THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY Cop. 2- NOTICE: Return or renew all Library Materials! The Minimum Fee for each Lost Book is $50.00. The person charging this material is responsible for its return to the library from which it was withdrawn on or before the Latest Date stamped below. Theft, mutilation, and underlining of books are reasons for discipli- nary action and may result in dismissal from the University To renew call Telephone Center, 333-6400 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN ' 05 L161 O-1096 Crop Yields From Illinois Soil Experiment Fields Including the Crop Season 1935 By F. C. BAUER, A. L. LANG, C. J. BADGER, L. B. MILLER, C. H. FARNHAM, and P. E. JOHNSON UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION BULLETIN 425 (JULY, 1936) CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION 147 PART I. CROP YIELDS OF 1934 AND 1935, WITH SUMMARIES FOR 1932-1935 152' PART II. INFLUENCE OF VARIOUS MATERIALS IN INCREASING CROP YIELDS AND VALUES, 1932-1935 181 Wide Range in Productivity Levels of Untreated Land 181 Response to Manure 181 Response to Crop Residues 183 Response to Limestone 185 Response to Phosphate 186 Response to Potash 187 Economic Considerations 188 Effect of Soil Treatment on Productivity Levels 195 Relation of Soil Treatment to Crop Quality 196 PART III. LONG-TIME SUMMARIES OF CROP YIELDS ON INDI- VIDUAL FIELDS 200 Aledo 201-202 Antioch 203 Bloomington 204 Carlinville 205-206 Carthage 206-208 Clayton 208-209 Dixon 209-210 Elizabethtown 211 Enfield 211-212 Ewing 212-214 Hartsburg 214-216 Joliet 217-218 Kewanee 219-221 Lebanon 221-224 McNabb 224 Minonk 225 Mt. Morris 226-227 Newton 227-228 Oblong 229-230 Oquawka 231 Raleigh , 232, 233 Sparta 232, 234 Toledo 234-237 Unionville 237-238 Urbana, Morrow Plots 239 Urbana, South Farm 239-240 West Salem 241 INDEX TO FERTILIZER AND TREATMENT MATERIALS 242 Urbana, Illinois July, 1936 Publications in the Bulletin series report the results of investigations made by or sponsored. by the Experiment Station Crop Yields From Illinois Soil Experi- ment Fields Including the Crop Season of 1935 By F. C. BAUER, A. L. LANG, C. J. BADGER, L. B. MILLER, C. N. FARXHAM, and P. E. JOHNSON' INTRODUCTION "TTMPOVERISHED SOILS cannot support a prosperous agriculture. When man begins to till land, he encourages changes in the chem- -^- ical, physical, and biological nature of the soils that tend to lower productivity. Crop removals, drainage, and erosion exact their toll of nutrient material that has accumulated thru the ages. The rapidity with which these changes and losses take place depends, in a broad way, on the quality of the materials from which a soil is formed, on the intensity of the weathering forces acting on these materials, and on the care exercised in management and treatment. As a result of these conditions and forces, the farm lands of a state like Illinois vary widely and are constantly changing in their capacities and require- ments for crop production. To know more precisely what impoverishment means, how rapidly it advances, and how and to what extent it may be corrected, soil experiment fields have been maintained by the Illinois Agricultural Experiment Station for many years. Such investigations have been in progress at Urbana since 1876; the first of the present outlying soil experiment fields was established in the fall of 1901. Some of the original fields are still in operation ; some have been discontinued at one time or another for various reasons. During the crop season of 1935, twenty-six permanent fields were in operation. Complete records from all the Illinois soil experiment fields up to and including 1924 were reported in Bulletin 273. Subsequent results have been reported annually in bulletin form thru the crop season of 1933. The present bulletin is a continuation of this annual series ; but while it gives detailed yields of each of the more important crops grown in 1934 and 1935, it gives also comprehensive summaries extend- ing back over all the years the respective fields have been in operation as well as summaries for the last rotation period, 1932-1935. J F. C. BAUER, Chief, Soil Experiment Fields; A. L. LANG, Assistant Chief; C. J. BADGER and L. B. MILLER, Associates; and C. X. FARNHAM and P. E. JOIIXSON, Assistants. 147 148 BULLETIN No. 425 How the Results Are Summarized The purpose of this bulletin is to bring out the effects of different kinds of soil treatment, on various kinds of soil, in changing crop yields. The data are presented chiefly in terms of bushel or ton yields- of individual crops. Long-time averages, last-rotation averages, and annual yields for 1934 and 1935 are all presented in this way. Altho the effects of the various soil-treatment practices on individual crops are readily shown by such averages, their comparative effects on all the crops grown under a given management system on a given soil type are not readily ascertained. For such comparisons more con- densed averages are necessary. These are supplied by converting crop yields into the common denominators indicated below. Money Values. Money values provide a convenient unit for sum- marizing crop yield data since they are easily understood. They are objectionable because of the wide variations that occur in crop prices from place to place, from day to day, and from season to season. They are essential, however, for economic interpretations and when used with understanding are very useful. They will be found in many of the following tables. In calculating the money values recorded in this bulletin, the after- harvest prices received by farmers and reported by the government for a given year were applied to the yields of that year, and the average annual crop values then computed for the period selected. The crop prices for the four-year period ending in 1935 averaged as fol- lows: corn, 48 cents; oats, 27 cents; wheat, 74 cents a bushel; mixed hay, $8.62; clover hay, $9.15; and alfalfa, $11.42 a ton. Where deductions are made for the cost of the treatment applied. crop residues were figured as costing 75 cents an acre annually, and manure, limestone, rock phosphate, and muriate of potash at 75 cents. $3, $15, and $50 a ton respectively. Under average conditions these prices should cover the cost of application as well as purchase. Digestible Nutrients. Another method of averaging different kinds of crops together, that avoids the objections of money values, is to convert the yields of the different crops to pounds of digestible nutri- ents. This common denominator is not subject to fluctuations of any kind, and tends to weight the various kinds of crops according to their feed and food value. In all the tables in Parts II and III yield data will be found expressed in terms of this unit as well as in dollars, or bushels, or tons. In converting crop yields to digestible nutrients, the following values were assumed for the more commonly grown crops: Corn 44 . 8 pounds a bushel Wheat 48.0 pounds a bushel Oats 22.4 pounds a bushel Soybeans 57.6 pounds a bushel 1936] CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS Son. EXPERIMENT FIELDS 149 Clover hay 1,060 pounds a ton Alfalfa hay . 1,020 pounds a ton Mixed hay 1,000 pounds a ton Soybean hay 840 pounds a ton Yield Index. In many of the tables another measure has been introduced to assist in the interpretation of the yield data. This meas- ure is called the yield index. It is determined by dividing the pounds of digestible nutrients produced on an acre of treated land by the number of pounds produced on an acre of untreated land. Thus it shows the number of times the yields on the treated land are of the yields on the untreated land. An index of 1.16 means, for example, that the yields from the treated plot were 1.16 times the yields from the check plot ; in other words, that the treatment can be credited with having increased the yields 16 percent. Economic Analysis Altho the main purpose of this publication is to record the actual crop yields obtained from the various management practices employed on the Illinois soil experiment fields, it seems desirable to give some suggestion of the economic significance of some of the more important management practices used. This may be done from either of two points of view: 1. The fertilizer point of view; that is, from the standpoint of the margin remaining after the costs of the treatment materials have been deducted from the value of the increased yields. 2. The farm point of view; that is from the standpoint of the margin of profit for the farm as a whole from the soil treatments after all farming expenses have been cared for. Obviously the second method is much the more satisfactory. Indeed the first one may easily lead to quite false conclusions, for when the yields from untreated land are very low, even spectacular increases per ton of fertilizing material or per acre of crop may be obtained without bringing the total acre-yield to a level that will enable a farmer to pay the expenses of growing and marketing as well as treat- ment and still have a margin for taxes, interest, repayment of prin- cipal, and compensation for ownership and operation. The first method is useful, however, when its limitations are properly understood. In this publication the fertilizer point of view is represented by the data in Tables 25 and 26 (pages 190 and 191), showing, respec- tively, the net acre-increase and the total net acre-yield from the most effective system of soil treatment in the manure system and in the residues system on each field. The farm point of view is represented by the data in Table 27 (pages 193 and 194), which shows the "investment returns" from the different treatments on the different fields for the four-year period ending in 1935. 150 BULLETIN No. 425 [/i 00 r* O * H as H CO 0) J vo rq r^ CN oo M '55 U C 2 cS C/5 OO OO ro O *O O 1 Oi 2^^2^ , u 3 z 4) -*- TJ ^ <* VO CN * ^ gs u 4J JS ON rj< -, ^ vo so g C SH Iz y *~ s> ^"^ M L^ ft -0 -00 5 b MM IM I -CS -^J U B< V. - _ _ r - 2. U,^ Z 5 c as t~ o -\o cs CO i i s ^ CN ^H . 1 c^ Is T3 O -O O O 8 c 5 :3 :2S D pi O >O t>- OO t^ f*5 O T} *- *-> O < -" J OvO>OO'*'-iO'5^* l >'5OOP^CN'-itNC 1 SfSt^fOOO 3 s * U .r-O-"* 1 O'-'O OOMOT)t^. 4 i a j 1 o s tf *^*r"^ ^H-H^ I i I i i/0\Ot--CS-it^OOrOO*'OOOr5fNr<5TjOOT}<'-''-ir') X. 1 4 5 It n | 1 rt c* T3 O\ MN ^H--C^-l - IC^^-HCS O I 1 1 1 1 " 1 1 t^.tiOOvCNiOOO*^-' 1 OfSOOt~OOvt^-OVT < 2 < o g rt Ot^-^^O*' ir*5>O^i t O O OO *O >O re >O t^- tf) \O CN OO OO vO 1^- O\ j_ <3j nc/3 ca J 5 3 g n J V In i s c i h U U O ** O ~- **" *5 "5 O <*> OO O ** *^ O '-H CS .-H -H ^-,-H | g 3 o J Ov O O f*5 ^O OO -. O t~- Sj N s _c o a J ] 4 f 9 K S 3 15 ^i TJ iOt-OO'*'-i'* v Ot^ v OOvf5O'-"OroO'-> | *H - | N | | _3 3 t>- (N >r> CNO O * O O -< Of^ OOOO\ ~- O\ <* OO OO g- .2 "a a rt 0) o c C rt OOO-^O^f^'* < '* < t^ r *5OONOvTt >)--i r h H i H c D J *o CO c o l_ 9 d J a < H -o .% u. _i c rt c .... . ; o P 4> . s :... _ _ u~ . . . aj -C . . . . ni . C . . o>. lliii^lili^iil^iliJi '-iesrO'^ 4 iO v Ot^'OOOvO'- 1 tSPO^ < iO\Ot^OOO>O "No limestone. b Fo 05 CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS 157 OrO- .^CVOCV|--0^^^ 1 1 1 "* ' | "" 1 T 1 7"* OT^OV -vOOCNt^iO >Ot^-Tt* ITERIALS, 9 to to n creases for 1 7 ^ t l^-rji . oo O OO O O NO O N "5 NO Residues - 1 U H H O U, en a 13 77" ii MI O> P^I <* OO OO ' <^5 CN \O Tt \O Tj< OO ) INCREASE :NT FIELDS e) c p JS VO ^- ^ O\ fO "^ O CN "^ "^ IO "^ ^N a" <-- O if) OO ^ 10 t^ r OO CN ir> O *5 NO >O _ z fc o 3 9 03 % 3 C Increase CN t^ C^l^f^ONONfOC^CSsO O '"^ ^ - I - I o u c s~ n rt o ^- OO OO NONOON^JONON CSro^-f5 1 --'4<^^CN^-IOOO< V 5'* I ' V 1OO'^ < OC ^~ C/) c J ^S2SS rq 00 00 vO rrj ^ H O M 1 A) :::::::::::::> g : : : i : : O O . . on ..M.-.-'jU'-.u-^ &:" 9 _^,^^^H 158 BULLETIN No. 425 [July, en" I Q, O Tj- O- fC Sjj v2 1 7 M 8 CO Si 00 ^ - 5, f M u o a- o oo >o H 8 i-3 ' ,-<' irj o' Z 3 U o s 5 OJ u H s ' '-'fsi M ! b I/) M "8 en u tn g3 'c TJ C f; OO ^O **O S5 S C3 11 U. < i "? 0. 9". : : , s o is ^ I cu b " rs tfi i W U "oj <*-! - - ' E o> CO 0) CO _j .**?;: Uc/5 ^ CO N i tn ^^ CO U o C * 2 Q J 3 C n) S -- : : "" - I * c o\ 0) ^* i o tN CN C * ' CD 4-1 JS ~ C 03 Ji o u !S H V "i^ III! *O " D- C ON OO O\ Tf \o o O SPO tN . ^- . . irj f*J O --^O c/T ij 1 ft 1 O N t~- *5 CN \O O *5 fN ' 1 ' ' 1 IO ^H - t^ OJ f^ * 't Tt T MATERIA E (U i 1 $ ncreases for Uc _3 * r^ vO Tj< 10 O ' 1 1 ON >O . . 10 IO ' 1 ' ' 10 OO . _ . . CN ro TREATMEN o '8 oi ox J )lover-alfalf 1 rt 1O tN VO ITS vO -^-O 0) JZ c ca V J3 >. C^ 1 1 oo ON cs CS f5 Tj< tN U _O T3 0) OS 1 OO OO NO O *^ Tt <^O O -^ O UcS^ 5 S2 ^ 00 1- e 3 C rt rt i S V^i CD Ov CN t^ O -*t^ rr, o 1 >* ON >0 *-* ON O CN (*> '1 1- < (^) 00 --'t^^OO'O O t>- Tt <*)' CN > -* ro ON <5 T3 4> rt T3 C Ti< O> f*5 ON 0 i o 4-1 c D rt ~* ^ CkS U > < X \ \ 73 .2- u. < . .< H jj; c nj o: !| c c > ^ t 2 4) u _Q 3- = efl 4) C"Q UJO^> -H CSPO Tt c Q be be c 2'5.S "3 S"c5 ^ SDoiu ^ O f. 1 ^ oo 10 'M 0. . ^ ^ T "". .2 L 1 1 E 0) V s 1 b ^ o OOOO 10 ui r S c , ^ . 3 "^ ^^ o '8 QJ . OS -. 000 JS~ o E | o 1; S 1 ^ ^ 000 45 "2 c ~~ 1 "5 t> C uT t Ou u (N s o o f*i >0 O 0) _o 5 1 ^S a -Z CO _ u < - V 1 J 1 +-> & 8 O H - g _>< --^ '35 "5 u ' >> u "2 d u c ^ o H u 3 2 - S * . 000 ai ao a> ~v o 1 o ^ ^ o 000 Z c "" . 9 o 3 "a. O >^ _4> c CO U. o "o Oquawka. Newton . . CO r t. C/3 Ms ^. C. i a S u to co C ^ 1 esco CO ai CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS 161 .^t^O-^O^^NO^ON^OOONONOO* ^ON ^-H^ c/T 3 H 1 IO * >O NO ON O NO CO O <*5 OO CS 10 O CN 1^. O NO f5 f- ON OO 1 1 III 13 i H H V ao co ti creases for 7 " i T N 77 i " i i i 03 i | J TJ.N010CN l^ -H 10 -H Tj< 10 10 Tj< NO 10 . CO CN ON CN t- < i H M O 8 . i i || ""7" 7~ N i ^CREASES F 1 rt o! o 1 ** 1 =8 j^iooNONOo too ONOONOoofooooNNOt^.OfcocN-H c H z g < H*_ 21T ^ CN OO -H NO >-i Tjt Tf ^< NO rj< ^ -. 10 OO O NO NO OO O OO CO c*5 O ^ s s gw s a& a Kf3 J2 O w P i X D u t^ IO * I CN CN CN ^ ^ CN NO CN ON * < IO ^ NO CO NO CN II7III 1 1 1 2 S 3 cB w m 1| >^3 01 to 3 C a 8 c CN OO -H rl< 10 CO ON T* * fO f* NO 10 -H 10 "i OO O *^ ^ OO 1 1 ~ II 1 --- ^^ N a OO >O ON CN IO CN CN T(< -H CO O O NO -H -H o * CN OO CO OO CO CO 5 PO ON Z a: 1 o t^ ^ i 10 t^- 1^ ^ ON co CO ON CN ON OO IO ^" * * *O CO CN NO OO < CN i-c CN CN | i-l^-l -H -H -l -H >rt CN -" CO OO ONf*- ON OO NO CN O OO NO NO O NO O '-i CN OO rl< O O CN NO O i C ^i OO IO IO ON CO ^ ON O CO OO CO NO NO ON NO O CO NO O -" OO u Pd 5 < w > C/5 0^ t, C r 1 t 5 t > ::::::::::::::::: :| : : : : : Id 3 H CO I- lljJlilJilfiiilll^ll ^ ill^-2.9 --="|l SI 111^ i JfS oil'S 162 BULLETIN No. 425 = H & 5 TO ' 2 -'2 U, * ___-.-.,/-. _ ^H ^H CO 1 1 - \ \ 1 CN OO OO f*5 1 1 -J _ ~, ^H -H CS -H OOOOt~-lO > OTl< 3S O u w "8 ^ E i*5 CN O Tt< ro 00 10 OO I I 7 O O OOOO PO OO OO r r5 r-i CN OO "0 CN OO - 00 i c-i 00 < {Jfl-j- *- C 3 -i CN rc ^ iO O 164 BULLETIN No. 425 rNroO vO^Tfr- ..NONOO-^WCN^^fN^ro 1 ^.ro -rs,,, . cs!^ ^S^r ^ ATERIALS, i 0) 1 i u 7T7" 2 i i JATMENT M Residues 77 1 77 i "" K : 7" 5 " i ^ * O ^* ^O f^l CS r*5 O ^ OO -H ^O *O O *** f^i "> >O O ^* -^ vC H g U, in u H -o 7 i 1 7^ 7 i ~ \~ \ i "7 ~ D INCRKAS NT FIELDS e) c C OO 00 *O Ov O O O **5 *^* *^* O^io^r^rs^^' oo c PLOTS AN EXPF.RIMF lels per acr g [ o> 0. . 10 *-H . . c*3 ro *-t . ^-i CN ur> r^ T^ 10 r^ r^ 10 l '> l/) (U 1! -J .iDt^l -re M -t^ M rqoot^-t^ OO ~O -*O> < U "" z O o 2 3 C i u c ' 1 1 ' *)t*> -^O\->Tt -O\ cOOO^ffN'O^'t^'OOO^ Q ^ H t> 1 rt TJ : -3 :: *,* -2~ H c C rt ff)ff) CM CN CS 2>U QS<5UOc/2O3WD&- '^UOSZ 06 1936} CROP Yir.i.ns FROM ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS 165 cS-C CO C is a a c 3 o 2 "o _cy 1 1 II T!< \O <*3 >O OO *) CN fN CN CN H CN tN CS -H 1 oooooooooo 166 BULLETIN Xo. 425 [July, ^00>OO -i/>^ ";C*~^" ^r f<", O"5O>^"O 1 * . l f. r5 OO PI ^ "5 ro 1 1 I 1 ' 1 1 II' 1 1 1 OOOv t-~ O O> O 'Of! OOPTif^iO n j i t t V \ j! u o u ^__ rrj i/-) /> r> r^ ^ -O O PO O 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 OO>OOv<*2 ->O ^ Tf OOO> -O CN ON >O O >O S 1 t Residues *J t-00^^ ^-f*;iot^'4 < ^-' ^-OOfO< > OTjf*;oO III' 1 - -" >O O ^O N >O 00 O O> O ^O O> r^ O OO 10 1 i M ) t n o 0) OS T3 OOt^-H-H_- , ^, _ _ ^] _ . _ _ ^_ (V, (NJ - 1 1 1 III O <*3 ^" C^J 1*5 \O f*5 O> O CS f- "5 ' O\ ON r*) s . N i* i H a S *? S C D _rt O t^ <*5 O O OO r^ OO Ov t^ ^^ \O O\ OO f5 ( O*Ot'5Tj >O PO O ~* ~ ^O . EXPERIMF hels per acr g J m u >O t>- -H fN vO f*5 -H . OO t^. PC ^C "5 c^) ^ O OOl^ 10 Ov *^ O < s ;C/3 C0_ ; < " o JS V 01 >, (O 1 c 7 rt 2 o C J f5 N . \o O> <~C O O'-'tN'O*** l^ll 'III v OO*-*Jt^oOCN^-OO r '5~*'>O ^J't^rocONOiO " - I H r> a s 1 s o "5 *5 ^ >O N >O fN CN CM OO fO ' >O -" >O "5 rOlOiOOOO-OOO t^^-P^vO^Of^fNCNP^OOT^S \ c D JS SOOCNlf*2vOOv'2'<* < *OvO^-OfNf^TfNO^J < 'l OOt^OOONO- H f s r *5'^ < '5 x Ot>.OOOvO as CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS 167 "S c & C 3 rt O CN CS CS ro III 3333 OOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOC OOO i >OO ta i !*! -H f) IO i rj- r^ <5 O\ 1 C*J t^ CN) Ti< Tj< M D * n 1 "8 4-> fS (X T3 1 1 1 1 1 O C> .f*5 >0 1^- d en 33 z; a > Z H < S 1? kl c D JO ^i u-> vO*- 1 m Os O\ ^- b^K. riUTB . EXPERIMI hels per acr Q 2 u tj< p^f*5 . (M Ov >O \ 3 <*> s 5 tn 3 g 3 J B (D > to g c CO ft 2 u - J >O OI^ 1 t^ OO vO 2 H r> > h H s 1 ^ TJ 1O *5 CN f> O\O 1) r 2 g 4-> D J2 Tt< Tjl PO . . ro - 3 j P v U. c 4 ^ at C6J : :5 : : "> ^'i 0> Ou l^isl -*C -- . ^ _ L o CN s l" 5 1 rt fi c c c OO vO ^ 00 * 8 ^ _= 3 "o OH C. i_ J^. r*5 if) cs O oo t9 : 2 ^ 2 C u > < s E i 00 rt o 0) X i O\ O tN -O r^ 10 ! 2^ ' o. (2 00 Timothy "0 Soybeans 1 C ctf JS 15 1 >> o M BJ C ^ ** V - _o [ 3 u E = ^ cs J^^i : 9 s .-1 H * 1 1 15 o c 1 C5 o TJ 000 oo -: ^ 8 V OS c ^^ P u c rt j: o 4-1 4> ^0 C ~ Q. |al ||1 > bb c _o d s a u WWc? s 'c V z O g X rt C ~* 170 BULLETIN No. 425 :i _ O d. M 2 M _: - 5 g W < en S3 Hu ^ Is u a j 22 i. U 01 5 H o gw O U CL 3 CTj "O v C is ^2 "8 ^^ ^^ 4) C i .5 c 2 t* tz'i cd as . t5 rf - 10 o . j I fN .0*1 t^ ao 30 * ^ o Tf ior> <>t^r- Tf OOOOTJ- II II ~- -" CS O O^ 1OOC S III II I oo OO >O vO <* -l tN tS ^- ^H - a.aaaaao.aac. 3333333333 2S8S8822S2 OCCOOOOOOC 172 BULLETIN No. 425 [July, I H CJ ( Z H ft. ^ X Su en^ s CU o :& J O ^ X C U u - p u T O O ^^ O O *" -d \T) rr) D -NONOO-ON * 0 10 * 0) c A --00 MH 7 i CO 10 * O -1^ 0) In i-J " tr. .10 to' C8 to ' 1 1 ' CO LI 0) c 3 o3 r<> -r-vo * S S vO -NO to -ON 1 JJ T3 *-^ OO O^ O cu u C ^ . OO ^ o *o 10 co c p "^ "al ,2. fjv . * tc uj a u ^ C^ C o OJ ^ 3 O u U O rt o * ^< -^ 1 H ca H cs (*5 Tf IO NO ai 1936] CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS 173 y. 4> a: re 2 S b '/" * a 22 ^ ' ' i OC CN OO 10 r PO t~. rr; OC Tf II * * r} fvi t^ O >O ^i vo ^j. ; ^J- \c OO O N f3 Ov OO OC >O OO O ^ * l^- >} OC 10 *} >O O tN PC "i 1/5 re TJ< ro 10 P^ * i fN fvj N CN CN -^ ^- 174 BULLETIN No. 425 C/w/y, a h TJ O. -a So <- r^ rr> fS OO CN ^HCN ^H^^CN^-l -HO <-ICO * O * -H o " OO M3 O O --" PO Ov O 00 J> .-C . . | S o S-P |mOlijiyfJri!!iE | S.l ^ rt"^ ^^ *:'| S-gJ'fJ l-2-f 176 BULLETIN No. 425 3 I 1 CO H < -* >O -H O O ^ ^* to CO CO CO 1 1 * CO CO CO co aacxaaaaaa 333333333 ooooooooo OOOOOOOOO a 2 u CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS Sou. EXPERIMENT FIELDS 177 a c 96 a NM Cu M < a i I a. L LI O U. CO ^ u $ C tt. CO >. en g cn J m 6 o < j - ."2 Ofi 'S u H J3j 3) Ss a 3 a! S a $ "8 Be H i c8 ~ V C rt o S D u. 5 E I W< 2 CL o * Z o> M a Q 3 g 2 i **" = CU < j H a; i % ^J J s_ ^ to ? tn w H Ojo C c CU 5 3 ^H C s> - ^^ a ~ 5. S as o u 5 Q T3 n ^ U rt "O en C Q i3 .3 J ~ U & a o H > -a o. ^ = 3 rt O .j; ^ & I fcg j fa C 03 H O-J \o < i vo . to T*< oo Tf r5 OO r*5 O\ -H r*> i O . ^-i -* -^ oo iO O OO f*5 * OvOvO tO\'^< .OO^tMO i r r r r r * r ' r II r*5 O P> OO -- fN ^O O -*f <*5 OO *5 O *^- "5 CS CTv l~- .000 i vO tf) O) ^< I C^ ^ * fN O ; . . -o-oo 178 Xo. 425 [/M/.V, 1 tu c i js c D S"g i JS c D "| c8 O 2 fe curs o f5 *; o o o oo 1 1 1 rr, -^ ^ ^ ^H aaaaaaaaaa 3333333333 OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO 1936} CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS H ^THCN^ - ^0- . 0-CN - ^rN ^T*^^< f* * ^ : I I : I : ~ I ^^ ^ ^ & UH O ^t-t^CS ^TtfO OONCM T-l-< S ' ! 1 1 H ^, < l| ] 5 ,^ . . . . . . 00 i? ,? !|if 2 ! ? "i J C 55 ^ S '>, 3 z afc i B H o en *" Z rt ^il/^T-lOfD CNOf*>^f CN^OCS-^H T-ICSIOCN CSCSTl*^^ OH t^llllll 1 *~ l 1 1 ^ Pi Q S 03 t-, R 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Kzg g H , X CU I; O [If s co ^C^-^TtifC OCSiOO *OOTi-^ fe 1 ^4 O w ^% C C_) ""> en ^* CO u |> >-i o 0) C E 3 ir> J CU C ^t^.lO<^3"0 CST-ICSCN t-~t O\O\ lOO^OOO O Os t - 1 "^ 2 M ffl Jg ^ U ~ z V ^ , Q " Z ^ e^ 3 /^-N S~ N S-** S-**. S~^ < 2 oi I a "H ^^CS OO---HCO lOt^-CN-^n Ol^OOtO t^CO'-lCN COOOCNf-H HW 2 !>H 1 j'ls^S^, ^^S;^ ^5J^^ S^i2^ 2^ 5 S 3 H O r^ f^ ^ C/} a - 2 2! u K o dxSi, s^si, cs^ coil^ c$^ oo' O c3 r? rt O cfl ^ ^ O cd ^ ^ O rt ^ ^ O cti -^ ^ UO^K UO^K UO^K UO^E UO>K g a g s s > > 03 H w o 180 BULLETIN No. 425 ** 1O ^C Ov O CN O* CN O O O* OO C^ O SO ON *O t^* ^H ^ K^ J^CN tNt^ ^ CN O\ CNCNCNvO t^^}"t^OO i- 1 \O PC S. l' ^ ~$ 1 cu u HCN OO\ !'-< -*OOCN rtPCl^sO TJ OO if) PC Tj< ON "-I ON CN OO ON t vO O * CN O -^ ON j; iPC tf)if)i-* |O^'* < OPCPCCN oOOOOvO & vj. o 'K o5 A Ji A A ^ ""3 * ON i* O O ^^ O tO *O ON PC *O PC ^ OO i-* CN CN O O 1 Q* 1, ' 1 "\ " ' *" ^ B Q 1 3 s-a ^ ^_^ OO "O ON ON E 2 ' ', \ jjjissjsj, ct; 00 ^ g^ ^ PCOO^^ ^.^^^ to 4-1 Q ~ '. i U X ^^ 0) "c y flu u. *^ OO PC *-* to O ^O PC ON O O PC NO vO PC ***" to O to CN S l CN PC I CN . PC 00 ^ ^H NO PC ^H rji rt NO CN I *-" 1-1 * _ i O = $ rt "f 1" 8 2, . O s. 0) jj to J ^^HI -^ io^*-t sO^COOfN OOfOOOrJ* fOfSOOO .S CO *^** en n "^4 *"^ > s ^ c 6 ^ _ U e u /% 3 > N as 3 rt g ^ON^THOO ^vOTt* iOO-^O\ -^HsO^t^ sOroCNOO ^ C^ ^H \O ^O *O *O *O t*** *O t** *O ^O fO ^* OO CS ^5 a 81 1 " ^^PC-^0^ N0o5~ ^^.^-,S PC-*toP? CNJ-^^ O "a - ! .2 J ' 5 i- ^J G ^h ^H c/5 ^^ t*** f*5 OO OO f*5 ON V O ^* f** *O ^^ ^^^^x^,^ ^S ^ ^-S ^ N^X >> efl ^ ' JS ' i O a o u 4-> Q. j J 2 u _>, O d.* : S : =S : dS^ dS.; c : 'S ji a o bti^^ g*C^j Octf*^^ ottf" 1 ^^ otd^3 u r\ ^s ^ J-p r\ ^ *|r< f\ ^ ^ ^T* f) Q ^ ^ f\ Q ^ ^p V ^^ ^ *^^ ^^ ^^ *^ ^ ^^ ^^ **'^ *" ^~^ * 1 * 1 ^ ^ ^^ c __ a ~ > - x - 9 3J k^ ^ K> 1936] CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS 181 PART II. INFLUENCE OF VARIOUS MATERIALS IN INCREASING CROP YIELDS AND VALUES, 1932-1935 TABLES in this Part furnish a basis for judging the relative effectiveness of various treatment materials and systems -*- in increasing crop yields and values on each of the Illinois soil experiment fields during the last rotation period. A very condensed form of summary is used. The crop yields for the four-year period have been converted into both money values and digestible nutrients, and the latter measure has been used as the basis for calculating the percentage increases that are attributable to the various soil-treatment materials. For those fields on which a four- year rotation is practiced and each crop is grown every year an arrangement which prevails on most fields this procedure condenses 16 crop yields into one figure. From such figures one can see at a glance the relative advantage which has been demonstrated for any particular treatment material during the four-year period. Wide Range in Productivity Levels of Untreated Land The great range in the present productivity levels of untreated Illinois soils is shown by the yields obtained from the untreated plots on the twenty-five fields listed in Table 19. The annual acre- value of the crops grown during the last rotation ranged from $2.86 at Eliza- bethtown to $22.60 at McNabb. Values for the other fields are distributed more or less regularly between these two extremes. In order that comparisons between the different fields with respect to their productivity levels may be quickly made, these levels are expressed as percentage variations from the average of the three fields representing soils of good productivity Aledo, Hartsburg, and Minonk, whose yields of digestible nutrients averaged 1,848 pounds. When these percentage variations are correlated with the soil groups on pages 150 and 151, some interesting relationships are apparent. The darker-colored soils, for instance, range in productivity level from around 50 percent of the average of the three "basic" fields to 123 per- cent. The lighter-colored soils range from 15 percent to 32 percent. The sand soils occupy a position at about 33-percent level. (See page 196 for graphical presentation of these facts.) Response to Manure The amount of manure that can be produced and returned to the soil in livestock systems of farming depends upon the productiveness of the soil. Tests show that when one-third of the produce grown is sold and two-thirds fed, and allowance is made for one-fifth of the 182 BULLETIN No. 425 [July, TABLE 19. UNTREATED LAND: VALUE OF ALL CROPS, YIELD OF DIGESTIBLE NUTRIENTS, AND PRODUCTIVITY LEVELS, ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS (Based on average annual acre-yields for four-year period ending in 1935) Rank Field County Crop value Digestible nutrients Produc- tivity level' 1 McNabb. . . . . . Putnam $22.60 Ibs. 2 277 perct. 123.2 2 Aledo . . . . Mercer 20.46 2 065 111.7 3 Kewanee . . . . Henry 18.25 1 837 99.4 4 Hartsburg . . . . Logan 18.82 1 752 94.8 5 Minonk . . . . Wood ford 17.43 1 727 93.5 6 Dixon . Lee 16.08 1 561 84.5 7 Lebanon . . . . St. Clair 16.39 1 481 80.1 8 Mt. Morris . . . Ogle 14.44 1 420 76.8 9 Bloomington . . . . McLean 11.36 1 400 75.7 10 Carthage . . . . Hancock 11.64 1 232 66.7 11 Joliet Will 9.79 1 006 54.4 1? Carlinville . . . . Macoupin 11.50 992 53.7 id Clayton . . . . Adams 8.29 958 51.8 14 Antioch . . . . Lake 9.61 954 51.6 IS Oquawka . . . . Henderson 6.21 600 32.5 16 Oblong . . . . Crawford 6.61 600 32.5 17 Toledo . . . . Cumberland 6.06 557 30.1 18 Enfield . . . White 5.07 478 25.9 19 Newton Tasoer 5.08 431 23.3 ?0 Raleigh . . . . Saline 4.87 410 22.2 71 Unionville . . . . Massac 4.01 374 20.2 7,7, West Salem . . . . Edwards 3.69 336 18.2 ?3 Ewing . . . . Franklin 3.80 316 17.1 74 Elizabethtown . . . . Hardin 2.86 304 16.5 25 Sparta . . . . Randolph 3.27 271 14.7 B The average yield of the digestible nutrients produced on the Aledo, Hartsburg, and Minonk fields (Soil Groups I and II), which represent corn-belt soils of good productive levels, was 1,848 pounds an acre. This yield is taken as 100 percent in calculating the productivity levels. manure to be lost before it can be returned to the land, then for every ton of crops grown one ton of manure containing 25 percent of dry matter and 75 percent moisture can be returned to the soil. When manure was applied to the respective experiment fields on this basis, the amount returned annually per acre, when no supplementary treat- ments were used, ranged from a little more than !/> ton on the least productive soils to about 3 Y^ tons on the more productive soils, as may be seen from an inspection of Table 20. While the application of manure in amounts determined by the above plan increased the crop yields on all fields, the size of the increases varied markedly. The lowest increase occurred at Sparta, on a light-colored soil of low productivity, $1.42 an acre annually; the greatest increase, $8.29, was obtained at Dixon, on a dark-colored soil of good productivity. Similarly the ton-value of the manure applica- tions, as expressed in increased yields, ranged from 6 cents at Minonk on a productive dark-colored soil to $7.02 at Elizabethtown on a light- 1936] CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS 183 TABLE 20. MANURE: AMOUNTS APPLIED AND INFLUENCE ON CROP VALUES, DIGESTIBLE NUTRIENTS, AND SOIL PRODUCTIVITY LEVELS, ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS (For four-year period ending in 1935) Rank Field Annual acre rate of application Annual acre-increases Change in soil produc- tivity level Crop value Digestible nutrients Ton value 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Dixon h .. . 3 ins .32 .40 ,15 .80 .08 02 .42 .02 .45 .97 60 .03 67 91 88 20 81 93 08 37 71 23 77 Q Jo 5 7 5 5 5 4 5 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 1 2 3 4 1 .29 .25 .04 .71 .92 .30 .46 .12 .77 .05 .66 .73 .03 .69 .82 .60 .62 .12 .87 .94 .38 .06 .42 Ibs. 855 657 656 596 595 584 526 514 450 411 410 371 352 335 298 280 273 270 249 244 208 168 99 $1 1 1 2 4 1 2 3 7 1 4 3 2 2 1 2 1 .76 .79 .51 .29 .10 .45 .09 .94 .54 .42 .02 .09 .39 .11 .59 .06 .48 .60 .15 .40 .17 .55 .09 perct. 41.7 32.0 31.9 29.0 28.9 28.4 25.7 25.1 22.0 20.0 20.0 18.1 17.2 16.3 14.5 13.6 13.3 13.2 12.1 11.9 10.1 8.2 4.8 Aledo 3 Hartsburg .. . 3 Mt. Morris ... 2 Lebanon . . . 2 West Salem" ... 1 Clayton .. . 2 Kewanee . .. 3 Oquawka . . . 1 Raleigh Elizabethtown Carlinville 2 Carthage .. . 2 Ewing Enfield Minonk .. . 3, Unionville Newton. ... Joliet 2 Oblong 1, McNabb ... 3. Toledo .. . 1. Sparta "Four tons of limestone applied in 1912. colored soil of low productivity. The smaller applications of manure tended to give the higher ton-values. The response of the different fields to manure applications, ex- pressed as a percentage change in the productivity level of the field, ranged from less than 5 percent at Sparta to more than 40 percent at Dixon ; and these variations in response appear to have no correlation with variations in the productivity levels of the untreated soil of these fields (Table 19). Soils of high and of low levels showed both good and poor response to manure. Response to Crop Residues Farms on which little or no livestock is fed usually produce more or less crop-residue material that may be used for soil-improvement purposes. Cropping systems are easily devised in which the amount of such material for soil improvement can be greatly increased. The value of such materials, as utilized on the soil experiment fields, is shown by the data in Table 21. This material has consisted chiefly of cornstalks, green-manure sweet clover, second-crop red clover, and 184 BULLETIN No. 425 [July, TABLE 21. CROP RESIDUES: INFLUENCE ON CROP VALUES, DIGESTIBLE NUTRIENTS, AND SOIL PRODUCTIVITY LEVELS WHEN PLOWED DOWN IN AB- SENCE OF OTHER SOIL TREATMENTS, ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS (For four-year period ending in 1935) Annual acre-increases Change in Rank Field Crop value Digestible nutrients soil produc- tivity level 1 Mt. Morris $2 96 Ibs. 299 perct. 18 1 2 Aledo 3 34 296 18 3 West Salem* 3.42 276 16 8 4 Kewanee 3.53 275 16 7 s Hartsburg 2.68 269 16 4 6 Minonk 2.82 263 16 7 Bloomington 1 79 261 15 8 8 Antioch b ... . 2.24 225 13 7 Q Oblong 1 03 81 5 10 Raleigh ... .78 79 4 8 11 Unionville 58 75 4.6 1? Enfield 93 64 3.9 13 Toledo 42 64 3.9 14 Sparta 52 48 2.9 IS Lebanon 63 24 1.4 16 Oquawka . . . 08 19 1.2 17 Ewing 09 18 1.1 18 Joliet - 07 17 1 19 Carthage 02 13 .7 70 Clayton 71 -6 - .4 71 Elizabethtown 26 -9 - .5 7? Newton 23 -35 -2.1 73 Carlinville -.62 -38 -2.3 74 Dixon . - 49 -80 -6.1 25 McNabb , 83 -127 -7.8 Four tons of limestone applied in 1912. stone and phosphate. b Residues used in addition to lime- soybean chaff grown upon the land and plowed down in the absence of other soil treatments. In the early years the grain straws were also returned. This practice is now being resumed on a number of the fields. This system of soil improvement may be rather effective on some soils and less effective on others, judging from the data in Table 21. The best results have been obtained on those fields where clover, especially sweet clover, will grow without the application of limestone. The poorest results, on the whole, were obtained on the less productive soils, where legumes grow poorly, if at all, without the application of limestone. Some of the dark-colored soils that will not grow sweet .clover without limestone, but which will grow red clover (such as the Dixon field), do not show high returns for the residues system. This is due, not to the fact that the system has no worth on such soils, but to the fact that in making the comparisons only one crop of clover hay is 1936] CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS 185 removed from the residues plot and two are removed from the check plot. This makes it difficult to measure the effects of those fields where red clover is grown both as hay and as a residues crop. If the system has worth on such soils, it should be reflected in the grain yields. Reference to the yield data for the Dixon field indicates that increased grain yields are obtained in this system. Response to Limestone On most experiment fields an application of 4 tons of limestone in addition to either manure or crop residues was made when the field was established. Subsequent applications were made at the rate of 2 tons an acre each four years thereafter until 1923, when all applica- tions were discontinued, the plan being to make future applications TABLE 22. LIMESTONE: INFLUENCE ON CROP VALUES, DIGESTIBLE NUTRIENTS AND SOIL PRODUCTIVITY LEVELS WHEN USED IN ADDITION TO EITHER MANURE OR CROP RESIDUES, ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS (For four-year period ending in 1935) Manure system Residues system Rank Field Annual acre- increases Change Rank Field Annual acre- increases Change Di- pro- r, gest- due- value ible tivit y e nutri- levels ents Di- pro- Crop ?*f - ? u .c- value lble tlvlt y e nutri- levels ents 1 Oblong Ibs. perct. $7.77 831 40.5 6.82 761 37.0 6.54 736 35.9 5.39 671 32.7 . 6.30 657 32.0 5.53 653 31.8 5.40 633 30.8 4.64 588 28.6 5.45 581 28.4 5.33 569 27.7 5.32 565 27.5 3.76 433 21.1 2.84 285 13.9 2.72 272 13.2 2.39 250 12.1 2.28 241 11.7 .97 201 9.8 1.07 158 7.7 1.14 148 7.3 .77 86 4.1 .35 84 4.1 -1.26 -101 -4.9 1 Lebanon Ibs. perct. 37.45 685 41.7 7.11 671 40.8 6.23 585 35.6 4.73 445 27.1 4.69 443 26.9 6.21 443 26.9 4.76 408 24.8 3.65 376 22.9 4.47 376 22.9 3.81 350 21.3 3.96 342 20.8 2.66 316 19.2 3.73 307 18.7 2.94 292 17.8 2.36 288 17.5 2.31 274 16.7 1.92 164 9.9 1.20 163 9.9 1.57 159 9.7 1.00 111 6.8 .31 88 5.4 .32 47 2.8 .36 15 .9 2 Oquawka . 2 Oquawka 3 Ewing 4 Unionville. . . . 5 Elizabethtown. 6 Raleigh 3 Elizabethtown . 4 Raleigh 5 Oblong 6 Sparta 7 Enfield 7 Unionville 8 Aledo 8 Toledo 9 Lebanon . 9 Carlinville 10 Toledo 10 Sparta . . 1 1 Newton 11 Enfield 12 Clayton 12 Mt. Morris 13 Ewing 13 West Salem*. . 14 Carlinville. . . . 15 Carthage 14 Carthage 15 Clayton 16 Kewanee 16 Dixon 17 Aledo 17 West Salem 8 .. . 18 Antioch b . . 18 Mt. Morris. . . 19 Hartsburg. . . . 19 Newton 20 Dixon... . 20 Kewanee 21 Joliet 21 Hartsburg 22 Joliet 22 Minonk 23 Minonk a ln addition to light lime in 1912. b Limestone used in addition to RKbP. 186 BULLETIN No. 425 when needed. The total amount applied to date to the respective fields ranges from 4 to 10 tons an acre, depending upon the age of the field. On most fields the total application is equivalent to about 700 to 800 pounds annually. The influence of limestone on soil productivity is probably in large part indirect. Many soils will not grow legume crops such as red clover, sweet clover, and alfalfa satisfactorily until limestone has been applied. With a satisfactory growth of these legumes, especially when all or a part of the growth is plowed under, striking improvements in soil productivity are usually observed. Altho this increased productiv- ity may result directly from the residues of the legume crops grown, limestone must be given credit for making the increase possible. Many of the fields which gave but little response to the residues system of soil management (Table 21) are very greatly improved in productivity after the application of limestone (Table 22). The degree of such improvement appears to be related more or less directly to the natural ability of the soil to grow satisfactory legume crops. The more productive soils that naturally produce more or less satisfactory legume crops give the least response to applications of limestone ; those that naturally produce unsatisfactory legume crops give the greatest responses. It is therefore to be expected that soils varying widely in natural productivity will exhibit a wide range in response to limestone. These data indicate that some soils are in great need of limestone, while others have not as yet developed any need for it. Such results emphasize the fact that a definite soil-testing program is needed on every farm. Directions for making the necessary tests are given in Circular 346, "Test Your Soil for Acidity." Response to Phosphate On most Illinois soil experiment fields one ton of rock phosphate an acre was applied when the field was established, and one ton was further applied every four years thereafter until a total of 4 tons was reached. On some fields bone phosphate was applied at the annual rate of 200 pounds an acre until a total of 4,800 pounds was reached. Including all the years of the experiments, rock phosphate has been applied at the annual acre-rate of 350 to 400 pounds and bone phos- phate at the rate of 150 pounds. The results obtained from this use of the phosphates during the four-year period ending in 1935 are recorded in Table 23. More recently superphosphate has been applied on a number of the fields in comparison with the above-mentioned carriers. For the results of these experiments, see index on page 242. In general, better responses to phosphate were obtained in the residues system than in the manure system, probably because the manure functions to some extent as a source of phosphorus. In both 1936~\ CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS 187 TABLE 23. ROCK PHOSPHATE: INFLUENCE ON CROP VALUES, DIGESTIBLE NUTRIENTS, AND SOIL PRODUCTIVITY LEVELS WHEN USED IN ADDITION TO EITHER MANURE AND LIMESTONE OR CROP RESIDUES AND LIMESTONE, ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS (For four-year period ending in 1935) Manure system Residues system Annual acre- increases Change Annual acre- increases Change Rank Field Crop value Di- gest- nutri- ents pro- tivity levels Rank Field Di- /- erest- Cr . op ible value nutri- ents pro- duc- tivity levels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 21 22 Elizabethtown.. West Salem .... Enfield. 32.86 2.37 1.71 1.40 1.39 1.79 1.05 1.17 .62 .94 .65 .71 .81 .49 .92 .23 .04 .04 .08 .94 .07 -.14 -.54 Ibs. 224 209 178 166 141 135 120 115 108 95 84 75 54 47 41 35 28 24 13 -15 -40 -54 perct. 10.9 10.2 8.7 8.1 6.9 6.6 5.9 5.6 5.3 4.6 4.1 3.7 2.6 2.3 2.0 1.7 1.4 1.2 .6 -.1 -.7 -1.9 -2.7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Bloomington 8 . . Elizabethtown . Antioch* . . . J4.61 5.46 3.15 3.29 1.94 1.69 1.27 2 24 1^53 1.40 1.47 1.16 1.14 .58 1.05 .71 1.07 .18 .88 1.26 .48 .44 .24 -.45 Ibs. 633 468 356 263 179 146 140 127 124 108 107 105 71 68 65 60 56 55 50 42 39 19 7 -21 perct. 38.5 28.4 21.7 16.0 10.9 8.8 8.5 7.7 7.5 6.6 6.5 6.4 4.3 4.1 3.9 3.7 3.4 3.4 3.1 2.5 2.3 1.2 .5 -1.3 Ewing West Salem . . . Joliet Clayton Sparta Raleigh Joliet Clayton Unionville. . . . Ewing Newton Unionville . . . Oblong . Enfield . ... Kewanee . . . Oblong . . Raleigh . . Carthage Minonk Oquawka Mt. Morris. . . . Kewanee .... Toledo Toledo Carlinville. . . Lebanon . . Dixon Sparta Carthage . . Dixon Lebanon Carlinville Hartsburg Newton. . . McNabb b Mt. Morris. . . . Aledo Minonk Hartsburg. . . . Aledo Oquawka "Bone phosphate. b No limestone. systems there are some fields that have given but little or no response to phosphorus, probably because the soil has not yet become deficient in available phosphorus, or because some other deficiency is of more importance than the phosphorus deficiency. The results indicate the desirability of testing the soil for available phosphorus as described in Circular 421, "Testing Soil for Available Phosphorus," before making plans to use phosphorus fertilizers exten- sively. Response to Potash "The potash used in these experiments was applied at the annual acre-rate of 200 pounds of kainit or 100 pounds of potassium sulfate or potassium chlorid ahead of corn or wheat. 188 BULLETIN No. 425 [July, TABLE 24. POTASH: INFLUENCE ON CROP VALUES, DIGESTIBLE NUTRIENTS, AND SOIL PRODUCTIVITY LEVELS WHEN USED IN ADDITION TO RESIDUES, LIMESTONE, AND PHOSPHATE," ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS (For four-year period ending in 1935) Annual acre-increases Change in Rank Field Crop value Digestible nutrients soil produc- tivity levels 1 Ewing . $6.70 Ibs. 640 perct. 39.0 2 Toledo .... 5 . 79 539 32.8 3 Newton 6.35 494 30.1 4 Oblong 4.88 455 27.7 5 Enfield 4.90 436 26.5 6 West Salem 4.56 409 24.9 7 Carlinville ... 2 . 54 240 14.6 8 Oquawka 2.27 229 13.9 9 Raleigh ... ... 2 97 209 12.8 10 Unionville 2.16 192 11.7 11 Dixon 2 . 20 187 11.4 12 Joliet 1.93 185 11.3 13 Sparta 2 . 02 162 9.9 14 Mt. Morris 1.21 122 7.4 15 Antioch b 1 40 121 ' 7.4 16 Bloomington b 85 107 6.5 17 Aledo 75 74 4.5 18 Lebanon 41 68 4.1 19 Carthage .. . -.18 24 1.5 70 Elizabethtown .50 16 1.0 21 Clayton 09 11 .7 22 Minonk 08 -1 -.1 73 Hartsburg -.61 -53 -3.2 24 Kewanee ....-1.14 -58 -3.5 "Potash, mostly kainit until 1932; since that time potassium chlorid. b Residual potassium sulfate. The data presented in Table 24 reveal that the more productive soils have given little or no response to potash and that the less pro- ductive soils have usually given good responses. A careful study of all the experimental data indicates that the favorable results for potash may have been influenced in part by the accompanying treatments. The limestone - sweet-clover treatment especially seems to have hastened the need for potash on some kinds of soil. More detailed experiments have been started on the Ewing and Toledo fields with respect to this problem. The reader is referred to pages 212-214 and 234-237 for the results from these experiments. Economic Considerations Net Effects of Soil-Treatment Systems. In the preceding tables of this section the total increases resulting from the use of the respective soil-treatment materials have been recorded. Another point of interest concerns the net increases resulting from the respective treatment materials after the costs of the materials have been accounted for (the 1936} CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS 189 fertilizer point of view, see page 149). In order that the reader may have some notion of what the net increases have been that have resulted from the use of soil-treatment materials on the Illinois soil experiment fields, deductions for costs have been made for those treatment combinations that have given the largest net increases on the respective fields. These data are recorded in Table 25. In general, the less productive soils have tended to give the largest net acre-returns for the various systems of soil treatment. On these soils the more complicated systems of treatment are needed, while on the more productive soils the simpler systems of treatment have tended to give the greater economic increases. The manure systems tend to be more effective than the residues systems, tho some of the more productive soils give larger net increases for the residues system (see Aledo field). Altho the net increases for the various systems of soil treatment are of much interest, they are of less importance to the farmer than the total acre-yields after the cost of the treatment has been deducted. The importance of viewing the data from this standpoint is brought out in Table 26. Ranked by net values of total crop yields, the Illinois soil experi- ment fields (Table 26) fall into quite a different order than when arranged according to net value of crop increases. Even tho the net increases for soil treatment may be considerably greater on the less productive soils than on the more productive soils, the net total yields produced on the more productive fields are much greater. On the Aledo and Sparta fields, for instance, the net values of the increases from soil treatment in the residues system are about the same $5.21 and $4.97 respectively (Table 25) ; yet the total value of the crop yields from the Aledo field is $24.52, while from the Sparta field it is only $8.25 (Table 26). These figures emphasize the fact that net total acre-production is of much greater importance to a farmer than the increases that he can obtain for any particular treatment. Investment Returns From Soil-Treatment Systems. The effect of a soil treatment viewed even from the standpoint of the total net acre- value realized after treatment costs are deducted is interesting but it is not the final test of the worthwhileness of a treatment system to the individual farmer, for a system may add substantially to the yields of low-yielding land without enabling a farmer to reap a profit from the farm as a whole when growing and marketing costs as well as treatment costs have been deducted. It is from this "farm point of view" that an individual farmer must evaluate systems of soil treatment. It is not an easy one from which to generalize in presenting soil-treatment data owing to the existence of widely varying costs and prices. A moderate increase or decrease 190 BULLETIN No. 425 [July, M U I r 2 U X O H x : H .a j M C/5 ^ 4^ -o (/> _O 1 1 I s ^ S gt fi fe- i s O M U. U 2: u (4 9 u < H H X Ji . Q c J2 E ^ to :2S S-8 .SPS Q = |J U2 SB U d i jL 1j3 . - CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS 191 Q. 2i - U Si c 2 6 O~_O'^ r rtj3 rt 2 w> tuo c rt iS s!S.S. & a "^ > 'rn /1\ Cd O O) 4) '>,_3 4) rt C > tt * ^ IO OO CN h O OO ^t< CS Ov (N CN O OO O ^t 1 <^5 >O <~O t> rf O4 OO ^ O O C> 00 O t^ O vO O OO t*5 Os < < o> Cu a Jj (X) Oi fc EXPERIMENTS e* system under eatments ! J 05 J a 13 ^J o c^ in i* 11 05 o .S jtj g 03 M J C 04 o~ ti t 55 c ^^ o fc 55 5 55 M CL, 8 l_, U PA w OM 0) O C 3 ^ 3 a C 03 4) 'C *-> OJ 03 i 5,8 J K U O ti ii 3 -u fc c i c 5S ^ t, n 4> S _ si TURNS Vi 3 6 K 0) W H W H c/) 1& W c5 o T3 & z [3 .-2 T. bi Id J PQ H c R> II 1 i 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 7777TTT i i cs ~H CN CN ro ro 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ,2 m rs * 194 BULLETIN No. 425 o 3 IS r OS i 1 I I 5 ^ "O Q, = 3 ceo 13 S* ".= OOOOO"* I . -H o 10 >D oo dues -^. r5 - ro (S i -H PC CN ^t ^ > CN ^- u ^ pe I '-i Ov >O OO OO ^< IO CS OO CS O -1 tN OO >O <*5 O\ O O Ov ___-.-. . fC Tj< PC Tj< ^1 VQ fO S TABLE 44. CLAYTON FIELD: MIXED-FERTILIZER TESTS Present rotation: Corn, oats, wheat (Le) (Average crop yields 1930-1935 in bushels per acre) 209 Treatment systems Corn 6 crops Oats 5 crops Wheat 6 crops RL, 5-15-5. . 22.1 44.0 46.3 RL 18.2 42.0 44.4 RL, 0-15-5 26 47.4 46 9 RL, 0-15-0 23.2 48.9 44.1 RL 19.8 41.6 43.8 RL, 0-0-5 19.6 50.1 49.8 RL. 0-0-50 20.8 47.0 49.8 TABLE 45. DIXON FIELD: COMPARISON OF SOIL-TREATMENT SYSTEMS Present rotation: Corn, oats, clover, wheat (Le) (Average crop yields 1910-1935 in bushels or (tons) per acre) Treatment C f n systems cropg Oats 23 crops Clover 16 crops Wheat 20 crops S< be cr All crops Dy- ans 5 ops Digest- ible nu- trients Yield index 1910- 1935 1932- 1935 . . 41.6 47.6 61.9 65.3 66.3 52.6 55.1 60.2 61.8 61.3 (1. (2. (2. (2, (1 (1 (1 (1 (2 73) 54) 67) .77) .56) 42) .75) .94) .09) 21.7 28.5 31.2 33.4 22.7 25.1 28.4 31.6 33.0 (1.50) (1.75) (1.87) (1.91) (1.27) (1.43) (1.40) (1.38) (1.42) 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 494 046 182 249 436 526 660 795 888 1.000 1.369 1.461 1.505 1.000 1.063 1.156 1.250 1.315 1.064 1.637 1.694 1.713 1.068 1.012 1.203 1.241 1.371 M . . 62.6 ML . . 66 9 MLrP. . . 68 3 . . 45 . 2 R . . . 52 5 RL . .. 59 9 RLrP . 60 6 RLrPK . ... 66.2 210 BULLETIN No. 425 TABLE 46. D1XON FIELD: PHOSPHATE-CARRIER TESTS* ROCK, SUPER, AND BONE PHOSPHATES USED WITH AND WITHOUT LIMESTONE Present rotation: Corn, oats, clover, wheat (Le) (Average crop yields 1924-1935 in bushels or (tons) per acre) Treatment systems Corn 12 crops Oats 12 crops Clover 10 crops Wheat 12 crops All crops Digestible nutrients Yield index 1924- 1935 1932- 1935 Original treatment (south halves) . . 50.4 43.2 59.8 64.9 64.1 47.7 49.4 57.4 58.7 58.4 42.8 (1.78) (2.56) (2.63) (2.74) (1.84) (1.46) (1.88) (2.06) (2.21) (1.65) 23.3 31.1 33.8 34.8 23.9 26.5 30.7 32.8 34.2 21.8 1 602 2 283 2 424 2 450 1 582 1 590 1 890 1 972 2 106 1 483 1.000 1.408 1.513 1.529 1.000 1.005 1.195 1.247 1.331 1.000 .993 1.526 1.580 1.597 .969 .918 1.092 1.126 1.245 .933 M . 72.4 ML . 76.7 MLrP . 76.8 . . 49.5 R . 55.7 RL . 65.0 RLrP . 65.1 RLrPK . . 72.6 . 48.4 New treatment (north halves) RL*>.. 54.6 45.3 (1.31) 23.1 1 470 .929 .925 MrP ... 73.8 61.6 (2.53) 31.9 2 310 1.424 1.541 MLbP ... 74.3 65.4 (2.70) 33.8 2 434 1.519 1.607 MLrP + ... 74.8 65.6 (2.81) 33.9 2 445 1.526 1.610 RsP... 55.8 52.7 (1.39) 29.3 1 628 1.029 .988 RrP ... 61.3 53.7 (1.56) 30.9 1 745 1.103 1.066 RLsP ... 63.2 60.2 (1.88) 33.7 1 927 1.218 1.063 RLrP+ ... 65.0 59.7 (2.07) 32.6 1 978 1.250 1.140 RLrP+K.. 72.2 61.7 (2.21) 35.3 2 139 1.352 1.254 RLrP b ... 57.5 52.2 (1.62) 27.3 1 679 1.132 1.134 Comparisons should be made between north and south halves. b Light applica- tion of limestone. TABLE 47. DIXON FIELD: CROP- RESIDUES TESTS GRAIN STRAWS, CORNSTALKS BURNED AND NOT BURNED, AND SWEET CLOVER Present rotation: Corn, oats, wheat (Le on certain plots) (Average crop yields 1930-1935 in bushels per acre) Treatment systems Corn 6 crops Oats 6 crops Wheat 6 crops L, all residues . 57 5 45 6 21.5 L, cornstalks and wheat straw 59.2 43.9 20.8 L, cornstalks 55.2 43.9 21.8 L, cornstalks burned (ash returned) 58.7 46.3 21.7 L, all residues, sweet clover 75.6 54.7 24.1 L, cornstalks, wheat straw, sweet clover 70.6 53 5 26.8 L, cornstalks, sweet clover 63 7 55.6 25.4 L, cornstalks burned (ash returned), sweet clover.. . 60.2 53.5 25.5 1936} CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS TABLE 48. ELIZABETHTOWN FIELD: COMPARISON OF SOIL- TREATMENT SYSTEMS Present rotation: Corn, oats, mixed hay, wheat (Le) (Average crop yields 1918-1935 in bushels or (tons) per acre) 211 Treatment systems Corn 17 crops Wheat after corn 9 crops Wheat after mixed hay 3 crops Mixed hay 11 crops All crops Digestible nutrients Yield index 1918- 1935 1932- 1935 0.. 12.1 1.7 4.4 11.6 15.1 1.7 2.4 7.3 14.4 14.4 4.8 8.3 17.2 24.0 4.8 4.9 12.0 22.1 23.8 ( -09) ( -26) (1.08) (1.57) ( -09) ( -14) ( -84) (1.51) (1.78) 318 b 530 1 077 1 330 254 290 803 1 180 1 240 1.000 1.667 3.387 4.182 1.000 1.142 3.161 4.646 4.882 1.339 2.296 4.362 5.066 1.134 1.098 3.402 5.244 5.307 M . 22.7 ML . 38.8 MLrP . 42.4 12.1 R . 14.6 RL . 33.8 RLrP . 42.7 RLrPK . 42.8 Yields from check plot in residues system used for all comparisons because of silting on the check plot in the manure system. b Digestible nutrients are from check plot in residues system, with addition of corn stover. TABLE 49. ENFIELD FIELD: COMPARISON OF SOIL-TREATMENT SYSTEMS Present rotation: Corn, oats, mixed hay, wheat (Le) (Average crop yields 1912-1935 in bushels or (tons) per acre) Treatment C systems crops Oats 23 crops Leg- ume hav 22 Wheat 18 crops Soy- bean hay 5 crops All crops Digest- ible nu- trients Yield index 1912- 1935 1932- 1935 .. 15, 8 1 5 8 2 3 9 .5 9 12.4 17.2 29.0 29.4 11.7 13.1 26.8 29.9 32.6 ( (1 (1 ( (1 (1 (1 .21) .31) .45) .57) .18) .20) .13) .13) .57) 6.6 9.9 22.2 24.8 7.6 8.5 19.1 23.7 26.8 ( (1 (1 ( (1 (1 (1 .43) .59) .28) .33) .36) .36) .04) .09) .12) 441 622 1 223 1 325 373 433 915 1 001 1 203 1.000 1.410 2.773 3.005 1.000 1.161 2.453 2.684 3.225 1.204 1.880 3.315 3.719 1.137 1.308 2.225 2.515 3.684 M 24. ML 37. MLrP .... 39 16 R 19 RL 30 RLrP 32 RLrPK . ... 39 212 BULLETIN No. 425 TABLE 50. ENFIELD FIELD: LEGUME GREEN-MANURE TESTS- CLOVER vs. RED CLOVER Present rotation: Corn, wheat (Le either red or sweet clover) (Average crop yields 1924-1935 in bushels per acre) [July, - SWEET Treatment systems* Corn 12 crops Wheat 9 crops L. . 19.8 6.7 L 22.3 8.6 L, rP, sP, sweet clover . . 24 13 8 L, rP, sP, red clover . . 23 1 15 3 L, rP, sweet clover 21.6 12.8 L, rP red clover 20.8 15.6 L, rP, sP, sweet clover 19.7 13.1 L, rP, sP, red clover 22.0 15.8 L, rP, sweet clover ... . . . . 18.0 12.9 L, rP, red clover 20.3 16.2 L, sweet clover 15.4 11.3 L, red clover 19.3 13.2 'Beginning with 1932 KC1 was added on all plots to the corn and wheat. TABLE 51. EWING FIELD: COMPARISON OF SOIL-TREATMENT SYSTEMS Present rotation: Corn, oats, mixed hay, wheat (Le) (Average crop yields 1910-1935 in bushels or (tons) per acre) Treatment C systems cropg Oats 26 crops Leg- ume hay 24 crops Wheat 19 crops S b 1 cr ov- All crops ean lay 9 ops Digest- ible nu- trients Yield index 1910- 1935 1932- 1935 . . 10 .4 .3 .4 ,8 ,3 .8 .8 5 10.1 15.3 30.9 32.8 12.1 12.8 28.2 29.8 35.3 ( -23) ( -26) (1.27) (1.46) ( -21) ( .20) ( -95) ( -99) (1-27) 3.4 6.8 24.0 27.2 3.1 4.3 19.7 23.1 30.7 (1 (1 (1 (1 .43) .56) .22) .31) .38) .37) .98) 02) .18) 329 571 1 263 1 352 304 312 815 878 1 256 1 1 3 4 1 1 2 2. 4. .000 .736 .839 .109 .000 .026 .681 888 132 .997 2.015 4.252 4.757 .997 1.056 2.066 2.484 4.589 M. 23 ML 41 MLrP 42 . . 11 R 12 RL 23 RLrP 25. RLrPK .... 44. 1936] CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS 213 TABLE 52. EWING FIELD: POTASH-PROBLEM TESTS INVOLVING SUPPLEMENTARY FERTILIZER COMBINATIONS, ORGANIC MATTER, AND MANAGEMENT FACTORS Present rotation: Corn, oats, mixed hay, wheat (Le) (Average crop yields 1932-1935 in bushels or (tons) per acre) Treatment systems Corn Oats Mixed hay 8 All crops \\heat Digestible yield nutrients index Section C No supplementary treatment . . 10.3 11.2 17.1 30.0 28.7 12.7 12.5 21.4 23.0 27.6 16.3 (0 ) (0 ) ( .96) (1.52) ( ) (0 ) ( .31) ( .52) (1.14) ( ) 5.0 10.4 29.1 1 30.4 1 3.5 4.0 17.2 23.6 33.5 1 13.3 328 663 399 565 303 321 628 755 395 486 1.000 2.021 4.265 4.771 1.000 1.060 2.073 2.492 4.604 1.604 b M ... 28.7 ML ... 47.4 MLrP ... 52.2 . . 13.1 RL ... 15.3 RL ... 16.2 RLrP ... 21.3 RLrPK.. 49.7 sP ... 17.7 Section A Superphosphate and potassium chlorid sP, KC1.. 14.2 16.5 20.2 31.8 30.0 18.3 23.4 28.1 29.8 32.2 20.0 (0 ) ( ) (1.85) (1.67) ( ) (1.01) (1.06) (1.31) (2.06) ( ) 15.5 19.0 34.0 1 33.0 1 16.1 32.6 1 32.5 1 33.3 1 34.7 1 16.9 530 743 647 567 579 178 268 361 551 597 1.616 2.265 5.021 4.777 1.911 3.888 4.185 4.492 5.119 1.970= M + sP, KC1 ... 25.0 ML + sP, KC1 ... 47.3 MLrP + sP, KCl . . 45 . 8 sP, KCl.. 21.2 RL + sP, KCl ... 36.6 RL + sP, KCl ... 40 4 RLrP + sP, KCl ... 42.9 RLrPK + sP, KCl. . ... 44.7 sP, KCl ... 21.8 Section B Potassium chlorid KCl. . 14.1 12.2 17.6 31.7 29.0 13.1 21.2 23.7 25.3 28.7 14.2 ( o ) (0 ) (1.55) (1.68) ( ) ( -85) ( -80) (1.69) (1.34) ( ) 8.1 13.3 32.5 33.8 8.4 24.9 25.4 29.9 33.9 1 10.0 395 714 636 649 428 064 082 321 420 470 1.204 2.177 4.988 5.027 1.413 3.512 3.571 4.360 4.686 1.551 b M + KCl ... 29 8 ML + KCl ... 52 4 MLrP + KCl 52 3 KCl.. 18.9 R + KCl ... 38 1 RL + KCl ... 38 1 RLrP + KCl . 41 7 RLrPK + KCl . . ... 47.9 KCl ... 21.1 (Table 52 is concluded on page 214) 214 BULLETIN No. 425 TABLE 52. EWING FIELD, Concluded Treatment systems Mixed All crops Corn Oats hay . Wheat Digestible Yield nutrients index Section D Miscellaneous treatments NaNO,.. 10.3 13.7 (0 ) 3.9 317 .966 M 18.8 16.0 (0 ) 9.4 514 1.567 M'L 34 . 1 26.2 ( -62) 27.3 1 110 3.384 M'LrP 34 . 9 27.7 ( -75) 29.7 1 189 3.625 NaNO,, KC1.. 20.2 13.6 ( ) 8.5 460 1.518 RL 30.4 21.3 ( .61) 19.3 851 2.809 RL (no. sw. cl.) 19.3 24.0 ( -67) 22.1 807 2.663 RLrP, straw .... 44.6 27.2 (1.02) 27.2 1 237 4.083 RLrP, K d . . 39.0 28.4 ( .92) 28.8 1 173 3.871 NaNO,, sP, KC1 .... 22.4 19.5 (0 ) 19.0 627 2.069 b Average of three years. b Residues check plot in Section C used as check. "Residual manure. d Residual kainit. TABLE 53. HARTSBURG FIELD: COMPARISON OF SOIL-TREATMENT SYSTEMS Present rotations: Manure system Corn, corn, oats, clover-alfalfa; Residues system Corn, corn, oats (Le), wheat (Le) (Average crop yields 1911-1935 in bushels or (tons) per acre) Corn Treatment 1st yr. systems 23 crops Corn 2dyr. 12 crops Oats 25 crops Wheat 22 crops Leg- All crops ume hay Digest- 8 ible nu- crops trients Yield index 1911- 1935 1932- 1935 . . 43 ,2 ,2 ,2 ,9 6 8 6 ,7 48. 59 63 61 51 57 63 64 62 ,7 ,3 7 ,8 ,5 ,7 6 ,2 7 45.9 51.4 56.2 55.5 45.5- 51.6 49.1 51.6 51.9 24.1" 28.6" 33. 9" 35. 3 27.1 30.1 27.9 32.0 32.1 (2.03) b (2.58) b (2.67) b (2.74) b (1.66) (2.00) (1.99) (2.04) (1-99) 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 851 208 410 448 754 033 066 177 188 1.000 1.193 1.302 1.323 1.000 1.159 1.178 1.241 1.247 .991 1.345 1.425 1.396 .953 1.106 1.156 1.180 1.150 M 55 ML 63 MLrP 62 . . 47 R 62 RL 66 RLrP 66 RLrPK . ... 63 'Average of 21 crops. b Average of 9 crops. 1936} CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS 215 TABLE 54. HARTSBURG FIELD: PHOSPHATE-CARRIER TESTS" ROCK, SUPER, AND BONE PHOSPHATES USED WITH AND WITHOUT LIMESTONE Present rotations: Manure system Corn, corn, oats, clover-alfalfa; Residues system Corn, corn, oats (Le), wheat (Le) (Average crop yields 1924-1935 in bushels per acre) Treatment systems Corn 1st yr. 12 crops Corn 2dyr. 12 crops All crops Oats 12 crops Wheat 11 crops Digestible nutrients Yield index 1924- 1932- 1935 1935 Original treatment (west halves) . . 43.3 48.7 43.0 23. l b 1 785 1.000 1.027 M ... 57.9 59 3 50 6 28 8 b 2 283 1.279 1.395 ML .... 67.0 63.7 52.6 31. 7 b 2 505 1.403 1.478 MLrP 65 . 6 61.8 52.1 33. 7 b 2 471 1.384 1.448 46.9 51.5 44.3 23.9 1 647 1.000 1.015 R 66 6 57 7 47 2 28.2 2 004 1 217 1.178 RL 70.0 63.6 46.1 25.8 2 071 1.257 1.231 RLrP .... 71.6 64.2 45.6 30.4 2 148 1.304 1.257 RLrPK.. 66.9 62.7 46.7 31.3 2 100 1.275 1.225 .... 51.3 51.7 43.8 26.0 1 721 1.000 .987 New treatment (east halves) RL C 58.5 52.5 43.7 24.8 1 813 1.101 1.126 MrP . ... 58.4 59.6 51.7 32. 8 b 2 340 1.311 1.387 MLbP . ... 66.6 63.1 52.8 34. 6 b 2 503 1.402 1.478 MLrP-f . ... 65.5 65.6 52.9 35. 9 b 2 522 1.413 1.440 RsP.. 63.7 56.9 48.5 31.5 2 015 1.223 1.233 RrP . ... 68.0 61.0 52.3 34.6 2 157 1.310 1.276 RLsP . ... 69.7 63.2 50.7 35.1 2 202 1.337 1.293 RLrP+ . ... 70.4 63.7 50.9 32.9 2 188 1.328 1.289 RLrPK 66.8 63.1 49.2 32.0 2 126 1.291 1.233 RLrP" .... 61.0 51.3 46.2 30.1 1 991 1.157 1.111 Comparisons should be made between east and west halves, crops. c Light application of limestone. b Average of 10 216 BULLETIN No. 425 [/H/V, TABLE 55. HARTSBURG FIELD: COMPARISON OF FERTILIZERS USED AS SUPPLEMENTS TO SOIL-TREATMENT SYSTEMS Present rotation: Corn, oats, wheat, clover-alfalfa (Average crop yields 1932-1935 in bushels or (tons) per acre) Corn Oats Wheat Clover-alfalfa Treatment systems Supplementary Supplementary Supplementary Supplementary treatment treatment treatment treatment None With None With None With None With Treble superphosphate 0-45-0 . . 51 8 ss 1 64 7 54 7 24.5 30.0 (1 1?) (1.37) M .... 53. 6 S7 5 56.6 60.6 19.7 36.5 (1 77) (2.03) ML .... 57. 6 57. ,3 62.5 63.8 23.3 36.3 (2. 81) (2.78) MLrP .... 54 .8 54. ,5 60.9 61.6 24.7 35.2 (3. 39) (2.87) . . 55 6 58 4 60 3 64.4 20.0 33 7 (1 S7) (1.61) R. . 64 5 6? 68 1 67 5 17 8 35 2 (1 S8) (1.69) RL .... 66 8 69 ,5 57.5 52.5 25.8 30.3 (2. 64) (3.12) RLrP .... 68 .3 67. ,9 64.1 66.3 22.7 31.8 (3, 13) (3 . 68) RLrPK.. ... 64 .7 70 ,1 65.0 66.3 22.7 30.5 (3. 82) (4.18) .... 51 .8 55 .7 60.9 58.8 18.8 30.5 (2. 23) (1.57) Mixed fertilizer 2-12-6 M.. 53 6 S9 5 57.5 57.5 21 31 5 (1 78) (1.46) ML 53 ft S7 <) 56 9 61 3 16 7 30 8 C? S8) (3.21) MLrP 52 S4 4 62 8 63 4 22 2 33 3 C? 9S) (3 . 14) MrP 39 7 4S ,7 67 8 66 3 28 2 32 3 (| 81) (1 76) 34 8 40 9 63.8 55.9 19.0 26.5 a .53) (1.32) 1936] CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS 217 Ed ^ (fl "t3 x iS > U a H o U c b ^ o .8 VO S 10 I 3 1 CQ H e Q c <~z~ p o a 3OOOO lO^^^'-" CM o O CM o oo O "I O t t^ O *> ' CM Tf VO 00 O -* CM ' ^- CM ^ CM OOf^iOO t^OO*O Ov X ~: "". OO O i < - 1 CM CM ^ ^ H O OOOO >O O CM OO CM OO OOOOO CM JJ J g 218 BULLETIN No. 425 [July, TABLE 57. JOLIET FIELD: LEGUME AND SOIL-TREATMENT COMBINATION TEST RED CLOVER vs. ALFALFA IN ROTATION Present rotation: Corn, barley, wheat, legume (clover or alfalfa) (Average crop yields 1924-1935 in bushels or (tons) per acre) Treatment systems Corn 12 crops Barley 10 crops Leg- All crops Wheat 11 crops ume hay 10 crops Yield index ible nu- 1924- trients 1935 1932- 1935 RL, red clover 30.0 37.4 41.9 36.9 36.4 39.7 40.3 42.5 36.6 35.0 27 31 33 27 28 33 33 34 28 28 4 3 3 7 2 9 7 2 1 4 17 22 22 18 18 24 23 23 19 21 8 5 4 3 7 5 7 7 1 ( ( ( (1 (1 (1 (1 ( .61) .97) .98) 71) .78) 43) 63) 66) 13) 93) 983 1 239 1 306 1 094 1 107 1 402 1 436 1 465 1 300 1 146 .899 .133 .194 .000 .966 .223 .253 .278 1.134 1.000 .589 .830 .857 .633 .655 .884 .899 .928 .804 .685 RLrP, red clover RLrP, gypsum, red clover RL, red clover RL, alfalfa RLrP, alfalfa RLrPL, alfalfa RLrP, KC1, alfalfa.. RL, KC1. alfalfa.. RL, alfalfa TABLE 58. JOLIET FIELD: PHOSPHATE TESTS (Average crop yields per acre 1910-1935 in bushels or (tons) )' Treatments Wheat 4 crops Buck- wheat 1 crop Red- clover 1 crop Alfalfa 1 crop Digest- Yield ible b index nutrients 7 7 crops crops Rock phosphate of different finenesses (total acre-application, 1,500 pounds) None 19 1 11 s (? 83) (2 40) 1 353 1.000 99% thru 100-mesh 25 1 IS 8 n 88) (3.49) 1 855 1.371 91% thru 100-mesh 24 17 6 (4 11) (3 22) 1 837 1.358 87% thru 100-mesh 24 S 17 6 (4 08) (3 59) 1 891 1 398 62% thru 100-mesh . .. 24 5 15 .5 (3 71) (3.60) 1 828 1.351 Rock phosphate applied at different rates None 19 1 12 3 (2 86) (2 26) 1 341 1.000 500 pounds per acre . . 20 5 13 9 (3 50) (2 38) 1 501 1.119 1,000 pounds per acre. . . . . . 24.3 16.2 (3.93) (2.90) 1 756 1.309 2,000 pounds per acre. . . . . . 26.4 17.3 (3.82) (3.48) 1 887 1.407 4.000 pounds per acre. . . . . . 27.0 15.8 (3.84) (3.84) 1 952 1.456 Phosphate carriers applied in amounts representing approximately money values None 15 7 9 9 (2 76) (2 32) 1 231 1.000 Rock (1,892 pounds) 6 . . 20.6 16.7 (3.64) (3.31) 1 673 1.359 Bone (984 pounds) . . 22.2 14.4 (3 . 75) (3.14) 1 698 1.379 Super (698 pounds) Treble (510 pounds) . . 25.0 . . 26.9 14.8 16.1 (3.94) (3.77) (2.90) (3.00) 1 771 1 818 1.439 1.477 Average of 5 replicates. b Wheat failed in 1934. 'Total amounts applied. 1936} CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS 219 TABLE 59. KEWANEE FIELD: COMPARISON OF SOIL-TREATMENT SYSTEMS Present rotations: Manure system Corn, oats, clover, wheat; Residues system Corn, corn, oats (Le), wheat (Le) (Average crop yields 1915-1935 in bushels or (tons) per acre) All crops Treatment systems Corn 19 crops Oats 19 crops Clover 17 crops Wheat 16 crops Digestible nutrients Yield index 1915- 1932- crops crops crops crops nutrients 1915- 1935 1932- 1935 . . 55.9 55.0 (1.55) 28.1 1 773 1.000 .972 M 69.7 66.9 (2.21) 32.4 2 197 1.239 1.262 ML 74.3 68.6 (2.37) 35.3 2 332 1.315 1.398 MLrP 75.3 67.6 (2.53) 39.7 2 457 1.386 1.446 . . 56.4 56.8 (1.69) a 29.0 1 746 1.000 1.117 R 61.8 56.0 (1.38) a 31.5 1 784 1.022 1.274 RL 69.0 59.3 (1.62) a 34.4 1 955 1.120 1.338 RLrP ...... 71.9 64.9 (1.86) a 39.8 2 113 1.210 1.377 RLrPK.... 73.6 66.1 (1.92) a 40.9 2 171 1.243 1.344 a Average of 14 crops. TABLE 60. KEWANEE FIELD: PHOSPHATE-CARRIER TESTS ROCK vs. SUPER PHOSPHATE W r ITH AND WITHOUT LIMESTONE Present rotation: Corn, corn, oats (Le), wheat (Le) (Average crop yields 1922-1935 in bushels or (tons) per acre) Treatment systems Corn 14 crops Oats 14 crops Wheat 13 crops Clover 11 crops All crops Digestible nutrients Yield index R 63 2 55.7 66.1 67.9 67.3 69.2 29.4 40.8 42 .1 38.7 44.1 (1.35) (2.51) (2.44) (2.47) (2.49) 1 817 2 394 2 390 2 395 2 455 1.000 1.318 1.315 1.318 1.351 RrP.. 75.2 RsP ... 74.1 RLrP 76 7 RLsP ... 76.6 "Check plot n main residues system used for comparisons 220 BULLETIN No. 425 [/H/V, TABLE 61. KEWANEE FIELD: PHOSPHATE TESTS (Average crop yields 1928-1935" in bushels or (tons) per acre) Treatments Oats 1 crop Wheat 3 crops Red clover 2 crops Alfalfa 1 crop Digest- ible 15 nutrients 7 crops Yield index 7 crops Rock phosphate of different finenesses (total acre-application, 1,500 pounds) None 74.7 82.1 76.4 74.8 76.4 25.9 36.5 35.2 36.7 33.0 (3.72) (4.54) (4.32) (4.60) (4.42) (2.00) (2.16) (2.25) (2.25) (1.79) 2 191 2 704 2 606 2 717 2 523 1.000 1.234 1.189 1.240 1.152 99% thru 100-mesh 91% thru 100-mesh 82% thru 100-mesh 62% thru 100-mesh Rock phosphate applied at different rates None 70.7 80.6 78.7 76.5 76.4 26.9 32.8 36.8 40.7 41.9 (3.30) (3.66) (3.95) (4.25) (4.21) (2.30) (2.34) (2.50) (2.61) (2.63) 2 113 2 382 2 570 2 750 2 766 1.000 1.127 1.216 1.301 1.309 500 pounds per acre 1 ,000 pounds per acre 2,000 pounds per acre 4,000 pounds per acre Phosphate carriers applied in amounts representing approximately money values None 71.0 78.1 77.0 75.9 81.9 26.0 37.7 36.2 38.2 36.9 (3.06) (4.01) (3.76) (3.58) (3.60) (2.57) (2.65) (2.92) (2.72) (2.65) 2 062 2 626 2 555 2 510 2 501 1.000 1.274 1.239 1.217 1.213 Rock (1,892 pounds) Bone (984 pounds) Super (698 pounds) Treble (510) pounds) "Average of 5 replicates. b \Vheat failed in 1934. "Total amounts applied. 1936] CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS 221 TABLE 62. KEWANEE FIELD: PHOSPHATE TESTS Crop: Continuous winter wheat (Average crop yields 1932-1935* in bushels per acre) Treatments Wheat 1932 Wheat 1933 Wheat 1935 average Rock phosphate of different finenesses (total acre-application, 150 pounds) None 42.8 22.6 11.4 25.6 99% thru 100-mesh (A) 47.6 25.8 20.3 31.2 99% thru 100-mesh (B) 46.0 24.6 23.5 31.4 91% thru 100-mesh 44.8 22.6 17.8 28 4 82% thru 100-mesh 45.9 24.4 22.4 30 9 62% thru 100-mesh 43.7 25.5 22 7 30 6 Finely ground limestone 42.4 23.4 8.6 24.8 Pure chemical carriers (10 pounds elemental phosphorus annually) None 15. 9 C 24.4 12.2 17.5 Finely ground limestone 16.0 22.8 10.6 16 5 Monocalcium phosphate 16.9 35.0 36.3 29 4 Dicalcium phosphate . .. 17.1 32 6 30 6 26 8 Tricalcium phosphate 17 5 32 6 34 7 28 3 Monomagnesium phosphate . 17 6 36 5 28 5 27 5 Monosodium phosphate 16.4 32.3 33.5 27.4 Monoammonium phosphate 18.0 33.9 32.3 28.1 Average of 5 replicates, following plots. b Wheat failed in 1934. 'Spring wheat on this and TABLE 63. LEBANON FIELD: COMPARISON OF SOIL-TREATMENT SYSTEMS Present rotation: Corn, oats, wheat, clover-alfalfa (Average crop yields 1910-1935 in bushels or (tons) per acre) Treatment Co systems crops Oats 16 crops Wheat 30 crops Leg- ume hay 12 crops Soy- All crops bean hay 9 crops Digest- ible nu- trients Yield index 1910- 1935 1932- 1935 . . 21 .4 .0 .2 .5 .0 3 .8 .9 31.4 41.3 46.6 44.9 28.1 32.7 48.6 49.4 54.3 31.6 41.4 45.5 44.3 35.8 37.8 48.6 48.5 51.2 (1 (2 (3 (3 (1 (1 (2 (2. (2 .83) .63) .69) .87) .57) .52) .50) 67) .75) (1.12) (1.58) (1-81) (1.86) (1.26) (1.32) (1.45) (1.52) (1.71) 1 299 1 705 2 033 2 028 1 150 1 256 1 650 1 712 1 808 1.000 1.313 1 .565 1.561 1.000 1.092 1.435 1.489 1.572 1.062 1.520 1.968 1.978 1.377 1.397 1.993 2.045 2.104 M 26 ML 30 MLrP 31 22 R 23 RL 29 RLrP 29 RLrPK . ... 29 222 BULLETIN No. 425 [/ TABLE 64. LEBANON FIELD: COMPARISON OF FERTILIZERS USED AS SUPPLEMENTS TO SOIL-TREATMENT SYSTEMS Present rotation: Corn, oats, wheat, clover-alfalfa (Average crop yields 1932-1935 in bushels or (tons) per acre) Treatment systems Corn Oats Wheat Hay All crops Digestible nutrients Yield, index Section A No supplementary treatment .. 48.6 40.8 54.8 58.2 57.6 51.5 50.0 58.7 61.3 62.8 52.9 26.5 33.2 35.7 35.2 27.2 29.3 34.4 31.9 34.1 27.7 ( .76) (2.00) (4.20) (4.38) (1.87) (1.60) (3.14) (3.49) (3.38) (2.02) 1 380 1 975 2 556 2 569 1 583 1 607 2 292 2 352 2 420 1 687 .000 .431 .852 .862 .000 .015 .448 1.486 1.529 1.000 M 56.8 ML 53.2 MLrP 51.8 43.0 R 49.9 RL 56.4 RLrP 55.1 RLrPK . . 60.7 47.7 Section B Rock phosphate rP. ., 45.0 40.1 58.1 60.4 56.5 50.5 48.2 56.9 57.8 63.4 56.0 27.8 35.5 35.5 35.4 29.1 29.8 32.4 35.2 35.5 30.1 ( .68) (2.40) (4.23) (4.47) (1.99) (1.93) (3.30) (3.52) (3.37) (2.48) 1 334 2 090 2 513 2 558 1 630 1 660 2 216 2 355 2 431 1 892 .967 1.514 1.821 1.854 1.030 1.049 1.400 1.488 1.536 1.122 M + rP 53.4 ML + rP 48.7 MLrP + rP 49.1 rP. .. 43.0 R + rP 47.2 RL + rP 49.1 RLrP + rP 52.8 RLrPK + rP. . 60.0 rP 51.2 1936] CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS 223 TABLE 64. LEBANON FIELD, Concluded Treatment systems All crops Corn Oats Wheat Hay Digestible nutrients Yield index Section C Superphosphate sP . 39.1 36.4 56.0 59.4 56.3 47.5 46.8 57.6 59.0 65.2 53.8 27.6 32.1 33.8 33.6 31.1 32.2 32.8 34.4 37.3 29.4 ( -76) (2.47) (4.35) (4.70) (2.02) (1.61) (3.24) (3.50) (3.39) (2.54) 1 262 2 044 2 493 2 509 1 613 1 591 2 198 2 290 2 397 1 917 .914 1.481 1.807 1.818 1.019 1.005 1.389 1.447 1.514 1.136 M + sP 53.0 ML + sP . . . 46.1 MLrP + sP 42 5 sP 40.0 R + sP . 46.7 RL + sP . 48.1 RLrP + sP 47 8 RLrPK + sP 53.9 sP 53.8 Section D Mixed fertilizer (2-12-6) M.F.. 41.8 37.9 53.0 53.0 54.7 46.1 43.1 56.4 60.7 65.0 47.5 26.7 32.3 31.6 32.0 30.7 31.8 33.4 33.1 34.6 31.0 ( .98) (2.65) (4.60) (4.64) (1-79) (1.58) (3.33) (3.52) (3.51) (2.50) 1 352 2 098 2 588 2 537 1 588 1 599 2 274 2 314 2 370 1 902 .980 1.520 1.875 1.838 1.003 1.010 1.437 1.462 1.497 1.127 M + M.F 54.4 ML + M.F 52.7 MLrP + M.F 46.8 M.F.. 44.4 R + M.F 50.4 RL + M.F 52.6 RLrP + M.F 48.8 RLrPK + M.F. . 51.4 M.F 54.8 224 BULLETIN Xo. 425 TABLE 65. LEBANON FIELD: SOIL-TREATMENT SYSTEMS FOR POTATO ROTATION Present rotation: Potatoes, wheat (Le) (Average crop yields 1925-1935 in bushels per acre) Treatment systems Potatoes 11 crops Wheat 10 crops LeM.. 63 4 33 LesP 68.3 34.1 LerP 59.8 34.4 LesPK. . . . 61.3 34.8 LerPK 60.2 34.4 Le, straw 107 4 32 2 LesP, straw 128.1 33.4 LerP, straw 126.5 32.3 Le, treble superphosphate 63.9 34.6 Le, potassium phosphate 72.2 31.3 TABLE 66. McNABB FIELD: COMPARISON OF SOIL-TREATMENT SYSTEMS Present rotation: Corn, oats, wheat, clover (Average crop yields 1907-1935 in bushels or (tons) per acre) Treatment systems Corn 27 crops Oats 26 crops Wheat 25 crops Legume hay 25 crops All crops Digestible nutrients Yield index 1907- 1935 1932- 1935 R. . 67.7 60.4 65.6 63.3 66.8 63.9 61.6 31.6 34.7 33.3 35. 6 33. 9 30.9 (1.73)- (1.76)- (2.49) (2.70) (2.57) (2.35) 2 363 2 366 2 498 2 083 1 915 2 049 .946 .947 1.000 1.017 .935 1.000 .797 .865 .847 1.290 1.291 1.189 RrP 73.4 . 70.6 MrP. . . 74.6 M . 71.2 . 69.3 Average of 24 crops. 1936] CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS 225 TABLE 67. MINONK FIELD: COMPARISON OF SOIL-TREATMENT SYSTEMS Present rotations: Manure system Corn, corn, oats, clover-alfalfa; Residues system Corn, corn, oats (Le), wheat (Le) (Average crop yields 1910-1935 in bushels or (tons) per acre) Corn Treatment 1st yr. systems 23 crops Corn 2dyr. 11 crops Oats 23 crops Leg- All crops Wheat 21 crops ume hay 9 crops Digest- ible nu- trients Yield index 1910- 1935 1932- 1935 .. 49 .4 .9 ,2 ,4 ,0 .8 ,3 ,9 3 50.6 57.5 55.8 55.1 46.8 58.4 58.6 57.9 56.0 55.9 58.4 56.4 55.4 52.4 57.6 57.7 58.3 58.6 29.9" 33.2" 31.5" 33. O a 28.3 31.0 28.5 30.4 30.1 (2. (2 (2, (2 (1 (1 (1 (1 (1 ,50) b ,79) b 72) b 81) b .68) .75) 69) 69) 59) 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 965 205 190 197 591 816 806 839 789 1.000 1. 122 1.114 1.118 1.000 1.141 1.135 1.156 1.124 1.032 1.174 1.123 1.150 .897 1.062 1.072 1.084 1.083 M . . . . 59 ML 61 MLrP 61 . . . . 49 R . . . . 58 RL 61 RLrP 61 RLrPK ... 60 a Average of 19 crops. b Average of 11 crops. TABLE 68. MINONK FIELD: NITROGEN FERTILIZER TESTS SODIUM NITRATE AND AMMONIUM SULFATE COMBINATIONS APPLIED AS SUPPLEMENTS TO SYSTEMS OF SOIL TREATMENT Present rotations: Manure system Corn, corn, oats, clover-alfalfa; Residues system Corn, corn, oats (Le), wheat (Le) (Average crop yields 1928-1935 in bushels per acre) Treatment systems Increases for nitrogen* fertilizers Corn 1st year 7 crops Corn 2d year 5 crops Oats 5 crops Wheat 8 crops .. 2.4 -.9 -.8 4.3 -.7 1.0 .1 3.4 1.1 3.2 1.2 3.2 -1.0 1.0 2.5 3.5 .9 3.2 1.2 3.3 b 4.5 4.2 b 5.1 b 4.6 2.3 2.1 .7 1.7 M 2.9 ML .2 MLrP .9 . . 1.2 R .5 RL .0 RLrP -.5 RLrPK 1.0 Nitrogen applied to corn and wheat in the form of ammonium sulfate and sodium nitrate. b Six crops. 226 BULLETIN No. 425 [July, TABLE 69. MT. MORRIS FIELD: COMPARISON OF SOIL-TREATMENT SYSTEMS Present rotations: Manure system Corn, oats, clover, wheat; Residues system Corn, corn, oats (Le), wheat (Le) (Average crop yields 1910-1935 in bushels or (tons) per acre) A 11 crops Treatment Corn 23 Oats 23 Clover 15 V\ heat 21 Yield index crops crops crops crops nutrients 1910- 1935 1932- 1935 . . 47.5 53.9 (1 . 74)* 20.4 1 641 1.000 .874 M . 63.8 63.4 (2.29) 24.8 2 045 1.246 1.237 ML . 69.6 67.2 (2.76) 30.0 2 248 1.370 1.333 MLrP 69.0 67.8 (2.68)- 31.1 2 243 1.367 1.324 . . 45.1 49.3 (1.63) 20.2 1 478 1.000 .951 R . 53.1 53.1 (1.57) 21.8 1 578 1.068 1.153 RL. . . 64.4 63.2 (2.05) 27.8 1 917 1.297 1.367 RLrP . 66.9 64.6 (2.06) 30.7 1 981 1.340 1.415 RLrPK . 68.6 65.5 (2.15) 31.7 2 048 1.386 1.497 Average of 3 crops. TABLE 70. MT. MORRIS FIELD: COMPARISON OF SOIL-TREATMENT SYSTEMS Present rotation: Corn, barley, clover-alfalfa, alfalfa (4 years) (Average crop yields 1921-1935 in bushels or (tons) per acre) Treatment systems Corn 15 crops Barley 15 crops Clover- alfalfa 8 crops Alfalfa 18 crops All crops Digestible nutrients Yield index 1921- 1935 1932- 1935 . . . 65.1 34.1 40.3 48.7 48.6 (2.16) (2.48) (3.49) (3.51) (2.13) (2.42) (3.64) (3.78) 2 141 2 390 3 022 3 058 1.000 1.116 1.411 1.428 .922 1.022 1.202 1.188 M 68 9 ML . 74.4 MLrP . 72.6 1936] CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS 227 TABLE 71. MT. MORRIS FIELD: ROTATION TEST COMPARATIVE EFFECTS OF TIMOTHY, SOYBEANS, RED CLOVER, AND ALFALFA Present rotation: Corn, oats and either timothy, soybeans, red clover, or alfalfa (Average crop yields 1928-1935 in bushels or (tons) per acre) Treatment systems Corn 6 crops Oats 5 crops Hay 6 crops All crops Digestible nutrients Yield index L, timothy 50.1 53.0 56.4 55.5 58.4 58.7 59.2 56.7 58.4 (1.00) (1.16) (3.27) (3.16) (2.93) (2.65) (2.49) (2.45) 1 487 1 654 2 664 2 611 2 540 2 451 2 073 2 103 1.000 1.112 1.792 1.756 1.708 1.648 1.394 1.414 LrP, timothy ... 55.7 L, red clover 68 LrP, red clover ... 66.0 L, alfalfa. . 69.5 LrP, alfalfa 70.0 L, soybeans 60.8 LrP, soybeans . .. 62.7 TABLE 72. -NEWTON FIELD: COMPARISON OF SOIL-TREATMENT SYSTEMS Present rotation: Corn, oats (Le), wheat (Le), redtop (4 years) (Average crop yields 1912-1935 in bushels or (tons) per acre) Treatment systems Corn 28 crops Oats 9 crops Wheat 24 crops Soy- beans 12 crops All crops Hay 9 crops Digest- ible nu- trients Yield index 1912- 1935 1932- 1935 . . 11.6 9.9 19.7 31.0 32.1 10.9 10.7 22.6 25.4 26.6 .8 2.7 15.0 20.3 1.7 1.8 9.9 16.0 21.9 5.6 7.8 11.7 12.7 5.4 4.7 8.1 9.2 10.0 ( -57) ( .66) (1.18) (1.43) ( .52) ( .61) (1.00) (1.03) (1.52) 375 592 1 101 1 229 328 340 641 749 990 1.000 1.579 2.936 3.277 1.000 1.037 1.954 2.284 3.018 1.200 1.920 3.427 3.715 1.259 1.152 1.637 1.756 3.262 M . 18.9 ML . 29.9 MLrP . 29.4 11.6 R . 11.7 RL . 16.9 RLrP . 17.0 RLrPK . 24.7 228 BULLETIN No. 425 8 _ o>2 5 IIISl 5^i S 23 1 B B \ ^2 fS /l O O Q O O <*) i** f* Q ^01/1^*0 O 00 ^r*^* O Ov^OOOCOC O CN'O^t" a z tic limestone j I ^ u = i|, c n 3'S u go lO^OOO f* OO^-CSro Op ^*f*)OOr^X fN ^''OOO^f** O O CT> *O t"- ^ O ^P*30O*^; " t2 Dolomi 1 S I tn gL J u a w ~"1 "^ ^~i O 000^*0*^ O *OiO^O>Of^ O* OOO-<^ O Hi - < ~ =- d a a - & 3" * o *O ^OOOOO^O^I O 1 tOOOO^O'O <*? ^t^oOt***^ 1 O* en jj? . B Yield ind ss I iias i sssas i ^m i LIMESTO beans, wh ;lds 1913- estone ' 1 e B ^ ^^^0000 ^* O>^OvO*O* i' OO^*O^^ i/l Si* _b E ^ t. !-& -o,o -, oo ocooo-oa W ^ o ^ o> bo Z 5 fc igh-calci 1 f - r,~ Ll ^ | -i --J-M ' <^r4^^ P > 1 a < Jj O a w -.5 -=-i e g, t^vO'0'00 t^vOr^l-t^ a 00 ^ O 1 1 *>' = a H CO C" o u tSfSCMtN 2 * ^g O o^ ^ CO f5 O OO *! OO O O >0 O O IT) lO <5 ^H -H CM fN tN O Tjt rt <>) \O o o NO 10 r* O -H -H ^-. ro c ~ln i s s >> >< NO ^ - ^ z is a J) U- (J S rt o) < ^"^ cu d a < J CO c S.2 II Illl C/5 "o 4J en -i > CS O) *^~ 10 o^ ^^ OO 00 O ro 10 OO * 10 \o 10 00^- '-i -H CN CN O UO ON O to OO co ON <* -H ^H 1^ \O OO J 03 rt CN J=(M 2 oo CN oo ON O i-l NO NO *O ^ 5 2 u - 5 ' S ^ s 10 CJ co \ ON p S. c rt uo o OO PO t^ rt O <* OO O\ CN ON "0 -H 1C O-*0 00 J i U So a * 5.1 SJ . -s< = o ISP 5 E^S, O *-H \O 10 O ro co Tfi OO ON CM CO Tj< ON NO O - O !i cS^2 U o ON t^r^ t^ i 67) MLP 40 1924-193512 years None 22 9 28.9 53.0 30. 62. 9 36. 58. 2 9 54. 81. 7 4 (1. (3. 27) 12) MLP 42 TABLE 88. URBANA, SOUTH FARM: COMPARISON OF SOIL-TREATMENT SYSTEMS, SOUTHWEST ROTATION Rotation: Corn, oats, clover, wheat (Le) (Average crop yields 1903-1935 in bushels or (tons) per acre) Treatment systems Corn 33 crops Oats 33 crops Wheat 30 crop's Clover hay, 15 crops Clover seed 10 crops Soy- bean hay, 14 crops Soy- bean seed 9 crops RrP. . 62.2 53.7 39.4 (2.02) a 1.03 (2.55) a 20.3 R . 57.0 47.2 30.0 (1.81) a 1.11 (2.31) a 18.8 M . 60.8 53.1 31.5 (2.13) (1.79) MrP . 62.6 57.7 39.4 (2.51) (2.03) Corn 25 crops Oats 24 crops Wheat 24 crops Clover hay, 9 crops Clover seed 6 crops Soy- bean hay, 11 crops Soy- bean seed 7 crops RLrP . 65 8 56 1 38 1 1 12 (2 64) a 21 R. . 55 4 49 8 28 6 1 06 (2 38) a 19 2 M . 59.0 58.3 29.8 (1.99) (1.85) MLrP . 64.9 61.9 39.1 (2.44) (2.19) "Average of four years. 240 BULLETIN No. 425 {.July, TABLE 89. URBANA, SOUTH FARM: COMPARISON OF SOIL-TREATMENT SYSTEMS, NORTH-CENTRAL ROTATION Rotation: Corn, corn, oats, clover (Average crop yields 1903-1935 in bushels or (tons) per acre) Treatment systems Corn 1st year 33 crops Corn 2d year crops Oats 30 crops Clover hay, 20 crops Clover seed 16 crops Soy- bean hay, 10 crops Soy- bean seed 14 crops RrP.. . . 58.7 53.1 56.2 (2.39) .60 19 7 R . . 54.0 47.7 50.6 (2.07) .53 18 7 M . . 56.5 52.1 53.6 (1.54) (1 62) 23 4 a MrP . . 59.9 56.6 58.2 (1.81) (1-67) 26.0- Average of four years. TABLE 90. URBANA, SOUTH FARM: COMPARISON OF SOIL-TREATMENT SYSTEMS, SOUTH-CENTRAL ROTATION Rotation: Corn, corn, corn, soybeans (Average crop yields 1903-1935 in bushels or (tons) per acre) Corn Corn Corn Soybeans Treatment 1st year 2d year 3d year 30 systems 33 33 33 crops crops crops crops RrP 51 1 45 4 43 8 22 5 R 46.4 42.5 39.5 21.1 M 50.9 47.2 41.2 (1.83) MrP 53.2 49.7 45.0 (1.89) CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS 241 TMENT SYSTEM H x rt Z JS os > < 'I ^ U S = Q S- J cd ON E II s u '^ W c o ^l g ^ 5 o rt fe 05 g W < O. JJ .-9c a. S8 5 - s O - O - CM O t^ O* ~- CM . : :cu -cucu o'SSS i 242 BULLETIN No. 425 [July, INDEX TO FERTILIZER AND TREATMENT MATERIALS MINERAL FERTILIZERS TABLES Lime Carriers Limestone Standard on most fields Influence on crop values, digestible nutrients, and productivity levels 22 Comparative tests 37, 57, 73 Nitrogen Carriers Ammonium sulfate 68 Sodium nitrate 52, 68, 80, 86 Phosphorus Carriers Bone phosphate 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 46, 54, 58, 60, 61, 75, 78, 82 Rock phosphate Standard On most fields Influence on crop values, di- gestible nutrients, and productivity levels 23 Rates of application 58, 61 Fineness of grinding 58, 61, 62 Slag phosphate 31 Superphosphate 30, 31, 37, 42, 44, 46, 50, 52, 54, 58, 60, 61, 64, 65, 75, 78, 80, 82, 86 Treble superphosphate 37, 55, 58, 61, 65 Comparison of carriers 30, 31, 33, 34, 37, 42, 46, 50, 52, 54, 55, 58, 60, 61, 62, 64, 65, 75, 78, 80, 82, 86 Potassium Carriers Kainit Was standard on most fields prior to 1932 Potassium chlorid Standard on most fields since 1932 Influence on crop values, digestible nutrients, and productivity levels 24 Potassium sulfate 32, 33, 34, 35 Comparison of carriers 44, 52, 75, 80, 82, 86 Mixed Fertilizers 38, 42, 44, 52, 55, 64, 80 Miscellaneous Materials Gypsum 57 ORGANIC MANURES Animal Manures Regular application On most fields Amounts applied and influence on crop values, digestible nutri- ents, and productivity levels. 20 Residual effect 52, 55, 70 Crop Residues Combinations Standard on most fields Influence on crop values, digestible nutrients, and productivity levels 21 Cornstalks 47 Grain straws 47, 52, 65, 83, 84 Green manures Alfalfa.. 57, 71 Comparison of legumes 50, 57, 71 Hubam clover 29, 30, 31, 53, 54, 59, 60, 65, 67, 68, 69, 72, 79, 80 1936} CROP YIELDS FROM ILLINOIS SOIL EXPERIMENT FIELDS 243 TABLES Lespedeza Seeded with Hubam and sweet clover on most southern fields since 1930 and most northern fields since 1934 Red clover 50, 57, 71 Soybeans 71 Sweet clover Standard on most fields SPECIAL EXPERIMENTS Legumes vs. nonlegume residues 47 Special phosphate studies 58, 61, 62 Effect of various hay crops on soil productivity 71 SUMMARIES BY INDIVIDUAL CROPS Corn (first year) 1934 yields 1 1935 yields 7 4-year period ending in 1935 13, 18 Corn (second year) 1934 yields 2 1935 yields 8 Four-year period ending in 1935 . . 14 Oats 1934 yields 4 1935 yields 10 Four-year period ending in 1935. .16, 18 Wheat 1934 yields 3 1935 yields 9 Four-year period ending in 1935. .15, 18 Hay 1934 yields 6 1935 yields 12 Four-year period ending in 1935. .17, 18 Soybeans 1934 yields 5 1935 yields 11 ECONOMIC INTERPRETATIONS Four- Year Period Ending in 1935 19, 25, 26, 27 "ERSITYOFILLINOIS-URBANA