34 STATE HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. 



terials S8.37 per acre. Again allowing S3. 00 for the cost of applying 

 the fertilizer, we have a cost of say $11.50 per acre. Our figures show 

 that we have a gain of 63^ bushels per tree, which when multiplied by 

 the number of trees per acre or 27 gives 175 bushels as the gain per acre. 

 $1.00 per bushel conservative figure at which to place the selling price 

 of apples this year, and a gross gain of $175.00 per acre results. Deduct- 

 ing the cost of the fertilizer, a net gain of $163.50 is shown this year. 



On the Pewaukee trees, a very important fact was noted. Pewaukees 

 are notoriously off-year bearers, that is, they bear one year and rest 

 the next unless some climatic conditions force them into bearing two 

 years in succession. This has evidently happened in the Thomas orchard 

 at one time, for some of these trees had a crop in 1920, while others were 

 practicall}^ bare. One would naturally expect those trees which bore 

 heavily in 1920 to be vacant this year. However, it was these trees on 

 which fertilizer had been applied. We find from the use of 5 lbs. of 

 nitrate of soda and 10 lbs. of acid phosphate that these trees which 

 should not have borne any apples this year had an average of 10 bushels 

 of apples, whereas, the trees along side, with which 1921 was an onboaring 

 year, produced 19 bushels per tree. There seems no other factor to 

 attribute the fact that the off year trees gave 10 bushels each of apples 

 this year except that they had received a stimulus last year by the appli- 

 cation of fertilizer to set fruit buds which functioned this year. This 

 is another very important reason why trees need fertilizer. 



The Elberta peach orchard on the Rogers' farm is on light sandy soil 

 and is a uniform stand of peaches planted in 1911, but because of having 

 lost two years of their life due to the freeze in 1919, we figure these trees 

 as being eight years old. In this test ten trees were taken to which 

 fertilizer was applied in each series, and a guard row on which no ferti- 

 lizer was applied, and from which no results were taken were left be- 

 tween each row. Therefore, there could be no chance of the fertilizer 

 from the adjoining row being used by trees under test alongside of it 

 and making the results of the test unreliable. The average yield of the 10 

 trees where 2}^ lbs. of nitrate of soda was applied per tree was 1 }/2 bushels 

 of peaches per tree; on the row that had 23^ lbs. of nitrate of soda and 

 5 lbs. of acid phosphate per tree, an average of 1.4 bushels was obtained 

 per tree; and where 2}/^ lbs. of nitrate of soda, 5 lbs. of phosphate and 

 1 lb. of muriate of potash was applied, slightly more than 1,V2 bushels 

 of peaches were obtained. As in the cherry and apple test, the check 

 peach trees which received no fertilizer did not produce as much fruit 

 as was obtained where fertilizer was used, only ^ of a bushel of peaches 

 being the average of this row of trees. From these results it was seen 

 that the nitrogen seems to be the determining factor, and it is recom- 

 mended that nitrogen alone, either in the form of nitrate of soda or 

 ammonium sulphate be used on peaches. 



The cost of the nitrogen per tree is Oc. Figuring lOS trees per acre 

 gives a cost of $9.72 for the fertilizer, and allowing $3.00 labor cost 

 for the application of material gives the total cost of application of 

 $12.72 per acre for this fertilize)-. Three-fourths of a bushel is the gain 

 per tree with the use of fertilizer and when multii)lied by 108 trees per 

 acre gives a gain of 81 bushels per acre. $1.50 per bushel is a conserva- 

 tive selling price for peaches in 1921, making a total of $121.40 gross gain, 

 or deducting the cost of fertilizer, making a net gain of about $108.68 

 per acre. 



