10 



that the exceedingly high purities may be to some extent due to 1< 

 of liquid from the bottles during the two months storage, althoi 

 the containers appeared to be tightly stoppered. 



In the following table the tonnage results have been arraiij 

 and averaged so as to make possible a comparison of the yiel^ 

 obtained with the same amounts of fertilizer and varying methods 

 application. 



TABLE II. Yields obtained by varying methods of application of fertilizer , Cairo, Ga., 



Plat 



No. 



Yield per 



Amount of fertilizer and method of application. 



Field A. Kii-ld 



Tons. 



1 No fertilizer 7 . 60 



17 ! do 13. 40 



23 do 10.60 



42 do 11-50 141 



63 do ! 12.25 13i 



" Average 11.07. 1 



One application: 



2 800 pounds normal formula 1 16 23 



31 800 pounds normal formula J 



1,200 pounds normal formula 



4 2,000 pounds normal formula ! I 1 .'. 30 



Average 1 7. 72 



Two applications: 



6 800 pounds normal formula j 16.95 j 



27 800 pounds normal formula 



7 1,200 pounds normal formula : 19.55 ; 



1,200 pounds normal formula 23.50 



2,000 pounds normal formula 24.90 



29 2,000 pounds normal formula 26.80 



Average : 22. 08 



Three applications: 



10 800 pounds normal formula 17. 75 



11 1,200 pounds normal formula 19.80 



12 2,000 pounds normal formula 22. 30 



Average 19. 95 



One application: 



3 1,200 pounds normal formula 16. 95 



4 2,000 pounds normal formula 19. 30 



Average 1 v 1 n 



Two applications: 



7 1,200 pounds normal formula - 19.55 



1,200 pounds normal formula 23,50 



2.000 pounds normal formula 24.90 



2,000 pounds normal formula 25.80 



Average 23.44 



Three applications: 



11 1,200 pounds normal formula 



12 2,000 pounds normal f ormiilr 22. 30 



A v rape 21.05 



Broadcast: 



32 1,200 pounds normal formula 19.00 



2,000 pounds normal formula 19. 55 



43 1,200 pounds normal formula 1? 



44 2,000 pounds normal formula 21.50 



Average 19.21 



