6 MASS. EXPERIMENT STATION BULLETIN 324 



determine whether the subsoils were richer in potash than the surface soils. 

 Localities were chosen because of typical underlying rock or glacial drift. The 

 areas selected for the sampling were in uncultivated pastures or woodland. 

 Samples were secured of the surface soil 6 to 8 inches in depth and each foot 

 of subsoil to the sixth foot in depth. The field work was done by Robert L. 

 Coffin. The chemical analyses were made of the fine soil which passed through a 

 sieve with holes 1 millimeter in diameter and were limited to the loss on heating 

 the soil to red heat and to the potash soluble in hydrochloric acid solution of 

 specific gravity 1.12. All the chemical analyses were made by Walter S. Frost. 

 The results have remained unpublished until now. 



Since these soil samples were secured, the soil surveys have been published 

 and by the soil maps the soil series for each of the localities has been identified 

 and included in the table with the analytical data. The three major groups of 

 soils are each represented by these samples: Glacial drift, water-borne drift, and 

 recent alluvial soils. The analytical data in the table are not carried beyond 

 the 4th foot in depth. 



Table 1. -Potash in Massachusetts soils 



Soil Group 



Soil 

 Series 



Locality 



Percentage of Potash 



Glacial Drift 



Granite Gloucester Dedham 



Gneiss Gloucester Wendell 



Mica Schist Hollis Deerfield 



Pyrites Schist Brookfield Templeton 



Sandstone Cheshire Agawam 



Limestone Dover Pittsfield 



Water-borne Drift 



Plain Merrimac Concord 



Plain Merrimac Marshfield 



Terrace Hadley Hadley 



Plain Chicopee Agawam 



Lowland Scarboro State College 



Recent Alluvial Soils 



Fresh-water Meadow East Sudbury 



Diked Tidal-marsh Marshfield 



Ctanberry Bog Peat North Carver 



Aside from the marsh soils, the only soil showing marked increases in potash 

 in the 1st and 2nd feet of subsoil is the Hollis soil from Deerfield. This soil series 

 is derived from a slaty schist high in mica, which is the principal potash mineral 

 in such rocks. The variation in potash may be due to leaching, but is more 

 probably due to different proportions of mica when the several levels were de- 

 posited. 



In the Survey of Worcester County Soils (pp. 1544-1547), Latimer discussed 

 the formation of soils from glacial drift, bringing out these salient points. Soil- 



