G UX1\'. OF X. II. ACiK. EXPKRl.MEXT STATIOX | 1 lulll'till '.'oS 



above the check i)lols riiul those where fertihzer without Hnie was ap])he(h 

 The hii^hest yieklint^' j^lots were those with three tons of hmestone and iJOO 

 ]ioun(ls of su])eriihosi)hate ]>er acre: the yield amounted to -i.oS.") j)()unds — 

 more ihnu a ton al)o\e the clieck i)lots. The carry-over of i)hos]:)horus and 

 l^otasli from the ])recedin,q- corn cro]) di'l not seem to l)e in ([uaiitity suffi- 

 cient to stimulate the yield. 



Similar indications of the wilue oL lime on oats were evident in the fer- 

 tilizer studies at C'olebrook. A ])()rtiiin of this field was seeded to oats 

 al)out June 1, and the cro]) was harvested for forage. Xo fertilizer was 

 used for the oats, hut lime was applied on certain plots at the rate of two 

 and fom- tons ])er acre. Increased yields for the two-ton application were 

 significant, amounting to ioT) ])oun(ls of hay. and the four-ton application 

 did not give much better rettu'us. (PunicU U uiuL) 



FERTILIZER STUDIES ON POTATOES 



Scattering the fertilizer in the row with the seed has given a slight 

 advantage for two ven.rs as com])ared with ])lacing it above. l)elow or at the 

 side of the seed. 



Studies of var^•ing amounts of j^otash with fixed amounts of nitrogen 

 ai'd phosphoric a.cicl were made tluring the year in duplicate plots on a 

 worn-out sod land wliich IkkI n(.t been jjlowed or fertilized for "30 years or 

 more. The fertilizer was a])plied at the rate of l..-)()n pounds i^er acre but 

 no manure was used. The average vields were as follows: Check plots, 

 148.2; 4-8-0 grade. 25(5.3: 4-8-3 grade, 292.?: 4-8-G grade, 295.0: 4-8-10 

 grade, 313.9. ' 



On other i)lots where manure was used without chemical fertilizers it 

 was found that 12 tons of manure increased the yield ?? luishels over the 

 check plot, and 24 tons increased it 117 l)ushels. With potatoes 80c a 

 bushel this year, this gave a Vcdue of $5.13 for each of the first 12 tons of 

 manure used, and $2.(18 for each of the last 12 tons, with no allowance for 

 any residual eiTect for succeeding crops. The manure was partially 

 rotted and applied and hoed in just before ])lanting. The results bear out 

 those of a similar ex])criment two years ago. 



Nitrate Versus Sulphate Nitrogen for Potatoes 



■With the ])rices of sulphate of ammonia and nitrate of soda the same per 

 ton as they have been for the past two seasons, the question arises, "Can 

 we substitute sulphate for nitrate in our potato fertilizer and thus cut the 

 price?" ^I'o secure some data on this question, two plots were planted in 

 duphcate. one with all the inorganic nitrogen as nitrate and the other with 

 the inorganic nitrogen as sulphate. These were checked against a third 

 plot with nitrate and sulphate mixed in ec[ual proportions along with tank- 

 age as a source of organic nitrogen. In each case the fertilizer was a 4-8-4 

 grade a])plied at the rate of 1,800 pounds per acre. 



The total vield of the sulphate plot was about 11 bushels per acre less 

 than the other two, while its yield of Xo. 1 potatoes was 29 l)ushels less 

 than either of the other two. Yields of both the nitrate and mixed_ plots 

 were practically identical. While this one year's test was not conclusive, it 

 seems to indicate that sulphate alone is not as desirable as a mixture of the 

 two in a potato fertilizer. 



A comparison of quadruple strength fertilizer with the ordinary grade 



