Full text of "The new potato culture as developed by the trench system"

See other formats

horwshea tease aweR

1c A R M LA N
S BOO , EDITION REVISE D AND PNEARGED

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

PRE

BeW POTATO
SuULTURE

As developed by the Trench System, by the judicious use of
Chemical Fertilizers, and by the Experiments carried
on at the Rural Grounds during the

= past sixteen years.

ELBERT S. CARMAN,

Editor of THE RURAL NEW-YORKER, Originator of the Trench System and _

a . Of the Potatoes Nos. 1, 2 and 3.

SECOND EDITION, REVISED AND ENLARGED.

nOPY Ric =
GOPYRIGAS SGN
hea : .
AV i | he +
Pe a ER LAS
18 _ ~4# ¥ He .* ABs ee
= * OF wasuiag i=
~—= oe X

THE RURAL PUBLISHING COMPANY, — $39 CE tf!
j

TIMES BUILDING, NEW YORK,

ie ‘ ; hy Copyright 1893, by

THE RURAL PUBLISHING COMPANY, |

‘

TO MY FRIEND

See POR Ne SSE NIN E7E--LAW.ES

BARGE SEL Ds ER SS hac. S:,
THIS LITTLE VOLUME IS
RESPECTFULLY AND AFFECTIONATELY INSCRIBED

BY PRIVATE LETTER,
BY HIS NOBLE EXAMPLE, AND BY MANY CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE
JOURNAL I HAVE EDITED DURING THE
PAST FIFTEEN YEARS, HE HAS ENCOURAGED AND
INSPIRED ME TO TRY TO DO AS HE

HAS DONE, THOUGH WITH FEEBLE SUCCESS.

B.S: -C:

INT RODUCT ORY,

OR the past fifteen years, during the srowing season,

'- J have given a part of my time to potato experimen-
tation, in the hope that I might throw some additional

light upon the various questions involved in the central prob-
lem, ‘‘ How to increase the yield without proportionately in-
creasing the cost of production.” It often happened that, in
the soil of my home grounds, some hills would yield enor-
| mously, while others would yield little. What was this owing
to? What kind of manure or culture—what preparation of
the soil would zwsure the maximum crop ? Would stable or
cow manure, hen manure, or a compost of the three?) Would
lime, plaster, salt, muck, wood ashes, muriate or sulphate of
potash, bone, phosphatic rock, fish, flesh, blood, sulphate of
ammonia, nitrate of soda, separately or in any combination,
effect this? . Would it be possible so to fit the soil as materi-
ally to increase the yield? What would be the best depth to
plant the seed?» How much seed should be planted—single
eyes, two, three, or four eyes; half potatoes, whole potatoes,
stem-ends or seed-ends? Should the manure or fertilizer be
placed under or ever, and how much should be used? Should

the soil be frmed or rendered as loose and friable as possible?

6 The New FPotato Culture.

These were the individual questions suggesting themselves
which made up the central problem, ‘‘ How can we increase
the yield of potatoes without proporiionately increasing the
cost of production 2?” :

As experiments were carried on from year to year, it was
found that the yield from this experiment plot was increased
at the rate of from 100 to 600 bushels to the acre; that por-
tions yielded at the rate of over 1,000; that certain hills and
certain varieties, treated apparently the same as the rest,
yielded over 1,500 bushels to the acre. Would it be posszble
to ascertain what the exact conditions were which gave such
yields? Would it be possible to approach them on aeres in-
stead of plots? Would it be possible to furnish equivalent conat-
tions to acres in an economical way ?

The reader who has the patience to consider with some care
the following pages, may judge for himself whether any ap-
proach to a positive answer has been made by the results of
the work herein placed before him.

River Edge, Bergen County, New Jersey.

CONTENTS.

REWER oh ook whence 2) esha a ooo

The Origin of the Trench System of Raising Potatoes. The
‘“Potato Contest.”” Howit Came About The ‘‘Contest”’ Plot.
The Planting Begun and Finished. The Fertilizer Used. The
Trenches. How far Apart. Hilling up Avoided. The Varie-
ties Planted. Notesof Progress. A Perfect Stand. Incessant
Rains. The First Intimation of Something Wrong. The Vines
Die Prematurely. Applications of Various Insecticides. The
Cucumber Flea-beetle Discovered to be the Cause. Not Con-
fined toany Limited District. Previously Attributed to ‘‘Blight.”
Insecticides of no Effect to Kill the Insect—But they Hurt the
Vines. Previous Treatment of the ‘‘Contest”’ Plot. The Re-
sult. The Plot Measured by the Committee. Yield of the Sev-
eral Seedlings. No. 3 Failed. Otherwise the Yield would have
Exceeded the Rate of 700 Bushels to the Acre. Report of the
Judges.

CHAPTER II

Failures, but Instructive Failures, The Second ‘‘ Contest”
Plot. Modifications. Favorable Conditions in Every Way.
Notes of Progress. Flea-beetles in Great Numbers. All Sorts
of Insecticides Used Without Avail. Foliage Injured. The
Kinds Planted. Premature Death of the Vines. The Yield.
The Tubers not Half Grown, and a Large Proportion Decayed.

Merrie: Liles: vee...

Another Failure ona Larger Scale, with its Teachings. Learn
by Failures as well as by Successes. A Half-acre Trial on a
Poor Soil. General Opinion that such Large Yields cannot be
Produced on Extended Areas. May we not Double our Crops
without Doubling the Cost of Raising them? The Enemies of
Great Yields. Potatoes Checked in their Growth never Yield
Maximum Crops. The Fitting of the Half Acre. Plowed in
the Fall and Potash and Phosphoric Acid Applied. Why Ni-
trogen was not Applied in the Fall. The Trenches Depth to
Plant. Covering. Conservation of Moisture. Hilling-up to
be Avoided. Why. Shallow Cultivation. Spring Work. A

PAGE

The New Potato Culture.

Late, Cold, Wet Spring. An Injudicious Decision. Additiomml
Fertilizers Applied. Frost-bitten Seed. One-eye Pieces Planteth
of Necessity. Number of Potatoes to the Barrel. The Kimels
Planted. The Mulch. The Forms and Quantity of Nitroguib
Applied. Partial Failure of the Seed. The Yield. The Cava,

CHaprmR Vee ee

Mr. Terry’s Views. Expectations not Realized. The Yiells
from Small Plots Deceptive. Mr. Minch’s Great Yields Queriatt,
The Author’s Yields due to other Causes than the Trenches. Mer.
Terry cannot see any Benefit from the Use of Fertilizers on his
Land. The Advantages of Level Cultivation Set Forth. Few-
er Green Potatoes. Reply to Mr. Terry. Evident reasons why
as Large Crops cannot be Kaised on Acres as on Selected Plots.
Just as much to be Learned from Trials on Small as on Con-
siderable Areas. The Small Plot may tell us Just what the Acre
Needs.. Why Farmers Prefer to ‘‘Hill-up.””. How Trenches
Direct the Rainfall. Mr. Minch Explains. The Economy of
Large Quantities of Manure.

CHAPTER V

Some Heavy Yields by the Trench Method. The ‘‘Women’s
National Potato Contest.’’ Overi1,ooo Entries. Prizes Award-
ed. The Yields of the Prize-takers. The Trench System takes
the First Prize in a full Acre Contest. The Prize won was
$1, 100—the Yield was 738 Bushels.

CHAPTER R SLs Oe ee ne eel ee

Conservation of Moisture. Importance of Rainfall. Inef-
fectiveness of American Experiment Station Work. Sir J. B.
Lawes. When and How first Induced to Write for the Ameri-
can Farm Press. Governmental Action Precipitated thereby in
the matter of Establishing Experiment Stations. Fundamen-
tal Weakness of American Stations as at Present Conducted.
Political Influences. ‘‘Available” rather than ‘‘ Capable’’ men
too often Chosen as Officers. Uncertain Tenure of Office.
Conducting the same Experiments Year after Year Impracti-
cable. Farmers are Solicited to Try the Effects of Mulching
ina Small Way. Objections to the Trench Answered. Tread-
ing on the Seed Pieces Condemned. Roots do not Issue from the
Seed. Seed Potatoes, unlike true Seed, need a Loose, Mellow
Soil.

CuHaPpter VII

Experiments with Different Fertilizers, First Season. Single
or Special Fertilizers. Fertilizers should not be Condemned
because Fertilizer Constituents, used Separately, fail to In-
crease the Crop. How to Find Out what your Land Needs-
The Elements Deficient in the Soil must be Supplied. Wherein

Fertilizers Differ from Manure The Neecs of this Particular

Contents,

Su JJPlainly Shown. The Soil will Answer Questions if put in
the Right Way. The Natural Soil Yields. The Specially Fer-
tilized Soil Yields. The Complete Fertilized Soil Yields.
Tables and Comparisons. Second Season’s Trial on different
Land with the same Fertilizers and Fertilizer Constituents. A
Soil that will ‘‘Not Grow Beans” without Manure. A Hungry
Soil. Tables. A Summary of Results. Third Season’s Trial
on a Change of Plots with Essentially the same Fertilizers and
Fertilizer Constituents. To what Extent do Small or Thrifty
Tops Correspond to the Crop of Potatoes? Ratings Rarely
Fail to Indicate. When they (the Ratings) do Fail. Well
Balanced Fertilizers never give a Luxuriant Growth of Vines
without a Corresponding Growth of Tubers. Better Landthan
that of Preceding Trials and more Variable Results. The Land
still Replies: ‘‘Give Me All Kinds of Food.” A Letter from
Sir j. B. Lawes respecting the Effects of Different Fertilizers.
Artificial Fertilizers Profitable, if Judiciousiy Applied, in Po-
tato Culture. Nine crops of Potatoes in succession Grown at
Rothamsted. The Kinds and Amounts Fed. The Results of
Nitrate Nitrogen and Ammonia Nitrogen the Same. The Loss
of Nitrogen and the Necessity of a Liberal Supply. The Re-
sults of Mineral Fertilizers alone only One-half those when
Nitrogen is Added. The Quantity of Potash Required is very
Large. The Color of tne Leaves and stems as Attected by Ni-
trogen, by Minerals and by Both. Explanation. A Larger
Crop of Potatoes Obtained with Minerals alone than with Ni-
trogenalone. Wheatan Exception. Why. Instructive Tables ;
Study them. The Minerals may Remain for Future Crops—
the Nitrogen is Lost. Results of Experiments made at Roth-

amsted on the Growth of Potatoes for Twelve Years in Succes- |

sion on the Same Land, as set forth by Dr. Gilbert. Twelve
Years of Potato Culture without any Manure or Fertilizer. The
Yield as Great, under this Exhaustive Treatment, as the Aver-
age Yield cf the United States. Nitrogenous Manures alone
Barely lucrease the Yield. The Slow Action of Farm-yard Ma-
nure. The Marked Effects of an Addition of Nitrogen to Farm-
yard Manure. JLuisease does not Increase by Continued Growth
from Sezson ts Season. Specific Gravity of the Potato an In-
dication of Quality. Cook Potatoes with their Skins on.

Pie MEG N Gatlin a Pee dias Sa aie vests ins ade. w Wena Sieh nh Shai
The Effects of Differen: Quaatities of ‘‘Complete” Fertil-

-izerson Potatoes Fertilizersagainst Manure. Telling Effects
of Fertilizers on Potatoes. ‘hey Increase the Yield more than

does Stable “ianare. Trial upon One-tenth of an Acre that had
not been Manured in 15 Years. Smo>other Potatoes from the
Fertilizer. ‘Tue Vital Questicn which each Farmer must Solve
for Himseit cr be Left Behind in the Procession. The Yields
from 220, 440, 880, 1,320, 1,760, 2,200 pounds of Fertilizer to
the Acre. Sulphate of Iron Harmful. Averages. A Differ-
ence of over 138 Bushels per Acr2. In what Way is the Reader
to turn the Results to His Own Advantage ?

PAGE

1O The New Potato Culture.

GrArriR se a eae

Shall the Fertilizer be placed Under or Over the Seed Pieces ?
Its Importance Depends on the Method of Culture. Tables.
Averages. The Second Year Results. GeneralSummary. The
Difference in Favor of the Fertilizer Over 9.68 Bushels per
Acre.

CHAPTER X

-e@@ wv &€He

~Results of Planting Potatoes in Trenches of Different Depths.
First Trial. Planted from Two to Ten Inches Deep. Second
Trial. Third Trial. Summary of Averages.

CHAPTER ND 2 ROR een ii re tee

Nitrogen, especially Nitrate Nitrogen as in Nitrate of Soda.
Its Effects when Applied Alone. May Farmers derive a Profit
fromits Use when Applied to Land Indiscriminately or as Farm
Manure is Applied? Joseph Harris’s Views and the Author’s
Answer. Experiments. The Results, in a Partial Way, Justify
Mr. Harris’s Conclusions that the Average Potato Fertilizers
of To-day are too Low in Nitrogen, in so far as this Particular
Soil may be Taken as a Guide. See to it that the Land is well
Supplied with Minerals, and then Add Increasing Doses of Ni-
trogen in an Experimental Way.

CuHaPtTer XII

Sundry Experiments. Potatoes Raised in Half Barrels.
First, Pure Sand ; Second, Garden Soil ; Third, Three-quarters
Garden Soil, One-quarter Cut Straw. Results. Experiment
with Three Barrels. Barrels Half Filled, the Seed Potatoes
Planted and Covered with a few Inches of Soil. As the Shoots
Grow the Barrels are gradually Filled, Leaving the Seed Pieces
16 Inches Below the Surface. Where would the Tubers Form?
The Root and Tuber-forming Growth. Blight. Results. Seed
Potatoes Treated in Various Ways, and Fertilizers. Excessive
Manuring. Effects of Salt. A New Way to Mulch Potatoes.
‘‘Valley Mulching.” Pieces Placed on Top of the Soil and
Covered with Mulch and Fertilized. Trenches Mulched, Fer-
tilized and Not. Doubts Expressed as to Reported Yields. As
High as ‘‘at the Rate” per Acre of over 1,800 Bushels, as Es-
timated from a few Hills. The easy Method of Computing
Yields with Accuracy. The Best Distance Apart for ‘‘ Single-
eye” Seed. Different Number of Eyes to a Piece, from Single
to Four Eyes toa piece. Different Sized Pieces without Re-
gard to Number of Eyes. Experiments to Determine how
Much Flesh each Eye should Have. Seed-end against Stem-
end. Shall the Distance Apart, of the Seed Pieces Planted, be
Proportionate to the Size of the Seed ?

PAGE

ISO

RET er Rr a A Oi babae ee:

Contents

Size of Seed. Generalizations. Habit of the Variety to be
Considered. Small Seed of some Kinds—Large of Others. No
Positive Rule can be Given. Illustrations. The Loss from
Missing Hills. Underground Development. Relations be-
tween Few Eyes and Long Joints; Bushy and ‘'Leggy’”’ Vines.
True Roots and Tuber-bearing Stems. Absurd Names. Seed
and Stem Ends might more Properly be Called Tip and Butt,
or Top and Bottom. Potato Growth. How Stems are Modi-
fied by Light and Air; by Soil and Moisture. Limiting the
Space for the Growth of Nodes and Tubers. Increase the Root
System by Deeper Planting and a Mellow Soil. A Ten-story
House may Occupy the same Ground Area as a One-story House.
Again, as to the Size of Seed-pieces. Every Variety differs in
Number and Potency of Eyes, and must be Cut and Planted
Accordingly.

~ CHAPTER XIV

Analysis of the Tubers and Vines. The Effects of Special
or Single Fertilizers, and in Various Combinations. The Ef-
fects of ‘‘Complete” Fertilizers. Stimuiants. ‘‘Complete”
Fertilizers not Necessarily Effective. A Familiar Talk with
Farmers. Erroneous Conclusions as to Fertilizers. Why
Farmers Condemn them. Food in the Soil, previously Inert,
Rendered Available by Salt, Plaster, Lime, Etc. Forcing Land.
Lashing it into Temporary Productiveness. ‘‘Complete”’
Fertilizers which Analyze the Same may Give very Different
Results. Their Agricultural Value. Irrational Conclusions.
How Money is Thrown Away. Farmers Conjured to use High-
grade Fertilizers Adapted to the Needs of their Land. The
Potato’s Needs. The Difference. A Distinction without a
Difference. Chemical Fertilizers arg simply Concentrated
Manures.

CHAPTER XV

Seedling Potatoes. How to Gather the Seeds, Plant them

and Treat the Seedlings. Every Gardener and Farmer should

~ Raise his Own Varieties. How to Select. Should we save

Seed Potatoes from the most Productive Hills? Why the same
Variety Varies. Millions of Dollars spent for New Varieties
that might Just as Well have been Raised at Home. Seed Balls
or Fruit. Selection of Seed. Glass Structures not Necessary.
A Sunny Window will Do. Howto Transplant. After care.
Avoid any Poisonous Application. Mosquito Netting. How
we should Select the Seedling Potatces. Immature Seed will
give a Degenerated Crop. Immature Cuttings will Produce
Comparatively Feeble Plants. Bud Variation. Select Seed-
ling Tubers of the Shape Desired. How Seedlings from the
same Seed may Vary.

123

135

[2 The New Potato Culture.
Page
(SHAPTER > OV [oe 5, See a ee eee ee Se I44

Care of Seed. Exposing Sound Seed to Light and Sun Before
Planting. How to Detect ‘‘ Blind’ Eyes. [imeasa Preserver.
Handling. Poisoning. How a Perfect Staind may be Secured.
The Views of Several Correspondents. Tie Importance of
Shallow Cultivation and a Mellow Soil Emphasized: Paris ,
Green. Mixit with Plaster, not with Water. Why! Absur-
dity of Picking off the Potato Beetles by Hand.

CE APTRR COV re ot 2 Oe “149

Experiments During a Dry Season and in a Variable Soil.
_ First Series. Comparison of Nitrate of Soda with Nitrate of -
Potash. Vine Growth. Second Series. Comparison of Stock-
bridge with Nitrate of Soda. Vine Growth. Third Series.
Comparison of Sulphate of Potash with Bradley. Vine Growth.
Fourth Series.- Comparison of Fertilized Trenches with Unfer-
tiled. Vine Growth Fifth ~Series. Effectsof Snuff asa
Fertilizer. The Effects of Nitrogen, Phosphate and Potash,
Used Separately and in Various Combinations. Vine Growth.
Averages of Yield of the Several Nitrate of Soda Trenches.

Caaprer XVI 2h ae NET SORE ae oe err!

Another Talk About the Use and Effects of Chemical Fertil-
izers. A Maximum Crop of Potatoes Means an Ample Supply
of Potato Food. Diluted Bordeaux Gives Unmistakable Benefits.

CGHAPTERUXT XG oe aie ol, Be 183

- Miscellaneous. The Objections to Hilling-up. Mr. Hersey’s
Views as to Seed-end and Stem-end Seed: as to Shape, An-
swered- Brevities. Difficulty in Crossing Potato Flowers.
Seed Sold by Sezdmen as ‘‘Hybrid” Seed, not Hybrid. Hybrids
Between the Alkekengi and Potato Sterile. Prof. Bailey’s Ex-
periments in Grafting the Potato on the Tomato, and v7ce versa.
An Explanation of the Effects and Non-effects of Plasters.

Questions and Answers. Killing the Tops Lessens the Yield.
Keeping Potatoes. Largest Yielders. How Much Seed to the
Acre? Doesit Pay to Buy Fertilizer Constituents and Mix them
at Home? Index, :

GoneAcPAD B Riek

Origin of the Trench Method.

N THE back part of our home grounds is a garden-plot of about
an acre. When we built upon the property (two acres in all),
nearly twenty years ago, it was designed that this garden-plot

should be given to small fruits—grapes, strawberries, raspber-
ries, blackberries, currants, etc.—-around the borders, while upon the
central area it was proposed to raise potatoes and other vegetables
for family use. This was somewhat before I had thought of ‘‘experi-
ment grounds” or had associated myself with the farm paper with
which I soon after became and have since been connected. The soil
was a mellow loam that might well be defined as ‘‘just right” or, in
“more specific description, one that, while retentive of moisture, was
yet well drained and neither too much inclined to an impervious clay
nor, on the other hand, to a leachy sand. Of the fertility of this
soil, nothing was known further than that it had been cropped for
many years without manure—fertilizers were practically unknown.

Our first season’s essay proved to be a decided failure, though, in

so far as we knew, our instructions were well carried out by the gar-
dener. The potato ‘‘seed”’ (Early Rose) was planted in hills two by
three feet apart without manure. The plot was fairly well cultivated,
and the plants hilled-up according to the then popular way of raising
potatoes. It was our hope (a confident hope, too,) to beat our neigh-
bors, between whom, in the matter of all early vegetables, a friendly
rivalry existed.

ihe tops grew vigorously enough, and anything like a failure of the
tubers was not thought of. That this plot should have yielded not
over seventy-five bushels to the acre is a fact that I have often pon-
-dered over, while anything like a satisfactory explanation has never

(13)

14 The New Potato Culture.

occurred tome. Assuming, at any rate, that this land was not over-
well adapted to potatoes, their cultivation was not attempted for sev-
eral seasons thereafter.

At length, having engaged in farm journalism, and desirous of test-
ing the new varieties of potatoes then announced in unqualified terms
of praise in the seedsmen’s catalogues of the day, I determined to
ascertain what cow/d be done in this uncongenial soil, and the ‘‘ Zyench
System’’ was among the first of the experiments which were suggested.

From that time until now this plot has been given to raising, in small
trial-lots ranging from three or four to a dozen ‘‘hills,”’ all the new
varieties of which ‘‘seed *’ has been procurable. Probably the average
number of trials during all these years would not be found to be iess
than seventy-five kinds for each season. The yields of these little
lots varied remarkably—all the way from 150 to over 1,800 bushels to
the acre. All were treated essentially alike, and reports were duly
printed as to size, shape, color, yield and quality. The reports of
the new kinds which gave a low yield were rarely made use of by the
seedsmen, or others originating or introducing them, while the stupen-
dous yields were given the most conspicuous publicity, greatly to my
mortification-in many cases. One of the most startling of these an-
nouncements declared that 1,391} bushels per acre of the Green
Mountain potato, had been raised by me. The truth was, that there
were but ¢hree pieces (hills) planted, which yielded 17} lbs., or at the
rate of 1,391.50 bushelstotheacre! So it transpired that the anoma-
lous yields reported from season to season were doubted by many
good people, and it was to prove what the trench method was really
capable of doing that a ‘‘contest’” was announced, the results and
every step of which were to be open to public investigation. Be it
said here that I have never claimed that this method is preferable in
all sorts of soils, for the excellent reason that I have not tried it in all
sorts of soils. Reasoning from what is known of the potato during
its period of growth, the trench system would wo¢ increase the yield in
a sandy, leachy soil in which the level of the ground water is low, as
nothing can be gained by rendering the soil less capable of securing
the needed store of moisture through the osmotic action which the
trench modification helps to assure in more retentive soils.

We have repeatedly, side by side, with and without fertilizer, tried
this method and the usual way of raising potatoes, with the invariable

Origin of the Trench Method. 15

result that the trenches have given a decidedly larger yield. More
than this, in our trials any decided increase of fertilizers, by the new
method has given, as will be shown further on, a greater increase in
yield than the same amount of fertilizer by the old way, which of zt-
_se/f is an important consideration. It shows that in the one case the
plant is able to appropriate the food supplied to a better advantage
than in the other.

Furthermore, as the results of liberal prizes offered in 1888 and
again in 1889, it has been demonstrated that by far the heaviest yields
-on record have been produced by this method, which, in theory at any
rate, seems to secure to the potato all that it needs in so far as it is
in the power of man to do so.

HOW THE ‘‘CONTEST’’ CAME ABOUT.

‘During the winter of 1888 I made the statement in print that if I
could not raise a¢ the rate of over 700 bushels of potatoes to the acre
on a given plot in my experiment grounds by what is known as the
Rural Trench System of cultivation, let the season be favorable or
unfavorable, I would forfeit $50 if any one would pay the same
“amount in case of my success—the money in either event to be donated
for some charitable purpose. The challenge was accepted by Mr.
Wilmer Atkinson, the editor of the Farm Journal, of Philadelphia, Pa.

THE ‘* CONTEST” PLOT.

Owing t: the lateness of the season, the ‘‘ Contest” plot was not
planted until April zo. Theplanting was begun at 74.mM. At 8 A.M.
a shower began which continued until the work was finished, causing
the soil to become muddy on the surface. Previously (April 9th) the
seed potatoes were spread out singly in a warm room. The eyes of
the ‘‘seed end’’ soon pushed, forming short, warty shoots. The eyes
of the other portions of the potatoes grew but slightly. The object
in placing the seed potatoes in a warm, light room was to secure the
most vigorous seed.

All potatoes, the eyes of which seemed dormant or feeble—‘‘blind”
as they are commonly called—were rejected. They were cut accord-
ing to the number of strong eyes developed, the object being to have,
atleast, three to a piece. On April 18th, the trenches were dug with

16 The New Potato Culture.

a spade, about seven inches deep and a full foot in width. As we had
not from experiments made determined whether it was better to strew
the fertilizer wuzder or over the ‘‘seed,”’ it was sown both under and
over. Eight hundred and eighty pounds were first evenly sown in the
bottom of the trench, and incorporated with the soil by a Hexamer
pronged hoe. On this, an inch or so of soil was raked, and the seed-
~ pieces were placed exactly one foot apart, the trenches being three
feet apart, measuring from the middle of each. These (the seed-
pieces) were covered with another inch of soil, and powdered sutphur
was scattered upon it at the rate of 400 pounds to the acre. Then an
additional spread of the fertilizer (Mapes’s Potato), at the rate of 880
pounds to the acre, was given, making in all 1,760 pounds to the acre.
The trenches were then refilled wi. the soil taken out, which, being
looser than the rest, left the soil of the trenches higher than that
between them.

We have always been careful not to compact the trench soil any
more than can be helped. The ridge left soon settles to the general
level, and is so preserved during the season, as all hilling up is care-
fully avoided. The plot was planted to the following varieties—alJ
seedlings of my own:

i Pop Gee, ec tae ie 33. pieces—one trench,
Noi ais saunas 66 ‘* -—two trenches.
Notte d ae MeGNae ss TEP ee

NOTES OF PROGRESS.

May 15th.—Up to this time the rain-fall had been all that was needed.
No. 3 was the first to appear above ground; No. 4 next, and No. 2
last. Frost occurred the 17th, and cold, constant rains followed up
to May 30th. The soil was drenched. Lima beans and melon seeds
rotted in the ground. There was a perfect stand of potatoes in the
‘contest’? plot. My note book of June ist says: ‘‘ Sifted Paris green
and plaster—one pound of the poison to 200 pounds of the plaster.
Soil compacted from incessant rains ; frost this morning.”

June 3d: ‘‘The plot cannot be cultivated de/ween the plants because
the tops meet and cover the soil.”

June 8th: ‘‘No. 2 was the last to push its shoots above the soil, and

Origin of the Trench Method. 17

the plants were for some tirme smaller than those of the 3 and 4. At
this time they have outgrown No. 3. All are growing thriftily.”’

THE FIRST INTIMATION OF SOMETHING WRONG.

June 17th: ‘‘The vines are now meeting, so that further cultivation
between the trenches is impossible without injury to the vines. No.
3 vines are less thrifty than those of Nos. 2 or 4, and show signs
of some weakness.” _ 3

june 25th: ‘‘The No. 3 vines seem to be dying, from some cause
which we cannot even guess at. One says ‘it is a mole that has gone
through the trenches ;
ble heat which followed upon a long term of cold, wet weather !’
Another says ‘it is the sulphur. You have given them too much.’
The stems are weakly, the leaves yellowish. Some of the stems are
turning black, and withering within an inch of the soil.”

June 3d: ‘‘Gave another application of Paris-green and plaster.”

After the above date all hope was lost of winning the contest. It
was evident that No. 3 would be nearly a failure. The cause was
discovered to be the

»)

another says ‘it isa scald, owing to the terri-

FLEA BEETLE,

known entomologically as HY/altica cucumeris. The first suggestion
came from our foreman, who said his own potato tops were dying,
and that they were alive with fleas that were eating the leaves.
‘¢ There are so many” said he, ‘‘that you can meee the noise they
make when disturbed as I pass along the rows.’

The writer had noticed while sifting NE and Paris-green that
these insects existed in unusual numbers, but it did not occur to him
that they were the cause of the mischief. An examination of
neighboring fields was made, and all were found to be injured more
or less. Later, as the facts were published, accounts from many
parts of the country were received showing that the pest was not con-
fined to any limited section. Many who previously attributed the de-
struction of their potatoes to ‘‘blight” found that the flea beetle was
really the culprit.

Soon after the No. 3 was hurt beyond recovery, the No. 4 was at-
tacked, and finally the No. 2. We sprayed the vines with Buhach-

P.—2

18 The New FPotato Culture.

water, hellebore, Gishurst compound and Paris-green, but without the
slightest helpful effect.

PREVIOUS TREATMENT OF THE CONTEST PLOT.

Potatoes had been raised on the piece of ground of which the ‘‘ con-
test” plot was a part, for 12 consecutive years. It had never re-
ceived much manure. The-applications of fertilizers each year have
averaged, no doubt, at the rate of 1,200 pounds to the acre, for the
most part Mapes’s Potato, with which, as with other brands, noted
further on, I had been carrying on experiments of various kinds ©
during the entire period, upon considerable areas as well as upon
small plots.

Besides the potato fertilizer, the plot had received, at various times,
small dressings of lime, wood ashes (leached and unleached), kainit
and raw bone-flour.

LHE RESULT.

Friday, the 28th of September, every member of the committee ap-
_pointed to determine the yield was present, together with some 4o
others from various parts of the country. Previous to digging the
crop, the ground was carefully measured,: to give accuracy to the
computation.

The No. 4 yielded at the rate of 644 bushels per acre.|. The Nosw
yielded at the rate of 1,076 bushels to the acre. No. 3 was a com-
parative failure, owing to the vines having been destroyed by the flea
beetle. The yield was only at the rate of 276 bushels to the acre.
As this potato occupied two-fifths of the entire plot, the yield was
thus reduced to below 700 bushels to the acre. It will appear to the
reader and was evident to the judges and others who were present
that, had the whole of the plot been planted with No. 2, the yield
would largely have exceeded 700 bushels to the acre, and the SEES:
would consequently have been decided in our favor.

REPORT OF THE JUDGES.
\
‘‘ We, the undersigned committee, having been appointed for the

purpose of calculating the yield of potatoes grown upon the ‘con-

Origin of the Trench Method. 19

test plot’ at River Edge, Bergen county, N. J., do hereby certify that
we saw the potatoes dug and measured the yield thereof. We found
it to be at the rate of 583 bushels per acre.”

ee PETER COLLIER,
. Any SELES,
|. J. C. Havivanp,
Li ©] BENEDICT,
[ P. T. Quinn,
Committee.
Subscribed and sworn to this 28th of September, 1888, before me,
Joun G. WEBB,
Justice of the Peace.

GrhvAsP alee atl

Fatlures, but Instructive Failures.

AD THE ‘‘ Contest plot” been inaugurated a year or so before
it was, there could have been little fear of failure. It was
not until the 7vs¢ contest season that either blight or the flea
beetle injured the crop materially. These devastators were,

before that time, practically unknown.

A renewed effort was made the next year to produce at the rate of
over 700 bushels to the acre. The wager of $200 was offered in our
confidence that it could be done and, though the offer was widely pub-
lished, there was not one to accept it, though, as in the first contest,
the money was to have been given for some benevolent purpose.

THE SECOND CONTEST PLOT.

Trenches were dug April 6th, 10 inches deep and wide, 11 in num-
ber, each 33 feet long and three feet apart. Twenty-five pounds of the
same potato fertilizer as previously used (1,000 pounds to the acre) were
then sown broadcast, walking through the trenches—not zz the trenches
alone, but over the soil piled up between the trenches as well. The
bottom of each trench was then loosened with a Hexamer pronged hoe, —
Five inches of soil were then raked back into the trenches and on this
the seed-pieces (half of medium-sized potatoes with the seed-end cut
off) were placed exactly one foot apart, making 33 in each trench, or
363 in the entire plot. Such large seed-pieces were never used before.
The trenches were never before dug quite so deep and never before
placed upon so great a depth of meow soil. This work was done in
a perfect manner, as the weather was fine and the soil in splendid con-
dition to work. The trenches were filled, being careful to fill one at

(20)

Fatlures, but Instructive Failures. 2%

a time and complete it so that the work could be done without walking
on the completed trenches. Never was there a mellower seed-bed.

NOTES OF PROGRESS.

‘May 7th.—To-day flea beetles were noticed in great numbers.
Some of the plants were four inches high, others just breaking through.
Sprayed all with tobacco soap dissolved in water, using two ounces to
a pailful of water. Not effective.

‘¢ May 8th.—Sprayed the plants with water in which tobacco-stems
had been boiled; also with whale-oil soap-water, one ounce to one
gallon of water.

‘¢May gth.—Used Thymo-cresol and Paris-green and water. Corn
cobs were dipped into crude carbolic acid and one placed between
every two plants. Not effective in the least.

“May 1oth.—A cyclone, attended with heavy rain. In the evening
after the storm, as many flea beetles were noticed as before the storm.

‘¢May 12th.—One tablespoonful of hellebore, one heaping table-
spoonful of buhach, 25 drops of sulphuric acid, one teaspoonful of
Paris-green to a pailful of water were sprayed on the vines. No effect.

‘‘May 14th.._Two teaspoonsful of Thymo-cresol, a heaping tea-
spoonful of Paris-green to a pailful of water sprayed on the plants.

-‘*The leaves now began to show some injury from these applications.

‘May 17th.—Fleas thicker than ever. Applied Bordeaux Mixture
on half the plot, and on the other aloes dissolved in hot water, four
ounces to two gallons. The fleas seemed delighted with both.

‘¢May 22d.—It was plainly to be seen that the R. N.-Y. No. 3 plants
(second trench) were dying. It was decided to dig them up and plant
‘Minister’ instead. A few days after, several rows were dusted with
unleached wood-ashes. The fleas the next day were not so numerous
upon the dusted plants. They preferred the plants not dusted. Later
the plants of the entire plot were first sprayed with water and then a
mixture of the following was sifted upon them: Paris-green, two
pounds, extended with one barrel of plaster; sifted unleached ashes ;
one-eighth pound of snuff, making in all a quarter of a barrel in the
proportion of two-thirds ashes and one-third poisoned plaster. This
was found to repel the fleas somewhat.

‘*June 16th.—Excessive rains up to this time. The vines have
made a fine growth.

22 The New Potato Culture.

‘‘July 23d.—Excessive rains up tothistime. Soilsaturated. Every
variety is more or less injured by the flea beetle.
‘¢July 30th.—Vines dying.

THE KINDS PLANTED.

Mrench Nos ase. Seedling (NOs 12%, Wak esc mie 40's 33 pieces.
a Ran 38 Dane Ala Oroty aeNORNS aerate $s eat es gene Bo) te
a Seb NISMO ohare BEE INTO Devos eels eevee Ree een 33 ee
us Cary 2 ie A Fer de INIOM Agu steele te ie enone 33
ot Fe PEGG Sremecter: HEY MINIO: potas erence teete amen 33.5 ies

SO dnt Or ANIOIE Ae etcetera 337) te
a aah oe Brownell’s Wanner ce) soa oe 300
os EBV an SIRE yada Monroe" County niZeea cee 33 Sale
Be OS ecmi From J. H. Woodburn, Sterling,

Lad. oe Ree Fave eee nee see II s
of a ROR es cyances New: Queens ceyece eet ee 22) ae
es Sh oars Seedling of Rose, from Thos.

Lazell, Big Rapids, Mich.. : .22 ue
ae Se eaten eae Tonhosks, from Theron Platt,

INewitownen Connh ere eee iit us
ee Siebel ats aie eX Brownellis Wane oi aes 33) ae

Ase, WINS IID)

No. 2 yielded 63 pounds, or at the rate of 454.66 bushels to the
acre. They seemed to be about half grown. There were few rotten
potatoes. %

Minister yielded 32 pounds, or at the rate of 234.66 bushels to the
acre. Many small; many rotten. .

No, 4 (third row) yielded 53 pounds, or at the rate of 388.66 bush-
els to the acre. Many rotten; half grown.

No. 4 (fourth row) yielded the same as the preceding, 53 pounds.

No. 4 (fifth row) yielded the same within a fraction.

Brownell s Winner (seventh row) yielded 38 pounds, or at the rate
of 278.66 bushels per acre. Many rotten; all small.

Monroe County Prize yielded 63 pounds, or at the rate of 462 bush-
els to the acre. Many rotten.

Woodburn Seedling yielded five pounds. There were 11 hills.
This was at the rate of 110 bushels per acre. |

Failures, but Instructive Fatlures. 23

New Queen, 22 pieces, yielded 48 pounds, or at the rate of 469.33
bushels to the acre. The tubers were small but there were a great
number.

Seedling Rose yielded 71 pounds or at the rate of 520.66 bushels to
the acre.

Brownell’s Winner (duplicate row) yielded 71 pounds or at the rate
of 520.66 bushels to the acre. This last row was planted with seed
from Mr. Brownell, while the other row was planted with seed raised
here last year, which did not fully mature owing, as stated under the
first contest account, to blight and flea beetles.

THE ENTIRE YIELD

was 549 pounds, without making any allowance for decayed tubers,
which is at the rate of 367 bushels to the acre. Taking the whole
lot, probably over one-fourth were rotten, while the sound potatoes
were not over one-half the usual size.

To what extent the premature death of the vines was due to fleas,
to excessive rain or to fungoid causes, we were unable to form any
opinion.

Coll ARE ental

Another Failure on a Larger Scale, with its Teachings.

* HERE is little doubt about it that thoughtful farmers may
learn as well by failures as by successes. It is for this rea-
son that we dwell upon the failure of our repeated endeav-
ors to raise over 700 bushels to the acre, or at that rate.
We have now to record a failure—the most disastrous, perhaps, of
any attempted, though others have since demonstrated that by this
very ‘‘trench method” the claims made for it are by no means chim:
erical—the crops having been raised in localities not infested with the
flea beetle and blight. The trial to be recorded was made upon a meas-
ured half-acre of an impoverished soil.

The yields of from 1,000 to 1,800 bushels of potatoes to the acre
(at those rates) raised on specially prepared plots in my experiment
grounds of rich, garden soil, have called out various comments from
many editors of the press. That we have actually raised such yields
need not have been doubted, since the potatoes (of the largest yield
and several others nearly as great) were dug and weighed in the pres-
ence of several well-known horticulturists or farmers, who were visit-
ing here at the time. But all agree that such yields cannot be raised
on large areas except at a cost exceeding their profitable production.
It may be that neither 1,000 nor even 700 bushels of potatoes can be
profitably raised upon an acre of land. But from our persistent tests
with various methods of culture, the question is raised whether we may
not at least double our potato crops without doubling the cost of
raising them. The two great enemies of immense yields are, first,
drought and, second, az znsufficient supply of available food. Now, this
NEW METHOD Is TO SUPPLY THE FOOD in abundance, and to so conserve

(24)

Another Failure on a Larger Scale. 25

moisture as to carry the plants through the season without a check in
their growth—for potatoes that are checked in their earlier growth
never yield largely, no matter what the subsequent weather may be.

In order to test this question, whether or not by our method we
could raise a large, paying crop on an extended area, a half-acre of
very poor land (not capable of yielding 100 bushels to the acre with-
out manure) was given its preparatory fitting. The land was perfectly
level and naturally well-drained, consisting of a sandy loam quite im-
poverished by constant cropping, having received but at the rate of 15
tons of farm manure to the acre in many years, and that in one ap-
plication four years prior to this trial. Anexact half-acre was measured
off and plowed eight inches deep, on the 26th of November. The
next day it was harrowed, and on the 28th the following fertilizers
were spread broadcast, no farm manure whatever being used:

600 pounds of bone-black superphosphate, furnishing 25 per cent.
of soluble and available phosphoric acid.

_ 400 pounds of sulphate of potash, furnishing 50 per cent. of sulphate
of potash, and 4o per cent. of sulphate of magnesia.

400 pounds of kainit, furnishing 40 per cent. of sulphate of potash,
and common salt.

The cost of the above fertilizers was $44 fer acre, or $22 for the
half acre.

On the afternoon of the same day the land was again harrowed, so
as to incorporate the fertilizer with the surface soil and prevent its
being blown off in case of high winds.

It will be seen that in the above fertilizers there is no ammonia or
nitrogen. Either of these would have been washed through the soil
ere planting time the next Spring, while it was assumed that the
potash and phosphoric acid would be retained. In the Spring it was
proposed to sow more of both potash and phosphoric ee and alsoa
liberal quantity of nitrate of soda.

The object of the trench system of potato raising is two-fold : first,
to give a mellow, porous soil for the growing tubers. It is claimed
that any considerable pressure upon them must have some effect to
mar their shape and dwarf their size. Thetuber takes no part in the
nourishment of the plant, but must itself be nourished dy the plant
and its roots. If, therefore, when and after the tubers begin to form,
the plants do not receive an abundance of food, their further growth

26 The New Potato Culture.

must cease, or at least be checked. But without moisture the food
in the soil is unavailable, no matter how great soever may be the
supply. Hence,-therefore, second, the trench system, it is maintained,
retains moisture during periods of dry weather, when the soil as ordi-
narily treated would dry out. The trenches must be plowed (or in
small plots, spaded) at least 12 inches wide and six deep. The land
should always be plowed in the Fall so that it may be friable and
lightin the Spring. Choose large tubers, cut them in larger or smaller
pieces according to the variety, giving them all the flesh possible, and
place them about one foot apart and at least four inches deep in the
trenches, which should be about three feet apart. Cover them with an
inch or so of soil, throwing it on with as little compaction as possible.

Now, if it is desired to guard against the effects of severe drought,
a spread of coarse marsh hay, or something of the kind, after being
run through a cutter, may be spread over this soil in the trenches two
inches deep. The fertilizers should then be strewn evenly over the
hay, and the trenches filled, always as lightly as possible, and ridged
up with the soil taken out of them. A rain or so will settle this ridge
nearly to a level with the rest. If the land is not liable to be affected
by dry weather, the hay mulch, should of course, be omitted. It
will be found that the mellow soil of the trench, which readily admits
even the lightest rains which fall, and, indeed, heavy dews, will ma-
terially help to resist the effects of moderately dry periods. Perhaps,
too, the moisture condensed from the. air which the porous soil ad-
mits, should be taken into the account.

Hilling-up under this system is not only unnecessary but decidedly
injurious. The potatoes are planted as deep in the soil as they ever
need to be. They receive at once the benefit of rain, which, under
the hilling method, is in great part carried off betweenthe hills. The
growth of the vines will be found so rapid that few weeds ever start
between the plants; while between the rows, shallow cultivation,
(never deep) may be given as needed to free the land from weeds and
preserve a mellow surface. As with our system of corn culture, I hold
that plowing destroys many of the roots, all of which are needed
to feed the plants.

THE YIELD OF THE YPOOR-SOIL HALE-ACRE OF) PORAMO@HS=

The lay of the half acre is perfectly level, as just stated, save that

Another Failure on a Larger Scale. 27

it dishes a little near the middle where it needs draining. Up to date
the expense for work and fertilizer was $26.20.

The spring opened so late that it was April 16th before work
could be continued, and even then it was questioned whether it would
not be wiser to wait awhile and take the chances of planting too late
rather than attempt to prepare a soil which was still cold and wet.
But the latter course was injudiciously decided upon. Two bags
(400 pounds) of Mapes’s Potato fertilizer were sown and the land
harrowed east and west. The land was then marked north and
south, the marks three feet apart. The trenches were made four
inches deep (they should have been deeper) with a Syracuse shovel
plow, which did not serve the purpose as well as was desired.

THE SEED: PIECES.

It was intended to plant only Hodgman Seedling and Green
Mountain potatoes, as these in our rich-soil plots had given the great-
est yields of any up to that time. Ascertaining at the last moment,
however, that but one barrel of seed of the Green Mountain could be
procured, it was determined to make the Hodgman seed go as far as
possible and to fill out with otherkinds. The Hodgman seedling pota-
- toes were found to have been frost-bitten in their passage from New
Hampshire. They were cut to one eye generally, though two would
have been preferred. The two barrels of seed contained 1,346 pota-
toes, which, placing one piece every foot in the trench, planted 21 of
the 37 trenches of the plot. In the next nine rows, Green Mountain
seed was planted. Then followed other kinds, which will be noted
further on. The pieces were covered with a hoe with an inch of soil,
and upon this soil a further application of potato fertilizer was given
at the rate of 800 pounds to the acre.

THE MULCH

consisting of course swamp hay, was run through a cutter and cut in
about two-inch lengths. This was strewn over the fertilizer two
inches thick from wall to wall of the trench. The soil was then hoed
over the mulch, forming ridges two inches above the surface, which
soon settled nearly to a level with the adjacent soil after a few rains.

The cost of the coarse meadow hay used was about $3 a ton. It
_ was estimated that one ton would mulch an acre, the trenches being

28 The New Potato Culture.

15 inches wide and three feet apart, measuring from the middle of
each. The entire cost of the hay, cutting and distributing it in an
economical way when entire accuracy, regardless of cost, is not
aimed at, was estimated at $12 per acre.

NITROGEN

was applied in the three forms (mixed together) of blood, nitrate of
soda, and sulphate of ammonia, at the rate of 400 pounds to the
acre, as soon as most of the sprouts showed above the ground. This
was broadcasted, the land receiving immediately afterwards a shallow
cultivation.
THE WEATHER

continued cold, with frequent showers. Most of the pieces, however,
had sprouted by June 10, except the Hodgman Seedling. It was
thus early evident that this portion of the plot—21~-37ths of the half
acre—would prove a failure. Only here and there could a sprout be
seen, while the pieces not sprouted were either quite hard or else
were rotting in the ground. Probably not over two-thirds of the
seed pieces ever sprouted, and one-third of these were so late in
sprouting that no tubers formed—not even small ones. The weather
suddenly changed to excessive heat—the hottest of the season—and
drought set in. The stems were very large, the foliage so ample
that all the land was entirely covered, except that occupied by the
Hodgman Seedling. All who saw the plants at this time, with their
luxuriant, dark-green leaves, predicted a fine success for the trench
method—a prediction, which I grieve to say, was not fulfilled.

The yield is presented below which will scarcely need verification
as ‘‘doubting Thomases ’’ rarely doubt the results of experiments
which turn out agreeably to their views.

To have admitted, however, that we ourselves by this failure were
convinced that the principles of this system of potato culture were in
fault, would have been premature. While it certainly did fail that
season and under the unfavorable conditions as stated, it has suc-
ceeded since far beyond the extra cost of its practice, as will be.
shown directly.

DEVE AVL ED:

Beyond the half acre, a trench was plowed in order to test the
natural fertility of the soil as well as the effects of a comparatively

Another Failure on a Larger Scale. 29

small quantity of fertilizer, both without mulch. Hodgman Seed-
ling from our own seed (not frost-bitten) was planted. The seed zo/
fertilized, yielded 163 bushels per acre. The seed fertilized (at the
rate of 400 lbs. Mapes’s Potato fertilizer per acre), yielded 185 bush-
els per acre, showing an increase of 24 bushels for the fertilizer.

The State of Maine, the first row of the plot proper (east) yielded
at the rate of 240 bushels to the acre, the weight of potatoes dug
from this row being 180 pounds. This row, as well as eight others,
was 13 feet shorter than the rest, on account of the interference of
an apple tree.

Seedling No. 1. There were two rows (Nos. 2 and 3) of this, which
together yielded but 195 pounds. This was at the rate of 130.25
bushels to the acre.

The Corliss Matchless (row No. 4 and a part of row No. 5) yielded
150 pounds, or at the rate of 184 bushels to the acre.

The Underwood (116 pieces, row 5) yielded 115 pounds, or at the
rate of 238 bushels to the acre.

The Greenleaf (98 pieces, parts of rows 5 and 6) yielded 75 pounds,
or at the rate of 184 bushels to the acre.

The Bonanza (78 pieces, row 6) yielded 65 pounds, or at the rate
of 200.40 bushels to the acre.

The Montreal (85 pieces, parts of rows 6 and 7) yielded 86 pounds,
or at the rate of 243.26 bushels to the acre.

The rest of the row No. 7 was an experiment to ascertain whether
anything is gained by rolling the cut surface in plaster and keeping
the pieces one week before planting, over planting freshly-cut seed
without plaster. The 60 pieces (Green Mountain) plastered and kept
a week before planting, yielded 248 tubers (204 marketable) which
weighed 594 pounds. This is at the rate of 238 bushels to the acre.
The 90 pieces (Green Mountain) planted as soon as cut without
plaster, yielded 493 tubers (347 marketable), which weighed 105
pounds. This is at the rate of 280.58 bushels to the acre—the larg-
est yield of all. .

We come now to the nine full rows of Green Mountain. The yield
was 27+ bushels of 60 pounds, which is at the rate of 224.05 to the
acre.

30 The New Potato Culture.

Finally, we have 21 rows of the Hodgman Seedling from the
frosted seed. The yield was but 244 bushels, which is at the rate
of but 86 (85.74) bushels to the acre.

Mshs | COSA,

Not counting the cost of harvesting the crop or of the rent of the
land, or of the writer’s time and labor, we estimated the cost of rais-
ing this half acre of potatoes at not less than $60. The entire crop
would not that year have sold for more than $40.

GHA PIER IV.

Mr. Terry’s views. Small plot trials condemned. Mr. Minch
criticized. Ineffectiveness of fertilizers on Mr. Terry s land.
Reply. How the yield of acres may be made to equal those

of small plots. Mr. Minch’s reply to Mr. Terry.

R. T. B. TERRY, of Hudson, Ohio, is well-known to many
of the farmers of the country as a very successful potata
grower. It may interest and instruct my readers if I here
reproduce a correspondence which occurred between him

and the writer regarding large yields in general, and the trench method
in particular.

MR. TERRY’S REMARKS.

‘«« Will you allow me to say that I am not quite ‘satisfied with your
potato wager as it now stands ?

‘<Tf the four little words, ‘at the rate of’ were left out, and the
rest read, that you will raise over 700 bushels per acre, on say five
acres, this season, then would I clap my hands for joy. Every pota-
to grower in the country would be deeply interested ; that is, if he
had any progress about him. Should you win such a wager, or
come near it, the writer would go to New Jersey both on purpose to
see the potatoes and the ground with his own eyes. Very many
others would do the same and be benefited. I have long been trying
to get just a sight. Once the realization seemed near. I read of a
man who was digging some 600 bushels per acre, on two acres. I
wrote him immediately and asked if the report was true, and if so,
might I come and see some dug? His reply completely cooled off
‘my ardor. He wrote: ‘I have two acres of potatoes that will yield

(31)

22 The New Potato Culture.

some 600 bushels, not 600 per acre.’ This has always been my luck
when I have tried to see big yields.

‘¢T do not doubt the yields reported by you; but I do,wish the ex-
periments could be on a large scale. Thousands of growers would
thank you most heartily. We farmers who live by our crops cannot
make much out at thorough experiment work. I wish our experiment
stations would experiment with farm crops by the acre instead of lit-
tle plots of a few rods. Our Ohio director thinks well of this plan,
and we hope for something valuable from him in the future.

‘* Everyone knows there is a great difference in the yield of small
plots and the average of whole fields. The yields of Mr. Minch by
vour trench system show something of this. He had 650 bushels per
acre on two acres (would that I could have seen them) ; 400 per acre
on two others, and an average of little over 300 per acre on 22 acres,
which I suppose included the first four. Now what we farmers want
to know is why did he not average 650 bushels per acre on the 22
acres ? Why did two acres produce double the average of the field ?
Has he learned, so that next time, the season being as favorable, he
can bring the whole field up to this high point ? I have obtained a
yield, on small plots, measured before witnesses, at the rate of 400 to
500 bushels per acre, but have never been able to bring a whole
field up to Mr. Minch’s average. From my experience I should say
that your success was due to heavy manuring, hand culture, absence
of hills, rather than to the trenches. If the soil was all mellow and
fine, I cannot see what possible advantage a trench 15 inches wide
and four deep could have over one four inches wide and the same
depth, except that the fertilizer could be put in a broader space, as
the first hard rain wouldin either case, on my soil, settle all ground
about alike. As for manure, one can hardly lay too much stress on
the value of it. To those liberal doses, year after year, you largely
owe your success. I only wish I could wse 1,200 pounds of potato
fertilizer per acre and make it pay! But the singular thing is that I
cannot see one particle of benefit fromitsuse. I have tried the same
kind you are using on rows clear through a large field put on in nearly
the same way, and at the rate of 1,000 pounds per acre, and never
could tell from the growth of the vines or the yield of the tubers
where it was put.

‘* Now, in hand culture, with the hand Planet cultivator you speak

Criticising the Contests. 33

of, I can see that it has an advantage over field culture, where a horse
is used. Having the soil mellow and loose so as to supply a ‘ yielding
medium,’ which you speak of, is a matter of great importance. A
man walking between the rows when the soil is reasonably dry would
not disturb the yielding medium, nor even pack the ground where he
walked very much.

‘‘ When one harrows with a team, and then rolls and plants with
a planter and horses (and it is the same when he marks out and covers
witha planter and horses), then harrows some three times to kill weeds,
then cultivates six to eight times with horses, he will find his yielding
medium considerably injured. I have caused a horse to step on the
ground where potato hills were to be, after the seed was planted, and
then compared the yield with that of hills in the next row that were
not tramped on, and it was largely in favor of the latter. We take
great pains to keep the horses in the center between the rows, when
harrowing and cultivating. Ridges over the rows or drills enable us
to do this when harrowing. The ground is worked but little before
planting, partly for this reason. We are also very careful to work
the ground only when it is quite dry. A horse will not then pack it so
very much worse than a man. In all these ways we study to keep a
yielding medium for the potatoes to expand in; but practically we
cannot do it as well as you do by hand.

‘¢] shake hands with you on the level culture, or nearly so, that
you practice! But do you know that the majority make high hills yet ?
If they would only stop to think a moment, they would give away their
shovel plows, as the writer did years ago. Ona field cultivated level,
and the surface all mellow, the rain goes right down where it falls,
wetting all the soil, and carrying what fertility it has in it right to the
growing roots that extend all through between the rows. Where a
shovel plow is used before a heavy shower, much of the water runs
off in the furrows, carrying its fertility with it. The ground in the
hills, instead of being a ‘yielding medium’ often gets so dry and
hard that the yield is injured. Level soil will withstand drought best.
In a wet season potatoes will stand hilling better, but on drained land
even then hills are aninjury.. When one takes soil from between the
rows to pile up around the hills, he is laying bare, or nearly so, the
roots that are alone in the center. This is abusing the plants, and

P.—3 :

34 The New Potato Culture.

on drained land I know of no possible benefit to be derived. Better
plant about four inches' deep and keep the ground nearly level. In
practice I have to throw a little dirt in under the plants, with the
Planet horse-hoe; but we keep the surface as nearly level as pos-
sible. After raising many thousands of bushels in this way we find
no more greened or sunburned than when we hilled up high ; in truth
I think not so many.

‘‘If farmers would pay close attention to these points another
season they will have cause to rejoice, viz. : Plenty of suitable food,
as little packing of the soil when working as possible, and level (sen-
sible) culture. Then I would add such tillage as will give the crop
the most benefit from the moisture in the soil, or save the most moist-
ure for the crop. After all the ‘main point is the one brought
out by you: ‘Every farmer does not act upon his knowledge.’ It is
not how much do we know, but how much use do we make of our
knowledge.”’

REPLY.

We are pleased to receive the above from a farmer who is renowned
as a potato grower. It is also to be regretted that we are obliged to
answer ‘‘at the rate of’’ instead of ‘‘ per acre.’’ The reason is this:
Offering a wager was thought of only a few months prior to the pro-
- posed ‘‘contest”’ and, therefore, too late to give the fall preparation
to the land which is deemed essential to great potato yields. Again,
it has often been doubted whether we ever did or could raise the large
crops, even upon small areas which we have so often reported. Fur-
thermore, it was our desire to use for seed my seedlings Nos. 2, 3 and
4 for this particular trial, and of these we had very limited quantities,
no more than enough to plant roo hills of any, or more than 200 hills
in all, which would take about all of the plot that we were prepared
to spare. We have never held that proportionately as many potatoes
could be raised on an acre of land as upon a selected portion of that
acre, for the reason that it is hard to find an acre or more of land of
uniform lay, composition and fertility. It is simply held that by em-
ploying certain methods the yield of potatoes can be greatly increased
as well in field as in plot culture, and profitably increased. We have
never known just how much importance to attach to the trenches.
Mr. Terry, until of late years, has not been familiar with our experi-

Criticising the Contests. 35

ment work, and, of course knows nothing whatever of the trials to de-
termine how much the trenches, of themselves, increased the yield.
In every trial made, the land laid out in trenches, whether with or
without fertilizer or manure, has largely outyielded that planted ac-
cording to the old method of planting in furrows or hills. Every one
knows, it is true, the great difference between the yields of small plots
and the average of whole fields. This difference is unavoidable, and
it must ever be, unless the poorest parts of a field are by manure,
-drainage, or in some other way rendered as suitable to potato culture
as the best parts of the field. We may increase the yield of the poorest
parts by special means, such, for example, as by the trench system ;
but if one portion of a field is liable to suffer more from drought than
another, or if other parts are imperfectly drained, we may rarely hope
to obtain the best yields from those parts. It is not absurd to say
that just as much may be learned from the culture of potatoes on
small plots as on acres. The small plot tells us just what the acre
needs, and we have only to supply all the wanting conditions to make
the latter as productive as the other. It may be doubted if ever any
one can discover a method of raising maximum crops of potatoes, or
of anything else, unless every need of the crop grown is fully supplied.
It may be assumed, however, that the full needs of the potato are not
fully understood or, if understood, it has been supposed that it will
not pay to supply them. Twelve years ago no one could have made
us believe that one day we would raise at the rate of 1,000 bushels
per acre on a plot of one-fortieth of an acre. With 60 different kinds
of potatoes planted in every way we could think of, and well cared for,
the largest yield was less than at the rate of 350 bushels per acre.
Not until the trench method was hit upon did we succeed in obtaining
these great yields. We do not pretend to understand the effect or
action of this system any further than that it seems to conserve moist-
ure and to assist in carrying the plants through droughts which would
otherwise check their growth; the depth at which the seed-pieces are
placed, the yielding medium by which they are surrounded may all
play a part, while the food seems to be placed just where it feeds the
plants most effectively.

Mr. Terry asks why Mr. Minch under the trench system did not
‘average 650 bushels per acre on 22 acres instead of on two acres?
Our reply would be that he did not or could not supply all the con-

36 The New Potato Culture.

ditions to the 22 acres that existed onthe two acres. But he did raise
an average of 300 bushels on the 22 acres, and is not this of itself a
splendid triumph for this method? The thing for Mr. M. to do now
is to endeavor to supply to all of the 22 acres the favorable conditions
which exist in the two acres, or to come as near to it as possible.

If the soil of an entire field were all ‘‘mellow and fine’’ alike, we
cannot see any clearer than Mr. Terry can what advantages a trench
would give. But this is not in practice tne case. The plowing or
digging of the trench gives additional tilth and pulverization to the’
extent that in harvesting the crop we can often see the boundary be-
tween it and the abutting soil. We are inclined to think that on most
soils the first hard rain would not settle all the soil alike, but that the
trench soil would still remain somewhat less compact until the vines
_ grew large enough to cover the trench, when they would protect the
soil more or less from further compaction.

‘*To those liberal doses of manure you largely owe your success.”
If this is the explanation it is of the highest importance to farmers,
since the increased crop pays for the manure ten times over, and acres
as well as plots may be treated in the same way.

Yes, indeed, we know that the majority of farmers about us in New
Jersey and Long Island ‘‘ make high hills yet.” The reason assigned
is that the crop is far more easily dug, while the tubers burn less.

‘*On a field cultivated level and the surface all mellow, the rain
goes right down where it falls, wetting all the soil and carrying all the
fertility it has right to the growing roots.’ That is what I have been
harping on for twelve years, not only in potato, but in corn culture.
It was a part of our system when, on five acres, over 120 bushels of
shelled corn were raised fer acre, the yield having been measured by
half a dozen disinterested and well-known persons.

Now it seems to us that the trenches tend to direct the rainfall so
that the moisture first reaches the roots where they are the most nu-
merous., and here, too, the fertilizer exists in abundance, while the
porosity of the trench soil helps to retain the moisture, and the shelter-
ing leaves retard the surface evaporation.

Finally, Mr. Terry, in the face of your statement that potato ferti-
lizers do not increase your yield, and that you have not much faith in
the efficacy of the trench, we beg to make the request that you will
plow at least one trench across your potato field (after it is otherwise

Ls a

Criticising the Contests. 37

fitted) of the depth and width stated; that you will cover the seed-
pieces lightly with soil—just barely to conceal them—and then spread
evenly in this trench, throughout its length and breadth at the rate
of 1,000 or 1,200 pounds per acre, of a high grade, well-balanced po-
tato fertilizer, and that you will publish the results.

MR. MINCH EXPLAINS.

‘¢T was much interested in Mr. Terry’s article and your remarks
following were read with profit. For the benefit of Mr. Terry I will
here explain how I obtained the yield claimed, which can be verified
by many having knowledge of the facts.

‘‘Tn 1885 the two acres named received 1,000 pounds of pure bone
dust per acre, 500 pounds of kainit, 20 two-horse loads of well-rotted
compost of stable manure, and 800 pounds of phosphate to each
acre. In 1886 the same received 20 two-horse loads of stable manure
compost and 1,000 pounds each of fine bone dust and kainit. In 1887
there was applied the same quantity of compost, bone and kainit,

_ making in three years, to each acre, 60 loads of rich stable compost

(equal at least to 120 loads of ordinary raw manure,) 3,000 pounds of
bone, 2,500 of kainit, and 800 of phosphate. This, some would say
was an enormous waste of fertilizers, but I wanted to test the matter
of economy of the use of so large a dressing. The season of 1887
was, in South Jersey, a remarkable one for moisture and freedom
from hot sun and sun-scald. The yield was as I have givenit. The
soil is a friable clay loam, of excellent drainage, and a very favora-
ble one for the experiment. This year I propose again to use on
each acre 20 two-horse loads of stable compost and 1,000 pounds
each of the fine bone and kainit.

‘‘ The 22 acres alluded to had no manure applied to them like the
two acres named, or the yield would have been much greater. Mr.
Terry is in error in supposing that the average of the 22 acres of 312
bushels per acre included the first mentioned plot of twoacres. The
crop of each plot was given separately. The large yield obtained
was secured by deep, close planting—not more than Io inches apart
in the row, and the rows three feet apart. This gives, if there be a
perfect stand, 16,940 plants per acre, and should each plant yield
only 2% pounds per hill it would aggregate a yield of over 700

38 The New Potato Culture.

_bushels per acre. Unless the potatoes are closely planted, where
manure is used so excessively the growth will run largely to vine, and
the yield will be comparatively trifling.” [This depends upon the
size of the vines, does it not ? The Early Ohio, for instance, might
well be planted 10 inches apart, but we should hesitate about plant-
ing such varieties as the Blush, White Elephant, etc., less than a foot
or 14 inches apart.—E. S.C.] ‘‘ Deep planting in the soil described
allows double setting of the tubers; often triple sets are found—
one at the bottom of the trench, one at the top, and one between
these. The largest yields can never be obtained where there is ne-
glect of any of the essentials of success in the culture. I cultivate
well before the plants appear, and as little as possible afterward. Too
much after culture is a serious injury to the potato, and will largely
reduce the product. My purpose has been to test the economic part
of the problem, and so far the heavier use of fertilizers has been
best. I find that fewer acres and more manure, accompanied with a
careful study of the requirements of successful culture, afford better
results than the cultivation of a large area with a smaller average
yield. ;

‘*Mr. Carman is doing a good work and will come out successful

in the potato contest. Should this coming season be favorable, I
will invite Mr. Terry to see a few potatoes. Should there be failure
from any cause, I will-cheerfully chronicle my defeat.”

CORE Aa ie Bee es

Some Heavy Yields by the Trench Method.

N 1888 an offer (through the paper I then controlled) of some
thing over $1,000 (in sums of $150 and less) was made to the
wives of American farmers for the largest yields of potatoes to
be produced on not less than one-fortieth of au acre. The en-

terprise was known as the Women’s NationaL Potato Contest,
and the interest shown from the outset until the close was certainly
worthy of the name. There were over one thousand entries. Nearly
ail of the prizes for the- heaviest yields were awarded to those whe
adopted the trench system, and the crops, as figured per acre, ranged
from 1,062 bushels (the highest) to something over 300 bushels. The
first prize (one-twentieth of an acre) was awarded to Mrs. Selinda E.
jones, of Chautauqua county, N. Y., and the variety of potato was
the White Elephant or Late Beauty of Hebron—they are the same.
The yield was 53,4, bushels—z2,735 pounds of marketable and 450
-pounds of unmarketable potatoes, or at the rate of 1,06124 bushels
to the acre.

The second prize was awarded to Mrs. Eliza Day, of Johnson
county, Wyoming. The plot was one-twentieth of an acre—variety
Early Vermont, yield 48 bushels 33 pounds of marketable, and two
bushels 14% pounds of unmarketable, or at the rate of 1,015+ bush-
els to the acre.
_ The third prize was awarded to Miss Mary Rusk, of Madisen
county, Illinois. The plot was one-fortieth of an acre, or thirty-
three feet square ; the variety was Chicago Market, and the total
yield was 24 bushels and 16 pounds, or at the rate of 970.66 bushels
to the acre.

(39)

{

40 The New Potato Culture.

The fourth prize was awarded Miss Emma Hissam, of Steele
county, Minnesota. The area was one-twentieth of an acre, variety
Late Rose; yield 46 bushels, one peck, or at the rate of 925 bushels
to the acre.

The fifth prize was awarded to Mrs. M. T. Covell, of Erie county,
Ohio. The area was one-fortieth of an acre; varieties Green
Mountain and Rural Blush; the yield was 1,380 pounds, or at the
rate of 920 bushels to the acre.

The sixth prize was won by Mrs. Agnes C. Cameron, of Texas
county, Missouri. The area was one-fortieth of an acre; the va-
rieties Rural Blush and Beauty of Hebron; the yield 1,282, of which
1,260 pounds were marketable, or, at the rate of 85424 bushels to
the acre.

The seventh prize, and the last we need here record, was awarded
to Mrs. Mary E. Warren, of Fairfield county, Connecticut. Thearea
was one-fortieth of an acre, the variety White Flower ; the yield
(total) was 1,215 pounds, or twenty bushels and one peck, being at
the rate of 810 bushels per acre.

THE TRENCH SYSTEM FINALLY GIVES 738 BUSHELS TO THE VACRE

Contemporaneously with the above recorded Women’s Contest,
though announced afterwards, another was being conducted by the
owners of the American Agriculturist, supported by a number of en-
terprising firms. The prescribed area was not less than an acre or,
if less than an acre, no allowance was to be made for the shortage. The
first prize, $1,100, was awarded to Mr. C. B. Coy, of Presque Island,
Maine. The crop was raised in strict accordance with the trench
system, as will appear by the following note in reply to my inquiry:

January 10, 1590.

Dear Sir: I was induced to use the trench system in planting my prize
acre by seeing a report of some very large yields raised by that method, in
the Bowker Fertilizer company’s hand-book. The large yields I refer to
were raised by you on the Rural Experiment Grounds. I shall plant all
my potatoes that way another year. I think the system a grand success.

Presque Isle, Maine. Cuas. BP Gow:

The yield was 738 bushels on the acre, or rather it was a fraction

Some Heavy Yields, bie ois

less than an acre, the exact deficit having escaped my memory. The
particulars, in so far as they need be stated, were as follows :

Eleven hundred pounds of the Stockbridge potato manure were
scattered along the bottom of the trenches, after they had been laid
off for the seed, and were well mixed with the earth in and about the
trenches by hand with the hoe before planting. The balance (gco
pounds) was applied June 12th at the time of the first hoeing, etc.
The land was laid off in trenches two feet nine inches apart. The
seed was dropped 12 inches apart. It was covered by the hoe to a
depth of two or three inches. Only such tubers were selected for
seed as had strong, green sprouts at the time of planting.

The seed was taken from the cellar about six weeks before plant-
ing and spread thinly on the floor of a dry and warm room in the
house.

There is nothing else in the cultivation of this magnificent crop
that needs to be noted except that the acre was plowed during the
preceding summer (August); again plowed (cross-plowed) the next
spring and thoroughly harrowed two weeks after. The variety raised
was Dakota Red.

CT Ace Rsv ab

Conservation of Moisture—Importance of Rainfall—Ineffecttve-
ness of American Experiment Station Work.

BOUT the time that the proposed Women’s National Potato
Contest was being discussed, Dr. Lawes, the world-renowned
experimenter of Rothamsted, England, favored me with the
following brief but suggestive letter. As another and more

Jengthy communication appears from this grand man—to whom the
entire world is under a load of indebtedness, which it but imperfectly
recognizes at present, but which it surely will more adequately recog-
nize in the future—I may be pardoned for saying that it was through
my repeated solicitations that he was first induced to write for the
American farm press, and that it was to his work and influence more
than to all other causes that I was induced to commence experiment
work—experiment stations were then virtually unknown in America—
the results, in so far as potatoes are concerned, being for the most
part placed before the reader in this book. I am by no means alone
in assuming that it was in a great measure owing to the publicity thus
given to farm experimentation in this country that, let my own parti-
cipation be reckoned, as it should be, of comparative insignificance,
governmental action in favor of State stations was precipitated. Up
to this time, however, these experiment stations have been of trifling
service to the people they are intended to help, and, it may well be
feared, they never will be of service at all proportionate to their cost
until their fundamental weakness is recognized and repaired. The
director is, as a rule, chosen through political influence, with little re-
gard to his fitness for the position. His assistants are appointed not
because they are capable men, but because they are available men

(42)

The Importance of Water. 43

who, out of employment, are glad to accept of salavies which capable
men could not afford to accept. Their tenure of office is, from the na

ture of the case, uncertain, and it is soon ascertained that the reward
of devoted services is, if not gobbled up by their superior, at least un-
duly shared with him. The few exceptions to this disheartening state
of things, made by bright, ambitious young fellows, soon lead to
better offers from agricultural colleges or other (for the time) better
conducted stations, and the promising young fellows quit the work
which is but fairly begun, to plunge into work of a necessarily different
character owing to the needs of a different locality, soil and climate.
Necessarily, therefore, while such a state of things exists, there is
little hope that the station employees of this country may ever work
out those or cognate problems which, at Rothamsted during the past
forty-five years, have received the patient, unremitting study and toil
‘of trained hands, enthusiastic hearts and competent heads.

IMPORTANCE OF WATER TO THE POTATO CROP.

‘“«If you want to grow large crops of potatoes you must be liberal
in your supply of water as well as of food. The following table will
give you some idea of the importance of rainfall even when the pota-
toes have abundance of food. We grow potatoes continually upon the
same land, using the same manures, viz: 300 pounds of sulphate of
potash, soda, magnesia, superphosphate, with, in one experiment, 400
pounds of sulphate of ammonia, and in another, 550 pounds of nitrate
of soda. The potash and phosphate are in excess of the requirements
of the largest crop grown, so they are accumulating in the soil. The
nitrogen is also largely in excess of what the crop takes up, but this
does not accumulate.

Rainfall in inches

May to October, 5 mos. Bushels per acre.
1881, 13%. 482
1882, 12%. 387
1883, 13. 401
1884, 9. 222

‘©In 1881 the rainfall was better distributed over the season than it
was in 1883. Of course, I do not advocate the use of irrigation unless
for the purpose of experiment, but merely wish to point out how im-

AA The New Potato Culture.

portant an abundant supply of rain is. The rainfall last year was
fairly abundant for all other crops, but not for the potato.
° ‘|. B. LAwEess

Sir J. B. Lawes’s letter, received at a time when hundreds were pre-
paring to try the new method, seemed to emphasize the importance
of any kind of culture which gave promise of a conservation of moist-
ure.

THE TRENCH METHOD OF CONSERVING MOISTURE.

The potato plant, before the tubers begin to form, never suffers
from drought any more than do young corn plants; but when the
tubers are forming, their supply of moisture szws¢ be unfailing, or a
check in their growth mws¢ follow—and a check means a small crop,
or, if growth should be resumed, a prongy crop. We would ask our
readers to compare the weight of the tubers produced by a given
plant and the weight of the haulm (stems and leaves) of that plant.
The tubers must grow and mature during a few weeks. They are
nearly three-quarters water, and the leaves and stems and fibrous
roots, which together generally weigh less than the potatoes, are ~
taxed to their utmost to supply this water and the food it holds. It
does not matter in the least how rich the soil is, without moisture the
food is unavailable. We have already explained how the ‘‘ trench ”
system is supposed to conserve moisture: We wish now to urge our
readers also to try, at least in one trench, the effects of mulching. In
our early tests, given in detail further on, the mwz/ched trenches in-
creased the yield over the unmulched trenches 88 bushels per acre,
both fertilized with essentially the same quantity and kind of fertili-
zers. Two inches of cut straw, coarse hay, or wheat, rye, barley or
oat chaff, will serve the purpose, and if by its use, the yield can be
increased during dry seasons our farmers may well afford to apply it.
The drawback is that it is impossible to predict whether the season
will be wet or dry.

The trench system will be found not to require the additional labor
and expense that many suppose. But in the other case, if the in-
creased yield will more than repay the cost, why not adopt it? Let
every one of our farmer or gardener readers bury his incredulity or
prejudices for the once, and give the method a careful, exact trial.

The Importance of Water. 45

A common plow may be used to form the trenches by plowing both
ways, forming an open or dead furrow—or a shovel or listing plow
may be used. Let the bottom of the trenches be 10 inches wide a/
feast. This bottom should be mellowed, and the seed potatoes placed
one foot apart. Cover them with two inches or more of soil. Then
apply the mulch, scattering it evenZy over the surface-soil of the
trench, and then sow the complete potato fertilizer at the rate of 500
pounds (or more) to the acre. Finally, fill the trench as “ghily as
possible with the return soil, and give level cultivation.

OBJECTIONS TO THE TRENCH.

Several friends, as did Mr. Terry, have asked this question: ‘‘If I
thoroughly prepare my field so that all of it is the same as the trench,
what would be the use of plowing a trench ?” There would be no use
whatever in so far as the mellowness of the soil could increase the
crop. The trench, however, would still enable the farmer to place
the fertilizer just where it is most needed for that crop and it would
further enable him to plant deeper, a consideration, as we believe, of
the first importance. In practice, however, it may be repeated, we

_ have never seen a field so well prepared that plowing a trench and re-

filling it would not still further mellow the soil.

Again, the objection to the trench and to level outer has been
made that more tubers become exposed to the air, becoming green
and worthless. Such an objection will never be made by those who
have given it a thorough trial. Having plenty of soil in which to form

_ without being crowded, they rarely grow above the soil. Another ob-

jection is that it costs more to harvest trench than hill potatoes, an
objection that is valid enough if the increased yield from the trenches
is not enough to pay for the extra labor. It is not the work that a
farmer puts on his crops, neither is it the cost of the manure that
must first be taken into account. The question is, ‘‘ w7// zt pay?”
Treading on the seed-piece after it has been dropped into the hill
or drill is approved of by many thorough-going farmers because it in-
sures a closer contact of the piece with the soil. But this is quite at
variance with our ideas of trench culture. If the design were to
smash the piece of potato or to injure the eyes, it would be more or
less effective, no doubt. , If the roots grew out of the potato there

46 : The New Potato Culture,

might be some sense in it. But the soil has nothing to do with the
starting of the roots any further than it provides moisture. The
roots grow out of the stem which is for a time supported by the
seed potato itself. The sprout, shoot or stem makes its way through
the soil, and the contact of the mellowest soil is sufficiently close. To
keep it mellow—not to compact it—is the problem, and this problem
is solved more nearly, in our opinion, by the trench than by any other
method of potato culture known to-day.

CUED ALE Reanved

Experiments with Different Fertilizers on Potatoes.

FIRST SEASON.

HESE tests with different fertilizers, and with various combi-
nations of them, seem to the writer to be as instructive as
any similar experiments can be that are not repeated from
‘year to year. Many experiments of this kind are altogether

contradictory, for the reason, probably, that the soil in which they are
made is not so far impoverished that they will show what food is really
needed. Many farmers who have tried plain superphosphates alone,
raw bone alone, or potash alone, or any two, will see from these tests

that they ought not condemn so-called chemical fertilizers because any
- one, or even any two, should fail to give a marked increase of crop.
If a soil needs all kinds of plant food and is supplied with but one, no
matter how large the quantity may be, the crops will not be materially
benefited. Thus it will be seen that in these tests, potash alone did
_no good; dissolved burnt bone, which furnishes phosphoric acid only,
did no good. Nitrogen increased the growth of the vines, which, for
want of potash and phosphoric acid in the soil, gave, it is assumed,
no increase of tubers. But the complete fertilizers—-those which fur-
nish all three—gave an increase of crop in every case.

Study this question, farmers. It will pay you to do so. If you
don’t know what your land needs, use comPLETE fertilizers, with a fair
per cent. of the three essential constituents, until you find out. You
can find out by making just such experiments as those which are given.
When we hear farmers say that they have tried kainit, or superphos-
phate, or sulphate or muriate of potash, without the slightest effect,
we earnestly desire to explain the thing to them as we ourselves un-

(47)

48 The New Potato Culture.

derstand it. Let it be borne in mind that five tons, or a greater or
‘ess amount, of potash or plain superphosphate of lime, or both, might
be spread upon an acre without any result. But let us even the next
season, or possibly ten years afterwards, supply nitrate of soda or
salts of ammonia plentifully, and the farmer would no longer say that
fertilizers were worthless upon his soil. Plants, like human creatures,
need a complete food, and if the soil does not supply it, we must feed
the soil with the deficient element. If the soil from exhaustion needs
every element, we must supply a ‘‘complete”’ food, complete in the
quantity as well as in the number of food components.

Let us further consider that farm manure, aside from its mechan-
ical effects, is precisely the same as the so-called concentrated ferti-
lizers, except that it is less soluble. That is to say, if we could burn
farm manure, and still preserve all of its nitrogen, the ashes would
show just exactly what we may furnish to the land in chemical fertili-
zers. It is very plain, however, that the mechanical effects of bulky
manure can never be supplied by fertilizers.

We are not, just now, advocating the use of fertilizers at all—
neither are we discussing the question as to whether, at their present

price, we can aFFoRD to use them. We merely wish to show that ~

they do furnish the elements of food to plants the same as stable or
farm manure or composts of leaves, muck, straw or any other sub-
stance furnishes them, and that we have but to supply the elements |
which our soil needs to render it fertile.

As shown in the tests given in detail as we proceed, there is in the
main no positive contradiction in the results. All the plots tell, if
averages be considered, about the same story, and that is, that this
particular worn-out loam needs comMPLETE fertilizer—that is, phos-
phoric acid, potash and nitrogen. Nitrogen alone, while it gave
greater growth of tops of a deeper green color than the others, could
not sustain the plants to a full maturity. The tops therefore died,
and the yield was poor. The disparities between individual plots are
such as may be looked for in any system of experimentation that is
not carried on for years in succession in the same way and upon the
same soil.

Plot 27, which gives by far the greatest yield, received less fertili-
zer than either plots 12 or 17. It may reasonably be concluded,
therefore, that this is owing to the two inches of short-cut timothy

Experiments with Different Fertilizers. 49

hay which was spread as a mulch. The pieces were covered, as were
al! the others, with two inches of soil. Upon this the hay was evenly
spread across the trench, and upon the hay 500 pounds (per acre) of
potato fertilizer and 50 pounds of kainit were strewn. The early part
of the season was so dry that it was thought that all of the potatoes
received a check. It was then, no doubt, that the mulch of hay per-
formed its best service.

These experiments were designed to test the effects of the various
concentrated constituents of which commercial fertilizers are cqm-
posed, separately and in various combinations. The soil of the plots
selected was, as stated, a worn out sandy loam, level and naturally
well drained. There was no air stirring to interfere with the even
distribution of the fertilizers ; the soil was mellow and moist without
being wet, and with ample assistance the entire work of sowing the
fertilizers, planting and finishing the plots, was accomplished between
7 in the morning and sunset of April 14th.

The seed had been cut several days previously, the White Star
having been selected as, by its season of maturing, keeping qualities
and vigor, well suited to such tests. Potatoes of nearly the same
size were cut in halves lengthwise, the seed end of each having been
cut off and rejected. The seed conditions were made still more equal
by using the same weight of seed pieces to each plot. -Trenches had
been dug several days previously, two spades wide and six inches
deep—the trenches szr feet apart so that the roots of one trench
should not reach and feed upon the fertilizer of the adjacent trenches.
Later, two inches of soil were raked into the trenches, and upon this
the pieces (cut surface down) were placed one foot apart, April 14th,
as stated above. Two inches of the soil were raked over them and
the different fertilizers applied as shown in the table further on.

As regards the yield per acre, the two extremes may be given—first,
the mulched plot (No. 27) which received fertilizer and kainit ; and,
second, the average yield of the plots zof fertilized. It must be borne
in mind that the trenches were six feet apart. Very likely they would
have yielded nearly as well had they been three feet apart, the dis-
tauce usually allowed. At six feet apart the yield of the mulched plot
(No. 27) was at the rate of 172.33 bushels to the acre, or 344.66, were
the yield to be estimated from trenches three feet apart, which, for
ready comparison with the later trials, has been preferred.

oS
u *

50 The New Potato Culture.

The average yield of the plots of fertilized, at six feet apart, was
at the rate of 69.66 bushels to the acre—or had the trenches been
three feet apart, double that amount, or 139.32 bushels to the acre.
If we take the average yield of all the plots which did not receive
‘‘complete”’ fertilizers, we find it to be at six feet apart at the rate of
79-75 bushels to the acre—or at three feet apart 159.50 to the acre.
The specza/ fertilizer therefore zzcreased the yield, only ro bushels to the
acre, if we reckon at six feet apart ; and 20 bushels, if at three feet
apart, as compared with the. zatura/ soil, while the complete fertilizer
and hay mulch increased the yield, over the natural soil, 102.69
bushels to the acre, if planted six feet apart, and 205.38 bushels to
the acre, if planted three feet apart. With the complete fertilizer
(potash, nitrogen and phosphoric acid) and zw2thout the hay mulch
(plot No. 17), the yield was increased over the natural soil or unfertil-
ized plots, 58.67 bushels to the acre at six feet, and at three feet
117.34 bushels to the acre. With the complete fertilizer of plot No.
12 the yield was increased 38.50 bushels if planted six feet apart, and
77 bushels if three feet apart.

POTATO FERTILIZER EXPERIMENTS. ‘

Showing the comparative yield per acre, the fertilizers used, and the
relative size of vines.

Fertilizer. Vine Bus. of

FERTILIZER USED. Pounds per Growth potatoes

acre. June 16. to acre.

NO Ear aN MtEAtesOlisodaciy. fe het soe eee 200 9 124 66
CE ES YE PIE EE

No. #22 Sulphate of ammonia 72.2. ite toe 120 8.50 124.66
a ee OT)

No:. .3.. Dissolved bone-black . ..2).2...1<.,- 400 5 122.83

(i VO 0 RE
INO 4p O femtilizer sey ee et 2k ak seme 5 100.83
No. 5. Sulphate of potash (50 percent.) .. 300 5.50 154.00

Now 6x 8P Taster 4D Ji0 ee ii ty eae eae As ot 400 5.50 141.16

Lixperimenis with Different Fertilizers. 51

Fertilizer. Vine Bus. of
FERTILIZER USED. Pounds per Growth Potatoes
acre. June 16. to acre.
MMAR ICAIINGY bor Ge Shae ace te FN Gt Lon enn idle do el of 2,000 6 161.83
ET RT PETS A Ra Oe
iomanSe Nitrate OL SOGA «jai wverdby-cteie oda sans j 200
Dissolved, bone-black....:./:.... ( — 40e 9 170.50
GEN GM UN OMErtiiZer. be. sates coe Vt ey ks : 5 135.66
RimeioneWiNIt Gate OF SOMA 8. A we eles oe a 200
Sullohareot;potasiy sag ost is Fee 200 9 232.83

Now Dissolved bone-black ..4......%.. j 400
Stlpmaterok POtash |)... ac «cre x sou 5.50 174,16
own. Nitrate of soda.....: Sidhe We Dnt Ve 205)
Dissolved bone-black 1-2). .....i. i) AGO LOu ude 2LORaS
Suilalaaite Ol POtdSlyn viet ani. « | +300

Nose mine STOUTIC DONE... 65.5002 6 663 1,000 6.50 157.6€
(No plots between Nos. 13 and 16)

ee TRE SE a

No. 16. No fertilizer ...... nee Ne pte og eae 5 172.33

Nomi7. Mapes potato manure ...-:..:- 3 Bae acre lS) sme) 256.66
No. 18. Farm manure, two years old ...... 20, 000 8 ZIT OS
ar IQ. a ee . : AEG cle isle Leelee Au 5 141.16 _
iMoraazoursitted Coal-ashés) 3. cies ek ee. 40 bus. 5 141.16
iG, Dit ein) eee ON eee Ss Ma eats SS onulibsee vies (5 SOMME FORSO
No. 22, TORR a ae eee eee ne 1,760 5.50) 186.83

ives. UN@ tertlizer 2.2.45. Rete, shcte, da orcianat ate | 5.50 154.00

52 The New Potato Culture.

Fertilizer. Vine Bus. of
FERTILIZER USED. Pounds per Growth, potatoes

acre. June 16. to acre.

No. 24. Unleached wood-ashes from burnt

DEUSH etwas 3.2 Cee ene 41} bus. 5.50 165.00
INOAZ Sa allem ama mures .scun.. we acer tae eee 55 bus. 9 176.00
Now zor No tentilizer S420... ace a eee ee 5 154.00
NOs 27a Viapes potatommaniite manera rae 500 lbs.
CANDLES 4 OSs Vie ase ae ies Np nee et 50 8 344.66
Flay smu Ga Wie eee ace le ne oe ee —

It must be explained that the ‘‘vine growth” as exhibited in the
second column of the preceding table is intended to show the size
and vigor of the plants as they appeared at the time noted, June 16.
Such observations have been carefully made in most of these potato
experiments, the aim being to see in how far the yield of tubers ac-
cords with the growth of vine. Ten is the number to denote the
maximum of vigor, lower numbers indicating less vigor and size. It
has been found a very trustworthy way of gwessemg at the yield ; that
is to say, the yield of tubers is generally proportionate to the develop-
ment of the vines.*

SECOND YEAR’S TRIAL ON DIFFERENT LAND WITH THE SAME
FERTILIZERS AND FERTILIZER CONSTITUENTS.

Here we have a soil that will not ‘‘ grow beans,” or even a good
crop of weeds without manure. Though cropped year after year,
this part of the field has received neither fertilizers nor manure for
many years. It was, therefore, very hungry, and ready to show its”
appreciation of a full meal, which rich soils never do. What did the
soil need, was the question again asked ? Was it bone, or potash, or
ammonia—one, two or three ? Would ashes or hen manure or farm

*The potato fertilizer used (Mapes) had the following guaranteed analysis:

1.46 Nitrate soda. 3.90 Soluble phosphoric acid. |
.85 Ammonia. Au2)) Reverted s Potash 7.32.
1.60 Organic. 2.54 Insoluble “ sf

2 37-—Total, lod ie b= etal |

Lixperiments with Different Fertilizers. 53

manure or plaster give a good crop? Would fertilizer give a larger
crop than manure ? Would ground fish yield a good crop? Would
| nitrogen alone in excess help the crop? Would a large quantity of
nitrogen alone produce a paying crop? Would phosphoric acid or
potash, or the two combined, prove sufficient for a profitable crop?
Could a well balanced ‘‘ complete’ manure for potatoes be made
from dissolved rock, nitrate of soda and muriate of potash? How
would the same compare with the highest priced ‘‘complete” potato
manure offered by dealers? All these questions we hoped to answer
by this series of experiments.

The land was plowed April 10. The work of planting was begun
at eight o’clock, April 14, and finished at 5.30, three men being em-
ployed. The ‘‘ Calico” potato (a seedling of my own) an early va-
riety, was the ‘‘seed” planted. In the previous year’s trial it was the
White Star, as noted—an intermediate kind. There was, as in the
previous trial, scarcely a breath of air moving to interfere with the
even distribution of the fertilizers. The season was favorable to a
maximum yield from first to last.

In the following, as in the preceding tables, the heavy lines show
the rate of yield per acre and are drawn to a scale—one-eighth of an
inch representing 10 bushels—one inch equal to 80 bushels. All the
potatoes were weighed, regardless of size, and 60 pounds rated asa
bushel.

Pounds Vine Growth Yield
Plots. Fertilizer. applied May 27, bushels
per acre. 1omaximum. per acre.

Nomar iiinate Ot Soda)”. 2). 2,000. cals ee ee 200 3 141
Mowe NA tiral SOU By. kee loeb e e ne ——. 2 88
Nome oulponate of, ammonia... «0.50 25... : 120 4 132

iMi@eess) Dissolved: bone-black... 2... 0. J. 2. 400 4 103

Riera Natiral soil. 9. sb os oo. ee ee eg ——_ 2 97

No. 5. Sulphate of potash..... PR) Nia ue 32004 LA 2 95

The New Fotato Culture.

Pounds Vine Growth Yield

; Plots. Fertilizer. applied May 27, bushels
, perv acre. lomaximum. per acre
INOS. (O..4 APIAStCRS Ae esa ot celal ites ee eae 400 I go
INOme 7. SN atural¥somle reds. 6 2). a/c cco este ania —— 2 68
N (ANTiprateronuso Gal? cit.) iaccs nee eee en 200 }

OS: - 2 110
( Dissolved bone-black .............. 400 J

Now io. = Harm amantine, two years oldwrrns.. 20, 000 4 147
N 1 Nitrate oli soda Mimact nile sateen mere 200 }

INO. IO. 2 go

/ Sil phate otapotasheenm a ant are ere 300 j
eee Dissolved bone-black a) as. eee ee 400 | 5 81

Sulphate ol potash: 215 -.cos. eee 300 J

( INitraterol FSOClasy Wt: mele icine twee 200
Nosa2.; «Dissolved pbone-blacks a2.) .0 .-19-e 400 3 84
t Sulplaterotspotashl eye. same oe 300 )

This plot was affected by the roots of a tree.

INGsigo aw DONC an ciate tise eer eter I, 000 4 aa
No. 14. Farm manure, two years old........ 20,000 4 I00

INOM i Se. oN abiral Soil wire Gain bioareee eiee ee een ——- I 59

ING 16, /SElenwmanur arere mate eros he peter ee 1,440 4 81
DN IER SS a)
Nowi7. Mapes potatomanune: —- ones eee 800 9 176
No. 18. Farm manure, two years old........ 20, 000 6 169
INossro lst Mapes. potato umuanine pete se ee ie I, 200 9 273
EE
( Acid phosphate). < see) tetas ere 700 |
NosZotcuUNitraterot soar ia ee ee ary ee 200 6 150
| Mumriate ok /potasia: pee erry ase 120

Experiments with Different Fertilizers. 55

Pounds Vine Growth Yield
Plots. Fertilizer. applied May 27, bushels
; per acre. 1lomaximum. per acre.

Pee NCIC TehOSphates . fo. . 5c wll a wise yes 700 3 110
Ror os. j Nitrate Oats 0 Gey santa aha ate late aire Hehe aes 210 } A ate
eMininiatevof> potashies 2... 42-25-35. 120 J

No. 23. Ground fish

Mom24ce Mapes’ potato manure... 2.0.2... .% 1,200 8 323
The seed pieces mulched with old straw, Rural trench mulch system.

No. 25. Natural soil

BS oiler ee ea ea 2 59
a a
PPO eM MAME |. ac. e. clos e+ + boys Be 2,880 Fi 147
- TT
TE NCOVG| aa See tpl mea a or tr es BA Ak rea ahaa
Noi, 27: INiineitenOl: S@Giain = site <). oLee t peee A TOO 8 183
Sulphate of ammonia (442.2. 2
(ERE ST a
No. 28. - Mapes’ potato manure, 1,200 lbs.,
with the following nitrogen mixture
added :
tolaGle panei sears tahe e ayetae. clavetio sieges’ ae |
% IN Tienes OlesoeleR Ie Gn oee cee boo
: ( 600 10 235
Sulphate ol ammonia... -.-:--- J
Mulch was used same as 24.
CR
No. 29. Same as 28, except that a mulch of ]
old straw was spread over seed 224

PLCS Serge cosine enema rayst otane sod J

8
a SE Th EE LE
COMPARATIVE AVERAGE YIELDS. ,

Average yield of the trenches with neither manure nor fertilizer:

74 bushels per acre.

GES

56 The New Potato Culture.

Average yield of the trenches with incomplete fertilizers :

112 bushels per acre.

Average yield of the trenches with hen manure:

114 bushels per acre

Average yield of the trenches with ground fish :

124 bushels per acre.

Average yield of the trenches with farm manure:

139 bushels per acre.

Average yield of the trenches with complete potato fertilizer :

221 bushels per acre.

Pr SS ARs

The largest yield was given by trench No. 24, which received the
complete fertilizer and a mulch of old straw which had been exposed
to the weather during the entire winter. This was spread two inches
deep in the trench directly on the potato pieces after they had been
covered with an inch of soil and the fertilizer used for that trench.
The yield was at the rate of 323 bushels to the acre, or 50 bushels
more than where the same quantity of the same fertilizer was used
without mulch in trench No. 18. When, however, the trenches Nos.
28 and No. 29 are compared, it appears that the mulch did not in-
crease the yield. While in trench No. 27 an excessive dressing of ni-
trogen alone (in three forms) seems to have raised the yield 109
lhushels per acre over the natural soil yield, it seems to have lessened
the yield when added to the complete fertilizer 44 bushels, as com-
pared with trench 19. While, therefore, an excessive application of
nitrogenous fertilizers alone may be supposed to increase the yield by
acting upon the latent potash and phosphate of the soil, an over-dose
in addition to an ample supply of complete fertilizer seems to be in-
jurious.

While it is plafn that this series of experiments, as do the first
series, show that a complete fertilizer alone will produce a maximum
crop in this soil, the action of partial fertilizers is in some cases con-
tradictory and in many cases uesatisfactory.

Lixperiments with Different Fertilizers, 57

In row No. 1 nitrate of soda gives 141 bushels to the acre, and yet
in No. 8 the same quantity (200 pounds per acre) of nitrate of soda,
together with 400 pounds of dissolved bone-black, gives only 110 bush-
els; 31 bushels less than pure nitrate of soda alone. Again, in No.
10 nitrate of soda and sulphate of potash give only 90 bushels, while
in plot No. 5 sulphate of potash alone gives at the rate of 95 bushels.
Similar contradictory results seem to rule in the majority of experi-
ments reported of this class of fertilizers. Their action is so largely
an indirect one on the other ingredients already in the soil, and in so
many ways they act and re-act on the soil and themselves that it seems
to be impossible to trace their plant-feeding powers. The results
from their use in an experiment in 1884 were more contradictory
than during the past year. Nitrate of soda gave promise in the vine
growth of a good crop, equal to that of the best complete manure,
instead of which it failed to hold out through the season and yielded
little more than the natural soil. The results from sulphate of am-
monia were little if any better than from nitrate of soda—fair prom-
ises and poor results.

Complete manures, especially the complete potato manure, prove
themselves to have adequate feeding resources of their own. They
seem to feed the crop from their own resources, not only producing
healthy vine growth, but bringing large yields.

THIRD YEAR’S TRIAL ON DIFFERENT LAND WITH ESSENTIALLY THE
SAME FERTILIZERS AND FERTILIZER CONSTITUENTS.

As to the preparation of the plots, it is hardly necessary to repeat
what has been said on preceding pages. The seed, Rural Blush,
a late variety, was cut the day previous to planting. Potatoes of
nearly the same size were cut in halves lengthwise, the seed ends of
which had been cut off and rejected. The seed conditions, as be-
fore, were made still more equal by using the same weight of seed
pieces to each plot. Trenches had been dug several days previously,
fifteen inches wide and six inches deep, the trenches three feet apart.
Later, two inches of soil were raked into the trenches, and upon this
the pieces (cut surface down) were placed one foot apart. Two inches
of soil were raked over them, and the fertilizer applied as described.
The season, for this land, was considered favorable. The work of
planting and fertilizing was completed by three men in one day.

The New Potato Culture. V4]

Pounds fertilizer Yield bushels
per acre. per acre.
Tee Nt PALS SOU. Aa aia ite oe ee 200 235
TAO AMUNE to, 4c)) trio alae soc OO) eR 250 .
2.< Sulphate Of AMMONIA. + 4,5. 16 io) 30]
3.) Dissolved ‘bone-black: 9.2.4.2 a: 400 266
A eNOrTAnUGE 0 t i25 Pee Ae 00 242
be A OUlphate potash << yaeeran 2282 300 272
Gtarilaster ss: fie 22. ka eee 400 225
(eNOMMATIIVE hao tae is berks 6 mee oo 200
SerNigkAte sodas cn ee eee 200 )
Dissolyed bone-black: -l..2.. 222 400 § "ae
Opp New Mork manure ee) L's wor ate to tons 433
LOS MUNTth ALE: SOG. .18 tec Na eet Bicat 200 lbs. )
Sulphate jaotasia Poe ek eels B00 a) ae
mie. a Dissolved. bone-plack.j....0 4.2 4001 =)
Sulphate potash ?..2 220026: Flee ee) ae
tA MwrNGERAte SOA. r yess cw cy ara eee: 200"! |
Dissolved bone-black.......... Ao" P 348
Sulphate potas .2 wo... eee ZOO Rete
13. |Raw-bone..:... ofan ere lata TeOOOs wee 290
14. N. Y. manure forked in the bot-*
tom of the trench and the seed-
preces placed on topo: to tons 280
5: Or INOS MMDIMEL DE) yc ML. te ee en ane oo lbs, 272
OWN El CTaMe ankelah Vogt eWetersoh ee getty mate A tpe ZiIGLO wa 323
17. Mapes’s potato manure........ SOOR L 332
18. N. Y. manure spread on the top
of the covered seed-pieces.
(Miulchisy stem) i032. 22k os ro tons 348
19. Mapes’s potato manure (ammonia
4.50; phosphoric acid, 8.00;
Potash #6: 00), A see eae atta 2 1,200 lbs. 511
20... Acid (S. Cy rock) sphesphate..... 700) /£97)
Nitrate soda) eo aa eerc ete aa ZOO r 381
Muriate*potash<! Cena tah aa ee 2 Os ie
21... werd phosphate {eae aces een ce TOONS 229

Experiments with Different Fertilizers.’ 59

Pounds f. ertilizer Yield bushels
per acre. per acre.
BUELL ALE. SOMAG, chayeyniala ain pais =\h, ois: oro)? ZOO, sss | 323
Vi ALePOLASH so lieveraiasia ale ict 120 « S

24. Nitrogen mixture, viz: equal
parts sulphate of ammonia,
nitrate soda and dried blood,
200 pounds of each, per acre,
was spread on top the seed-
pieces after they had been
lightly covered with soil,and 10
tons No ¥. stable’ manure
spread on top of this for a

SAIL (oa NPE ae Male Er oar BA 476
Pie SON OMIMTATL UES Yipee ac vie bie se & oe ; 269
pose Ploats (finest S.C. rock) .... 2. 1,000 lbs. 289
Pe Peruvian SUdNO.,.A)20. 2. feta. AGO x" 264
Popeeen MAME | 5.- 2 a. a ws esate one 250" 363
29. Nomanure ............-..... 246

AVERAGES.

fetanmniriaine DIOLS AVETACG. . 6.22 oie m ated s woes glo Nw, oe 2 sets 253
Siaeie chemical constituents. 2). 0.4.- 42-0...) -A¢s2gen-> 263
Two cu hed Ne aaa ecieae Sass bh BA Aca EA ean ce Ee 324
Three Fe CNet MARES NS bed hata Wade Paget iis ad oe 364
PeAEOMPCTELIIZEH? pine ae eo ein ae Clie 8S oye same ase ees 421
Sf YSN i a(S an ah a a ie Ss Pe PE eee 354
Pees IMM TERT SV ULE Ciel ts Mlaneste Sepia aes otek S15 Be ketaa we shee ey sual Sess ve 343
same a Veh ee sera BA Me ey ats pS enrciiare, S15 da say S¥ey Zea, hae 323

THE PROMISE OF YIELD AS INDICATED BY THE VINES JUNE 27TH.

As in preceding years, we rated the growth and general appearance
of the vines, with the view to ascertaining in what degree the yield
of potatoes would correspond with the promise thus indicated. Ten
(10) is the highest Aosszbée rating. ,

60 The New FPotato Culture.

Ploeg oe ee Rated 2 Ploterss ements dae Rated 3
e Tivo ) ois ated eee ge ‘Sa S puna iee access Cotsics ni ee)
- DO ot ae te ee eamiat, 5 EEE Regt Sele tesa sa ame 0)
i BP ohare aN ne ee Pad, 63 OD OS STAG a aaavreria Sse fone meas ea
5 A’, fe Ageec gens he ade 2 of ARORA eae eee NG
ef Ba Eh esiedtueee eke Soe ee AONE ct on Sea Bethy ric
= OF tree meer aL ED GND Tes & Seapage ger en ao his
a Td SOO BO ries Wed SiR 222 NO Sorand B86 ee
Bal Ricteee sic fe ae tate +: Mle Pen Sr ara eae eS
on O Perron ater i i BSE! DUP. tenn. SeNneea eee elite
SpE Oy rededencreue teeta e at one: ba! BQ. doeogs 00+ “Se?
Sara Eo Ee bey eaten ona en OS ae eG ol ede:
aes ph ieee, crea ey Oe aasr ital Py SUT SA ora, Nena s eee pares}
mabe PLAS Nite Stee sertere se cess ins Mg Se DOF uage eich te aoe pa
Mmm TPA Neceys ctega tows sate a 7! Sop e2OG Ae on. erence ee ee

One often hears of immense tops, and yet a very small yield. This
has occurred in my experience, though in more fertile soil; first, when
large quantities of unleached ashes were used, and, second, when farm
manure alone was used, plowed under the preceding fall. With well
balanced chemical fertilizers alone it has never occurred; indeed we
believe, though we do not know, that with well balanced complete
fertilizers a heavy growth of tops is an almost unfailing indication of
a large crop of tubers, even though as high as two tons of fertilizer
to the acre be used.

THE LAND.

The land of the plots was, as is plainly shown by the good yields
without manure, much more fertile than that of the plots experimented
with in previous years. The change was made because there seemed
no longer any reason for continuing the poorer land trials, since the
result of two seasons of trial proved beyond a doubt that the soil
needed all kinds of plant food, and that a decidedly increased yield
could not be secured without them. They were therefore given up in
favor of richer land, though of the same character, a loam inclining
a trifle to sand rather than to clay.

It will be seen that the results are variable, though complete ferti-

Experiments with Different Fertilizers. 61

lizers still give largely increased yields over special constituents, and
the valuable lesson taught in this case, as in the previous trials, is that
for potatoes, it pays well on this land to use them in preference to
partial fertilizers or even to hen, fish or stable manure. The manure
was from New York stables, well decomposed, and of apparently ex-
cellent quality. The Peruvian guano contained an undue weight of
stones and we do not regard the trialasafairone. The variableness
of the yields is probably due in a measure to two causes, viz: (1) po-
tatoes were raised upon the same land the year before, fertilized in
the drill, and (2) corn was raised two years before, manured in the hill.

A LETTER FROM SIR J. B. LAWES RESPECTING THE EFFECTS OF
DIFFERENT FERTILIZERS.

Having presented the results of our own experiments touching this
very important question in regard to the effects of fertilizers (complete
and special or partial) on the growth of potatoes, I may conclude the
subject with the following valuable communication which I have re-
ceived from Sir J. B. Lawes, of Rothamsted, England :

‘¢ Although I consider that the use of complete artificial manures
involves 100 great a cost for their employment in the growth of ordi-

‘nary farm crops, perhaps an exception may be made in regard to

potatoes, a crop which requires a large supply of both potash and
nitrogen.

‘© At Rothamsted, we have grown nine crops of potatoes in suc-
cession upon land which for 16 years previously had received no yard
manure, and the average yield of the last three crops has been 400
bushels per acre, calculating the bushel to weigh 50 pounds. The
manure used each year has been 300 pounds of sulphate of potash,
350 pounds of superphosphate of lime, and 400 pounds of salts of am-
monia, while in another experiment, instead of the salts of ammonia,
540 pounds of nitrate of soda were applied. The produce from both
manures has been almost identical.

‘¢The sulphate oz potash supplies about 130 pounds of potash—and
we find very nearly the same amount in the crop. The phosphoric
acid, on the other hand, is much in excess of the requirements of the
crop, and it might be reduced one-half. The salts of ammonia and
the nitrate each supply about the same amount of nitrogen—87 pounds

62 The New Potato Culture.

and of this the crop does not take up more than 50 pounds; there is,
apparently, therefore, a considerable loss of this substance; but, at
the same time, any reduction in the amount of these manures would
be followed by a reduction in the crop. The loss of this costly manure
ingredient is a most serious matter, as unfortunately there is but
little prospect of recovering, in succeeding crops, any appreciable
amount of the 37 pounds not taken up by the first. By means of the
same mineral manures a/one, we have grown—over the same period—
one half the crop we obtained by the application of minerals with
nitrogen, the soil having supplied a sufficient amount of that substance |
to give a product of 200 bushels; but one-half of the minerals applied
remained inactive in the soil ; ‘these, however, might be made available
to the crop by an application of nitrogen.

‘The quantity of potash removed in potatoes is very large. Inthe
400 bushels it amounts to about 130 pounds. Compare this with the
amount removed by animals. An ox, weighing-1,400 pounds, which
was killed for the purpose of analysis, contained only two and one-half
pounds, in the whole carcass and offal. Hay is another crop which
takes a good deal of potash from the soil, and farmers in England
rarely grow either hay or potatoes for sale, unless there are facilities
for the purchase of town dung. Artificial manures are certainly not
used alone, by practical farmers, in the growth of their crops.

‘¢In our experiment field, the character of the manures is always
represented in the stems and leaves of the plant. Ammonia and ni-
trate, without minerals, give'a low stem and greenish-brown leaves,
which in the evening appear almost black. Minerals without nitro-
gen, give a thin, low stem and yellowish-green leaves, while miner-
als and nitrogen together give a luxuriant, and sometimes an over-
luxuriant, stem with leaves of a bright green. There is no difficulty
in accounting for these peculiarities. A plant takes up whatever food
is most abundant in the soil, with the hope, as I sometimes put it,
that sooner or later it may find the food which suits it best. In the
dark green leaves the nitrogen is in excess, but starch cannot be
formed without potash, and the supplies of potash are not sufficient
to use up the nitrogen. It is far more easy to change yellowish-
green of the mineral-manured potatoes into a dark green, than it is to
lighten the color of potatoes which receive nitrogen; a solution of
nitr>+e of soda will effect the one in a very few days, but as both

Experiments with Different Fertilizers. 63

potash and phosphoric acid form insoluble compounds with the soil,
they are much more slowly taken up by plants.

‘We aiways, however, obtain a larger crop of potatoes where we
apply the mineral manures alone, than where we apply the nitrogen
without the minerals, though in the next field, salts of ammonia, ap-
plied without minerals for 39 years in succession, have grown larger
crops of wheat over the whole period than mineral manures with-
out ammonia. To explain this apparent inconsistency we must con-
sider the great difference in character of the two crops.

‘‘Wheat in England is sown in the autumn, and being a deep-
rooted plant, it has a greater range of soil to obtain a supply of min-
eral food than the spring-sown potato. The relation between the
potash and the phosphoric acid and nitrogen in the two crops is also
very different. In the wheat crops grown by salts of ammonia alone,
mixed samples, taken over a period of 10 years, give the products per
acre of the total crop-—straw and grain—as follows: ‘nitrogen, 36
pounds ; potash, 23 pounds; phosphoric acid, 13 pounds. Therela-
tion, therefore, between these two important minerals and nitrogen is
ASI aaLOr 1:

‘‘TIn the potato crop, on the other hand, the proportion of nitrogen
to the minerals is nearly 1 of nitrogen to 3 of minerals, the demand
upon the soil for potash being much greater in the case of potatoes
than where wheat or barley is grown. It must be a very large wheat
crop indeed which removes 50 pounds of nitrogen from the soil, but
in some of our potato crops we carry off more than roo pounds of that
substance per acre.

‘¢ As very few soils could furnish so large an amount as this from
their own resources, when potatoes are continuously grown, it becomes
necessary to furnish-a supply of potash either in dung or chemical
salts. The following table gives the products of the crop grown in
1883, being the ninth in succession without any change in the manures

TABLE.
Potatoes per acre

in long ton. Cwt.
HE OR LOUIS, Ole CUM Git ds, Aictou oc ctal<\s 2 + syst tla ey Ys 6
2 vinneEalsewithout HMFOSEN, .... ss.) + ee: 5
Pee NG eEOcen WiLHOUe MmINeLAlS. Je... s.p en eee 3 3
Aue Withers anGyAmMOnia: sa. 22... = eae 58 19
Ep Viimerals and mitrates . 4)... 's 6 eles a2 ees 8 2

64 The New Potato Culture.

Amount of mineral matter and nitrogen per ceut. in dry tubers.

Mineral matter. Nitrogen.
aD a se aoe Sat otha te ew eaeatton A Pee yet od 3.5 I.09
DS Verailonsthe oP avewee TNS END eee eee 3.86 0.73
BES ere ot GEAR CESS SUE reg ae ae 2.64 EeAg,
ARS Sas Ore tai EE ER OREY s eSene eayer see 3.67 1.08
ees eruad Ab Ores Nios sea RnR Gi sence 3.86 Tey

‘¢ The character of the manure is most clearly shown in the compo-
sition of the crop. In No. 2, manured with minerals, the minerals
are more than five times as high as the nitrogen; while in No. 3,
where ammonia or nitrates are used, the minerals are considerably
less than double the amount of nitrogen. In both cases there is a
waste of power, shown by small crops, and unused manures. The
loss, however, is not equal in both cases, as the minerals remain in
the soil, to be taken up at some future time, while the nitrogen is
probably lost.”

RESULTS OF EXPERIMENTS AT ROTHAMSTED (ENGLAND) ON THE
GROWTH OF POTATOES FOR TWELVE YEARS IN
SUCCESSION ON THE SAME LAND.

Dr. J. H. Gilbert, Dr. Lawes’s associate, in a lecture before the
Royal Agricultural College speaks at considerable length on the
above subject.

His special object was to show the general requirements of the
crop, both actually and as compared with other crops, and the actual
and comparative characters and composition of the product obtained.
He draws his illustrations mainly from the resuits of field experi-
ments on the growth of the potato by different manures, for a num-
ber of years in succession on the same land, at Rothamsted, and
from those of collateral investigations into the composition of the
produce, made in the Rothamsted laboratory.

The average produce over twelve years without manure is not quice
two tons per acre ; and there was considerable decline from period to
period under this exhausting treatment. Nevertheless this low yield
without manure for twelve years in succession on the same land,
is about as much as the average produce under ordinary cultivation

”

Experiments with Different Fertilizers, 65

in the United States, and nearly two-thirds as much as in some im-

_ portant European countries. By superphosphate of lime alone, the

produce is raised from an average of scarcely two, to nearly 33
tons; that is, to very little more than by the superphosphates alone.
It is evident, therefore, that up to this amount of production, the

character of the exhaustion induced by the growth of the crop on

- this land, which was, agriculturally speaking, in a somewhat exhausted
condition, was much more that of available phosphoric acid than of

potash, or the other bases. It is remarkable that there is much less
increase of produce of potatoes by nitrogenous manures than by
mineral manures alone.

Thus, by ammonium salts alone there is an average produce of
scarcely two tons six cwts., or only about six cwts. more than with-
out manure ; and with nitrate of soda alone there is an average of
only two tons 12% cwt. per acre. The better result by nitrate of
soda than by ammonium salts is doubtless due to the nitrogenous
supply being more immediately available, and more rapidly dis-
tributed within the soil, and so inducing a more extended develop-
ment of the feeding root.

These negative results by the nitrogenous manures alone, confirm
the conclusion that by the continuous growth of the crop on this
land it was the valuable supply of mineral constituents within the
root range of the plants, more than that of nitrogen, that became
deficient.

The last two lines of the table show that, with-the mixed mineral
manure and ammonium salts together, there was an average of about
six tons 14% cwts., and with the mixed mineral manure and the same
amount of nitrogen as nitrate of soda, an average of six tons 13
cwt.; that is, nearly twice as much as with the mineral manure
alone, and much more than twice as much as with the nitrogenous
manure alone.

The fact is, that it is only the comparatively small proportion of
the nitrogen of farm-yard manure, which is due to the liquid dejec-
tions of the animals, that is in a readily and rapidly available condi-
tion; whilst that due to more or less digested matter passing in the
feces, is more slowly available, and that in the latter remains a long
time inactive. Hence, the addition of nitrogen as nitrate of soda to
the farm yard manure had a very marked effect.

P.—5

66 The New Potato Culture.

The summary shows that the proportion of diseased tubers was
the greater, the greater the amount of nitrogen supplied.

Upon the whole, it is obvious that in the case of this somewhat
agriculturally exhausted arable land, mineral manures alone had
more effect than nitrogenous manures alone ; but that, mineral con-
stituents being adequately supplied, the further addition of nitroge-
nous Manures was essential to obtain anything like full crops.

It is of interest to observe that the amount of disease was not en-
hanced by the continuous growth of the crop on the same land, as is
frequently assumed to be the case.

But little is definitely known of the special function of individual
mineral constituents in vegetation. It is, however, pretty clearly es-
tablished that the presence of potash is essential for the formation
of the chief non-nitrogenous matters—starch and sugar. The pub-
lished results of experiments at Rothamsted have shown that the
proportion of potash in the ash of wheat was the greater, the better
matured the grain—that is, the larger proportion of starch it cou-
tained; and here in the potato we find a greatly increased amount of
potash in the heaviest crops, that is to say, in those in which the
largest amounts of starch have been formed.

The accumulation of phosphoric acid, on the other hand, is more
directly connected with the assimilation of nitrogen and the forma-
tion of the nitrogenous compound.

It will be remembered that the quantity of farm-yard manure an-
nually applied per acre was estimated to contain about 200 pounds of
nitrogen, besides a very large amount of mineral constituents. Yet,
in no case was the increased yield of solid substance in the crop so
great as was obtained by an artificial mixture of mineral and nitro-—
genous manure, supplying only 86 pounds of nitrogen, but in a more
readily available condition. Nor was the increased assimilation of any
of the individual constituents so great under the influence of the farm-
yard manure, as when they were applied in the rapidly available condi-
tion, as in the artificial mixtures. .

In the case of other crops it has been found that only a small por-
tion of the nitrogen of farm-yard manure was taken up in the year
ef application. But these results seem to indicate that the potato zs
able to avail ttself of a less proportion of the nitrogen of the manure than
any other farm crop. Yet,in ordinary practice, farm-yard manureis

Experiments with Different fertilizers. 67

not only largely relied upon for potatoes, but is often applied in
larger quantities for them than for any other crop. It is probable,
that independent of its liberal supply of all necessary constituents,
its beneficial effects are in a considerable degree due to its influence
on the mechanical condition of the soil, rendering it more porous and
easily permeable to the surface roots, upon the development of which
the success of the crop so much depends. Then, again, something

- may be due to an increased temperature of the surface soil, en-

gendered by the decomposition of so large an amount of organic
matter within it ; while the carbonic acid evolved in the decomposi-
tion will, with the aid of moisture, serve to render the mineral re-
sources of the soil more soluble.

In countries where the potato is largely grown for the manufacture
of starch, the specific gravity serves as an important indication of
quality. The higher the specific gravity, the greater, as arule, is the
proportion of dry matter, and the greater the proportion of starch.
Indeed, tables are constructed for the calculations of the percentage
of dry matter, and of starch from the specific gravity of the tubers.

The general conclusion to which these calculations as to the dis-
tribution of the various constituents of potato tubers leads is, that
from 80 to 85 per cent., or even more, of the total nitrogen of the tu-
bers may be in the juice, and that about the same proportion of the
total mineral matter also may be in the juice. Further, that about
the same proportion—8o to 85 per cent.—of the total potash, and
about two-thirds of the total phosphoric acid, are in the juice. And
when it is borne in mind that two-thirds, or more, of the nitrogen ex-
isting as albuminoids is in the juice, it is obvious that if the mode of

cooking the potato is such as to exclude the constituents of the juice

from the final food product, there is considerable waste of nutritive
matter; and that, indeed, the proportion of albuminoid matter in the
food is exceedingly small. When potatoes are used as a mere ad-
junct to an otherwise liberal diet, the general practice is to cut off
the rind, and to put the peeled potatoes into cold water, by which a
‘large proportion of the soluble albuminoid matters must be washed
out, before the temperature of the water becomes sufficiently high
to coagulate and fix them. A very large proportion of the potash
must also be washed out under such circumstances. When, how-
ever, potatoes constitute an important item in the diet, as in the ru

68 The New Potato Culture.

ral districts of Ireland, for example, it is usual to boil them in their
skins, or, as it is said, in their jackets. Under such circumstences,
certainly a much larger proportion of the albuminoid matter will
reach the stomachs of the consumers ; and doubtless much more of
the potash and phosphoric acid also. Still, it is obvious that a potato
diet must be very deficient in the proportion of nutritive nitrogenous
compounds.

The produce of dry substance of tubers was, without manure,
1,353 pounds per acre ; with purely mineral manure, 2,384 pounds ;
and with the mixture of the mineral and nitrogenous manures
(‘‘complete”’) more than 4,000 pounds per acre.

Potatoes are reckoned to contain on an average more than 21 per
cent. of starch.

The produce of starch per acre is 1,120 pounds without manure,
and 1,988 or nearly 2,000 pounds with purely mineral manure—that
is without nitrogen. The amount witb purely nitrogenous manure is
not so great as that with purely mineral manure. But with both
nitrogenous and mineral manure (‘‘ complete”) the quantity of starch
is raised to an average of about 3,400 pounds, or about 1% ton
per acre.

ae
,*

Clee Rework,

The Effects of Different Quantities of Fertilizers and Manures.

' FERTILIZERS VERSUS MANURES.

N NO other crop have we had such telling results from the
use of chemical fertilizers, as compared with tarm manure,
as upon potatoes, and this has been the case during the
past twelve years without any exception that is now recalled.

This seems to have been the experience of many other farmers.
Upon oats and corn, and vegetables of various kinds, fertilizers have
occasionally failed to increase the crop, while farm manuresin contigu-
ous plots have produced marked effects. The experiments which we
now have to record are no exceptions, though all the conditions
seemed favorable to a decided and impartial test.

The land (a sandy loam) had never received any chemical fertili-
zers, and, for 15 years at least, no manure of any kind. Two plots
were measured off, one-tenth of an acre each, that is 132x33 feet.
The first received three tons of stable manure, or at the rate of 30
tons to the acre in October. The seed potatoes (Great Eastern)
were cut to two eyes each and planted April 22,in drills 2% feet
apart, and 14 inches apart in the drills. Both plots were cultivated
once and hoed twice, the soil being kept level without any hilling up
about the plants. The yield was 24 bushels and 3 pecks, or at the
rate of 247.50 bushels to the acre, of which 80 per cent. were market-
able.

The second plot received instead of the stable manure 200 pounds
of potato fertilizer, or at the rate of one ton to the acre, the seed
pieces, distance of planting and treatment being ‘ust the same as

(69)

70 The New Potato Culture.

with the first plot. The yield was 27% bushels, or at the rate of 275
bushels to the acre, of which go per cent. were marketable. The po-
tatoes were smoother. and brighter and less injured by wire worms
than those of the manure plot.

The cost of the manure delivered was three dollars per ton, or nine
dollars for the plot. The cost of the potato fertilizer was $48 per
ton, or $4.80 for the plot. The guaranteed analysis of the latter was, ©
ammonia, 4.50 to 5 per cent; phosphoric acid, 8 to to per cent;
potash, 6 to 8 per cent., magnesia, lime, soda, etc., forming the rest.

The season was unfavorable throughout. :

If potatoes had been raised on the same plots the neat year with-
out fertilizer or manure, possibly or even probably the manured plot
would have outyielded the fertilized plot, because if for no other
reason, the nitrogen of the latter, being soluble, would have passed
tbrough the soil, while the farm manure would have yielded nitrogen
for that and subsequent seasons.

THE EFFECTS OF INCREASING QUANTITIES OF FERTILIZERS ON
LAND MORE OR LESS IMPOVERISHED.

What amount of potato fertilizer can I use profitably on my land
for this crop? By potato fertilizer is meant that which is sold as
such by leading fertilizer manufacturers, costing from $40 to $45 per
ton, and analyzing about four per cent. of nitrogen, ten per cent. of
phosphoric acid, and seven per cent. of potash. It is a question
which a farmer must answer for himself, and that the question may be
answered it is the object of these experiments to show. My experi-
ment land, as has been shown, needs all kinds of plant food. Noth-
ing less than a ‘‘complete”’ potato fertilizer will materially increase
the crop. For example, if the above fertilizer be deprived of either
potash, nitrogen or phosphoric acid, no matter in how great quantities
the remainder is applied, no material increase in the crop will be
given. This is true of this particular land. Upon other farms, any
one or two might increase the yield as much as if all were used, in
which case the cost of the omitted ingredients would be saved.
Whether special or complete fertilizers will prove more profitable
depends entirely upon what the land needs, and this vital question is
what each farmer must find out for himself.

Effects of Different Quantities of Fertilizers. 71

The trenches were dug about a foot wide and four inches deep, as in
most of the potato experiments herein recorded. The seed pieces
were placed in the bottom, exactly a foot apart, and lightly covered
with soil, and the various quantities of fertilizers as stated in the fol-
lowing tables were evenly strewn in the trenches. The fertilizer used
in this series of experiments was the ‘‘ Stockbridge Potato Manure, ’
the.analysis and cost of which are approximately given above. The
variety planted was the Rural Blush.

FIRST SERIES.

No. 1. 220 pounds to the acre. The yield was at the rate of
276.83 bushels to the acre.
No. 2. 440 pounds of fertilizer to the acre. Yield, 330 busheis to
the acre.
No. 3. 880 pounds of fertilizer. Yield, 397.83 bushels to the acre.
No. 4. Natural soil. The yield was at the rate of 163.16 bushels
to the acre.
No. 5. 220 pounds of fertilizer to the acre (duplicate of No. 1).
The yield was at the rate of 245.66 bushels to the acre.
No. 6. 440 pounds of fertilizer to the acre (duplicate of No. 2).
The yield was 370.33 bushels to the acre.
No. 7. 880 pounds of fertilizer to the acre (duplicate of No. 3).
The yield was at the rate of 476.66 bushels to the acre. ~
Averaging the two separate trials, we have:

220 pounds fertilizer. Yield 261.24 bushels.

440 ce 6 ce 350.16 ce
880 (a 6 ‘é 437.24 sé
Natural soil. by 162 16 me

It appears, then, that 220 pounds of this fertilizer strewn in the
trenches, as above explained, increased the yield over the unfertil-
ized soil at the rate of 98 bushels to the acre: 440 pounds, 187
-pushels ; 880 pounds, 274 bushels.

The above experiments show that thus far 880 pounds of the fer-
tilizer may profitably be used to the acre. How much more than that
amount can be profitably used will be shown in the next trials in which
the comparative results of stable manure are also given. The prom-
ise of the yields, as judged by the growth and appearance of the

72 The New Potato Culture.

vines, is shown by ratings made by two persons, June 27. Ten (10),
as in trials-:previously reported, was fixed as the highest rating.

Plot 1, rated June 27 (220 pounds fertilizer), «.
ce 2, ce «6 440 ce ec 6.
(ag Bu ce oe 880 ¢ 6 8.
a 4. a 66 refeye) a 66 2.

DUPLICATES.

Plot 5, rated June 27 (220 pounds fertilizer), 5.

ce 6, oe ce 440 ee ce Wr
ce Fs ae ce 880 ec ec Q.

SULPHATE. OF IRON HARMFUL.

In this experiment Williams, Clark & Co.’s potato fertilizer was
used, the minimum guaranteed analysis being ammonia four per
cent., soluble phosphoric acid five per cent., potash eight per cent.

No. 1 received at the rate of 19,800 pounds of New York stable
manure per acre. The yield was at the rate of 328.16 bushels to
thenaete:

No. 2 received neither manure nor fertilizer. The yield was
212.66 bushels to the acre.

No. 3 received 440 pounds of the fertilizer. The yield was 245.66.
No. 4 received 880 pounds. The yield was 330 bushels.

No. 5 received 880 pounds of the fertilizer and at the rate of 440
pounds to the acre of sulphate of iron. The yield was 309.83 bushels
to the acre.

No. 6 received 1,320 pounds of the potato fertilizer. The yield was
at the rate of 388.66 bushels to the acre.

No. 7 received 1,320 pounds of the potato fertilizer with 440
pounds of the sudphate of iron. The yield was 379.50 bushels.

No. 8 nothing. Yield 264.00—the highest yield ever made in this
particular soil without manure or fertilizer.

No. 9 received 1,760 pounds of the potato fertilizer. Yield, 443.66.

No. 10 received 2,200 pounds to the acre of the potato fertilizer.
The yield was nearly the same as No. 9g, viz., 443 bushels. No. 11
received 2,640 pounds. The yield was 480.33.

No. 12 received at the rate of 880 pounds of the potato fertilizer
and also 200 pounds of ground fish, 660 pounds of kainit, 440 of bone

ee ee ey

Effects of Different Quantites of Fertilizers. 915

flour, and 440 pounds of nitrate of soda—z,640 pounds to the acre in
all. With this excessive application of all kinds of plant food, but
especially of nitrogen, the yield was 361.16 bushels to the acre.

In this experiment the yield is profitably increased by this fertilizer
up to 1,760 pounds to the acre. The tabulated figures are:

, 440 POMC SRST UTI ZETA der ach eee eek ece a ate ide 245.66 bushels.
Soon is Set tees pele ene pa oa 8 coy BECO &
MON Ang SEDO S (UL) Remedi cnet dey ta ee 388.66 fe
Te 7OO) por” Dini. Ra obeheVRN Sr Pearse orate tenia > AABZOO.s
fa? 200% BM Se BA ige AFR EME RENE NE 443.00 e
2 OA. ge \ pee Rete Near eR ae Ae at 480. 33

That No. 8 without any fertilizer should haye yielded more than
No. 3, which received 440 pounds to the acre, cannot be accounted
for. That 2,200 pounds gave no greater yield than 1,760 pounds,
while 2 640 pounds largely increased the yield over either, is also in-
explicable.

The copperas decreased the yield in both trials.

As in previous trials of the several plots, as judged by the growth
and appearance of the vines, the promise of yield is shown by ratings
made by two persons June 27, ten (10) being the highest.

IN| Oi5p, Sit yaa eaeaeraeee Rate dise Suche nes eee 1,980 lbs. stable manure.
2 sec. cris. S GY ua RUG ee Nothing.
(0) 32) Soe eee ‘ ON a ga 440 fertilizer.
ie Nimans anaes FRIELING CED EL Ti 10 6! Bbole a
10 EOS ean a ‘: Op ges eaters a 880 a
(0) S16 a Ea ae ee Sense. ar. TaZOn. aa
, . 1,320 fertilizer.
Now 7 prtteseeee WA EO CeO act. ces se ees 440 sulphate of iron.
Ree 2. a Sic ie oe espe ee ae . Nothing.
TO ae aga a SET On aa ast ha arteon 1;700 fertilizer:
aD). creates casa 336 ee LOneca rece ote 2 2 ZOO ge
: RMON Tass Sz osre ee cree a TOME oe ore tee aes 2,640 ws
OY Se ae een a a Shae aie 5 har ama 2,640 mixed fertilizer.

HOW MUCH FERTILIZER MAY BE PROFITABLY USED FOR POTATOES
ON AN IMPOVERISHED SOIL THAT NEEIIS
‘©COMPLETE’’ FERTILIZER?

The soil on which these experiments have been carried on for the
past /wo years is so impoverished that the yield by the most careful
trench culture without fertilizer is less than 150 bushels of potatoes

74 The New Potato Culture.

to the acre, while paying crops of corn or vegetables of an, kind are
out of the question. Fertilizer has been used from 40v to 2,200
pounds to the acre for two seasons on this particular plot, and for four
other seasons on two other fields, and the results have been essentially
the same, whether the weather has been wet or dry. The variety was

the Rural Blush. The season was the wettest ever known.

FIRST SERIES.

Biot tig Natural soln. eee eee 161.33 bushels per acre
me. 440 pounds fertilizer: wets EQOLOO 24 5s He
3 880 % echt 4 fie SLT LEOO ws ee
A. At, 320 bc BUSS SME: We ofa es ape SA ktY, 27S. 00 eee “
5a al 7OO SONY RORY etme Sat Pec yt 330.00 a
6. 2.200 Sel eee ie Comers Sak 308.00 ie -
SECOND SERIES
ret g7-- sNatural sollte 2 \. s eee 154.00 bushels per acre.
iy 1S. a foOmpoundsmenrtilizers a eee eee LO7AOO 5 ee a
g. 880 Bike eset eer muieanes 216.33 ve a
ee lONeAs 20 eB es hatireet car: ote 2a Ong: a
cnet e700 car eae Fae wee eee 297.00 ss :
2 e 25200: he) PA Se Sete Aa eS 330.00 a Zo
THIRD SERIES.
Plot 13 Ne tuital soil. eke eee ee eo a eee 117.33 bushels per acre.
Sd 740 pounds fertilizers ee Coe 073m a
7S Tuo <> Ketel) Re aaah SN ae ae TMOKIACIO, ne
ETO! IA Q2O Oh) ay al Se ee 282.33 Me ae
Fe SCI hb OO PTS Fag RS eee eee gaa 300,00 ©" tee
Belo. 2.200 Bea are een eee BAd OOmems fe
FOURTH SERIES. ie:
Plot, 16.4 Naturalisoillearte once tes ee 146.66 bushels per’ acre.
* 20; . 440-pounds fertilizer ie) ee 165. : i
¢ Seo 880 Oe eaten te eet at ota ier 238.33 "2 By
522, aan SS Ie eh hae aS ee 304.33 Bu re
e236 6.700 ORL SAP Bs eee eR es 249.33 a om
2 24. 2;200 Dt age ea Wedsse ob acck ite wrote 36300 m, -

Liffect of Different Quantities of Fertilizers. 75
AVERAGES.

IN Gare byez Son Rea ae Cae MR ae 144 bushels per acre.

“z4o pounds fertilizer. . ..s. 3: nOgt ao ms

880 NG Res PAU ns LA on 1s os
I,320 ea BB Nextel auc eke te tans 278 =e rt
1,760 ay bat Maycas 300 tae Lay Bie 294 a i
2,200 ny Re dhl Are i 336 a ae

Rot prevailed more than ever before. The rotten potatoes were
not estimated. The vines were injured by the flea-beetle and died
nearly one month earlier than usual. The tubers seemed to be about
three-quarters of the normal size.

It would seem that farmers cultivating impoverished land should
learn a valuable lesson from these experiments, which have been con-
ducted long enough to prove that there is a reasonable chance of
raising profitable crops of potatoes by the liberal use of high-grade
fertilizers. The guaranteed analysis of the fertilizer used is as
follows :

PANTO OWN A pat awe cho -a8e ae etnies Suan hes 4% per cent.
IBhosphonic acids, e251. 8 to 10 7.
OPASIL ass aidkay Petetelske ene. shay oe 6to 8 yi

EFFECTS OF DIFFERENT QUANTITIES OF FERTILIZERS ON POTA-
: TOES GROWN IN A VARIABLE SOIL.

Plot 30— 220 pounds, yielded at the rate per acre of...... 258.50 bushels.
‘* 36— -220 ae ee se et? TB Sonic aes ol EM eee On OREM Elia 205.33 os
“i NOR SAP) et De aR ote Oe et Pal Ga eel a6 fa Caney, eae 172.33 Se
‘* 3I— 440 D1 OT acl ie aed Tea ee Oe Sime cr Nie a Ae 298.83 4
ees 440 Ruel ens Behe Wien oh AeA eben. eenlaivel a. soa ay a che Sere's.« 253- st
eA O Peon SBE? 5 ye Pe PG SEs Ppaclap co eitetale everest oe 253- Ps
‘« 32— 880 MME oR og OPM | Mh tarta Sher Joe ess, 6" e 6 282.33 es
OSGeo it i. die ep med e ees Se 227 s
‘© 42— 880 idle pate RARE COE GB oe Oar a 231. “
‘f 33—I,320 RR ee ONT Mee A LS One eit Ss) eek a fea sm 228.16 ‘.
41.320 ae iN otal chal cosa TATK Somos se was ees 8 ae = s2A2 a
45,700 Mara eel ge War ee Gk icy «ann ho ences ethan olka’ 280. _
‘* 39—1,760 SR Mme ear eee UN SN ata" alin lai7ei tue, re opie ge eaten 242. =a
eto OOO STL, Soy ie a gee ee eee aD Se St CY a 161. 33 i

ys Sonu 000 AOS A ee Sieveres en ky by 8) BTCVer eT ere. 6 Wes SS Se Se © eo snk FB : ‘

76 The New Potato Culture.

SUMMARY.

The average crop of the plots that did not receive any fer-

iilizer was tattthe rates pera@enre Of... «eee ee 146.66 bushels.
220 POUNGS, SAVEl Booms, ey Mate: kore” See een eee 212.05 ie
AAO ec dara a Ce Ge a enna See er EN MEE DVI cc AEA a 268.28 io
SS Om meas ES oN iean as cee ste aig cick s 0G ee ee eae eae 246.78 ss
Ts S20 hl ig Wa cue Teatnats 2s bos Rae ME AREA) «> A eee. ee 285.08 ue
1,760 fe ste he OE ea Se ie eee ee RS ae 261. A

The variety planted was the Rural Blush. Some of the vines were
greatly, some lightly, and a few not at all, injured by the flea-beetle.
The fertilizer used was the Stockbridge potato manure.

ON AN ADJACENT PLOT.

These trials as to the effects of increasing amounts of fertilizers
were again carried on during the past season—18g90. The season
was remarkable for the amount and frequency of rainfall and for
comparatively few potato beetles. Flea-beetles were less numerous
and blight less destructive than during the two preceding seasons.
The plots have never (so far as the writer can ascertain) received any
manure or fertilizer of any kind prior to the last three years, when
these potato experiments were begun on this particular land. The
soil is variable, being in parts a stiff clay while in other portions it is
more of a loamy character. Mapes’ potato fertilizer, the analysis of
which has been given, was used in quantities at the rate of from 220
to 1,760 pounds to the acre. The trenches and culture given were the
same as in preceding trials, the variety Rural Blush.

Plot =— a220upoundsito the acre. = ..a ae eee yield 156 __ bushels.

ys = 8220 os red eat ira Bae eer Oru ent pate 2G) oy
‘* 2— 440 ro gle TA Sorat nee, net vara thes Log, 2
if MO i Ra Seite as Sakceg se Spee Fue Ne eo sf" E76 re
‘“ 3— 880 eS pene Mee SE ae ea ol ae Eee ae ns Soe 226.10 of
‘* 8— 880 : Piet Ph Ga Ae ME ie SERS (“2TOtSs A
‘“-4a—i1,760 ' = SA RON, SM Or eI Seon eo ome -
‘« g—1,760 # tS gp tia tei a ede gare PS at KR re tt. 2098, 0 Ommumas

e 5—Nothing (0004 oc. Pee Pee gine k oo is ee 2 cua ie aeons

Liffect of Different Quantities of Fertilizers. a3

AVERAGES.

Pee MIIGer SAVE PEL ACUC, vise ete ci eee ee ee ee nae 196.16 bushels.
Eeaepounds £ertilizer gave per <acre..'.2.3..0...5..0.6005. LASS Ae
440 a ss Rie ea awaits bse batce th oho wie 2}.) 6; 2) 5 ols 181.50
880 4 ee OF oO) SO aa oe eee oe cr 219.99 :

1,760 “ “ ee ee oa toca Ay ticle ¥s 305.90 pi

TOTAL AVERAGES.

No fertilizer yielded per acre....:.... teen eee eee eee. 187.77 bushels.
Pempounes fertilizer, yielded wo tials eo Dias na as ee es ZOO. GHA aa
WompoUunds tertikizer yielded. 35.522. 0. 6 Life ee cae ee os 71 ig 7. ae
Baomoommcds fertilizer yielded 525... . <2 who. de ee oon 290.00 +. *

meomemmonncds fertilizer gielded 5.2... 24 Set woes ee ee 217525 ze

MmPEpOulCds Tertiizer, yielded... .-2..- 205... 0sc2e cere e eee 320.14 és

Io tons (nearly, viz., 19,800 lbs.) stable manure yielded . 328.16 -
30 tons stable manure yielded, ina less favorable season, 247.50

PETA Cst ale MMAMUTE. 2... 5s vss besa as eto de at 287.83 a

In what way is our friend, the reader, to turn the above experiments
to his own advantage? Were his land the same he would naturally
reason in this wise: ‘‘ The natural soil, I find, may be relied upon
to give 188 bushels tothe acre. To be on the safe side I will estimate
their market value at 50 cents the bushel. That would give $94
worth of potatoes to the acre. Now, 220 pounds of fertilizer costing
$4.40 (or $40 per ton) gives an increase of 19 bushels, which at 50
cents the bushel are worth $9.50. I ama gainer, for the use of the
fertilizer, of $9.50 per acre, less $4.40, or $5.10 per acre. If I use 440
pounds of fertilizer I am, by the same figuring, a gainer of $27.50.
If I use 880 pounds of fertilizer I gain $51.00; 1,320 pounds, $64.50 ;
1,760 pounds, $69.00, not to consider the advantage which will ac-
_ crue to succeeding crops by excessive applications.”

But the chances are largely against the assumption that his land
is the same, or so nearly the same, that he would be safe in adopting
‘the above conclusions as safe to work upon. There is not one to ad-

78 The New Potato Culture.

vise him wherein he should proceed differently. Analysis of his soil
would not be an infallible guide. The brightest agricultural chemist
in the world could give him no positive information as to the kind and
quality of fertilizer which might be most economically used. Mani-
festly, therefore, he must become his own teacher, and he can do this
in no other more effective way than by instituting a similar set of ex-
periments on his own fields, guided by the intimations which stable,
farm-yard, hen or other manure, ashes or other partial manures may
have in past seasons afforded. In effectually carrying on such a
series of simple investigations, subsequent parts of this book may be
of assistance.

:
owt) ee

CiIpPAarTER lx

Shall the Fertilizer be Placed Under or Over the Seed Pieces ?

T IS not known to the writer that any effective experiments have
been made to solve this seemingly important problem. If the old
way—or ordinary way—of planting potatoes be pursued, viz.,
placing the pieces in a shallow plow-furrow and then throwing the

furrow soil back, it may have little significance one way or the other.
But if the trench system be followed, there might reasonably be expect-
ed a decided difference—a difference modified of course by rainfall—
whether the applied food be below or above the pieces. The experi-
ments were begun ten years ago for a single season, and resumed
four years ago. The following plain tables will set forth the outcome
up to this time. Evidently the trials should be made not only in
light, medium’and heavy soils, but for many years ere an emphatic

- answer could reasonably be looked for.

The trenches were dug about five inches deep, three feet apart, |

and a foot wide. The Stockbridge * potato fertilizer (880 lbs. to the
acre) was spread under and over the pieces (Blush), separated from
them in either case by two inches of soil. The season was favor-
able, being neither too wet nor too dry.

FERTILIZER UNDER.

IN. hy SOSA NCi Sa ae Oe area en 359. 33 bushels.
aE AML s | AEE Peo8s «tnos tyne S%n 8 wa Lees 313.33 St
eM ARS ates Ts ASO Settss, apse (a SH eld padahe aes 0 BES 412.50 a
MEGA bet ete kites oat wi of she aes Yip bes 330.00 ‘

* The average analysis of this fertilizer is given as ammonia, five per cent, phosphoric
acid, 10 per cent; potash, six per cent.

(79)

80 The New Potato Culture.

ING? 170, PER MA CTE act opts oate on ete ge ahs eect ees 310.20 bushels.
cae SSG EE ah hae ao te De pe Deee ites GaP SEE RA ALG Sh aways mieten: ge 335.50 pat
a ea ies 12 neh sutras acu Nk Seton eS ioc lakenn webee eines coke 297.00 ae
ira a siya te Sep ge ee east pe aa tice Ste oe ie arene 392. 33 “

RE V7 PR ga Eas eS tt ae ae Dera ae ow oN cS 289.66 ae
Sap UG), Mana MeatpeTNee ROE Oye S08. ohn may Retctane eS eee anes 289.66 5

3,329.51 bushels.

Or at the average rate of 332.95 bushels to the acre.

FERTILIZER OVER.

INOi220nper acresn A [hs anh (kn Sante nego eee 359.33 bushels.
SI CA Biel ies, 2k PR AS Bt eee rat OAM ie nn TR 339.16 fe
FOR Sens Rh Re ME a Se Nake MRAM A in lt peeks 5 339.16 uc
CE Ea tor oe ee, Gaal sate, eb e gaee. ks Ga RIS Loca eraen ie TaN co 8 322.66 hk
PRO iad TP 1s: SANNA les gice> Ces eh coseer are weiteaatet ae 419.83 aS
OCA Weg. Rec Arne ete er mg mE Rees Fong ew I aha 322.66 Pe
BER SGA he Wau uate MER Res Pattee i tanee bat tak ices yee, 311.66 s
SPIO) CaN bite oh orcad? ame Se aes ose neta ens Pe cue 2 BO5nO0 Ao
BES SEO A ae eR eh te earth gerne iss He ogee ee a a ee 354.50 a

3,133.96 bushels.

Or at the average rate of 348.21 bushels of potatoes to the acre.
We have thus fara difference of over 15 bushels in favor of placing
the fertilizer above the seed pieces.

UNDER AND OVER EXPERIMENTS CONDUCTED FOR THE SECOND
YEAR.

The trenches were dug the same depth, viz., five inches. In the
‘fertilizer zzder” trials, the fertilizer was strewn in the bottom of the
trenches and the seed pieces (Blush) placed on or in contact with the
fertilizer. In the ‘‘ fertilizer over”’ trials, the pieces were placed in
the bottom of the trenches, and the trenches filled to within one inch.
The fertilizer (the same as that used in the experiments recorded
above) was then strewn on this soil in the trenches, at the rate of
1,300 pounds to the acre, and the remaining inch of the trench filled
in and the soil leveled. Fractions are omitted in the results. The
season was wet.

fertilizer Under or Over the Seed Pieces. Sr

Piper stertuizer UNCEL . it 6 coos caes eae 293 bushels per acre.
a2) bl Guy ei re hat tL tae Se i 293 sie ag
ee) Si Peele tS - nih. ate Tec) ae 6 3 205 eee
oie 4 (ENTS fete hy Meee ea ohana Fhgh aes
peri» ITIGT eek st OC cyst ayo Zia ea! Phat Ae
10) PONE Leo eh sy. cig Soe be, 3 os Dye 1h aehs
aaa i (Eva Glave se ee ie kan TIO" Pty ms
Bie Os i OWE OR ae iC sjogt m0 wo Cer ie Ake
ae, Pe [Hin | Sql ean em 279 ‘ ie as
tO a ORCS? SAN a oO Sea aa Z60. Gee es
he F His GlEe es eae Baas «ct pile 6
ieee x CUES AS a nome B0Sum. fF LSI

AVERAGE.

CNBC ESOS ee Sealer a 235 bushels per acre.
PEE ooo tls ion ag eee 268 bushels per acre.

' SHALL THE FERTILIZER BE PLACED UNDER OR OVER THE SEED

PIECES ? THIRD YEAR (1890).

The trenches were dug this times six inches deep. In the ‘ferti-
lizer under” trials, the fertilizer was strewn in the bottom of the
trenches, and the seed pieces (Rural Blush) placed on (in contact
with) the fertilizer. Inthe ‘‘fertilizer over” trials, the pieces were
placed in the bottom, as with the others, and five inches of soil were
returned. Then the fertilizer was sown on this soil, the remaining
soil (one inch) being replaced to fill the trench.

imei tetiilizer under - yield pep acres: ....6..5+----45-- 232.83
Scape} as ‘s OS 5 CS a aa aa SH 253
Sen x 3 = DOM ge Oo ghar kht Pate a cameo 269.50
Os Fs a ‘ ef MRED ES My sae haus SRK 255.65
ano a “s a aly PER ie cick sven esate tale 254.83
INMEEATEC Vil) PEL ACTE . ik... c eset eee reece sta teee 253.16
No. 2, fertilizer over; yield per acre .....-..--+-++++>- 214.50
a 74; 4 ut gs BEE cokes 3 ata te eee 225.50
2.6; se us e Bat Pa Salada gS aA hae ae 218.16
TORRES ee “ a Ss Mee tebe g Soar ye Na 245.66
ss) ei ee cf TNT or Gene ike MRE Ae a et 265.83

82 The New Potate Culture.

A difference in favor of placing the fertilizer wzder, of 19.23 bushels
per acre. The fertilizer used in this and the preceding trial was the
Mapes’ potato, at the rate of 1,000 pounds to the acre. The season
was wet throughout, one of the wettest remembered.

IN THE SEASON OF 1889,

which was also a wet season, and when the crop was thought to be
lessened by the flea-beetle and blight, the average results were as fol-
lows, as above recorded.

Under yielded an average per acre of.... 235 bushels.
Over ig S e et 208 as

A difference of 33 bushels per acre in favor of placing the ferti-
lizer over.

DURING THE SEASON OF 1888,

Stockbridge potatc fertilizer was used at the rate of 800 pounds to
the acre, as also stated. The season was favorable as to rain-fall, it
being neither too much nor too little, while the tops were not harmed
by flea-beetles or blight :

Under yielded an average per acre of.... 332.95 bushels.
Over sf a oe Son, 34032

We have a difference of 15.26 bushels per acre in favor of placing
the fertilizer over. 3

A GENERAL SUMMARY

of the averages for the three years shows as follows :

Fertilizer over, per acre

ni atone cairn eee 283.38 bushels.
wince series mallee tae 27357 Ona

Difference in favor of fertilizer over.. 9.68 “

: Geel EKA,

Results of Planting Potatoes in Trenches of Different “Depths.
FIRS® TRIALS.

HE soil of these’ plots, naturally variable, was made exceed-
ingly so by grading, the soil from the higher parts having
been carted to the lower places. Itis in some parts a sandy
loam, in others a clay loam, and in still other parts a stiff

brick-clay, all impoverished by years of cropping without any manure
of any kind. These potato experiments were in previous years made
on plots of notably uniform soil, so impoverished that anything short
of a ‘‘*complete” fertilizer failed to materially increase the crops.

This was proven so conclusively that there seemed to be no reason
why the trials should be continued upon them.

The following exhibit, as might well have been anticipated from the
variability of the soil, seems to show that the depth of planting
should be governed by the character of the soil. At the rate of 800
pounds of Stockbridge potato fertilizer was sown in the trenches
after the seed pieces were lightly covered. The trenches were three
feet apart, measuring in this trial, as in every other, from the middle

of each.
Plot 21, 4 inches deep yielded........ 403.33 bushels per acre.
ee 23% rs ms i eee oor 348.33 oe 4
ee ms a SE ie SE eae 263 00) «2 a

This gives an average, for four-inch deep planting, of 371.55
bushels to the acre.

Plot 20, 8 inches deep yielded........ 385.00 bushels per acre.
Pia, ue oe HLS ah ili ore Fe 300/062 a
“26, Be idan. Begs Ge 2 oe 355.66 “ z
‘* 29 e cE fe ise, tad JIE. 00:\e 85 “

84 The New Potato Culture.

This gives an average per acre, for eight inches deep planting, of
338.24.

Plot 24, roinchesideep yielded==5 267.66 bushels per acre.
9 25, cé Ce a eS nn aoe 381.33 cs ce
te 28, a: 6 ce, Chee 384.16 a ce

This gives an average per acre, for ten-inch deep planting, of 311.05
bushels.

SUMMARY.

A en-inchaplam tits nee ee ay ee 311.05 bushels
Hightane bs plamtider 2 eres see te 333,24 one
Houreinehy plamtingecr:: srr reer 371.55 as

The variety planted was the Rural Blush. Some of the vines were
greatly, some slightly, and a few not at all injured by the flea-beetle.

IN 1889,

one of the wettest seasons known, the average results, much reduced
by blight and the flea-beetle, were as follows :

Twoinches; per acre - . 2. 62.0). 80s, 02. bc8 oes 22 2 Ome
Four 66 ot 6c ; 220 6c
Six 6c a a 185 cc
Totes BE EEN Sar eral ceed na cetege sede et ey a eae eae 197 See
Ten s Se cme aera arar Prats. Cen oem ee Ra, 2 EAS: = tome

TRIALS OF 1890.

The trenches were dug two, four, six, eight and ten inches deep,
and the fertilizer was sown at the rate of 1,000 pounds to the acrein
the trenches after the seed pieces had received an inch covering of
soil. The fertilizer used was the Mapes potato, analyzing as follows :
Ammonia, 4.50 per cent.; phosphoric acid, eight; potash, six; the

minimum quantities guaranteed. The soil of these plots is naturally

poor and thin—a loam inclining rather to clay than to sand. It has
never received any manure in so far as the writer has been able to
learn—certainly not within the past 19 years. The season was wet

throughout. There were so few potato-beetles that it was necessary

to apply Paris-green but once. Then it was sifted upon the vines—

1% pound to 200 pounds of plaster, thoroughly mixed together on a

Results of Planting at Various Depths. 85

ight board floor. The mass of plaster was first spread over the floor
about two inches in thickness. The poison was then as evenly as
possible sifted over this. It was then mixed by the use of a steel
rake, shoveled into a heap, spread out again and raked, etc., until the
distribution of the poison seemed to be perfect. There were few flea-
beetles and no blight, though last year on this same land, flea-beetles
destroyed the vines several weeks before their time of maturity.

The variety, as in all previous trials, was the Rural Blush.
; Bushels

LVo. Inches. per acre.

ae DM MR TCL Rete esos SNare tet «haters “eye « Miele ti. e ia te coy hata awa o Nels 308.
2 Bi oS Crd CO EMC CCR ae eer RO ee Peri a 297.
Be eee, SO Gray See weed. + Maea phe mse mee 304.33
4. Sg Chin OE ORY er Penne Seen ea ee Oe 247.50
ae OME Ment eke Soo 8) esis) ests aie se © eejent es «ie aoe «6 276.83
6. Bo 0 0 B15 TOUR Neen eer ee a ier a 249.

7 UME ee Se fea 8 Pen od Gr yar Sire. ae coieWotoh are oie! 62") ole as 287.83
8. So ci do GRE ae eee en ie tees ear te eae ga 302.50
Q. MEN a eather iene tyeyrvoks wimia a bee 265,83

Io i PN Re Recher scar! sis ti SR Aes Rosie Ge cie eS oe ee a 287.83

II Bo hg Sees 6a nna ane eater aa eee Rr oc aera rae 260.

12 Gig 5 6 Oe AA Re eRe a a ee ee ee Or 238.33

13 Ree cons rch er eave ed» ce des, Cote. ows Kani 278.66

14 EINE ater crete eae os artic sels s cate eee et aie 223.66

a5 TG 2:3 2S OAR aR ee ee ree 269.50

i MOT Ne SR ceasing (sieeve ois We ele oe Aes Sew es 260

17] Te Fai eS Te 6 caitdy aang 2 wis o's 6 apse ea Se ae © 261 .83
18 CEST PIAS, oepias xe chile ole als ote beak eas oe 267.66
sme) MER eet eres ots NaS. SF Aeied eh ewte and Brow Sa ee 227.33

20 OMB EM Pee cies = chiens 3.5 .di.sse se sreaepe pois ovale a Pigan operehs 236.50

21 Mee eaceila. oho Sacra seer ei Wiehel es Meyayal vim, eee pe o's 280.50

22 hl, an) bE eile Bac eon Ey Seer eae RE a ROR . 278.66

23 SMe et US tan a wn gee we we ae ST 539

24 Seca ee a ern es ea 300

25; COMME Reuse APLAR ico onc idie ois eg etein Ss wale Seascale, om ge 240.16

26. EE Ra oe Sy fs ke Mae SS harness hare Wales S 242

27 2 cag Cape ace Ce a CR OE SSR RRL A GM ll Sela 293;

28 Eo oy pe Se NS Ola Ne a eee eee Ce ers at te 254.83
29 Bk i ee eg Ree a tra 293

30 Ria as CN hn Greie a cis, cowie sao een s)¥e a wea eS 269.50

86 The New Potato Culture.

Bushels
LVo. Inches. per acre.
Bile Be SNS SEA ridge a ROOT OR oo SES, ONS Shee Mae MED RRS Spree 258.33
22. CNS PORE EE nee tts i, Ses ae ee a a Bing tre IR os SP See lc ZOoA Mey,
23. OUTS 2A eee eens hs a) en Rear: CORE 247.50
34. St Seah city Seat ees ees Si fet ee AER ain 251.16

AVERAGES.

two imches depthiyielded, peracne: 2.454.250" 265 40 bushels.
IBOUTae Pe S nay ee eh ete ae Ao) 297226 s
Six - af at Sf SUB Le ee, cece eae 281.56 of
Bieht) ¢ Of us Td aaa = Say she Sond BSE s
iene ms Fe gee Wind on et ee 263.38 x

The difference between the greatest yield—six inches depth—and
the smallest yield—eight inches depth—is 23.19 bushels to the acre.
The difference between the eight inches depth and the ten inches
depth is but five bushels to the acre. Had the season been dry we
should naturally have looked for a larger yield from the deeper
trenches. As it was, the difference does not at all pay for the extra
cost of a depth of planting beyond six inches.

AVERAGE OF TOTAL RESULTS.

Twoumches) per -aACreh scwaecas We ee ee ee '. 245.70 bushels.
EVO UG abies hae Peery ies Be RB Ps ae SP 7. §280:00 of
Six sf ace Ae JRE A iat te (ee 22B027, a
Bishi OF eile Sage Fd cx tag Se te Sel DETR OO sae
shenees Sty lth, oes Lt oe 2 aed an 240.81 Ss

It will be seen that the four-inch trenches give the largest yield as
the average of three years during which these experiments have been
conducted. When it is considered that the eight-inch trenches give
the next largest yield, we have evidence that the experiments have
not been carried on long enough to warrant any positive generaliza-
tions.

Srna ER XI.

ee especially nitrate nitrogen as in nitrate of scda. Its

effects when applied alone. May farmers derive a profit from

its use when applied to land indiscriminately or as farm

manure 1s applied ? Joseph Harris’s views and the author’s
answer. Experiments.

HAVE always taken the view; with or without sufficient data for

intelligent guidance, that unless the farmer or gardener by actual
test, has found out that his land is poor in nitrogen and fairly sup-

plied with potash and phosphoric acid, conditions which are
F known rarely to exist, he cannot afford to use the nitrate of soda alone
. except in asmall, experimental way. The same may be said of sul-
phate of ammonia. This view I have taken pains to emphasize from
time to time in several of the leading farm papers of the day. Ina
prominent horticultural magazine Mr. Joseph Harris, of Moreton
Farm—the author of several interesting and very instructive books
on farm topics—has criticised these opinions, as may be seen by the
following remarks :

MR. HARRIS’S CRITICISMS.

‘‘Mr. Carman says: ‘It is much to be regretted that certain
writers are advocating the use of nitrate of soda. Unless the land is
well supplied with potash and phosphoric acid and needs nitrogen
alone, nitrogen will not materially increase the crop.’

*‘ This is a self-evident proposition. And the same thing might be

said of soda, lime, magnesia, sulphuric acid andiron. All these ingre-
dients of plants are absolutely essential to healthy plant growth.

‘¢ There are people who contend that to maintain the productive-

(87)

88 The New Fotato Culture.

ness of our land it is necessary to return to the soil the amount of
plant food that the crops remove. They overlook the fact that a cer-
tain amount of plant food is rendered available each year from the
store of plant food lying dormant in the soil. If this is sufficient we
need use nomanure. If any one element is deficient, we must supply
the deficiency or be satisfied with a deficient yield. The weakest link
in-a chain determines the strength of the whole chain. If we find out
the weakest link and strengthen it, then some other link would be the
weakest. Asa rule, for most garden crops our soils are deficient,
rst, in nitrogen; and when this is supplied, they are deficient, 2nd,
in phosphoric acid ; and when this is supplied they are deficient, 3rd,
in potash, and so on through every link in the chain.

‘For forty years or more, efforts have been made to find out what
ingredients of plant food are most likely to be deficient. It was pro-
posed to analyze the soils. . This was found to be practically uscless.
The idea was then advanced that the amount of plant food in the
crops would tell us the amount necessary to apply in manure. Lawes
and Gilbert’s experiments, over forty years ago, demonstrated the
fallacy of this idea, but every now and then it shoots up again and
grows as vigorously and perniciously as ever.

‘What we need, especially in garden crops, is not ‘soil tests,’ but

experiments that will show what plants require a ‘sap of the soil’ —

specially rich in nitrogen or in phosphoric acid or potash. In other
words, we want to ascertain the weakest link in the supply of food
for different plants; and there is no way of getting at the facts ex-
cept by actual experiments. 2

‘¢When Mr. Carman says it is much to be regretted that we are
advocating the use of nitrate of soda, he overlooks the fact that we
advocate the use of superphosphate with equal earnestness, and, in
some cases, of potash also. The object of these articles was to show
that when gardeners use the ordinary commercial fertilizers, they
spend a great deal of money for plant food that their crops do not
need. For instance, if they want to apply 100 pounds of nitrogen on
an acre of land, and 50 pounds of phosphoric acid, and buy a fertilizer
guaranteed to contain 2 per cent. of nitrogen and 12 per cent. of phos-
phoric acid, they will have to sow 5,000 pounds to the acre, and this
will furnish ¢welve times as much phosphoric acid as is required.
What we contend for is that they should buy the necessary phos-

—

: The Use of Nitrogen. 89

phoric acid in the cheapest and best form 4nd be sure to use enough

_of it, but not too much. To put on twelve times as much soluble

phosphoric acid as is needed, in order to get the necessary nitrogen,
is folly. If you want nitrogen as well as phosphoric acid, buy the
nitrogen in the cheapest and best form. If we recommend nitrate of
soda to those who wish to buy nitrogen, it is because the nitrogen is
in the best and most available form, and because, at the present timc,
it is the cheapest source of nitrogen.

‘There are enormous beds of it in South America, and its use in
Europe is rapidly increasing, while with us it is almost unknown.
It certainly is well worth our while to see if, especially in our dry and
sunny climate, we cannot use it to great advantage.

‘‘Mr. Carman further says: ‘In experiments made at the Rural
Grounds during two seasons, to ascertain the effect of nitrogen on
potatoes, it was found that additional quantities of nitrate of soda, or

-sulphate of ammonia, or blood, or all three, beyond what was supplied

by the ‘complete’ fertilizer, did not increase the -yield in any case.
aoe rom 1200 to 2,000 pounds-of the fertilizer was used,

- guaranteed to contain 33 per cent. of nitrogen, 12 per cent. of phos-

phoric acid and 6 per cent. of potash. It appears, therefore, that the

amount of nitrogen supplied by the fertilizer was amply sufficient for

the crop’s needs, and that the added nitrogen was so much money
thrown away.’ .

‘Mr, Carman made better experiments than his allusion to them
above would indicate. Our own personal objection to them is that
they were on too small a scale to carry conviction to an old farmer
and gardener. The plots were only 7}, part of an acre each. One
good feature, however, was that four plots were left without manure.
These plots produced at the rate of 88, 97, 68 and 59 bushels per
acre each. The variation in the land, therefore, was 38 bushels per
acre. Bearing this fact in mind, let us look at some of the more im-
portant results bearing on the subject we are discussing.

- $* RESULTS OF EXPERIMENTS ON POTATOES BY E. S. CARMAN.

Bushels

; per acre.
fr Nomanuxe (averages plots)... 2s....).s.N a wee sede ae 74
2—avo pounds sulphate of potash... <1... 2). -s- see as oe 95
5-400 pounds superphosphate .- 0... ees Sarees to eee 103

gO The New Fotato Culture.

cy Bushels
per acre.
‘A-—200 pounds mitrate Ol iso dann. ssc: | eee ee T41
5—1,I00 pounds blood, nitrate of soda and sulphate of am-
malo ntar 25.) Heke Sets Rated ae eit: ean a 183
6—ro tons two-year-old farm manures.) sees... ae eee 139

7—200 pounds nitrate of soda )

bane etn eee. ee 139
120 pounds nitrate of potash $
8—200 pounds nitrate of soda
I2Z0 pounds mutniate ok pPOtashy ysis oer ks ooo eae 156
700 pounds superphosphate

‘¢ There is certainly nothing in these results contradictory to the
principles we have advocated. Mr. Carman states that the scil had
been cropped for many years without manure of any kind, and that
it ‘would not grow beans, or even a good crop of weeds without
manure.’ And yet it will be seen that nitrogen a/one, on plot 5, pro-
duced 183 bushels of potatoes per acre, while on plot 8, 1,020 pounds
of a ‘complete manure’ produced only 156 bushels, or 27 bushels
less than nitrogen alone. Why is this? Did the phosphoric acid
and potash do harm? No; there was not nitrogen enough. The
phosphoric acid and potash could not increase the crop for lack of
nitrogen.

‘¢ Mr. Carman tells us that he used from 1,200 to 2,000 pounds of a
complete fertilizer, guaranteed to contain 34 per cent. of nitrogen,
12 per cent. phosphoric acid and 6 per cent. of potash, and that
when he added more nitrogen, it did no good. Why shouldit! Oats
are good for horses, but when a horse has all the oats he will cat,
throwing more oats in the manger will not increase his strength or
improve his appearance. If the ton of complete fertilizer furnished
all the nitrogen the plants wanted, more could do no good. But for
the sake of getting 70 pounds of nitrogen, what folly it is to use aton
of fertilizer that contains a greal deal more phosphoric acid, costing
8 cents per lb., than the crop can possibly want? This is the point
we wish to impress on our readers. And it is a matter of surprise
that so clear-headed and able a man as Mr. Carman does not see
that his own experiments demonstrate, if they demonstrate anything,
that, so far as the production of potatoes is concerned, this worn out
soil, that was so poor that it would not grow a good crop of weeds,
was more deficient in available nitrogen than in any other constituent

The Use of Nitrogen. gi

of plant-food. Superphosphate and potash, without nitrogen, did no
good. They could produce no effect from lack of nitrogen. Thirty-
two pounds of nitrogen per acre, in the form of nitrate of soda,
raised the crop from 74 bushels per acre (or possibly 59 bushels) to
141 bushels per acre. The same amount of nitrogen on plot 8, in
1,020 lbs. of ‘ complete manure’ produced 156 bushels, the 820 lbs.
of superphosphate and potash only increasing the yield 15 bushels
per acre—not as much as the difference in yield of the unmanured
plots. Nitrogen alone, on plot 5, produced 183 bushels per acre. It
is clear, therefore, that a complete manure, like that used on plot 8,
containing about 3% per cent. of nitrogen, is a very costly and
‘badly balanced ration’ for potatoes.. It does not, for Mr. Car-
man’s poor, worn-out soil, contain half nitrogen enough. It is true
that by using enough of it you could grow a large crop, but it would
be done at a fearful and-unnecessary expense. We feel perfectly safe
in saying that a ton of it per acre would produce no larger a crop
than half a ton that contained double the amount of nitrogen.

‘¢ A complete manure, such as that used on plot 8, would probably
cost $40 per ton. The 200 lbs. of nitrate of soda in the mixture can
be bought for $5. In other words, the phosphoric acid and potash in
the ton of this complete manure cost $35. Leave half of it out and
double the nitrate and you will, in my judgment, get quite as large a
crop at far less cost. There is nothing in Mr. Carman’s experiments,
or any other, to lead me to suppose otherwise.

‘‘Voreton Farm. JosepH Harris.”

REPLY TO JOSEPH HARRIS.

Mr. Joseph Harris’s views are no doubt as sound as a dollar in the
general principles which they advocate ; but the instances which he
- cites in proof of his conclusions are possibly open to criticism.

For a year or so past certain writers have advocated a more gen-
erous use of nitrate of soda, in a way to lead those who have given
little thought to chemical fertilizer questions to assume that it is in
itself a fertilizer which will insure a profitable increase of crop, re-
gardless of the needs of the soil. I have therefore repeatedly
cautioned my readers not to use nitrate of soda (or nitrogen in any
soluble form) unless it is known that the land is already proportion-
ately supplied with available phosphoric acid and potash. Nitrogen

92 The New Potato Culture.

is neither more nor less valuable to the gardener or farmer than is
either of the others. Itis by far more costly, and, while the phos-
phates and potash remain in the soil for subsequent crops, nitrate of
soda leaves us even before the current crop is harvested. Wedo not
need to tell our distinguished critic this. He knows it, and has
taught it in his writings for many years. And yet we place Mr. Har-
ris among those who, while cracking up nitrate of soda, has of, in
every case or in most cases, emphasized sufficiently the insuperable
importance of a corresponding supply of minerals.

Mr. Harris assumes that the chemical fertilizers of to-day contain
toosmall a quantity of nitrogen ; that the minerals (potash and phos-
phate) are the strong links, and that a deficiency of nitrogen is the
weak link of the chain by which the crop, in due proportion, will be
diminished. This is true without a doubt in a majority of cases, and
it is well that it is true, for if the farmer is to lose a part of the
money he pays for fertilizers, he would better invest it in food con-
stituents of a lower cost which will remain in his soil, than in nitrogen
at a higher cost, which takes its leave after a single season of service.
If a farmer, from experimentation, is fairly confident that his land is
especially short in nitrogen, let him buy fertilizers with a high ratio
of nitrogen; but if he knows nothing about it, the very best thing he
can do is to buy high-grade complete fertilizers and use them until by
experiment he finds that more nitrogen will profitably augment his
crops. Then he may wisely add nitrate of soda, salts of ammonia or
organic nitrogen, as he, by trial in an inexpensive way on small plots
here and there, may find them serviceable. The advocacy of the use
of one-sided, low-priced fertilizers on the part of the mixers (‘‘man-
ufacturers ’’) and their agents, has done incalculable harm in the way
of inducing those who till the scil to purchase fertilizers which do not
furnish the full or partial meal which their land demands. The con-
sequence is that they denounce fertilizers zz foto. Thus, bone or
South Carolina rock, kainit, superphosphates, ammoniated superphos-
phates, sold under high-sounding, taking names, and prices far below
those of high-grade brands, are tried and condemned, not for what
they really are, but as ‘‘ ferdz/zzevs”’ which are assumed to furnish

everything in the way of plant food that the name represents. So it ~

is that in every case gifted and well-known writers, like Mr. Harris,
whose words of advice are taken without question, should place all

ee oP a a ee
\ ’ 7*

The Use of Nitrogen. 93

ro)

possible emphasis upon the economy of purchasing either high-grade
complete fertilizers, or of ‘‘incomplete” fertilizers only as the farmer
or gardener has learned from experiment that his land responds fully
to bone, to potash or to nitrogen, and that the other constituents are
not at present needed.

Mr. Harris says that itis a matter of surprise that I do not see
that my own experiments demonstrate that, so far as the production
of potatoes is concerned, my worn-out soil was more deficient in nitro-
gen than in any other constituent of plant-food. ‘‘ Superphosphate and
potash, without nitrogen, did no good. They could produce no effect
without nitrogen. Nitrogen alone on one plot produced 183 bushels
per acre,” or, I may, add, 105 bushels above the average of the plots
of natural soil wz¢fourtfertilizer. It is true that if this single trial be
taken as a basis for comparison, Mr. Harris’s reasoning is logical
enough. It should be stated in fairness, however, that this little
nitrogen plot yielded more for some reason than any other nitrogen-
plot either of that year’s experiments or of those of preceding years.
Another plot which received not only the same quantity of nitrate of
soda per acre (200 pounds), but also z00 pounds of sulphate of
potash, produced but go bushels of potatoes to the acre, or 12
bushels above the natural-soil plots. Again, raw bone (1,100 pounds),

furnishing perhaps three or four per cent. of ammonia, gave but 77

bushels per acre. Again, in our similar experiments of the year be.
fore, nitrate of soda (200 pounds) gave a yield but little more than the
average of the natural-soil plots. The several no-fertilizer plots
yielded an average of 143 bushels to the acre. Nitrate of soda (200
pounds) yielded but 125 bushels, sulphate of ammonia (120 pounds)
yielded the same, nitrate of soda (200 pounds) and dissolved bone-
black (400 pounds) yielded 168 bushels. Nitrate of soda (200

pounds) and sulphate of potash (300 pounds) gave 233 bushels per

acre. Nitrate of soda (200 pounds), dissolved bone-black * 400
pounds), sulphate of potash (300 pounds)—a complete fertilizer—
gave 217 bushels. The Mapes potato manure (800 pounds, gave 257
bushels to the acre, while in the later experiments quoted by Mr.
Harris, 1,200 pounds of the Mapes (3.70 nitrogen guaranteed) gave a
yield of 273 bushels to the acre. See

From a glance at the experiments carried on during the season to
which’Mr. Harris alludes, it is admitted that nitrosen alone gave a

94 The New Potato Culture.

greater increase over the unmanured plots than either potash or
phosphoric acid or both. It is just as evident, withal, that in no in-~
stance was a large crop raised except when a high-grade complete
fertilizer was used. Whether a smaller quantity of the fertilize
and an additional dose of nitrogen would have given as large a crop
we have no proof one way or the other. If we were striving to raise
the largest possible yield per acre, we would not use nitrogen in the |
form of nitrate of soda alone, but in the blended forms of nitrate of
soda, sulphate of ammonia, dried blood, urate of ammonia and other
organic salts of ammonia found in Peruvian guano, all of them solu-
ble, but in varying degrees. Moreover, we should supply them,
especially on light and fallow land, in minimum quantities consistent
with experience, on account of their expense and the liability of loss
by leaching. It is easy to supplement nitrogen to a growing crop by
top-dressing, if it is thought that it will prove serviceable, as, es-
pecially in the form of nitrate, it is exceedingly prompt in its action.
On a portion of the same impoverished field upon which the potato
trials alluded to were made, the effects of a dressing of 150 lbs. te
the acre of nitrate of soda on corn were plainly visible 50 feet away,
_ three days after the application, in the darker color of the leaves as
compared with the rest of the field which had received potash and
phosphoric acid only.

Our great authority, Sir J. B. Lawes, grew potatoes on the same
plots for nine consecutive years, from 1876 to 1884 inclusive. The
average yield from the use of 400 lbs. of ammonia salts alone was
103 bushels per acre ; that from 550 lbs. of nitrate of soda was 104
bushels. The same amount of ammonia salts, with the ash elements
added (complete), produced an average for the nine years of 325
bushels per acre. Nitrate of soda (550 lbs.), with the ash elements
added, gave 300 bushels per acre. Farm-yard manure (16 tons)—an
average of six years—gave a yield of 253 bushels per acre.

Mr. Harris remarks that the 200 lbs. of nitrate of soda used in
several of my experiments to form complete fertilizers, can be bought
‘for $5. We agree with him that for potatoes it is an ill-balanced fer-
tilizer in most cases, not, however, because it contains too little ni-
trogen necessarily, but because it does not exist in varied forms and
also because the potash is too low by half for soils deficient in potash.
Where a large crop is anticipated it is always safer {0 use an excess

The Use of Nitrogen. 95

of food constituents, particularly of those that do not waste by leach.
ing. Phosphoric acid is, next to nitrogen, the ingredient oftenest de-
ficient in soils. Nine-tenths of the fertilizers used in England and
America are mainly phosphoric acid. Potash in many soils, how-
ever, 1s present in liberal quantities, and it would be unwise to supply
it in full rations unless a known dcficit exists.

If you err at all, gardeners and farmers, it is better to err on the
side of economy. Phosphoric acid will remain with you to feed sub-
sequent crops. So willpotash. Know that your soilneeds more ni-
trogen before you apply it in liberal doses. Nitrogen costs a lot of
money, and the higher the price of experiment ingredients, the less
the farmer should apply it without due discrimination. We say give
the soil all the phosphoric acid you choose. You will rarely overdo
it. Give it potash according to its needs, as nearly as youmay. But
be gentle and conservative in the use of nitrogen, unless you are
positive it will give you full returns. It is a ruinous luxury.

We may every one of us bear in mind that if phosphates ma-
terially increase our crops, we have evidence, to a certain extent, that
nitrates are the less needed at present ; if potash increase the crop,
here is evidence that nitrates are the less needed. If both phos-
phates and potash fail, then let the cxperimenter add nitrates in vary-
ing quantities from 100 to 300 pounds to the acre, and thus in a safe,
inexpensive way find out approximately what his land needs.

THE EFFECT OF NITROGEN IN VARYING QUANTITIES UPON POTA-
RO Shhh Cis Ok ENC REASING TOUAN TID LES Ob hE RAED BRS.

This question of how much nitrogen farmers or gardeners may
with profit give to the soil is one manifestly of the first importance.
Mr. Harris’s position may be repeated and emphasized in the follow-
ing words: ‘‘Itis a matter of surprise that Mr. Carman does not
see that his own experiments demonstrate that, so far as the produc-
tion of potatoes is concerned, his worn-out soil was more deficient in
nitrogen than in any other constituent of plant-food.”

It was to throw more light upon this question that the following
trials were made during the past season (1890). Mr. Harris con-
tends that the chemical fertilizers of to-day, as a rule, contain too
small a quantity of nitrogen; that the minerals (potash and phos-

96 The New Lotato Culture.

phate) are the strong links, and that a deficiency of nitrogen is the
weak link of the chain by which the crop, in due proportion, will be
diminished. An injudicious advocacy of the good effects to be de-
rived from nitrate of soda, on the part of many writers, has had a
decided effect upon those who have not studied chemical fertilizer
problems to induce them to jump at the conclusion that it will insure
a profitable increase of crops regardless of the needs of the soil.
Nitrogen (it may well be repeated) is neither more nor less valuable
to the farmer or gardener than is either potash or phosphate. It is
far more costly and, while the phosphate and potash remain in the
soil for subsequent crops if not used up by the current crop, nitrate
of soda, unless supplied in repeated doses, often fails to carry a late
crop through to maturity.

The plots (23 in number) were planted April 26, by the trench
method, so often described. The variety was the Rural Blush, the
fertilizer was the Mapes, with the following analysis :

(NITION). stem Siete sre eieten se 4.59 to 5 percent.
hosplogicucide.: - err Sire tOBLO Raat
HO tals lntyogiaa.- tow, ats ceases ete 6 tomd f
Bushels
per acre.
Plotwac Nowertrhizeriot<anyalincer es thy ee eee 207.50
eyo. 440) l|bs. potato tertilizer to) the acters er eee 214.50
66 : 6) 0% ag ts ce and
: ue : : ress 249.33
55 ‘‘ to the acre of nitrate of soda
eee o ‘* potato fertilizer and
4 a Pt Aeew oy Tote tar eee 249.33
Ire) nitrate of soda ,
5. 440 ‘ potato fertilizer and 1 orton othe ee 284.17
220 nitrate of soda
ciara (CY o ‘‘ potato fertilizer and
44 lee ee ee ia ete 309.83
330 ‘‘ nitrate of soda

In the above experiment it is plain that the yield increases (with
one exception, when they are the saine) as the quantity of nitrate of
soda increases. It must be borne in mind that but 440 pounds to
the acre of the potato fertilizer was used in any one of the above
six trials.

The Use of Nitrogen. 97
Bushels
per acre.
Plot). 7. No fenelizerotwaltiys KAM aN eee i. se ves de'el ere 260.
I 880 Ibs. potato fertilizer and Mae Oh kent sb
55. ‘‘ nitrate of soda
pete? OQ: 880 ‘‘ potato fertilizer and
IIo ‘‘ nitrate of soda 4, A Go ois
on UG, 880 ‘' potatofertilizerand » age
220 ‘‘ nitrate of soda ayia ee
ES a 880 ‘‘ potato fertilizer and | as
B20 enitrate Ol soda seas ue Sosate Sk
Bergh 24 880 ‘‘ potato fertilizer w.thout any
nitrate of soda penal Rae

Hereit would appear that there are indications that the larger

amount of potato fertilizer gave the crop nearly all the nitrogen
needed, since 880 lbs., without additional nitrate, gave as large a
yield (315 bushels) as did the addition of r1o lbs. of nitrate of soda,

asin plot 9. Itis true that plot 10, with 220 lbs. of nitrate, gives
the heaviest yield, offset by the yield of plot 11, which received 330
Ibs., yielding but 308 bushels.

Bushels
a : per acre.
Plot 13. 1,320 lbs. potato fertilizer, no nitrate of
. --+ 344.60
soda
Pee so0 ° otato fertilizer and
eg 3 ° pe Bey it eke ake 403.33
55 nitrate of soda
Pinan er 220 ' "| potato fertilizer and
5 3 6 ies CSA A ne aK 375.83
I1O nitrate of soda \
fro.) 1,320 ‘* potato fertilizer and
. Der ES ne ae 396.
220 ‘* nitrate of soda
MT esr, 20}, otato fertilizer and
7 3 Ls ins ue A Abad a a 353.83
330 nitrate of soda

The above results, as will be seen, are contradictory. It is evi-
dent that 1,320 lbs. of the potato fertilizer should furnish, of itself,
all the nitrogen which the crop could use. Nevertheless, an addition
of 55 lbs. to the acre of nitrate of soda gives the largest yield of
any. Larger quantities seem to reduce the yield more or less,
though the addition of 220 lbs. gives the next heaviest yield.

On a different part of the field, where the land is a trifle lighter
and apparently more uniform, nitrate of soda in varying quantities
was used without any potato fertilizer. The following are the

results:
P.—7

98 The New Potato Culture.

Bushels
per acre.
lots 418: S355ulbs: of mitrateiotisodac ssa o> tae ee 403.33
a LOO Ne ey a SS ae SOMA ta ob, 302.50
oe 2OW 220 oe co Meee etse piles Sema toca Ov Aes eae 352.
e ZEA) 280m s rs Pp McaSiat we Re ye ores ak os oie eer eearege 315.

Here it will be seen that the small amount of 55 lbs. to the acre of
nitrate of soda, without any potato fertilizer, gave as large a yield as
plot 14, which received the same amount of nitrate of soda and 1,320
Ibs. of the potato fertilizer.

In the two following experiments a fertilizer high in ammonia, 7.50
per cent; high also in potash, 10.50 per cent, but low in phosphoric
acid, 4.50 per cent., was tried. The results were as follows :

Bushels

per acre.
Plotm. 6 a40rlbs. tome acre wntaee ao paren aca ee ees 27GE
es rerea) 4G is it) Micralel av Pai hes brea tins Seemauause eae 330.

SUMMARY.

We may summarize in this way:

Average of plots that did not receive either potato fertilizer or
nitrate of soda alone, 233.75 bushels to the acre.

With 440 lbs. of potato fertilizer, nitrate of soda, from 55 to 330
Ibs. to the acre, increased the yield over the no-fertilizer plots 39.41
bushels per acre. |

With 880 lbs. of potato fertilizer, nitrate of soda, from 55 to 330
Ibs. to the acre, increased the yield over the no-fertilizer plots 87.50
bushels per acre, or but 6.25 bushels over the plot which received the
same amount of potato fertilizer (880 lbs.) without nitrate of soda.

With 1,320 lbs. of fertilizer, nitrate of soda from 55 to 330 lbs. to
the acre, increased the yield over the no-fertilizer plots 148.50 bushels
to the acre, or 35.65 bushels over the plot which received the 1,320
Ibs. of fertilizer alone.

The results of the above experiments would seem, though in a
feeble way, to justify Mr. Harris’s conclusions that the potato fertili-

zers of to-day are too low in nitrogen. Still we would as urgently as

ever advise farmers not to depend upon nitrogen for a profitable in-
crease of crops, but rather to see to it that the land is well supplied

re ie J a
= . \
| a

The Use of Nitrogen. 99

with minerals, and to experiment with the costly nitrogen, using on
different portions of the same field, as we have done, ali the way from
55 to 320 lbs. to the acre—an experiment which, conducted on small
plots, involves neither much trouble nor expense. Remember that
what you do not recover of nitrate of soda or sulphate of ammonia
in the crops of the season, you will never recover. But the phos-
phates and potash that one crop may not use will remain for the
next.

Gib Ave Ree <a:

Sundry Experiments.

POTATO CULTURE IN HALF-BARRELS.

EMENT barrels were sawed through the centre and the half-

8 barrels, or kegs, used. Beauty of Hebron Potatoes, of

equal weight, were selected for seed and cut in halves, the
seed-end-half alone being used. They were planted in the
morning of April ro.

No. 2. Pure Sand.—Seed piece planted six inches deep. This keg
(half-barrel) gave the strongest, tallest plants, and the leaves were
the darkest color of any. July 18, the tops being dead, the barrel
was broken apart, leaving the sand the shape of the barrel so that
the tubers and roots could be carefully examined. The roots pene-
trated to every portion of the sand. The box was watered with
horse-manure water, and small quantities of nitrate of soda, dissolved
bone and potash were sprinkled upon the surface of the sand and
scratched in. The tubers of the yield weighed 45% ounces. They
were 35 in number, of the average size of hens’ eggs and uniformly
so. Eight of the best weighed one pound. All were clean, bright
and smooth. The seed piece was so decayed that little but the skin
remained.

No. 2. Garden Soil,.—Seed piece planted four inches deep.
Watered as often as needed with rain water. Yield, 40 ounces. There
were 43 tubers, one larger than in No. 1. Eight of the best weighed
1z0unces. Tubers not so shapely or smooth. Roots penetrated to
every part of the soil. Seed piece quite decayed.

No. 3. Three- Quarters Garden Soil, One- Quarter Sand.—The seed
piece was placed upon the soil and covered with the sand. Watered

(100)

we
|

Sundry Experiments, IOI

with rain water. The yield was 21 ounces, 38 tubers. The best
eight weighed 1034 ounces. Clean and shapely, as in No. 1. Seed
piece decayed.

No. 2. T, hree- Quarters Garden Sol, One- Quarter Cut Straw.—The
seed piece was placed upon the soil and the halt-barrel filled with the
straw. Watered withrainwater. The yield was 11 ounces. Twenty

_ clean, shapely tubers formed almost in a ball about the seed piece,

which still retained its form plump and solid, and was still pushing
new buds. Upon cutting it open, the flesh was watery and semi-
translucent, as if exhausted of starch. This seed piece which, as
above stated, was the seed-end-half of Beauty of Hebron, was cutin
two and each piece again planted in the garden, but the sprouts, if
indeed any grew, did not appear above the soil. The roots of this
barrel penetrated to every portion of both the soil and straw.

THE THREE BARRELS.
/

On April roth, 1889, three barrels of the same size were provided
with perfect drainage, and filled to within 16 inches of the top with
garden loam and sand—half and half—thoroughly mixed. While
mixing the sand and loam together, potato fertilizer was added—one
quarter of a pound to each barrel. In the first barrel a single tuber
(medium size) of seedling No. 2 was placed upon the loam and sand,
being 16 inches below the top of the barrel. In the second barrel a
single tuber of the same size, of seedling No. 3 was similarly placed.
A single tuber of the seedling No. 4, of the same size, was placed in
the third barrel. These potatoes were then covered with about three
inches of the same sand, loam and fertilizer, the distance from the
top of the soil being now about 13 inches. As the shoots of the
growing potatoes appeared above the surface, more soil and sand
were added, until the barrels were filled to within an inch of the top,
and the tops were then allowed to grow as they would, being atlength
supported by a platform raised to the height of the barrels. The
seed was planted April 10, and the shoots of all three appeared
above the soil May 18, there being scarcely ten hours difference.

Planted 16 inches deep, where would the tubers form ; near the bot-
tom, midway, orin tiers from the bottom to the top? This is what
the experiment was designed to show. It was also designed to show

102 The New Fotato Culture.

the root and tuver-forming growth of plants raised under these
peculiar conditions. The plants were watered as water was needed.
It was not necessary to apply poison, as the potato beetles seemed to
prefer a lower plane. In the earlier part of the season the leaves
showed no flea-beetle perforations, and few were seen upon them.
Later they injured the leaves as much as those growing in the plots
near by. This is noted because it has been stated that the cucumber
flea-beetle confines itself to within a foot or so of the ground. ~

It was the design to have sawed the barrels lengthwise, in halves,
and to have removed the soil and sand just as the vines began to
show maturity, but while yet the potatoes would cling to the stems.
Thus the root and tuber-bearing systems could have been well shown
after the sand and soil had been carefully washed out by the use of
a hand-pump and hose. The vines ‘blighted, ’’ however, in mid-
July and were quite dry and dead before the services of a photo-
grapher could be secured.

The cut shows fairly well in what part of the barrel the tubers grew,
apparently from 4 to 12 inches below the surface, yet while washing
out the sand and soil, several fell from their places. The reader
must bear in mind that back of those-shown in the illustration, other
potatoes were covered and concealed in the sand and soil. The yield
was as follows:

No. 2 yielded 13 marketable potatoes, 8 small and 2 rotten,
weighing six pounds. The decayed tubers were not weighed or taken
in the account. Allowing three square feet to the hill, as in field cul-
ture, the yield would be 1,452 bushels to the acre.

No. 3 blighted earlier than the others and the yield was 20 very
small potatoes weighing 14 ounces.

No. 4 yielded 13 marketable and 3 small tubers. Not less than
ten were rotten and not estimated. They weighed 4% pounds.

SEED PIECES VARIOUSLY TREATED.

Test No. 26. Queen of the Valley was cut to two-eye pieces and
placed in a spade-wide furrow, or trench, four inches deep in mellow
garden soil. They were then covered lightly with soil and the furrow
nearly covered with straw. On this, chemical potato fertilizer was
thrown at the rate of 500 pounds to the acre, and the furrow was then

Wey

Ties

ARRELS.

Fig. : Tis THREE B

104 The New Potato Culture.

leveled with soil. The yield was 907.50 bushels to the acre. Best
five weighed six and one-quarter pounds. Large and small, 135,520
to the acre, or g$ tubers to the hill.

Test No. 27. Same variety, planted in the same way as in No. 26.
The pieces were covered lightly with soil, then with a liberal spread
of hen manure, which was covered lightly with soil; then a second
spread of hen manure, and finally the furrow was filled with soil.
The yield was at the rate of 705.83 bushels to the acre. Best five,
four pounds one ounce. Large and smail, 116,160 to the acre.

Test No. 28. Planted as above, and a heavy spread of salt— 4o
bushels to the acre—strewn over the. pieces, which were first lightly
covered with soil. The seed pieces rotted in the ground.

Test No. 30. These were manured with chemical fertilizers at the
rate of 1,000 pounds to the acre without straw mulch. The yield was
665.50 bushels tothe acre. Best five, five pounds. Large and small,
101,640 to the acre, or seven potatoes to the hill.

Test No. 31. These pieces (Peerless, as in Nos. 29 and 30) were
covered lightly with soil, and the trench filled with stable manure
(the same as No. 26 was filled with cut straw). No fertilizer was used.
The yield was 907.25 bushels to the acre. Best five weighed three
pounds eight and one-half ounces. Large and small, 217,800 to
the acre, or an average of 15 to the hill. This yield was about
the same as in No. 26, but the potatoes were smaller and much in-
jured by wire-worms.

Test No. 32. These pieces (Peerless) were first covered with soil
lightly, then salt at the rate of 15 bushels to the acre, then a mulch
of stable manure as in No. 31; then a spread of hen manure, at the
rate of 20 bushels to the acre, and finally unleached ashes at the rate
of 15 bushels to the acre. The object of this trial was to ascertain,
first, whether a surfeit of manure would increase the yield, and sec-
ond, whether the salt would have any effect to keep wire-worms away,
as compared with No. 31, which received only stable manure. The
7 yield was 826.83 bushels to the acre. Best five, five pounds. Large
and small, 179,080 to the acre, or 124 to the hill, They were eaten-
as badly as in test No. 31. .

Sundry Experiments. 105

A NEW WAY TO MULCH POTATOES—VALLEY MULCHING.

Mulching potatoes is sometimes very successful, and at other times
useless, or harmful. The effect depends upon the soil or season.
When the early spring is backward and wet, the mulch keeps the soii
cold; the seed pieces are delayed in sprouting and an imperfect stand

~is the result. What is wanted is a mulch that will conserve moisture

and yet not intercept the warming rays of the sun. The ‘‘valley”’
system it was thought might accomplish this. Whether it is practi-

‘cable or profitable, we are not prepared to say.

The soil (an impoverished, sandy loam) was plowed, raked and
leveled the same as if grass
rare: CL seed were to be sown, as
shown by line a, Figure 2z.
The seed pieces (two eyes)
Pama G were then placed on the

TORAH
Jintao ide

ET TT

soil one foot apart in rows
three feet apart, as shown
at J) ) Wiese pieces were
then lightly covered with
soil hoed from between the
rows (1, 2, 3,) and at the

eile, 2.

‘rate of 1,000 pounds per acre of Baker’s potato fertilizer strewn evenly
over it. Then more soil was hoed over the fertilizer until continuous

hills five inches high were formed, as shown atc, forming the valleys,
as shown at 4, 5, 6. The valleys were then filled with a mulch of
coarse straw and hay that had been raked up into cocks from a part
of the field where it had lain all winter, thus partly filling the valleys, as
shown by the dotted line. The design was that such plots were not
tobe cultivated during the whole season. If the mulching material
is old, few seeds will sprout in the mulch, while those that sprout -be-
neath it will be smothered. The weeds that grow on top of the hills
may be pulled up. But the vines very soon cover the hills, forming
a shade not favorable to their growth. ‘The yield of potatoes was 45
pounds, which was at the rate of 352 bushels to the acre, 60 per cént.
of which were marketable as to size.

If it were desirable to try this system on a large scale, a small plow
run both ways, or a shovel plow, would serve to turn furrows over the
pieces, leaving the valleys to be mulched. In the

100 The New Potato Culture.

SECOND EXPERIMENT,

which is by no means new, the pieces were placed on the top of
the leveled soil as before, and the same kind of mulch spread over
them five inches high directly over the pieces and sloping gradu-
ally towards the other rows. Upon this mulch the same quantity of
the same fertilizer was sown. The yield was at the rate of 330 bush-
els to the acre. In this trial there were 316 tubers (45 pounds), of
which 162 were of marketable size. Many, however, were injured by
erubs of the May beetle and wire-worm. The next test was the
trench-mulch system, using the same quantity of the same fertilizer.
The yield was 316 potatoes (31? pounds) of which 156 were marketa-
ble. This was at the rate of 276.83 bushels to the acre.

Another trench without mulch, and fertilized with the same manure,
at the rate of 1,200 pounds to the acre, yielded at the rate of 278.66
bushels, there being 314 tubers (38 pounds), 146 marketable.

The fertility of the soil is shown approximately by the yield of two
trenches that were not fertilized. The first yieldca 162 potatoes
(12) pounds) of which 54 were of marketable size, though very scabby.
This is at the rate of but 91.66 bushels to the acre. The second un-
fertilized trench yielded 156 tubers (154 pounds) of which 60 were mar-
ketable as to size, but much injured by scab. This is at the rate of
113.66 bushels to the acre.

‘The average yield of the unmanured trenches was 102.66 bushels
to the acre. The trench (not mulched) which received 1,200 pounds
of fertilizer yielded at the rate of 278.66, an increase over the unfer-
tilized trenches of 176 bushels. The trench which was mulched
(trench-mulch plan) and given 1,000 pounds of fertilizer gave an in-
crease over unmanured plots of 174.18 bushels ; the surface mulch-
ing an increase of 228.66 bushels, and the ‘‘ valley”? mulching an in-
crease of 250.66 bushels to the acre.

The philosophy of the method seems sensible enough. About a
foot of soil in width directly over the pieces is without any mulch, and
the mellow, loose soil receives the air, the sun’s rays and the rain,
while the mulch in the valleys should assist in retaining the moisture
so received for the benefit of the roots until the growth of the tops
covers all.

Sunary Experiments. 107
ah,
DOUBTS EXPRESSED AS TO REPORTED YIELDS.

When in 1882, I reported that several of the potatoes tested yielded
at the rate of over 700 bushels per acre, several friends, as previously
intimated, wrote that they doubted the fact. One said that he had
raised potatoes all his life, and that he considered himself a good
farmer, yet he had never harvested 400 bushels from anacre. Were
we to judge alone from my farm experience in the sandy soil of my
Long Island (N. Y.) farm, I should be ready to share the doubts of
this correspondent. There we have never raised a large crop of pota-
toes, though we have tried over too different kinds, and raised them
under different methods of cultivation, and with different manures.

Later, as previous mention has been made, we were both surprised
and pleased at the quantity of potatoes, which, it was found, could
be raised upon our New Jersey experiment plots. Many trials have ©
proved utter or partial failures, as was to have been expected; still
in many cases we have harvested at the rate of over 700 bushels to
the acre ; in quite a number over 800 bushels; in six or eight cases
over goo ; in three over 1,000; in one case over 1,100 bushels, and
finally, in another over 1,800.

METHOD OF COMPUTING YIELDS.

The method of computing yields is a simple and, as will be seen,
an entirely accurate one. The only way in which it differs from field
yields, is that every hill is counted. There is no allowance made for
vacant hills, which always occur upon large areas. ‘hat is to say, if
we plant 20 pieces and but 10 grow, we estimate the yield by 10
hills—not by 20. As arule, however, every piece planted grows, so
that generally there are no changes to be made. Upon to acres of
the same land, manured, planted and cultivated in the same way and to
the same variety of potato, we should of course look for essentially
the same yield.

The method of computing the yield is as follows: The pieces are
always placed by measure just one foot apart in drills three feet
apart. A cord with knots in which short strings are tied one foot
apart, is stretched over each drill its entire length. The seed pieces
are placed under these marks. With pieces placed one foot apart in
drills three feet apart, we should have 14,520 pieces to the acre.

108 The New Potato Culture.

Now if weplant 20 pieces, and the yield is 50 pounds, the rule of |

three will give the yield per acre in pounds. This must be divided
by 60, the legal number of pounds for a bushel of potatoes, and the
answer gives the yield per acre, viz., 605 bushels.. The yield is
weighed upon nicely balanced scales placed near the plots, and each
kind-is weighed as soon as harvested, and the weight, even to the
quarter of an ounce, and the number of potatoes, large and small,
are recorded at once. In ordinary experiments of this kind, aliquot
parts of an acre are desirable for easy computation.

THE BEST DISTANCE APART FOR SINGLE EYES.

The following experiments were made in 1881 to ascertain what
distance apart potato ‘‘seeds,” cut to single eyes, should be planted
in order to produce the best yield of marketable potatoes. Each test
row was but 33 feet in length ; the variety planted was Beauty of
Hebron. An old sod was plowed under in the winter of 1880. The
land was well prepared the following spring. The seed pieces were
placed in shallow furrows, three feet apart, May 18, and upon thema
slight sprinkling of concentrated potato fertilizer was strewn. The
soil was then hoed back so that the entire plot was quite level. The
same fertilizer at the rate of 300 pounds per acre was afterwards
spread broadcast, just previous to the first cultivation.

That the yield was light in every case was no doubt due to the fact
that the season was unfavorable to the potato crop, being very dry in
the early, and too wet in the later part.

ONE EVE IN A PLACE——-ALL THE DRILLS 33) PRED VUN SeiNGapEe

18 pieces, weighing 12 ounces. Yield 24 pounds.
(18 pieces in a drill 33 feet long would he 22 inches apart.)
20 pieces, weighing 14 ounces. Yield 14% pounds.
(This row was harmed by moles.)

25.pieces, weighing 14 ounces. Yield 251% pounds.

Berta et = TA, es i Old fa
2OUlmE. oA 18 ae eee MOST, We
33 es of 22 a4 aa, Se cls
40 iz if 23 at i. 20 ie
Ayan a 26 os Ed DANE es
OGL: uN 32 ee Si alee S

Sundry Experiments. store)

-TWO PIECES, EACH HAVING BUT ONE EYE, PUT CLOSE TOGETHER IN
DRILLS 33 FEET IN LENGTH.

40 pieces, weighing 22 ounces. Yield 24% pounds.
(Nearly 10 inches apart.)

50 pieces, weighing 24 ounces. Yield 27 S

60 pieces, weighing 28 ounces. Yield 24% ‘'

66 pieces, weighing 34 ounces. Yield 254% ‘'

THREE PIECES (SINGLE EYES) PUT CLOSE TOGETHER IN DRILLS 33
FER E IN LENGTH:

48 pieces, weighing 22 ounces. Yield 18 pounds.
(Injured by moles.)

75 pieces, weighing 40 ounces. Yield 24 a

go pieces, weighing 42 ounces. Yield 24 e

The average size of the last was much smaller than any of the

others.
FOUR PIECES PUT CLOSE TOGETHER IN DRILLS 33 FEET LONG.

64 pieces, weighing 33 ounces. Yield 24 pounds.

BIVE, PIECES CLOSE TOGELHER——DRILE 33 FEET...

80 pieces, weighing 36 ounces. Yield 27 ounces.

On comparing the various products (but omitting such as were
injured by moles), it appears that in the two poorest rows the average
number of pieces was 35, and the average product 20% pounds,
making the yield per acre equivalent to 150 bushels. It will also be
seen that in the best row the number of pieces was 66, with a yield
of 31% pounds, making the rate per acre 225 bushels. Taking the
average rate per acre for all the rows together, we find it equal to 184
bushels, with 50 pieces in each row, and for the five best rows 209
bushels per acre, with an average of 64 pieces per row.

Now to show in what way, and to what extent the spaces in plant-
ing affect the yield, we have the following figures :

Bushels

per acre
35 pieces per row represent a yield of about................ 159
Beek rs a oh SIAL olties coe al atonal Aad oi 184
Gag 4° am me * aie ade cA tanccatnc es atala terest 209
G6. ** ie ss see Mika a 2S Rate ae ae 225

IIo The New Potato Culture.

IN OTHER WORDS,

The distance apart for 150 bushels per acre was nearly 12 inches.

66 cc a3 ce 184 6 (a 66 8 16
66 a ag 6c 209 66 (ag iG 7 6c
6c 6c 6c a3 225 cé te was just 6 66

In another view also, this result is further confirmed, for if we take
the closest planting above given (which is six inches in the row), it

shows an area of 216 square inches for each single eye, which is

space enough for a much larger yield than either of the above.

TESTS WITH DIFFERENT NUMBERS OF EYES TO A PIECE.

No. &3v. Variety planted, the Improved Peachblow. Single.

strong eyes, one by three feet apart. Yield, 171.45 bushels per acre.
Large and small, 33,880—a very large average size. No small pota-
toes. Best five, 2 pounds 11% ounces.

No. 84v. Two strong eyes in one piece. Yield, 252 bushels per
acre. Large and small, 50,820 to the acre. Best five, 2 pounds 8%
ounces.

No. 85v. Three strong eyes to apiece. Yield, 292.50 bushels per
acre. Large and small, 50,810 to the acre. Best five weighed 2
pounds 13% ounces.

No. 86v. Four strong eyes toa piece. Yield, 322.66 bushels per
acre. Large and small, 62,920. Best five weighed 3 pounds 3%
ounces.

Single strong eyes of White Star gave a yield atthe rate of 171.45
bushels ; two strong eyes, 252 bushels; three strong eyes, 282.50 ;
four strong eyes, 322.86. -

DIFFERENT SIZED PIECES WITHOUT REGARD TO NUMBER
OF EYES.

Trench No. 1. Rather small potatoes were cut into four pieces.
Yield per acre, 230.41 bushels. There were 193 marketable potatoes
and 56 small. The vines were rated June 27, as six, 10 being best.

Trench No. 2. Half potatoes were used inthistrench. The yield
per acre was at the rate of 256.66 bushels. There were 165 market-
able—282 very small, none very large. The vines were rated June
27 AS) SIX:

a —-

Sundry Laperiments. III

Trench No. 3. Whole Potatoes.—The yield per acre was at the

rate of 278.66 bushels, of which 236 were marketable and 310 small.

It will be seen that whole seed gave 48 bushels per acre more than
quarter pieces and 22 bushels more than half pieces. But the num-
ber of unmarketable potatoes increased with the size of the seed—
the whole pieces giving the greatest number, the half pieces next and
the quarter pieces fewest.

POTATO SKINS CUT TO SINGLE EYES.

May 26th were planted in well prepared ground, 37 pieces of po-
tato skins—each having a single strong eye—six inches apart in the
drill. The 37 pieces weighed two ounces. Three grew, and the yield
was half a dozen potatoes as large as marbles. The experiment was
made to test the value of a positive assertion on the part of a ‘‘ well
known ” farm writer that such eyes would yield as well as those to
which flesh is attached.

EXPERIMENT TO DETERMINE HOW MUCH FLESH EACH EYE
SHOULD HAVE WHEN PLANTED TO PRODUCE THE MOST
PROFITABLE CROP.

Test 46 A. The seed potatoes were selected all of the same size,
and peeled, all eyes being cut off except the strongest near the mid-
dle—that is, whole potatoes were peeled so that but one eye was left
with a ring of skin about it. It would be equivalent to cutting out
all the eyes but one, and then planting the whole potato as if it were
a seed piece with a single strong eye. The variety was the Peerless;
the amount of chemical potato fertilizer used was 1,000 pounds to
the acre. They were planted one piece (four inches deep) every foot
in trenches (spade wide) three feet apart ; cultiva-
tion flat. Theyield was at the rate of 806.66 bush-
els to the acre. The best five weighed 3 pounds 3
ounces. There were of large and small potatoes
at the rate of 140,560 to the acre, or 9% to a hill.

Test 47 A. The pieces were cut as shown by
figure 3, and of that size. They were planted,
as in 46 A, three inches deep. So many of the
pieces either failed to sprout, or died after the
sprouting, that no estimate could be made of the
yield per acre.

II2 The New Potato Culture.

Test 48 A. In this test cylindrical pieces were cut through the po-
tato as shown at Fig. 4, with a strong eye upon one end, and planted
four inches deep. The yield was at the rate of
211.75 bushels to the acre. Of large and smail
there were at the rate of 87,120 potatoes to the
acre, or sixto a hill.

In order to ascertain how much flesh should be
left to an eye or to the eyes of seed pieces, it
would doubtless be necessary to repeat the tests
hundreds of times in different soils, and with dif-
erent varieties. ‘* Enough is as good as a feast,’
but what would be enough in a wet spring might
prove too little in a dry one; what might serve
in a rich soil might prove insufficient in a poor
soil. The quantity of flesh which should go with
each piece, is, theoretically, that which without
unnecessary waste, will best support the eyes
until, by the growth of the roots, support from
the flesh is no longer required.

SEED END vs. STEM END IN A RICH SOIL.

The seed end of Early Rose yielded 710.82
bushels to the acre. Largest five weighed 2
pounds 9g} ounces. Large and small, 214,170
to the acre, or 143 to the hill. The shoots ap-
peared before those of the stem-end seed, and the tops were nearly

twice as large.

The stem end of Early Rose yielded at the rate of 620.10 bushels
totheacre. Best five, 3 pounds 84 ounces. Large and small, 170,610,
of 11% to the hill.

The seed end of the Rural Blush yielded 282.33 bushels to the
acre. Best five weighed 1 pound 6 ounces. Large and small, 116,-
120 to the acre, or 8 to ahill. The shoots appeared before those of
the stem end. The stem end yielded 937.71 bushels to the acre.
Best five, 2 pounds 53 ounces. Large and small, 232,320 to the acre
or 16 to a hill.

The seed end of the Queen of the Valley yielded 363 bushels to the
acre. Best five weighed 2 pounds 15} ounces. Large and small,

<ft
a’

Sundry Experiments. [1g

67,760 to the acre, or over 44 toa hill. The shoots appeared before
those of the stem end. The stem end of Queen of the Valley yielded
393-21 bushels to the acre. Best five, 4 pounds 14 ounce. Large
and small, 72,600 to the acre.

Judging from these tests alone, we should seéec¢ the stem end of the
Blush and Queen of the Valley, and seed end for the Early Rose, ex-
cept that in the latter case the potatoes averaged smaller. The seed
potatoes were cut in halves, one for the seed, the other for the stem
ends). ;

It would appear that with some varieties it is better to plant stem
ends, and such tests should be made with every variety.

SHALL THE DISTANCE APART OF THE SEED PIECES PLANTED BE
PROPORTIONATE TO THE SIZE OF THE SEED?

»~ Mr. T. B. Terry, in commenting upon the experiments made by
several stations, as well as by myself, which seemed to show that
small (one or two-eye) pieces were not profitable, expressed the opin-
ion that experimenters should plant small seed closer together, in
order to make the conditions equal. We were, therefore, induced to
resume our trials during the past season (1890), in the hope of throw-
ing more light upon this really important problem. As a single ex-
periment it is not worth much except as continued trials, season after
season, in different land and with different varieties, may confirm the
outcome, and give data for generalizations. All the potatoes used for
seed were of medium size. It may be said that the tubers from the
whole seed were smaller than those from any of the smaller seed.
The record showing the comparative size was unfortunately lost.

This trial was made in an impoverished soil of a clay loam, fertil-
ized with 1,000 lbs. to the acre of the Mapes potato fertilizer, of which
ananalysis has been given on previous pages. The pieces were placed
in trenches four inches deep, and three feet apart measuring from the
middle of each, on a plot of one-fortieth of an acre—33 feet square.
It will be seen that we have on this plot 1,089 square feet, which
divided by three gives 363 seed pieces, if planted one foot apart in the
trenches.

No. 1. 132 pieces, single eyes, yielded at the rate of 187 bushels
per acre. The pieces were placed three inches apart.

P.—8

Ti4 The New Potato Culture.

No. 2. 66 pieces, single eyes, yielded at the rate of 209 bushels to
the acre. The pieces were placed six inches apart.

No. 3. 66 two-eye pieces, yielded at the rate of 227.33 bushels to
the acre. The pieces were placed six inches apart.

No. 4. 33 half potatoes, yielded at the rate of 227.33 bushels to
the acre, the same as plot No. 3. The half potatoes were placed one
foot apart.

No. 5. 33 whole potatoes, yielded at the rate of 282.33 bushels to
the acre. The tubers were placed one foot apart.

It appears, therefore, that whole potatoes of medium size, placed .

one foot apart, in trenches three feet apart, yielded over 95 bushels
per acre more than single eye pieces placed three inches apart; 73
bushels more than'single eye pieces placed six inches apart, and 55
bushels an acre more than either two-eye pieces or half potatoes.

“38
we Pa ~

CHAPTER XII.

Size of Seed. Generalizations. Habit cof the vartety to be
considered. Small seed of some kinds—Large of others.
No positive rule can be given. Illustrations. The loss,
from missing bills. Underground development. Rela-
tions between few eyes and long joints. ‘Bushy and
“‘Jegoy’ vines. True roots and tuber-bearing stems.

THE SIZE -OF SEED.

IG. 5 shows how potatoes usually sprout in a aark cellar
when not in contact with other potatoes or with any damp
substances. It will be seen that the buds (‘‘eyes’’) of the
‘¢ seed-end ’’ have alone sprouted. We have found that in

many varietics these are the cnly buds which do push, either in the
cellar or when planted. The ‘‘ eyes” of the other parts seem ‘‘ blind”
orimpotent. The pieces rot in the ground. With other varieties
every ‘‘ eye’”’ will sprout, though those of the ‘‘ seed-end ”’ are almost
always the strongest and the first to sprout.

Hence it would appear that the size of the ‘‘seed’”’ to be planted
should be determined by the habit, so to speak, of the variety and
not by any fixed rule to use one, two, three eyes, half or whole seed.
Hence it is, too, that reports of experiments to settle this vexed ques-
‘tion are so contradictory. We will guarantee that an experiment of
this kind with my No. 2 Seedling would show that one-quarter of each
tuber, including the ‘‘seed-end’’ would give a greater yield than
three-quarters of the tuber wzthout.the ‘‘seed-end.’’ And-we are
further confident that if the seed of this variety were cut in halves,
one-half being ‘‘seed-end’”’ the other ‘‘ stem-end,”’ the stem halves |

(115) :

116 The New Potato Culture.

would fail to sprout in about six cases out of seven. Again, if we
were using Wall’s Orange or
any other similar variety hav-
ing many and prominent eyes,
we should reject the seed-end
and cut the rest to two or
three eyes, depending upon the
size of the seed tubers.

The loss of the yield from
*‘ missing ”’ hills is not well con-
sidered. In many a thrifty
field of potatoes it is not un-
common to find 20 per cent. of
missing hills. One-fifth of the
crop is thus sacrificed ; or if
the actual yield be 200 bushels
to the acre, the loss would be
50 bushels.

ABSURD NAMES.

Why call the ends of the
potato ‘‘seed”’ and ‘‘stem”’
ends ? These parts might bet-
ter be called the top and bot-
tom, since they are the top and
bottom of a potato, the same
as there is a top and bottom or ie
an apex and base to a leaf, toa
twig ora branch. We might
even better say ‘‘butt” and
‘« tip,” as of the ear of corn.
The seed-end of a potato is
just as much the top of a po-
tato as the topmost bud on a
branch is the tip or top, and
the stem end is the bottom or
base, simply because it is the
lowest portion. As in any Fie. 5

LS
fia
fur

Va rit
fe ee

Potato Sced and Vines. 7)

rooted cutting and as in most established plants, the top buds swell
and grow first; so the ‘‘ eyes” of the ‘‘seed”’ or the top of the potato
push first.

POTATO GROWTH.

In my poor way I have studied during late years the underground
devclopment of the potato dur-
ing its several stages from the
sprouting of the sced piece to
the devclopment of the tubers,
and would ask my readers’
patience while I endeavor to
explain it as best I may.

It seems that the distance
between the joints of a potato
vine (nodes) as well as the dis-
tance between the eyes, or
nodes, or joints, of the under-
ground shoot is proportionate
to the zumber of eyes on a potato

ise That is to say, few-eyed pota-
\ toes will give a vine with fewer

(as _ Joints (longer internodes) than
ee /many-eyed potatoes. Suppos-

ing this to be true, one would
infer that the fewer-eyed tuber
would give the greatest length
of vine and the least compact
or bushy habit. A many-eyed
potato would give closer-joint-
ed stems and a greater propor-
tionate amount of foliage. To
a certain extent, therefore, the
number of eyes of a given vari-
ety is a guzde both to the ds-
tance apart to plant and the
Eeece depth to plant.

118 The New Potato Culture.

The first true roots issue not from the seed potato in any case, but
from avound the eye or bud; from the growing shoot, which is the de-
velopment-of the eye or bud. These underground shoots make an
SF %& effort to produce leaves at their nodes or joints
which, being underground, die. From their axils
the true fibrous roots grow which support the plant.
From every node or joint, also, issue stems which
at their ends ¢hicken or may thicken into tubers.

_ Above-ground leaves develop at the nodes or
joints, and between them and
the main stem (that is in the
axil) secondary stems or
branches grow. Under-
ground, the Zeaf is suppressed
and we have a leafless stem
or slender shoot (provided
with eyes or buds all the
same) which at the tip or
just behind it enlarges to
formthe tuber. The tip it-
self is a suppressed leaf, ana
the suppression seems to z7-

WS =

os — = =

Se
_—— =

ep —

Z eS rots

Fig. 6- (p.. 147) shows
seed potato which I lifted
from a six-inch trench just be-
- fore the sprouts had reached

: ; the surface soil. It will be

seen that fibrous roots have

grown from all the lower

Fic. 7. nodes of the shoots, and that

the tuber-bearing nodes have not yet developed. Fig. 7 shows a
potato taken from a barrel of potatoes in the cellar. The potatoes
were moist and decaying, which gave the conditions essential for the
growth of fibrous roots the same as if it were growing in the soil.
Now if this condition of moisture and decay had not existed, the shocts
would be like those of Figure 5, and they would continue to grow
until the seed or parent tuber became exhausted of its nutriment. In

duce the swelling of the stem. .

Potato Seed and Vines. 119

a lighter place leaves would grow from the nodes, but neither fibrous
' roots nor tuber-bearing stems
would appear.

What we want is to provide
those conditions economically
that shall induce the greatest
number of nodes to send out
fibrous roots and tuber-bearing
stems. In the usucl system of
oem Taising potatoes, they are plant-

BiG, 3.
In the Hill. (Ideal.)

ed in V-shaped furrows scarcely three
inches deep and covered; they are cul-
tivated both ways and usually hilled up.
We have tried to show that the sprout
which is the growth of the ‘‘eye” —
changes into green leaves and vines
above the ground in the air and sun-
light, and that below it remains of a
whitish color and sends forth roots and
tuber-bearing stems. Inthe old method
all the tubers must form in a compara-
tively narrow, cramped space. Be-
tween the seed-piece and the air there
is but a length of perhaps three inches
- of stem—the portion which is to fur-
nish the fibrous roots for the plant’s
support. Thereis, withal, only a single
node or so, or several crowded together,
and it is from these that the tuber-
bearing stems issue. The plart may Ree
- give a great amount of foliage, Lut it The Trench. (ldeal.)

ian Tinie ( sim iN Gece

LEZ,
Se A ee

Oe,
me me ee em ne

nk
@ SrxaDeaaees Qos eoas ss at

¢
a
a
q
j
i
!
t
i
i}
0
!
t
1
1
t
i]
4
t
f
8
Ll]
|
|
\
'
,
!
H

“a et Mee ad

120; The New Potato Culture.

cannot give a maximum amount of tubers, because the space for them
to grow is too limited. In the trench the conditions are different.
The seed-pieces are four, five, or even six, inches below the surface
and three or four nodes, well separated, send out their fibrous roots
and tuber-bearing stems. The root system is thrice as great. Itis
as if there were three or four tiers, or planes, for the growth of pota-
toes, a virtual extension of the area planted, the same as a ten-story
house may occupy the same area of ground as a one-story house.
Food is supplied in abundance. The roots grow deep and help to
carry the plants through droughts. This they cannot so well do in
shallower planting, being nearer the surface and more at the mercy
of heat and droughts.

Fig. 10 (p. 121) shows a Thorburn (early) potato carefully lifted
June 12; it was planted May z. It will be seen that several tubers
are beginning to form, while others are an inch or more in diameter.
Some of the roots were thus early eighteen inches in length. In the
old way these roots would have extended for the most part laterally
on either side of the furrow or hill, having no mellow trench soil to
go down into and spread out in all directions. Inthe trench the roots
grow from the bottom as well as near the top. They prefer to go
down, that being the easiest course; while there too they find the
most food and moisture. |

AGAIN, AS TO THE SIZE OF SEED-PIECES.

I beg to remark here that my experiments during the past fifteen
years ought to throw some light upon the important question of the
size of seed. As a result, my belief is that no one can say or will
ever be able to say, whether it is better to use whole potatoes or any
given number of eyes, or sizes of pieces, as a guide for all potatoes
and different soils. The number of sprouts desirable to have in a hill
depends to a great extent upon the distance apart of the hills, and
upon the vigor of the vines.

Last year I dug up seed-pieces of different varieties planted ten
days previously. Any one who will do this at such a time, will find
that the size of the seed must be determined by the xwmberx and vigor
of the eyes. For example, the R. N.-Y. No. 2 has not only few eyes,
but those of the seed-end alone were pushing, notwithstanding the
seed potatoes had been exposed to the light and heat for a week or

122 The New Potato Culture.

more before planting. Half pieces of this variety were planted. My
No. 3 has also few eyes, yet from every eye planted a sprout was
growing. Does it not follow that smaller pieces of the No. 3 than of
the No. 2 should be planted? The Everitt potato has many eyes,
and a peculiarity is that all seem equally sensitive or ready to grow.

Let us take 50 different varieties of potatoes—all of the same size
—and cut them totwoeyes. Weshall find that some of the varieties
will give a perfect stand, and yield a large crop of marketable pota-
toes, while others will give a very imper-
fect stand and a poor yield. The same
will be the case if whole seed is planted.
Some varieties will send up a dozen
shoots, others only a few. The yield of
the one may be a large crop of small
potatoes; of the other, a large crop of
large potatoes. The farmer can judge
what sized seed to plant, when he sees
and knows his potato, how the seed has
been kept, and how it will act in his soil,
and not until then—and there is no ex-
periment station that can tell him.*

My experience has led me to answer
all inquiries: ‘‘ Use large sized pieces con-
taining two or three strong eyes,” and that
is the nearest I can come to any fixed
rule.

The adviceto use ‘‘ whole seed”’ is very
bad indeed. I feel assured if followed
out with certain varieties, a yield of
small tubers will result every time, while with other varieties the ad-
vice may be as sound as a siiver dollar.

The results at certain experiment stations, as well as my own, which
show that the best yields come from whole seeds, prove simply that
seed of some varieties, preserved in a certain way, and planted in a
certain soil and situation, will give the largest crops for the particular
varieties tried, and they prove nothing more.

* Varieties of potatoes which grow so closely together that they may be thrown out with
one turn ofthe fork have, and necessarily so, short tuber-bearing stems. In varieties like
The Rural Blush, that ‘‘straggle,’” the stem is long. This is shown at Fig. 11. Thestem
if straightened out would be a foot in length.

:
if
» a

GHA REAR. 2oky..

Analysis of the tubers and vines. The effects of special or

single fertilizers and in various combinations. The

_ effects of ‘° Complete” fertilizers. Stimulants. Complete

fertilizers not necessarily effective. A familiar talk with
farmers.

The result of 7o analyses of the tuber, by various chemists, em-
bracing a great many varieties and modes of culture, are summed up
in the following table:

Minimum. Maximum. Average.
Benes Tota eis a issiia\ weal ca tavaivce sin ets = one 68.29 82.88 oT TT,
Nitrogenous substance..,...-. ET On5O 3.60 1.70
Grace hates Pe ce osx a ageisy pe eee es 0.05 0.80 0.18
Non-nitrogenous extractive a Reaiee 56.57 20.56
substances, starch, sugar, etc.
TEMS Sia Soh Anni ne aie a Osi 1.40 0.75
Agito Ge een oe SERRA RE ei cea 0.42 1.46 0.97

As the result of 53 analyses of the as# of the tuber, we have the
following :

i Minimum. Maximum. Average.
FEES Ee: ete ans hale = oe erate ate 60a mee mie 43.97 73.01 60.37
Sader Rate ee nara ie nc dete cee seeee 0.00 16.93 202
MGCP P ahi cae che cis rok se She okie eels 0.51 6.23 2.57
Magnesia... ....0.-- eee ere eee 1.32 13.58 4.69
eCEriCsOXIGE, . 604222. we ce ee ee 0.04 7.18 1.18
Phosphoric acid...... .--++-++++- 8.39 27.14 17.35
Sulphuric acid........--++++++-+-+:- 0. 44 14.89 6.49
STEAM gee ge cysn Sicistie s1Spetalehcalals, = Sau 0'sls © 0.00 SLL 207
GO MOTUS ae aa winnie. y Wels ee sip aieaverees 0.85 10.75 gy dia
(123)

124 The New Potato Culture.

Six analyses of the Zogs give the following average results : Potash,
20.78 ; soda, 2.31; lime, 32.65 ; magnesia, 16.51 ; ferric oxidemensar
phosphoric acid, 7.89; sulphuric acid, 6.32; silica, 4.32; chlorine,
5.78. Potash and phosphoric acid are therefore predominating in-
gredients of the ash of the tuber, and soda and silica are evidently
quite unessential, since they may be entirely absent ; soda may also
be wanting in the tops.

From these figures it may be estimated tnat in a crop of 150
bushels, weighing g,o00 pounds, and 600 pounds of tops, we should re-
move, of the three most valuable ingredients of plant-food, the
quantities per acre given in the following table, omitting fractions.
For the purpose of comparison, we give aiso the quantities of these
three substances gathered by a crop of wheat, 25 bushels, and straw,
2,500 pounds; and of Indian corn, 50 bushels,’ stover 4,500 pounds,
and cobs, 60 pounds.

LVitrogen. Phos. Acid. Potash.

Potatoes : Miu Srsrrts -1s one eee ee 20 ag 53
MOPS tarde ete Basdest Meee aha eee 4 II

AIN@t all. Stes 2 cae hee isos en 26 19 64

Wheat : GrAIM eiaje a Macnee nokta a Steet eee 30 13 8
SEGAWHE Se tes ead age eee I2 6 ity

° = —— —

Motalcc7 Arcs. en eee ee 42 19 25

inciantcorn: SeGraicrvo0 oe oh a= reer wn eaten 48 20 12
SLOVEL 9s ecieas waite a eee 22 23 41

COS ee etx.) wei ee ev aednn eee tenes 2 4

Al Otall Si baht ets BUN ene ete eee TD. 43 57

From these figures it appears that to produce the potato crop,
potash is required in larger proportion ‘than either nitrogen or phos-
phoric acid, and that more is required for this crop than for either
wheat or corn, notwithstanding that the latter is such a gross feeder.
When we come to consider the comparative exhaustion of the soil by
the two crops, remembering that of the corn crop, only the grain with
12 pounds of potash is liable to leave the farm, while of the potato
crop the tubers, with 53 pounds of potash for every acre, are usually
exported, the usefulness of potash manures in potato culture would
appear to be very plainly indicated. To the quantity of nitrogen

Analyses and Fertilizers. | S23

gathered by the potato crop, as given in the table, something must be
added for the tops, with reference to which we find no determinations
of this element. Making due allowance for this, the best manure for
the potato would seem to be a ‘‘ complete” one; that is, one contain-
ing all three of these substances—nitrogen, phosphoric acid and
potash, with a large proportion of the last.

I have for years endeavored to call attention to the fact that many of
the experiments made by farmers, and even by the officers of agricul-
tural experiment stations, for the purpose of finding out what fert1-
lizer constituents their land most needs, are delusive. If a given piece
of land needs potash and nothing else, then that piece of land, year -
after year, will not yield maximum crops without potash. If it hap-
pens to need phosphates only, then full crops cannot be raised with-
out some fertilizer which furnishes available phosphoric acid, as bone,
fish, etc. If it stands in need of nitrogen only, nitrogen must be used.
Here we have a plain case. The one ingredient necded is supplied in
either trial and the land responds by giving the fullest crops of which
itis capable. Each of the three farmers may truly say, ‘‘my land
needs potash ’—‘‘ mine phosphate ”—‘‘ mine nitrogen.” But suppose
in the first example phosphate is needed as well as potash; in the
second potash is needed as well as phosphate ; in the third either is
needed as well as nitrogen, what will probably be the result of the ex-
periments? That the first piece of land will not give an increase of
crop from the use of potash ; the second will make little or no re-
sponse to the phosphate, and the third none from the nitrogen. The
experimenters jump at the conclusion that their land does not stand
in need of the special fertilizers applied. A fourth example may be
given : The land needs all three of the fertilizers. The farmer spreads
on one plot or field burnt bone (phosphoric acid only), on the other sul-
phate of potash, on a third nitrate of soda and potash, on a fourth
potash and burnt bone. It is possible that not one of these fields or
plots will yield a full crop, and the experimenter arrives at the erro-
neous conclusion that chemical fertilizers are worthless upon his land.
His land needs all three and is not satisfied with any one or two. If
we would ascertain whether a given piece of land needs a special or
complete food, a complete fertilizer should be used on one plot, and
upon another, a fertilizer from which one or another of its constitu-
ents is omitted. And it may be necessary to repeat this several

126 The New Potato (CHEITE.

years. A comparison then between the several crops would be likely
to answer the question whether the omitted constituent was the one
most needed or not at all needed. But there is still another cause
which might mislead farmers as to the effects of chemical fertilizers,
or other chemicals used as such. We allude to the action of certain
substances which are either not plant-foods or incomplete foods.
Such, for example, are salt, plaster, lime, sulphate or muriate of
potash, nitrate of soda or sulphate of ammonia, etc. The fact that
any one of these has greatly increased crops would not prove that the
land needed it ; it would not even prove that the substance was a
plant-food. The increased crop might be due to food in the soil, pre-
viously inert, rendered soluble by the salt, plaster, lime, nitrate of
soda, or potash. In other words, their action was essentially that of a
stimulant, because the land has been forced to yield up what it was
otherwise powerless to have done. So it is that certain more or less
impoverished soils may be lashed into yielding abundantly, while every
year becoming poorer, until they become so exhausted that they have
nothing more for the time to give. Everything has been taken from
them, and now every thing must be supplied. A neighboring farmer
ten years ago told the writer that his father had ‘‘ brought up” his
farm by lime, and that he (the son) proposed to continue its_use.
He has since changed his mind, for the reason that he cannot raise
paying crops without manure or fertilizers, no matter how much lime
is used. How many readers have had a similar experience? We
may here call attention to the fact, not generally considered, that two
‘‘ complete” fertilizers which analyze the same, may yet give very
different results, not because the food of the one is more available
than that of the other, as when leather or shoddy is employed to
furnish nitrogen, or undissolved South Carolina rock phosphoric
acid, but because in the one different forms of the same constituent
may beused. Thus, for example, in a potato fertilizer, if the nitro-
gen were furnished by bone and blood, both slowly soluble, we should
not look for so large a yield as if nitrate of soda and sulphate of
ammonia were added. What is needed is food adapted to the plant
from the beginning to maturity, so thatit shall not suffer during any period
of its growth, in so far as abundant and assimilable food can prevent.
And these facts, which are positively known to be facts, we would
gladly, by iteration and reiteration, if necessary, impress upon those

Analyses and Fertilizers. 127

readers who, through perfunctory investigations or from merely
jumping at conclusions without any rational data to guide them, de-
nounce concentrated fertilizers as worthless.

HOW MONEY IS THROWN AWAY.

Suppose, as has previously been said, we should separate farm ma-
nure into three parts, viz, : phosphoric acid, potash and nitrogen, the
three constituents which, as we have had it drummed into us for
many years, all plants must be supplied with, and which impoverished
soils do not furnish in available forms. Suppose that we give a crop
a large quantity of ove of these constituents, and that the crop shows
no benefit from the application ; would that prove farm manure to be
ineffectual? Not at all. Suppose we sow super-phosphaite or potash,
or nitrogen, upon our soil—only one, or even two—and the crop is
not appreciably better ; would that prove that the so-called chemical
fertilizers are of no use? It would prove just exactly as much in the
one case as inthe other. It would only prove one of two things ;
first, that the soil was rich and needed no plant food, or second, that
the soil was so impoverished that it needed a/.

If farmers buy bone ash, which furnishes only phosphoric acid ; or
sulphate or muriate of potash, which furnishes only potash ; or ni-
trate of soda or sulphate of ammonia, which furnishes only nitrogen,
and spread it upon a poor soil which needs a// three, they will get no

_ adequate increase of crops—and they may rely upon it. But they

must not, therefore, condemn the use of concentrated fertilizers. In
this connection, let me ask the reader again to refer to the effects of
the various fertilizers upon potatoes raised upon my ‘‘ worn-out”
soil. Is not the lesson taught by them conclusive ? Potash, as it ex-
ists in kainit, applied at the rate of two tons to the acre, gave no in-
crease in the yield. Burnt bone had little effect. Nitrogen was not
effective, except (in most cases) to make an early promise which was
broken later. But the complete fertilizers gave large yields.

I conjure you, farmers (and I would repeat it again and again), un-
less you desire to throw your money away—do not buy special or low
grade fertilizers, unless by actual tests you happen to know just what
your land needs. A cheap fertilizer means one that supplies a low
per cent. of plant-food; or else it means a special or comparatively

128 The New Potato Culture.

worthless fertilizer, like ground leather, hair, wool, plaster, salt or
something of the kind.

Suppose you apply 1,000 pounds of bone-flour to your land each
year for 10 years. Finding it of great service for five years, it is con-
tinued. But the farmer finds, later, that it does not increase his
crops at all. He might naturally, though erroneously, call his land
‘“bone-sick.”” Now, let him apply potash and the land responds at
once, giving the finest crop ever raised upon the farm. The trouble

was, not that the land had too much bone or phosphoric acid, buttoo .

little potash. The crops had appropriated all the available potash
and could not live on bones alone. So, in like manner, land might
seem to become ‘‘potash-sick.” In such a case bone-flour would
prove a specific cure. Farmers should not overlook the fact that
when an imperfect food alone is furnished to plants, they cannot
_ thrive unless the soil supplies the constituents which the imperfect
food does not supply. In the course of time the land yields up its
present store and a perfect food must be supplied. |

A TALK WITH FARMERS ABOUT CHEMICAL FERTILIZERS.

The following is almost a verbatim report of talks I have had with
farmers living about us. It may serve to emphasize what has pre-
viously been said upon the rational use of fertilizers. See also
Chapter XVIII.

FARMER A.

‘¢ How did your potatoes turn out °”

Farmer A.: ‘* Those manured with farm manure plowed in last
fall yielded 200 bushels to the acre. Those upon which I used ‘ phos-
phates’ yielded about 150.”

‘¢What was the ‘phosphate’ ?”

A.: **I don’t know. I bought it for $20 a ton.”

‘¢Did you ever try a higher grade of fertilizer ?”’

A.: ‘Yes. Last year I paid $30 a ton, and spread it on rye at
the rate of 500 pounds tothe acre. I left a piece about 50 feet square
without any ‘phosphate’. This piece was just as good as the rest.
Once I tried kainit, but it did not increase the crop of corn. There
is nothing like farm manure, if I could only afford to buy it. Limeis
the best fertilizer forme. It has done my land more good than all

232

your ‘ phosphates.

= pw

‘

Analyses and Fertilizers. 129

‘¢What do you understand by the word ‘phosphate’ ?”

A.: ‘I understand it to mean chemical fertilizers.”

‘¢ And what are the chemical fertilizers made of ?”

A.: ‘*Of ‘phosphates’, I suppose.”’

‘¢ Here we have a ‘phosphate’ that costs $45 per ton, and here is an-
other brand for $20. Why is it, think you, that many farmers pre-
fer the $45 ‘phosphate’ ?”

A.: ‘‘I cannot say. Ishould‘feel that I was throwing away my
money. My idea was to experiment with the low-priced fertilizer first

and if I found it increased my crops, I then proposed to try a higher-

priced article. But my opinion is that ‘phosphates’ don’t pay on
my farm.”
FARMER B.

‘‘Do you use chemical fertilizers ?”’

Farmer B.: ‘‘No. Iuselime. My father before me brought up
this farm with lime, and I use it in preference to anything else, ex-
cept manure.”’

‘*Do you buy manure ?”

B.: ‘‘No. I use what we make from our two horses, four cows,
from the pigs and poultry. My farm consists of 70 acres.”

‘¢ Do you raise wheat ?”

B.: ‘*No, we cannot raise wheat any more. Besides, rye pays
better. The straw always brings a good price.”

‘¢ And why cannot you raise wheat ?”

A.: ‘*Oh! the climate seems to have changed, or at any rate the
farm does not seem to be adapted to it any longer.”

‘¢And how about corn? Can you raise as much corn as you could

y years ago 2”

B:: ‘Field corn is no longer a paying crop with me. I raise sweet
corn, manuring it in the hill, and send it to market. Sweet corn,
lima beans and tomatoes pay me best. All are well manured in the
hall;”’

‘*Do you raise clover ?”

B.: ‘‘Yes, we seed to timothy and clover after sweet corn. But

clover is uncertain now-a-days. Sometimes we gct a catch, oftener

not. The same change of climate seems to be the cause. Ycars ago,
we could raise peaches here in abundance. Now they are of no ac-
count, and so it goes.”

r—9

130 The New Potato Culture.

‘¢Do you think that lime supplies to the soil all the food that plants
take from it ?”

B.: ‘*That’s an old story. No, probably not. But I believe that
the soil is practically inexhaustible, and that lime makes its food solu-

ble as our crops need it. My belief is that chemical fertilizers pass —

through the soil, so that nothing remains after the first season.”
‘¢ Probably you are aware that J. B. Lawes, of England, has raised
crops with fertilizers alone for over 45 years, and that he harvests as

large crops as by the use of farm manure, which for the same length .

of time has been applied to other plots of the same crops.”

‘¢Does it pay him ?”

‘¢ The money equivalent is about:the same upon both plots.”

B.: ‘I believe that all editors of farm papers advocate the use of
fertilizers. They seem to have great faith in quack medicines also.
I receive probably fifty free specimen copies every season. They are
full of ail sorts of fraudulent advertisements. In one column they
advocate temperance; they declare that they will not insert unreliable
advertisements at any price. In other columns I find advertisements
of bitters, which are alcohol in part ; of positive cures for consumption,

fits, deafness, cancer; of mines and land schemes; of British claim:
agencies and all sorts of frauds, which are frauds upon the face of

them. You editors can’t afford to tell the truth about these things.
You would iose your advertising patronage. Editors run their papers
to make money, and you must crack up chemical fertilizers.”

‘¢Do you read the daily or religious papers ?”’

B.: ‘*Yes, I read the weekly issue of the daily papers anda cei

religious paper.

‘‘And do you find that they are more careful to exclude unreliable

advertisements ?”’

B.: .‘‘Not at all. I have no faith in the integrity and sincerity of
editors. There is no class of teachers so given to lying; no class
that so set themselves up on a high pinnacle of morality, that are so
ready to bob up or down according to the pay they receive.”

FARMER C.

Farmer C.: ‘‘I have never tried chemical fertilizers, but think of |

doing so. Which make would you advise me to buy, and what price
to pay?”

Analyses and Fertilizers. E3t

‘¢ The price depends upon the quality of the fertilizer. All reliable
manufacturers charge about the same price for the same quality.
“Which gives the most plant food for the money can only be ascer-
tained by chemical analyses, and these do not always show the agri-

cultural value. One article might show as high a per cent. of nitro-
gen as another, while in one case the nitrogen is in leather or hair,
and not available as plant food, and in the other the nitrogen is in
nitrate of soda or sulphate of ammonia, which is in a soluble form.
The phosphoric acid in one may be in bone, in the other in raw South
‘Carolina rock. The first is worth seven cents, the second only two
cents a pound. The way to find out what fertilizer to buy is to find
out what kind your land needs. This can only be done by using the
various constituents separately and in varying combinations. In the
absence of this information, what are called complete fertilizers should
preferably be used; that is, those which furnish all kinds of plone
food in which the soil is probably deficient.”

C.: . ‘*And what do they cost ?”

‘From the lowest to the highest price. One firm may sell a com-
plete fertilizer for $20 a ton—complete because it contains one or the
other forms of phosphate, potash and nitrogen—another may cost
$60 a ton, because it contains a higher per cent. of the same con-
stituents.”

Gos Which am I to choose then ?”’

‘«TIt is merely a question of the cost of transportation and applica-
tion. Here are two fertilizers, one costing $25 a ton and the other
$50. We will suppose that the first contains just half the plant food
thatthe second contains. You pay half price and have twice as much
to spread on your land and twice as much to pay freight and carriage
upon.”

FARMER D.

Farmer D.: ‘‘I understand that you recommend a complete fer-
tilizer if a farmer has determined to use fertilizers, and does not
know just what his land needs. You say that a complete fertilizer
means one that contains phosphoric acid, potash and nitrogen. The
land is supposed to have a supply of the rest. Do not raw-bone and

; potash make a complete fertilizer ?”
‘¢The word comnlete is an unfortunate one as applied to fertilizers,

132 The New Potato Culture:

the same as ‘‘ phosphate,”’ because both are misleading. A complete
fertilizer could be made up that would be worth less than $5 a ton.
Muck, containing a trace of each cf the three plant foods, would be as
complete in the mercantile sense as if it contained large percentages.”

D.: ‘‘Raw-bone contains phosphoric acid and nitrogen. Suppose
we add potash in any form, would that not be a good complete fer-
tilizer ?”’

‘Not the best. Raw-boneis slow to decompose. Neither its nitro
gen nor phosphoric acid is immediately available. Besides its per
cent. of nitrogen is rather low, being less generally than three per
cent. Probably the best fertilizers are made up of many different
sorts of plant food. For example, the nitrogen may be supplied by
fish, nitrate of soda, sulphate of ammonia, blood and guano. Insuch
fertilizers, the nitrogen is available trom the beginning to the end of
the plant’s life. First, the nitrate of soda is at once ready for the
plant; then the sulphate of ammonia; then the guano, blood and fish.
It is the same with phosphoric acid. This should be furnished by
super: phosphate first, then by raw-bone, etc., so that the plant shall
have a ready supply at every stage of its growth.”

D.: ‘*How am I to be assured that I get all this, even though I
buy the highest grades of fertilizers ?” . |

‘©You can’t. All you can do is to buy of reputable firms who agree
to sell you what you ask for. The analyses, as published in the bul-
letins periodically issued by experiment stations, are helpful guides;
the crops must show the rest.”

D.: ‘*My neighbor used 600 pounds to the acre of high-grade
$40-fertilizer last season on his corn. The crop was very poor.”

‘¢ And the season was dry ?”

DE aRVies x.
‘¢ Have you never known farm manure to fail in such a season ?
D.: ‘*Do you advise farmers to use fertilizers ?”’

‘¢Jt is far beyond any one to advise in the matter, further than to
say that farmers cannot use them to the best advantage, except by
chance, unless they study the science of fertilizers as they would
study a book, and then, with the light of such knowledge, experiment
with them in their own fields. Each farmer would then be enabled
to answer the question for himself. No one can answer it for him,

Analyses and Fertilizers. 133

THE POTATO’S NEEDS.

To sum up the demand of successful potato culture, a farmer must
_know, by actual trial on his own grounds, what varieties succeed best,
/in order to insure the best results ; also, if possible, at what season

he had best plant his crop so that it may be supported by plentiful
rain-falls at the time of the setting of the tubers; also the fields best
adapted to the growth of potatoes; then he must act accordingly.
In a series of years a iarmer, acting on such general principles, will
be more likely to be successful than one who p.ants such sorts as he
may have on hand, and at such times as best suits his convenience,
without regard to the quality of the seed or its adaptedness to his
sol, as it is now a well established fact that a variety that succeeds
‘well in some localities, is comparatively worthless in others.

A mellow soil, a moist soil well drained ; plenty of potash, nitro
gen, phosphoric acid, lime, and possibly magnesia, sulphur and salt,
for mechanical effects, or for an effect not understood ; give the seed
pieces enough flesh to support them until the shoots can be sup-
ported by their own roots. Plant them in depth according to the soil,
whether inclining to clay or sand, from three inches to five inches.
The distance of the hills or drills, and the pieces in them, should be
regulated by the vigor and size of the varieties planted. Rank-grow-
ing varieties, the same as tall-growing corn, will not yield well if
planted too closely together. Hilling-up on well drained land never
increases the crop. The fibrous roots extend from hill to hill, from
row to row, and the soil should not be taken from them to heap it up
about the stems where it is not needed. In hill culture, where the
tubers crowd each other out of the ground, hilling-up is necessary
only to protect the potatoes from the air and light. Broadcast ma-
nuring is better than manuring in the hill, for the reason that it is the
fibrous roots that need the food—wzof the tubers, which are fed by
the fibrous roots. Kill the potato beetles before they have injured
the foliage. Amy injury to the foliage will impair the vigor of the

_ plant, and less vigor in the plant means less crop.

THE DIFFERENCE.

It is unfortunate that the name ‘ chemical fertilizer’? should be
generally accepted as something different from ‘‘manure.’ They are

134 The New Potato Culture.

precisely the same thing. That is to say, if we desire to answer the
question, ‘‘ What is manure ?”’ we must answer that it consists of just
those constituents which by chemists are called nitrogen, sulphuric
acid, gypsum, potash, copperas, ammonia, magnesia, silicon, etc. If
we burn a quantity of straw, grass, wood, flesh or any other sub-
stance, we have the ash constituents remaining. Zy/cy are the so-
called chemical fertilizers, excepting that the nitrogen, carbon, oxy-
gen, hydrogen, etc., have escaped in the form of gas. If we take a
rock and pound it to a very fine powder, we have a manure or fertilizer,
and its value depends upon its content of those materials which plants
need. We do not consider bone or South Carolina rock a chemical
fertilizer fer se, and yet either is, in fact, just as much a chemical fer-
tilizer as is nitrate of soda, sulphate of ammonia, muriate or sulphate
of potash, for the reason that they are valuable as a plant food only
as they contain those substances. It is just the same with any kind
of manure. The essential difference between farm manure and chem-
ical fertilizers is that the former is bulky, slow to decay, yielding up
to plants its nourishing elements not until they have become soluble by
slow combustion. While, too, this 4/2 is decomposing, it exerts a
mechanical influence on the soil, making it lighter, admitting more air
and moisture to the plants, which are hungry to avail themselves of
either,

It is with agricultural chemists as with other scientific individuals—

they are not aware to what extent the employment of so-called scien--

tific terms renders their work Greek to the mass of those they seek to
instruct. If farmers were at once to understand that chemical fertil-
izers are merely concentrated farm manure, they would not be so prone

to regard a sufficient understanding of the action of these fertilizers.

as something beyond their comprehension without an amount of study
which they believe themselves unable to give to the subject. Comcen-
‘rated manure and farm manure would be the better names to give re-
spectively to the waste products of the farm and to those self-same
products which are now known only as ‘‘ chemical fertilizers. ’

GAP ER ay

Seealing Potatoes. How to plant the seed and treat the seed-
lings. Every gardener and farmer should ratse his own
varieties. How to select. Should we save tubers from
the most productive hills? Why the same vartety varies.

T IS NOW some fifteen years ago that I began to raise potatoes
from seed. Previous to that time, raising potatoes from seed was
supposed to be a very hard thing to do; there were “‘secrets

about it known only to a few,” I was told, upon inquiry of a leading
seedsman of those days. The seed and seedlings needed ‘‘ bottom
heat,” and thereafter even temperature and steady moisture, such as
could be given only in glass structures fitted especially for such work.
The truth is, as many of my readers are now aware, tnat potato seeds
germinate somewhat more readily than tomato seeds, and, until set
out in the open ground, may be treated in precisely the same way.
From the time that I found this out up to this day, I have advocated
seedling potato culture, through the farm press. New varieties of
potatoes are absolutely necessary from time to time. All varieties,
after a'time, degenerate or ‘‘run out,’’ as most farmers select their
‘¢seed.’’ Millions of dollars have been spent for new potato ‘‘ seed,”
that might just as well have been raised at home.

SEED BALLS OR FRUIT.

Let us gather the seed balls, apples, or whatever one chooses to
call tnem, from the potato vines as soon as they begin to die. These

: (135)

136 The New Potato Culture.

may be kept until they begin to wither or rot, when the flesh is parted
from the seed and the latter dried and preserved the same as any
other seeds, until sowing time arrives. The seed ball of a potato is
the proper fruit, as the tomato is the fruit of the tomatoplant. The
tuber of a potato is merely a swollen underground stem, quite dis-
tinct from the roots. Indeed, tubers often form above ground in the
axils of the green stems, as no doubt readers have had occasion to
notice. The so-called ‘‘ eyes’ of the potato tuber are buds which,
as we also know, push and form stems and leaves feeding upon the
decomposing flesh of the tuber itself. Potatoes may be, and are,
grown from these stems, and in this way large quantities may be
raised from a single tuber by pulling off the shoots and planting
them as they grow. But this is a branch of the subject which is
treated elsewhere.

In times gone by potato plants fruited plentifully, and potato apples
could be procured in unlimited quantities. It is different now.
Many of our present kinds do not fruit at all—some of them do not
even bloom. Twelve years ago I raised 62 different varieties and
was unable either to procure any pollen for the purpose of crossing,
or a single seed ball. The past season, of 50 different kinds, ten
bore seed balls, one—Wall’s Orange—in large quantities, a cluster of
whichis shown at Fig. 14, p.139. Whenitisconsidered that potatoes
have been bred and cultivated for the tubers alone, it is not surpris-
ing perhaps, that the plants should incline to fruit less and less with
every year. Some say that the yield of potatoes 50 years ago was
greater than now, ana that, therefore, the potato is less productive
now than then. This, while perhaps true in fact, is no doubt an erro-
neous view as to the cause. If our ancestors had had our present

varieties they would probably have produced very much larger crops..

The buds or eyes of potatoes sometimes vary, as has been stated,
producing potatoes that differ in quality, in color or in time of maturing.
Thus we have the Late Rose, Beauty of Hebron, etc., from Early
Rose and Beauty of Hebron. But potatoes never ‘‘ mix in the hill”
from contact, as some suppose. We can produce new varieties a!
will ouly from the seed.

m+ ' '
a

Seedling Potatoes. 137

SELECTION OF SEEDS.

It seems hardly necessary to advise that balls from the best va-
rieties should alone be saved—the best yielders, the
best in quality, in shape’ the bést keepers and those
which are least liable to disease. If our own po-
tato vines produce no balls, probably they may be
found in our neighbors’ fields or patches. If they
too fail, we may write to friends in other states or
localities or we may purchase them of seedsmen.
We will suppose that the reader has neither green-
Fic. 12. houses nor plant frames of any kind. We should
next require a sunny window facing the east or south

or, better, southeast, and a room in which the temperature never

falls below 35 degrees.

PLANTING.

Provide well-drained flower pots, filled with mellow garden soil.
Press’ the soil firmly with the bottom of another flower pot. Then
sow the seeds evenly half-an-inch apart and cover with one-eighth
‘inch of soil, and again press the soil—this time lightly. Place these
pots in pans or buckets of water so that the water comes up outside
the pots nearly as high as the surface of the soil, and leave them
until the surface soil begins to show it is wet. Remove them then
to the sunny window and cover each with glass. So treated they will
need no more water until germination takes place, which will be in
about a week or ten days. The glasses may be removed as soon as
most of the sceds have sprouted. It is better, however, to remove
the glass gradually, first by raising it an eighth of an inch, then a —
quarter and finally lifting it off entirely. We prefer this method of
supplying water to surface-watering for several reasons, chief among
which is that the soil is not washed off the seed. The first leaves ap-
pear as in Fig. 13 A, the later leaves asin Fig. 13 B. We should |
advise that the seeds be sown not until late February, or early March.
The little plants will then be large enough to transplant to little pots
(say three inches in diameter) by early April. A pocket-knife blade
is as good as anything for the purpose of ‘‘ pricking out”’ the plants,

only one of which should be planted in each thumb- pot.

138 The New Potato Culture.

CARE OF THE PLANTS.

By April 20 many leaves will be found to be of the shape and size of
Fig. 12, while the plants will have reached the average height of four
inches—some strong,some puny. The one thing now to be borne in
mind is that these seedlings do not receive a check from over or in-
sufficient watering, from too much or

too little heat, or from any other ~ /
cause, otherwise the swelling stems or STALN2
little tubers will cease to grow or they
‘7
A |

will make a second growth.

As soon as all danger of frost is
over, we may now transplant our seed-
ling vines to a warm, well prepared
plot. Dig little holes with a trowel,
one foot apart, in drills three feet apart, oe
and thump the balls of earth, which iN)
will be held firmly together by the Fic. 13.
fibrous roots of the plants, out of the
pots and set them firmly in these holes. Thereafter their treatment
will be the same as potato plants from eyes.

If it be desired to raise the largest crop and the largest tubers from
seed, and one has a greenhouse, the seed may be sown in January.
As the little pots into which the seedlings are transplanted become
filled with roots, they (the seedlings) may be thumped out and placed
in larger pots. Set out in the open, as above described, after there is
no longer danger of frost, the tops will grow as large as those of
other plants, while many of the tubers will be found to be of market-

mae

able size.

Our view has been that farmers may raise seedlings that will be
found to be better adapted to their farms than most of the hundreds
‘ of kinds offered for sale. Then again in the case of a lucky hit, the
variety might be sold to some enterprising seedsman for a price that
would well repay the producer for all his time and trouble. Theseeds
will sprout about as readily astomato seeds. The trouble begins when
the little tender plants are set out in the open ground. The beetles
attack both leaf and stem and destroy them inafew days. The seed-
lings cannot be saved by any application of arsenic or other poisons.

Seedling Potatoes. 139

Fic. 14.
Fruit balls of Wall’s Orange potato.

The injury to the leaves and stems which the beetles or grubs will eat
before the poison kills them will destroy the vines. Besides they are
so tender that they cannot even stand the plaster alone—much less

poisoned plaster.

140 The New Fotato Culture.

As soon as the seedlings are set in the garden, mosquito netting,
one yard wide, is stretched lengthwise of the rows and supported
above the vines by half-hoops or sticks, placed at intervals of four
feet, like the rafters of a double pitch roof, and the peaks are con-
nected by horizontal sticks tied to the peaks, or where the two sticks
meet, giving all needed support to the netting above, while the edges
on either side are held in place below merely by covering them with
an inch of soil, or by narrow boards. We have now a two-pitched
or oval covering, which is quickly made and at merely the cost of the
netting. This protects the vines thoroughly until they fill the trian-
gular or oval space, when they are large and strong enough to stand
poisoned plaster, and the netting may be removed, to be used a second
time the next season.

SHOULD, WEY SEEBCE SHED) POTATOES PROM THE, MOS PROD wC.

AAD, GSO LIES

Some years ago, Dr. Sturtevant, the director of the New York Experi-
ment Station at the time, stated that he found that potatoes selected
for ‘*seed’’ from the most prolific hills gave greater yields than the
‘‘seed”’ selected from hills yielding the smallest number and weight
of tubers.

The late Peter Henderson, commenting upon this, took the view
that ‘‘further experiments will show that this increased productive- —
ness will not continue to hold, because the reason for the greater or
less yield was probably only an accident of circumstances, due to
specially favorable conditions of the set made to form the hill, or to
being highly fertilized, or to some such cause that gave it this tem-
porary advantage; and that the chances are all against any perma-
nent improvement being made by such seiections.”

This is certainly a very important question. A potato, it must be re-
peated, is a peculiar stem, with buds. Its peculiarity is that which gives

it value as food, which is starchy, tender and wholesome. When
these swollen stems are planted, the buds (eyes) grow, the same as

any other buds, and from the underground portion of these shoots
issue roots and other stems, the extremities of which swell, forming
tubers. Some of these grow large and shapely ; others small and ill
shapen. Still others are just beginning to form as the season ad-

Seedling Potatoes. T4I

vances, even as the vines die and the tubers are harvested. Every
so-called variety of potato has, when all its needs are supplied, a cer-
tain limit as to size and perfection. Ad tubers which do not so develop
are retarded or injured in one way or another, Some are harmed by
drought or by too much moisture; some by insects; while the shape
is modified by the heaviness or lightness of the soil, by stones or by
growing too close together. Potatoes grown in pure sand, and fed
with liquid food, are, as we have shown, always smooth and perfect in
form; that is, perfect, according to the standard of the particular vari-

ety cultivated. It may well be thought that any irregularity in shape,

due to stones or a too compact soil, etc., would never be repeated and
become fixed were such deformed potatoes planted again and again.

_ It seems reasonable, however, to suppose that those tubers which are

harmed by parasites, or rot, or insects, have thereby sustained in-
juries which, decomposing the tissue, must weaken the virility of the
buds and shoots. The smaller and smallest potatoes of a crop are
those which have been dwarfed from some cause. The formation of
more tubers than the parent plant could support is, perhaps, one
cause; and the formation of tubers too late to mature is, no doubt,
another. It may be a matter of pure conjecture whether, in the
former case, the dwarfed potatoes are possessed of as much vigor as
the largest one. But, in the latter case, all analogies point to the
conclusion that immature tubers, as well as immature cuttings of any
kind, will produce comparatively feeble plants. This is well exem-
plified by the weakened constitution of grape-vines grown from green
wood.

What is called ‘‘ bud variation’’ is, as is well known, common
enough. Thus it is we have many of our most prized orna-
mental plants, as, for example, weeping and variegated trees, shrubs
and house plants. The writer has in mind a willow, a few branches
of which bore leaves splashed and striped with bright yellow. By
starting cuttings from the variegated shoots for several generations,
the variegation has become fixed, while the original tree has lost its
variegation. Similar cases often occur with potatoes. We have now
a purple-skinned potato that matured on a plant all the other tubers
of which were buff-skinned, and the potatoes are notably different in
quality. If such qualities may be fixed by selection, why may not

_alsq inererased prodnctiveness he fixed by selection? Let us now

142 The New Potato Culture.

speak of the variations which occur in young and seedling potatoes,
which, we fancy, will give emphasis to the view we have taken, viz:
that productiveness may be increased by selecting, not only tubers
from the best hills, but, it may be added, from the shapeliest and
most perfect individuals in such hills.

Let us sow seeds—true seeds from the fruit or seed-ball. Each
plant may produce, let us say 15 tubers, varying in size froma pea to
an egg. They will also vary in shape. Some will be round and
smooth ; others pointed at the ends, others long and slender. Every
experienced seedling potato grower knows that he can generally se-
cure the shape desired by planting tubers of that shafe and then again
selecting the same shape for the next crop, until the variety is con-
sidered established and ready to turn upon the market. From the
same seedling plant, therefore, he can oftentimes propagate varieties
which shall be round, flattened, cylindrical, or ‘‘ kidney”’ shaped.

Seedling potatoes often, also, vary in color, and the color can be fixed

by selection, as just described. No less does the productiveness of
tubers from the same seedling plant vary. This I have seen in my
experience again and again. The tubers from an original seedling
plant will vary in yield as much as they will vary in shape or color,
or in depth of eyes. I do not know the practice of a/ originators of
new potatoes, but I do know that some of them select for the second
planting those tubers which closely resemble one another in shape
and general appearance wéthout the least regard for or any knowl-
edge of their different yielding powers. The next season selection is
again made from these according to appearance, time of ripening,
etc. Finally the new variety is ready to be sold. The tubers bring
from 25 cents to $1 a pound, and single potatoes are sent all over
the country. Is it surprising that many report that the new potato
is immensely productive, while others report otherwise? Further
than this: I know of seedling potato growers that select tubers from
more than one hill if the seed planted is the same and the appearance
of tubers of the different seedlings is the same. According to this,
a dozen or more kinds differing in productiveness and in quality are
sent out wzder the same name. Evidently we should gain in such cases
by selecting the best tubers of the most productive hills. Evidently
again, farmer Jones may find the new seedling of a better quality
and a greater yielder than farmer Brown, who purchased the ‘‘ seed”

NA te APs

af ‘Seedling Potatoes.

a the same Secdemnan: and gave the same or even better cultiva:
The fact is that the two men plant and raise potatoes which ~

Beaty different in quality and productiveness, though to all out-
d appearances they are much the same, .

of,
LET IT BE REPEATED.

eA ie keel

Care of tie seed. Exposing sound seed to light and sun before
planting. How to detect impotent eyes. Lime as a pre-
server. Handling. Digging potatoes by machinery.
Potsoning.

T IS my opinion that it will pay farmers to place their seed-pieces
(if sound, that is, not sprouted) in light, sunny places ten days
before planting time. They can then cut their seed intelligently,
according to the number and vigor of the eyes. In this way a

perfect stand may be secured, and it may be doubted if it can be se-
cured in any other way. The seed, of course, must be kept sound, or
nothing can be gained by the exposure to light and warmth. Prob-
ably seed raised in Ohio or Pennsylvania or Illinois will yield just as
well as seed from Maine or Canada, provided it can be kept from
sprouting.

Let us place our sound seed then in a temperature of 70 degrees
for ten days. All the potent eyes will develop a short, stubby, warty
erowth not easily broken off in the usual handling, and the tubers
may be cut accordingly.

MGE ER Wiis lee Jerrard, of Caribou, Maine, plants his seed potatoes
fresh from his cool cellars when they are nearly as dormant as when
dug in the autumn before. He finds they come through the ground
with a big vigorous shoot and maintain a superior vigor all through
the season. Seed potatoes from which sprouts have been removed
once or more, lack vitality as compared with fresh ones. He stores
his potatoes in deep, cool cellars, in bins 4 feet wide and 3% feet
deep, one above another, two high, with a floor and air space between
them. They have plenty of air in the fall, but not in the spring, and
they do not sprout until June.

(144)

Care of the Secd and Crop. 145

Mr. Geo. E. Waring, a correspondent, says that while we all know
that a low temperature prevents tubers from sprouting, it is not gen-
erally known that cold much below 40 degrees and quite above freez-
ing, will permanently impair their power of germination. Seed po-
tatoes should be kept with much care in this respect, at a few de-
-grees higher than is best for winter apples, and never too low, even for
a short time.

LIME

has often been recommended as a preventive of potato rot. The
N. Y. Experiment Station does not find itso. The Director filled two
barrels with sound White Star potatoes, in the fall of 1883, in one of
which he sprinkled air-slaked lime, as the tubers were put in, in suffi-
cient quantity to whiten them. On April 3d, the potatoes in both
barrels were examined. The one treated with lime had 68 decayed
tubers, while the other contained but 52. It thus appears that in
this experiment the lime exerted no beneficial influence.

Many people are in favor of leaving potatoes in the ground to th-
latest safe hour, say early November, and this even for those matur-
ing in July. Taking one season with another, this has been the
writer's experience—an experience rendered necessary, in great part,
in order to secure to his experiments equivalent conditions.

HANDLING.

A friend writes that he has tried several ways of harvesting pota-
toes, but finds that if good help can be had, digging by hand is the
best. Last year his men dug with a potato fork, taking two rows
each and going backward, throwing the potatoes from the two rows
together, leaving them in good shape to pick up. He had one man
that would dig roo bushels every day, and dig them clean. His po-
tatoes are sorted in the field; to do the job there requires less time
_ and labor than when left for some other time. Small potatoes are
drawn into the barn and fed to the cows, except several barrels that
are put into the cellar to be cooked and fed to the chickens during
the winter.

Another correspondent writes that he digs his potatoes by hand,
- with hooks ; he prefers hooks to forks, hoes or diggers; he can get
P.—I0 |

146 The New Potato Culture.

all the potatoes in a hill without bruising them. He always sorts in

the field, making two pickings. Small potatoes are fed to stock.

Owing to the waste of shrinkage, interest, resorting, frost, rotting and

other risks one must run, the chances of an extra price in spring are
not enough to pay for holding over.

A third writes that if the potatoes are to be shipped in bulk in a
car, or put directly into the cellar, the cheapest way to handle them
isin sacks. Scatter the sacks along so they will be convenient, and
pick the potatoes up into small baskets, so that you can hold the sack
and empty the potatoes into it without help. Then put only a bushel
into a sack ; one man can easily throw this into the wagon without
help, and there will be no need of tying a sack only half full. With
one man in the wagon to place the sacks, and two to hand them up,
it is the work of a very few moments to load, and the unloading can
be done as rapidly.

Every person who raises many potatoes, writes a fourth friend,
should have a number of small boxes holding about a bushel each.
These can be placed along the rows and filled from the ground.
They should be placed in the wagon and not emptied until the barn
or cellar is reached. Most farmers handle their potatoes over three
or four times in passing from the ground to the bin. Why handle
them unnecessarily ? What must we think of a farmer who has to
mow down the weeds on his patch in order to find his potatoes ?

DIGGING POTATOES BY MACHINERY.

An expert can dig half an acre even of drilled potatoes, in a day of
ten hours, if the crop is clean. But ordinary men would be about
three days digging an acre. The cost of this amount of labor, in-
cluding the board, would be about $4. There are more farmers who
get their potatoes dug at a greater cost per acre than this, than there
are who pay less. Thus writes Mr. T. B. Terry, of Ohio, who has
been very successful in potato farming. For three years past he has
used a digger, which cost $1co. Hand labor has been entirely dis-
pensed with, except at the ends of the field and when digging unripe
potatoes for the market. About an hour’s work in the morning, and
as much more after dinner, would dig as many potatoes as his help
would pick up. With the conditions all just right, he has dug an acre
in two hours, but ordinarily it would take about three.

Care of the Seed and Crop. 147

Instead of paying out about $50 a season for extra help to dig his
crop, the machine now does it, and he hardly misses the time spent in
riding on it,and of course he pockets the $50. This is more than
literally true now, for of course the machine has more than saved its
first cost. Again, he can rush business, putting all the help at pick-
ing up. He is quite independent, alsg, for any one can pick up, but
few can dig well and fast. The machine wears fast, but probably
$10 would cover the wear to date. In replying to a question which I
asked Mr. Terry, he says that he has always practiced shallow culti-
vation until the growth of vines prevented it. It is true, as he be-
lieves, that the ‘‘ trenches’”’ render cultivation less necessary, but it
is nevertheless of the first importance if we would secure a maxi-
mum yield. Keep the surface soil mellow as long as possible.
Plants cannot do their best in a compact soil—it matters not what the
plant is —a rose, a pansy, a corn or potato plant. If I have en-
deavored to impress one thing more than another upon my readers
it is the importance of a mellow surface during plant growth. I
began its advocacy years ago when, upon a measured acre of land, I
raised over 130 bushels of shelled corn. At the same time I began
the advocacy of shallow cultivation for corn—since extended to pota-
toes. When I began to talk of shallow cultivation for corn, other
’ absurdity. Now,
there are few good farmers who care to sever the roots of the grow-
ing corn, and it is evident that shallow cultivation for potatoes is all
the while gaining friends.

journals were commending the ‘‘root pruning’

PARIS GREEN.

I am of the opinion now, as I have been for several years past,
that the most economical way to apply Paris green is to thoroughly
mix it with plaster, as previously described, rathcr than with water.
In the latter the poison cannot be equally distributed, stir the water
as we may. The upper portions of the water will always hold less
than the lower portions, where the insoluble heavy powder coliects in
larger quantity in spite of constant stirring. The leaves of the pota-
‘to plant are harmed by this. Not so with flour or plaster. While
we must use a dessertspoonful of the green to a pailful of water to
‘render it effective, the same quantity thoroughly mixed with two pail-
fule of plaster will prove just as effectual. }

148 The New Potato Culture.

Again, much of the water applied falls to the ground. A part only
is retained on the leaves, while nearly all of the poisoned plaster, if
skilfully applied, falls upon and is retained by the leaves until the -
next rain. The poiscned water, for the most part, does not seitle or
dry upon the edges of the leaves, but the poison collects as the water
evaporates near the center or mid-veins or depressions, so that the
beetles may eat up the best part of the leaf ere they encounter the
poison, and the leaves are for the most part destroyed.

PICKING OFF THE BEETLES.

;

Nobody that speaks from experience, as it seems to me, will advise _

people to pick off the first potato beetles (parent beetles) by hand in
order to save work later on when the eggs hatch out. We tried this
plan thoroughly for several years, and an estimate was kept and pub-
lished of how many beetles were thus gathered and destroyed daily.
But it seemed in a great measure a loss of time andtoil. It is true
enough that if all the parent beetles are destroyed, there will be no
grubs. But this is impracticable. A large proportion at any given
time are concealed under the soil, while others are creeping from
place to place, not to speak of those that come from neighboring
premises. In spite of our care in destroying the beetles and eggs,
myriads of grubs appeared, and we were at length driven to use

Paris green the same as in previous years. When writers advise us, ~

as many have done, te gather the beetles by hand, we want to tell
them that if they would practice this advice for one season they
would not care to offer it again.

§
2
5

CRAP TER XVil

THE RATEST: POTATO EXPERIMENTS MADE AT THE
“RURAL” GROUNDS.

Experiments during a ary season and in a variable soil. ‘Does
the high-grade potato fertilizer furnish enough nitrogen ?
Does it pay to use nitrate of potash (saltpeter) rather
than nitrogen and potash in other forms? The carefullest
experminents with fertilizers may yield contradictory re-
sults during a droughty season and in a variable soil.
The effects of high-grade fertilizers used from 440 to
1,320 pounds to the acre. The effects of nitrogen alone
and of from 55 to 440 pounds of nitrate of soda and nt-
trate of potash to the acre used alone and added to high-
grade potato fertilizers. The effects of snuff used in
quantities from 1,760 to 3,520 pounds to the acre, with
and without added nitrogen and potash. Trials with
Mapes’s, ‘Bowker’s and Bradley’s fertilizers separately and
Combined.

HE land, upon which this series of experiments was tried is
notably variable, and necessarily so, a fact that studious
readers will need to understand and bear in mind if they
hope to learn anything from this series of experiments—102

in number.
: Four years ago the land was a dead level, and so imperfectly
drained that water, after heavy rains, remained upon parts for

: several days.

Three years ago it was so graded that the land was made to slope
7 ; (149) |

150 New Potato Culture.

gently from the east to the west, and the surplus water to run intoa
ditch three feet deep, dug along the western boundary. This was
effected by casting the soil of the western portion first to the eastern-

most portion, and in smaller quantity as the western boundary was

neared. A soil varying in depth and fertility in every part was the
consequence. Last year sweet corn was raised upon it, fertilized
with 800 pounds to the acre of the Mapes Potato Manure. With this
exception it had never received either fertilizer or manure. The
field, varying from a sandy loam to a clay loam, with a varying sub-
soil from a brick clay in some places to sand in others, has always
been thought by native farmers of such low natural fertility that no
one cared to cultivate it.

The season was one of excessive dryness. Many wells in the
neighborhood never known to fail before were dry for six weeks dur-
ing the late summer and fall. There were few beetles, and Paris-
green, applied with plaster once, sufficed to killthem. There was no
blight. Rotten potatoes varied in number in the different trenches,
as will be noted. .

The attention of our readers is asked to the entire series of five
presentations, since each should be studied with the others.

In past years the soil of our several experiment fields, as we have

endeavored to show in preceding pages, needed a complete food, and -

nothing less would yield profitable crops. The present set of exper-
iments may also show certain general results which are not contra-
dictory, but in great part it will appear that a variable soil should
never be selected as one fit for experiments with commercial fertili-
zers or with plant food of any kind whatever, except as the design
may be to show its variability.

FIRST SERIES.

Average fertility of the soil as shown by no-manure trenches Nos. 6 and
15, 209.91 bushels to the acre.
Trench No. 1.—440 pounds Mapes Potato Manure.

Bushels.
Vield; per acre, -argetubersi- oss... ee - io) 298.83
Yield, per acre. SmiallPtubers).-- 221. -.- 0 =e 33.00
—EEE

Total yield, per acre .2...22%. 2 «c71.- ee 331.83

“=
i
7
:
™
3
:
:
.
3

No.

Experiments.

. 2.—440 pounds Mapes.

55 pounds nitrate soda.

Yield, per acre. Large tubers........
Yield, per acre. Small tubers........

Total yield, per acre.............

3.—440 pounds Mapes.
110 pounds nitrate soda.

Yield, per acre. Large tubers........
Yield, per acre. Small tubers........

Total yield, per acre...........--
. 4.—440 pounds Mapes.

220 pounds nitrate soda.

Yield, per acre. Large tubers........
Yield, per acre. Small tubers <2 50... .

Total yield, per acre :......-:--.-

5.—440 pounds Mapes.
330 pounds nitrate soda,

Yield, peracre. Large tubers........
_Yield, per acre. Small tubers........-

Total yield, per acre ...........--
. 6.—No. fertilizer.
Yield, per acre. Large tubers......--
Yield, per acre. Smalltubers ......-

Total yield, per acre ...........--
. 7.—880 pounds Mapes.
Yield, peracre. Large tubers.......-.
Yield, per acre. Small tubers.....-...-

Total yield, per acre ............
. 8.— 880 pounds Mapes.

55 pounds nitrate soda.

Yield, per acre. Large tubers.......-
Yigld, per acre. Small tubers......--.

Total yield, per acre .....---.---
. 9.—880 pounds Mapes.

110 pounds nitrate soda.

Yield, per acre. Largetubers.......-
Yield, peracre. Smalltubers.......-

Total yield, per acre.........----

«| 2.0! 6 wt 6) 6, 6 0) S .6) 0, o)is

Ce ee

eet eee eee

sisi rs) (w) SE apis) ©) (08-2. \0) (©

ecreree eee ee eee

ee ee we eee eee

oe eee ee ee ee ee

ails! aire ieiipiesa)ce: see. (Blue

ec ee eee eee ee et

Siielt el ie) wl wes) tans te

eee reo ee eee ee ee

oe eee eo oe ee eee

er ee ee ee

je: alts: weiter eeu ja le) econ = Ds

eoscereere et eee

ros Ge cca el Qa ceo

so, 0 0) 0: @ je) a _ ee ee ee

©, 4) ae) a tad) (ee) (et (6) ce) e) ee

No.

The New Potato Culture.

. 10.—880 pounds Mapes.

220 pounds nitrate soda.
Yield, per acre. Large tubers
Yield, per acre. Small tubers

oe © © © © 0 ee 6 0 oe © 5 ee ew te we @

Ce ee ee

Total yield, per acre =.-.5-.: apie SF Se ee

11.—88o pounds nitrate.

55 pounds nitrate potash.
Yield, per acre. Large tubers
Yield, per acre. Small tubers

Total yield;-per acre: ‘4 =..-.c5 ob ee eee

12.—880 pounds Mapes.

110 pounds nitrate pozash.
Yield, per acre. Large tubers
Yield, per acre. Small tubers

Total yield, PELIACTE ho ks Set a ee Ge ee

13.—880 pounds Mapes.

220 pounds nitrate potash.
Yield, per acre. Large tubers
Yield, per acre. Small tubers

COwOuCw Ory cyt Chi) CM

e806 Cee © eee 6c es we ele > ote

Ce ry

Cr ,

Dotal-yieid, periacre: =. 775.6 wos eee

14.—880 pounds Mapes.

440 pounds nitrate potash.

Yield, per acre. Large tubers

eee ee eee woe oe we eee wee se oe

Vield;sper acre: (Small tubersee ese oes

Lota) yield;per acre . 2% 5. nn ee ee eee
. 15.—No fertilizer.
Yield, per acre. Large tubers .

Yield, per acre. Small tubers

Total yield, per acre .....

. 16.—1,320 pounds Mapes.

Yield, per acre. Large tubers
Yield, per acre. Large tubers

eocee ee sveee

Ce ee ey

S\xe), ©. © Je\ ay « se) «hele

@ 0 (0 © «9 «© ae ¢ sa) see ¢ @lepece.esa

oe eeeevees

eeeeeee eee

Yotal yield, peracre.7.) 2h ses seca a eee

q Lxperiments
: . _ No. 17.—1,320 pounds Mapes.
I10 pounds nitrate polash.
1 Wield speracre smedie BIDELS 5 oi P0500. LE ee 236.50
Napid wpemacre, sulall tubers) #0.) .5 0.0082 acs ss. 42.16
Motaleyieldrper ACKe ae tials): Suse's wn hluecdre Page mt 278.66
No. 18.—1,320 pounds Mapes.
. 110 pounds nitrate soda.
a NMaleldy peracrex.. WArpeMUDGrS. 1. vias xo o.a4,+ 0 obese 4,5 cok 267.66
Waieids per acre, .oiall tubers; .-< qice sce cess Novae 80.66
SE Otalkyield- perma Gres src. .5 staPae verge ioe tak <i casa ee 348.32
A No. 19.—1,320 pounds Mapes. ;
110 pounds sulphate potash.
pele per acre, Harge tubers... 430 a te cps eee 262,16
Wieldsper acre: - Small tubers. =... 6 ns. -obeauts dee Ses 69.66
: Motalyueld) per acre... 0. oe sks eee ee ote veis, 33002
It will be seen that
No. 1.—Mapes alone, 440 pounds, yielded................ 331.83
No. 7.—Mapes a/one, 880 pounds, yielded................ 234.66
No. 16.—Mapes a@/one, 1,220 pounds, yielded ............ 320.83

Or an average of 295.77 bushels to the acre.

153

Taking the same amounts of Mapes with 55 pounds of nitrate of

soda to the acre, and we have the following :

- No. 2.—440 pounds Mapes.
FG pOluas mitrate SOUS «22s eas ee orton 273.16
No. 8.—88o0 pounds Mapes.

55 pounds nitrate SOdal 2425.5... sc eres Sole So 271533

No. 18.—1,320 pounds Mapes.
pio pounds mitrate’soda Soii. = see es ee 348.32
Or an average of 297.60 bushels to the acre. That is to say,

the

addition of 55, 55 and 110 pounds of nitrate of soda to the acre to

to the Mapes, did not materially increase the yield.
No. 3.—440 pounds Mapes.

LrGspounds nitrate Sodan 5. |. .4.. tacos oS Amy eet 226. 16
No. 9.—88o0 pounds Mapes.
Bhonponnds witratesOda~ 0... ).o2:-.0s ess wa Bae 262. 16
No. 18.—1,320 pounds Mapes.
BEORPOUMGS Mittate GOGa . 2. >. 9. et sake ee 278.66

Or an average of 255.66 bushels to the acre—or about 42 bushels

154 The New Potato Culture.

less than in the preceding trials, though nearly twice as much nitro-
gen was added.
No. 4.—440 pounds Mapes.

220) pounds mittateOlisoday. >. cere aoc ee 286.00
No. 10.—880 pounds Mapes.
220 pounds nitratesodaa.. 22.2427. 5-8 Soe 304.33
No. 18.—1,320 pounds Mapes.
Tro pounds nitrateisoda\~ «. .-.6 @-- oe ee 348.32

Or an average of 312.88 bushels to the acre.

No. 5.—440 pounds Mapes, with 330 pounds of nitrate, gave a yield
of only 236.49 bushels to the acre.

It appears that while 440, 880 and 1,320 pounds to the acre of the
Mapes gave an average of 295.77 bushels to the acre, the addition to
the above of 55, 110, 220 and 330 pounds of nitrate of soda to the
acre gave but 275.66 bushels to the acre—a difference of 20 bushels
against the use of additional nitrate. .

Let us now compare the nitrate of soda with the nitrate of potash.
Nitrate of soda contains about 16 per cent. of nitrogen; nitrate of
potash (saltpeter), about 13 per cent. of nitrogen and 46 per cent. of
potash. It is evident that if more potash is needed than the potato
fertilizer furnishes, nitrate of potash should increase the yield more
than the nitrate of soda.

No. 11.—88o0 pounds Mapes.

55 pounds nitrate potash q.7-..4- 5-5 ce ee 285.99
(Note.—Additional nitrate potash was not tried with 440 pounds of the Mapes.)
No. 12.—88o0 pounds Mapes.

ETO pounds nitrate potash...e 42 oO. ee eee 285.99
No. 13.—880 pounds Mapes.

220) pounds nitrates potashwes a2 4-7 «4s 359.33
No. 14.—88o0 pounds Mapes.

440 pounds nitrate potash. -.5... .)> 25 eee 366.66

(NoTE.—330 pounds of nitrate of soda was the highest added.)
No. 17.—1,320 pounds Mapes.
Tro pounds mitrate potashy. 2 a-] sc. eee 278.66
Here we have an average of 315.52 bushels to the acre where
nitrate of potash was used, instead of 275.66 bushels where nitrate
soda was used, a difference in favor of nitrate potash ever nitrate of
soda of about 39 bushels per acre, and a difference in favor of addi-
tional nitrate of potash over the Mapes alone of about 19 bushels per

Experiments. 155

acre. In No. 19, 110 pounds of sw/phate of potash was added to
1,320 pounds of the Mapes alone, the yield being 331.82 bushels to
the acre, or an increase over nitrate of potash of about 16 bushels to
the acre, and over nitrate of soda of about 56 bushels.

VINE GROWTH.

On June 14 the condition of the vines was estimated by three per-
sons, 10 denoting maximum and 1 minimum vigor. The object of
these estimates is, as has been explained, to show in how far such
condition of the vines corresponds with the yield of tubers. It will
be seen to correspond closely :

SUC gs ieee hee ae 534 NORTE seer sacs 634
eS Die eee SP gaye tots a as ats 6 Ww (7S a Renae RY TEP ce oe 7
21.2 seg eS 6% FE les (7 Ee RN eee TCS tn oS 834
UAB Pi. epee acres os = 4 7%, TORSES (7, ae AY ah Pinan tere? 9%
Ee ss Are lahare war's lope 23, © 7. ee Sea E Sem eh mayenee sy aap ye, eke 2%
CSS (63 cee Seen RN ea am 3 eis |) RRS MRR a oh Be (Ao 8
Mh re Rn it aus Lk 6% ees ire Opa AR rE red 734
Srp an ee eee aE 7% OE Go gee a ema, eric 5 84
EOL ch act patie peel s/o. 7 Bex CEG! sexe cs ee eres 7%
BEGOR cae serie ste one 8 8

SECOND SERIES.

Average fertility of the soil per acre of this plot, as shown by no-
manure trenches Nos. 45, 54 and 59, 263.38 bushels, as against
209.91 bushels in the first series.

Trench No. 40.—440 pounds Stockbridge Potato Manure.

Yield, per acre. Large tubers..........-------+:--- 287.83
Yield, per acre. Small tubers..........-...----+++- 51.33
Mota yield, per acre, +. 21. 4h: er erea 339.16

No. 41.—440 pounds Stockbridge.
55 pounds nitrate soda.
Yield, per acre. Largetubers......-...--+---++---- 269.50
Yield, per acre. Smalltubers ............+--++-+++-- 51.33

Motavyield, per AGI. . <2 sivas page aoe tees 320.83

156

No.

The New Potato Culture.

42. —440 pounds Stockbridge.
IIo pounds nitrate soda.

Vield;-per-acre: » Large tubers 2. tis See
Yield? per.acre.2 ‘Smallvtubers.] | 3-7 tg 4.

Total yield™perdcre ss: be aaa

[One rotten potato. ]

. 43-—440 pounds Stockbridge.

220 pounds nitrate soda.

Vield;. per-acre:. -Large tubers =. 2 uae eG). Se ee ‘
Yield, periacre- Smalltubers <5. =. s25-25*

Dotalyield,-peracte....- os see er ee
. 44.—440 pounds Stockbridge.

330 pounds nitrate soda.

Waeld) per acre> “Warge tubers =. 255-2 = rir ac. :
Wield:“peracre:--Small tubers... 542.90

Totalvyield) per:acre 3... 5a
. 45.—No manure.
Wield) peracke, = acanee tuberses vei eee
Vield, per acre.. Small twhers (2 e = ae eee fs

Total yield peracre ...2. 2 25 eee
. 46.—880 pounds Stockbridge.
Wield=per-acre. jarge tubers: =) ee
Yield, per acre... Small tubers. -2=.2 = 4-2). =-

‘otal yield, peracten-c.. shee

47.—880 pounds Stockbridge.
55 pounds nitrate soda.

Vueld sper acre. laree tubersa.. 2 ee ee
Yield, penacre: sjonial itilbetse.<- oe

Totalsyield: ‘peracte.. 3. Gee
. 48.—880 pounds Stockbridge.

110 pounds nitrate soca.

Vield; per acre: earge tubers Sere Cees eee.
Vield; per:acre! Smalllitubers)-427 eee

Total-yield; peracté 262 eee Ae ee

eo 8 6 we we

et
vs 4

No.

Experiments.

49.—88e pounds Stockbridge.

220 pounds nitrate soda.
Wield, per aeres Maree tubers si... ec. 2... ec tyente el wee
Wield, spetsacre: .omalltubersys i. Adit. 164.2 oa cadens

Total Mile lidg. Pel ACHer 5/2 2: .0588 so tapas aolook Stee

. 50.—880 pounds Stockbridge.

55 pounds nitrate potash.

Mield-=per acte.. Large tubers atts 4 liseli a ee ao
Mield sper acre: Small tubersuinawt. ..2 0422 ne Sas
Dotal- yield peracte vit 26a ates ae os hl eae ;

. 51.—880 pounds Stockbridge.

IIo pounds nitrate pozash.
Miceli per acrer.> War ee tubers 84 vas Fe dork vig ae 2
Miele per acre... Sinalltubers.5 2 fe oe ae we Pe a

Moral yield, per acreus... wey aise ns cee ee Se
(Fifteen rotten potatoes.)

. 52.—880 pounds Stockbridge.

220 pounds nitrate potash.
misled, per acre: “dLarse tubers. =.) 222 ete he ee
wields per acre-< Small tubers?.7 7% sos s5 os ots eee

Motaliyielid: -peraCKer. - tach. oi oe eee Ge dee ee.
(Fourteen rotten potatoes.)

. 53.-—880 pounds Stockbridge.

440 pounds nitrate potash.
pacla-“per dere: -Warse-tubers op! ss see oe hone
Wield per acre. >Smalltubers 2.07 .:-2).c0r « eRe

(Letal yield, peracre: 7 i4 5,558 eee et es

oe (Two rotten potatoes.)
54.—No fertilizer.

Yield, per acre. Large tubers... Ape a I
Nield@per acte.t.omall tubers. .).7 0.0.25 a Paes

otal yield, “peracre <A 2205. hi Se Seeks we
(Two rotten potatoes.)

. 55.—1,320 pounds Stockbridge.

wield, per acre: (Large tubers... 0-22 .a.5ste- sseodctapees
Niele pet acre. smial) tubers-.\ vy te 2 teens aati

otal yield: per acre gft.os aoe eee ee ee 2¢

(Eleven rotten potatoes.)

157

158 The New Potato Culture.

No. 56.—1,320 pounds Stockbridge.
IIo pounds nitrate potash.

Wield, per actes) arge tubers-s- oe sk oe ee ee 275.00
Wield; perdere.. oma) lA bersi.se tt ccs teens eet 53.16
Potaltyieldjeper acres. iss. 2 ant yor Ae 328.16

(Eleven rotten potatoes )
No. 57.—1,320 pounds Stockbridge.
IIo pounds nitrate soda.

Wield: iperjacre... clLeargetubersii vies 10 ee 231.00
Yield, petiacre;. Small tubers. 2 25.2 se eee 30.66
Total yield. per acre ces to hanes oe ee ee 267.66

(Twenty rotten potatoes.)
No. 58 —1,320 pounds Stockbridge.
110 pounds sulphate potash.

Yaeld) peracre. a Warse tubers. 4-1- RPE BSE 324.50
Wield) perzacre. —Small tubers) 7-)- 226 aa. ee 51.53 ¢
Total-yield;, per acke* A. sos ee a ee 376.03

(Five rotten potatoes.)

No. 59.—No fertilizer.

Vield:periacre: = arse tubess.).- =. ee 245.66
Wield;sper acre, -Smialictubers 235.2 eee 36.66
Hotal-yield, per-acre* 3 0s ee a ee 282.32

(One rotten potato.)
It will be seen that
No. 40.—Stockbridge a/one, 440 pounds, yielded . .339 16 bushels.
No. 46.—Stockbridge a/one, 880 pounds, yielded . .326.33 *
No. 55.—Stockbridge a/one, 1,320 pounds, yielded.295.16 ‘‘
Or an average of 320.21 bushels to the acre.
As in the first series, no increase of crop is given by the larger
amounts of fertilizers.
The same amounts of Stockbridge, with 55 and 110 pounds of nitrate
of soda added, gave the following yields:
No. 41.—440 pounds Stockbridge, yielded
55 pounds nitrate soda,
No. 47.—880 pounds Stockbridge, yielded
55 pounds nitrate soda,
No. 57.—1,320 pounds Stockbridge,
IIo pounds nitrate soda,
Or an averageof 292.10 bushels tothe acre, or 28 bushels per acre

... 320.83 bushels.
.. .287.82 bushels.

yielded .. .267.66 bushels.

LI lea
‘ a :
: ’

Experiments. 159

less than the same amounts of Stockbridge without any addition of

nitrate.
No. 42.—440 pounds Stockbridge,
IIo pounds nitrate soda,
No. 48—880 pounds Stockbridge,
110 pounds nitrate soda,

No. 57—1,320 pounds Stockbridge, yielded .. .267.66 bushels.
IIo pounds nitrate soda, j

yielded . . . 307.99 bushels.

| yielded ..-374.00 bushels.

Or an average of about 317 (316.55) bushels to the acre, or about

‘three bushels less per acre than when the same amounts of Stock-

bridge were used without any addition of nitrate.

No. 43.—440 pounds Stockbridge,
220 pounds nitrate soda,

No. 49.—880 pounds ptockridge, t yielded . .. 339.16 bushels.
220 pounds nitrate soda,

lo: 57.—1, 320 pounds Stockbridsc, yielded .. .267.66 bushels.
Tio pounds nitrate soda, j

t yielded ..- 324.49 bushels.

Or an average of 310.44 bushels to the acre, or about 10 bushels
per acre less than the same amounts of Stockbridge without any addi-
tion of nitrate.

No. 44.—440 pounds of Stockbridge and 330 pounds of nitrate gave
312 bushels to the acre, or 27 bushels less per acre than when 440
pounds of the Stockridge was used alone, as in trench No. 4o, or 8
pounds less than the average of Stockbridge alone.

While 440, 880 and 1,320 pounds to the acre of the Stockbridge
alone gave an average of 320 bushels to the acre, the addition to the
above of 55, I10, 220 and 330 pounds of nitrate of soda to the acre
gave 316.70 bushels to the acre—a loss of about three bushels to the
acre, as compared with those trenches which did not receive nitrate

of soda beyond that which was in the Stockbridge fertilizer.

In the first series of experiments, it will be seen that the additional
nitrate added to the Mapes Potato Fertilizer reduced the yield at the
rate of 20 bushels per acre.

As in the first series of which this is a duplicate, merely substi-
tuting Stockbridge for Mapes, the results of using nitrate of Aofash in
place of nitrate of soda may be compared, the object being to deter-
mine whether the made-up fertilizers contain enough potash as well
as nitrate.

160 The New Potato Culture.

No. 50.—88o0 pounds Stockbridge, ) yielded 454.72 been
55 pounds nitrate potash.

No. 51.—880 pounds Stockbridge,
IIo pounds nitrate potash,

No. 52.—880 pounds Stockbridge,
220 pounds nitrate potash,

No. 53.—880 pounds Stockbridge,
440 pounds nitrate potash,

No. 56.—1,329 pounds Stockbridge, yielded
110 pounds nitrate potash,

| yielded .. .320.82 bushels.
| yielded ...276.82 bushels.
t yielded ...302.49 bushels.

328.16 bushels.

The average yield from the addition of nitrate of potash was 337

bushels to the acre, an increase over the same quantities of nitrate
of soda used of 21 bushels to the acre and of 17 bushels over the

Stockbridge used alone. In the first series the nitrate of potash in-

creased the yield 39 bushels per acre over nitrate of soda, and 19
bushels increase over the Mapes used alone.

In No. 58, 110 pounds of sulphate of potash was added to 1,320
pounds of Stockbridge, as, in trench No. 19 of the first series, the
same amount of sulphate of potash was added tothe Mapes. The
yield was 376 bushels to the acre, or an increase over the average
of nitrate of soda of 60 bushels and over the nitrate of potash of 39
bushels. :

In the first series the sulphate gave an increase over nitrate of
potash of 16 bushels, and over nitrate of soda of 56 bushels.

It may be worthy of consideration that in the above trials, no rot-

ten potatoes were found in the first series. In this series, in the three
trenches not fertilized but two rotten potatoes were found, while in
nine of the fertilized trenches 81 rotten potatoes were found.
VINE GROWTH.
As in the first series, the condition of the vines was estimated by
three persons on June 1410 denoting the maximum and one the
minimum vigor :

NO. A002) ali ws CS oye ean S eee ee ee 6%
Ln (rer y Seger a te eit MA Cuneo ade km So bio cS. 7%
ING. <4 deere eu 6 wrote ste g Sag ete ees eeees et p Sagia lee ea 8
AN Copy AROMA SO RC Alt Wes oa ae ay ehh oS = 2 « . 8Y
Now age ss SF ei eee usa ae ee a ee Se ee Se ee 8
iN fo ays Pee OP mR Premeerouer Gin Spain ockrgiees oo sol 2... 5%

Experiments. 161

RSOMACT EN oor sence WatatAre mi tsisyarakttnid o0¢ ies ch eicic i Meyaiels = os,e a intece afe) oboe
RNAS iclaitiis) ay spor as, aia chases POH EE SBC SOE RIC asta aieaur 84
MINOR Kinccs eck apatite Ceska a Mies hel liege i ethe''n, on ists te tolal eagle gi ara aie & 9%
MEGAMI ch Mh cyan st Mal caked ahr aa Mh eye) Wielihs wha) xin iene, ms ee eh c'Myt ermga ae 9
PRS a2 ne eae ce elarete seta nies «Ahoy be tel aaah ine 7p
PRAIA mites eats ene ca GPa sev eienae eels gel oe ise at ae saan 8
PRS Bie ele Ane ON YG co Kalas -2le casa te iacw iy Shem cata outta sega eee 834
PAS harold apa Miah eee yiri sist aib ecto = tetl aye gea olay te aha se alee Hate 4
PANGS Maeee Denier siaha +e eo o's tioge 4 = Saye 2 dan) false, ec eueleuh mee # eaters Gael r ye 8
EMSRS UA Save od. Se eno up ee) vials ole tials oe elds een 8%
MRS CRS ce 200s fee Pi are, si cye, Spey atalel ere co ialeya, sree we roae hn ey neh l@ 2 ahha oes) 4 834
PMNS ORR Ni te as wa sree kepeccla mn aaencse nu sues ve. eye ea Pr 734
No. 516 jn \o, Sei Sgt ARCH AE eu rs ci boa CACC REC Cig OC) Ot neice a bia mT 9 re Il 434

THIRD SERIES.

Average fertility of the soil per acre of this plot as shown by no--
manure trenches, Nos. 65, 74 and 79, 281.72 bushels, as against
209.91 bushels in the first series and 263.38 in the second.

Trench No. 60.—440 pounds of Bradley Potato Manure.
Yield, per acre. Large tubers....... Fea AP ARE ke 328.16
Yield, per acre. Small tubers............--+--++--- 55

Motal yield, per acre...) .. 160g. 4 8 3 eee 383.16

(Three rotten potatoes.)

No. 61.—440 pounds Bradley.

55 pounds nitrate soda. es
Yield, per acre. Large tubers...........-+++-+-+->- 350.16
Yield, per acre. Small tubers...........---++-----: 47.75
diotaleyield’ per ACTS»). lecaorpnale ws A cnted te ae or 397.91
No. 62.—440 pounds Bradley.
r1o pounds nitrate soda.
Yield, per acre. Large tubers........-.+--.+---++>- 324.50
Yield, per acre. Small tubers............ eee Tapa b 6232
iofal yieldwper acne leek ont ga! ee hee eee 386.83 k
(Two rotten potatoes.)
No. 63.—440 pounds Bradley.
220 pounds nitrate soda.
Wield, per acre. ~ Large tubers ...\2...+.5+-- 2.5. oo = 330
Yield, per acre. Small tubers...-.5 ...--...+-+-55, RIN
Aicrauyteld: permacre.. 7.2.1. |). a.) a a etcren aa ee 381.33

(Four rotten potatoes.)

162 The New Potato Culture.

No. 64.—440 pounds Bradley.
330 pounds nitrate soda.

Yield, per acre: sLargeatubers)..2 04.2) eh eee 385
Vield! pervacre: Small tubers’ 2. /.-0 24-2 ee eee 69.66
Total wield; per acre... oan ee cy oi aoe ee ee 454.66

(Three rotten potatoes.)
No. 65.—No manure.

Yield, per acre: karge tubers 2." “ay. -. eee Poets) 813)
Yield -peracres Pomalllituberss..3 5-5. 405 ee 55
sFotaliyield; per acre... s.. 24a. ots ee 293.33
No. 66.—880 pounds Bradley.
Voeldtyperiacres) learce i bersi es snc 320.83
Yield sper acre: >) Smalistubers)...5- se ee 84.66
Dotaltyieldsper-acre* ty. ee eee Lo EA AOs NAG

(Three rotten potatocs.)
No. 67.—880 pounds Bradley.
55 pounds nitrate soda,

Wield;peracre. Warge;tulberss 1. -.to- 308.
Wieldy peracress Sinall) tubersiess) i.) eee »:.' | SOZ66
Total yield; per acre ss. 24. cio. ao eee 388.66

No. 68.—88o0 pounds Bradley.
I1o pounds nitrate soda.

Yield; periacre. (barge tubers 2-5. eee eee 266.71
Vield,sper’acre. Small tubers)... 52.) a. eee 80.66
Total yield, per acre 2.2.5.5 oe ee 347.37

No. 69.—88o0 pounds Bradley.
220 pounds nitrate soda.

Yield; \peracre> darge tubers. 0: er eee 278.66
Yield; wer acre: Sinallubers.= 4-4. = ae 82.50
‘Total yield, per acre 5.2). 8. be. 2 oe 361.16

No. 70.—880 pounds Bradley.
55 pounds nitrate polash.

Vield, per acre: “Large tubers... >. .\. 252.2 286
Yield; peracre* Small tubers, .,..... =... 3.2 eee 73-33
Total yield, per ACE iui g ids 4 De ee 359 33

No. 71.—88o0 pounds Bradley.
110 pounds nitrate potash.
Yield, per’acre. Largejtuberss2-: ..-+a42-0e0 eee 311.66
Yield, per acre. Small tubers:.=.5. 325. 67.83

Total yield, pér acre... 0S. Tele!

oie ee

No.

oe
2VO.

Experiments.

. 72.—880 pounds Bradley.
220 pounds nitrate polash.
Wield, per-acre,,-Large tubers. .>...%°...
Wield, perjacre!, small tubers.2. 22...)
TETSU Wok 2 cc EA tae AO ae
. 73.—880 pounds Bradley.

440 pounds nitrate potash.

Micldsspemdcres- «large: tubers... ).\.24/.2.
Naeld;yper acre)? Small twbers...,......
Motalayield per acres se. i. Cosa.

(Two rotten potatoes. )

. 74.—No fertilizers.

Mieid aperacre. | large ttilbersy 20 S|.

Micids per acre.) Small tibers is. % 2.4.
Mhotraliwielde perracrenr.. 29.22 66.5

75.—1,320 pounds Bradley.

Mieldiiper acre, \lcarge tubers..afs aie a fe
Mateld) aper acres | simatl tuberse) 072. 2.2:

Motal yield, periacre =e: sce os ne
. 76.—1,320 pounds Bradley.

IIo pounds nitrate potash.

Mield per acre.) (Uarse- tubers, 3.5% see
Mield ;per acre: omiall tubersis5 2524. 2:
Mortal yield) wperacret = pore seo

(Four rotten potatoes.)

_ 77.—1,320 pounds Bradley.

IIo pounds nitrate soda.

Nieldiperacre., Large tubers 33. 54.24):
Yield, peracre. , Small tubers..........
otal yield sper acre). Sonie's enh.

(Thirty-one rotten potatoes.)
78.—1.320 pounds Bradley.
110 pounds sulphate potash.

Naeld; per acre. Large tubers. ........:
Wield; per acre, small tubers.2.... -....
doatal-yield, peracie-< 2. 2.0.4.0 .4k

‘ (Six rotten potatoes.)
79.—No fertilizer.

Yield, peracre. Large tubers..... Saha
Vieldj*per acre.’ Small-tubers..,2.. 64...

Total yield, per acre .+......°-..-:
(Twelve retten petato~*.)

Cee ee

m6) aha) | lade x eae

a, es fer «im eh/s) ees ebie of

O Uso oo Boer Clomc

So ws) fo) ajt'e) ee. IV) jwiial cs

elie) elge, «cate: ej cebcemnn=

164 The New Potato Culture.

Comparing the yields of the same amount of fertilizers, one with
another, as was done in Series I. and IJ., we shall see that—
No. 60.—Bradley a/one, 440 pounds, yielded 383.16 bushels.
No. 66.—Bradley a/oxe, 880 pounds, yielded 405.49 bushels.
No. 75.—Bradley a/one, 1,320 pounds, yielded 397.82 bushels.

Or an average of 396.49 bushels totheacre. The increase in crop,
as compared to the increase in the quantity of fertilizer, is not pro-
portionate or profitable. In series I. and II., it may be borne in
mind, the crop decreased with the increase of fertilizer.

The same amount of Bradley, with 55 and 110 pounds of nitrateof |
soda added, gave the following yields ;

None 5 22 poune> ae l yielded. ..397.91 bushels.
55 pounds nitrate soda, j

Ne, G7 880 poms Bradley, yielded.. 388.66 bushels.
55 pounds nitrate soda,

No. 77.—1,320 pounds Bradley, }

ielded. ..425.32 bushels.
IIo pounds nitrate soda, ye 425 :3 20

Or an average of 403.96 bushels to the acre, or but 7.47 bushels
to the acre more than the same amounts of Bradley without any ad-
ditional nitrate.

No. 62.—440 pounds a, yielded. . .386.83 bushels.
T1o pounds nitrate soda,
No. 68.—88o0 pounds Sele N vielded@: “347257 aaeneie
110 pounds nitrate soda, )

No. 77.—1,320 pounds Bradley, q isded

‘ ...425.32 bushels.
IIo pounds nitrate soda, ‘ese 5

Or an average or 386.50 bushels to the acre, or 9.99 bushels per
acre less than the same amounts of Bradley used alone.
No. 63.—440 pounds Bradley,

220 pounds nitrate soda,
No. 69.—88o0 pounds Bradley, ’
220 pounds nitrate soda, j
No. 77.—1,320 pounds Bradley,

yielded. . .381.33 bushels.
yielded. ..361.16 bushels.

ielded... 25. bushels.
110 pounds nitrate soda, by .25.32 bushels

Or an average of 389.27 bushels to the acre, or 6.22 bushels per
acre less than Bradley alone.

No. 64.--440 pounds Bradley and 330 pounds nitrate soda, gave
454.66 bushels to the acre, or 71.50 bushels more than when the
same amount of Bradley was used without any additional nitrate. -

Experiments. 165

While 440, 880 and 1,320 pounds of Bradley alone gave an average
of 396.49 bushels to the acre, the addition to the above of 55, 110,
220 and 330 pounds of nitrate of soda to the acre gave an average of
394.15 bushels to the acre, or over a bushel less than the Bradley
alone. :

In the first series the additional nitrate reduced the yield 20 bushels
per acre, in the second three bushels. |

We may now, as in the first and second series, compare the results
of using nitrate of Jofash in place of the nitrate of soda.

« No. 70.—880 pounds Bradley, | yielded. 359.33 bushels.
55 pounds nitrate potash,

No. 71.—880 pounds ego t yielded. ..379.49 bushels.
; 110 pounds nitrate potash,

iteag2- 76°99 pounds aa yielded. . .388.12 bushels.
220 pounds nitrate potash,

‘No. 73.—880 pounds Bradley,
440 pounds nitrate potash,
No. 76.—1,320 pounds Bradley, yielded
IIo pounds nitrate potash,

The average’ yield from the addition of nitrate of potash was
395.88 bushels to the acre, or 1.73 bushel more than the nitrate
of soda and 0.39 bushel over the same amounts of Bradley used
alone. In the first series nitrate of potash increased the yield 39
bushels per acre over nitrate of soda and 19 bushels per acre over

yielded. . .355.66 bushels.

...496.82 bushels.

the Mapes used alone. In the second series the nitrate of potash in-

creased the yield over nitrate of soda 21 bushels, and 17 bushels over
the Stockbridge used alone.

In ’No. 78, 110 pounds of szdphate of potash was added to 1,320
pounds of Bradley. The yield was but 350.16 bushels to the acre,

or about 25 bushels less than with either the Bradley alone, the Brad-

ley and nitrate of soda or the Bradley and nitrate of potash.

In the first series the sulphate gave an increase over{ithe nitrate of
soda of 56 bushels and over nitrate of potash of 16 bushels. In the
second series the sulphate gave an increase over nitrate of soda of
60 bushels and over nitrate of potash of 39 bushels.

The fact may again be alluded to that in the first series there were
no rotten potatoes. In,the second series there were 81 rotten in the
fertilized trenches, and two in the ‘‘no-manure” trenches. In the

166 The New Potato Culture.

present series there are 12 in the ‘‘no-manure” trenches, and 58 in
the fertilized trenches. This is a matter of little moment, however,
since the fertilized trenches greatly outnumber the unfertilized.

VINE GROWTH.
As in the first and second series, the condition of the vines was es-

timated by three persons on June 14, 10 denoting the maximum and
one the minimum of size and vigor:

Now Ooh es -- 634 ING@MO7 cee e- 734 NO.74 one ope 6
ek (Sy eae tee Ap. ROS cs eel. cate 84% Py bsteeere oS d = 94
PMO Zwei xk ast 7% "GOO zee eies 9 “496. =e 9%
CUO Mat arate 734, 7 Ove cha ae 834 muy 7 Pete 834

NO Aran: Somes: 9 PW (Ge renter 9% 98) ee 8%
EOS ans fools 54 Ts Tet Ss tea 934 '- 70). eee 434
pO Ory ieke ee 71%4 May Sines cee 9%

The largest yields, Nos. 76, 64, 77, 61, 75, 72, 62, etc., were rated
respectively: 914, 9, 82, 74,934, 9%; while the lowest yields, Nos. 79,
65, 74, 68, 78, etc., were rated respectively: 4%, 54, 6, 8g, 83, etc. “The
natural fertility of the soil (in this third series) is shown by trenches
Nos. 65, 74 and 79, averaging 281.72 bushels tothe acre. Inthe first
series the average fertility of the ‘‘no-manure”’ trenches was 209.91 ;
in the second 263.38. Let us see how this corresponds with the
average yields of the fertilized trenches : ,

SERIES NO. f. Bus.
Fertilized trenches 22 sc.c5jo a Ss)s ke. ek Eee 294.34
Unterhilized trenches {2:2 oe A040 2S oie ee ee 209.91
Yield of fertilized over uufertilized, per acre..... 84.43
SERIES NO. 2.
Fertilized frenGhes. 12 .---2 — Geese me es 8s ee 326.66
Untertilized trenches 7.2. 252046 acc cs dein ose ee ee 263.38
Yield of fertilized over unfertilized, per acre..... 63.28
SERIES NO. 3.
Fertilized: trenches: (esi. .3 sae sear esis Nee aie ee 391.72
Wintertilized trenchese. .2ye Sach. tee oe ee ee 281.72
Yield of fertilized over unfertilized, per acre..... 110.00

For an account of the land and how it was treated, see page 832

November 28, 1891.

Experiments, 167

FOURTH SERIES.

It is reasonably claimed that better crops may be raised from fer-
tilizers made up of different forms of each of the three essential
kinds of-plant food than from those made up of one form of each.
That is to say, itis better to give phosphoric acid, both as superphos-
phate and phosphate, than either alone. So, too, as to-nitrogen and
potash. In this way, it is assumed, an available supply is more likely
to be secured for the plant at all stages of growth. For example, if
the fertilizer is supplied with nitrate of soda, sulphate of ammonia
and blood, the roots will get their first nitrogen from the nitrate of
soda and later from the sulphate of ammonia and blood, these being
less soluble and so serving to keep up a ready diet during the entire
growing season. Now, each dealer (manufacturer) of fertilizers claims
a special value for his own goods owing to special treatment, combi-
nation or methods, or the superiority of the raw materials used. It
might be supposed, therefore, that a combination of all these excel-
lencies would give larger crops than the fertilizer of any single manu-
acturer. The following trials (g6 to 103 inclusive) were designed to
investigate this question:

Trench No. 96.—440 pounds of Mapes, Bradley and Stockbridge, 7. ¢.,
146% pounds of each, mixed together.

Naicid= per acre). Large potatoes). 255.8 eis. es ye 300.16
~ Siclds per acre:~ .small* potatoes oy ily. = ele eke e 62.33
Gita ald, «per -ACKEL Res. sacs dd Paks eee eS ae 308.49

(Four rotten.)

No..97.—880 pounds of the three, 293% pounds of each.

Micld .peracre:. “Laree potatoes: : .. f:..sni8... 222-2 S: 276.83
aici peracre small potatOess 5 22 Ass cece 8 res ok 84.33
ihetal yield Wperrieretiey toe. fo Je atta. oe ache 361.16

(Two rotten.)
No, 98.—1,320 pounds of the three, z. ¢., 440 pounds of each.

Mieldaper acre, Waree potatoes. 027.22. toss eee 283.33
Micid@peracce. small potatoes . 522504... 2..\36 43 22 82.50

ior eyreldperiacrets 2. Svc y alte atm cae ee eee 365.83

568 The New Potato Culture.

No. 99.—440 pounds of the three.
Ito pounds nitrate soda.

Vield¥ per acre) Barselpotatoesi se. see ao: eee 251.16
Vieldisperacre! (small potatoes)... ek) eee » pines
Motal wields werracne es sete hol. eee .. 302.49

No. 100.—88o pounds of the three.
220 pounds nitrate soda.

Wield peracres slvarge potatoesmn sae are eee 293.33
Yields per acre. (Small potatocsis.49 ee eee 44
AL otali yield. Sper acre: seins be eee ene 337.33

No. 101.—1,320 pounds of the three.
330 pounds nitrate soda.

Mieldisperiacres earcenpotatcesiaan se see ee eee 320.83
Wield per acres ssmall potatoes <1 4h ae eee 42.16
‘Botalivield) (weriacre: fee ote d pa eee 362.99

No. 102.—No fertilizer.
Wiel di penacre. Warge potatoes 1a 315.33
Yield per acre), Smalipotatoes sees aaa eer aa aie), 5
Notalyy 1eldyperacne! Os ee seas eae ee a ee 353.83

(Four rotten.)

The average yield of the six fertilized trenches is at the rate of
349.71 bushels to the acre. The yield of the unfertilized trench was
353-83, or a difference in favor of ‘‘no-fertilizers’’ of 4.12 bushels to
the acre. The average fertility of the soil, as shown by the ‘‘no-ma-
nure’”’ trenches of the first series, was 209.91; of the second series,
203.38; of the’ third, 281.72, and ‘of the fourth (presempimasaeas
bushels to the acre. In the first series, the fertilized trenches yielded
84.43 bushels more than the unfertilized ; in the second, 63.28 more
than the unfertilized ; in the third series, 110 bushels more than the
unfertilized. And now in the fourth series, the wxzfertilized trench
yielded 4.12 bushels more than the fertilized.

It must be considered, in partial explanation of the above showing,
that the natural soil fertility increases with every series, viz. :

DETICS Tedd re saad eee ee Fees oe - 209.91 bushels per acre.
SOLES 2? 1/04 AMES ct het kel he eee 263.38 bushc!s per acre. |
SERIES i312 Fee tae i ee atlas cane 281.72 bushels per acre.

SIEPICS (4 hel Step tot Seether a amines 353.83 bushels per acre.

Experiments. 169

It will be seen, also, that the yield peracre from the effects of the
fertilizers diminishes as the natural soil fertility increases.

The entire plot is nearly square, the four sides facing north, south,
east and west. The land slopes gently, almost imperceptibly, from
east to west, and from northeast to southwest. Series I. occupied
the northernmost portion, II., III. and IV. following in the order
given. It was thought that the soil of Series I. was the driest, as it
was a trifle the highest. A ditch on the west was dug three years ago
(as already stated) to carry away the surface water, which in previ-
ous years was held ina shallow basin, towards the west and southwest.

VINE GROWTH.

The condition of the vines was estimated:as follows:

SION Os <6 -(5 46 as 758 NOP GOs se 7% INOs TOU: geese 93%
OC a Ae ea 84% EO EROOY ase. a 8% MTL O2 Bee ie a 4 434

FIFTH SERIES—(Last).

The results of using Mapes, Bowker and Bradley fertilizers sepa-
rately and together, with and without added nitrogen in the form of
nitrate of soda and nitrogen, and potash in the form of nitrate of
potash, are before the reader. In this fifth (and last) series of ex-
periments the effects (1) of snuff are to be recorded and (2) the effects
of nitrogen, phosphate and potash, used separately and in various com-
binations.

Trench No. 20.—No fertilizer.

picid; peracre. Large potatoes 4: .\. 4's Bach eee 168.66
Milcld speriacre. -y Stalk potatoes... <.,..0) ae. ee. 60.50
Popa viele se WelsaAChen ty... -'5 os oa Sun ctsyeruereisem i eamaee: 229.16
No. 21.—1,760 pounds tobacco snuff.
Miride per acte,.. Larges potatoes, cit. ost. . uss e lao 185.16
Baelan per acre: small potatoesa.!.as |!) ae aoe 42.16
Btota lhyteldh per gene, orci t TM Ulicg Jae Chasen 227.32
No. 22.—3,520 pounds snuff.
Wield spenacre, Large,potatoes:\4:-.~.. «suse 278.66
Waeidiaperacre. omall:potatoesy.,. .!sisa> «aes ae stapes 50.83

PEGta level Wek AOTE cs bs teh y Stok fae ak ae eee oh 335-49

170

No.

The New Fotato Culture.

. 23.—3,520 pounds snuff.

440 pounds nitrate soda.

Yield Mpeviacre., Warsepotatoes sn ae eet
Yield, per,acre.~ Smallipotatoes a)... cr

Total-yieldsperacrerce cn nance sae

24.—3,520 pounds snuff.
440 pounds nitrate pozash.

Micldtipenacre: learce: tubersas suse ae
Yield) perm actew) Small ptuberss sme eee

otal wicidmperacren hae. eee
. 25.—55 pounds nitrate potash.
Wield pemacre, Wwargepotatoesy 44.4 -6ece
Wield\pemacres omall potatoes, nner ee

Hhotalsyvield sper acre ae a eee eee
. 26.—110 pounds nitrate potash.
NMield per acre. large potatoes nee au.
Vieldipemacre: somal potatoess ecm ans

PLotalivieldvper acre. eae eee
. 27.220 pounds nitrate potash.
Yield; peracre. large potatoes... .17.2....4.:
Naeldt peracres omallepotatoes: «aes eee

otal yield wneracres rere eee:

. 28.—440 pounds nitrate potash.
Vield,ypemacre, arcelpotatoess sano
Yield, per acre... Small potatoes ...7...-4.

Gotalbyieldperacres Gere eee

. 29.—880 pounds nitrate potash.
Mield Gper acte s Marre potatoes. ase ee
Wield eperacte.. Small potatoesi- = seer

Totaltyield* peracre oo... mee eee

30.— 55 pounds nitrate soda.
220 pounds dissolved bone.

Wield; perjacre.. Large potatoes: see eee
Yaeld, per acre: -Small potatoes asa eee

Zotal yield; peracrew i 3. pee n eee

ye ee te

ee ee ed

Oey het) ONO O

ee er ey

e225
= >
es

No.

Experiments.

. 31.— 55 pounds nitrate potash.

220 pounds dissolved bone.

Yield; per acre. Large potatoes .....
Yield, per acre. Small potatoes.....

otal yield; per/acre..i 2.00. 2...
5. 32.— 55 pounds nitrate porcsh.

220 pounds fine raw bone.

Yield, per acre. Large potatoes.....
Yield, per acre. Small potatoes .....

Total yield, per acre............

33-— 55 pounds nitrate soda.
220 pounds fine raw bone.

Yield, per acre. Large potatoes.....
Yield, per acre. Small potatoes.....

otal yield, per acre .25.5.22.. 2.
. 34.—NVo fertilizer.
Yield, per acre. Large potatoes .....
Yield, per acre. Small potatoes.....

otal yield, pertacre ...25 ss 5s.

. 35.—55 pounds nitrate soda.
Yield, per acre. Large potatoes....
Yield, per acre. Small potatoes....

aotal yield. peracre:.2). 4254.2.

36.—110 pounds nitrate soda.

Yield, per acre. Large potatoes ...
Yield, per acre. Small potatoes....

otal yield, “per acre? =< 1. 5k 2
. 37.-—220 pounds nitrate soda.
Yield, per acre. Large potatoes ....
Yield, per acre. Small potatoes....

Total yield, per acre........-

. 38.—440 pounds nitrate soda.
Yield, per acre. Large potatoes.....
Yield, per acre. Small potatoes....

otal yield! periacre.: 600. 6454

i @\ @ 10) elves) (e,O\te o> otek ie

Ce |

eee ee ee wwe wee e

Cr er

i re

Ce, Aw wires einer el vem) 14) a (a) fo) Ne

aj see ei teste) sl leiiel =) viie Wale) ihe

171

The New. Potato Cuiture.

. 39.—880 pounds nitrate soda.

Yield, per acre. Large potatoes
Yield, per acre. Small potatoes

Total yield, per acre

Yield, per acre. Large potatoes
Yield, per acre. Small potatoes

Motalwieldypenacre te. wane joe ae
(Fifteen rotten potatoes.)

. 81.—220 pounds nitrate potash.

(Same as No. 27.)
Yield, per acre. Large potatoes
Yield, per acre. Small potatoes

Total yield, per acre
(Eighteen rotten potatoes.)

. 82.—110 pounds nitrate soda.

Iro pounds nitrate potash.
Nicldsspermacres + Carce potatoes ane
Yield, per acre. Small potatoes

Total yield, per acre
(Eight rotten potatoes.)

. 83.—110 pounds nitrate soda.

110 pounds sulphate potash.
Yield, per acre. Large potatoes
Yield, per acre. Small potatoes

Total yield, per acre
(Nine rotten potatoes.)

. 84.—110 pounds nitrate potash.

110 pounds sz/phate potash.
Yield, peracre. Large potatoes
Vield, per acre, “Snvallipotatoes,.- a eee.
Total yield, per acre

(Twenty-eight rotten potatoes.)

aeipe) we) ee) ie/iw fe) le) ie) is im) j=lel Ne

aie) admis Wael mike, lel re,

OO CC nC ee caret

ee ey

. 80.—220 pounds nitratesoda. (Sameas No. 37.)

Draw ey ie le, t=. ‘aie! (@) (a) a) ate. tenia cee aimee

« fle! ‘eo. es allies atkeurenre

{
= . ee.
Cy eae ee ey ee

_. experiments.
No. 85.—1:0 pounds nitrate soda.
220 pounds raw bone flour.
Yield, peracre. Large potatoes 6 eee eee see eee: .. 300.66
- Yield, per acre. Small potatoes ......-.--eseee ee 62.33
Total yield, per acre .. 2. -oe ee i eo ia ae 362.99
(Fifteen rotten potatoes.)
No. 86.—110 pounds nitrate potash.
110 pounds raw bone.
r10 pounds dissolved bone.
Wyield, per acre. Large potatoes’... 5+. .-9F 1+ 2000 eo 313.50
y Yield, per acre. Smiall potatoes ss. pec ee 77.00
otal yield per acre . 2% Sap e es es 390.50
(Nine rotten potatoes.)
No. 87.—110 pounds nitrate soda.
3 110 pounds sulphate potash.
z10 pounds dissolved bone.
/110 pounds raw bone.
Wield, per acre. Large potatoes +. --- 3; > y- nso iti 333-66
Yield, per acre. Small potatoes --.-.-----.-----+7*: 62.33
Total yield, per acre..... US palate Uy orate Ie age ad 395.99
: (Nine rotten potatces.) ;
No. 88 —110 pounds sulphate potash.
rro pounds nitrate potash.
Wield per acre. Large potatees: on -i ities taints . 271233
Meld! per acre.) Small-potatoes» sr.ia7 a1 adie a 71.50
Me atalyaell,p pel ACE. tar) ape Canis her jn 842283
(See No. 84.)
(Nine rotten potatoes.)
No. 89.—1:70 pounds sulphate potash,
110 pounds nitrate soda.
(See No. 83.)
Wield. “per\acre.. Large potatoes w+. ++ ++ se cnee 7s: o2 SE5 63S
Yield, per acre. Small potatoes.....- phd ARRAN AN eee 40.33

Motaleyleld sper 3Ches.<.4- 02. ee 1 ane 355-66
(Three rotten potatoes.)

173

No.

-No.

The New Potato Culture.

. 90.220 pounds sulphate potash.

220 pounds nitrate potash.

Nield; per acre: «Varge potatoes 4)... eee

Yield, peracre. Small potatoes ....-....

es ee ee

Totalsyield; per acre: v4 ose oss. eee eee

(Six rotten potatoes. )

. 91.—220 pounds sulphate fodash.

220 pounds nitrate soda.

Yield, peracres Warge potdtoesiy. -- 3... --- eee
Yield, per acre. “Small potatoes\.-2 590)... ee

Notal yield; per:acre. ¢. 4.033...) 402. a eee

(Seven rotten potatoes.)
92.—No fertilizer.

Yield, peracre. .arge potatoes <.-) 2.5). eae

Yield, per acre. Small potatoes...

Motalbyieldsipenjacre tines see
(Three rotten potatoes.)

. 93.—440 pounds sulphate pofash.

440 pounds nitrate potash.
Yield, per acre. Large potatoes
Yield, per acre. Small potatoes

Dotaliyitelds peracres +... eae
j (Two rotten potatocs.)

. 94.—440 pounds nitrate soda.

(Compare with No. 38.)
Yield, per acre. Large potatoes
Yield, per acre. Small potatoes........

‘Rotaleyreldeipersdcne: 2.2.4, se ee
(Two rotten potatces )
95.—440 pounds nitrate fozash.
440 pounds nitrate soda.
440 pounds sulphate fo/ash.

ee we We ee Sete se « es = chee

Yield, per acre; ‘Warge potatoes, <=.) 4559-. 44: eee

Yield, per acre. Smali potatoes

Wotal yield} peraeresc. ee see ees

ose vet fe) ete

eS ae ee ee
a

Experiments. 175

Contrary to expectation, there was uot a rotten potato in this
trench. It is noteworthy also that the average size of tubers was
the largest, with the fewest small ones.

VINE GROWTH.

As in the previous series, the condition of the vines was estimated
on June 14, 10 denoting the maximum and one the minimum of size
and vigor :

INiCy 7G eee 334 Nosig 32h nieces: 6% N@iH8 5.) ih2. BG
io 7 ie 6 Pie OY ba Rama 5 SRO Oras Mere IE o/
OO eee a 534 By Nes ipcetisliutocd sé 5% ORC ate Eines 71%
UNCLE a a 5h SOR AOK Evens ches 534 Se BB tokaic's 5%
TO Ae ee 5% Shs ERT Miaka Bao 6 or so bak ge hee 5%
eS Ae. ah 2s 6 eee Oya ae a 7% OOe <option 6
27 6% SSGAES 6 jhe Rae oe 54 POUT Co) cehraian: Ree 634
0 2). eee 7 Bora eS 534 oD Be a ee 534
| A 7S eae 6% Sasso 9 Gene aE 8 6 O38 ave ois. 614
Bree AO ce ie an 6 S22 Fe wes 6 fon OA issuer 2 6%
Bate Sic 2 3 6% Seto )S tesa ie tae 6 PROS teens vi
(ls Ua a ae 64% Serie Vises hy 6%

In this series the average product of the unfertilized trenches, Nos
20, 34 and g2, was 284.77 bushels to the acre. The position of the
trenches from Nos. zo to 39 was next to the highest land (Mapes);
the position of the rest, Nos. 80 to 95, was nearly the lowest. No. 20
(no fertilizer) yielded 229 bushels ; No. 34, 291 bushels, and No. g2.
333 bushels, the yield generally increasing as the land declined,
whether the trenches were fertilized or not. Now, let uscompare the
average yield of the trenches of the higher land (Nos. 20 to 39) with
the average yield of the trenches of the lower land (Nos. 80 to 95, in-
clusive). The average yield of trenches from Nos. 2o to 39, inclusive
(higher land), was at the rate of 284 bushels to the acre. The aver
age yield of trenches from Nos. 80 to 95, inclusive (lower land), was
at the rate of 368 bushels to the acre, an increase of 84 bushels to
the acre for the lower and (supposably) moister land.

When we began to write up the results of this laborious series of
potato experiments, we were fearful that they would prove contradic-
tory and worthless. The known variability of the land did not at all
account for the gradual increase in the cropas we proceeded from the

176 The New Potato Culture.

northeast (higher land) to the southwest (lower land), because the
grading had been done in such a way that, though marked differences
in yield were to have been looked for as between two contiguous
trenches, yet in a breast of 25 trenches, the average yield ought not
to have been materially affected by the grading, since the same soj]
was used—some little parts (dishes) receiving more than other parts,
some (hillocks) receiving less or none.

The increasing yield as we go from northeast to southwest is not
however, altogether attributable, it may be assumed, to a propor-

tionate declination of the land. A careful examination shows that -

the subsoil of the northeastern portion is more sandy, and that 30 feet
further north it runs into a pure, seemingly bottomless sand; while
as we go to the south the subsoil becomes hard, and at a depth of three
feet almost’ impenetrable. Itis plain, then, thatif the entire plot
were level, the soil would retain moisture more and more as we go
toward the southwest. It must not be forgotten that the season was
the driest of many years. The reader may argue that in the moister
portions of the plot, the ferdi/izers ought to have given larger yields,
or a greater difference between the fertilized and unfertilized trenches.
It is not difficult to understand, however, that while an exceedingly
small quantity of soil moisture might support the plant, it might yet

be insufficient to dsso/ve the applied chemicals and render them fit for

food.

AVERAGES.

The seven nitrate of soda trenches yielded an average of 320.18
bushels to the acre; the six nitrate of potash trenches an average of
but 280.14 bushels to the acre—a difference in favor of the nitrate of
soda of about 40 bushels per acre. But the nitrate of soda trenches
were Nos. 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 80, 94, while the nitrate of potash
trenches were further towards the northeast which, we are assuming,
is less retentive of moisture than the trenches toward the southwest.
The nitrate of potash trenches were Nos. 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 and 8r.
If we compare nitrate of potash trench No. 81 with nitrate of soda
trench No. 80 (which were side by side), we shall see that the nitrate
of potash outyielded the nitrate of soda by 18.33 bushels per acre.
Trench No. 94, which received 440 pounds of nitrate of soda (twice
as much as No. 81, which received 220 pounds of nitrate of Jofash)

L:xperiments. B77

yielded 372.16 bushels, or 23.80 bushels more than the nitrate of
potash, but its position was 13 trenches nearer the lowest (or south-

western) portion of the field. The interested reader may readily

make further comparisons for himself, if he will but bear in mind
that the first breast of trenches begins with No. 1 and ends with the
fast tobacco trench, No. 24; and that this is the highest and driest
land, growing moister from No. 1 to 24, or from east to west.

As we further go to the south the trenches progress regularly in
number up to the last, No. 102, which occupied the lowest part, the
southwestern boundary of the entire plot. The whole difference,
however, between the highest (northeast) part and the lowest (south-
west) part is not over 18 inches.

It miy be noted that the potatoes fertilized with snuff were brighter
aud smoother than the others. Asthere was no scab, it could not be
ascertained if the snuff acted to prevent it.

The number of what we considered large or marketable potatoes
to a bushel of 60 pounds was 279.

The Rural Blush, as in the preceding experiments of these kinds,
was the potato used.

The above series of fertilizer experiments fairly point to one con-
clusion, if to no other, viz., that the drought may be such that while
there is insufficient moisture in the soil to dissolve chemical fertilizers
and render them soluble, there may still be soil moisture enough to
give a certain amount of nutriment to the plants. There is no such
thing as plant growth without moisture; but it is easy to see, as we
have said, that an amount of moisture sufficient to keep the plant
alive and growing might be quite insufficient to dissolve applied
potash, nitrate or phosphate. It is quite within the experience of
many of our readers that farm manure—even when applied in gen-
erous quantity—has failed to give a large crop. In such cases, the
failureis usually and justly attributed to the season. When fertilizers
are used freely and the crop fails during a dry season, many are too
apt to attribute the failure to the fertilizers and not to the drought.

CHAPTER XVIII.

eAnother talk about the use and effects of chemical fertilizers.
Benefits of the ‘Bordeaux mixture diluted.

On page 128 several talks between farmers and the writer are placed

before the reader. Since the first edition appeared, other farmers
have visited us, and the following questions and answers embody
such portions of our talks regarding potatoes as have not been well]
emphasized in other portions of this book :

Question. You have been experimenting with potatoes for 15
years or more. As a consequence, do you feel competent to instruct
your average potato-growing neighbor ?

ANSWER. Yes, of late years our regular crop has far exceeded the
crops of our neighbors.

QO. With a proportionate increase in the cost of production 2

A. With /ss than a proportionate increase in the cost of produc-

O. What new experiments do you propose to try this season ?

cee NOTE:

O. How is that ?

A. We have tried all the rational (and many irrational) experi-
ments we could think of, again and again, and there seems to be no
reason for continuing them further.

O. You fancy, then, that you ‘‘know it all ?”

A. We fancy that we do not know what further experiments to
make with a view to a further economical increase of crop.

A. Among the results of our experiments, it has been found that
different soils require different treatment.

A. No, in minor respects.

Chemical Fertilizers. | 179

QO. Theu in all esseutial respects, you think you know how to prvu-
duce a maximum crop of potatoes at a minimum cost ?
A, With the present data for investigation, yes.
~ ©. That is saying a good deal ?
fe A. Itissimply saying that we have tried every method of culture
we can think or hear of, often enough tos have received what we be-
‘ieve to be trustworthy answers to the questions asked. It is perhaps
‘sore a matter of belief than of absolute proof.

QO. To what do you attribute the fact that your crops are much
lirger than those of your neighbors ?

A. To the fact that they do not fit their land properly, and are un-
wv lling to use suitable fertilizers in sufficient quantity.

A. The surface soil alone is properly fitted.
~ Q. Hence it is you favor your trench system ?

A. Yes. That helps to fit the soil to a depthof six inches or

_more, the same as the surface soil is fitted by harrowing. It is more
important that the soil in which the tubers and roots form and grow
should be mellow and uniform than that the surface soil, in which they

do mot grow, should be so prepared.

O. Do you prefer fertilizers to farm manure ?

A. Yes, for the one reason that farmers cannot afford, or think
they cannot, to use farm manure in sufficient quantity to supply the
needs of the potato during every stage of its growth. A maximum
crop of potatoes means an amfle supply of potato food, and this
means a richer soil than one farmer in 100 has.

OQ. And do you think an ample supply of fertilizers can be fur-
nished at a less cost with the same effect ?

A. Itcan be supplied ata less costfor this year and next, and
perhaps a third or fourth. Of two soils equally rich—one with fer-
ulizer, the other with manure—we should much prefer the latter.

ae Why?

A. Because it exists in an equally soluble and less caustic form.

QO. What do you mean by ‘‘caustic ?”’ |

A. Comparing grape wine and grape brandy, the latter is the more
caustic form of liquor.

-Q. Do-you regard fertilizers, then, as stimulants ?

1SO The New Potato Culture.

A. Not at all in the usual sense of the word. All foods inacon- .
densed form become stimulants—many nutritious foods become~

poisons if sufficiently concentrated.

Q. Why do not farmers use fertilizers in sufficient quantity upon

potatoes ?

A. For several reasons. The cost is startling. Again, many
farmers use inferior fertilizers because the price is low, which means
cither that the fertilizer is low in soluble plant food, or that the food
cxists in a form regarded by the plant as ‘‘ Jevsona non grata.” Farm-
ers can not know just what fertilizers will give them maximum crops

until they have learnt by experiment. Potatoes, as other plants,

must be supplied with an abundance of suitable food. If the soil is
deficient in potash and rich in phosphate and nitrogen, then an ample
supply of potash renders the soil productive to its fullest capacity.
If, however, this farmer buys an ‘‘ammoniated superphosphate,” and
finds that it does not increase the crop, he must not assume that all
fertilizers are frauds, as many farmers do.

QO. Youemphasize the importance of a sufficient supply of fertilizer.
What amount do you consider a sufficient quantity ?

A. That depends wholly upon the fertility of the soil. Upon our
«xperiment land, impoverished by many years of cropping with little
or no manure, we have found that 1,750 pounds to theacre of a high-
grade potato fertilizer could be economically used.

©. What size of potato seed have you found it advantageous to
use, and how deep should the seed be placed, and how far apart?

A. The size of seed depends upon the size of the tuber and the
number of eyes. The fewer the eyes to a tuber, the larger the pieces
inay be. Weuse from two to three vigorous eyes, with all the flesh
possible. In our loamy soil, planting in trenches four to five inches

is about the right depth. The distance apart also depends upon the

variety used. Theoretically, potatoes should be planted so far apart
as to admit of a full natural development of the tops. Early Ohio
may, therefore, be planted closer than Beauty of Hebron or White

Elephant.

crops in a droughty season ?
A. No, that could be done only by irrigation. But we have found

ee &: ne iu

Chemical Fertilizers. I8I

that our method insures protection against drought to a certain ex.
tent. Our experiments have shown again and again that the finest
tops, as arule, give the largest yield of tubers. Anysystem of treat-
meut, therefore, which increasés the growth above ground may be
trusted to increase the growth beneath. The trench conserves mois-
ture, and this moisture retains the fertilizer or food in a soluble form
/onger than when it is applied in the usual way, that is, ‘‘in the hill,”
or sown broadcast. Vigorous tops mean a vigorous root system, and
vigorous’roots penetrate the soil further and deeper in all directions
than the feebler root system of smallertops. As the root system in-
creases, so do the tuber-bearing stems increase.
Q. Is the quality of potatoes influenced by the manure used?
A. The work done here has never been designed to answer that
question. From careful experiments carried on at the New Jersey
_ Experiment Station, the answer would be emphatically ‘‘yes.” It
was found that both manure and fertilizer increase the water content
of the tuber; that the form of potash used influences both the water
-and starch contents, kainit giving the most water and least starch ;
next came yard manure, muriate and, finally, sulphate of potash, the
last giving the highest content of starch excepting only the tubers
raised without manure of any kind. As to guality, the difference in
flavor was marked. Those raised with sulphate were decidedly su-
perior to all others; those from yard manure next, from the muriate
next and, finally, those from the kainit ranked lowest. As to yzedd,
muriate stood first, sulphate next, kainit next and yard manure last.
Q. Have you derived any benefit from spraying with the Bordeaux
mixture ? .
A. Not from the Bordeaux mixture of the original recipe. It in-
jured the vines and decreased the yield; but from a greatly diluted
Bordeaux mixture, unmistakable benefits were derived. A plot of 33
feet square was selected for thetrial. Half was sprayed three times
_ during the season—in June, July and August—the other half not
sprayed. The vines of the latter were somewhat injured by blight,
and died ten days earlier than the sprayed half, which was not
touched by blight,
QO. What formula did you use?
A. The simple formula of one ounce each of copper sulphate and

quick lime to every gallon of water.

182 | The New Potato Cures,

O. Did you use Paris- -green separately ?
A. No, with the Bordeaux. One level teaspoonful of Paris- -green
was stirred in every pail (two gallons) of water. . ie

long and a Vermorel or Cyclone nozzle. We preferred the former, — 4

because it is readily freed of any obstruction. ; ie
ee a

ao
oA

Neo

CHAPTER XIX.

Brevities. The objections to hilling up. Mr. Hirsey answered.
Difficulty in crossing potatoes. So-called hybrid seeds are
not hybrids. Hybrids between the strawberry tomato and
the potato. Prof. Batley’s grafting experiments. Why
plaster 1s sometimes effective, sometimes not. Questions
answered. ie ke

E cannot in these days afford to plant potatoes with deep
eyes, elther for home use or market.

It would be but little trouble to save out the best tubers of

the most productive hills while digging the crop; and if

by so doing we can preserve the original vigor of the varieties, the
trouble will be well expended.

We find that there are 673 potatoes of average size in a barrel.
If the potato pieces are planted in drills one foot apart, the drills
being three feet apart, 14,520 will be required for an acre, or about
4% barrels, if we make five pieces of each potato.

Wuat does the farmer hill up for? Some do it to kill the weeds.
Others hill up to increase the crop. This may increase the yield,
but it also increases the proportion of small potatoes. The green
stems, covered up by hilling, send out roots and tuber-bearing stems
_ from joints or adventitious buds. The hill accomplishes only what
the trench accomplishes far better, by giving a depth of soil below,
instead of above, and a more uniform pressure on all sides to be
overcome by the rapidly growing tuber. :

Tue practice of hilling up corn and potatoes is not only robbing
Peter tg pay Paul, but is worse than that. It is both robbing Peter

(183)

184 The New Fotato Culture.

and injuring Paul. When corn is a foot high, the roots exvend a
foot on either side; z. ¢., the plant is the center of a circle of roots
at least two-feet in diameter. Now, in order to hill up, we take
away the soil from these root extremities to heap it about the stems
where it is not - needed for any purpose whatever. When the roots
extend half-way or more between the hills or drills, it is worse. The
roots are then in a measure deprived of moisture, food and shelter,
while many of the ro :t; *m:h the piant reeds aie severed.

Tue true seeds of potatoes will germinate if three years old.

Be careful not to plant frost-bitten seed potatoes.

Avor ploughing potato land when it is not dry enough to crumbie —

as it is plowed.

Iris a good plan, for late potatoes, to sow blood, nitrate of soda or
sulphate of ammonia not until the sprouts show themselves above the
ground.

CuLTIvATE shallow if you would avoid the worst effects of dry
weather.

Mr. Epmunp Hirsey, of Massachusetts, has carried on a series of
experiments with potatoes for several years. He arrives at some
conclusions which are at a variance with the results of my own
experiments. ‘‘ The form of a potato,” he says, ‘‘cannot as a rule
be changed by the selection of any particular form.” This may be
true of well established varieties, but it is not true as to the se!ec-
tion of the tubers which true seed produces. We have repeatedly
selected differently shaped potatoes produced by the seedling plant,

establishing varieties widely differing from each otherin shape. (See _

Chapi2xv..)

Again he says: ‘‘ The seed-end of a potato is better to plant than
the stem end, because the plants start with more vigor and produce
larger and more potatoes.” Yes, the seed end does start earlicr and
more vigorously than the stem-end. It is true also that seed-end
pieces will produce more potatoes than stem-end pieces—but they
are smaller. The greater the number of eyes planted, the greater
the number of sprouts and, consequently, the more potatoes are
formed. But they are necessarily smaller. _He further says that
‘‘two distinct varieties will not mixin the hill.” This isa postulate

and scarcely needs to be stated. There will always be farmers who

Brevities. 185

believe that potatoes do mix in the hill, as well as farmers who believe
that wheat changes to chess, oats to barley, etc. But until absolute
proof of such changes has been furnished, we must be guided by
what we know of the laws of plant growth.

I HAVE never been able to cross pctato flowers, for the reason that
in spite of diligent search I have never been able to gather any pol-
len, though no less than an average of 100 different varieties have
been raised in small quantity every season. And yet, some of our
seedsmen offer ‘* hybrid potato seed” for 25 cents the packet. In
the technical sense, the1e is no such thing as ‘‘hybrid”’ potato seed.
If we were to cross a tomato or an alkekengi and a potato, the sced

‘would then be true hybrids. But crosses betwcen different kinds of

potatoes produce cross-breeds merely, and it is a more correct word
to use. Hundreds of new seedlings are announced from year to year,

with both parents given in a positive way. We may reasonably

believe that the parentage of many of our new potatoes, and the
hybridizing of these ‘‘hybrid”’ seeds, are merely guessed at or are
altogether fictitious. Of course, ‘‘ seed balls’”’ do form, and in such
cases there must be pollen. But to find pollen and to apply it so
that a cross is £zowz to have taken place, is a task that no one can
afford to do, unless, in place of 25 cents a packet, he were to charge

50 cents or more per seed.

SPEAKING of ‘‘ hybrid’ potatoes, the following bit of experience
may interest the reader. An attempt was first made to cross the
tomato upon the potato. This failed. Pollen from the alkekengi, or
strawberry tomato, was then applied to the pistils of the potato
flower, and one seed ball was the result. The several seeds were
planted, four of which sprouted and grew. The plants resembled po-
tatoes in all ways save two ; they did not blossom, and in the fall it
was found, upon digging them up carefully, that not a tuber, nor the
sign of one, had formed.

In this connection, the results of grafting potato cions upon tomato
stems, and wice versa, as effected by Prof. L. H. Bailey, of Cornell
University, during the past season, may be mentioned. The potato
plants with tomato tops produced good tubers even when no potato
sprouts were allowed to grow. from the root. The tomato tops in
some cases produced good, large tomatoes also—two diverse crops

186 The New Lovato Culture.

from cne plant. But the onc which produced most tomatoes bore no
potatoes—the vigor had evidently all gone to the tomato fruits. The
tomato plants with potato tops grew nicely, but produced no tubers.
But tue potato tops blossomed freely, but no balls set.

Ix places where good wood ashes are cheap, farmers should never

Luy chemical fertilizers until the ashes have been tried.” Avtimsranare
supplement to unlcached ashes is fine raw-bone flour, being strong in
phosphoric acid, in which ashes are weak, and furnishing nitrogen, of
which ashes are destitute.

TuRouGH all times plaster has been regarded by many as a direct.
and very valuable plant-food, especially for clover. By others it has
becn regarded as of no value, for the good reason that no visivle
effects fsliowed its use. Inthe light of more recent knowledge, such
contradictory phenomena are apparently well explained. Plaster
scts the fixed or insoluble potash of the soil free. That is to say,
the sulphuric acid of the plaster combines with the fixed potash of
the soil, forming sulphate of potash, which is soluble. So, too, it may
act upon the carbonate of ammonia of the soil, which is volatile,
fixing it as sulphate of ammonia, until as such it is used by the grow-
ing crop or passcs through the soil in the drainage water. In most
cases, itis probable that the lime of the gypsum has little, if any,
effect in increasing the crop upon soils which are already supplied
with lime, and yct it is often upon just such soils that gypsum shows
atits best. In such soils there is little doubt that potash, either in
unlecached ashes, muriate or sulphate of potash, would have a more
immediate and telling effect upon the crop. In this case the needed
element (potash) is given to the soil in a soluble condition ; in the;
other, the plastcr splits into two parts, so to say, the lime becoming
fixcd and the sulphuric acid seizing upon the inert potash, rendering
it scluble. It will be seen that plastcr is therefore what may fairly be
called a stimulant

an excitant. How greatly soever it may increase
the crop one season, we may look for a proportionate decline the
next.

THE KILLING OF POTATO” LOPS, LESSENS “Ett vate:

D. F. S. HENpERsoN, Texas.—-Does the killing of potato tops by
late spring frosts diminish the yield or deteriorate the quality of the
crop? We plant potatoes about February 15, and the tops are fre-

Brevtties. 187

quently killed by frosts. We getacrop, of course, but is’nt it smaller
than it would have been had not the frosts killed the tops ?

Answer.—There can be little doubt that the killing of potato tops
by frost or any other cause lessens the yield materially and also im-
pairs'the quality of the tuber. If the tops were killed a second time
by the frost, what would be the effect ? Itis true that potatoes may
be raised from cuttings continuously. The cut tuber used for seed is
itself a cutting. But the cutting must be a strong, healthy cutting.
A plant injured by frost is weakened in every part.

FERTILIZING POTATOES.

BC: J. M., Tom’s River, N. J.—_In the Rural trench system the fer-
tilizer is applied above and below the ‘‘seed. Do you in general
favor ‘‘hill and drill” or broadcast fertilizing? Am I wrong in
broadcasting valuable (costly) fertilizers, that is, do I fail to get the
most profitable immediate returns ?

Answer.—Above or below or both as one chooses. I have, .as. a
tule, favored broadcast fertilizing. For potatoes I favor confining the
fertilizers to the trenches if one foot or more wide. This is an opinion
not founded on experiment. For corn, wheat and all crops the roots
of which extend frcm row to row and plant to plant, we have no doubt
that broadcast fertilizing is the most economical thing to do. We
find that the sass of roots of potatoes grow in the trenches and
that, therefore, if the trenches are three feet apart, they will get at
least twice as much fertilizer as if the same gross amount were dis-
tributed broadcast.

, KEEPING POTATOES.

W. O. F., Greensburg, Ind.—What is the best plan for keeping po-
tatoes over winter, especially early potatoes for seed ?

Answer.—tIn northern sections the commonest way is to store the
tubers in cool, well ventilated cellars. Opinions vary as to whether
the potatocs should be packed in large bins or in smaller lots in bar-
rels or boxes, but it would seem that most growers store. in large
masses. It pays, as all agree, to shovel or handle the seed potatoes -
‘over several times during ‘the winter. We have often thought that
potatoes coul! le stored vcry successfully in sacks, which cou!d be
emptied and refilled once cach month, or six weeks, during the winter.

188 The New Fotate Culture.

Many of the large growers nse pits for storing. The pit illustrated
at Fig. 15 is described by W. W. Tracy, of. Detroit. The potatoes
are put into the pit as soon after being dug as possible, when they are
covered with straw or corn stalks for a few days. They are then
covered with boards and earth, the ends of the pit being Icft open.
Later the ends are closed, and a small amount of ventilation -is «f-
forded by means of a wisp of straw, which extends up through the
center of the covering to the open air. In the illustration, a@ repre-
sents a pole supporting the boards ; 4, six inches of earth; c, cight
inches of manure; d, six inches of earth; c, eight inchesof manure ;
f, a straw ventilator, and g, a space of eight inches between potatoes

and boards.

Sse OS nay

Lye Coe
Lele,

ig Be

Tunas NWeEw-loRKER

AMP OLAT Op ia. meilGre ms.

LARGEST YIELDERS.

E. P. N., Albany, N. Y.What varieties would you select, as likely
to give the greatest number of bushels to the acre ?

Answer.—Silver Lake, Everett, Summit, Jewell, Columbia, Charter
Oak, Morning Star, Early Gem, Snowflake, Late Vermont, White
Elephant, or late Beauty of Hebron, White Star, Burbank, Empire
State, Home Comfort, Early Maine, Cream of the Field, Dakota
Red, R. N.-Y. No. 2, Brownell’s Winner, Corliss’s Matchless,
Bonanza, Late Hoosier, Montreal, Green Mountain, Hodgman’s Seed-
ling, Nott’s Victor, Pearl of Savoy, Early Puritan, Rural Blush, Min-
ister, Tonhosks, Crown Jewel, Polaris, Delaware. Not all of these

: as Ew

77eae

Brevities. 189

are of good quality, as grown at the Rural Grounds, but the quality
may be good in other soils.

ABOUT POTATO PLANTING

J. H.N., Afton, N. Y.—I am going to plant about 14 acres of pota-
toes on a sandy loam upland. The White Star and Burbank are the
kinds mostly raised in this section; would you advise me to plant
those or some other varieties, 2nd what kind would you advise? a2.
How many bushels shall I allow totheacre, andif cut, how many eyes
to the hill? 3. Would wood ashes be good as a fertilizer ?

Answer.—ti. It willbe safer on large areas to plant potatoes that
you know do well on other farms near you, than to try experiments.
New varieties ought always to be tried on small areas. 2. If you
cut medium sized potatoes, having a medium number of eyes, to two
eyes, and plant one by three feet apart, you will need 12 to 15 bushels.
‘Not less than two strong eyes. Give all the flesh possible. 3. Yes, .
a splendid fertilizer, but one-sided. On your land, add fine raw-bone
flour—4oo pounds to the acre.

HOW MUCH SEED POTATOES.

J. V. C., Lysander, N. Y.—In planting potatoes for flat. culture,
how many bushels of seed are needed per acre ?: ‘

Answer.—The above question cannot be answered definitely.
All depends upon the size of the potato, the number of eyes to be
planted, the number of eyes in the variety of potato and the distance
apart. The best way to find out is to count the potatoes in a barrel,
and multiply the number by the number of pieces each potato will
give. Then estimate the distance apart at which ‘+ is proposed. to
plant. If to be planted one by three feet apart, 1,,520 pieces will be
required for an acre.

W.G.S., Benedict, N. Y.—1. Why have we no potato balls now ?
Is it on account of the Colorado beetle? 2. How do potatoes
‘¢mix’’ in the hill ?

Answer.—t. It seems to be 1:aw cf nature that as we change plants
to our needs or ‘‘improve’’ thez: as we may, they deteriorate in
other ways. Thus double flowers are produced -at the cost of

siamensand pictils. Many frults—annles, pears, oranves for exomn!o

190 The New Potato Culture.

—as they are increased in size become seedless. -We grow potatoes
for the tubers, and the plants having been propagated by tubers
through generations, their nature 1s changed. We produce larger
tubers and more of them. The energy of the plants, which generc-
tions ago was divided between tubers and secd balls, is now directed
towards tubers entirely. 2. Potatoes do not ‘‘ mix’ in the hill. Itis
impossible. Any variation in potatoes that appears in the product cf
the same seed potato, is owing to bud variation—just the same as any
green-leaved plant is liable to produce a colored-leaved shoot. These
are called ‘‘sports”’ for want of a better word. It seems probable,
that ‘‘ sports” are really the cropping out of foreign blood cr owing
to natural or artificial crossing or hybridization, the effects cf which,
though dormant for years, finally become potent through peculiar
conditions.

HIGH AND LOW-GRADE FERTILIZERS.

An Op FarMER, Monroe County, N. Y.—In 7he Rura/ of October
25, mention is made of ‘‘low-grade”’ and ‘‘ high-grade”’ fertilizers.
I would esteem it a favor if you would tell me what I am to under-
stand by these terms. Does the high-grade contain something that
the low-grade does not contain, or is there-more of some valuable in-
eredient in the high-grade than in the low-grade, and if so, what is
it? Oris the difference due to the quality, or solubility, or availa-
bility of the ingredients? Please give us an illustraticn ct a high
and low-grade article, telling just what each contains, and the value

and cost cf each. I believe you are right, but many of mynecightors.

prefer the low-priced fertilizers. Some of them are using disscived
South Carolina rock phosphate, and say that it produces just as good
results as the higher-priced article. But perhaps they are not using
what you term a ‘‘ high-grade ”’ fertilizer.

Ajiswer.—Herce is a forcible question—from an experienced farmer,

too, ‘* Why use a higli-grade fertilizer?’ Because (1) it costs no
more than a low-grade for freight. Because (2) it costs no more to
spread it on your land. Because (3) it costs the firm that mixes it no
more than to mix a low-grade. Because (4) the per, cent. of plant-
food ingredients is (as a rule) higher in high-grades than in low-

oradas

Breviltes. ly

HOME-MIXED FERTILIZERS.

C. S. A., Lansing, Mich.—Does it pay to buy the chemicals and
mtx them at home ?*

Answer.—Yes and no. Nothing pays that is not managed with in-
telligence. Itis better t6 buy of a reputable firm, at a fair price, a
standard brand of fertilizer than to buy a lot of coarse chemicals and
nitrogenous waste and to mix them hap-hazard. It is probably
cheaper in the rush of spring work to buy factory-mixed goods than

- to stop to order chemicals in small quantities and to mix them. In

some places, and at exceptional times, factory-mixed goods may be
sold at prices so low as to make it altogether more profitable to buy
them than to buy and mix fertilizer chemicals.

On the other hand, many farmers find it much to their advantage
to buy for cash the same fertilizer chemicals that are bought by man-
ufacturers, and to mix them for themselves, instead of buying for cash
the factory-mixed goods.

WHAT ARE THE ADVANTAGES CLAIMED FOR HOME-MIXING ?

- a. It is easier to prove the quality of separate chemicals than of

- the mixture of them. It is said that it is quite beyond the chemist’s

nower to certainly detect inferior forms of nitrogen, for instance, ina
mixed fertilizer, but it-is certainly very easy to detect them in sul-
phate of ammonia, cotton-seed meal, dried blood and the like.

6. By mixing his own fertilizers the farmer can perfectly adapt his
fertilizer to his idea of the requirements of his land and crop, and
any intelligent farmer is the best or only judge of these requirements.

' That opinions differ greatly as to the best mixture for any special

crop will be very evideut to any one who compares the composition of
the leading brands of fertilizers specially designed for the potato or

the onion crop, for instance. The chance to vary his formula and

note the differences that result on the same field in the same year is
worth not a little to any man who manages his farm ‘‘ with ancient
sinew and with modern art.” |

c. It 1s easier for farmers whose land and crops are different, to
club together and make an order for fertilizer chemicals large enough

#*] am indebted to Dr. E. H. Jenkins, of the Connecticut Experiment Station, for the

answe-~ to this aucstion.

192 The New Potato Culture.

to secure wholesale rates, than it is to agree on one or two brands of

factory-mixed goods which they will order in considerable quantities.
@. Commercial fertilizers on most farms are not a substitute for

manure, but a supplement to it, and it is often profitable to add to the
dressing of manure only a single fertilizing ingredient, ¢. g., nitrogen
to give an earlier start, phosphoric acid to favor early ripéning, or
potash to supply a known deficiency of the soil. This can be done
with fertilizer chemicals, not with ready-mixed fertilizers.

c. With ordinary business care in’searching the market, buying for
cash, buying early before the usual sharp rise in chemicals takes place
with the opening of the spring trade, mixing the chemicals on the
days when out-of-door work cannot be done, while the help on the
farm must be paid for just the same—under these conditions home-
mixing has been found by many farmers to pay a large profit. Farm-
ing can be successful only when business methods are used in every
branch. The competition is close and the profits are small in New
England farming, but so they are in every kind of business no less
than in farming. The per cent. of really successful farmers is very
small, but this is just as true of every other line of business. Care-

ful study of the markets he buys and sells in and that he may buy-

and sell in will generally pay a farmer better than exclusive attention
to the production of his crops.

PAGE
RMSE StALOME™ Short Siee. wy a) lye ee ee a geet are een ie en ae 65
mswes asa tertilizer=. 2. 5)... 2! Oa eee ee ee oe 186
See eS emile bem Olle. 0.) s «feet Pjur oe pogo Mas a) eee ee hk hae 148
eCPREC IR AN Achy Geter aM oA tie ig EE relia Si meek pe Sats TEER ey varie
Bordeaux mixture, Benefits of 2.0. os a Rel de Stee An eam) (to) tal Ys 72)
iS i Wit; bovapply<wwithh: sire toe oe S38 SPP eee ae PE 182

Le PSL GSS Beige Ripon ane ge Ra raat tine Seam rR a Mige Ay eka o5 8a ae hep al es
Bud variation, What is knownas .... eae ae We ee eee NS di) |
Chemical Fertilizers, A talk of use and effects of Star SREP ABST. dele Ned Bers fo)
2y as Slidicient supply of 23°55. 2). see oe ay iene eet a
Crops, large, wanted, use an excess of plantfood .-........... 93
Paar sao DM CULGYy ADOUL= i oie. ele. Ps ee ek OS a ee, 2 pn 6 BD
Experiment Stations. ...... SAR te veka Gi cas Oke OR aaa antes eat Se a ae 42
Hyessolind. How-to detect - 2+... 2 20.2 ER RAEN A GI OS ms pears OLE
BEKO EN Oman So seo at ed tet a tk oes SERA Cees ch nae Re ier ine A oa eed 2. Bre eis
Seabee ye ALC ole Aa ee ees POLS soak oh See ae eee 136
HeLaliser-apoveor Welow-the SCEG. (2. 25. oe. os, we ce oe eh OST
Zs Chemicalsameas&Xmanure...... Bt Sates Aa Rtas Nine Ae Soa es 133

a WonminleGemarts teceee eset tye SiS end, 12.oa el eee aah i ta eo ge ree

ee 3 QAM, CLO) OS is sae ee ee en ee Spee tar ge te 155)

i constituents needed by land, How to findout ......... 125

ite SAI SMUMNUC TUS steer, Se PA eee ct eoting se ens DOLE a ae reine See eae 52

ae PO SGA ES iio aha a oer ae teeter ee ee cl

a How much may be profitably ee pet i See 3 Shao ee ales

ae ingredients, Supplying more than crops require, ‘folly F 90

He ale sRAe ee ecus Or cee Sg i. ote SF, . . 50, 53, 54, 55, 56, 58, 59

es under orover seed pieces, ..... Si eS (tte, poe sits re9s 1S

Se ‘« seed pieces, Difference in oe CTE one io sf Aso lates Sarees
Fertilizers alone, large crops ... eats ARS oe? RP ars kee ce kee aa 63
i: best made up different Pere, of plant flood sad shi eee ae 132

ey characterrepresented inetheyplant -.<,. 3) aes os Se 62

ve chemical, A talk with farmersonm =. | 205-42 Jaks ae + Oe

“ commercial, Use of, money spent for food not needed .... 88

Oe Bauumersishnould study theiscienceol «72 2.) fee eee 132

bey CiberemtebiLeCts Ofc." 0% eel Ao et eer al sin belt a cee 69

ff Dis v Sir J. B. ‘Tawee's experinients Fret vit tte On

(193)

194 The New Potato Culture.

PAGE
Fertilizers different, Experiments with . 2. ... - <2: = = 2°55 senna

ae High and low erade . 26.25 fan. cs i 182, 190
ge Home -mixe@: * nee apie etetis oS 4 oS ehk iene eee 191
a es do they pay. Ge icker. oss c.) 2) ne 192
ce How money is thrownaway on. 2 6 |) a eee Ts
es Increased quantities, effects. .... rararenme er SE
ce si S tables”... eo). 96, 97
ee one-sided, low priced, Harm doneby....... pa Te Lh 92
pe on variable soil, Effects of different quantities. ....... 75
se used by Mr. Min¢hic 4.2% 2. tes eo a 37
“ os. manures for potatoes «2 ...°. =... 6 69
Hood, Pertectamust besupplied > Fa -.-8 = a) E wens. jo 2a le oer 128
Grafting the potatoand tomato .......... pele leis bee 185
Handling: 2 2 wc) 3 te Oe eens er 145
Hilling up, Objections to.0. 2.2 50.0.7. eS ee ee onlay
Hybrid between potato and alkekengi ~. - ~ - 2... 2 32 eee 185
tec »geeds not hybrid - 2.05 .%.-. a se ee en es
Land impoyerished, Increased quantities of fertilizer .......... 70
oe ee that needs complete fertilizer, how much touse .. 73
RE SOL MHe\PlOTS: oy cer We. icusgeer eee eee “ek a =) pe 60
‘¢ short in nitrogen, use fertilizers with high rate nitrogen ...... 92
«< whatit requires, How to findiout --.\2 3} = . 245 125
hawes,-Dri <5. Soe. ns) Sls cs La ec rr 42 |
Lime as a: preserver =... 60.03. 2 ee ee ee
‘¢ superphosphate alone wise ue le!) wel gl cae a le Se es
Coe tovorimg Wp the Lamar ay. s.r Son le 2 Ci gS.) oe 125
“ “Use of,in the:soil -- ac. 2 fects pe 3S oe Se 180
Machinery, Digging by ..... es Pats 146
Manure, Concentrated and farm, “Tai a names MOP ar es, Soc, 144
es Warm -f o>. 6 a He tec SE es oe a oe ee 48
ge é~-and chemical fertilizers, difference . -..<: 21. oe eee 134
eC “ concentrated | .« 2.4. cleo ws, Se ee Se 134
ot Wihatis ei f48 % <a 2 ee es ee od eee er 133
Manures, different, Effects of (12: -: 3%... 2 -4:... = eee 69
ef Mineral alone, large crops .-.\.. 2 :% >... 60.) ae 63
Moisture, Method of conserving by trench system............ 44
Mulch, Anew; how prepared ©... s0. 0: 245 1 105
¢.- experiments | .f:-24 on 6h ee Se en Se 105
‘Straw tor potatoes ,. 2.0% 2.) es es 56
$60 Walley: oc 8s as Sa Gots) ge SS dee ne eee mee ee 105
Nirate of soda alone an ill-balanced fertilizer for potatoes ........ 93
ah ee ‘¢ “yield of potatoes ~ 27.222 << so <3 2 ee 93
fs st use of, Mr. Harris’s:criticism °°... =... - ato ee 87
EC es ee ae “ oi reply-: . .°;. 2%. 232 eee 91
He Ke with corresponding supply of minerals .......... 92

\ ee
$ 7 > ee:

L[hdex.

Nitrate of soda, writers advocating the useof .. .

195

PAGE

N rua and phosphoricacid needed, buy nitrogen in euenpee and bestform 83

easy to apply top dressing
a effect in varying quantities . .
Bs Effects of . i 3 PP
ae Farmers not ae dependtt risers atone Ne
se Gentle and conservative in the use of

ee its effects when applied alone. . ......-..4

oo not more valuable than potash and phosphoric acid
ne only for one season . .

Le Wseblendedfiovrms. Of o 2.08 0 Foo hoi Sa a eee

es used without regard to soil

Nitrogenous manures alone, Negative result of .......

Paris ereen and plaster preferred . ....0.-% - as 6s ee.
a So Waters Obj CChlONS tO aoc .0s et 2 che) ah gsi
ee for potato beetles, Quantity mixed with plaster .
Peespnokic acid, Wiects: OL . 20.20.56. ee me he
Plant growth without moisture ......... SSRI rates
Plants require food adapted to their growth .........
Plaster, Causes of variable effects of Se
PETS CTE vo oot Oe elon ORE Re ea eee Sm Ln pene
Eee teRe CUS OR a0 oto Rew el ey a en eee tate Some
ar eomOaice waVy SO LOW ms. ooh a6 oo So ayes Ale we te
eee contest, HOw 1t. came avOub.. <7 22. Le ee 3 at
bie ae Judges’ report . . Be ee och yy Faeroe es ae
se se j ONG) sida EN ORR coi atten tect odie ferader bs ih Suga wha
hoes ee sr -aLback Of Med DECGlCSy snc. sneak ec oe Ue
Bae st Se NOES OL PROSLESS ) cel ts seca aye ae cee
“ Kit (SP previous treatment... sa.0. 0s) soos ©
he ap BE SULGReN het 20-5 cps cess bie Sek Leen ata tale Saal
“ SSC COMGNn ast sc tates Set ek Fy th gh Man sae ite
ee co oe inGS PlanLeG= 22.4 os tsetse a ay <8
He ae Sete Olean crepe sot ee ot ER, ET re Pe aly
ae os women’s prizes awarded......... ees
‘¢ crop, conserving moisture by trench method...
s¢ «Importance of water tothe... .-
I CuliivaLion; AaVOId. packing soll >. 2. SS
ids < failures TMS ELUCUEVE Key seis eae ee ae Gera
fo oF On-avlarcer scale. 25172 (Payee aeysitte
*£* culture; drought, to guard against .....:....
Ke iy fertilizers used by Mr. Minch .......
ae b Mirtle Ware Sc t2es. . > wrut lance ie Ae ole peteh eee
ae ts es ‘6 preparation of soil, water, etc
Bs as eh CO A abs 2) 6 bap ame ante Pe Ape MT 9 8

as OS iSeries Sa EE CES be errata oe nes

Cy vem Wel) ria Seer JB eT, di at a” ie, Lettie

Sie tae shy eee oe

ni Eh
98

SERIE dena 95

Meee 87
deter RPE SE ti 96
99

196 ihe New Potato Cullure.

ge es Mr. Minch’s yield, how obtained .....
cc oy on small plots, remarks as alee
ee fe yielding medium for growth... 2 .-. | : Si a ae

a Dakota Red, large yield
oe Eiveritt.imanyieyes.. Se 4s aaa
et experiments at Rothamsted in succession

re barrel in garden soil
ae HS at Rural Grounds, five scrics .
Potato experiments, barrel in pure sand :
ue ae ‘« 84 garden soil, 14 sand
Pe re es ee “ Yeutstraw . .
me se larcesiyiGlid = St. hacen eee
“ MD Oniditerentlands ces e
ue gC third year’s trial on differ ant ena
oy GVES arr erty se res i oe Oa nee, Dies ae gee a
‘ e yiind. 46 ere
we ‘¢ many, growth of vine. .
os ‘¢ what they are 2 Ane 7 Fee
‘© fertilizer experiment yates. Ree Reese ed poe iB dU, 538, 54, 55, 56,
‘¢ fertilizers of the day too low in nitrogen. . 7 CHS
‘food, ample supply ols." 2-5 2° 3 ve <8. a tee
= SSFOwinge, cramped spaced@ra es s.. er a. eee
3 SLOW UUs as sh ee iG etek
‘¢ many-eyed, growth of VLC: 5)" toa ape
e nitrogen inthe juice ... STS SO a dee Nee Ra
oe Pe taken up by the lant
‘¢ number of eyes a guide to planting
‘¢ to plot, half acre, fertilizers used
F ee fone TU CHS ke ee wees Seite
al = <* Nitrosentapplied Se ae usa.
oC “Seed -PICCOS > 2 i404 ee Bride et, ho ee
ee os Of SAVICTG. SMA 8 Cree:
s ey ef NOE POOTASOUL tates ia et aprons
2 PlotSlamdvoie eset! 52. oh cro eee 6 a ee ee
a <> whichvyields mostmys wens. 4-7 0 0are

o “raising, Usual SySbtem! «<i s2i21¢ 2 <2 we eee
oe seed and stem ends, absurd names .

oe ‘¢ cut to single eyes, the distance to alent.

es Gylindricalipieces 3 aaa. ae ee

ee ‘¢ flesh to each eye for profitable crop

ef “< pieces, different numberof eyes. = 47. 4)....). eee
es ef “sizes diiterenti se eee Ut
oS ee “e oteie treated before pinemie. oe
et se "> planting’ 2. <6 2. Ske re a ee oe

Index. 197
PAGE!
Potato seed, Selection of... - - - - ee ete ee te ets 137;
ee ‘© ~=gize determined by number and vigor ofeyes .....-- 120
e Lc AC La SE ie: APRN el ea eae aM TP fe ee eas AM Arh Paneer eee 120, 180
Ke MORE eT AE aa = Sane ee as Dh aug Nee cael lee Poy Ue ee at ele eaten Pees aia iF
Cd OAT Safle CO bint els ieee bate ae Me ee haa are, any 122
Bee ceines; care Ol. - Pt gin fe ee eg) Mahe = pa aeh of lene Ne 138
“ skinscuttosingleeyes ... +--+ +++ sss ee: Lin We |
ee Pee liaiian Ger ain a ieee ade hehe = yi desis eae erp eee ean ees 67
«“ tests, difference between small plots and whole fields ..... . 85
ba Mowe cyrme tinal aE AS: oo es a le! ons a0 erie shee iay (my omaginny jul bpor gett eget examiner 2 le 34
rag FopSeaMalySeS-OF ss 0.% ey Seely 3p eye oh oli te ae 124
Me VIMEOSHOWLN OL 220g =r =e the See ke 155, 160, 166, 169, 175
Potato tops, any injury to decreases PWG nyelGa yg eye bs hes tao tes eee ae 186
fe See TMT SCs os Sore kee cabin ue chan) eet Peep ter eee et Tees ok 60
Peenbers analy sesOl . (2. Tyr +) hab teen ea Sere ee 123
“yields as indicated by Ria Maes ag eects Semeur tees Ore oan SOmare 59
ot (eee Beonapurtime. sme biOG l,i i, rs sacar sWe au eee Ao) 107
“ Wemheavy, by uence mennod e.g: te) moe) Aa se ei 39
ue Pau eianivense,«tiwOrCMemies .. gales pe Raia copie an ep ci 24
ke Pm aTiMes COL USSU tere) ee cat gto ms rm eine Ooo legen a 25
‘6 «© “ Reported, doubts expressed ......-- Stee eee 107
ae i ectartling annOUNCCMeRES (2945 Re oyster fe 14
Eames West VACIMCS: 0 Spe cle oe ei we eee ere 154
ce Different fertilizers forexperiments...----+--+- +++: 47
a REPTILAeU MEN SIMUM Se oe neue Whee ae Vaal Yon eae n sa ese 10%
ee fertilizer over or under seed pieces ..--- +--+ sss 79
se Hleweeyied. BrOWL, Oley: ce cee ay 2 ay ae ee ag any
me TESCO Se a en, ca tnd ag eee er ee 135
ee grown in variable soil, effects of different quantities of fer ti-
MP OTES Naa tee ae le os a ee er nr ater ito he
Be Hlowamuuch Seed tO are. <2 > 2a ye eo Ses Te Bey 155
ce MEMECeSSION Or lO years 02> ~ ios) 2 eee ay iy ae 61
v6 Treysvepe hia) Glo 3 emcee eee a ea en tS Pe Mery eee 153
we mulching,anew way.-.---:--s:+°- eee pub ie 105
ue Pocperimenusin mauling =). —. ehh 2 ee eae 105
ve needs, farmer mustfindout....---.-- ck stgeaias are ee 133
ne never mixinthehill..... ce oe Cure 136 |
ee on same soil for 9 years, Dr. eens, Ss ‘experiments oe 24 Fy SES
of Bey rst Ber Bes LO VAN Ste teekiap loo seats Wiel on Weakest ieinicl ree Ne aes 64
Bs moncedseiaht inches deep = =) «7-2-2 iia) yr se eG 84
“ CeCe INCHES ACEP... <- eprembate 242 tment oe ea 83
ee = in four-inch trenches give largest yield... .-- - aoe Oo
ue a ‘¢ trenches of different depth, results ...--+-+--- 83
fe ene tir Gls GCCCD- «co cet Bite crake ies eel terse me 84
fe quality of influenced by manure Used mesg ay ae he Fe SESS Rie 181

198 The New Potato Culture.
PAGE
Potatoes, what a crop removes fromanacre ........ ....%% 124
ob yield of, nirate of sodaialoneused ~ 0.0.2 2 =. ee 93
Productiveness fixed by selection” 2.2" ice (+254 2. > 422 141
Seed and stem ends, absurd mames*) "0. . 4. 7. 116
("ball from Wal’aOranesey so 2 a eS et ee ve LO
te pS a MERU a> seme een aus eee earth tae ae ‘a 185
GO! GRRGWOE SPs en a Mie cea age ew ores ae a Jog i a 144
‘“ cut to single eye, distanced apartto plant ..... oo 108
tt. Gnd peestem end? Vises ley oN hee eee ee eee oo eee a eal
"experiments withione pic€e" ">... tags ee pt ts)
ee ie ‘“ -two-pieces: i.) 505 (oa as. See ee 109
fe oe “three <8oi2 0 a Sa ee , . 109
Ob OC SCS OUT Tee STA Ee ee 22 2 109
‘« Exposing it to light and sun before planting .. . 144
cos Werhilizer underorvover.wllclie. ie eee oo.
‘s Plesh to each eye for most profitable crop ...... Marrs 5 111
te” from productive hills, should we select. . ~- 2 = =) (2=aseneuee 149
Or HOW <CUL fee = Bebe a aide cee ihe Se Tee rr 49
ae ‘¢ omuch flesh to.each-eye-+.~ <0 Ge ee TES
ce CC STePAared. 2h 050 a ee ye ey SE Lee oer ee 57
cc “pieces. different number of €yes’ -..7--5. : 2 -) .).5-3 110
es “~ distance apart in proportion-to size... +! . 22 eae 1138
us én “Gy hing rica. os cc.te Go i ye sl de Fe ee re 112
ae “ne of potato No. 205. ee ee ee 115
ce ‘¢ sizes different ..... “aoe Towa) 2 oe Me er 110
wc’. te wariously treated../'- 5) Gt. 4. a (Ps 102
te plamtine sc) SS aes fete ess Be i Ss ee 137
“selecting the little tubers for. .-2. --+-5% 2% > Seo) eee 142
s selections Of . 620i soe Ele & Vee eee Te tn 137
‘“¢ size'determined by number and vigor ofeyes............ 120
ee ah oe ‘¢. the variety: 2)... G.23- = 3 ee 115
oskin of the potato... o2-s Sosa ee ee oe Lil
(C\“wWhole POCALOCS sso cieS* et ee Slots oa eae ee ete oe 111
os ie es bDadadvice.. 29.2. 4. 22. A 23 122
Seedlings Careol ne par ee ako oe eR oe ree “> See 138
Soil, how to find out what it requires... .°--. 9 | 2-322 ees
natural) yleld-of potatoes <).--> / : 2 2°. 220 ace (ue
‘ tests notneeded® so oe eb 2 ee See 88
c what did it mee? 8 & es i 52
ge ‘- -itneeds; how to'get.at. ~ 122° 22.2". =) ee 88
““~ impoverished, to lash into yielding. > <2. ===. = 2) eee 126
Straw mulch, how prepared ........ 48 | ie 2s 56
Sulphateotiron Narmful’. 2 292 ee eee ee ne 71
ADEs ee a ks ee eee Ea Eg Sears ee ee erie ee 73, 74, 75, 76, 85
Trench, how to-prepare \. Gat 20) singe) ee Bee ee 45

Index. 199

PAGE

Een Br Let nOU na OOUG OWE ses laf sy /as ove lal rea 6, ree wd 8 ce Ss 35
at Se At Vane SmOlnpe st ct as wise Ase ee Seo ao. 36

Cs be CiLects OnLOn Mamta Ms e8. ay Bret 6 ot ee 8 Se ee, AO

6 ur micas Of CoOMSerVINe MOISTULEL ~s.G:. 2°. 2.2.3 bao? 44

ge a Mire Cony’ S"SUGCESS WIth. 6 eee ee Sy 40

66 ae ac oe CCD asc ANE >, RR OPN cas Me Teh yin To AECr is 40

“ ve GUE CUIOUS LUM penne sd, ay a eae eae Oye, 158 et he te et 45

ot 2 OLISMENO Re SS Le pp aah elas TEE Ue ae ee eee 13

= es VCO De Vapi AO we rege Soe surat ERG LE ON et 40
Trenches, Average yield of the nitrate of soda’. .........5... 176
mumers trom the most productive hills.) 2. = 0.0.02... ee et 142
‘¢ save only those from most productive hills. ........2.2..,. 143
Mee SUMED a tees tao ho Poe amo LN em oy ie lactate eo 105
See eset, GE SCOCO 7 Milas et a ee! we, Loe Loe 136
M@etretole nie WObALOCTOP: «aed (otis ts visete yoy ee es ee 43
Saeide promise as indicated, Dy VINES. Jot. o fo. Lk ce a ew 59
Yields, computing method..... a SOIMEN Ca bare kore Me Soak on Seas Sees 107
Sl etre vd GubtSeXxpressed. oe eee ae a eee oP 107

200 The New Potato Culture.

INDEX TO ILLUSTRATIONS.

PAGE
Muleh. Valley oc: pkey: rhe eames tee pean a aes a . 105
Potato, Blush, long-stemmed 42 2202 2. 5 suo ee 122
‘growth without moisture and decay > - = =... - Segoe

Sf + BLOW EMS <5. + ao eck bx oa ae Sas Wee ees) ye 118

cc” *pit;.and how to construct =. ... ..6°. =o 2. oe 188

+. seed, lifted from.a trench \ 4. <4 83. ceh ae te eee Bee al?

*-— seedlings; first leaves. 2 0. 20e ts a Bes ee eee 1387.

os = second leaves:: 42g: ia) “See. <a Be eee ) phe OS

‘“~ taken from barrel in cellar... 2° 2. 2 2)... 2 3. ar
Potatoes in the: hill, ideal <5. 2 lee G2 uch eek
se ‘+. trench, ideals. 5. @ an 3 GM Se So ore 119

x 2 £OOts and sb DEES a vags ee + be 121
Seed ballof Wall’s Orange potato . . . 2 4. <2 Jk 0 139
wiece, one.eye.only..- eS ee ee Dee te ee 111
“<“*2potatoes, cylindrical pieces. ~s. 2... 2-s°s = =\.80 726s se 112

The Great Potato Contest of
the American Agricultarist.

pn ee pt pelt eg
SS

In this Contest the Leading Potato Manures, including Mapes, Stock-
bridge and Bradley, were used in competition with each other,
and against Stable Manure, Mixed Chemicals, etc.

‘*847%4 bushels of Potatoes with half ton of the Mapes Potato Manure
on one measured acre.” ‘‘Jhe largest crop ever grown with fertilizers on
manure.” —Fyrom the Official Report of the American Agriculturist, Dec., 1890.

The Two Largest Crops Ever Grown with Fertilizers or Farm
Manure were Grown with the [lapes Potato Tanure
in Prize Contest, 1890.

Competition in Aroostook County, Maine,
on One Measured Acre.

Quantity Fertilizer. Bushels. Net Profit.
MapesrPotato Manure ...... 00. 0.02... Ty Q@5orlbs.c5 20.) 2745. ! 2 5$2 30100
are Ss) dO: MORNE ae wren ahs Oe OOO OSE a. 005 32), | hake Z SOG
US tS to" Satake CWOGn ie seas Sent St th, OOO Sable \t. 45 7Q' 2: eee yee

The American Agriculturist, in commenting on the Crop Contest in
December, 1890, states:

‘‘ Apparently it is not so much the quantity but the rorm in which
the plant food is furnished that governs the yield, provided a reasonable
amount is supplied.”’

The Mapes Potato Mannre. ‘‘Its action Approaches Certainty and as near
to it asany manure can be expected to do.”—E. S. Carman, Rural New Yorker.

‘‘The Mapes Potato Manure is certainly as good a fertilizer for the crop as we
can expect to find.’”—J. T. Lovett, Orchard and Garden.

‘‘ Under average conditions, and in far the greater number of cases, we do not
hesitate to name the Mapes Potato Manure as the Best and Most Profitable Fer-
tilizer for Potatoes."—American Agriculturist.

‘‘Our own experience with various commercial fertilizers has convinced us
that with judicious use of the Mapes Manures worn-out lands can be Restored to
Fertility Quicker, and with less expense, than in any other way.”—American Ag-
riculturattst.

Send for descriptive pamphlet on the Mapes’ Manures—Potatoes,
Truck, Fruits, Fruit Trees, Farm Crops. Mailed Free.

Mapes Formula and Peruvian Guano Co.,
143 Liberty Street, New York. |

SECOND EDITION.
THE NURSERY BOOR

A Complete Hand-Book of Propagation and Pollination.

By L. H. BAILEY.

This valuable little manual has been compiled at great pains. The author has had
unusual facilities for its preparation, having been aided by many experts in many directions.
The book is ab-
solutely devoid
of theory and
speculation.
It has nothing
jp to do with
vA, Dlant physiol-
"AZ ogy, nor with
any obstruse
reasons of plant
growth. It sim-
ply tells plainly
ee and briefly
COVERED LAYER OF VIBURNUM, what everyone
who Sows a
seed, makes a cutting, sets a graft, or crosses a flower wants to know. It is entirely new
and original in method and matter. The cuts number almost 100, and are made especially
for it, direct from nature. The book treats all kinds of cultivated plants, fruits, vegetables,
greenhouse plants, hardy herbs, ornamental trees and shrubs, forest trees.

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER I.—Seedage. CuaptTeR II.—Separation and |Division. CuHapTer III.—
Layerage. CHAPTER IV.—Cuttage. CHAPTER V.—Graftage. Including Grafting,
Budding, Inarching, etc.

CHAPTER VI.—Nursery List.

This is the great feature ofthe book. It has an alphabetical list of all kinds of plants,
with a short statement telling which of the operations described in the first five chapters
are employed in propagating them. Over 2,000 entries are made in thelist. The
following entries will give an idea of the method:

ACER (Map1£). Sapindacez. Stocks are grown from stratified seeds, which should
be sown an inch or two deep; or some species, as A. dasycarpum, come readily if
seeds aresimply sown as soon as ripe. Some cultural varieties are layered, but bet-
ter plants are obtained by grafting. Varieties of native species are worked upon
common or nativestocks. The Japanesesorts are winter-worked upon imported A.
polymorphumstocks, either by whip orveneer-grafting. Maplescanalsobe budded
in summer, and they grow readily from cuttings of both ripe and soft wood.

PHYLLOCACTUS, PHYLLOCEREUS, DISOCACTUS (Lear-Cactus). Cactez.
Fresh seeds grow readily. Sow in rather sandy soil, which is well drained, and
apply water as for common seeds. When the seedlings appear, remove to a light
position. Cuttings from mature shoots, three to six inches in length. root readily in
sharp sand. Givea temperature of about 60°, and apply only sufficient water to
keep from flagging. Ifthe cuttings are very juicy, they may be laid on dry sand
for several days before planting.

GOOSEBERRY. Seeds, for the raising of new varieties should be sown as soon as
well cured, in loam or sandy soil, or they may be stratified and sown together well
with the sand in the spring. Cuttings six to eight inches long, of the mature wood,
inserted two-thirds their length, usually grow readily, especially if taken in August
or September and stored during winter. Stronger plants are usually obtained by
layers, and the English varieties are nearly always layered in this country. Mound-
layering is usually employed, the English varieties being allowed to remain in
layerage two years, but the American varieties only one (Fig. 27). Layerage plants
are usually set in nursery rows for a year 2fterremoval fromthestools. Green-lay-
ering during summer is sometimes practised for new or rare varieties.

CufPTeR VII.—Pollination, giving directions for making crosses, etc.
PRICE, Cloth, $1; paper, 50 cents.
THE RURAL PUBLISHING COMPANY, New York.

MIM oy VG aes
POTTY TT pr N
Ue CEE

XI.

XII.
XIII.

XIV.

Second Revised Edition.

Horticulturist’s Rule=-Book.

Designed as a pocket companion. Contains in handy and concise form, a great
number of the rules and receipts required by fruit-growers, truck gardeners,
florists, farmers, etc. Undoubtedly the best thing of the kind ever published.

BY L. H. BAILEY,

Editor of American Gardening, Horticulturist of the Cornell Experiment Station and
- Professor of Horticulture in Cornell University.

CoNTENTS OF THE Book.

Insecticide.

Injurious Insects, with preven-
tives and remedies.

Fungicides for plant diseases.

Plant Diseases, with preven-
tives and remedies.

Injuries from mice, rabbits, birds
etc., with preventives and rem-
edies.

Weeds.

Waxes and Washes for grafting
and for wounds.

Cements, Paints, etc.

Seed Tables: 1. Quantities re-
quired for sowing given areas.
2. Weight and size of seeds of
kitchen garden vegetables. 3.

Longevity of seeds. 4. Time re- |

quired for kitchen seeds to
germinate.

Planting Tables: 1. Dates for
sowing or setting kitchen gar-
den vegetables in different lati-
tudes. 2. Tender and hardy
vegetables. 3. Usual distance
apart for planting fruits and
vegetables. 4. Number of plants
required to set an acre at given
distances apart.

Maturity and Yields: 1. Time
required for the maturity of
kitchen garden vegetables. 2.
Time required for the bearing
of fruit plants. 3. Longevity of
fruit plants. 4. Average yields
of various crops.

Method of Keeping and Stor-
ing fruits and vegetables.

Multiplication and Porpaga-
tion of Plants: 1. Method of
multiplying plants. 2. Ways of
grafting and budding, 3. Par-
ticular methods by which vari-
ous fruits are propagated. 4.
Stocks used for various fruits.

Standard Measures and Sizes:
1. Standard flower pots. 2. Stan-
dard and legal measures. 3. En-
glish measures for sale of fruits
and vegetables.

Price, cloth, $1.00; paper, 50c.

THE RURAL PUBLISHING COMPANY, New York.

XV.

XVI.

XVII.

XVIII.
XIX.

XX.

XXII.

XXIII.
XXIV.

XXV.

Tables of Weights and Meas-
ures.

Miscellaneous tables, figures and
notes: I. Quantities of water
held in pipesand tank. 2. Ther-
mometer scales. 3. Effect of
wind in cooling glass roofs. 4.
Per cent. of light reflected from
glass at various angles of in-
clination. 5. Weights of various
varieties of apples per bushel.
6. Amount of various products
yielded by giving quantities of
fruit. 7. Labels. 8. Miscellany.

Rules: 1. Loudon’s rules of hor-
ticulture. 2. Rules of nomencla-
ture. 3. Rules for exhibition.

Postal Rates and Regulations.

Weather Signs, and protection
from frost.

Collecting and Preserving: 1.
How to make an herbarium.
2. Preserving and printing of
flowers and other parts of
plannts. 3. Keeping cut-flowers.
4. Perfumery. 5. How to collect
and preserve insects.

Elements, Symbols and Analy-
ses: 1. The elements and their
chemical symbols. 2. Chemical
composition ofa few common
substances. Analyses: (a) Fruits
and Vegetables; (4) Seeds and
Fertilizers; (c) Soils and Min-
erals.

Names and Histories: 1. Vege-
tables which have different
names in England and America.
2. Derivation of names of vari-
ous fruits and vegetables. 3.
Names of fruits and vegetables
in various languages. 4. Periods
of cultivation and native coun-
tries of cultivated plants. _

Facts and statistics of horticul-
ture and the vegetable kingdom.

Glossary oftechnical words used
by horticulturists.

Calendar.

ANNALS OF HORTICULTURE

BY PROFESSOR L. H. BAILEY.

As a work of reference for all students of plants and nature, this will be
invaluable. No one who expects to keep up with the progress of the times
can be without it. A feature of the volume isa census of cultivated plants of
American origin, with dates of introduction and extent of variation under
culture. This includes all ornamentals and all esculents, and will include
hundreds of entries. It will form an invaluable contribution to the knowl-
edge of the origin and variation of plants. The novelties of the year, tools
and conveniences of the year, directories, lists of plant portraits, including
all the leading journals of the world this year, recent horticultural literature,
and other chapters, are each alone worth many times more than the cost of
the book. What have horticulturists thought about during 1892? This is
the theme of the book.

Profusely Dlustrated. In fulloCloth, $1.

Chrysanthemum Guitvre for America.

ENE gegen 7M History of the Chrysanthemum; Classification
| FLX sa Viaed and Care.
a By JAMES MORTON.

An excellent and thorough book; especially
\\y adapted to the culture of Chrysanthemums in
SQ ys America. The chapters include:

Oriental and European History.
@ American History. Propagation. General Culture.
Exhibition Plants, Insects and Diseases.
Sports and Other Variations.
Chrysanthemum Shows and Organizations.
Classification. Varieties for Various Purposes.
Calendar of Monthly Operations.

Thus it will be seen that the author covers the field quite thoroughly.
No other book yet published on this subject approaches this in special value
for American lovers of the ‘‘ Queenof Autumn.”’ Illustrated. Pages, about 120,

PRICE, Cloth, $1.00; Paper, 60 cents.

THE RURAL PUBLISHING COMPANY, New York.

a yen ecaNTER

it Marks!

= ae it Furrows!
; J ft Drops!

Ne it Covers!

— = s= : Lad 7. ‘ ii > l a All in One Operation.

——SSSSSS=S>
LSSSS=|S=== =
= = ————S— =

DISTRIBUTES SATE

FERTILIZERS. \\.C User) coRN, BEANS,
Absolutely Cuaranteed. ‘\ a wr.

ENSILACE, Etc.

Mention this paper. Tlustrated Circular Sent Free.

Lalit

‘ASPINWALL MANUFACTURING Cco., JACKSON, MICH.

What is
The Rural New=Yorker?

The MOST TRUSTWORTHY of any paper ofits class printed.—
le i. Harrison, President of the Storrs & Harrison Company.

Everybody that zs a body knows of the UNIQUE INDIVIDU-
ALITY of THE Rurat along the lines of original experimental in-
vestigation.—J. J. H. GREGory. |

The editor of THE Rurat NEw-YorKER has opened an entirely
NEW FIELD OF INVESTIGATION, the possibilities of which
cannot be conjectured.—Norman J. COLMAN.

THE RuraL NEw-YorkER has DONE MORE FOR FARMERS
than nine-tenths of all the land-grant Colleges and Experiment
Stations.—Wew York Tribune.

We have seen on the farm of the editor of THE RurRAL NEw-
YORKER a crop of 134 bushels of shelled corn raised on one acre of
land.—American Agriculturist.

THe RuraLt NeEw-YorkeEr illustrates the PROGRESS made by
the agricultural class, much of which is due to the inspiration of THE
RurAL NEw-YorKER, and the papers which follow its example.—
Lr. Gov. E. F. Jones.

Tue Rurat New-Yorxer has DONE MORE TO PROMOTE
THE- TRUE_INTERESTS OF | AGRICULEURE (than walieeae
Experiment Stations put together.— The New York Times.

The best farm weekly in the world.— Farm Journal.

PRICE, $1 a year. REDUCED from §2.

THE RURAL PUBLISHING COMPANY, N. Y.

P. O. Box, 3318.

AJIIERIGAN GARDENING

Combines in one magazine the old Horticulturist of Andrew Jackson Downing,
established in 1846; The Gardener’s Monthly of Marot and Meehan,
established in 1857; The Floral Cabinet of Henry T. Williams,
established in 1871; The American Garden of Dr.

F. M. Hexamer, established in 1872, and Popular
Gardening of Elias A. Long.

Edited by Professor H. L. BAILEY, practical horticulturalist, Professor
of Horticulture in Cornell University and Horticulturalist of the Cornell
Lixperiment Station.

It is the only independent, illustrated magazine of Horticulture and
Country Life in the world. It is the Livest, Brightest, Largest, Hand-
momest, most valuable Rural Magazine published anywhere.

It is in magazine form, with a beautiful cover, over 800 pages and 900
illustrations ina year; writt2n and prepared by hundreds of bright writers,
original thinkers, successful specialists and practical horticulturists in all
parts of the world. Original from cover to cover. Its special features in-
clude:

FRUIT CULTURE, embracing all branches, climates and conditions, from
apples in Maine and Minnesota to oranges in Florida and California; small
fruits and tree fruits of every description; grapes in the vineyard and un-
der glass; diseases of fruits; insect enemies; nut culture; new varieties.
Illustrated.

FLORICULTURE, comprising descriptions of varieties and methods of
culture. Accounts of all the new introductions; conservatory and green-
house management; beds and bedding; artistic arrangement; commercial
floriculture; window gardening. Illustrated. -

LANDSCAPE GARDENING in allits phases, from park construction and
management down to the arrangement of the smallest places. Illustrated.

VEGETABLE GARDENING.—Growing vegetables for market and home
use, under glass and out-doors. New varieties. Illustrated.

GREENHOUSE CONSTRUCTION, heating, ventilation, etc. Illustrated.

‘THE EDITOR’S OUTLOOK” discusses current topics of interest to all
agriculturists.

‘“‘CIONS ” chronicles recent happenings in the horticultural field.

“BOOKS AND BULLETINS” is a most important department, giving, as
it does, the gist of the work of the Experiment Stations extracted from their
bulletins, review of books, etc.

TERMS: $1.00 a year.
THE RURAL PUBLISHING COMPANY, New York.

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

) ooo2bestsor

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "The new potato culture as developed by the trench system"

See other formats