b; THE SIGNIFICANCE OF SOIL VARIATIONS IN RASPBERRY CULTURE ' Thesis for Degree of M. S. Gordon R. Schlubdtis and McIvin B. Hoffman I 9 Z: 6 _ “£515. T III .I .,...;..1,o. ryr. will: H..- I 5.3!.“ a. fl- 1 :I .v u. v Er". .u..Av.r :o ..... up vIvLIrK~ . iaNWIuIIInNN .n‘.‘ -.. - I L. x o l!.I.. Di. (Pr . .- u4.rn.ha.! JV" h. .A. .p..I'ls|L.AIId-..hu. 3.“ Im .Ibn.I.... - r: A: : .:|o.uernF~hIW..é-RH.M§§E {IRENE . I u . ‘ . O! 7 . . s. ’ . a s .‘t, . V a w . IA. .u. \ s\.m. V r. I . c A: .I L {y I. ‘ I .. A x . J flit ‘Jp \ulu- ‘. A a Jill. The Significance of Soil Variations in Raspberry Culture by Gordon RIIS ...... and Melvin b. Hoffman A THE 3 I S Submitted to the Faculty of the Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the degree of Master of Science II“ . \‘I‘I,’ I“ Departments of Soils and Horticulture East lansing, Michigan 1926 THESIS ETRODUCTION Even the untrained observer is aware of major variations in soils, for they are manifested primarily by the success or failure of plants to make proper growth in certain locations. That this condition of poor re- sponse of certain crops to certain locations is of economic importance is evidenced by the results of a detailed study of the correlation of soil conditions with the vegetative growth of certain crops. The growth.of raspberries was found to be subject to variations which had no apparent solution. so, in as much as its cultivation ranks as one of the leading small fruit industries of Michigan it was taken for a detailed study. This fruit is extensively cultivated in Western.Michigan.throughout the fruit belt and is repre- sented on an area of extremely variable soils from the Indiana border running north along the Lake shore, to the Straits. The glaciation of this area has resulted in variations, in.the soil profile which are not easily observed from a surface inspection but are signigicant in the cultivation of crops In the study of this problem effort was made to in- clude all the more important soil factors affecting plant growth. That plant growth is an indication of soil con- y._# a) a .n. -\ \‘vv ”ii -2- ditions has long been recognized, for as early as 1860 Hilgard (18) made use of plant growth in.mapping ag- ricultural possibilities. This work has been followed by Clements, 1910 (11), Shantz 1911 (29) and Weaver 1919 (32) in mapping soil in a large way by the vegetation. We also know something about the response of plants to I! ails with variations in fertilizers, moisture, etc. Granting that plant growth is a reliable indication of soil conditions and that the plant growth of this par- ticular area varies greatly, there is Justification for assuming that there is considerable variation in the soil of this raspberry plantation. REVIEW OF LITERATURE The literature bearing directly on this subject is not extensive for it has been.only within the last few years that the effects of entire soil profile as ins fluencing plant growth has been greatly considered. In fact information of this type on bramble fruits is almost entirely lacking. Studies of the influence of subsoil, apart from the surface soil, on the fertility of the soil were begun in 1917 by Alway,McDole, and Host (2) on the "rawness", which showed an unproductivity of these sub- soils. Lipman (19) did the same with arid subsoils of the west. Alway (1) continued the same line of investi- gations in 1918 followed by Harmer (16) who worked with legumes on subsoils. McMiller (24) in 1919 studied the effects of adding various fertilizing constituents to the "raw" subsoil horizons. Work of much the same nature was carried on by Crist and Weaver (13) in 1924 showing the absorption of large quantities of nutrients from the sub- soil when they were available, but investigations of, Millar (25) 1925 question the availability of nutrients in the subsoils of certain types of soils. That conditions other than that of fertility are important is shown.by the work on aeration studied and summarized by Clements (10). Signiiigance of gravitation- al water affecting the aeration of roots was definitely - 4 - discussed in the works of Arker (3), with Lupinus albus growing in water. Snow (IO) studied the action of corn roots in.water, and Stoklasa and Ernest (31) definitely concluded that a supersaturated condition of the soil causes injurious effects due to poor aeration. The work all points to a definite need for aeration of plant roots. A definite study of the relation ofwater table to root development has been made in only a few cases. Elliot (15) in 1920 studied the relation between.the downward penetration of corn roots and water level on peat soil and found a definite relationship between the height of the corn and depth of the water table. Driggers (14) worked with water levels on cranberry bogs, finding a correlation between cranberry growth and water levels. He attributes the poor growth to lack of aeration. Work of much the same nature was carried on by Ballantyne in 1916 (4) on mineral soil in Utah on the relation of drainage and root systems of peach trees. History and Description of Field All of the data reported.were collected from a field of raspberries located near the Michigan Experiment- al Sub Station grounds in the north western corner of Van Buren County. This section of the Michigan Fruit Belt is well known for its large planting of raspberries and other small fruits. The plantings were made in the spring of 1922; growth - 5 - of plants soon gave evidence of significant soil varia- tions even though the surface was fairly level and the soil appeared to be uniform in composition. The map (Fig. 1) shows the topography, soil types, and location of stations that were selected for the detailed study here reported. The topographical map (Fig. 1) shows that the field slopes very slightly to the north and east. There is only a difference of 7 feet in elevation from the lowest to the highest point, the 2 points being about 240 feet apart. The surrounding fields present a similar topography. Certainly they are no more rolling. Atmospheric drainage over this entire area would be considered uniform and good. ~The topography of the field is such that surface water drains off well. Gravitational water was never known to stand on the surface of this field. Even after heavy rains, water disappears from the surface of the low- est elevations within a reasonably short length of time. The surface soil of this field varies in depth from 4 to 9 inches. It is a dark grey in color, ranging from a a fine sandy loam to a sandy loam and to all appearances uniform in composition. However, the surface soil alone reveals little information regarding the types of soil found in this field. The soil survey which was made to a depth of 75 inches shows the following soil types to be represented in this field: Ottawa, Saugatuck, and the shallow and deep phases - 5 9 of Allendale. Detailed descriptions of these types are found under a separate heading. This number of soil types represented in two and a fraction acres of ground gives some indication as to the great variations that are en- countered in the sub soil. At some locations in the field the clay is found immediately beneath the surface layer While at other locations it is found at depths varying from 12 to 75 inches from the surface. Where the clay does not come in immediate contact with the surface layer this space is filled in with sand of various textures and colors. The undulating surface of the clay substratum connected with its impervious nature present logical conditions for the formation of sub surface water-pockets that drain very slowly. (Graphs Figs. 2, 3, 4 and 5.) During the first 3 years of the plantation much effort was put forward to obtain a perfect stand of plants over the entire field. In spite of much replanting, plants cone tinued to die out in certain areas. The Spring and Summer of 1924 brought abnormal heavy rainfall (Rainfall Records Table 7) and a great increase in the number of dead plants. From these observations the importance of sub-soil conditions in raspberry culture was realized and the follow- ing investigation was under taken in hope of explaining some of the difference in plant behavior on the various locations of the field. am. 5/. wow (Assumed) ~.I */ # F ,4: ”WW/'5 I: ear/mm: f 3:] 077'}? my - 5/21/01 706/ 50/1 mm mmampfl/Mz Mfl/D a; HflfPBt'fl/W F/fZfl AfMW/‘Mf FflfiMi Soafl/flflrf/K M/ZW. \I\ z 5fl0W/fl6 L 56/97/01 flf' 577770/V5 S€A1£'- / 40 ’ f/éVa/xéfl 53.4%? fl/eVI/zén fro/e / o 7.7 - . {J ,4 . 77” ”7" 54/7/4722 4/ . Wane/— We// /i K 76" F" ”we”, ”M :1: fl ' .244 ex \ \ N \_ I k 9x y \ W a a k 7.," I 7. Q J / fi". 9 ”f6;- F fry/[fl Wc// #2 3 5/l//b// ”’7 5/f Vt \ MM“ a f}4 if 3: / /i " n 44 - // N 1 74” I_ __ 2; 30 W ~‘ 36 I 70~.——\\ 1‘ 4,: ; 5%] [3/11 g M [’3 f‘ % ‘ ,4; g) (a /' W 6 I g/f’yfl/ 4/7 5‘74, v" W7?» 14"e// K" 6 g) 74 jfvf/bn gld”/3 , N 72 ‘ 2’79:sz ' //—\ N 21 a ” . ”We” MW ’3' /i I— £79769” 37/ 70 1‘4 5.4 ”d; [pl/e /~ ' [/ért/flaw 7664? .30 V ' 441 ‘6 [4‘ ‘ / \ A? (a ' Xi. “A / . 71 5/41 34 . £2 ,1; 60 éé 71 Ej 46 " [oflj/flc/IM/ 36675.01: ”(J 50// d/dflj flfle/ [/39 6' {M4/ ’5? //, jAJW/éj 56 // fi/‘j’I/éj 477/ 450/7 //d/'/za,,.5 ”/52! ' /'//a.f7[/17;}7j 7‘4? sure/(27 5a r/ac‘? A?! 7%? {/y 50/47‘r474a by . 7’ ' 9" w , 70 [(7 j:— A 4v/'7lq‘//;94/ j€C7(/4'/1 0/ éaxr/ d/caj fléj/éJ 1,),(3 fl (Mai [27 /)J jlé W/flj Jo/l/ W/Ij’J/éf/ aha/I 54// %r/Zon$ fl/Ja /'//a .r/rJ/xérj 74%? a f, ere/7 Jar/46¢ a/ 7g? t/f/j 5udJ'7‘tv-d7‘a m. ' c I -‘fl. __ ‘_l__.ll 1-__~..A l I I} 1 '-..a_;;: " ._:...‘-a. /, fl. / - , (776ny / 27 jade film/lb” jtd/e’ a ____ 77 AZ I A?” #47?» Ire// - f4? 2,: RI era/Ia. “’23 . - ‘\ e 77’ $3 ~-kztzifiixn\\l .23 3 \ I— W/tr W:// 76 [j i fidfi/j Aajer \ 5m 2 fl 0 14’» “x Surface Layey#__ 6 \ v éé 3 ”\wa’y Lolly A7 71 R If)” 7; N 31 22¢ 314 6/0/ fi Jo .75 J4 ,4 [/EI/é’f/brr 554/! 71 J “if“ 0 99 __ [4/072 r W(// . 45/ s 64 /3 ~ s 72 \ \_\ Q 7’ a? Surface Ldjer\\ - [/4 ‘e‘?’ \\ \N\—\ \ We ” A\\\‘7/—\ \ V\ / 6/03 yo __ . (Vary r \/ U F7 :“‘3’ fij Z’Xohjl'fia/l’x’nv/ 59(7624 fig) 501/ (VA/77 flo/éz/ [/2748 fl/MJ/ F7 /}/’ fad/4027 50i/ z/ojra/Jj 44/ 54/'/ flak/‘Zo/rfi; ”/54 ///.9J7zra7‘/}rj ”/4? III/81’!” Saw/0'66 4/ 7%? 6’41)! 50/5/re7’am. 50nd] layer- _ Wow/”er We// 5/4703”, fly [/fyy/xo/y fiffl/e a $1 : 33 e e s a 320K4h$ “4’41 [37:01. / \ MN 6\ smk’e 390840; way {ayil/Z ftsfifibbbhkbsars 5‘5 3 [My/macaw sec/m .; 50,1 4/”; awe/1,2,, 3 (we; 6}// 5pm», 50/ Z/fjrd/Aj .m/ 50,7 55,414,,” ”/50 ///AIJ’//~I7Z/}7j 794.? Aura/é»; 5a f/fl (P 4/ 7“! 6/0} iaZI/Io/am. - 7 - Description of Soil Typgg_ These types have been described by McCool and Vetch. The following quotations from their report bring out the more important differences: Ottawa Type “The ottawa types consist of pale yellowish sands. They are nearly uniform in texture and loosely coherent in structure to depths of 4 to 6 feet or more. The shallow, coarse, sandy or gravelly substratum which characterizes the Plainfield is absent and in places a substratum of clay is found. Most of the sand is medium in texture, but small bodies of fine and very fine sand have been observed in Van.Buren County and the Saginaw Basin, and doubtless a considerable aggregate of the loamy fine sand will be found when.detailed soil surveys are completed". "Chemical analyses indicate relatively low percentages of nitrogen, calcium, phosphorus, and potassium. Excepting the first 2 to 4 inches of virgin soil there is little or no difference in the quantity of these elements to depths of 3 to 4 feet, or more“. "The soil reaction is moderately acid to a depth of 4 feet or more. It is true that a high percentage of the moisture present is available for plant use, although the average total quantity is small because of the loose structure and absence of impervious layers at shallow depthS" e 9 8 9 Saugatuck Types "The Saugatuck types are distinguished chiefly by a yellowishsbrown or reddish-brown layer of sand at a depth of 6 to 24 inches, which is in many places firmly cemented into a hardpan. The surface soil is a dark-gray mechan- ical mixture of organic matter and sand. The substratum is loose sand to a depth of 4 feet or more. The brown.sur- face horizon may be brought to the surface through plow- ing and the dynamiting or pulling of stumps, so that culrivated fields present a variegated appearance due to spots of dark gray, light gray, and brown soil". "Lew fertility in the essential elements, calcium, phosphorus, and potassium are indicated by chemical analyses and the growth of native vegetation. The soil shows a light degree of acidity in the surface and also to depths of 3 feet or more, especially in the brown.hardpan layer. It is notable that this brown layer apparently holds a higher percentage of moisture than the sands above or be- low it, and also contains slightly higher percentages of nitrogen, calcium, phosphorus, and potassium". "In the virgin condition the soil is nearly always moist since the water table lies at depths of 2 to 3 feet. However, at times, both under natural conditions and under cultivation, the surface sand may become excessively dry“. Allendale Type '"The allendale type is characterized by a grayish surface soil, underlain by a lighter-gray or bleached e 9 2 layer, thence yellowish sandy soil resting upon relatively impervious clay at depths of 2 to 4 feet. The surface soil is generally loamy or a light sandy loam rather than a pure sand“. "The soil is generally slight to medium in degree of acidity in the sandy portion of the soil profile, while the underlying clay is generally nearly neutral or alkaline. The growth of cultivated and native plants indicates fertility a little higher than that of the Saugatuck and waton sandy soils." methods of Investigation The topographical map (Fig. 1) shows that the field was divided into two series, A and B. Series A.was planted to red raspberries and Series B was planted to black rasp- berries. In making the detailed studies of soil conditions and corresponding plant growth an.effort was made to locate stations for study so that the behavior of both species of plants could be observed on each type of soil. The investigations were started in September 1924 when a soil survey was made of the entire field. In.making the survey about 75 profiles were obtained in the 2 1/2 acre field. The profiles were examined to a depth of 72 inches. The results of this survey led to the location of stations on the various types of soil as indicated on the map (Fig. 1). Some stations are located rather close together, indicating a change of soil type or a more shallow or deeper phase of the same type. - 10 - At each station there was installed a water well from which water table heights could be conveniently measured. The wells were installed by sinking a piece of three-fourths inch gas pipe in the ground to a depth known to be below the water-table. This depth was found by the use of the soil auger. The pipe was set on a few pieces of very coarse gravel, that were previously dropped into the hole, in order that the water in the pipe could easily rise and fall with the water table in the $011. Other than the soil survey and installation of water wells no other data were taken until the following spring. Beginning in the spring of 1925, at the time growth started, water table depths were taken at weekly intervals throughout the growing season. At the same time the water tables were measured, soil samples were taken for moisture determination in each soil horizon down to and including the clay layer, provided the clay could be reached with the 70 inch soil auger. These samples were collected in cans designed for the purpose and carried to the laboratory immediately where they were weighed and placed in a soil oven. The oven was kept at a temperature of 110°C. The smaples were kept at this temperature for 24 hours, after which they were reweighed and moisture percentages cal- culated. At intervals of two weeks a set of samples, similar to the samples taken for moisture determinations, were collect- ed for laboratory studies. - 11 - Laboratggy Studies These samples were sent to the laboratory of the Soils Section where studies were made on Nitrates, H-ion concentrations, and freezing point depressions, soon after they were received. Each sample was passed through a 1mm. mesh screen, carefully mixed on a sheet of paper and placed in small paper bags until determinations were made. Nitrates were determined by the method of Schreiner and Failyer, (28). Freezing point determinations were made by the method developed by Bouyoucos and McCool, (9). The heat of wetting (7) was employed as a method for the determination of colloids. I The hydrogen ion concentration was determined by means of the quinhydrone electrode as outlined by E. Biilmann (6). Field Studies Yields were taken on individual plants in each check block for the seasons of 1924 and 1925. These yields are reported in ounces of berries per plant (Table 8). In computing the average yield of plants for any location all the plants in the block were not used; instead about 8 or 10 plants immediately around the station were used. Such a system was thought to be better than taking yields for the entire block since different soil conditions and consequent- ly different plant growth may be encountered 20 feet away from the station. Excavations of plants and studies of root distrubutions - 12 - were made at each station during August 1925. The root systems of at least 2 plants at each station were ex- cavated, described, and photographed. The method used in root excavations was similar to that employed by Weaver (32). In short it consisted in digging a trench 2 to 3 feet wide and 5 to 6 feet long to a depth cf about 4 1/2 feet by the side of the plant to be examined. This offered an open face into which one might dig with a hand pick furnished with a sharp point on one end, and after sufficient practice and acquaintance with the soil texture, root systems were obtained almost in their entirety. Photographs were made while the root system was still attached to one side of the excavation. Such photographs show the relation of root distribution to sub soil horizons and height of water table. After growth.had ceased in the Fall of 1925 growth measurements and cans production records were taken at all the various stations. The same plants were used for these records that yield records were taken from earlier in the Season. PRESENTATION OF DATA Each station will now be taken.up separately and in more detail. The soil and moisture conditions prevailing and the response of the plants to these conditions will be considered. Station #1 The location of station 1 is shown on the map (Fig. l), - 13 - at the head of a slight depression indicated by Contours 94 and 95. Such a location should induce horizontal as well as vertical drainage. The elevation of this station was only 4 feet lower than the highest elevation in the field, 240 feet away. The soil is a shallow phase Allendale sandy loam. The surface soil is a gray sandy loam seven inches in depth and to all appearances uniform in character. It would be regarded as fertile and as being of good physical character. It is friable, works up well; water drains through it readily; it shows no tendency to cement or puddle when wet nor to bake upon drying. Nitrate determinations (Table #1) showed the soil to be high in nitrate nitrogen throughout the season. The reaction of the soil would be considered neutral (Table #2) the Ph determinations ranging from 6.9 to 7.2 for the season. Immediately beneath the surface soil is a layer of rather coarse sand. This in turn is underlaid by the clay at 34 inches. The sand permits water to seep through readily, but in reality seepage is very slow, because of the impervious nature of the clay beneath. The result is a comparatively high water table throughout the year. As a matter of fact the curve (Fig. #6) shows that at no time did it recede to the clay layer and during a 10-12 week drought it dropped only 20 inches. Four times during the growing season it was to within 10 inches of the surface, once following the heavy - 14 - rains of early September it rose to the 7 inch layer of surface soil. The distribution of the root system at this location is is shown in Fig. 7 and its penetration represented graphic- ally in Fig. 6. It may be described as moderately wide spreading but very shallow, practically limited to the 7- inch layer of surface soil. A few feeding roots worked their way down into the sand to a depth of 3-inches (total depth of 10 inches) but the working level of the root system was within seven inches of the surface. The fact that the division line between surface soil and sub-soil coincides with the highest level reached by the water table makes it difficult to say which of these two factors de- termines depth of root penetration. Correlated with the shallow and limited root system of the plants at this station was an unsatisfactory non- vigorous growth of the above ground parts. This is well illustrated in Fig. 7, by a typical plant growing in this location and by its growth records (Table 9). In 1924 it produced only three, in 1925 four, weak slender canes. Furthermore in order to secure a stand of plants in this area it has been necessary frequently to replant. FORK MI .0, it‘lli 5’00) fart...“ 3‘ ‘ 'I .e , MADOOON. WII. Fig. 7 -- Plants at Station 1. Top: Showing distribution and penetration of roots: Bottom: Showing growth made by Plants. - 15 - Station #2 This station is located close to station 1 as shown.on the map (Fig. l). The soil is a shallow phase of the Allendale type as is station 1. There is no marked or noticeable difference in the sur- face soil of Station 2 from that of Station 1. The color, texture, and physical properties described at station 1 are identical with those of station 2 and the intervening area. Immediately beneath the surface soil is the clay horizon. The 27-inch layer of sand at station 1 has com- pletely disappeared at station 2 and the clay substratum lies within eight inches of the surface. Very poor drainage conditions exist here as the high water table for the entire season indicates (Fig. 8). Gravitational water remained in the first 15 inches of soil until the first week of June when it began to recede very slowly but never went below 30-inches during the 10 to 12 weeks drought. The rains of early September caused an imp mediate rise of the water table and it reached a height of 16 inches from the surface within a period of one week. There was only a slight fluctuation from this depth for the remainder of the season. In making fertility studies the nitrate content (Tab. 1) was found to be exceptionally high at this station compared to the other Stations. The soil reaction was slightly alkaline throughout the entire season (Tab. 2). -l6- . The root system (Fig. 9) produced at Station number 2 is shallow and wide spreading. Practically the entire root system is limited to the 8-inch layer of surface soil. The pantration which is represented by the graph (Fig. 8) shows that the working level and the division line of surface soil and sub-soil coincide. This condition was also found to exist at Station number 1 where the water table was of practically the same height. The maximum penetration is slightly greater in the clay sub-soil of station 2 than in the sand of station number one. This difference, however, is so slight that it would be hard to draw any conclusions I favoring either type of sub-soil when such a high water table exists at both locations. The vegetative growth has been poor, which would be expected on such a limited root system. The average cane growth was less at this station than at station number one ( Table 9 ). The yields for the 1924 and 1925 season.were slightly greater at station 2 than station 1; however, the difference is not significant (Table 8). Many plants in this location have been replanted several times during the short life of the plantation. , ‘ \ my comp. unoosou. me. W1 MN 3 ‘- n ‘2. J——-—)‘_ *(g'. g .e.. "Q’ “A I . 4... «191.,- ‘9:‘:-"‘." I‘.‘ -,- «fr. , . ,. 21‘.an , A. 4 t.» Fig. 9 -- Plants at Station 2. Tap: Showing distribution and penetration of roots; Bottom: Showing growth made by plants. - 17 - Station #3 Station number 3 is located at the base of the most severe drop from the highest point of the plantation, with a gradual slope to the north.(Fig. l). The surface slope being sufficient to care for the immediate run off. A study of the profile at this station showed it to be a deep phase Allendale. The surface soil is a sandy loam about 9 inches deep and comparing very closely to the surface soils of other locations as to size and nature of particles (Table 5). The fertility of the surface soil is relatively low, as indicated by the low nitrate (Table l) and high concentration of H-ion(Table 2). The surface layer is underlain with a layer of white sand 66 inches in thickness. The clay is encountered at a depth of 75 inches. The water table reached its highest point, 12 inches from surface during the first week of may. It dropped from 12 inches regularly to 35 inches at weekly intervals and remained at a depth of 35 to 45 inches throughout the en- tire summer (Fig. 10). The depth of water table at Station 3 is as great or greater than at Station 4 (Fig. 12). However, the maximum penetration of roots is only 15 inches at Station 5 and 54 inches at Station 4. Examination of the soil moisture percentages show the soil of Station 3 to contain 2 to £% more moisture than Station 4 (Table 6). Furthermore Station 4 has a soil and sub-soil which according to Table 5 would be expected to hold more water as unfree water 9 18 - because of more colloidal material. Excavations showed the roots to be much concentrated in the upper 7 or 8 inches of soil, with a working level of about 9 inches (Fig. 11). These roots had a lateral ex- pansion of about 84 inches and a maximum penetration of 15 inches. The maximum penetration was largely neW'growth which seemed to have started after the water table receded to a lower level. Cane growth displayed about the same vigor as was found at Station 1 (Table 9); however the average number of canes per hill was greater and the yield was some what greater (Table 8). These data indicate conditions slightly more favorable for growth than at stations 1 and 2. . t m $1.4m w . M FMM 'g'akfdcc CO‘OP. HADIION. WII. - .ltw Fig. 11 -- Plants at Station 5. TOp: Showing distribution and penetration of roots; Bottom: showing growth made by plants. - 19 - Station #4 ’ Station number 4 is shown on the map (Fig. 1) as having the same elevation as Station 1. The area surroundingthis station, for a radius of 50 feet, would be considered level. To the north 50 or 60 feet is a very gradual slope into the depression at Stations 1 and 2. Conditions for soil drain- age would be considered good. The Saugatuck type is represented by this soil pro- file. The surface soil is a gray sandy loam medium to fine in texture. It is 5 inches in depth and apparently uniform - in character. Its physical condition.would be regarded as .very good; it drains readily and pulverizes easily when cultivated. The surface soil is underlain by a 12-inch layer of rather fine reddish sand (Table 5) immediately beneath which is clay, the clay being within 17 inches of the sur- face. The nitrate content ran medium to low throughout the season. The soil reaction was slightly acid, the PH range for the season being 5.6 to 5.7. The water table at this station did not show any ex- treme fluctuations (Fig. 12). Only for a period of about 1-week, in early May, did the water table make its appearance in the sandy layer. The heavy rains of early September seem- ‘ ed to have little or no effect on the water table. surface and horizontal drainage to the north must have played a part. The water table never receded to such a depth that -30.. would cause the plants to suffer from drought; nor did it rise to such a point that there would be any possible in- Jury to roots from gravitational water. The distribution of the root system at this location is shown in Fig. 15 and its penetration represented graph- ically in Fig. 12. It is very vigorous and well developed in all directions, having a lateral spread of 48" and a maximum penetration of 54". The working level reaches to a depth of 15 inches, filling the surface soil and the first 8 inches of sandy sub-soil with a mass of well branch- ed rootlets. The division line between the surface soil and sub-soil seems not to influence root penetration. The roots ramify very freely in the sandy layer and a few in- dividual roots penetrate deep into the clay. The top growth measurements (Table 9) of the plants at this location show the advantage of such a root system. The plant excavated consisted of 10 canes produced in 1924 and 14 canes produced in 1925. The yield records (Table 8) for a few plants around this station show a decidedly better average production per plant than plants of stations 1, 2, and 5. No replanting has been necessary on this location. CO'OP, MADISON . "II. 5.. a a 4a t a. - ‘ ‘ . ‘.‘ I I I I t'r ‘ \ . p 3:} ‘ if," ,1. I . C _. 2”“: I" i '.-' 9. 1 .‘,Q ‘\ , . w: I "“’J§ q!‘ "t .. 8e '- in i ,1»:- '5 it “*- . ‘n - . :g‘ ‘ ."r I ( u . ‘ [~7-.. ‘.‘ _ '—Fig. 15 -- Plants at Station 4. Top: Showing distribution and penetration of roots; Bottom: Showing growth made by plant 8 e - 21 - . Station #5 The location of Station 5 is shown on the map (Fig. l) as being very close to station 4 only 11 or 12 ft. away. It was established at this point because of extreme sub- soil differences within the very short distance. There were no particular surface differences in elevation or sur- face 8011. Studies of the soil profile showed it to be of a deep phase Allendale type. The surface soil was found to be about the same in texture as that of the entire plantation. Nitrate determinations show the fertility of this station to be slightly greater than that of station 4 (Table l). The soil reaction was found to be more acid than at any other station in the field (Table 2). The surface soil layer is 6 inches in depth and is underlain by a layer of white leached sand 50 inches in thickness. The white color of the sand is an indication of excessive leaching by drainage water which also re- moved much of the nutritive and soluble material, as shown by tables 1 and 4. Observations on the fluctuation of free water shows a water table maintaining a level of about 15 inches from the surface for several weeks during the spring and early summer, April 22 to June 6. The table then receded to a depth of 40 inches which.was a little lower than station 4. Results of root studies show the concentration of roots to be in the upper 10 inches of soil, working 4 or 5 inches into the white sand (Fig. 14). However, the larg- 92.2- er roots of the system are confined to the surface 6 or 8 inches with smaller roots extending into the sub-soil. The working level is above the highest point reached by the water table at any time during the season, which is a little lower than station 4. At station 4 the water table was found slightly above the working level of the roots once during the spring, whereas at station 5 the water table, although remaining high for a longer period of time, does not submerge the more concentrated mass of roots. The root systems at station 5 seem to have been restricted to the surface layer by the higher fertility of this layer and the impoverished condition of the white leached sand below. This has very likely served to keep the major portion of the roots near the surface and in so doing preserved them from being flooded. Cane growth and yields are greater at this station than at station 4 where the water table is lower and root penetration greater. This is the only exception to the general rule encountered in the entire field. £6 (.7 ,lrram 5a rial! CO'OP. IAD5ION , VII. ‘ K \ I . Fifi-'- Fig. 15 -- Plants at Station 5. T0p: Showing distribution and penetration of roots; Bottom: Showing growth made by plants. 9 25 - Station #6 This station is located on the highest elevation in the field. The land slopes slightly in all directions, resulting in excellent surface drainage. The total elevation is about 6 feet above the lowest point in the plantation (Fig. 1). Thorough examination showed the soil profile to be very uniform over the entire plat. Nitrate determinations made on the surface soil at this station indicate con- ditions such as are usually found in soils of medimm fertility (Table l). The soil reaction was comparatively acid (Table 2). This is a typical Saugatuck soil having the character- istic dark sandy loam surface soil 5 to 8 inches thick, which is underlain with a white sandy layer of about 10 inches. This white layer of sand gives away to a red sand hard-pan of 10 to 12 inches followed by white sand to a depth of more than 75 inches. This type of soil is not recognized as being extremely fertile, but the results as shown by cane and fruit production prove this soil to be high producing. This sandy type of soil and sub-soil permits the ready movement of gravitational water in all directions and the water table is at all times lower than the work- ing level of the roots which is about 16 inches. For the major portion of the season gravitational water was well below the maximum penetration of the roots-- - 24 9 54 inches (Fig. 16). With the very low water table during the extremely dry season (1925) the soil still held cone siderable moisture; in fact it varied little during the season (Table 6). After careful excavation of several typical plants at this station it was found that very extensive root systems were developed by the plants. These roots were largely con- centrated above the hardpan as shown in Fig. 17. Many roots were found to run out in a horizontal direction when they came in contact with the hardpan. Few roots penetrated the hardpan to the maximum penetration of 54 inches. The marked turning of the roots by the hardpan Shows that it is a limiting factor in the ramification of the roots through the soil. The excellent growth of the plants (Table 9), however, indicates that greater penetration is not nec- essary in a soil of such depth and degree of fertility, when the plants are set at the distance of 5 feet. As would be expected from the extensive root system, the growth of the vegetative parts is very good (Tab1e9). Plants on this location have produced a larger number of vigorous canes per hill than at any other part of the plantation. A perfect stand of plants resulted from the original planting. This station had the lowest water table and the high- est acid condition of any station in the field. The nitrates were found to be medium in amount compared with the rest of the field. With these conditions prevailing, better cane - 35 - growth and higher yields were obtained from plants at station 6 than at any other station where records were made. Fig. 17 -- Plants at Station 6. Top: Showing distribution and penetration of roots; Bottom: Showing growth made by plants. - 25 - Station #7 This station is located at the north end of the field as shown on the map (Fig. 1). It is the lowest in elevation of all the stations studied. Most of the surface drainage from the north end of the field passes over this station since it is located in the depression running to the north east. The type represented at station 7 is a shallow phase Allendale. A loam surface 7 inches deep underlain by clay was the profile found at this station. The surface soil was somewhat heavy containing more colloidal material as shown by the heat of wetting (Table 5); but still of a very good type for raspberry culture.(Loree (20)). The soil is of a higher fertility than the majority of the locations studied. The water table was high throughout the entire season, .fluctuating from a depth of 5 inches in the spring to a depth of 25 inches in mid-summer (Fig. 18). However, the moisture content of the surface and sub-soil was not ex- cessive at any time during the season.when not containing gravitational water (Table 6). In fact it was no higher than some of the lighter surface soils in other blocks. Root excavations showed the root system of the plants to be limited to the first five inches of surface soil. A few roots showed a maximum penetration of 11 inches, this depth carried them into the clay sub-stratum about 6 inches (Fig. 18). - 37 - Five or six inches has not provided enough room fer a root growth sufficient to support plants of a satisfactory size and vigor (Table 9). All of the plants in this area have been reset at least once since the plantation was first established. During the season of 1924 there were only four 2-year old plants to calculate an average yield from. This average was only 0.5 oz. per plant. Before the 1925 season was over so many of the plants had died. while others were deteriorating in vigor, that no yields were taken. FORM MI 4' I” flaw far/44¢ "an“ that or u Ammo-Atte- ~ - “(‘IYY Cn'C‘P, MADI’ON. W'I. . .0". 'fl .: h 5 . .,_'.-_ 1 ' ' 2-. ‘J'I " , \2‘4321Wt 3" . -AA .- . . ' «In Snowing distribution Fig. 19 -- Plants at Station 7. Top: and penetration of roots; Bottom: Showing growth made by plants. - 28 - Station #8 Investigations were made at station 8 close to those at station 7, as shown on the map (Fig. 1). This was done because of the extreme variation in the soil profile and the differences in plant growth. The difference in eleva- tion between stations 7 and 8 is very slight, and the two locations are within 55 feet of each other. _ Examination of the soil profile at this station showed it to be an Allendale loam. The soil was not so high in nitrate content as at station 7, being less favorable fer growth in this respect. Soil at station 8 was very near a neutral condition. The surface layer is about 7 inches in thickness and the heaviest in texture of any found in the field (Table 5). However it was always in a good physical condition and did not tend to break up in clods when cultivated. Fourteen inches of white leached sand, low in nitrates and of an acid nature lay immediately beneath the surface. Below this sand there is 19 inches of red sand mixed with some clay before the clay substratum is reached. The water table rose to 10 inches from the surface on May 2, but rapidly receded to 57 inches where it re- mained throughout the summer (Fig. 20). The moisture content was higher for the surface soil at station 8 than at station 7; but not any higher than would be ex- pected when the difference in texture is considered. The sub-soil layers hold sufficient moisture to induce growth. - 3g - The root system and its distribution, shown in Fig. 21, would be regarded as very vigorous and extensive, forming a complete network through the soil. The working level of the roots at this location was about 19 inches, with many going to a depth of 28 inches and having a lateral spread of about 50 inches. The roots were well distributed through the white sand and the layer of clay and sand mixture. The water table rose into the working mass of roots at one time during the spring. This rise was so tempo- rary and the fall was so rapid that it seemed to have little or no effect on root development (Fig. 20). Vegetative growth and fruit yields show that conditions at station 8 are favorable for plant growth. All of the plants in the immediate vicinity of the well were survivors of the original planting (Table 9). .141111 514; .2ardll‘ . , F " It '30 a " _ win filer, _ W‘iftw _ 'f“._ 07' CO°OP. MADISON. W... F 21 -- Plants at Statio 335 penetration of roots; Bottom: ‘Showing g Plants. on“ Showin. distribution ‘ $0 wth made by - 50 - Station #9 Station 9 was located as shown on the map (Fig. 1), because of differences in plant growth. The entire block is level and the only apparent difference between this location and the rest of the block was in plant growth which was not extensive at station #9. Upon examination the soil proved to be a deep phase Allendale type, with a surface soil of 9 inches underlain with a gray sand layer of 21 inches, which in turn is underlain by a 12-inch layer of red sand. At this depth of the profile the clay substratum is encountered. The surface soil is a sandy loam comparing closely with that of the greater portion of the plantation (Table 5). Nitrate content (Table 1) and acidity determinations (Table 2) indicate at least an average fertility. The sub-soil layers are low in nitrates and do not possess a high degree of acidity. The water table measurements show a very high:water table throughout the entire season (Fig. 22). In early spring the water stood within 5 inches of the surface and never dropped below 26 inches during the summer. Plant growth was decidedly limited in this area, there being only one plant in the vicinity, the rest having died out. This plant was excavated in the usual way to study root development. Figure 25 shows this small plant with its restricted root system. The working level was only 6 inches from the surface with a maximum penetration of 10 inches. This root system would be classified as shallow - 31 - and wide spreading, having a lateral extension of 24 inches. Gravitational water coming within 5 inches of the surface evidently restricted the area for root development to the surface layer; whereas, the roots would ordinarily develop more extensively as they did in much the same soil profile at station 8 with a lower water table. It is also important to note that the moisture content in both soil and sub-soil of station 9 does not vary a great deal fnam that of stations 8 and 10 where plant growth.was good (Table 6). a" w u. w n. o m n A u r. o o o C E ) .Fig. 25 -- Plants at Station 9. Top: Showing distribution and penetration of roots; Bottom: Showing growth made by Plants. .. 53 - Station #10 Station 10 was located about 50 feet from station 9, as shown on the map (Fig. 1). There were no apparent differences between the two stations on the Block as to elevation and surface features, but the plant growth was different. Examination of the soil profile at station 10 showed variation from that at station 9 especially in depth of horizons. The soil is of the Saugatuck series. The sur- face soil is a sandy loam 8 inches in thickness and about the same texture as that at station 9. The nitrate de- terminations show that station 10 is less fertile than station 9. The soil reaction Shows about the same degree of acidity at both stations. The sub-soil was a reddish yellow gravelly sand layer about 8 inches in thickness terminated with the clay substratum at 16 inches. Records of the water table variations Show complete saturation at 9 inches from the surface in early spring. It then receded rapidly to a depth of about 50 inches which was maintained throughout the summer until the fall rains appeared and caused a rise (Fig. 24). The moisture per- centages of the soil were somewhat lower than at station 9, but there was sufficient moisture to maintain plant growth (Table 6). Excavations show that the plants at this station have well developed root systems. The 8-inch layer of surface soil is matted with well branched roots from 1/3 to 1/4 inch in diameter (Fig. 25). Enough roots penetrate into 9 55 ~ the sandy layer to give a working level of 12 inches. many of the roots work into the clay to a depth of 50 inches which is practically at the water level. The 9 inches of roots above the level of the water in early spring apparent- ly provided sufficient room for the plant to grow as there seems to have been no detrimental effect on the plant growth. In comparison to station 9 with its lack of plant growth but deep sub-soil, the shallow sub-soil of station 10 can- not be a limiting factor. This station compares more closely with station 8 with its clay mixture coming to within 20 inches of the surface and its low water table. The vegetative growth and fruit yields at this station are good (Tables 8-9), indicating favorable conditions for plant growth. No replanting has ever been done. .c u a, r 3 I l. 7... (NSIYV CO‘OP. MADISON, WOC. Fig. 25 -- Plants at Station 10. Top: Showing distribution and penetration of roots; Bottom: Showing growth made by plants. 9 54 9 Station #11 Station 11 was located on the east side of the plantation, (Fig. l), in an area showing a very uniform plant growth.and a.uniform soil profile.. For this reason only one station was located in the area. Surface drain- age from this block may take place either to the north or east. This entire block is composed of a very uniform pro- file of deep phase Allendale sandy loam. The nitrate de- terminations were not so high at this station as those found at stations 7 and 9 and the soil is decidedly acid, (Tables 1-2), which indicates an average fertility. - The surface soil is possibly a little lighter in texture than the surface soils of other stations (Table 5). The sub-soil layers are of the usual nature fer the Allen- dale type; first the white sand from 5-16 inches, underlain by a reddish yellow sand from 16-28 inches, with white sand continuing from the 28 inch depth to the clay substratum which is encountered at a depth of 56 inches. Water table measurements snowed a lower level through» out the early spring than was found at any other station in the black raspberry planting. The highest point reached by the water table was 21 inches, which was maintained over a period of 5 weeks. The gravitational water level then re- ceded to 47 inches during late summer and rose only to the 56 inch mark with the rains of early September (Fig. 26). The moisture content of the entire profile was ample to maintain growth throughout the season. 9 55 9 The root systems excavated at this station were found to be very well developed (Fig. 27). As a matter of fact the most extensive root system of the entire plantation.was found in this block. The working level extended to a depth of 20 inches and the maximum penetration was 22 inches, showing that there were well branched feeding roots almost as deep as the maximum penetration. There was a lateral development of 55 inches, the roots ramifying very freely through the sandy sub-layers to a much greater depth in this block than they did in similar soil profiles at stations 9 or 15, Where greater fertility predominates but associated with a much higher water table. Correlated with the vigorous root growth, extensive top growth and good yields of fruit were recorded at this station (Table 899). All the plants at station represent the original plantings. Fig. 27 -- Plants at Station 11. Top: Showing distribution and penetration of roots; Bottom: Showing growth made by plants. \i - 35 - ‘- Station #12 This station.was located on the east side as shown on. the map (Fig. 1.). The topographical map shows this block to be situated on a very slight incline that continues for at least 100 feet east of the block thus providing good surface drainage. The surface soil is a light gray sandy loam 8 inches deep and apparently uniform in character. The surface soil is underlain by a very thhzk horizon of coarse yellow sand. In fact the exact thickness could not be determined since the clay was not reached. This soil is an Ottawa sandy loam. The nitrate content varied throughout the season but would be regarded as good When compared with surrounding blocks (Table 1). Héion determinations Showed this soil to be slightly acid, the PH average being about 5.5 for the season. A good physical condition prevails in the surface soil at this station. The water table curve shows that at no time during the season did gravitational water stand within 15 inches of the surface. This height was maintained only for a short time in the early spring. After the first week of May the water receded very rapidly to a depth of about 50 inches from the surface where it remained for the rest of the season (Fig. 28). The excavation of several root systems at this location showed a maximum penetration of 24 to 28 inches,.and a work- ing level of about 15 inches. Here again the working level does not go below the highest point reached by the water - 37 - table but does go considerable deeper than.the working level found at other stations where the water table came nearer the surface. The roots at this station penetrated into the sub-soil as though no change in soil horizon had been encountered (Fig. 29). The growth of canes at this stationmas proportionly good (Table 9). Five plants in the immediate vicinity of this station produced 4 canes per crown during the summer of 1925. Each of these canes averaged one-half inch in diameter. Such cane growth from the crown of a black rasp- berry plant would be considered good. These fine plants averaged 12.9 ounces of berries per plant in 1924 and 21.2 ounces in 1925 (Table 8). FORM MI § 1 ! I ( . ) x i r . 54!] ill fi/(te .- _ ,‘._.-i_..._.___....i._ _. Mt; .4 ._ . w. A _ :_ .5 .. h S S.; S S . S... . I _ n u 'ARTHEHT OF HEHATICS . n ft//!!' .909". " ~ ".1 . (‘1. I): r’o A . . .. v: ,,_., " f - .' . - N . ' , ~fi .JR 5‘"? ' ~--_\:‘€" .' ‘ _: l o. a \l- . £3 - - v I Fig. 29 -- Plants at Station 12. Top: Showing distribution and penetration of roots; Bottom: Showing growth made by Plants. 9 58 9 Station #13 Station number 15 was only 15 feet from station number 12 (Fig. l). The same soil conditions described for station 12 were found at station 15. Station 15 being an Ottawa soil also the first sub-soil horizon is composed of yellow sand 52 inches in depth. The clay is encountered at a depth of 60 inches. The fact that clay was reached with the soil auger at this station and was not reached with the soil auger at station 12 brings out the one and only dif- ference in soil profile of the two stations. The nitrates were somewhat higher at the beginning of the season at station 15 (Table 1) and the surface soil of station 15 was nearer neutrality than that of station 12. The water table showed about the same seasonal fluctua- tions at this station as it did at station 12 (Fig. 50). Gravitational water reached a point 2 inches nearer the sur- face at this location, in the early spring, than it did at location 12. Every plant that was in close proximity to this statinn died during the summer of 1924, When the rainfall was con- siderably more than that received during 1925 (Table 10). No water table data were taken during 1924 so it was im- possible to compare the fluctuation of water table at stations 12 and 15 for the 1924 season.when all plants died at station 15. To obtain some information as to how roots had reacted to the conditions at station 15 the nearest surviving plant - 39 - was excavated. The plant was approximately 8 feet from the water well. The working level of this root system was limited to the first eight inches of soil. A few stringy roots showed a maximum penetration of 17 inches. Closely correlated with this limited root system only one cane was produced in 1924 and one cane in 1925. .' .0 _‘ -,4",' ‘1.) I- . . ‘ '9’ s- L.‘ . h, 1' , ‘J ’ .‘V‘?o-I.',Ih‘ ’0 ‘ ~ " .A J_,:‘.’ _,.__,. .‘TLQ ~ A; ‘ . " gaf‘ a , _ c w ’ '~.. '3'... . ‘ ; '«.;J.‘¢q . ’ 3'..." :1 :3 (3}?) It J3? .:’~_§L :1 ‘ 1'?‘ a lg. . 1. .‘ .1"- - "ffia enigma. t — g .1 v - v1. . .- a» : r;«‘ .u ._ 6v:- : '1 .K t \ ‘ e ' - ‘0 ‘ ' - a» 2‘ -.\ ' V. .. )- ' Fig. :51 —- Plants at Station 13. Top: Showing distribution and penetration of roots; Bottom: Showing growth made by - Plants. ¥ As previously stated the heat of wetting was used in a comparative way as an indication of the texture of the soil. However there was not a great difference in the physical condition of the surface soil as indicated by the results of the heat of wetting determinations and actual field observation. * It is a well recognized fact that nitrogen is the most important fertilizing element for the stimulation of vegetative growth and that, (26), of all the nitrogen compounds yet investigated, nitrates are the best and in natural conditions, the only nitrogenous nutrient for non- leguminous plants. Therefore nitrates may be taken as a measure of the ability of the soil to produce vegetative growth. The amount of nitrates in the soil varies accord- ing to several factors which makes the drawing of conclusions from the amounts found present a difficult matter. Some of these correlated factors such as acidity, (26), washing out by drainage water (27), time of year, (20) and soil moisture (22), and the influence of other fertilizing elements in the soil, are factors which have been found to vary considerably on this particular area. However a careful study of the nitrates of the soil throughout the season reveals the fact that though nitrates are important - 41 - on plots of little vegetative growth there may be relative- ly large amounts of nitrates present and where there is good grwoth there may be but few nitrates present. This of course may be partially explained in that the large growth takes up the nitrates as fast as they are produced, but even before growth starts in early spring these apparent inconsistencies were evident. When the coefficient of correlation between vegetative growth and nitrates present in the soil is determined a negative correlation of .2 is obtained, which would indicate that nitrates are not a limiting factor or that other factors are of greater sig- nificance and tended to overcome the influence of the nitrates on the growth in this field. The acidity of the soil affects the plant growth both directly, (26) and indirectly in affecting nitrates. Judg- ing,however,from the results of determinations made there is no correlation between growth and H-ion concentration in this field. The concentration of soluble salts in the soil solution should also prove to be a factor but in this case can not be considered a limiting factor because of the slight variations as revealed by the freezing point determinations. The possibilities of considering soil or soil aeration as directly influencing the plant growth separately are limited because of the very close correlation of soil moisture and soil aeration. That this is the case has been - 43 - well established in that too much water causes the exclusion of air. A study of the moisture content of the soil in the portions above the water table indicate a sufficient quantity of water for growth at all times during the season. That the moisture content is closely associated with the dis- tance from water table and soil texture is well recognized and the work of Harris & Turpin (17) presents data showing that moisture from a saturated soil moves farther into a loam than into a sand'and into a sand farther than into a clay. The clay however contained more moisture in the layer of 8011 next to the water supply than.the others and sand the least. Sand with 7.77% water gave up its moisture to loam much more readily than loam with 31.09% and clay with 24.62%. The rate of rise of moisture from soils of varying texture varied inveffily to the fineness. Water rose to a height of over 30 inches in a loam soil from a moist sand in 94 days and only 6 inches clay. The rise con- tinued steady longer in clay than in other soils. That there is a correlation between the worh of Harris & Turpin and the problem under discussion is evident for there is a great variation in the soil profile. That is, the water table and the saturated soils come in contact with soils of various texture, and also vary in their distance from the surface. This causes variations in the amount of moisture present .in the feeding area of the roots which would cause variations in growth. The requirement of soil moisture for good growth - 43 - of the raspberry plant has not been determined, but it is readily seen by comparison of the soil moisture, above the saturated soil, and the growth on the various locations that the variations in the soil moisture of the feeding area are not of great enough significance to call them a limiting factor. The moisture relationships of the soil yet to be con~ sidered include the problem of the gravitational water and its variation as revealed by the use of wells placed over the plantation. Comparison of the growth and yields with the water table variations show that on locations of poor growth the water table was in all cases very near the surface for at least a short period of time during the beginning of the growing season. Classifying the locations as to soil type, plant growth and height of water table in, the spring results in the following table, (Page 44). There are correlations of growth with soil type as would be expected because of similarities throughout a soil type in chemical and physical nature (23) and (33). As moisture is one of the controlling factors in soil formation the type of soil varies with moisture and there is a correlation between growth and soil type. A reason for the variation in water table may be found in a detailed study of the soil profile over the entire area which was studied. In transposing profile and topographic measurements graphically it is seen that the surface of the clay substratum which underlies the entire area presents - 44 - Assoam aHmM :pHs H opre popes .o>¢ npsoam aoom npws H spsoam doom an3 H museum doom an3 n Swsoam doom mass m OHDma hopes 30H npsoam noon an3 H Ansonm noom nsHs n 923 popes swam samppo Modpstmm oHeenoHHd omega moon OHsdsmHHd omega BOHHenm - 45 - several pockets for the holding of water (Figures 2, 3, 4 and 5). When these pockets occur near the surface so that the water table comes in to the feeding area of the roots in the early Spring then the water table presents a factor which must be conidered in the growth of raspberries. Much work has been done on the "rawness" of subsoils and the power of plants to take nutrients at lower levels. However it was not because of the "rawness" that the roots did not penetrate the soil in certain locations for in the same type of soil without the high water table was penetrat- ed very freely. Other work tends to show that a high water table would inhibit root growth.arker (3) investigated the influence of the surrounding medium upon roots and showed that the rate of growth in roots of Lupinus albus was increased when a stream of atmospheric air was drawn through the soil. The growth of roots Lupinus & Heleanthus in water was faster when atmospheric air was bubbled through the solution. The growth in mud was promoted by frequently renewing the water and thus increasing the access of air. Studies by Snow (30) showed that an absence of oxygen stopped the production of root hairs and retarded growth. Further studies by Stoklasa and Ernest (51) prove that there is an injurious action which the lack of oxygen in the soil produces on root development and that this lack of oxygen appears in soils which are supersaturated. Even plants which naturally grow in very wet locations have been found 9 46 2 to need aeration, as shown by Coville (12) in his study of p the blue berry. The length of time which.plant roots may be to submerged varies with the plant according to Berg- man(5). He showed that with beans, balsam and geraniums in pots submerged with bog water and tap water the time before wilting began varied from two days with balsam to four days with beans and geraniums. In the case of the raspberries on this particular plantation the length of time which the roots were submerged was in most cases as long as 7 days, but the entire root system.was not submerged. The amount of injury was correlated with the length of time and and the amount of the root system submerged. This would tend to limit the root growth to the upper layer of the soil. This is shown in the photographs to be the case. 9 47 - CONCLUSION It can.be said in conclusion that the aeration of raspberry roots is an essential factor in the success- ful growth of these plants. Furthermore this aeration is closely correlated with the presence of gravitational water in the soil. Extreme variations in subsoils occur in Michigan in the raspberry producing sections. These variations bring about a condition of gravitational water near the surface of the soil with a subsequent injury to the raspberry plants. - 43 - Tab 18 NO 0 l Nitrates in Dry Soil Parts to the Million of Water Extract Station 1 to e on Surface Sand Surface Clay Surface Sand Surface Sand Clay Surface Sand Surface Red Sand Hard Layer White Sand . Surface Clay Surface White Sand Red Sand Surface Gray Sand Surface ,4: (f) ”:2 flO€;’)CC>C;C)CD\1(D PCS‘JCDIbCOCfiQ G) F4 «3C I 0-8 Gravelly Sand 8-16 Surface White Sand Yellow Sand White Sand Surface Yellow Sand Surface Yellow Sand Foreign material Present in Sample. O-S 5-16 16-28 28-56 0-8 8-72 0-8 8~6O April 28,'25 mtekdereunHwamteeav O O O O O . O O O O 0 Hmommmmmemo 2.9 (fimrPNCflgal-JNNH mommwguoma a 3.2 2.0 3.1 3.3 2.0 Trace F-J cut-5'0... 03 O (D H. o (E) 0 ‘HHHWNWOWHEHNHHMH O (figCfiKMPCDFWfiaHPCfimCfiPJmCflGJU o O (D 1": eof‘joeoooi‘jeoeoeoo NHHHHHHH mpmmwmm May 26,'25 I'-‘ #sUHCfiHt-BHN‘EU$HQ®HUU®HHHUHO§NH ooeool’fieoeol’jeeoeoei‘fieoeooo June 23,325 1.0 1.9 7.3 3.0 Trace Trace Trace $40001in 0103000393 (hi-40190093 IPOVOOJOOH July 21,'25 F4 tH +4 m NWHHHWUUHHWNWHHOQNNNmNUmHU 00.1.00... 6.0 3.1 7.5 6.5 Trace Trace #4303er 96 O O O O O 0 \‘103g $$HHUOOOHNUOQWO§®$O§W CD August 20,?25 H. C O O O UGOHUNU‘ONI—JUWOQNNEP‘UTKOKDOTF-‘ODQOSD manometer?» o w Cfit—‘t—‘Hl—‘t—Sf-‘NUJHUTOV O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O OJCRF-‘lr—‘NF-‘F-‘(flt-‘l—‘NWN (flip-GP - 49 - Table NO. 2 Hydrogen-ion Concentration of Surface Soil During Season in terms of PH Station No. April 28 Kay 26 June 23 July 21 August 24 l 6.92 6.96 6.91 7.20 7.05 2 7.09 7.52 7.00 7.15 7.20 5 5.67 5.75 5.68 5.46 5.68 4 5.75 5.77 5.68 5 5.22 6.88 5.11 6 5.46 0.46 5.18 7 5.65 5.70 5.97 8 3.49 6.65 6.11 9 5.91 6.16 5.97 10 5.89 6.07 5.89 11 5.46 5.55 5.58 12‘ 5.56 5.80 5.45 13 3.97 5.86 5.51 4 Foreign material present. frat. . , : A--- r. .. ° - -‘ .. 1.118 113-114.? “ell-1011 coin::e-iitr.at1on, in 9H, Location \‘1 xi) , . 1, .- .." A. . -.. earl ac e no i’ 1 h. «.3 :1. Second " Third " Fourth " {\Z) “41 O Q"; ~35) C3 [.1 Table No. June 23, 6.11 6.60 6.45 6 051:6 5.65 Table 30. 4 Soluble material, in parts to the million as determined by the freezing point depression, in the surface 80118. Location April 28 May 26 June 23 July 21 August 20 l 475 575 500 450 575 2 235 425 575 474 500 Z 100 475 550 575 375 a ’> ‘2“ 525 475 450 H 420 525 675 450 425 6 560 625 725 500 475 7 a J 635 675 675 575 o 625 725 475 500 9 460 550 700 750 600 10 a n 600 725 675 400 11 575 650 800 800 550 12 475 600 725 475 450 13 o 675 750 62” 400 Table No. 4% Soluble material in parts to the million, of profile at each station, June 23, 1925. Station 1 2: 5 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 15 Surface horizon 500 ;9H3 550 525 675 735 675 725 700 725 800 725 750 Second " 55 650 675 475 575 425 425 550 475 600 475 550 525 Third " 625 500 650 700 Fburth " 475 750 Table NO. 5 Font of wetting in Jaloriuu per gram of oil profile at (u U (cacklsstatitu1, Jtuna 23, 21925 As ; W 1Ln1.1011 1 Li L3 4 0 0 7’ 9 1C) :11. -12 :15 7urfuce horizon 1.605 1.267 1.425 1.550 1.285 1.496 1.808 2.246 1.317 1.2 7 1.058 1.581 1.02 Vocond ” .976 4.071 .012 1.890 .469 1.500 5.575 .229 .500 .515 .351 .507 .506 1‘11‘. I "I, " ‘ _‘ ‘7 “ ‘ ,l . L...l.1v1. (4,017.1: 0:.)b6 ”1.01.130 .(JLlO ".7 . H .) F 7 w . 1.01411 1211. 04-40(: 0109 T A B L E N U M B 8-2 .2. Moisture Deteuuinations at eekly Intervals For Growing Season 1925. Sta. Sampl8 4/22 4/28 5/8 5/15 5/22 5/29 6/6 . 6/11 6/19 6/27 7/2 7/10 7/17 7/24 7/5l 8/’7 8/15 8/28 9/15 9/25 170. HO. 1 1 1 22.2 22.2 20.9 20.5 28.7 20.2 19.8 18.8 20.8 18.8 17.1 18.1 19.9 21-5 15-7 20.8 21.0 18-6 16.8 19.5 2 16.2 18. 5 17.8 12.2 18.2 11.4 11.2 10.1 11.7 9.2 8.9 9.2 10.2 9.5 9.8 10.1 18-5 11-9 15-4 10 5 2 8 16.9 17.0 18.4 12.2 12.1 11.0 18.9 12.1 12.9 18.5 16.0 9.5 10.7 9.5 12.7 10.5 15.9 12.9 12.1 16. 5 4 21.8 21.7 20.8 20.0 20.6 20.0 19.1 19.8 19.8 18.4 12.0 16.4 18.0 17.0 18.6 17.5 19.5 14-5 15-6 15.7 2 5 18.1 18.4 17.7 15.2 14.1 15.8 14.5 12.8 14.9 12.1 12-9 15.6 15-5 12.5 16.9 lO~7 15-0 11.3 16-3 15.1 6 85.8 16.9 18.0 21.4 16.0 15.8 8.7 12.4 8.4 7.7 7.9 7.0 4.4 10-2 7.7 12.3 7.0 9.2 10.0 4 7 18.7 20. 8 19.5 15. 2 16.8 16.0 18.6 11.4 12.8 12.1 8.8 12.7 10.7 ”o6 13-6 15-0 14.5 12.9 13-8 14.0 8 14.8 16. 8 16.0 18. 9 11.8 10.9 8.4 5.9 5.8 6.9 7.4 6.8 5.7 5.5 9.6 8.6 12.9 5.6 9.4 7.2 9 18.4 20 8 9.0 18. 4 15.9 15.7 18.9 17.9 22,2 16.0 16.1 15.5 12.5 15.5 12.8 18.8 16.9 15.5 14.5 17.5 5 10 14.6 17. 4 18.1 14. 8 14.0 12.9 11.8 10.8 10.5 10.2 11.5 10.0 10-9 9.9 10.7 9«6 14.2 17.7 11-0 9.8 11 18.8 18.0 18.6 12.8 18.7 11.4 8.6 18.8 8.8 8.6 9.1 7.8 10~8 12.7 9.4 9-0 12. 0 10.7 9-6 8.5 6 12 17.7 17.8 17.9 16.8 16.1 16.0 15.6 14.0 18.8 18.6 10.1 11.6 12-6 8.1 l4~2 '9-7 14-1 ll-O 15-0 14-2 18 17.4 28.5 22.1 14.7 28.6 17.4 18.0 18.6 9.8 10. 2 12.2 39-8 16.5 9.0 14-2 8-7 14 2 14-6 17-5 12-0 1.4 14:01 1,705 1502 9.4: 9.0 704 803 704 6.2 5.6 4'8 7.0 5'3 5’9 5‘8 5'8 5'5 5'5: 7’6 7'1- 15 27.2 21.8 15.0 10.4 8.5 9.2 8.4 8.2 4-6 5.2 4-7 5-5 4-9 5.1 4 5 5-9 4.2 4.0 7 16 14.8 19.0 17.2 15.0 12.4 18.1 6.6 11.4 18.2 15.8 8~5 12-2 14-7 13.6 16.8 14-0 18° 4 9-9 14.5 15.2 17 18.7 16.5 28. 6 21.8 20.4 19.8 17.5 19.2 16.8 19.8 15-6 20.4 20~0 17-6 16-8 l5~0 22 0 l8~l 14-8 16.1 8 18 28.6 22.5 20. 6 22. 6 22.6 22.8 15.4 19.8 19.4 17.2 15-9 16-8 19-6 14-1 19-6 15~6 19-0 15-1 20.0 19.1 19 22.5 19 8 l6 8 14.5 15.5 9.1 10.6 8.1 9.4 7.5 5.6 4.6 9.8 6.4 6.5 11.0 8.5 11.4 10.0 20 22.8 20.1 18.1 17.8 18.0 15.0 16.4. 14.8 14.5 1505 15.0 1104: 1101 11.8 1105 1402 1507 1302 1305 9 21 21.5 20.2 17.6 19 .1 18.7 18.0 17.1 18.4 17.2 15.8 16-5 15-6 16.0 14~1 17-6 14-3 17-8 17~7 15-9 17-2 22 19. 2 12.9 15.2 12.4 11.7 9.6 9.2 10.1 7.8 8.8 6-5 7«5 6~7 9-1 7.1 14.0 10-3 8-6 10.2 10 28 22.0 22. 0 19.0 16.4 16.0 15.7 14.8 14.8 12.7 14.4 15-8 12-2 15.8 10-1 15-4 12-7 15~l 14-3 16-1 14-7 24 17.8 20. 6 14.6 12.8 10.8 10.1 7.9 6.2 10.5 9.2 5-4 5-6 6.0 4-9 6~6 7.0 13-1 10.5 10.1 8-8 11 25 18.8 15.9 18.2 17.8 12.5 18.4 14.8 16.1 20.0 18.2 10.6 11-5 10-2 8-7 11.2 9-6 12.2 12-1 15-6 11.2 26 10.4 17.7 19.4 10.6 11.2 7.9 10.4 11.4 6.0 7~4 7.8 6~9 7-4 9-7 10-0 .6o9 5-5 9-9 9.3 27 20.0 25.0 19.7 17.9 14.9 12.8 10.5 14.9 11.8 .8o1 11.6 8-5 6~1 7-8 10-5 13-6 9.4 12-? 9.6 28 21,4 17,7 11,5 18,1 15,9 17,5 15.4 12.2 11.9 5.5 4.4 9.0 8.8 17.5 18.8 11. 8 9.8 12 29 20.1 22.8 21.0 21.2 17.6 19.8 20.8 18.2 19.7 16.7 15.7 17.1 16-9 16.1 16-4 16-8 18.6 18.0 17.6 15.1 80 22.0 17.4 17.1 14.4 12.2 11.0 11.6 18.0 14.7 12.6 12.5 11-2 16-7 14-7 12-1 12~8 16-6 15-6 17.1 12-1 18 81 16.0 18.9 17.9 18.9 15.2 16.4 15.4 14.9 14.8 14.7 14-8 14.4 13-2 12-4 14-0 12-9 15.0 12-7 14.0 12.8 82 14.9 17. 8 14.5 14.1 10.5 9.0 8.8 8.5 8.5 8.2 7.3 7-8 5.1 8-5 10-2 6.1 11-5 7.3 10.5 7-5 F . Tuble Ho. V iiai¢1f:fil] !’U’m)rii3 ('kgan. ylfifljjlfiitflhbioll 1r: iN(flleE;) SoulJ1I ave , Itichi 011 {‘7‘ L‘ t. g) "1 I. ‘ :7 ; ' W ‘ .’ ‘1 . . ' 'J» 7? a ' ‘ _L ‘ I :1 Q :J I )f L g I") 1r.(l Q '.. ‘1 All a J. I-_-' ‘J 0 L1! t l. O " '1. (1 D {J 11 ll 0 _ “. , " ..’, ‘. ..7, -','~— .’ 'f' " " '3 Uh: :, J; \u“ t « ‘: K W x.) t t In NH 1.1.. W4, : (r, 1' Wu a) _ -. WU Ck. Wt.“ bk ALLII“ i l a. L" O a "3' :11 o; g) :1 a 2; C‘ I L3 {J '0 08 J- O 6 ‘/2 l o 6 8 "Li‘s/v o {1 (J i! 0 (L {g o f: 6 l o :3 (f3 0 ‘3. :1 07:10; 0 L1“, 0 C) (K; June .15 7.16 1.15 1.95 .39 .16 .95 .94 Jnigf .(ML .26% .35 1.43/ .9]. .52 .521 7,.92 Angust ".05 .04 .02 .02 .00 2.60 .02 .1“ Seybomhcr .79 .63 3.95 .58 1.04 .91 .09 .14 - 55 - Table No. 8 Yield records for 1924 and 1925 Station Yield per hill in ounces 1924 1925 I .7 55 2 .9 .8 3 4.2 4.8 4 9.4 16.1 5 15.0 20.0 6 18.6 34.7 7 .3 Plants dead 8 16.4 10.4 9 P l a n t s d e a d 10 17.6 10.9 11 27.1 8.5 12 12.9 21.2 H (>3 P l a n t s' d e a d 955-.- Table No. 9 Vegetative growth in fall of 1925 Station Av. No. canes Av. length of per hill each cane.(inches) 1 8.7 56. 2 7.8 35.7 3 9.7 35.4 4 10.9 39.5 5 13.2 42.3 6 15.8 54.8 Av. cane diameter in l/Bans. inches 7 2.3 9.1 8 5.8 ‘ 11.3 9 p l a n t s d e a d 10 5.6 12.1 11 4.0 15.3 12 4.0 16.0 13 Only 1 cane in 16 hills. - 57 — ACKNOWLEDGEENT The writers wish to express their appreciation to Dr. M. M. McCool and Professor V. R. Gardner for reading and criticizing the manuscript, and to these and other members of the Soil Section Staff and Horticultural Section Staff fer their suggestions and criticisms during the pro- 'gress of the work. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 9582-.- SUMHARY On a two and one-half acre field of raspberries three distinct soil types, Allendale, Ottawa, and Saugatuck, were found. A more detailed study revealed considerable variation within these types. This variation consisted prin- cipally in depth to the clay substratum. The height of the water table was found to be more or less correlated with the soil type. In most cases the Allendale type had a high water table, the Saugatuck type a low to average water table and the Ottawa a low water table. Marked variations in the extent of the root develop- ment of the raspberry plants were found in different parts of the area studied. The roots varied in depth of penetration from those going only 10 or 11 inches deep and having most of the roots at 5-7 inches from the surface to those having a penetration to 30-35 inches with the roots filling the soil to a depth of 16-19 inches. The root development and depth of penetration was found to be closely correlated with the heighth of the water table. Locations with a high water table had poor root development and shallow penetration, 7. . 9 59 2 locationewith a low water table had extensive root development. The top growth, yield of fruit, and longivity of the plants were directly proportional to the root development and consequently correlated with the height of the water table. No correlation was found between soil acidity, nitrate content of the soil or the concentration of its soluble salts and the plant growth. l. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 8. 9. 10. ~60:- LITERATURE CITED Alway, F. J. 1918. The rawness of subsoils. In Science, V. 47, p. 196. Alway, F. J., McDole, G. 3., and Rost, C. Q. 1917. The loess soils of the Nebraska portion of the transi- tion. region: VI The relative “rawness‘ of the sub- soils. In Soil Sci., V. 3, No. 1, p.9-35. Arker, J. 1901. Die Beeinflussing des Wachstums durch das umgebende meduim. Diss. Colangen 1900; Bot. Cent. 87: 433. Ballantyne, A. B. 1916. Water table variations Causes and effects. Utah Agr. Col. Exp. Sta. Bul. 144. Bergman, H. F. 1920. The relation of aeration to growth and activity of roots and its influence on theecesis of plants in swamps. Ann. Bot: 34:13. Biilmann, E. 1924. On the measurements of hydrogen- ion concentration in soil by means of the quinhydrone electrode. Jour. Agr. Sci., V. 14, Pt. 2, Apr. 1924, p.232. Bouyoucos, G. Soil Sci., V. 19, No. 2, Feb. 1925. Bouyoucos, G. Soil Sci., V. 19, No. 6, June 1925. Bouyoucos, G. and mcCool, M. Mich. Agr. Col. Exp. Sta., Tech. Bul. 24. (1915) Clements, F. E. 1920. Aeration and air content, the role of oxygen in root activity. Carnegie, Pub. 315, Washington, D. C. ll. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. - 61 - Clements, F. C. 1910. A classification and use survey of Minnesota. Minn. Consev. Agr. Congress 1910. Coville, F. V. 1910. Experiments in blueberry culture. U. S. D. A., Bur. P1. Ind. Bul. 193. Crist, J. W., and Weaver, J. E. 1924. Absorption of nutrients from subsoil in relation to crop yield. In Bot. Gaz., V. 77, No. 2, p. 121-148. Driggers, B. F., 1925. The effect of different water levels on the growth of cranberries. Unpublished thesis on file in the library at Rutgers University. Elliott, G. R. B. 1924. Relation between the downward penetration of corn roots and water level in peat soil. Ecology, V. 5, No. 2, Apr. 1924. p. 175-79. Harmer, P. M., 1918. The relative rawness of some humid Subsoils. In Soil Sci., V. 5, p. 393. Harris, F. S. and Turpin, H. W. Mbvement and dis- tribution of moisture in the soil. Jour. Agr. Res. 10 (1917), No. 3. p. 113. Hilgard, E. W. 1860. Report on the geology and ag- riculture of the State of Mississippi. 2:202. Lipman, C. B. 1917. The rawness of subsoils. In Science V. 46, p. 288. Lohnis, F. Influence of time of year on nitrate forma- tion in soil. Centbl. Bakt. (etc.) 2. Abt., 58 (1923) No. 9-12, p. 207-211. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. - 62 - Loree, R. E. Raspberry culture. Mich. Agr. Exp. Sta. 1 Cir. Bul. e7. (1922) A Mortin, J. C. and Christie, A. W. Effect of variation in moisture content on the water extractable matter of soils. Jour. Agr. Res. 18 (1919) No. 3, p. 139-143. M00001, M. i., Veatch, J. 0., and Spurway, C. H. Soil profile studies in Kichigan. Soil Sci., Vol. ;VI, No. 2, August, 1923. KcMiller, P. R., 1919. Some notes on the cause of the unproductivity of "raw" subsoils in humid regions. In Soil Sci., V. 7, No. 3, p. 233-36. Miller, C. E. 1925. Availability of nutrients in subsoils. Soil Sci., V. 19, No. 4, Apr. 1925. Russell, E. J. Soil Conditions and Plant Growth, ed. 4 Longmans, Green & Co., London. Russell, E. J. and Richards, E. H. 1920. The washing out of nitrates by drainage water. Jour. Agr. Sci. (Eng.) 1920, Ho. 1, p. 22-43. Schreiner and Failyer, U. S. Bur. Soils, Bul. 31. (1906) Shantz, H. L. 1911. Natural vegetation as an indicator of the capabilities of land for crop production in the great plains area. U. S. Bur. Plant. Ind. 201. Snow, L. M. 1905. The develOpment of root-hairs. Bot. Gaz. 40:12. Stoklasa, J., and Ernest, A. 1905. Ueber den Ursprung, die Menge und Bedeutung des Kohlen-dioxids im Boden. Centb. Bakt. 14:723. - 53 - 32. Weaver, J. E. (1919) Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. No. 286. 33. Wheeting, L. C. 1924. Some physical to chemical pro- perties of several soil profiles. Rich. Agr. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bul. 62. 34. Whiting, A. L. and Schoonover, W. R. Nitrate production in field soils in Illinois. I11. Sta. Bul. 225, p. 27—63. (1920) ....I _ ..“ l-l..t .., y’l,....¥L..rIi3Inh| v1: l.b-¥.I .l.ll.~.|..lu,-eilnlu Ivar! in.f|= no I 0 II “51351 . . . O 1‘ . . u .1, 4 ll . i. . . 4. n L. .II .,1 , , .0 ...:Va. . . .-.n.. .0 H. .. .91.....!.Iu...slb.tvt|1.s.1a..iudn ......u. ......t :1... ,.. .| p..¢1.1,..n.<,o..1.1£..