A Study of | Composition of Growing Pasture G 2 A . My 4 / H . ' ? U ' " j b ' pt \ . Hi é . 4 if ! pe ' it ‘ { 5 i'4h ; : +! Yi that 4, itt ath tt uy ; tt 3 ‘ ii ui j ae | 4 u 6 aay ira Cm : 4 hy ELH Pt San) ORE HAA | Chemistry eT ~*~ ~~ UNIVOR cLLINOrS EAR RARS A STUDY OF SOME OF THE FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE THE YIELD AND THE COMPOSITION OF GROWING PASTURE GRASS BY JESSE MELANGTHON BARNHART B. S. University of Illinois, 1906 THESIS Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE — IN CHEMISTRY ~ IN THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 1912 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS THE GRADUATE SCHOOL 50 190 ae 5 . . vesse Melangtnon Barnnart ores bt, ad ¥ c Tan t + ad 5 ; ENTITLED ..A.Study..of Some.of. the Pactors ee nce 1e e Growl Past Grass. T3 In an +ha ‘al + a" Yield. and the.Compos OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE BE ACCEPTED AS FULFILLING THIS PART DEGREE OF (Lc, In Ckarge of Major Work ) Coc 2t+<5 ~~ Head of Department PA Recommendation concurred in: Committee Lo on Final Examination INTRODUCTION The pasture is the last part of the farm to receive any care. The general opinion among farmers seems to be that this part of the farm can take care of itself. Considering the immense amount of investigational work carried on to solve other agriculturel problems it would seem that the agricultural experimentalist has taken almost the same view of the situation as the farmer himself. As this country becomes more thickly populated and the grass areas are broken up the increasing importance of pastures becomes more apparent. It has often been said that good grass is the basis of good agriculture. Certainly few will disagree with the statement that good grass is the basis of the animal industry, part- icularly the dairy part of this industry. With the business of dairy- ing growing of necessity as certainly as the density of population,it is apparent that investigations into the methods of increasing the ef- ficiency of pastures are needed. When the agricultural experiment stations were established in this country several investigators took up the study of grasses. I)ty 1888 and 1889 Armsby, Caldwell and Holter carried on investigations into the yield, composition and digistibility of pasture grass at the Pennsylvania (2 Station. About the same time dunt of the Illinois Station, published a bulletin on"Grasses and Clovers"that took up the study of the effect of ripeness upon the yield and composition. A year later Pde of Iowa, , cae 33 (4) published a study of the chemical composition of Blue Grass. Other station workers have published numerous analyses of pasture grass, but it seems that no systematic study has been made in recent years upon the yield, composition and nutritive value of pasture grass as influenced by the different factors that might be introduced to increase the ef - ficiency of pastures. This problem was thought to be of sufficient im- portance to warrant an attack upon it, by this department, with the modern methods that were unavailable for use by the pioneer investigators. Since this investigation was started a bulletin a appeared from the Cornell Station on "Pastures in New York State." Simultanecusly, 6) ; from the Pennsylvania Station another bulletin was published upon "Meadows and Pastures." In these two investigations grass mixtures and their efficiency as to yield received the most attention, with fertilizers re- ceiving the remaining consideration. No attempt was made to study the composition of the grass. PLAN OF EXPERIMENT Description of Plots A systematic plan was laid in 1910 for the study of pastures grass from different points of view. The yield, composition and nutritive value as influenced by tillage, manure and cutting were included in the plan of investigation. With this purpose in mind, a portion of pasture land, well sodded with blue grass mixed with scme whiteclover,was selected at the north end of the South Dairy farm (figure 1.) as representative of good pasture conditions and suitable for the purposes of this investiga- tion. A suitable fence was erected for the protection of the grass from animals or tresspassers and the enclosure laid off into seven plots. Each plot contained an area of 1/40 acre with the dimensions of one rod in width by four rods in length. 1.- Round Dairy Barn 2.- Dairy Pasture Land ( 1910 ) 3e- Implement Shed *4,- PASTURE EXPERIMENT PLOTS 5.- Cemetery 6e- North Dairy Barn 7e- Agricultural Building Figure le Treatment of Plots In the spring, as soon as the ground wes dry enough to work, plots 3, 4, 5, and 6 (see Figure 2) were disced. In addition, plots 5 and 6 were treated with stable manure at the rate of 20 pounds per acre. Plots 1, 2, and 7 received no treatment. Method of Cutting the Grass Early in May, when the cows of the farm were turned out on grass, all ef the plots with the exception of No. 7 were cut. The cutting was done with a sharp lawn mower which was run at the same adjustment, as to length, throughout the experiment. The machine was adjusted to cut as low as possible, the purpose being to cut as close to the ground as a cow could bite off the blades of grass. A lawn mower, thus adjusted was the closest imitetion of a cow eating grass that we could get. 09 Plots 1, 3 and 5 were cut every week, while plots 2, 4 and 6 were cut every two weeks. The cutting of the grass was continued, with these | intervals allowed for growth, throughout the pasture season. Plot 7 was cut twice a year; the first time when ripe, about the the middle of June; the second time about the middle of September. Method of Sampling Grass The lawn mower was provided with a grass catcher or apron to collect the cut grass. As fast as the apron filled, the grass was emptied into metal cans. These cans were provided with tight fitting covers to pre- vent loss of moisture by evaporation. This precaution was necessary as the grass had to be carried a mile to the laboratory. Any evapora- tion became condensed in the upper part of the can and on the under sur- JUCUZBEL 4 {UEWUZROT 4 ZUEU4RET4 pesnuel pesnuer “3 % ou ou ou peos tp peos tp peos tp syooh ¢ Yoeows AJOAS AceAe AI6AG ION AJEOAG 4no 4Y1O 4no ano “ON oO "SLOId GyAysSVd WONd Tad dxd "Sf eine face of the lid. This happened only in the hottest weather. In this event, the moisture was wiped out of the can with a portion of the cutting and then mixed, as thoroughly as possible, with the entire cutting. The grass was always cut in the afternoon to give ample time for the evapora- tion of any dew. In case of rain, the mowing was postponed until fair weather. These postponements, which were few, caused no sensible error in the results as fair and dry weather conditions followed within twenty- four hours. At the laboratory, each cutting was accurately weighed to determine the yield of grass. A representative fraction, two to three pounds, was then taken from each as a sample. This sample was dried at room tem- perature. Method of Drying the Grass The drying was done in trays made especially for the purpose,of one quarter inch mesh wire netting. Each tray was three feet square and six inches deep, large enough to accommodate one sample in a thin layer. To prevent the grass from dropping through the mesh, the bottom of each tray was lined with thin muslin. The trays were arranged in a double decked rack carrying eight trays in all. At one end of the rack an electric fan was stationed to facilitate the drying process,by creating a constant change of air above the undried grass. Qo Preparation of Sample for Analysis After drying, the samples were ground to a powder which was, in most cases, as fine as flour. A few samples, that were of particularly hard and tough growth, could not be ground quite this fine without danger of heating the burrs of the grinder. In this case it was thought better to be content with a coarser sample than run the risk of introducig a greater error by heating the sample. A quantity of each ground sample sufficient to fill a Mason pint jar was kept for chemical analysis. p J I METHODS OF ANALYSES The analysis consisted of moisture, protein, ether extract, ash, and carbohydrate determinations. (7 Determination of Moisture ) For the determination of moisture, from 1.5 to 2 grams of the sub- stance were dried at 104 degrees C. in a current of dry hydrogen until con- stant in weight. The sample was weighed in a metal dish (a bottle cap of tin foil composition) about 23 inches in diameter and one-half inch in depth. Each dish was provided with a cover for protection of the dry sample from any moisture in the atmosphere while on the balance pan. (7) Determination of Ether Extract The residue from the moisture determination was transferred to an ordina glass extraction tube and extracted for 16 hours with anhydrous o alcohol free ether ina Soxhlet fat extraction apparatus. The extract was dried at 100 degrees C. for intervals of one-half hour, until con- stant in weight. The anhydrous ether was prepared by dehydrating Kahlbaum ether with metallic sodium wire. (7) Determination of Ash For the determination of ash 2 to 2.5 grams of the sample were charred & is and burned until free of carbon, at the lowest possible heat and weighed. (8) Determination of Crude Protein The crude protein was obtained by weighing about one gram of the sub- stance into a 500 cc. digestion flask and treating with 25 cc. concen- trated sulphuric acid and 0.65 grams metallic mercury. After heating until nearly colorless, the flask was cooled and 10 grams of powdered potassium sulphate added and digestion continued one-half hour when oxidation was complete. The solution of the oxidized material was diluted, treated with an excess of strong sodium hydroxide solution, distilled and titrated, to determine the nitrogen present as in the Kjeldahl method. The protein factor used was 6.25. Blanks were run on all reagents. Cochineal was used as an indicator. Determination of Carbohydrates The carbohydrates were determined by difference. DISCUSSION OF DATA Yield of Grass In the study of the data collected in this investigation, the yield of grass naturelly commands first attention. While the yield may have no relation to the nutritive value of the gress, it is evident that any increase in yield means an increase in the totel supply of food nutrients. Data bearing upon this point is presented in Table l. From this table and derived tabulations and curves, not only the variations in yield may be studied but the influences responsible for them. ee that the soil, variety and stand of grass were as nearly alike, in all cases, as it was possible to select, the influence of the following factors upon the growth of pasture grass is present. (a) The age of the pasture season. (b) Tillage. (bo) Manure. (d) Frequency of cutting grass. In order to arrive at any conclusion as to the influence of these factors upon pasture grass, it was necessary to assemble or calculate the data from the experiment to a form convenient for study. Plot 1, the untreated plot cut weekly, is the check plot of the whole experiment. In the study of the effect of age of the pasture season, the results from this plot alone are used as this one corresponds neares* to the pasture under everage farm conditions. The difference in the results from the check plot and the corresponding disced plot (Plot 3 cut weekly) is re- garded as caused by discing. he influence of the manure factor is obtained in the following manner: The results from Plot 5 (disced, manured and cut weekly) are subtracted from the results for the check plot. This givesthe influence of tillage and manure combined. Having obtained the results of discing from Plots 3 and 1, this factor is deducted from the disced, manured influence. This data is corsidered as the influence of manure alone. The effect of fre- quency of cutting is obtained by a comparison of results from the check plot and its corresponding plots cut biweekly and twice per year, respec- tively. The influence of this factor upon tillage and manure is obtained by a comparison of each treated plot with its biweekly duplicate. -l0< The Influence of the Age of the Pasture Season upon the Yield A study of Table 1, check Plot 1, shows that the yields decrease after the first cutting until the first week in July, when they increas sud- denly; a drop to yields corresponding those of the first week in June then follows on the succeeding week. Another increase is evident two weeks later. The yields then dim- inish and reach a minimum the second week of August. Still another in- crease is then noted and two weeks afterward,or the first week in September, the largest yields of the season are recorded. A sudden drop follows to yields corresponding to July production, succeeded by further decrease for the last week, - the second weck in October. A good growth in May end early June diminishing to August, witha return to May and June yields in’the fall is characteristic of the growth of Blue Grass. The results here presented vary from the expected,in that the month of June is the poorest of the pasture season. The data in Table 2, which is a condensation of Table 1, brings out this point. A further inspection of the data in this table reveals monthly intermittent variations in yield, starting with May as the high point and alternating high and low yields per month throughout the season. This observation is presented graphically in Chart l. Influence of Tillage upon the Yield nr The data upon this point is presented in Table 3. The results are expressed in weight increase and in increase in percent of undisced plot yields. From this table, it will be observed that the increase in yield due to tillage is small, outside the initial cutting, at the forepart of the pasture season. A pronounced effect is first produced,beginning with the month of July. From this time on an increase of from 25 to 62 per- cent of the undisced plot yields is observed. Chart II. presents the data of Table 3 in a more comprehensible form. It will be noted that while the comparative increase; that is, the percent increase in yield large ,the actual weight increase is small. comprehensible form than Chart Il. ; is evident that tillage has a beneficial effect upon the growth of pasture grass. This effect is most pronounced during the latter part of the pasture sea particularly during the months of July and September. The total annual increase expressed in weight increes while in terms of percent of undisced plot yields, it is is shown graphically in Chart IV. The Influence of Manure upon the Yield This data is presented in Tables 5 and 6 and Charts IV.and YV In Table 5, the weight increase and the increase in percent of unmanured plot yields for each cutting are presented. Chart VY. is a graphic presenta- tion of the data in Table 5. In Table 6, the data of Table 5 are condensed to show increase per month, likewise Chart V.is similarly condensed from Chart Iv, A study of these tables and charts reveals a large consistent increese due to the application of manure. Expressed in weight increase the results range from 56.6 to60 pounds yield, as the maximum, the first cutting of the Bye = season to 1.10 pounds as the minimum, - a cutting in mid-summer. Expressed in percent of unmanured plot yields, the results vary from a maximum of 932.8 percent, a cutting in October, to a minimum of 91.7 percent in Au- gust. According to these data, with the exception of the opening and closing months, the effect of manure upon the yield is evenly distributed through- cut the pasture season. An inspection of Chart V.. brings out this point Clearly. The months of May and October are the high points in the curve. The increase in percent of unmanured plot yields, for the month of May, is 242 percent. This is larger than the percent increase for any other month, except October. During this month the increase rises to 486.7 percent. The total annual weight increase is 208 pounds, while the percent increase is 227.4 percent. This is shown in Chart VII. The Influence of Frequency of Cutting upon the Yield To study the influence of the length of the period between cuttings upon the yields of pasture grass, turn to Table 2. An inspection of the data in this table shows that in every instance the plots cut once in two weeks produced more grass than those cut weekly. From these data it is apparent thet the less frequent the cutting the larger the yields of grass. Plot 7,. the plot cut twice a year, produced 169.60 pounds as against 91.50 pounds for check Plot 1, cut weekly, and 115.60 pounds for the check Plot 2, cut biweekly. As to the relation of frequency of cutting to tillage, Table 4 shows that the percent increase in yield due to discing varies directly as the Table 1 - Yields of Grass from Plots at each Cutting Results in pounds Disced and Manured Plot i Plot 2 Plot 7 Cut Cut Cut twice Cut weekly biweekly a year biweekly 2209 6.2 5.8 4.9 out 2.0 1.8 2.0 5.4 4.5 4.9 4.6 cri ‘ OO CMO 0 CO oo O'O'S ° Po) Co oi MPRrRrWrPHY ADwhOuMmhW HWA @We « i frequency of cutting. This statement also holdstrue in the manured plots. From Table 6,it appears that frequency of cutting is ac- SRE Se See companied by the largest percent increase in benefits from the applica- tion of manure. D1 for each Plot per month n nh Disced and manured Piet 2 Pit. 2 Plot 7 Plot 3 cut cut cut cut weekly biweekly twice weekly a year 21.90 September October LT. Of SS ee ae Co | Hesiod | | Ere | Saouseees soseeeesecceacseees seceecseeecensr sence naccesseesseat Seiesieee attest causes! i I | i t | } | i — Beeeeee } Seon! i t | | { [ | | eC eaaUEESRE Swen Soe on Spent | ’ t + + f } EEE EEE EEE EEE a I SEE RROD crt | i + } | Soe + } | } t r 4} } | } } | t + Se a tp oe te t te (ens aon a | ane t ! t } ro } oe T | EEE CSE IS Ss ee RE ; jive = 002) NO. 346 Table 3 - Influence of Tillage on Yield Results for each Cutting Grass Grass Cut weekl Cut biweekly} Increase ' Increase | eas Increase in in percent i in percent pounds untreated pounc untreated plot yield plot yield SSC CGSOR SRE e NO. 346 Table 4 - Influence of Tillage on Yield Total Monthly Increase Cut biweekl Increase Increase Increase Increase in in percent in in percent Month pounds unt reated pounds untreated plot yield plot yield ~6,40 May June July August September October i } SoCo | + en es ee ee -— ap ace aes app ate i | | } HOLA Ane a a Me ee wm: | i SEE er NO. 346 Table 5 - Influence of Manure on Yield Results for each Cutting Grass Grass Cut weekly Cut biweekly '! 25 June 1 ! 8 " Le n 22 " 29 July 6 " 13 " 20 " Ov " a4 '! 3 Sept. 8 . 14 Increase in pounds 56 660 304.30 68 .80 236.10 7.15 130.20 -- -- 7.65 147.10 14.40 112.50 7.70 167 .40 -+ -+ 5.45 213.80 12.50 156 .2¢ 3.45 164.30 ae on 3.65 202 .80 7.20 126.10 3.25 203.10 -- ~- 41.75 286 .60 11.45 145.30 5.65 201.80 -- -- 7.15 198 .60 2.10 133 .60 4.30 134 .40 oa ~~ 3.20 128 .00 590 85.950 1.10 91.70 -~ ~~ 2.10 1i3.50 230 47.0C 8.65 274.60 -- “+ 9.65 247 .40 17.10 69.30 11.45 116.30 == -- 7.10 253.60 17275 35.5€ 10.00 294 .40 a= -- 10.30 238.70 14.10 183.10 14.65 532.80 = -- 5.00 Increase in percent untreated plot yields 396 .30 Increase in pounds Increase in percent untreated pan ope | t } sonosaon =f See e eases tt Table 6 - Influence of Manure on Yield Total Monthly Increase Cut weekly Cut biweekly Increase Increase Increase Increase in in percent. in in percent. Month pounds Untreated pounds untreated J. 4, 5 Sage a See ae plot yields 73.20 194.20 July August September 31.85 153.10 October 418 .00 { +——+ + = TOLL -— a aa eeesasees abt r++ + bape et NO. 346 Fete Beene CHART Vi. n a a a ae SANNA INCREASE TIN VELD Dum to TrrAGr. t i] { Qo fed co aa | - flee eae te 26.5 pounds = =. weekly zs a sesasbaseacsacsuaees: 25a5 pounds = biweek ly ad | i ae 4 siete eee 29.07 per icant = = out weekly t 4 $ ie] S ct aot a oe 22.0 per cent - - - cut biweekly | 2.0% I Addvte es peaec ares uty CHART VIT. ieacugtirsat INdREASE TNUYIHLDIDUR -To-MANURE. ee } BGS0 SRSSRSESER aE 208 a1 pounds out weekly 192.413 pourds ET eur bavesk? 227ot per icent cut_weekly 16603 per icent cut-biweekily ' Heise idivs ae | f SPREE ESET gee ea | THE COMPOSITION OF THE GRASS In the study of the composition of the grass each constituent up separetely and, as in the case of the yield, the following influences are studied: (a) The age of the pasture season. (bd) Tillage. (c) Manure. (d) Frequency of cutting. DRY MATTEF The dry matter is considered first. Tab 7 contains the percent of dry matter in the cuttings for each plot. The Influence of the Age of Pasture Season Taking up the influence of the age of the pasture season upon the var- iation in percent of dry matter, a study of the results for Plot 1, the check plot of the experiment, shows a reange from 23.96 to 45 percent. The variation in percent of this constituent is bes in which the results are reduced to average percent of dry matter per month. The curve in the chart shows that the lowest percent of dry matter in past- ure grass is in the month of May, while the highest is for June. The re- sults range from 29.57 to 39.33 percent. After June the percent drops to 33.5 percent and remains practically constant for the remainder of the season. Influence of Tillage The influence of tillage upon the percent of d peas | woes grass is shown in Table 10. The data appears in the first column. It will be seen that the average composition of grass grown on the disced plot shows an increase in dry matter for May, followed by a decrease for the re- mainder of the season up to the month of October. The maximum decrease of 4.65 percent occurs in July. The black line in Chart IX. is a graphic presentation of the results upon this point. From these data it appears that tillage causes a marked decrease in the percent of dry matter in the pasture grass. That is to say, grass growing upon soil that has been disced in the spring contains a higher percentage of moisture than grass growing upon undisced ground. Grass grown under the first conditions is a more succulent feed. Influence of Manure The influence of manure upon the percent of dry matter in is shown in Table 10 and Chart IX. An inspection of the second column in | the table shows an increase in percent of this constituent for the May grass, about equal to the effect produced by tillage. The remainder of the season the dry matter suffers a decrease. From a minimum in July of 0.49 percent, the amount steadily becomes greater, reaching a maximum of 6.92 percent at the end of the season. Chart IX. shows this point clearly. From these results, it appeers that the manuring of pasture grass produces grass that is a more succulent feed than grass grown upon unmanured soil. It will be noted from the chart that the succulent effect, if it may be called such, of manure is most apparent during the latter part of the | el pasture season, wh e the greatest benefit from tillage in this respect is Carlier in the season. 227- Influence of Freguency of Cutting The data upon the influence of frequency of cutting upon the percent of dry matter in pasture grass is found in Tables 11 and 12 and in Charts x. and XI. Chart XI. is a reduction of this data to its simplest and most comprehensible form. Curve 1. in this chart represents the fluctuations of percentage of dry matter in the grass cut biweekly,from the check plot , as compared with the corresponding plot cut weekly. The zone above the line represents increase, that below, decrease in percentage of dry matter. Curve 2 is a similar representation for tillage. Curve 3 is for manure. From a study of these data, it appears that although such infrecuency of + mad @® = cutting as twice a year causes a large increase in percentage of dry matt of the grass, a lengthening of the period of growth,from one week to two weeks, has.a tendency to decrease the percentage of this constituent for at least a definite part of the season. Grass cut biweekly during the months of July and August, shows a decrease in dry matter as comparedwith gras: cut weekly for the same period. In July, particularly, decreases of over 4 percent are noted. According to the yearly averages, grass cut twice a year contains 44.97 percent of dry matter against 33.21 percent (a 11.76 percent increase) for grass cut weekly. The grass cut every two weeks has an average, for the year, cf 32.81 percent, almost 0.5 percent less than grass cut weekly. As to the effect of the co-relation of frequency of cutting and tillage upon the percentage of dry matter, it appears that in spite of some fluctua- tions of the curve between the plus and minus zones, the predominating in- fluence is toward a decrease in percenta e of dry matter. This is part- Cc o icularly evident the latter part of the pasture season. For the year, 2k the grass cut biweekly shows a decrease of 1.30 percent when compared with that cut weekly. In the case of manure, the opposite effect is produced. Although some cuttings show a decrease in percent of dry matter, the co-related influence of cutting grass biweekly and manuring is to increase this constituent. The averages for the year show an increese of 1.53 percent of dry matter in biweekly cut grass over that cut weekly. Table 7 - Variation in Dry Matter for each Plot at each Cutting Disced Results in percent Disced and No treatment manured Plot 2 Plot 7 Plot 3 Plot 4 Piot 5. Pilot Date Cut bi- Cut twice] Cut Cut bi-] Cut Cut bi- weekly a _yoar weekly € weekly May 10 28.44 33.05 27.60 29.87 30.03 " 18 29 .96 =a 32.44 = 36.32 a "25 30.49 31.04 31.49 31.37 30.28 — 29.82 June 1 BRD -- a3 ~~ 30,20 =~ ! 8 34.31 34.54 46.64 oa. £9 30.65 29.39 | " 15 3 ap aoe 29.45 : ee 45.26 46. 43.58 40.84 " 29 32. 31.63 ve July 6 29 26.72 41.65 a Os 25.67 oat " 20 30. S022 7 2s 71 27 26 31.04 en | Aug. 3 30 29.52 32.98 " 10 32 36.21 a : a 33.98 5. 35 35.48 32.03 " 24 30.54 ins 26 24.84 =3 | m3 26.06 28.78 27s 20668 eet Sept .8 23 .96 == 43.30 a. 21.93 ies | "14 30.47 30.14 32 of.65 25.32 eee el 34.22 a 33. 25.34 2 " 38 31.46 35.30 33 23.75 26.68 Oct. 7 35.60 ms 35. 26.66 e ene: 33.20 31.78 35 26.62 25.21 Table 9 - Monthly Variation in Dry Matter Percent results Plot l Plot 5 Month No treatment Disced and manured August September October SSenS See e SeSeeSeeee we | i | TTT ss bzzee: Het Bosseeoge See See ee Sess Saawe f fie | H i onl ; } PH an ari i co tt } if aay SR G08 SESE RSSRs SSSR SSE Ih Bt SeSee pi. a! t } i 4 } { | abi j | + +t ; Fil - 4 | py — } a8) = i | i if 4 | f ; 4 ++} | J I $+ ‘aneeanen + +} } 4 {- +4 + 4 \ 4 i { } | } i ian 4 ba} , } +4+ + a! babe it } 1 ; tt SR0000f on BOGGS BOSE ORES tRSGE | Spore} 4 + | Het | t i SEcceeenener® HH 30+ HHH | t Se ee aera Socene a ann it | + $ + | mee 1 | 2. 1 ja + t Se ee a : i f i | } | i t DRE i A t SSB SS GSOR0 SOSRESSERE SHSSTAVSESt ; ++ 4 4 + Fey] | + + _ Ht Nt | \ i SS es ee eee eee oe SES SSSSRSSRSE PARAS SRSEs SeeEEE eS | ) ee ee ee en | } 1 } | t | j | } , i i J0SSCSSSCCGsCCoREees ae ; | { [ Cr aa | j } i t i T SSSR BASSE SSSRE SORSR BOSS Seeee oeee | | i | | } | { } Oo» sal | as See Fae | 149 POS eS SeeSe | | Table 10 - Showing in the first column the monthly variation of the influence of tillage upon the dry matter of pasture grass, and in the second column the same data for manure Results in percent Increase Increase due to due to Month tillage manure July August September October >. Ae a SS = i } | | | tL } +1 i | j | } { t j | | | | ae Jo0 CoS Seew gegeeseeseaes: sor are a EC J } t + } | | | = | tts guaae bp Re ames i ee) Penlo i erp SS Est | | Het ths | SSSR ORSSE BOCRSRees oe ee Pore is SuaBt oma SEgusaaume cma: 3 Pat I | tf Lo | io ¥ i tot roe + we Y } I E i 4 rey
hail ; |
a 1 a T | | He ba i s Be | 1
pis Hoe sou acs SEBBE =)
+} Nd ae ee Bo SESk/eSENs Bees + Ht |
1] aw! _ i . a c t as nl | |
ett + + if pst i i
Poon 5s SeeC_ beeen oa FOUL EBRES su
sae”: gaggegen-sansee Fe &@ | |
: : ; PP t t SS0S0008 Genesee ck Eiaeiste slater feiss ;
f
\
i
THA es —
i
‘BTITR RE a
bAECH EH
He
eargase ft
}
if
t
ot cajartcspectnc pec
|
x)
ttt
tiecres
BAGH A
ie
Tee
}
}
}
|
|
|
1
}
|
|
aL.
scint
+
f
'
t
i
i
| |
+
j
+
|
|
+
it
4
aed
a
iaeueeeel Senna SEs Sel aia SSSSG08 SESE SSRee Seeee sees
+ + ‘ + t }
| | | |
} Tt | } |
AEROS oe 208 SE ee ee
H | roo
SS ee ee eee aes HH lane ws Bea aa ims Poh eee Saas
|
Sesser seessteees EEE EH
} |
aeseeuaeeseeen
eH
PH
oth
4
|
ike
{
{
|
= 35
Table 11 - Variation in Dry Matter. Weekly cut Plots Averaged
to Compare with Biweekly cut Plots
Results in percent
Disced and
manured
Plot 2 Plot 5 Flot. 6
Cut Cut Cut Cut Cut
Date Weekly biweekly twice weekly
a year
May 10 28.27 28 .44 a ( 27.60 29.37 30.03
: 29 30.23 31.04 31.97 31.37 33.28 29.32
June 8 32.91 34.54 46.64 33.33 34.92 30.38 29 .39
= 22 40.77 45.26 39.47 39.74 36.52 40.84
July 6 36.53 32.26 31.27 ot .99 29.1 41.65
a 20 32.73 28 .60 29.44 32.32 27.94 etetl
Aug. 3 35.21 33.17 28.78 32.12 30.28 32.98
" 17 37.94 35.60 34.07 32.01 36.35 32.08
: 31 28.30 28.78 27.41 15.19 22.76 12.87
Sept.14 21.20 30.14 43.30 27.74 28.44 23.79 25.12
: 28 32.84 35.30 33.23 33.11 24.10 26.68
Oct. 13 34.40 35.24 33.59 26.64 25.e1
Table 12 - Variation of Dry Matter. A Comparison of Plots cut
‘al
Biweekly with Plots Cut Weekly
Difference Difference Difference
between between between
untreated disced and
nlots manured vlots
) “4 & Os
+ QO. - 2
4 - O.
4 + 4,
= |: 2
- 4
+
«
OPORWOHWADOLY
Sept.14
"28
Oct. 13
i
NYVnonnonrdvorkrHl PH OO
alas Ps ave °
Powowaw hw O OD
WOWWO OC WAINMWD OA A
éMrmorO LW C
a eteeaten
con ~
i i | t >. }
Eo eet Dao
at i } aie ee pare
| 8d i ro 5 ®
a | e+ OH
SSCA GEese RSS coe eam ae ae Soe Ir ee eee
ia : ple Sete
eptt Saeageneee Breet
= fh tr t tet | Ft got
the ECS Ht $3) 'S
201 SESE PRA ee ag oSe 015) 8
; ! um =
| aperee found the data
upon the influence of tillage upon the protein content of pasture
The first column in the tables show the gain or loss in percent of protein
caused by discing. The first curve in the charts is the
tion of this data. Considering the results upon the basis o
tillage has a beneficial effect upon the protein content at the begin
end of the pasture season. It is in the middle of the season that a decrease
in protein is noted. It must not be overlooked, however,that the gain in
one part of the season is offset by an almost equal loss in another part of
the season. The gain in protein per month ranges from 0.22 to 0.96 percent,
while the losses vary from .02 to .91 percent. While the minimum gai
losses are insignificant and may be due to the probable error in analytical
methods and manipulations, the maximum gains or losses ar
When the variable moisture content of the ssh gra is removed from
the data by calculation and the results p sd upon the water free basis,it
is still more apparent that tillage has a beneficial effect
content of pasture grass. It will be noticed in Curve I.
the largest benefit is produced in the early grass. Wit
the benefits of the influence of tillage diminish a
gresses.
-35—
.
Influence of Manure
The data for the influence of manure upon the percent protein in pasture
grass is found in the same tables and charts with the data upon tillage pro-
tein content. The second column of the tables and the second curve of the
charts contain these results. Upon the fresh basis the grass from the man-
ured plot shows.a substantial gain (0.70 percent) in percent protein for
he first two months. However, beginning with July and extending with dim
inishing significance, a loss is noted for the remainder of the season. Ex-
cept for July this loss is small and probably insignificant.
On the other hand, these results when reduced to the water free basis
show the real effect of manuring upon the protein content of the grass. Be-
ginning with the minimum yet significant increase in protein content for
the early grass, each succeeding month of the pasture season shows steadily
increasing benefits from the manure. These benefits increase as the season
progresses, ending with the maximum increase of nearly three times the initial
increase in percent of protein produced by manure.
Influence of Frequency of Cutting
The data for the influence of frequency of cutting upon the protein con-
tent of grass is found in Tables 19, 20, 21, 22, and Charts XVI., XVII.,
XVIII. The first column in the tables and the first curve in the charts
contain the data showing the effect of biweekly cutting for the check plo
Mg. Tk} Column 2 and 3 and Curves 2 and 3, show the corresponding
data for the disced and disced , manured plots respectively.
A study of these tables and charts shows that cutting the gra
© Oo
instead of weekly decreases the protein content of the grass
upon the fresh basis, while they suggest this conclusion, fluctuate consid-
erably, showing gains in some instances. The water free basis data brings
out this point more clearly. From Chart XVII. it is evident that biweekly
applies to the treated as well as the untreated plots.
cuttings of grass as compared with weekly cutting tends
cent protein in pasture rrass. This tendency increase
P J
pasture season and with the treatment of the plots
plot shows the largest decrease from this cause.
Chart XVIII. shows the average percent protein content of the
A
from each plot for the entire pasture season. It will be noted
p
grass from plot 7, cut twice yearly and comparable witl
+
that it was untreated, contained still less protein then the beweekly cut
grass. These results indicate that the less frequent pasture
the lower will be its protein content.
m
)
to decrease the per-
s with the age of the
he disced,manured
the check plot in
rass is cut,
S
ao
bi-
BEA |
Weeacl
lisced
T)5
L
twice
ent
atm
biweekly
No tre
=|
o
&
G4
ap
Ps
acd
»
4»
s
oO
Ss
oO
oO
a)
S$.
ai
Q
@
oO
Ss
ra]
OD
&
=
~
®
ii}
Ry
G4
oO
»
S
oO
~
S
o
D
Ss
me |
i)
+»
oO
&
A4
8
Table 13
Results i
Results in
Table 14 = Protein Content of Pasture Grass for
each Cutting from each Plot
vercent of water free substance
Fiori - - Pigt. 2
Cut Cut
weekly biwoekly
14.81
14.15
15.96
16.37
LSet?
17.04
16.28
17.40
20.49
19.30
19.3
18.50
18.59
18.54
a A
19.413
16.17
16.28
BNP Tk
17.08
20.75
22.89
22.06
a” *é. > si 7 8 e«- e
IP wp ~x
NIwrnwn~ 2w0oo0o
° e
Omme C
309 0139 OO on
Qa ~
oO»
NWN DY HY
Gs
wo OW 09
Ww Ww W DO
a8)
09 00
we C
Y
Co
Cc
MO 0 DD DH HY
COO -~ 3
eM MOF ©
TH MOP OHO PRY Oo
te Le” Coat ey Ye a Aa ee
phan tS -
Mw oon do dm -
ome eon fb ~I «
Table 15 = Monthly Vari on in Protein Content of Pasture
from each Plot
mercent of fresh substance
a na
nA. % we 4
Manure d
Plot 2
cut
biweekly wi weekly
°
cw
e
fo>)
A
3 G3
to ~O
Om &
~ nO sj
no cw
ed
“J &
e:
~] ~~
Oo J
-
Pon Om
e
wn 3 OA WD a
CoO wn
September
October
rep)
NnNmuw~) oO wm
SI Pe tn w
Uo
nm OO
Ju
HH tn O
bly i |
on &
st
“JI on ow
QD
fas
oO
in yvercent
and
No treatment
Plot 1 Plot 2 P 3 lot 4 I Plot 6
cut cut sut cut ; cut
weekly biweekly i nt biweekly] weekly bi-
SP te
WEEKLY
May 15.87 16.68
June 15.89 8 e 8.20
July 17.33 19.73
August 8 17.02 8.18
September 16.62 18.79 88
October 20.79 21.92 19.92
“e@evh
+s
.
Te)
A
5M HY
4
eo
4
rat
‘