COTTON. 35 



the purpose of comparing the results from muriate of potash, sul- 

 phate of potash magnesia and kainit as fertilizer for corn. 



"There is an increased yield on all of the third series of plots 

 where the potash fertilizer is supplied by sulphate of potash, the most 

 remarkable increase being on plot 28, where sulphate of potash alone 

 is used." 



COTTON. 



ALABAMA, 1890. 



Experiment by J. S. Newman, Director, and Joseph Clayton. 

 Assistant Agriculturist. Bulletin No. 22. 



'*Kainit causes the cotton plant to retain the leaves, while they 

 blighted where none was used. , . . 



"The per cent, of profit from a judicious use of fertilizers, followed 

 by intelligent cultivation, is most satisfactory." 



ALABAMA ^Auburn Station), 1892. 



By J. H, Radney, Roanoke, Randolph Co. Bulletin No. 34. 

 Soil — Sandy loam. Subsoil — Clay. 



"By noticing the yield from plots i, 2 and 3, where the fertilizers 

 were applied singly, it will be observed that muriate of potash gives 

 the best results." 



GEORGIA. 1893. 



By R. J. Redding, Director. Bulletin No. 20. 



"The fertilizing ingredients contained phosphoric acid, nitrogen 

 and potash and were used in this experiment in various proportions, in 

 order to study the best combination of the fertilizer for cotton. It 

 was found that a fertilizer containing 3 per cent, of potash produced 

 the best results. 



"And it would require 700 lbs. of such a fertilizer per acre to pro. 

 duce the same increase on similar soil to that of the experiment under 

 consideration. In other words, 700 lbs. of a fertilizer analyzing as the 

 above may reasonably be expected to increase the yield of land in fairly 

 good condition by 1,000 lbs. Such an amount of fertilizer would cost 

 $8.00 or $9.00, and the increased yield of cotton would therefore cost 

 about 80 or 90 cents per hundred weight of seed cotton, or less than 3 

 cents per pound of lint, ready to gather from the field. The results of 

 the experiments of the past year agree substantially, and in most cases 

 remarkably, with those of 1891, and confirm the general conclusion 

 that high farming, including renovating crops, such as cowpeas and 

 other legumes, deep preparation, liberal manuring, select seed, and 

 frequent shallow cultivation is the solultion of the problem of 'how to 

 make farming pay.' It has never 'paid' to coTitinually cultivate a poor 



