Deterioration Sugar Beets Due to Nitrates 135 
that, owing to their abundant foliage, it seemed that they had lost 
but few or no leaves. This was not the case for, by counting the 
lea\ es killed by the leaf-spot on a number of beets we convinced 
ourselves that any judgment based upon the apparent immunity of 
the nitrate beets, was not at all justified by the facts. 
Our observations upon the effects of the leaf-spot are by no 
means so definite as those recorded by Nicholson and Lyon in Neb. 
Bui. 67 p. 20, where they state “Where this disease proceeds this 
far (to the total destruction of the foliage. H.) it seriously affects 
the yield and sugar content of the beets. At the time of harvest, 
beets severely attacked produced between three and four tons less 
than those only mildly affected, while the sugar was fully one per¬ 
cent lower.” 
Lyon and Wiancko in Neb. Bui. 81, p. 11, refer to the effect of 
removing a part of the foliage, one-half in the case discussed and 
state, “As regards the practice of breaking off the outer leaves it 
woud seem that good may result since the yield secured was over 
two and one-half tons more per acre than the average of the ordinary 
treated plots. . It has been argued that breaking off the leaves or 
otherwise bruising the beet may result in permanent injury but it 
was observed in this case that aside from the larger growth of the 
roots, the leaves were considerably healthier later in the season, 
being less affected by the leaf-spot than were the plots on either 
side.' - ’ . Again in their Summary and Conclusions they state that 
“Breaking off a part of the leaves of sugar beets at ‘laying by’ time 
did not injuriously affect the yield or quality of the crop. Beets 
treated in this way were less affected by ‘leaf-spot’ disease than those 
not so treated.” 
In Jahresbericht der Zuckerfabrikation, 1907, p. 55, the results 
recorded as obtained by Andrlik and Urban upon the effects of de¬ 
foliation show that the removal of jo percent of the leaves in the 
early part of July depressed the yield 36 percent, the yield of sugar 
35 percent and the yield of dry substance 34 percent. The plants 
removed much less plant food, 38-8 percent less ntrogen, 34.9 per¬ 
cent less potash and 36.0 percent less phosphoric acid, than uninjured 
plants. The plant food removed with the leaves (by defoliation) 
was not taken into consideration. Defoliation at the end of July 
lowered the yield of beets by 24.0 percent, of leaves 23.0 percent, and 
of sugar 30.5 percent. The percentage of sugar in the beets was 
lowered 1.1 percent. The plants took up 30.0 percent less nitrogen, 
28.0 percent less potash and 18.0 percent less phosphoric acid than 
uninjured plants. The removal of 19.0 percent of the leaves on 21 
Aug. depressed the yield of roots by 13.0 percent, increased the 
leaves by 3.0 percent, did not change the percentage of sugar in the 
