CROP PRODUCTION 153 



some, when it is become noxious in consequence of animals either liv- 

 ing, or breathing, or dying, and putrefying in it." Upon the observa- 

 tions just cited, coupled with Priestley's discovery of oxygen, is based 

 one of the most important principles of plant physiology. 



Up to about 1800, studies were largely of a qualitative nature, 

 but the work of DeSaussure on quantitative gaseous exchange in 

 plants laid the foundation for work now included in the modern 

 period of plant investigations. DeSaussure, however, viewed his studies 

 largely from the chemical aspect. 



Early in the eighteenth century, Liebig referred to the work up 

 to his time as being of a nature "fitted only to awake pity." Liebig 

 announced that "the crops on a field diminish or increase in exact pro- 

 portion to the diminution or increase of the substances conveyed to it 

 in manure." The fundamental truths that he contributed marked the 

 beginning of a new era and he prepared the world for the splendid 

 progress that followed. 



About the time Liebig was startling the world with his theories, 

 was born Von Sachs, who was later to be known as favorably in the 

 field of botany as was Liebig in the science of chemistry. In April, 

 1859, Sachs was called by Professor Stockhardt to the Experiment Sta- 

 tion at Tharand to perfect and extend his researches on the water 

 (nutrient solution) method, and to direct the work of the Experiment 

 Station along lines of experimental plant physiology. Later at the 

 Agricultural Academy at Bonn, Poppelsdorf, he gave us the now 

 classic contributions on germination, material transportation, and 

 translocation ; and thus laid broad and deep the foundations for an ex- 

 perimental study of plant nutrition. His chief interest in botany 

 seemed to be in its application to agriculture. It is to be regretted 

 that botany and agriculture alike failed to follow his leadership in the 

 application of plant physiology to agriculture. The intimate and 

 definite relation between the two fields so well recognized by Stock- 

 hardt and so masterfully developed by Sachs was all but broken with 

 the latter's passing. A field so auspiciously developed has been allowed 

 to lie fallow for more than half a century. 



THE NEED FOR BOTANY IN A STUDY OF CROP PROBLEMS 



Just why botanists of the immediate past have overlooked such an 

 opportunity for service is not clear. "What is the matter with 

 botany?" is a favorite question nowadays. Piper suggests that "in- 

 tellectual isolation" is one cause of this indifference. Probably "pro- 

 vincialism" is at the foundation of certain troubles. One writer be- 



