SCIENCE AND INDUSTRY. 
The Board of Trade has investigated the method and the results, 
but is not prepared to say how much of the success is due to the soaking 
in the chemical solution and how much to the electrical treatment. 
Various agricultural societies have had reports from special committees, 
and experts from abroad have also examined the fields scattered over 
many parts of the country, from the infertile and newly-ploughed heaths 
of Dorset to the chalk around Salisbury Plain, and the stiff clays of 
Cheshire. 
Practican Resuurs rorom Fry’s Meruop ty ENnGuann. 
The seed was divided, one-half treated, and all sown and grown 
under the same conditions in each particular case, by practical agricul- 
turists under ordinary farming conditions. : 
Some of the chief results by different farmers were as follows:— 
Gains per Acre. Gains per Acre in Straw. 
Bushels. Bushels. Tons ewt. Tons ewt. 
Atri ee 21a (ire. HON GEER (aby au. 8 (bya a 
afadiyes (aly ee 64) I 2 (any ay (2) 0 10 
Oats et (Gb) 4a Te, — ey ez = 
Other gains were :— ae 
Wheat .. 8} bushels; 5% bushels. 
Oats .. 12,194, 18, and 5 bushels. 
The general results may be summarized thus :— 
(1) The electrified seed in all cases gaye an increased yield in 
bushels per acre varying from 25 to 387 per cent. The 
average for the 1918 season was over 30 per cent. increase. 
(2) The electrified seed yielded a better quality grain ranging 
from 1 to 4 Ibs. per bushel heavier. This means better 
milling quality, more flour, and less offal. 
(3) The straw averaged from 2 inches to 8 inches longer than . 
the untreated. i 
(4) The electrified gave stouter straw (an excess of 26 per cent. 
of that measured), and hence could stand up better. 
(5) The tillering of the plant was greater from the treated seed, 
and it produced more ears of wheat and barley, or: panicles 
of oats. Thus thicker plants with longer and stronger 
stems gave the increased yield of heavier grain. 
Can Rusr pe Conrrotten py Enecrrican Trearmenr? 
At the farm of W. E. Pledge, at Elmstead, near Ashford, in Kent, 
a remarkable example of rust resistance was seen, whicli, if supported 
by future tests, will considerably affect agricultural practice. A field 
of 8 acres had been sown with red standard wheat in October, 1918, 
one-half treated and the other untreated by electricity, but all sprayed 
with copper sulphate solution to prevent rust. The land was very poor, — 
but the treated seed produced far more vigorous plants. The untreated 
would return not more than the 3 bushels per acre used to sow it; whereas 
the treated would yield a profitable return to the farmer. The untreated 
32 
