Oct. 22, 1917 
Effect of Sulphur on Different Crops and Soils 
101 
Warren. —Beneficial, oat straw from the smaller application, and 
wheat, both in grain and straw, from the larger application. Injurious, 
soybean hay. 
Mason.— Beneficial, alfalfa and wheat, both in grain and straw, from 
the larger application. Injurious, clover. 
MuhlENburg. —Beneficial, none. Injurious, soybean grain, clover, and 
wheat grain from larger application. 
Barren. —Beneficial, soybean grain. Injurious, none. 
McCracken. —Beneficial, oat straw and wheat grain from larger appli¬ 
cation. Injurious, soybean grain and clover. 
Madison. —Beneficial, soybean hay and alfalfa. Injurious, wheat, 
both in grain and straw, from smaller application. 
Jefferson. —Beneficial, soybeans, both in hay and grain. Injurious, 
none. 
From the foregoing we find that the sulphur has affected the crops 
differently, depending on the soil. Some undoubtedly were benefited, 
others were injured, while in many cases no effect was apparent. On the 
whole, there is a preponderance of gains from the sulphur, although 
generally small. 
Some observers have found that sulphur had a more marked effect 
on certain crops when applied to soils fairly well supplied with organic 
matter. What the effect would have been if such had been the case 
here or if the other fertilizing ingredients had been omitted is not easy 
to forecast, for, as stated before, it is difficult to have all soil conditions 
ideal in order to prove a certain point. Soil fertility involves so many 
factors that its study is very complicated. The question of mineral 
plant food has occupied considerable attention, and rightly so, but 
oftentimes another important side has been overlooked—namely, the 
organic matter, involving, as it does, all bacterial activities of the soil. 
If a bacterial study was carried on in mineral-nutrition work, probably 
different deductions would be drawn then where each is considered alone. 
In this connection it might be.of interest to state that Fred and Hart 
(3) have been found that soluble phosphates have a more marked effect 
on promoting the bacterial activity of a soil than sulphates; and for 
this reason, while sulphates are important and as low in amount in 
most soils as phosphates, they will not in all probability have the same 
crop-producing power as the phosphates. 
From an examination of Tables III, it will be found that applications 
of sulphur increased the total and sulphate-sulphur content of the 
plant; and the larger the application, the greater the increase. Fur¬ 
thermore, it will also be observed that in the clover and alfalfa, the 
sulphur marked “residual” more nearly approaches a constant figure, 
regardless of whether sulphur was applied or not. This does not hold 
true with respect to the soybeans in most cases, however, and this in¬ 
dicates that the excess sulphur in the clover and alfalfa plants exists as 
