THE EFFEC'? OF FERTEUZERS iNQ‘LUDiNG $EVERAL MINOR ELEMENTS ON TEE GROWTH {I}? .ALFALFA ON FOUR {QRC‘BLEM SANDY SOILS Thesis 5m i‘i'w gimme 5% M. 5. MiCHEGAN STATE COLLEGE Rwy 33 398‘ EFOflSQ’fl 1949‘ 1.1:th Q'I .. This is to certilg that the It thesis entitled l l "The Effect of FertiFizere - . vi Including deversl Minor Elements : . r , n l on the Growth of Alfalfa on Four Problem Canny coils" 'i presented hg l - 3 Roy L. Bronson l has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for M. b. . Soil Science __degree in _ __ - . . . .. _ Iron-1-10. ‘D'Iu—u q “nu-wa- -. r-f-unr Us, [___ Bang Major professor Inne_, ,M&x_19,_1343”_ - ‘ l-A'I 0-- l‘ .u" THE EFFECT OF FERTILIZERS INCLUDING SEVERAL MINOR.ELEMENTS ON THE GROWTH OF ALFALFA ON FOUR.PROBLEM SANDY SOILS by ROY DE BOLT BRONSON A THESIS Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Soil Science 1949 {fit-131$ ACKNOWLEDGEMENT To Dr. R. L. Cook for his continued friendly counsel and encouragement throughout the course of this study, to Dr. L. M. Turk for suggestions and proof of the manuscript, and to all the others of the Soil Science Department whose cooperation made this work possible, I wish to express my sincere appreciation and gratitude. ESpecially am I in- debted to my wife, Bertie, for her assistance and inspiration. 316917 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION REVIEW OF LITERATURE HISTORY OF SOILS STUDIED EXPERIMENTAL Plan of Study Soil descriptions Sampling and preparation of soils Soil treatments A Greenhouse technique OBSERVATIONS DURING GROWTH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION SUML‘IARY AND CONCLUSIONS LITERATURE CITED APPENDIX Plates Figures Tables Page 10 12 13 15 18 21 26 35 41 45 INTRODUCTION Factors contributing to the culture of vigorous and productive stands of alfalfa have engaged the attention of crOp specialists for a number of years. Great effort has been directed to improvement of yield and quality, to insect and disease resistance, and to varietal adaptation to varying climatic conditions. Realization of the value of alfalfa as a productive, soil-conserving crap and the recog- nition of the importance of maintaining a large percentage of farm acreage in sod-forming crops have lead to its wide- spread use in crop rotations. A large portion of the agricultural land of Michigan is of a nature which supports healthy and productive stands of winter-hardy alfalfa without supplemental irriga- tion. Large centers of population in the central and southern parts support a thriving dairy industry. As a result, alfalfa has come to he one of the more important agricultural crops of the state. Parts of the upper peninsula, and much of the northern half of the lower peninsula of Michigan, including some areas farther south along the shores of Lake Michigan, are characterized by considerable areas of light-textured soils which originally supported fine stands of coniferous and deciduous forest. Nearly all of this land was depleted of its timber reserve during the early eXploitive days of the lumber barons, and most of the soils are unsuited to the type of general agricultural enterprise which is common to the outlying areas of the state. However, some of the adjoin- ing areas of slightly heavier texture and of greater mois- ture retaining ability are able to produce good yields of such crOps as potatoes, small grains, and hay through the use of generous amounts of fertilizers, manure, and liming materials. In these instances, the excellent, sometimes excessive, internal drainage and the open nature of the soil make the maintenance of organic matter difficult, if not impossible, without the aid of a thrifty, nitrogen~ fixing legume. These are the very areas in which the farm Operators and owners have experienced great difficulty in establishing and maintaining productive stands of alfalfa or alfalfa-grass mixtures. The greenhouse investigations which are reported in this paper were undertaken as a means of gaining some indication of a limiting nutrient element or elements which could be supplied to enable thefarmers in these problem areas to use alfalfa effectively in their rotations. REVIEW OF LITERATURE The nature of this problem is rather general, and the literature which may logically pertain to the sub- ject matter is so voluminous as to preclude the practica- bility of a comprehensive review. No attempt is made to in- clude all such work on minor or major elements, but rather to highlight the more fundamental contributions by previous workers, and to at least mention some of the more recent works which may have a direct bearing on the nature of this eXperiment. If there is one point of agreement on the nutri- tional requirements of alfalfa, it is that this legume needs frequent medium to heavy applications of potash (23). Owens (34) states that nutrient deficiencies due to lack of phOSphates are possibly more widespread than those due to lack of any other essential element. The agreement among agronomists as to the use of potassium and phosphorus fertilizers is relatively widespread, and with modification for the particular locality, the same major nutrients are used in growing alfalfa across the United States. . The fact that these two nutrients are required in rather large amounts has been well established, but the fact of the relationship of some of the minor or micro- elements to the phOSphorus and potassium nutrition of alfalfa in particular, and to the nutrition of plants in general is less well established. Truog and others (40) suggest that magnesium functions as a carrier of phosphorus and that there is a positive correlation between the amount of available mag- nesium and the efficiency of phosphate fertilizers. Lucas and Scarseth (28) found a reciprocal relationship between . potassium, calcium, and magnesium in the plant which may be influenced by the relationship of these elements in the soil. Excess potassium in the soil may increase the 4 potassium content of the plants, but decrease the content of magnesium and calcium. Overliming may decrease the content of potassium and magnesium in the plant. This is in agreement with work by Bear (4) which showed that the total cationpequivalent of alfalfa plants remained constant for a given crop, and that an increase in one cation was made at the expense of those others pre- sent. Wallace and others (44) lend credence to the work of Bear in suggesting that calcium, magnesium, potassium, and possibly other nutrient elements have at least two functions, one specific and the other general. One cation may be replaced to a degree by one or more others, yet a certain minimum amount of each essential nutrient cation must be present for normal growth. Jamison (24) investigated the relationship of potassium and magnesium in several soils. Hunter (23) found that variations in the calcium-magnesium ratio of the soil affected the composition of the alfalfa but not the yield. Other workers have cited the relationship of calcium to boron; of iron-manganese redox systems and cal- cium in relation to iron chlorosis (9). Henderson (22) studied the interrelationship of manganese and boron. magnesium is essential to plant growth. It is a part of the chlorophyll molecule. Its essential nature has been known since the early work of Wilstatter in 1906, but the fact that some soils were deficient in magnesium was not brought out until Garner and others (18) described sand drown of tobacco in 1922. Chlorosis of cotton due to magnesium deficiency was reported by Garner (18) and by COOper (15). manganese is shown to be essential to the growth of plants and is associated with the oxidation-reduction systems within the plant, often in relationship with iron, even though its specific functions within the plant are not well established. Early reports by Maze (29) and McHargue (30) pointed out chlorosis due to manganese deficiency. Later, manganese deficiency in various horticultural and field crOps was noted and described by other investigators (10, 19, 31, 38). Olsen (33) brought out the fact that the total quantity of manganese in the soil does not usually indicate the nutrient status of the plants in relation to that element, but that the availability of manganese is rather more directly related to the soil reaction and the reducing ability of the soil. Iggp is directly related to the functiOn of chlor- Ophyll even though it has not been shown to be a part of the chlorophyll molecule. It was perhaps the earliest of the nutrient elements to bereported lacking and the first of the secondary elements to be recognized as essential to plants growing under field conditions. Iron chlorosis of pineapples in Hawaii (25, 26) is reportedly due to an iron deficiency induced by excess manganese. Under other condi- tions, the chlorosis due to iron deficiency may be the re- sult of overliming (21). work by Chandler and Scarseth (ll) 6 with legumes on alkaline clay soils showed that additions phosphates caused no chlorosis of alfalfa, but that the iron content of the leaves was reduced. The availability of iron in the soil is governed to a large extent by the soil reaction and by the reducing ability of the soil. ggggp was originally reported as an essential element by Agulhon (l) in 1910. Later, warington (45) showed the effect of boron on the broad bean. Boron de— ficiency has since been shown to be the cause of such nutri- tional diseases as cracked stem of celery (35), heart rot of sugar beets (8), internal cork of apples (3), and inter- nal browning of cauliflower (l6). Robbins (36) points out the essentiality of boron in the root environment. Rogers (37) related the boron requirement of alfalfa to calcium supply in the soil and also observed that symptoms of boron deficiemy have been seen in alfalfa before any reduction in yield of hay occurs. Berger and Truog (5) discuss the relationship of boron availability to organic matter content and active calcium of the soil, and to the soil texture. Cook (13) reported boron deficiency symptoms in alfalfa on soils where sugar beets had previously suffered from heart rot. Copper apparently occurs in most normal agricul- tural soils in sufficient quantity for normal plant growth. As a result, easily-recognized copper deficiency symptoms do not generally occur except in regions of Florida, some locations on the Atlantic coastal plain, and on certain 7 muck and peat soils (20). Copper compounds do function in plant nutrition. thkenhirn (32) found that copper in- creased growth of onions, sweet clover, and potatoes on peat. Anderssen (2) found that a chlorosis which occurred on sandy, well-drained soils in South.Africa was remedied by application of c0pper compounds, but not by application of potassium, magnesium, manganese, sulfur, or iron. Knott (27) also found that copper improved color and thickness of scales of onions. Floyd (17) described die—back of citrus in Florida as caused by cepper deficiency. HISTORY OF SOILS STUDIED The farms from which the soils to be investigated were taken, were chosen from a large number which have been cooperating with the soils program of Michigan State College. Field eXperiments and demonstration plots on these particular farms had failed to show consistent response to management and soil amendment. figmet loamy sand'was selected from the Clifford Shantz farm near Fairview in Oscoda County. In this case, the seedings of alfalfa were successful insofar as the es- tablishment of the young plants was concerned. The stand which resulted was uniform, but the crowns of alfalfa were relatively sparser than is acceptable for Michigan. Field experiments on this farm using phosphate and potash, alone and in combination, and with magnesium or borax added, showed that neither potash or phosphate alone gave appreciable increase, but that phosphate and potash together showed response wherever applied, but es- pecially where magnesium was supplied as well. Borax added to potash and phOSphate showed a slight decrease in hay yield compared to phosphate and potash alone. gggylipg loamy sand was supplied by the martin ~ Goodroe farm near Sterling in Arenac County. On this soil type, poor stands were obtained upon seeding and, after established, failed to show vigorous growth or productive yields. This soil suffered from an acid condition which was remedied after the field plots were established. Con- sequently, the soil for the greenhouse study had the bene- fit of this liming treatment. - Data from the field eXperiments, using the same treatments as with the Shanta farm, showed marked response to phosphate and potash together and with magnesium added. Borax with the phosphate and potash resulted in consider- ably lower yields than the control plot. The allendale loamy sand and the Allendale ggpgy lggg came from the P. J. Rood farm near Covert in van Buren County. In the period of eighteen years preceding this ex- periment, only once was a successful seeding made. In every case, high germination, tested and inoculated seed was sown. The tepography is slightly rolling with suffic- ient slepe to provide adequatesurface drainage for alfalfa. A favorable soil reaction varying from pH 6.3 to pH. 6.5 has been established by liming. The problem in this case is that of establish- ment of the seeding. .At one time, rough experimental strips were laid out by the owner using combinations of potash and phosphate fertilizers in an attempt to discover a soil amendment which would give a satisfactory seeding. In no case did the fertilizer benefit the seeding. EXPERIMENTAL LLQEELQI The soils studied were taken from the problem areas described in the preceding section. The soils were prepared and potted for a study of the response of alfalfa to various fertilizer treatments under greenhouse conditions. Various combinations of nitrogen, phOSphorus, and potassium were compared. In addition, several combinations of minor elements including magnesium, manganese, iron, boron, and copper were used as a supplement to the basic phOSphate and potash fertilizer which is currently consider- ed most beneficial for growth of alfalfa on the more produc- tive soil types in Michigan. Various physical and chemical characteristics of the chosen soils were determined and their relationship to the growth of the alfalfa observed. Results of this experiment were recorded as obser- vations on the growth, deficiency symptoms, and yield data of the plant top growth. lO §2il.daaazipiisaa Emmet (41, 43). The area of sampling lies on a gravelly phase of Emmet loamy sand. Under cultivation, the original three immediate surface layers are combined to form a light-brown loamy sand, most of which is medium or fine in texture. Beneath the plow layer, lies a layer of dark-brown or dull-yellow sand grading into the parent glacial sandy drift. The soil is low in fertility, as compared to clay soils, but apparently has a little higher content of available magnesium and calcium than other sands of the pinelands, and possibly slightly more moisture owing to the strong develOpment of the brown sub-surface layer. In most places the soil reaction is acid, but in some cases it is neutral or slightly alkaline in one or more layers. The surface relief of the land is that of a‘ plateau of smooth, long, broad, sweeping slopes with local- ly level to chOppy and broken areas. Owing to the texture and structure of the soil and underlying drift, and to the generally leping surface, the land is well drained and sometimes dry. The water table lies at great depth in most cases. The soil used in the experiment showed a pH of, 6.7 and an organic matter content of 2.0%. See Table l. Grayling (42, 43). Under cultivation this soil is grayish or very light brown in the plow layer underlain by a dull ll yellowish loamy sand which becomes lighter in color at a depth of 20 to 30 inches and grades downward to a substra- tum of coarser sand, or mixed sand and fine gravel. This series is distinguished by its loose sandy texture and pervious nature. The average moisture content is low and the fertility is correSpondingly low. The land is nearly level, but it is well drained or even dry due to its open nature. Grayling sand has little agricultural value and though there are a few small farms on this land, most cul- tivation attempts have been unsuccessful. Liberal use of lime, fertilizer, and manure have resulted in fair yields of some creps including alfalfa, sweet clover, and potatoes. Acid reactions are obtained to a depth of two to three feet, but liming of this particular soil has brought the pH to 6.1. ‘The organic content is relatively low, falling at 1.4%. See Table l. Allendale (43, 46). The surface layer consists of a yellowish fine sandy loam to loamy sand of varying depths depending on location. Below, there appears a mottled gray, yellowish, and brown sandy loam to clay which passes rather abruptly into a pale-gray and rusty brown mottled clay. In these particular areas of sampling, the depth of the sandy overlay which is considered typical of the» Allendale series is shallow and of limited distribution. As a result, the soil is mapped as the heavier Napanee, but 12 the presence of the sandy surface layer carries the tex- tural classification into the range of sandy loam and loamy sand in these two cases. These soils occur on level to gently undulating or rolling plains, and the drainage is variable according to topographic location. Although the surface or plow layer is of light texture, the presence of the underlying, heavy clay layer prevents excessive percolation. Allendale is considered to be productive and well adapted to the culture of both small and tree fruits and, in some cases, to general farming. A mechanical analyses of these soils show one to be a sandy loam and the other a loamy sand, both having a pH of 6.4. The sandy loam has 2.5% organic matter and the loamy sand has 1.8% organic matter, as shown in Table 1. Sampling and ppeparation g: ppil Soils for the greenhouse experiment were taken from the plow layer of the area adjacent to the field plots located on the individual farms. The field soil was sacked, transported to a drying room, allowed to become air dry, and then was screened through a 4-mesh sieve. Weighed amounts of each of the four soils were placed in 2-gallon, glazed earthenware pots. In order to secure equal volumes of soil for root develOpment, differ- ent wieghts of the different textured soils were used.. 9000 grams of Grayling and Emmet soils were used per pot, 13 and 8000 grams of Allendale soils. The pots were then 'brought to moisture equivalent, as determined by Bouyoucos (6), with distilled water. A period of forty- eight hours was allowed for the soils to come to uniform moisture conditions before planting. ppil treatments Fertilizers for the different treatments were compounded in the dry salt form from analytical grade chemicals, using pure quartz sand as a filler. The 0-20-20 fertilizer, used alone and in all minor element treat- ments, was mixed and used throughout. Stock fertilizers for each treatment were compounded and the individual por- tions were weighed from the stock mixtures. Each soil received the following sixteen treat- ments. Each treatment on each soil was rqiicated three times. This required 48 pets for each soil or a total of 192 for the four soils. Fertilizer treatments were as follows: Control, no treatment. ‘ 0 0-20-0, 1000 lb. per acre 0-20-20, 1000 lb. per acre 0-0-20, 1000 lb. per acre 5-20-20, 1000 lb. per acre 0-20-40, 1000 lb. per acre 0-20-20, 1000 lb. per acre / mg, Mh, Fe, B, Cu m‘qmmkkflml—J 0-20-20, 1000 lb. per acre / Mh, Fe, B, Cu 9. 0-20-20, 10. 0-20-20, 11. 0-20-20, 12. 0-20-20, 13. 0-20-20, 14. 0-20-20, 15. 0-20-20, 16. 0-20-20, 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 lb. lb. 1b. 1b. lb. lb. lb. lb. per acre / mg, per acre / IaIg, peracre / Mg, per acre / mg, per acre / Mg per acre / hn, per acre / B per acre / Cu 14 Minor elements were supplied at the following rates, in pounds per acre of salts as listed on page r$(bekw0 Mg - 200 lb. of magnesium sulfate, Mh - 100 lb. of manganous sulfate, Fe - 100 lb. of ferrous sulfate, B - 10 lb. of sodium tetraborate,-and Cu - 10 1b. of cupric sulfate. The following carrier'salts were used in supply- ing major and minor elements: Nitrogen Phosphorus Potassium Magne s ium manganese Iron Boron COpper Ammonium nitrate Monocalcium phosphate Potassium chloride Magnesium sulfate Manganous sulfate Ferrous sulfate Sodium tetraborate Cupric sulfate NHANO3 CaH4(P04)2.H20 KCl MsSoz, . 31120 Mn 504. 2H20 F6304 . 7H20 Na2B40.7 CuSO4 . 51-120 The fertilizer was placed in a circular trench 1% inches deep and four inches in diameter and concentric with the lip of the pot. This trench was made by simply 15 inverting a four-inch flower pot on the surface of the moist soil and rotating the flower pot while applying downward pressure. Fertilizer computations were based on the soil surface area of the average pot. gpgenhouse technique ‘ After the fertilizer had been applied, the pots were again brought to moisture equivalent (distilled water was used throughout this eXperiment) and allowed to reach equilibrium. Evaporation from the pots was kept at a mini- mum during this period through the use of heavy, waxed paper. On September 15, 1948, about thirty seeds of certified Hardigan alfalfa were placed in a shallow, circu- lar trench, six inches in diameter, similar to that used for fertilizer placement and fashioned in an identical manner using a six inch flower pot. Through this device, all the seeds in the pot occupied the same position relative to the band of fertilizer which was about one inch below and one inch to the side of the seed. 8 In order to insure sufficient moisture for the germination of the seed and growth of the seedlings under the prevailing conditions of bright sunlight and high tem- perature, the evaporation rate was reduced by keeping the germinating seeds covered with a somewhat translucent, heavily-waxed paper. 16 Moisture was maintained as near moisture equiva-’ lent as possible throughout the early growth of the plants. Random selections of pots were made from each soil and from various treatments within these soils. These were weighed before each watering and themoisture loss determined. The average of these weighings for each soil was taken as indicative of the water required. This procedure was fol- . lowed until the plants reached a weight which made the pro- cess inaccurate. By this time the plants had reached a stage of root development in which they were able to utilize more of the moisture in the pot. From this point, distilled water was supplied as the need was apparent. From time to time, the position of the movable benches was changed to minimize the influence of variations in temperature and sunlight. During the short day period of the winter months, the cloudy weather obscured the sun for a number of days. Correspondingly, the growth of the alfalfa plants was excessively vegetative and the develOp- ment of the plants was slow. At the age of sixteen weeks, no blossoms had appeared, so in order to bring the plants to blossom, they were placed under a bank of fluorescent lights and the photoperiod increased to fourteen hours. The first blossoms began to form eleven days later. At twenty and one half weeks the plants, in about one tenth bloom, were harvested two inches above the crown. The second cutting was made five weeks after the first and the third cutting followed five weeks after the second. 17 In harvesting, the tOp growth of the plant was cut at the level of the top of the pot which was about two inches above the crown. The green plant material was placed in paper bags and dried at 150-160 degrees Farenheit for seventy-two hours. The dried samples were weighed. Samples for green tissue testing of the third cutting were taken, weighed green, placed in moisture-proof cellOphane bags, and stapled closed. Outdoor temperatures at the time of cutting were suitable for refrigeration and the samples remained in excellent condition until tissue tests were made. The remaining t0p growth was cut, weighed and dried, and weighed again to determine percent moisture from which the total dry matter was computed. 0f the soil treatments where only nitrogen, phos- phorus, and potassium were used, each replicate was sampled and tested individually, but where minor elements were added, samples from three pots were composited and tested as a unit. Green tissue tests were made according to the method of Cook andothers (14) using reagents from the Simplex‘soil testing kit of Spurway (39). During the course of the development of the alfalfa plants prior to the first cutting, considerable difficulty was eXperienced with red spider. This pest was controlled through use of 15% parathion dry powder in distilled water. Spraying caused injury to the young, actively growing por- tions of the plants which may have masked some deficiency 18 symptoms. Later, it was discovered that Spraying immedi- ately following harvest would control the red spider until the next harvest, without serious injury to the plants. OBSERVATIONS DURING GROWTH Throughout the growth of the alfalfa, from plant- ing until time for the first harvest, no conspicuous dif- ferences.appeared. The control plants were apparently the same as those on the treated soils. Initially, those plants which received 0-20-40 showed poor germination and stunted growth. The barren spaces were replanted ten days after the original planting. At four weeks all pots were thinned to fifteen plants. ‘When the plants were six weeks old, the stand was reduced to ten plants per pot. This was the final thinning. . .At the time of the first harvest, no deficiency symptoms had appeared; foliage was normal, dark green, and vigorous. Plants on Emmet loamy sand seemed slightly delayed in maturity as evidencedby the lack of blossoms on many pots. After the first cutting, the recovery growth of those plants receiving only phOSphorus showed definite re- tardation when compared to those which had been treated with 0-20-20. ‘In addition, the lower leaves showed a row of small white spots roughly parallel to the leaf margin. Later, a marginal yellowing of the leaflets appeared. This l9 phenomenon showed only on those plants growing on Allendale sandy loam and Grayling loamy sand. As the plants pro- gressed, the differences in growth grew less and less distinct, but were still noticeable at the time of harvest. About two weeks prior to the second harvest, at the time when the first blossoms were appearing, many of the plants growing on Grayling loamy sand began to exhibit a yellowing of the terminal growth, resetting, and dying back of the terminal bud. These symptoms coincide with those described by Colwell and Lincoln (12) and by Cook (13) .as caused by deficiency of boron. These indications appeared only on those treatments which had received at least some potash and no boron. The fact that these symp- toms did not show on those pots which had received neither boron nor potassium suggests that potassium was the first limiting factor. While these symptoms did not occur in every replication of every treatment having no boron, they did appear in.79 percent of the replications. In no case ‘did they appear where boron had been applied. Previous to the second harvest, potassium defic- iency symptoms had appeared on the control plants and those where the treatment had included phosphorus alone on all soils except the Allendale loamy sand. The height of the plants-figgz-noticeably less than that of those which received both phosphorus and potassium. 'Those treatments having phosphorus, potassium, magnesium, manganese, iron and boron but no copper resulted 20 in shorter growth than did other minor element treatments on Grayling loamy sand and on.Allendale sandy loam. The plants on these pots were otherwise normal. Following the second cutting, conspicuous differ- ences in growth began to appear. These were most apparent where either phOSphate or potash or both had been omitted. .gggyling loamy sand Definite potassium deficiency showed both on the control plants and on those where phOSphorus alone had been supplied. That phOSphorus alone was not sufficient as a fertilizer is shown by Plate 1. marginal yellowing began to show on the lower leaves of even the 0-20—20 treated plants. Potassium alone caused reduced growth but the plants were of normal color as were the plants of the re- maining treatments. The plants seemed to be restricted in growth where copper was omitted (treatment 12) and where boron was added without the other minor elements (treat- ment 15). See Plates 2 and 3. The yellowing and resetting of the terminal growth which had been conspicuous just previous to the second cut- ting failed to appear before the third cutting except where 5-20420 had been applied and where copper had been used in addition to 0-20-20 (treatment 16). No differences were apparent as a result of the other minor element treatments. Emmet loam: sand Except that potassium deficiency symptoms appeared, the plants grown on this soil were much the same 21 as those on the Grayling loamy sand. Noticeably reduced growth occurred where both potassium and phosphorus or either element singly were omitted from the fertilizers. The control plants were definitely of shorter growth than any except those grown.where the treatment included only potassium or only phosphorus. These differences in growth are shown in Plates 4 and 5. All plants were a normal healthy green color. Allendale loamy sang On this soil, conspicuous suppression of growth occurred only where one or the other, or both of the prin- cipal nutrients (phosphorus or potassium) were lacking. Other plants appeared normal and vigorous. Allendale sandy loam In the heavier Allendale soil, the differences which resulted from the treatments were less noticeable but were of the same nature as those which occured on the loamy sand, with one exception. Where copper was omitted (treat- ment 12) the plants were smaller than those where it was included with 0—20-20 and all the other secondary elements (treatment 7). This is indicated by the cultures shown in Plate.6. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Emmet loamy sand Evidently the supply of potassium in this soil was sufficient to produce a healthy first cutting, but in 22 subsequent cuttings the potassium supplied to the plants ' progressively decreased. As shown in Figure l and Table 2, phosphorus alone produced growth equal to phosphorus plus potassium, but potassium alone caused reduced growth. In, the second and third cuttings, as shown in Tables 3 and 4, neither phOSphorus nor potassium alone supported a growth of plants comparable to that induced by the 0-20-20 treat- ment. All treat¢ments which included minor elements caused significantly greater yields than did 0-20-20 alone _ in the third cutting. See Table 4. Among the minor elements, there appears to be no single nutrient which consistently accounts for the benefits drived from the mixture. It would appear that those treatments which, in addition to 0-20-20, included magnesium or at least four of the minor elements resulted in greater yields than did those receiving no mag— nesium or less than four of the minor elements. This effect showed in both the second and third cuttings, but was ob- scured in the totals (Table 5). Progressively increasing benefit due to nitrogen (treatment 5) shows in Figure l and Tables 3, 4 and 5. Some depression of growth appears to result from the addition of boron to phosphorus and potassium (treatment 15). In both the second and third harvests, the yield from this treatment was significantly less than from phOSphorus and potassium alone and was not different from the control, as is shown in the curve for the total of the first two cut- tings, Figure l. 23 Astudy of Tables 2, 3, 4, and 5 shows how the response to fertilizer on this soil increased with each successive cutting. In the first cutting, phosphorus and potash fertilizer did not, in any combination, significant- ly increase yields, but when extra elements were added, the increases in yield became significant. In the second cut- ting, phosphorus and potash combinations did increase yields and the effect of nitrOgen began to show up. Still further increases in yield resulted from the minor elements. At the third cutting all fertilizer treatments resulted in yields which were significantly larger than those from the unfer- tilized pots. Furthermore, all cultures treated with minor elements yielded significantly more than did those treated only with 0-20-20 fertilizer. This accumulative effect even resulted in the 5-20-20 treated plants (treatment 5) Yield- ing enough more than those which received O-20-2O that the difference was significant for the three cuttings. This is shown in Table 5. Green tissue tests, reported in Table 18, showed that in all cases but one where potassium had been applied, the potaSsium in the plant was medium, high, or very high at the time of the third cutting. The exception was where 0-20-20 plus copper was used. It appears, then, that potassium is not likely to be a limiting element when applied at rates equal to 1000 pounds of 0-0-20 per acre. Tissue tests for phosphorus showed medium orhigh phosphorus where phosphorus had been applied in all but two cases; one, where all minor elements except magnesium were applied (treatment 24 8), and the other, where only boron was added to the O-20-2O (treatment 15). Grayling loamy sand There were no significant differences in the re- sults from the first cutting (Table 6). As shown by the. second cutting results presented in Figure 2 and Table 7, all treatments which included the 0-20-20 fertilizer re- sulted in yields which were significantly greater than those obtained from the control cultures. The yields obtained where minor elements were applied were all about the same and were not significantly greater than those obtained where only O-20-2O was applied. See Table 7. Only where 0-20-40 was applied was there a significant increase in yield over that obtained where the fertilizer was 0—20-20. The total yields showed that 0-20—20 plus boron was the only treatment including both phOSphorus and potassium which failed to cause a significant increase over the control. See Table 9. Again on this soil, it is interesting that in the first crOp there were no signficiant differences in yield caused by treatment, but on the second and third crops, all treatments which included both phOSphorus and potash caused significant increases in yield. It is noteworthy that in the total for the three cuttings (Table 9) potash alone was no different than the control and gave significantly less yield than did the 0-20-20 treatment. This had not shown on the individual cuttings. See Tables 6, 7, and 8. 25 Allendale loamy sand The treatments did not cause significant differ- ences in the yields of the first and second cuttings of alfalfa on this soil. All treatments receiving potassium caused highly significantI:TIncreases in yields, as com- pared to the control yields, on the third cutting, as shown by the curve for the third cutting in Figure 3 and the data in Table 12. No differences in yields resulted from the application of minor elements. The treatments did not cause significant differences in total yield (Table 13). f . Potassium appears as the first limiting element among those used in this experiment on the Allendale loamy sand. Indications are that potassium alone was equal to. potassium plus phosphorus at least for the first three cuttings. The data presented in Tables 10, 11, and 12 show the delayed response to potassium.' Not until the third cutting did this effect show up. Allendale sandy loam On this soil, the fertilizer treatments did not affect the yields of alfalfa until the third cutting, at ‘which time all cultures which had received potassium yielded significantly more than did the controls. Those 'which received both phosphorus and potassium yielded high- ly'significantly greater than the controls. The minor 26 element treatment including all but iron (treatment 10) re- sulted in yields which were significantly greater than those obtained from pots treated only with O-20—20, while that having cOpper omitted (treatment 12) significantly reduced the yields. Plants which received only O-20-2O plus magne- sium (treatment 13) or 0-20-20 plus COpper (treatment 16) were significantly suppressed in growth. See Figure 4. This soil seemed almost identical to the Allendale loamy sand so far as response to fertilizer was concerned. Not until the third cutting, as shown in Tables 14, 15, and 16, did significant differences in yield show up as a result of the fertilizer treatments. Then, all fertilized alfalfa yielded more than did that not fertilized. These differences do not show in the total of the three cuttings. See Table ’ 17. Again it is very likely that subsequent crOps of alfalfa on this soil may show benefit from some elements other than phOSphorus and potassium. summer AND CONCLUSIONS ‘ From four fields in areas where alfalfa production is a problem, sandy soils were selected for a greenhouse study to determine the effect of several combinations of nutrient elements on the growth of alfalfa. Fifteen treat- ments and the control were set up, each treatment on each soil consisting of three replicate pots. Each 2-gallon pot supported ten alfalfa plants which were harvested three times when in one-tenth bloom. Chemical and physical preperties 27 of the soils were determined, green tissue tests were made of the top growth, and the yield of top growth was measured as dry matter. Growth and development were observed and noted as were any abnormalities such as deficiency symptoms. Yield data for each cutting on each soil was statistically analyzed as a randomized block. The incidence of significant differences increased with each successive cutting. Results of this work agree with those of other workers on the need for large quantities of phOSphorus and potassium. In each soil, the greatest differences in yield were due to the influence of potassium and phosphorus. Results with Emmet loamy sand indicated that there was a limitation due to lack of nitrogen as shown by the increasing reaponse to nitrogen with successive cuttings. There was also a marked reSponse to minor elements and mag- nesium on this soil. The reaponse to these elements in- creased from cutting to cutting. It was impossible to pick out any individual element which was entirely responsible for the increase in yield which resulted from elements other than phOSphorus and potassium. On Emmet loamy sand and on Grayling loamy sand there was some reduction in growth where boron was applied with phosphorus and potassium without the other minor elements. On Grayling loamy sand and Allendale sandy loam yields of alfalfa were depressed where copper was omitted but all other minor elements were added. 28 Boron deficiency symptoms appeared on plants grown in Grayling loam sand in the second crop but failed to show on the subsequent recovery growth. Pos- sibly growth was limited by some other nutrient defic- iency in the third crop to the extent that there was suf- ficient boron in the soil for the crop produced. On all soils, the need for phosphorus and potassium became more noticeable in the second and third crOps than in the first. On the Emmet soil this same thing was true with reapect to the minor elements and mag- nesium. It was suggested that on the other soils, the Grayling and the two Allendale soils, subsequent crops may show a need for elements other than for phOSphorus and potaSsium. That possibility is being studied but time does not permit the results to be included in this report. The work reported in this thesis is intended as preliminary to field investigations. It is the thought of the author that these data do indicate places where minor elements may be lacking or may be present in injur- ious quantities, but that further investigation is re- quired for conclusive evidence of the effect of these de— ficiencies or toxicities under field conditions. 29 LITERATURE CITED ' Agulhon, H. Recherches sur la presence et la role du bore chez les vegetaux. These, Paris. 1910. Anderssen, F. G. Chlorosis of deciduous fruit trees due to a copper deficiency. Jour. Pom. and Hort. Sci. 10:130-146. 1932. Askew, H. O. The boron status of fruit and leaves in relation to "internal cork" of apples in the Nelson district. New Zeal. Jour. Sci. and Technol. 17:388-391. 1935. Bear, F. E. Cation constancy in alfalfa. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron. .37:219-222. 1945. Berger, K. 0., and Truog, E. Boron availability in relation to soil reaction and organic matter content. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 10:113-116. 1946. Bouyoucos, G. J. .A comparison of the centrifuge and suction methods for determining moisture equivalent. 3011 Sci. 49:165-171. 1935. Bouyoucos, G. J. Directions for making mechanical . analyses of soils by the hydrometer method. Soil Sci. 42:225-229. 1936. Brandenburg, E. Eenige gevallen van physiologische zeikten der bieten: I. meded. Inst. Suikerbietenteelt 1:89-104. 1931. . _ Brewer, P. H., and Carr, R. H. Fertility of a soil as related to the forms of its iron and manganese. Soil Sci. 23:165-173. 1927. 10. ll. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 3O Carne,‘w. W. Grey speck disease of wheat and oats (known as white wilt in west Australia). Jour. Dept. Agr. West. Austr. 4:515-519. 1927. Chandler,‘w. V. and Scarseth, G. D. Iron starvation as affected by overphOSphating and sulfur treatment on Houston and Sumter clay soils. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron. 33:93-104. 1941. _ Colwell, W. E., and Lincoln, C. .A comparison of boron deficiency symptoms and potato leaf hOpper injury on alfalfa. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron. 34:495- 498. 1942. Cook, R. L. Boron deficiency in Michigan soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 2g375-382. 1937. Cook, R. L., Robertson, L. 3., Lawton, Kirk, and Rood, P. J. Green tissue testing with the Spurway soil testing equipment as an aid in soil fertility ' studies. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 12:379-381. 1947. 7 Cooper, H. P., et a1. EXperiments with field crops and fertilizers. South Carolina Exp. Sta. Annual Rpt. 46:17e28. 1933. . . Dearborn, C. H., and Raleigh, G. J. A preliminary note on the control of internal brown-rot of cauli- flower by the use of boron. .Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. Proc. 33:622-623. 1936. Floyd, B. F. ‘Dieback, or exanthema of citrus trees. Fla. Agr. EXp. Sta. Bul. 140. 1917. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 31 Garner, W. W., McMhrtrey, J. E., Jr., and moss, E. G. Sand drown, a chlorosis of tobacco and other plants resulting from magnesium deficiency. Science 56:341- 342. 1922. Gerretson, F. C. manganese deficiency of cats and its relation to soil bacteria. Ann. Bot. 1:207-230. 1937. ’ Gilbert, F..A. COpper as a fertilizer amendment for tobacco and other crOps. Better Creps 32:8-11. 1948. Gile, P. L., and Carrero, J. 0. Cause of lime- induced chlorosis and availability of iron in the soil. Jour. Agr. Res._ 20:33-62. 1920. Henderson, J. H. M., and Veal, M. P. Effect of the interrelationship of boron and manganese on the growth and calcium uptake of blue lupine in solution culture. Plant Physiology 231:6095620. 1948. Hunter, A. S. Yield and composition of alfalfa as affected by variations in the calcium-magnesium ratios in the soil. Soil Sci. 67:53-62. 1949. Jamison, V. C. Chemical relationships of potassium and magnesium in organic and sandy soils of central Florida. Soil Sci. 63:443-453. 1946. Johnson, M. O. Manganese chlorosis of pineapples: its cause and control. Hawaii Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 52. 1924. _ Johnson, M. 0. Control of chlorosis of the pineapple and other plants.' Jour. Indus. and Engin. Chem. 20:724-725. 1928. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 32 Knott, J. E. The effect of certain mineral elements on the color and thickness of onion scales. New York (Cornell) Agr. EXp. Sta. Bul. 552. 1933. . Lucas, R, E., and Scarseth, G. D. Potassium, calcium, and magnesium balance and reciprocal relationship in plants. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron. 39:887-896. 1947. Maze, P. M. Note sur les chloroses des vegetaux. Compte Rendu. Soc. Biol. 77:539-541. 1914. McHargue, J. S. The role of manganese in plants. Journ. Amer. Chem. Soc. 44:1592-1598. 1922. McMurtrey, J. E. Jr. Symptoms on field grown tobacco characteristic of the deficient supply of each of several essential chemical elements. U. 8. Dept. Agr. Tech. Bul. 612. 1938. thkenhirn, R. J. Response of plants to boron, copper, and manganese. Journ. Amer. Soc. Agron. 28:824— 842. 1936. Olsen, C. The absorption of manganese by plants. Compte. Rendu. Lab. Carlsberg 20. 1934. Owens, 3., and Brown, B. A. Leguminous crops, their fertilization and management in the northeastern states. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 8:268-270. 1944. Purvis, E. R., and Ruprecht, R. W} Cracked stem of celery caused by a boron deficiency in the soil. Fla. Agr. EXp. Sta. Bul. 307. 1940. Robbins, W. R.. Calcium and boron as essential factors in the root environment. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron. 40:795-803. 1948. 37. 38. 39. 41. 42. 43. 2+4. 45. 33 Rogers, H. T. water soluble boron in coarse textured soils in relation to the need of boron fertilization for legumes. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron. 39:914-928. 1947. p . . Schreiner, 0., and Dawson, P. R. manganese deficiency in soils and fertilizers. Ind. and Eng. Chem. 19:400— 404. 1927, _ _ Spurway, C. H.. Soil fertility control for greenhouses. Mich. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 325. 1943. _ Truog, E., Goates, R. J. Gerloff, G. 0., and Berger, K. C. Magnesium-phosphorus relationship in plant nutrition. Soil Sci. 63:19T25: 1947. Veatch, J. 0., Schoenmann, L. R., Millar, C. E., and Shearin, A. E. Soil survey of OScoda county, Michigan. U. 8. Dept. of Agr. Bul. 20.. 1931. ’ Veatch, J. 0., Schoenmann, L. R., and Fuller, G. L. Soil survey of Ogemaw county, Michigan. U. S. Dept. of Agr. Bul. 28. 1923. Veatch, J. 0. Agricultural land classification and land types of Michigan. Mich. Agr. Exp. Sta. Spec. Bul. 231. .1941. _ Wallace, A. et a1. Further evidence supporting cation equivalent constancy in alfalfa. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron. 40:80-87. 1948. Warington, K. The effect of boric acid and borax on the broad bean and certain other plants. Ann.Bot. 37: 529-672. 34 46. Wildermuth, R., Kerr, J. A., Trull, F. W., and Stack, J. W. Soil survey of Van Buren county, Michigan. 1922. 35 APPENDIX Plate 1. Third crop of alfalfa on Grayling loamy sand. 1. No treatment 2. 0-20-0 3. 0—20-20 / Mg, Mh, Fe, B, Cu 4. 0-20-20 / B 36 Plate 2. Third crOp of alfalfa on Grayling loamy sand. 1. 0-20-20 / Mg, Mn, Fe, B, Cu 2. 0—20-20 5 Mg, Mn, Fe, B 3. 0-20-20 / Cu 37 Plate 3. Third crop of alfalfa on Grayling loamy sand. 1. No treatment 2. 0-20-20 3. 0-20-20 ,1 Mg, Mn, Fe, B, Cu 4'. 0-20-20 ,1 B Plate 4. Third CrOp of alfalfa on Emmet loamy sand. No treatment 0-20-0 0-20-20 0-0-20 38 39 Plate 5. Third crop of alfalfa on #‘KNNl-J Emmet loamy sand. No treatment 0-20-20 0-20-20 / Mg, Mh, Fe, B, Cu 0-20-20 / B Plate 6. Third crOp of alfalfa on Allendale sandy loam. . No treatment . 0-20-20 0—20-20 / mg, Mh, Fe, B, Cu «L‘UNH . 0-20-20 ,1 Mg, Mn, Fe, B l .4 OH. NH- man mm 1 mm... mm. on: .mmmwpaso mucosa was umafim mo Hmp09.nll..mmaposo paflnp.lll..mqapuso pnooom.lll..mnapwso pmnfim .mwmauuso manna mo Havoc-III flea one ma momma momv nonssz escapades aflom me me .fi EH m: fl 3 adqaumiuaflwagmflser W m. w o no semen» map so aeeaaaaeaea do pecans one a enemaa ) IO / \' 1’ .OH \\./ < \\. f} INH r I fl 0 J ./ / \. . III/z. . .\\\\\.///// \\\\\ III/:.///// .\\\\\ .Hm I L.nm j - .mm .mm . an .mm 10.1 .Ied surelg u“; leads" [an .emaapeee agents and eeaae no fleece.nun:.maaeeee tease 42 OH 1 NH_1 mH 1 mm n mm 1 On 1 Nm_| .emaaeeee omen» mo Heeeeuun. .mmapase cacao» .maaeeee eeaee.|||. Ava new ma momma oomv unmeasz pcmapuopa Haom ma ma wfl ma NH HH OH m o b w m e m N H b _ — p r _ - — . L _ p _ b @ 1| I r \/\/\/I\ LINH poem mason mmaahmpo so umasmad no seamen one do maeaaaaeaoa co caches any a enemaa 10H ImH .:::::.\\\\\./////;.:::. \\\\\..nnln.n::::. .\\\\\./////.\\\\\.\\\\\ ram rnm tom ram :0» god 18d swamp a; ledge“ fag 7). A. .ameaeeee eeeeee sea amend no Hence..nu..meaeeee ewes» .3533 3.25 mo .233 Ill .mmaposo esooou A: one 3 momma oomv muons—22 935mg“. .33 ea m H «H m H «be HH OH m m a c m. e m. L p . . . b . . p F b p p ”N .maaeeee eeaaa.uuu mm; Hm; mm. mm. eaem mason oaaeeeaaa do eeaeeaa no semen» one no meeaaaaeeoa no pecans one a enemaa ll :3” INA 13” new ram .23 In» rm» 1% mad smug a; Jeane“ £13 M .wmmaueso cocoon one amnam mo Hmpopzlls.muapa:o wean» .omaaeeoo oops» no Hoeoo.||u .mnwppso cocoon flea one ma momma oomv mucosa: amoapmona Adam .woaeeoo eaaae.unl. OH. NH. 0H. val mm. on. up em. we we ea ea we Ha ea a m a o a e a a a F u b P n L b n p - b . . . b m soon modem oaeoaoaae ao ouaoeaa no women» one do maoaaaaeeoa no scones any e anomaa ----‘1‘ ;/ .\\ _.0H \ <, -«H. w .n .ma . ..oa 11:1...uunu; .\\\\\ ///// .\||\\. ..:::.. ..N~ OIIIII-o/e\ .. f.e~ I L D. row .on ‘1', ‘11 fun .e» 10d Jed smeag at median 513 45 Table 1. Chemical and physical preperties of Grayling, Emmet and Allendale loamy sands and of Allendale sandy loam. % Soil mechanical analysis pH organic matter % % % sand silt clay Emmet loamy 81.0 13.0 6.0 6.62 2.0 sand Grayling loamy 89.5 5.7 4.8 6.05 1.4 sand _ ‘ Allendale 86.7 6.8 6.5 6.42 1.8 loamy sand _ ‘ . . Allendale 67.5 16.7 15.8 6.36 2.5 sandy loam Mechanical analyses were made according to the hydrometer method of Bouyoucos (7). pH determinations were made with the Beckman glass electrode. Organic matter was determined by the wet combustion method with modification for photoelectric colorimeter. Table 2. Emmet loamy sand. alfalfa top growth. ‘— First cutting yield of 45 1 Dry % incr. % incr. Soil treatment matter over no over grams trtmt. 0-20—20 1. None 10.80 0.00 -6.09 2. 0-20-0 11.66 7.96 1.39 3. 0-20-20 11.50 6.48 0.00 4. 0-0-20 10.07 -6.76 -12.44'* 5. 5-20-20 11.46 6.11 -O.35 6. 0-20-40 11.06 2.41 -3.83 7. 0-20-20 / mg, En, Fe, 3, Cu 10.90 0.92 -5.22 8. 0-20-20 / an, Fe, 3, Cu 11.50 6.48 0.00 9. 0-20-20 / mg, Fe, B, Cu 12.16 12.59” 5.74 10. 0-20-20 / mg, Mn, B, Cu 12.23 13.24* 6.35 11. 0-20-20 / mg, Mn, Fe, Cu 11.90 lo.17* 3,48 12. 0-20-20 / Mg, an, Fe, B 11.73 8.61 2.00 13. 0-20-20 / mg. 12.03 11.39” 4.61 14. 0-20-20 / mn, Fe 11.96 10.74.* 4.00 15. 0-20-20 / B 11.23 3.98” -2.35 16. 0-20-20 / Cu 12.23 13.24% 6.35 l Fertilizer rates and carriers are described on * Significant at the5% level. pages 13-14. Table 3. Emmet loamy sand. alfalfa top growth w 47 Second cutting yield of 1 Dry % incr. % incr. was: 1:12.11? 0.2320 1. None 7.90 0.00 -19.39-** 2. 0-20-0 , 8.30 5.06 -15.31'** 3. 0-20-20 9.80 24.05** 0.00 4. 0-0-20 8.20 3.80 -16.32'** 5. 5-2o-2o 10.53 33.29** 7.44 6. 0-20-40 9.96 26.08** 1.63 7. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, 3, Cu 9.43 19.36** -3.78 8. 0-20-20 / Mn, Fe, B, Cu 10.56 34.93** 8.77 9. 0-20-20 / mg, Fe, 3, Cu 9.93 25.78** 1.33 10. 0-20-20 / Ms, Mn, 3, Cu 9.30 17.72** -5.10 11. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, Cu 9.30 17.72** -5.10 12. 0-20-20 / mg, Mn, .6, B 9.66 22.28** -1.43 13. 0-20-20 / Mg 9.36 18.48** -4.49 14. 0-20-20 / Mn, Fe 8.40‘ 6.33 -14.29’** 15. 0.20-20 / s 7.66 -3.04 -21.84‘** 16. 0.20-20 / Cu 8.60 8.86 -12.24’* 1 13-14. fl")!- Fertilizer rates and carriers are described on page Significant at the 5% level. Significant at the 1% level. 48 Table 4. Emmet loamy sand. Third cutting yield of alfalfa top growth. Dry % incr. % incr. Soil treatmentl matter. over no over grams trtmt. 0-20-20 1. NOne 6.20 0.00 -21.52-** 2. 0-20-0 7.16 15.48* -9.37 3. 0-20-20 7.90 27.42** 0.00 4. 0-0-20 7.33 18.23Hr -7.22 5. 5-20-20 10.10 62.90** 27.84?“ 6. 0-20-40 8.93 44.03** 13.04” 7. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, B, Cu 8.86 42.90** 12.15* 8. 0-20-20 / Mn, Fe, B, Cu 10.27 65.64** 30.00** 9. 0-20-20 / Mg, Fe, B, Cu 9.73 56.94?” 23.17** 10. 0-20-20 / Mg, mn, B, Cu 9.56 54.19** 21.01** 11. 0-20-20 / Mg, Mn, Fe, Cu 9.03 45.65** l4.03** 12. 0-20-20 / Mg, mn, Fe, B 9.31 50.16** l7.85** 13. 0-20-20 / mg 9.80 58.06** 24.05** 14. 0-20-20 / Mh, Fe 8.43 35.91** 6.70* 15. 0-20-20 / B 8.13 31.13** 2.91” 16. 0-20-20 / Cu 8.46 37.45** 7.09* l Fertilizer rates and carriers are described on page 13-14. * Significant at the 5% level. *9 Significant at the 1% level. Table 5. top growth, three cuttings. ____________________________________________________________ Emmet loamy sand. 49 Total yield of alfalfa 1 Dry % incr. incr. Soil treatment matter over no over grams trtmt. 0-20-20 1. None 24.90 0.00 -14.72-** 2. 0-20-0 27.13 8.96% -7.09 3. 0-20-20 29.20 17.27* 0.00 4. 0-0-20 25.26 1.45 -13.49‘** 5. 5-20-20 32.10 28.92** 9.93* 6. 0-20-40 29.96 20.32** 2.60 7. 0-20-20 / M3, mn, Fe, B, Cu 29.20 17.27** 0.00 8. 0-20-20 / mn, Fe, B, Cu 32.43 30.247M 11.06** 9. 0-20-20 / M3, Fe, B, Cu 31.83 27.83** 9.01* 10. 0-20-20 / M3, mn, B, Cu 31.16 25.14** 6.71 11. 0-20-20 / M8, mn, Fe, Cu 30.26 21.53**- 3.63 12. 0-20-20 / M3, mn, Fe, B 30.70 23.29** 5.14 13. 0-20-20 / mg 31.20 25.30** 6.85 14. 0-20-20 / Mh, Fe 28.80 l5.66** -1.37 15. 0-20-20 / B 27.03 8.56 -7.44 16. 0-20-20 / Cu 29.30 16.59”” -0.58 l. Fertilizer rates and carriers are described on page 13-14. * Significant at the 5% level. *4!- Significant at the 1% level. Table 6. Grayling loamy sanr. alfalfa t0p growth. 50 First cutting yield of 1 Dry % incr. % incr. Soil treatment matter over no over grams trtmt. O-2Q-2O 1. None 11.50 0.00 1.15 2. 0-20-0 12.40 7.83 9.07 3. 0-20-20 11.46 -0.35 0.00 4. 0-0-20 10.20 -11.30 -10.39 5. 5—20—20 11.56 0.52 1.68 6. 0-20-40 11.80 2.61 3.79 7. 0-20-20 / M3, nn, Fe, B, Cu 11.80 2.61 3.79 . 0-20-20 / Mn, Fe, B, Cu 11.93 3.74 4.93 9. 0-20-20 / M3, Fe, B, Cu 11.30 -1.74 -0.61 10. 0;20-20 / M3, Mn, B, Cu 12.33 7.22 8.45 11. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, Cu 12.03 4.61 5.81 12. 0-20-20 / M3, MM, Fe, B 11.13 -3.22 -2.10 13. 0-20-20 / M3_ 12.10 5.22 6.43 14. 0-20-20 / Mn, Fe 11.53 0.26 1.42 15. 0-20-20 / B 11.03 -4.09 - 2.98 16. 0-20-20 / Cu 11.90 3.48 4.67 l Fertilizer rates and carriers are described on page 14. 13- 51 Table 7. Grayling loamy sand. Second cutting yield of alfalfa top growth. Dry % incr. % incr. Soil treatmentl matter over no over grams trtmt. 0-20-20 1. None 7.93 0.00 -17.14'** 2. 0-20-0 8.47 6.80 -11.50'** 3. 0-20-20 9.57 20.68** 0.00 4. 0-0-20 8.76 10.46** 1.98 5. 5-20-20 9.80 23.58** 2.40 6. 0-20-40 10.96 38.20** 14.52* 7. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, B, 10.63 34.04** 11.07 . 0-20-20 / Mn, Fe, B, Cu 10.20 28.62** 6.58 9. 0-20-20 / M3, Fe, 3, Cu 10.56 33.16** 10.34 10. 0-20-20 ,1 M3 12m, B, Cu 10.23 29.00M 6.89 11. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, Cu 10.20 28.62** 6.58 12. 0-20-20 / M3, F1, Fe, B 9.664 21.81** 0.94 13. 0-20-20 / M3 10.23 29.00** 6.89 14. 0-20-20 / Mn, Fe 10.30 29.88** 7.62 15. 0-20-20 / B 9.66 21.81** 0.94 16. 0-20-20 / Cu 10.06 26.86** ’5.12 l Fertilizer rates and carriers are described on page 13-14. * Significant at the 5% level. ** Significant at the 1% level. 52 Table 8. Grayling loamy sand. Third cutting yield of alfalfa top growth. Soil treatmentl magigr gvégcio % 032;. grams trtmt. 0—20—20 1. Mona 6.93 0.00 -25.48‘** 2. 0-20-0 7.06 1.87 -24.08‘** 3. 0-20-20 9.30 34.19** 0.00 4. 0-0-20 7.77 12.12 -16.45 5. 5-20-20 8.70 25.54** -6.45 6. 0-20-40 9.93 43.28** 6.77 7. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, B, Cu 9.60 38.52** 3.23 8. 0-20-20 / Mn, Fe, B, Cu 9.07 30.88** -2.47 9. 0-20-20 / M3, Fe, B, Cu 9.77 40.98** 5.06 10. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, B, Cu 10.40 50.07** 11.83 11. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, Cu 10.03 44.73** 7.85 12. 0-20-20 - M3, Mn, Fe, B 9.27 33.77** -0.32 13. 0-20-20 / M3 9.87 42.42** 6.13 14. 0-20-20 / mn, Fe 10.03 44.73** 7.85 15. 0-20-20 / B 9.80 41.41** 5.38 16. 0-20-20 / Cu 10.17 46.75** 9.36 l Fertilizer rates and carriers * Significant at the 5% level. ** Significant at the 1% level. are described on page 13-14. 53 Table 9. Total yields of alfalfa Grayling loamy sand. t0p growth, three cuttings. 1 Dry % incr. % incr. Soil treatment matter over no over grams trtmt. 0-20-20 1. None 26.43 0.00 «14.74--M 2. 0-20-0 27.93 5.68 -9.90 3. 0-20-20 31.00 17.29**. 0.00 4. 0-0-20 26.07 -1.36 -15.90-**. 5. 6-20-20 30.07 13.88* -3.00 6. 0-20-40 32.70 23.92** 5.48 7. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, B, Cu 32.00 21.09** 3.23 8. 0-20-20 / Mn, Fe, B, Cu 31.20 18.05** 0.64 9. 0-20-20 / F , Fe, B, Cu — 31.63 19.68** 2.03 10. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, B, Cu 32.90 24.48** 6.13 11. 0-20-20 / M3, nn, Fe, Cu 32.27 22.10** 4.10 12. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, B 30.00 13.51’ -3.23 13. 0-20-20 / M3 32.20 21.83”” 3.87 14. 0-20-20 / Mn, Fe 31.97 20.96** 3.13 15. 0-20-20 / B 30.50 15.40“ 1.63 16. 0-20-20 / Cu 32.13 21.56** 3.64 l Fertilizer rates and carriers are described on page 13-14. * Significant at the 5% level. ** Significant at the 1% level. 54 Table 10. Allendale loamy sand. First cutting yield of alfalfa top growth. .___________________________________________________________ Dry % incr. % incr. Soil treatment1 matter over no over grams trtmt. O-20-2O l. NOne 12.17 0.00 -3.41 2. 0-20-0 12.83 5.42 1.96 3. 0-20-20 12.60 3.53 0.00 4. 0-0-20 11.27 -7.40 -10.56 5. 5-20-20 12.36 ,1.56 -1.90 6. 0—20-40 12.80 5.18 1.59 7. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, B, Cu 13.03 7.06 3.41 8. 0-20-20 / Mn, Fe, B, Cu 13.13 7.89 4.21 9. 0-20-20 / M3, Fe, B, Cu 12.50 2.71 -0.79 10. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, B, Cu 13.50 10.93 7.14 11. 0-20-20 / mg, mn, Fe, Cu 13.63 12.00 8.17 12. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, B 12.43 2.14 -1.35 13. 0-20-20 / M3 12.50 2.71 -0.79 14. 0-20-20 / Mn, Fe 12.96 6.49 2.86 15. 0-20-20 / B 12.00 -1.40 -4.77 16. 0-20-20 / Cu 12.23 0.49 -2.94 l Fertilizer rates and carriers 14. are described on page 13- Table 11. alfalfa t0p growth. Allendale loamy sand. 55 Second cutting yield of Dry % incr. % incr. Soil treatment matter over no over grams trtmt. 0-20-20 1. Mona 9.37 0.00 -13.24 2. 0-20-0 9.13 -2.57 -15.40 3. 0-20-20 10.80 15.25 0.00 4. 0-0-20 10.23 9.17 -5.28 5. 5-20-20 10.10 7.79 -6.48 6. 0-20-40 10.03 7.04 —7.13 7. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, B, Cu 9.96 6.29 —7.78 8. 0-20-20 / Mn, Fe, B, Cu 10.16 8.43 ~5.93 9. 0-20-20 / M3, Fe, B, Cu 10.06 7.36 -6.85 10. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, B, Cu 10.90 16.32 0.93 11. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, Cu 10.43 11.31 -3.43 12. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, B 11.36 21.23 5.19 13. 0-20-20 / M3, 11.10 18.46 2.78 14. 0-20-20 / Mn, Fe 10.53 12.38 -2.50 15. 0-20-20 / B 9.43 0.63 -12.69 16. 0-20-20 - Cu 10.36 10.56 44.07 l Fertlizer rates and carriers are described on page 13-14. 56 Table 12. Allendale loamy sand. Third cutting yield of alfalfa top growth. Dry % incr. % incr. Soil treatmentl matter over no over grams trtmt. 0-20-20 1, None 7.40 0.00 -28.37-** 2. 0-20-0 8.67 17.16 -16.10 3. 0-20-20 10.33 39.59** 0.00 4. 0-0-20 9.60 29.73** -7.07 5. 5-20—20 11.13 50.41M 9.38 6. 0-20-40 10.07 36.09** -2.52 7. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, B, Cu 10.67 44.19** 3.29 . 0-20-20 / Mn, Fe, B, Cu 10.97 48.25** 6.20 9. 0-20-20 / M3, Fe, B, Cu 10.57 42.84** 2.32 10. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, B, Cu 11.10 50.00** 7.45 11. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, Cu 11.07 49.60** 7.16 12. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, B 11.20 51.36** 8.42 13. 0-20-20 / M3, 10.97 48.25** 6.20 14. 0-20-20 / Mn, Fe 10.70 44.60** 3.58 15. 0-20-20 / B 9.70 31.09** -6.10 16. 0-20-20 / Cu 10.27 38.79** -0.58 l Fertilizer rates and carriers are described on page 15—14. * Significant at the 5% level. ** Significant at the 1% level. Table 13. Allendale loamy sand. 57 Total yield of alfalfa top growth, three cuttings. 1 Dry % incr. % incr. 1...... MM: 0-253. 1. NOne 28.93 0.00 -14.24 2. 0-20-0 30.63 5.87 -9.20 3. 0-20-20 33.73 16.59 0.00 4., 0-0-20 31.10 7.50 -7.80 5. 5-20-20 33.60 16.14 -0.39 6. 0-20-40 32.90 13.72 -2.47 7. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, B, Cu 33.73 16.59 0.00 8. 0-20-20 / Mn, Fe, B, Cu 34.26 18.42 1.57 9. 0-20-20 / M3, Fe, B, Cu 33.20 14.75 -1.57 10. 0-20-20 ; M3, Mn, B, Cu 32.06 10.81 -4.95 11. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn. Fe, Cu 35.13 21.43 4.15 12. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, B 34.96 20.84 3.65 13. 0-20-20 / M3. 34.56 19.46 2.46 14. 0-20-20 / Mn, Fe 34.20 18.21 1.39 15. 0-20-20 / B 31.13 7.60 -7.71 16. 0-20-20 / Cu 32.864 13.58 -2.58 l Fertilizer rates and carriers are described on pages 13- 14. 58 Table 14. Allendale sandy loam. First cutting yield of alfalfa top growth. 1 Dry % incr. % incr. Soil treatment matter over no over grams trtmt. 0-20-20 1. None 10.80 0.00 -2.56 . 2. 0-20-0 12.40 14.81 12.10 3. 0-20-20 11.06 2.40 0.00 4. 0-0-20 10.87 0.65 -l.72 5. 5—20-20 12.13 12.31 9.67 6. 0-20-40 11.63 7.68 5.15 7. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, B, Cu 12.50 15.74 13.02 8. 0-20-20 / Mn, Fe, B, Cu 12.96 12.00 17.18 9. 0-20-20 / M3, Fe, B, Cu 12.43 15.09 12.39 10. 0-20-20 / mg, Mn, B, Cu 11.26 4.26 1.81 11. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, Cu 12.20 12.96 10.31 12. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, B 9.96 -7.78 -9.95 13, 0-20-20 / MB_ 11.83 9.54 6.96 14. 0-20-20 / mn, Fe 12.30 13.89 11.21 15. 0-20-20 / B 11.63 7.68 5.15 16. 0-20-20 / Cu 12.00 11.11 8.50 l Fertilizer rates and carriers 14. are described on page 13- 59 Table 15. Allendale sandy loam.. Second cutting yield of alfalfa top growth. Dry % incr. % incr. Soil treatment1 matter over no over grams trtmt. 0-20-20 1. None 8.77 0.00' -18.27 2. 0-20-0 9.86 12.43 -8.10 3. 0-20-20 10.73 22.35 0.00 4. 0-0-20 9.83 12.09 -8.39 5. 5-20-20 9.76 11.29 -3.97 6. 0-20-40 10.60 20.87 —1.21 7. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, B, Cu 11.00 25.43 2.52 8. 0-20-20 / mn, Fe, B, Cu 9.83 12.09 -8.39 9. 0-20-20 / mg, Fe, B, Cu 10.43 18.93 -2.80 10. 0-20—20 / Hg, Mn, B, Cu 10.20 16.31 -4.96 11. 0-20—20 / M3, Mn, Fe, Cu 10.50 19.73 -2.14 12. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, B 8.73 -0.45 -18.64 13. 0—20-20 / M3 10.10 15.17 -5.87 14. 0-20-20 / Mn, Fe 9.70 10.61 -9.60 15. 0-20—20 / B 10.00 14.03 -6.80 16. 0-20-201/ Cu 9.60 9.47 -10.53 l Fertilizer rates and carriers 14. are described on page 13- Table 16. Allendale sandy loam.. of alfalfa top growth. 60 Third cutting yield 1 Dry % incr. % incr. Soil treatment matter over no over grams trtmt. 0-20-20 1. None 9.20 0.00 -15.05‘** 2. 0-20-0 9.76 6.09** -9.85‘** 3. 0-20-20 10.83 17.72** 0.00 4. 0-0-20 9.60 4.35* -11.36-** 5. 5-20-20 10.77 17.07** -0.55 6. 0-20-40 10.43 13.37** -3.69 7. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, B, Cu 10.90 18.48** 0.65 8. 0-20-20 / Mn Fe, B, Cu 10.57 14.90** -2.41 9. 0-20-20 / M3, Fe, B, Cu 10.57 14.90** -2.41 10. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, B, Cu 11.27 22.50““ 4.06* 11. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, Cu 10.87 18.16** 0.37 12. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, B 9.83 6.85** '9-23'** 13. 0-20-20 7 M3. 10.40 13.05** -3.97‘* 14. 0-20-20 / Mn, Fe 10.53 14.46** -2.77 15. 0-20-20 / B 10.77 17.07** -0.55 16. 0-20-20 / Cu 10.43 13.37** -3.69-* l Fertilizer rates and carriers are described on page 13-14. * Significant at the 5% level. ** Significant at the 1% level. Table 17. top growth, three cuttings. Allendale sandy loam. Total 61 yield of alfalfa % incr. Soil treatmentl magigr Eeigcio over _ grams trtmt. 0—20-20 1. None 28.77 0.00 -1l.83 2. 0-20-0 32.03 11.33 -l.65 3. 0-20-20 32.63 13.42 0.00 4. 0-0-20 29.97 4.17 -8.16 5. 5-20-20 32.67 13.55 -1.41 6. 0-20-40 32.70 13.66 0.21 7. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, B, Cu 34.40 19.57 5.43 8. 0-20-20 / Mh, Fe, B, Cu 33.37 15.99 2.27 9. 0-20-20 / M3, Fe, B, Cu 33.10 15.05 1.44 10. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, B, Cu 32.73 13.76 0.31 11. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, Cu 33.57 16.68 2.88 12. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, B 28.53 -0.84 -12.56 13. 0-20-20 / M3 32.33 12.37 —O.96 l4. 0-20-20 / Mh, Fe 32.53 13.07 -0.31 15. 0-20-20 / B 32.40 12.61 -0.70 16. 0-20-20 /‘0u 32.70 13.65 0.22 1 Fertilizer rates and carriers 14. are described on page 13- 62 Table 18. Green tissue tests1 for potassium and phOSphorus at the time of the third cutting. ______________________ Gray- Allen? Allen, Emmet ling dale dale Soil treatment2 loamy loamy loamy sandy ' sand sargh_ s d 1 a ’37—? K P K ”3'12?" 1. None , L M L L L L L L 2. 0-20-0 H L M L H B H L 3. 0-20-20 M H H L H L H L 4. 0-0-20 L VH L L L H L M 5. 5—20-20 M H M H H L M, M 6. 0-20—40 M VH L VH H M M H 7. 0-20-20 / M3, Mn, Fe, B, Cu M M L M M L M L 8. 0-20-20 ,1 Mn, Fe, B, Cu H L H M L H M 9. 0-20-20 ,1 M3, Fe, B, Cu M H M H H M H L 10. 0-20-20 ,1 M3, Mn, B, Cu M L H M H M 11. 0-20-20 ,(1 , Mn, Fe, Cu H H L M M H H L 12. 0-20-20 ,1 M3, Mn, Fe, B M M H M L L H M 13. 0-20-20 ,1 M3 M M H L H M H M 14. 0-20-20 ,1 Mn, Fe H M H H H L H M 15. 0-20-20 ,1 B L M M H H H 16. 0-20-20 / Cu H L M L H H L 1 According to Cook and others (14) 2 Fertilizer rates and carriers are described on page 13-14. H . high, VH = very high, M = medium, L =_low, B = blank. I; ’nqfil ".8; ORLY MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY LI 0 3 1293 BRARIES 3082 0470