SUBSOIL PLOWING. 391 
their public spirit in giving others the advantage of their experi- 
ence at considerable expense to themselves. The following is their 
own description of their experience with subsoiling: 
“A field that was subsoiled in the fall of 1891 and cropped to corn 
the seasons of ’92 and 93 was planted to oats in the spring of ’94 and 
produced a yield of 3914 bushels per acre, while on another portion 
of the same field which had been subsoiled in the fall of ’92 and 
raised a crop of corn the season of ’93 the yield of oats was 4414 
bushels per acre, showing a difference of 5 bushels per acre in favor 
of the land which had raised but one crop since subsoiling. 
“Now we will compare the results on land on the same farm not 
subsoiled. Land subsoil plowed in the fall of 1892 and planted to 
corn in the spring of 1893 yielded 75 bushels per acre, while corn on 
land not subsoiled, but otherwise treated in identically the same 
manner, yielded but 36 bushels per acre. Land subsoiled and 
planted to potatoes in the spring of 1893 yielded 125 busbels per acre, 
while the potato crop on land not subsoiled was practically a fail- 
ure. This season (1894) the yield of potatoes on subsoiled land was 96 
bushels per acre. The potatoes were planted on the 18th of May, 
and on June 23d we had the last heavy rain of the season. From 
June 23d to August 16th we had 0.49 inch of rainfall, less than % inch 
in fifty-four days, and still we raised a fair crop of potatoes. Rye 
on subsoiled land yielded 3014 bushels per acre; on land not sub- 
soiled, 2% bushels. Oats sown on land which had raised one crop 
of corn since subsoiling yielded 4414 bushels per acre; on land which 
had raised two crops of corn since subsoiling, 3914 bushels per acre; 
on land NOT SUBSOILED, 17 bushels per acre.” 
This was a carefully conducted and thoroughly reliable test, and 
one that any farmer can make for himself. 
It is easy to understand why subsoiling is peculiarly well adapted 
to the agriculture of Nebraska when -the conditions influencing the 
growth of crops are examined. In the first place,there is,throughout 
most of the state,an annual rainfall somewhatless than that of most 
arable portions of the country. Added to this is a very dry atmos- 
phereand periods of extreme heat accompanied by hot winds,which 
makes the rate of evaporation very high. From the readings of the 
wet bulb thermometer, it is calculated that the annual evaporation 
from a waier surface is 40 inches in the eastern part of the state and 
50 inches in the western part. This is about twice as much as the an- 
nual rainfall in the eastern portion and considerably more than in 
the western portion. Such conditions make it necessary toremove as 
far as possible the opportunity for evaporation of the moisture from 
the soil. In order that the evaporation shall be reduced to a mini- 
- mum, it is imperative that the water should soak deeply and quickly 
into the soil; but to do this the soil and subsoil must be loose. 
Hellriegel showed very clearly by experiment the difference in the 
water holding power between a loose and a firmly compacted soil. 
He took a quantity of loamy soil, and, after dividing it in two parts, 
firmly compressed the one, while the otherremainedloose. Hethen 
determined the water holding power of each, and found that of the 
compact soil to be only 26 per cent., while that of the loose soil was 
40 per cent. 
eb 
ahh 
’ 
a en sy eee 
ie) pate 
“f 
oa 
er heed os 
Pot Ree | aS eR eS 
on 8 we ee 
oh TT. 
aay 
As 
+ hi. 
ea 7 ‘ 
1 ¢ : e : ’ ‘tT Poe , “ 
p! , a ge wae i ake , i" i 
eee ee EE Pn eee ESE. ete ee ee & ey 
~ oP 
sik hs 
ell 8 ee ed & yt 
LV? awe 
