirttemb. Wchnbl. Landw, 1913, 29, 439; 30, 455. (29, 845) 70 Lewis, A. C. Ga. Bd. Ent. Bui. 32 (1910), 35. (24, 745) Linsbauer, L., Zweigelt, F., and Zuderwell, H. Programm u. Jahresber. K. K. Hoh. Lehranst. Wein u. Obstbau Klos- terneuburg, 1912-13, 159. (30, 240) Lloyd, F. E., Ridgway, C. S., and Chatterton, H. J. Bui. Agr. Dept. (Ala.), 32. (23, 247) Morse, W. J. Me. Sta. Bui. 164. (21, 144) Muller, H. C., Molz, E., and Morgenthaler, D. Ber. Agr. Chem. Krontoll u. Vers. Stat. Pflanzenkrank. Prov. Sachsen, 1912, 67. (30, 148) Norton, J. B. S., and Norman, A. J. Md. Sta. Bui. 143. (23, 252) Pam mel, L. H. Trans. Iowa Hort. Soc., 47 (1912), 196. (29, 445) Reed, G. M. Ann. Rpt. Mo. Bd. Hort., 5 (1912), 342. (28, 243) Salmon, E. S. Jour. Southeast Agr. Col. Wye, 1912, 21, 321. (30, 348) Selby, A. D. Ohio State Hort. Soc. Ann. Rpt., 43 (1910), 77. (24, 447) Tompson, H. C. Miss. Sta. Bui. 141. (24, 45) Westerdyjk, Johanna Phytopath. Lab. “Willie Commelin Scholten,” Jaarver, 1912. (30, 647) Whetzel, H. H. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Bui 283. (24, 550) Black-Spot Canker Carpenter, J. F. Brit. Columbia Dept. Agr. Bui. 34 (1911). (27, 448) To prevent infection, apply Bordeaux or lime sulfur. Keep dry and free from injury. Brown Rot ( Monilia ) de Istvanffi, G. Bui. Inst. Cent. Ampelol. Roy. Hongrois, 1 (1906), 29. (21, 552) Chlorosis Riviere, G., and Bailhache, G. Jour. Soc. Nat. Hort. France, 4 ser., 14 (1913), 287. (30, 749) Iron sulfate gives favorable results, due probably to the metallic component of this salt. (Anon.) Bol. Quind. Soc. Agr. Ital., 16 (1911), 16, 595; abs. in Mitt. Deut. Landw. Gesell., 26 (1911), 42, 582. (26, 749) Crown Gall ( Pseudomonas ) Phillips, J. L. Rpt. State Ent. and Plant Path. Va., 7 (1908-09), 56. (23, 149) Fire Blight ( Bacillus ) Jones, D. H. Ontario Dept. Agr. Bui. 176. (23, 49) Stewart, V. B. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Bui. 329. (29, 348) Eradicate holdover blight, remove quince blossom buds, and inspect diseased areas often. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Circ. 20. (29, 551) Whetzel, H. H., and Stewart, V. B. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Bui. 272. (22, 747) Hypochnose ( Hypochnus ) Stevens, F. L., and Hall, J. G. Ann. Mycol., 7 (1909), 1, 49. (21, 244) Mushroom Root Rot ( Armillaria ) Barss, H. P. Ore. Countryman, 6 (1913), 3, 113. (30, 649) Remove and destroy affected and dead roots; disinfect with Bordeaux, lime sulfur, or corrosive sublimate and treat exposed surfaces with tree paint or grafting wax. Scab ( Venturia ) Huber, K. Deut. Obstbau Ztg., 1908, 23-24, 382. (21, 54) Bordeaux recommended. TRUCK CROPS Diseases, General Collinge, W. E. Rpt. Econ. Biol., 2 (1912), 41. (26, 445) Eastham, J. W., and Howitt, J. E. Ontario Dept. Agr. Bui. 171. (21, 342) Fawcett, H. S. Fla. Sta. Rpt. 1908, 64. (21, 343) Giddings, N. J. W. Va. Sta. Bui. 123. (23, 46) Harter, L. L. Va. Truck Sta. Bui. 1. (22, 147) Kirch ner, O. Wiirttemb. Wchnbl. Landw., 1913, 29, 439; 30, 455. (29, 845) Muller, H. C., Stormer, K., et al. Ber. Agr. Chem. Kontroll u. Vers. Stat. Pflanzenkrank. Prov. Sachsen, 1910, 71. (26, 142) Muller, H. C., Molz, E., and Morgenthaler, D. Ber. Agr. Chem. Kontroll u. Vers. Stat. Pflanzenkrank. Prov. Sachsen, 1912, 67. (30, 148) Sackett, W. G. Colo. Sta. Bui. 138. (21, 145) 72 Selby, A. D. Ann. Rpt. Columbus Hort. Soc., 1910, 13. (28, 148) Tompson, H. C. Miss. Sta. Bui. 141. (24, 45) Westerdijk, Johanna Phytopath. Lab. “Willie Commelin Scholten,” Jaarver, 1911. (30, 647) Phytopath. Lab. “Willie Commelin Scholten,” Jaarver, 1912. (30. 647) Whetzel, H. H. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Bui. 283. (24, 550) (Anon.) Wis. Sta. Bui. 228. (28, 844) Club Root ( Plasmodiophora ) van Poeteren, N. Tijdschr. Plantenziekten, 17 (1911), 4-6, 150. (26, 447) Wagner, J. P. Mitt. Deut. Landw. Gesell., 24 (1909), 41, 610. (23, 250) Gifford, C. M. Vt. Sta. Bui. 157. Damping-off ( Fusarium ) (26, 57) 73 FUNGICIDES ADHERENTS, GENERAL Astruc, H. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. TEst-Centre), 34 (1913), 24, 746; 25, 780. (29, 554) Fonzes-Diacon, H. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. TEst-Centre), 34 (1913), 11, 331 (29, 157) Lecomte, A. Rev. Vit., 40 (1913), 1027, 225. (30, 248) Vermorel, V., and Dantony, E. Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. (Paris), 154 (1912), 20, 1300-1302. (27, 548) Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. (Paris), 156 (1913), 19, 1475; Prog. Agr. et Vit (Ed. TEst-Centre), 34 (1913), 21, 657. (29, 451) Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. TEst-Centre), 34 (1913), 25, 778. (30, 153) Weinmann, J. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. TEst-Centre), 33 (1912), 23, 709. (27, 753) Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. TEst-Centre), 33 (1912), 29, 85. (28, 154) PREPARATION AND APPLICATION, GENERAL Chandler, W. H. Ann. Rpt. Mo. Bd. Hort., 2 (1908), 314. (22, 152) Chappaz, G. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. TEst-Centre), 34 (1913), 16, 487. (29, 554) Cook, M. T. The Diseases of Tropical Plants, 1913, 11. (31, 241) Hollrung, M. Die Mittel zur Bekampfung der Pflanzenkrankheiten, Berlin, 1914, 2 ed., rev. and enl., 8. (31, 745) McCallum, W. B. Ariz. Sta-. Bui. 60. (22, 53) McCue, C. A. Del. Sta. Bui. 98. (28, 449) van Hall-de Jonge, A. E. Dept. Landb. Suriname Bui. 22. (22, 549) Vermorel, V., and Dantony, E. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. TEst-Centre), 34 (1913), 24, 745. (30, 153) Notes sur les Preparations Insecticides, Fongicides et Bouillies Mouillantes, Montpellier and Villefranche, 1914. (31, 153) Vivarelli, L. Rivista (Conegliano), 4 ser., 16 (1910), 11, 249; 12, 277; 13, 296. (23, 747) Whetzel, H. H. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Circ. 2. (20, 551) 7 4 (Anon.) Insect Pest and Plant Disease Bur. Nebr. Bui. 1. (21, 645) BORDEAUX Preparation and Application — McAlpine, D. Jour. Dept. Agr. Victoria, 8 (1910), 2, 728. (24, 555) O’Gara, P. J. Rogue River Fruit Grower, 1 (1909), 7, 1. (22, 249) Quanjer, H. M. Tijdschr. Plantenziekten, 16 (1910), 1-2, 16. (23, 355) Salmon, E. S. Jour. Bd. Agr. (London), 16 (1910), 10, 793. (22, 653) van der Zande, K. H. M., and Lagers, G. H. G. Tijdschr. Plantenziekten, 16 (1910), 1-2, 32. (23, 356) Vermorel, V., and Dantony, E. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 34 (1913), 24, 745. (30, 153) Chemistry — Barker, B. T. P., and Gimingham, C. T. Jour. Agr. Sci., 4 (1911), 1, 76. (25, 458) Bell, J. M., and Taber, W. C. Jour. Phys. Chem., 11 (1907), 8, 632. (22, 456) Gimingham, C. T. Chem. World, 1 (1912), 11, 363. (28, 552) Kolliker, A. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 19 (1909), 7, 385. (22, 549) Pickering, S. U. Jour. Agr. Sci., 3 (1909), 2, 171. (22, 455) Adhesive and Spreading Qualities — Lutman, B. F. Phytopath., 2 (1912), 1, 32. (27, 154) Marescalchi, A. Coltivatore, 55 (1909), 17, 531. (22, 454) . Injury Resulting — Dandeno, J. B. Rpt. Mich. Acad. Sci., 11 (1909), 30. (23, 252) Groth, B. H. A. N. J. Sta. Bui. 232. (24, 156) Salmon, E. S. Jour. Bd. Agr. (London), 17 (1910), 2, 103. (23, 554) Scott, W. M. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Circ. 54. (23, 51) Stone, G. E. Mass. Sta. Rpt. 1909, pt. 2, 46. (24, 253) 75 Compared with Other Fungicides — Foglesong, L. E. Trans. 111. Hort. Soc., n. ser., 43 (1909), 365. (23, 745) Pantanelli, E. Staz. Sper. Agr. Ital., 46 (1913), 5, 329. (31, 843) Scott, W. M. Va. Sta. Bui. 188. (23, 352) Stewart, F. C., and French, G. T. Phytopath., 2 (1912), 1, 45. (27, 151) Watkins, O. S. Address 55th Annual Convention 111. State Hort. Soc. (Kinmundy) 1911. (25, 146) Miscellaneous — Crandall, C. S. 111. Sta. Bui. 135. (21, 547) Dandeno, J. B. Rpt. Mich. Acad. Sci., 10 (1908), 58. (21, 340) Hawkins, L. A. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 35 (1914), 3, 72; 5, 142; 7, 210. (31. 50) Jones, L. R., and Giddings, N. J. Vt. Sta. Bui. 142. (21, 549) Kirch ner, O. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 18 (1908), 2, 65. (21, 147) Rorer, J. B. Bui. Dept. Agr. Trinidad, 9 (1910), 64, 10. (23, 455) Stewart, F. C., et al. N. Y. (Geneva) Sta. Bui. 323. (23, 449) COPPER FUNGICIDES OTHER THAN BORDEAUX Preparation and Application — Chappaz, G. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 33 (1912), 12, 353. (27, 254) SCHERPE, R. Min. Bl. K. Preuss. Verwalt. Landw., Domanen u. Forsten, 8 (1912), 7, 219 (28, 247) Sharples, A. Agr. Bui. Fed. Malay States, 1 (1913), 11, 392. (29, 651) Chemistry — Campbell, C. Riv. Patol. Veg., 6 (1912), 15, 225. (28, 552) Adhesive and Spreading Qualities — Dejeanne, A. Rev. Vit., 33 (1910), 863, 701. (24, 51) 76 Injury Resulting — Ewert, R. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank.. 22 (1912), 5, 257. (28, 247) D’Ippolito, G. Staz. Sper. Agr. Ital., 43 (1910), 10, 735. (25, 548) (Anon.) Jour. Bd. Agr. (London), 19 (1912), 9, 751. (28, 648) Compared with Other Fungicides — Biusine Engrais, 24 (1910), 13, 355. (21, 54) Chuard, E. Terre Vaud., 2 (1910), 18, 205. (23, 453) Marescalchi, A. Coltivatore, 55 (1909), 17, 531. (22,454) Perrin, G. Bui. Soc. Nat. Agr. France, 69 (1909), 10, 890. (23, 253) Miscellaneous — de Jaczewski, A. 1 Cong. Internat. Pathol. Camparee (Paris), 1912, 2, Comp. Rend., 948. (31, 841) Malvezin, P. Bui. Soc. Chim. France, 4 ser., 5 (1909), 23, 1096. (22, 457) Vermorel, V., and Dantony, E. Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. (Paris), 152 (1911), 19, 1263. (25, 459) LIME SULFUR Preparation and Application — Burgess, W. B. Jour. Southeast Agr. Col. Wye, 1910, 19, 61. (25, 755) Manaresi, A. Agr. Mod. (Milan), 19 (1913), 23, 271. (31, 749) McAlpine, D. Jour. Dept. Agr. Victoria, 8 (1910), 2, 728. (24, 555) Salmon, E. S. Jour. Bd. Agr. (London), 17 (1910), 3, 184. (23, 655) Stewart, J. P. Proc. State Hort. Soc. Pa., 52 (1911), 176. (25, 353) Injury Resulting — Safro, V. I. Ore. Sta. Research Bui. 2. (30, 152) Salmon, E. S. Jour. Bd. Agr. (London), 17 (1911), 11, 881. (24, 745) Wallace, E. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Bui. 288. (25, 47) 77 Compared with Other Fungicides — Foglesong, L. E. Trans. 111. Hort. Soc., n. ser., 43 (1909), 365. (23, 745) Pantanelli, E. Staz. Sper. Agr. Ital., 46 (1913), 5, 329. (31, 843) Scott, W. M. Address 55th Annual Convention 111. State Hort. Soc. (Kinmundy), 1911. (25, 147) U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Circ. 54. (23, 51) Va. Sta. Bui. 188. (23, 352) Stewart, F. C., and French, G. T. Phytopath., 2 (1912), 1, 45. (27, 151) Tetzner Deut. Obstbau Ztg., 1910, 14, 179. (23, 554) Wallace, E. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Bui. 289. (25, 48) Watkins, O. S. Address 55th Annual Convention 111. State Hort. Soc. (Kinmundy) 1911. (25, 146) Miscellaneous — American Pomological Society Proc. Amer. Pomol. Soc., 1909, 112. (24, 653) Cadoret, A. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 33 (1912), 49, 716. (28, 652) Clinton, G. P., and Britton, W. E. Conn. State Sta. Rpt 1909-10, pt. 7, 583. (24, 553) Savastano, L. Bol. Arbor. Ital., 7 (1911), 3-4, 193. (28, 247) R. Staz. Sper. Agrum. e Fruitticol. Acireale, Bol. 5 (1912). (27, 253) Scott, W. M. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Circ. 27. (21, 149) Shutt, F. T. Canada Expt. Farms Rpts. 1907, 165. (21, 341) Wallace, E., Blodgett, F. M., and Hesler, L. R. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Bui. 290. Whetzel, H. H. Reprint from Proc. N. Y. State Fruit Growers’ Assoc., 9 (1910), 31 (23, 655) SOIL DISINFECTANTS Bell air, G. Rev. Hort. (Paris), 81 (1909), 23, 555. (22, 549) 78 Gilchrist, D. A. County Northumb. Ed. Com. Bui. 21 (1914), 84. (31, 842) See also Exp Sta. Rec., 29, 752. Hartley, C. Phytopath., 2 (1912), 2, 99. (27, 655) Johnson, J. Wis. Sta. Research Bui. 31 (1914). (30, 846) Rolet, A. Jour. Agr. Prat., n. ser, 27 (1914), 3, 89. (31, 248) Winston, J. R. Phytopath., 3 (1913), 1, 74. (29, 645) SULFUR Juritz, C. F. Agr. Jour. Cape Good Hope, 33 (1908), 6, 719. (20, 951) Marcille, R. Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. (Paris), 152 (1911), 12, 780. (25, 351) (Anon.) Jour. Bd. Agr. (London), 21 (1914), 3, 236; noted in Agr. News (Barbados), 13 (1914), 320, 254. (31, 846) A Bibliography of Non-Parasitic Diseases of Plants BY Cyrus W. Lantz Preface The aim in the preparation of this bibliography is merely to present a list of non-parasitic diseases of plants with reference to the more important litera- ture on these diseases. The list includes those diseases in which no parasites have been found and some diseases — e. g., gummosis — in which there is some question as to whether the cause is or is not a parasite. The diseases are listed under the common names of the plants upon which they occur, and the names of these plants are arranged alphabetically. Where a disease occurs upon several different plants, — e. g., chlorosis, mosaic, — it is also given a separate heading, and placed in its alphabetical position. Plant injuries are also arranged in this way. Owing to the confusion in the naming of some of the so-called physiologi- cal diseases and to the lack of definite knowledge concerning them, it is probable that the same disease in some instances occurs under two different names; how- ever, it seems better to err in this way than to risk the grouping together of distinct diseases as one. The names here used for the diseases are those found in the original publication. This list of diseases and literature is complete up to and including the year 1914 in so far as it has been possible to make it. Free use has been made of a bibliography of non-parasitic diseases of plants published by Dr. George E. Stone in the 17th Annual Report (1905) of the Hatch Experiment Station of Massachusetts and of the reviews in the Experiment Station Record. A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF NON-PARASITIC DISEASES OF PLANTS By CYRUS W. LANTZ, Assistant in Botany APPLE Baldwin Fruit Spot Sturgis, W. C. Conn. Sta. Rpt., 21 (1897), 171. (See also Fruit Spot.) Bitter Pit Evans, I. B. P. Transvaal Dept. Agr. Tech. Bui. 1 (1910), 18. Union South Africa Tech. Bui. 2 (1911), 1-18. Ewart, A. J. Proc. Roy. Soc. Victoria, n. ser, 24 (1911), 2, 367-419. Farmer, J. B. Roy. Bot. Gard. Kew, Bui. Misc. Inform., 1907, 6, 250. Lounsbury, C. P. Agr. Jour. Cape Good Hope, 37 (1910), 2, 150-173. McAlpine, D. Jour. Dept. Agr. Victoria, 8 (1910), 4, 201-202. Jour. New Zeal. Dept. Agr., 5 (1912), 2, 139. Prog. Rpt. Bitter Pit Invest. (Australia), 1 (1911-12), 197; abs. in Bot Centbl., 122 (1913), 18, 431. Quinn, G. Jour. Agr. and Indus. So. Aust, 8 (1905), 6, 305-309. White, J. Proc. Roy. Soc. Victoria (reprint), n. ser., 24 (1911), 1, 19. Collar Blight Waite, M. B. Rpt. W. Va. Bd. Agr, 1912, 25, 66-74. Frost Injury Jones, L. R. Vt. Sta. Bui. .49 (1895). Stewart, F. C. N. Y. (Geneva) Sta. Bui. 220 (1902). ( 81 ) 82 Fruit Spot Brooks, C. N. H. Sta. Sci. Contrib. 2, 423-456; Bui. Torrey Bot. Club, 35 (1908), 9, 423-456. Phytopath., 3 (1913), 4, 249-250. Jones, L. R., and Orton, W. A. Vt. Sta. Rpt. 1899, 159-164. Scott, W. M. Phytopath., 1 (1911), 1, 32-34. Stakman, E. C., and Rose, R. C. Phytopath., 4 (1914), 4, 333-335. Stewart, F. C. N. Y. (Geneva) Sta. Bui. 164 (1899). WORTMAN, J. Landw. Jahrb., 21 (1892), 663-675. (See also Jonathan Fruit Spot.) Jonathan Fruit Spot Beach and Clark N. Y. (Geneva) Sta. Bui. 248 (1904). Cook, M. T., and Martin, G. W. Phytopath, 4 (1914), 2, 102-103. Phytopath, 3 (1913), 2, 119-120. Norton, J. B. S. Phytopath., 3 (1913), 2, 99-100. Scott, W. M, and Roberts, J. W. U. S. Dept. Agr, Bur. Plant Indus. Circ. 112 (1913). (See also Fruit Spot.) Rosette ( ) Colo. Sta. Bui. 69 (1902). • Jones, L. R. Vt. Sta. Rpt. 1896-97, 55-59. Scald Spray Injury Eustace, H. J. Science, n. ser, 21 (1905), 548, 994-995. Morse, W. J. Me. Sta. Bui. 223 (1914). •Stewart, F. C, and Eustace, H. J. N. Y. (Geneva) Sta. Bui. 220 (1902) Swingle, D. B, and Morris, H. E. Phytopath, 1 (1911), 3, 79-93. 83 Waite, M. B. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Circ. 58 (1910). Water Core Bothe, R. Deut. Obstbau Ztg., 1912, 1, 16; abs. in Centbl. Bakt., 2 Abt., 35 (1912) 20-24, 544. Norton, J. B. S. Phytopath., 1 (1911), 4, 126-128. O’Gara, P. J. Off. Path. Rogue River Valley (Ore.) Bui. 9 (1912), 8. Phytopath., 3 (1913), 2. 121-128. Reiche, H. Deut. Obstbau Ztg., 1912, 1, 16-17; abs. in Centbl. Bakt., 2 Abt., 35 (1912) 20-40, 544. APRICOT Leaf Scorch, or Sunburn Toumey, J. W Ariz. Sta Rpt. 1898, 163-165 ASTER (China) Yellows Smith, R. E. Mass. (Hatch) Sta. Bui. 79 (1902). BEET Curly Top Arthur, J. C. Proc. Amer. Assoc. Adv. Sci., 38 (1899), 280. and Golden, Katherine Proc. Ind. Acad. Sci., 1891, 92. Ball, E. D. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Ent. Bui. 66 (1909), pt. 4. Bunzel, H. H. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Bui. 277 (1913). U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Bui. 238 (1912). Biochem. Ztschr., 50 (1913), 3-4, 185-208. Cunningham, Clara A. Bot. Gaz., 28 (1899), 177-191. Lapham, M. H., and Heilmann, W. H. U. S. Dept. Agr. Soil Survey of Lower Salinas Valley, Cal., 1901, 56. Shaw, H. B. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Bui. 181 (1910). 8 4 Townsend, C. O. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Bui. 122 (1908). U. S. Dept. Agr. Rpt. 72 (1902), 93-95. Heart Rot Busse, W. R., and Ulrich, P. Mitt. K. Biol. Anst. Land u. Forstw., 1909, 8, 24-25. Kruger, W. Bl. Zuckerrubenbau, 16 (1909), 24, 369-373. Leaf Scorch Stewart, F. C. N. Y. (Geneva) Sta. Bui. 162 (1899). Tumor Reinelt, J. Bl. Zuckerrubenbau, 16 (1909), 21, 328-330; abs. in Centbl. Bakt., 2 Abt., 26 (1910), 16-17, 479. Bl. Zuckerrubenbau, 16 (1909), 5, 68-73; 6, 81-87. Spisar, K. Ztschr. Zuckerindus. Bohmen, 34 (1910), 11, 629-634. CASSAVA Leaf Curl Zimmerman, A. Pflanzer., 2 (1906), 10, 145; abs. in Centbl. Bakt., 2 Abt., 18 (1907), 10-12, 366-367. CAULIFLOWER Leaf Scorch Stewart, F. C. N. Y. (Geneva) Sta. Bui. 162 (1899). CELERY Pithiness Austin, C. F., and White, T. W. Md. Sta. Bui. 93 (1904). Garcia, F. N. Mex. Sta. Rpt. 1904, 27. Sandsten, E. P., and White, T. W. Md. Sta. Bui. 83 (1902). CEREAL General Riehm, E. Centbl. Bakt., 2 Abt., 39 (1913), 4-7, 81-107. Brusone and Blight of Rice Brizi, U. Ann. 1st. Agr. (Milan), 7 (1905-06), 107-174. Ann. 1st. Agr. (Milan), 5 (1901-04), 77-95. Agr. Mod., 11 (1905), 380, 394, 452; abs. in Centbl. Bakt., 2 Abt., 15 (1906), 21, 653-654. D’ Almeida, J. V. Rev. Agron. (Portugal), 5 (1907), 8, 242-247. Farneti, R. Atti Cong. Risicolo Internat., 3 (1906), 79-101. Hewitt, J. L. Ark. Sta. Bui. 110 (1912). Foot Disease Robert, E. Jour. Agr. Prat., n. ser.. 26 (1913), 49, 715-716. Frost Injury Sorauer, P. Landw. Jahrb., 32 (1903), 1, 1-68. Zimmerman, H. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 23 (1913), 6, 332-334. Yellows of Oats Clausen, H. Mitt. Deut. Landw. Gesell., 25 (1910), 44, 631-639. Zapal Vassiliev, T. Khoziaistvo., 7 (1912), 26, 864-872; 27, 903-909; abs. in Internat. Inst. Agr. (Rome), Bui. Bur. Agr. Intel, and Plant Diseases, 3 (1912), 10, 2301-2303. (See also Smoke.) CHERRY Leaf Scorch Barss, H. P. Ore. Sta. Bien. Crop Pest and Hort. Rpt. 1911-12, 198-217. Gummosis Mikosch, K. Sitzber. K. Akad. Wiss. (Vienna), Math. Naturw. Kl., 115 (1906), 6, 911-961 Sorauer, P. Landw. Jahrb., 39 (1910), 2, 259-298. Landw. Jahrb., 42 (1912), 5, 719-750. (See also Cauliflower.) 86 CHLOROSIS General Baur, E. Ber. Deut. Bot. Gesell., 26a (1908), 9, 711-713. Dementjew, A. Ann. Sci. Agron., 2 ser., 2 (1904), 1, 63-81. Hasselbring, H. Bot. Gaz., 41 (1906), 361. Hoc, P. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed l’Est-Centre), 33 (1912), 36, 312-313. Maze, P., Ruot, M., and Lemoigne, M. Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. (Paris), 155 (1912), 7, 435-437; abs. in Chem. Centbl., 2 (1912), 17, 1490. Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. (Paris), 157 (1913), 12, 495-498. Provost-Dumarchais, G. Jour. Agr. Prat., n. ser., 22 (1911), 46, 616-617 Riviere, G., and Bailhache, G. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 31 (1910), 15, 453-454. Jour. Soc. Nat. Hort. France, 4 ser., 14 (1913), 287-288. Verneuil, A., and Lafond, R. Rev. Vit., 36 (1911), 927, 321-326. (See also Citrus Fruits, Grape, Maize, Mallow, Pear, and Sugar Cane.) CITRUS FRUITS General Rolfs, P. H., Fawcett, H. S., and Floyd, B. F. Fla. Sta. Bui. 108 (1911). Swingle, W. T., and Webber, H. J. U. S. Dept. Agr., Div. Veg. Phys. and Path. Bui. 8 (1896). Hume, H. H. Fla. Sta. Bui. 53 (1900). Blight Brown Spot of Orange Coit, J. E. Cal. Cult., 37 (1911), 3, 51-52. Chlorosis Averna-Sacca, R. Bol. Agr. (Sao Paulo), 13 ser., 1912, 2, 129-150. Floyd, B. F. Fla. Sta. Rpt. 1909, 68. 87 Lipman, C. B. f and Snowden, R. R. Pacific Rural Press, 81 (1911), 21, 412; 24, 472-473. Collar Rot Fuller, C. Agr. Jour, and Misc. Rec., 6 (1903), 5, 150-151. Dieback, or Exanthema Brittlebank, C. C. Jour. Dept. Agr. Victoria, 10 (1912), 7, 401-404. Butler, O. Ann. Bot., 25 (1911), 97, 141. Essig, E. O. Pomona Col. Jour. Econ. Bot., 1 (1911), 2, 73-82. Floyd, B. F. Fla. Sta. Rpt. 1912, 102. Fla. Sta. Rpt. 1910, 56-68. Hume, H. H. Fla. Sta. Bui. 53 (1900). Lipman, C. B. Science, n. ser., 39 (1914), 1011, 728-730. Mills, J. W. Cal. Sta. Bui. 138 (1902). Gummosis, Foot Rot, Mai di Gomma Bertoni, M. S. Agronomia (Puerto Bertoni), 5 (1911), 2, 77-89. Agronomia (Puerto Bertoni), 5 (1913), 3-4, 93-97. Call, A. F. Proc. Fruit Growers’ Conv. Cal., 37 (1910), 66-71. Fawcett, H. S. Mo. Bui. Com Hort. Cal., 1 (1912), 5, 147-156. Abs. in Phytopath., 4 (1914), 1, 54. — and Burger, O. F. Mycol., 3 (1911), 3, 151-153. Floyd, B. F. Abs. in Phytopath., 4 (1914), 1, 53. Hume, H. H. Fla. Sta. Bui. 53 (1900). Mills, J. W. Cal. Sta. Bui. 138 (1902). Savastano, L., and Majmone, B. Bol. Arbor. Ital., 5 (1909), 2, 68-73. 88 Melanose Floyd, B. F. Fla. Sta. Rpt. 1910, 56-68. and Stevens, H. E. Fla. Sta. Bui. Ill (1912). Hume, H. H. Fla. Sta. Bui. 53 (1900). Splitting of Oranges Savastano, L. Bol. Arbor. Ital., 5 (1909), 2, 83-87. Yellow Spotting Floyd, B. F. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc., 22 (1909), 88-93. Fla. Sta. Rpt. 1910, 56-68. Thomas, E. E. Cal. Sta. Circ. 85 (1912). COTTON General Atkinson, G. F. U. S. Dept. Agr. Bui. 33 (1896). Hibbard, R. P. Miss. Sta. Buis. 140 (1910), MOB (1910). i Brunissure Maige, A., and Nicolas, G. Bui. Soc. Hist. Nat. Afrique Nord., 2 (1910), 4, 65-68. Curly Leaf Kranzlin, G. Pflanzer, 6 (1910), 9-10, 129-145; 11-12, 161-170. Pflanzer, 7 (1911), 6, 327-329. Thiele, R. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 23 (1913), 4, 198-201. Atkinson, G. F. Ala. Sta. Bui. 36 (1892). Red Leaf Blight Rust Atkinson, G. F. Ala. Sta. Bui. 27 (1891). Duggar, J. F. Ala. Sta. Buis. 76, 78, 89, 101, 102. Earle, F. S. Ala. Sta. Bui. 99 (1898). Shedding of Bolls Hibbard, R. P. Miss. Sta. Buis. 140 (1910), 140B (1910). Tomosis Cook, O. F. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Circ. 120. Atkinson, G. F. Ala. Sta. Bui. 36 (1892). Yellow Leaf Blight CRANBERRY Blossom Blight Shear, C. L. Proc. Wis. Cranberry Growers’ Assoc.. 22 (1909), 4-7. CUCUMBER Leaf Curl Stone, G. E. Mass. (Hatch) Sta. Bui. 87 (1903). Stone, G. E. Mass. Sta. Rpt. 1909, pt. 1, 163. Mosaic Stem Curl Stone, G. E. Mass. (Hatch) Sta. Bui. 87 (1903). Wilt Stone, G. E. Mass. (Hatch) Sta. Bui. 87 (1903). DAFFODIL Yellow Stripe Darlington, H. R. Tour. Roy. Hort. Soc. (London), 34 (1908), 2, 161-166. ELECTRICAL INJURY General Cromie, G. A. Sci. Amer. Sup., 77 (1914), 1985, 36-37. McDougall, D. T. Jour. N. Y. Bot. Gard., 3 (1902), 31, 131-135. Start, E. A., Stone, G. E., and Fernald, H. T. Mass. Sta. Bui. 125 (1908). Stone, G. E. Mass. Sta. Bui. 91 (1903). 90 Stone, G. E. Mass. Sta. Rpt. 1904, 7-34. and Chapman, G. H. Mass. Sta. Rpt. 1911, pt. 1, 144-176. Wolff, F. Naturvv. Ztschr. Land u. Forstw., 5 (1907), 9, 425-471. FROST INJURY General Blackman, F. F. New Phytol , 8 (1909), 9-10, 354-363. Blake, M. A., and Farley, A. J. N. J. Sta. Rpt. 1912, 78-85. Butters, F. K., and Rosendahl, C. O. Minn. Bot. Studies, 4 (1911), pt. 2, 153-159. Science, n. ser, 33 (1911), 842, 261. Chittenden, F. J. Jour. Roy. Hort. Soc. (London), 36 (1910), 2, 358-404. Clement, F. M. Ann. Rpt. Quebec Soc. Protect. Plants, 5 (1912-13), 24-26. Crandall, C. S. Colo. Sta. Bui. 41 (1898). Elwes, H. J. Quart. Jour. Forestry, 1 (1907), 2, 169-179. Frazer, C. Country Gentleman, 79 (1914), 8, 360-392. Friedrich, J. Centbl. Gesam. Forstw., 33 (1907), 5, 185-192. Hartley, C. P. Forest. Club Ann. (Univ. Nebr.), 4 (1912), 39-50. Hedgecock, G. G. Phytopath., 3 (1913), 2, 111-114. Torreya, 12 (1912), 2, 25-30. Lustner, G. Deut. Obstbau Ztg, 1911, 4, 233-236. Massee, G. Roy. Bot. Gard. Kew, Bui. Misc. Inform., 1909, 2, 53-55. Maximow, N. A. Jahrb. Wis. Bot. (Pringsheim), 53 (1914), 3, 327-420. Molisch, H. Schr. Ver. Naturw. Kenntnisse Wien, 51 (1910-11), 141-176; abs. in Bot. Centbl.. 119 (1912), 16, 404-405. Noack, F. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 15 (1905), 1, 29-43. 9i Ohlweiler, W. W. Mo. Bot. Gard. Ann. Rpt., 23 (19120, 101-131. SOLEREDER, H. Centbl. Bakt.. 2 Abt., 12 (1904), 6-8, 253-262. Sorauer, P. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 12 (1902), 44-47. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 24 (1914), 2, 65-76. Naturwissenschaften, 1 (1913), 44, 1055-1058; 45, 1094-1097. Stone, G. E. Mass. Sta. Rpt. 1911, pt. 1, 110-114. and Monahan, N. F. Mass. Sta. Rpt. 1904, 7-34. von Schrenk, H. Mo. Bot. Gard. Ann. Rpt., 18 (1907), 81-83. Mo. Bot. Gard. Ann. Rpt., 16 (1905), 117-120. Waldron, C. B. N. D. Sta. Rpt. 1910, 49-51. (See also Apple, Cereal, Gummosis, Pear, Plum, and Quince.) GRAPE General Bioletti, F. T. Pacific Rural Press, 78 (1909), 1, 5. Butler, O. Cal. Sta. Bui. 168 (1905). Linsbauer, L. Jahresber. Ver. Angew. Bot., 7 (1909), 112-118. Anaheim, or California Vine Disease Butler, O. Mem. Torrey Bot. Club, 14 (1910), 2, 111-153. Hoops, H. How to make grape culture profitable in California, Wrights, Cal., Author, 1904, 3-8. Lounsbury, C. P. Agr. Jour. Cape Good Hope, 18 (1901), 2, 90-94. Pierce, N. B. Pacific Rural Press, 69 (1905), 5, 78. U. S. Dept. Agr., Farmers’ Bui. 30 (1895). Woods, A. F. Abs. in Science, n. ser., 13 (1901), 320, 247-248. 92 Brunissure Degrully, L. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 24 (1903), 15, 449-452. Ducomet, V. Assoc. Franc. Avanc. Sci., 32 (1904), 697-707; abs. in Bot. Centbl., 98 (1905), 4, 96-97. Ravaz, L. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 25 (1904), 3, 69-72; 19, 568-569. Ann. Rcole Nat. Agr. Montpellier, n. ser., 3 (1903), 2, 145-156; 3, 175-251. and Sicard, L. Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. Paris, 136 (1903), 21, 1276-1278. Chlorosis Bernatsky, J. Bui. Inst. Cent. Ampelol. Roy. Hongrois, 1 (1906), 8-9. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 32 (1911), 32, 162-164. Chancrin, E. Jour. Agr. Prat., n. ser.. 23 (1912), 22, 683-686. Chauzit, B. Rev. Vit., 15 (1901), 393, 718-719. Corso, G. Ann. R. Staz. Chim. Agr. Sper. Roma, 2 ser., 4 (1910), 129-142. Guillon, J. M., and Brunand, V. Rev. Vit., 20 (1903), 513, 437-441; 516, 532-535. Mottareale, G. Bol. R. Scuola Sup. Agr. Portici, 2 ser., 1902, 6. Pierce, N. B. U. S. Dept. Agr., Div. Veg. Path. Bui. 2 (1892). Ravaz, L. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 34 (1913), 47, 641-652. Vernet, L. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 25 (1904), 13, 385-386. Coulure Bioletti, F. T. Pacific Rural Press, 77 (1909), 22, 401. Lodeman, E. G. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta, Bui. 76 (1894). Pierce, N. B. U. S. Dept. Agr., Farmers’ Bui. 30 (1895). Court-noue Barry, S. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 35 (1914), 5, 146-147. 93 Chappaz, G. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 34 (1913), 18, 554-557. Faes, H. Vie Agr. et Rurale, 2 (1913), 27, 14-17. Jaccard, P. Arch. Sci. Phys. et Nat. (Geneva), 4 ser., 28 (1909), 11, 519-521; abs. in Centbl. Bakt., 2 Abt, 28 (1910), 9-11, 282-283. and Burnat, J. Rev. Vit., 37 (1912), 961, 665-668. Kober, F. Abs. in Centbl. Bakt., 2 Abt., 35 (1912), 20-24, 551. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 34 (1913), 51, 779-781. Lamauraux Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 34 (1913), 40, 417-421. Ravaz, L. Vie Agr. et Rurale, 2 (1913), 27, 10-13. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 34 (1913), 20, 616-624. Falling of Flowers Pantanelli, E. Atti R. Accad. Lincei, Rend. Cl. Sci. Fis., Mat. e Nat., 5 ser., 18 (1909) 1, 8, 406-411; abs. in Jour. Chem. Soc. (London), 96 (1909), 560, II, 513. Malnero, Rougeot, Folletage Lodeman, E. G. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Bui. 76 (1894). Pierce, N. B. L. S. Dept. Agr., Div. Veg. Path. Bui. 2 (1892). Ravaz, L., and Roos, L. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 26 (1905), 39, 363-370; 40, 392-398. Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. (Paris), 141 (1905), 6, 366-367. Mosaic Pantanelli, E. Malpighia, 24 (1912), 5-6, 497-523; 25 (1912), 1, 17-46. Pourriture Pierce, N. B. U. S. Dept. Agr., Div. Veg. Path. Bui. 2 (1892). Roncet Averna-Sacca, R. Atti R. 1st. Incorogg. Napoli, 6 ser., 62 (1910), 113-143. Mameli, Eva Atti R. Accad. Lincei, Rend. Cl. Sci. Fis., Mat. e Nat., 5 ser., 22 (1913), I, 12, 879-883. 94 PA NTA NELLI, E. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 23 (1913), 1 , 1-34. Reprint from Vit. Moderna, 17 (1911), 10-11; Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 22 (1912), 1, 1-38. Bol. Min. Agr. Indus, e Com. (Rome), ser. C, 9 (1910), 2, 20-27. Atti R. Accad. Lincei, Rend. Cl. Sci. Fis., Mat. e Nat., 5 ser., 19 (1910), I, 7, 395-405. Bol. Min. Agr. Indus, e Com. (Rome), ser. C, 11 (1912), 2-3, 1-10. Staz. Sper. Agr. Ital., 45 (1912), 4, 249-301. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 23 (1913), 1, 1-34. Pavarino, L. Riv. Patol. Veg., 6 (1913), 6, 164-170; 7, 193-203. Petri, L. Atti R. Accad. Lincei, Rend. Cl. Sci. Fis., Mat. e Nat., 5 ser., 21 (1912), I, 7, 505-511; abs. in Internat. Inst. Agr. (Rome), Bui. Bur. Agr. Intel, and Plant Diseases, 3 (1912), 6, 1445. Atti R. Accad. Lincei, Rend. Cl. Sci. Fis., Mat. e Nat., 5 ser., 21 (1912), II, 1, 113-119; abs. in Internat. Inst. Agr. (Rome), Bui. Bur. Agr. Intel, and Plant Diseases, 3 (1912), 9, 2091-2093. Atti R. Accad. Lincei, Rend. Cl. Sci. Fis., Mat. e Nat., 5 ser., 23 (1914), I, 3, 154-161. Spray Injury Muth, F. Jahresber. Ver. Angew. Bot., 9 (1911), 218-240. Mitt. Deut. Weinbau Ver., 1 (1906), 1, 9-18; abs. in Bot. Centbl., 105 (1907), 28. 26-27. Sun Scald and Scorching Pacottet, P. Rev. Vit., 32 (1909), 813, 57-60. Ravaz, L. Prog. Agr. et Vit. (Ed. l’Est-Centre), 34 (1913), 28, 33-35. GUMMOSIS General Beyerinck, M. W., and Rant, A. Centbl. Bakt., 2 Abt., 15 (1905-06), 366-375. Butler, O. Ann. Bot., 25 (1911), 97, 107-153. 95 Call, A. F. Proc. Fruit Growers’ Conv. Cal., 37 (1910), 66-71. de Bussy, L. P. Meded. Deli-Proefstat. Medan, 6 (1911), 2, 77-89. Fawcett, H. S. Phytopath., 3 (1913), 3, 194-195. Cal. Cult., 42 (1914), 4, 99-102. Griffin, F. L. Science, n. ser., 34 (1911), 879, 615-616. Gruss, J. Jahrb. Wiss. Bot., 47 (1909-10), 393-430. — and Sorauer, P. Notizbl. K. Bot. Gartens u. Mus. Berlin, 5 (1910), 47, 188-197. Honing, J. A. Meded. Deli-Proefstat. Medan, 6 (1911), 1, 1-30; 7 (1912), 1, 1-11. Rant, A. Inaug. Diss. Amsterdam, 1906; abs. in Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 17 (1907), 3, 179-180. Ruhland, W. Ber. Deut. Bot. Gesell., 25 (1907), 6, 302-315. Sorauer, P. Landw. Jahrb.. 41 (1911), 1, 131-162; 42 (1912), 5, 719-750; abs. in Bot. Gaz., 54 (1912), 2, 173-174. Wolf, F. A. Plant World, 15 (1912), 3, 60-66. Young, H. D. Phytopath., 3 (1913), 3, 195-196. (See also Beet, Cherry, Citrus, Peach, Pear, Plum, Sugar Cane, and Tobacco.) HAIL INJURY General Phillips, J. H. Trans. Acad. Sci. St. Louis, 19 (1910), 3, 49-56. Sampson, H. C. Trans, and Proc. Bot. Soc. Edinburgh, 22 (1902), pt. 2, 254-257. Voges, E. Centbl. Bakt., 2 Abt., 36 (1913), 19-25, 532-567. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 22 (1912), 8, 457-462. HEAT INJURY General Jones, L. R. Vt. Sta. Rpt. 1900, 281-282 96 Munch, E. Naturw. Ztschr. Forst u. Landw., 11 (1913), 12, 557-562. Naturw. Ztschr. Forst u. Landw., 12 (1914), 4, 169-188. von Tubeuf, C. Naturw. Ztschr. Forst u. Landw., 12 (1914), 2, 67-88; 4, 161-169. ICE-STORM INJURY General Chapman, H. H. Forestry and Irrig., 8 (1902), 3, 130. INTUMESCENCE General Dale, E. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. London, ser. B, 198 (1906). Phil. Trans. R. Soc. London, ser. B, 194 (1901). Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 16 (1906), 232. Kuster, E. Ber. Deut. Bot. Gesell., 21 (1901), 452-458. SORAUER, P. Ber. Deut. Bot. Gesell., 19 (1901), 115-119. Trotter, A. Annali di Botanica, 1 (1904), 123-133. VON ScHRENK, H. Mo. Bot. Gard. Ann. Rpt., 16 (1905), 125-148. (See also Tomato (Oedema), Manihot, and Potato.) LEAF SCORCH (See Apricot, Beet, Cauliflower, and Cherry.) LETTUCE Tipburn Stone, G. E. Mass. (Hatch) Sta. Rpt. 1897, 82-84. — — and Smith, R. £. Mass. (Hatch) Sta. Bui. 69 (1900). LILY , TT . Bermuda Lily Disease Woods, A. F. U. S. Dept. Agr., Div. Veg. Phys. and Path. Bui. 14 (1897). MAIZE , , _ Chlorosis Maze, P. Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. (Paris). 153 (1911), 19. 902-905. 97 Baur, E. MALLOW Chlorosis Ber. Deut. Bot. Gesell., 24 (1906), 8, 416-428. Sitzber. K. Preuss. Akad. Wiss, 1906, 1; abs. in Bot. Centbl., 103 (1906), 2, 21. MANIHOT (Edema Wolf, F. A., and Lloyd, F. E. Phytopath, 2 (1912), 4, 131-134. Fulton, H. S. Ga. Sta. Bui. 57 (1902). MELON Tipburn Sturgis, W. C. MOSAIC General Conn. Sta. Rpt. 1898, 256-263. Vallillo, G. Ztschr. Infektionskrank. u. Hyg. Haustiere, 9 (1911), 6, 433-479. Woods, A. F. Science, n. ser, 11 (1900), 262, 17-19. Centbl. Bakt, 2 Abt, 5 (1899), 22, 745. (See also Beet, Cucumber, Peanut, Pepper, Tobacco, and Tomato.) (See Cereal.) OATS Norton, J. B. S. PEACH Crown Swelling Phytopath, 1 (1911), 2, 53-54. Dropsical Swelling ( ) Ohio Sta. Bui. 92 (1898). Fruit Crack, or Sun Scald Rolfs, F. M. Mo. Fruit Sta. Bui. 17 (1911). Taft, L. R. Gummosis Mich. Sta. Rpt. 1896, 123-124. 9 8 Taft, L. R. Mich. Sta. Rpt. 1897, 96. Mich. Sta. Bui. 156 (1898). Little Peach Blake, M. A. N. J. Sta. Bui. 226 (1910). Caesar, L. Ontario Dept. Agr. Bui. 201 (1912 V Taft, L. R. Mich. Sta. Rpt. 1896, 121-122. Mich. Sta. Bui. 156 (1898). ( Mechanical Injuries ) Ohio Sta. Bui. 92 (1898). Rosette Bogne, E. D. Okla. Sta. Bui. 20 (1896). Evans, P. Mo. Fruit Sta. Bui. 11 (1905). Johnson, W. G. Md. Sta. Bui. 42 (1896). Smith, E. F. U. S. Dept. Agr., Div. Veg. Path. Bui. 1 (1891). U. S. Dept. Agr. Jour. Mycol., 6 (1891), 4, 143-148. U. S. Dept. Agr. Jour. Mycol., 7 (1894), 3, 226-232. U. S. Dept. Agr., Farmers’ Bui. 17 (1894). Starnes, H. N. Ga. Sta. Bui. 42 (1898). Bain, S. M. Tenn. Sta. Bui. 15 (1902). Spray Injury Science, n. ser., 14 (1901), 221-222; Bot. Gaz., 33 (1902), 244-245. Tenn. Sta. Bui. 8 (1895). Card, F. W., and Stene, A. E. R. I. Sta. Rpt. 1903, 223-224. Groth, B. H. A. N. J. Sta. Bui. 232 (1910). 99 Sturgis, W. C. Conn. Sta. Rpt., 24 (1900), 219-254. ( ) Ohio Sta. Bui. 92 (1898). Twig Spots Yellows Bailey, L. H. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Bui. 25 (1890). N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Bui. 75 (1894). Beckwith, M. H. Del. Sta. Rpt. 1893, 152-153. Blake, M. A. N. J. Sta. Bui. 226 (1910). Butz, G. C. Pa. Sta. Bui. 37 (1896). Clinton Conn. Sta. Rpt., 31-32 (1907-08), 877. Corbett, L. C. W. Va. Sta. Bui. 66 (1900). Essig, E. O. Mo. Bui. Com. Hort. Cal.. 1 (1912), 8, 337-359. Hutchins, E. Better Fruit, 5 (1910), 1, 64-65. Johnson, W. G. Md. Sta. Bui. 42 (1896). Maynard, S. T. Mass. (Hatch) Sta. Bui. 8 (1890). Morse, E. W., and Fetzer, L. W. Abs. in Science, n. ser., 35 (1912), 897, 393. Bui. Bussey Inst., 3 (1901), 1, 12. Phillips, J. L. Rpt. State Ent. and Plant Path. Va., 7 (1908-09), 56-98. Powell, G. H. Del. Sta. Rpt. 1897, 168-173. Selby, A. D. Ohio Sta. Bui. 92 (1898). Ohio Sta. Bui. 104 (1899). Smith, E. F. U. S. Dept. Agr., Div. Veg. Path. Bui. 1 (1891). . IOO Smith, E. F. U. S. Dept. Agr., Farmers’ Bui. 17 (1894). Rpt. Chief of Section Veg. Path. Washington 1890. U. S. Dept. Agr., Div. Veg. Path. Bui. 4 (1893). Starnes, H. N. Ga. Sta. Bui. 42 (1898). Sturgis, William Conn. Sta. Bui. Ill (1892). Conn. Sta. Bui. 115 (1893). Taft, L. R. Mich. Sta. Bui. 103 (1894). Waite, M. B. Abs. in Science, n. ser., 31 (1910), 803, 798-799. ( ) N. J. Sta. Rpt. 1898, 357-359. ( ) N. J. Sta. Rpt. 1899, 417-418. ( ) N. C. Sta. Bui. 92 (1893). ( ) N. C. Sta. Bui. 120 (1895). PEANUT General Rutgers, A. A. L. Dept. Landb. Nijv. an Handel (Dutch East Indies) Meded. Afdell. Plan- tenziekten, 1913, 6, 5. Zimmerman, A. Pflanzer, 3 (1907), 9, 129-133. PEAR Chlorosis Schellenberg, H. Landw. Jahrb. Schweiz, 26 (1912), 6, 432-437. Frost Injury Crandall, C. S. Colo. Sta. Bui. 41 (1898). Jones, L. R. Vt. Sta. Bui. 49 (1895). Smith, R. E. Mo. Weather Rev., 39 (1911), 8, 1257. Sturgis, W. C. Conn. Sta. Rpt., 19 (1895), 190. IOI PECAN Rosette Orton, W. A., and Rand, F. V. Jour. Agr. Research, 3 (1914), 2. PEPPER Mosaic ScHWARZE, C. A. Abs. in Phytopath., 4 (1914), 1, 42. PLUM Frost Cracks and Sun Scald Chester, F. D. Del. Sta. Bui. 57 (1902). ( ) Cal. Sta. Bui. 41 (1898). Gummosis Hedrick, U. P. Ore. Sta. Bui. 45 (1897). Selby, A. D. Ohio Sta. Bui. 79 (1897). Yellows Stone, G. E. Mass. (Hatch) Sta. Rpt. 1903, 35. POTATO Bruise Horne, A. S. Jour. Roy. Hort. Soc. (London), 38 (1912), 1 , 37-51. Internal Brown Rot and Black Heart Bartholomew, E. T. Phytopath., 3 (1913), 3, 180-182. Green, S. B. Minn. Sta. Bui. 39 (1894) ; Bui. 45 (1895). Horne, A. S. Ann. Mycol., 7 (1909), 3, 286-288. Stewart, F. C. N. Y. (Geneva) Sta. Bui. 101 ; Rpt. 1896, 511. ( ) Jour. Bd. Agr. (London), 16 (1909), 8, 647-648. Intumescence and Hypertrophy Douglas, Gertrude E. Bot. Gaz., 43 (1907), 4, 233-250. Fucsko, M. Bot. Kozlem (Budapest), 11 (1912), 1, 14-29. 102 Leaf Roll Appel, O. Jahresber. Ver. Angew. Bot., 6 (1908), 259-265. and Krutz, W. Mitt. K. Biol. Anst. Land u. Forstw., 8 (1909), 15-17. and SCHLUMBERGER, O. Deut. Landw. Gesell., 190 (1911), 102-108. Mitt. K. Biol. Anst. Land u. Forstw., 12 (1912), 14-15. Mitt. K. Biol. Anst. Land u. Forstw., 11 (1911), 13-15; abs. in Centbl. Bakt., 2 Abt., 32 (1912), 6-12, 321-322. Deut. Landw. Gesell., 190 (1911). Bohutinsky-Krizevci, G. Ztschr. Landw. Versuchw. Osterr., 13 (1910), 7, 607-633 Monatsh. Landw., 2 (1909), 118; abs in Centbl. Bakt., 2 Abt., 24 (1909), 23-25, 575-576. Doby, G. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 22 (1912), 7, 401-403. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 21 (1911), 1-2, 10-17. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 22 (1912), 4, 204-211. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 21 (1911), 6, 321-336. Fitch, C. L. Proc. Soc. Hort. Sci., 9 (1912), 44-51. Hedlund, T. Tidski. Landtman, 31 (1910), 512-515, 532-541; abs. in Bot. Centbl., 114 (1910), 22, 567-568. Himmelbaur, W. Osterr. Ungar. Ztschr. Zuckerindus. u. Landw., 41 (1912), 5, 714-716; 6, 944-976. Kock, G. Abs. in Centbl. Bakt., 2 Abt., 26 (1910), 25, 697-698. and Kornauth, K. Monatsh. Landw., 3 (1910), 12, 365-369. Ztschr. Landw. Versuchw. Osterr., 14 (1911), 5, 759-805. Ztschr. Landw. Versuchsw. Osterr., 15 (1912), 3, 179-247. Kock, Kornauth, and Broz Ztschr. Landw. Versuchsw. Osterr., 16 (1913), 3, 89-140; Bot. Centbl., 123 (1913), 8, 200. 103 Kornauth, K., and Reitmar, O. Monatsh. Landw., 2 (1909). 78; abs. in Centbl. Bakt.. 2 Abt., 24 (1909). 23-25, 573-574. Orton, W. A. U. S. Dept. Agr. Bui. 64 (1914). Abs. in Phytopath., 3 (1913), 1. 69. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Circ. 109 (1913). OSTERSPEN Mitt. Deut. Landw. Gesell, 26 (1911). 18. 222-224. Quanjer, H. M. Mededeelingen, Ryks Hoogere Land, Tuin-en Boschboueoschool, Wagen- nigen, deel 6, afl. 2, 1913, 41-80. Reitmar, O. Ztschr. Landw. Versuchw. Osterr, 16 (1913), 6, 653-717. Landw. Versuchsw. Osterr., 13 (1910), 4, 190-197. Ztschr. Landw. Versuchsw. Osterr., 13 (1910), 4, 190-197. Ztschr. Landw. Versuchsw. Osterr., 15 (1912), 1, 1-106. Remy, T., and Schneider, G. Fiihling’s Landw. Ztg., 58 (1909), 6, 201-219. Schander, R. Jahresber. Ver. Angew. Bot., 7 (1909), 235-245. Ber. West. Preuss. Bot. Zool. Ver., 32 (1910), 70-77. and Tiesenhausen, M. Mitt. Kaiser Wilhelms Inst. Landw. Bromberg, 6 (1914), 2, 115-124. Schmid, A. Illus. Landw. Ztg., 31 (1911), 17, 160; abs. in Centbl. Bakt., 2 Abt., 31 (1911), 11-15, 331-332. Schmidt, E. W. Deut. Landw. Presse, 36 (1909), 99, 1051. SoRAUER, P. Internat. Phytopath. Dienst. Beigabe zu Zeitschrift fur Pflanzenkrank. Jahrb., 1 (1908), 33-59. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 23 (1913), 4, 244-253. Spieckermann, A. Jahresber. Ver. Angew. Bot.. 8 (1910), 1-19, 173-177; abs. in Centbl. Bakt., 2 Abt, 31 (1911), 23-25. Stormer, K. Jahresber. Ver. Angew. Bot.. 7 (1909), 119-170. 104 Stormer, K. and Morgenthaler, O. Naturw. Ztschr. Forst u. Landw., 9 (1911), 12, 521-551. Vanha, J. Monatsh. Landw., 3 (1910), 9, 268-276. Voges, E. Fiihling’s Landw. Ztg., 61 (1912), 16, 542-553. von Beke, L. Jahresber. Ver. Angew. Bot., 10 (1912), 145-155. Pimply Potatoes Stewart, F. C. N. Y. (Geneva) Sta. Bui. 101; Rpt. 1896, 447-521. Ring Disease Mayer, A. Jour. Landw., 55 (1907), 4, 301-304. Spray Injury Lutman, B. F. Vt. Sta. Bui. 162 (1912). Munn, M. T. N. Y. (Geneva) Sta. Bui. 352 (1912). Orton, W. A., and Field, E. C. Abs. in Science, n. ser., 31 (1910), 803, 796. Stewart, F. C., and French, G. T. N. Y. (Geneva) Sta. Bui. 347 (1912). Stewart, F. C., and Gloyer, W. O. N. Y. (Geneva) Sta. Bui. 369 (1913). Tipburn Galloway, B. T. U. S. Dept. Agr., Farmers’ Bui. 91 (1899). Jones, L. R. Vt. Sta. Bui. 49 (1895) ; Bui. 72 (1899). QUINCE Blotch Brooks, C. Phytopath, 3 (1913), 4, 249-250. Frost Blisters Stewart, F. C, and Eustace, H. J. N. Y. (Geneva) Sta. Bui. 220 (1902). RASPBERRY Yellows Howitt, J. E. Canad. Hort, 36 (1913), 10, 237-238. Melchers, L. E. Ohio Nat, 14 (1914), 6. 281-288. 105 RICE (See Cereal.) ROSE Bronzing of Leaves Stone, G. E. Mass. (Hatch) Sta. Rpt. 1899, 156-159. ( ) N. J. Sta. Rpt. 1891, 303-304. ROSETTE (See Apple, Peach, and Pecan.) SMOKE AND GAS INJURIES; INJURIES FROM INDUSTRIAL WORKS Cement Dust Anderson, P. J. Abs. in Phytopath., 2 (1912), 1, 45. Parish, S. B. Plant World, 13 (1910), 12, 288-291. Pierce, G. J. Plant World, 13 (1910), 12, 283-288. Science, n. ser., 30 (1909), 775, 652-654. Coal Tar Ewert, R. Ber. K. Lehranst. Obst u. Gartenbau Proskau, 1911, 76. Gatin, C. L. Abs. in Internat. Inst. Agr. (Rome), Bui. Bur. Agr. Intel, and Plant Dis- eases, 3 (1912), 7, 1670-1672. Flue Dust Hasselhoff, E. Chem. Centbl., 2 (1907), 21, 1755-1756; Jour. Chem. Soc. (London), 92 (1907), 541, II, 905-906. Fuhling’s Landw. Ztg.. 57 (1908), 18, 609-615. Gas Knight, L. I., Rose, R. C., and Crocker, W. Abs. in Science, n. ser., 31 (1910), 799, 635-636. Osterhout, W. J. V. Univ. Cal. Pub. Bot., 3 (1908), 4, 339-340. Illuminating Gas Crocker, W., and Knight, L. I. Bot. Gaz., 46 (1908), 4, 259-276. Shonnard, F. Yonkers, N. Y. ; Dept. Public Works, 1903. io6 Stone, G. E. Mass. Sta. Rpt. 1912, pt. 1, 45-60. Bakke, A. L. Ia. Sta. Bui. 145 (1913). Smoke Bokorny, T. Chem, Ztg., 36 (1912), 111, 1050-1051; abs. in Jour. Chem. Soc. (London), 102 (1912), 600, 11, 980. Buckhout Pa. State Col. Pub. 1900. Crowther, C. Jour. Roy. Hort. Soc. (London), 38 (1913), 3, 461-468. — — — — and Ruston, A. G. Jour. Agr. Sci., 4 (1911), 1, 25-55. — — and Stewart, D. W. Jour. Agr. Sci. (England), 5 (1913), 4, 391-408. Ebaugh, W. C. Jour. Amer. Chem. Soc., 29 (1907), 951-970. Gerlach Forst u. Jagdw., 40 (1908), 7, 429-437. Haywood, J. K. Jour. Amer. Chem. Soc., 29 (1907), 7, 998-1009. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Chem. Bui. 89 (1905). Hedgcock, G. G. Jour. Wash. Acad. Sci., 4 (1914), 4, 70-71. Knight, L. I., and Crocker, W. Bot. Gaz., 55 (1913), 5, 337-371. Abs. in Science, n. ser., 37 (1913), 949, 380. McClelland, E. H. Mellon Inst. Indus. Research Smoke Invest. Bui. 2 (1913), 58-71. Muller, H. C., et al. Kontroll u. Vers. Pflanzenkrank. Prov. Sachsen, 1910, 20-22. Ber. Agr. Chem. Kontroll u. Vers. Stat. Pflanzenkrank. Prov. Sachsen, 1912, 19-22. Ruston, A. G., and Crowther, C. Rpt. Brit. Assoc. Adv. Sci. 1910, 577-578. Sabachnikoff, V. Contribution a l’Rtude des Fumees et des Poussieres Industrielles dans leurs Rapports avec la Vegetation. Thesis, Univ. Nancy, 1913, 1-252. Schroter, F. Tharand. Forstl. Jahrb., 57 (1907), 2, 211-430. SORAUER, P. Landw. Jahrb., 33 (1904), 4-5, 585-664. io7 Stone, G. E., and Monahan, N. F. Mass. Sta. Rpt. 1906, 115. Swain, R. E., and Harkins, W. D. Jour. Amer. Chem. Soc., 30 (1908), 6, 915-928. von Rusnov, P. Centbl. Gesam. Forstw., 36 (1910), 6, 257-268. Widtsoe, J. A. Utah Sta. Bui. 88 (1903). Tarred Roads Claussen, P. Arb. K. Biol. Anst. Land u. Forstw., 8 (1913), 5, 493-514. Gatin, C. L. Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. (Paris), 153 (1911), 15, 688-690; 153 (1911), 3, 202-204. Ann. Sci. Nat. Bot., 9 ser., 15 (1912), 2-4, 165-262. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 22 (1912), 4, 193-204. Griffon, E. Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. (Paris), 151 (1910), 23, 1070-1073. Mirande, M. Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. (Paris), 151 (1910), 21, 949-952. Tobacco Smoke Molisch, H. Anzeiger K. Akad. Wiss. Wien, Math. Naturw. Kl., 1911, 2, 20-22; abs. in Centbl. Bakt., 2 Abt., 31 (1911), 11-15, 380-381. SPRAY INJURY General Ball, E. D. Gem State Rural, 14 (1909), 10, 6-8. Ballou, F. H. Ohio Sta. Bui. 240 (1912). Beach, S. A., and Bailey, L. H. N. Y. (Geneva) Sta. Bui. 196 (1900). Bonns, W. W. Me. Sta. Bui. 198 (1912). Clark, J. F. Bot. Gaz, 33 (1902), 1, 26-48. Crandall, C. S. 111. Sta. Bui. 135 (1909). Evans, W. H. U. S. Dept. Agr., Div. Veg. Phys. and Path. Bui. 10 (1896). Ewert, R. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank . 22 (1912), 5, 257-285. io8 Fairchild, D. G. U. S. Dept. Agr., Div. Veg. Phys. and Path. Bui. 6 (1894). Gimingham, C. T. Chem. World, 1 (1912), 11, 363-364. Grossenbacher, J. G. N. Y. Sta. Tech. Bui. 12. Headden, W. P. Colo. Sta. Bui. 157 (1910). Colo. Sta. Bui. 131 (1908). Hedrick, U. P. N. Y. (Geneva) Sta. Bui. 287 (1907). Hewitt, J. L. Ark. Sta. Bui. 114 (1913), PlSOVSCHI, E. Rev. Gen. Sci., 24 (1913), 21, 787-788. Safro, V. I. Ore. Sta. Research Bui. 2 (1913). Salmon, E. S. Jour. Bd. Agr. (London), 17 (1910), 2, 103-113. Schander, R. Landw. Jahrb., 33 (1904), 517. Scott, W. M. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Circ. 27 (1909). Selby, A. D. Ohio State Hort. Soc. Ann. Rpt., 43 (1910), 77-88. Stewart, J. P. Advance Rpt. Conn. Pomol. Soc., 21 (1912). Stone, G. E. Mass. Sta. Rpt. 1909, pt. 2, 46-47. Swingle, W. T. U. S. Dept. Agr., Div. Veg. Phys. and Path. Bui. 9 (1896). Wallace, E. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Bui. 288 (1910). — , Blodgett, F. M., and Nessler, L. R. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Bui. 290 (1911). Watkins, O. S. 111. Sta. Circ. 159 (1912). WlLKEN, F. W. Mich. Sta. Rpt. 1911, 184-146. (See also Apple, Grape, Peach, and Potato.) SUGAR CANE Chlorosis Gile, P. L., and Ageton, C. N. Porto Rico Sta. Rpt. 1913, 13-14. 109 Sereh Zeylstra, H. H. Ber. Deut. Bot. Gesell., 29 (1911), 6, 330-333. ( ) Agr. News (Barbados), 10 (1911), 241, 238-239. SUN SCALD (See Apple, Peach, Plum, and Potato.) SYRINGA Leaf Roll Laubert, R. Gartenflora, 63 (1914), 1, 9-11. TOBACCO Gummosis Honing, J. A. Meded. Deli-Proefstat. Medan, 5 (1911), 6, 169-185. Meded. Deli-Proefstat. Medan, 5 (1910), 1, 24. Leaf Curl Ludwig, K. Ber. Deut. Bot. Gesell., 31 (1913), 9, 536-546. Mosaic Allard, H. A. Jour. Agr. Research, 3 (1915), 4. U. S. Dept. Agr. Bui. 40 (1913). Science, n. ser., 36 (1912), 938, 875-876. Beyerinck, W. W. Sep. Verhandel. K. Akad. Wetensch. Amsterdam, 1898; abs. in Bot. Centbl., 78 (1899), 5, 146-151; abs. also in Jour. Roy. Micros. Soc. (London) 1899, 3, 319-320. Centbl. Bakt., 2 Abt., 5 (1899), 1, 27-33. Bouygnes and Perreau Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. (Paris), 139 (1904), 4, 309-310 Chapman, G. H. Mass. Sta. Rpt. 1912, pt. 2, 41-51. Heintzel, K. Inaug. Diss., Erlangen, 1900. Hunger, F. W. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 15 (1905), 257-311. Bui. de l’lnst. Bot. de Buitenzorg 17 (1903). 1 10 I WAN0SKY, D. Centbl. Bakt., 2 Abt., 7 (1901), 4, 148. Bui. Acad. Imp. Sci. St. Petersburg, 35 (1892), 1, 67-70. Ztschr. Pflanzenkrank., 13 (1903), 1-41. Jensen, H. Centbl. Bakt., 2 Abt., 15 (1905), 13-14, 440-445. Johnson, J. Wis. Sta. Bui. 237 (1914). Lodewijics, J. A. Abs. in Bot. Centbl., 114 (1910), 20, 518. Loew U. S. Dept. Agr. Rpt. 65 (1900), 11-25. Mayer, A. U. S. Dept. Agr. Jour. Mycol., 7 (1894), 4, 333-378. Selby, A. D. Ohio Sta. Bui. 156 (1904). Stone and Chapman Mass. Sta. Rpt., 22 (1907), 120-150. Sturgis, W. C. Conn. Sta. Rpt. 1898, 242-260. Woods, A. F. U. S. Dept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus. Bui. 18 (1902). Abs. in Sci., n. ser., 13 (1901), 320, 247-248. Science, n. ser., 11 (1900), 262, 17-19. TOMATO Blossom-end Rot Brooks, C. Abs. in Phytopath., 4 (1914), 1, 49. Smith, Elizabeth H. Mass. Sta. Tech. Bui. 3 (1907). Stucky, H. P., and Temple, J. C. Ga. Sta. Bui. 96 (1911). Dropping of Buds Rogers, S. S. Cal. Sta. Bui. 239 (1913). Rolfs, P. H. Fla. Sta. Bui. 47 (1898); Bui. 117 (1913). Hollow Stem Rolfs, P. H. Fla. Sta. Bui. 47 (1898); Bui. 117 (1913). 1 1 1 Mosaic Melchers, L. E. Ohio Nat., 13 (1913), 8, 149-175. Westerdijk, Johanna Meded. Phytopath. Lab. “Willie Commelin Scholten,” 1910; abs. in Ztschr Pflanzenkrank., 20 (1910), 7, 425-426. CEdema Atkinson, G. F. N. Y. (Cornell) Sta. Bui. 53 (1893). Rolfs, P. H. Fla. Sta. Bui. 47 (1898). Fla. Sta. Bui. 117 (1913). YELLOWS (See Aster, Oats, Peach, Plum, and Raspberry.) (See Cereal.) WHEAT WIND Meyer, F. J. Naturw. Wchnschr., 28 (1913), 38. 599-606 ILLINOIS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION November, 1915 Abstract of Circular 184 entitled THE PRAIRIE SPIRIT IN LANDSCAPE GARD EN ING By WILHELM MILLER DIVISION OF LANDSCAPE EXTENSION, DEPARTMENT OF HORTICULTURE An early effort towards a prairie style of architecture and landscape gardening College of Agriculture UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS URBANA Abstract of Circular 184 entitled “THE PRAIRIE SPIRIT IN LANDSCAPE GARDENING” “The Prairie Spirit in Landscape Gardening” is a 36-page circular containing 100 illustrations. It is uniform with “The Illinois Way of Beautifying the Farm” (Circular 170), the page being 9^x12 inches. As this publication is^ too expen- sive for unlimited free distribution, an abstract of it is here given. The aim of “The Prairie Spirit” is to show “what the people of Illinois have done and can do toward designing and planting public and private grounds for efficiency and beauty.” CONTENTS CHAPTER I — The Prairie Style of Landscape Gardening. II — Everyone Can Apply the Prin- ciple of Conservation. III — A Free Restoration of Ancient Illinois. IV — Restoration Applied to Farm- stead and City Lot. V — Restoring the Romantic Types of Illinois Scenery. VI — Can the Prairie be Restored? CHAPTER VII — Everyone Can Apply the Prin- ciple of Repetition. VIII — Adapting the Prairie Style to Other Kinds of Scenery. IX — Materials Used in the Prairie Style. X — Some Uses for Illinois Materials. XI — Literature of the Prairie Style of Landscape Gardening. XII — The Showiest Plants in the World. The first eleven chapters are devoted to various phases of the prairie style of landscape gardening, which aims to fit the peculiar scenery, climate, soil, labor, and other conditions of the prairies, instead of copying literally the manners and materials of other regions. The prairie style is defined as “an American mode of design based upon the practical needs of the middle-western people and characterized by preservation of typical western scenery, by restoration of local color, and by repetition of the horizontal line of land or sky, which is the strongest feature of prairie scenery.” This repetition is accomplished by means of “stratified plants,” which have strong horizontal branches or flower clusters, like certain hawthorns or thorn apples. An historical sketch traces the beginnings of this style back to 1878, but the most characteristic development began in 1901. Since then one landscape gar- dener has submitted an itemized list of work amounting to $6,000,000, done in Illinois and near-by states, which he declares was “inspired by the prairie.” Twenty-seven of the photographs represent conscious efforts in the direction of a prairie style. The reader is free to like these effects or not, but he cannot say that the prairie st)de is theoretical, or entirely in the future. The prairie style is to be distinguished from “the Illinois way.” The former is a mode of design ; the latter is not. The Illinois way of planting is defined as the use of as high a proportion of plants native to Illinois as is consistent with practical requirements and the principles of design. In this sense every state in the Union may have a “way” of its own based upon its local flora. The prairie style, however, is suitable only for the Middle West. It is of special interest to Illinois, because Illinois is the “Prairie state.” It is difficult for any book to tell just how to design and plant any particular place, because no two places have the same conditions, and therefore no two places should be planted in exactly the same way. However, general principles are here laid down and nearly every chapter is summarized in the form of one or more practical applications headed by the phrase “I Will” or “We Will.” The 2 3 former is a motto of Chicago ; the latter has been suggested as a new, informal motto for Illinois. Improvement organizations that are always inquiring “What shall we do?” will find thirty-two answers from which they may select. To applying the principle of conservation Chapter II is devoted. Six lines of work are* recommended and addresses are given of five national and state organizations that will help local groups and individuals. To applying the principle of restoration several chapters are devoted. “A Free Restoration of Ancient Illinois” shows a series of landscapes under glass, sug- gesting the beauty of vanished and disappearing types of scenery. “Restoring the Romantic Types of Illinois Scenery” names eight types different from the prairie, (lake bluffs, ravines, river banks, ponds, rocks, dunes, woods, and road- sides), and gives examples of actual restorations in Illinois. “Can the Prairie be Restored?” discusses prairie parks, miniature prairies, prairie gardens, prairie borders, wild and cultivated prairie, the broad and the long views, and methods of restoration. “Restoration Applied to Farmstead and City Lot” shows what can be done when little money and space are available. To applying the principle of repetition Chapter VII is devoted. This explains how the prairie spirit has been brought into the daily lives of rich and poor in city, suburbs, and country in all parts of the Prairie state. The reader will naturally ask whether the prairie style is only for the prairie. Chapter VIII replies that it has already been adapted to all other kinds of scenery found in Illinois. It explains how to intensify each type and how to blend all in one great scheme for beautifying Illinois. The materials used in the prairie style are classified in a new way. Class I consists of stratified materials or symbols of the prairie, while Class II consists of non-stratified materials, which may be reminders of Illinois. The stratified materials include 34 perennials, 22 shrubs, 12 small trees, 17 tall and medium-high trees, and 2 evergreens — a total of 87 species that have horizontal branches, flower clusters, or both. The non-stratified materials number 112, making a total of nearly 200 permanent ornamental plants native to Illinois. These are all in cultivation and may be secured from the fourteen nurserymen named or may be transplanted from the wild if necessary or desirable. Some practical uses for these materials are briefly mentioned. Certain kinds are suitable for such common needs as foundation planting, porch decoration, wall covering, framing the view of the house, and planting hardy borders. Others are suitable only for parks and large estates, or for special problems such as arbors, banks, bird gardens, bluffs, cut flowers, street trees, windbreaks, water gardens, and peculiar soils. A chapter on literature is the last of the series devoted to the prairie style of landscape gardening. “The Showiest Plants in the World” deals with the old problem of good and bad taste in a new spirit. The author assumes that the motives are honorable and the plants attractive, and that the whole question of good taste is simply one of self-restraint and fitness. Guided by these principles the reader may readily decide what constitutes good or bad taste in the use of bedding plants, annual flowers, variegated foliage, everblooming flowers, “quick growers”, spectacular forms, weeping trees, cut-leaved plants, double flowers, and formal plants. The evolution of taste is described. “The Illinois Citizen’s Oath” is suggested by the famous Athenian oath which was taken by every young man when he came of age and received the suffrage. The oath is not recommended for any particular locality, but furnishes a con- venient list of the civic ideals that are commonly proposed by commercial clubs and other improvement organizations. A photograph shows a spot in a park suitable for public meetings of all kinds, including those connected with the bestowal of political power. “The Prairie Spirit” expresses, in “I Will” form, some of the popular senti- ments about prairie scenery and its beautification. “A Short Ballot for Illinois Citizens” crystallizes into six suggestions the most important improvements that should commonly be made in home grounds. 4 Educational work should not be judged by commercial standards. The following figures, however, are illuminating and encouraging. At the end of its second year the Division of Landscape Extension had 5,200 pledges “to do some permanent ornamental planting within a year.” The signers we-re then asked to report on what they had done. Replies were received from 991, or 19 percent. These spent a total of $75,117 on materials, grading, lawn tools, etc. The average expenditure was nearly $76. The average expenditure of the 642 persons who spent less than $100 was $22. These results cannot be attributed entirely to the Division of Landscape Extension, because many persons, doubtless, were ready to spend something on outdoor improvements before reading the literature or hearing the lectures. The illustrations offer considerable evidence that Illinois is developing a new and appropriate style of beauty. Of the 100 pictures, 86 were taken in Illinois, only 14 coming from other states. About 61 are marked “Done in Illinois” as a guarantee that the pictures were really taken in Illinois, not in other states, and that they were made in cultivation, not in the wild. In other words they repre- sent money spent by Illinoisans in cultivating or preserving Illinois species. The beauty of the illustrations may tempt some inexperienced persons to fancy that “landscape gardening is only for parks and rich folks.” On the contrary, so far as self-expression goes, landscape gardening offers aS great an oppor- tunity to every living soul as music does, or any other fine art. Special care has been taken in every chapter to show how people with little money or space may apply the principles of landscape gardening. A single prairie rose bush beside the door may be all that some one can afford, and that is enough to sug- gest the prairie spirit. Over fifty of the pictures indicate small or moderate means ; only ten indicate private wealth. About thirty involve public expenditure, but many of these pic- tures show trees or shrubs that can be grown as well by the poor man as the rich. Thirty-three species of plants native to Illinois are pictured. All sections of Illinois are represented by examples. So also are farm, city, and suburb. Special effort has been made to bring the message home to the individual in the chapter called “Restoration Applied to Farmstead and City Lot.” This indicates ten things which the average farmer can do, and seven things which the average cit^ lot owner may accomplish. Of the illustrations twenty-eight were taken on the farm or by country roads, eight show city yards, and fourteen were taken in suburban home grounds. While “The Prairie Spirit” was prepared primarily for the people of Illinois, its principles are applicable thruout the Middle West. Indeed, conservation and restoration are applicable everywhere. This circular, therefore, may be of national interest, especially in new communities where people still despise or neglect the local flora. It may even have some educational value in regions where none of the middle-western species will grow, by setting people to thinking in new and constructive ways about their environment. To prevent waste it is suggested that those who desire copies of “The Prairie Spirit’’ use the application blank below. If TThe Illinois -Way" (Ciiculai i>u) T5> a4&e- dcsired, arum i 1 ar"To rflTiniiylTu~-ttse d . Department of Horticulture University of Illinois Urbana, Illinois If you will send me a copy of “The Prairie Spirit” (Circular 184) I will do some permanent ornamental planting within a year. Name .... - Address „ ► UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS-URBANA Q.630.7IL6C C 001 CIRCULAR URBANA, ILL 155-184 1912-1915 (BDW/O 170) 3 0112 019531943 Pr 'vi^K