SUMMER-FALLOW I XG. 35 



the wheat is hand-liocd in the spriiiir to kecj) it tieau. A few years 

 a^o, ill a tieUl ailjoiiiin^ tliis experimental wheal ticlil, and that is 

 of iLe same charueler of laud, he made the followinii ixperimcnt. 

 The land, after wheat, was fal.owed, and then !-own to wheat; 

 then fallowed the next year, and again sown to wheat, and the next 

 year it was sown to wiieat after wheat. Tlie followinij: is the re- 

 sult compared with the yield of the continuously unmanured plot 

 in the experimental field that is sown to wheat every year: 



1. Year— No. 1— Fallow No cro|). 



No. 3 — Wheat after wheat \'> bushels 3t peeks per acre. 



2. Ykar-No. 1— Wheat after fallow 87 " — " " 



No. ;i— Wlieat aftir wliciit Vi " 3i " *' 



3. Year — No. 1 — Fallow aftt-r wheat No crop. 



No. 2 — Wheat after wheat 1.5 busliels 3i pecks per acre. 



4. Year— No. 1— Wheat after fallow 42 " — " " 



No. 3— Wheat after wheat 21 " (li " " 



5. Year— No. 1— Wheat after wheat 17 " 11 " " 



No. 3 — Wheat after wheat 17 " — " 



Taking the first four years, we have a total yield from the plot 

 sown every year of 06 bushels 2^^ i)eeks, and from the two crops 

 alternately fallowed, a total yield of 79 bushels. The next year, 

 when wheat was sown after wheat on the land previonsly fallowed, 

 the yield was almost identical with the yield from the plot that has 

 grown wheat after wheat for so many years. 



So far, these results do not indicate any exhaustion from the 

 practice of fallowing. On the other hand, they tend to show that 

 we can get more wheat by sowing it every other year, than by 

 cropi^ing it every year in succession. The reason for this may be 

 found in the fact that in a fallow the land is more frequently ex- 

 posed to the atmosphere by repeated plowingsand harrowings; and 

 it should be borne in mind that the effect of stirring the land is not 

 necessarily in proportion to tlic total amount of stirring, but is 

 according to the number of times that fresh particles of soil are 

 exposed to the atmosphere. Two plowings and two harrowings 

 in one week, will not do as much good as two plowings and two 

 harrowings, at diffr^rent times in the course of three or four months. 

 It is for this reason that I object, theoretically, to sowing wheat 

 after barley. We often plow the barley stubble twice, and spend 

 ci'isi'lerablc labor in getting the land into good condition ; but it 

 is generally all done in the course of ten days or two weeks. We 

 do not get any adequate benefit for this labor. We can kill weeds 

 readily at this season, (Aurust), Imt the stirring of the soil does 

 not develope the latent plant-food to the extent it would if the 



