378 
JUNE 8 
Mixed Wheat Seed 
Shall We Sow a Single Variety? 
M. DE VILMORIN’S VIEWS. 
AMERICAN COMMENT. 
An Interesting Discussion 
Last year the Mar* Lane Express of Eng¬ 
land printed an argument by M. Henry L. de 
Vilmortn, head of the celebratad Paris firm 
of Vilmrrin, Andrieux & Co., in favor of the 
sowing of mixed wheat seeds. The R. N.-Y. 
reproduced the following synopsis of M. de 
Vilmorin’s views. 
“It has been established by numerous ex¬ 
periments that the sowing together of two 
distiret kinds of wheat, gives almost invari¬ 
ably a better yield of grain than would have 
been obtained from the same total quantity 
of either kind sown separately; and, speaking 
of France, he says that skillful cultivators 
o'ten employ mixtures of seed corn. In sup¬ 
port of this practice it is remarked that each 
variety of wheat differs from all others not 
only in its external characters, but, to some 
extent. In the manner of its nourishment in 
its special needs, and in the proportions of 
the materials it draws from the soil—slight 
differences, it is true, and yet sufficient to ex¬ 
ercise a distinct influence upon the yield. It 
has been truly observed in criticism of too 
thic • seeding, that the most powerful enemy 
the wheat plant has to compete with, is the 
wheat plant itself; this is particularly the case 
if the plants which find themselves in strife, 
belong to the same variety, for the roots of 
each plant are continuously in contact with 
those of adjacent plants, which at the same 
time and at the same depth, are seeking in the 
soil precisely the same food. If, however, two 
different varieties have been sown together, 
the competition will be less severe for each. 
Another advantage of sowing mixed seed is 
that it yields in general, a grain of better ap¬ 
pearance, and this is especially the case when 
a white or yellow grain is sown with a red 
one, or a soft-grained variety with one of 
which the grain is horny or polished. In this 
way is obtained what is termed upon the mar¬ 
kets wheat panachb (i. e.,) variegated or 
mixed; ordinarily, these samples sell better 
than those of pure wheats.” 
The high reputation of M de Vilmoriu will 
stamp these views as well worthy of consider¬ 
ation, however novel they may appear to 
American farmers. The R N. -Y. has there¬ 
fore requested some of its correspondents to 
give their opinions on the matter. These 
opinions follow: 
FROM PROF. J. W. SANBORN. 
The principles involved in mixing different 
varieties of wheat, if the practice is wise, rest 
either upon all those sound and, as I believe, 
vital principles involved in crop rotations, or 
upon crossings that may occur by natural 
processes. Botanists seem to agree that wheats 
do not cross readily ; indeed it das been held 
that they do not cross at all, but are self-fer¬ 
tilizers or, in other words, in-breeders. It has 
always seemed to me that our new sorts not 
artificially produced, are to be accounted for 
upon the principle called variation, or by 
some “sporting.” I believe that cross-bred 
plants are more vigorous,and should it be that 
mixed grains result in crosses, these by virtue 
of their vigor would come to the front. But 
that such is the fact will not be admitted, nor 
is there evidence enough to support such a 
view. Among other good things that he has 
done tie editor of the Rural New-Yorker 
has shown the possibility of wheat crossing, 
and it has been shown by others also. 
So far as the idea of rotation is involved, 
we certainly cannot claim much of the dis¬ 
tinguishing advantages of rotation for M. 
Vilmorin’s recommendation, for that rests 
upon principles involving the use of plants 
of other species and genera. The leading 
characteristics of different varieties of wheat 
must be essentially the same; that is, their 
composition, root area, time of Jripemng, the 
acids in their roots for soil solution, etc. It 
is probable that slight variations in those 
capacities and directions of development 
would amount to something. There are vari¬ 
ations in the races of men and in the varieties 
of corn. The question occurs, however, would 
it not be better to select the variety the sum 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
of whose good qualities is the highest? I seo 
no. field of probable gain save in the root ac¬ 
tion of wheat, the roots of mixed sorts more 
completely filling the soil and solving it in 
diverse directions: and then too there is 
a possibility of crossing. Of course, weak- 
strawed kinds would be supported by the 
stronger sorts. 
I find that the millers raise no objection to 
such mixing of seed; indeed they mix the va¬ 
rieties in grinding. There is the objection 
that mixed wheat will not ripen together and 
that the tall sorts will shadow the shorter 
ones. This objection I regard as of some im¬ 
portance as there is a right moment for cut¬ 
ting the crop, which varies with ea^h sort. 
This could be partly made good by harvesting 
the earlier sorts a little late. But even then 
we are confronted by the fact that wheat loses 
in weight after it has once become rip°, ivbile 
yet remaining on the stem. Again, the more 
vigorous sorts of wheat must impair the 
growth of the less vigorous ones, as Darwin 
shows, occurs when two plants of diverse vi¬ 
tality occupy one pot. If the distinguished 
French seedsman rests his belief upon impres¬ 
sions, I should feel at liberty to doubt the 
value of mixing seed wheat unless crossing 
occurs, in which event I should be unqualifi¬ 
edly for it. If M. Vilmorin has made an ex¬ 
act test of the matter, then I am in a position 
to accept his conclusions, for I have no con¬ 
troversy with facts and detest wise contro¬ 
versial speculations in their presence. 
So far as informed, I should now select the 
most productive wheat that the millers will 
accept and that which is adapted to the soil I 
may have in hand. This wheat I would bold 
up as best I could by the most rigid course of 
selection. By this process as one of the fac¬ 
tors, our entire wheat crop has averaged 39 
bushels per acre for the last three years. 
Columbia, Mo. 
FROM PROF C. S. PLUMB 
While I do not know how wheats are graded 
as to price in France, I do believe that the 
American farmer who grows mixed seed can¬ 
not compete in the home market with the 
farmer who produces a good, even quality of 
grain I certainly believe that Vi'morin’s 
idea is more theoretical than practical, and 
for the following reasons: 
1 My observation is that wheat cross-fer¬ 
tilizes very sparingly, hence the results 
through this medium would be immaterial. 
2. Some varieties of wheat are of entirely 
different character, in maturity, hardiness, 
size of plant, etc Now, the more the ex¬ 
tremes are mixed, the more uneven the sam¬ 
ple would be. If a late variety be sown with an 
early one, the latter will be ready for cutting 
before the other is fit. If a variety that rusts 
badly be sown with one quite free from this 
malady, the former may help break down the 
latter in lodging. But, assuming that two 
varieties that are quite closely connected be 
planted, it seem* to me that the more nearly 
these varieties resemble one another the bet¬ 
ter for the grower. 
3. Patrick Shirreff, of England, was proba¬ 
bly the most skillful theoretical and practical 
wheat culturist in the world. His policy was 
to breed up one variety, and by that means, 
pursued for many years, he produced a va¬ 
riety of wheat that brought the very highest 
market price, and his wheat became world- 
famous. 
4. The miller desires the cleanest, evenest, 
plumpest grain he can get. The more closely 
all the grains a farmer delivers resemble one 
another, and approach or excel a certain mer¬ 
cantile standard, the nearer he approaches the 
highest market price. 
5. In reference to the roots of different 
varieties of wheat seeking food in the ground, 
I seriously question if there is a man living 
who has the data at his command to show that 
the healthy roots of one variety will seek any 
different chemical food from that sought by 
the roots of another equally healthy plant of 
another variety. This must be simply theory, 
for it is now positively known that the roots 
of the wheat plant penetrate much deeper in 
the soil than was thought up to a very recent 
date. 
Though we have a vast number of names of 
wheats, it is my opinion, based on consider¬ 
able field work, that of distinctive varieties 
we have but comparatively few. I advocate 
crossing varieties by artificial means, thus at¬ 
tempting improvement. However, if we 
would have the best wheat, we must grow it 
on land that is rich in plant food,and adapted 
to that plant. If our wheat deteriorates, I do 
not believe it the fault of the variety ; in all 
probability it is owing to deterioration of the 
soil, caused by starvation treatment. 
Univ. of Tennessee. 
FROM F. P. ROOT. 
The mixing of different varieties of grains 
in the growing of a crop is claimed by many 
to be advantageous in the yield, and also, in 
many cases, in the quality of the product. 
It is a theory and also a practice not new in 
this Genesee valley, a noted grain-growing 
section from the earliest days of its settle¬ 
ment. Fifty years ago and upwards, follow¬ 
ing the practice of my father, who was a very 
successful wheat grower, I grew mixed 
wheats exclusively for several years. The 
two varieties grown together, were the 
White Flint and the Red Chaff Bald, and also 
a white wheat. The gain claimed was that a 
surer and better yield was usually obtained 
because the former was a more hardy and 
stronger-growing variety and the latter a 
more prolific yielder with stronger and 
coarser straw,which aided to hold up the flint 
variety which was liable to fall on a rich soil. 
This practice of mixing varieties of wheat 
was quite common in this section for several 
years; but it gradually disappeared on the in¬ 
troduction of other improved varieties of grain 
but the practice of mixing varieties of seed 
in wheat growing is by no means absolute at 
the present time; for in our market at Roch¬ 
ester, regular quotations are given for mixed, 
as well as for pure varieties of wheat. It is 
claimed by some theorists that different varie¬ 
ties ot wheat draw from the soil different 
elements of plant food, and hence two 
or more varieties may be grown together 
with less exhaustion of some elements 
of pl<int food than when but one is grown. I 
think, however, that this is rather a slender 
basis on which to base an argument in support 
of a theory,for the differences in the elements 
contained in different varieties of wheat are 
very trifling; but there may be at times some 
practical benefits in this theory, like the fol¬ 
lowing: One variety may grow a stronger 
fibrous root, and hence it will resist heaving 
by the frosts of spring better than another 
which is more prolific and less hardy, and 
when these two are sown together,if the weak¬ 
er one fails, the stronger may not fail. It may 
be asked, then, why not sow the stronger va¬ 
riety altogether ? The answer is, that the 
cho ; cest varieties of wheat, such as are the 
most desirable in market, are, as a rule, less 
hardy in resisting tho casualties of the grow¬ 
ing season than the coarser and less desirable 
sorts. Again, when one variety grows a tall¬ 
er straw than another, the heads are less 
crowded and a better circulation of air and 
sunshine is obtained at ripening time and one 
variety that gnws a very stiff straw may 
hold up another that grows a weaker straw, 
but which is more prolific. After consider¬ 
ing all these trifling benefits to be obtained 
trom a mixture of seeds, I think it tends to 
negligence and carelessness on the part of 
the farmer in procuring the best and purest 
seeds, which is of far more importance than 
the fancied benefits of mixin^varieties. Mix¬ 
ing seeds is quite too common among a large 
class of farmers, such as mixing rye with 
wheat, chip, cockle, quack, red-root and 
many other noxious seeds, much to the dam¬ 
age of the crop and of the farmer. In gener¬ 
al,the farmer who takes pride in having clean 
and pure varieties of wheat,oats, barley,corn, 
potatoes, etc., is the best farmer and will be 
more successful in his business than the one 
who gets things mixed in his crop or in 
his head. 
Monroe County, N. Y. 
FROM PROF SAM’L JOHNSON. 
I have had no experience in the sowing of 
mixed wheats; but from the well-known rep¬ 
utation of M. DeVilmorin, I should think his 
statements worthy of careful consideration. 
It occurs to me that not much stress should be 
laid upon the theory that “the different vari¬ 
eties of wheat differ from each other in the 
manner of their nourishment and in the pro¬ 
portion of the materials they draw from tho 
soil.” These differences must be so slight, if 
they exist at all, that it seems that we must 
look elsewhere for the reason of an increased 
yield, if such is the result of sowing several 
distinct varieties together. Without speculat¬ 
ing further upon the reasons given for this 
practice, I shall be very glad to note this as 
an interesting question for investigation in 
our experimental fields. 
In this connection I may add that in a con¬ 
versation on grain-growing with Regents 
Hiram Smith and H. D. Hitt, of the Univer¬ 
sity of Wisconsin, the latter gentleman in¬ 
formed me that he had sown spring wheat 
with his oats last spring, and that it was a 
common practice in his vicinity. It was there 
claimed that without any diminution in the 
yield of oats, often 10 or 12 bushels of wheat 
per acre were obtained from this sowing of 
mixed oats and wheat. Peas and oats are 
often sown together, the latter serving to hold 
up the peas and prevent them from lodging 
so that they fill better, giving an increased 
yield, while a fair return of oats is secured. 
The amount and kind of food elements taken 
up by these different grains differ more or less 
in kind and in degree, and this would indicate 
why the practice might prove profitable under 
certain conditions. (Mich. Ag. College.) 
FROM PROF. K. M. SHELTON. 
I think well of the suggestion of sowing 
mixed varieties of wheat together, provided, 
of course, the differences between them are 
not too great. Besides the advantage of hav¬ 
ing wheats that feed differently growiug to¬ 
gether. as suggested, the fact that they 
ripen at different times would be quite likely 
to prevent their “lodging” in many cases; 
and it would not be unlikely that the danger 
of complete destruction of the crops by in¬ 
sects would be averted. The practice of grow¬ 
ing mixed grain crops for stock feed is an old 
one. In England mixed oats and peas are a 
favorite crop with stockmen. In this section 
of the Great West, millet or Hungarian is quite 
commonly sown broadcast with sorghum, 
the resultant crop being a very heavy yield of 
curable and highly nutritious fodder. 
Kansas Ag. College. 
FROM COL. F. D. CURTIS 
The plan of M. de Vilmorin has the merit, 
ot novelty. I fail to see how one wheat plant 
will or can assist another in its growth. A 
coarser or ranker wheat would, of course, 
send its roots down deeper into the soil; but 
how this could add to the yield of the more 
delicate or lighter-growing kind is not ap¬ 
parent. It is, however, plain to me that the 
underlying plants would rob those feeding 
nearer the surface of moisture and plant food, 
just as trees unfit a plot of ground for the 
production of other vegetation wherever their 
roots fill the under strata of earth. If these 
wheats did not flower at the same time there 
would be no stimulus to production, nor 
would there be any hybridizing of peculiar¬ 
ities If wheats of different character were 
sown, and both threw off their pollen at the 
same time, there might be a mixture,and per¬ 
haps a mottled wheat es the result of the com¬ 
bination or union of different colors. The 
new s°ed would have a future, being perhaps 
in part like one parent and perhaps in part 
like the other : or it might be mostly like one. 
The idea is interesting for the sake of the 
amusement it may cause, and testing it in 
practice will help to multiply kinds ; but in 
the trial crop each kind must depend on the 
characteristics it has received by heredity. 
There is no nerve force or magnetic power to 
be absorbed or borrowed. I have often 
planted corn in this way, and the result was 
mixed kernels in the ears, but I have never 
noticed that the lesser stalks were made 
greater, or that the larger were magnified; 
each followed its own bent. 
Saratoga Co., N. Y. 
FARMERS’ PROSPECrS IN ENGLAND. 
PROFESSOR J. P. SHELDON. 
All-round improvement in stock-raising 
prospects due to abundance of forage and 
shortage in cattle and sheep ; prices great¬ 
ly increased ; of late milch cows have paid 
best ; good prices for milk, butter and 
cheese ; arable farming still depressed ; the 
check to agHculture likely to be perma¬ 
nent; other industries reviving ; great ad¬ 
vantages of American farmers. 
Bo far as stock-raising, grass-land farmers 
are concerned, there are several points this 
spring in marked contrast to the spring of last 
year, as indeed there were between last fall 
and the one preceding it. These changes, on 
the whole, are improvements, and people are 
in better spirits than, perhaps, they have 
been during any other year in the current 
decade. There is a large, all round increase 
in the value of the livestock of the farm, aud 
this is owing to two prime causes—the one a 
favorable aud the other an unfavorable cause. 
The first of these is found in the plentiful sur¬ 
plus of forage which is now left unconsumed 
on most farms, as compared with the great 
scarcity of it which prevailed a year ago; the 
other is the serious decrease,which has taken 
place in the number of live stock—that is of 
cattle and sheep more particularly. Our na¬ 
tional agricultural statistics are collected on 
the fourth of June, each year, and they form 
a valuable guide to the comparatively small 
but increasing number of farmers who take 
the trouble to study them. On June 4, 1887, 
we had in Great Britain a total of 6,441,268 
cattle, of all ages; and of sheep, 25,958,768. 
During the succeeding twelve months, these 
totals had gone down to 6,129,375, and 25,257,- 
149, respectively, showing a decrease of cattle 
amounting to 311,893, aud of sheep to 701,619. 
This diminution in numbers is owing 
mainly to the dry summer of 1887, in which 
all kinds of crops were very light, aud which 
caused the slaughtering of a vast number of 
half-fat cattle, to save the cost of wintering, 
and to make up the supply of beef required by 
