germinating by the formaldehyde. The oresenop of ih... + 



mterpretation of the yields very uncertain A i^.ff.^ ^^"^ variables made the 

 of 1923 to determine to what Ltent each of theS"? .7' ""^^^ ^^ ^^'^ experiments 

 variation in yield. This was accomphshed bf S de Sn -" 'f^^^'^^^ for the 

 chemical injury. During the tliird or fourth weJfn Tl^^^ ^-^*^^* °f *he 

 thought that practically all the plants whiXwnili ^^^^' planting, when it was 

 any of them had disappeared froS smut or dZn?n r.1 ""^ '^'f ^^^^le and before 

 row was determined h respective ofTLetLrS^^^^ * r' "'^^^ "^ P^^^*« ^^ ^^«^ 

 son of these with the untreated ro^ deteTiWTd t£ .^^ ^"^^P^"' 



The relative amount of loss from smut wfs dSStn • a ^^u""^ °^ .*^^ chemical loss. 

 the number of sound bulbs from tTif nTmber ofTel 



injury. It is not thereby assumed that aU thp nllft! i -^l^ ''.^^ ^'''^P^^ chemical 

 kiUed by smut but that other aTenci^factLd^^^^^^^^^ ^^ ^^^ interim were 



to check up under field conditions the inflnp^nT? ^-i "" l*^^ '■°^'"- ^^^^ i^^ order 

 percentage of moisture inlheZnonelnc^^^^^ T'^""'' ^* P^^^i^S «^^e, the 



experimental field on the day of plantLg. '''^^'' ™ calculated for each 



Allen Clark Farm Experiment, 19 S3 

 This experiment was located in North Amhpr^f nn lor,^ i. •■, - <■ 

 smut at one end but very lightly at the otht Tf T ^and heavily infested with 



13 niches apart, seeded It the ratf of sh ptnds p rtc'i e' tVp'"'' '?? ^'''}'''f' 

 moist, containing 17 per cent water wifh f ^oJT +? ' -. ^^^® ground was fairly 



dry weight. It was pTanSd on Inrimid t W ^^ 'T''^^ ^^-^^ P^^ ^^^*- ^^ ^^^ 

 29th. The rain probably came sSon Zouit!^?}'^^^ T""' °^ *^^ 28th and 

 Inspections while the onions wei^comiS^un ^ ^^'' '"'u^*' °^ *^^^ treatment, 



lings at the end of a montl shTwed Tp pL?" i '^^^P^rison by counting the seed- 

 On September 4, wL^ "^0111^" tSe rtTtn /""^^ ^"^^^Sible in this field, 

 of each row on the more heaZ inf^^^^^^^^ *^" '""^^ b,^lbs in 100 feet 

 presented in Table VI (p 28) are .hnH+ li / ^ t^u '^^'"^ counted. The results, 

 neither extremely dry nm- ex? emelv wet tI H^^* *?' '?.''^^^ ^^^^^ ^^'^ '^''^ ^^s 

 formulas of medLi dilution (^64-3000 1^5 STo^wI^' ^f.' ''T'^T'^ '^' 

 tion was medium (l-50-400o\ Knn^ ^/+i f V' y^'^""^ *^® ^^te of distribu- 



1-50-5000 was leait sa^iJSy . "" The Iptran^^^^^^^ ^°"*^°^i Y /^^ 



ha vesting is shown in Fig. 2. appearance ot the field four weeks before 



Kuzmeski Farm Experiment, 1923 



pounds per acre on Anril 9 t^^ ""n"^ ^^ '^'^'^" ^P^^*' needed at the rate o six 



during t^e daTand tr uUeed^n' da^TnT ^"''^ ^7 ""^•^"?^- ^ ^^^^^^ ^^^^ 

 for a week. The moisture waSpiZ f P wf ''PP^'' ^^^^"^ '^ *^e same condition 

 the dry weight of the soU All cnSd^tf *■ ""'"'^ *^f ?)'^*^y? ^^^P^^^^^ 45 per cent, of 

 dehydi injmy. "^^ conditions were ideal for a high percentage of formal- 



lingf X^fttTsTuc^^^^^^^^^^ '''^'''^ T ^^^. T^«-g the number of seed- 



all that was p7edicted Oi^lpn P 'T.l"P' «h?^"^d ^^^^t the injm-y was certainly 

 counted. The dataon thf. piT ^*^' ''''^^'' °^. ''°^^^^ ^^^^^s remaining were 

 These dat-i shnw +W +? experiment are summarized in Table VH (p 29) 



5000 formulfca^sed^^h^^^^^^^^ "-^^ all formulas used. Tl7l-50- 



tion wasXuted 1 1 00 tw ^ *\^*7'^' 20 per cent. Even when the solu- 



practlll fi^^muk e^ "^ ^^ P^^,^^"*- Jt\^' doubtful whether any 



this loss. Under these condft in n^^I \ '' kTT 1'^ f.^ditions which will ehminate 

 and increase the atl^ro^^Ten^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ' 



Station Farm Experiment, 1923 



siste™'f 40 row? 1??nM^^ "^ ^"f'"^ f'^ experiment of 1919 was located. It con- 

 pounds per acT' The oTwTvP "^^ ^^ ^'f ^°^^' ^?^^^ °^- ^P^^^ 26 at rate of sh 

 per acre, i he soil was very dry and remained so for 48 hours after planting. 



19 



