AN INTERESTING FERTILIZER PROBLEM 

 By H. B. Arbuckle 



Last summer a large number of farmers in Rockingham county suf- 

 fered almost total loss of their tobacco crop. It so happened that one 

 of these farmers used two bags of fertilizer that he had kept over from 

 the previous year. He observed that the rows of tobacco upon which 

 he used this old fertilizer to the very plant in the row where he 

 changed to the new fertilizer grew off well and produced well. All the 

 rest of his tobacco was stunted and never showed any growth except in 

 very rainy M-eather. 



This was sufficient to fix suspicion upon the new fertilizer. This 

 led to my investigation. The fertilizer was marked "For Tobacco" 

 and the tag showed a guaranteed analysis, 8-2-2. On analysis the 

 fertilizer checked up very well as 8-2-2. The nitrogen was a little low 

 as determined by Kjeldahl, showing approximately 1.5. It is inter- 

 esting to note that when the nitrogen was determined by Dumas, it 

 ran distinctl}' higher. 



The fertilizer was at once tried out on boxes of clover and rye at 

 the rate of 1,000 lbs. per acre and compared with a fertilizer prepared 

 in the laboratory to yield 8-2-2, the potash being supplied as potassium 

 sulphate and the nitrogen as sodium nitrate. In these experiments the 

 fertilizer under investigation showed up to tine advantage, showing 

 distinct advantage over the prepared fertilizer. Having no tobacco 

 plants at this time, the fertilizer was reported as good, but 

 the farmers insisted that it be tried out on tobacco. After 

 growing a lot of tobacco plants a set of boxes was prepared to test 

 this fertilizer in varying amounts and other fertilizers prepared with 

 potash and nitrogen from different sources. Having discovered that 

 the fertilizer under test contained over l/{ of chlorides and knowing 

 that chlorides were not good for tobacco, the chlorine was removed 

 from the fertilizer. It was found that the tobacco plants in the boxes 

 in which 600 lbs. was used in the row or 1,000 lbs. mixed with the soil 

 were nearly all killed. The few plants remaining were pale and sickly 

 and produced no growth in two months time. The plants in those 

 boxes fertilized with 1,000 lbs. of the fertilizer with the chlorine re- 

 moved grew nicely, comparing favorably with tlie best fertilizers pre- 

 pared for tobacco. 



[ 94] 



