48 



MASS. EXPERIMENT STATION BULLETIN 196. 



Table VI. — Average Yields. 



Crop. 



Millet (1 year), . . . 



Corn, ensilage (1 year), 



f Reans, . 

 Soy beans (1 year),^ 



{ Straw, . 



Corn and soy beans (1 year), 



f Grain, 



Stover, 



Mixed grass and clover (5 years), 



Total weight of crops removed, av 

 erage of five plots. 



Corn (3 years), \ 



AVERAQB FOR FiVB PlOTS. 



North Half. 



3,847 pounds 

 15,890 pounds 

 15 07 bushels 

 1,212 pounds 

 22,034 pounds 

 37. 14 bushels 

 4,452 pounds 

 7,101 pounds 



100,517 pounds 



South Half. 



5,414 pounds 

 16,914 pounds 

 14 61 bushels 

 1,193 pounds 

 21,907 pounds 

 41 13 bushels 

 4,844 pounds 

 7,250 pounds 



105,694 pounds 



Per Cent for 



South Half 



(North Half = 



100 Per Cent). 



140 7 

 106 4 

 96 9 



98 4 



99 4 

 110 7 

 108 8 

 102.1 



105 2 



Table VII indicates the number of times out of the twelve (the total 

 number of years during the period when manure was generallj' applied 

 annually) in which the yield on N was superior to that on S. 



Table VII. 



General Residts. 



Plot. 



North Half 

 ahead — 



1, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 years out of 12 



5 years out of 12 

 2 years out of 12 

 7 years out of 12 



3 



4 



5 1 year out of 12 



Examination of this table shows that on plot 3, S almost invariably 

 gave the larger yield, N being superior to it only two j^ears out of twelve. 

 This may be explained by the greater fertility or better physical condition 

 of S on plot 3, as shown by the yields given in Table II. On plot 5 the 

 general superiority of S was still more marked, N giving the larger yield 

 only one year out of twelve. It will be remembered that the manure 

 applied to plot 5 was from horses, whereas that applied to all the other 

 plots was from a herd of well-fed dairy cows. As has been pointed out, 

 this stable manure was usually comparatively fresh, yet it had without 

 doubt undergone more fermentation previous to being taken to the field 

 than had the cow manure applied to the other plots. The effect of this 

 greater progress toward complete disintegration at the time of spreading 

 must have been to increase the proportion of soluble matter in the manure, 



