58 



MASS. EXPERIMENT STATION BULLETIN 196. 



Examination of Table XI shows that there was a small financial ad- 

 vantage clue to the larger crop in favor of plots S, which represent the 

 double handling system. Table XII shows a much larger difference. 

 There are two reasons for this: first, the superiority of plots S during 

 the period subsequent to that covered by annual applications of manure 

 was much greater than during the period in which manure was applied 

 yearly; and, second, this superiority, as already pointed out, has shown a 

 tendency to increase with lapse of time. 



While it has previously been referred to, it seems desirable again to 

 call attention to the fact that spreading manure during the winter helps 

 to relieve the pressure of work in the sj)ring, and therefore possesses some 

 advantage which cannot be shown in dollars and cents, and whic-h of 

 course varies with the weather and other conditions affecting the spring 

 work. 



Table XII. — Calculated Results per Acre {1912-19). 



Crop. 



CiOD Values, 



Yearly 

 Average. Dif- 

 ference in 

 Favor of Spring 

 (Plots S). 



Number of 

 Years. 



Total Dif- 

 ference in Favor 

 of Spring 

 (Plots S). 



Mixed grass and clover, 

 Soy beans (ensilage), 

 Soy beans, 

 Corn, 

 Total, 



S2 10 



24 



10 04 



12 73 



$8 40 



24 



10 04 



25 46 



S44 14 



Average for 1 year, S5.52. 



Final Conclusions. 

 L Had the experiment been brought to a conclusion in 1911, the last 

 year of the period during which manure was applied annually, the state- 

 ment would apparently have been justified that it made little difference 

 in financial result which of the two plaus of applying manure should be 

 followed. This, however, would not haA^e amounted to a demonstration 

 that excess wastage had not occurred on plots N, for the reason that in 

 spite of such wastage under the conditions which had existed throughout 

 the experiment, the supply of plant food on plots N had probably been 

 adequate to give yields nearly as large as all the conditions affecting the 

 yields on ])l()ts S made possible. 



2. That the manure on plots N had suffered quite serious losses has 

 been made apparent by the relative j'ields as compared with plots S 

 during the period 1912-19, in which no additional manure had been 

 applied. 



