Feb. 2, 1920.] Agricultural Gazette oflV.S.W. Ill 



Soil Improvement for Maize^ 



I. — Manures and Eertilisers. 



[Continued from page 35.] 



H. WENHOLZ, B.Se. (Agr.), Inspector of Agriculture. 



Increased Yields from Stable or Animal Manure. 

 Experiments with stall manure have been conducted in Ohio* fov the past 

 twenty years and leave no room for doubt as to the definite value of its effect 

 on maize and the following crops in a rotation. It has been found that an 

 application of 8 tons of stall manure per acre on maize once every three 

 years (in a rotation with wheat and clover) has increased the yield of 

 maize 23*2 bushels per acre as an average for the last tiventy years. 

 Correspondingly increased yields have also been obtained from the other 

 crops in the rotation — all due to the manuring for maize. In Indiana,! ^n 

 a plot of continuous maize for twenty-seven years, an average increase of 

 I'i bushels per acre has been obtained from an annual application of 34 

 tons of manure per acre. 



From the figures showing the composition of animal manures, it will be 

 seen that of their three fertilising elements phosphorus shows the smallest 

 percentage. The deficiency, together with the fact that most of the soils of 

 this State are also deficient in this plant food ingredient and readily respond 

 to applications of phosphate in some form, has led to the reinforcement of 

 animal manure witli superphosphate. In the first mentioned I'otation (Ohio), 

 a reinforcement of animal manure at the rate of 40 lb. superphosphate to 

 1 ton of manure {i.e., 320 lb. superphosphate applied with 8 tons of manure 

 once every three years) increased the yield of maize 35 bushels per acre as an 

 average for twenty years, as well as increasing the yield of the following crops 

 in the rotation nearly double that of the increase obtained from manure 

 without superphosphate. 



Enough has been said of the value of animal manure for maize to indicate 

 the importance of its conservation. Whatever the means adopted to that end 

 and for its application as described, the extra labour involved will be, in 

 most cases, amply repaid. 



The question is sometimes raised whether it is better in using a limited 

 amount of animal manure to spread it over a large area or only to 

 enrich a small area with it. The results obtained in Ohio over twenty 

 years indicate that greater returns are obtained by spreading the manure 

 evenly over a large area, though under our conditions, for poorer 

 soils, or to ensure tije production of seed where there is likelihood of 

 comple.e failure in some years, a heavy application on a small area would 

 probably be best. The increased prices of f ^rm products and feeding stuff of 



* Ohio Agr. Expt. Sta. Mon. Bull., Vol. 3, No. 5 (May, 1918). 

 t Purdue Univ. (Indiana) Bull. •222 (1918). 



