208 



ANNUAL, REPORT OF THE 



Off. Doc. 



great difference in the adaptability of soils to alfalfa lias been 

 abundantly jii(,'A('u. The following table gives the mechanical an- 

 alyses of five soils of the humid section of the United States on 

 which alfalfa has been grown. 



a 



1. Dunkirk grravelly loam 



2. Miami stony loam, ... 



3. Wabash loam 



4. Hagerstown clay loam, 



5. Dunkirk clay loam, .. 



16.3 

 22.5 

 24.3 

 29.9 

 29.9 



On Dunkirk gravelly loam and Miami siony loam alfafa grows 

 without any difficulty. About the only thing necessary is to sow 

 the seed. On the Wabash loam, good yields of alfalfa can be ob- 

 tained by proper cultural methods. On Hagerstown clay loam 

 much greater care is necessary and more failures occur, especially 

 owing to variations in season while every precaution possible must 

 be taken to get good yields on the Dunkirk clay loam. Since the 

 mechanical analyses of Hagerstown and Dunkirk clay loam are so 

 nearly identical, the question may be raised as to why these soils 

 differ in their adaptability to alfalfa. The explanation may bt 

 sought in two directions: (1) The Hagerstown clay loam has perfect 

 drainage, owing to its limestone formation, while the Dunkirk clay 

 loam, which is a river drift soil deposited by lake action has very 

 poor natural drainage; [2) the alfalfa plant is a lime loving plant 

 and in all humid regions, especially, is, other things equal, adapted 

 to soils of limestone formation. 



The adaptation of soils to fruit trees is a question of special in- 

 terest in Pennsylvania. It has been shown that the soil best 

 adapted to Rhode Island Greenings is not the one best adapted to 

 Baldwins, that the soil best adapted to Baldwins is not the one 

 best adapted to Grimes' Golden. To avoid possible misinterpreta- 

 tion, it should be noted in passing that these apples have a climatic 

 as well as a soil adaptation. It is well known that the soil best 

 adapted to peaches is not in general well adapted to apples. This 

 is a reason why in general peaches should not be used as fillers 

 for apples, or apples grown in order to rest the land from peaches. 

 The speaker had this impressed upon him recently in making a 

 visit to the fruit sections of Adams and Franklin counties. He 

 visited a man who has 140 acres of peaches and about an equal 

 number of acres of apples, although not 280 acres of fruit trees, 

 because his orchards are largely interplanted. The land is De 

 Kalb stony loam and is especially adapted to peaches. Peaches, 

 as the man remarked to me, had been very good to him, but his 

 apples while by no means a failure, were a source of trouble and 

 anxiety. The next day I visited a man located seventeen miles 

 from the orchard just mentioned. The soil type, one of the Porter 

 series, was, however, quite different. The history of the orchard, 

 the appearance of the trees and the opinion of the owner all con- 



