402 



The Wohurn Field Experiments, 1911. 



respective values of the different varieties grown or of the 

 methods of planting employed. But, so far as one may hazard 

 conclusions, it would seem that, o^ the whole, the " Klein 

 Wanzle])en Z " did the best, then the " N " variety of the 

 same. As regards distance of rows apart, the results were 

 too " in and out " to say much al)out them. 



In experiment (h) the sugar-beets Avere not washed, but 

 the weights were those taken in the field just as a crop of 

 mangolds would be weighed. As already stated, the mangolds 

 were found to lose 13 per cent, by washing, against the 35 to 40 

 per cent, of loss with the sugar-beet. 



The weights put out in Table VII. of the respective yield of 

 sugar-beet and mangolds enables a comparison to be drawn 

 between the two crops, for, although the season was an excep- 

 tional one, the crops were grown side by side on the same land, 

 they were similarly manured, &c., and so were grown under 

 quite similar conditions. It will be seen that the mangolds 

 gave practically double the crop that sugar-beet did, and this 

 would he further accentuated had the crops been compared in 

 the washed state. The soil in this experiment was much more 

 suitalile for root-growing than that of Stackyard Field (experi- 

 ment (a)), and the yield of sugar-beet was increased accordingly 

 from 14 and 15 tons to 22^ tons per acre reckoned on the 

 unwashed roots. In this case it would seem that having the 

 rows wider apart slightly increased the yield. 



Coming now to the relative cost of cultivation, it was found, 

 as nearly as could be ascertained, that the sugar-beet cost 21. an 

 acre more to grow than did the mangold, and, while the cost of 

 the latter might fairly he put at 10^. per acre, the sugar-beet 

 cost 121. per acre. Careful records were kept of certain details, 

 such as the cost of hoeing, singling, lifting, &c., and the 

 followinsr mav be found of interest : — 



Cost per acre of hoeing, singling, 

 and cutting out . . . . 

 Cost per acre of lifting crop . 



Sugar-beet 



12 in. apart 



s. d. 

 49 6 

 37 



86 6 



15 in. apart 



,s. d. 

 40 6 

 30 



ro 6 



18 in. apart 



«. d. 

 33 

 25 



.58 



Mangolds 



24 in. apart 



s. d. 



Ifi 6 



8 



24 6 



In making these comparisons it must l)e borne in mind that 

 with sugar-l)eet all the hoeing had to be done by hand, whereas 

 with mangolds, sown wider apart from row to row, horse- 

 hoeing could be employed to a certain extent. 



