THE GENESEE FARMER. 



273 



IS GRAIN GROWN UPON POOR SOIL AS RICH IN 



ALL THE ESSENTIAL INGREDIENTS OF 



NUTRITION AS THAT WHICH IS 



GROWN ON RICH SOIL! 



Eds. Genesee Farmer : — In looking over a late 

 number of your paper, under the head of " Why 

 Cattle Chew Bones," after stating the general im- 

 pression on the subject, viz., that it is because the 

 soil lacks phosphates and hence the crops grown 

 upon it are deficient in this material, you remark : 

 *' We do not believe that a plant of clover grown 

 on a soil deficient in phosphates would contain any 

 less of this substance than those grown on richer 

 land. If the #oil contained no phosphates, the 

 plant would not grow at aW." 



I had entertained the opinion that corn or other 

 grain grown on a poor soil would contain all the 

 nutritious properties (although the yield would be 

 less) in about the same proportions as that grown 

 upon rich land, until convinced to the contrary by 

 the experiments of Dr. Robert Peter, of Lexing- 

 ton, Kentucky. In conducting extensive analyses 

 in connection with the geological survey of Ken- 

 tucky, Dr. Peter procured, through the agency of 

 Mr. Sidney Lyon, Topographical Engineer in the 

 Survey, a number of ears of corn grown upon the 

 poorest soil in one of the poorest sections of the 

 State, for the purpose of analysis, in comparison 

 with com grown near Lexington, on the richest 

 soil in the State. The com sent by Mr. Lyon was 

 of a yellowish red variety, generally considered 

 more productive on poor soil than white corn, and 

 withal richer in oil than the white varieties gener- 

 ally. Accompanying the corn was the following 

 geological description of the soil upon which it 

 was grown : " The waste of the second sandstone 

 above the base of the millstone grit, the surface of 

 the field being well covered with small fragments 

 from that bed. The corn from 6^ ears weighed 2 

 lbs. 6 oz., averaging about 7 inches to the ear, and 

 these were the best that could be found. Produce, 

 about 8 to 12 bushels to the acre." 



For comparison, Dr. Peter procured five ears 

 from the rich land of Fayette county, of the blue 

 limestone of the lower Silurian formation. Pro- 

 duce, about 75 bushels to the acre (with the care- 

 less cultivation of the West), which is below the 

 ordinary yield, the season having been an unfavor- 

 able one. The weight of the corn from these five 

 ears was 8 lbs. 8 oz. The ears averaged *l\ inches 

 in length each. Weight of the cob when dried 

 was about one-sixth of the corn. The variety was 

 the common white. 



The following is Dr. Peter's statement of the 

 analysis, with some of his remarks : 



" The examination of the two specimens, taking 

 equal portions of the meal resulting from grinding 

 in a hand mill, resulted as follows; 



(A), corn from the poor field. 



(B), corn from the rich field. 



Z IN 100 PAF.T8 OF THE THOROUGHLY AIR-DRIBD CORN I 



„ (A) fB) 



Yellowish oil 4.60OO 5.2600 



IN TUB ASH: 



Potash 2840 .2878 



Boda 0854 .2204 



Lime 0052 .0076 



Magnesia 0713 .1287 



Oxide ot iron av.d maeanese not estimated. 



Phosphoric acid \ .8513 .4230 



Sulphuric acid 0165 trace. 



Chlorine not estimated. (A) (B) "1 



Silica 0150 .0250 



Carbonic acid and loss 1513 .3195 



0.9S00 1.4120 



Proportion of phosphate of lime 0093 .0139 



Proportion- of phosphate of magnesia 1984 .3584 



Phosphoric acid combined with alkaiies 1483 .1870 



In these analyses, only the principal mineral in- 

 gredients and oil are noted. The former — the 

 mineral elements— conducing, with the so-called 

 organic elements of the corn, to the growth of the 

 bone, muscle, etc., and the oil to the fattening of 

 the animals fed upon it. The proportion of these 

 organic elements, viz., of the carbon, hydrogen and 

 nitrogen, were not sought for, because these are 

 not taken from the soil by the plants, but are sup- 

 plied from the water and the atmosphere, and con- 

 sequently are abundant everywhere; and especial- 

 ly as they are found always in ihe fixed propor- 

 tions in the organic matters of vegetable and ani- 

 mal bodies." 



So far as this one analysis goes, it would seem 

 that you are mistaken in your conclusion in regard 

 to clover, etc., grown upon soil deficient in certain 

 ingredients. My observation, since the date of the 

 analysis referred to, rather goes to convince me of 

 the error of opinion formerly entertained. 



Dr. Peter, in speaking of the rich " blue grass 

 region" of central Kentucky, on the fertile soil 

 formed by the disintegration of the soft layers of 

 blue limestone of the lower Silurian epoch, re- 

 marks: "I have often had occasion to admire the 

 luxuriant growth of vegetables, and the rapid and 

 perfect development of the animals raised upon it. 

 Compared with some of those of the poorer soils 

 of some of the other geological formations, the 

 horses, mules, hogs, cattle, and even men, and the 

 cats and dogs, seem to be of larger growth, and 

 present a much more thrifty and well-ted appear- 

 ance." 



1 present you these statements because they are 

 interesting, whether you admit the conclusions or 

 not. H. P. B. 



Sag Harbor, N. Y. 



Remarks. — We cannot admit the conclusions. 

 We do not see that these analyses prove anything. 

 They are incomplete. They do not show how much 

 starch, vegetable albumen and other nutritious 

 substances there was in the corn. The one that 

 has the least oil may have had the most starch. 

 In fact, judging from the analyses, it is highly 

 probable that such was the case. 



Then, again, the coin was not the same variety. 

 It may be, too, that the climate was not the same 

 in both cases — and we know that climate has more 

 to do witli variations in the composition of grain 

 than the soil. 



Had our friend H. P. B. sent us the analyses of 

 these two samples of corn, without saying anything 

 in regard to the conditions under which they were 

 grown, and asked us to say which was the best 

 sample of corn, we should have replied, " it is im- 

 possible for any one to tell." If pressed for an 

 opinion, we should have been inclined to have 



