180 STATE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE 



May 7tb the oats were well up, June 25tli tbey were just heading out; they were 

 cut July 27th and hauled to the barn August 6th. 



Determinations of tne moisture in the plots of No. 15 were made on five different 

 dates, April 16th, 28th. .uay 5th, 12th and 24th. 



Similar determinations were made in No. 8 on April 30th, May 13th, 31st, and 

 June 7th. 



AVERAGE PER CENT OP MOISTURE IN OAT PLOTS AND YIELD. 



No. 15. Fall plowed. Ist foot. 



Plot 1, not rolled 14.27 



Plot 2, rolled before drilling 14.15 



Plot 3. rolled after drilling 15.39 



No. 4. rolled and harrowed after 



drilling 12.39 



General average 



No. 8. Fall plowed. 

 Plot 1, rolled and harrowed after 



drilling 14.79 



Plot 2. rolled after drilling 15.39 



Plot 3. rolled before drilling 15.67 



Plot 4. not rolled 14.06 



General average 



Spring plowed. 



Plot 5. rolled before drilling 13.35 13.29 14.72 13.79 1,333 



Plot 6. rolled and harrowed after 



drilling 13.46 



Plot 7. rolled after drilling 13.47 



Plot 8, not rolled 15.31 



General average 



The preceding table shows in No. 8 a marked difference in moisture in favor of 

 the fall plowed land. In one case alone does a plot plowed in the spring have an 

 equal or larger amount of moisture than any plot of the fall plowed laud. The 

 average per cent of moisture to a depth of three feet for the fall plowed exceeds 

 by .70 per cent that for the spring plowed. This means a difference in favor of the 

 fall plowed land of about forty-five tons of water per acre. The difference was not 

 apparent until May 31st, but was very marked on this and the succeeding date, 

 June 7th. The average excess of moisture on these dates was 1.89 per cent, or 111 

 tons of water per acre. Attention is here called to the table on page 95, giving the 

 average per cent of moisture for each date on which samples were taken. 



The yields in No. 8 show a much greater difference in favor of the fall plowed 

 land than did the moisture determinations. There is not a single instances in which 

 a spring plowed plot equals in yield a plot plowed in the fall. The highest yield per 

 acre on the spring plowed land was 137 pounds less than the lowest yield on the fall 

 plowed. The average yield on The fall plowed is slightly over 23 per cent higher than 

 that of the spring plowed. While, because of variations in conditions, no direct 

 comparison can be made between No. 8 and No. 15, it is interesting to note that 

 the average yield per acre in No. 15 is higher than on the fall plowed land in No. 8. 

 It seems probable that No. 15 derived some considerable advantage from the fall 

 plowing. 



Comimrison of methods of preparation.— An examination of the table given above 

 does not show, as far as content of moisture is concerned, any marked difference in 

 favor of any one of the special methods of preparation. The results in duplicate 

 plots are completely at variance. 



While the yields of these individual plots similarly treated do not agree 

 perfectly, they are still sufficiently in accord to furnish us some instruction. It is 

 to be noted that the sum of the yields of the three plots rolled after drilling is 4,625 

 pounds, while the yields of the three plots not rolled was but 4.434 pounds, a 

 difference of 191 pounds or 4 per cent of the yield of the plots not rolled. Between 

 the methods of rolling before drilling and rolling and harrowing after drilling there 

 seems to be no appreciable difference. When to use the roller or whether to use it 



