96 BOTANICAL GAZETTE [FEBRUARY 
the surface soil (no. g A), but the subsoil (no. 9 B) had only a little 
more than half as much sulphur as phosphorus. The difference 
- between the sulphur and phosphorus contents in one of the Mich- 
igan soils was not great. The surface soil (no. 2A) contained 
0.0486 per cent sulphur and 0.0518 per cent phosphorus, while the 
subsoil (no. 2B) contained 0.0405 per cent sulphur and 0.0561 per 
cent phosphorus. All the other samples were much higher in phos- 
phorus than in sulphur. The difference was very great in one of 
the Indiana soils, which had over six times as much phosphorus as 
sulphur, and in the Kentucky soils, in most of which the phospho- 
rus content was from five to eleven times as much as the sulphur. 
In two of the Kentucky soils the phosphorus content was only three 
times as much as the sulphur, and in one only four times as much. 
The Michigan soils, samples 1-5, were taken on the Wah-Bee- 
Mee-Mee farm at White Pigeon, Michigan. Samples 1 and 5 
were sampled to three depths and all the others to two depths. 
These soils are alluvial sandy loams, varying from light brown to 
dark brown on the surface and grading into a yellow sandy subsoil 
containing some gravel. The light colored samples contained 
more sand in both surface and subsoil and were lower in volatile 
matter, sulphur, and phosphorus, than the darker colored ones. 
All were low in both sulphur and phosphorus, but the sulphur is 
lower than phosphorus in all the samples. With the exception of 
sample 1, the sulphur was always lower in the subsoil than in the 
surface soil. 
The Ohio soils, samples 6-9, were taken near Copley, Ohio. 
Nos. 6, 7, and 8 are upland silt loams containing some sand. The 
surface soil is a yellow brown grading into a uniformly light yellow 
subsoil, which indicates good underdrainage as well as good sur- 
face drainage. These soils apparently belong to the type mapped 
as the Wooster silt loam. The sulphur content was low in both 
surface and subsoil, while the phosphorus content was fairly good 
in the surface but low in the subsoil. In every sample the sub- 
soil was lower in volatile matter, sulphur, and phosphorus than the 
corresponding surface soil. 
Sample 9 is poorly drained, and the surface soil has a large 
amount of organic matter with some silt, sand, and a little clay. 
