‘- ~'-' v < ’mo——w—r‘—— —-~——-— .. . L. _-'—' ____——— __.-——-— _._————- __———— —_———— ———— ___———— _—_—-— _.————— ’— _—.—— _———— _———— _————— A STUDY OF DIFFERENT METHODS OF APPLYING FERTILIZER ON THE PRODUCTION OF FLUE-CURED TOBACCO IN ONTARIO Thesis for the Degree of M. S. MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE Lea Stephen Vickery I942 . . o . .. v . . a . »,. I44! .../.w. .. ....;. ‘ xsl. .--~u.v4.’\. I r0- 1...“. .. . I I ... 120.2%...EWI, . I. III”... 1..Iflf.. ‘ .JL‘F 1‘. . I {LVII III’IIIVI'I cl I. A S”UQY OF 9 gTQA;;r Kegaeie OF AsPLIING FeaTILILgn on TEL IROLUCTION 0y FLUL-JUELD 1: LhnLO H (—1 L1 .32 C) C) O L—I --a ¢-4 C) by Lee Stephen Vickery L. ‘a'o 1__ o “ 1|”..L Gill 9 an Submitted to the Graduate S»Cllool of 9 State College of bgvicult mL1°e and Applied the Science in partial fuliilwnant oi requirements for the degree of tv— iv- A») 111R 01;] SC IDIIC Dep artm ent of Ifor'tieulture “ Jau‘g t—V“ n T‘- a’ I 11' 3 In r‘q .|-}L_LI-JJ :lnLQ Tmr 41L ,"Q’T' PJ'-L .4 1"!\ iLJQJJ m r “n _L 1i;-)L_‘J ff 7? ".I’1"‘3.r7 -‘nlL}1_LIJlLlL LZQEUIOLJS Extent of Experiments . . L-I ocation ’TJ lot Technique {111(1 53C)j.]. . o e e Fertilizer Applied . . . 0 GP 01.! I311 I48 Yield Determinations . . Determining I .4. I um (3 11:51 11’ T] U (D Ci (L erminin C1 (D CI‘ ' I r K.) J v. f1 0 the C rop RSUI’BI'EIBII‘GS o e 0 Grade Index Index Starter Solutions . e . o Kethod of‘Obteining the Cost in Rows 7‘! D 1958 Results 1959 Results 1940 Results Results Results for 1941 Results Results for Results for iEJUTAL sESULTS tatistical Anslysi O for Series Series and Bands . U} 9 1940 II 1940 O O O O O 0 Series I 1941 Series II 1941 4‘ r\ P' I ,-’ 1&aea3 the Naturity Index . . O O 0 Apply 0 ' O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O 0 . . . . . . . p . . . . . . . 0 O ‘ 0 Fort . . . O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O . . . . . . 0 O O . . . . . . . . . o 0 O O O O O O O . . . . . . . . . O O O ilizer . . o . . . I?) 14 14 14 15 16 10 IO 8 Cs] 0] I 10 I0 to If.) I--’ (10 U1 01 01 O a 01 (O Average Results for 1958 to 1941 Inoltsive . . . 57 The Cost of Transplanting and Drilling Fertilizer U‘l (I) for TObrS‘.CCO . o o o o o o o o O o o O IOII o o e e o o e e o e o e o o o o o e o o o o 59 SUI I J1“ f o o o o e o o o e o o e o o o o o o o o o o O 62 J11£11JEZI o e o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O o 64: TL :3 HQ“ :JITIBS o e e e o e e o o o e o o o o o e e e '70 (1) 139209901109 In recent years considerable experimentation has been conducted in Canada and the United States to as certs 9in the proper method of applying large amounts of fertilizer to cul- tivat ed crops. Various methoCs Have been devise" and then discarded as investigation became more specific Some 1ert- ilizer mixtures have been found injurious to plants, while others when mixed with the s 0 *Jo i—l V are capable oi combining Achewic;lly with cer‘ain minerals maiin them unavailable to the plant. Upon investigating su01 f9ctors, new fertilizer drills and attachments 9re bei _n3 tested for growing crops more economi09 9119. At present the method of applyin 9 fert- ilizer is considered just as important as applying materials of the right an9ly .is or in tie Tlf 3ht 9mount. Flue-cured tobacco usually requires from eight hundred to one thousand pounds of specia 91 fertilizer per acre under Canaiian conditions. Such amounts are necessary as this par- ticular type of tobacco must be grown on light sandy soils to produce the high qu9lity of lea 9f required for the manufacture 01 ciraretteb. Broadcasting the fertilizer over the soil was the fillst H(LLOL used to apply lar3e quantities. this method, however, proved to be unsatisfactory as the fertilizer vas insufficientlv available when required by the plant. apply- . o u __ _ _o o _o __ fl 3" 13 f), _I_ 1’ (1 33‘ r‘ - J- - 1D" 9rulitixirq3 the iYnetilizeI>.u1 the 1mm; uei nu) tr99.il,wit 0 l I '1 _ , :1 v_ _? 3,3 In 3 1_ ‘ r ,I- 3 c 0 ing eventually repl9ce ed tue broadcastin3 method. At this period nitr03enous fertilizers were Cwapo ed lar3e ely of htlv so uble materials or of insoluble materials whicn A N) v as a result of chemical chan3es, slowlyy ielded soluble sub- stances. Such mixtures could be applied to the soil with little or no chance of increasing the concentration of the soil solution to a point that would injure the roots of lants. In recent years vaSt eh9n3es nave taken place in *6 the composition of fertilizers. The readily soluble nitro- 3enous materials have lar3e1y replaced those that are slowly soluble in water. Such changes r W possibly have detrimen- tal effects upon tobacco plants if the roots come in contact with the fertilizer shortly after tranSplanting. To insure :galn nst possiole injury the practice throughout the flue- cured district has been to drill the fertilizer at least 1 I one week before transplanting the tobacco. Under average soil moisture cone itions, this me thod may be quite effecient. However, dry or wet condit one may occur with resultant ”burn- ing" of the roots, or leaching of the fertilizer, respective- ly. Certain fertilizer ingredients may become ”fixed” by the dos , the we alines s H. soil, especially the phOSphate salts. Bes ‘ndicated this method recu 111es two operations, one to drill the fertilizer and the other to transplant the tobacco. ff Fertilizer applied in bands on each side of the plant at transplanting has recently been recommended for many crops, and in many cases has replaced the older methoos. This meth- od allows the fertilizer to be concentrated in bands, there- by preventing losses through leaching and de eclc M5118 the fix- ation of certain elements by r9d901n3 the area exposed to soil p9.rticle s; the roots cannot come in contact with the .‘ fertilizer until the plants become established; the opera- ”H" tions of applying fertilizer and transplanting are completed at one time. Recommendations have been published on band applications of fertilizer for certain cultivated crops in various locali- ties. InvestigatiOLs supporting such recommendations, have saown that soil, climatic conditions, and the kind and amount of fertilizer applied, produce Variable effects. Flue-cured tobacco plants have very tender roots when transplanted, as they are grown in a greenhouse under artifi- cial conditions. These seedlings are very sensitive to fer- tilizer and require extreme care in relation to the place- ment of fertilizer. 3 Investieations on applying fe'tilizer in bands at the time of tranSplanting flue-cured tobacco had not been conduct- p. H. e n Canada prior to the eXperiments herein reported. The purpose of the investigation under study is to com- .are the effect of different methods of applying fertilizer on the stand, growth, maturity, quality, and yield of flue- cured tobacco. AS already stated, the two most Common methods for ap— 1JVinv fertilizer are broadcasting and localiz izer 131515.11 close promi.:1it3,r to the plant. firoadcasting (31):.) consists of applyin3 and covering the fertilizer before plantinr 1.77;;ic‘z1 requires an ervztra ope:1_1ati'r.on. 2-inch i:-:ation of the pertilivpr bv ~pe 3—11 mnv “0’0 71' rw m ’w e, ..._\_/ J. a- U... ._._:./ u" Lil- x ().h .".'_"-"" Ll’. ); L2 ‘LD__3C€ 33“ 1,13 .LnQ Lil- method, and as lertilizers are known only to move sli3ht dis- L , -. _ 1. -‘ r ~.— '7 I“ : I- - n--r 1 4- w - 1- — . ~— tances horizontall, (an), it m., be out of reach of to roots 1 1' 7" '3" N r‘ ‘ 3‘ A ‘r 3- .. ‘3— _ 'r ’ ‘ 1 'F‘ ‘ ' 1 ‘- 7., " \ " “ ~W1en rmhpl “P %L U} LAX? Pl alt. 01 die o.in:r lrwui, i01’C3ululV“bbd cro11c on heavy soils, which are to be followed by 3réin crops, LJL/ broadcasting may be preferable as the residual ierti lizer would be evenly Julstri _3)11},(:<3_ f0? the fol 301'! ill.” cr:.-.p. There are several methods of applying iertilizer local- “' t‘u " fhe fertilizer may be drilled in the row +4 ‘1 1, 3 - o (.1. D H :5 D "D 3'5 9 : and mixed with the soil before tran swll ntins or it may be ap- plied in bands at the time of transpl.nt’:3 n’th a combined ertilizer drill and transpl1nr er, providing such eq1.o ent ’1 lable. Fractional portions of lertilizer may be ap- i- O 8V8. Ho {0 plied at transplanting or by side dressin3 after the plants ha ave COmHENCe¢ to ;3ro on. As these methods may prove to be sw1tis fa chnr':for cc qu1in cio1x3 some uwgrlnot be s11i tablr,gfor l, fer' ilizer, and W'e. fl1er mav dete C3 8. flue-cured tobacco. mine what method is most practical to produce the best ,uali- ty and yield of tobacco. Some fertilizer mixtures contain nrreuoeitu that are quite injurious if they come in contact with the roots. Flue- cured tobacco fertilize er in Ontario contains nitrate of soda and sulphate of ammonia, which, according to Sagre (55), are injurious to tender roots. The cause of the injury has been disputed by several investigators. Some report that the in- jurious effect of the readily soluble or highly ionized min- eral fertilizers is due to exceSSive concentration of the solu- ble salts which causes injury to the roots by plasmolysis. v . I Coe (7) concluded that it was due to E18 increased osmotic pressures of the soil solution and the consequent retardation in absorption of water by the roots or seed. Truog (44) states that hiyh concentrations of fertilizers should not be applied with seed because the fertilizer will hold on to the water so strongly that the seed or roots cannot get it. The injury may also be due to ”burn”, according to Beaumount (5), or the withdrawal of water from the plant, or to poisoning by small amounts of toxins. 1 ierris (16) reported the toxicity of soluble salts in the soil to be in the following order of decreasing effect:- Sodium Chloride, Calcium Chloride, Potassium Chloride, Sodium ‘itrate, hggnesium Chloride, Potassium Kitrate, Nagnesium Nitrate, Sodium Carbonate, Potassium Carbonate, Sodium Sul— phate, Potassium Sulphate, and iagnesium Sulphate. According to Sayre (55), and others, moisture has a direct relation to the amount of ”burning" that takes place. It has been found that where the soil moisture is low, the are is hivh Harris (16) eXperimented N O "burning" of fertili with New Zealand wheat on Greenville loan and reported that the number of seeds which germinated, the average height of plants and dry matter produced, all decreased with the in- creased concentration of the alkali, and that the plants were more capable of enduring alkali conditions witn a fair supply of moisture in the soil than where the soil was dry. On corn (44) it was found that not only was the percentage germination less at the lower soil moisture content but al- so the time required for germination was considerably in- creased. Burd (4) reported that the concentration of the v soil solution fluctuates at lea t in proportion to the moist- C0 ure content of the soil. Coe (7) concluded that climatic or seasonal conditions, especially the rainfall is one of the most important factors influencing the occurrences of imper- ious effects from fertilizer. In summarizing these statements, it may be assumed that, although these results are on crops other than tobacco, he same injurious effects may occur if the plants are trans- planted directly into the fertilizer. Fertilizer drilled in the row one week before transplanting flue-cured tobacco may injure the plants to a large extent if inadequate rainfall occurs, whereas applying fertilizer in bands on each side of the tobacco at transplanting may el’minate burning of the roots. Kcfiurtrey (23) reports that with tobacco the survival of plants is important as it affects the succeeding growth of the crop. When the growth is irregular as a result of numerous and frequent replantings, a decrease in yield and quality of the crop is the usual result. However, there are seasons when delayed growth may be advantageous. When the o o u o _ _.'-1 “‘_. o 1“ 17? 5} ’1 crop reaches a critical State of growth Qdflné a oiy peiiou (7) it frequently suffers to such an extent that complete re- covery does not take place when the weather becomes favorable. The most outstanding result on tobacco at Tifton, Georria (16), using 1000 pounds per acre of a 5-8-6 fert- \_J 5 plants and consequent Pb ilizer, was the heavy mortality 0 delay in growth and ripening on treatments with fertilizer applied in close proximity to the root system. Tobacco re- ceiving fertilizer applied 4% inches from each sifie of the row was reported to have suffered the lowest mortality rate, grew faster, matured earlier and pr duced a higher yield ’13 ind acre value than any other treatment. It was found in n 1939 that tobacco receiving band place- < (—1. H0 rginia (25) ments of fertilizer grew more uniformly, matured earlier and appeared to be far superior to the other treatments. Bachtell (1) preferred placing the fertilizer for tobacco in bands rather than in the row. Bands applied as close to the row as 2 to 2% inches were recommended and in a verti- cal zone from the level of the base of the root crown to about one inch below. Investigations on placement of fertilizer on some other cultivated crops are seemingly more advanced than those on tobacco. Tomatoes, a crop similar to tobacco at the period of tranSplsntilg, has been experimented with a great deal. Hester (18) reported that more tomato plants were killed by improper methods of applying the fertilizer than by other injuries. He recommended applying fertili- zer in bands or mixing it well with the soil under the row 1 A and side dressing the remainder intervals during the (Q c'r' A (V V *fi irst, second, and third months after setting the plants. The most effective utilization of fertilizer, according to Sayre (34), is to apply 20 to 500 pounds per acre by the band method. Larger applications should be applied pre- vious to transplanting, such as phosphate fertilizers, or side dressing after transplanting with nitrogen and potash. Wtis method may be profitable for tomato growers, but it appears to involve excessive work for tobacco. resides the "burning" effect of fertilizers, some have the ability "o combine with other elements contained in the sail therebv causina fixation of the fertilizer. Phosphate and aotash are the two main compounds in flue- cured tobacco fertilizers that are fixed by soils. PhOo‘ J. phate fixation in soils may be purely chemical, the phos- phorus taking the orm of slightly soluble mineral phos- phates; or it may be of a biological nature in which the phosphorus exists, first as living and later as inanimate organic or micro-organic material. The latter lixa‘ion of phosphorus may not be detrimental in sandy soils because of the low amounts of organic matter. Fixed phosphorus may be reaarfed as falling into three groups (17); (a) the readily available C93(Pt4)2; (b) the moderately available AlPO4, and (C) tlle diffiCUlCly aVailable fOI'I‘QS FGPOZL, A19(O::)5FO4 and Feg(0h5)POA. The predominating form in which soluble .‘ . q 1 o __ f1 . .- 1‘ \w .0 ( 1" .n .f')! WP _6 0 "_ abundance of the d fierent materials capaole Oi iixing pnos- oheruo 1f the ratio of active calcium to active iron and aluminum is high, the fixation will be largely in the calcium (9) form, and the fixed ,hos'rhorus will be rerdily available. If the reverse is true, the fixation will be largely as iron and aluminum compounds of phosphorus, which are oilfi- cultly available. The minimum fixation of phosphates occurs in soils with a pH about 6.5, according to Scarseth (57), and the amounts that are fixed are usually in the form of tri-calcium-phos- .1. 13118. b e . hot only does the character of the soil affect the percent age of the phosphorus that is fixed in less available form but also the amount of phos sphorus applied and the time elapsing between the application and when it is required. The longer the phosphate remains in the soil the larger will be the perceLtage fixed in less available form. The more the compounds of the soil become saturated with phos1.horus, the smaller will be the percentage of the phosphorus fert- ilizer that is held in unavailable form. Harper (15) reported that the amount of residual phos- phorus was grea ter when fertilizer ttschments were used than when the 1.ertilizer was applied by hand as these attach- ments do not mix the fertilizer with the soil. Potassium salts are fixed by the soil as well as phOSph ate salts, according to Cooper (8) and others. The extent of fixation is almost al‘am directly proportional to the content of the colloidal matter in the soil, a d is considered to be the gr atest in clays and clay loams and least in lLQ ht s:nds and sandy loams. The fixation or hold- ing of potash by the soil is of rest importance as it serves (8) as a check against too ratiu solution and leaching, and max s for a more continuous supply of available potash. f -—10 fixed may move slowly in the soil and in light sandy soils may in time be carried down to the ground water. (5 Experiments conducted in different parts 0“ the coun— I'! -i try show that where 13:18 i "‘4 ._J ertilizer is preperly l respect to the seed or roots, the yields obtained are much better from row or hill applications than from the use of similar amounts of fertilizer applied by broadcasting (15). 0 According to Earper, one of the main reasons for these re— d— Ct H4 ,4 (0 CL l~ l sults is tha iosphorus aoolied in the fertilizer is ll kept in a more available condition. When the fertilizer is )plied broadcast the 3hosphate particles come in contact e amount of soil and the phosphorus is therefore rapidly fixed in a condition not readily available to plants. Fertilizers in the granular form are considered to be less fixed by the soil than if applied in the powdered sta"e. ieuring (23) statjs that large fertilizer particles in Life htly hastened the emorQence of plants, while powdered fertilizers delayed it. Broadcasting versus row application of fertilizer nas been compared at the Substation. It was found, when applied witnin tne row, nat hiQher yields were produced. iherefore, broadcasting of fertilizer was eliminated from the experi- ments which are to be presented. Since movement of the soil solution is principally down and up depending upon the rainfall and surface evaporation .L (11) U PGSJFC'l elv, the soluble salt concentration is likely to be excessive immedia.teM belo. or above the fertilizer for a per- 10(:1 Of a few dfiys. Lateral movement of fer' tilizers s lizm ted H H . ‘V to approximately one half inch, With the exception of calcium cyanamid (55 reatest movement is by Jnorc-o 0 nitro- gen ani the rate varies with o;ffereat c>1iounds. The Inove- nent of phosphoric acid in tn— soil is quite restrithd, due lOS phorus. Water-soluble potash is quickly changed to a water-insoluble form in the soil (55). Fertilizers applied in the form of solutions, known as ”starter solutions” for transplanted crops, have opened a new ‘ield of inve,ti-at on. Some €XJCP-JQHUS have been conducted on tobacco and tomatoes. Roberts (50) reported in Kentucky on starter solutions applied in the water for burley tobacco. Different ingredients of nitrogen were used at var: -ous rates, and it was found that the use of nitrate of soda or other solu- ble nitrogen salts, in the water for setting tobacco, in suffi- cient quarm”i ty to rave f rtilizing value, causes injury to the plants. He concluded that if fertilizers are needed, it is oest to apply tne' In in the rO' Considerable Oerrimentation has been conducted on toma to plants, which are similar to tobacco plants, at the time of transplanting. Sayre (74) states that if a nutrient solution H s poured around the roots of a tomato plant at the time of transplm. “ting, the plant will recover more quickly and the yields, particularly the early yields, will be cons: we ably increased. Sayre used complete Starter solutions as well as carter solution. Jack (21) reported that there is some evidence that dilute phosphoric acid or sup: rpnos- phate solutions applied to 0L6 roe“s at trans olantl“3 in- K...) 1 CPGLSGQ the ear " Jield of tomatoes in comparison with water \I (J J) alone. Solutions of nitrogen or potesh, however, were found not to be cons is tentlJ favorable to yields when inpl ed in ‘§ (‘3 .1. l the same :21a1m 3r. ,Superplu:‘3:i hate was fOUl o- to have no injur- ious effects on been roots, according to SaJre (55) and Pie erre (20) but greatly stimulhted the growth of fine fibrous roots. iitrate and potash fertilizers apparentlJ do injure the roots considerably. Therefore, phosghate fertilizers maJ he suxerior as a sta.rt or solution by stimulating root growth shortly after tra ans lantirg, until "he roots have devel- "d r to obtain nutrients from the regular band v 3 Some inveStlgations have included "nlltttn the amount _ .. ,— of fertilizer into more than one agplication. The 1iLSt per- 7 ‘I tion maJ we applied DJ broadc'"t:n” or in too row, and tne rervuxm;i er dinwjl the :WNDJiTES seascui'bJ runnls oi‘53ide fflJUZG- ment. fhis method has not always proved successful, although thBO“€thClly, it annears to be sound. Rovers (51) reported ‘A.’ L“ ‘ ' u that applying half of e 200 pound application of nitrate of soda to cotton at planting and half at c7_: oppin“ time was super- ior to app lJing the full amount at nlantine time. Along the Coastal Plain, it was reported that if all the DibPO;GN, whether the source was nitra_te of soda, sulphate of ammonia, or urea, gave nearlJ as good or better results then delsJed dressings. ubs tstion in 1940, excessive Jellowing of the tobacco C0 AD the 1 occurred during the growing season. Some of the plants were (15) Side—dressed with nitro ,‘NI g.) 'enous fertilizers applied both in the form of a solution and in the er state. Thes- side (1‘3) r'vrn m»,_,r_w ’1‘“ ._.~ "2“"— l.f‘.-L._.:lL.L.’L.LJQ uni) tnjliLUJJS Extent of Experiments PreliminarJ experiments were started at the Substa- tion n 1956 on placing fertilizer in bands on each side of the row at the time of transplanting tobacco. The trenches were made bJ means of a hoe and the fertilizer applied by hand. This method wa. unsatisfactorwr as the difficult to dig uniformly to obtain the correct dentn and distance from the row; and when the fertilizer was a it adnered to the leaves causing a burning effect. The re- sults obtained, therefore, are not presented. In 1958, a transplanter, equipped with a fertilizer attachment was ob- tained. mhis machine was constructed to allow the depth and width of the bands to be changed as desired. The attachment ’was very convenient for conducting experiments on apleing fertilizer. Various methods of apleing fertilizer were tried be- tween 1938 and 1941, inclusive. Fertilizer was placed in bands at various depths and distances from the row at trans- planting; in rows bJ hand one week before transplanting; and in the water as Starter solutions. These methods were not all compared everJ Jear, as it was necessary to discontinue certain treatments which proved unsatisfactory in order to eliminate excess expenditures. Location and Soil The experiments were conducted at the Dominion Experi- mental Substation, Horfolk CountJ, Delhi, Ontario, Canada. The district has approximatelJ 150,000 acres of flue—cured (1: U1 v " r1 '\ tobacco soil, which consists mainly of Plainfiela Sana, JO‘ wine Sandy Loam, and Fox Sand. The soil at the Substation [—1. s quite uniform, well drained, Fox Sand, rather low in or- ganic matter, and with a pH of approximatelv 5.8. The topo- graphy is unusually level. The plot locations selected at the Substation were fairly uniform. In 1953 and l~39 only one series of plots was laid out each year. In 1940 two series of plots were used. Series I was located on soil which had been cropped with tobacco previous to 1940 an€ Series II on soil not pre- viously cropped by tobacco. In 1941 two similar series were laid out, and were located on old and new tobacco soil. Plot Technique The plots used for testing the various positions of fertilizer were 1/40 acre in size, measuring 81‘ 8” long and 15' 4" wide. Each plot consisted of four rows of tobac- co with tie rows 40 inches apart; the slants within the row .L 3 23 inches reart. Quadruplicate plots were used for each '4. treatment in randomized blocks. Two blocks were located on the same range side by siCe with the other two blocks in an adjacent range, thus allowing the plots to be as close to- gether as possible so that differences in soil would be mini- mized. The plots were randomized within each block accord- 'ing to Tippett's tables (15). Fertilizer Applied A 2-10-8 basic fertilizer was anrlied to all the series 9 of experiments at the rate of 1000 pounds per acre. The an- alysis for the 2-10-8 tobacco fertilizer was as follows. One- quarter of the total nitrogen was made up of high grade (16) organic materials 01 animal or plant origin, one-quarter from nitrate nitrogen such as nitrate of soda, and one-half from standard water-soluble materials such as sulphate of ammonia. I J J. CD (”x F1 The ph_sphoric acid was deriv r( m super phosphate or other easily soluble phOSphateS. The potash was derived from sul- floaate of’Ixitash aIKi1miriate of‘lmnxnni in sucti‘““ wertions lflui‘ to O the chlorine content would not exceed three percent. This it of chlorine content has been considered necessary to protect U the burning quality of the leaf. The fertilizer contained mae- k.) n. nesia in the filler as a safeguard against magnesium deiieieney. Growth Neasurements Durins the 1941 growing season, measurements were made on Q J- plant growth. This was accomplished by measuring the height of plants within each plot and selecting certain leaves for length and width. Because of the large number of plants it was impossible to measure every leaf and plant. However, by using Tipoett's randomized sampling numbers, certain plants were selected. Eight plants were selected from each plot, four from each of the two center rows, eliminating the end plants. Each plant was numbered and was found by merely counting d w one row and back the other. A new set of randomized numbers was used each time measurements were taken so that the same plants would not be selected twice. Lotes were taken on the two series laid out in 1941. The heiehts of plants were taken three times throughout the growing season before topping the tobacco. The length and width .1 of the fourth leaf from the base was taken three times, tne ninth leaf, the fourth leaf from the top, and the top or tip leaf once. (17) $10 elci Determinations A 7 Flue—cured tobacco is harv es”;ed differently than any other type of tobacco, due chiefly to the ripening character— istics of the plant. The leaves, when reaching maturity, turn yellowish-green in color commencing at the base of the plant and gradually ripen toward the apex as the season proceeds. Harvesting usually commences in Ontario the first part of -‘ Augus and continues until tne middle part of September in an average growing season. In harvesting a crop of flue-cured tobacco approximately five ”primings" are necessary. Each ”priminfi‘” 0 consists of pulling two to four leaves from each plant, depending on the maturity. Usually only two leaves are taken for the first priming as they are of poor quality and should not be mixed with the high grade leaf. Not more than four leaves are taken at one time for the 0“ rerz1a; nin primings as leaves of di iferent type will not cure evenly together in the liln. For yield determinations, at the Substation, only the two center rows of each plot are harvested, leaving the end U plants, thus eliminating border effect. The plots are kept 1 separated by marked taws whic L) '0 bimt d to every plot 'str 9., 1. ka‘J 1 are before harvesting each priming. These tags are marked with the plot and priming number and are kept with the tobacco throughout the entire handling of the series. The leaves, when 1 primed, are strung on lath in hands of three with approximately thirty hands per lath, depending on the size of the leaf and the priming. The lath are placed in a kiln for curing. Curing ‘riefly of yellowi 5:, color fixino and drying the U, 0 C) h: C’} P. U) d- U} .‘4 (12) 1 leaf, which requires about four to five days. The temperatu“e in the kiln ranges from about 900 to 1800 F. dependina on the advancement of the stares of curing. After curing, tne kilns U 0 F. are opened to allow suff'cien' C’ ' moisture to be absorbed by the leaf so that it may be removed nd Jacked without crumpliig. ‘ SD The leaf is piled in a packing barn where it remains until begins. ”Stripping” conSists of removing the leaf from the lath, and weighing those of each plot separately for each priming. The leaves are then packed in bales weighing about fifty pounds each, keeping the plots separated by means of paper sheets. Each priming is handled in a similar manner. When all the primings are stripped, the weights are totaled for each plot. During the harvest season the number of plants harvested from each plot are recorded. When tobacco is planted in rows 40 inches apart and 25 inches within the row 6818 plants are re- quired per acre. Therefore, by dividing the number of plants harvested into the total number of plants per acre, an acre fac- tor is dete nined. The yield per acre for ea h plot is deter- mined by multiplying the acre factor by the number of pounds of leaf produced. The yields for the four plots in each treatment are aver- aged together thus obtaining the yield per acre. Determinin;_the Grade Index The quality of flue-cured tobacco was determined by Kam- inine the cured leaf after it was stripped and baled. Upon pre- paring for grading, the first and second nrimings were baled to- 1 gether, and the third, fourth, anc fifth together. The grading (19) was accomplished by experienced graders of the Leamington Sales Tobacco Company, Leamington, Ontario and supervised by hessrs. F. A. Stinson, Officer in Charge, Dominion BXperimen- tal Substation, Delhi, Ontario, and R. J. Haslam, Assistant Superintendent, Dominion Experimental Station, Harrow, Ontario. Flue-cured tobacco is divided generally into four class- ifications according to the location of the leaf on the plant; namely sand lugs, cutters, leaf, and tips. The sand lugs are leaves from near the bottom of the plant which are short, thin and usually characterized by a dull, dingy finish, but occasion- ally show high color. Cutters are leaves which grow just above the sand leaves or sand lugs, and are composed of high grade leaves which are very thin to medium in body. The leaf g°ades are composed of leaves which are medium to heaVy in body and grow normally from the upper middle of the plant to the tips. The tips are heavy bodied leaves consisting of approximately two leaves from the top of the plant. Each of the above class- ifications are diviied into several grades according to tex- ture, body, and color. Each grade has a price value per pound by which the quality of the tobacco can be estimated. Table (1) gives the description of the various grades used and the rela- tive prices per pound for each grade during th years the ex- periments were conducted. The grades and prices were changed somewhat in 1941 owing to variations in the quality and value of the tobacco. The plots were graded separately and the weight of each grade determined. The quality of the tobacco was calculated by multiplying the weight of each grade by its relative price and diviaiic bv the total weight of the grades, thus obtaining (20) a relative price for every plot of tobacco. This relative as rice is called the grade index in all the succeeding tables. The average grade index was calculated for each treatment by ‘ . f ‘ 3-1, I” ding the av rage I I... V [—‘o d (.L rield per acre into the average crop index. (.1 Determining the Crop Index The crop index was determined by multiplying the grade in- 1 dex by the yield per acre, whica gives the returns per acre in dollars. This estimation shows whether there is any difference between the treatments as to the ~‘riel( and quality combined. ma 1’? 0""? ‘ "’ - - rP—d ”‘ ”AL“ f -0 ‘ "‘°o-:1"‘73 ‘ inc repi_cit-ons were average together or eacn ticatment. .‘ J- . '2 M - 'y - 7 a —: J— 't' —-‘ v: -F De ermining toe hatur;ty index The maturity index was estimated by two methods. The first method was by counting the number of plants in bloom, in early, and late bud stages prior to topping tae tobacco. The number in bloom was multiplied by 1.5 and the number in early bud added to this fi ure. This sum was divided by the number of plants harvested for rield and multiplied by 100, thus ob- taining a relative figure for maturity index. The second meth- od consisted of determining the percentages of leaf primed in the first three primings. Iatrrity index was taken only in 1 1940 and 1941 and both methods are included in the results. (21) Table (l). Cfiuuhmsrurl relative val1nus tn cents ptq*:mmumi for astimmting the quality of tobacco. :Lelxvcive laxicUs Grades: 54’ per pmmd 3 ‘if.vjfl f 1f ~x _. a o J) ,- eescription 01 Grades. Cl 58 58 Bright lemon cutter leaf, thin, clear, verv fine texture. Co 35 54 Bri ht lemon- -oran; e cutter leaf, very {J l 1 1 Q iine text ire, sliguilg more see; tnan 01' O 1 (O (O {O C; bri ght cutt r 1U”, thin, snort, clear. O H O] H 03 1988-40 common sponged cutt r leaf, thin, short, no green. 1941 Cutter leaf, no lugs. CAX 10 Common mixed sponged lugs. B1 41 40 Good 1r3“_m11i{flit 1er.rm1 to elrrr;e, cle ar 10 1, fire texture, n'v spongng. B 55 05 Kedium Orange leaf, clear fine texture, no sponging. B" 27 28 Good bright sponged leaf, light in o color and ooay. BA 50 SO hedium to heav; orange leaf, free from sponging, medium texture. B 20 20 193V? dark Spenged leaf, coarse texture. Green, cutter leaf, (replacing Ll grade) L“ at“ *3 (\D t?» b2 Briwit lemon cutter leaf with greenish Lo ' 27 28 Good quality green and red leaf. L5 18 5 He Vy green and red leaf, rather coarse texture. L,1 9 10 Low quality green leaf and tips. 10 17 Bright orange tips. 1"5-2 7 10 hold (zelOIKxi tips. Ch 18 14 re v61noe~ ripe mahoganv leaf, coa .rse centfi" u 7: f“ ~— “xuo ml 0 how qua ll-ty earn tips. 1J.D. O O Incltdtws a_]_l tunnqed, Ckwui, 31%KH1, and other misaleiule tobacco. Starter Solutions In Series II 1941, two starter solution treet“we1t were included. These were only included to obtain prelimin- ary res ults on whether thew had any effect on the stand, qual— ity, and yield of leaf produced. The solutions were a“ to the plents at tre nspl nt ing tkrouvn the waterinv device on he planter. The ingredients were dissolved in water by al- lowing them to seek over night. The two solutions consisted of treble suoerphoswhate, used singly at the rate of two f water, and an 8-24-8 fertilizer 0 pounds per fort; 0 M11 18 mixture, at four pounds ner forty gallons of water. The fol- .L gredients used for the 8-)4-8 mix- lowing table outlines the in ture : Table (w). Toteriel used in the 8-94-3 starter olution. : Eereentzr e oi e C1: Lo. los. per Katerial : ingrc c9dient : 40 gal. water Nitrate of soda vsfi of the total N2 1.55 Sulphate of ammonia 2:; of the total H2 .40 eble superinoeante lOOé of the total I205 2.00 Sulphate of ootesh 75; of the total E90 .48 Lhufis te of po askl 25d oi‘inua hotel 150 .16 neon plant received approximately 1/5 of a pint of starter solution. In addition to the starter solution these treatments received the regular application of a 2-10-3 fert- ilizer at the rate of 1000 pounds per acre in bands 4 inches 7 .1. l 1 from the pl9nts and 4 inches deep at tne time of transplanting. :ning tne Cost of Applving ”ertilizer in Rows [—'I Ketlzod of Obta and wands. .. I A suitable location was selected at the Suoststion in 1941 where the rows of too zucco were quite long, - to eli: line'te turning too often at the ends. Tie l<3n; th of time required to drill fertilizer and trensnle nt tobacco separately was com- pared with the time required to do the same ooerati one with a fertilizer attachment on the transplanter. The number of hours requ_i red wes calculated on the more basis. Dhe labour cost was considered at BSJ per hour for each man and I U] Ofl per hour for man and team. The method of statisticsl analvsis was outlined bv Dr. E. D. Eaten, ASSOC is te ProIessor ofi a thematics and Research ics, Eichigsn State College, East Lansing, van. In order to outline the procedure, an example may Show the various steps more clearly than an eXplanetion. The r‘ 53 are 188d for an (0 yield per acre data from Table (5) for 1 example. LLL‘L‘C": : etions :A B C D E F G H : 8 x (it) 1 1850 1847 2150 2057 2102 2015 1855 1896 15750 2 1795 1864 2002 1914 1945 1979 1808 1862 15169 5 199" 1621 2018 2071 2069 1945 192 1726 15574 4 1919 1868 1955 1985 2115 1389 2059 1996 15666 i; X 7540 7400 8125 7907 6251 r”5’26 7650 7%80 62159 2T2 485 510 811 9 — a: : 8R" 9 965,504,495 (25)“ s,se1,2ss,321 3x. 120,995,675 . Sum of the squares for Totals (K) s Zxa-(Sx)3 g 5395“; u a: m I E4 [‘0 H I to 0 CD 0 Sum of the squares for Replications (L) 0! 1 (‘0 f"! Sum of the squares ior Treatments (P) I 0’) F3 I C909 t\. .54 K) II H O 9 C 0 col (241) Aialysis of Variance on the Siource nJiiiruwnum3:Sum_oi' prnres : \hxéiance : 1?. Value Total : 51 :K 529455 : K 1062“ : 51 Replications: 5 :L LF840 : L 79fi7 ° 5 1 1 r1reatments : 7 :P 185480 : P 25¢5e=tz t = 0.45 7 e Error (e) : 21 :fi-L-E 142155 (E) : W 5758:8: : : : 21 : Deviation of means = = 6788 = 58.12 Ho *3 'V‘~ o a - r, n 2 2 —v ( beV1ation between a 'ierences 01 means :V(41.1) 4- (41.1) =58.12 This series has 21 degrees of freedom for error, tLus tables, the Values of ”t” are 2.08 for the 5 percent and 2.845 for the 1 percent point. Therefore the 5 Percent difference of means for sirnificance between treat— k.) ments would be (53.12 X 2.08 120.9 and the 1 percent d1 3 .L 7.1- LEOP- ence of means for significance between treatments would be h (53.1; " 2.845) 165.2. If there is 120.9 or 165.4 pounds of tobacco per acre lifference in means between the treatments, less than live or (1 one fercent of the cases for error is due to random sum,1ing fluctuations respectively. '— ~s 9 “9 :xaswwligs ULV sxcellent weather conditions prevailed throughout the 1958 growing season. An average rainfall occurred during the last week in Kay, prior to transplanting, but was rather light 7 in June. From July 10 until the completion of narvest abund- ant and frequent rainfall was recorded. The followin table (5) shows the weekly rainfall throughout the season in compar— ison with an eight year average. .' (5) The weekly rainfall during the lc58 growing season ‘ "1 o _ n . - lh.C111(Lln" r‘n \—"<)fi1’) ‘rx \f()J1{\ "'1 - M 'I' — - - 7.5+ *3 8, H O v o '3€501i3 911111123 : u 11a_LrLCrt11_ 111 111011e£3 season : C53 : 8_year average Lia-V } ‘ T / 042 .30 ” 14 .66 ,3 ” 2 1.52 .56 ” f3 . 5s 1 .00 June .25 .40 " l .98 .45 ” 1 .24 1.10 ” 2 .OO .58 O O (D 91 <2 {\2) O O (O (.0 (\3 (0 <2 Q3 C—-z = s H (4 ClN’F’ 01000] 0:10 (‘0 DIODE-‘1.“ Q) I—‘ O (N H O) (D m H O O C. O O C: c (\3 <1 0 I...’ ()1 o ('1 A (C) C: V The treatments consisted of applying fertilize er in the row with the fertilizer drill one week before Mr nsg lantinW° in trenches by hand one week before transplanting; in bands 6 inch s from the row and 2, 4, and 8 inches deep, and 5 and 9 inches from the row and 4 inches deep. Table (4) shows the results for 1958. Tobacco fertil- ized by bands of fer ”tilizer placed 8 inches from the row and 2, 4, or 8 inches deep produce d significantly larger yields than fertilizer applied by hand one week before trInsnlcntine or in bands 9 inches from the row and 4 inches deep. Tobacco produced from fertilizer being applied 2 or 6 inches deep and 4 inches from the plants was found to produce Sieinficartly i her yields than where the fertilizer was drilled in the :3.‘ row one week before transplanting. rertilizer applied 9 in- ches from the plants and 4 inehe es deep produced rather poor yields of tobacco which were significantly lower than where the fertilizer was placed in bands closer to the plant. Where the fertilizer was a_pp nli ed in b)? nds 8 inches from the row and 6 inc ches deep the quali1ty of tobacco was signifi- cantly higher than where the fertilizer was placed by hand one week before transplanting. There were no si.1nifi-ca t differ- ences among the grade indexes for the other treatments. The crop index for tobacco which received fertilizer in bands 8 inches from the row and 2, 4, or 8 inches deep at the time of transplanting was sienificantlv greater than where it was applied by hand in rows one we-k before transplanting. Plots on which fertilizer was applied 6 inches deep and 8 in- ches from the row produced signif cwntlr greater returns per Table (4) 1938. Grade index, yield per acre, and crOp index from.side and row placements of fertilizer. . :Grade : Yield : Crop Method of applying fertilizerzReplic-:index : per ac.: index :ation : ¢ : lbs. : $ A. Applied in the row With the 1 30.0 1830 549 fertilizer drill one week 2 30.7 1795 551 before transplanting 3 31.7 1996 633 4 29.7 1919 570 Ayg. 30.5 1885 576 B. Applied by hand in trench 1 30.6 1847 565 one week before trans- 2 29.5 1864 550 planting. 3 30.2 1821 550 4 26.8 1868 501 Avg. 29.3 1850 541 0. Applied in bands 6" from 1 30.8 2150 662 row and 2" deep at time of 2 32.1 2002 643 transplanting 3 30.0 2018 605 4 27.0 1955 539 Mg. 30.0 20 31 612 D. Applied in bands 6" from 1 31.0' 2037 631 row and 4" deep at time of 2 31.8 1914 609 transplanting 3 55. O 20 71 684: 4 30.4 1885 573 fig. 31.6 1977 624 E. Applied in bands 6" from 1 33.2 2102 698 row and 6" deep at time of 2 33.9 1945 659 transplanting 3 27.5 2069 569 4 33.2 2115 702‘ AvgL 32.0 2058 657 F. Applied in bands 3" from 1 31181 2015' 640 row and 4” deep at time of 2 32.7 1979 647 transplanting 3 32.8 1945 638 4 30.3 1889 572 Avg. 31.9 1957 624 G. Applied in bands 6" from 1 30.4 1855 564 row and 4" deep at time of 2 31.1 1808 562 transplanting 3 28.1 1928 542 4 29.4 2039 599 Avg. 29.8 1908 567 H. Applied in bands 9" from. I—' 27.7' 11896 525 row and 4" deep at time of 2 32.2 '1862 599 transplanting 3 27.9 1726 482 4 33.3 1996 665 Avg. 30.3 1870 568 5% difference of means for significance 2.68 121.2 76.7 1% difference of means for significance 3.79 164.9 104.4 (33) acre than those on which applications were made in the row witn the fertilizer drill one week before transplanting. 1959 Results In the 1959 growing season, a sand storm occurred which destroyed a considerable number of the newly trans— planted plants, therefore a large amount of replantins was Ho necessary. This m shap to the series produced an uneven stand of tobacco. The season was fairly dry, and according- ly yields and quality were low. 1he following table (5) in- dicates the amount of ra’nfall occurring during the growing “able (5) The weekly rainfall during the 1959 growing season including an foear average. Weeks—during : Rainfall in inches season : 1959 8 year average Ray 1 ” 7 .OO .55 ” 14 .48 .50 ” 21 .2- .56 " 28 .25 1.00 June 4 .60 .40 " 11 ' .29 .45 " 25 .46 .68 July 2 1.06 .69 " 9 .45 .27 ” 16 .45 .92 " 25 .05 .29 ” 50 2.59 .77 Aug 0 6 o 57 .50 " 15 1.54 1.01 " 2O .15 .58 " 2 .02 .5 Scpt.5 .57 .58 ” 10 .22 1.04 ” 17 .74 .74 Total 10.29 12.58 The treatm nts were changed somewm at from those used (0 in 1 58 The Lre.tncnt where the fertilizer was placed in rows by hand, one week before "ransolanting was replaced by I H a new tree" art with tne fenti l :e row at the H I“ N ('3 e ‘13 d ’15 H H. L .. 9.. H. b (.1. +34 time of transplanting. This treatment was included to show what effects would appear from actually trans Wpla t1nm tobac- + K) co into a row of fertilizer without 110'1n' an interval. The treatments also included applyin n3 fertilizer in the row 0 I one week before ransnlantia , and in bands 5 and 8 inches 0) H. from the row of tobacco and 2, 4, and nches deep, as well as, in bands 9 inches from the row and 4 inches deep. During the growing season, no OVEStindtfl" differences were observed between the treatments conducted. Table (6) includes the grade index, yield per acre, and crop index for the different met‘ols of applying fertilizer in the series. Only one treatment gave 817D'f109ntlv h13her yield per acre than any of the others. Where the fertilizer was placed in bands 5 inches from the row and 6 inches deep higher yie elds were produced than where it was placed in bands 6 inches from the row and 4 inches deep. The grade index fluctuated very little between the treatments with only two showing si3nificant differences. 1 n bands 6 inches 14 Tobacco produced by placing the fertilizer from the row and 2 inches deep showed sienil icantly hi 3her quality than where it was “1 we d in be _nd 4 inches deep. ,v 1ne crop index showed slightly better results. where the fertilizer was applied in bands 6 inches from the row l-JI and 4 inches deep produced s nif icantly greater returns {.2 (50) Table (6) 1959. Grade index, yield per acre, and crop index from side and row placements of fertilizer. : :Grade: Yield : Crop Method of applying fertilizer: Replic-:index: per ac.: index ation : 3g, : lbs. : 5 A. Applied in the row with 1 22.2 1498 555 the fertilizer drill one 2 27.1 1581 574 week before transplanting 5 26.0 1554 599 4 21.0 1552 280 Avg. 24.1 1456 546 B. Applied in the row with 1 25.1 1455 565 the fertilizer drill at 2 25.7 1552 565 the time of transplanting 5 24.9 1648 410 4 25.9 1525 516 Avg. 24.4 1489 564 0. Applied in bands 5" from. 1 22.8 1510 544’ row and 2” deep at time of 2 22.5 1580 508 transplanting 5 24.4 1504 567 4 25.2 1608 575 Avg. 25.2 1500 548 D. Applied in bands 5” from 1 21.9 1451 515 row and 4” deep at time of 2 25.5 1415 550 transplanting 5 26.2 1457 582 4 25.1 1657 585 Avg. 25.5 1490 552 E. Applied in bands 5" from 1 20.2 1500 505 row and 6” deep at time of 2 24.2 1659 597 transplanting 5 22.9 1521 548 g‘ 25.4 1500 406 Avg. 25.2 1565 564 __ F. Applied in bands 6" from I_5 26.2 1482 588 row and 2” deep at time of 2 27.9 1451 599 transplanting 5 25.4 1568 567 4 25.4 1549 595 Avg. 25.7 1508 587 G. Applied in bands 6" from 1 20.0 1525 277 row and 4" deep at time of 2 22.7 1455 525 transplanting 5 22.5 1581 508 4 22.5 1580 511 Avg. 22.1 1579 505 H. Applied in bands 6" from. 1 21.6 1295 280 row and 6" deep at time of 2 26.1 1522 545 transplanting 5 25.1 1474 570 4 24.4 1568 585 . Avg. 24.5 1415 544_4_ 1. Applied in bands 9" from 1 25.5 1448 540 row and 4" deep at time of 2 22.5 1465 527 transplanting 5 26.7 1440 584 4 27.0 1602 455 Avg. 24.9 1489 571 55 difference of means for significance 2.6 154.8 5204 ' 5.50 182.7 71.0 1% difference of means for significance » .- ». --1- -' - p ° .‘ .' .~ ' '-°. ° ‘ »' per ac1e than where it «.5 applied with the fertilizer drill at transnlfurxhr3 or in b rKMStS inches ihxnn the rwurzun1§2 in- The e;_mr11~ntal work on fertilizer plac< cement was en- larged in 1940 to has ten the reesu11:s so that they night be of benefit to the flue-cured tobacco growers of Ontario. Two idehtical series of plots were 1aint.-ng; in br-nis :23 in- ches from the row and 2, 4, and 5 inches deep, and in bands 5 and 7 inches from the row and 4 inches deep. The amount of rainfall occurring thrgughout the grow- ing season isp e'enc C in table (7). During the week before Series I wzs transplanted, two inches of rainfall was record- ed, whereas before the second series slignch less than one inch occurred. Rainfall was abundant and frequent during the growing season and produced varying effects upon the tobacco treated by different methods of applying fertilizer. On Aug- ust 25, a fairly heavy frost occurre( in the eistrico which ed about thee to four 1e ves per plant. The injured 'u g ‘ 1 1 o 1 H _ _ _v_ I 1,- ' _..'1- 8(1, 1?1(31, 811d.1xsa1gfiiecz, nruie1101‘, to TJULJAil‘l Luie to c:- leaf was narve total yield per acre. 1 Throughout the season growth measurements were "ahen J- on both series. Katurity notes were aken on the number of plants topch at each time of topping and a maturity index determined. The percentages of tobacco primed in the first three primings was also calculated and is included under the J- —. ' 1- . r? a maturity index. Table (7) The weekly rainfall during the growing season for 1940, including an 8-year average. leeks during : heinfall in inches season :_. 1940 8~year average May 1 , ” 7 .51 .55 ” 14 .45 .50 ” 21 .88 .56 ” 28 2.24 1.00 June 4 .76 .40 " ll .00 .45 ” 18 1.48 1.10 ” 25 5.16 .58 July 2 .98 .69 H 9 .10 .37 " 16 .62 .92 " 25 .12 .2 ” 50 .44 .77 Aqu 6 .85 .50 " 15 .62 1.01 ” 20 .56 .56 ” 27 .71 .59 Sept.5 1.77 .58 ” 10 .59 1.04 " 17 .69 .74 Total 18.09 12.58 ’Results for Series I 1940 On July 2, approximately one month after trensnlant: the first set of observation notes were taken for Series I. The notes included color, uniformity, and relative size of plants for all treatments. t was observed, at this date, where the fertilizer was placed in the row one week before transplanting, retarded growth occurred and in comparison with the other treatments the plants were lighter green in color. Where the fertilizer was placed in the row at transplanting, the plants anoearea to be medium green in color, althou er irregular in size. The plots with shallow placement of fert- Ia il 20 r showed better growth and more unifer1nity of color than any other treatment. There the fertilizer was placed in bands 7 inches away from the row the plants appeared to be rather small in size and rather light green in color. One week later, July 8, another set of observation notes was taken. At tlwi period, although considerable growth had occurred since July 2, the treatments Showed similar va ri 1tions. The tobacco receiv- .1. ing fertilizer in bands placed close to the plants appeared to be growing faster and were more uniform in growth than where the fertilizer was ap.lied in the row and in bands 7 inches from the row. Plants that obtained fertilizer in the row one week before transolantina showed little consistency in size and appeared relatively short. The final set of notes on growth development was taken on July 19, when the plants were commencing to appear in bud. The outstanding treatment ap- wnd 5 in- OJ (L) peared to be where the fertilizer was applied in ches from the row and 2 inches deep. The heaves on the plants this treatment were quite broad; whereas oy a* row, the ”ob acco appeared to be somewhat peaked, t; leaves were narrow, slender, and rather short at the apex of the plant. Prior to topping, maturity index notes were taken on the number of plants in bloom, and in late and early bud. Upon observing the da“a presented in table (8), it may be seen that, where the fertilizer was applied in the row one week before and at transplanting, as well as in bands 7 inches from the row and 5 inches deep, maturity appeared delayed in comparison with the other treatments, which were si J7liCuh'1y erflr i6 r in maturity both at the 5 and 1 percent points. The maturity index data show that where the fertilizer was applied in bands 5 inches from the row and 2, 4, and 5 inches deep, the tobacco Mil tured ? 'r n I quite uniforL lly. HO difierences in the maturity iniex among the treatments were significant when taken on the amount of to- no bacco harvested in the Iirst three primings. Apparently at harvest the leaves were fairly unifoim in ripeness. On August 24 frost injured some of the tobacco in this eXperiment, therefore, the yield per acre was divided into two types of leaf; the marketable leaf, which consisted of tobacco free from frost injury; the total leaf, which consisted of all the leaf harvested. On studying Mic data presented in table (8) it may be seen tliat where the fertilizer was placed in bands 5 inches deep there was obtained the highest yield of tobacco both in marketable and in total leaf. These treatments gave nificantly higher yields than those in which the fertilizer was placed in the row one week before transplanting or in bands 7 inches from the row and 4 inches deep at transplanting. The hest quality of tobacco was produced on plots receiving fert- iliz er in bands 5 inches from the row and 4 inches deep, and was 0) ig‘ nifican“;ly higher th.9 n tooacco fertilized by drilling in the row one week before transplanting. Evidently the crop in- dex was favoured also by the be nd application. ihe re urns per Table (8) Series I, 1940. r-v r:- L) L} Grade index, yield per acre, crap index, and maturity index from side and row placements of fertilizer. Method of apply- Yield' ' er acre ‘ 3 ind Replica»zaradeWI'arI W'ml: crap :‘E‘F “3%.!!! t ing fertilizer ions :indexzable leaf: leaf :index:t0p-: 1, 2, ¢ lbs :1bsHping & 3? A. Applied in the 1 19.4 row with fertil- 2 22.3 852 886 190 73 68 izer drill one 3 ' 21.0 792 825 116 55 68 week before trans- 4 21.3 908 949 193 96 71 planting Avg. 19.5 845 ‘88 65 D. Applied in the 1 22.1 1053 1078 233 83 67 row with fertilizer 2 19.5 958 967 187 60 75 drill at time of 3 15.5 976 1019 151 68 69 transplanting 4 28.3 967 1026 274 90 74 vg. 989 *1523 211 i76“‘"2[ 6. Applied in bands '1 25. 9 1999 1199 295 195 72 ' 5' from row and 2' 2 23.1 1131 1148 261 114 74 deep at time of 3 23.2 985 1086 229 114 67 transplanting d 4 22.2 1137 1179 252 116 74 Avg. 23.6 0 30 5 D. Applied in bands ‘1 24. 1111 255 115 71 5' from row and 4“ 2 22.0 1150 1167 253 116 73 deep at time of 3 19.3 985 1053 190 122 70 transplanting 4 22.5 818 903 184 91 73 B. Applied in bands 1 22.5 975 1955 217 94 157 5' from row and 5' 2 19.1 1108 1125 212 99 71 deep at time of 3 21.4 1044 1111 223 119 71 transplanting 4 22.1 1156 1200 256 111 71 Vg. o 7. Applied in bands *I* 21.6‘ 962 971 *209 99 ‘772 3“ from row and 4' 2 23.1 958 1002 221 80 70 deep at time of 3 24.7 1022 1074 252 103 69 transplanting 4 26.2 1086 1187 285 102 70 Avg. 240 4 0. Applied in bands “I“ 21.2 814 ‘840 _1'73 55 79 7' from row and 4“ 2 23.6 983 992 232 91 74 deep at time of 3 24.1 1022 1022 246 31 71 transplanting 4 20.6 941 967 194 80 72 5% difference of means . . . « . . . 4 for significance 1% difference of means 5.4 176.1 156.4 74.2 29.0 4.30 for significance acre were SL nific cantly higher for the treatment where the fertilizer was applied in bands 5 inches from the row and 2 in- ches deep than where it was applied in the row one week before transplanting. Re Ults for Série° II, lOWO Jhe first observation notes were t9 hen on July 2, approx- imately one month after trons; “Ut'n” At this period of growth interesting differences appeared between the various treatments. Tobacco fertilized by the drill one week before 'renspL nting end in bonds 7 inches from the row and 4 inches deep efpeared pale green in color; however, the plants were fairly uniform F. n size. The plants in the nlots With l€PtLl zer applied one week before transplanting were as lerg as the other treatments, as the wide band application plots consisted of small if W110 1’6- \ p ents. There the fertilizer was applied in the row 80 trons- }? l on "C 3.113 the I) l 9.11 ’L'. S W e 1°63 1'90 (‘1 i 11121 C re en in, c Q 1 0 1° , tho ugh qui be irregular in growth. Plants on plots which received ti maining tre toente, consis ti n” of fertilizer anilied in bands 5 inches irom ‘he row and 2, 4, and 5 inches deep, were quite nd fairly uniform in size. Tie plots were m (J *5 I I 1 1 3 O O 5 H. D O O H O '15 (‘3 n again observed one week late“. Tobacco receiving iertilizer 1 in the row one week before trs “919nting and in bands 7 inches from the row and 4 inches deep still appeared very pale green .1. .1- in color, whereas that which received 'he row app H110 lClOH at H ronsplenting 19d trrned fcom a medium.to 9 l ght green color. oldnts on the other treatments remained quite dark green. Irregule riLy in growth still persisted on plots which receiVed the fertilizer in the row. 57 July 19 the band amplicotion J. 1:].C) f 1):)“ ‘1"“Ll t() L! l I) .' , .' I“ .F.. 3 .1- _ " in color rniiorml13, 9n1 placed in the row one we ‘ earwxi soswwnxnt Iwytardcxi Fri 8 liQ~ htnes in color. .d_ --wo .LCLL Cl'lZ cation of lar to the other band .‘-'_‘ .' :1") ‘-.. A Katurity Index data Outstandings ficant in maturity by receiv side of the row and 2 and 4 inches deep we than where the fertilizer tr: ins; l nti n; The natur t9 e leaf pride in the f cant differences between The tort l le9..“1iarv per acre columns in table inches to the side and 2 from the row and 4 inches nificantly higher yields one week before transplan row and 5 inches deep. bands 5 or 7 inches from of tobacco were signiimic I 4- fertilizer in the row at produced was inclined to n ‘,. fl ex ueiore ." 3 .n _’1 u -L i 1. band Where ’- -._._'..: Llfio‘ni b‘l. C""'\ L)'/ t1"?.n 19} in. 9nd.srtill iruxl its growth cco receivin9 U f’" 13318 13710.8 Dene app lication treatments. -‘ C1 are presente in erences concerning the earliness ipplications are shown in the re- C V“ -.° . ‘- I 411011. ’8 in" fertilizer in bands to or inches to th re ficantly earlier in maturity was placed in the row one week before ity index alculsted from the gzrcen- irst three prim' s showed no signi- ‘P :\I .' , ._i l trea.tments. ! the IL 1 GO. (9). or 4 inches deep, n 9%? ”J 1 sented under yield OS C 5 Fertilizer applied in bands and 3 or 7 inches deep in each instance produced sig- than where it was placed in the row ting inches from the '4. tie row and 4 inches deem, F0 :1tly h Sher t11.9 thet wh transplanting. The marketable leaf be lower in yield on treatments mrtnr— table (9). Table (9) Series II, 1940. Grade index, yield per acre, crop index, and maturity index from side and row placements of fertilizer. . : ‘ Yield: : {maturity Method of applying: : : gper acre : : index fertilizer :Replica-zGradefflafket- {Tota130r0p :at :5 in :tion :indexzable leaf:1eaf :Index:t0p-:1,2 a : ' : lbs : lbs : :ping: 6? A. Applied in the 1 24.0 726 1089 174 95 66 row with the ferti- 2 26.7 764 1047 174 114 70 lizer drill one 6 24.5 769 1151 181 84 64 week before trans- 4 26.7 726 1066 171 97 68 planting Avg. 24.0’ *7 98 467' I. Applied in the 1 22.8 801 1098 186 97 76 row with fertilizer 2 26.2 819 1124 190 111 76 drill at time of 6 26.4 784 1115 186 122 70 transplanting , 4 25.0 820 1050 205 126 78 6. Applied in bandsfil 23.5 798 1098 188 III 73 5' from row and 2” 2 21.6 850 1190 184 116 71 deep at time of 6 26.0 806 1191 185 141 67 transplanting 4 25.5 850 1119 217 109 76 I780 230 D. Applied in bands 1 22.7 791 1164 180 128 6'6" 5' from rov and 4' 2 21.6 847 1164 186 128 76 deep at time of 6 22.0 784 1080 172 118 76 transplanting 4 26.9 788 1065 188 96 74 Avg. 22._ 6 ‘ E. Applied in bands 1 22.6 810 1089 181 ’101 74 5' from row and 5" 2 26.6 784 1162 185 160 69 deep at time of 6 20.9 779 1065 166 96 76 transplanting 4 26.4 762 1061 178 108 72 Avg. 22. F. Applied in bands 1* 26.41 898* 1188 267 115 76 6‘I from row and 4' 2 26.6 911 1162 212 165 81 deep at time of 6 25.6 788 1208 199 126 65 transplanting . 4 26.4 856 1246 255 119 69 Avg. 2 . G. Applied in bands 1 26.5 757 1133 131 115 31 7' from row and 4“ 2 26.7 926 1200 219 100 77 deep at time of 6 24.9 859 1262 214 95 68 transplanting 4 28.9 888 1190 257 114 66 IVE. o ‘ 55 difference of means 1.5 56.6 64.1 21.0 18.6 6.5 for significance 1} difference of means 2.1 76.5 88.5 29.0 26.5 8.7 for significance ing late in the season. The band applications 5 and 7 inches from the row and 4 inches deep each produced significantly hi her yield s of markets ole le9f t119n where the fertilizer was applied in tLe row o11e week before transplanting. lhe treatment receiving the fertilizer in canes 7 inches to the side of the row and 4 inches deep prod Htced sivnificantly her quality tobacco than any other treatment, w ception of the band application where the fertilizer was placed in bands 6 inches from the row and at the same depth. Fefi1'il- izer applied in bands 5 inches from the row and 4 or 5 inches deep produced si nificantly inferior quality of leaf than the above treat.1c Mt . Similarly for the crop inlex the fertilizer 99 plied 5 and 7 inches from the row of tobacco was si niiicz1 ntly gre9ter than any of the other treatments in the series. 1941 Resnlts however, due to limited space and firms 1088 the two series were not identical. The firS‘ series, designated as series I, in- cluded treatments with the fertilizer 9pplief in the row with the 1‘s rtilizer drill one week before and 9t trans919nt1n in bands 5 inches from the row and 2, 4, and 5 inches dee ep; in SO 4 Q, nches C- P. bands 6 9nd 7 inches from the row an eep. included fertilizer applied in the row with the fertilizer drill one week before and at transplanting; in hands 7 inches from.the row and 4 inches deep. Since recent investigation had shown that starter solutions on other cultivated crops n39 proluced beneficial effects, two treatwonts, made up of treble (40) SUperphosphate and 8-24-— solutions, were included in this series. 'H ‘ 9. ' D . ’7 'v ‘ r' " "- ~ ~- -' '. x r9 "- fine r91n1all in 1991 was JUOUb average. Ser1es 1 re- ceived a considerable amount of rainfall during the week pre- vious to transplanting, whereas the second series received 0 '| Q ion. This difference i1 CT verv little nr901pita' ._J 9 D :3 [—1 5.3 :_J H *J *3 O l LUCOd very intereStin; results on the mortality of plants 9f- .... ter transplantir for the V9rious methods of arnlying fertil— 1‘ lg) "a. J. izer. fhe season was excellent for growing tobacco and no 1rost occurred until after the two series were harvesued. \I LJ folJAnvinr-'t9hlra (10) an ens ifiwe 1K13:lv pnn3cipinn1t-)r1'fl1ro1{; season. Table (10) The we 31:13; rainfall durin‘: th J 5399531711, :1ncl111v11g 9.11 E? 37091“ :1 '-'—'"':" «‘t‘"""'"‘« 3'? ‘ '1 .. . “Gm-18 {11101115 11111111911 111 .310 S(%C‘F‘.-C)1'1 4 " 14 .09 " 21 1.02 .59 " 29 1 45 "0 June 4 .e I...) H 1 c O O o ”'3 U] (‘0 :: ‘Ol-J O 010: (O {0 Ol 03 0 Q] to O O \1 I (21 [11.18. 6 .02 .50 x 15 .45 1.91 20 .44 .00 ” 27 .60 .59 Sept.5 .06 .58 (41) Results for Series I 1941. Series I was tr9n€“lanted Kay 61, and considerable rain- '6) .1. fall cc 0 urred during the week prior to transplanting. This r1infall apparently had beneficial effects on the n- Pb amount 0 treatments where the fertilizer was placed in the row one week before and at tranSplanting. This may be observed br studying Table (ll) on the percentage of plants killed by injuries such as ”fertilizer burn”, mechanical injuries, and injuries other than those caused by cutworms or wireworms. The percentage killed is quite low in comparison with Series II for the same treatments. No sisnificant differences are seen between the treatments, which indicates that very little burning of the roots occurred. Figure (I) illustrates the uniformity of the percentage of plants killed on the various treatments. Figure (I). Percentage of plants killed by injuries other than those killed by insects for Series I, 1941. 5.0- N) o 01 % of plants killed Treatments Table (11) Series I, 1941. Percentage of plants killed by injuries, other thal those caused b; insect injury, iron side and row placements of fertilizer. :Percenta;e of plants killed by in- :jurie: other than insect injury Letbod of a)nlvinn fe tiliser: dealications : : 1 2 5 4 :Avera;e A. Applied in the row with the 1.9 5.1 1.5 5.1 2.4 fertilizer drill one week before transplanting B. Applied in the row with the 0.6 5.1 2.5 5.8 2.5 fertilizer drill at time of transplanting C. Applied :n bands 5" from row 0.0 1.5 0.6 4.4 1.6 i and 2” @860 at time of trans- "W O1 ti‘ (1' plaat_nu (n if» 0 .p K) O 43 5.1 1" O) D. Applied in bands 5" from row 0. and 4” deep at time of trans- planting E. Applied in bands 5” from row 1. and 5” deep at time of trans- planting 01 O: O [.1 H O a 0.6 1. Cl F. Applied in bands 3” from row 0.6 1.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 and 4” deep at time of trans- planting G. Applied in bands 7” from row 0.1 5.8 0.0 5.0 5.0 and 4” deep at time of trans- planting 5; difference of means for significance 1.4 1% difference of means for significance 1.9 J ts were made througaout . 0 Measurements on senth developmen .‘ the erowine season. Table (12) shows tne heights of plants at different periods of growth and the average number of leaves harvested for each replication. On July 5 no significant d11- ferences in hei hts occurred between the treatments. One week U 1 0 later, however, plants with the fertilizer applied in the row A 1 £3 03 V with the fe tilizer drill one week before tra 1spl: nt_" n , was sirnificantly shorter in hei3ht than where the fertilizer was applied in the row at transglantin3, in bands 5 inche es from the row and 5 inches deep, or in bands 5 inches from the row and 4 inches deep. Tobacco that received fertilizer in a row xv H drilled at transnlantin 3rew relatively tall durin3 that week, 1 CL. '__J and was si le tr than where the fertilizer was ap- plied in the row one week before transplantin3, in bands 5 .L inches from the row and 2 or 4 inches deep, or in bands 5 in- sotes taken on July 21, 1 ches irom the row and 4 inches deep. "7‘ before topping commenced, showed that plots, having the fertil- izer placed in bands fairly close to the row and in the row at the time of transplanting, were $13 nif ic.ntly taller than where it was a“p1ied in the row one week before transple nting . Fir» ure (2) shows Cis tinctly the heights of 1:0 vr: rious treatments in the early sta3es of 3rowth. Upon examinins tables (15) and (14), concerning the len3ti1and wietn of various lea ves, no la ar3e differences seem to occur. The ”we extreme treatments are those in which the fertilizer was placed in bands 5 inches from the row one we m1 before transplantin3. The former treatment evidently produced 1“ a i3nificantly longer fourth lea from the base, fourth leaf U) from the apex, and top leaf. y indexes at topping are presented in The avera3e maturit table (15). The tobacco in the treatment consisting of apply- ing the fertilizer in bands 5 in hes frOIH the row and 5 inches deep was significantly earlier in maturity, than where it was .5" oplied in the row with the ie1tilizer drill one week before A 112- the V Table (12) Series I, 1941. Heights of plants at different periods of growth and number of leaves harvested from side and row placements oilfertilizer. ° : :Number Method of applying:Replica—:Average heights of plants: of fertilizer : tion§_ : July 5: July 12: Ju1y2l :leaveg A. Applied in the 1 9.9 16.5 26.6 15 row with the ferti- 2 8.4 15.7 27.5 16 lizer drill one be— 5 10.4 19.8 50.4 15 for transplanting 4 15.7 16.1 54.9 14 Avg. 10.6 16.5 2918 15 B. Applied in the 1 11.1 20.5 55.0 16 row with the ferti- 2 10.1 19.8 52.8 15 lizer drill at time 5 10.4 21.0 41.9 15 of transplanting 4 15.5 2515 57.5 15 AvgEL 11 .8 2112 56.8 15 C. Applied in bands 1 9.8 16.7 59.5 16 5' from row and 2" 2 12.5 16.6 55.1 16 deep at time of 5 11.9 16.6 55.1 15 transplanting 4; 11.5 22.0 _59,4, 14 Avg. 1112 18.0 55.4 15 D. Applied in bands 1 10.6 16.9 55.9 15 5' from row and 4” 2 11.7 18.0 57.8 15 deep at time of 5 11.7 18.1 55.2 16 transplanting 4 10.5 17.5 5545 14 Avt4_ 11.1 17.6 55.1 15 E. Applied in bands 1 10.5 19.9 55.5 16 5' from row and 5” 2 15.4 19.1 54.8 15 deep at time of 5 11.2 20.4 58.4 15 transplanting 4 1511 19.0 40.4 16 Avg. 12.1 19.6 51.5 16 F. Applied in bands 1 10.0 16.0 55.1 15 5“ from row and 4” 2 12.2 18.9 55.6 15 deep at time of 5 15.4 20.6 58.5 15 trans planting 4; 15.4 19.4 58.9 15 Avg; 12.5 18.7 56.5 15 G. Applied in bands 1 11.8 17.5 55.9 16 7' from row and 4” 2 10.9 19.2 55.5 16 deep at time of 5 10.8 16.0 50.8 14 transplanting 4 11.6 18.4 50.6 15 Avg. 11.5 117.7 52.7 15 I 5; difference of means 2.1 2.3 4.5 for significance 1% difference of means 2.9 5.8 5.9 for significance A | L‘- (II V Table (15) Series I, 1941. Length and width of the 4th leaf at different periods of growth from side and of fertiliger. row placements Method of apply-:Rep- : : : ing fertilizer :licap: Jul 5 : Jul 12 : Jul 21 :tions: ongt : eng : engt A. Applied in the row With the fert- 1 13.4 7.6 1506 901 18.7 1005 ilizer drill one 2 12.2 6.9 14.5 8.4 18.1 10.4 week before trans— 5 15.8 8.5 16.8 9.5 20.4 11.9 planting 4 14.9 8.8 1700 1002 2006 1203 73. o o o o o o ' B. Applied in the 1 14.1 '77 17.1 9.9 21.0 11:5- row with the fert— 2 15.4 7.5 17.5 10.2 18.8 10.9 ilizer drill at 5 15.6 7.5 17.8 9.7 21.6 11.7 time of trans- 4 1603 908 1808 1100 1908 1104 planting Avg. 14.4 8.0 1 o o 05 o 3. Applied in bands 1 1206 6.5 1602 900 2001 1009 5' from row and 2" 2 14.5 7.8 15.8 8.9 19.9 10.9 deep at time Of 3 1407 807 1604 906 1908 1104! transplanting 4 14.1 8.0 18.5 10.5 21.5 11.6 AV 0 o o o o o o D. Applied.in bands E 13.5 7.9 15.5 8.9 119.1 1518 5‘ from row and 4' 2 14.6 8.5 17.0 9.5 20.6 11.4 deep at time of 5 15.8 7.9 15.9 8.0 18.1 10.2 transplanting 4 13.2 703 1609 908 2004 1100 AV 0 o o o 0. B. Applied in bands 1. . .1 .4 20.7 1124 5' from row and 5' 2 15.4 8.7 ‘17.1 9.5 19.8 11.5 deep at time Of 5 14.3 807 17.9 1004 2001 1103 transplanting 4 15.5 8.5 17 ’ IVE. 15.0 8.6 17.5 10.2 20.8 11.7 F. Applied in bands 0 70—8 1 o o o O 5' from row and 4' 2 14.2 8.0 17.2 9.9 19.2 10.7 deep at time of 1 5 15.9 9.5 18.7 11.2 21.4 11.9 transplanting 4 15.4 8.8 15.5 10.0 21.5 11.9 TV 1408 8.8 1 o o G. Applied in bands . . . . 7“ from row and 4'I 2 14.5 8.5 16.8 9.8 20.4 11.6 deep at time Of 3 1208 7.2 1508 901 19.2 1004 transplanting 4 14.6 8.7 16.4 9.5 18.5 10.4 Mg. 14.1 8.2 16.4 9.6 19.8 1173‘ 5% difference of means 1.4 1.2 1.6 1.0 1.7 1.1 for significance if difference of means 1.9 1.6 2.2 1.5 2.5 1.4 for significance A I I3 O ') v Table (14) Series I, 1941. Length and width of the 9th leaf from the base, 4th leaf from the apex, and the top leaf from side and row placements of fertilizer. :Rep- : July 21 :July 51, 4th: July 51, Method of applying:lica—: 9th leaf :leaf from top Top leaf fertilizer :tions:Length:Width:Length:Widtthength:Width A. Applied in the 1 17.4 9.0 17.0 6.7 15.4 4.8 row with the ferti— 2 16.8 8.8 17.0 6.9 15.5 4.6 lizer drill one 5 19.8 10.5 17.2 6.7 15.2 4.6 week before trans- 4 19.8 10.5 16.2 6.1_ 12.5 5.9 planting Avg, 18.5 9.6 16.9 6.6. l5.l_. 4.5 B. Applied in the 1 20.8 10.7 17.5 6.6 14.0 5.4 row with the ferti- 2 18.4 9.5 16.9 6.8 15.5 4.9 lizer drill at time 5. 21.5 11.5 18.8 7.8 15.6 5.5¢ of transplanting 4 18.9 9.8 18.0 57.4 14.5 5.5 Avg. 19.9 10,5 17.8 7.3 14.4 5.5 0. Applied in bands 1 20.7 11.6 16.5 5.9 12.5 4.1 5’ from row and 2" 2 19.9 11.0 16.9 6.5 12.9 4.4 deep at time of 5 20.6 10.8 18.4 7.5 15.0 5.5 transplanting 4 21,9 10.9 16.7 6.7 15.7 4&7 Avg. 20.6 11,1 17.1. 6.7 15.5 4.5 D. Applied in bands 1 17.6 9.6 16.9 6.5 15.2 4.5 5” from row and 4“ 2 21.0 11.4 17.9 7.2 14.5 5.0 deep at time of 5 18.6 10.0 16.6 6.4 12.7 4.7 transplanting 4 19.4 10.5 15.8 6.2 11.9 5.5 Avg. 19.2 10.4 16.8 6.5 15.1 4.4 E. Applied in bands 1 20.6 11.2 18.2 7.8 15.2 5.6 5” from row and 5' 2 18.9 10.4 18.5 7.5 14.9 5.5 deep at time of 5 20.5 11.1 18.5 8.0 15.2 5.8 transplanting 4 20.0 11.6 18-6 7.8 15.7 5.4 Avg. 20.5 11.1 18.4 7.8 414.8 5.6 F. Applied in bands 1 19.7 11.4 16.4 6.7 15.1 4.7 5' from row and 4” 2 20.7 11.1 16.9 6.8 14.1 4.9 deep at time of 5 21.6 11.4 17.8 7.1 12.6 5.0 transplanting 4 20.4 10.5 17.1 6.7 15.7 4.9 Avg. 20.6 11.1 17.1 6.8 15.4 4.9 G. Applied in bands 1 21.6 11.7 16.9 6.5 15.0 4.5 7“ from row and 4" 2 21.7 12.0 17.8 6.7 15.9 4.8 deep at time of 5 17.6 9.2 17.5 7.4 14.5 5.8 transplanting 4 17.1 8.5 17.9 745 14.7 5-1 Avg. 19.5 10.5 17.5 6.9 14.0 4.9 5% difference of means 2.2 1.5 0.9 0.6 1.5 0.5 for significance 1% difference of means 5.1 2.0 1.5 0.8 1.7 0.8 for significance Table (15) Series I, 1941. Grade index, yield per acre, crop index, and maturity index from side and row placements of fertilizer. Method of applying:Replioa-:Index: per acre:index: r8. 6. 131d :CrOp :Haturity index at : fertilizer : tions p lbs. :tOpping:l,2,&5P A. Applied in the 1 25.0 1748 457 14 62 row with the ferti- 2 21.9 1672 566 5 55 lizer drill one 5 25.4 1916 487 14 59 week before trans- 4 26.5 1878 494 54 58 planting. Avg. 24.7» 21804 446 17 52 B. Applied in the 1 25.0 1860 465 51 57 row with the ferti— 2 22.0 2047 450 28 48 lizer drill at time 5 25.8 1800 428 28 59 of transplanting 4 24.5 1874 455 It . 25.8 1895 455 52 56 6. Applied in bands 5' I 23.5 1874 455 I7 55 from row and 2' deep 2 24.6 1885 465 54 61 at time of trans- 5 25.7 1897 450 28 48 planting 4 25.7 1848 475 59 58 Avg. 24.6* 1876 461 557— 57 D. Applied in bands 12* 24.5 1644 5' from row and 4' 2 25.2 1915 444 44 56 deep at time of 5 24.5 1776 455 54 59 transplanting. 4 25.9 2109 546 59 50 IVE. 240 B. Applied in bands 17 2 . 5' from row and 5' 2 26.6 2046 544 51 58 deep at time of 5 26.5 1917 508 44 60 transplanting 4 27.0 2070 559 59 57 fig. 2674 1988 , r1 Applied in bands 1* 21.8 1849 453 *10* 751“' 5' from row and 4' 2 24.9 1964 489 50 58 deep at time of 5 28.5“ 2059 581 57 51 transplanting. 4 24.1 2008 484 40 59 Avg. 224.8* 1965 489 29 56 0. Applied in bands I 22.4‘ 12151 429 15 53 7' from row and 4' 2 24.5 2129 517 25 52 deep at time of 5 25.9 1689 404 11 65 transplanting 4 27°5 1667 455 56 66 5f difference of means 2.2 195.5 68.9 12.0 7.4 for significance 1; difference of means 3.0 267.8 94.4 16.5 10.1 for significance Figure (2) F H-- —-q Height in inches 10 4 _ go 7‘“ J. ’1 _‘ ._ ‘ r ,‘ I: . >_. )LQWoS 01 plmn,8 a. 411 ,. _‘ .F: j I POM $188 and row p1 ——- -I — _-- -q -— b -- _ ...t..:n — —- . 9'. .0 -—-b . .:.: . 0" Q D‘?d° In' \ O Q- o . .'. 0 .. I. \ .0 v . '0 ' p 0' c M. ’0 .d.‘ ts,’ ‘ 0'. .0 ... .. 'u'. ‘ V O. y '.o I". w :yerioms of ggmnflil fertilizer for —-q b-_ q. p ___ July :1 --- -_ —-- -_ ———l b -- - -— - -- - -- - -- b-- lb -- July 12 .. July 6 June ts m r a \ 1-x, 111328.101? I transplanblng, or 1n bdnus 7 inches from the row 9nd 4 inch“s - ‘\ I ‘1' -'—" 1‘ ’1‘ . vfl J ’1‘ O“ ‘- ‘1‘" h “ -'v— . — (~- 71‘ vnu ‘ 1 -‘~ -" ‘ ‘P - ‘I (16‘?) J a- L; LJ‘AC- U ' " (3 C’i 'Jr'..llSL.)lg,1' ULI‘lKQO J.[]O 1,11 £111,111... '11:]. -Li—C‘i. J'L L)D- “'1'.“ -. _ 1. ‘1 "'“v‘fl "‘ ‘1‘: :JH'-nr~' I" 1 1r I ‘-\"r'-- 3'7 " ""1. D.‘-.r' ”"H’b’na LILJIM-u 110:1 u u LWI 091.1, #9 01 - 8.11 i" “HALL: 1&1 t,:.__O l _L .- L; b. Ibb 17111 111;;8 ::‘<> 3:1 11C) CIUWJC’QLUICJlll;; L1;1;;ke1n1r1ceens. — 1 - -. " 1 “\K " t“ w J" ‘1 ‘ "'" ‘I‘ " r~‘ ’1 '. rw "‘ rue lelfl per acre J,S parclcvlapld OUUSL n 1mg lOllOW- 1mg two tr01_1mn:8, ootn o: un‘cn received the lcruillzer 1n usuad. Shire t:e lerlelzvr W9: flCCGU 1n bands 3 1nd 0 1n- clcs f“QH tLe row, 8nd 3 and 4 LHC es 108?, rusgectlvclje Go- ‘\ 5‘ 1 " W \‘j "-|(‘ . .1"— ". FI-‘t ‘.~~.- ,‘10 Q 1.~,- 'r- \" <-~’.r‘)c< ,3 "~' 3 7 ‘ J'- C". ,1. LIQCCO '1 DULCE/LL J- J.-Ll/)_._J 11.1., ,1"- U: 1.013;.) , .1 J) ‘UVCI‘ [In 1&1,le Mb]: (“I no L; gig)“ nificantlj ?i“nvr tbfln for cm; of she obh r tronbmants. 'fia I ,1 v IQO 083118 in U 517.110. 8 canth‘ C) f L’ - ‘ f.) l ~J U s 4 n ,. nun, —»y. --1 u" 9-310-he S J. TON. LN 20 1'2) x L‘ 1 1C1 ‘- .° .. - .u ‘- -7 .. 21, .° -. .1. Claus/1° 83811 .[J .LL/ L]-T.L‘=:.‘H. tobacco produ T1 C, (:0. I “ 1| _ '_ .0 r- A ‘ umjnl-uarcll LOT ap- " 0 1 ' J _ ‘ v 5 13012057. «106* f), w 3:0 in. che 'Ylw ‘b czvj1s- .1... 71.. 1““ f1“ bung. 1.1..1.J.'. 1113 P9 81.1%.? L231“ acre aiml’u F3; 31'110‘111815 lthf’jl'fyl" 171101‘8 4..) 13.5.8 toeacco was fertil1zer in bands 3 inches from the row and *r] led in the rev.r e1 ther at or Cwméxveetglkefane trfiolsglgq1tln3. Results lor Series II, 1941 The rainfall vas very low curing tte week bleTC trans- rlantinc this series of plots. This apparentl'r had an effect on the mortality of the plants receivinc different treatments. The mortalitv of plants that obtained fertilizer in the row drilled one week before and at transplanting, as well as the 8-24-8 starter solution vas sicnlileantlv greater for the one Figure (5). Percentage of plants killed by injuries other 20 than insects for Series II, 1941. p lO _ % of plants killed \ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ a\\\\\\\\\\\\\\m > \ \\\\\\ Treatments Table (16) r‘.“ (99) Series II, 1941. Percentage of plants killed by injuries other than those caused by insect injury, from side placement with and without starter solutions and rowgplacements of fertilizer. {Forcentage of—plantskilledby injuries Method of applying fertilizer other than insect inlury 'fieplications A. Applied in the row with the fertilizer drill one week before transplanting D. Applied in the row with the fertilizer drill at time of transplanting 0. Applied in bands 4“ from row and 2' deep at time of trans- planting D. Applied in bands 4' from row and 4' deep at time of trans- planting E. Applied in bands 4' from row and 5' deep at time of trans- planting F. Applied in bands 7' from row and 4" deep at time of trans- planting G. Applied in bands 4' from row and 4' deep 4 treble superphos— phate starter solu- tion at time of trans- planting. H. Applied in band 4' from row and 4' deep 4:8—24—8 starter solu- tion at time of trans— planting 51 difference of means 1% difference of means '1 8.1 23.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 16.9 12.5 10.6 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.8 6.5 20.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.6 0.0 9.4 for significance for significance 4 5.6 21.9 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.6 18.9 0.5 033 0.0 50.2 0.3 15.5 5.0 *‘5 nificantly nigher than where the ertili‘ zer was annlied one week before transplanting. The average he:L nt of ulants presented in table (17) shows very little significant difference following the various treatments. On July 17, the plants where * placed in the row 1t trensolanting was sieniiicantlv shorter in height than where it was aoolied in bands 2 or 5 inches deep and 4 inches from the row or 4 inches deep and 7 inches from the row. Enaminstion of table (18) re, eals no outstanding differ- ences between “as treatments as to the width and len th of the fourth leaf. q Table (19) shows a siwnificant difference between the " u 1 average size of t11_e nintn lea' two tre RbMCDLu. unere *“J F. C) 1...] 1—-’ 9 i"- H 3 the fertilizer was placed in bands 4 inches Wrgm the row and inches ”een ‘1: - szgnificantlv larser averace size of "' U k.) k.) (—1 ,1 ’“3' CD A ‘ .3 0) than where the 5-24-8 starter solution was used. Ho sig- 3 1‘") 1e“ nif'cant difference occurred betaeen the aversme size of the U I.J I W four h leaf from the apex following tne c flcnert tr1atwtnts. 0n observ n“ table (20) it ma* be seen teat treble SU‘mrr- 3110331101364, 11.. :ed as s staflter . >111L,i on 911;"aren'tly has LLC:I’1*?;(1 the C0 naturitv at H0 121D; as tobacco following tnis treatment 1 _ 1 l nific:_-1.ntl';,r earlier in ma.t1,1r:7t;’ 1311.51.11 tint on waich the fert- I _ ~ \ . _Ia trvm1sc1311t- ' 3 C’t‘ . 0 ' ‘_‘ " 7v 1 L .n, -. 1lizer was a 111 c 1n tne row one nCOL bolero or Table (17) Series II, 1941. Heights of plants at different periods of growth and number of leaves harvested from side place- ments with and without starter solutions and row 4p1acements of fertilizer. for significance : : Number .Method of applying:Replica- Aver e heights of plants : of fertilizer : tions : July E0: July 17: July 24: :Leaves A. Applied in the 1 10.7 18.0 28.3 15 row with the ferti- 2 9.0 17.8 31.8 14 lizer drill one week 3 9.9 19.8 31.7 16 before transplanting 4 11.3 18.9 33.3 15 Itg. 10.2 18:? 3I.3 15 B. Applied in the _l 9.7’ —16.4 ’30.4 ’15 row with the ferti- 2 10.2 18.5 33.6 14 lizer drill at time 3 8.5 17.0 30.8 17 of transplanting 4 7.9 12.3 29.7 15 Av . 19.1 16.1’ 3171 1st— 6. Applied in bands E 9?3“ 22.8 ‘3l.6 15 4' from row and 2" 2 8.1 19.4 25.4 14 deep at time of trans-3 1D.8 17.2 32.5 16 planting. 4 10:8 1907 3200 1. Ar . 9.8 19.8 30.3 IS D. Applied in bands E 11.1 19.6 #3273 15 4. from row and. 4' 2 1006 2008 3106 15 deep at time of 3 9.3 20.8 32.6 14 transplanting. 4 90 6 170 4 £10 6 16 Avg. 10.2 19:? 5200 15 B. Applied in bands 331 10.4 18.4 30.9 15 from row and 5' deep 2 8.3 18.3 35.8 15 at time of trans- 3 808 1705 51:09 17 planting. 4 1006 2106 3501 15 Tvg. 9:5 18.9 33.4 16 F. Applied in bands 1 8.2 18.0 33:9 14 7” from row and 4“ 2 10.0 18.8 32.0 15 deep at time of 3 8.3 19.4 31.9 16 transplanting 4 8.6 20.1 29.3 16 111g. 8.8 *19.1 ‘§;.8 IS G. Applied in bands *1 12.0 ‘18.0 33.4 16 4" from row and 4” 2 12.1 ‘ 18.6 34.4 16 deep 4 treble super. 3 10.3 20.6 29.9 16 phosphate starter solup4 9.1 18.9 32.9 16 tion at time Of trans-Avg. 1009 1906 3%.: 1 planting. H. Applied in bands 4” 1 9.1 19.4 32.3 15 from row and 4' deep 2 9.1 15.5 24.6 14 4 8-24-8 starter solup 3 8.1 18.3 29.0 15 tion at time of 4 11.3- 18.6 36.4 17 transplanting. Avg. ‘9.4 18.3—1 ‘L30.6 15 5% difference of means 1.? 2.9 4.1 1.1 for significance 1‘ difference of means 2.3 3.9 5.5 1.5 Table (18) Series II, 1941. Length and width of the fourth leaf at differ- ent periods of growth from side placements with and without starter solutions and row placements of fertilizeg. Jul 10 : ‘Eethod of;apply1ng:fiepllca- Jul 17 : Jul 24 fertilizer :tions TI3figt%TWIdtETEEfigtE%WIdtfiTt§fi§thWTdth A. Applied in the 1. 13.6 7.4 17.4 10.9 18.9 11.9 1‘0' '1th the fertl- 2 1307 801 17.5 1101 1909 1201 lizer drill one week 3 13.0 7.6 18.9 11.3 19.3 12.2 before transplanting «4 14.6 8.4 18.9 11.0 19.2 11.2 Avg. 913.7 7.8 18.2 11.1 19.4 —11.9 D. Applied in the 1 ‘13.9 8.2 17.7 11.2 1 . . row with the ferti- 2 13.8 7.8 18.4 11.2 19.6 11.4 lizer drill at 3 12.6 7.9 16.8 11.2 18.6 11.2 time of trans- 4 12.4 7.4 16.3 10.0 19.5 12.0 planting Arg. 13. . . . . . G. Applied in bands 1 11.9 8.1 19.6 12.1 20.7 11.9 4'I from row and 2' 2 12.1 6.9 17.5 10.5 17.9 10.6 deep at time Of 3 1409 806 18.1 1109 19.4 1109 transplanting 4 15.1 8.8 19.0 11.4 19.4 11.8 Avg! 13.5 801 180 o o O D. Applied in bands *1 15:0 8.8 18.4 10.5 19.7* 12.6 4' from row and 4'I 2 14.3 8.7 18.4 11.4 18.8 11.1 deep at time of 3 13.2 7.7 18.8 11.0 19.9 11.7 transplanting 4 13.7 8.2 17.2 10.3 19.0 11.2 Avg. 14.1 8.4 18.2 18.8 1W4 1175' E. Applied in bands *I’ ‘1376 . . . . . 4' from row and 5“ 2 12.6 7.7 18.4 11.1 19.8 12.1 deep at time of 3 13.7 8.2 A 18.2 12.1 19.6 12.3 transplanting 4 14.9 9.4 - -19.4 11.5 19.9 11.5 Avg. 1.30 05 e e e e F. Applied in bands 1 12} . 17.9 711.1 19.5 II.” 7' from row and 4' 2 14.4 8.8 17.4 10.7 18.8 10.8 deep at time of 3 13.4 7.9 19.1 12.0 19.6 12.6 transplanting 4 10.8 7.5 18.7 11.2 18.9 11.9 Avg. 12.8 _ 7.9 1873 11:3 . . G. Applied in bands 1 14.4-. 8.4 18.2 ’10.5 19.1 11.8 4' from row and 4“ 2 14.7‘ 8.5 18.8 11.4 19.0 11.3 deep 4 treble super- 3 14.7 9.0 19.9 11.9 19.2 12.2 phosphate starter 4 13.9 8.1 19.0 11.5 19.4 11.9 solution at time of ng. 14.4 8.5 19.0 11.3 9. 1. transplanting B. Applied in bands 1 14.2 8.8 17.9 11.1 19.3 11.8 4“ from row and 4“ 2 13.0 7.3 17.0 10.3 16.7 9.7 deep 4 8-24~8 3 13.8 8.3 18.9 11.8 19.0 11.8 starter solution 4 14.6 8.8 19.6 11.8 19.9 12.1 at time of trans- Avg. 1 . . 18.4 11: . planting. 5% difference of menas 1.6 0.9 1.2 0.7 0.8 0.8 for significance 1% differencc or means 202 105 107 100 101 102 for significance Table (19) Series II, 1941. Length and width of the 9th leaf from the base, 4th leaf from the apex, and the top leaf from side placements with and without starter solu- tions and rowgplacements of fertilizer. :Rep— : July 24, 34th leaf August?— Method of applying:1ica-: 9th leaf :from to : to leaf fertilizer :tions:Length:Width:Length?§13?fi?f§fi§%fiTWTHtfif 1‘0. with the ferti- 2 17.7 9.2 16.9 6.4 15.6 507 11,... drill one :5 17.0 9.1 1852 6.5 15.8 5.2 '96k before trans... 4 1705 900 1603 509 1404 409 planting. 7173. j7.r 900 1700 602 I4. 0 I. A 116d 1n the 1 17.6 901 17.1 605 1500 502 m. Sign, the gem. 2 18.0 9.1 16.8 5.9 14.6 4.9 lizer arm at time of 3 17.1 8.3 17.4 6.2 15.0 3.4 transplanting. 4. 16.9 802 1804 608 1600 506 Avg. 17.; 8.7 1704 . o e 6. Applied in bands 1. 1718* 8.9 16.4 15.8 *14.3 1.8 4“ from row and 2f" 2 16.6 8.4 15.8 6.0 14.3 5.0 deep at time or 3 1706 806 1605 508 1405 4.8 transplanting 4 18.7 9.4 17.0 6.0 15.6 5.2 A Avg. 17.7 80g 0 e o 0 D. Applied in bands 1. 1116.9’ 8.37 16.7 :6.9 14.7' 671 4“ from row and 4' 2 17.0 807 17.1 601 14.8 500 deep at time Of 3 18.6 905 1607 600 1400 4.4 transplanting 4 1805 907 1705 602 1506 502 Avg. T7. 5 90 1 1170 0 16:1: 1408 40 9 E. Applied_1n bands 1. 18.8 9.9 *16.5 5.9 14.9 4.9 4' from row and 5' 2 1809 9.5 1504 506 1401 406 deep at time of 3 18.2 9.6 18.5 6.6 15. 5.3 Transplanting, ___4 18.8 9.3 16.6 5.7 13.7 5.0 Avg. 18.7 9.6 16.8 6.0 14.8 5.0 F. Applied in bands :1 20.0 10.8 16.8 w116.4 14.4» . '7' from row and 4' 2 16.8 8.3 16.3 6.0 14.4 5.0 deep at time of 3 18.0 9.4 18.5 6.5 15.9 5.1 transplanting. 4 1705 8.6 17.9 6.5 14.7 4.8 IVE. 18.6 9.? 1704 T4 _I‘eg 506 G. Applied in bands ‘1’ 18.27 ‘9.4 15.0 6.6 15.3 5.3 4'I from row and 4'I 2 18.9 9.9 16.5 5.5 15.1 5.0 deep 4 treble super- 3 17.0 7.9 18.7 6.7 1518 5.6 phosphate starter 4 17.9 9.1 17.6 6.4 15.4 5.3 solution at time of Kig. 118.0 9.1 ‘17. , . . 6.3 transplanting. H. Applied in bands 1 18.5 9.3 17.3 6.6 15.3 5.3 4' from row and 4" 2 1408 604 1604 600 1402 4.8 deep 4 8-24—8 3 16.5 7.6 17.4 6.4 15.3 5.1 Starter SOIUtlon at 4 1803 903 1705 601 1501 5.0 time of transplant. ’KVg. 17.0 8.2 1712 6.3 15.5 5.1 1113. 6% difference of means 1.4 1.2 0.9 0.4 1.2 0.7 for significance 1% difference of means 1-9 1.6 1-3 0-6 1.6 0-9 for significance. Table (20) A fl—‘ ‘J‘ U] W Series II, 1941. Grade index, yield per acre, crop index, and maturity index from side placements with and without started solutions and row placements ___ of fertilizer. Method of applyingzfieplica- : EradezYield Cropiflaturity index :index :per acre:index: at : n fertilizer :tions lbs : :t0pping52,&3P A. Applied in the 1 25.0 1642 410 41 62 row with the ferti- 2 25.1 1611 404 39 65 lizer drill one 3 24.2 1786 432 48 60 week before trans- 4 24.0 1610 386 55 65 plantlns Avg. 2456— 11662 408 46 B- Applied in the 1 25.4 1622 380 46 57 row with the fertil- 2 23.0 1570 361 68 67 izer drill at time 3 26.9 1567 422 35 64 of transplanting. 4 24.1 1502 364 36 58 —Av . 24.4 '1565 382 36 35 0. Applied in bandl"1 24.3 1739 423 33 63 4' from row and 2' 2 23.9 1514 362 29 68 deep at time of trans% 24.1 1636 394 48 65 plantins. 4 25.5 1676 427 64 66 AVE. 24. D. Applied in bandi:1 23.9 1692 464 69 35 4' from row and 4' 2 23.4 1653 387 78 68 deep at time of 5 25.4 1702 452 58 66 transplanting. 4 23.4 1639 384 62 67 Av . 24.0 ‘1672 452* E. Applied in bandi‘i?‘ 2 . * 1 4034* 55 66 4' from row and 5“ 2 24.0 1685 387 78 68 deep at time of 3 25.9 1760 456 52 62 transplanting. 4 25.7 1697 402 84 67 15*. 24.3‘ 1711 41 A F. Applied in bands-{E 24. 7' from row and‘4' 2 28.5 1589 373 64 71 deep at time of 5 22.8 1905 436 70 55 transplanting. 4 22.1 1617 357 57 57 IV 0 2 e 9. Applied in bands-4E 24.2 1895 410 58 31 4' from row and 4’ 2 24.8 1647 409 70 68 deep 5 treble superb 3 23.5 1959 460 62 58 phosphate starter .4 24.4 1747 426 80 62 solution at time origig. 24.2 1732” 426 70 62 transplanting. H. Applied in bands 1 26.1 1714 447 52 64 4' from 20* and 4' 2 22.8 1464 554 56 65 deep 4 8-24-8 start- 3 25.2 1689 592 52 63 er solution at time 4 21.0 1689 355 73 64 of transplanting. “ng. 2 . 3 64 55 difference of means 1.7 109.8 33.3 17.5 4.5 for significance 1} difference of means 2.4 149.5 45.5 23.8 6.1 for significance. Table (21) Average results for all series on the grade index, yield per acre, and crop index on row and band applications of fertilizers for 1938 to 1941 inclu- sive. : : Grade: 1Yleld : ‘Cfop Method of applying: Year and series :index : per acre: index fertilizer : : _g_ : lbs : row with the ferti- 1939 24.1 1436 346 lizer drill one week Series I 1940 19.5 845 165 before transplanting. Series II 1940 24.0 730 175 Series I' 1941 24.7 1804 446 Series II 1941 24.6 1662 408 Ferage 26.3 1394 B. Applied in bands 1938 31.9 1957 624 3' from row and 4' 1939 23.6 1490 352 deep at time of Series I 1940 24.0 1007 242 transplanting. Series II 1940 25.3 863 218 Series I 1941 24.8 1965 489 Series II 1941 24.0 1672 402 Average 26.0 1492 0. Applied in bands 1938 30.3 1870 568 7 to 9' from row and 1939 24.9 1489 371 4' deep at time of Series I 1940 22.5 940 211 transplanting. Series II 1940 25.9 845 218 Series I 1941 24.5 1850 451 Series II 1941 23.1 1688 391 Kierage “26.4 1447 368 D. Applied in bands 1938 20.0 2031 612 4 to 6' from row 1939 25.7 1508 387 and 2' deep at time Series I 1940 23.6 1088 257 of transplanting Series II 1940 23.4 825 193 Series I 1941 24.6 1876 461 Series II 1941 24.5 1641 402 Ferage 2 e B. Applied in bands 1938 32.0 2058 657 4 to 6' from row and 1939 24.3 1415 344 5 to 6' deep at time Series I 1940 21.2 1071 227 of transplanting. Series II 1940 22.5 784 177 Series I 1941 26.4 1988 524 Series II 1941 24.31711 416 Average 26. 6 15 66 391 5% difference of means for significance 1.4 66.8 29.2 1‘ difference of means for significance 1.9 91.0 39.8 (5'7) 9 -1 1 ' ,..- 'L n 3 .1 ‘- 7 -‘ .,:- "r. “-. A 1'...” 1 « -.- .. ‘ 7. u . - .. A - '. bowl/L", L. :11}. 10 .1’1 '11. Li J. 6:1“ 11065: L. (3' .1501}. V1-61 0.8 9 re “Put-1611i,- U V‘ 7‘ L'_ ' ’ (“(1 f0"? t? C‘ G’s-9:. r30 “‘11 91".] 3 c1 ru'nw‘w no la '- L r' 1'1 r: H n n" 4 "9"- “ '3 .J , LL LL-..) .3 tJI. _1-KI\) . .11-. CIUL.-L/ A.) .)i)CJ.L i)“ l,‘\,).);’J L93. L16 1191’C/L). "hi-J (.1. a) LILlL DU]. (*1 _ _:_ _O ‘0 .—-V _‘ 'I J- O _ 1‘ .9. . .‘L. a -9 . _ . ' . R3- .0 _\ f] O 1- N “1 ' 1 _O -- 14' solution in aLoL,Lon o lcrtilizor 9591188 in ownos 4 incncs ‘ ' '. - 1.. ‘4 ’ ‘ '. "1| ‘ 1". "’3 A "-1 ' I ‘ l'.‘ - ‘- “ " '\ ‘\ “‘.* ".' "‘ "7': L." I' ~" vi.) "" !_ '. .. ' 1' [gilt/‘13 5 101.3515 £361" {10 L b’ ur'r‘j'l cud 6853.119181] 88 H3. LI}. one 1838111201“ .- ' m—l ~' in. - .1. A- .. .9 u: .» n l -.- 1-1. a, L r" r. r; ,1 . {11);}:1— ]. (J LL _!-n LIJ LC) I) - If 1‘11. b [1171.81.11 8;! 1-11’1 LI L111] .' , O :11] L); it! 11:; G O J- (3 - 4‘1“: -8 _g_ I- .—~ _ x_ 0 g _ 1» _ . A ___F O _ ‘i _r'a ’ _._ l- s 3 ‘ >0 _ ,1 .0 g S 88.1“ 881‘ 8011.1 L 1.11". , OI“ UJ’ {11‘} l; Jill-u 8.38 1. Ul‘ 8 L]- .LZwl” in 191311.84 L11- M o 'f‘ . -}-‘ "r r1 ‘ O -' } a q 1 ~ CLLC L5 1 P240. .J 98 PC) a. Lila .5 1110.18 L. (-883 . -"T ‘. 1‘4"" n .'~. ‘1‘ 1 . f1". ' ‘5 "1" ‘n '1 r "‘ "1 2 F! l' ’. "‘3‘," " ’r‘ '1‘ ‘ 1“ .’L 1.0 S .I.- r1_ L .!_C .118 U. 3.1 L. (-31 (11181:, S on bile £111.11}. 80.1 81 888.000 " "‘ ‘- “ -’ I-‘* “ ‘ ‘ ~ 1‘ "fl ' 'r -. ‘I'fi' ‘!"‘ "r. \‘ "‘ 378.8 fnl‘LULU. UQLJL—NDTL {‘63.} :38 _L 011 (in; 0.1. 8110 UPC? 8.9161168 . 'gch’:Iolliavin;;'tne Av8r9~8 Results for 1939 to 1941 Inclusive inc grade index, 71016 per acre, 9nd crop index for all (I .— tr89t18nts that 981 o inc]_adod evcg°r v mrr in 89 ch series from U 1953 to 1941 are averaged and croselt d in 59818 (ml). The pl9ccmcnt of the bands V91 :L8d SalwJ‘b fro 1y99r to year, but the rcsn ts 9re given for approximate positions of fertilizer 1"). v There appcsrs to be no signiLicano dliicronc co in average quality of lc9I between an? 01 the treatments. .fi- ['1 On compsring the net and old method of applying Iertil- izer it is seen thnt where the band 99 liC9tion W98 used, the yield and returns were significantly higher than where it was placed in the row one week bcI 0P8“ transllsnt ing, with the ox- cootion oI LLcrc tLe I8 tiliscr was plsccd in bands 7 to 9 inches from the row and 4 ion es Lccp. The lost of lr9esnl9ntinfi 9nd Irillin Fertilizer for Tobncco Ehe following table (92) shows the number of hours re- quired 9nd the cost per acre of 9fplyin3 fertflil zer for tob9c- co, and tr nspl ting u.erc tie b 89 rethod of fertilizer aoifli- cation 9nd drilling Iert1lizer in the row before transplanting are compared. Table (22) ”est of tr9nspl9nting tob9cco by applyin" the fertilizer in the row before 9nd in bands at the L193 0. 'Ur9n9;flrqitir{: : Irlme re- :9 ( 1,1 _ j r. f“ . . . ‘ ‘1’)? . OCU ‘, 185 AOL). or 9‘Ileln' . Operatlon :9}. J21 (HQ? eyzacfe 46E; Iertilizer ; .acre(ni . - A: Applied in tne r08 with ‘UrJll‘nf fertil-: r : 4 the Iertilizer erill one Izer .. : 1.4Z : .7? week before transelentin3:tr9n.pl9nting : 2.78 : 2.70 ’Tetaf’ é{3? 8.90 E: Ayglied in bends 4” from *1rzn9‘19ntwnr : r n fl the rel :7nd 4” deco at :and erilling : 0.01 8.81 time of tr9 neul9nting :iert ilizer 3 Dif I‘ erence .92 .19 Upon observing the above table there is 9 slight advun- tege in time 9.nd cost in appring twe time 01 transplanting rather row one week before then epplyinv he trwutspl ‘9 L- J- 88988 ab W C “J C. *— o {—1 -—- o N (D *‘3 H :5 'tlle fertilizer unting. Yield and (unlity of flue-cured tobacco is -ons. Despite such unconi: rolle‘ole '1 o . ‘. factors the results presented are interest1n3 and show to some xte1d; Ju'L,_1iann(u1 01 ‘dje Gngperinnnit. In 1W -1 e1iiercnces were obtained on the mort aLity of plants among the various met cos of applying fertilizer. these results appear correlated with the amount of rainfall during the week prior to trencplnnting. When the precipitation was )lied in rows one week before or at trans- planting caused a large ne'tslit \ of plants, whar as, when high pre cipite qtion occurred no OUUobleinf differences were observed among the treatments. Treble sneerphOSphste applied as a start- er solution did not affect the plants, however, an 8- 24-8 solu- tion caused nearly fifteen percent mortality. M tro en and potash fertilizers apparently co us e cons idere ble ”hurnvnr of roots vhen in contact wi“n them. A large percentage of the nitrogenous materis.l in flue— cured tobscco fertilizer is ca pot ole of leaching qnite readily. In 1940 considerable rainfall occurred during the first month of the SrOVJi n3 season, after WFLC 11, plants oetr inin; fertili- zer in the row one week before trans ole ntingé ‘urned quite pale green in color. Pl nts ier tilized ey bo.nds within reeSd1eble distance of the roots, however, still aopesred medium to dark U.) 0.) green. It ems that when fertilizer is epnlied ald mixed with \J the sail in advance of transplanting, some of the nitrogen may be lost through leaching. Tobacco fertilized by bands placed 7 inches from the row end 4 inches deep was also light green (1:0) in color, but at this puPiOu the roots mev not have reached the fertilizer. Etuysfuyite ;fe1W;ilizu3rs :vre lHflOHTl to 1100 nae ‘U‘i :cx1 tuxre reeuily ween mixee with the soil than when pl ced in concen- -" 3Q 4‘ “\‘r‘ b(, (j (u * ~' -y- (—1 ‘ [3,. - ; .'_.'-. 1‘ J. - _1 , v '.‘.V \ .' .' t1.4n11 - n u-. .Lt .Lns 1.»wru4 t1L.t 111c111 tima feI CLJHLZGI‘EYBS enn- ' .L Pli e” in bands 1': tnin r T::;1,S<:>11:—1bl_e (3 is trance from the r CIT, 171311 ‘13 fimeKPGd e 1lie r'iflmn11flmare the limitilizer Wes sgqfiLied in.the row one aeek before trensplin: ins . As phosphate fertilizers w are considered to nesten maturity, a reduction in fixation by bend applications may heve been a determining factor. Phos- 1 r). pnorus 11xetion eerhrps helps to ceus e 9 reduction in yiel’l; as fertilizer agp ied in the row oeiore trsnsplnnt tin; was Si;- nificently lower tns n where applied in bends 5 o 6 incios from the row and 2 to 5 inches 'ee p | 0 ”he heights of plants receivine fertilizer in the row ‘ before transplanting appeared snorter, in comparison Witl band I» eprl cations Within close proximity of the plents. Fertilizer a :Mili (1 ix) plruats irl'bsruls r7 irufl1osx frunn iflie IPOTI erui 4 :anluzs hst the fertilizer 1131 cc k.) V d- dee; also were shorter, iniic s'iw1 too far from the elnnts for maximum use. Upon summarizing tnc re—sults for lQLS to 19él, inclusive, ice_nt difierence in qunlitr was obtained. Thereiore, 1") no si ni e merently the mathod of e..1">l.‘n?‘i1’13 tin fertilizer has little influence on the cuslit;r pro-sluccd. The ields, luxveverg :fluy ed siip1if c~n«,('1l.11%41 es .‘ Fertilizer nppliee in bends 3 to 3 inches from the row fine z . '_ . q .a _ T _1 ~ _ r-. 4 -1 ' J- 1 _|_fl4| - fa ”A_ !_ f - 130 o 111c11e<3 (LGIEE3 Inrm31n1(:ea1 :Ls:r;;e1? V lQBl'IS tllnfl 11n131w3 tin: 1_c1?t_Ll )J izer Wis applied in the row one ween be ere tr inwlnqt1ur. "-i‘ ‘5-’r - ' ‘ ’fl‘ 5'" '. . 1‘ “ "1 ‘ ; 1 V r '~ I ' (‘1 < .-a -,— - 1‘ '_.. U~>J €138 1iltCChl 1;.1nchJs uAD-Q. £1£3 PtflhjflrCB SCcudS i41'be crue .UDP’<1PQ’ Calluigtlcnis. lflelxis :ipr )en'nyd ‘to lye iIMZJCnictul Vuiflife t11c131_e 5311i~1e 1 11(1513113 tea 17:13 11s<33 51s {1 S't5111t251‘ f1C)lJJ;)lJOI1. 1fi1i_s Innbr in vc:'b6n1n_‘tb(: rrx111i; 017 pluns:fl101%1s s;t;1iwl 1r; 1N1oi; 4f°orrth in the eerly part of the growing season, thereby developifig a substantial root system before heavy :rowt? took place. Applying fe;tilize r one week before tPJPS elentIT neces- sitstes two operations, one to drill the fertilizer end the other to trensplsnt tie tobacco. The results inuicnte that nearly one hour we; be seved when planting en acre of tot ecco by using toe com inee trensplenter and fertilizer e-r1 ill. Al- fi: the lCflTOlllZCfl‘ wi s.) p- thCTKfil'UhO actxe 1 Elle symnrt trznsyflxurtin‘ ' >2 ! . a . r- "Y“ 1 v“ . . \ ‘. x A . rx“ fix (~1 'l“ '. ' (V! 'n l‘ ‘5 "‘1‘ ’fi 6 ‘x " :1ttsc72 HTC is sliltlr lfihl hf Lfimu1 tr nern11t1nt,:n.t~r 1M1..1ert- ilizer if‘