The Bulletin. 83 



ble as prodnoors of Imnuis. In addition to the plants lioroin naniod as desira- 

 ble i)roducers of liunuis, the making and spreading upon the hmd of large 

 quantities of barnyard manure must not be neglected. Besides the value of 

 stable manure as containing plant food and hnnius, it encourages the growth 

 of soil bacteria. 



The farmer who faithfully carries out the methods of soil improvement as 

 outlined herein for a period of years will have little to complain of as to the 

 textural condition of his soil. 



THE RELATION OF SOIL MOISTURE TO SOIL FERTILITY. 



By T. J. W. Broome. 



The relation of moisture to soil fertility, and ways and means for increasing 

 the water-holding capacity of the soil, have not received the consideration 

 from ruost farmers that their importance demands. Water is the most impor- 

 tant factor in crop 'production. Eighty to 90 per cent of all plants is water. 

 Plants require and take all their food in solution with water. Water is itself 

 a plant-food substance. The micro-organisms which are necessary to and 

 abound in all productive soils require a wholesome supply of soil moisture ; 

 otherwise they cannot perform properly their functions in the soil. Three to 

 four hundred pounds of water are i-equired to produce a pound of dry matter ; 

 more is required on poor land ; that is, this amount of water must pass from 

 the soil upward through the plant. Although there may be an abundance of 

 plant food in the soil, when moisture is deticieut the plant goes hungry, and 

 lean crops are the result. It is said that the crops of the United States are 

 more frequently cut short by an insufficiency of moisture than from any other 

 cause. These losses occur not in periods of great drouth only, such as we are 

 now passing through, but in years of normal rainfall a drouth of two or three 

 weeks duration, at a time when the crop requires most moisture, very mate- 

 rially reduces the yield. The cause for much of the loss in this way is 

 directly traceable to careless or indifferent management of the soil in regard 

 to moisture. That a large part of this annual loss, which is accredited to the 

 drouths, can be averted is too evident to admit of debate. 



North Carolina farmers cultivated last year, 1910, in round numbers, 3,000,- 

 000 acres in corn. It does not take a very severe drouth to reduce the yield 

 by one bushel per acre, or by five bushels on much of the farm lands of the 

 State. Now, if by a little care we can increase the water-holding capacity of 

 the soil to the extent that one bushel more per acre can be produced, which 

 will only be about 28,000 pounds of water — equal to about one-eighth inch 

 rainfall — the wealth of the State will be increased to the extent of the value 

 of 3,000,000 bushels of corn — two and a quarter million dollars at present 

 prices. 



King has found that a soil, plowed late in the fall, contained on the 14th 

 of the following May 130.0 tons more water per acre than a similar soil 

 unplowed in the fall, both fields remaining untouched in spring until May 

 14th. This increased amount of water in the fall-plowed field is equal to the 

 amount of water removed from the soil in the production of 9% bushels of 

 corn. If we cut these figures practically in half, and say that this increased 

 quantity of soil moisture is capable of producing 5 bushels more per acre, this 

 would mean 15,000,000 bushels added to the corn crop of North Carolina. 



Can we increase the water-holding capacity of North Carolina corn lands 

 to the extent that 5 bushels more corn per acre can be produced? Is this too 

 much to hope for from this source? Has the importance of a little moisture 

 been overestimated? We think not. There are demonstrations in almost every 

 section of the State which are conclusive on this point. We have seen, this 



