W-y^' :-v^v J \ J BULLETIN NO. 162 FEBRUARY, 1912 ALABAMA Agricultural Experiment Station OF THE Alabama Polytechnic institute AUBURN Local Fertilizer Experiments With Cotton in North Alabama in 1911 BY .i. J. F. DUGGAR -iV J. T. WILLIAMSON L. L. GLOVER and E. HODSON Opelika, Ala. Post Publishing Company 1912 COMMITTEE OF TRUSTEES OX EXPERIMEXT STATIOX. Hon. R. F. Koi.b Montgomery Hon. H. L. Martin O^ark Hon. a. W. Bku \nniston STATION STAI-F. C. C. Th.vcii President of the College J. F. DuGGAR Director and Agriculturist B. B. Ross Chemist and State Chemist -C. A. Cakv Veterinarian and Director Farmcr.s' Institutes J. T. Anderson Chemist, Soil and Crop Investigations Dan T. Gray Animal Industry W. E. Hinds Entomologist F. E. Lloyd Botanist P. F. Williams Horticulturist C. L. Hare Chemist L. N. Duncan'" Superintendent of Extension Work F. A. Wolf Plant Pathologist T. Bragg First Assistant Chemist E. I'". Cal'Then Associate Agriculturist and Recorder W. F. Ward* Junior Animal IIusl)andman I. S. McAdory Assistant in Veterinary Science "VV. F. Turner Assistant in Entomology 'M. F. FuNCHESS Assistant Agriculturist J. B. Hobdy* ...•..., Assistant in Extension Work 'C S. Ridgvvay Assistant in Botany J. C. C. Price Assistant in Horticulture L. W. Shook Assistant in Animal Industry E. R. EuDALY* Assistant in Beef and Swine Industry J. T. Williamson Field Agent in Agriculture L. L. Glover Field Agent in Agriculture li M. Conolly Field Assistant in Horticulture ■O H. Sellars Secretary to Director J. Cohen Assistant in Chemistry "I. W. Carpenter Field Assistant in Entomology 1. W. Summers Assistant in Animal Lulustry S S. Jerdan* Assistant in Beef Industry A. R. Gissendanner Assistant in Swine Husbandry ■C. D. Allis Assistant Ir Poultry *In Co-operation with U. S. Department of Agriculture. LOCAL FERTILIZER EXPERIMENTS WITH COTTON IN NORTH ALABAMA IN 1911 By By J. F. DuGGAR, J. T. Williamson', L. L. Glover, E. IIodson. The chief object of these local fertilizer experiments or soil tests has been to ascertain the best fertilizer or combination of fertilizers for cotton, growing on each cjf the principal soils of the northern half of Alabama. The results recorded in this bulletin were obtained in fer- tilizer experiments conducted with the funds provided by the Legislature of Alabama in February, 1911. This bulletin deals only with fertilizer experiments carried to a conclusion in 1911 in the northern half of the State. For convenience the counties grouped together in this bulletin are those lying wholly north of the Central Prairie or Lime Region of Central Alabama. The results of fertilizer experiments made in the counties lying wholly or partly south of the Central Prairie Region ap- peared in Rulletin No. 160, issued by this Station in December, 1911. L-ocal fertilizer tests constitute only one of many lines of experiments instituted in 1911 by the Alabama Experiment Station with the support of state funds, none of which were available for experimental work prior to the present year. Local fertilizer experiments as now conducted are made on the farnis of farmers especially recommended as being men likely to take the necessary pains to secure accurate results. These experiments, located all over the State, are visited and supervised by representatives of the Experiment Station, who are expected to select and measure ,thc land, make periodic visits, and take notes on the progress gmd. results of the experi- ment, and, so far .as practicable, assist in harvesting the crop. ■However, the late date at which this work was begun in 1911, the fact that many farmers had already fertilized their most suitable land before being invited to make the^e experiments, and the necessary delay in securing tlif: services of. the men who were to supervise these experiments, resulted in many cases in the selection of land and of locations which later proved' not entirely satisfactory. It is expected that in future the per- centage of conclusive and satisfactory experiments will be larger- However, no increase can be made in the total number of fertilizer experiments. Small lots of carefully weighed and mixed fertilizers were supplied to each experimenter. Detailed instructions as to- how to conduct the experiment and blank forms for report- ing results were also furnished. Representatives of t)ie Sta- tion inspected from one to three times all of the experiments here published except one. The following list gives the name and address of each- experimenter who has reported the; results of fertilizer ex- periments made in 1911 in the part of the State indicated, together with the page of this bulletin where the results may be found. COUNTY POST OFFICE NAME Page Bibb Randolph M. J. Payne 54,56 Bibb Centerviile J. H. Thompson £4,55 Blount Oneonto \V. F. Tidwell 42 Calhoun Choccolocco J. G. Borders 33 Calhoun Jacksonville T. S. Weaver 32 Cherokee .Centre W. \\'. Ward 36- Chilton Clanton E. H. Parrish 54,55 Chilton Jemison J. D. C. Scott 54,55 Chilton Maplesville D. M. Foshee 14 Clay Ashland C. F. Striplin 54,56 Clay Ashland J. R. Carpenter 54,56 Clay Lineville A. Bell Cleburne Heflin J . \\'. Norton .54, 56 Colbert Tuscumbia G. H. Harris 50 Coosa Nixburg S. M. Day 9- Etowah Attalla W. A. Colvin 35- Franklin Russellville W. S. Douglas Jackson! Stevenson J. C. Tally 54,56 Jefferson Quinton_ ... \\". L. Peterson 31 Jefferson Birmingham, R. R.8.. .G. C. Depoister .29 Lamar Vernon E. Ward 24 Lamar Sulligent Jack ^^■oods 26 Lauderdale Florence W. R. Cox 47,48 Lauderdale Florence J. F. Underwood 48- Limestone Athens . . Eighth Dist. Agr. School .44. 45- COUNTY POST OFFICE NAME Page Limestone- Athens .Fletcher Barksdale 39 Madison Hiintsville W. W. Fox 51,55 Madison New Hope ..C. T. Butler ...51,55 Marion Glen Allen , W. P. Letson 51,52 Marshall ..Boaz L. O. Cox 41,42 Morgan. New Decatur L. L Pepper 55 Morgan . Hartselle... R. F. Orr 38 Pickens Aliceville G. C. Turnipseed 23 Pickens Ariceville J. D. Sanders ...21 Randolph Roanoke _J. T. Baird 15 Shelby ..Columbiana Henry Milner 16 Talladega Talladega.. J. C. Wallis 12 Talladega Childersburg \V. Boaz 11 Tallapoosa Da-ieville J. D. Williams... 52,53 Tallapoosa East Tallassee. T. S. Ruffin . . . 8 Tuscaloosa Tuscaloosa... W. D. Lewis 18 Tuscaloosa Tuscaloosa R. M. Snow 20 Walker Cordova ...G. L. Alexander . 28 M'alker . Jasper D. B. Lewis 27 Winston Nausoo D. C. Wakefield 45 Plans were made and fertilizers were supplied for experi- ments in the following localities, where, however, the experi- ments were not carried out or, if carried out, no results were re- ported. COUNTY POST OFFICE NAME Fayette ...-_-.. -Newtonville.. ..J. H. Sullivan Jackson Paint Rock W. E. Lester Lawrence Wheeler Garth Gilchrist Madison Madison ..J. B. Bronaugh St. Clair Steele J. M. Shaw The directions sent to each experimenter stated that the land employed for this test should be level and uniform, not manured in recent years, not in cowpeas the preceding year, and that it should be representative of large soil areas in its vicinity. The need of perfect uniformity and standard treat- ment for all plots (except as to kind of fertilizer used) was -emphasized. Fertilizers were applied in the usual manner — that is, drilled before planting, except nitrate of soda which was di- rected to be applied when the plants were 6 to 10 inches high. The Fertilizers Used. The following prices are used, as representing approx- imately the average cash price in local markets during the last few years : Per Ton. Acid phosphate (14 per cent, available) $14.00 Cotton seed meal $30.00 Kainit $14.00 Prices naturally vary in different localties. Any one can substitute the cost of fertilizers in his locality for the prices given above. In each experiment three plots were left unfertilized, these being plots 3, 7, and 11. When these yields differed widely the experiment was classed as inconclusive The increase on plots 4 to 6 is calculated on the assumption that the grada- tion in fertility is uniform from plots 3 to 7; likewise the increase is calculated for Plots 8 to 10 inclusive.* The fol- lowing- table shows what kind and amounts of fertilizers were used on certain plots; the number of pounds of nitro- gen, phosphoric acid, and potash supplied per acre by each fertilizer mixture; and the percentage composition and cost per ton of each mixture, the latter being given in order that these mixtures may be readily compared with various brands of prepared guanos. *In other words instead of calculating the increase merely by subtracting the yields of any plot from the average yield of the three unfertilized plots (which would be incorrect and mis- leading unless all three unfertilized plots afforded practically the same yield), the following method is used as a means of making allowance for variations in the natural fertility of the. different plots: — (-1). The difference between the yields of unfertilized plots 3 and 7, or between unfertilized plots 7 and 11 is divided by 4, because this difference must be distributed over the four, intervening plots. (2). This quotient is then added to the yield of the poor- est Of this unfertilized pair, thus giving the corrected or calcu- lated yield (if unfertilized), for the fertilized plot adjacent to the poorest unfertilized one. Similarly the yield of the poorest unfertilized plot is increased by twice and three times the abore quotient as a means of calculating the corrected unfertilized yield on the plots occupying respectively second and third, positions from the poorest unfertilized plot of the pair. (3) Now these calculated yields (if the plots were unfer- tilized) are subtracted in regular order from the corresponding actual yield, thus giving the most accurate measure known for the increase due to tie fertilizer. Pounds per acre of fertilizers, nitrogen, phosphoric acid, and^. potash used and composition of each mixture. o Z FERTILIZERS IP a o 9-» 10 12- i Lbs. 2u0 240 200 2(H) 240 20O 200 240 200 200 240 200 200 24(' 100 240 100 100 KIND MIXTURE CONTAINS o Cotton seed meal /// 100 ll's. c. s. meal* Acid phosphate /;/ 100 lbs. acid plios. Kainit /// 100 lbs. kainit Cotton seed meal Acid phosphate In 100 lbs. abo-cc mixt. Cotton seed meal Kainit _ /;/ 100 lbs. above 7ni.\t. Acid phosphate . Kainit /;/ 100 lbs. above mi.xt. Cotton seed meal Acid phosphate . _ Kainit /« 100 lbs. aboir mi.xt C'otton seed meal Acid phosphate Kainit In 100 lbs. above mixt Acid phosphate.. Kainit Nitrate of soda In 100 lbs. I a boar mixt Lbs 13.58 6.79 3.09 lo.5S 3.39 t o Li>s. 5.7b 2.88 36.12 15.0.S o 13.58 2.12 13.58 2.59 14.00 3.18 41.88 9.52 5, "76 1.44 8.21 41.88 6.54 41.88 7.75 15.05 8.20 Lbs 3 54 I 1.77 1 / \ 24.60 ) 12.30 \ 3.54 .80 28.14 / 7.03 \ 5 .59 \ 28.14 I 4.39 \ 15.84 / 2.93 \ 12.30 ^ 2.80 \ CU8T OF FERTILI- ZERS 0) 0) Dh $30.00 14.(0 14.00 21.27 22 00 13.99 19.00 20.13 22.17 $ 3.00 1.68 1.40- 4.68 4.40 3.08 6.08 5.38 4.88 ^Average of many analj'sis. tCounting all the phosphoric acid in cotton seed meal as available. Those farmers who are more accustomed to the word ammonia than to the term nitrogen, can change the figures for nitrogen into their ammonia equivalents b}'^ multiplying bj' 1 1'V Price Assumed for Seed Cotton. The price assuined is $14.00 per ton for seed, and 10 cents per pound lor lint- This is equal to 3.8 cents per pound of seed cotton turning out 33 3^3 per cent of lint. Deducting To cents per pound as the average cost of picking and ginning, and we have left 3.2 cents as the net value per pound of the increase of seed cotton due to fertilizers. This latter 8 TALLAPOOSA COUNTY, ^ MILE WEST OF EAST TALLASSEE. T. S. RUFFIN. Gray sandy loam, red clay subsoil. This is old land, and has been long in cultivation. There was no material damage from rust or insect injuries, The most profitable fertilizer was cotton seed meal applied alone, which afforded a profit of $10.57, or 302 per cent profit on the invest- ment in fertilizers. The average estimated increase of seed cottton per acre was 217 pounds for cotton seed meal. On the average there was a loss of 38 pounds for acid phosphate, and a gain of 92 pounds for kainit. Nitrate of soda applied June 20, was more eft'ective than was cotton seed meal. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 424 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 156 lbs. To kainit plot 196 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plo. 92 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 217 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 8 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot — 260 lbs. To kainit plot 102 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plot — 2 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate — 38 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot , US lbs. To cotton seed meal plot — HO l^s. To acid phosphate plot 212 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot 148 lbs. Average increase with kainit 92 lbs. Increase from use of different quantities of kainit: From use of 200 pounds kainit 148 lbs. From use of 100 pounds kainit 72 lbs. Increase from use of cotton seed meal 92 lbs. Increase from use of nitrate of soda 216 lbs. N itrate better by 124 lbs. Fertilizer experiments at Alexander City and East Tallassee Alexander City East Tallassee 6 Amount fertili- zer per acre KIND Yield seed cotton per acre Increase over unfertilized plot E 0 k. u *- 0) '■^ rE 2 r Yield seed cotton per cotton Increase over unfertilized plot e 2 *- 2 c Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. 1 200 Cotton seed meal 672 128 $1.10 1112 424 SI0.57 2 240 Acid phosphate. 640 96 1.39 696 8 —1.42 3 000 200 200 240 No fertilizer _ 544 576 904 "so 456 '"i"i6 9.91 688 808 856 118 164 4 Kainit 2.38 5J Cotton seed meal Acid phosphate.- 0.57 •6 j 200 200 Cotton seed meal Kainit .. } 696 296 5.07 1008 314 5.65 7 000 240 200 No fertilizer. .. 352 1064 690 19.00 696 912 220 M Acid phosphate.. Kainit 1 3.96 I 200 Cotton seed meal i 1 '1 240 Acid phosphate.. 1168 772 18.62 1000 312 3.90 200 Kainit \ .oj 200 Cotton seed meal } 240 Acid phosphate.. { 1064 646 15.29 920 236 2.17 i 100 Kainit 11 000 240 No fertilizer. 440 680 Acid phosphate.. ] 12] 100 100 Kainit Nitrate of soda .. . 928 488 10.74 1040 360 6.64 COOSA COUNTY, 13 MILES SOUTHWEST OF ALEX- ANDER CITY. S. M. Day. Gray and red loam, red clay subsoil. This land has been cleared for about 75 years. The preced- ing crop was cotton. There was very little shedding and no damage from rust. Plots 1, 3, 7, and 11 had poor stands. 10 There was no damage done by the cotton caterpillars. The complete fertilizers were all highly profitable, as was also a mixture of acid phosphate and kainit. The complete fer- tilizers with cotton seed meal gave larger profits than did the one with nitrate of soda. The average estimated increase of seed cotton per acre was 197 pounds for cotton seed meal ; 378 pounds for acid phosphate ; and 290 pounds for kainit. Nitrate of soda applied June 16, was less effective than was cotton seed meal. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 128 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 360 lbs. To kainit plot 216 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 82 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal . .^ 197 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 96 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 328 lbs. To kainit plot 610 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plot 476 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate 378 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot 80 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 168 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 594 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot 316 lbs. Average increase with kainit 290 lbs. Increase from use of different quantities of kainit: From use of 200 pounds kainit 316 lbs. From use of 100 pounds kainit 190 lbs. 11 TALLADEGA COUNTY, 3 MILES EAST OF CHIL- DERSBURG. W. BoAz. Gray loam zcith clay subsoil. This land has been cleared for 25 years. The preceding crops were cotton. There was no damage from rust or shed- ding, but about 10 cent damage from the cotton caterpillar. All the fertlizers were profitable except those on plot 12. The com- plete fertilizer on plot 10 afforded the largest profit, $7.48 per acre, or 139 per cent profit on the cost of fertilizers. The average estimated increase of seed cotton per acre was 110 pounds for cotton seed meal; 186 pounds for acid phos- phate and 40 pounds for kainit. Nitrate of soda applied June 20, was less effective than was cotton seed meal. Kainit at the rate of 100 pounds per acre was more effective than where it was applied at double this rate. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 128 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 164 lbs. To kainit plot 108 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 38 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 110 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 168 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 204 lbs. To kainit plot 220 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plot 150 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate 186 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot 50 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 30 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 102 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot — 24 lbs. Average increase with kainit 40 lbs. 12 Increase from use of different quantities of kainit: From use of 200 pounds kainit — 24 lbs. From use of 100 pounds kainit 70 lbs. Experiments in Talladega County Childersburg Talladega o Z *-» _o Oh , Lh a) (U u< "+-( o 4_, rt 3 0) O a. e i^ < KIND c o *-< c c o o i o (1) — o t- rv 1 u > -c tj >T3 -a 2 u -a 2 ^ O 0) ^S. Cu^ ■^s. 1 2 3 4 5-^ 10| 11 Lbs. 200 240 000 200 200 240 200 200 00'"> 240 200 200 240 200 200 240 100 000 240 100 100 Cotton seed meal _ Acid phosphate No fertilizer Kainit Cotton seed meal ] Acid phosphate. _ f Cotton seed meal I Kainit \ No fertilizer Acid phosphate. _ } Kainit ... ] Cotton seed meal ) Acid phosphate.. ,- Kainit ) Cotton seed meal ") Acid phosphate .- \ Kainit j No fertilizer Acid phosphate.. J Kainit ■ Nitrate of soda .. ) Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. 568 128 $1.10 1240 200 608 168 3.69 1240 200 440 1040 480 50 0.20 1048 000 752 332 5.94 1296 240 568 158 1.65 1144 80 400 - _ .. - 1072 _ 648 270 5.56 1240 256 664 308 3.78 1320 424 736 402 7.48 1548 740 312 720 464 152 0.02 1032 312 $ 3.40 4.72 —1^40 3.00 —1.84 5.11 7.48 18.30 5.10 TALLADEGA COUNTY, 7 MILES NORTH OF TALLA DEGA. J. C. Wallis. Dark loam, clay subsoil. This land has been in cultivation for nine years. The pre- ceding crop was corn. Shedding- was uniform. There was no damage from rust and the cotton caterpillar attacked the cotton too late to do any material damage. The stand was good. All of the fertilizers were profitable except those on plots 5 and 6. The most profitable fertilizer was the complete 13 fertlizer on plot 10, which afforded a profit of $18.30 per acre, or 341 per cent on the cost of fertilizers. The average estimated increase of seed cotton per acre where cotton seed meal was applied was 122 pounds ; 210 pounds for acid phosphate, and 30 pounds for kainit. Nitrate of soda applied July 3 was less effective than was cotton seed meal. One hundred pounds of kainit was better than a larger amount. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 200 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 40 lbs. To kainit plot 80 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 168 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 122 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 200 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 40 lbs. To kainit plot 256 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plot 344 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate 210 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot 000 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot — 120 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 56 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot 184 lbs. Average increase with kainit 30 lbs. Increase from use of different quantities of kainit: To use of 200 pounds kainit 184 lbs. To use of 100 pounds kainit 500 lbs. 14 CHILTON COUNTY, HALF-MILE SOUTH OF MA- PLESVILLE. D. M. FOSHEE. Sandy loam. The preceding crop on this land was corn. No report was made on insect injuries or stand. All of the fertilizers were profitable. The greatest profits were from mixtures of cotton seed meal mixed with either kainit or acid phosphate. The av- erage increase of seed cotton per acre was 272 pounds for cotton seed meal; 33 pounds for acid phosphate ; and 19 pounds for kainit. Nitrate of soda, applied June 5th, was more efifective than was cotton seed meal in a complete fertilizer.- The smaller amount of kainit was preferable to the larger amount. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 424 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 276 lbs. To kainit plot 292 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 96 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 272 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot '!!..".... .'.' 224 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot :' 76 lbs. To kainit plot '.'. 14 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plot........... — 182 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate 33 lbs. Increase cf seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot '. .' . . . 202 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot . . . . . .. .'. .."...' ..'... 70 lbs. To acid phosphate plot .i". . . ............ — 8 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot — 188 lbs. Average increase with kainit 19 lbs. Increase from use of cotton seed meal 96 lbs. Increase from use of nitrate of soda 248 lbs. Nitrate better by 152 lbs. 15 Fertilizer experiments in Cliilton and Ran dolph Conn ROANOK ties Maplesville :e J— /I, o o o Urn ^ c o o •- "5. ii S o >■? P o > X3 ^ . KIND -T3 0 g o ^ c c > ^ E C li >- Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. 1 200 Cotton seed meal 792 424 $10.57 816 16 $ 2.49 2 240 Acid phosphate. 592 224 5.49 840 40 —0.40 3 (00 2i.O No fertilizer 368 584 202 5.06 800 840 136 4 Kainit 2 95 ■'{ 200 240 Cotton seed meal Acid phosphate. 1 896 SCO 11.32 1136 528 12.22 -1 200 200 Cotton seed nteal Kainit . . . I -i 904 494 11.41 648 136 0 05 7 000 240 20U No fertilizer 424 664 216 3.83 416 808 384 8^ Acid phosphate.. Kainit S 9.21 \ 2O0 Cotton seed meal 1 ^ 240 Acid phosphate. 784 312 3.90 936 504 10.05 / 200 Kainit . .. . \ \ 200 Cotton seed meal 1 10-^ 240 Acid phosphate . f 784 288 3.84 944 504 10.75 / 100 Kainit . \ 11 0(0 240 No fertilizer 520 448 \ Acid phosphate. 1 , _ . 12- 100 Kainit 960 440 9.20 800 352 6.38 / 1(«L Nitrate of soda . . \ RANDOLPH COUXTY, 2 MILES WEST OF ROANOKE. J. T. B.MRD. Red clay loam, zcith red clay subsoil. This land has been cleared for 75 years. Corn was the pre- ceding crop. There was no damage reported from rust or in- sect attacks. The stand was good, 820 plants per plot. The average estimated increase of seed cotton was 156 pounds per acre for cotton seed meal ; 292 pounds for acid phoshate ; and 144 pounds for kainit. The complete fertilizers were very profitable. The highest profit per acre was $12.22, or 261 per cent on the investment in fertilizers. 16 Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 16 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 488 lbs. To kainit plot 000 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 120 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 156 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 40 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 512 lbs. To kainit plot 248 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plot 368 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate 292 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot 136 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 120 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 344 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot — 24 lbs. Average increase with kainit 144 lbs. Increase from use of cotton seed meal 156 lbs. Increase from use of nitrate of soda 4 lbs. Cotton seed meal better by 152 lbs. SHELBY COUNTY, >4-MILE EAST OF COLUMBIANA. Henry Milner. Gray gravely loam, zvith light yelloiv subsoil. This land has been cleared for fifteen years. The preceding crop was cotton. Rust did most damage on the unfertilized plots, and least damage on plots 9, 10, and 12, or the ones most highly fertlized. The stand was uniform. All of the fertilizers were highly profitable. Kainit where applied alone or in combination proved to be the most profitable of any one of the fertilizers. Where ap- plied alone it afforded a profit of $8.63 or 616 per cent on the investment in fertilizers, against a profit of $2.93 for acid phos- phate, and $4.11 for cotton seed meal. The most profitable 17 complete fertilizers were those applied to plots 9 and 10 which afforded a profit of $12.73 and $12.99, respectively, as compar- ed with a profit of $8.94 for the complete fertilizer containing nitrate of soda. The average estimated increase of seed cotton per acre at- tributable to cotton seed meal was 185 pounds ; to acid phos- phate 147 pounds ; and to kainit 273 pounds. Fertilizer experiment at Columbiana 6 Z ■*-) o Amount fertili- zer per acre KIND Vield seed cotton per acre Increase over unfertilized plot 5 Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. 1 200 Cotton seed meal _ . 568 224 $ 4.17 2 240 Acid phosphate ... 488 144 2.93 3 000 No fertilizer.- ..... 344 4 200 Kainit ._..__.... 680 322 8.63 ^! 200 240 Cotton seed meal / Acid phosphate. \ 768 396 7.99 ^■) 200 200 Cotton seed meal / Kainit \ 856 470 10.64 7 000 No fertilizer _ 400 .... 8-) 240 200 200 Acid phosphate. _ / Kainit \ Cotton seed meal j 880 474 12.08 9-^ 240 200 200 Acid phosphate. . ■ Kainit. . . . . ' Cotton seed meal i lOOC) 588 12.7S 10-^ / 240 100 Acid phosphate.. ■ Kainit i 992 574 12.99 11 000 No fertilizer 424 1..^ 240 100 100 Acid phosphate., j Kainit - 856 432 8.94 / Nitrate of soda . . ' Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To fertilized plot 224 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 252 lbs. To kainit plot 148 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 114 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 185 lbs» 18 Increase of seed cotton per acre v/hen acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 144 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 172 lbs. To kainit plot 152 lbs To cotton seed meal and kainit plot 118 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate 147 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot 322 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 246 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 330 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot 192 lb3 Average increase with kainit 273 lbs. Increase from use of different quantities of kainit: From use of 200 pounds kainit 192 lbs. From use of 100 pounds kainit 178 lbs. Increase from use of cot'on seed meal 114 lbs. Increase from use of nitrate of soda — 28 lbs. Cotton seed meal better by 142 lbs. TUSCALOOSA COUNTY, Z% MILES EAST OF TUSCA- , j;... LOOSA. W. D. Lewis. Red clay loam. . The preceding crop was corn. There was a good stand. This cotton, was 'injured to some extent by drought in June and July/ ; Cotton sded meal and acid phosphate were profitable when vised' ^lone land' When combined, except when in combination witli kainit. i The average increase of seed cotton per acre was 114 ppvihids for cotton seed meal, against 58 pounds for acid phos- phate,,-and 152 pounds for kainit. ?!<3ortt0n seed meal, gave a profit of $4.04 per acre or 135 per c^fit f acid phosphate gave a profit of $4.46 per acre or 242 per cent ; A mixture of cotton seed meal and acid phosphate gave a profit of $7.35 per acre or 163 per cent. 19 Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 220 lbs. To acid phospha'^e plot 1 84 lbs. To kainit plot —12 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 64 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 114 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 192 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 156 lbs. To kainit plot —96 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plo. — 20 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate 58 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot 80 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot — 152 lbs. To acid phosphate plot —208 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot — 328 lbs. Average increase with kainit . — 152 lbs. Increase from use of cotton seed meal ., 64 lbs. Increase from use of nitrate of soda 96 lbs. N Itrate better by 32 lbs. 20 Experiments in Tuscaloosa County 3^4 Miles East of 2 Mi LES \Vl :ST OF Tuscaloosa Tuscaloosa ,^ 5 _o o _o ■^ o o 3 "^ S 2 o > T2 p o > -TD 5 1 KIND (U ID O OJ N O O) 0) .- 5 . N 4-) g ^ ^ c« ^" 2 t* '-C ~ 2i ■- 1 1 'P II 1— 1 ■4_ Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. 1 200 Cotton seed meal _ - 860 220 $ 4.04 424 —32 —4 02 2 240 Acid phosphate 832 192 4 46 728 272 7.02 3 000 No fertilizer 640 456 4 200 200 240 Kainit . . 720 1016 "80 376 1^16 7.35 832 808 376 352 10^63 5-1 Cotton seed meal 1 Acid phosphate -- \ 6.58 ''■! 200 200 000 Cotton seed meal ^ Kainit \ 708 68 —2.22 944 488 11.22 7 No fertilizer «-! 240 200 200 Acid phosphate, _ / Kainit \ 624 —16 —3.59 1080 624 16.89 ( Cotton seed meal l 9- 240 zAcid phosphate.- - 688 48 —4 52 1120 664 15.17 / 200 Kainit ) i 200 Cotton seed meal i 10 240 Acid phosphate __ - 792 152 -0.52 976 520 11.26 / 100 Kainit ) 11 000 No fertilizer ( 240 Acid phosphate.. J 12- 100 Kainit - 824 184 1.01 856 400 7.92 / 100 Nitrate of soda __ i TUSCALOOSA COUNTY, 2 MILES WEST OF TUSCA- LOOSA. Richard M. Snow. Red day loam. Old land pastured for the two preceding years. Japanese- clover grew in the pasture. No rust or insect damages were re- ported. There was a poor stand on account of thinning too early. The highest yields were produced by complete fer- tilizers, but the greatest profit was from kainit and acid phos- phate. 21 Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 32 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 80 lbs To kainit plot 112 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 40 lbs Average increase with cotton seed meal 50 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 272 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 3S4 lbs. To kainit plot 248 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plot 176 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate 270 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot 376 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 520 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 352 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot 312 lbs. Average increase with kainit 390 lbs. Increase from use of different quantities of kainit: From use of 200 pounds kainit 312 lbs. From use of 100 pounds kainit • 163 lbs. Increase from use of cotton seed meal 40 lbs. Increase from use of nitrate of soda — 80 lbs. Cotton seed meal better by 120 lbs. PICKENS COUNTY, >4-MILE FROM ALICEVILLE. J. D. Sanders. Sandy loam ivith ycllozv clay subsoil. This land has been in cultivation for a considerable length of time. There was no damage reported from rust or insect at- tacks. The stand was poor, but each plot had an average num- ber of plants. The most profitable complete fertilizer was that applied to Plot 9, affording a profit of $4.16 per acre or 68 per cent on the investment in fertilizers. The most profitable single fertilizer was acid phosphate, which gave a profit of $2.72, or 172 per cent on the investment in fertilizer. The aver- age estimated increase of seed cotton attributable to cotton seed meal was 34 pounds; to acid phosphate 142 pounds, and to kainit 46 pounds. 22 Cotton seed meal was better than nitrate of soda, and 100 pounds of kainit was practically as effective as 200 pounds. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 88 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 176 lbs. To kainit plot 96 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 175 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 134 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 128 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 216 lbs. To kainit plot 73 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plot ' 152 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate 142 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot 72 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 80 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 17 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot 16 lbs. Average increase with kainit 46 lbs. Increase from use of different quantities of kainit: From use of 200 pounds kainit 16 lbs. From use of 100 poundis kainit — 16 lbs. Increase from use of cotton seed meal 175 lbs. Increase from use of nitrate of soda " 71 lbs Cotton seed meal better by : . . . 104 lbs. Fertilizer' experiments in Pickens County >4 Mile From 5 Mii.es West of Alicevili-e ALICEVILI-E 6 Z Om lb 5 .. o ^ < s •KIND 5 o '•J T3 Kainit ... _ . \ 481 145 1.56 840 68 —0.90 '! 200 Cotton seed meal '^ 240 Acid phosphate. . - 656 320 4.16 864 120 -2.24 200 Kainit l .O.J 200 Cotton seed meal j 240 Acid phosphate. . 624 2,S8 3 84 680 —36 —6.53 100 Kainit ' 11 ( 000 240 No fertilizer Acid phosphate. . ^ 688 12 100 100 Kainit. . - Nitrate of soda . i 520 184 1.01 864 176 0.75 PICKENS COUNTY, 5 MILES WEST OF ALICEVILLE. G. C. TURNIPSEED. Red clay loam ivith red clay subsoil. This land has been in cultivation for about 75 years. The preceding crop was corn. There was no damage done from rust or worms. The cotton suffered from drought. The most profitable fertilizer was cotton seed meal which gave a profit of $4.94 per acre, or 165 per cent on the investment in fertilizers. The average estimated increase of seed cotton per acre was 101 pounds for cotton seed meal ; 49 pounds for acid phosphate ; and a loss of 79 pounds for kainit. Nitrate of soda was more effective than was cotton seed meal. 24 .Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 248 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 000 Its. To kainit plot 104 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 52 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 101 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 168 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot — 80 lbs. To kainit plot 80 lbs. To CO ton seed meal and kainit plot 28 lbs. Average increase witli acid phosphate 49. lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot —12 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot — 156 lbs. To acid phosphate plot — 100 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot — 48 lbs. Average increase with kainit — 79 lbs. Increase from use of cot on seed meal 52 lbs. Increase from use of nitrate of soda 264 lbs. Nitrate better by 212 lbs. LAMAR COUNTY, 12 MILES SOUTH OF SULLIGENT. E. Ward. Light sandy loam, clay subsoil. This land has been cultivated for 40 years. The preceding crop was cotton. There was no damage from rust or from the cotton caterpllar. The stand was good. This soil was chiefly in need of nitrogen. A mixture of cot- ton seed meal and acid phosphate gave the largest profit, $12.09 per acre, or a profit of 258 per cent on the investment in fertilizers. The average increase in seed cotton per acre was, with cotton seed meal, 223 pounds, and with acid phosphate 137 pounds. Kainit resulted on an average in the loss of 53 pounds of seed cotton per acre. Cotton seed meal was slightly more effective than an applica- tion of nitrate of soda made in July. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 384 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 204 lbs. To kainit plot 156 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 196 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 223 lbs. 25 Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 320 lbs. ■ To cotton seed meal plot 144 lbs. To kainit plot 22 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit 62 ibs. Average increase with acid phosphate 137 Ibs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot 150 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot — 78 lbs. To acid phosphate plot . . . .* — 148 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot — 156 lbs. Average increase with kainit — 53 Ibs. Increase from use of cotton seed meal 196 lbs. Increase from use of nitrate of soda 176 lbs. Cotton seed meal better by 20 Ibs. Fertilizer experiments with cotton near Sulligent o Z •t-t _o 12 Mii.is South 6 Miles South O £. c < KIND ^M o O o o (— "^ 0 S a. o u a. 5-S c o o -a §^ 0) 0) 0) tA ^- ca 'Z T3 y « Z -a C3 »-. ttj D ^ O '^-' o t- u. o •.?; c c £^ > c c 1-H 3 2 t: 1 2 4 8- 10 11 12- l^os. 200 240 00 1 200 200 240 2uO 200 000 240 200 200 240 200 200 240 100 000 240 100 100 Cotton seed meal _ . Acid phosphate No fertilizer _. Kainit Cotton seed meal ) Acid phosphate __ \ Cotton seed meal / Kainit ) No fertilizer Acid phosphate.- I Kainit \ Cotton seed meal J Acid phosphate. _ • Kainit ) Cotton seed meal j| Acid phosphate.. - Kainit ) No fertilizer Acid phosphate.- ) Kainit-- 1 ,- Nitrate of soda.- ) Lbs. 672 608 288 448 Lbs. 384 320 150 $ 9.29 8.56 ''3!40 Lbs. 552 488 408 432 Lbs. 144 80 16 832 524 12.09 624 2C0 624 306 5.39 560 128 328 - - _ . 440 496 172 2. 42 592 142 688 368 5.70 552 92 680 364 6.27 632 162 312 480 656 344 6.13 824 344 $1.61 0.88 -6! 89 1.72 —0.30 1.46 -3.14 -0.20 6.13 26 LAMAR COUNTY, 6 MILES SOUTH OF SULLIGENT. Jack Woods. Gray clay loam unth red subsoil. This land has been in cultivation 40 years. The preceding crop was cotton. No damage was reported from rust. Slight damage was done by cotton caterpillars. The stand was uni- form. The only fertilizer sho\\*ing any considerable profit was a complete fertilizer consisting of acid phosphate, kainit and nitrate of soda (Plot 12), which afforded a profit of $6.13 per acre, or 126 per cent on the investment in fertilizers. The aver- age estimated increase of seed cotton per acre was 82 pounds for cotton seed meal ; and 57 pounds for acid phosphate ; while 'vith kainit there was, on the average, no increase in the crop. Nitrate of soda applied June 19, was more efifective than was an earlier and larger application of cotton seed meal. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 144 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 120 lbs. To kainit plot 112 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot — 50 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 82 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 80 lbs. To cotton seed meal plct 56 lbs. To kainit plot 126 lbs. To cot' on seed meal and kainit plot ■ — 36 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate 57 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot 16 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot — 16 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 62 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot — 108 lbs. Average increase with kainit — 12 lbs. Increase from use of cotton seed meal — 50 lbs. Increase from use of nitrate of soda 132 lbs. Nitrate better by 182 lbs. 27 WALKER COUNTY, 6 MILES EAST OF JASPER. D. B. Lewis. Light gray loam, yelloiu clay subsoil. This land has been in cultivation for 48 years. The preced- ing crop was r3'e. There was no damage reported from rust or insect injuries. The stand was uniform for each plot. The average estimated increase of seed cotton per acre was 288 pounds for cotton seed meal ; for acid phosphate 400 pounds ; and 50 pounds for kainit. The greatest profit was afforded by a mixture of cotton seed meal and acid phosphate on Plot 5, namely, $19.13 per acre. This is a profit of 409 per cent on the investment in fertilizers. All of the complete fertilizers were highly profitable. Of the single applications acid phosphate was the most profitable. The complete fertilizers with cotton seed meal gave higher profits than when nitrate of soda was used. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 180 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 396 lbs. To kainit plot • 294 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 278 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 288 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 348 lbs. To co'ton seed meal plot ^64 lbs. To kainit plot 370 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plot 354 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate 409 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot -^40 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 154 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 62 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot — 56 lbs. Average increase with kainit 50 lbs. Increase from use of cotton seed meal 278 lbs. Increase from use of nitrate of soda 168 lbs. Cotton seed meal better by 110 lbs. 28 Fertilizer experiments in Walker County o Z Jasper Cordova KIND r- i~ o •4-* o '•^ o o s^ o 5 ci. CJ 5^ S3 w — ■ p o ^-o o (1) O) O (u w: — 1 a '13 ^ ca (U 1- .— ""* 2 rt (U t- t- m U, (U l' u u '+^ O -^ :s. ^^ >| a. M 3 c 2 u 1 2 3 4 5-! 10 11 12- Lbs. 200 240 000 200 200 240 200 200 000 240 200 200 240 200 200 240 100 000 240 100 100 Cotton seed meal . Acid phosphate. _ . No fertilizer Kainit Cotton seed meal I Acid phosphate.. \ Cotton seed meal / Kainit S No fertilizer Acid phosphate. _ I Kainit ) Cotton seed meal i Acid phosphate.. • Kainit > Cotton seed meal i Acid phosphate.. • Kainit i No fertilizer Acid phosphate.. j| Kainit ,• Nitrate of soda .. ) Lbs. 456 624 276 302 Lbs. 18u 348 "'40 $ 3.76 9.46 —0.12 Lbs. 768 824 600 712 Lbs. 168 224 136 992 744 19.13 952 400 568 334 6.29 808 280 220 504 640 410 10.04 712 192 928 688 15.94 768 232 884 634 14.91 856 304 260 568 784 524 11.89 904 336 $ 2.38 5.49 '2'95 8.12 4.56 3.06 1.34 4.35 5.87 WALKER COUNTY, 3 MILES SOUTH OF CORDOVA. G. L. Alexander. Gray loam, red clay subsoil. This land has been in cultivation for 26 years. There was no damage from rust. The preceding crop was oats. The stand was very good, though not perfect. The most profitable fertilizer was cotton seed meal and acid phosphate, affording a profit of $8.12 per acre, or 173 per cent on the investment in fertlizer. The average estimated increase of seed cotton per acre was 132 pounds for cotton seed meal; 116 pounds for acid phosphate; and 12 pounds for kainit. The complete fertilizer with nitrate of soda gave a higher proJEit than did the complete fertlizer with cotton seed meal. Of 29 the single applications, acid phosphate was the most profitable. Kainit was not needed. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 168 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 176 lbs. To kainit plo!; 144 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 40 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 132 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 224 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 232 lbs. To kainit plot 56 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plot — 48 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate 116 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot 136 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 112 lbs. To acid phosphate plot — 32 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot — 168 lbs Average increase with kainit 12 lbs. Increase from use of cotton seed meal 40 lbs. Increase from use of nitrate of soda 72 lbs. Nitrate better by 32 lbs. JEFFERSON COUNTY, 10 MILES NORTHEAST OF BIRMINGHAM. G. C. Depoister. Gray gravely loam with red clay subsoil. This land has been cleared only five years. Corn was the preceding crop. There was no damage done from rust or in- sect attacks. There was a good stand. The most profitable fertilizer was acid phosphate and kainit,. $8.74 per acre, or 284 per cent profit on the investment. The most profitable single fertilizer was acid phosphate, $3.18, or 189 per cent profit on the investment. The average estimated increase in seed cotton per acre was 97 pounds from cotton seed meal, 186 pounds from acid phosphate, and 77 pounds- from kainit. 30 Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 104 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 168 lbs. To kainit plot 160 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot — 46 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 97 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 152 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 216 lbs. To kainit plot 290 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plot 84 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot To cotton seed meal plot To acid phosphate plot To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot 186 lbs. 48 lbs. 104 lbs. 186 lbs. —28 lbs. Average increase with kainit 77 lbs. Fertilizer experiments in Jefferson County o Z 0. 10 Miles North of Birmingham QUINTON o a. S 1- < S KIND o o o o o a; o i_ ex QJ > -T3 r^ o > -a "O O oj •— -a O QJ N O j_ ^ 1— 1 D [SJ 2 u 1 2 ?, 4 ^) ^] 7 «) 9* 10 11 12 Lbs. 200 240 000 200 200 240 200 200 00 » 240 200 200 240 200 200 240 100 000 240 100 100 Cotton seed meal _ . Acid phosphate No fertilizer Kainit Cotton seed meal / Acid phosphate. _ ) Cotton seed meal I Kainit ) No fertilizer Acid phosphate. . Kainit Cotton seed meal Acid phosphate. . Kainit Cotton seed meal Acid phosphate . Kainit No fertilizer Acid phosphate., j Kainit ,■ Nitrate of soda . ) Lbs. Lbs. i.bs. Lbs. 1144 80 $ 1.86 1064 104 992 —72 —3.98 1112 152 1064 960 968 —52 —3.06 1008 48 1120 144 —0.07 1280 320 1040 108 —0.94 1168 208 888 _.._ 960 952 82 —0.46 1312 338 1144 292 3.26 1280 292 1224 390 7.10 1280 278 816 1016 944 128 —0.78 856 — 160 $ 0.33 3.18 0^i4 5.56 2.26 8.74 3.26 3.52 -10.00 31 JEFFERSON COUNTY, lj4 MILES EAST OF QUINTON. W. L. Peterson. Light gray loam, red clay subsoil. This land has been cultivated for 18 years. The preceding crop was wheat. Some damage was done by the cotton cater- pillar. There was a good stand. Complete fertilizers were the most profitable. The complete fertilizer on Plot 10 affording a profit of $7.10 per acre, or 132 per cent on the investment. The average estimated increase of seed cotton per acre was 167 pounds from cotton seed meal ; 53 pounds from acid phosphate ; and 45 pounds from kainit. Cotton seed meal was more effective than nitrate of soda, and 100 pounds of kainit afforded a larger yield than did 200 pounds. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 80 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 216 lbs. To kainit plot 160 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 210 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 167 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot —72 lbs. To co'ton seed meal plot 64 lbs. To kainit plot 134 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plot 184 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate 53 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot —52 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 28 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 154 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot 148 lbs. .Average increase with kainit ..•••• 45 lbs. Increase from use of different quantities of kainit: From use of 200 pounds kainit 148 lbs. From use of 100 pounds kainit 246 Ibn. Increase from use of cotton seed meal 210 lbs. Increase from use of nitrate of soda — 02 lbs. Cotton seed meal better by 262 lbs. 32 CALHOUN COUNTY, 2^ MILES SOUTH OF JACK- SONVILLE. T. S. Weaver. Sandy land with clay subsoil. This land has been cleared 30 years or more. The preced- ing crop was cotton. There was no damage from rust. There was a good stand. The most profitable application of fertilizer proved to be the complete fertilizer, on plot 12, which contained nitrate of soda ; this mixture afforded a profit of $9.97 per acre,, or 204 per cent on the investment in fertilizers. The applica- tion of fertilizers singly was not profitable. The average increase of seed cotton per acre was 150 pounds from cotton seed meal; 70 pounds from acid phosphate; and 36 pounds from kainit. Nitrate of soda was more effective than cotton seed meal, and. 100 pounds of kainit was better than 200 pounds. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 64 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 188 lbs. To kainit plot 68 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 278 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 150 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 8 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 132 lbs. To kainit plot ~36 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plot 174 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate 70. lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added : To unfertilzed plot 34 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 38 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 10 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot 80 lbs. Average increase with kainit 36 lbs. Increase from use of 200 pounds kainit 80 lbs. Increase from use of 100 pounds kainit 118 lbs. Increase from use of cotton seed meal 278 lbs. Increase from use of nitrate of soda 428 lbs. Nitrate better by ""^O "'s.. 33 Fertilizer experiments in Calhoun County Jacksonville Choccolocco 1 *-l V OJ I- M-H o ^_, rt o c OJ o o c u Q- < KIND c: ^ c ^ o o o O o o t- a. -a O 0) -a O tU O) N O . o N « 1- <^4 0) N a; (A o; t3 C3 w t- QJ IJ i_ o "*- O •" u CJ H- > ^ £.^ ^^ S a; 'C — o t- i~~ — 1 2 3 4 10 11 12 Lbs. 200 240 000 200 200 240 2C0 200 000 240 200 200 240 200 200 240 100 COO 240 100 100 Cotton seed meal _. Acid phosphate No fertilizer Kainit Cotton seed meal ) Acid phosphate. _ \ Cotton seed meal 1 Kainit / No fertilizer Acid phosphate.. Kainit Cotton se^d meal Acid phosphate.. Kainit Cotton seed meal Acid phosphate.. Kainit No fertilizer Acid phosphate . I Kainit |- Nitrate of soda .. > Lbs. 712 656 648 736 Lbs. 64 8 34 —0.95 —1.42 -0"31 Lbs. 1080 1(156 896 952 952 196 1.59 1152 912 102 -1.14 1112 864 864 888 —2 —3.14 992 1192 276 2.75 1280 1256 314 4.67 1240 968 880 1432 464 9.97 1360 Lbs. 184 160 64 272 240 124 408 364 480 $ 2 3 .89 .44 0.65 4.02 3.28 0.89 6.98 6.27 10.48 CALHOUN COUNTY, 2 MILES NORTH OF CHOC- COLOCCO. J. G. Borders. Red chocolate valley land, zvith red clay subsoil. This land has been in cultivation for fifty years. The pre- ceding crop was cotton. All fertilizers were profitable. The highest profits were made from complete fertilizers. The average estimated in- crease of seed cotton per acre was 189 pounds for cotton seed meal; 119 pounds for acid phosphate; and 55 pounds kainit. The highest profit afforded by single fertilizer was from acid phosphate, $3.44. The complete fertilizers were all profit- able, the one containing nitrate of soda affording the largest 34 profit, namely, $10.48 per acre, or 215 per cent on the invest- ment in fertilizers. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 184 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 112 lbs. To kainit plot 176 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 284 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 189 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 160 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 88 lbs. To kainit plot 60 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plot 168 lbs. Average increase witii acid phosphate 119 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot 64 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 56 lbs. To acid phosphate plot — 36 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot 136 lbs. Average increase with kainit 55 lbs. Increase from use of different quantities of kainit: From use of 200 pounds kainit 136 lbs. From use of 100 pounds kainit 92 lbs. Increase from use of cotton seed meal 284 lbs. Increase from use of nitrate of soda 400 lbs. Nitrate better by 116 lbs. 35 ETOWAH COUNTY, 5 MILES SOUTHWEST OF ATTALLA. W. A. COLVIN. Gray gravley land zvitli ycllozc clay subsoil. This land has been cleared for 30 years. The preceding crop was corn. Shedding was uniform. Damage from rust was most on Plot 5 and least on Plot 10. There was a good stand, and same number of plants on each plot. Complete fertilizers were most profitable. Plot 9 gave a profit of $5.44 per acre, or 89 per cent on the investment. The average increase of seed cotton per acre was 115 pounds for cotton seed meal; 93 pounds for phosphate; and 129 pounds for kainit. Cotton seed meal was slightly more effective than nitrate of soda. Increase of seed co'.ton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 144 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 88 lbs. To kainit plot 96 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 132 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 115 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 136 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 80 lbs. To kainit plot 60 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plot 96 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate 93 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot 168 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 120 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 92 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot 136 lbs. Average increase with kainit 129 lbs. Increase from use of different quantities of kainit: From use of 200 pounds kainit 133 lbs. From use of 100 pounds kainit 108 lbs. Increase from use of cotton seed meal 132 lbs. Increase from use of nitrate of soda 88 lbs. Cotton seed meal better by 44 lbs. 36 Fertilizer experiments in Etowah and Cherokee Counties Attalla Leesburg o 4-* 1 ■*-' a* 0) 4_J rt c o O- c u < N KIND c o *-• o u 13 OJ aj (U i/i u T3 0) j^'^ O/ >^ > -a O 0) N dJ .- c/3 -— (P 1- _^ o o 0 fe '^ > -o -o 0 oj N 0) ^ 1— 1 s 1 2 3 4 5i 6 7 lo- ll 12- Lbs. 200 240 000 200 200 240 200 200 000 240 200 200 240 200 200 240 100 000 240 100 100 Cotton seed meal .. Acid phosphate No fertilizer Kainit Cotton seed meal / Acid phosphate. _ \ Cotton seed meal \_ Kainit \ No fertilizer Acid phosphate __ } Kainit \ Cotton seed meal l Acid phosphate.. - Kainit ) Cotton seed meal J Acid phosphate. _ ,- Kainit ) No fertilizer- Acid phosphate.. ) Kainit - Nitrate of soda __ ) Lbs. 416 408 272 448 512 560 304 544 688 672 352 640 Lbs. r44 136 168 224 264 228 360 332 288 $ 1.61 2 67 3'98 2.49 4.05 4.22 5.44 5.24 4.34 Lbs. 976 864 Lbs. 352 . 240 "840 "216 - 984 360 872 248 624 736 112 920 296 1088 464 1040 416 % 8.26 6.00 -5"5i 6.84 4.54 0.50 3.39 9.47 8.43 CHEROKEE COUNTY, 4 MILES EAST OF LEESBURG. W. W. Ward. Gray upland, red clay subsoil. The preceding crop on this land was rye. This land has been in cultivation for 40 or 50 years. There was considerable rust on all plots, but Plot 5 was the most seriously attacked. There was no damage from worms. The stand was good. All applications of fertilizers were profitable. The greatest profit was afforded by the complete fertilizer on Plot 10, which afforded a profit of $9.47 per acre, or 174 per cent on the in- vestment in fertilizers. From the application of cotton seed meal alone a profit of $8.26 was realized, or 275 per cent on. the investment. The average increase of seed cotton per acre 37 was 172 pounds for cotton seed meal; for acid phosphate 48 pounds ; and a loss of 20 pounds for kainit. Cotton seed meal was more profitable than nitrate of soda. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 352 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 120 lbs. To kainit plot 32 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 1S4 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 172 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 240 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 8 lbs. To kainit plot —104 lbs. To CO ton seed meal and kainit plot 48 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate 48 lbs.. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot 216 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot —104 lbs. To acid phosphate plot . — 128 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot — 64 lbs. Average increase with kainit — 20 lbs. Increase from use of cotton seed meal 184 lbs. Increase from use of nitra'e of soda 136 lbs. Cotton seed meal better by 48 lbs- 38 MORGAN COUNTY, 8 MILES SOUTHWEST OF HARTSELLE. Robert F. Orr. Clay loam iv'itli red subsoil. This land has been cultivated for 75 or more years. The preceding- crop was cotton. The stand was fairly good. No damage by insects were reported. Cotton seed meal gave the most profitable result. Acid phosphate and kainit did not pay. The average increase for cotton seed meal was 173 pounds of seed cotton per acre, against 2 pounds for acid phosphate, and a loss of 20 pounds where kainit was used. Cotton seed meal gave a profit of $3.66 per acre, or 122 per cent profit on the in- vestment in fertilizers. On the whole, there was little profit from fertilizers in this experiment. Increase of seed co'ton per acre when cotton seed n:eal was added: To unfertilized plot 208 lbs. To acid phosphate plot ISO lbs. To kainit plot 76 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 228 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed mesi 173 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 48 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 20 lbs. To kainit plot — 106 lbs. To co'-ton seed meal and kainit plot 45 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate 2 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot 78 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot — .54 lbs. To acid phosphate plot — 76 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot —28 lbs. Average increase with kainit — 20 lbs. Increase from use of different quantifies of kainit: From use- of 200 poundiS kainit — .''8 lbs. From use of 100 pounds kainit — 8 lb? Increase from use of cotton seed meal 228 lbs. Increase from use of nitrate of soda 136 lbs. Cotton seed meal better by 92 lbs. 39 Experiments in Limestone and Moriran Counties Athen's Hartselle 1 • c o _S 1 - o ^ p > -a ^ • '\J KIND 0^ C 0) N o . a> O 0- N ^ o z l« >- 2 'S 0) - — tA 1_ Cj 0) ::r re 4- •-n i— c — L- ^ 1- o '+- O f O i- V >*- c *_. K. < 5i — B c ^ '-"" S ^ '+- Lbs. Lbs. Lbs Lbs. Lbs 1 200 Cotton seed meal V36 80 —0.44 640 ^08 $ 3.66 2 240 Acid phosphate 7)2 —144 —6.29 480 48 —0.14 3 000 No fertilizer. 856 432 4 200 Kainit . .. 672 -136 —5 75 560 78 "i!i6 ^i 200 Cotton seed meal ' 240 Acid (ihosphate. . \ 984 224 2.49 760 223 2.62 , \ 200 Cotton seed meal I ^1 200 Kainit , \ 920 208 2.26 736 154 0.53 7 COO No fertilizer 664 632 »■; 240 21 lO 2( 0 Acid phosphate. . / Kainit . \ 824 160 2.04 632 --28 —3.98 9* Cotton seed meal i 240 Acid phosphate . . - 968 304 3.65 888 200 0.32 / 200 Kainit ' \ 200 Co. ton seed meal j 10- / 240 Acid phosphate. . 96U 296 4.09 936 220 1.66 100 Kainit ' 11 OtiO No fertilizer 664 744 \ 240 Acid phosphate., i Kainit . • 12- 100 848 184 1.01 872 128 —0.78 / 100 Nitrate of Soda. ' LLMESTONE COUNTY, 7 AlILES EAST OF ATHENS. Fletcher Barksd.vle.. Gray clay loam zvith red subsoil. This land has been cleared for 10 years. The stand was uniform. There was no rvist, but some damage was done by the cotton caterpillar. The largest increases are from com- plete fertilizers and from a combination of acid phosphate and cotton seed meal. Apparently fertilizers used singly were not profitable. The average estimated increase of seed cotton per acre for cotton seed meal was 244 pounds ; for acid phosphate 99 pounds ; and for kainit 93 pounds. 40 Increase of seed co'ton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 80 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 368 lbs. To kainit plot 344 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 144 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 224 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot — 144 lbs. To CO ton seed meal plot 144 lbs. To kainit plot 296 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plot 98 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate 99 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot —136 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 128 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 304 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phospha'e plot 80 lbs. Average increase with kainit 93 lbs. Increase from use of different quantities of kainit: From use of 200 pounds kainit 80 lbs. From use of 100 pounds kainit 72 lb? Increase from use of cotton seed meal 144 lbs. Increase from use of nitrate of soda 32 lbs. Cotton seed meal better by 112 lbs. 41 * :\IARSHALL COUNTY, ly. MILES WEST OF BOAZ. L. O. Cox. Gray loam, ycllozi' clay Subsoil. This land lias only been cleared 8 years. The preceding crop \vas wheat. There was no damage reported from rust or in- sect attacks. The complete fertilizer's were the most profitable, Plot lO" affording a profit of $10.24, or 190 per cent on the investment in fertilizers. Of the fertilizers applied singly acid phosphate afforded the largest profit, $4.98 per cent, or 231 per cent on the investment. The average estimated increase of seed cotton per acre was 184 pounds for cotton seed meal ; 205 pounds for acid phosphate, and 7 pounds for kainit. From the results ob- tained from kainit there is apparently a sufficient amount of potash in the soil. Cotton seed meal was more profitable than nitrate of soda. Increase of seed co'ton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 240 lbs. To acid phosphate plot .- . . 244 lbs. To kainit plot 164 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 88 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 184 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 208 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 212 lbs. To kainit plot 238 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kaini' plot 162 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate 205 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot 50 Ibs._ To cotton seed meal plot — 26 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 80 Ibs- To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot — 76 lbs. Average increase with kainit 7 lbs.. Increase from use of cotton seed meal 88 lbs. Increase from use of nitrate of soda 32 lbs. Cotton seed meal better by 56 lbs.. 42 Fertilizer experiments in Marshall and Blount Counties BOAZ Oneonto o z 4-* . rt c L, •-> o < N KIND o o o o o 1- a. 0 1- a, > -G ^ t> TJ -c O OJ — ■u O OJ O) s o , QJ N a> (u >+. 0) OJ OJ 0) •- V5 T^ 01 !- •-n '~ -7- '-^ L- O) .2i ■- u •*- O t" OJ :_ > ^ t-H 2 a-ii ■■J=i ~ S t: 1 2 3 4 7 10 11 12 Lbs. 200 240 000 20O 201) 240 200 200 000 240 200 200 240 200 200 240 103 0,10 240 100 100 Cotton seed meal _. Acid phosphate No fertilizer Kainit Cotton seed meal / Acid phosphate.- 'i Cotton seed meal i Kainit . \ No fertilizer Acid phosphate.- / Kainit \ Cotton seed meal ; Acid phosphate-. Kainit ; Cotton seed meal , Acid phosphate. - Kainit ) No fertilizer Acid phosphate., "l Kainit _ . _ > Nitrate of soda ._ J Lbs. 800 768 560 616 Lbs. 240 208 'oO $ 4.68 4.98 0.20 Lbs. 912 lOnO 58 + 672 Lbs. 328 416 "]30 1(124 452 9.78 1112 612 792 214 2.45 720 262 584 416 856 288 6.14 960 558 928 376 5.95 1128 740 1024 4S8 10.24 1144 770 520 360 952 432 8.94 800 440 $ 7.50 11.63 ^2^76 14.90 3.90 14.78 17.60 19.26 9.20 J3LOUXT COUNTY, 6 MILES WEST OF ONEONTO. W. F. TiDWELL. Gray gravely loam, zvith silt and stone subsoil. This land has been in cultivation for 25 years. The preced- ing crop was corn. There was no damage from rust. The most profitable fertilizer was the application on Plot 10, which .-gave an estimated profit of $19.26 per acre. The most profit- able single fertilizer was acid phosphate, which gave an esti- mated profit of $11.63 per acre. The average estimated increase of seed cotton per acre was 210 pounds for cotton seed meal : for acid phosphate 402 pounds ; for kainit 84 pounds. 43 Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 328 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 196 lbs. To kainit -plot 132 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 182 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 210 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 416 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 284 lbs. To kainit plot 428 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plot 478 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate 402 lbs. increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot 130 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot — 66 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 142 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot 128 lbs. Average increase with kainit ..•••• 84 lbs. increase from use of different quantities of kainit: From use of 200 pounds kainit 128 Ibs- From use of 100 pounds kainit 158 lb&. 44 LIMESTONE COUNTY, 1 MILE SOUTHEAST OF ATHENS. Eighth District Agricultural School. Red clay loam, red clay subsoil. There was no damage from rust. There was very Httle dam- age done by the cotton caterpillar. The highest profit was obtained on Plot 9, where a complete fertilizer was used. Among the single fertilizers, cotton seed meal used alone gave the highest profit. Kainit and acid phos- phate were not profitable when used alone. The average esti- mated increase of seed cotton per acre was 149 pounds for cot- ton seed meal ; 82 pounds for acid phosphate, and 38 pounds for kainit. Nitrate of soda applied June 27 was practically equal to cot- ton seed meal. Increase of seed cotton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 144 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 76 lbs. To kainit plot 132 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 244 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 149 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 16 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 52 lbs. To kainit plot 74 lbs. To CO. ton seed meal and kainit plot 186 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate 82 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot —30 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot — 42 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 28 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot 196 lbs. Average increase with kainit 38 I'ai. Increase from use of cotton seed meal 244 lbs. Increase from use of ni rate 248 lbs. Nitrate better by 4 lbs. 45 Fertilizer experiments in Limestone and Winston Counties Athens Nauvoo o T3 1/1 — Is ^ Si -a o <^ 2^ OJ 1- 2^ 0) t. u, 47 LAUDERDALK COUNTY, 2 MILES WEST OE FLOREXCE. \\'. R. Cox. Clay soil with red clay subsoil. This land has been cleared for 65 years. The preceding" crop was cotton. 'Jhere was no damage reported from rust. The cotton caterpillar destroyed about 23}/^ per cent of the entire croj). The stand was good, except a few missing plants in Plot 1. Cla\- from the ditch was thrown on Plot 12, which seemed to decrease the yicUl on that plot. It appears from this experiment that this land docs not need kainit. Cotton seed meal and acid phosphate were profit- able when used alone or in pairs. The highest estimated in- creased yield of seed cotton per acre was 372 pounds on Plot 10. A ])rofit of $6.59 per acre, or 122 per cent, was obtained on this plot. The average estimated increase of seed cotton per acre was 183 pounds for cotton seed meal ; 129 pounds for acid phos- phate ; and an average loss of 18 pounds per acre for kainit. - Cotton seed meal was more effective than nitrate of soda. Increase of seed colton i)er acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 136 lbs. To acid phospha e plot 148 lbs. To kainit plot 140 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 306 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 183 lbs». Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 104 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot. 116 lbs. To kainit plot 64 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plo: 230 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate 129 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot —38 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot — 34 lbs. To acid phosphate plot — 78 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot 80 lbs. Average increase with kainit — 18 lbs.. 48 Increase from use of different Quantises of kainit: From use of 200 pounds kainit, in complete fertilizer. . From use of 100 pounds kainit in complete fertilizer. . Experiments at Florence, Lauderdale County 80 lbs. 122 lbs. o z 1 2 3 4 5\ ■9^ L r I 11 r 12^ I 2 Miles \^■EST 5 Miles North .J. !-• O) a; o -t-i nl c :3 OJ u a. < KIND ;Z ^ ^_j O o o _i O 1- Q. o u a. > -a E > -o 'O O aj 13 O a; N o . (U 0) OJ (JO I- 2 '^ rease ertili fit fr ilize (U a> (/I I- 2« Ol 4-. (p t- 0) l_ o •*- o ^ -Si ^ O vt- > a. c c oL^ > S. c = Lbs. 200 240 (00 200 2 0 240 200 2u0 000 240 200 200 240 200 200 240 100 000 200 100 103 2 " Cotton seed meaL. Acid Phospliate No fertilizer Kainit Cotton seed meal / Acid Piiosphate.- \ Cotton seed meal I Kainit \ No fertilizer Acid Phospliate- / Kainit \ Cotton seed meal ] Acid Phosphate.- }■ Kainit Cotton seed meal Acid Phosphate. _ |- Kainit J No fertilizer Acid Phosphate.- ] Kainit [ Nitrate of soda_. I Lbs. 696 664 560 552 Lbs. 136 104 1138 $ 1.35; 1.65 — 2" 62 Lbs. 640 592 424 400 Lbs. 216 168 -76 872 252 3.38 736 208 752 102 — 1 14 ' 752 172 680 632 672 26 —2.25 584 18 9U 332 4.54 768 268 952 374 6.59 808 374 544 368 5-14 640 272 $ 3.91 3.70 —3.83 1.98 l.CO —2.50 2.50 6.59 3.82 LAUDERDALE COUNTY, 5 .MILES NORTH OF FLORENCE. J. l\ Underwood. Gray sandy loam z^'itli ycllon' clay snbsod. This land has been cleared for 20 years. The preceding crop was corn. There was no damage from rust. Boll worms did some damage. The stand v.^as good. The most profitable application was the complete fertilizer, which afforded a profit of $6.59 per acre, or a profit of 82 per cent on the investment in fertilizers. The average estimated 49 increase of seed cotton per acre was 189 pounds for cotton seed meal ; 88 pounds for acid phosphate. There was, on the aver- age, a loss of 53 pounds where kainit was used. Cotton seed meal was superior to nitrate of soda. Increase of seed co-ton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 216 lbs. To acid phosphate plo'. 40 lbs. To kainit plot 248 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 250 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 189 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 168 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot — 8 lbs. To kainit plot ; 94 lbs. To cot. on seed meal and kainit plot 96 lbs- Average increase with acid phosphate 88 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot — 76 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot ■ — 44 lbs. To acid phosphate plot — 150 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot 60 lbs. Average increase with kainit — 53 lbs. Increase from use of different quantities of kainit: From use of 200 pounds kainit in complete fertilizer. . 60 lbs. From use of 100 pounds kainit in complete fertilizer. . 106 lbs. Increase from use of cotton seed meal 250 lbs. Increase from use of nitrate 148 lbs. Cotton seed meal better by 102 lbs. 50 INCONCLUSIVE EXPERIMENTS. COLBERT COUNTY, 2 MILES EAST OF TUSCUMBIA, G. H. Harris. Dark clay loam:, valley soil; red clay subsoil. This land has been in cultivation for a long time. The pre- ceding crop was oats. There was no shedding or rust, but the cotton caterpillar damaged the crop about 60 per cent, render- ing the results inconclusive. (See page 50.) The most profit- able application was on Plot 12, affording a profit of $4.34, or 89 per cent on the cost of fertilizers. The average estimated increase of seed cotton per acre due to the use of cotton seed meal was 69 pounds ; 108 pounds for acid phosphate ; and a loss of 6 pounds for kainit. Nitrate of soda applied June 15 was more effective than was cotton seed meal. Experimenis at Tuscumbia 6 Z o Amount fertili- zer per acre KIND Yield seed cotton per acre Increase over unfertilized plot 2 t 1 2 3 4 Lbs. 200 240 000 200 200 240 200 200 000 240 200 200 240 200 200 240 100 000 240 100 100 Cotton seed mea'l .. Acid phosphate No fertilizer Kainit Lbs. 184 208 104 152 328 168 120 208 296 312 88 376 Lbs. 80 104 46 216 52 96 192 216 288 $ 0.44 1.65 0^07 7 8* 11 Cotton seed meal 1 Acid phosphate. . j Cotton seed meal | Kainit / No fertilizer Acid phosphate.. \ Kainit J Cotton seed meal / Acid phosphate.. • Kainit ' Cotton seed meal j Acid phosphate.. • Kainit i No fertilizer Acid phosphate., j Kainit 2.23 — 2.74 — 0.01 O.re 1.53 4.34 Nitrate of soda ' 51 In MADISON COUNTY, 4 miles south of Gurlcy, C. T. Butler conducted an experiment on light red clay loam, with red clay subsoil. The results were inconclusive, partly because of injuries by the cotton caterpillar. See page 55. In MADISON COUNTY, 3 miles northwest of Huntsville, W. \V. Fox conducted a fertilizer experiment on gray land with red clay subsoil. This proved inconclusive because of want of uniformity in the fertility of the land. Apparently MARION COUNTY, 6 MILES NORTHEAST OF GLEN the most profitable fertilizer was cotton seed meal. See page 55 ALLEN. W. P. Letson. Dark sandy loam, red clay subsoil. This land has been cleared for 30 years. The preceding crop was cotton. There was no damage from rust or insect attacks. There was a perfect stand. The plots in this experiment were I'g-acre each, instead of 'v^^ as were the regular plots, but received the full amount of fertilizer. The yields were so ir- regular that no definite conclusion can be drawn, except that cotton seed meal and nitrate of soda were profitable. Increase of seed co'.ton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 450 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 200 lbs. To kainit plot 201 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 263 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 279 lbs. Increase of seed coUon per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 100 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot — 150 lbs. To kainit plot —50 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plot 12 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate — 10 lbs. 52 Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was addfed: To unfertilized plot 12 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot — 237 lbs. To acid phosphate plot — 138 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot — 75 lbs. Average increase with kainit — 110 lbs. Increase from use of cotton seed meal 263 lbs. Increase from use of nitrate of soda 285 lbs. Nitrate better by 22 lbs. Inconclusive experiments in Marion and Tallapoosa Counties 6 Miles East of Glen Allen 4 Miles South of Dadeville r '-< *- C3 OJ O O- < KIND o o .J, c o O o e i Urn OJ 0 T3 o tu •^H o ■a o a> 0) 2 '^ a; .5 fit fro ilizer c 3 O u D. 2 ^ OJ U ^ >- O MS O t" '' h ^ c c 1— 1 D i ^ 1 < c s c 2 - o t^ Lbs. 250 300 000 250 250 300 250 250 000 300 250 250 300 250 250 300 125 000 300 125 125 Cotton seed meal . Acid phosphate No fertilizer Kainit Cotton seed meal / Acid phosphate. _ ) Cotton seed meal ^ Kainit )' No fertilizer Acid phosphate.- / Kainit )" Cotton seed meal J Acid phosphate. _ - Kainit ) Cotton seed meal i Acid phosphate _ _ ;- Kainit ) No fertilizer Acid phosphate. _ ) Kainit [- Nitrate of soda ._ ) Lbs. Lbs. 1 Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. 1200 450 $10.65 300 1104 240 850 100 1.10 j 360 924 60 750 oon 864 750 12 — i.37 300 924 63 1025 300 3.75 1 i300 / 360 1140 282 925 213 1.32 (300 1 300 1176 321 700 000 852 650 —38 — 5.07 (360 "/ 300 ( 300 972 123 900 225 — 0 40 ' - 360 (300 I 300 1368 522 940 278 2.17 : - 360 j / 150 1236 393 650 1 000 i t 360 840 950 300 3.50 - 150 1 ( 150 1272 432 ■0.58 — olos 2.00 4.67 —0.68 7.58 4.51 6.50 53 TALLAPOOSA COUNTY, 4 MILES SOUTH OF DADEVILLE. J. D. Williams. Red loam, red clay subsoil. This land has been in cultivation for about 20 years. The preceding crop was oats. Considerable damage was done by rust on Plots 9 and 10, and slight damage was done by wilt. There was a nearly perfect stand. All of the complete fertilizers were profitable, as were all other plots where cotton seed meal was added. Cotton seed meal, when applied alone, gave a profit of $3.18 or 76 per cent on the investment. The average estimated increase of seed cotton per acre was 280 pounds for cotton seed meal ; 91 pounds for acid phosphate; and 112 pounds for kainit. The plots in this experiment were only yV -acre, instead of % acre as di- rected, making the rate of fertilization heavier; and hence the results cannot be compared with those of other experiments reported. Increase of seed co'ton per acre when cotton seed meal was added: To unfertilized plot 240 lbs. To acid phospha e plot 222 lbs. To kainit plot 258 lbs. To acid phosphate and kainit plot 399 lbs. Average increase with cotton seed meal 280 lbs. Increase of seed co ton per acre when acid phosphate was added: To unfertilized plot 60 lbs. To cotton seed meal plot 42 lbs. To kainit plot 60 lbs. To cotton seed meal and kainit plot 201 lbs. Average increase with acid phosphate 91 lbs. Increase of seed cotton per acre when kainit was added: To unfertilized plot 63 lbs.. To cotton seed meal plot 81 lbs. To acid phosphate plot 63 lbs. To cotton seed meal and acid phosphate plot 240 lbs- Average increase with kainit 112 lbs> 54 Increase from use of different quantities of kainit: To use of 200 pounds kainiL 240 lbs. To use of 100 pounds kainit Ill lbs. Increase from use of cotton seed meal 399 lbs. Increase from use of nitrate of soda 438 lbs. Nitrate better by 39 lbs. In CHILTON COUNTY, E. H. Parrish, at Clanton, made an experiment, on gray sandy land, which proved inconchisive because of variation in fertility. See page 55. In CHILTON COUNTY, Ay. miles northwest of Jemison, J. D. C. Scott conducted an experiment on gray clay loam. This experiment is counted inconclusive because of want of uniformity in the land and because the plots were only 2 rows wide. See page 55. Near Centersville, BIBB COUNTY, J. H. Thompson con- ducted a fertilizer test, on dark gray soil. This experiment was rendered inconclusive by the cotton caterpillars. See page 55. In JACKSON COUNTY, 5 miles northeast of Stevenson, J. C. Talley conducted an inconclusive fertilizer test. See page 56. In CLEBURNE COUNTY, near Heflin, J. W. Norton con- ducted an exeriment which, because of irregularity in the fer- tility of the land, proved inconclusive. See page 56. In BIBB COUNTY, near Randolph, M. J. Payne conducted an experiment which proved inconclusive because of irregu- larity in yield of plots. See page 56. In CLAY COUNTY, ^ mile south of Ashland, C. F. Strip- lin conducted an experiment on gray sandy loam, with red subsoil. This experiment proved inconclusive, apparently be- •cause of want of uniformity in the different plots. See page 56. In CLAY COUNTY, 4 miles east of Ashland, J. R. Car- penter, conducted a fertilizer experiment on gray loam, with ■clay subsoil. The lightning and caterpillars rendered the test inconclusive. See page 56. 55 In MORGAN COUNTY, 3 miles southwest of New Deca- tur, L. L. Pepper conducted an experiment on red clay loam, with red clay subsoil. This proved inconclusive, probably be- cause of the variations in the fertility of certain of the plots. See page 56. C/5 5 o 42 "so > u o — z of D 10|d pazjiujajun J3AO asrajouj 3JDB J ad loid p3Z[|iji3jun ja.^O 3SE3J0UJ 3J0B jad uouo.") paas p[a!A 3J.^B J 3d llOnOO p33S PJ3!.\ }oid pdzi|UJ3}un jaAO 3SB3JDUJ aaoTJ J3d tionoo pass p|3i.\ joid pazi|ujajun ja.\o asEajouj aj3u J3d uoijoop33s ppi \ Z 3J.113 jad jaz -Jljjjaj lunoiuy •c^N ^oid X -1- — CO cr> (M .; o -r -^ rr vT ^ <0 X^ O CN CO — ; O 3^ t^ t-^ [^ vn O 00 X o : CO l^ CN i-H CO O O 00 rv) • 'rt" (>) ^ ;£ f CO -+ X ,^ 30 30 00 O o O -* ^1 (M vC 03 T h~. vO 00 (N — , ir-; -T CO in l^ I-- M- -o in t^ ■"S- X .; '+'^J CN ^ CO , c o ■<* , o a <: I- u~, 1 o -:r '^ 1 oo — '>J CO t ri ■^ -f Tl< ■"* ' ■ vC -+ - 1 vC O -r O ^ 00 o CD \D <• — !^I LC o o VD ■T >o CTv — O X t^ 30 t- 1-H 00 O rv] (M 00 C^ *-H y—\ t— f i-H ^^ o 00 o a^ in t-~. o in X ,• rf CN O •* OJ CN !M 00 ^ X O "I- ;S OJ CO xC sO I^ CO in VO 1" X vO — ; oc ^ CO -r vD o in in CO SO ■^ o ""^ „• X X X vC CO o ■^ (M , ^- O OJ CO CJN o t ■^ 00 CO 1 -^(M — r- T— 1 (M t-l f.^ ■ CN (>a 'TB sC X CN o o >* CN o 1 Sct! .- 00 ^ o CO '^ \D CO Csj — ; Ln in c<-j m ^ vC •^ sO O \D in —4 ' O) 0) N tn ::r o - JS o „ aj •- o _ o ■ a- c ^ t: Q.„ t: = z c 15 O) to o — ■? C3 I V <1> E 15 T3 O. 0) So oj o a> a. ■j^ o - JS O ' T3 C O ^J O r: Uo o .-1 t- o 1— 1 CO JSAO 8SB9J0UI J ; ; 1—1 ! rH 1—1 CO ■>-. w < Z " a ^j aiOT larl • o -M ^- 00 vO 00 sC ^£> C^ CO 00 Ti- «i) Q ^ CD CO ^1 -^ rO QO i-H OS c<-. tH r v^ Q uoiioD paas ppiA — CO T ^ •* IT) -r ■^ -^ sO CD ir; 00 =s § feo ^o\A p8zi|ijj9jun SSOOO iT-H 00 IM CO lO 1 (Nl CD T— 1 00 oc < z W < en ni J9A0 aSB3J3UJ J'-' I'-' CO CM I— 1 CO CN iH >i r- C3 ^< 9J0B jad • o '^ to 00 vr; ^ O CO -+ CO ■vC o ^' ^O -5j< lO CO -^03CC CNCO O OS •^ vO ^ CO ir- rr •t3 S u. uojioo paasppi;^ u-3 rr (M CO T uo CO TT c: ^ o ^^ lojd paziijuajun • O 00 '00 C5 ^ CO •o CO ^ §< ^ s J8A0 9SB3J3UI r-i CO T— t T— 1 co IC *t •c: • O OO O !M j -t\ o 1 X 50jd p9zi[iiJ9jun • 00 -* ' lo 00 T-H CO -^ ' CD 1—1 o D. J o D Z < Pi J9AO 9SB9J[0UJ 1 1 ■ I— t T— 1 CO CSJ 9JDB jad • C to (M -+ ■* OJ O CD CO C<1 00 ^ 3: S (M Ol "-. 00 CD t^ O •* 00 CD a Oi uo»oo pa9Sp[9I^ v£3 Csi o 00 1- 00 CO uonoD paasppi^ — lO LO ^ -^ co CO CO li-. ^ CD \r ^ <3 CO loid p9ziiUJ9jun i ; : ;S 00 00 ' 00 c: o jaAO aSB9JDUJ ^ \ \ \ T— t CO OJ •H ■ij S ajOE J9d • 1 . (M 00 '^i 00 00 CD oq ri oc CO ;.' w . . OS O 3 : i'^^ o vo TJ. ^ CO >o c lO ■ CO Ni Q C rt E «< C rt C rt , E rt rt T3 '-^ -C t. ^ '- I- -C _E J^ k. JS O -r- Z -c a. a> "C CI, TO 0) a ■c a. ! -u o- O) a. i« OJ OO N I' S^ a; N « OJ w OJ f/i {/) W c a. c: ■•- ■— o O) o C 2. *. 7^ o a. *. 0 2 -a £ 'S S t: 'c 2t='S a; Tz"z. "^ O '-' 0 ra Q O o. n O '^ n O o rt n ^ p C ■^ lA .- t/5 u?.50 a ton. Table 3. — Quantilt/ Ami Cost Of Feed Required To Make 100 Pounds Of Gain. (Dec. 1, 1909— Feb. 23, 1910.) (84 Days.) Pounds of feed to Cost of feed to Lot RATION make 100 pounds make 1 same total gains in live weight, but those in Lot 1 had the advantage in that they had a cheap fed, silage, addea to the basal ration of cottonseed meal and hulls. Each steer in Lot 1 made a clear profit of .$7.68. while each one in Lot 3 made a profit of only J}>6.97. The steers which received Johnson-grass hay along with the cottonseed meal and hulls (Lot 2) made a profit of only $5.50 each. SLAUGHTER DATA. Table 4 shows the total weight of each lot of cattle, the live weight ;il llic Ldiiisvillo market, the number of pounds each steer Idst in shij)inent, the dressed weight at Louisville, and liie per cent of dressed weight to livo weight. The steers were driven 4 miles to a railroad, and, on account of delays, were in the cars 48 hours. Table 4. — Slaughfcr Records. Lot Number o' steers Total weight on farm Total weight at Louisville Average shrinkage en route per steer Total dressed weight at Louisville Average per cent, dressed out by farm weights Per cent. Average per cent, drer.sed out by market wt^ights Founds Pounds Pounds Pounds Per cent. 1 20 l'i235 17683 77.5 9926 57.6 56.1 2 20 189S0 17615 68.3 9736 51.3 55.3 3 20 19900 18325 78.8 1016+ 51.1 55.5 The shrinkage on tlie road was rather great, but it should be remembered that there was a delay of several hours in shipment. Those cattle which were fed John- son-grass hay (Lot 2) lost the fewest pounds in weight. Each steer lost 77.5, 68.3 and 78.8 pounds in Lots 1, 2, and 3 respectively; or, the silage-fed steers (Lot 1) lost in transit 8.1 per cent of their weight, those in Lot 2 (John- son-grass lot) lost 7.1 per cent, while those in Lot 3 (cot- tonseed meal and hulls) shrunk 7.9 per cent. The steers in Lot 1, (the silage-fed cattle) dressed out higher than the steers in Lots 2 and 3, dressing 56.1 per cent by the market weights. The steers in Lots 2 and 3 dressed 55.3 per cent and 55.5 per cent respectively. 76 Table 5- —Summary o f Results. LOT 1 Feed:- Cottonseed meal Cottonseed hulls Corn silage LOT 2 Feed:— Cottonseed meal Cottonseed hulls Johnson-erass hay LOT 3 Feed: — Cottonseed mea Cottonseed hu Pounds Pounds Pounds Average weight of steers at be- ginning, Dec. 1, 1909 811 820 851 Average weight of steers at close Feb. 23; 1910 962 151 949 129 995 Average total gain of each steer for whole period of 84 days 144 Average daily gain of each steer whole period of 84 day s 1.8 1.54 1.71 Average daily gain of each steer for first 56 days while silage was fed 1.86 6.1 15.1 21.0 1.43 6.1 14.3 1.89 Average cottonseed meal fed daily per steer _ . 6.1 Average cottonseed hulls fed dai- Iv per steer _ 26.6 Average silage fed daily per steer Average Johnson-grass hay fed daily per steer __ _ _ 8.40 Cottonseed meal to make 100 pounds of gain for whole period of 84 days ... 341 287 399 372 357 Cottonseed meal to make 100 pounds of gain for first 56 days 280 Roughage to make 100 pounds gain for whole period of 84 days 781 silage 1020 hulls 931 hulls 550 hay 1554 hulls Roughage to make 100 pounds of gain for first 56 days while si- lage was fed 812 hulls 1132 silage 1004 hulls 641 hay 1475 hulls Cost to make 100 pounds of gain for whole period of 84 days__. $8.98 $11.47 $10.08 Cost to make 100 pounds of gain for first 56 days 7.98 11.88 8.80 Cost of steers per cwt. in fall 3.25 3.25 3.25 Selling price of steers in Louis- ville 5.75 5.75 5.75 Selling price of steers on farm... 5.10 5.10 5.10 Profit per steer . . . 7.68 5.50 6.97 77 SUMMARY STATEMENTS. 1 — The steers ^^'hich were used in this test were from 2 to 3 years old. They liad all been grf^V^d up by the use of Aberdeen-Angus, Herel'urd, and Shorthorn sires. 2 — At the beginning of the test they averaged 827 pounds each in weight. Tliey were fed 84 days and at the close of the test each steer averaged 967. 3 — The 60 head of steers were divided into three lots and fed as follows: — Lot 1 : — Cottonseed meal. Cottonseed hulls. Corn silage. Lot 2: — Cottonseed meal. Cottonseed hulls. Johnson-grass hay. Lot 3: — Cottonseed meal. Cottonseed hulls. 4 — For the whol(^ })eriod of 84 days an average daily gain of 1.8, 1.54, and 1.71 ])ounds were secured in Lots 1, 2, and 3, respectively. 5 — During the ilrst 56 days, when silage was fed in Lot 1, an average daily gain of 1.86, 1.43, and 1.89 pounds were secured in Lots 1, 2, and 3, respectively. 6— For the whole period of 84 days it cost $8.98, $11.47, and $10.08 to make 100 pounds of gain in Lots 1, 2, and 3, respectively, 7 — For the first 56 days, when silage was fed in Lot 1, it cost $7.98, $11.88, and $8.80 to make 100 pounds of gain in Lots 1, 2, and 3, respectively. 8_The fall of 1909 the steers cost $3.25 per hundred- weight. At the end of the test they were shipped to Louisville and sold for $5.75 per hundredweight. 9 — Each steer in Lots 1, 2, and 3, netted a clear profit of $7.68, $5.50, and $6.97, respectively. 10 — Corn silage proved to be an exceedingly satis- factory addition to a basal ration of cottonseed meal and hulls, but Johnson-grass hay was an exceedingly imsatisfactory supplement when used in the same way. Part II. Wintering Steers Preparatory to Summer Fattening on Pasture. INTRODUCTION. For several years this Station, cooperating with the Bureau of Animal Industry, has been studying the sub- ject of wintering mature steers and subsequently fatten- ing them in the summer on pasture. Some of the work has been published,* but the conditions surrounding the work herein published were altogether different from the circumstances surrounding the pre\ious work. In the first place, these cattle were of different age and quality from the ones which were used in the former experimen- tal work. In the second place, the grass upon which these cattle grazed grew on a sandy instead of a lime soil. In the previous work the cattle were grazed upon lime soils with sweet clover (Melilotus) as the basal pas- ture crop during the early part of the grazing season. In the work published in this bulletin no sweet clover pastures were available, as it does not occur upon the sandy soils of this region. Two separate experiments are reported in this section owing to the fact that two distinct types of cattle were- used. The animals were divided into four lots, two of them composed of high grade young cattle, and the other two of common or scrub cattle fully a year older. The work was done in cooperation with Mr. F. I. Derby, of Sumter County, Alabama, he furnishing the cattle and the feed and the Alabama Experiment Station and the Bureau of Animal Industry providing a trained man to carry on the experiment. Mr. J. W. Ridgway was lo- *See Alabama Station bulletin No. 151, or Bureau of Animal' Industry bulletin No. 131. 79 cated on the farm and had personal supervision of all the experimental work. OBJECTS OF THE AVORK. This work was outlined \\i(li the following objects in- view : 1. To study the problem of feeding steers during the winter months with a view to fattening them on pasture the follo\^-ing summer. 2. To determine the profits, if any, in supplementing sandy soil pastures with cottonseed cake during the sum- mer fattening process. 3. To study a common southern method of managing and fattening common or scrub cattle. Steers can be purchased cheaper during the fall of the year than at any other time, so many feeders prefer to buy in the fall, ^^'hen cheap steers are so purchased, a common practice in the South is to "rough" them through the winter months as cheaply as possible, turn them on pasture the following summer and sell them to the butcher at the end of the pasture season. THE CATTLE. The cattle were all bought in Sumter and neighboring counties, but those selected for Lots 4 and 5 were an ex- cellent grade of animals, all having Shorthorn or Aber- deen-Angus blood, while those placed in Lots X and Y represented no particular breeding; they w^re, in fact, scrubs, or the common cattle of the neighborhood. The steers in Lots 4 and 5 were from 20 to 24 months old when purchased in the fall of 1909, and had attained an average weight of 616 pounds. The steers of Lots X and Y were from 3 to 4 years old and weighed only 565 pounds each when the test began, December 6, 1909. The cattle, both young and old, were dehorned as soon as brought to the farm. The reader's attention should be called to the fact that, while the results secured in Lots 4 and 5 are comparable 80 with each other, they are not in any waiyeomparabre wife the results secured in Lots X and Y. These are t;wo sep- arate experiments and are not comparable in mij way. PASTURES. The soil upon which these steers grazed was ©f a saoi- dy and sandy loam character, such as is found iin a cu-t- over pine district. A large proportion of the pastures was low so that in rainy weather they beeame- exceed- ingly wet. There was some sandy ridge land,, however, in each pasture. Carpet grass, lespedeza, broom sedge aadl a small amount of bermuda and Paspalum Dilatatum eoiistiitu- ted the plants that formed the pastures. They afforded an abundance of grass throughout the grazing season, but the growth was rank and very watery^ as the fre- quent rains kept the pasture exceedingly wet during tlio whole test. Sweet clover (Melilotus) does not grow in this region. No expense or time had ever been expended on these pastures except to build a wire fence around them. The plants mentioned above had come voluntar- ily after the pine woods were cleared away. WINTER RANGE The steers of Lots X and Y, after being dehorned and tagged, were turned out December 6, 1909, in a tract of cut-over pine lands. Approximately 20,000 acres of land were in this tract, but it was not fenced, so the steers had the privilege of going practically anywhere in the south- ern part of Sumter County. This land had grown up during the previous summer with broom sedge, lesped- eza and other native grasses. When frost came the grasses were, of course, all killed, but still they afforded some grazing for the steers during the first part of th'> winter. During the latter part of the \^'inter, when grazing is usually short, no little amount of Augusta vetch came up and furnished good grazing during the early spring months. This plant, more than anything 81 else, perhaps, kept the steers from losing weight while on the range, as it gave good grazing in March and April. The steers evidently gained in weight during these two months. The steers were not taken olT this range until April 23, 1910. The young steers of Lots 4 and 5 were not turned on the range. PLAN OF THE FEEDING. In order to give a clear idea of the nature of the work, the general plan of the feeding is outlined helow: Table 6. — General Plan of The Feeding. The Young Steers. Lot Number of steers 17 Winter Feeding (Dec. 6. 19«9-March 31. i910) Cottonseed meal \ ^o Cottonseed hulls J ration Cottonseed meal t Cottonseed hulls - j^.j Johnson-grass hay ) ration Summer Fattening (April 2, 1910- Aug. 26, 1910) Pasture Cottonseed cake Pasture Cottonseed cake The Common Steers, Dec. 6. 1909 April 23, 1910 April 23, 1910-Sept. 2, 1910 Range onlv Range onlv Pasture Cottonseed cake Pasture alone The general plan was to feed the steers of Lot 4 and 5 sufficient feed to produce small gains throughout the winter months. They were a good class of cattle and young, so it was thought that it would pay to feed them liberally during the winter months. Accordingly a par- tial ration of cottonseed meal and cottonseed hulls was fed to the steers in Lot 4 while those in Lot 5 had some Johnson-grass hay added to the basal ration of cotton- 82 seed meal and hulls. No effort was made to fatten these young cattle during the winter; the object was to make only small gains and keep them in thriving condition. The fattening was to occur the subsequent summer, when they were on the pasture. The steers of Lots X and Y were turned out as one lot on the range. Being of poor quality, it was not thought that it would be profitable to give them high-priced feeds during the winter months when they were to be fattened on pasture the following summer. As stated before, the range consisted of cut-over pine lands; they had the freedom of probably 20000 acres. The authors realize that this latter method of handling and feeding cattle during the winter is one that will soon go out of vogue on account of the fact that these large ranges will eventually be settled and fenced, but at the present time and under present conditions many farmers are so situated that they can profitably make use of these large tracts. These cattle received no at- tention at all throughout the winter months. In fact, only a few of them were seen during the whole winter. The following spring, April 21, they were brought up, weighed again, and turned onto the summer pasture for the summer fattening work. They were now divided in two lots and fed upon different feeds. The steers of Lots X were grazed upon a pasture and received a small feed of cottonseed cake in addition to the pasture. The steers of Lot Y were in a similar pasture and received nothing in addition. No shelter except the trees was provided for the cattle in either the winter or summer time. They did not seem to suffer from cold in the winter or from the heat in the summer. The summer pastures were abundantly pro- vided with good shade trees and water. While there w^ere cattle ticks in the pasture, yet the cattle were not permitted to become badly infested. A dipping vat was used to keep down heavy infestation. No cases of Texas fever developed. The weight of each steer was secured at the beginning 83 and end of each test, and with the exception of Lots X and Y during the winter of 1909-10, the total weight of each lot was noted every twenty-eight days. When the stivers were sold they were driven 4 miles to the shipping point at A^'hitfield, Alabama. CHARACTER AND PRICE OF FEEDS. Local conditions determine to a large extent the farm prices of feeds. Any price that might be assumed would not meet nil conditions, but the following prices have been taken as a basis upon which to make financial es- timates : Cottonseed meal .$26.00 a ton Cottonseed cake 26.00 a ton Cottonseed hulls 7.00 a ton Johnson-grass hay 11.00 a tori Pasture, per steer 50 cts. a month All of th(! feeds were of good quality. The cottonseed cake, which was used in all of the summer feeding work, had been broken into nut size by the oil mill and sacked. As has been slated in a previous bulletin, this cake can be purchased in the large cake size, just as it comes from the press, for about .$2.00 a ton cheaper than in the nut size. Some feeders fmd that it pays to break the cake on their own farms. The cake is the same thing as cot- tonseed meal, except that it is not ground into a meal. There are several advantages in feeding cake in place of cottonseed meal, especially in summer feeding. A rain does not render the cake unpalatable; but it will often put the meal in such a condition that the cattle will not eat it. Again, no loss is incurred with the cake during windy days, whereas the meal, when fed in the open pasture, is sometimes wasted on account of the winds. Furthermore, the cake requires chewing before being swallowed, and therefore must be eaten very much slower than the meal, so when a number of steers are being fed together the greedy one has little chance to get enough cake to produce scours. In feeding cottonseed meal the greedy steer often scours on account of the fact 84 that he can bolt the meal and get more than his share; this not only injures the steer but makes the bunch "feed out" unevenly. DAILY RATIONS DURING WINTER MONTHS. It should again be noted that the cattle were not being fattened during the winter months; they were simply being carried through so as to be in condition for fat- tening on grass the following summer. The steers of Lots 4 and 5 were confined on cotton fields where col- ton had been grown the previous summer. Of course, they obtained some feed from these cotton fields, espec- ially the first part of the winter, and in addition were given a half ration of cottonseed meal, hulls, and hay, as noted below. Lots X and Y were on the open range with no additional feed. The amount of feed given is shown in the following table : Table 1.- — The Average Daily Amount of Feed Given Each Steer During the Winter Months. The Young Steers. (Dec. 6, 1909— Mar. 31, 1910.) (116 days.) Lot Number of steers RATION Average daily amount 4 5 18 17 Cottonseed meal Cottonseed hulls Cottonseed meal Cottonseed hulls Johnsonrgrass hay Pounds 2.35 13.29 2.35 6.82 5.50 The Common Steers. (Dec. 6, 1909— Apr. 23, 1910) (139 days.) X and Y Open range only Open range only None None 85 It is seen that nono of the steers was fed more than a half ration of purchased feeds. Each steer in Lot 4 re- ceived an average daily feed of 2.35 pounds of cottonseed meal plus 13.29 pounds of hulls. Each steer in Lol o consumed an average of 2.35 pounds of cottonseed meal^ 6.82 pounds of cottonseed hulls and 5.5 pounds of John- son-grass hay daily. These were small amounts of feed but, as will be seen later, the animals made a fairly good daily gain. During the whole winter each animal in Lot 4 ate 273 pounds of cottonseed meal and 1542- pounds of hulls at a total cost of $8.95. During the same length of time each steer in Lot 5 ate 273 pounds of cot- tonseed meal, 791 pounds of hulls, and 638 pounds of hay, at a cost of $9.83. The steers in Lots X and Y received no food at all in addition to the cut-over pine range. WEIGHTS A\n GAINS Dl HING THE WINTER MONTHS. The following table shows that all of the cattle gained during the \\int('r months even the ones which were turned out on the ojjcn range and received no feed or attention during the whole winter. In this connection it should be called to mind that these cattle which were turned out on the range were mature animals. They were better able than young animals to care for them- selves, as they were strong enough to get about over large areas and hunt for a living. Mature steers can withstand careless treatment and yet come through to spring in fairly good condition, while young animals, like those in Lots 4 and 5, might starve with similar feed and treatment. Xo one would advise a farmer to turn young animals on an open range during the winter months and give them no feed or attention. A young beef animal, if he is to attain a respectable size, must be fed and cared for during the cold months. 86 Table 8. — Weights and Gains During the Winter Months. The Young Steers (Dec. 6, 1909— Mar. 31, 1910.) (116 days.) Lot Number of steers 18 17 RATION Cottonseed meal ) }4 Cottonseed hulls ) ration Cottonseed meal ) }4 Cottonseed hulls Johnson-grass hay ' ratio Average initial weight of each steer Average spring weight of each steer Average total gain of each steer Pounds Pounds Pounds 624 698 74 608 676 1. -«rl 68 Average daily gain of each steer Pounds 0.64 0.59 The Goiiiinon Steers. (Dec. 6, 1909— Apr. 23, 1910) (139 days.) X and 43 Range alone Range alone 565 575 10 0.08 The steers m Lots 4 and 5 made as good gains as was desired. No effort was made to fatten them. During the whole feeding period of 116 days each steer gained 74 and 68 pounds in Lots 4 and 5 respectively. They were in an excellent condition when spring came. Each steer in the range lots (Lots X and Y combined) gained 10 pounds during the whole winter. They too, were in good condition when grass came in the spring. When cattle are turned on the open range during the winter they, as a rule, lose instead of gain in weight. In some former work the cattle which had no feed during the cold months except what they secured from the open range, lost approximately 100 pounds each during the winter time.* It is a very unusual occurence for steers to make gain during the winter months when handled and fed as were those in Lots X and Y. *See Alabama Station Bulletin 151, or Bureau of Animal Indu.s- try Bulletin 131. 87 -QUANTITY AND COST OF FEED REQUIRED TO MAKE 100 POUNDS GAIN DURING THE WINTER. The following- table shows that the gains made during the winter months by the steers in Lots 4 and 5 were ex- pensive ones. There is no way to determine the cost of gains made by the range cattle (Lots X and Y), as no value ov rental price has ever been placed upon the •open range. "Table 9. — Quautity (uid ('ost of Feed Required to Make 100 Pounds of Gain During the Winter Months. The Young Steers (Dec. G, 1909— Mar. 31, 1910.) air. (lavs.! Lot RATION Feed required to make 1(10 pounds of gain Cos* of feed to make 100 pounds of gain Pounds 4 Cottonseed meal Cottonseed hulls 368 2u77 $12.05 5 Cottonseed meal Cottonseed Inills Johnson-grass hay 424 1160 935 14.71 X and Y Tlir Coniinou Steers. (Dec. 6, 1909— Apr. 23, 1910) (139 days.) Range alone Nothing Each 100 pounds of gain during the winter months -cost $12.05 and $14.71 in Lots 4 and 5 respectively. These were very expensive gains and hard to overcome even when the steers wer continued on a very cheap ration^ pasture and cottonseed cake— the following summer. In fact the expensive winter gains of Lots 4 and 5 were .never counteracted by the cheap gains of the following 8a summer, as money was finally lost on these two lots of cattle. The gains secured during the winter months were expensive by reason of the fact that the ration was too near a mere maintenance ration. It is seen that in Lot 4, 368 pounds of cottonseed meal plus 2077 pounds of hulls were required to make 100 pounds of increase in live weight. In Lot 5, where Johnson-grass hay was introduced, 424 pounds of cottonseed meal, 1160 pounds of hulls and 935 pounds of hay were required to maki? 100 pounds of gain. Johnson-grass hay did not improve the ration of cot- tonseed meal and hulls. Nothing was gained by its in- troduction. In comparing the results of Lots 4 and 5, it is learned that 035 pounds of Johnson-grass, hay saved 917 pounds of hulls, but caused a loss of 56 pounds of cottonseed meal; or, one ton of the hay was worth r$5.26 in this feeding test, when cottonseed meal and cottonseed hulls are valued at $26.00 and $7.00 a ton respectively. It will be remembered that in Part f of this bulletin the same hay was worth only $1.31 .i ton as a fattening feed. The nearer a feed or a com- bination of feeds approaches a mere maintenance ra- tion the more valuable such a hay as Johnson-grass be- comes. The small increase in live weight of the steers in Lots X and Y was made without cost as the range, their only feed, was free. THE SPRING COST OF THE STEERS. The steers in Lots 4 and 5 cost 3I/2 cents a pound the- fall of 1909; those in Lot 4 averaged $21.84 each, and fhose in Lot 5 $21.28. They were well-bred animals; no scrubs were among them. The steers in Lots X and Y were of a very common grade and cost only 2^/4 cents a pound. Although these cattle were not to be fattened for the market until the next summer, they were all bought during the fall of 1909, as it is practically impossible to get together a bunch of cattle in the spring. However^ 89 it cosis something to feed cattle tliroiigli the winter months, and the farmer who buys them in the fall with the intention of carrying them until the following sum- mer to fatten for the market, is interested in knowing what it will cost to get them through the winter months. In other words, he desires to know the spring cost, w^hich is equal to the fall price plus the cost of getting the cat- tle through the winter months. If it were possible to get them through the winter months witliout cost, or gain, or loss in weight, the spring and fall prices would be iden- tical, but this can seldom be accomplished. As a rule, the steers must be fed, and they commonly gain or lose in weight. These expenses and changes in live weight all have a bearing on the S])ring price. The following table presents the fall price, the cost to get each steer through the winter, and the spring price after the winter expenses and changes in live weight have boon tnl^cn into considoi'atirm. Table 10.- — Average Fall (uid Sjiriiuj Prices of t/ie Cattle, and Cost of Winter Feeding. The Young Steers (Dec. 6, 1909— Mar. 31, 1910.) (116 days.) Lot RATION Fall price per hundred-weight Averaee cost to feed each steer through the winter Spring price per hundred- weight 4 Cottonseed meal Cottonseed hulls $3.50 $8.95 $4.41 5 Cottonseed meal Cottonseed hulls - Johnson-grass haj- 3.50 9.83 4.60 The Common Cattle (Dec. 6, 1909-April 23, 1910 139 days). 90 In Lot 4 it cost $8.95 to feed each steer through the winter months. In Lot 5, where Johnson-grass hay was used, the expense to feed each steer for the same length of time was raised to $9.83. The Johnson-grass hay in- creased tlie expense. When these winter expenses are added to the original cost and allowance made for the winter gains, the steers in the spring cost $4.41 and $4.60 per hundredweight in Lots 4 and 5 respectively, which brought their average price to $30.79 for Lot 4, and $31.11 for Lot 5. The steers in Lots X and Y were cheaper at the end of the winter than they were the previous Tali. This was due to the fact that they gained a few pounds during the winter months (10 pounds each), while no expense was attached to feeding them, as they were grazed on the open range. It is, of course, an unusual occurence for these two factors to be combined in this way. These catttle were bought in the fall of 1909 for $2.25 per hun- dredweight, but when spring arrived, April 23, 1910,. their cost per hundredweight was reduced to $2.21. FATTEMNG THE CATTLE ON PASTURE. At the close of the winter tests the steers were redivided into lots, turned into the summer pastures and fattened for the late summer market. The winter feeding of Lots 4 and 5 was discontinued March 31, 1910. On April 2, 1910, the pastures were ready for grazing, so the summer fattening tests were inaugu- rated on this date. The steers in Lots 4 and 5 were com- bined into one lot, and grazed upon the same pasture throughout the summer experiment. The range or common cattle (Lots X and Y) were divided into two lots, as nearly equal as possible in quality, size, breeding, and placed upon separate pas- tures on April 23, 1910. One lot of cattle. Lot X, was fed cottonseed cake along with the pasture; Lot Y was fed nothing except pasture. The feeding was done once a day in open fed troughs; 91 these troughs were conveniently h)cated in the pastures. In order that all of the cattle would come out to the iroughs the feeding was done in the cool of the evening, or about sundown. An abundance of water and salt was kept before the animals all the time. AMOl NT OF COTTONSEED CAKE FED E.\CH STEER DAILY. To avoid scouring and other ill results, steers which are being fattened must become accustomed gradually to cottonseed meal and cottonseed cake. Many feeders increase tlie feed too rapidly for best results. The tempta- tion is to get the steers on full feed within a few days af- ter the feeding begins, but this tendency should be curbed. The following table illustrates the amount of cottonseed cake given each steer daily l)y periods of 28 days : Table 11. — Daily Ration for Each Steer During Summer Fatteniufj. THE YOUNG STEERS THE COMMON STEERS April 2. 3910- Aug 26, 1910 April 23. J9l()-Sept. 2. 1910 Ration Lots 4 and 5 combined Cottonseed cake and pasture Lot X Cottonseed cake and pasture Lot Y Pasture alone Pounds Pound* First 28 days .__ 2.19 calve 2.84 cake Pasture alone Second 28 days 4.36 cake 3.48 cake Pasture alone Third 28 days_. 5.50 cake 3.48 cake Pasture alone Fourth 28 days . Fifth 23 days... 6.00 cake 6.00 cake 5.00 caV-e Last 21 davs: — 4.91 cake Pasture alone Pasture alone Last 7 days 5.14 cake Attention is again called to the fact that the results se- cured in Lots 4 and 5 (now combined into one lot) can- not be compared with those secured in Lots X and Y. It a •a V c o c II V •a 55 Si a- o 93 slK.iihl 1)1' nntrMl thai Ihese lots were not started on feeds ■al till' same date, sold at the same time, or fed and carej for similarly the proceeding winter. This is not a test in M-hich common cattle are compared with good ones. Lots X and "i". however, are comparable with each other. All nf the cattle, except Lot Y which were on the pas- ture alone, were given a very small daily feed of cake during the first fe^^- weeks. Each of the young steers re- ceived an average of only 2.19 pounds of cake daily dur- ing the first 28 days. This amouid was increased from time to time, as shown in the table. For a time each steer was eating 6 pounds of cake a day, but this amount was finally reduced somewhat on account of scouring and hot ^^•eather. At first Ihc common steers (Lot X) were also given a very small allowance of cottonseed cake, each steer re- ceiving an average of 2.84 pounds of cake daily during the first 28 days. The steers in this lot were never given a daily feed of over 5 pounds of cake. The steers in Lot Y received no feed at all in addition to the pasture, the object being to learn whether it would pay to feed cot- tonseed cake to steers of this grade while grazing a fair- ly good pasture. WKIGHTS AND GAINS ON PASTURE The follo\\ing table shows the average initial weight, average final weight, and the total and average daily gains of each steer. All of the gains were unsatisfactory. To have been entirely satisfactory the average daily gains should have been not less than 2 pounds. The authors are unable to state postively why the gains were no greater, but it ^^•as probably due to the unusual amount of rain during the grazing season. The pastures were on low grounds which continued extremely wet throughout the greater part of the test. The grass made a good growth and the steers seemed to be well filled practically all of the time, but, of course, the grass that they obtained was very soft and full of water. 94 Table 12. — Weights, Total Gains, and Average Dailij Gains of the Steers During the Summer of 1910. The Young Steers. (April 2, 1910— Aug. 26, 1910.) (147 days.) Lot Number of steers RATION Average initial weight of each steer Average final w^eight of each steer Average total gain of each steer Average- daily gain of each steer 4 and 5 35 Pasture and Cottonseed cake Pounds 687 Pounds 855 Pounds 168 Pounds 1.14 The Common Steers. (April 23, 1910— Sept. 2, 1910.) (11 3 days. ) X 28 Pasture Cottonseed cake 572 761 189 1.42 Y 15 Pasture alone 580 757 177 1.33 Each of the young steers made a total gain of 164 pounds during the 147 days that they were on feed. This- was an average daily gain of 1.14 pounds. As stated be- fore, these gains were exceedingly unsatisfactory. With the amount of cottonseed cake they received along with the pasture it was expected that they would make not less than an average daily gain of 2 pounds a day. In some former feeding work* the daily gains obtained averaged more than two pounds when the pastures were supple- mented by cottonseed cake. The common cattle of lot Y (pasture alone) made fairly satisfactory gains, although larger gains were ex- pected. Each steer made an average daily gain of 1.33 pounds, or a total gain of 177 pounds for the whole- summer of 133 days. The steers (Lot X) which received some cottonseed cake along with the pasture made a *See Alabama Station Bulletin 151 or Bureau of Animal Indus- try Bulletin 131. 95 very little larger daily gain Ihan the ones on pasture al(ine. Kaeh cake-fed steer made an average daily gain of 1.43 j)()unds, or a total gain of 189 pounds for the Mhole summer, while the pasture steers each gained 177 pounds, or an average daily gain of 1.33 pounds. Ql A.NTH V AM) CdST OF FEEO REQLIHKI) TO MAKE lOa POl NDS GAI\. \A'hen cattle are heing fattened and the gains are small, they are almost certain to be expensive; the results se- cured in this experiment were no exception to the gen- eral nilf. The table f(»llowing shows that the summer gains were extremely expensive when compared to form- er experiments that have been made in this State. At least two factors \\erp involved in making these summer gains expensive. First, tho cattle were fed a rather heavy ration of high-priced cottonseed cake along with the pasture, and, second, the cattle did not respond to till' liberal' feeding, due probably at least in part to the wet pastures. Table 13. — QuantUij and Cost of Feed Required to Make 100 Pounds of Grain. The Young Steers. (April 1910- (147 -Aug. days) 16, 1910) Lot Number of steers RATION Total cost of feed and pasture for each steer Pounds of feed to make 100 pounds of gain Cost to make 100 pounds of gain includ- ing pasture 4 and 5 35 Pasture Cottonseed cake $11.54 Pounds 423 $7.06 The Common Cattle. (April 23, 1910— Sept. 2, 1910.) (133 days.l Pasture X 28 Cottonseed cake $9.10 274 $4.82 Y 15 Pasture alone 2.38 None 1.55 96 It cost $11.54 to feed each steer in Lots 4 and 5 through the summer when cottonseed cake is valued at $26.00 a ton and the pasture at 50 cents a month for each ani- mal. Or it required 423 pounds of cottonseed cake at a cost of $7.06, to malve 100 pounds of increase in live weight. This was an unusually expensive gain for summer feeding. The following extract is taken from Alabama Station bulletin No. 151, which is a report of some previous work done in fattening cattle in the summer time on pasture : 'Tn every case above, the cost to make one hundred pounds increase in live weight was very low. (In one case $1.18 when pasture was used alone; in another case $1.03; when cottonseed cake was used it cost only $2,56 to make 100 pounds of gain in one ^experiment, and $3.21 in a second test). When steers -^re fattened during the winter time each pound of gain is put on at a loss, as each pound ])ut on may be ex- pected to cost from 8 to 12 cents; and the profit is de- pendent upon the enchancement of the value of the steer over and above the selling value of pounds of gain made. In these tests each pound put on during the fattening period was put on at a profit, a very unusual occurrence in fattening beef cattle. These cheap finishing gains made the feeding operations compar- atively safe as far as profits were concerned. As stated JDefore, these cheap gains were due to two factors; iirst, the cattle had a cheap and succulent roughage — pasture. Second, the amount of concentrated feeds used •was kept down to a comparatively small figure; from :2.76 to 3.31 pounds of cottonseed cake and 4.48 pounds of cottonseed were fed each steer daily." In Lot X, one of tlie lots of common cattle, 274 pounds of cake were required to make 100 pounds of gain , at an expense of $4.82 per hundredweight. To feed each steer in this lot all summer it cost $9.10, when the feeds are valued as above. The cattle in Lot Y received no cake in addition to the pasturage so it cost only $2.38 to feed each one from April 23 to September 2 when pasturage is valued at 50 cents a month per head. r o c ■ » c a^ 22. o » 0 y < Ei c 0 3- ft 5' n r. 0 0 3 i/> a n a. a K n c ■a a 3 3 98 FINAXCIAL STATEMENT OF THE SUMMER FEEDING. As stated before, the cattle in Lots 4 and 5 cost 3V2 cents a pound in the fall of 1909. These cattle were fed through the winter of 1909-"i0 on a light ration of feeds as heretofore outlined. \Mien spring arrived, and the expense of the winter feeding had been added to the fall price, the steers had cost ip4.41 and $4.60 per hundred- weight respectively. These were the values placed upon them at the beginning of the summer feeding. April 2. 1910. On August 26, 1910, they were sold for $4.50 pe:- hundredweight on the farm, after a 3 per cent shrink. The common cattle in Lots X and Y were also pur- chased in the fall of 1909, costing, however, only 2^/4 cents a pound. They ate no expensive feeds during the winter months as they were turned out on the open range. On April 23, 1910 they were taken off this winter range and weighed again, and it was learned that each steer had gained 10 pounds during the winter. Owing to the fact that they had been fed no feeds during the winter upon which a price was placed (open rang; has no value placed upon it) they were really cheaper in the spring of 1910 than they were the previous fall as they had gained in weight. This condition of afYairs is, of course, very unusual. When this increase in weight was taken into consideration, the cattle cost $2.21 per hundredweight the spring of 1910; at the begin- ning of the summer work this value was placed upon them. On September 2, 1910 they were sold and shipped to the Atlanta market, realizing $3.87y2 per hundred- weight for Lot X and $3.60 per hundredweight for Lot Y. 99 FINANCIAL STATEVIKNT OF LOTS 4 AND 5. Lot 4 — CottonscMHl cake and pasture: To 18 steers, 12,5()() lbs. at $4.41 per cwt.. .$554.16 To 12,770 lbs. cuttoriseed cake at $26.00 per ton 166.01 To pasture for SVi months at 50 cents a month 47.25 767.42 By sale 18 steers, 15,064 lbs. at $4.50 per cwt $677.88 Total loss 89.54 Loss per steer 4.97 Lot 5 — Cottonseed cake and pasture : To 17 steers, 11,494 lbs. at $4.60 per cwt. $528.72 To 12,061 lbs. cottonseed cake at $26.00 a ton 156.79 To pasture for 5V4 months at 50 cents a month 44.62 730.13 By sale 17 steers, 13,978 lbs. at $4.50 per cwt ■ $629.01 Total loss 101.12 Loss per steer 5,95 It is seen that the steers in both of these lots were fed at a loss, each steer losing $4.97 and $5.95 in Lots 4 and 5 respectively. It should be noted that the ex- pense of feeding these cattle through the previous win- ter is also charged against them in the above statements. The steers in Lot 4 w^ere fed through the previous win- ter on cottonseed meal and hulls, while those of Lot 5 had some Johnson-grass hay added to the basal ration of cottonseed meal and hulls. More money was lost on the steers in Lot 5 because of the fact that Johnson- grass hay increased the expense of the winter ration^ (See page 87.) 100 This work shows clearly that profits cannot be made upon cattle when the conditions are as they were in this test. It is true that the beef cattle market was demor- alized just at the time of sale, but even with a normal market it would have been impossible to have made money on these young steers. To have come out even on the operation the steers of Lots 4 and 5 would have had to sell for $5.09 and $5.24 per hundredweight re- spectively. This they would not have done even under normal market conditions. Too much high-priced feed had been fed. Furthermore, subsequent work seems to teach that, while they were fed too long a time in the summer, they were not fed liberally enough during the winter. If they had been sold earlier in the summer the financial outcome would not have been so discouraging, as the price would have been better and considerable high-priced feed would have been saved. In fact, a little profit ^^'ould have been secured if they had been sold about July. Then again, the expense of feeding them during the winter was a heavy one, while >only small gains were secured. It cost $8.95 and $9.83 to feed each steer in Lots 4 and 5 through the winter months. If profits are to be made in handling cattle in this manner, the winter feed bill must be carefully looked after. Two or three methods of feeding can be adopted by which the winter feeding can be done more economi- cally than was the case in this test. In the first place, these young steers were not fed a sufficient amount oi feed during the winter months. Their ration was too near a mere maintenance ration. In the second place, the open range in some parts of the State, can be used to supplement the high-priced feeds. With young ani- mals the range can never entirely take the place of high-priced feeds, as young animals must be fed during the winter months if satisfactory results are secured. This system of wintering cattle, however, will disappear as soon as the State becomes more densely populated and the large farms are divided into small ones. In the 101 third place, the old cotton and corn fields can be mad.^ to be exceedingly profitable when fenced; both the young and old animals can be turned on these fields and oflentinies secure one-half of their winter feed from them. This third method is a permanent one and will be iiiln»(liir'('d more and more as our farming conditions change. I INA.NCIAL STATEMEXT OF LOTS X AND Y. Lot X — Cottonseed cake and pasture: To 28 steers, 16,011 lbs. at $2.19 per cwt. $350.64 To 14,493 lbs. cottonseed cake at $26.00 a ton 188.41 To pasture, 4 % months at 50 cents a month 66.50 605.55 By sale 28 steers, 20,665 lbs. at $3.87i/2 per cwt $800.77 Total ])rofit 195.22 Profit ])f'r steer 6.97 Lot Y — Pasture alone : To 15 steers, 8,697 lbs. at $2.25 per cwt. . . 195.68 To pasture, 4% months at 50 cents a month 35.63 231.31 By sale 15 steers, 11,008 lbs. at $3.60 per cwt $396.29" Total profit 164.98 Profit per steer 11.00 These steers were sold on the farm with a 3 per cent shrink. Those in Lot X sold for $3.87^^ per hundred- weight, and those in Lot Y for $3.60. Exceedingly sat- isfactory profits were made on these cattle, $6.97 clear- profit being made on each steer in Lot X, w^hile eacb. animal in Lot Y returned a profit of $11.00 102 In this particular experiment it did not pay to supple- ment the pasture with the cottonseed cake; more money would have been made it the cake had not been used. These results, however, do not agree with others secured in former work*. The cattle in Lot X did not respond to the extra feed of cottonseed cake; this is shown to be true by the daily gains. The steers in Lot Y where no cake was fed made an average daily gain of 1.33 pounds, while the steers of Lot X, where the cake was fed along with pasture, made an average daily gain of only 1.42 pounds. This is unusual and the authors regard the results as abnormal, SLAUGHTER RECORDS. The steers of Lots 4 and 5 were shipped to Atlanta, where complete slaughter records were secured. Those of Lots X and Y were also shipped to Atlanta, but no slaughter data were obtained. Table 14. — Shipping Weights and Slaughter Data. Lot Number of steers Total weight on farm Total weight at Atlanta Shrinkage en route per steer Total dressed weight at Atlanta Per cent. dressed out by farm weight Per cent, dressed out by Atlanta weight Pounds Pounds Pounds Pounds Per cent. Per cent. 4 18 15530 14920 33.9 8252 53.1 55.3 5 17 14402 13740 38.9 7531 52.3 54.8 The cattle were driven 4 miles from the farm to the railroad. The shrinkage en route was not large, being 33.9 pounds and 38.9 pounds for each animal in Lots 4 and 5 respectively. By Atlanta weights, the steers in Lot 4 dressed 55.3 per cent, while those in Lot 5 dressed 54.8 per cent. "^See Alabama bulletin 151, or Bureau of Animal Indu.stry bul- letin 131. 103 SUMMARY. 1. Two separate tests are reported in Part II. The steers in Lots 4 and 5 were a high-grade buncli of young cattle; those in Lots X and Y were the common cattle ■of Sumter and neighboring counties. These tests arc not comi)arable. '^. The steers in Lots 4 and 5 were carried through the winter of 1909-'10 on the following feeds: — Lot 4— Cottonseed meal, Cottonseed hulls. Lot 5— Cottonseed meal, Cottonseed hulls, Johnson-grass hay. The general plan was to give sufficient feed to produc*^ ;small gains throughout the winter months. Xo eflori was made to falleii the steers as they were to bs fattened the following sununer on pasture. 3. The steers in Lots X and Y were carried through the winter of 19U9-'10 on the range alone; no purchased feeds were used. The object was to fatten these cattle the following sununer on pasture. 4. The steers in Lots 4 and 5 ate the following -amounts of feed each day during the winter: Lot 4— Cottonseed meal 2.35 pounds Cottonseed hulls 13.29 pounds Lot 5— Cottonseed meal 2.35 pounds Cottonseed hulls 6.82 pounds Johnson-grass hay 5.50 pounds 5. The test was inaugurated December 6, 1909. On this date the steers in Lots 4 and 5 averaged 624 and 608 pounds in weight. At the close of tlie winter period, April 1, 1910, the steers had attained an average weight •of 698 and 676 pounds in the respective lots. 104 6. The steers in Lots X and Y (combined during the winter months) averaged 565 pounds in weight at the beginning of the winter test, December 6, 1909. At tli^^ close of the winter, April 23, 1910, they had attained an average weight of 575 pounds. 7. To feed each steer through the winter cost $8.95 and $9.83 in Lots 4 and 5 respectively. Johnson-grass hay increased the expense; it did not pay to use the hay along with the cottonseed meal and hulls. 8. The steers in Lots 4 and 5 cost 3^^ cents a pound when they were purchased the fall of 1909. At the end of the winter feeding they had cost $4.41 and 4.60 per hundredweight respectively, after the gains were taken into consideration. 9. Owing to the fact that the common cattle in Lots^ X and Y were fed nothing except range during the cold months, but at the same time gained a little in weight, they v/ere cheaper when spring opened thau' they were the previous fall. They were bought in the fall of 1909 for $2.25 per hundredweight, and at the end of the winter period, April 23, 1910, their cost per hun- dredweight was reduced to $2.21. 10. When the spring of 1910 arrived all the cattle were turned on pasture and fattened for the late summer market. Lots 4 and 5 were combined into one lot, while Lots X and Y were separated into two lots. The steers in Lot 4 and 5 were fed cottonseed cake along with pas- ture from April 2, 1910 to August 26, 1910. The steers in^ Lots X and Y were given the following feeds from April 23, 1910 to September 2, 1910: Lot X— Pasture, Cottonseed cake. Lot Y— Pasture alone. 11. The steers in Lots 4 and 5 (now combined) made- an average daily gain of only 1.14 pounds during the- pasture season. This was unsatisfactory. 105 12. The steers in Lots X and Y made an average daily gain of 1.42 and 1.33 pounds respectively during the pasture season. This was also unsatisfactory. 13. Including the cost of pasture, it cost $7.06 to make 100 pounds of gain in Lots 4 and 5 during the pasture period. These were unusually expensive gains for the summer season. 14. Including the cost of pasture, it cost $4.82 and $1.55 to make 100 pounds of gain in Lots X and Y re- spectively. 15. The reader's attention should be called to the fact that the results secured in Lots 4 and 5 are not comparable with those secured in Lots X and Y. 16. Money was lost on the cattle in Lots 4 and 5, $4.97 on each steer in Lot 4, and $5.95 on each one in Lot 5. 17. Excellent profits were realized on the cattle in Lots X and Y, $6.97 on each steer in Lot X, and $11.00 on each one in Lot Y. In this experiment it did not pay to supplement the pasture with the cottonseed cake. This result, however, does not agree with other results secured in former experiments. For reasons stated in the text of this bulletin the authors regard this result as abnormal. X'.'- v^^i.-!?' ■»-*". .'.■■>- ■"$«•'' 1 New York Botanical Garden Librar llllilllllillilllllllll II II HI 3 5185 00259 6425