694 



Agricultural Journal of Victoria. 



done. Lighter applications were, however, made witli a smaller 

 quantity (1 cwt.) of superphosphate, and interesting results have 

 followed. They are here given. 



Yields Produced by 



These figures reveal a vastly greater relative operative ett'ect on 

 the part of a small application of nitrogenous manure in combination 

 with a lighter phosphatic application than of a large nitrogenous 

 dressing in conjunction with larger phosphatic applications. In fact 

 the i cwt. of sulphate of ammonia and nitrate of soda, applied with 

 1 cwt. of superphosphate, has given the same increase in yield as 

 1 cwt. given with twice the quantity of superphosphate. 



Increases Produced by 



J cwt. sulphate of ammonia with 



1 cwt. superphosphate 



1 cwt. sulphate of ammonia with 



2 cwt. superphosphate 



'tons. 

 36 



•35 



^ cwt. nitrate of soda with 1 cwt. 



superphosphate . . . . 24 



1 cwt. nitrate of soda with 2 cwt. I 

 superphosphate .. .. 23 



The { cwt. of sulphate of ammonia in conjunction with 1 cwt. of 

 superphosphate has, taking the average of 23 fields, given an 

 increased yield of 1 ton to the acre — a larger return than that obtained 

 from '6 cwt. of superphosphate alone, and at a less outlay — the cost 

 for this application being about 12s. 3d. per acre. The results are of 

 great value to the farmer as iudicating#he advisability of applications, 

 in this form of combination, very materially smaller than those 

 formerly considered necessary. That sulphate of ammonia will, under 

 all conditions, prove more effective used in equal quantities than 

 nitrate of soda, is to be doubted. In oO cases only out of the 60 

 fields included in Table A are the increased yields from sidphate of 

 ammonia larger than they are from nitrate of soda, and it was 

 observed during the experiments that weather conditions, defective 

 drainage, time of application and other points were factors largely 

 influencing the relative effective power of each. Under certain soil 

 conditions, such as defective draiuage, excess of moisture, as well as 

 unfavourable temperature conditions preventing the crop benefiting 

 ^ o an appreciable extent from the presence of sulphate of ammonia, 

 he nitrate, applied in the spring, appeared to produce better results. 

 This was particularly evident in the Allansford fields. It was also 



