July, 1917.] 



GROWTH OF APPLE TREES. 



21 



soil treatment has not given an increase in yield over the previous 

 plot, especially when the growth is in its favor. The growth in 

 this plot has scarcely held its own during the second four-year 

 period of the experiment, which is doubtless significant in the 

 face of the subsequent plots, which under fertilization, have all 

 increased in the second four-year period. However it must still 

 be stated that after nine years the orchard has not paid in dollars 

 and cents for the fertilizers which have been applied. 



TABLE No. 7. 



Average Twig Growth Woodman Orchard. 



1909-1916. 



Inches. 



In the subsequent plots Nos. 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10, we see that all 

 have more than maintained their growth since the early years of 

 the experiment and most of them have gained considerably under 

 the treatments they have received. This is also true of the 

 cover crops on these plots, but has been especially noticeable 

 the past two years (1915-1916). Therefore we can summarize 

 the effect of the fertilizer treatments on these plots by saying 

 that they remained about the same as the one receiving good 

 culture including a cover crop (Plot 5) but without fertilization, 

 for the first six years of the experiment but since that time tne 

 growth has been noticeably greater, and in the ninth year (1916) 

 the average of all the fertilized plots was 26 per cent greater than 

 Plot 5. Graphs showing the average growth during the first and 

 second four-year periods are shown in Charts Nos. 3. and 5. 

 Possibly the most striking feature of these charts is the gain 

 made by the excess potash plot which now slightly leads the 

 excess nitrogen plot, also the falling off of Plot 4, and to a less 

 degree, Plot 5. 



