FIELD CROPS. 441 



At Hosbangabad, saltpeter gave the best results in a test of tbe mauurial re- 

 quirements of wheat under irrigation. Barnj-ard manure showed little advan- 

 tage on uuirrigated plats of wheat. A wheat-gram-wheat rotation proved the 

 most profitable of the wheat series, continuous cropping with wheat being only 

 slightly less profitable. Sowing in drills and at the rate of 120 lbs. per acre, 

 gave the best results. Plowing with a deep iron plow proved superior to other 

 methods. Ammonium sulphate gave the maximum results with hay and cotton. 



Annual report of the Lyallpur Agricultural Station for the kharif and 

 rabi seasons, 1908-9 (Ann. Rpt. Lyallpur A gr. Stn., 1908-9, pp. i//+XA'/.Y).— 

 AVork briefly reported is that with methods of cultivation, handling and 

 marketing of cotton and jute, tests of Australian, indigenous, macaroni, com- 

 mon, punjab, bearded and beardless common wheats, barley, gram, oats, 

 cassava, mulberry trees, figs, and silkworms. 



Calcium nitrate applied to wheat at the rates of 100 lbs. and 150 lbs. per 

 acre produced increases in yield of 36 per cent and 20 per cent, respectively. 

 In another experiment the jiercentages of increase were 3.3 and 21 per cent, 

 respectively. On sugar cane the same fertilizer produced a markedly greater 

 increase in yield and in percentage of juice and gur, than did crude nitrate 

 when applied at the rate of G.5 lbs. of nitrogen per acre. In a 12-year rotation 

 experiment the yield of maize in 1908 cultivated with the deep plow was from 

 2 to 11 times as great as that obtained with the desi plow. 



Report on the agricultural station, Oral, Jalaun, of the United Provinces 

 of Agra and Oudh, June 30, 1909 (Rpt. Agr. Sta. Oral, Jalaun [India], 1909, 

 PI). 17. niap>i '/). — Variety tests were conducted with wheat, sorghum, cotton, 

 and peanuts, together with tests of cultural methods, utilization of waste land 

 for spineless cactus, common blue Agave, Prosopis juUflora, and Melilotns 

 officinalis, methods of eradication of weeds, soil analyses, and tests of barn- 

 yard manure and night soil. In a 3-year test of 5 varieties, the A^irginia 

 peanut proved the best. The possibility of the successful establishment of date 

 plantations is regarded as demonstrated. Meteorological data and notes on 

 insect pests are also given. 



Report of the experiment field of the Krasno-ufimsk Trade School for 

 1907, L. Lyevochkin {Zhur. Opuitn. Agron. (Russ. Jour. E.vpt. Landic), 10 

 {1909). Ao. 3, pp. 376-S79). — Ft-rtilizer and variety tests are I'oported. 



Report on the Cawnpore Agricultural Station in the United Provinces, 

 June 30, 1909 (Rpt. Cawnpore [India] Agr. Sta., 1909, pp. Ji5+8A, dgm. i).— 

 This report contains, in addition to tlie work with field crops, meteorological 

 and soil data pertaining to the locality of the station, and notes cm insect and 

 other pests, implements, and new plants of the year. 



In experiments with sulphate of ammonia, superphosphate, and farmyard 

 manure applied separately and in combination, the first named fertilizer pro- 

 duced the greatest increase in yield of lint cotton and in lint percentage, super- 

 phosphate apparently producing a decrease in each. A comparison of nitrate 

 of lime and cyanamid applied as top-dressing on land already rich from applica- 

 tions of farmyard manure showed an average increase in yield of 2,100 lbs. 

 per acre of sugar cane from the former and 470 lbs. from the latter, and an 

 increased percentage of juice of about 1..5 per cent in each case. On the wheat 

 plats during the seasons of 1908 and 1909 nitrate of lime apparently produced 

 an average increase in yield of 370 lbs. of grain, while the cyanamid appeared 

 to produce a decrease at the rate of 5 lbs. per acre as compared with the 

 untreated plats. Fertilizer experiments on potatoes for the period 1904-1909 

 showed average increases per acre at the rate of 5,9.50 lbs. from neem cake, 

 4,293 lbs. from night soil, and 4,298 lbs. from cotton refuse. Contradictory 



31125— No. 5—10 1 



