close

Вход

Забыли?

вход по аккаунту

?

THE YIELD AND QUALITY OF PENNSYLVANIA CIGAR-LEAF TOBACCO AS INFLUENCED BYFERTILIZER TREATMENT AND SYSTEM OF ROTATION

код для вставкиСкачать
THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE .COLLEGE
The Graduate School
Department of Agricultural and Biological Chemistry
THE YIELD AND QUALITY OP PENNSYLVANIA CIGAR-LEAP
TOBACCO AS INFLUENCED BY FERTILIZER TREATMENT
AND SYSTEM OF ROTATION
A Thesis
*7
Joseph Clyde Underwood
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment for
the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
J a n u a r y ,
19A 2
Approved
Phyto Chemistry
H e s ^ ’oiTlDepaFEmeir
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE
OP C O N T E N T S
Page
I.
II.
Ill*
IV ®
V.
VI.
VII.
VIII.
IX.
INTRODUCTION
1
HISTORICAL
3
REVIEW OP THE LITERATURE
5
METHODS
11
PRESENTATION OP DATA
17
DISCUSSION OP RESULTS
37
SUMMARY
46
ACKN OWLEDGMENTS
47
BIBLIOGRAPHY
48
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
THE YIELD AND QUALITY OP PENNSYLVANIA ClGAR-LEAF
TOBACCO AS INFLUENCED BY FERTILIZER TREATMENT
AND SYSTEM OF ROTATION
I®
INTRODUCTION
The production of cigar-leal tobacco is one of the
leading agricultural industries of Pennsylvania, although
only a small portion of the State is suitable for its
cultivation,,
Lancaster County growers produce more than
ninety per cent of the total quantity annually produced
in this State0
This limitation of area greatly enhances
the probability of large fluctuations in the supply of
tobacco due to unsatisfactory weather conditions or crop
diseases®
Consequently, both the growers and manufactur­
ers are vitally interested in determining the conditions
that will insure a more or less constant supply of high
quality tobacco each year®
In 1939 Pennsylvania occupied first place among the
states in total production of cigar-leaf tobacco, although
the monetary value of the Connecticut crop exceeded that
of Pennsylvania®
While 75 per cent of the tobacco raised
now in Pennsylvania goes into the wrapper class, It Is
evident that this figure can and should be exceeded In
years to come*
Some of the farmers of Lancaster County follow a
three-year rotation system in growing tobacco*
The rel­
ative value of this rotation had never been studied exper-
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
imentally, and, therefore, in 1952 a project on this
investigation was begun at the Tobacco Experimental Farm.
This paper deals with the results obtained from nine years
of the Three-Year Rotation Experiment, with special refer­
ence to the over-shadowing influence of clover and alfalfa
stubble and residues when plowed under preceding the crop.
Also, the results of a Four-Year Rotation Experiment will
be used as far as possible for comparison.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
II.
HISTORICAL
Tobacco investigations in Pennsylvania were begun
in 1893 under the direction of Dr. William Frear repre­
senting The Pennsylvania Agricultural Experiment Station®
As the station was located In a section of the State un­
favorable for the growing of tobacco, the work was carried
on In the various tobacco-growing sections of the State.
Fertilization, curing, variety and strains of tobacco, and
the cast of production were studied.
In 1912, in coopera­
tion with the United States Department of Agriculture,
experimental substations were established at Ephrata and
at Lock Haven*
The previous work was continued and
additional investigations were made on seed beds, seedcleaning, rate-of-seeding, fumigation, fertilizer treat­
ments, various cultural practices, varieties and strains
of tobacco, and breeding for high and low nicotine content.
The tobacco substation at Ephrata was abandoned In
1931 and a new location was chosen near the city of Lan­
caster.
The experimental field, consisting of ten acres,
was located near Roseville on the Oregon Pike, one mile
from Lancaster.
The field was nearly level with a slight
southern exposure, and the soil was of the Hagerstown
silt loam type.
There had been no fertilizer used on this
field for more than twenty years.
Thomas (81) has de­
scribed the soils of this field In detail.
In 1952, along
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
-4 «
with the continuation of previous work, an extensive
experiment was begun on the fertilizer treatment of
tobacco grown in a three-year rotation system*
The best
source and amount of nitrogen, potassium, and phosphorus
were studied*
A four-year rotation experiment paralleling the
three-year one was started in 1938*
enlargment of the farm*
This necessitated an
The ground adjacent to the orig­
inal field was found to be unsuitable for ideal experi­
mental work, and, therefore, in 1940 the location of the
substation was moved to the Espenshade farm which is
adjacent to the former location*
be undertaken.
Here, further work will
This includes, besides the rotation work,
experiments on fertilizer placement, insect control,
disease control, minor elements, and strains of tobacco*
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
III.
REVIEW OP THE LITERATURE
1. General
The tobacco plant has a high ash content which means
that it Is exacting in Its mineral requirements.
Since the
quality of the leaf Is influenced greatly by Its mineral
constituents and the composition varies with changes in
the fertilizer applied to the soil* a properly physlologically“balanced nutrient medium should furnish all the
necessary nutrients in the proper quantity and form in
order to produce tobacco of both maximum yield and quality*
The literature relating to the intake of minerals by
plants is so voluminous that only a few references on this
phenomenon will be given and those will be confined to
certain studies pertaining to nitrogen and potassium as
the actions of these two elements are closely related to
this present study.
Much work has been done upon the
effects of different sources of nitrogen upon the growth
of plants.
Summarizing the results of many papers,
nitrogen is best utilized by the plant in the nitrate ion
form.
The ammonium Ion is absorbed by the plant, but Is
toxic under certain conditions.
Naftel (66) reports that
the ammonium Ion can be absorbed safely in the early
stages of growth.
Briefly, it appears that the value of
any source of nitrogen depends upon whether or not the
form of the nitrogen can be changed readily to an available
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
form under soil conditions*
Ames (2) describes various
factors affecting nitrification in soils*
When a form of
organic matter, such as cotton seed meal, manure, or a
green cover crop, is used as a source of nitrogen, all
factors concerned in decomposition are important in
determining the availability of the nitrogen*
Waksman
(84 and 85) has several papers upon the breakdown of
organic matter in the soil and its effect upon the soil
itself*
Moisture plays an important role (26) in the
availability of all ions in the soil medium®
The availability of potassium is influenced generally
by the same factors that influence nitrogen availability
(42)*
As all ions are absorbed through the roots of the
plants, factors affecting the root grov/th influence
absorption®
Also, the physical properties of the soil
have an effect upon ion absorption®
Many papers in this
relation of soil properties on the intake of ions are
available*
The influence of such factors as pH (67),
concentration of ions, soil bacteria (84), moisture (22),
and antagonism of ions (15) are likewise found in the
literature®
The influence of one ion upon others as to their
absorption has been studied by Lowig (51), Breazeale (15),
Mosolov (64), Alten (1), Gassner (36), and Tarchin (83).
These men say that the elements needed by plants should be
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
-7 -
present in certain concentrations in relation to each
other.
Another factor very important in the phenomenon of
the absorption of ions by plants is the kind of plant.
This accounts for the great differences in the general
conclusions drawn from experiments by various workers.
Rotation of crops has been used as a means of main­
taining soil fertility for many years.
At first, the
commonly grown crops were rotated, but it soon became
evident that some plants grew best if they followed certain
other specific plants or were in a three-year rotation.
Also, the value of legumes in rotation was discovered.
Collison and Menshing (20) describe the effect of legumes
in crop rotation upon the yield of following crops.
They
say that the influence of the legume residue upon the
physical nature of the soil is just as important as the
nitrogen mad© available by the fixation process of the
symbiotic bacteria connected with the legumes.
Lyon (53
and 54), Haedden (37), and Puller (31) also report work
done on the effects of legumes upon succeeding crops.
The decomposition of these plants by bacteria is reported
upon by Lockett (48), Beavens (13), and Barnette (11).
Hale (38) compares winter green legume manure and sodium
nitrate as a fertilizer for cotton.
2. Rotation and Fertilization in Tobacco Culture
The tobacco plant has been used in biochemical research
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
-8 -
largely because It is a very good. Indicator plant,
A.
heavy feeder, it shows the effect of deficiencies or over­
supply of the various elements in the soil,
Anderson (5)
describes the symptoms of many malnutrition diseases of
Connecticut Valley tobacco®
The factors of climate, rainfall, kind of soil, and
kind of tobacco grown influence the quality and yield of
the crop so much that fertilization and cultural practices
have become local problems.
The conditions under which the
fine light wrapper-grade of cigar-leaf of the Connecticut
Valley is grown are very different from those used in
Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, where a heavy filler-leaf
is raised.
The reports of The Connecticut Agricultural
Experiment Station show many facts concerning fertiliza­
tion, cultural practices, mineral metabolism, and disease
control of the tobacco of that State,
Anderson and co­
workers (5) have shown that a three-year rotation a3
practiced by Lancaster County growers Is not suitable for
Connecticut tobacco®
Instead, tobacco is grown year after
year on the same soil with proper fertilization for such a
method.
Garner (32} has fully discussed the fertilization
of various types of tobacco grown In different parts of
the United States.
The chemical composition of the leaf is important
in determining the quality of the tobacco.
Beaumont (12),
Garner (32), Middleburg (62), and Anderson (7) are a few
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
-9 -
of many who have studied, the nitrogen nutrition of tobacco*
The best source of nitrogen seems to vary with the locality
and hind of tobacco grown*
Nitrogen is more important in
influencing the yield of the tobacco than the quality®
The form of nitrogen best utilized by the tobacco plant is
discussed by Thomas (82)•
Rotation is used chiefly to
maintain the nitrogen fertility of the soil*
Beaumont (12),
Eisenmenger (25), and Moss (65) report upon rotation in
various parts of the country*
Potassium is an important constituent of the leaf*
It is associated with the burning quality, disease re­
sistance, and carbohydrate and protein synthesis*
Baily
(9), Coolhaas (23), Garner (33), and Haley (40) have
studied the factors related to the burning quality of
tobacco®
Lagatu (47) relates the disease resistance of
tobacco to wildfire with its potassium content*
Shedd
(78) has reported work on the relation of the potassium,
chlorine, and sulfate content of Kentucky tobacco to
quality*
Certain ions cannot be used in tobacco fertilizers,
as they are detrimental to the quality of tobacco®
Chlorine, if applied as muriate of potash, depresses the
burning quality®
Elemental sulfur spoils the aroma of
the smoke«
The factors affecting the growing of tobacco in
Pennsylvania have been studied by various workers connected
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
-1 0 -
v/ith the tobacco substation in Lancaster County®
(50), Haley (39), G a m e r
Prear
(32), and Olsen (70) have re­
ported on various phases of tobacco cultivation®
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
-1 1 -
IV.
METHODS
A. Field Practices
The Three-Year Rotation Project at Roseville con­
sisted of tobacco, wheat and clover in order of success­
ion, except on three plots where alfalfa replaced clover.
The experimental grotmd was divided into three tiers so
that a crop of each product could be harvested every year.
Each year, after proper preparation of the seed
beds, plants were grown which were later transplanted to
the field plots.
These were cultivated, topped upon
approaching maturity, harvested at maturity, and placed
in a curing shed.
The plants were set at twenty-six-inch
intervals in rows forty-two inches apart.
The usual
cultural practices and methods of insect and disease
control were used that the farmers of Lancaster County
followed.
The fertilizer treatments of the Three-Year Rotation
Experiment are as follows:
1. Varying amounts and kinds for the tobacco.
2„ A uniform treatment of three hundred pounds of
16 per cent superphosphate per acre for the wheat®
3.
The clover received no treatment.
Manure was
applied approximately one month before the tobacco was
transplanted.
The other fertilizers, with the exception
of nitrate of soda, which was applied as a side dressing
one month after transplanting, were broadcast about one
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
-1 2 -
vreek before transplanting*
However,, plots 16, 17, and 18
were fertilized in the row at the time of transplanting#
The follov/ing is a list of the fertilizers used::
1* Nitrogen#
a# Two-thirds from cotton seed meal#
b# One-third nitrate of soda except on plot 14
where two-thirds of the nitrogen came from nitrate of soda#
2# Phosphoric Acid#
a# Sixteen per cent superphosphate#
•3# Potash.
a# Sulphate of potash#
4# Manure#
a. Stockyard manure with very little straw<>
5# Lime#
a# Hydrated lime#
The same cultural practices were used in the FourYear Rotation Project#
Here a rotation of tobacco, wheat,
legume, and corn is followed#
The fertilizer used in the
treatments are listed as follows:
1# Nitrogen.
a# Ammonium Sulphate,
b# Cottonseed Meal#
c# Nitrate of Soda#
d# Soybean Meal#
e# Urea.
f# Potassium Nitrate.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
—lo—
2. Potassium.
a. Potassium Carbonate.
b. Potassium Nitrate.
c. Potassium Sulphate©
3. Phosphorus.
a. ..Superphosphate--16$.
b. Steamed Bone Meal.
c. Precipitated Bone Meal.
4. Manure.
a© Stockyard manure with very little straw©
5© Sulphur.
a. Elemental Sulphur®
6* Manganese©
a. Manganese Sulphate.
A somewhat different plan of fertilization from that
of the Three-Year Rotation Experiment is used in the
Four-Year Rotation Experiment.
The latter experiment is
divided into six parts, each a small independent experiment
in itself.
Series A, the low nitrogen series, deals with
the performance of various nitrogen carriers used to supply
30 pounds per acre of that element in a 3-8-12 mixture,
with the addition to all plots 10 tons per acre of manure.
Also, two plots receive a composite nitrogen treatment.
Series B, a high nitrogen series, deals with the same
nitrogen carriers applied at the rate of 60 pounds of the
element per acre without manure.
with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
-1 4 -
The potash Series, C, involves the use of potassium
In different forms and quantities In a 3-S-X mixture
applied at the rate of 1000 pounds per acre with 10 tons
of manure per acre*
The two phosphorus Series, D and E, parallel the two
nitrogen series In the nitrogen treatment, hut in addition
the phosphorus Is varied as to quantity and source.
Series P, a miscellaneous series, includes the use of
sulfur, supplemental manganese, manure alone, and no
fertilizer*
B. Chemical Methods
1• Sampling,
Samples consisting of the sixth leaf from the bottom
of the plant comprising ten plants from each plot were
taken at harvesting time*
These samples were weighed,
packed in dry ice, taken at once to State College, and
dried at 70°~80° C. for 24-30 hours*
Then they were
reweighed, ground so that the entire sample passed through
a sixty-mesh sieve, and sealed in glass containers,
A
chemical analysis for moisture, total nitrogen, and po­
tassium was made upon them®
2, Chemical Analyses,
a. Moisture.
A five-grain sample was dried in an oven at
97.5° C. for two (2) hours, cooled, and weighed*
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
-1 5 -
b. Total Nitrogen*
The Kjeldahl-Gunning-Annold Method modified to
include nitrates,, as given in 11Methods of Analysis of the
Association of Official Agricultural Chemists," Third
Edition, was used*
3* Potassium Determination*
a* Preparation of Sample*
A five-gram sample in a porcelain crucible was
placed in a muffle furnace at 480° C t for twenty-four
hours*
The ash was then taken up in dilute hydrochloric
and dilute nitric acid, filtered, and washed with hot
dilute nitric acid (1 to 99)*
The filter paper and res­
idue were reburned in the same crucible in the muffle
furnace at full red heat*
This ash was taken up in aqua
regia, boiled, diluted, filtered, and washed with hot
dilute nitric acid (1 to 99).
The filtrate and washings
were made up to a volume of 500 ml®
b* Potassium Determination®
To a 50 ml* aliquot of the above solution in a
porcelain dish was added \ ml* of cone® HgSO^*
The
solution was evaporated to dryness on the steam bath*
The dish was then placed on an electric hot plate and
heated cautiously until the residue was white, and then
placed over a hot Meeker flame for a few minutes.
The
residue v/as taken up with 1 ml* of concentrated HC1, and
hot water added, stirring until solution v/as complete*
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
-1 6 -
Then 5 ml. of platinic chloride (.02 gm Pt per ml.) were
added and the solution evaporated on the steam bath just
to dryness.
The residue v/as taken up with 25 ml. of
acidulated alcohol (2.25 normal hydrochloric acid in
80$ ethyl alcohol).
The mixture was thoroughly stirred.
After standing about one-half hour, the contents of the
dish were filtered through a weighed Gooch crucible, v/ashed
with 80$ alcohol, with Lindo-Gladding solution (ammonium
chloride solution saturated with K^PtClg )9 again with 80$
alcohol, dried at 100° C. for 30 minutes and then weighed.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
-1 7
V.
PRESENTATION OF DATA
A. General
The three-year rotation field (See Figure 1) was
divided Into three tiers of 31 plots, each one represent*
ing 1/21 of an acre, so that each year three crops—
tohacco, wheat, and clover— were grown in the following
order:
Tier I
Tier II
Tier III
1932
Tohacco
Clover
P/heat
1933
Wheat
Tobacco
Clover
1934
Clover
Wheat
Tobacco
1935
Tobacco
Clover
Wheat
The Four-Year Rotation Experiment with which the
Three-Year Experiment will be compared consisted of eightyfour plots per tier of l/40 acre each.
These plots re­
ceived various fertilizer treatments, some of which were
the same as applied to certain of the plots of the threeyear rotation*
However, the tobacco grown on the Four-
Year Rotation plots did not follow a legumec
Table I shows the monthly precipitation at the
tobacco farm for the years 1932 to 1940.
for these years is also given.
factor in the growth of tobacco.
The average
This is a very important
The precipitation must
be both ample and well distributed throughout the growing
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
-1 8 -
[ Xi'LKlMLN IAl. IUBAf.cn
I AW(,Ao!l !•: nOUNIY - PPNNo'il V/iNIA
NOll
Ml I'll'!'. Ill TV
N
'< A
M
P "'Ull ft/'f' f'f I,M
A H f Mil
i
l t - ' l !<!" ri l A N A C M
//."
A l l f>t O I •» IN I M K f f
n o tA T IO N AfU <Vff
nflM
<>r A n A' 0/
LEGEND
RW
NIL
I WO
ROIA1
JL
ft
I0 H
llijy/ddli
H A 6 ERST 0V/M
SILT
LOAM
TIER II
FOUR
ROTATION
A I IO N
HA6ERST0WN
S IL T
LO Ar*
DEEP
PHASE
IL R
FHHEE YEAR
1
R O T A T IO N
H A 6 E R S T 0W N
S i l t LOAr*:
HEAVY sue
S o il phase
rHREL*
)tA6 £R
S
T
v.*>
:
s il t
l <
v
s h a llo w
PHA-SE
Y L A R ROTATION
i
n il J
L v J I l J l.l
HftftERSTOv.
CLAY LOAM
TIER
III R L i:
Y I-A R
_
NOfC ‘
w >m ttn [ k i f t i m j
All t j r t i l H t /l UA9 H. LV
Figure 1*
im
1I O
ROTA
N
_ litJLrrJl
Tii.n ltf ( f o . i R
•
,
__
y r f t H K O T A I i o n ') v - i <« II
Plan of Three-Year Rotation Plots*
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table I
Precipitation Data Taken at Tobacco Substation at Roseville,
1935
1936
1937
1S38
1959
1940
Ave©
1,55
1,25
5.92
4.30
1.50
3.12
1.07
2.81
1.56
2,34
2,15
2,42
1.38
1.60
5.54
2.46
2.43
March
5,15
5,33
2.12
1.75
4,67
1.10
2,35
2.85
3,55
3.21
April
1,59
4,75
0.85
4.00
2.50
4.17
1.80
3.98
6.03
3.31
May
2,17
4.73
2.73
1.50
1.47
2.65
3.02
0.50
4.40
2.57
June
5,27
1,35
3 ©49
2061
4.25
5.30
5.01
3,49
3 .21
3.78
July
3 ©00
8.80
4,28
4,33
3,72
8,30
5.26
2,13
1.92
4.64
August
4 ,20 12,94
3©22
1.90
4.45 10,43
2.22
4.86
4.69
5.43
1932
1933
January
3,76
February
1934
September 1,30
3.11
8.39
3.80
2,10
1.00
3.24
2.13
5.01
3,23.
October
7,82
2.14
1.35
1» 23
1.75
5,30
2.20
6.31
2.33
3.37
November
4,40
0.51
3 ©Oo
5.30
1.00
2.22
1.92
0,49
4.63
2.61
December
2.28
1.85
2.00
2,28
5,20
1.00
2.50
2.17
2.42
2.41
Total
43.50 49.40 35.48 32.10 39.45 47.40 32,62 35.01 41.72 39.80
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
-20season for best results*
B. The Three-Year Rotation Results.
1. Table II show3 the field and fertilizer treatments
that were applied to the 31 plots of the Three-Year Rotation
Experiment.
These various treatments were designed to
show the effects of varying amounts of nitrogen, phos­
phorus, and potassium, of varying the amounts of the same
fertilizer, of using manure with and without fertilizers,
of applying lime, and of replacing the clover in the
rotation by alfalfa.
A plot receiving a basic fertilizer
appears at regular Intervals of every sixth plot.
This
is to show the variation in the natural fertility of the
soil.
Two of the plots received no fertilizer treatment
and acted as checks.
2. Shown In Table III are the dates of seeding,
fertilization, transplanting, topping, and harvesting of
the plants for the years 1932- to 1940.
This gives some
indication of the variations In the cultural practices
from year to year as Influenced by climatic factors.
3« The Yields.
Table IV gives the tobacco yields In pounds per acre
of the thirty-one plots of the Three-Year Rotation for
the years 1932 to 1940 inclusive.
The average yield for
each plot for the nine years Is also given.
The relation­
ship of the yields is shown graphically in Figure 2.
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
As
-21Table II
Fertilizer Treatments of the Three-Year Rotation Plots,
Plot
No*
Manure
tons
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Fertilizers
Quantity Formula
lbs*
1000
a»fl«
« • )
•EPOS
(P « I
« . ..
■D os
oo cti
O P VC
CM 0 9
O9C0E
I D CM
eve*
OTCD
■van
etc OB
O P CCS
n
ti
ti
n
ti
tt
it
tt
ti
500
1500
1000
n
ti
500
1000
1500
10
10
10
10
o » on
10
10
20
o n w
os os
oner
1000
II
II
II
500
1000
ii
Method of
Application
lbs*
6-8-4
6-8-8
6—8—12
6—8—16
0—8—12
3-8-12
9-8-12.
6-0-12
6-4-12
0-8-12
6-8-12
6-8-12
6-8-12
6-8-12
0-8-12
6-8-12
6-8-12
6-8-12
< D «
«»cs
e a o
Lime
0-8-12
0-8-12
3-6-12
3—6—3
3-8-12
0-8-12
3-8—16
<E9
CP
CP
Broadcast
n
n
ii
«s»
CO
OP
ooj
ess
OK)
oo
1000
oo
oo
ti
it
tt
ti
ti
it
ti
ti
ii
it
In rov/3
11
CO
ti
«o
<»
«
CO
<■<!•
Broadcast
it
tf
CD
ti
CD
t!
-
!t
KD
tl
-
O P «B
c a «
OP
M CE.
OP 0 3
—
69
«
CCBPP
•e fts
CSD
CP oc
1000
0—8—12
6-8-12
CO
II
-
«
Broadcast
11
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
-22-
Table III
Dates of Various Cultural Practices In Tobacco Growing
at Roseville*
Year
Manure
Applied
Fertilizer
Applied
Plants
Plants
Topped
Harvested
1932
April 27
May 27
June 6
Aug* 22
Sept» 12
1953
May 10
June 1
June 3
Aug* 14
Aug. 28
1934
May 19
May 24
June 8
Aug* 2-6
Aug* 27
1935
May 2
May 18
May 27
July 27
Aug* 23
1936
May 5
May 18
June 5
Aug. 12
Sept. 4
1937
May 8
May 18
May 22
Aug * 15
Aug. 19
1940
May 2
June 7
June 13
Aug* 21
Sept. 17
I
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
-23Table IV
The Annual Yields Obtained From Plots of the Three-Year Rotation
Experiment at Roseville, Pa. Over A Hine-Year Period.
Pounds Per Acre
Plot
1932
1933
1934
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
1940 Ave©
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
1783
1911
1925
1827
1281
1596
1596
1554
1638
1512
1734
1806
1638
1743
1554
1869
2352
2583
1050
1680
1764
2205
2058
1869
1680
2163
1869
1952
1155
1659
1785
1218
1365
1407
1099
1070
1218
1218
966
1155
1008
1050
1281
1134
1134
1134
1239
1586
1512
987
1155
1260
1428
1260
1260
1260
1134
1260
1407
966
1134
1260
1743
1890
1964
1617
1502
1386
1533
1313
1481
1450
1471
1670
1817
1743
1418
1691
1974
2048
1355
1701
1869
1895
1870
1764
1901
1869
1691
2038
1439
1712
2129
1995
2100
2163
1995
1470
1722
1953
1785
1764
1607
1701
1932
1764
1911
1523
1764
1985
2142
1208
1617
1869
2100
1806
1848
1911
1932
1869
1974
1565
1932
2027
1995
2037
2058
1890
1617
1890
2016
1895
1785
1617
1796
1932
1848
1838
1638
1775
2079
2289
1512
1638
1743
1995
1724
1701
1659
1848
1838
2090
1659
1995
2247
1491
1596
1659
1617
1260
1491
1522
1428
1365
966
1155
1533
1512
1449
1323
1428
1533
1722
1092
1281
1407
1680
1449
1449
1281
1764
1470
1743
1176
1654
1701
1660
1368
1505
1584
1136
1279
1430
1224
1342
1232
1594
1729
1373
1464
1240
1236
1523
1691
953
1263
1440
1600
1379
1382
1262
1648
1458
1676
1476
1374
1312
1325
1430
1448
1362
1100
1290
1456
1331
1424
1305
1365
1332
1284
1307
1282
1366
1473
1352
1044
1238
1306
1282
1236
1273
1316
1382
1259
1312
1235
1367
1447
1729
1997
1711
1725
1594
1526
1639
1562
1596
1675
1651
1731
1659
1703
1589
1594
1763
1817
1435
1621
1666
1792
1816
1926
1836
2147
1948
2143
1747
2019
1976
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. F urther reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
1660
1744
1760
1635
1337
1489
1596
1451
1506
1375
1502
1661
1559
1588
1411
1551
1785
1906
1182.
1466
1592
1775
1622
1608
1567
1765
1629
1812.
1380
1650
1765
-P4-
Yield
in H u n d r e d s
of
Pounds
per
A cre
66
I2 3
4
5
6
7 8 9 10 I I 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2 4 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
P lo t
Figure 2
Average Yielc. of the Three-Year Rotation
°lots for the Years I 032 to 19A O .
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
the 1933 and 1937 seasons were strikingly different on
account of the abnormal rainfall, the yields of these
years were studied separately.
The data in Table V
compares these years with the nine-year average and with
the average of the seven years that remain after the years
1933 and 1937 were taken out.
4. Relative Rank of Plots in Respect to Yield.
The rank of each plot in the decreasing order of
yield was determined for the nine years and is presented
in Table VI.
The average ranks for the nine years, with
those of the years 1935 and 1957, and those of the re­
maining seven years, are shown in Table VII.
5. Composition of the Mature Leaf.
The total potassium and nitrogen content of the
mature leaf of the Three-Year Rotation for the years
1935 to 1939 are presented in Table VIII and Table IX
respectively.
The average for the five years is also
given, with the rank of the plots in decreasing order in
respect to both potassium and nitrogen.
6. Quality of the Tobacco.
Some data on the quality of the tobacco from the
Three-Year Rotation plots are presented in Table X.
These tests were made by commercial experts.
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
-26Table V
Average Yields of the Three-Year Rotation Plots Over Various
Periods of Time,
Plot
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Average
1660
1744
1760
1655
1337
1489
1596
1451
1506
1375
1502
1661
1559
1588
1411
.1551
1785
1906
1185
1466
1592
1775
1622
1608
1567
1765
1629
1812
1380
1650
1765
1933 and 1937
1535
1481
1533
1358
1165
1355
1370
1197
1260
987
1103
1407
1323
1292
1229
1534
1459
1617
1040
1218
1339
1554
1540
1540
1271
1449
1565
1575
1071
1394
1481
Nine-year Average
— (1933 anci
1747
1813
1822
1717
1385
1527
1660
1521
1576
1485
1616
1733
1626
1673
1463
1614
1878
1989
1218
1537
1665
1840
1698
1681
1271
1855
1705
1881
1467
1723
1841
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. F urth er reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
-27Table VI
The relation of plot treatments to total yields of tobacco
on the three-year rotation experiment at Roseville, Pa*
over a nine-ysar period. In descending order*
Plot
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
No* of plot in rank, with respect to annual yield
1932 1933 1934 1935 1935 1937 1938 1939 1940
18
17
22
26
23
8
3
2
24
16
27
4
12
31
1
21
14
11
25
20
30
13
9
6
7
8
15
10
5
29
19
18
22
28
3
17
2
12
21
23
24
25
27
31
16
6
7
1
20
9
13
14
15
26
30
4
5
11
10
19
8
29
31
18
28
17
22
25
2
23
26
21
13
24
1
14
30
20
17
26
12
4
7
5
9
11
10
29
15
6
19
8
3
18
2
22
31
1
4
17
28
7
12
30
26
14
25
27
21
24
23
8
13
16
9
6
11
20
10
29
15
5
19
18
31
28
17
3
2
7
22
30
1
12
4
6
8
26
13
14
27
11
9
16
21
23
24
29
25
20
15
5
10
19
26
28
18
31
22
3
30
20
4
2
17
12
7
13
1
6
37
24
23
14
8
16
21
9
15
25
5
29
11
19
10
12
18
28
1
26
22
11
4
17
3
29
14
27
21
7
24
23
30
13
2
9
31
6
20
25
15
15
10
8
5
19
17
7
3
31
2
9
26
30
16
11
4
18
12
8
1
25
28
14
21
10
6
13
22
15
24
27
20
23
25
5
19
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. F urther reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
26
28
30
2
31
27
24
25
18
23
22
17
29
12
1
4
3.
14
10
21
13
11
7
20
9
5
16
15
8
6
19
-2 3 -
Table VII
Ranks of the Plots in Order of Decreasing Yield for Various
Periods of Time*
Plots Arranged in Order of Their Decreasing Yield®
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
13
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Nine-year Average
Plot
Yield
18
28
17
22
76
31
3
2
12
1
30
4
27
23
24
7
21
14
25
13
16
9
11
6
20
8
15
29
10
5
19
1906
1812
1785
1775
1765
1765
1760
1744
1661
1660
1650
1635
1629
1622
1608
1596
1592
1588
1567
1559
1551
1506
1502
1489
1466
1451
1411
1380
1375
1337
1178
Average
1933 and 1937
Plot Yield
13
28
22
3
2
31
17
26
12
30
7
27
4
6
JL
23
24
21
16
13
14
25
9
15
20
8
5
11
29
19
10
1617
1575
1554
1533
1481
1481
1459
1449
1407
1394
1370
1365
1358
1355
1355
1340
1340
1339
1334
1323
1292
1271
1260
1229
1218
1197
1165
1103
1071
1040
987
Nine-year Average
- (1933 and 1937)
Plot
Yield
18
28
17
26
31
22
3
2
1
12
30
4
27
23
24
14
21
7
25
13
11
16
9
20
6
8
10
29
15
5
19
1989
1881
1878
1855
1841
1840
1822
1813
1747
1733
1723
1717
1705
1698
1681
1673
1665
1660
1653
1626
1616
1614
1576
1537
1527
1521
1485
1467
1463
1385
1218
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
-29Table VIII
Potassium Content of the Mature Leaf of the Tobacco of
the Three-Year Rotation Plots*
Plot
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Ave®
1935
2 #10
2*59
2*46
3*16
2*61
2*30
2*85
2*28
2*62
2*36
1*98
3*05
2*63
2*41
1*91
1*57
2*47
3*04
1*02
2*29
3*54
4*02
3*75
4*31
2*66
4*11
3*79
4*41
1*91
3*46
3 oil
2*80
1936
1*73
2*55
3*36
3*74
3*88
3*16
2*56
3*10
2*60
3*39
2*42
3*52
3*10
3*02
2.81
2*21
2*91
o *30
2*37
2*91
3*53
3*98
3*43
3.78
3.40
4*02
2*98
3*96
2.04
2*37
2 *6o
3*06
1937
2.47
3*21
3*49
4.01
3.91
3.99
2.99
3.83
4.36
4*10
2*72
3*85
3.24
3*18
3*94
2*01
2.49
3.30
2*56
3.28
4.50
4*03
4*20
4.30
3*27
3.78
3.30
4*02
2*05
3.40
4.18
3.49
1938
2*31
2*53
2.78
2.80
2*20
3.35
2.78
2.42
2.47
2.36
1.80
2*58
2*62
1.96
1.83
2.21
3*10
3.69
0.94
2.22
3*47
3.58
3.49
3.56
2.32
4*19
3.94
4.50
1.84
2.64
3.51
2.77
1939
1.39
1.59
2.11
2.74
2.42
2*06
2.15
2*32
2 *01
2*33
2*03
2.77
2*32
2.01
1*86
1.92
2*37
3.57
0.97
1.99
2.45
2.82
2.35
2.57
2.06
2.91
1.90
2.51
1*11
2.29
2.80
2.22
Ave *
2.00
2*49
2*84
3*29
3*00
2.96
2.67
2*79
2.81
2.91
2.19
3*17
2.78
2*52
2.47
1.98
2.67
3.38
1*57
2.54
3.50
3.69
3.44
3.70
2*74
3*80
3*18
3*88
1*79
2.83
3.25
2.87
Rank
28
25
15
8
12
13
21
13
17
14
27
11
19
24
26
29
22
7
31
23
5
4
6
3
20
2
10
1
30
16
9
.
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
Table IX
Total Nitrogen Content of the Mature Leaf of Tobacco of
the Three-Year Rotation Plots,
Plot
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
51
Ave,
1935
3*95
3*72
3*32
3*31
2 .94
3.50
3*77
5.54
3.66
2.72
3.52
3.77
3.44
3.40
2.26
2.97
3.04
3.45
3.46
2.67
2.60
3.02
3.16
3.31
2.61
3.26
3.00
3.65
2.62
2.52
2.93
3.20
1936
3.71
4.41
3.90
3.70
3.13
3.67
3.52
4.11
3.19
3.57
3.32
3.92
3.45
3.83
3.24
3,14
3.65
3.32
2.92
3,16
2.95
3.65
3,34
3.78
3.06
3.28
2.85
3.74
3.86
3.68
4.16
3.52
1937
3,36
3.00
3 ,49
2.84
2.85
2.98
3.21
3 .54
5.26
2,64
3.10
2.54
2.82
2.98
2.50
2.64
2.54
3.06
2.85
2.55
2.14
2.42
2.47
2,67
2.19
2.37
2.36
2.84
2.56
2.32
3.09
2.78
1938
3.32
2.78
2.64
2.76
2.62
2.42
2,83
3 ©0o
3.00
2.49
3.04
3.05
2.61
2.66
2.54
2.72
3.20
3.46
2.97
2.34
2.71
2.78
2.89
2.79
2.53
2.81
2.71
2.80
3.19
2.74
2.81
2.81
1939
3.87
3.75
4.14
4.12
3.78
3.80
o .86
4.00
4.31
3.69
3.96
4.11
3.99
3.88
3.59
4.19
3.90
3.92
3.56
3.76
3.62
3.74
3.87
3.78
3.51
3.72
o .89
3.80
4,05
3.51
3.34
3.84
Ave.
3,64
3.43
3.50
3.35
3,06
3,27
3.44
3.64
3.48
3.02
3.39
3,48
3.26
3.35
2 ©83
3.13
3.27
3.44
3.15
2.90
2.80
3.12
3.15
3.27
2.78
o ,09
2,96
3.37
3.26
2.95
3.27
3.23
Rani
1
8
3
11
24
16
7
2
5
25
9
4
17
12
29
21
13
6
20
28
30
22
19
15
31
23
26
10
18
27
14
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
Table X
The Percentage of the Tobacco from the Various Plot 3 of the
Three-Year Rotation Experiment of Wrapper Grade*
Plot
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
1
2
o
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
15
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
74
75
73
74
71
68
79
75
71
73
7478
75
74
69
75
83
83
66
71
75
80
81
82
78
82
79
82
75
71
76
71
77
75
78
74
69
73
71
70
70
65
72
77
67
77
76
76
83
78
70
75
80
84
84
73
77
75
84
76
82
84
43
56
61
55
68
66
62
62
60
41
50
62
60
58
59
46
47
59
42
56
63
54
54
49
70
46
57
63
36
47
50
74
79
78
80
34
76
72
68
70
66
66
73
63
73
61
63
74
84
47
69
73
80
79
73
68
82
80
85
77
75
77
69
74
73
74
63
64
73
75
70
74
66
70
71
74
65
78
81
85
67
79
74
78
77
81
76
81
78
81
74
81
80
Average
Without 1937
72
76
75
77
69
69
74
72
70
71
70
73
72
72
68
73
79
84
79
72
74
80
80
80
74
81
73
83
76
78
79
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. F urther reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
r
-3 2 -
C® Comparing the Three- and the Four-Year Rotation Plots*
1* In Table XI the yields of corresponding plots from
the Three- and the Four-Year Rotation are compared®
Plots
are compared that received the same fertilizer treatment*
The majority yields of the plots from the Four-Ysar
Rotation over the corresponding one or group from the
Three-Year Experiment are expressed®
These yields are an
average of the 1938 and 1939 crops as the Four-Year
Experiment was started In 1938*
2* A comparison of the potassium and nitrogen content
of the mature tobacco of the same corresponding plots
mentioned above Is shown in Tables XII and XIII respect­
ively®
3® Table XIV shows the differences in quality of
these same plots®
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
-53Tab le XI
A Comparison of the Yields of Corresponding Plots of the
Three- and Four-Year Rotation Experiments* Average
Yields in Pounds per Acre for the Years of
1938, 1939, and 1940*
Plots
Rota­
Treatment
tion Fertilizer Manure
3,13,14,17,31 3-Yr •
10,16,52,58
4-Yr •
6-8-12
6
38,39,82,83
3-Yr*
4-Yr*
8
51,78
A v e • Yield Majority of
in Founds Four-Year Plot
1530
1628
98
3-8-12
1365
1576
211
3-Yr*
4-Yr*
6-0-12
1372
1428
56
9
32,77
3-Yr®
4-Yr®
6-4-12
u
1454
1591
157
19,29
40,79
3-Yr*
4-Yr*
None
»
1315
1249
-66
21
2,9,43,51
3-Yr*
4-Yr®
0-8-12
tr
10 Tons
ir
1471
1643
172
22
o,8,44,50
3-Yr*
4-Yr*
3-8-12
10 Tons
tt
1558
1743
185
tt
23
19,72
3-Yr®
4-Yr*
3—8—8
10 Tons
tt
1477
1661
184
it
26
20,71
3-Yr*
4-Yr*
3-8-16
1726
1759
33
ti
27
41,81
3-Yr®
4-Yr*
«0«M
W9*
10 Tons
ti
1555
1535
-30
28
42,80
3-Yr*
4-Yr®
20 Tons
u
1710
1664
—46
tt
it
ti
BO 0 0
0*0
10 Tons
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. F urther reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
“34Table XII
A Comparison of the Total Nitrogen Content of the Mature
Leaf of Tobacco from Corresponding Plots of the
Three- and Four-Year Rotation Experiments#
r‘—
Plots
RotaTreatment
tlon Fertilizer Manure
3,13,14,17,31 3-Yr©
10,16,52,58
4-Yr©
6—8—12
3-Yr©
4-Yr©
3-8-12
6
38,39,82,83
t!
tt
6-0-12
8
31,78
4-Yr©
9
32,77
3-Yr©
4—Yr ©
19,29
40,79
3-Yr©
4-Yr©
None
21
2,9,43,51
3-Yr©
4-Yr©
0-8-12
22
3,8,44,50
3-Yr#
4-Yr#
3-8-12
23
19,72.
3-Yr©
4-Yr#
3-8-8
26
20,71
3-Yr#
4-Yr#
3-8-16
27
41,81
3-Yr©
4-Yr©
None
28
42,80
3-Yr©
4-Yr.
None
tt
6-4-12
tt
tt
tt
tt
tt
tt
tt
t!
°/i N
MaTjoFxty~ ' o f ~
Four-Year Plot
% N
3 ©32.
3©51
0©19
3 ©11
3©50
0©39
3 ©52
3©96
0.44
3,66
3 ©75
0.09
3 ©70
3 ©85
0*15
10 Tons 3 ©17
n
3 ©43
0#26
10 Tons 3©26
it
3 ©63
0*37
10 Tons 3 ©38
tt
3 ©04
-0*34
10 Tons 3*27
tt
3*26
—0 ©01
10 Tons 3»30
tt
3 ©77
0*47
20 Tons 3©30
tt
3.65
0.35
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
-35Table XIII
A Comparison of the Total Potassium Content of the Mature
Leaf of Tobacco from Corresponding Plots of the
Three- and Four-Year Rotation Experiments®
Plots
RotaTreatment
tion Fertilizer Manure
% K
F.Iaj ority of
Four-Year Plot
K
3,13,14,17,31 3-Yr.
10,16,52,58
4-Yr®
6-8-12
it
2.56
2.52
-0.04
6
38,39,82,83
3-Yr®
4-Yr®
3-8-12
n
2.71
2.95
0«24
8
31,78
3-Yr®
4-Yr®
6-0-12
it
2.37
2.90
0.53
9
32,77
3-Yr ®
4-Yr.
6-4-12
it
2.24
2.45
0.21
19,29
40,79
3-Yr®
4-Yr.
None
it
1.22
1.47
0.25
21
2,9,43,51
3-Yr.
4-Yr.
0-8-12.
n
10 Tons
tt
2.96
3.04
0.08
22
3,8,44,50
3-Yr.
4-Yr.
3—8—12
tt
10 Tons
ti
3.20
5.29
0.09
23
19,72
3-Yr.
4-Yr.
3-8-8
tt
10 Tons
tt
2.92
2.58
—0 *34
26
20,71
3—Yr ®
4-Yr.
3-8-16
ti
10 Tons
ti
3.55
3.85
0.30
27
41,81
3-Yr.
4-Yr.
None
ti
10 Tons
tt
2.92.
2.36
—0 .56
28
42,80
3-Yr.
4-Yr®
None
ti
20 Tons
ti
3.51
2.45
-1.06
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. F urther reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
-36
Table XIV
A Comparison of the Quality of Tobacco from Corresponding Plots
of the Three- and Four-Year Rotation Experiment.
Plots
RotaTreatment
4- ^
TPo
■y>4*-4 1 -4 r* v» T
./To■mi
tion
Fertilizer
Manure
Production of Wrappers
1
1
Q?1Q
At ra, .
1938
1939
Ave®
%
.
Four-Year
M
o ^ /‘W*-? 4- tr
Majority
3,13,14,17,31 3-Yr.
10,16,52,58
4-Yr®
6-8-12
73
83
76
70
75
77
2
6
tt
64
69
70
76
6
8
31,78
3-Yr.
4-Yr®
6-0-12
68
76
75
70
72.
73
1
9
32,77
3-Yr.
4-Yr®
6-4-12
70
82
70
74
70
78
8
19,29
40,79
3-Yr.
4-Yr®
None
62
72
71
50
67
61
—6
21
2,9,43,51
3-Yr.
4-Yr®
0-8-12
10 Tons
73
78
74
74
74
76
22
o,8,44,50
3-Yr®
4-Yr,
3-8-12
10 Tons
80
86
78
70
79
78
25
19,72
3-Yr.
4-Yr®
3-8-8
10 Tons
79
81
77
77
78
79
1
26
20,71
3-Yr e
4-Yr®
3-8-16
10 Tons
82
86
81
80
82
84
2
2,7
None
10 Tons
80
77
78
52
79
65
H
!
r4
3-Yr®
4-Yr®
28
42,80
3-Yr®
4-Yr®
None
2 0 T QU5
83
76
81
66
82
71
-11
CO
76
82
H
3-Yr®
4-Yr.
3-8-12
38,39,82,85
ii
tt
t!
ti
ti
it
ti
tt
n
it
It:
it
tt
1!
ti
n
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
2.
-3 7 -
DISCUSSION OP RESULTS
A. General
When the data of any field experiment is discussed,
there are certain uncontrollable factors that must be
taken into consideration*
The yield and quality of
tobacco from various plots are affected, besides the
fertilizer treatment by (1), climatic factors, especially
rainfall;
(2), the inherent fertility of the soil of the
different plots;
(3), the tobacco plants used; and (4),
plant disease*
1* Rainfall*
The role that moisture plays in plant growth cannot
be overemphasized*
Its tremendous Influence will be
brought out in this paper*
A few of Its more important
functions are as follows:
a* It acts as a soil solution for ions*
b® It reacts with soil components to make elements
available for plant absorption.
c* It takes part in photosynthesis®
d® It regulates the action of many soil bacteria®
B* Three-Year Rotation Experiment,
1. Effects of the Different Fertilizer Treatments*
These effects will first be discussed under several
sub-groupings Into which the various treatments fall*
Yield, chemical composition, and quality will be used to
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
r
»38«
ascertain the differences caused "by the treatments.
a. V/h.en the amount of potassium In the fertilizer
is varied, phosphorus and nitrogen are constant:
Plot 1,
6-8-4; Plot 3, 6-8-8; Plot 3, 6-8-12; Plot 4, 6-8-16.
Under these conditions plot 3 gave the highest
yield.
The nitrogen content of the leaf decreased and the
potassium content increased as the amount of potassium of
the fertilisers was increased . The "best yield and
N:IC ratio was obtained from the 6-8-12 treatment.
b. When the amount of nitrogen in the fertilizer
is varied, the phosphorus and potassium are constant:
Plot 5, 0-8-12; Plot 6, 3-8-12; Plot 3, 6-8-12; Plot 7,
9—8—12.
There was no direct correlation between the
amount of nitrogen in the fertilizer and the amount ab­
sorbed by the plant.
The increased nitrogen caused an
increase in the nitrogen content, the change being greater
between the 0-8-12 and the 3-8-12 treatment than between
the 3-8-12, 6-8-12 and the 9-8-12 treatments.
The recip­
rocal effect of the nitrogen and potassium again occurred.
The 3-8-12 treatment gave the best NsK ratio in this
series.
The best yield was again obtained from the
6-8-12 treatment.
The influence of the various amounts
of nitrogen upon the yield was more marked than that of
the potassium.
c. When the amount of the fertilizer applied is
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
varied:
Plots 11, 12, and 14 received a 6-8-12 fertilizer
at the rate of 500, 1500, and 1000 pounds jjer acre re­
spectively,
Although the application of 1000 pounds
produced the best yield, there was not a significant
difference between all three plots.
The potassium content
of the leaf showed a marked increase as the amount of
fertilizer applied was increased, while the nitrogen
increased only a small amount,
d.
When lime is added, the nitrogen, phosphorus,
and potassium being constant:
Plot 3, 6-8-12; Plot 13,
6-8-12-Lime•
Both the yield and the mineral content was re­
duced by the application of lime®
e® When the method of application and the amount
of the fertilizer is varied:
Plots 16, 17, and 18 were
treated the same as plots 11, 14, and 12 respectively
in c except that the fertilizer was applied in the row
at the time of transplanting.
This method of application
produced the greatest differences in yield of all the
different series of the Three-Year Rotation Experiment,
Also, plot 18 which received 1500 pounds of a 6-8-12
fertilizer produced the highest yield ox tobacco of all
the plots®
The nitrogen content of the leaf was about
the same as that of the leaf resulting from the broadcast
method®
The potassium content showed even greater differ­
ences than when the fertilizer was broadcast.
The 6-8-12
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
r
®*40®"*
treatment of 1500 pounds per acre produced a tobacco with
a fair N:K ratio®
f. When manure is and is not used:
Plots 21, 22,
23, 24, 26, and 27 received in addition to various fertil­
izer treatments, .10 tons of manure per acre®
Plot 28
received 20 tons of manure alone®
Manure definitely has
a place in tobacco fertilization.
Its use increases the
yield markedly and causes a real increase in the potassium
content of the leaf in comparison to the nitrogen®
The
non-manure plots of the experiment (1-18) averaged 1576
pounds per acre for the nine years, and the mature leaf
contained an average of 3.44$ nitrogen and 2*66$ potassium®
The manure plots averaged 1688 pounds of tobacco per acre
which contained an average of 3.25$ nitrogen and 3«60$
potassium.
The use of manure alone as a fertilizer in
10-ton and 20-ton applications showed that the nitrogen
content of the tobacco produced was approximately the
same but that the potassium content increased from 3®18$
to 3.88$.
The yield was also Increased by the larger
application.
These figures show that the use of the
proper kind of manure Is certainly to be recommended®
The use of various commercial fertilizers along with
manure showed that the supplement of 1000 pounds of a
3-8-12 fertilizer produced the best yields.
g. mien alfalfa replaces clover in the rotation:
Plot 29 versus 19; plot 30 versus 25; plot 31 versus 3.
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. F urther reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
-4 1 —
The use of alfalfa instead, of clover in the
rotation produced higher yields.
Plot 30 with alfalfa
instead of clover receiving 1000 pounds of 0-8-12 fertil­
izer produced 1650 pounds per acre*
The average yield of
the plots receiving this treatment with clover in the
rotation was 1431 pounds per acre*
The alfalfa plot 31
receiving a 6-8-12 treatment produced 1761 pounds of
tobacco per acre which was just about the same as that of
the plots following clover*
The alfalfa seems to furnish
more nitrogen than the clover*
The tobacco produced by
the alfalfa plots had a more balanced nitrogen potassium
content *
Prom the results shown concerning the fertilizer
treatments of the Three-Year Rotation, it seems evident
that manure is very beneficial in tobacco growing, hut
there are several points concerning its use that must not
be overlooked.
These will be discussed in detail later,
after the facts resulting from the Four-Year Rotation
Experiment are presented.
It can also be concluded that
a balanced fertilizer should be used for tobacco*
C*
A Comparison of the Three- and Four-Year Rotation
Experiments as to the Yield and Quality of tne Tobacco
Produced
Table XI gives a comparison between plots of the
Three- and Four-Year Rotation Experiments that received
the same fertilizer treatment.
These corresponding plots
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
have received the same treatment except that those of the
Three-Year Rotation have been subjected to a three-year
rotation with tobacco following a legume*
The tobacco on
the four-year rotation plots does not follow a legume*
Of the eleven different treatments cited, the plots from
the four-year rotation experiment show a higher yield in
all but three cases and one of those was the no-treatment
check*
The two plots from which the Three-Year Experiment
shows the higher yield are those receiving manure alone*
These two treatments, also, were the only ones where the
Three-Year Rotation plots showed a higher leaf composition
and quality.
Plots of both rotations receiving 10 tons of
manure and 1000 pounds of a 3-8-16 fertilizer per acre
produced the highest average yield of tobacco.
This
tobacco produced the most wrapper grade cured tobacco with
a good mineral balance of all the treatments for the years
of 1938 and 1939.
It is evident from these facts that the
use of a three-year rotation does not result in any def­
inite benefits for the tobacco grower.
D.
The Role of 1'Titrogen in the Metabolism of the Tobacco
Plant
The yield and quality of the 1933 and 1937 tobacco
were poor, the quality being so low that only a small
fraction of the crop was sold as wrapper-grade.
This was
due to bad attacks of wildfire which forced early harvest
R eproduced with perm ission o f the copyright owner. F urther reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
-4 3 -
both years In order to save a portion of the crop*
The
explanation for these outbreaks is complicated, but the
paramount factor was weather conditions*
Examination of
Table I will show that in 1933 and 1937 the rainfall for
July and August was more than tv/ice the average precipita­
tion for these months during 1932 to 1940*
Not only was
the rainfall very heavy, but it also fell over a period
of just a few days breaking stretches of drouth*
For
example, in 1933 only 1*35 inches of rain fell during the
entire month of June*
This drouth continued with only two
good rains until July 26 when 4*9 Inches fell*
On
August 3, 3*0 inches fell and August continued to be wet,
12*94 inches falling during the month as compared to a
nine-year average of 5*43 inches*
These abnormal weather conditions affect the nitrogen
metabolism of the plant*
It is a well established fact
that the nitrogen nutrition of a plant has some relation
to disease resistance*
Nitrogen should be supplied to a
plant in the correct form for assimilation in the appro­
priate amount at the right time during the life-cycle if
a healthy specimen is to result*
In the case of tobacco
this means that the source of the nitrogen should be
regulated so that a proper amount is available throughout
the growing period, but so there will be a relatively small
quantity available during the ripening period.
Now, one
of the chief problems facing the tobacco grower of Lancaster
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. F urth er reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
r
-1 4 -
County Is the maintaining a high enough level of potassium
in the leaf.
The use of manure is a means of doing this
as is shown by the data presented in this thesis*
Under
normal conditions, the manure begins to be decomposed at
once by the soil microorganisms releasing ammonia*
The
ammonia may be changed to the nitrate form by other soil
microorganisms or may be absorbed by the plant.
Plants
can use some ammonia in the early stages of growth as
shown by the work of several men®
But, if conditions
are such that decomposition doesn't occur rapidly enough
as 7/hen a drouth occurs, a latent supply of nitrogen is
carried over into the ripening period of the tobacco
plant.
Then, at this time, if the amount of moisture
becomes greater, decomposition of the manure residue is
increased, releasing large amounts of ammonia.
This is
changed to the nitrate form and causes a secondary growth
period*
If the soil becomes water-logged by the breaking
of the drouth by large amounts.of rain, the ammonia isn't
changed to the nitrate and is absorbed by the plant in
large amounts which is toxic during the ripening period,
especially if the plant is low in carbohydrate content.
This Is the case with the cigar-Ieaf tobacco plant*
The
result of the reactions just described is a weakened abnormal
plant which is easily attacked by disease.
This explana­
tion is substantiated by the following data from Table X;
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. F urther reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
Production of Wrappers
Plots
1-18
21-28
Manure
T/Acre
Average Percent for
1955-1956-1958-1939
Average Percent
for 1937
None
73
62
10
79
55
There v/as abnormal rainfall in the year 1937 and the crop
had to be harvested early to save it from total loss*
The data show that the manure plots were harder hit by
disease in 1937 than the non-manure plots.
Therefore,
it is recommended that well-rotted manure be used with a
supplement of commercial fertilizer for the best results
under all kinds of weather conditions.
It should not be
possible for large amounts of nitrogen to become avail­
able during the ripening period.
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. F urther reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
[
-46SUMvIARY
The nine years of following a three-year rotation
system of tobacco growing with wheat, clover, and tobacco
grown In that order seem to have produced the following
facts concerning the fertilisation of tobacco,
1, The best form of nitrogen utilized by the plant
Is the nitrate,
2, The potassium absorption by the plant varies
directly with the amounts applied In the fertilizer,
3, Fifteen hundred pounds of a 6-8-12 fertilizer
applied in the row gave the best yields with good quality.
However, the yield from this treatment was below that of
the manure plots in dry weather,
A combination of 10 tons
of manure and 1000 pounds of a 3-8-12 fertilizer was satis­
factory,
4, The three-year rotation did not seem to produce
any better yields or quality of tobacco than the ordinary
treatments with which it was compared®
5, Well-rotted manure supplemented by commercial
fertilizer Is to be recommended for use as a tobacco
fertilizer,
5, Regulation of the nitrogen nutrition through soil
management seems to be a help in controlling disease
during seasons of abnormal weather such as drouth followed
by excess rainfall.
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. F urth er reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
ACKN O W LEDG M ENT
The author wishes at this time to express his
sincere thanks to Dr. D. E. Haley for his help and
guidance in the experimental work and the writing of
this thesis; to those at the Tobacco Substation at
Lancaster who rendered valuable aide
R eproduced with perm ission o f the copyright owner. F urther reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1,
Alten, P., Goese, C-., and Fisher, H*
1957*
Carbon Dioxide Assimilation and Nitrogen
Economy With Increasing Supply of Potash*
E m a h r , Planze 33: 21 (C.A. 31-1347)®
2o
Ames, J. W.
1931*
Factors Affecting Nitrates on Soils®
Ohio Agr® Expt. Sta® Bi-Bull* 153*
3®
Anderson, P. J., Swanback, T. R . , and Street,
1929*
0. E.
Use of Manure as a Supplement to Commercial
Fertilizer*
Conn* Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull* 311*
4.
Anderson, P. J., Swanback, T. R., and Street,
1932®
0. E.
Potash Requirements of the Tobacco Crop*
Conn. Agr* Expt. Sta. Bull* 334®
5*
Anderson, P. J., Swanback, T. R*, and Street, 0. E.
1932.
Tobacco Substation at Windsor (Conn.).
Report
for 1931®
Conn® Agr* Expt. Sta. Bull. 335.
6®
Anderson, P. J., Swanback, T. h.» and Street-, u. .a.
1936®
Fertilizer Experiments With Tobacco With Single
Sources of Nitrogen*
Conn. Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull* 386®
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. F urther reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
7.
Anderson, P. J., Swanback, T. R., and Street, 0. E.
1938,
Soybean Meal as a Tobacco Fertilizer.
Conn, Agr, Expt. Sta. Bull, 410«
8e
Anderson, P. J., Svranback, T. R., and Street, 0. E.
1938,
Quantity of Fertilizer Required for an Acre
of Tobacco®
Conn, Agr, Expt, Sta, Bull, 410,
9,
Baily, S. M. and Anderson, P, J.
1950,
Chemical Composition of a Tobacco Crop That
Burns Poorly with One that Burns Well*
Conn, Agr, Expt, Sta. Bull, 311,
10,
Barbier, G,
1936,
Mineral nutrition of the Plant as a Function
of the Chemical Composition of Its Medium,
Ann, Agron, (U.S.) 6: 568,
11.
Barnette, R. M . , Jones, H. V/., and Hester, J. B.
1938,
Lysimeter Studies with the Decomposition of
Summer Cover Crops,
12*
Florida Agr. Expt. Sta, Bull.
327,
Beaumont, A. B. and Snell, M.
E.
1933,
Effect of Certain Cropping Systems on the Yield
and Quality of Havana Tobacco.
Mass, Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull. 297*
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
-SOIS*
Beavens, E. A. and. James, L. H.
1934*
The microbial Decomposition of Successive
Cuttings of Alfalfa H a y Under Aerobic Conditions*
J* Agr* Research 48: 1121*
14®
Behr, George
1939.
The Influence of Stable Manure on Intermed­
iate Layers of Soil During the Rotting®
J. Landw® 86: 199 (C.A. 33: 4725).
15®
Breazeale, J. P.
1928.
The Effect of One Element of Plant Pood Upon
the Absorption by Plants of Another Element*
Ariz* Agr. Expt. Sta. Tech. Bull* 19*
16*
Briscoe, C. E. and Earned, II*
1929.
Bacterial Effects of C-reen Manure®
Miss. Agr* Expt. Sta. Tech. Bull® 17®
17®
Brov/n, P. E. and Mendell, P. H.
1928.
Some Biological Effects of Certain nitrogen
Fertilizers.
Proc. Iowa Acad* Sci® 35*
18®
Carr, J. M.
1936.
Tobacco Fertilizers.
Ga* Coastal Plain Expt. Sta. Bull. 16th Ann. Re­
port 26*
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
-5119.
Collander, Runar
1937.
Cation Selection by Higher Plants.
Ber. deut. botan. Ges. 55 (C.A. 31: 3526).
20.
Collison, R. C.
1931.
Some Effects of Legumes In Relation to
Economical Crop Production®
N. Y. Agr® Expt. Sta. Bull. 596.
21®
Collison, R. C. and Mensching, J. E.
1930®
Nitrogen and Water Relations of Crops In
Legume and Non-Legume Rotations®
N. Y. Agr. Expt. Sta. Tech® Bull® 166®
22®
Collison, R. C.,Beatie,
1933.
II. G., and Harlass,
Mineral and Water Relations and
J. D.
Final Nitro­
gen Balance in Legume and Non-Legume Rotation®
N. Y. Agr® Expt® Sta. Tech.. Bull® 212.
23®
Coolhaas, C.
1931®
Investigations on Fine-holding Capacity of
Tobacco Leaf.
Proefsta. Vorstenland® Tabak. Mededeel No. 66, 1-22
(C.A® 25, 2811).
24.
Eckstein, Oscar
1939.
Effect of Potash Fertilizing on the Pro­
duction of Organic Matter.
Plant Physiol. 14 y 113.
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
25«
Eisenmenger, Walter S©
1958*
Some Correlation In Plant-tissue Composition,
Decomposition Products and Effects Upon Crop Rota­
tion With Tobacco©
J. Agr. Research 56: 309®
26©
Emmert, E. M. and Ball, E. K.
1933©
Effect of Soil Moisture on the Availability
of Nitrate, Phosphate, and Potassium to the Tomato
Plant•
Soil Sci© 3 5 r 295©
27.
Finnell, E. H.
1933©
Raw Organic Matter Accumulations Under Various
Systems of Culture®
Okla. Agr. Expt® Sta. Bull© 216®
28.
Prear, V/©
1888.
Pennsylvania Tobacco Soils®
Pa® Agr. Expt® Sta© Bull. 7*
29.
Frear, W®
1916.
Tobacco Experiments 1915-16.
Pa. Agr. Expt. Sta. Annual Report©
30.
Frear, W. and Hibshman
1921®
Production of Cigar-leaf Tobacco in Pennsyl­
vania .
U. S. Dept. Agr. Farmers* Bull. 416®
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. F urther reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
-5 3 -
31*
Puller, James
1933*
Influence of Legume Versus Non-Legume Crops
on the Microbiological Activities in the Soil*
Soil Sci* 35: 485*
32*
Garner, \7. \hl»
1907*
Relation of the Composition of the Leaf to
the Burning Qualities of Tobacco*
U. S. Dept* Agr. Bur. Plant Ind. Bull. 105®
33*
Garner, YJ. V».
1934®
Nitrogen Nutrition of Tobacco*
XT. S. D. A. Tech. Bull® 414®
34.
Gartner, Karoly
1938.
Evaluation of Tobacco on the Basis of Its
Chemical Composition®
Magyar Chem. Paly’o rat® 45:. 19 (C.A. 33: 7485)®
35®
Garola, J*
1934.
Influence of Fertilisers on Plant Nutrition*
Ann® Agr on. 4:. 480®
36®
Gassner, G. and Goeze, G®
1934.
Importance of the Potassium-Nitrogen Ratio
in the Soil for Assimilation, Chlorophyll Content,
and Transpiration of Young Cereal Plants.
Z. Pflanzenernahr 36A: 61 (C.A. 29: 1853)®
w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. F urther reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
-5 4 -
37 e
Haedden, Wm. P®
1930®
Effects of Clover and Alfalfa In Rotation®
Colo® Agr® Expt® Sta. Bull® 363®
38.
Hale, G. A.
193G®
Winter Legume-green Manure Versus Sodium
Hitrate for Cotton®
J. Am® Soc. Agron® 88: 156®
39®
Haley, D. E®
1929.
The Chemical Approach to the Study of Problems
of Tobacco Fertilization.
J. Am. Soc. Agron® 21: 114®
40® Haley, D. E. and Olsen, Otto
1929.
Relation of Potassium to Iron in the Combustion
of Cigar-leaf Tobacco®
Science 70: 17®
41.
Haley, D. E®, Longnecker, -J. B®, and Olsen, Otto
1931®
Composition and Quality of Pennsylvania
Cigar-leaf Tobacco as Related to Fertilizer Treatment,
Plant Physiology 6: 177®
42®
Hoffer, G. N.
1939.
Potash in Plant Metabolism.
Ind® Eng. Chem® 30: 885.
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
-5 5 -
43*
Hoffmann, Ph.
1933.
Potash Fertilization of Tobacco.
Srnahr Pflanze 29: 45.
44.
Holtz, H. F. and Yardecaveye, S. C.
1938.
Organic Residues and Nitrogen Fertilizers
in Relation to the Productivity and Humus Content
of Palouse Silt Loam.
Soil Sci. 45: 143.
45.
Jones, D. H. and Garrand, E. H.
1930.
Early Versus Late Plowing of Sweet Clover
for Green Manure.
Sci. Agr. 10:. 419.
46.
Kirste, A.
1932.
Ratio of Nitrogen, Phosphoric Acid, and
Potash Required b y Cultivated Plants in Relation to
the Ratio in Fertilizers.
Fortschr. Landw. 7: 558.
47.
Lagatu, Henni and Mareme, Louis
1935.
Variations on the Physiological Ratios and
Their Correlation With the Wildfire Disease in the
Tobacco Leaf.
Compt. rend. 201: 374.
R eproduced with perm ission o f the copyright owner. F urther reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
1-3®
Lockett, T® L.
1937®
Microbiological Aspects of Decomposition of
Glover and Rye Plants at Different Growth Stages®
Soil Sci® 44: 425®
49®
Lockett, T. L®
1938®
Nitrogen and Phosphorus Changes in the Decom­
position of Rye and Clover at Different Stages of
Growth®
Soil Sci® 45: 13®
50®
Lohnis, F®
1926®
Effect of Growing Legumes Upon Succeeding
Crops «
Soil Sci® 22: 355®
51®
Lowig, E®
1935®
Influence of Anions of Potash Salts, Silica,
and Nitrogen on Mildew Resistance of Grains and
Forage®
Landw® Jahub, 81: 273®
52®
Lyon, T« L® and Bizzell, J. A«
1933®
Nitrogen Accumulation in Soil as Influenced
by the Cropping System®
J. Am, Soc s Agron® 25: 266*
R eproduced with perm ission o f the copyright owner. F urther reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
-5 7 -
53®
Lyon, T. L.
1929®
Legumes as a Source of Nitrogen in Crop
Rotations 0
Cornell Agr. Expt* Sta. Bull. 500*
54.
Lyon, T. L.
1936®
Residual Effects of Some Leguminous Crops.
Cornell (N.Y.) Agr. Expt* Sta. Bull* 545®
55®
Maclntire, W. H. and Sanders, K. B.
1930.
The Fixation of the Potash of a Green Manure
"by Liming Materials®
Soil Sci. 29: 109®
56.
Mack, W. B* and Tuttle, A. P.
1932.
Relation Among Fertilizer Treatment, Soil
Moisture, Organic Matter, and Yield of Vegetable
Crops®
J. Am. Soc* Agron. 24: 182.
57®
Martin, T. L.
1927.
Decomposition Studies of Alfalfa and Sweet
Clover Roots and Straw®
Soil Sci. 24:; 309.
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
-5 8 -
58*
Martin, T. L*
1930*
The Effect of Alfalfa and Sweet Clover Roots
and Tops on Carbon Dioxide Evolution and Accumulation
of Nitrates in the Soil*
Soil Sci* 29: 363*
59*
Martin, T* L*
1933*
Influence of Chemical Composition of Organic
Matter on Rate of Decomposition*
J* Am. Soc. Agron* 25: 341*
60®
McPhee, K. G., Nelson, N. T., and Rahnke, G. N.
1939.
Potassium Studies on Ontario Flue-cured
Tobacco Soils®
Sci* Agr. 19: 304®
61*
Metsger, W. H*
1934.
Distribution of Fertilizer Residues In the
Soil After Fourteen Years of a Fertilizer Experiment
With Alfalfa*
J. Am. Soc. Agron. 26: 620.
62®
Middleburg, II. A.
1939.
Nitrogen Balance and Nitrogen Fertilization
of Tobacco*
Mededeel. Proefsta. V. Tobolc No* 85 (C.A. 38: 5972)*
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. F urth er reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
-5963•
Morgan, M. P. and Street, 0. E.
1938,
Role of Cover Crops in the Maintenance of
the Fertility of Tobacco Soils,
Conn, Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull, 410.
64,
Mosolov, I. V.
1936.
Influence of Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and
Potassium on the Formation of Protein, Fat, and
Carbohydrates in Soybeans.
Chemisation Socialistic Agr. (U.S.S.R.) No, 9: 91
(C.A. 31, 6796 (1937)).
65®
Moss, E. G.
1933.
Fertilizer and Lime Requirements for Tobacco
Grown in Rotation With Oats, Soybeans, and Rye,
N. Car. Agr. Expt. Sta. 46th Ann. Rept. 21.
66.
Naftel, James A.
1931.
The Absorption of Ammonium and Nitrate
Nitrogen b y Various Plants at Different Stages of
Growth.
J. Am. Soc. Agron. 23: 142.
67.
Nehring, K.
1937,
Influence of Soil Reaction on the Intake of
Various Nutrients.
Z. Pflanzenernahr, Dungung Bodenk 29A: 320.
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
-6063©
Nightingale, G. T., Schermerhorn, L. G., and
Robhins, W. R.
1930*
Some Effects of Potassium. Deficiency on the
Nitrogenous and Carbohydrate Constituents of Plants.
N. J. Agr* Expt. Sta. Bull© 499©
69©
Olsen, Otto
1923®
Tobacco Seed Beds®
Pa® Agr* Expt® Sta. Leaflet 17®
70®
Olsen, Otto
1923©
Results of Tobacco Experiments in Pennsylvania
1912-22®
Pa® Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull® 179.
71®
Olsen, Otto
1929©
Cigar Tobacco Production in Pennsylvania©
U. S. Dept. Agr. Farmers* Bull.
72®
Olsen, Otto and Haley, D.
1930®
1580.
E.
Results of Tobacco Experiments in Pennsylvania
1922-27©
Pa® Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull. 240®
73.
Osugi, S. and Acki, M®
1933. Influence of Nitrogen,Phosphorus, Potassium,
and Calcium on Decomposition of Organic Matter.
J. Sci. Soil Manure 4®
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
-61.
74®
Pandalae, X® M.
1956.
Nitrification In the Presence of Organic
Matter®
Science 84: 440,* 9
75®
Phillips, Max, •
1935•
and James, L. H®
Microbial Decomposition of the Constituents
of Alfalfa Hay®
J® Bact® 29: 83®
76®
Romashkevlch, J. F®
1930®
Phosphoric Acid and Potash from Manure Under
Various Conditions of Storing the Manure®
Udobrenie I Unozhai 2: 769 (C.A® 25s 3758)®
77»
Sanborn, J. R.
1927®
Essential Food Substances in Soil®
J® Bact® 13: 113®
78®
Shedd, 0. M.
1930®
The Potassium, Chlorine, and Sulfate Contents
of Kentucky Tobacco as Related to Grade®
Ky. Agr, Expt® Sta® Research Bull® 308®
79.
Sievens, F® J.
1930,
Significance of Nitrogen in Soil Organic
Matter Relationships®
J, Am, Soc. Agron® 22: 10®
R eproduced with perm ission o f the copyright owner. F urther reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
80*
Tenny, P. G» and Waksinan, S. A.
1929*
Composition of Natural Organic Materials and
Their Decomposition in the Soil©
Soil Sci* 28:: 55*
81®
Thomas, J. J., Haley, D. S., and Olsen, Otto
1936®
Absorption of Plant Nutrients in Relation to
the Production of Pa* Cigar-leaf Tobacco.
Pa* Agr. Expt, Sta, Bull* 331.
82®
Thomas, R. P.
1930.
Relation of Nitrate Nitrogen and Nitrifica­
tion to the Growth of Tobacco Following Timothy.
Univ. V/is. Agr. Expt* Sta* Research Bull. 105.
83.
Turchin, Th« V*
1934.
Influence of Potash Upon the Nitrogen and
Carbohydrate Changes in Plants.
Z. Pflanzenernahr Dungung Bodenk 35A: 343
(C.A. 29: 1566)«
84.
Waksman, S. A. and Tenny, F. G.
1927.
The Composition of Natural Organic Materials
and Their Decomposition In the Soil.
Soil Sci. 24: 275.
perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
85®
Walesman, S. A. and Tenney, P. G.
1928®
Composition of Natural Organic Materials and
Their Decomposition in the Soil*
III® The Influence
of the Nature of the Plant Upon the Rapidity of Its
Decomposition®
Soil Sci® 26: 155®
86®
Wall, rJ® E®
1939®
Role of Potassium In Plants®
I® Effect of
Varying Amounts of Potassium on Nitrogenous, Carbo­
hydrate, and Mineral Metabolism in the Tomato Plant®
Soil Sci® 47: 143®
87®
Wad, Y. D® and Ghosh, S®
1938®
Availability of Nitrogen Under Varying
Moisture Conditions In the Soil®
Proc® Soc® Biol. Chemists, India 3, 1-12 (1938)
(C.A® 32, 5127 (1938))®
R eproduced w ith perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w itho ut perm ission.
Документ
Категория
Без категории
Просмотров
0
Размер файла
2 389 Кб
Теги
sdewsdweddes
1/--страниц
Пожаловаться на содержимое документа