STUDIES CONCERNING THE ELIMINATION OF EXPERIMENTAL ERROR IN COM- PARATIVE CROP TESTS By T. A. KIESSELBACH A THESIS ' PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE COLLEGE IN THE UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA . IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT OF BOTANY LINCOLN, NEBRASKA December, 1917 Reprint from Nebraska Agricultural Experiment Station Research Bulletin No. 13 a SS On FP en t_ N STUDIES CONCERNING THE ELIMINATION OF EXPERIMENTAL ERROR IN COM- PARATIVE CROP TESTS By T. A. KIESSELBACH Sei ESIS PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE COLLEGE IN THE UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF REQUIREMENTS FOR THH DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT OF BOTANY LINCOLN, NEBRASKA December, 1917 Reprint from Nebraska Agricultural Experiment Station Research Bulletin No. 13 Ward AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION OF NEBRASKA THE GOVERNING BOARD (THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY ) HONORABLE E. P. BROWN, President, Davey. HONORABLE J. E. MILLER, Vice President, Lincoln. HONORABLE FRANK L. HALLER, Omaha. HONORABLE VICTOR G. LYFORD, Falls City. HONORABLE PHILIP L. HALL, Lincoln. HONORABLE HARRY D. LANDIS, Seward. THE STATION OFFICERS *SAMUEL AVERY, Pu. D., LL. D., Chancellor, ex officio. W. G. HASTINGS, A. B., Acting Chancellor. E. A. BURNETT, D. Sc., Director. C. W. PUGSLEY, B. Sc., Director of Extension Service. J. S. DALES, M. Pu., Financial Secretary. Cc. A. LEWIS, B. Sc., Bulletin Editor. THE WORKING STAFF y . W. Upson, Pu. D., Agricultural Chemistry. .W. Case, M. E., A. E., Agricultural Engineering. . W. Burr, B. Sc., Agronomy. . A. KresseLBacH, A. M., Agronomy. . J. Gramuicu, B. Sc., Animal Husbandry. .H. Garin, M. D. C., Animal Pathology. . H. Frannsen, M. S. A., Dairy Husbandry. | AWRENCE BRUNER, B. Sc., Entomology. . H. Swenk, A. M., Entomology. _C. Futtey, A. M., Farm Management. R. F. Howarp, A. M., Horticulture. G. A. LoveLanp, A. M., Meteorology. E. Meap Wixcox, Pu. D., Plant Pathology and Physiology. F. E. MusseEHL, B. Sc., Poultry. W. P. Snyper, M. S., Superintendent Experiment Substation, North Platte. James Cowan, M. E., Superintendent Experimental Substation, Valentine. James A. Hovpen, B. Sc., Superintendent Experimental Substation, Mitchell. TL. L. Zoox, B. Sc., Agronomist, North Platte. — *J. W. Carvin, B. Sc., Associate in Agricultural Chemistry. tG. K. K. Linx, Pu. D., Associate in Plant Pathology and Physiology. Erwin Hort, B. Sc., Assistant in Agronomy. W. B. Nevens, M. S., Assistant in Dairy Husbandry. R. R. Sparrorp, A. M., Assistant in Farm Management. Tet se *Granted leave of absence for military service. +Detailed from Office of Dry Land Agriculture, United States Depart- ment of Agriculture, Washington, D. C. tGranted leave of absence. *. Of. p35 AUG 2.499) CONTENTS ASHUILTM ONTO DUST Ne eS NE CS NN en SCN sa see ek len eee Oe Nee Error due to competition between adjacent plats... Illustration of principle of competition between adjacent rows Competition between adjacent rows of small grain... Row competition in rate-of-planting tests with wheat and OES Se SN a gO ec ER ce EO A ORS Relative stooling of two rates of planting when compared in alternating rows and alternating blocks... Row competition between varieties of wheat and oats... Evidence of plat competiticn in a wheat-breeding nursery Competition between individual plants... Competition between corn test plats as a source of experi- LIM Tae Ga tg Ts Ona ease oe ot NEO ad er ed CE TERR hI ae GMA ye Row competition in rate-of-planting tests with corn... Intra-hill and row competition in corn variety yield tests Summary of plat Competition studless ee Variation of stand as a source of error in yield tests with corn... Relation of stand to yield in single-row test plats... Combination of rate planting with variety yield tests... Hifect of removing suckers with different varieties... Reliability of estimating plat yields by means of fractional areas... Experimental errors caused by soil variation... WISE OsteeClnie Ces spot See ee ee ae eee abe Reduction of error by replication ee DUE, Ole SAS Eyl Seo Ole TNE SiSMUMCHMUCS Oe Wale ORO MANOS CierOR Probable error for 50 groups of four adjacent thirtieth-acre TOL AUS EHO fe ISCHNE NES ONTO EU See eee i UN 9 Das UNA hess bade Op Probable error of 50 groups of four systematically distrib- uted thirtieth-acre plats of Kherson Oats .o........ccccccccccceceeceeeeeeeeeeeeee Examples of limitation of the probable errov.......0000000- Effect of change in methods on agronomic. equipment... Measuring improvement in yield thru breeding Soil limitation as a source of error in pot experiments... Effect of the size of pot upon the growth of corn... Effect of planting at different rates upon the growth of corn in TOXOVS: oiaiseanee eee erect ie Ne ra cre RR te eam) a Statement of methods in bulletins AES Noi @ Sate cao Lan yiceege meena ea eee eee Mace ial te A oun A ner pet ns, ds dra er eA The author wishes to take this opportunity to thank Professors R. J. Pool and W. W. Burr for the interest and advice they have given him in the preparation of this bulletin as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. SUMMARY 1. In determining the effect of competition between single-row test plats as a source of experimental error in crop yield tests, the relative yields of two crops planted in blocks containing several rows have been regarded as the true relative values for the crops tested. In ascertaining some of these true values, the outer rows of the plats have been discarded in order to eliminate almost entirely plat com- petition. Plats were sufficiently replicated to secure quite reliable relative yields for the conditions under which they were grown. In plat competition tests in 1913 with two rates of plant- ing Turkey Red wheat, the thin rate yielded 68 per cent as much as the thick rate when grown in single alternating rows, while in five-row blocks the thin rate yielded 90 per cent as much as the thick rate. Competition in rows with a thicker rate of planting caused the.thin rate to yield rela- tively 24.4 per cent too low. In a similar test in 1914 the thin rate yielded relatively 56.8 per cent too low. 2. In 19138, competition between alternating rows of two rates of planting with Kherson oats caused the thin rate to yield relatively 20 per cent too low. In 1914, similar single- row competition caused the thin rate to yield relatively 34.3 per cent too low. 3. In 1914, competition between alternating single-row plats of Turkey Red wheat sown at two rates reduced the relative number of stools per plant approximately 37 per cent for the thin rate. There was a similar reduction of 20 per cent for Kherson oats, due to plat competition. 4. The relative competitive effect of varieties varies in different years, due to difference in adaptation to the seasonal conditions. In 1913, competition with Turkey Red winter wheat in single rows caused Big Frame winter wheat to yield rela- tively 10.3 per cent too high. In similar competition in 1914 Big Frame yielded relatively 12.4 per cent too low. In 1913 there was practically no competitive effect be- tween alternating rows of Turkey Red and Nebraska No. 28 winter wheat varieties. This was due to abnormal climatic conditions. However, in 1914 under rather normal condi- tions competition between single-row plats caused the Ne- braska No. 28 to yield relatively 25.9 per cent too low. § Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 5. In 1913 in alternating single-row test plats of Burt and Kherson oats, the Burt yielded relatively 16 per cent too high, while in 1914 the yield was relatively 37.6 per cent too high, due to plat competition. In 1913, competition with Kherson oats in alternating one- row plats caused Swedish Select oats to yield relatively 7 per cent too high, while in 1914 its yield was relatively 4.3 per cent too low. 6. When large and small seeds of wheat were planted in competition in the same row, the small seed, as a result of: competition, yielded relatively 15 per cent too little grain, 20 per cent too little straw, and made 18 per cent too small total yield. Similar competition was found between varieties of wheat planted in the same row. 7. In a single-row test of 80 strains of Turkey Red wheat grown in the same order each of four years, there are evidences of plat competition between strains. As an aver- age for four years, the poorest strain, No. 75, grew between strains No. 74 and No. 76, ranking one and five. A special test of these three strains in 1915 and 1916 disclosed that strains No. 74 and No. 76 were favored 20 and 15 per cent respectively thru competition with a less vigorous strain. 8. In a rate-of-planting test with Nebraska White Prize corn,—in which two rates of planting, namely two and four plants per hill, were compared in alternating single row plats, —the thin rate yielded relatively 29.3 per cent too low in 1914 because of plat competition. In 1915 the thin rate yielded 9 per cent too low because of plat competition. In 1916 such competition caused the thin rate to yield relatively 16.1 per cent too low. 9. A large, medium, and small variety of corn were grown in plat competition studies during 1912 and 1914. These varieties were Hogue’s Yellow Dent, University No. 3, and Pride of the North, respectively. In 1912, Pride of the North yielded 85 per cent as much as Hogue’s Yellow Dent in alternating three-row plats, while it yielded 66 per cent as much in alternating single rows. When compared in the same hill by the intra-hill method, the Pride of the North yielded only 47 per cent as much as Hogue’s Yellow Dent. Due to competition, the Pride of the North yielded relatively 44.7 per cent too low when compared in the same hill, and 22 per cent too low in alternating one-row plats. Experimental Error in Crop. Tests ait 10. In 1914, due to plat competition, Pride of the North corn ylelded relatively 51 per cent too low when compared with Hogue’s Yellow Dent in the same hill, while in alter- nating single-row plats it yielded relatively 28.3 per cent too low. In a comparison of University No. 3 with Hogue’s Yellow Dent, the University No. 3 yielded relatively eight per cent too low in single-row plats, and within the hill it yielded relatively one per cent too high. The lack of competition within the hill in this case may have been due to there being only two plants of a rather similar type in a hill. When ail three varieties were compared in the same hill, the relative yields for Hogue’s Yellow Dent, University No. 3, and Pride of the North were respectively 100, 96, and 28, as compared with 100, 98, and 53 in the center row of three-row plats and 100, 98, and 388 in single rows. 11. In 1916, inbred Hogue’s Yellow Dent corn which had been greatly reduced in vigor by five years of self-fertiliza- tion was compared with the more vigorous first generation hybrid of two such pure lines, in blocks, rows, and hills. Be- cause of competition with the larger plants in the same hill, the inbred corn yielded relatively 44 per cent too low, while in alternating single rows, it yielded relatively 16 per cent too low. 12. Studies with oats, wheat, and corn suggest that the yield of the border rows of narrow, adjacent test plats may be materially affected by plat competition. 13. When surrounded by corn hills having a full stand of three plants, two-plant hills and three-plant hills respec- tively yielded 10.5 per cent and 35 per cent more than a one- plant hill in 1914. In a similar test in 1917, two-plant hills and three-plant hills respectively yielded 67 and 102 per cent more than a one-plant hill. 14. The average grain yield of a three-plant corn hill sur- rounded by a full normal stand of three plants per hill was 465.8 grams in 1914. This yield per hill was increased 2.7, 5.3, 13.1, and 438.1 per cent by the presence, respectively, of (1) one adjacent hill with two plants, (2) one adjacent hill with one plant, (3) one adjacent blank hill, and (4) two adjacent blank hills. In 1917 corresponding adjacent imper- rect hills increased the grain yield of three-plant hills, other- wise surrounded by a full stand, respectively 2, 9, 15, and 25 per cent. & Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 15. Regarding three plants per hill as a perfect stand, the reduction in yield of corn was not proportional to a reduc- tion in stand. With single-row plats, stands averaging 92.8, 87.2, 82.7, 77.8, 73.1, 66.6, and 43.0 per cent yielded respec- tively 85.5, 88.1, 88.5, 82.2, 77.9, 74.8, and 56.7 bushels per acre. 16. Satisfactory yield correction for corn based upon per cent of stand cannot be made, because the effect upon yield depends upon the distribution of the missing plants and because the effect upon yield is not proportional to the per cent stand. Comparable yield tests of similar varieties or strains of corn may be secured by basing the yield upon a counted number of hills containing a uniform number of plants and surrounded by a full stand. 17. Corn varieties or types differing markedly in growth characteristics should be tested at several rates of planting, because the optimum rate for one is not necessarily that for another. Thus, as an average for two years, Pride of the North and Calico produced their maximum yield when grown at the rate of five plants per hill, while Mammonth White Pearl yielded best at the three-rate. In 1914, Pride of the North yielded most at the five-rate, University No. 3 did equally well at the two and three-rate, while Hogue’s Yellow Dent produced best at the two-rate. 18. The removal of suckers affects the yield of varieties differently, and for this reason suckers should for no reason be removed in comparative variety tests. 19. In comparative yield tests where it is not conven- ient to harvest and thresh the entire plats, fairly reliable results may be obtained by harvesting and averaging a large number of systematically distributed small fractional areas or quadrates from each plat. The necessary number of eee to be representative will vary with the size of the plats. Twenty 32-inch quadrates harvested from thirtieth-acre wheat plats gave fairly reliable results. Less than 20 proved likely to be unrepresentative of the plats. Very satisfactory results were obtained by having 40 quadrates represent one- fifteenth acre of wheat. 20. Two hundred and seven thirtieth-acre plats were grown to a uniform crop of Kherson oats for the purpose of studying various phases of experimental error. Calcula- tions have been made from them to show: (1) The use and Experimental Error in Crop Tests 9 effectiveness of check plats for reducing test plats to com- parable yields; (2) the reduction of error by the replication of plats; (3) the relative reliability of plats of various sizes and shapes; and (4) the significance of the “probable error” as a measure-of confidence which may be placed in mean results. When the odd and even numbered plats of these 207 are regarded as check plats and test plats respectively and the grain yield of each test plat is corrected by the mean of the two adjacent check plats, the coefficient of variability for the actual yields of these test plats is reduced from 7.85 per cent for the actual yields to 7.01 per cent for the corrected yields. Assuming every third plat to be a check, and correcting the intervening plats by the one adjacent check plat, the coef- ficient of variability was reduced from 7.79 per cent to 7.35 per cent. With every third plat regarded as a check plat, and the intervening plats corrected progressively by the two near- est checks, the coefficient of variability is reduced from 7.87 to 6.57 per cent. Thus it is seen that none of the three methods of check plat correction have been very effective. The yield of systematically distributed check plats can- not be regarded as a reliable measure for correcting and es- tablishing correct theoretical or normal yields for the inter- vening plats. es 21. Systematic replication of plats is the most effective and satisfactory means for reducing error caused by soil or other environmental variations. When 200 thirtieth-acre plats were planted to a uniform crop of Kherson oats, the coefficients of variability for the grain yields of single plats and for the mean yields of two, four, and eight plats were 6.30, 4.59, 2.91, and 2.18 per cent respectively. The extreme variation between yields was also reduced from 20.7 bushels for single plats to 7.5 bushels for the means of eight plats. Reduction of error by averaging adjacent plats (which is equivalent to increasing the size of the plat) was far less effective than systematic replication. The coefficients of vari- ability for single plats and for the mean yields of two, four a eight adjacent plats were 6.30, 5.46, 5.28, and 4.78 per cent. Variation between long, narrow plats was less marked than for short, wide plats of the same area. The coefficient of variability for tenth-acre oats plats 48 rods by 5.50 feet was 10 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 3.84 per cent as compared with 5.18 per cent for plats 16 rods by 16.5 feet. 22. Two hundred uniformly planted thirtieth-acre Kher- son oats plats were arranged in 50 groups of four adjacent plats each, and also in 50 groups of four systematically dis- tributed plats. For both methods of grouping, the “prob- able error’ has been calculated for the mean yield of each group of four plats. The results indicate that a small prob- able error cannot be regarded as sufficient reason for con- fidence in the reliability of data. Because of chance groupings of either large or small variations where relatively small numbers are used, a mean may be either more or less accurate than an application of the probable error would indicate. 23. In four comparative rate-planting yield tests with small grains in alternating single-row plats the probable error was less than 2 per cent in all cases, and yet there existed an average actual error of 34 per cent in relative yields due to plat competition. Similar results are indicated for variety tests with small grains. 24. An application of the probable error to tests made in 1916 concerning the relative water requirement for grain production of Hogue’s Yellow Dent corn and Turkey Red winter wheat may result in greatly misplaced confidence. We may be confident from one test that Hogue’s Yellow Dent corn uses considerably less water per pound of grain than does Turkey Red wheat, and from another test we may be equally confident that the corn uses more than twice as much water for grain production as does the wheat. The second comparative figures are unreliable because the soil was rela- tively overcropped by the corn. 25. Crop tests are subject to such a multitude of local environmental influences that errors in them cannot be regarded as occurring according to the formulas or rules of chance calculated mathematically from purely mechanical observations. The probable error may apply where only accidental variations occur but not where systematic varia- tions exist. Crop tests are subject to systematic variations. 26. In view of the precautions necessary to guard against the invalidating influences of various sources of experimental error, greater and better facilities should be provided experi- ment stations for the conduct of crop investigations. Experimental Error in Crop Tests 11 27. In crop breeding experiments improvement in yield over the original can only be measured accurately by grow- ing each year some of the original unselected seed for com- parison. The method of comparing the results of one period of years with those of another is unreliable. For example, Hogue’s Yellow Dent corn which has undergone continuous ear-to-row breeding since 1902 yielded 39 per cent less during the seven-year period 1907-1913 than during the preceding seven years. However, a seven-year comparison with the orig- inal seed which has been grown as a check indicates that the inherent yielding power of the ear-to-row and the original corn are almost identical. 28. Soil limitation may be a serious source of error in pot experiments. The relative total moisture-free yields for individual corn plants grown in pots of six sizes in 1914 were, in order from the smallest to the largest, 100, 211, 324.1, 453.6, 643.8, and 747. The corresponding yields of ear corn were 100, 632.5, 1082.8, 2417, 2990, and 4046.7. A uniform application of 1.75 pound of sheep manure per plant (or per pot) increased the yields of total dry matter for the S1X sizes, in order from the smallest to the largest, 176.4, 95.3, 69.3, 26.1, 12.7, and 7.2 per cent. The corresponding increases in yield of ear corn caused by the manure were 722.5, 193.6, 149.2, 18.9, 14.1, and 2.9 per cent. In 1915 the relative yields of total dry matter from the six sizes of pots, progressing from the smallest to the largest, were 100, 150, 229.6, 355.6, 586, and 578.7 per cent. The corresponding relative yields of ear corn were 100, 276.2, CGA Yeo. 2idleo..and 266. Applying manure in amounts proportional to the quan- tity of soil contained, in 1915 had far less striking effect upon the pot yields for the different sizes than when equal quantities were applied in 1914, regardless of the quantity of soil contained. 29. When two, four, or six corn plants were grown in pots of the proper size for growing one normal corn plant, the individual plant yields of total dry matter were respec- tively 50.8, 26.7, and 16.6 per cent as large as for the one-rate, while the corresponding yields of ear corn were respectively 39./, 15.9, and 2.8 per cent as large. 30. A review of several hundred experiment station bulletins dealing with variety, fertilizer, cultural, and pot 12 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 tests indicates that the statement of methods employed in securing experimental data is often inadequate to acquaint the reader with the manner in which the results were ob- tained. Such a statement is desirable in order that one may judge regarding the reliability of the results and the degree of confidence which the data merit. STUDIES CONCERNING THE ELIMINATION OF EXPERIMENTAL ERROR IN COMPARA- TIVE CROP TESTS By T. A. KIESSELBACH It is apparent that many sources of error have uncon- sciously entered into comparative crop yield tests. The very important matter of overcoming variation in soil conditions as a source of experimental error has been quite extensively studied and reported by various investigators during the past decade. The means suggested for reducing such error have been (1) repetition of plats and (2) correction of yields according to check plats planted to a uniform variety or treatment at stated intervals. Both methods have proved of value and a combination of both may often be used advan- tazeously. Some danger always exists of error occurring in the check plats and that correcting according to them may introduce new errors in the yields of crops compared. The method should, for this reason, be used with caution. Studies in experimental error conducted at this Experi- ment Station prior to 1911 have been published by Prof. E. G. Montgomery, now of Cornell University, in Bulletin No. 269, of the Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. Department of Agriculture, and in the Twenty-sixth Annual Report of the Nebraska Agricultural Experiment Station. These pub- lished results concern primarily the general problems of repe- tition and size of nursery small grain plats, and the use of check plats. The object of the following investigations was to secure further information regarding the elimination of error in comparative yield tests. Shortage of facilities for carrying on this character of work in addition to the regular crop investigations of the Experiment Station has in some cases necessitated intermittent experiments. The duration of some of the tests has for the same reason been shorter than would have been desired. Agisnawilediannent is gratefully made to Professor J. A. Ratcliff and Pro- fessor C. A. Helm for valuable assistance in field supervision and in keeping records during much of the time these experiments were in progress. Messrs. H. G. Gould, E. R. Ewing, R. EH. Holland and H. B. Pier, have also rendered efficient assistance at vatious times. 14. Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 ERROR DUE TO COMPETITION BETWEEN ADJACENT PLATS It is a well known principle in ecology that a keen com- petition for soil moisture and nutrients may exist between plants which differ in growth habit, when grown in close proximity. Competition between adjacent rows of different varieties, selections, or rates of planting, had suggested itself as a possible source of error in crop tests. An inves- tigation was planned in 1912 to determine the relative merits of rows and blocks for making comparative yield tests in the small grain nursery and in corn experiments. The question was: Will two varieties give the same com- parative yields when planted in alternating rows as when planted in alternating blocks consisting of a number of rows? It was reasonable to assume that there would be less plat- competition between varieties planted in blocks than when planted in single rows. It has been a common practice in crop breeding experi- ments to compare the selected strains in adjacent one-row plats for a number of years. Many other comparative tests have also been made in single row plats. ILLUSTRATION OF PRINCIPLE OF COMPETITION BETWEEN ADJACENT ROWS On the right-hand side of Fig. 1 is shown a crop of Tur- key Red winter wheat planted in the fall of 1912. To the south of this was planted Scotch Fife spring wheat in the spring of 1913. The first row of spring wheat, spaced ten inches from the winter wheat, is seen to have grown only about four inches tall with no grain production. The sec- ond row of spring wheat made an almost normal growth, while the third row was entirely normal. The complete fail- ure of the first row of spring wheat may be accounted for by the shortage of both moisture and available plant food material, due to the more rapid and luxuriant growth of the adjacent winter wheat. While this is an extreme example of competition between adjacent rows, it illustrates a principle commonly applying in crop yield tests. COMPETITION BETWEEN ADJACENT ROWS OF SMALL GRAIN The plan of the experiment was to plant two crops under comparison in alternating one-row plats and alternating five- row plats. These were replicated 50 times each year in order EKueperimental Error in Crop Tests ILS) Fig. 1—TIllustrating principle of competition between adjacent rows. Winter wheat on right; spring wheat on left. Due to competition with the winter wheat, the first row of spring wheat grew only four inches tall with no grain production. The second row was nearly normal and the third row entirely normal. to eliminate the accidental mechanical and physical errors due to variation in soil, exposure, stand, etc. These nursery rows were spaced 10 inches apart. The relative yields in either the entire five-row block or the three inner rows, as indicated, were regarded as the correct relative yields for the season. A difference in the relative yields when tested in alternating -rows, as compared with the relative yields in blocks, is chiefly due to, and measures, the competition be- tween the crops compared in rows. In part of the tests the blocks were harvested as individual rows, which permitted a study of the effect of plat competition upon the border rows of five-row plats. The straw yields as well as the grain yields were also secured in a portion of the tests. ROW COMPETITION IN RATH-OF-PLANTING TESTS WITH WHEAT AND OATS During the years 1913 and 1914, both oats and winter wheat were grown at two distinct rates of planting in both 16 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 alternating single-row plats and alternating five-row nur- sery plats, 16 feet in length. Wheat—Table 1 shows the results with the wheat rate- of-planting tests. When grown in single rows in 1913, the thin rate yielded 68 per cent as much as the thick rate, while in five-row blocks the thin rate yielded 90 per cent as much as the thick rate. Competition in rows with a thicker rate of planting caused the thin rate to yield relatively 24.4 per cent too low. (This percentage effect of competition is determined by dividing the difference between 68 per cent and 90 per cent, or 22, by 90.) In 1914 the thin rate in rows yielded 35 per cent as much as the thick rate, while in the center three rows of five-row plats it yielded 81 per cent as much as the thick rate. Due to competition, the thin rate yielded 56.8 per cent too low. If the two outside rows are averaged into the block yield, the Fig. 2—Method of planting nursery small grain plats with a special nursery drill. The drill can be rapidly adjusted to plant each row at a given rate, independently of the other rows 1OG ZOT:00T. BZ L0Z ZOL:00L | 68199 Ge= LS9 02+ 20Z |” (sted 0G Jo eBe1eAe) Yooiq Jo Smo. apIsUr ely, 66:00T 9° L= v9 0°L= 199 96:00T © 106 U'3* 606 “+++ -(sze[d 0G Jo e8VioAe) Yoo[q Jo SMO apisjno OMT, 6°00T:00T 0'S = 6&9 61 99 86:001 2+ 108 ORR OY Pee (sqe[d 0¢ Jo o8eI9A¥) SYOOTG MOI-oAY BuTyeUs}[V 69:001 | 8 FF 1SF qo= 799 19:00 VO= SPI 98=00G | (sze[d 0¢ Jo ede1aAz) syed Mor-o[ZuIs ButeUIE}[V vI6. UVAA en eee (een ca AR rece een aes 08:00T 81+ 8LT 8S BSS "7+" * * (sye[d 0¢ Jo e8BieAv) syOoTq MoI oA BuUeUIAITY peer ae | BY cole oa Saas $9:001 8°S= 8T1 O'V= 88S “++ **(szeid Q¢ Jo e8ei1aAv) s}e[d MOI-9[sUIS ZUIQeUINI[V €16l UVAA SULDLY) SULDLY) SUWDLYD) SWUDLY) uly ary 03 yory? | aed UIYL, a781 YOULL 0} Yoryy azel UIYL 9781 HOYT, oney o1ney ye|d jo JajovieyO MOI Jad MBI4S JO p[aIA asVIBAV MOL Jad UlV13 JO pjelA asvloAV Crop Tests rYOYr MN Experimental E (TIGI-SIG6GL) sznjd mou-aay Burznusazy pun sznjd Nos1-auo burznu “OVD UL palspdwmod WwayM 8200 UOSLaYyY YN Hbuyunid fo sazn1 omy fo spjarh aaynjay—zZ AIAVL, -qor1d 94} JO sdUBOYIUSIS 941 JO UO [ISSNOSIp 19}¥[ LOT ‘¥1-G9 ‘dd 90S ‘10119 9[qe "1, O} T SoTqey UL po YB[Ns[ed Useq SBY IOI1e o[qeqoid 9y.L.. G8: 00T 001+ 218 VL +166 T8:00T 9°S= 802 ViGs LG cena e ee (sze[d 0¢ Jo o8eIaAe) YOO[G JO SMO opISUT vel J, €9:00T GIL+ SIL L 11+ 6aI1 09:001 Ge= P81 og+90e | (szz[d 0G Jo e8e1aAe) YOOTG JO SMOI apIs}no OMT, PL:001 OL= SLL G6 += 6P0I GL: 001 ee S6L ise eneg nese oe (s}e[d 0G Jo asvi9Ae) SYoO[q MOI-aAY BuleUIEIV 68: 001 @CL= F6P 6°SL += S9ZL G8: 001 9°€= SIT 9°9= LZE "7+" ""(sze[d 0g Jo odeioAe) syed MOJ-9[SUIS SUT]VUIEA[V PI6l UVAA SU SE a eee ice eae al MO eae ; 06:00T So SGe GE= P68 "77" *** (sqeid 0G Jo ese1eAe) SHDOTG MOI-sAY BUIZVUIEITV Sato : see aA) 89:001 SE= 19S x89 688 | (sie[d 0G Jo eseioAw) sje[d Mor-a[suls Buneurery e16l UVAA SWDIE) SULDLD) SUDA) | SULDLY) uryy uly 0} oryy oye UIY I, aye YOU L 0} 4oryy a7@1 ULY YT, o781 YOY L, oney | oe yy qeid jo lojovreyD MOI Jad M2IZS JO pjalh asBVIOAV MOI Jod uleis Jo pjathk aseIeAV (TI6L-SI6L) s70)d No1-aay buyznusazyy pun sznjd Nos-auo Hurynusayy ur pa.od “UWLOD UAYM JPNOYN LaQUIM pay hayINnT yun Buiunid fo sazns oar, {O spjarh aniznjay—T AIAVL 18 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 ratio of thick to thin is 100:72 as compared with 100:81 for the center three rows, while the ratio of thick to thin for the two outside rows only was 100:60. From these data and other similar data it may be concluded that the outside rows of nursery test plats should be discarded. The straw yields for the 1914 rate-of-planting tests with wheat substantiate the same principles of competition as were brought out in the relative grain yields. In alternating rows, the ratio of thick to thin straw yield was 100:39. For the center three rows of five-row blocks, the ratio was 100:82. The ratio was 100:74 where all five rows were averaged, while it was 100:63 for the two outside rows. Oats—The relative yields of two rates of planting oats in alternating rows as compared with alternating five-row plats are shown in Table 2. In 1913 the thin rate in rows yielded 64 per cent as much as the thick rate, while in five- row blocks the thin rate yielded 80 per cent as much as the thick rate. Competition in rows with a thicker rate of plant- ing caused the thin rate to yield relatively 20 per cent too low. In 1914 the thin rate in alternating rows yielded 67 per cent as much as the thick rate, while when compared in the three inner rows of five-row plats the thin rate yielded 2 per cent more than the thick rate. Competition in rows with the thicker rate caused the thin rate of planting to yield rela- tively 34.3 per cent too low. If the yields of the entire five- row blocks are taken, the ratio of thick to thin is found to have been 100:98 as compared with 100:102 for the three inside rows, while the ratios of thick to thin for the two out- side rows was 100:96. Similar results were obtained from the straw yields in 1914. In alternating single rows the ratio of thick to thin straw yields was 100:69. For the center three rows of five- row blocks the ratio was 100:102. Where all five rows were averaged the ratio was 100:101, while for the two outside rows it was 100:99. RELATIVE STOOLING OF TWO RATES OF PLANTING WHEN COM- PARED IN ALTERNATING ROWS AND ALTERNATING BLOCKS In 1914, counts were made to determine the effect of com- petition between alternating rows of two rates of planting wheat and oats upon the relative stooling in the two rates. The counts were made for the plats reported in Tables 1 and 2. The results are given in Table 3. Experimental Error in Crop Tests 19 TABLE 3—Relative stooling of two rates of planting with Tur- key Red Wheat and Kherson oats when compared im alternating one-row plats and alternating five-row plats (GUO): No. No. stools | : plants : No. stools Character of plats and rate of planting aelOnreet inte es per plant of row WHEAT 1914 One-row plats MINI C Kar Ate nes Sea tere le erate CRU ter Nur ae 140 620 4.4 MIVHnINAALe es on ace ina ee canis s eaue Et ols 52.5 281 5.4 Ratio thick to thin................... 100:37 100:45 | 100:123 Five-row plats (middle 3 rows) Minnekenaten sy iit: pn went amen 150 560 3.7 pInMBI Abeer ales Ae ae ae Se ey Rade ae a 50.5 364 ee, Ratio thick to thin.................. 100:34 100:65 | 100:195 OATS 1914 One-row plats PING ua es sek See cl kh aS curt woes mae 195.5 392.5 | 2.0 ANAM, TEEN UE IE ea coh etree ny Ae ea are 100.5 271.0 Boll Ratio thick to thin................. -| 100:51 100:69 100:135 Five-row plats (middle 3 rows) Mpivckerra tee Ne Mahe ot ae eases AN, 195 380 1.9 Min nate. fsa: ee SE a ernie 100 320 | 3.2 Ratio thick to thin................. -| 100:51 100:84 | 100:168 In the alternating rows of wheat, the actual number of plants per row were in the ratio of 100:37, while in the three inside rows of the five row plats the ratio was 100:34. The number of culms per plant in the alternating thick and thin rows were in the ratio of 100:123, while in the center three rows of the five row plats the ratio was 100:195. In the case of the oats, the actual number of plants per row were in the ratio of 100:51, both for the alternating rows and for the three inside rows of the five-row blocks. The number of culms per plant in the alternating thick and vhin rows were in the ratio of 100:135, while for the center three rows of the five-row plats the ratio was 100:168. ROW COMPETITION BETWEEN VARIETIES OF WHEAT AND OATS Wheat—During the years 19138 and 1914, Big Frame winter wheat was compared with Turkey Red winter wheat in both alternating single-row plats and alternating five-row 20 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 eet tare) Ti, Ye Fig. 3—Competition between two types of wheat in adjacent rows. The single-row method of testing is unreliable Fig. 4—The ‘‘block’’ method of comparing varieties or selections for yield in the nursery. The two outside rows of each block should be discarded in order to avoid error from competition between adjacent plats. Part of the plats have been harvested Experimental Error in Crop Tests 21 plats. A similar comparison was also made between Turkey Red and Nebraska No. 28 winter wheat. Turkey Red is the standard bearded hard winter variety for normal Nebraska conditions, while Big Frame is one of the best beardless varieties of rather similar growth habits. The Nebraska No. 28 is an early wheat ripening about ten days before Turkey Red, and is normally six inches shorter. The relative growths of these varieties differ somewhat in different years according to their response to varying cli- matic conditions. This will account for one variety outyield- ing in one season, and another variety in a different season. For example, in 1913 the Nebraska No. 28 wheat grew fully as tall as Turkey Red, because it had attained its maximum height before dry weather set in, which somewhat stunted the more slowly developing Turkey Red wheat. The season of 1914 was more favorable for the Turkey Red wheat, which produced a normal, relatively greater vegetative growth. Table 4 gives the two years’ results with Turkey Red and Big Frame wheat. When grown in alternating. single rows in 1913, the Big Frame yielded 7 per cent more grain than the Turkey Red wheat, while in alternating five-row plats, the Big Frame yielded 38 per cent less than the Tur- key Red. Due to competition, the Big Frame yielded rela- tively 10.3 per cent too high in single-row plats. In 1914, the Big Frame yielded 85 per cent as much grain as Turkey Red when compared in alternating one-row plats, while it yielded 97 per cent as much in five-row plats. Competition in rows with Turkey Red caused the Big Frame to yield relatively 12.4 per cent too low. The straw yields for 1914 give results similar to those for grain. In alternating rows the ratio of Turkey Red to Big Frame straw yields was 100:90. In five-row plats this ratio was 100:97. Table 5 gives the relative yields of Turkey Red and Ne- braska No. 28 wheat during 1913 and 1914. The ratio of Turkey Red to Nebraska No. 28 grain yield was 100:107 in 1913, both when grown in alternating single-row plats and alternating five-row plats. The growth of the two varieties this year was so similar that competition appears to have been a negligible factor. In 1914 the Nebraska No. 28 yielded 63 per cent as much as the Turkey Red when compared in alternating single-row plats, while it yielded 85 per cent as much in alternating Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 a © VP, “--** (sqeid 0¢ Jo adeiaAzB) SHOO[G JO SMO apIsal salyy, (sye[d 0¢ Jo a8eiaAe) sje[d MOI-aAY BUIZeUIEILY ee 66 GE6 eS ee Sa eae Le= LOe Sao a seen BL SSL es tee 6°&= 862 eee eee eee "++" (sqyeid Q¢ Jo aBVIaA®) SHOOTG JO SMOI apIsS}NO OAT, 08: 00T 0°8= S18 0°8= 880T ¢8:00T 9° E> 8S L'¥* V&& “s"* == (sqeid 0G Jo e8eieAe) SHOO[G MOI-aAY BueUIEIV €S:00T 9°¢= 699 L°8+ 8e1 €9:00T LG GES & P+ 696 (s}e[d 0g Jo a8viaAe) sjeld Mos-o[SuIs SueUlei[ VY FI6T UVAA Writs a eect ce ol Mi eso ee | LoT:001 SZ ZF ee 968 Fee PDE ME EN well Me ge ae pr oe ae LOT: 001 2 &= 068 6°+= G9E (s}e{d 0¢ Jo aBeiaAeR) sjeid MOl-a[Zuls ZulyeUseILy s16él UVAA SWDLD) SULDIy) SULDID) SULDID) 82 “ON oe aa | BySBIgoN | 0 By aN | 0 0} peu race ae pey Aeyiny, 0} poy | wes ee pay Aayny, AayINY, Aayiny, | qeid jo Jajovieyy) oney oney MOI Jad MeBijs JO pjalh adBIOAY MOI Jad ulei3 JO pjalh aBvloAy (TI6I-EI6T) sqmjd Mos-aay Buryousayy puv sznjd Mos-auo burjnUusaz UL pasndwmod UuayN JaYN ..8Z “ON v”YSDLQAN,, PUY pay haying fo spjaih aaynjay—G ATAVL L6:00T 6'L* £96 LL &66 L6:001 O'F= O18 L'e= 028 "===>" (sqefd 0¢ Jo adesaae) SYOO|G MOI-aAY BuNVUIOIV 06:00T T'9= 188 o8= 186 ¢8:00T 9°S= 062 V8 Fe (sye[d 0¢ Jo adeiaAz) s}e[d MOJ-a[suIs SuQeUei[V FI6l UVAA Phe mer | eee Clee te, "| aie eon L6:00T 6°Z= L6ES 9°S= 80F “+ --"*>(sqeid Q¢ Jo aBviaAe) SYOO[q MOI-aAY BulQeUlaI[V ERS te | Me NG ets opined ti miioo kate crete LOT:00T OF LVE PP SSE (sjzeid 0¢ Jo aBeiaAz) sjeid MOI-9[Buls ZueVUloI] VY SI6l UVAA SUDLD SUD SUD4Iy) SIMDAD) awueig sg aweig 31g 07 poy 0} pay =e Sayany, awmeiy sig poy AoxInL wee awmelg BIg pay Aayiny ; oneYy oney qeid jo JajovieyO MOI Jad MBI}S JO Plath adBIBAY AMOI Jed uleiZ Jo pjalh a3eioaAVy (TI6I-EI6L) sq0ja noi-aay Gugnusayp pun szpjd No1-aUuo BurynusayY Ur pasndwoos uayn 7oayN aunty Hig puv pay fiayuny {0 spjah aa14nj}ay—F ATAVL Experimental Error in Crop Tests 23 five-row plats. In rows competition caused the Nebraska No. 28 to yield relatively 25.9 per cent too low. In this test the Nebraska No. 28 five-row plats were harvested as separate rows. The center three rows, free from competition with the ranker growing Turkey Red variety, yielded 21.0 per cent more per row than did the two outside rows. The three inside rows also yielded 7.7 per cent more per row than did the entire five-row plat. The straw yields for 1914 indicate similar effect of com- petition. Compared in alternating single-row plats, the ratio of Turkey Red to Nebraska No. 28 straw yields was 100:53, while in five-row plats this ratio was 100:80. The center three rows yielded 19.1 per cent more straw per row than did the two outer rows, which were obliged to compete with Turkey Red. The center three rows also yielded relatively 6.9 per cent more straw per row than did the entire five- row plat with the two outside rows included. Oats—Both Burt and Swedish Select oats varieties were compared during 1913 and 1914 with Kherson oats in alter- nating single-row and alternating five-row plats. Kherson oats is the standard early variety grown at the Nebraska Experiment Station. Burt oats is rather similar in growth habit to the Kherson, ripening at about the same time. The Swedish Select is a somewhat taller variety, ripen- ing about ten days later. Table 6 gives the two years’ results with Kherson and Burt oats. In 1913 the Burt outyielded the Kherson 30 per cent when planted in alternating single rows and 12 per cent in alternating five-row plats. Due to competition the Burt yielded relatively 16 per cent too high in single-row plats. In 1914 the Burt yielded 39 per cent more than the Kher- son in alternating single row plats, while it yielded 1 per cent more in the three center rows of alternating five-row plats. Competition in rows with Kherson oats caused the Burt to yield relatively 37.6 per cent too high. If the yields of the entire five-row plats are taken, the ratio of Kherson to Burt oats is 100:109 as compared with 100:101 for the three inside rows, and 100:120 for the two outside rows. The straw yields which were obtained for 1914 gave very similar results. In alternating single rows the ratio of Kherson to Burt straw yields was 100:139. For the three inside rows of alternating five-row plats the ratio was 100:109. For the entire five-row plats the ratio was 100:117. For the two outside rows it was 100:129. Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 24 ~ LIT:00T 88+ 299 £6:001 oo PPL | 9S F0G | 5 ca) WY ai [ee ca CNS (sze[d 0g Jo a8eiaAe) SYDO[q MOI-aAY Suljeulaify €IT-00T 8) 869 | oS 069 68-001 SO* Z8I GG SEAS OGrs mes een een (sze[d 0¢ Jo adevs0Az) s}¥[d Mod-a[Suls Bueusey[Y vI6lT UVAA tates hence NR | Be Der eer 2% LL:001 81+ LET | OTF IT6T | *'''* (sreid 0g Jo a8eraae) syoo[q Mos-eay ZuQeUIEITy Pee eae cr eed (hse race apg a FN Deg EY Oi Sta, 28: 001 GO LST 9°S= Z6I “7 """*"(sze8id 0G Jo a8e¥i9AR) syed MoJ-a[3uIs Bul} Bula} V S16. UVAA SUWDAID) SWDLE) | SUWDLE) SUDID) | alas | qoajag | he YsIpaMs 0}F YSIpems 04) 4; WOSIay JOIaS YSIpeMs uosio4y uosiayy JO9[PS YSIpeMs | UOsIoU ST oney onry | | yeid Jo Jajovieyg MOI Jad MBI}S JO pjalh asvioay MO1 Jod uleiZ Jo pjalh aseilaaAy | (TI6I-E16T) synjd nos-aay Huynusayn pun sznjd N01-aUo BULZDULAYYD UL pasmdUod UayM 810 490109 Ysipany pun Uosiayy fo spjaih aaynjay—y), AIAVI, 601001 | £8 09L L'&+ 969 TOT: 001 BC LOZ Corres [5% (s3e[d 0g JO aBBieae) syoo[q Jo SMO apIsU! saT4L, 6Z1:00T | eS 86L V9= S19 OZ1:00T G'3* PIS °F SLT "11 | Greld 0¢ Jo a8e1948) sxo0[q Jo SMor apisyno om], LIV:O0T | 68+ SLL 8°§= £99 601:00T V3 O1Z 3+ 61 “" Greid 0g Jo eseieae) syaorq Mo.-aay Sulyeuse3]V 6ET:00T | FL 9L9 9°L* 98h 6ET:00T VEs 11S Bicweal) ralleceere (sie[d 0g JO a8viaAe) sjejd Mos-a[BuIs ZuQeUIEI_Y bI6l UVAA Prem eee cae Sore Vie kat tace BL T:00T BI res | G6IFG0Z |''''''* (sreId Og Jo eBes0AR) sya0[q Mos-aAY BunBUIEI]V 5 aN le Resse ak eee O€1:001 SEF1I96 | VEFTOS |" ** (sted OG Jo aBBIBAe) szE[d Mos-g[ZUIS BUIQeUIEITY e16l UVAA SUDLY) SUDA) SULDALY) SUUD1E) qang 04 ying 04 uos1oY Y syeo Jung s}80 UOSIay yy uosiey y syeo Jing s}B0 UOSIOYY orney oney 4e|d jo lajoRieyD MOL Jad MBI3S JO path adeIoAYy MOI Jod Ule1s Jo pjalk asviaAy (TI6I-ET6T) s7njd Nos-aay Huynusayy pun synjd NO1-2U0 BuiznusazyM Ut parndwos uayn szvo0 yung pun Uosiayy fO spjavh aa4njay—9 ATA, Experimental Error in Crop Tests 25 Table 7 summarizes the two years’ data with Kherson and Swedish Select oats. In 1913 the Swedish Select yielded 18 per cent less than the Kherson when grown in alternating single-row plats, and 23 per cent less in alternating five-row plats. In alternating single rows the Swedish Select yielded relatively 7 per cent too high. In 1914 the Swedish Select yielded 89 per cent as much grain as Kherson in alternating single-row plats and 93 per cent as much in five-row plats. The Swedish Select straw yielded 13 per cent more in alternating rows and 17 per cent more in five-row plats. EVIDENCE OF PLAT COMPETITION IN A WHEAT-BREEDING NURSERY During the four years, 1910, 1911, 1912 and 1914, 80 strains of Turkey Red wheat were tested at the ordinary field rate of seeding in identically the same order each year, in single 16-foot rows ten inches apart. The entire series has been replicated ten times each year. It is probable that many of the yields have been subject to the effect of row com- petition. Table 8 contains a concrete example of competition be- tween strains in such a wheat-breeding nursery. In the four- year row test of 80 strains, strain No. 75 ranked 80, while strains No. 74 and No. 76 on either side ranked 1 and 5. Strain No. 75 is a slightly shorter and thinner stooling type. To determine whether the relative rankings of these strains might have been influenced by competition, they were com- pared in both rows and blocks for two years, 1915-1916. TABLE 8—Relative yields of three Turkey Red wheat strains when compared in five-row nursery plats and in single- row plats. Two-year average (1915-1916) Relative yields Strain number = Blocks Rows GRAIN 74 106 126 15 100 100 76 108 123 STRAW 74 110 113 15 100 100 76 102 109 26 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 Strain No. 74 was favored 20 per cent and strain No. 76, 15 per cent in yield by being compared (with an adjacent less vigorous type) in rows rather than in blocks. Fig. 5 is a photograph of these strains. Strain No.: Ck. 74 75 76 Fig. 5—Single-row nursery test plats of Turkey Red Winter wheat. Strain No. 75, in center, is seen to have a lower stooling capacity and is given and unfair test when growing between two high-stool- ae strains. The two adjacent strains in turn have an unfair advan- age Experimental Error in Crop Tests 2 These 80 strains are now all being grown in five-row plats, replicated ten times, for the purpose of establishing the correct relative yields, free from competition as a source of experimental error. Single-row plats are now regarded as unreliable and misleading, because a strain is certain to be unduly favored when grown beside a strain lower in com- petitive qualities due to such factors as low stooling, slow growing, or partial winterkilling. It is important to have any crop being tested surrounded by a crop of its own kind. COMPETITION BETWEEN INDIVIDUAL PLANTS Altho the yields of small grain are never compared by planting alternating seeds of two varieties or two grades of seed in the same row, yet such a comparison may be of inter- est to throw further light upon the principle of competition. TABLE 9—Relative yields, at the normal field rate of planting, of equal numbers of large and small wheat seeds when grown alone in blocks and when grown in competition by alternation in the same row* . Ratio of yield of small seeds to Method of comparing large and small large seeds seeds Grain | Sonny | Total WINTER WHEAT, 1914 Grades alone in blocks................. | 90:100 94:100 94:100 Grades competing....................:. 61:100 72:100 71:100 Grades alone in blocks.................. | 99:100 | 98:100 98:100 Grades competing...................... 83 :100 78:100 79:100 SPRING WHEAT, 1914 Grades alone in blocks.................. | 88:100 93:100 | 92:100 Grades competing..................... 78:100 | 78:100 78:100 SPRING WHEAT, 1915 Grades alone in-blocks.................. 80:100 93:100 90:100 Grades) competing:.... 22 25.5.25---4-.- 82:100 | 73:100 75:100 AVERAGE FOR WINTER AND SPRING WHEAT, 1914-1915 Grades alone in blocks.................. 89:100 94:100 93:100 Grades competing....................-. 76:100 75:100 76:100 *Compiled from data in Nebraska Research Bulletin No. 11, 1917. 23 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 During 1914 and 1915 large and small wheat seeds were planted alternatingly in the row at the normal field rate of planting. Two varieties were used and reciprocated so that the results in Table 9 represent the mean of two varieties for each grade. This reciprocation eliminates largely the varietal effects in the summary. It was necessary to use two distinct varieties (a bearded and a beardless) so that the plants from each grade might be separated at harvest. The same grades were also compared separately in nursery blocks to establish the relative yields when free from competition. As an average for two varieties each of winter and spring wheat for two years, the small seed in competition yielded relatively 15 per cent too little grain, 20 per cent too little straw, and made 18 per cent too small total yield. TABLE 10—Relative yields at the normal field rate of planting, of two varieties when grown alone in blocks, and when grown in competition by alternation in the same row* Relative yields Method of comparing varieties | 2s Grain | Straw | Total e WINTER WHEAT, 1914 Ratio Big Frame ( Alone@seencae 90:100 | 88:100 | 89:100 to Turkey Red.........\ Competition. 55:100 | 70:100 67:100 SPRING WHEAT, 1914 Ratio Scotch Fife j Alone. 22 23), 3 oeL00 93°100 | 90:100 ENT AT QUIS: «) 0. . estore: \ Competition . 61:100 = 90:100 86:100 WINTER WHEAT, 1915 Ratio Big Frame (CAlone=ne ne 82:100 | 105:100 | 99:100 tombunkeyaiveds. 2 5 \ Competition.| 120:100 128:100 125:100 SPRING WHEAT, 1915 Ratio Scotch Fife { Alones. shan | 95:100 | 114:100 | 109:100 to Marquis............| Competition.| 99:100 | 125:100 119:100 *Compiled from data in Nebraska Research Bulletin No. 11, 1917. The results for different years should not be averaged in this variety test, since varieties do not have the same relative competitive qualities in different years. We are interested here in what may happen any one year and not in an average of years. In similar manner, competition between two varieties planted within the same row was determined. Plants from each variety could be separated at harvest by the presence or absence of beards. The relative yields were also obtained in nursery blocks free from competition by harvesting the Experimental Error in Crop Tests 29 three inside rows of five-row blocks. The results in Table 10 indicate marked competition between varieties. Variety competition amounted to 61 per cent and 46 per cent for win- ter wheat yields in 1914 and 1915 respectively. For spring wheat this competition equaled 19 per cent and 4 per cent in 1914 and 1915 respectively. COMPETITION BETWEEN CORN TEST PLATS AS A SOURCE OF EXPERIMENTAL ERROR In corn variety tests, corn breeding experiments, and various other corn yield tests the crops under comparison have customarily been planted in adjacent plats containing one, two, three, or four rows. The single-row plat is used almost universally in corn breeding experiments. In several instances where only three or four kinds of corn were to be compared, these have all been planted in the same hill, giving each kind of corn a definite position in the hill. This intra- hill method has been employed by Hartley, Brown, Kyle, and Zook (1912) and by Collins (1914) .* Fig. 6—Planting experimental corn plats where accuracy is required. Hand planters are found far superior to planting with a hoe. A stuted number of kernels are placed in the planter for each drop *The year in parentheses following an author’s name in the text serves to associate the reference with a particular publication in the Bibliography (pp. 91-94), where the complete title is given. 80 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 Fig. 7--—A hill of checked corn with the three plants spaced in the hill in order that the plants may be readily counted without suckers being mistaken for separate plants In 1912 the Nebraska Experiment Station commenced a series of experiments to determine the reliability of the vari- ous kinds of corn test plats. The investigations were extended in 1913 but the corn was not harvested because of an almost total crop failure due to deficient rainfall. Good results were secured in 1914, 1915, and 1916. For planting, the land was marked off into hills three feet, eight inches apart and the corn planted at double the desired rate by means of hand planters. (Fig. 6.) When about four inches high the plants were thinned to the desired rate, thus producing an almost perfect stand. The plants were spaced within the hills so that the original plants could be easily distinguished from suckers. For the comparative yield tests, Experimental Error in Crop Tests 31 50 hills with the desired number of plants and surrounded by a normal stand were harvested from each row. This was accomplished by planting 72 hills in each row, which per- mitted the elimination of any hills having less than the full stand. Thus all yields were comparable so far as number of plants was concerned. The plats have been replicated eight or more times each year, as indicated in the tables, in order to eliminate soil variations. ROW COMPETITION IN RATE-OF-PLANTING TESTS WITH CORN Tables 11, 12, and 13 contain three years’ results with planting Nebraska White Prize corn at the rate of two and four plants per hill in alternating single-row and three-row Fig. 8—A hill of checked corn planted by the ordinary method without spacing the plants in the hill. It contains two plants, altho the number cannot be readily nor accurately determined as with the space-planted hill o2 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 TABLE 11—Relative yields of two rates of planting with Ne- braska White Prize corn when compared in alternating one-row plats and in alternating three-row plats (1914) | Yield per acre No. of No. of | No. of | No. of | No. of == rows in | plants | replica- | suckers | ears Average plat per hill = tions | per 100 | per 100 One-row plat or | of two plants | plants center row outside | | Tows ei | Bushels | Per cent | Bushels 1 4 15 7.4 67.0" | 43°85 | {00:0 aes 1 2 15 26.6 93.0 35.6 | 82.0 eg 4 9 71 | 66.0 | 384 | 100.0 | 398 3 2 a 96.0 44.3 .\ 11620 42.4 plats. The rows were harvested separately in the three-row plats. In 1914 the two-rate yielded 18 per cent less than the four-rate when compared in alternating single-row plats. In the center rows of alternating three-row plats, the two-rate yielded 16 per cent more than the four-rate. Due to compe- tition with a thicker stand, the two-rate yielded relatively 29.3 per cent too low in alternating single-row plats. In the two outer rows of the three-row plats, the ratio of the four- rate to the two-rate was 100:106.5 as compared with 100:116 for the center rows. TABLE 12—Relative yields of two rates of planting with Ne- braska White Prize corn when compared in alternating one-row plats and alternating three-row plats (1915) Yield per acre No. of No. of | No. of | No. of | No. of rows in plants | replica- | suckers | ears Average plat per hill | tions | per 100 per 100 | One-row plat or | of two plants plants center row outside rows | Bushels | Per cent | Bushels 1 4 8 8.5 95 101.7 100.0 ie i i 8 21.8 110 64.2 63.1 3 4 8 11.9 93 90.0 100.0 91.2 3 22 2) eee 112 62.0 70.0 63.0 Experimental Error in Crop Tests 33 In 1915 (Table 12), the two-rate yielded 36.9 per cent less than the four-rate when compared in alternating single-row plats. In the center rows of alternating three-row plats the two-rate yielded 30 per cent less than the four-rate. Due to competition, the two-rate yielded relatively 9.9 per cent too low in single-row plats. In the two outer rows the ratio of the four-rate to the two-rate was 100:69 as compared with 100:70 for the center rows. Competition was far less marked in 1915 than in 1914 because of much more favorable moist- ure conditions. In 1916 (Table 13), the two-rate yielded 21.3 per cent less than the four-rate when compared in alternating single-row plats. In the center rows of alternating three-row plats the two-rate yielded 6.2 per cent less than the four-rate. As the result of competition, the two-rate yielded relatively 16.1 per cent too low in single row plats. In the two outer rows the ratio of the four-rate to the two-rate was 100:85.9 as com- pared with 100:93.8 for the center rows. TABLE 13—Relative yields of two rates of planting with Ne- braska White Prize corn when compared in alternating one-row plats and alternating three-row plats (1916) Yield per acre No. of No. of | No. of No. of | No. of rows in | plants | replica- | suckers ears Average plat per hill | tions | per 100 | per 100 | One-row plat or | of two plants | plants center row outside rows Bushels Per wre Bushels 100 Scene 1 nl 8 24.8 82 52.7 1 2 8 ae | iii | 25 78.7 3 Me Te 23.0 799 | 51.8 | 100 53.4 3 2 8 ao | ile | 2a 93.8 | 45.9 INTRA-HILL AND ROW COMPETITION IN CORN VARIETY YIELD TESTS During the years 1912 and 1914, Pride of the North corn was compared with Hogue’s Yellow Dent corn in (1) alter- nating single rows, (2) alternating three-row plats, and (38) in the same hill. A similar comparison was also made be- tween University No. 3 corn and Hogue’s Yellow Dent in 1914. The relative yields of the above three varieties were also determined by planting all in the same hill. 3/ Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 The relative growth habits of these three varieties dur- ing 1914 is shown in Table 14. Hogue’s Yellow Dent igo large variety of corn requiring the entire season to mature. Pride of the North is a small, early-maturing variety. Uni- versity No. 3 is normally somewhat earlier and smaller than Hogue’s Yellow Dent. TABLE 14—Relative growth characters of three corn varieties used in 1914 (Table 16) to determine the amount of error from variety competition when tested by the single-row and intra-hill methods (1914 ) Length of : ; . Height of | Leaf-area Variety growing ae ae stalk per plant Days Inches Sq. In. HosueispyYellow, Dente hase s> =o eee alg, 96 997 Uintiversitva NOs errata eee ie 107 92 940 Bride oh the Norn tse ene ee 92 70. — 408 Fig. 9—-Alternating single-row plats of Hogue’s Yellow Dent and Pride of the North corn, 1914. The row method of testing corn types which differ in growth habit is unreliable because of competition between the plats Eeperimental Error in Crop Tests 390 Fig. 10—Alternating three-row plats of Hogue’s Yellow Dent and Pride of the North corn, 1914. Pride of the North on the right. Compe- tition between test plats may be avoided and correct relative yields obtained by discarding the outside rows of three-row plats In 1912 Hogue’s Yellow Dent and Pride of the North corn were grown. in alternating single rows and in alternating three-row plats at the rate of three plants per hill in each case. These were also compared for yield by growing one plant of each variety in the same hill. For this reason the variety yields per acre in the hill method are on a different basis than in case of the rows and blocks, but nevertheless they are com- parable. The three-row plat tests were replicated 10 times, the single row plats 20 times, and the hills 1,000 times. The results are contained in Table 15. In alternating three-row plats, Pride of the North yielded 85 per cent as much as Hogue’s Yellow Dent, while in alter- nating single-row plats it yielded 66 per cent as much as the Hogue’s Yellow Dent. Within the same hill, Pride of the North yielded 47 per cent as much as Hogue’s Yellow Dent. Due to competition Pride of the North yielded relatively 44.7 per cent too low in the same hill, and 22.4 per cent too low in the alternating rows. 36 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 In 1914 Hogue’s Yellow Dent corn was compared with University No. 3 corn in addition to a comparison with Pride of the North as made in 1912. All three varieties were also compared in the same hill. Plats were replicated the same as in 1912. The results are contained in Table 16. In the center row of alternating three-row plats, Pride of the North yielded 53 per cent as much as Hogue’s Yellow Dent, while in alternating single row plats it yielded 38 per cent as much as Hogue’s Yellow Dent. Within the same Fig. 11—Relative growth of Hogue’s Yellow Dent, University No. 3, and Pride of the North corn varieties when grown in the center row of three-row plats (1914) Kaperimental Error in Crop Tests 37 hill, Pride oi the North yielded 26 per cent as much as Hogue’s Yellow Dent. Due to competition with Hogue’s Yel- low Dent in the same hill, Pride of the North yielded rela- tively 51 per cent too low, while in alternating single-row plats it yielded relatively 28.3 per cent too low. Comparing the yields of Hogue’s Yellow Dent and Uni- versity No. 3 in the center rows of alternating three-row plats we have a ratio of 100:98, while in alternating single- row plats this ratio was 100:90. In the same hill the ratio Fig. 12——Relative growth of Hogue’s Yellow Dent, University No. 38, and Pride of the North corn varieties when grown in the same hill (1914) Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 38 2 Try a9d Jue[d suo Jo 9}¥1 294} UO peaseq—uUDAIS SI AJIII -BA YoRd TOF plelA [enjoe 9} “[[IY VUIVS 94} UL UMOIS SVM SOIJIIIVA VII} 10 OAM} JO YORI JO JURA 9UO BIOU MM: az VL 0001 oo a as aa Nils cee a a ei are ial Gon Fuse a. UMON ou} JO pHa Ae ee cleador PIS chloe Vk HPCE = SPD Sent Roa] cilia 2/1 nero ea aN ce ec ee enc umekiin GES 6°LG | OOOT qT ce eet CER gh Wey esate pe net see ig Ne quaq MoT[aA S,ans0H 66 0°08 | OOOT T 06 O19 06 § 9°69 86 Lv9 Or € le. a thee ee € “ON AjisiaAtuy) O0OT | FOE | OOOT T O0OT 89 06 & S19 0OT 8°S9 | Or SOR vate a en ieee quad Maas S,ans0y 96 9 0T | OOOT T 8& G66 0 & 162 &g L’S& | or Se gine §, hacen bag ae YON 947 JO apd sR, | Re (game | fates | aa | Re a a ae oe) ee ve MoO SamOH SMOL | eee “ot rod Aya1 o1DE “vol mieczad<|' png. | MOP AS URED cals eed aed Jad plalx -dad |-rea yora | 0d PIetA -dai syuv[q | OMY, | -dal sjue[g poereduiog satjaie A JO ‘ON) Jo squeid ve ‘ON ards Tae pee ela os [[IY owes ur paqyurlg SMO a[szurg quaoe(py syoorq MOI-9a1Y,], | (TIGL) YY awons ay? ur pazunid uaym pun ‘szn)d now-ajburs ‘sznjd NOL-aaLY} Ur pasndwmos uaym ‘sziqny y2NOLH Ui Bursaffip ‘savjaiuna Uso—d JO Spjaih aa1nn}aAy—9T ATAVL TTty ted Jue{[d 9uo jo 9}e1 BY] UO paseq—uUdBAIS St AJOIIGA YORI IOF ppotA Tenjoe 9y} ‘[[I4Y IJUIeS 9Y4} UT UMOIS SEM SoIJIIIVA OM} JO YOR Jo JuR[d 9UuO sIoy Mt ‘polted YYMOIS 19}JIOYS ABP-9T BV YIIM [T[VUIS WINIpsul SYA 4S9} SIY} UL pesn YIION 9} JO 9pldg 9} I[IYM ‘UIOD JO ALOIIVA SULIN]eUI-19} BT ‘8SIRT ‘paepuRys B SI JUG2C MOT[APA S,nsoH x Lv OOT Gol | B96 OO0T a 7 = LT[LY ewes ay} Ur payuEld YON ay} Jo epg pure Jue MOT[ax S,ens0H 99 OOT Lis | 8°0¢ 02 Cash PN eet SMOI e[SUIS Ul SUIVBUIS}[e YIION 94} JO aplid pue jue MO[[ax S,ensoyH g8 | 00T 6°GE TSE Or € ‘s7e[d MOa-voly} Ul SUUIAI[e YON a4} Jo epg pue yUaq MoOTjax S,ensoH quaa lag | juao lag syaysng sjaysng | Yon ayy) 34d yWon oy) Ue TSP | ooUeAL jo nie, | MOTTA | s,ensoy S,ansoyT suoty TG as -eoyjder | Jed sjue Sulueld jo Jauuew puev paledwood ,soaljolie aATYRlOW. | yenjoy jo as N Oud ued ¥ pue p x Le A. aioe Jad plalx (@I6L ) my aUWDS ay) Ue pojumd uayn pun ‘sznjd nos-aj7buis ‘sznj)d NOL-90LY} Ur pasvduos uayn ‘syqnoy yyNnoL6 ur Buraffip sayarwma usoa fo spjaih aaijn]ay—GT ATAVL Experimental Error in Crop Tests 39 was 100:99. Due to competition, the University No. 3 yielded relatively 8.0 per cent too low, in single rows and within the same hill it yielded 1 per cent too high. The ap- parent lack of competition within the hill in this case may have been due to there being only two plants of rather similar type in a hill. When ali three varieties were compared in the same hill the relative yields for the Hogue’s Yellow Dent, University No. 8, and Pride of the North were respectively 100, 96, and 28, aS compared with 100, 98, and 538 in the center rows of three-row plats, and 100, 90, and 38 in single-row plats. In the three-row plats (Table 16), the yields indicate that competition affects the outer rows to such an extent that they should be discarded in all yield tests of corns which dif- fer in growth habit. Single-row plats are unreliable for a comparative test of corn differing in growth habit or rate of planting. Two-row plats would probably be subject to one- half of the competition of single-row plats. In 1916 (Table 17), inbred and first generation hybrid Hogue’s Yellow Dent corn were similarly compared in (1) alternating single rows, (2) alternating three-row plats, and (3) in the same hill. The inbred corn had been self-fertilized TABLE 17—Relative yields of inbred Hogue’s Yellow Dent corn and first generation hybrid seed of inbred strains when compared in three-row plats, single-row plats, and when planted in the same hill (1916) Yield per acre : Plants Ne et Actual Relative Manner of planting per hill eeae Cross- Cross- iar Inbred bred Inbred Bus- | Bus- | Per Per hels hels cent cent Crossbred and inbred strains of H. Y. D. corn alternat- ing in 3-row plats........ 4 9 76.2 | 28.1 100 36.9 Crossbred and inbred strains of H. Y. D. corn alternat-| ing in single rows. 4 6 90.5 | 28.0 | 100 31.1 Crossbred and inbred strains of Ye Dr corm gb ced in the same hill*. 4 300 54.0 | 11.2 100 20.7 *Where two plants each of two types were grown in the same hill, ihe actual yield for each type is given, based on the rate of two plants per hill. 40 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 TABLE 18—Summary of relative grain yields when different rates of planting are tested in single-row plats and also in blocks containing several rows Ratio thick to thin Crop tested at two rates of planting ae ven of alteenate Alternat- . ing Ine COWES blocks Turkey Red winter wheat............... 1913 100:68 100:90 Turkey Red winter wheat............. 1914 100:35 100:81 WKhersGnc Oats 02 aia. et een ieee ae | 1913 100:64 100:80 Keaherson-OaliSrr 24 ooclacnnorre es. aie cenit 1914 100:67 1007102 Nebraska White Prize corn............. | 1914 100:82 100:116 Nebraska White Prize corn.............| 1915 100:638 100:70 Nebraska White PTIZeYCORM ner tcrs a ooe 1915 100:78 | 109:93— TABLE 19—Summary of relative grain yields when different varieties are tested in single-row plats and also in blocks containing several rows Varieties compared in alternating rows and in alternating blocks Ratio of variety No. 1 to variety No. 2 in Turkey Red (1) and Big Frome (2yewinterwNeatia.e nana: Turkey Red (1) and Big Frame (2) winter wheat. Turkey Red (1) and Nebraska No. 28 (2) winter wheat. . Turkey Red (1) and Nebraska No. 28 (2) winter wheat.... Kherson (1) and Burt (2) oats Kherson (1) and Burt (2) oats Kherson (1) and Swedish Se- PECba (2) OATS. oe Kherson (1) and Swedish Se-) HGCTN(Z)MOALS SO. fy Sc ccsee Hogue’s (1) and Pride of the INorbhi(2)iCOMn: ss. eas «aos Hogue’s (1) and Pride of the| INorthi(2)"eorns. 5... ...22.: Hogue’s (1) and University INO sto we) GOT t69. wei oes ats F\* Hogue’s (1) and inbred Hogue’s (2) corn.........| Year of | Compet- test Alternat- | Alternat- | ing in ing rows ing same hill blocks (Corn) 1913 100:107 100:97 1914 100:85 100:97 19138 100:107 100:107 1914 100:63 100:85 1913 100:130 100:112 1914 100:139 100:101 1913 100:82 100:77 1914 100:89 100:93 1912 100:66 100:85 100:47 1914 100:38 100:53 100:26 1914 100:90 100:98 100:99 1916 100:31 100:37 100:21 *Pirst generation hybrid of inbred strains. Experimental Error in Crop Tests Al for five years and was greatly reduced in size and vigor. The results indicate the error which might be expected if two inbred parents were to be compared with their hybrid and the original check seed. In alternating three-row plats, the inbred corn yielded 36.9 per cent as much as the hybrid seed, while in the alternating single-row plats it yielded 31.1 per cent as much. When compared in the same hill, the inbred seed yielded 20.7 per cent as much as the hybrid seed. Because of competition with the larger plants in the same hill, the inbred corn yielded relatively 44 per cent too low. while in alternating single rows, it yielded relatively 16 per cent too low. SUMMARY OF PLAT COMPETITION STUDIES The effects of single row plat competition upon comp2”a- tive grain yields, are summarized for wheat, oats, and corn, in Tables 18 and 19. These data are taken from Tables 1 lo 7 and 11 to 17. The ratios given for the comparative yields in blocks are for the middle row or middle three rows of either three-row plats or five-row plats, except in 1913, when the block-rows were not harvested separately. VARIATION OF STAND AS A SOURCE OF ERROR IN YIELD TESTS WITH CORN In order to secure information regarding the effect of variation in stand upon the accuracy of comparative corn tests, 2,000 hills of corn were planted in 1914 and 8,500 hills in 1917, in which were methodically distributed two, one and no-plant hills among hills with a full stand of three plants. Kach hill was harvested separately. The results are contained in Tables 20 and 21. In 1914 (Table 20), when surrounded by hills having a full stand of three plants, the respective relative grain yields of three-plant, two-plant and one-plant hills were 100, 82, and 74. In 1917 the corresponding relative yields were 100, 83, and 50. In 1914 (Table 21), when three-plant corn hills, other- wise surrounded by a full stand of three plants per hill, were adjacent to (1) one hill with two plants, (2) one hill with one plant, (3) one blank hill, (4) two blank hills, the respec- tive grain yields per hill were 3 per cent, 5 per cent, 13 per cent and 43 per cent greater than when surrounded entirely by three-plant hills. 42. Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 In 1917 corresponding hills with missing plants increased the grain yields of three-plant hills respectively 2 per cent, 9 per cent, 15 per cent and 25 per cent over the yield of three-plant hills entirely surrounded by three-plant hills. The data indicate that irregularity of stand in corn yield tests may cause inaccurate yields and should be avoided. Error due to variation in stand of corn may be largely overcome by planting the corn thick and thinning to a uni- form stand soon after coming up. If grown in hills, the seed may be space-planted in the hill so that the actual number of plants may be readily counted at harvest with- out suckers being mistaken for separate plants. It is desir- able, just before husking, to count out a given number of hills having a full stand and surrounded by a normal stand, upon which to base the yield per acre. This may be facili- tated by planting an additional number of hills to permit dis- carding. Space-planting in the hill for experimental yield tests may be accomplished by first marking off the field cross- wise with a sled marker and then making three separate spaced plantings in each intersection by means of a hand corn planter adapted for the purpose. Where three plants are grown per hill, the marker runners should be double so that all three plantings may be made in a runner mark, thus insuring uniform planting conditions for all three plants. There are exceptional kinds of corn experiments in which planting thick and thinning to insure a perfect stand would conflict with the object of the investigation: TABLE 20—Relative yields of one, two, and three-plant corn hills when surrounded uniformly by three-plant hills (1914 and 1917) Number of plants in = Number | Number | Number | Average grain hills surrounded by of hills ] of tillers | of ears yield per hill uniform three-plant averaged per 100 | per 100 hills | | plants plants Actual | Relative | | Grams Per cent YEAR 1914 Hills with three plants.. 310 8 83 466 100 Hills with two plants... | 70 38 96 380 82 Hills with one plant... . 16 112 168 344 74 YEAR 1917 Hills with three plants. . DS OHe eka ae dope 95 509 100 Hills with two plants. . .| BORE, alts co es es 102 422 83 Hills with one plant... || G4g* All coe eee 114 252 50 Eaperimental Error in Crop Tests 43 TABLE 21—Relative yields of three-plant corn hills adjacent to hills with missing plants (1914 and 1917) ] | ° 5 Three-plant hills sur- __ | Number _ Average grain Pa iiitied by: three: Run Der ae of ears | Yield of three-plant plant hills except as | averaged | per hill _ Li 1 U mus | ants Enq eae indicated below p Nes) aes Grams Per cent YEAR 1914 Surrounded by hills with | three plants..... 310 3 | 83.6 | 465.8 | 100 Adjacent to one hill with | mwOrplants)) .0an 2. 149 3 | O70 | AWD 103 Adjacent to one hill with | |. | Onesplant 34455 on. 44 3 | 86.3 490.3 105 Adjacent to one blank | | | hill... 3 2s 3 | 88.0 | 526.6 113 Adj acent to two blank | | | FAM See sense eens sie Ke | 3 91.0 | 666.5 143 YEAR 1917 Surrounded by hills with | | three plants......... | 288 3 95 509 100 Adjacent to one hill with} | | two plants.......... 211 3 | 96 519 102 Adjacent to one hill with | | OMeyplanu sane ene. | 258 3 102 HH | 10 Adjacent to one blank | [GUUS ase ae | 2x 3 99 585 [WS Adjacent to two blank | Tavs) Saree oe Ne ee ; 198 3 101 | 681 | 125 RELATION OF STAND TO YIELD IN SINGLE-ROW TEST PLATS The data in Table 22 were compiled from records of exten- sive ear-to-row tests of Hogue’s Yellow Dent corn made by Lyon and Montgomery at the Nebraska Station during the four years 1904-1907. Rows 72 hills in length had been planted by hand at the rate of three kernels per hill, 3 feet 8 inches apart. The entire plats were harvested regardless of the actual stand secured, altho a record was taken of the per cent stand. In Table 22 the plat yields have been assembled into groups for each year according to the per cent stand. Since a rather large number of plats are averaged in each group, this may overcome in large measure any inherent difference in yield- ing power of the individual ears tested, and the differ- 44. Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 TABLE 22—Relation of per cent germination in the field to yield of single-row test plats of Hogue’s Yellow Dent corn (1904-1907) | Numb Kernel ees | Number rnels : Year | of plats planted See baer averaged | per hill noon ae Per cent Busheis GERMINATION 90-95 PER CENT ESTO Es age ae eee 5 ae aA 10 3 92.1 76.8 QOD icccas ees 2 eee oe 9 3 92.3 94.6 OO Gia ein oe pert es er iwat be Ve 3 93.0 84.8 TOO i ee Onl eure eee eee 22 3 94.0 85.9 A OTARG OF ere es 5 Fae oc WL FR pl 43 3 i = (RRs 85.5 GERMINATION 85-90 PER CENT NO OAM Macc? eee ara r ays 12 3 87.6 81.3 OO Siegel ee Pelee, eae ee Scr 25 3 88.1 95.2 OO G es letra ne vag) aie ee 10 3 87.0 92.4 1907. Ree Se 525 16 3 86.0 83.7 ARSE ts och ea ea Ma RY ae | 63. 3 87.2 88.1 GERMINATION 80-85 PER CENT AS A ere eytee Mee ee ht, aon ee PA 3 83.1 75.4 TGLO)5)4's eae a tie ee Ree Dee ce oie 4() 3 83.2 88.4 ILD OS seiner Oa eee ee ane Peary ase Be 3 82.6 85.4 NG Oe ee eiata Seen ee 18 3 82.0 85.0 FAN CE AG Ci Mecengel op ithe oot) ate ds aly 3 82.7 83.5 GERMINATION 75-80 PER CENT 1D AER en Se ens, Wy ee ee | 12 3 lees F8e0 76.2 OO ieee rate Bet Later wea S 14 3 78.4 85.5 OO Gira eat eee tare 18 3 78.9 83.3 NLM OER ene e Se en ne ad ps 16 3 EO 83.9 PAS CT CCE gore, ete Ae pert 60. 3 17.8 82.2 GERMINATION 70-75 PER CENT OO Aree rae Sor a ee ee ee | 11 3 74.0 68.1 OO Sires coe eae teh ca tec € 3 Wee 79.9 QUO ESR eh eee Ae a 19 3 73.4 82.9 1 UC SHS aad er ole aa 10 3 72.0 80.6 PAVICTAD CH ezee see E in, © oc enor eran | 46. 3 73.1 Ted) GERMINATION 60-70 PER CENT SOBRE eee as te aa oe | 13 3 66.2 67.3 WOOD eee tice Lacing serge de veee | 3 3 67.3 (ues ES OGierne aa teet eee ea Lt 10 3 68.1 80.1 Ree Negere ah on dais ie 10 3 65.0 74.7 PVC OU Sta ie aetlery 4. * 36. 3 66.6 74.8 GERMINATION BELOW 60 PER CENT GOA Rrra Ae, oa etme nur iiss 21 3 35.6 42.6 TUS) oe oe ER rac ati heen 6 3 51.5 70.7 HE) Ope sa en eet fin to 11 3 42.1 56.9 Ue LOGS ASIP ea et Sieg R i x 43.0 56.8 I Se ae | 45 3 43.0 56.7 Experimental Error in Crop Tests A5 ence in yield for the groups may be assigned primarily to the difference in stand. During the four years, consid- ering three plants per hill a 100 per cent stand, stands aver- aoe 92:8, 387.2, 82.7, 17.8, 73.1, 66.6, and 43.C per cent yielded respectively 85.5, 88.1, 83.5, 82.2, 77.9, 74.8, and 56.7 bushels per acre. It appears from these results that what was regarded a perfect stand, namely three plants per hill, was too thick for a maximum yield with this variety, since an 87.2 per cent stand outyielded a 92.8 per cent stand. The yield by no means decreased in proportion to the stand. An average stand of 43 per cent yielded 66.3 per cent as much as a 92.8 per cent stand. It would appear unreliable to correct yields upon a basis of stand. The yield of an individual row plat planted at a given rate will vary greatly according to the stand in adjacent rows. For this reason the data in Table 22 must not be regarded as necessarily indicating the true relative yields, during the years tested, for the different stands as would be obtained in a proper rate-of-planting test. Because of the chance variations in stand of single-row plats, no reliable formulas can be established for the correc- tion of yields according to the per cent stand. For example, very different results may be expected from a row with 75 per cent stand, according to whether it falls between rows having a 50 per cent or a 100 per cent stand. This is borne out by the rate-of-planting tests in rows and blocks during the three years 1914-1916 (Tables 11, 12, and 13). COMBINATION OF RATE-PLANTING AND VARIETY YIELD TESTS It has been a rather common practice in variety yield tests to plant all varieties at one arbitrary “standard” rate, regardless of their growth habits. During 1907 and 1908, three varieties were tested at five different rates of planting. The Pride of the North and Calico, which are respectively small and medium-sized vari- eties, increased regularly in yield with the rate of planting, and produced their maximum at the rate of five plants per hill. On the other hand, Mammoth White Pearl, which is a large late corn, yielded its maximum at the three-rate and then fell off sharply. 46 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 In 1914, three varieties, differing distinctly in size and length of growing season, were planted at five different rates. Pride of the North produced its maximum yield at the rate of five plants per hill. University No. 3 produced identical and maximum yields at both the two and the three-rate and then fell off sharply. Hogue’s Yellow Dent produced its max- imum yield at the two-rate and then fell off sharply. The data in both Tables 23 and Table 24 indicate that the relative yielding power of varieties differing in growth habit can only be determined by planting at several rates. Different varieties have a different optimum rate of planting. TABLE 23—Relation of rate of planting to yield of corn varie- ties differing in growth habit grown in two-row plats* (1907-1908) Length | Yield per acre Plants per hill growing | | period 1907 1908 Average Days | Bushels Bushels Bushels PRIDE OF THE NORTH 1 127 33.7 25.0 29.3 2, 126 48.2 37.5 42.8 3 126 55.3 45.5 50.0 4 125 63.8 51.6 57.7 5 125 | 69.4 48.4 58.9 CALICO 1 WALl | 43.1 | 28.1 35.6 a 126 53.4 | 40.6 47.0 3 126 (pln) 53.1 62.0 4 125 74.8 56.2 65.5 5 | 124 | 78.7 64.1 71.4 MAMMOTH WHITE PEARL 1 | 135 45.6 | 43.8 44.7 2 135 | 59.1 | 65.6 62.3 3 134 | 70.7 | 71.9 71.3 4 | 133 52.0 | 59.4 55.7 5 | 138 > | 611 | 56.2 > eee *Plats not duplicated. 3 KHaperimental Error in Crop Tests AT EFFECT OF REMOVING SUCKERS WITH DIFFERENT VARIETIES Occasionally an investigator has removed the suckers from his corn varieties or selections in order to avoid annoyance by them. The data in Table 25 indicate that the removal of suckers may affect different varieties differently, and that a new error in testing may be introduced thereby. TABLE 24—Relation of rate of planting to yield of corn varie- ties differing in growth habit grown in three-row plats (1914) No. of ear : Plants| No. of Length Barren Two- bearing weld pe per replica- growing Meals eared suckers ae hill tions Period stalks per 100 (cea a plants | LON Days Per cent Per cent | | Bushels PRIDE OF THE NORTH 1 3 92 0 8 ri 17.4 2 3 92 0 1 2 28.2 3 3 92 | Y 0 0 35.5 4 3 92 2 0 0 39.8 5 3 92 8 0 0 44.4 UNIVERSITY NO. 3 al 3 107 0 14 20 40.2 2 3 107 1 3 D 59.6 3 3 107 6 1 0 59.5 4 3 107 8 0 0 52.7 5 3 | 107 15 0 | 0 47.3 HOGUE’S YELLOW DENT 1 3 119 0 10 19 44.4 2 3 119 | 1 | 1 2, 63.9 3 3 119 | 2 0 0 59.0 4 3 119 | iY 0 0 59.8 5 3 119 13 0 0 53.7 RELIABILITY OF ESTIMATING PLAT YIELDS BY MEANS OF FRACTIONAL AREAS In conducting field experiments in cooperation with farmers, experiment stations frequently encounter difficulty in having test plats properly harvested and threshed. In some states the yields of such plats are estimated by harvesting a number of very small apparently representative areas from each of the plats to be compared. The small quantity A8 =Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 TABLE 25—E'ffect of removing tillers from corn varieties dif- fering in growth habits (1912 and pene ie Plants. WNowat | Yield per acre* Variety | per replica Tillers | Tillers Dinee | hill tions | on removed ence vedns, | Bushels | Busheis | Buskels YEAR 1912 Pride of the: North...>....-. 2 10 38.6 30.9 el University. Nowe: s365. aes 2 oe 10 Aer 42.9 48 Hogue’s Yellow Dent........| 2 10 53.7 43.5 102 Pride the North: 3.) 42a. | 3 = Bk 40.9 38.2 PRT University No. 3. aereteceal| 3 10 56.9 | 64.2 2.7 Hogue’s Yellow Dent........ 3 10 43.6 | 38.8 4.8 YEAR 1914 Pride‘of- the North.......... 2 3 Bolo Beep 2.8 WnliversitvalNOmoncra see oe | 2 See Nea 50.5 +1.3 Hogue’s Yellow Dent ..... 2 3 Sako 55.0 +2.7 Prdevot the Northe...... oo. 3 3) | 38.8 33.6 Dee University No. 3. eapeprati Me 3 3 45-8 || 46:6 +0.8 Hogue’s Yellow Menke cack 3 | 3 | 544 | 54.8 0.1 *¥y ield per acre based on center row of three- -row plats in 1914 and on single-row plats in 1912. of grain harvested in this manner can readily be shipped to the central station for threshing and estimation of yield. In order to secure information relative to the reliability of such a method the following test was made in 1917: Duplicate thirtieth-acre field plats of each of seven differ- ent varieties or selections of winter wheat were chosen from among a large number of plats for this study. These plats measured 16 rods by 66 inches and contained eight rows. Twenty systematically distributed fractional areas or quadrates were harvested from each plat. These were 32 inches square, contained four rows of wheat, and were .0001632 acre in area. Quadrates were located 10 feet from each end and at intervals of 14 feet on alternate sides of the plat, as indicated in the following diagram. Diagram showing distribution of 20 quadrates in thirtieth-acre plats (Table 26) Experimental Error in Crop Tests 49 The quadrates were accurately laid out by means of an ivon frame, as shown in the following figure. A rectangular frame is more reliable than a round one where the grain is planted in rows. Frame used for laying off quadrates (Table 26) Because of severe and variable winterkilling the 14 plats differed markedly in the percentage of plants surviving, and in yield. There was also much greater variation between the quadrates within a single plat than would normally be expected. Opportunity was provided to compare the mean results of 5, 10, and 20 systematically distributed quadrates with the entire plat from which they were harvested. In making four groups of five quadrates each, group (a) contained quad- rates Nos. 1, 6, 9, 14, and 17; group (b) contained Nos. 3, 8, 11, 16, and 19; group (c) contained Nos. 2, 5, 10, 13, and 18; and group (d) Nos. 4, 7, 12, 15, and 20. For two groups of 10 quadrates each, group (a) contained Nos. 1, 4, 5, 8, 9, 12, 13, 16, 17, and 20, and group (b) contained Nos. 2, 3, 6, 7, 10, 11, 14, 15, 18, and 19. The results of these various eroupings are shown in Table 26 in comparison with the yields of the entire respective plats. The average yield determined from 20 quadrates deviated 1.4 bushels from the average plat yield. For individual plats the 20-quadrate yield estimation varied from 0.2 to 3.2 bushels per acre. Since each kind of wheat was grown in duplicate plats the mean of 40 quadrates can be compared with the mean of two field plats. In this comparison the average of these Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 50 ve + 10 + 0 — el — 0°0 0 — SOF ~~ sye|d ply wosy Sayeapenb jo uoetAeq SLé SLE LLL 8°OP 8°65 TLE 8° VE wore eee eres ess“saqeipenb Of JO esvi0Ay Lce Tle 0'8T LPP 8°68 GLE of ie ee St a syzid play 07 Jo adviaay G8 oLé Giog € 9 GES Sol O87 OLE | SPT 8's 8°oPV Gees VIP ESC es See ae | °° dnois 8 UI Sayeipenb AjuUeM J, G8 GLE §'6 $96 SES SGl O87 OLE | SVP 8S 8°oV 1s VIP [poh al aie a | | a lace eat aseIaAV TOP oSé TOP Lvs VIG tale Gos G9E (Bag L°3é VOV 9°08 vy GSS q ; 8°96 66 98E SLE 0°SS 1orey VSV 88S | GST 69 SEP V3é G’8s aS: B “vss dnois 8 Ul Seyeipenb ua, G8 GLE $66 9 GES GGL O'8P OLE | SVP SVE | Sor tol VIV fhe Ale Geaeaiame bo hee Be A Ae teeta Ge aseloAY V8é 6 LE SEs 9°SE L386 OST T6P eos TV | 98 8°66 olé TTP L6G Pp Sy SPs LPP 8°Sé OPT T6 LLY TSé | 0°96 GSEs 9°0P T06 he G 2 V9S | D) oss T8é 6°SE VIS 8°SS Sak S697 €68 | O87 este GcP VSE TOP 6° LG q $gé o8& TVV SOP GG HOE LSP 6°07 | STS Ss SoV 8°83 OP G66 Ge Alp reaet al dnois3 &% Ul sayeipenb aay VLE OTE C8 LS 6°06 VST o6P | & 07 Sry | WSs Sy | GEE SIP GaSe E ape Monet en el ge 38[d Pell ‘sng | ‘sng | ‘sng | ‘sng | sng | ‘sng | ‘sng | ‘sng | ‘sng | ‘sng | ‘sng | ‘sng | ‘sng | ‘sng | | | ee 0S GG TV €&T OP ra 8&é OT G&S v tS € 0& G 3eId | 3Ild | 3®[d | Fld | Fld | 31d Id | ¥8[d | 38Id | 38d | 3%Ild Vid | #8Ild | 381d | las = a= Petiehecngkeny NOILVOIAISSVIO pey Aoyxiny, 8L “ON 09 “ON 9 ON 8P “ON Gv (ON dnoiny AOYIBUY [BULSIIQ pey Aayiny, | poy Aeyxiny, | poy Aoyiny, | poy Aayxing, | poy Aoyiny, -wmazshs wo1f pun syd yooyn saqzun wolf aon sad UnL6 fo pjaih aaynnindwoj—9z ATV L Kuaperimental Error in Crop Tests 51 quadrate means, for the several sorts of wheat, deviated 2.2 per cent from the average of the duplicate plat yields. When the quadrates from each plat were grouped into sets of five and ten each, there was considerable variation in yield between the separate groups, which suggests that not less than 20 quadrates should be harvested from compara- tive plats of this character. It appears that the results from 20 systematically dis- tributed quadrates may be fairly safely substituted for the yield of the entire plat from which they are taken. EXPERIMENTAL ERRORS CAUSED BY SOIL VARIATION The lack of uniformly productive land for comparative crop tests has given rise to a number of methods frequently used for ascertaining and overcoming the resultant experi- mental error. Chief among these methods are: (1) The use of frequent, systematically distributed check plats planted to a uniform crop for the purpose of (a) indicating the degree Fig. 13—A relatively uniform field containing 207 thirtieth-acre plats sown for a method study to a uniform crop of Kherson oats (1916) 52 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 of variation due to the soil or (b) correcting the results from the intervening test plats. (2) Replication of plats and bas- ing the conclusions upon the mean yield. (3) Use of long, narrow rather than short, wide plats. (4) Calculating the probable error for the mean results of replicated plats, to indicate the degree of confidence which may be placed in the results. The results from 207 thirtieth-acre Kherson oats plats, grown in 1916, illustrate each of the four practices mentioned above. These plats were planted to a uniform crop upon a seemingly uniform field for the purpose of studying varia- tion in plat yields as a source of experimental error. The Fig. 14—-Two hundred and seven thirtieth-acre Kherson oats plats planted to a uniform crop for studying experimental error in 1916 entire field had been cropped uniformly to silage corn for a period of eight years. It had been plowed each year and was also plowed in preparation for the oats in 1916. The oats were drilled during two successive days in plats 16 rods by 66 inches, which equaled one drill width. The plats were separated by a space of 16 inches between outside drill rows. A wide discard border of oats was grown around the outer edge of the field, so that all plats should have a similar expo- sure. General views of this field are shown in Figures 13 and 14. Kuperimental Error in Crop Tests SYS) USE OF CHECK PLATS During the past 15 years it has become the general prac- tice in crop investigations to plant check plats at regular stated intervals. These plats are planted to a uniform crop and should yield alike except for various environmental sources of experimental error. The use of check plats may be twofold: (1) To indicate the error caused by variation in normal plat yields. The variation in the check plats is regarded as indicative of the error in the test plats. (2) Check plats are more commonly used to calculate the normal or theoretical yield of all plats in the field. All crops or treatments are then compared directly with each other by their increased or decreased yield above or below the calculated normal yield for the plats upon which they grew. This difference is best expressed in percentage of the normal plat yield. Comparative yields per acre may then be calculated for each crop, variety, or treatment by adding (or subtracting) the difference between it and the normal yield for the plat to (or from) the mean yield for all check plats in the field. This recalculation of yields is usually spoken of as correction according to check plats. The check plats may be variously distributed in the field according to the manner in which the corrections are to be made. Three methods of correction are in common use: (1) The normal or theoretical yield of the test plat is determined by, and is equivalent to, the average of two adjacent check plats. (Alternating plats are check plats.) (2) The normal or theoretical yield of the test plat is determined by, and is equivalent to, the yield of a single adjacent check plat. (Two test plats are planted between checks.) (38) The soil between two or more check plats is regarded as varying gradually from one check plat to the other and a progressive correction is used to establish the normal or theoretical yields of the intervening test plats. Thus, if two test plats lie between checks which yield 51 and 60 bushels respectively, the nor- mal yields assigned to the two test plats by this progressive method would be 54 and 57 bushels. Progressing from the lower to the higher yielding check the normal yield of the first test plat is greater than the poorer check by one-third of the difference, while the normal yield of the second test plat is greater than the poorer check by two-thirds of the difference. The proportion of the difference added to each successive test plat will depend upon the number of plats be- tween checks. Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 54 SL @LL |329 TLT a SL 918 |49 901 || ssn PES |42 E8 Coy, 71 Sissi eee Ore, | aie OLT 9°88" | 16:9 = |. 9°E°-=F |g || z798 LOT O92. | 1896 —| ee — | O1z8. | 2:62 (a3 SL L3L |32 69T OSL 9°08 |32 80T 8h 9°08 |42 Te TAYE NA easel AX) Soult egy al) cara: 891 Weele || 99s — 1) ee FPR coy 601 828 | 78¢ + | oF + | B°8z | FEB 0g a 8h STL |42 LOT Gige T88 |42 OTT || sez 69L |32 62 iOS. |\SStG st Gulestpenl OFGhe 1 (GeG)) 99T SSL 070 070 €98 | §'98 ITE) S26 | Prva | STE | (S0O“el. 8s 8Z 8h 6SL |42 SOT SL V8 | SIT || ssL L49 |32 LZ DSvin | POR ata le GOneteel meron lm eaae, POT 698 | OLIT+ | 68 + | fos | T'68 Ir || S's6 | oSi6er+ | OE | Sty | seg 9% 8h 9°08 42 €9T SSL | 6SL |42 FIT | sesL 8'8L |x GZ SVE NINOS Neg | RY ED, Zor Ged: 90S | OP | OGL Os ST I SiGe eSztest nyse tal Oro mel me OMe emer SSL 6SL |32 T9T oS8L 0°68 49 9IT SL 8'8L | Sz Farley Sey | eee al Vagal eed 09T PIS eraiz ar | CAs se SPs: ees TTiTeal| eee Sue O Le Gest ROR ley =()Onl meng Go OSL 69L 2 6ST SL 918 |42 SIT zZegL G38 |3 12 (SS SRR SEES Seu Ie OF I er Sy)) 8ST 818 | 097 + | 6E + | 2°78 | 9°88 CHEN A PAO) S| | Gas 02 o8h OSL |¥9 LST SSL L°L8 |32 021 o8L 88L 2 61 VP OW EXO = |) EH) S|) ORS Ih Sy 9ST VS. | U6Wiste||) Ghat | 9a08) || sss Tal $69 | OV TT—| ss — | azz | F89 SI 38h L°3L | SST oS8L G'S) |42 Z2l || 2 SL GGL |32 LT SEB NOSE | OiOe ata 2G? | ae $ST 98h || 2 | OF | PLL | Be | SSE) Lee 1) 79> —|8°0 — | eek | SLE) OT o8L | | SLL |32 SST CH= || | S6L |H2 PST || SSL T'T8 |? ST O;D ems SiGe alee SCC anl| Lay) aT OV, | RE Sra |) ON, ray), GCTEIE NORGSi eal KO nstan | Oscars cle OS alles 9S ae er wel 8769 | TST ask | L°79 |42 920 | seh f08 |32 &T DAV WASGRIE SEU AIR Se We Meee ie nisi} OST TER eS ALS pl) eed I) ecards} GT | sea aS a Paty te Grist alee G an ORSS aL SL | | | 2¢h |42 6PT ee | | 308 |42 82r | asy o6L |32 IT ain at| 2 CuO petan ear Oeste ee GxG2 oth aCe |e elnay eel rear |) eOsiteene | CRY) 1) CEI Galt 8h 070 070 | GUN Ween zoele. .0i 8h OSL |H9 LPT Z8L | @LL |42 O81 || 3S8L 2:08 1 6 rs 062+ | 0:9) 4-1) 0792, | 0:28 9FT Gy WER Sia I) ae ib fry || OP T&T (Opry rahi re tate Me | Fay || oS SSL | 6°9L |42 SFT OSL | | $S8 |42 Zer o8L | 918 |? 2 (OEY, YA I) Pa) | I ey PPT ei) WW SKeiy S|) tee = |}. FSR) | ees nM cate? IAs Sie We ders are || PSS) 8 9 o8L | SLL | SPT Sea | S48 |42 eT OSL | 8°78 |yo ¢ So | ee] RO | CRE, i Fant S90) | 98 | 9 T — | 0r98! | arse SSE || Ge On abe 8198S ee ean F 8h | 6&8 |42 TPT Ggy | 8'F8 |4? 9ST SSL $98 | € TiS) WVGlONsi | tci0) ste | (Saas OLS 1) SOV S'7L | LLY —| TH — | 0°98 | 618 | LET} ozs | eer =| 6:8) == 4) Gi0Salesars Z SSL 918 [42 68L ] ws, | SL8 |42 Set SSL | @¢L |¥o T s]aysngd 7U99 dad | S]aYysng “SnT “Sng sjayang | Ua dad Ss]aYysng “SN “SN_ | S]aYysng 1Uad dad | S]aYSng_ "SN “snd | | Bul | | ; [eu jeur pers Das ew || ppataé +10 NV abe A | Pars _ LON ey Pejoot | [BuUlIoU WOT —————————-| ‘ON peqoor [euliou wody $$ || ONE I) ORNS ER [euliou ul01y ON -109 uolzeIAaqd a10B 4e1q -109 uoletAsd 3108 qed -109 uolyeIAaqd 2198 | 981g | aad prarx | Jad platx | Jad pjatx | | xSpjah fo U01Q0a4L09 LOf 87D)d YoayD Huynusazyy f{O ASN MOYS 02 pajznjnd]nI sznId $}H0 UOSLAYY ILIV-YJIYMIYZ UALAS pun pa“puny OMJ—LZ ATAVI, 55 Crop Tests Experimental Error in . 00 60 10 00 B) yo yo yo yo yo yo yo yo yo yo Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 56 ARONOANMANATON ONAL AL OO On Sai aseas 1a B8L 8°8L |42 8ST o8L 9°88 |4° 6IT o8L 9°08 |#2 02 GOL GIG) eee || nO OSL Lot || € 18 Or Se beets ar &78 | LL8 OZI || T8L SONS || ee ae GiB ees er 61 GOL Vili 39 ee T&L 9ST || 398 9201+ | o8 + | 6.6L 188 Ter | 69 OF Li | 8i8 INGLE eso 8T o8L LOL |42 GST || Ss. | | GGL |¥2 Zar || SL QgL |42 LI Tas sor + | 98 + SOL | 6 SL PST Giese ats | 8S + | OFL | SLL Ser | 692 OR ae | Ge a re sia 9T G8 90°38 + | gg + OSL | BLL SST | g°S8 GSiG) seal saoeate VGL | G6L ver || LOL SOm hel Delta ales TT8 GT o8L LIL |*4° ¢ST o8L 8.0L 19 S2t || asL £98 |49 PL SPL REEL? | Ot OE ere) [IST |} 9°89 CTGls || GiG =a, | SOG lear | 921 || L'vL Cav | 8a8: aa ol ORES: 308 €I 0°82 YES AO) — al iat Si 7 TL Ost o°8 GUO ae SiS ete OLL | 28 | LGL || S6L Glee || easels 918 | 0&8 as o8L GGL |? 6PT 68h G08 |A2 8er || S8L f6L |? TT 0°9L BSG ia GiGia | Ly | Eau 8h1 oLL LENG TES tN) tepals Woy -6¢1 || G9L CU al all te tlh eee Or 61 ESS VeVi || 1616, OSL LYvT Srl 10:9 | ta Pas Seer Ost | 9°S2 LGN SiGe || OlesmlciOs 6 68h 0°28 |79 9FT || SSL 0°68 |49 TE || os8L 8 rs 8 L UL JiVAV: Semp| SORG) eee 1 SOS, 6°91 Str L6L E62 dea Sete L°§8 &S8 ost || s'SZ WES GiGi BSS | Oels L o9L CG |) (rh |e Loh ante rr || SL SGiS) See | eee Orcs: Sé1 | L8L 690 + | go + 878 | S98 9 o8L SLL |H9 S71 || 38h S18 |42 PET || SSL 878 | ¢ QPL LOW see | atGueee ClO 4 Gea; Cyl || ash LSSG) soe VIG tee ||| OLS V8 SéT | SLL Lvi0! ==") F210) == | Sires ras v 6°08 SPSicis, |) Sie TT8 | 6&8 Tvl | OSL LOA ae ORGieen lesa oehS: 9&T | 962 DRE Sea OA ae 8°78 98 & o8L O88 (12 OFT || VEL T68 |49 LET || ash 878 PP 3c 9°18 6EI | a8 SEI || ooh T sjaysng | juao 4aq | sjaysng | ‘sng | ‘sng | spaysnq | quaa tag | sjaysng | sng | ‘sng || sjaysng | juaa aq | sjaysng | ‘sng | ‘sng eur | | | [eur | | | (20 |renqoy| pjara | -zoyy [MPV | pars | ON pa ok Pars | =a gs payor jeusou Woly —————| ‘ON || Poeqoor | jewiou wo1y |——————_| ‘oN pajoaar | j[eulsou uIOIy |————————| “ON “109 uoryeIAad aloe | 928[q || 0D uol]BIAaqd | ai0R ACTA || =LO@y || uolyelAed aioe 121d Jad pjatx | | | tad pjatxk | yed ppatA } SYIIYI Uaanjaq auarsaqur sznjd joLaaas asayn sznjd yoaya hq spjarh fo uoyoas.oo fo poyzaw aaissawb -OLd AY}2 NOYS 0} paznjna] nd $70j1A 81NO UOSLAYY ALIV-YJAYAIY] WAAaS PUD paspuny ONT—b% ATAVL 59 ‘PleY 9} Ul palind00 Ady] SB UOTZISOM VATVVIoI VUIVS OY} UL 91GB} SIY} UL poSuvazie oie siVid sux | ar ios = TON OMO MAAC et ©O MO 610 [+ +| [+ +| At ot FO Ox 1IONh= HO COF- Hr | MO 1990 ©1090 Din ~-QD + +{ onl Experimental Error in Crop Tests mos tHe NO FO Dt H MH DO COS HOS SS HO HH 160 To DOHEOHBAWDDHOK HOE DOHOHOHNMONDBONHDSWWEDAIO BREE EOF EE OR EEE ORR ORR OER ER ORE ROR RE OW ANRMOANMANOCNOANSHEANTANANHANE ANODE Ao ~- 0100 | =F + + | Vsti OSL L02 88h OL | 9°8L 88h |¥9 902 || Z8L @¢8 | TL o8L 0788 | 6GL | 8°6L Gog || SSL | ore —| 62— | aes | T'88 oh GéL | 669 —| 6h — | 8'I8.| 69L Ten | 789 $02 | 6SL | F6-% —| Gz — | OS8 | G28 €L || Ll | Ley —| 97g — | G08 | 692 SOL |42 02 || sSsL 88 |H2- PL SL o6L |42 T'99 | 9°99 303 || SbL | S1¢ —| gry — | Ses | wer GL 68L | 68 +] 2:0 + | 682 | 9°08 619 | 8°g9 102 || 3gsg | 9L2I+ | sor+ | g:28 | 3°26 9b @6L | ovr + | Tr + | 9rgz | L6L LLG |¥2 004 || 2.8L TTS |42 LL Osh @82 \xo a9 | 19g 661 Ps. |Sao +] 43ot | O6L | EL SL aos |St¢ + | or + | 922 | 918 199 | STL 861 0:08 |78e +) 8r + | OLL | 8°82 6L GOL | 18° —| 924 — | OLL | F69 @TL |42 L6L OSL OSL |42 08 OSL P9L | 61L | $28 961 GLL | VET —| OL — | OL | 97EL 18 818 |pocit | ¢6 + | O92 | Sg8 G3L | O19 G6I 998 |Scr6 +] 02+ | TL | T18 28 v98 |9r01+ | 62+ | Gsz | FE8 Teh |42 P6r 8h 9°8L |32 €8 8h OSL |32 OL | ¥'69 e61 Ei6h | S6it + | Git + |) Siz) | enn rs VSL | 09° —| 8:3 — | BLL | OGL 6 PL | Z6L 261 GOL | 28°6 —]| Lz — | O82 | 8:02 Gg Z6L | rar + | OT + | 9708 | 9°18 6SL |42 T6T OSL 708 |42 98 8h res |42 V'3L | $89 06T S19 | seeI—] eoI— | ez | 019 18 68L |96 +] 8:0 + | Tes | 67E8 ¥89 | OL 681 GOL | 28:6 —| 82 — | SFL | O19 88 908 | 20g +)|G2et+ | g:2zg | ess L'¥9 |342 881 OSL .| STL |312 68 SL 3g | GOL | SIL L&T OO), | WS se | ie ae | GPW, ie, 06 S9L | SST —| Gt — | ors | 26L e921 | 9°99 981 908 |;roet+] eat | SL | ShL 16 T1s |cLet+ |] oe + | 0708 | 0-e8 0°28 |H2 SST OSL Lh |42 26 OSL 8°82 2 86L | LsL P81 UGh | 768 — || vig — | er | Eee &6 689 | &6TI—| 76 — | 88L | F69 LOL | SSL SST 678 | 198 + | G9 + | GGL | ozE +6 V6L | 7EE + | 60 + | 878L | 2°62 PIL |H2 280 S8L 69L |32 S6 8h 88h | 32 Gcu | O18 Ist || ggg | 6¢sett+ | Tor+ | SPL | 78 96 yes | irs +] pp+ | FIs | ges 69L | SLL O8T v08 |6L2+ | 06+ | OTL | OEL L6 8'9L | 6LT —| ST — | OF8 | G28 @8L |42 6LI OSL 6°89 [12 86 SL 1°98 |32 T6L | L'Sh SLT Te6 | 806+ | gett | 2°69 | oes 66 G3L |6a¢L —]| 39 — | 0S8 | 8°8L 66L | 8°02 LLY 918 |Orr +] TE + | SOL | 9:eL 00T e8L | sro +] To + | ees | res 9°08 |#2 9LT SSL STL |42 TOL SSL 918 |32 — | 0°08 | 8°8Z GLI 692 | 19k —| sr — | “2 | 6sz Z0T T9L | 6993 —| 372 — | 6I8 | 162 V6L | 6SL PLT 968 | O09 FI+ | PIT+ | T'8z | S68 e0T SOL | 8S —!| 06 — | wes | 708 882 |42 SLT SSL 918 |42 FOL SL ¢°38 |32 9°91 ) S°8L oLT OLL | 9ST —! et — | ges | ozs GOT SLL | 670 —!| FO — | ST8 | TI8 60 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 The three foregoing tables (27-29) show the exact ar- rangement in which the 207 Kherson oats plats were grown in the field. Certain plats have been designated as check plats according to each of the above three methods, and the intervening plats have been treated as test plats. The test plats have been corrected in yield according to the check plats. If such correction had been effective, the coefficient of variability for the corrected yields would have been ma- terially reduced below the coefficient of variability for the actual yields. On the contrary, however, the coefficients of variability were reduced less than 1 per cent, being 7.8 per cent for the actual yields and 7.0 per cent for the corrected vields, as an average for the three methods of correction. Table 30 gives the coefficients of variability for the actual and corrected yields of the test plats indicated in Tables 27, 28, and 29. TABLE 30—Hffect upon yield from correcting thirtieth-acre Kherson oats field plats according to various accepted means oe check ee correction™ (1916) apandard ieee Intervening Coefficient of Arrangement of | plat yields idee variability for check plats used | Fre- —- for correction | quency Cora. |. Cor- Cor- | Actual pected | Actual rected | Actual | rected yields | yields yields yields yields yields Bushels Bushels| Bushels Bushels| Per cent Per cent Alternate chee k | plats. | Correc- tion based upon| average of two) adjacent checks! 102 78.2 78.1 6.14 5.47 7.85 7.01 Checks every third) plat. Correc-| tion based upon one adjacent | check plat. .. ‘| 138 (8.0 >| eo gen G:0Snuaosl Ce 7.35 Checks every third) plat. Correc-) tion by progres-| sive method | based upon two!) | nearest checks..| 132 18.0 “ie TE 6.13 | 5.10 7.87 6.57 *Calculated from data in Tables 27, 28, and 29. Experimental Error in Crop Tests 61 REDUCTION OK ERROR BY REPLICATION The actua! yields from the first 200 of these similarly — treated plats of Kherson oats, described on pages 52 to 60, have been compiled to show the extreme variations, average and standard deviations from the mean, and the coeificients of variability for single plats and for the mean yields of two, four, and eight plats averaged together. These groupings have been arranged for both adjacent and systematically dis- tributed plats. The results are given in Table 31. It is clearly shown that replication greatly reduces the extreme variation and coefficient of variability in the yield of field plats. A given number of replications are also much more effective when systematically distributed than when adjacent plats are averaged. Fig. 15—-Harvesting thirtieth-acre plats of Kherson oats. The binder has a gasoline engine attached which cuts and binds the grain. This facilitates cleaning out the binder quickly at the end of each plat. Note the narrow bare spaces between plats. If the plats are tangled by lodging, they are separated by hand before being cut. This shape of plat is very convenient, since it is one drill in width and may be harvested by one swath of the binder Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 62 9 L9'T ivan oO8—V PL gS GZ “*dnois v ur szeid yyste “yed yy¢gg Area 16°Z 82° 66 L'Z8—8'e) Gg) yale Man te.f.g haluanrelter ll Weeyea ten oh ite nto Manet em ememeadl caleete: femta mentees asvloAy 90°¢ Le°2 702 0'18—0°2L LL GeGrae Wcon eee Sat ca 91°2 02°2 €8°T eF8—C'SL 9°6) aga © {| fan na sen 697 QG°E €6°% 8°SQ8—6'0L Gg), oi fo 0) 14) eevee @ Nal misents el ceh elie Gs? SW a ene ena ee wah wier 6 ie asvloAVy 1r'9 LLY GLe L98—L'S9 age ez P LS 16° 8e°2Z ZeS—TTL 6°) GZ 9 xe P 96°& 61'e 6h 'G8—C'EL 708 ez 4 thc gs ome eualbe cs acd €2°P Pre 28°Z 6 L8—P &L Ts GZ e 0g'9 267 Tre LL8—f'99 Gg) Oe Oe Te BO [oe ie Goa ieee oe aSVIOAY 12°6 99°9 GT" G°Z8—L'9S OF SL soy ja 61'S 98°2 Ghz 9°08—8°69 OFSL Get tdi GG"9 Ga'g aaa T'68—L'F9 01-08 oz J | Z°9 6PS ISP G°68—8°0L 08'T8 ace aa) tek tra ae eee ae Th 98° LLP 8°Z6—0'L9 O1'9L zp i et ell a aaa 7 Irs PeP 09°¢ T'88—¥'69 62°08 GZ | 509 LSP 6° U'88—L'P9 19°08 eq || L6P £0°F ore €'98—F'89 96°08 Gz 8 SLVTd CALAGIULSIA ATIVOLLVNALSAS AO GASOdWOO anouDd quao dag | sjaysng s]aysng sjaysng sjaysng | es UOeIAap | uORIAap UOTRLUIBA foal pout | sdnoig jo | yustoy}909 prepuegs | asVloAV aulelyxy wean Jequinn UOIjeaYIsse]O (9I6L 7) syd quaonip 40 , paqnqnsasyp hyworrouaysiis {0 sLsaqunu snoisna Ut padnoLb UayN s7n)d 48a} 81N0 UOSLAYY IAldV-YZaYLIYZ Ppaspuny om, fo pjaih Ul UoYMiLYDA—TE ATIAVI, 63 Experimental Error in Crop Tests ‘OpIM SjzeTd 9914} pues Suo[ s}e[d 9e14, SEM eld peuIquIOo. 9y1 Surdnoas SIy} U[x TT gre eae Teg 9°89 ZSL eZ . [eee osnvonocGoooG aa oOo 00 eid e ayeul 04 (szejd 6X[) esImepIs pednois syejd euIN cee 29'S LOZ 0'rs8—8" e), 28) rd (|S eoaaeoorov ooo GoGo GOS 4. yeTd 2 ayeul 07 (syed gxg) esIMyysuUe] pednois syed ouIN ge G0'F 6L'e C'P8—6 19 Z 8) ROBO LOROLOL TT OM ONO ota cbe bal tLOebaoed eco Ciceed 6 10 (bear orbng.oib asVloAy IT9 oP sl& 8°68 _V 6S VOL 6g 2 ) Syke qui voelepueug setae a her Rae Fre ee qed v ree ee ree eee ae os ae eyeVUl 0} asIMapIs pednois sjze[dzgoe1y,], T's 10g OZ ZP8—S IL EQ) GOGO OO DOO Oona Od oo OG OO Ooo tCO ODO OM OO DON asBIOAY 8° 66% 09° VC8—VP OL V9 eZ 0 } SES neces Nw shay RL ee eee qeid e ayeu nae foe ee de tan oe ce | 0} aSIMY}SUs, pednois sjeid se.1y, SHZIS GNV SHdVHS SNOIWVA AO SLVId AMVWN OL GHdNOUD SLWId 102 SLV GLé 9T& 9° E8989 G°8L Sierra inca BE aed aia dnois v ur syed jueoelpe yy sig gag CLT 6z eg @'GQ—9'g9 GQ), o000 DOC oOD Ooo OO OD DOO OOO OOD Ao oOo OOO asVlOAY v9 967 866 8S8—_ E79 V LL co 4 US cok Bait hee Gly 0g" 09°2 878—6 ZL G61 gee |5 SIN OEE HE UE 1d S208 De 97'G QP 978 0°S8—0°99 GQ) sifiaecekkebde pvecienielnerts: || torhepte lke; ietlanisa chew cuts hevie tactic cats wine oreo ere asVloAV 969 LGV 8 L6L—6 LG 6&2 Gc P Lg G97 OLE 6 888° L9 018 Gg 9 (nee sae eT'9 6L:F 6S'E 1°98 —0'19 28) God | Gnas Wiel gue Tee od IL€é 666 OS VS8—O0°GL 808 Gc B SLWId LNAOVfaGV HO GCHSOdNOO dNOUD quad Lad S]Jaysng S/aysng S/aysng S/aysng ae UOTPVIASP | UOTABIAEp & woreneA ie nie ¢ | Sdnoss jo. Se ie er quatatya09 prepueqys | osvioAVy owl} XW UBT JequinN UONBIYIsse|O (9T6L) synjd yuaovl po puv payngrigsrp hyjnoynwazshs fo ssaqunu snoiwpa ur padnowb Uayn SID) 482) 8300 UOSLAYY A49N-YJAYLLYI Paupuny om} fo pjarh ur WoMLLY A—(panu4UoD)—-TE ATAVI, 64 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 The yield of the 200 individual plats varied from 56.7 to 92.8 bushels per acre. The mean for eight groups of 25 single plats each gives an extreme difference between single plats of 20.7 bushels per acre. When two, four, and eight systematically distributed plats are averaged, the extreme differences in yield are respectively 14.9, 8.9, and 7.8 bushels. When two, four, and eight adjacent plats are averaged, these extreme differences are 19, 16.7, and 15 bushels. For sys- tematically distributed plats the coefficients of variability for one, two, four, and eight plats in a group are 6.30, 4.59, 2.91, and 2.18 per cent. For adjacent plats the coefficients of variability for one, two, four, and eight plats in a group are 6.30, 5.46, 5.28, and 4.78 per cent. Systematic distribution of replicated plats is seen to be very effective in reducing experimental error due to environ- mental variations. EFFECT OF SHAPE AND SIZE OF PLAT The 207 thirtieth-acre Kherson oats plats described in the preceding discussion were grouped to enable a compari- Various ways of combining plats to make plats of different sizes and shapes (Table 31) Experimental Error in Crop Tests 65 son of long narrow plats with short wide plats. The group- ings illustrated in the following diagrams were compared. (In the 1 x 9 grouping, three groups were necessarily irregu- lar in shape since 9 is not a multiple of 69.) The results are included in Table 31. Long, narrow plats are indicated to be more reliable than short wide plats of the same area. Increasing the size of the plat is less effec- tive in overcoming experimental error than the systematic distribution oi plats equal in combined area. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE “PROBABLE HRROR” The “probable error” calculation is being used somewhat by field crop experimenters. Its use is rather inviting since a small “probable error” is customarily regarded as indicat- ing accuracy in the results. Davenport’s interpretation is generally accepted, namely: “It (the probable error) indi- cates the degree of confidence which we should place in results obtained by statistical methods.” Where plats are replicated two or more times, the prob- able error of the mean.is based upon the standard deviation, and is determined by the following formula: standard deviation ) number of variates” - Probable error of mean = + 0.6745 which is also stated Ey, = + 0.6745 — The probable error is regarded as an upper and lower limit of divergence for which the chance is even that the true mean does not lie outside of these limits. Commenting upon the likelihood of the true mean lying outside of the limits set by the probable error, Davenport (1907) states: “Of course the error in a determination has also an even chance of lying outside the limits set by the probable error (EF), but the following table will show that it is very unlikely that the error is many times as great as E. Thus the chances that the true value lies within the range set by + H, + 2H, etc., are as follows: | 66 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 ie) the chances are even 2. E the chances are 4.5 to 1 the chances are 21 to 1 the chances are 142 to 1 the chances are 1310 to 1 the chances are 19,200 to 1 the chances are 420,000 to 1 the chances are 17,000,000 to 1 the chances are about 1,000,000,000 to 1 “It is extremely improbable, therefore, that an error will be many times as large as the probable error. For instance, it is practically certain that the error is not as large as 9 E, since the table shows that the chances are about a billion to one in favor of its being smaller than 9 E. “Thus by giving, along with any result, the calculated probable error, the reader may know what degree a con- fidence is to be ‘placed in the results.” In common usage, it is stated that the actual difference in the yield of two plats must be three times the probable error before the difference in yield is significant. It should be agreed at the outset that the probable error of a mean vield has significance only when the variations entering into the mean are purely accidental rather than sys- tematic. This distinction is understood by biometricians who universally attach importance to the probable error cal- culation when used in a legitimate manner. There appear to be strong possibilities of misusing the probable error and overestimating its value in agronomic studies. This need not be regarded as any defect in the probable error formula, but rather as a misapplication thereof to experimental results possessing either visible or invisible systematic errors. Field crop investigators consider it good technique to repli- cate test plats. It has been proposed that, in such tests, small probable errors for the mean yields of the various varieties or treatments would indicate reliability and justify con- fidence in the comparative yields. For the purpose of studying the significance of the prob- able error in field crop tests, the first 200 consecutive thir- tieth-acre Kherson oats plats described on pp. 52 to 64 have been grouped in 50 sets of four adjacent plats and also 50 sets of four systematically distributed plats, and the prob- able error calculated for the mean yield of each group of four plats. 4 a leasesses esses kesics| Experimental Error in Crop Tests 67 PROBABLE ERROR FOR FIFTY GROUPS OK FOUR ADJACENT THIRTIETH-ACRE PLATS OF KHERSON OATS That the probable error cannot apply to the mean yields of adjacent duplicate plats in a variety test is brought out by the following data: In Table 32 are given the mean yields for 50 groups of four adjacent plats, together with the average deviation, standard deviation, and probable error for each group. The average deviation of each group from the mean yield for the entire 200 plats is also indicated and in the last column of the table is given the ratio of this deviation to the probable error. If it is permissible to assume that one group of four dupli- cate plats is comparable with another group of four plats in the same field, then it would also seem permissible to assume that in the present instances, the mean yield for the entire 200 similarly treated oats plats should represent the correct yield or true value of any or all of the individual groups within the field. If this assumption be made with the adja- cent duplicate plats (Table 32), the actual error of these group means exceeded their probable error approximately 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, and 15 times respectively in 9, 5, (on ele le leraAnCile oKomps. . (see Cole die: lable 32). This is very inconsistent with the table of probabilities quoted from Davenport on page 66, and shows that a uniform ap- pearing field may be so heterogeneous in soil conditions that its mean yield cannot be regarded as correctly representing the true value of its various parts. Since all the plats were treated and planted alike any dif- ference in the yields of the groups represents experimental error, either in mechanical operations or in soil variation. Among the 50 groups of adjacent plats, one group yielded 14.2 bushels less and another group 7.3 bushels more per acre than the 200-plat mean. These extremes represent an experi- mental error of 21.5 bushels since both should have yielded alike if the method of comparison were reliable. Should we presume that groups No. 30 and No. 50 (Table 32) are distinct varieties in a comparative variety test, we would have a difference in yield of 21.5 bushels per acre. After multiplying the probable error of each mean by three, there remains a net difference of 11.63 bushels between the probable error ranges. Placing confidence in the probable error calculation, we would believe that there is a difference , Research Bul. 13 cultural Kap. Station Jreicu Nebraska A O14P} SITY} UL poJtodor sjeTd Q0Z I11}US 94} IOJ UBIOUT VY} STenbs uveut pley su L.. PTS MNS oN ante se ool Gol7 ShL 9°EL 0°€8 6°89 9°&L GZ 8T0 SO Contes | 068°F OSt'T 8°8L VPs 6°9L 0°38 “TL VG &L°PT eS == 8 + OFT 006° 6SL LOL GPL TéL SL &% LOY A 68 i+ OTFS Gos'y TTL 0°19 0'L9 3°08 &0L GE 00°% iGa ae Ons 901s 008°S VOL SLL 9°8L T18 9°EL TZ Se ee PASAY Spear Slaos GLLT gsL OgL 8°82 o6L U8 02 €L°& 9 + 69 T= 910°S GLO& 878 8°66 o6L 8°78 38 61 Lo 1 | OS a | \Moy OSs 0s9°¢ OS'S 18 [88 &'S8 8°82 9°EL 8I 09°0 go + isis | £6V'S 00S 0°6L 0°68 6°9L 6°9L 6 6L LT 06°& SUE ats Sirs cI¢T 0SO'T T08 9°08 L6L &8L 9°18 9T S00 EO Se | GU GF E169 GOL’ 9°8L v'69 VOL &S8 ves ST 660 AO se 81+ pos OGLE 88h OSL O°SL OWS PEs las 669 Valens OL” + TLOS OSL T 6°28 6&8 6°98 S38 L’6L &I LV'0 | N= OL T+ vso'g GLU LLL 0°68 8°82 V'69 L6L él OLY og + © Onlee LOT'S 008°S G°&8 | 88h 8°S8 G38 1°98 IL 00°F VS + (OG) Se DLL T geo 6°08 8°8L v8 9°18 L°6L Or LY'9 ee a | [SS Ge GEST OST T 818 608 9°38 T18 VEs8 6 8% esl Sie + 1G&°% Og8°T 6 08 | LoL 9°08 V8 6°91 8 63°0 | GOS 80°S= | 9216 009°L P6L Ne ParelSaete) Lt9 8°S8 ssl L 98°& oe + &8° += | 6910'S 0066 L118 308 8°8L &S8 S38 9 ol [it — MISE [Ese 1997 GL8°& BSL 9°08 8°8L 089 GGL o 9L°S 63 + | Omi | GOS 009°3 VI8 | SLL TT8 6°98 G08 v c8°s oe + aoe Se occur Sca'l g°08 | 0°68 6 6L L6L Go 08 & Oa TL 9g + OSes GLV I GLE T 42) 83 9°18 &S8 8°78 a 10'& Cy st | ev i= | 9767 009°6 8°S8 | vs 698 8°78 gL qT spaysng sjaysng | sjaysng sjaysng S]aYsng spysng | sjaysng sjaysng sjaysng CUI) COT) (6) (8) (1) (9) (Gg) (y) (§) (Z) (1) | | G1OD) |) eUBOUn Pied. uvoul OO TOM! eee oe sonoma, ecaee peer es Pes paseiaae sed inoj Joy aioe Jad plaix “ON dnoiy jo o1]ey Soeemee ajqeqoig I (9I16T) sdnow6 OG Ut pabuntdy atv synjd OOE waym szn]d $100 UOSHaYY a1av-yjarp.1yy quavvlpy anof fo spjarih Uunaw Of 401419 019DQ0Lg—Ze AIAV IL 69 ‘o148} SLY] UL pozLOdot seid YNZ IIt}US BY} IOJ UBS 94} STeEnbo uvou ploy eu. L6°S | 6 VI— 8Eor | 690°L 0S0°L & V9 LLG L-9S | 6 TL GIL OS 9L°S CPG —— 661+ | 006°S | 0087 0&2 Go8 O-L9 TéL v69 67 GV Ss Og — 9V T+ | 9187 OOTY? géL 6 6L 6 GL V89 §°0L 87 x 865 SL == 68 GF | 068°9 | OSL'S 6°0L L v9 STL 9°99 0°38 LY SS 61% eG = VL I+ S686 | G68'°S 0°92 LGL | Gig) LVL 918 97 wa) 6G & NS SO T+ 611 G60'§ 8 PL ELL € 8 L GL 8°0L ST © 80 | 120 ar LS 989°T | SLOT 9°82 9°08 88h 6S 8°82 LAY NN VL | ve = 16 + POLS GLO TGL | § 8h LL | GGL LGL &P 2, 90°L Si S9b 900°% SLOT L&h GGL ten 9; GGL 6°SL | GP S SOT LW) == SG) SF V00S 006°T SLL | 88h 9°08 6°SL 6°SL IP we GV & | Sa = Cyr =a 696 000°6 6°SL | L6L 6°91 88h OSL OF eS WIG Ss = OL = 160% GLO T 6 7L T&L LGL 6 SL SLL 6& OLL yg = Vig 061% S20'% 8°6L | LL 8°69 TUL gL | 8é = LVT [ea v6° + TLL SG | 0GE'S VLL Goh 0-SL 0°68 6°92 | LE 2S 60°0 OQ — 60° T+ Sivas OGLS V 8h 6°91 SLL Gy), 6&8 hs = 0g°9 39) ar 60 1+ GVO'E S666 698 0&8 918 G18 168 | G&é S v3°6 WY a Co = vrs T O0OrT | 972 88 V8 | 6 L8 0°28 | vé > 69'S 6 ar 66° = OV6S 0GG°S T'18 698 0°68 SLL 8°6L €& S= LOT Oi = 68 OF 860°L GéL'9 CTL 6 08 | 668 L V9 8°02 | 6& ic 90°T | IP ar 19 T= LLL Y 0007 | 6 08 6 6L | BLL SSD T83 Ig ~ 60°83 lh oP Ie += OILS | OSES 8°98 LL8 9°88 9°18 €98 0& S GOT | oo + 06 T= 8709'S | 0S0'S G08 0°38 0S 6°92 168 | 66 = 98S 09 + GL I+ 8668'S | 00OLS Gs v8 698 188 6 6L | 86 © feo | Gee OT 5°61 or | see | eae | et | 9 ; | ‘ me : | : : : : | ¢ ; g = sjoysng S/aysng sjaysng s/aysng sjaysng | sjaysng | SOE | sjaysng. | sjeysng | = (11) (01) (6) fF @@) | @) (9) sD) Gi) ts) (@) (1) SD) Ss 6 19) ee ou uol}eLAep uolyeIAap aioe Jed ey aol 100 dnoig 0 jo lola | piepueys asvloAV Plats ues poseiaaAe =7e]d Ino} JoF adow Jed pjarA “ON, dnoiry JO OBA UOIPVIAS] a[qeqoig | | (9T6L) SANOLB OG Ut pabUdsLy alo S2D)d NOE UayM sznjid szvD0 UOS -LOYY AAID-Y}91,.114) Quadvipyo unos fo Spjaih Wham LOf LOLA 21QDQOLd—(panuijuo) )—ZS BTEV , Research Bul. 13 ion cultural Hap. Stat grt Nebraska A 70 9142} SIU} UL pez1Odaar s7e[d 00% IAIJUe VY} IOJ UBS 9Y} S[TeNbe uvsuU pley sy. vel Ola 6 T+ 929°S | 0S0'E 6°91 OFT PUES LO0°T+= 81'S | GLVS 0°08 POT OT+ GP Se v6L'T Sec G°6L 66° T (tsar 6L T+ 960°S 0067 318 99°§ 87+ Se I+ 066°& 00V's | €E8 0L°0 Stt+ heise 8Ig'g SEV 8°6L 400 TO SOF 6189 GLOSS VSL 90°T Giga 80°O* 8919 000°9 | SOL 0L0 Ctl TL t+ 80g Oso'r LL 60 a Ome c8 + VoVa 000°% T8h 80 Lie €8° + S9VS OSES SLL 81 Gilets 8a I+ LOLS Osos V'08 86S 6S+ Te I+ T88°& Oges VS8 vol 61+ I = SPVs 008s ¥'08 O8'T Sor 8a 1+ 06L°S 002°E 8°08 Tr'0 (= GV OF PLUL SaVv9 GLL Lg°0 Ome Soe = 9LS'T Sec 68h 617 | 68+ 6° + 9GL°S GLOS P38 666 | oé+ VV I+ 9967 GLES L 18 810 €0+ Sy Se SC6'V OOL'T 8°82 90°0 vor BW Se VPEV GLLY 9°8L 18s | Vor vO T+ 160°& GLVS | 6°08 007 | s°g+ | SV I= POs V 0g9° & v8 6&0 9°0+ | Se I= 0697'S GLOSS T6L LVI | OR Gree | TOS gp0'9 | St67 gL sjaysng | sjaysng Saysng sjaysng sjaysng (TT) (OT) (6) (8) (1) (9) ore; 4 UBeU play | enor | wou wea | oto | OTe MaaeEeeois uea jo oney dnois jo | a[qeqoid PIBpUuBys Vv Piel W 5 uolRiAag 8°8L 6°SL 8°8L S3L SLL GGL L°OL o GL STL och 6°SL 8°8L 9°08 6°SL 6°SL LOL 6°9L 8°8L 0°SL T&L LOL 6°SL SLL th 8°69 Saysng (S) 8°0L So 6L BLL Sys 188 118 9°88 9°18 eo8 0°38 0°SL (F) Z'6L 8°F8 G28 T'88 _&'g8 8°8L 9°8L 0°88 6°9L 6°9L Z'6L 9°08 L'6L €°8L 9°18 v'69 VOL £798 ves 0°SL 0'SL 9°18 v'88 6°€8 €°98 S]aysng (§) 8°82 GS 308 ix 8°82 | &@ $98 6S $38 16 9°08 | 06 8°8L 61 v'89 8T gc) LT SLL 9T TT8 ST £98 tL 2°08 &1 0&8 as o6L II L’6L Or 308 6 8° r8 8 9°18 L 698 9 8°08 g vrs v £98 & 8'b8 G ooh qT s/aysng (Z) (T) “ON dnosy pereieae £je[d inoj 10} aioe Jad ppetx i 9T6L) sdnowb Og ur pabunssy LD sqnjd OO UayM s20j)d S700 UOSLaYY dLID-YJOYLLYZ pagnqgriysip hiyqooynmMazshs unof fo spjaih Unaw sof LOL 21/Q0Q04d—S§ ATEVL 71 ‘91qe1 SIU] UL S}eId 00Z 911}USe JY} AOJ URE BY} STenhbs Uv ple 2ULs eae) OSL pag “Ih 2 S. qa | = | mre | see 6 | 896: | ‘1! ee ee eras ea OS OVI Sa &V 6+ sstoL | G6G°8 LéL | L9S ggh 0&8 L6L 67 Ors | 8 e— | IS T+ | 9G6°S GLO LULL | TL GgL | 6°89 0°68 8b ~H SV 8 s— 66 + VOLS | GEOG LVL STL | OGL 9°&L 8°82 LY S gc°0 [Pla | 006+ | 6V6 G GLO 9°6L G°S8 0°68 V8 v'69 97 a 607% ve— | 69° T+ 8687 GLOV TGL 0-19 691 6°91 L6L GP ia &L'0 8 0— | 60° T+ 1G6'& 00LS LLL | T&L 6°91 0°68 8°82 VP S0'T Vo— ST 6+ | 06EY | 009°S 9h V69 SLL LTL 8°98 &P 2, 08°0 0° T— | Gol+ | GOOLE GLEE GLL | G6L Gg LGL G68 GV ) 801 Si+ | VL I= OLI'S | 0S0°S §°08 6°92 6°68 GUL L198 17 ae wt Lo— LO 1+ | GPSS | SLOG Boh V89 0°§8 T&L 8°8L OV iS) 06°0 = | 66 1+ G68°S Ogs'g | LOL | SOL 9°18 tL V8 6& 90°T Ve | 1G b= 619°6 | GLO 6 | TSL L V9 | G18 0°L9 9°18 8& = 09°0 Ay G8 oF SoV8 GEOL | 89L StL 168 | OL9 L6L LE Sy €&°0 8° 0— VW oF | VESL 0g0'9 LLL | Gye) | 8°18 | 608 G08 9& S 0L°0 Gilsts LB T= LG's OSL'T 8°62 0°28 | V8 €°0L G68 Ge S 690 Tulsts 6L 1+ S1ég GLO | 9°6L | LOL | G18 | SLL TI8 VE = L070 LOt | Onis oor? | SLOr oh) GSN | Was |, Pes er iS 6 T OMisr cel+ | 900°7 | OSsTs T08 tv | € 98 | TI8 L6L 6& L8°0 OI+ | SO USE 9FT'S 006% G6L 9°18 | 0°38 9°&L $°08 1€ > 610 60 | GO T+ | SITs 009°% 88h SLL | LL | 0°SL V8 0& & : ne | Gas 970°T oss" | G8L & 8h 8°61 8°8L 6°91 66 = 18°0 91+ v3 1+ | 8970'S OOTT T 08 LGh | 6 08 | 6 6L T88 86 DS vot | 8b 976+ L8G L | 0S6°9 LUL 8°02 bard) | T18 Lv9 LG = 00'T Got 67 oF vosOl | GCE'8 018 9°08 | L109 | 8°36 8°98 9G = sjysng | sjaysng | sjaysng | sjaysng sjaysng | sjaysng sjaysng | sjeysng sjaysng = Gp 1G | @ oe kG) Oe. oe | @® (z) (1) —F ; | .UBdUL ple | a | | | 3 a rs wor] atl aes | Woes ep | uolyeIAap oloe Jad | 3 Fi a : is 301 1)| anoas jo Le prepueys aseloAy plats uo | paseieae s}e[d moj 107 asoe red plo1z ON dnowy | woRerAed | | | (9L6T) sdnow6 OG UW pabUDlD aud snd 00g woyn sqnjd 8700 WOS.s0YM aLoD-Ypargulvyy paynquysip hynoynwagshs snof fo spjaih unaw of 40110 3190Q01g—(panurjuo))—Es A1dVL 72 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 of 11.63 bushels in the true value of the two varieties. How- ever, we know in this case that both groups should have yielded alike since they were planted to the same crop. The probable error would give us confidence in very inaccurate results. Slightly different results are obtained when the above ex- ample is calculated by the following prescribed formula: “The probable error of the difference of two means each affected with a probable error, is equal to the square root of the sum of the squares of the probable errors.” By this formula the difference in mean yield of groups Nos. 30 and 50 equals 21.52.55 bushels. Three times the probable error is 7.65 bushels which leaves a net difference of 13.85 bushels. PROBABLE ERROR OF FIFTY GROUPS OF FOUR SYSTEMATICALLY DISTRIBUTED THIRTIETH-ACRE PLATS OF KHERSON OATS Table 33 contains results with the same 200 Kherson Oats plats as compiled in Table 32, except that systematically dis- tributed plats rather than adjacent plats are averaged in groups of four each. If the mean yield of the entire 200 plats is here regarded as the true value of the various group means, the actual error of these group means exceeded their prob- able error 0,1, 2, 3, and 4 times in 10, 25, 10, 1, and 4 groups (See Col 11). This is a marked reduction in actual error as compared with similar data for adjacent plats and indi- cates a great advantage for systematic distribution. An ap- plication of the probable error to these systematically distrib- uted plats would seem fairly reasonable altho it cannot be applied absolutely. Because of chance groupings of either large or small varia- tions where relatively small numbers are used, the actual error of a mean may be greater than three times its probable error, or it may be smaller than the probable error. Data may be either more or less accurate than an application of the probable error would indicate. EXAMPLES OF LIMITATION OF THE PROBABLE ERROR Small Grain Row Tesits—In Tables 1 to 7 were given the relative small grain yields of rate-of-planting or variety tests in alternating nursery rows. The plats were replicated 50 times and the probable error of the mean yields is indicated. The yields in these plats were subject to two sources of error, namely soil variation and plat competition. Corresponding Experimental Error in Crop Tests (ce tests were also made in five-row plats relatively free from plat competition and subject primarily only to soil variations. In Table 1 (1913) the yields of the thick and thin planted wheat rows were, respectively, 389+5.3 and 264+3.8 grams. Altho the probable error for each yield is less than 2 per cent, the actual error of the relative yields due to competition is 24.4 per cent. In 1914 the yields of the thick and thin planted wheat rows were respectively 327+6.66 and 115+3.6 grams. Altho the probable error for each yield is only 2 per cent, the actual error of the relative yields, due to competition, is 56.8 per cent. In 1913 (Table 2) the probable errors for the mean yields of thick and thin planted oats rows were less than 2 per cent, but the actual error in relative yields, due to competi- tion, was 20 per cent. In 1914 the probable errors for simi- lar yields were also below 2 per cent, while the actual error in relative yields, due to competition, was 34.3 per cent. Similar examples are seen in variety tests in Tables 3 to 7. We would have great confidence in these single-row tests were we to judge them by their low “probable errors.” How- ever, it is evident that this confidence would be badly mis- placed. Crop tests are subject to such a multitude of local environ- mental influences that errors in them cannot be regarded as occurring according to the formulas or rules of chance cal- culated from purely mechanical observations. The probable error calculation may apply, for example, to the chance draw- ing of black and white marbles from a bag at a given ratio to each other. But variations in crop yields are no such sim- ple matter, and the probable error not only may have little significance but may be misleading. Water Requirements of Corn and Wheat—As further illus- tration of the limitation of the probable error, the following simple data from our 1916 water requirements of crop studies may be cited. The object was to make a comparative test of the relative water requirements for grain production of a standard variety of both corn and winter wheat. Potometers, 16 by 36 inches in size and containing 250 pounds of well-manured moist- ure-free soil, were used. (The method of testing is de- scribed in detail in Nebraska Research Bulletin No. 6.) Previous experiments had indicated that these potometers would grow one corn plant in a normal manner. The ratio 74 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 of 100 seeds of wheat to one of corn is normal in planting under field conditions in this region. Accordingly in com- paring corn and wheat in potometers they were planted re- spectively at the rates of one plant and 100 plants per pot. Under these conditions the respective water requirements for grain production of the corn and wheat were 743+48 and 1017+60. However, when the corn was grown at the rate of six plants per potometer these relative water require- ments were 3481+389 and 101760. Applying the general rule of “three times the probable error,’ we may be fairly confident from the one comparison that Hogue’s Yellow Dent corn uses considerably less water than Turkey Red winter wheat, and from the other compari- son we may be equally confident that corn uses more than double the amount of water for grain production than the wheat. In the first comparison the degree of cropping for this quantity of soil corresponded well with normal field conditions for each crop. In the second test, however, the corn was planted relatively much too thick, and for this reason the ratio of grain to vegetative growth was greatly reduced. As a mates the water requirement for grain production was in- creased. EFRECT OF CHANGE IN METHODS ON AGRONOMIC EQUIPMENT Replacing the single-row nursery test plat planted in du- plicate with five-row test plats replicated 10 times increases the land requirement 25 times for such nursery testing. In testing hoed crops the substitution of three-row plats, repli- cated five times, for single duplicated rows requires 15 rows rather than two rows. The replication of small grain field plats five times, rather than twice, greatly increases the land requirement. Fertilizer and tillage experiments which frequently are conducted in unduplicated plats should probably be at least triplicated. Reduction of error by replication is more effec- tive than the use of check plats alone. The introduction of check plats every fifth plat in itself occupies one-fifth of the land. The more refined methods of securing comparable stands of corn upon which to base the yields at harvest require much greater labor expenditure than formerly. Haperimental Error in Crop Tests 15 The proper conduct of experimental work in crop produc- tion in light of our present knowledge requires either a large extension in land area and labor facilities or else a marked restriction in the amount of investigation carried on. MBASURING IMPROVEMENT IN YIHLD THRU BREEDING Comparing the yield of corn for one period of years with the yield of another period is an unreliable method for not- ing improvement thru corn breeding. An illustration of this method is found in a circular of the United States Depart- ment of Agriculture Office of Corn Investigations, August 20, 1914. The data in Table 34 were given in this circular as TABLE 34—Daia given in Circular of Office of Corn Investiga- tions, U. S. Department of Agriculture, August 20, 1914, to show improvement from ear-to-row breeding conducted at Piketon, Pike County, Ohio Average for Average for first seven second seven | years, 1901- years, 1907- 1907 inclusive 1913 inclusive Ratio first period to second period Bushels Bushels Yield per acre as weighed in the fall| (70 lbs. of ears to the bushel). . Ha 85 100:110.4 Yield per acre of dry shelled grain (56 lbs. to the bushel) . | 63 75 100:119 indicating 19 per cent increase in yield of dry shelled corn per acre by ear-to-row breeding. The increase in yield of ear corn as weighed at husking time was 10.4 per cent. The measure of improvement by breeding was the average in- creased yield during a seven year period, 1907-1913, over the previous seven-year period. A comparison of the yields in Table 35 during these same two periods for the state of Ohio as compiled from the United States Yearbook indicates a similar increase in yield for the state in general. During the last period of seven years, the Ohio state yield was 11.4 per cent higher than during the previous seven years. Likewise data compiled from the re- ports of the Ohio State Secretary of Agriculture, indicate 9.4 per cent greater yield for Pike County, in which the experi- ments were conducted, during the last seven years than dur- ing the previous seven years. This suggests that more favor- 76 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 TABLE 35—Ohio state and Pike County yields of corn averaged for the same periods as given in Circular of the office of Corn Investigations, August 20, 1914 ; Average | Average for | Average for | Ratio frst yield for first seven second seven period to nine years _ years, 1901- | years, 1907- | : ae : : d iod ious t 1907 inclusive 1913 inclusive" Pee Oa first period Bushels | Bushels Bushels Yield per acre for | state of Ohio as compiled from U. Seevieas DOO ks wee 34.4 38.3 100:111.4 32.8 Yield per acre for | Pike County, Ohio, as compiled from) the reports of the Ohio State Board of Agriculture..... Pasa Sly! 100:109.4 able climatic conditions may have been the cause of the appar- ent improvement of the ear-to-row corn. A similar method of measuring improvement by ear-to- row corn breeding at the Nebraska Experiment Station dur- ing the same period of 13 years, gives the results shown in Table 36. The yield of continuous ear-to-row breeding strains during the seven-year period 1907-1913 was 61 per cent as great as during the preceding seven years. It would appear that the corn yield had been reduced 39 per cent by ear-to-row breeding during the last seven years. However, a comparison of yields in Lancaster County, in which the Station is located, shows a decreased yield of 30 per cent, and the State as a whole a decreased yiela of 17.3 per cent for the same two periods. Further, the yield of the original unselected Hogue’s Yellow Dent corn showed a decreased yield of 35 per cent at the Experiment Station during the second seven-year period. All indications are that the reduced yield of ear-to-row corn at the Experiment Station was due to climatic conditions and not to the breeding. An actual comparison of the ear-to-row corn during the last period of seven years with the original corn of the same variety planted each year as a check indicates an actual increased yield of 5.4 per cent due to breeding, whereas the other peed of comparison indicated a decreased yield of 39 per cent. Experimental Error in Crop Tests Ut TABLE 36—Nebraska data compiled to show resulis secured by the Nebraska Experiment Station from ear-to-row breed- ing if compared by the method of the Office of Corn Inves- tigations reported in Table 31 | Average Average | | Average yield for | yield for | yield for | first seven j|second seven| Ratio | nine years | years, 1901- | years, 1907- | previous to 1907 inclusive 1913 inclusive | first period | Bushels Bushels | | Bushels Yield for State of Ne-) | braska as compiled | | from U. S. Year- | IDOOKE Rie iar tne 28.3 | 23.4 | LOO sr — | 24.1 | See 3 : 7 —_—=- = " 2 . = Average yield _ for | | | Lancaster County. | 30.0 | 21.0 100:70 General crop of Hog-| ue’s Yellow Dent | | corn at the Nebras- | ka Experiment Sta- | | | DOM re evs c | 69.6 | 45.6 100:65.5 | Yield per acre, at the Nebraska Experi-: ment Station of Hogue’s Yellow: | Dent corn which! | has undergone con- | | tinuous ear-to-row) breeding sincee1902) 81.5* | 499 | 100-61.0 | Nebraska Hxperi- ment Station of or- | | iginal unselected | Hogue’s Yello | | Dent corn used as) | check for measur-| ing improvement from breeding}... . | Bee | 47.2 Ne ed ate *Dhe yield for ordinary Hogue’s Yellow Dent Corn for 1901 is included in this average. ;Averaging together these data for the seven years 1909-1915—during which period the precaution was taken to have strictly comparable results by thinning to a uniform stand and to reduce error by several replications— we have an average yield for the continuous ear-to-row breeding stock of 49.2 bushels, and the comparable check yield is 48.9 bushels. 78 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 A comparison of the Hogue’s Yellow Dent ear-to-row-selec- tion with the original unselected Hogue’s Yellow Dent corn for the seven-year period 1909-1915—during which time the precaution was taken to have strictly comparable results by thinning to a uniform stand, and to reduce error by several replications—indicates an increased yield of only six-tenths of one per cent due to the breeding. In order to measure progress in the improvement of corn thru breeding, it is necessary to compare the results each year with the original unselected corn. SOLL LIMITATION AS A SOURCE OF ERROR IN POT EXPERIMENTS The past discussions in this bulletin have dealt entirely with field experiments. Extensive use has also been made of pots filled with soil for comparing the yields of various crops and soil types, and for determining the fertilizer needs of dif- ferent soils and the water requirement of crops. A review of the literature indicates a marked lack of uniformity in the size of pots and rate of planting in them. Tables 37 to 47 contain the results from experiments con- ducted during three years, 1913-1915, bearing upon the effect of the size and rate of planting as sources of experimental error in pot tests. Galvanized iron pots were used, having a constant water supply from jars connected at the bottom. Rain was excluded by means of a closefitting cover about the stalk, and surface evaporation was reduced by means of a three-inch layer of gravel. All pots were planted each year from the same ear of Hogue’s Yellow Dent corn. Suckers were removed as soon TABLE 37—Summary showing the effect of the size of the pot upon the growth of corn. Hogue’s Yellow Dent corn (1913) Wt. of | Size of soil ae Dry matter ar 5 Height of A : 4 : ; s Pe la A averaged Mat | Total per plant stalk Inches | Pounds Grams Grams Sq. in. | Inches 12524... || 86 4 28 165 680 | 71 16x86... 245 80 194 | 416 OO 89 30x36...) 933 ; ae Bil | 599° 1440 | . 88 Experimental Error in Crop Tests m9) as they started, so as to prevent variability in the number of stalks per pot. Thus uniform conditions were provided thru- out all pots except the one or two variable factors under obser- vation. The pots were located in trenches within a cornfield, with their tops level with the field. They were filled with fertile surface soil from the Experiment Station Farm. The manure which was used in half of the pots during 1914 and 1915, as designated, was well-rotted sheep manure, and was thoroly mixed with the upper ten inches of soil. TABLE 38—Summary of data showing the effect of the size of pot upon grcow.h of corn. Hogue’s Yellow Dent corn ne 91 14) Moeture: fice, Total | Size of | contents ae | DEST ANE leaf- | Height pot _— ee | area of plant | Soil | Manure averaged) Ear Total per plant, Inches Pounds | Pounds | Grams | Grams | Sq. in. | Inches xl | BAL || 4 10 98 | 705 76 WI. 5s a BO fy | 05 4 | 82 269 1167 | 102 WA 85 4 63 ANG | JOG |) LOO) 1a, | 85 1.75 4 186 402 1853 | 106 16x24....|; 150 | 4 108 316 13843 | 110 16x24 =) 150) |) 175 4 270 535 1369 | 112 OWS... Ze | 3 242 442 1198 | NG IOS...) BBO 1 eas 8 287 558 IG | 9 iil ZG 5 6 ah 9 Bes) | 4 299 628 13808 | 112 ZALXO Ope 2088 20 | ello 4 341 708 1405 114 30x86....| 956 | 3 405 728 1269 | 108 SOzBS., . 2. GHG | = rs 4 416 ~ 781 1287 114 TABLE 39—Showing in per cent the effect of increasing the size of pot. The results in the different sizes without manure are here expressed in per cent of the results in the smallest size without manure. Hogue’s Yellow Dent corn (1914)* WW. t. of soil Dry HENS Total . Size of pot = | (m Hse a: — : leaf-area | Hehe a f.ee) luar | Tete! i per plant | Inches | Eee Per cent iPencent™| Pencent, | bercent A Deets eae ee vaoiag | | BOs) 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.00 | 100.0 ee Aegean ae | 85.0 GQ25 | Bild | 1GHB | UBit3 Gra a NOLO ORO BRAS WS OG ale OXS Oren eee | 239.0 2417.0 453.6 | 169.3 | 1538.0 DAEXD Olan eM aN: - 583.0 2990.0 643.8 | 185.6 | 147.4 30x38 Oe | 956.0 | 4046.7 CTD SOO ell *Data calculated from Table 38. 80 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 EFFECT OF THE SIZE OF POT UTPON THE GROWTH OF CORN In 1913 individual plants of Hogue’s Yellow Dent corn were grown in pots of three different sizes. The results are summarized in Table 37. In pots containing 86, 245, and 933 pounds of soil, the average total dry matter harvested per pot was respectively 165, 416, and 599 grams, while the average weights of ear corn were 28, 194, and 311 grams. In 1914, six sizes of pots were used, which contained 32, 85, 150, 239, 583, and 956 pounds of moisture-free soil. Four pots of each size were cropped without manure and four with manure. The results are summarized in Table 38. Table 39 shows in percentage the effect upon yields of increasing the pot size. Using the crop harvested in the smallest pots with- out manure as 100 per cent, the yields of total dry matter for the other sizes without manure were respectively 211, 324.1, 453.6, 643.8, and 747 per cent. The yields of ear corn were respectively 100, 632.5, 1082.8, 2417, 2990, and 4046.7 per cent. Table 40 shows in per cent the effect of applying a uniform rate of manure to the pots of different sizes in 1914. The yield with manure is expressed in per cent of the yield with- out manure for each size. TABLE 40—Showing in per cent the effect of applying a uni- form rate of manure to pots of different sizes. The results with manure are here expressed in per cent of the results Wt. of soil Dry matter |; Lotal : Size of pot (moisture= | ———— lea eee he of free) Ear Total | per plant Bie Inches Pounds Per cen! Per cent Per cent Inches 117254 I oe 32.5 822.5 276.4 165.6 133.5 PARA ee Cds 85.0 293.6 195.3 116.2 106.2 TGR DAs Roe. 150.0 249 2 169 3 101.8 101.3 LGRED) peaieke y oe 239.0 118.9 126.1 110.7 98.3 CUB ORA Se. . eae oe 583.0 114.1 12 eos 101.8 SOXSGR ae Te se 956.0 102.9 107.2 101.4 105.5 *Data calculated from Table 38. Applying 1.75 pounds of moisture-free manure per pot increased the yields of total dry matter for the different sized pots respectively 176.4, 25.3, 69.3, 26.1, 12.7, and 7.2 per cent. Likewise, the manure increased the yields of grain per pot Experimental Error in Crop Tests 81 Fig. 16—Representative plants of Hogue’s Yellow Dent Corn grown one stalk per pot, in pots of different sizes, 1914. (Table 38) Hach set contains a plant grown with and without manure. Pounds of soil per pot, left to right 1—-32.5; 2—-85; 3—-150; 4—239; 5—-—583; 6—956 82 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 respectively 722.5, 193.6, 149.2, 18.9, 14.1, and 2.9 per cent, according to the size of the pot. In the above experiment for 1914, the manure was applied on the individual plant basis. Assuming a normal stand of 3556 hills, each containing 3 plants, an acre of corn has 10,668 plants. One and seventy-five one hundredths pounds of moisture-free manure per plant would be at the rate of 9.33 tons per acre. In 1915, the same six sizes of pots were used as in 1914, and contained respectively 36, 83, 161, 258, 561, and 920 pounds of moisture-free soil. There were eight pots of each size, four of which were manured. Table 41 contains a sum- mary of the results. Table 42 shows in percentage the effect of increasing the pot size upon yield. Based upon the yield in the smallest pots, without ma- nure, the relative yields of dry matter for the respective sizes were 100, 150, 229.6, 355.6, 586, and 578.7 per cent. The relative yields of ear corn were respectively 100, 276.2, 819, 1647.5, 2,.7713;-and 2,667 per-cent: Table 48 shows in percentage the effects of applying, to the pots of different sizes, manure in amounts proportional TABLE 41—Summary of data showing the effect of the size of the pot upon the growth of corn. Hogue’s Yellow Dent corn (1915) Total Moisture-free | Size of contents | No.of | “Dry matter | eat Height pot a ee Fl | area | of plant Soil | Manure aaa ie | Ear Total (per plant Inches | Pounds | Pounds | | Grams | Grams | Sq. in. | Inches Id as 36. | 4 (2 AOS 108 753 f(a ARSED OE IE AG wildly iS A 17.8 107 776 80 MARA ohn, 83 | 4 29 162 1061 98 1246272 ane Soe oe Salts 4 30 172 1219 102 VGXBA <2) Gh 4 86 248 1150 109 NGse A er oh LG a V6 4 76 273 1238 111 HGxdG se Yet ee be 4 Mis) 384 1209 114 LOxS Gee: 253 .55 4 203 456 1266 111 PASO sl 2 OG. 3 291 633 1323 120 24%36..2.04 |. D6 16-25 4 366 684 1372 116 B0xs6.. 3.) O20 4 280 625 1226 116 BURGE ei) S20 2.00 4 331 685 1307 112 Experimental Error in Crop Tests 83 1 2 3 4 Se) CoS ao) LO el Fig. 17—Crop harvested from pots of six different sizes, 1915 (Table 41). One plant was grown per pot, with four pots of each size. Odd numbers without manure, even numbers with manure. (Ma- nure added in proportion to soil contents. ) Pounds of soil, left to right: 1 and 2—920 lbs.; 3 and 4—-561 lbs.; 5 and 6—253 lbs.; 7 and 8—161 lbs.; 9 and 10—83 lbs.; 11 and 12— 36 lbs. 84 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 to the amount of soil. Two pounds of moisture-free manure were applied to the largest pots, while the amounts added to the other sizes were respectively 1.25, 0.55, 0.36, 0.18, 0.8 pounds. Expressed in per cent of the yields without manure, the manured pots yielded 99.1, 106.2, 110.1, 118.8, 108, and 109.6 per cent total dry matter, and 169.5, 103.5, 88.4, 117.3, 125.7 and 118.2 per cent of ear corn. TABLE 42—Showing in per cent the effect of increasing the size of the pot. The results in the different sized pots without manure are here expressed in per cent of the re- sults in the smallest pots without manure. Hogue’s Yel- low Dent corn (1915)* Wt. of soil Dry matter Total Size of pot (moisture- | leaf-area nee of free) Ear Total per plant ate Inches Pounds Per cent | Per cent Per cent | Per cent AR Oe 36 is 1000 %e4, - OOD, 100.0 100.0 AOA ee Sa gan oe 83 2162. at) 150.0 140.9 138.0 cp 1 WANE eS ee Ae 161 |: 819:0- 4) 22956 12a, 153.5 GK O.22 can aes 253 1647.5 | 355.6 160.6 160.6 AG) en ae Re oe 561 2i(lae 586.1 17 5 169.0 BORED aise See 920 2667.0 578.7 162.8 163.4 *Data calculated from Table 41. TABLE 43—Summary of data showing the effect of applying manure proportional to the amount of soil in pots of dif- ferent sizes. The results with manure are here expressed in per cent of the results without manure. Hogue’s Yel- low Dent corn (1915)* Wt. of soil! Dry matter Pes Hotel ‘ Size of pot (moisture- | - —) leaf-area Heine ot free) | Ear > Motal | per plant Inches Pounds | Per cent | Per cent | Percent | Per cent 12.14 pe 36 169.5 991} pest 112 il/-5,67): ee eee 83 1 208.5.) | "OG 2) ae a eee 104.1 js ot a ae eee 161 | 88.45.01" AAO ae ie OTe 101.8 is eee 253," | 117 3-0,| 9 siete aaenedoge 97.4 DAS O Ne oe hase! 561 125.7% | J08:0 103.7 96.6 1 p23 eas ee 920 118.2) }. 10936 106.6 96.6 *“Data calculated from Table 41. Experimental Error in Crop Tests 85 ERRECT OF PLANTING AT DIFFERENT RATES UPON THE GROWTH OF CORN IN POTS In 1915, corn was planted at four different rates, namely one, two, four, and six plants in pots 16 by 36 inches in size and containing 253 pounds of soil. The results are contained in Tables 44, 45, and 46. Without manure (Table 45) the individual plants in the six, four and two-rate yielded respec- TABLE 44—Summary of data showing the effect of different rates of planting upon growth of corn in pots. Hogue’s Yellow Dent corn (1915) Moisture-free | tore tS) e- | * Rates of eae Nie. tatts Dry matter leaf- Height planting averaged came (oteetalllx per pot = aa ee per a Soil | Manure | Har Total | plantt | | Pounds | Pounds | | Grams | Grams | Sq. in. | Inches 1 253 4 Ne, | 476 1334 123 1 253 11 895) 8 262 539 1457 115 2 253 4 92 242 1210 120 Zi 253 1.55 | 4 118 219 1153 NZ, 4 253 | 4 37 27 895 106 4 253 1.55 4 Bf 151 990 105 6 253 4 6.5 79.0 714 90 6 253 1.55 4 iG | WONG) | BBil 93 *Where more than one plant was plant is given. 7The leaf-area is not very significant inasmuch as the lower leaves died prematurely according to the rate of planting—due to malnutrition. grown in a pot, the average yield per TABLE 45—Summary of data showing the effect of different rates of planting wpon growth of corn im pots. The results at different rates of planting without manure are here expressed in per cent of the resulis from one plant per ee ee s Yellow Dent corn ee Wt. oh | Rate of No. of | Dsy matter per plant Total F planting poe é pots leaf-area Hee of per pot | -free) averaged Won Total per plant | | Pounds Per cent | Per cent Per cent Per cent 1 253 4 100 100 100 100 2 253 4 39.7 50.8 90.7 97.5 A 253 4 15D | 26.7 67.1 86.2 6 Zo 4 Dace =| 16.6 5335) VBL -*Data calculated from Table 44. 86 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 ~ % * ‘ Tg) >, = Ss Nafta th re, SG A. a ig ie @ \ Fig. 18—Normal plants of Hogue’s Yellow Dent corn, grown one plant per pot, 1915 87 Crop Tests ‘or in Experimental Hv1 the foreground grown six, four and two plants in 19-—Plants per pot Fig. 88 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 Fig. ing rates per pot. 4, two plants per pot; 5 and 6, four plants per pot; plants per pot. manure. (Table 44.) 1914 20—--Crop harvested from four pots planted at each of the follow- Left to right, 1 and 2, one plant per pot; 3 and T and. "Sasi Odd numbers without manure, even numbers with Experimental Error in Crop Tests 89 tively 16.6, 26.7, and 50.8 per cent as much total dry matter as the one-rate, and their yield of ear corn was respectively 2.8, 15.9, and 39.7 per cent as much per plant. An application of 1.55 pounds of manure per pot (Table 46) increased the yields of total dry matter for the one, two, four and six-rates respectively 13.2, 15.3, 18.9, and 29.0 per cent. The yields of ear corn were 112.9, 128.3, 100.0, and 257.0 per cent as large with manure as without manure in the one, two, four, and six-rates respectively. TABLE 46—Summary of data showing the effect of different rates of planting upon growth of corn in pots. The results at the different rates of planting with manure are here expressed in per cent of the results without manure. Hogue’s Yellow Dent corn (1915)* Wt. moisture- Dry matter Rate of | No. of leaf- : planting free contents pots per plant eA eene per pot Eye averaged S| JOSE ae Soil Manure Kar Total |~ plant Pounds | Pounds Per cent | Per cent | Per cent | Per cent 1 253 1.55 8 112.9 113.2 109.2 93.5 2 253 1.55 4 128.3 115.3 95.3 93.3 4 253 1.55 4 100.0 118.9 110.6 99.1 6 253 1.55 4 257.0 | 129.0 | 120.6 103.3 *Data calculated from Table 44. STATEMENT OF METHODS IN BULLETINS A knowledge of the methods employed in crop testing is vital for intelligently evaluating the published results. With- out a statement of methods, the reader is obliged to assume that reliable methods were employed. Such an assumption is not warranted, since many methods used are known to be faulty. Not only the experiment station worker but the farmer as well should be given an opportunity to know in detail how the tests. were made. Increased experimentation by farmers has led many of them to be interested in methods. The following brief summary table indicates the extent to which experiment station bulletins dealing with crop tests and published in the United States during the years 1900- 1914 report details as to methods. A mere statement of re- sults is incomplete and does not carry conviction. 90 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 TABLE 47—Extent to which experiment station bulletins report the methods of investigation Per cent bulletins* reporting method details for Method details Variety | Fertilizer tests tests | Per cent | Per cent Years’ duration of tests.......... | 25 Sizeoff plats =: oa.0 scene ae 29 | 21 Shaperoisplatsi wes. eo oer 23 | 8 Number of duplicates averaged... 13 3 Distribution of duplicates........ 8 3 Use of- check. plats: 2%)... 25.05 405 8 11 Number of check plats........... 5 14 Distribution of check plats....... 3 5 Uniformity of conditions......... | 41 21 Sizesofgpotsis ct ae ee | Capacityzolpotsan ene: Maturity of crop in pots. ........ | Cultural | Pot tests | tests Per cent | Per cent *The total number of bulletins reviewed were: variety tests, 253; fer- tilizer tests, 146; cultural tests, 52; pot tests, 20. Experimental Error in Crop Tests 91 BIBLIOGRAPHY ALWOOD, W. B., and PRICH, R. H. 1890. Suggestions Regarding Size of Plats. (Virginia Agricul- tural Experiment Station, Bul. No. 6, pp. 20.) BARBER, C. W. 1914. Note on the Accuracy of Bushel Weight Determinations. (Maine Agricultural Experiment Station, Bul. 226, pp. 69-75.) 1914. Note on the Influence of Shape and Size of Plats in Tests of Varieties of Grain. (Maine Agricultural Experiment Sta- tion, Bul. 226, pp. 76-84.) 1914. Note on the Influence of Shape and Size of Plots in Tests of Varieties of Grain. (Maine Agricultural Experiment Sta- tion, Bul. 226, pp. 76-84.) BULL, C. P. 1909. The Row Method and the Centgener Method of Breeding Wheat, Oats and Barley. (Jour. of the American Society of Agronomy, Vol. I, pp. 95-98.) BRIGGS, L. J., and SHANTZ, H. L. 1913a. The Water Requirement of Plants. I. Investigations in the Great Plains in 1910 and 1911. (U. S. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Plant Industry, Bul. 284, 49 pp.) 1913b. The Water Requirement of Plants. II. A Review of the Literature. (U. S. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Plant Industry, Bul. 285, 96 pp.) CARLETON, M. A. 1909. Limitations in Field Experiments. (Proc. Soe. Prom. Agr. Science, Vol. 30, pp. 55-61.) COFFRY, G. N. 1913. The Purpose and Interpretation of Field Experiments. (Jour. of the American Society of Agronomy, Vol. 5, pp. 222- 230.) COLLINS, G. N. 1914. A More Accurate Method of Comparing First Generation Maize Hybrids with Their Parents. (U. S. Department of Agriculture, Jour. Agricultural Research 3, No. I, pp. 85-91.) 92 Nebraska Agricultural Exp. Station, Research Bul. 13 CORNG Vink: 1908. The Use of Row Plantings to Check Field Plats. (Jour. of the American Society of Agronomy, Vol. I, pp. 68-70.) DAVENPORT, E. 1907. Principles of Breeding. (Boston, pp. 721.) DAVENPORT, H., and FRAZIER, W. J. 1896. Experiments with Wheat, 1888-1895. (Illinois Agricul- tural Experiment Station, Bul. 41, pp. 153-155.) FARRELL, F. D. 1913. Interpreting the Variation of Plat Yields. (U. S. Depart- ment of Agriculture, Bureau of Plant Industry, Cire. 109, pp. 27-32.) HARTLEY, C. P., BROWN, ERNEST B., KYLE, C. H., and ZOOK, L. L. 1912. Crossbreeding Corn. (Bureau of Piant Industry, Bul. 218, 66 pp.) HILGARD, E. W. 1901. Soil Tests and Variety Tests. (Proceedings of the Society for the Promotion of Agricultural Science, 1901, pp. 89-94.) JARDINE, W. M. 1908. Methods of Studying the Relative Yielding Power of Ker- nels of Different Sizes. (Jour. of the American Society of Agronomy, Vol. I, pp. 104-108.) KIESSELBACH, T. A. 1916. Transpiration as a Factor in Crop Production. (Nebraska Agricultural Experiment Station, Research Bul. 6, pp. 214.) LEHN, D. 1913. New Works on Methods for Variety Testing. (Bl. Zucker- rubenbau, 20, No. 3, pp. 28-39; 4, pp: 52-55.) OWE El. Ele Methods of Determining Weight per Bushel. (Jour. of the American Society of Agronomy, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 121-128.) LYON, T. LYTTLETON. 1910.