This is to certify that the thesis entitled A Stuey of the Relation Between the Supply of Potassiun and Other nutrient elements in oeVeral nich- igan Soil Types ano the Growth of Alfalfa anu rieto Date Beans. presented b1] hirkpatr ick paw ton has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for "211. 1;. degree in- ,boiL,.1cience | w l ,7“ 7.1 Major professor 5'! Ef’i full llllul‘IllllllllI-l (ll‘lllllllllllltlllllllllllllllll. A STUDY OF THE REMTION BETWEEN THE SUPPLY OF POTASSIUM AND OTHER NUTRIENT WNTS IN SEVERAL MICHIGAN SOIL TYPES AND THE GRCHTH OF ALFALFA AND FIELD Em by Kirkpetrici: Lenten A THESIS Submitted to the graduate echool of Michigan Stete College of Agriculture and Applied Science in pertiel fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philoeophy Department of Soil Science 1945 TH ESlS 7/ZL/%t ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The author is indebted to Dr. R.L. Cook and Dr. C.E. Miller for their assistance during the course of the in- vestigation, and to Dr. J. Tyson and Mr. E.D. Longnecker for their help in the collection of soil samples. to}. C?) t J 'riu l”: ‘ 3 ii. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .......................................... SECTION I. SOIL AND PLANT ANALYSIS ................... Methods of Sampling ............................... Methods of Chemical Analysis ...................... Condition of Legume Stands as Related to Exchange- able Potassium and Other Chemical Character- iStiCS Of Some Sandy $0113 eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee POtfiBSium eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Calcium, Reaction, and Base Saturation ........ Ca+L{g/K Ratio 00......0....OOOCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. mosphoms COOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0.0.000... Relation Between Condition of Legume Stand and Chemical Composition of Plants ................ Calcium-Potassium Ratios as Related to Condition of Stand ...................................... SECTION II. GREENHOUSE STUDIES ....................... Experimental Plans ................................ Yield of Alfalfa as Affected by Treatment ......... SECTION III. A STUDY OF SOME POTASSICMSDEFICIEUT FIELD-BEANS SOILS IN MICHIGAN ..................... Location and Sampling of Fields ................... Weather Conditions During the Growing Season ...... The Potassium Content of Soils and Pean Plants .... EffeCt 0f SidedreSSIDg on Yield eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee 10 12 23 25 26 26 27 32 35 36 39 95 95 97 98 98 l[[.{ll I i iii. SECTION IV. THE POTASSIUM EQUILIBRIUM IN SOLE MICHIGAN SOILS OCCOOOCOOCOCOOCOOOCO0.00.0...OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Release StUdIes eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Experimental Procedure eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Rate of Release of Potassium as Affected by Cropping and LeaChing eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Effect of Cropping on Equilibrium Between Four Fr&0tion8 Of SOil POtfiSSium.eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Salt Soluble and ?eter Soluble Potassium.as Related to Cropping and Time Of Storage eeeeeeeeeeeeee Fixation StUdIeS eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeoeeeeeeeeeeee Experimental Procedure eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee The Potassium.Equilibrium as Affected by Addition of Muriate of Potash to the Soil .... Amounts Of POtfiSSium.FiXed eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Potassium Equilibrium in Soils Under Greenhouse CUIture .0.0.0...OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO00.0.0.0...00.. Source of Potassium for Plant Growth ................. SUNRARY eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee LITERATURE CITED COOOOOOOOOOOO0.00000000000000000000.00... 102 102 104 112 114 115 117 118 120 123 124 133 142 1. INTRODUCTION The fact that some Michigan soils are deficient in soil potassium for good legume growth has been partially demonstrated in previous years by fertiliser field trials, greenhouse pot experiments, plant tissue tests, and soil analyses. A more complete investigation was needed, however, to test the validity of the hypothesis that the cause of many low yields and crop failures of alfalfa and other legumes is due to a lack of available potassium. The importance of potassium in the nutrition of alfalfa and clovers has been indicated by the work of many investigators, including Amos and Bolts (2), Blair and Prince (5), Cook and Miller (10), Donaldson (11), Gustafson (13), Hunter, Toth, and Bear (15), Prince (27), and Weathers (34). Experimental work in Michigan by Cook (a) and Millar (21) has shown that for good legume growth, sandy soils need fertilisers having P31 ratios of 1:1, 1:2, or 1:3, while phosphate alone or fertilisers containing phosphorus uni potash in the ratio of 2 to l on the heavier loans and silt loans has proved most beneficial. The present fertiliser recommendation (10) for the better sandy loams where seedings may be made with or without a nurse crap is the use of 300 to 400 pounds per acre of 0-12-12. Fertiliser having the ratio 0-9-27 is advised for lighter soils where seedings should be made without a nurse crop. Top dressing of alfalfa stands on sandy soils nith 0-12-12 or 0-9-27 has been found to be profitable after the first cutting of the second harvest year, provided fertiliser was applied at seeding time. Subsequent applications may be made every two years for the duration of the stand. 2. Since the use of field plat trials in experimental work covering a large number of soil areas is both slow and expensive, correlation is needed between soil properties and crop growth. Once information has been established concerning the growth of legumes and such factors as the supply of available soil potassium and calcium, better interpretation can be made of farmers' problems of legume failures, and sounder reccnunendations can be given in part on a soil type basis for possible correction and solution. Such relation- ships can be obtained in one way by sampling many problem areas and making intensive greenhouse and laboratory tests on both soils and plants. The object of this investigation was to determine the supply of avail- able potassium and the soil factors influencing the supply in some Michigan soil types, and to compare the legume growth with the soil properties of samples taken from these soils. The study has been divided into four sections. 1. The collection and analysis of soil and plant samples from good and poor alfalfa fields in western Michigan. 2. Greenhouse pot tests on the growth of alfalfa under controlled nutrient and moisture supply, using soils'frcm known field locations. 3. Investigation of the relation between available soil potassium and the chemical composition of field beans grown in eastern Michigan. 4. The influence of cropping and fertilisation on the potassium equilibrium in some major Michigan soil types. 3. SECTION I. 8011. AND PLANT ANALYSIS In previous years, many reports have come from.farmers in‘western mchigan to county agricultural agents and soils extension specialists indicating difficulty in growing and maintaining alfalfa and clovers. This area includes the sandy soils extending from the Straits of thkinac to the southernfboundary of the state. In some cases no benefits were reported from the use of lime and fertilizer. The fact that the content of minor elements as well as available potassium tends to be rather low in sandy soil and the degree of leaching high, might be a partial cause for the unsatisfactory growth of legumes. An.adequate supply of calcium.is of course a prerequisite for a legume program, but it is also possible that overliming of such soils would make boron, manganese, sins, copper, and cobalt unavailable to plants. Since legume are extremely important in the crop rotation on the lighter soils as soil building crops in supplying organic matter and nitrogen, and in.the production of’hay and pasture, the problem.of the establishment and maintenance of alfalfa and clover stands *is an important one- Methods of Sampling In the manner of 194.0 and 1942 soils were collected from ram in St. Joseph, Cass, Kalamazoo, Van Buren, Manistee, Bensie, Antrim, Kalkaska, and Grand Traverse counties for chemical‘analysis and greenhouse investigation. The fields selected for study were located in general through the cooperation of the county agents. Samples of soil were taken from fields having high 4. yielding alfalfa stands and from fields where the stand was poor or had failed to catch or to produce good crops of alfalfa. ‘An.attempt was made to obtain these soils from good and poor fields on the same soil type and from.the same farm. In most cases it was necessary to obtain samples of a soil type from several different farms. Criteria for eval- uating good and poor alfalfa growth were visual appearance and farmers' reports on the yield. A.record of the past history of the field selected was obtained from the farmer. This report included the number of times alfalfa had been grown previously on the area, the duration of each stand, and the condition of each seeding and stand. The time, rate, and kind of fertil- izing, manuring, and lining were also considered in.the general crop rotation. For chemical analysis, two or three sets of profile soil samples were taken at random.in.each field. Samples were generally obtained to a depth of about three feet. Care was taken to avoid low wet areas and high droughty knells where conditions for alfalfa growth were not consistent 'with.those of the general section of the field. The samples were air dried and sieved through a two millimeter screen. The percentage of soil in the sample passing the screen was calculated and the soil then stored in glass containers. The soil types collected, their series number and location, the con- dition.of the alfalfa stand, and the study or studies fcr'which the soils were used are given in Table 1. 5. Table 1. The soil types, their series number, the location of sampling, the condition of the stand or field, and the study or studies for which these soils were used Series Soil Condition of number Em Location stand or field Study 1 Plainfield 0. Bolton Good laboratory sandy loam St. Joseph Cc. alfalfa uni, Sec. 22 T68 311W 2 Plainfield H.O. Berkhold Poor laboratory sandy loam St. Joseph Go. alfalfa m 8.0e 28 T68 R11! 3 Plainfield R. Samson Poor laboratory loamy sand Van Buren Co. alfalfa and NW} Sec. 18 greenhouse T38 R13! 4 Fox sandy D. Dermott Good laboratory loam St. Joseph Co. alfalfa 81!} Sec. 12 1‘78 212?! 5 Fox sandy LP. Wolf Fair to laboratory loam St. Joseph Cc. good alfalfa and NE} Sec. 13 ‘ ‘ greenhouse T88 211W 6 Fox sandy LP. Wolf Poor laboratory loam . St. Joseph Cc. alfalfa and NE} Sec. 13 greenhouse T88 R11! 7 Fox sandy E.P. Wolf Poor laboratory loam St. Joseph Co. alfalfa and 83% Sec. 12 greenhouse T88 R111? 8 Fox sdndy A. Huff Good laboratory loam St. Joseph Co. alfalfa as} Sec. 12 T88 2111: 9 Fox sandy G . Swift Poor laboratory loam Case 00. alfalfa 321» Sec. so 1'68 R16W 6. Table 1. (continued) Series Soil Condition of ’ number type Location stand or field Study 10 Fox fine A. Nower Good laboratory sandy loam Van Buren Co. alfalfa and NW} Sec. 25 greenhouse T38 R15! 11 Fox sandy A. Nower Poor laboratory loam Van Buren Co. alfalfa and 8H Sec. 25 greenhouse T38 R151? 12 Fox loam J. Woodman Good laboratory Van Buren Cc. alfalfa and 87!} Sec. 20 greenhouse T38 mm 13 Fox loam C. Billsbcrrow Fair laboratory Van Buren Cc. alfalfa rm} Sec. 5 T38 R13W 14 Fox silt H. Lurkins Good laboratory loam Van Bu ren Co. alfalfa 81?} Sec. 29 1‘38 814' 15 Ccloma ILA. Cook Good laboratory sandy St. Joseph Co. alfalfa loam NEvk Sec. 36 T78 R117! 16 Colona EA. Cock Poor laboratory sandy St. Joseph Cc. alfalfa loam N35 Sec. 36 T78 311W 1? Cclcma B. Fee Fair laboratory sandy Kalamazoo Co. alfalfa loan 83%- 8ec. 6 T38 31?! 18 Bellefontaine L. Huff Good laboratory sandy loam Cass Co. alfalfa as} Sec. 27 T68 2151' 19 Bellefontaine M. Whipple Poor laboratory sandy loam Kalamazoo Co. alfalfa mi See. 27 T13 39?! 7. Table 1. (continued) Tories Soil Condition of number type Location stand or field Study 20 Bellefontaine L. Cronkite Poor laboratory sandy loam Kalamazoo Co. alfalfa as} Sec. 20 T18 R111! 21 Warsaw H. Stears Poor laboratory loam St. Joseph Cc. alfalfa and SW} Sec. 29 greenhouse T78 R11}? 22 Warsaw H. Stears Good laboratory loan St. Joseph 00. alfalfa and 813} Sec. 32 greenhouse T78 R11] 23 Warsaw W. Bingham Poor laboratory sandy Kalamazoo Co. alfalfa loam 8W} Sec. 25 T38 3127! 24 Brunt L. Luts Poor Greenhouse loam lhnistee Go. alfalfa sanl SI} Sec. 26 T23N R151! 25. Emet W. Lindeman Fair laboratory sandy Manistee Co. alfalfa and loam NW} Sec. 1? greenhouse T231! 215! 26 Enact L.J. White Good laboratory sandy Benzie Cc. alfalfa and loam NW} Sec. 15 greenhouse T27N R13! 27 Emet F. Armstrong Fair laboratory sandy Kalkaska Co. alfalfa arxl loam 8W} Sec. 8 greenhouse T27N R61! 28 hunt R. Brown Fair Greenhouse sandy Kalkaska Co. alfalfa loam 81!} Sec. 13 29 Kalkaska F. Wakley Poor laboratory loamy Bensie Co. alfalfa and sand 8?}: Sec. 27 greenhouse 1‘27]! RBW 8. Table 1. (continued) Series Soil Condition of number type Location stand or field Study 30 Kalkaska C. Brown Poor laboratory sandy Kalkaska Co. alfalfa and loam NW} Sec. 4 greenhouse T27N R61! 31 Mancelona K. Derror Poor lab oratory sandy Antrim Cc. alfalfa and gravelly N's-i- Sec. 9 greenhouse loam T29N R67! 32 Onaway G. Steiner Good laboratory sandy Antrim Co. alfalfa and loam NE} Sec. 4 greenhouse T29N RBI 33 Onaway J. Kratchovil Good Greenhouse sandy Grand Traverse Co. alfalfa loam NEfi Sec. 24 34 Miami M. Pasco Poor laboratory loam Shiawassee Co. beans ".47 2 m1. Ne . Owosso 35 Conover M. Petell Good Laboratory loam Shiawassee Co. beans M47 4 mi. N. Owosec 36 Oshtemc C. Rouake Poor laboratory loam Saginaw Co. beans sand 2 mi. B. of Oakley 37 Kawkawlin F. Sabo Poor laboratory sandy Saginaw Co. beans loam 11-13 10 mi. 8e swim' 38 Brooks ton Sugar Company Good laboratory silt loam Saginaw Co. beans 4 mi. 3. of Saginaw 39 Gilford D. Mitchell Poor laboratory sandy Tuscola Co. beans 10“ 2 mic Ne 0f Eairgrove 9. Table 1. (concluded) Series Soil Condition of number me JItocation stand or field Study 40 lflami F. Kennedy Poor lab oratory loam Sanilac Co. beam 15-53 E. and 3. 0a.. City 41 Brochton N. Gilm0re Good laboratory silt loam Tuscola Co. beans 42 Gilford P. Kruse Fair laboratory sandy Tuscola Cc. beam loam 4 mi. N. of Unionville 43 Miami J. Dillman Good laboratory loam Tuscola Co. beans 2 mi. W. of Cass City 44 Brockston H. Armbruster Poor laboratory loam Huron Co. . beans 4 mi. N. of Unionville 45 Ccnover L. Austin Poa- laboratory loam Clinton Co. beans M-21 12 1111. W. St. Johns 10. Alfalfa plant samples were collected in the spring of 1941 from the above locations where it was possible to do so. The plants were selected at random over the field. No attempt was made to obtain the roots. After drying the plant mterial in an oven at 65° 0., it was ground for chemical analysis. Methods of Chemical Analysis Partial chemical analysis of the soils included base exchange capacity, reaction, exchangeable calcium, magnesium, and potassium, and available phosphorus. The base exchange capacity was determined according to the method of Chapman am Kelly (7). Agitating the soil suspensions in flasks in a shaking nachine was substituted for the 15 hour digestion period. Exchangeable calcium, magnesium, and potassium analyses were made on amonimn acetate leachates of soil samples. The leaching solution was made up as described by Schollenberger and Dreibelbis (29) and a ratio of 10 to l of solution to soil was used. The soil suspension was shaken 30 minutes, filtered under suction, and the soil washed on the filter with four 50 cc. portion of leaching solution. Tests showed that 15 to 30 minutes of agitation of the sandy soil suspensions would remove amounts of bases comparable to digestion or percolation procedure lasting 12 to 24 hours. The filtrate was evaporated to dryness and the organic matter destroyed. Gentle ignition was used to decompose the acetates, and the resultilg residue was taken up with dilute HCl and the solution filtered. This solution was analyzed for calcium by precipitating the oxalate, dissolving it in dilute sulfuric acid, and titrating with standard ll. potassium permanganate. Magnesium was determined gravimetrically on the filtrate and washings of the calcium determination using the organic precipitant, 8-hydroxyquinoline, as outlined by Kolthoff and Sandell (18). Before precipitation, the oxalate ion was destroyed as suggested by Alexander and Harper (1). After destroying the excess hydroxyquinoline by ignition, potassium was determined gravimetrically as the chloroplatinate on the filtrate and washings from the magnesium analysis. Available phos- phorus was determined by Truog's (30) method using a Duboscq calorimeter for color comparison. Measurements of pH were made using Spurway's "Soil- tex" indicator and the glass electrode. The analysis of plant materials was carried out by ashing from 2 to 5 grams of finely ground tissue, moistened with 1 to 10 sulfuric acid, in a muffle furnace at 350° C. for 12 hours. The ash was taken up with l to 5 hydrochloric acid and the silica dehydrated by evaporating the residue to dryness on the steam bath. The residue was then redissolved in dilute HCl and NE on added dropwise until a precipitate formed which could be dissolved 4 on stirring. The solution ms heated nearly to boiling and NH m added 4 to precipitate the iron, aluminum, and phosphorus in the sample. The precipitate was filtered off at once and washed with hot water until free of amonium ions. From an aliquot of this filtrate, calcium was determined as the oxalate. mgnesium in the filtrate and washings of the calcium analysis was determined gravimetrically as magnesium quinolate after the oxalate ion had been removed. The potassium present in the filtrate and washings of the magnesium analysis was precipitated as potassium chloroplatin- ate and washed with 80 per cent ethanol according to standard procedure. 12. Nitrogen analyses on the plant material were run using the Gunning-Arnold modification of the Kjeldahl method. Condition of legume Stands as Related to Exchangeable Potassium and Other Chemical Characteristics of Some Sandy Soils On the supposition that there would be a difference in the chemical characteristics of soils that supported good and poor legume growth, soil samples from 26 good and poor alfalfa fields were analyzed for exchangeable calcium, magnesium, potassium, available phosphorus, base exchange capacity and reaction. The results of these tests are listed in Table 2. From the data available, the per cent base saturation and the Cal-Mg/K ratio were calculated. Since no total base determinations were made, only Ca, Mg, and K are considered in the per cent saturation. There appears to be quite a large variation in the content of elements present between profile samples at certain locations. In some cases the differences between samples in the same field were greater than between samples from different fields on the same soil type. v In order to present a more comprehensive and condensed picture of the supply of plant nutrients, the mean of the analyses for all the soils grouped as having good or poor legume stands for each chemical character- istic is given in Table 3. The mean deviation and standard deviation are presented to indicate the amount of dispersion of the analyses from the mean. 13. .10 3.0 3.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 “0.0 00.00 0.0a HH.0 00.0 00.H 0.0” 0.00 00.0 0.0 00:0 0 scan-0 0.00 00.0 00.0 «0.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 0 :0 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 .0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00:00 0.0” 00.0 00.0 00.H «.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 «0'0 sandman scam 0.0." 00.0 00.0 H0.» 0.00 0.00 .0.0.0 0.0 0 00 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 «0:00 .5400 «.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-0 000.. 0.0a 00.0 00.0 00:0 H.00 “0.00 00.0 0.0 0 :0 “5903:..de 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.H 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 «0:00 0.0a 00.0 00.0 «0.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 «0:0 0 c.0000 0.3” 0.10 3.0 00.0 0.0.” 0.00 00.0 0.0 0 .0 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 «0-00 .0000”. «.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-0 00.0 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 0 n0 op 0000 0.00 0H.0 3.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00:00 ado." 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00:00 00nd. 0.00 0.10 000.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00$ 0.0 :30 30.30260.” £0.00 .e.a .c.8 .05 R .c.a conga. .5000 madam nasmuw. gssuuri. enmasu wasp» go m 000 000 000 0 .0.. 000 0.0 00 . no scapsoofl 0n. 93032.4 .000 00 .30 0: .30 so $.70 seam 3.3.00.3 5.000 803080 was c0303 090» H.000 sewage“: aspect s0 :03. 0.3.03.0 noon and 0000 80.5 00.3600 :0. 0.3.0000 mo 0003.93 03.08er sttdm .0 0.3.00 14. 0.0a 0H.0 00.0 mm.a n.0H 0.00. 00.0 n 0 00.00 0.0a 0H.0 00.0 ~0.H 0.0a 0.00 00.» 0.0 «0-0 0 0000.0 0.00 0H.0 ”0.0 «0.0 0.00 0.00 H~.0 0.0 0 -0 umauuaa 0000 0.0” HH.0 0H.0 »~.H 0.0” 0.H¢ 00.0 0.0 00.00 0.0a 0H.0 00.0 0N.H 0.0a 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-0 sued 0.0” 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.0» 0.00 00.0 «.0 0 -0 0000» «am 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 «.00 0H.> 0.0 00-00 0.00 0H.0 00.0 ”0.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 «Numa « .00000 «.ma 0H.0 00.0 00.» 0.H0 0.00 06.0 0.¢ 0H-0H 0.00 HH.0 «0.0 mfl.0 «.00 0.00 00.0 «.0 0H-0 «mflauad 0000 0.0H HH.0 00.0 «0.H 0.0” 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-00 0.3 3.0 3.0 0.0.» 3.0 0.00 00.0 0.0 «0-3 5.3 0.00 0H.0 00.0 H0.» «.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 0Ha0H 0000. x00 «.00 0H.0 00.0 0H.» 0.0» 0.00 00.0 0.0 0H-0 0.0H 0H.0 0H.0 00.0 0.0 ~.H» np.a 0.0 00-0” H.0 00.0 00.0 «0.0 0.0” 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-0 0 0.00.0 0.00 ~H.0 00.0 00.0 «.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 0 :0 thdMHd hoom 0.0a 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.0a 0.H0 H0.H 0.0 00-00 m.» 00.0 00.0 00.0 «.0 0.00 00.0 «.0 «0-0 000. 0.0 0H.0 00.0 H¢.~ 0.0m 0.H» 0H.¢ «.0 0 -0 cflofimqaaam .637.“ .05 3.0. 3.5 x .05 canon.“ a EM 5” ”Eden“ GHQ—HG. 03. MD A 00." co." 8..“ .0: 00H you mm Mo .8333 find canddgd .39 M you w: you .8 000m 550093 “$an noakunoo and owadnoxm 2:» 30m Auoauapaaov .0 candy 15. 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-0 0 ..0..0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 0 -0 0.000.000 .3000 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-0 .0000 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 0 -0 0000. 000 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-00 0.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-00 0 .o0uo0 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-0 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 0 -0 d d d 00 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-00 00 00 0 0 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-00 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-0 aao0 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 0 -0 000.. 000 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00.00 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-0 0 .00..0 fiobd NHoO ONoO mwofl HobH mobo DN0M ”on m IO dMHdfiHd ”ONH OHOO NNOO QWOH HowH 503 fibon NOW 84“ .HOOQ 0». “Ha 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-0 0300 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 0 -0 000.. 090 20.00.00 .0.00 .05. .05 R .05 00000000 080.0% 0000'qu 030.0%} 0000.0“ 0%.. 0000.30 mo 0 000 000 000 0 .00. 000 0.0 00 00 0000.000 000 03000.34 .0000 M .0000 w: .0000 do umzo 000m 3.0000000 500000 0003000080 00000 03000“ 09$ 00mm! 00000000000 .0 .0000 16. 0.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-00 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-0 00 ..00.0 0 00 00 0 00 0 00 0 0 00 0 00 00 0 0 0 0 -0 000.00. 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-00 0000 00 .000 0.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-00 _0000 000 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-0 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-00 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-00 00 ..00.0 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-00 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-0 0000000 0000 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-00 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-00 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-00 0000 000 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-0 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-00 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-00 00 ..00.0 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.00 0.0 00-0 .0 d 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-00 00000 0000 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-00 .0000 000.. 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-0 .000 000 06090“ 0003 0003. 0.05 R 0.03 DOAHOHH 0000mm- 0000Mm 300% 300.0% 009000 0000»- «0 m 000 000 000 .00. 000 0.0 00 00 0000.000 000 009000.34 .0000 M .0000 w: .0000 .6 000m 30000000 000.009 00030000000 0:00 0mn0000Hn1 0E0.» 0.00m Acwaavnoov .N 0.309 17. «.mm 00.0 $0.0 «$.0 $.00 0.$$ $$.m $$|¢N 0.0» 00.0 $0.0 «0.0 0.00 o.o$ $0.0 dmlm $0 00000m m.$m 00.0 $0.0 an.» ¢.~n $.mm $N.¢ m to 000.00. 0000 p.$0 00.0 $0.0 «$.0 $.00 $.$0 on.» $nl¢m 0.00 00.0 $0.0 00.0 $.m0 ~.$$ $0.0 dwu00 8.000 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 00-0 0000.... .00000 0.$0 «0.0 mm.o 00.0 0.00 $.$$ $0.0 $nl¢m 0.00 00.0 $0.0 «0.0 $.> $.$$ «$.N #mtm $0 no0uom 0.00 $0.0 $0.0 00.0 0.00 ~.o$ 00.» a no dm0au0. coca $.00 00.0 $$.o mm.o $.00 $.00 mm.0 $9300 $.00 «0.0 $0.0 n$.o m.$ c.0m $0.0 «mum 00‘.000 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0 -0 000.0 .00000 $.nm ¢0.o $0.0 $0.9 ~.m$ $.$$ No.0 ~¢I¢n «.00 $0.0 0~.m $N.$ «.00 $.00 $$.00 finlom $0 uo0ucm $.00 00.0 m$.0 o$.> o.$¢ 0.00 00.90 00:00 m.$~ «0.0 «$.o mm.$ $.0n n.>$ 96.00 00.0 0000000 ooom n.¢$ o~.o $0.0 $0.¢ n.$m N.m$ m$.> N¢|$n . $.om $0.0 om.m O¢.m o.$$ ¢.$$ nN.¢0 $nlmm o.$$ $0.0 m$.0 $m.m 0.m¢ m.$$ $¢.$0 00-00 E000..” #000 Mom «.0» «0.0 «$.o $$.$ o.$n m.$$ N$.00 00:0 30.00..“ .o.a .050 10.00 R .050 020200 «500$ «800$, 0500M madam. o0maau and». Mo 0 000 000 000 0 .0.. 000 0.0 mm 00 0000.000 00. 0000000h< 009 a 00m w: you do mm40w. 000m 09000900 apnea 000v0$noo an. oqunonm omhn 00cm 0000000000V .0 000.0 18. po.o sm.o an.“ o.m« o.mm an.» a.» onnma mo.o «m.o pm.” o.mm o.m¢ Hm.» ~.m maum ma .oauom no.0 mp.o m¢.~ >.nm m.mm om.m >.m a no « 11 .0333.» boom «H.o mo.H as.» ~.Hn m.mm >~.m m.m canon .E¢oa oa.o ¢«.o Hm.“ m.»n «.om mm.» o.» omuoa hand. po.o ~«.o «m.~ ”.mn m.¢¢ om.o m.m cane .naanaouoflaom oH.o «o.a Hm.“ n.«» «.am ao.¢ m.m ~¢non 5H.o mm.o «n.¢ o.H» m.oo mH.m o.m onumd we .ofluom ma.o ob.o ¢¢.~ o.m~ m.mm_ ~m.¢ m.m mflum _ ¢~.o ”a.” mm.m 0.0m m.>p an.» w.m m -o . 6.33qu doom. «H.o ”d.“ we.“ m.H» m.mm o¢.¢ «.m ~¢non a~.o so.” ~¢.» m.- m.o> pm.m m.« onuma .saoH oH.o pm.o no.» ".mn m.»o mm.» m.m mane hugs. an.o «m.o mo.m ».Hm m.¢m mm.~a ~.m m no unflaauomoaflom «H.o mm.o mm.o p.m m.mm «a.~ «.o onuom mo.o H~.o mo.H o.¢H o.¢¢ Ho.» ~.m cane 5H .owgom mo.o «n.o ma.” «.ofl o.¢¢ pm.» H.m o no mo.o -.o um.o o.HN o.om no.H o.m «anon «Madmaa goon 86 3.0 $6 “.2 3% 2.“ pi 8.» 53 oH.o aa.o Hm.o o.HH «.m» «a.» m.¢ m no hand. «guano 3.199 3.3 3.3 3.6 R .0:- .0323 Spam gum a 2.8qu 3&5. cud»- no m cod and cod a .pa. can you mm mo naapaoofl and 39.03.34 hon M .39 ms you do flioo 09am Edodmdo Apnea nowpaunoo and 0.320% on? :omll Auoauaaaoov .N capua 19. ¢.nm om.o on.o mm.H 0.0 m.am mm.¢ «.0 mnu¢m «.0 0H.o mm.o 00.0 w.on o.¢w mm.» m.m ¢Nuwa 0.0 mH.o mH.H mm.m m.¢¢ 0.0m 0m.m m.m manna mm acauom $.mH on.o ¢o.a ma.m «.mm n.0u mm.na m.m mHuo ‘11 1 { dmanmaa coon m.¢H na.o om.o n0.m ~.¢m m.>w mm.¢ m.m ~¢Imm «.wa mH.o ¢¢.o oh.¢ ~.¢n m.mm 00.5 m.m wmuom m.mm w~.o 00.0 mm.oa H.H¢ m.mm «m.ma H.> owrma .adon hauums. m.¢¢ mm.o mm.a mm.¢a m.mm 0.00 o>.>a «.0 «duo «.mw ma.o nw.o w~.H b.ma o.wn Hm.m o.m N¢|>m H.o¢ HH.o mm.o m~.H m.ma m.H¢ nm.¢ n.m sauna m.o¢ 00.0 mm.o mo.» o.o¢ m.om an.p h.m mauw Hm uofiucm m.Hn o~.o om.o on.m m.m¢ m.n> mm.ma 9.0 0 no 1 amadmad uoom 0.0H ma.o m¢.o mm.H «.ma o.mm 00.0 $.m N¢Ium m.mm «H.o 00.0 0m.» m.¢n «.mw oh.HH m.m Fatwa m.n¢ oa.o mw.o mn.m >.mm o.o> om.w o.m mnum .300H hanks: ~.¢n ma.o no.0 om.m m.mn o.nw mm.aa m.m w no mn.o mm.n as.~ m.mn o.w> am.m m.» oauom «H.o 00.0 pm.” m.¢n 0.H> mm.m m.m ownw om aowhom mo.o NH.H mm.m H.00 m.¢m «n.m w.m o no undamau nook HH.o aH.H 0m.» ”.0” 0.00 om.m 0.m Omaha 3.0 00.0 3.0 0.3 0.00 8.0 0.0 :4. 53 0083 00.0 «sue mm.¢ m.>m H.Ho ca.> m.m a no onwupnouoflaom 080%.“ 00!. 0.03 00.5 R 000.3 00.50“.“ 1 a 239m madam «sail names 3.30 no. m 00H can oo~ M .pau 00H ham mm 90 noHpaooa and capdafidhd you M hon w: you do um+¢o 000m avaOdmdo nvmon noakunoo and .0023" 25. Sow Acoanavnoov .m candy 20. «0.0 00.0 «~.H 0.00 0.00 0H.” 0.0 Hmuo 00 .ofiuom 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 «.0 0 -0 1+ dMHdMHd noom «0.0 H0.0 ~0.H 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-0 ado” 00.0 ma.H 00.0 «.00 0.00 «0.0 0.0 0 -0 0000. ocean 00.0 00.0 0H.H ».Hn 0.00 00.0 0.0 00-00 00.0 00.0 00.H 0.00 0.00 mm.“ 0.0 «0-0” 00 000000 HH.0 ma.a 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 «duo 11+ dmadkdd coco 00.0 00.0 00.H 0.0» «.00 H0.» 0.0 00:00 0H.0 0H.H 00.0 0.0» 0.00 H0.¢ 0.0 00-0 .auoH 0H.0 00.0 00.0 H.00 0.00 H0.0 0.0 0 -0 hogan 0.550 00.0 00.H 00.H 0.00 0.00 00.0 «.0 00-00 HH.0 mm.” 00.0 0.00 0.00 «0.0 0.0 00-0 00 .oauom 00.0 00.0 ”0.0 ”.00 0.00 00.0H 0.0 s -0 dmadmsd uoom 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.0” 0.0» 0H.« 0.0 00.00 0H.0 00.0 «0.0 ”.00 0.00 00.0H 0.0 00.0 oeuOH 000900 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 «.00 00.HH H.m 0 :0 CODE 000a 0.05 R 00’s uggoqfl caduww naduwl nswuw, madnw‘ odmsdn down. no 00a 00a 00H m .000 00H 0.0 m0 «0 uofipaoofl on. non M you w: you do mw+do ooam knaocmuo spoon nowkunoo and owna£oum1, ommn Haom Avosnavnoov .N candy 21. 0H.0 05.0 ~0.a H.0H 0.00 0H.¢ 0.0 00:00 0H.0 00.0 «0.0 0.00 0.05 Hm.0 0.0 0015 m» coauom 0H.0 00.H 00.0 0.00 0.00 NH.0 0.0 5 I0 ‘ duaumad 0ooo 0H.0 05.0 00.H 0.0H 0.H0 «0.0 0.0 00I0H 0H.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 5.00 aH.0 0.0 0HI0 afloa 3.0 00.0 00.0 5.00 0.50 00.5 0.0 0 ..0 003. 03:80 00.0 00.0 00.H 0.00 0.a0 50.0 0.0 00u0a 00.0 00.a 05.0 «.00 0.05 00.0 0.0 0HI0 an uofiuom 00.0 Hm.a «a.» H.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 0 I0 dundmad uoom 0H.0 00.H HH.~ 0.00 0.05 50.0 0.0 00:0H 00.0 a»; 3...... 0.05 0.05 8.0 5.0 070 50H 033:. 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.50 0.50 50.0 0.0 0 :0 duoaoonjx 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.0 00:00 00.0 0a.a m¢.a 5.H0 0.05 05.0 0.0 00:0 00 000000 50.0 NH.H 00.0 0.00 0.05 «0.0 0.0 0 :0 dmadmn¢ 00.0 05.0 05.0 0.00 «.00 00.H 0.0 00I0m noon on hash «0.0 0H.H 00.H 5.00 0.55 00.0 0.0 00:0 0000 00.0 00.H 00.0 0.00 0.50 00.0 0.0 0 to «Mouxadm 3.5 3.8 3.8 R .o.a canon.“ nadmmv‘ nsmhw. nammmw madam] named. undvo «0 00a 00H 03 a .08 02 .80 00 «o 8383 and hem M you 02 Mom 00 mm+ao 0000 avao0mao numon dawpfiunoo 0:0 000.530 25. :00 AvocsaonOOV .N oapua 22. Table 3. The statistical analysis of some chemical characteristics of the top soil from 26 good and poor alfalfa fields in western Michigan 3 Condition 3 3 3 3 3 3 Statistic 3 of 3 K1 3 Ca} 3 Mg; 3 Base 3Ca+Mg/k 3 3 stand 3 3 3 3 sat. 3 ratio 3 3 3 m.e. 3 m.e. 3 m.e.3 % 3 3 p.p.m. 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Mean 3 good 3 0.18 3 5.20 3 0.76 3 77.1 3 36.2 3 22.1 3 pour 3 001° 3 306° 3 0.65 3 69.4 8 5004 3 1807 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Mban 3 good 3 0.06 3 2.03 3 0.26 3 5.9 3 11.6 3 6.0 deviation 3 poor 3 0.03 3 1.30 3 0.30 3 11.1 3 18.2 3 7.3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Standard 3 good 3 0.10 3 2.80 3 0.33 3 7.9 3 15.9 3 7.8 deviation 3 poor 3 0.04 3 1.78 3 0.35 3 13.5 3 21.1 3 8.4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Significance between 3 3.5*¢3 4.1‘t3 1.1 3 0.7 3 2.6’ 3 1.2 moans 3 3 3 3 3 3 *Significant to the 5% point. ttSignificant to the 1% point. §Bxpressed in milliequiva1ents per 100 grams +§Awerage of only 15 fields. .011. 23. 0f the elements for which analyses were made, only exchangeable potassium and calcium were significantly different upon comparing good with poor alfalfa fields. Soils supporting good legume growth were slightly higher in replaceable magnesium and available phosphorus, and had greater per cent base saturation and lower (lung/R ratios than samples from poor legume stands. 3 significant difference between means at the 5 per cent point was found for the cams/x ratio. . In general the soil below the surface layer designated as ”profile" in the samples studied contained smaller quantities of plant nutrients as indicated by the mean value of the profile determinations in Table 4. As the content of calcium, mgnesium, and potassium fell off in the lower portion of the solum, the reaction, base saturation, and CaIng/K ratio decreased likewise. The total exchange capacity of the profile samples decreased with increasing depth, but not in proportion to the lowered base content. The amount of nutrients in the surface soil absorbed by alfalfa plants as compared with those taken up from the lower portions of the profile is not known, but Millar (20) has shown that alfalfa roots can absorb appreciable quantities of plant food at depths below the surface layer. However, it would seem that for most purposes an analysis of the top soil will give about as accurate a picture of the fertility of sandy soils as an entire profile analysis. Potassium As shown in Table 4, there is a notable difference in the exchangeable potassium of surface and profile samples when compang soils from good 24. Table 4. Partial chemical analysis of some sandy soils as related to depth of sampling and condition of legume stand Plainfield sandy soils 3 a s 3 Base Sample 3 Kt : cu : sang/x : saturation“! depth 3 Good 3 Poor 3 Good 3 Poor :_§ood a Poor 3 Good Poor 3 x s a Top soil 3 0.15 0.13 a 3.39 3.20 3 25.2 30.7 a 83.9 74.8 Profile 2 0.14 0.11 a 2.49 1.91 a 21.6 21.0 3 71.2 56.6 Fox sandy loam soils Top soil 3 0.13 0.09 s 4.56 3.39 x 41.2 44.1 a 76.1 74.9 Profile 2 0.14 0.09 a 3.21 2.41 s 28.0 32.5 x 65.0 63.4 Fox loam and silt loam soils 56p soil 3 0.19 0.10 s 5.68 4.67 a 55.0 54.1 s 72.8 65.9 Profile 8 0.17 0.10 a 5.03 3.07 a 35.5 35.9 s 70.0 53.7 Coloma sandy soils Top soil 3 0.15‘ 0.10 x 1.52 2.06 a 11.6 23.5 a 64.3 62.1 Profile 3 0.14 0.09 a 1.09 1.47 a 10.3 18.2 a 62.6 62.0 Bellefontaine sandy loam.soils EDP .011 3 0e14 0.10 3 7.80 5e76 3 65.9 64.1 3 81.0 61e6 Profile 3 0.14 0.07 a 4.18 3.26 a 38.9 45.6 a 75.9 64.3 Emmet sandy loam soils 53p soil 8 0.14 0.06 s 4.38 3.29 a 40.9 79.2 3 73.3 83.0 Pr0f11° 3 0.10 0e05 3 3e08 2e29 3 3408 65.0 3 6906 75e2 ‘Whrsaw sandy loam.and loam soils 55p soil 3 0.47 0.14 :12.02 6.20 s 28.4 54.2 a 87.1 58.6 50:11. 3 0026 0.12 3 6e96 4019 3 3002 36e9 3 78e7 4807 #Expressed in milliequivalents per 100 grams soil. ttExpressed in per cent. 25. and poor alfalfa fields. With the exception of the Warsaw soils, the potassium level of soils supporting luxuriant stands was about 0.15 milliequivalents per 100 grams as compared with 0.10 milliequivalents for the poor fields. 0n the basis of the removal of from 40 to 70 pounds of potassium during the growing season by alfalfa grown on sandy soils, it is evident that a level of 75 to 80 pounds of exchangeable potassium in sandy soils is insufficient to start or mintain a legume stand. Calcium, Reaction, and Base Saturation The exchangeable calcium content of soils having good legume stands was distinctly higher than that of soils from poor fields in the case of the Fox, Bellefontaine, Emmet and Warsaw soils. All fields sampled that supported a good alfalfa growth showed a reaction of pH 6.0 or higher, while 7 of the 14 fields having poor legume stands tested below pH 6.0. The per cent base saturation was higher in samples from the Plain- field, Bellefontaine, Warsaw, and Fox loam and silt loam soils on which alfalfa grew well than in soils from fields where growth was inferior. The Colour. and Fax sandy loam soils presented little difference in per cent base saturation for good or poor locations, while the opposite relation was noted for the Ehnmet soils. In general it appears that sandy soils havilg 70 to 75 per cent base saturation, when adequately supplied with available potassium, will produce flourishing stands of alfalfa. Vander- ford (32), in a greenhouse study on the effect of lime levels on legumes, founi increases in yield until a condition of 100 per cent base satur- ation was reached, but these increases were not of a uniform magnitude. 26. Under field conditions, it is not advisable to attempt to lime sandy soils to complete base saturation. Nmnerous experiments have been carried out by workers concerning the effect of lime on the availability of potassium for plants. Many con- flicting data have been published. Peach and Bradfield (24) consider ' this situation as the result of failure to evaluate properly the conditions under which the experiments were carried out. They believe that additions of lime to acid soils containing neutral salts will decrease the potassium concentration in the soil solution, depending on the initial degree of base saturation. In the absence of neutral salts in acid soils, potassium will be liberated by moderate applications of lime. CafilfilE Ratio Upon comparing the data in Table 4, the Ca4l‘g/K ratio was founi to be definitely lower for soils from the better legume stands in the case cf‘the Colom, Emet, Warsaw, and Fox loam and silt loam scils, and slightly lower in the Plainfield, Bellefontaine, and Fox sandy loam samples. For the sandy soils studied, it appears that a ratio higher than 25 to 30 is indicative of the inability of a soil to produce good alfalfa stands, while in the sandy loam and loam soils, Ca-Mg/K ratios of 45 to 50 or higher are synonomous with poor legume growth. Phosphorus The data in Table 3 indicate that the dilute acid soluble phosphorus content of soils from good and poor legume stands is almost the same. Truog (31) set an arbitrary limit of 50 pounds per acre of available phos- 27. phorus as the amount necessary for general farming on the sandy soils of 'Wisconsin. In this study, the mean of the phosphorus determination of all soils from good alfalfa fields was about 45 pounds per acre in the surface layer. Relation Between Condition of Legume' Stand and Chemical Composition of Plants A.partia1 chemical analysis of alfalfa plants from good and poor alfalfa stands in western Michigan is presented in Table 5. Calcium, magnesium, and potassium were determined separately on the leaves and stems, while analyses for nitrogen were made on the entire tap of the plant. No attempt was made to analyze the roots. Six poor stands and four satis- factory stands were selected on five representative soil types. .All poor fields exhibited medium to strong potash starvation symptoms, except series 7, where the alfalfa had failed to produce a stand. The alfalfa at series 5, 10, 12, and 22 was vigorous and healthy. The per cent nitrogen in the alfalfa tops varied considerably, and no definite correlation'was fOund'between the nitrogen and potash plant content. Millar (22) found a low positive ccrrelation.between the per cent nitrogen and potassium in a large number of legume hay samples grown in Michigan. Total protein was undoubtedly higher in those stands having normal growth and consequently greater yield. In general, the alfalfa from poor fields tended to be higher in calcium and magnesium than that from good stands, wdth the leaves containing the greater amount of each element. The inverse relation between the 28. Table 5. Partial chemical analysis* of alfalfa sampled from good and poor alfalfa stands in southwestern Michigan in June, 1941 Soil type 2 Condition 2 Part 2 2 2 2 and 2 of 2 of 2Nitrogen¢¢2 CaO 2 mgo 2 K20 number*** 2 stand 2 plant 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 per cent 2 per 2 per 2 per 2 2 2 2 cent 2 cent 2 cent 2 2 2 2 2 2 .Plainfield sand2Poor alfalfa stand2Leavcs 2 2 3.01 2 0.42 2 0.95 ' 2 ‘ 2 2 3.55 2 2 2 Series 3 2K deficiency 2 2 2 2 2 2 symptoms 2Stems 2 2 1.35 2 -- 2 1.12 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ‘ 2 2 2 2 2 Fox sandy loam 2Feir alfalfa stand2Leaves 2 2 3.45 2 0.55 2 1.42 2 2 2 3.78 2 2 2 Series 5 2 2Stems 2 2 1.28 2 0.45 2 1.55 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Fox sandy loam 2Fair to poor 3 2 2 2 2 2 alfalfa stand 2Leaves 2 2 3.35 2 0.60 2 0.87 2 2 2 4.02 2 2 2 Series 6 2K deficiency 2 2 2 2 2 2 symptoms 2Stems 2 2 1.35 2 0.49 2 0.68 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Fox sandy loam.2Young alfalfa 2 22 2 2 2 2 stand failed 2Leaves 2 2 3.44 2 0.65 2 1.04 2 2 2 3.35 2 2 2 Series 7 2Stunted growth 2Stems 2 2 1.48 2 0.57 2 0.90 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Fox fine 2 2 2 2 2 2 sandy loam 2Good alfalfa stand2Leaves 2 2 2.78 2 0.49 2 1.68 2 2 2 3.88 2 2 2 Series 10 2 2Stems 2 2 1.23 2 0.40 2 1.73 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Fox sandy loam 2Poor alfalfa stand2Leaves 2 2 3.84 2 0.62 2 0.61 2 2 2 3.75 2 2 2 Series 11 2K deficiency 2 2 2 2 2 2 symptoms 2Stems 2 2 1.82 2 0.55 2 0.75 2 2 2 2 29. Table 5. (continued) Soil type 2 Condition 2 Part 2 2 2 2 and 2 of 2 of 2Nitrogen**2 CaO 2 mgo 2 K20 number*** 2 stand 2_p1ant 2 2 2 2 2 2 2percent2per2per2per 2 2 2 2 cent2 cent2 cent 2 2 2 2 2 2 Fox loam. 2Good alfalfa stand 2Leaves 2 2 2.252 0.552 1.72 2 2 2 4.26 2 2 2 Series 12 2 2Stems 2 2 0.722 0.382 1.89 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Iarsaw loam 2Poor alfalfa stand 2Leaves 2 2 2.872 0.462 0.90 2 2 2 3.90 2 2 2 Series 21 2K deficiency 2 2 2 2 2 2 symptoms 2Stems 2 2 0.802 0.362 0.67 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Warsaw loam 2Good alfalfa stand 2Leaves 2 2 2.692 0.412 2.47 2 2 2 2.54 2 2 2 Series 22 2 2Stems 2 8 0.652 0.302 2.50 2 2 2 2 2 ' 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ‘Uarsaw sandy 2 2 2 2 2 2 loam. 2Poor alfalfa stand 2Leaves 2 2 2.832 0.622 0.80 2 2 2 3.95 2 2 2 Series 23 2K.deficiency 2 2 2 2 2 3 I .ymptm 3StOm 3 3 1e153 0e543 1.07 2 2 'Chemical analyses made on alfalfa tops. *tsnalyses made on leaves and stems together. essData for'each series given in Table 1. 30. calcium.and potassium content of alfalfa has been shown to occur in a number of experiments by investigators (2) and (30) in studies on the mineral content and requirements of'legumes. Since it has been shown that the exchangeable calcium and magnesium content of the soil from poor stands was no higher, and in some cases lower, than the soil from good locations, the higher content of these elements in potassium deficient alfalfa must be explained on the'basis that a low supply of available potassium in the soil upset the physiological balance of cation absorption and a larger proportion of calcium and magnesiumnwas taken into the plants. According to Pierre and Bower (26) the absorption of one cation is generally depressed by a high concentration of others. The correlation between the potash content of alfalfa and the condition of the stand was high as seen by the scatter diagram in Figure 1. The average potash content of the leaves of plants from poor fields was 0.86 per cent as compared with 1.82 per cent in the legumes from the four normal fields. Likewise the per cent K20 in the stems of deficient plants averaged about 0.87 in contrast to 1.92 in alfalfa stems from good fields. The fact that the stems of legumes are higher in potassium than the leaves is generally known. Tissue tests were made for potassium.in alfalfa on locations 3, 6, 11, 12, 21, and 22 in.the middle of May 1941, or about one month before samples were taken for chemical analysis. Though the deficiency symptoms were not as marked as a month later, the plants from series 3, 6, 11, and 21 gave a low test for potash, while the test of vigorous alfalfa plants from locations 12 and 22 showed high or adequate potassium. 31. 2.5 I 8 2 2.0 H =3 2 "‘ 1.5 O g“ e 4a 100 0 0 e 0 2 g 3 ‘h 0.5 0 Poor Fair Good Condition of stand Figure 1. Scatter diagram showing relation between per cent potash in alfalfa leaves and the condition of stand 32. The average potassium content of legume hays grown on the lighter soils of Michigan has been found.by Millar (22) to be about 1.34 per cent. This value is slightly below that of an.average of 1.55! for the normal alfalfa and considerably above that of 0.75! for the alfalfa from.deficient flOIdfle Calcium-Potassium Ratios as Related to Condition of Stand In Table 6 the relation between the potassium content of soils and plants and the condition of legume stand is clearly evidenced. The average replaceable potassium of soil profiles from good fields was 0.17 milliequivalents per 100 grams and 0.09 mdlliequivalents from the soils of deficient stands. This ratio of about 221 compares favorably with a 221 ratio of the potash content of alfalfa from good stands as compared with poor fields. The equivalent cation ratios for calcium2pctassium.are given in Table 6 for both plants and soils. In greenhouse pot studies of the Ca2K ratios for alfalfa, Hunter, Toth, and Bear (15) concluded that though alfalfa can adjust itself to wdde variations in soil Ca2K ratios, making normal growth between 121 and 10021, soils having the ratio of 421 or less gave optimum development for the period of study. The work from the New Jersey station indicated that an abrupt drop in yield took place when the calcium.content fell below 1 per cent, or when the ratio Ca2K exceeded 4 to 1. The data in thwerage of per cent potassium of leaves and stems. 33. Table 6. The relation of condition of stand to potassium.content and equivalent Ca2K ratios in soils and plant tissue 2Condition2 2 Exch. K 2 Equivalent 2 Equivalent Series 2 of 2 K 0 in 2per 100 gm. 2 Ca2K ratio 2 Ca2K ratio number 2 stand 2 p t* 2 soilit 2 plant 2 soilttt 2 2 24 2 me. 2 2 3 Poor 1.03 0.09 621 1121 6 Poor 0.78 0.09 721 2021 7 Poor 0.97 0.09 621 -- 11 Poor 0.68 0.08 1221 -- 21 Poor 0.79 0.13 621 3021 23 Poor 0.94 0.08 621 3921 5 Fair 1e49 0012 431 1631 10 Good 1.71 0.15 321 2721 12 . Goad 1081 0e15 231 2231 22 Good 2.49 0.25 221 2821 *Average of leaves and stems of plants collected in 1941. *tkverage of replaceable K of profile samples taken in 1940. ttfi‘venage of replaceable Ca and K of profile samples taken.in.1940. 34. this paper are in excellent agreement witn the critical limits set for the calcium.and potassium.content of alfalfa. However, it appears that the equivalent cation ratio of the soil can vary widely only if the ex- changeable potassium content is above a critical level. In the sandy soils of Michigan, this critical limit seems tp'be between 0.10 and 0.15 milliequivalents per 100 grams of soil. SECTION II. GREENHOUSE STUDIES In order to more clearly ascertain the correlation between the con- dition of legume stands and the supply of certain plant nutrients in soils, greenhouse studies were carried out under controlled conditions of moisture and plant food. It is generally considered that the cropping of soils in greenhouse pots is more intensive than under actual field trials with soil temperatures and moistures at a much higher level. This is evidenced by the fact that soils deficient in phosphorus in the field will often produce several crops of alfalfa in the greenhouse without showing the characteristic symptoms of phosphorus deficiency. It is quite possible that the response of alfalfa to certain chemical elements might be some- what different under field conditions. However, in the greenhouse, an investigaticn'of plant growthcan be made with most factors under control on a large number of soils with a minimum of time and expense. It is thought by many workers that intensive greenhouse pot culture simulates long time field cropping. It is known that certain so-called minor elements are essential for plant growth. Willis and Piland (35) together with mny other workers have found that boron prevents alfalfa ”yellows" and often greatly in- creases the yield of legumes. Experiments at the Florida Station (17) on an acid sandy soil lave shown that minor elements in the presence of line and fertilizer caused appreciable increases in the growth of pasture plants. so the work of Miller and Gillam (23) showed that commercial 36. fertilisers do not contain enough Mg, Mn, and Cu to take care of plant needs, these and other minor nutrients were included with calcium, potassium, and phosphorus as treatments in this greenhouse wort. Experimental Plans Samples for greenhouse study were taken from 18 alfalfa fields, the soils being represented as follows: Fox 5, Warsaw 2, Plainfield 1, Ernest 5, Kalkaska 2, Mmcelona 1, and Onaway 2. The soil types, their series number and location, and the kind of legume stand in the field are given in Table 1. Each soil sample was obtained by compounding 40 to 50 individual plow layer portions taken at random over the field. After sieving the soils through a one-half inch mesh galvanized screen, they were thoroughly mixed. To those soils that tested below pH 6.5, finely divided calcium carbonate was added to raise the reaction to a point between 6.5 and 7.0. The plant nutrients and the rates at which they were added on an acre basis are given in Table 7. All fertilizer and minor element compounds were added as chemically pure salts in solution, except phosphate, to partially wet soils in one and two gallon glazed jars. All treatments were replicated four times. Simple block or split plot designs were used and the yield results were analysed statistically. The soil in the pots was allowed to dry, was remixed, and brought to optimum moisture. Inoculation was provided for in cases where it was questionable whether nitrogen fixing bacteria were present. The soils were kept at optimum moisture during the course of the experiment by weigh- ing the pots at frequent intervals. Generally, after three or four 37. Table 7. Rates and kinds of lime, fertilizer materials, and minor elements applied to soils for greenhouse studies pH of soil Series before Pounds per acre of lime and fertilizer number potting» and minor element salts 3 5.5 1000 CaCO3, 160 KCl, 50 HgSO 27H 20, 15 NaBO-lOHO, 2512213042450 2 4 7 2 5 5.4 2000 oacos, 160 KCl, 178 “(32904)? 50 MgSO . 7H 0, 10 ONazB 07-1)H 0,5 MnSO4 2H20, 30$ 4- 5H20, 3507 K01 or 2nd stand. 6 5.3 Same as for series 5 10 6.0 1000 CaCOs, other additions same as series 5 111. 6.0 1000 CaCO 160 KCl, 200 Ca(H2 P0 22H 20, 50 mgso4- oéHO, 15 NazB4O7-10H2 0, 10) $020 405H20 11B 6.0 1000 Cacog, 320 KCl, 100 M’gSO6 7H60, 50 Mans:g 2H 0, 10 uSO4°5H20, 25 Na2B47 1H20, 10 Z 04 12 6.0 1000 CaCO3, other additions same as series 5 21 5.8 1000 CaCOs, other additions same as series 5 22 6.0 1000 CaCOS, other additions same as series 5 24 5.7 1000 CaCOs, 160 KCl, 75 mgso 27H 0, 25 MhSO4- 2H.0, 25 Na B 0 ~10H 0, 10 Co(CH 000) 24H 0, 2 2 4 7 2 2 2 15 Zn804 so NazB407- 101120, 20 Co(CH 3000)2-4H20, 25 M'nSO4 2H20 26 6.5 100 HgSO4-7H20, 400 KCl, 150 Ca(HZP 04)2 2H 20, . e S . 3O N'a28407 10H20, 50 1121804 2H20, 25 Cu 04 5H20, 15 Co(CH COO) 24H 0 3 2 2 27 6.0 1000 CaCO 3, 400 K01, 100 MgSO‘ 7H20, 15 ZnSO, 4' 25 Cu 04- 38. Table 7. (continued) pH of soil Series before Pounds per acre of lime and fertilizer number_ ‘pgttingg and minor element salts 28 5.7 1500 oacos, 200 KCl, 100 Mg604-7H20, 10 Zn504, 25 Na28407olOH20, 30 MnSO4-2Hzo, 15 CuSOkOSHzO 30 N" B 0 -lOH 0 60 MhSO 228 0 15 CuSO o5H 0 ‘2 4 7 2 ' 4 2 ' 4 2 ' 15 Co(CH3000)2-4H20 298 5.5 1000 CaCOa, 400 KCl, 100 MgS04 7H20, 25 CuSO4 5H20, 20 Co(CH3C00)2 4H20 30 5.8 1000 CaCOs, 350 K01, 75 MgSO4 7H20, lO ZnSO4, . 0H 0 l5 CuSO 5H 0 25 11978407 1 2 s ' 4 2 2 10 Co CH3000)2 4320 31 6.0 1000 CaCOS, 200 KCl, 100 MgSO4 7H 0, 25 Na2B4O7 lOdzo, 50 Mn804 2H20, 15 CuSO4 5H20, 10 Co(CH3COO)z 2H20 32 _ 6.5 400 KCl, 100 Mg804 7H20, 50 1211904 2520, 40 NazB4O7 10 H20, 25 CuSO4 5H20, 15 Co(CH3000)2 4H20 33 6.0 1000 CaCOs, 200 K01, 75 mgso4 7H20, 3O NazB407 lOHZO, 50 MbSO; 2H20, 15 ZnSO4, 15 CuSO4 5 H20 39. cuttings the alfalfa roots were removed and the cultures were refertilizedt and replanted to alfalfa. Yield of Alfalfa as.Affected by Treatment Plainfield loamy sand---series 3---As indicated in Table 8 little response was Obtained on Plainfield loamy sand from.additions of calcium or boron alone, but calcium together with potassium gave substantial increases in yield of tops and roots, especially at the time of the third cutting. A further addition of manganese resulted in a still greater increase in yield of both tops and.roots. 7 Fox sandy loams--series 5---0n Fox sandy loam soil, significant increases in.yield.were obtained, as evidenced in Table 9, for all cuttings of both stands. In the first stand calcium and potassium resulted in yields no - larger than did calcium alone, while calcium with phosphorus resulted in smaller yields than did calcium.alone. However, where the three elements calcium, phosphorus, and potassium were applied the yields were increased and where magnesium, boron, manganese and copper were added to this treat- ment, increases in.yield of 50 to 60 per cent resulted in the second and third cuttings. In the second stand calcium caused very little increase in yield but calcium.and potassium.resulted in increases up to 1000 per cent, while respective additions of magnesium, boron and magnesium, and boron, magnesium, manganese and copper caused in.each case further increases in.yield of tops and roots. Per cent nitrogen dropped off slightly with increases in.yield and the protein content in grams varied directly with yields. *P was left out of the fertilizer treatments for the second stand of series 5, 6, 10, 12, 21, and 22. 40. Table 8. The mean yield of tops and roots of alfalfa grown in greenhouse pets on a Plainfield loamy sandt as affected by various fertilizer and minor element treatments 2 To 2 Treatments*# 2 cuttings 2 Roots 2 let 2 2nd 2 3rd 2 3 ms Ems sue 3 $1115. 2 2 1e Check 3 4.4 2.1 4.3 3 5.4 2. B 3 4.4 2.2 503 3 7.2 3. Ca 2 4.3 2.1 4.9 2 7.9 4. Ca+K 2 5.0 2.7 7.4 2 14.6 5. Ca+K¥Mg 2 4.9 2.8 7.6 2 15.0 6. Ca+K+Mg+Mn 2 5.4 3.3 8.2 2 15.8 2 2 tData for series 3 given in Table 1. **Kind and rate of treatments listed in Table 7. Plate 1. Third cutting of alfalfa grown on Plainfield sand. Treatments listed above. 41. .u canoe nu nobww apnospdouv ho opau one vufiuaaie .H canes ow nobaw m coauom pom dvdneae .pndom my 0» undefieflnwfim.2 .adfluopda andam hut nope do coedp.evdv Adda « n a a pddomlmw a . v.0 « m.H « pd podowmwuwae « a u . on on eoooquMfin . . 22m.¢0m . *2n.mmu . osaap a m.H111 o.~n . . H.» o.~H . m.m ”.mfl . ao+ns.m+w2+x+ao w.H ».m~ . . o.» ~.HH . a.” m.ma . m+w2+u+¢o o.~ w.m~ . . N.» m.oH . a.» m.«H . w2+g+ao m.m ¢.«N . copooaaoo n a.» m.m . a.» H.»H . u+¢o m.m a.» a «new 02 . b.» 5.0 a a.» m.H a do m.~ o.» n « m.m m.o . m.m n.d a #0050 a a a . qweam azoomm . .....pn.e»uoua « u n d . puaomem . w.o . w.o . H.H . a. paaofidfiuwfi. a n u . on op eooouommaa a *uo.mm a 20.nm a . enm.mm . ooaeb m o.~ ~.m» . a.» ~.m . a.» 11o.m . m.~ m.~H .soaa24m4mz4m4mauo o.m m.mm . n.¢ a.» u m.» a.o . a.» n.QH . m+m+do «.m o.nm . ¢.¢ m.a . o.» m.¢ u $.n >.> . m+eo H.m m.mm . n.¢ m.m . m.» m.m . N.» m.m . M+eo m.» o.mm » m.¢ o.» . «.m o.m . «.m m.m . oo ~.~ m.mm . m.¢ «.m u «.n w.¢ . a.” $.b . . guano pueo hem eaduw « pace you macaw . pone pom madam . vooo you madam . . ”Maya . . pom hemw . . pom new « . Definem . flowchvaz . waeah . newouvaz » ”Hawk a nowoupwz a caewh a demonpfiz . caewh . . ado: . u ode: . . odez . . odoz a eaieupuoaveeua 300m a lwwlavpoo v.35. . $13.33 uncoom . wwaupso pang . . madam ammHm . .codvu ghaemue comm.d Souk eeeawoe Bdoa huge. Rpm e_no upon onsonnoouw na atomw ouaemad mo ovoopnoo owovoum one .oowoupfio anon pom .wfioah.oeos any no enquPdoup honaaavuom poouommwo mo vacuum .m oanfia 42. Table 10. Per cent increase in the yield of alfalfa tops and roots grown in greenhouse pots on a Fox sandy loam soil‘ on comparison of various fertilizer and minor element treatments 2 First Stand 2 T0917 2 Comparison of treatments** 2 Cuttings 2 Roots 2 lat 2 2nd 2 3rd 2 2 per cent 2per cent 8 8 0a/Ne treatment 2 24.9 28.8 22.8 2 13.7 0223/33 treatment 2 30.2 27.1 20.0 2 26.7 sags/We treatment 2 5.1 -2.0 -20.8 2 2.2 0a+K+Pyho treatment 2 40.0 31.4 29.2 2 31.5 Ca+K+P+Mg+B+Cu+Mn/No treatment 2 69.0 94.7 117.8 2 56.5 0243/32 2 4.4 -1.0 -2.5 2 11.3 0a+Pyba 2 -15.6 -23.9 -35.5 2 -1o.0 Ca+K+R/ba 2 12.3 2.0 5.1 2 15.7 0a§K+Pyba+K 2 7.5 3.3 8.0 2 3.8 022342/822P 2 33.2 34.2 63.4 2 28.7 02+KtP4Mg+8+0u+Mn/ba+K+P 2 21.0 48.2 68.6 2 18.9 I 8 8 . geranium 8 8 ca/No treatment 2 30.0 -12.5 2 6.6 0a43/No treatment 2 950.0 1125.0 2 713.3 eatxtlg/he treatment 2 1080.0 1212.5 2 793.3 oa+K+lgts/3e treatment 2 1175.0 1300.0 No 2 876.6 Oa+K+Mg+B+Gu¥Mn/No treatment 2 1371.0 1475.0 data 2 966.6 ca+K/ba 2 708.0 1300.0 collected 2 662.5 oa+Ktmg/ba 2 808.5 1400.0 2 737.5 02+K+Mg/ta+x 2 12.3 7.2 2 9.8 02+K+Mg+8/ba+K+Mg 2 8.0 6.7 2 9.3 ca+K+Mg+8+Cu+mn/ba+x+ug 2 24.2 20.0 2 19.7 eatK+Mg+B+0utmn/batK+Mg+s 2 15.0 12.5 2 9.2 8 8 *Data for series 5 given in Table 1. ttKind and rate of treatments listed in Table 7. 43. Fox sandy loamP--series 6--The alfalfa in all cuttings of the first and second stand showed a significant response to treatment. This is shown by the results reported in Table 11. The data in Table 12 show that calcium.resulted in only a small increase in yield, while alfalfa grown in pots treated with calcium and potash made up to 60 per cent better growth at the third cutting of the first stand. _Phosph0rus appeared to depress the yields. The combination of magnesium, boron, manganese and copper definitely helped to maintain legume yields when used with calcium and potassium. In the second stand potassiumnwas very efficient in increasing the growth of alfalfa. Its effect was especially marked in the roots. magnesium caused further increases in.yield, as did also Vboron and manganese and copper. Nitrogen and protein relations were the same as reported for series 5. Fox fine sandy loam-éseries 10---0n Fox fine sandy loan as shown in Table 13 significant increases in yield were obtained as a result of all treatments which included potassium. As shown in Table 14 the increase in.yield of tops ranged as high as 127 per cent of the yield of the untreated pots in the first stand and 406 per cent in the second stand. Caloium.alone did not cause a significant increase in yield in either stand. Calciumtplus phosphorus caused significant increases in.yield in the first and third cuttings of the first stand but not in the second cutting. Applications of”both phosphorus and potash in addition to calcium, however, resulted in yields decidedly higher than did either element alone. A further addition of magnesium, boron, manganese, and copper caused slight increases in the yields Obtained in the first two cuttings of the first stand and a significant increase in the third cutting. .m manna a“ nepfiw mpnoapcoup no opdn one cadmrrss .H enema ea nepmm m .emaem new even... .pnflom RH op Homoamflnwwmtt .Hdauopda panda hum dope no dondn.cveo Add: « u u u Pflfiomw WNW « . m.o « 3.m . no vocowanwwu . a e a on on cocouommfin . a §§N.ba u stm.m> n canPLW o.N m.m~ . . o.m ».~H . m.n «.ma . scannememm+m+eo H.m m.mm . . m.~ a.HH . m.~ m.ma . m+mz+m+eo m.m m.e~ . . N.» m.m . o.» n.3H . w24m+eo m.» H.0m . nopooaaoo s" H.» >.> . >.m m.oa » m+co >.m m.m « spew oz 2 m.» o.H e m.» o.a . co ».m m.» a . u m.» >.o . m.m N.H . noose « e e " eaten nzoomm . .....eeee»eeaa . a a a « pcwoq New . a.o . ~.H . 6.0 . ea eeeenmmnmm. . u u e on op 86.03.33 11‘ e 22H.»H . esm.m . 2.0.Hm . cease m m.H H.»» . m.» m.3 . m.» >.b . m.» m.aa a so4o24m4mm+m4M4eo ».m o.>m . «.3 3.m . 3.» 3.m . H.» 3.oa . m4M+eo m.m m.»m ” 0.3 m.m . 3.» 3.» a m.m ».m . m4co m.m 3.mm e H.3 H.» . m.» b.» . o.» m.m . M+so m.m ».mH e «.3 m.m . m.» 5.3 . m.m m.» . do w.» w.mH . ».3 o.m . ».» m.3 . m.m ».» . Mocno pace hem madam « pose hem madam . pace mom «scum space hem . madam e a vow new a . pom no“ u a 00W howl. . new new . ncwoupaz . caoflh . ocwoupwz a. oaowh . newouvflz . vaoam . dowoueaz « vane» . a ndcz . s does e e coca . u uses . sessepoQEpcoha cream , . wwwpvso wanna . “mmmwvso noose» a mowvvso pagan ” . ocean sandman coow c scum sesame» Econ known mom a no upon eeeonnooam a» dream cMHdMHc mo apnopnoo naepoum was .oomouvan pass you .cacwh noes on» no epnespcouv henwawpnom vacquMav mo pcommm .HH canny 45. Table 12. Per cent increases in the yield of alfalfa tops and roots grown in greenhouse pots on a Fox sandy loam soil* on comparison of various fertilizer and minor element treatments 2 First Stand 2 Tops 2 Comparison of treatmentsfit 2 Cuttings 2 Roots 2 let 2 2nd 2 3rd 2 2 per cent 2per cent 8 8 022/126 treatment 2 -7.8 4.4 11.3 2 -6.6 Ca+K/No treatment 2 35.0 27.2 57.1 2 28.3 Ca+R/No treatment 2 31.3 22.1 26.8 2 17.2 0a+K+P/Ne treatment 2 66.0 42.2 19.0 2 36.4 0a+K+P33g2840u+Mn/No treatment 2 88.5 70.6 147.3 2 67.2 0a+K/ta 2 46.5 22.0 41.0 2 37.3 0a+Pyta 2 42.9 17.0 13.7 2 25.4 0a+K+Pyta 2 80.2 36.3 7.0 2 45.9 6a+K+Pyta+K 2 23.0 11.8 -24.3 2 6.3 oa+K+Pyta+P 2 26.1 16.3 -6.0 2 16.4 0a+K+P+La+B+tsn+0u/0a+n+P 2 13. 1 20.0 107.8 2 22.6 8 8 8 2 Second Stand 8 8 Ca/No treatment 2 -14.5 42.9 2 -9.4 Catx/he treatment 2 801.0 1000.0 2 528.1 Ca¥K+Mg/No treatment 2 1130.0 1257.1 No 2 625.0 Ca+K+Mg+B/No treatment 2 1230.0 1571.4 data 2 706.3 0a§K+Mg+B+Mn40u/No treatment 2 1250.0 1657.1 collected 2 790.6 0a+K/ta 2 954.0 670.0 2 593.1 0a+Ktlg/ta 2 1340.0 850.0 2 700.0 ea+3+mg/ta+3 2 36.6 23.4 2 15.4 Ca+K+Mg+B/ta+K+ 2 8.1 23.2 2 11.2 Ca+K+Mg+B+Cu+Mn oatxtmg 2 9.8 29.5 2 22.9 oatxtmgtstoutnn/tatxtmgcs 2 1.5 5.1 2 10.4 8 8 *Data for series 6 given in Table l. *tKind and rate of treatments listed in Table 7. 46. .b oHpoa CH ooPHw apnospccuv no each can 0nHmetss .H eHnee 6H eeeHm oH eeHae» nee even... .eeHea RH op eneeHdHemH».. .HsHuoydE panm hut nope no woman deco HHQI vnHom R» as « a . e . . ».o . m.H . eeeeHmHemHe » H a . on o» ecoonommHa . H 220.3H» » tab.mb . osHs>2m. ».« ».3H . e m.» H.» a 0.« m.» . so+na+m+w2+m+c0 ».m m.»H . . m.» ».a . m.» o.OH . m+maamaeo ».m e.eH . . a.» n. . H.» o.» . msamaeo 3.« 0.»H » covooHHoo . b.» m.3 » 3.» m.» » x+e0 0.« «.» » spew oz 2 0.3 «.H a 0.3 0.« » c0 0.« H.» u e «.3 ».H a 0.» 3.« » noeno » a n a 93.48% Atacama « sis... quofivdoha . . e . . voHom.Nwmvo . ».o . a.o . ».H . peeeHmmemee . . . a 03.0» coooueMMHn 21. . 2.0.»H . ..».HH . .eH.» . eaHme a H.» m.»» . m.» 3.» . 3.» a.» . H.» m.» . amen24mmmmemam+em ».« 0.3« . «.3 0.« » ».» p.» » ».» 0.» . m+u+s0 0.« 0.0H a ».3 0.« a m.» 0.3 . 0.» m.» . m+do 0.« 0.«« e H.3 3.« e 3.» ».» e H.» 0.0 » m+c0 0.« 0.0H e 0.3 0.H . 0.» «.3 a ».» «.5 a do 0.« m.»H . 3.3 ».H e m.» H.3 a m.» 3.» . noono pace new menu» a pace hem macaw . pace you mean» a pose you mean» a . pom .Hom . . “Eamon » . 90m .Hcm . . 30W .Hcm » newousz » chHh . nowousz » cHlo » flowcthz » 0H0Hh . nowousz . 0H0Hh » a data a . neon » . sees » u use: . tresovocsvdona epoom . Mdevno cans » mwnHvuoo cocoa» » wdepso veuHm » mfiwam ammHm . . _ comp» 3.2”.»ch .HHe.“ e Scum eseHHom BdOH acne» onHm mom a no .900 onsonoocnm oH neon» dMHeMHd mo antennae :Hopoum one .cowoann peso n00 .vHon none on» no nanospdeuv acuHHHvuou poouemmHu mo vacuum .»H oHpea Table 14. 47. and roots grown in greenhouse pots on a Fox fine sandy loam soil‘ on comparison of various fertilizer and minor element treatments Per cent increase in the yield of alfalfa tops 8 First Stand 2 Tops 2 Comparison of treatments** 2 Cuttings 2 Roots 2 1st 2 2nd 2 3rd 2 2 per cent 2per cent 8 8 0a/he treatment . 12.5 3.0 21.7 2 16.1 oats/he treatment 2 40.8 28.0 58.3 2 41.9 ca4P/Ne treatment 2 23.4 11.6 31.6 2 26.4 oatxts/he treatment 2 34.5 38.0 73.5 2 58.5 0a+K4rtmg4B4mn4Cu/No treatment 2 37.0 43.3 127.0 2 51.6 0.43/0. 2 29.6 24.2 30.0 2 22.0 0.4270. 2 13.8 . 8.1 8.2 2 8.9 02+K+s/ba 2 19.5 33.9 42.5 2 36.7 ca23+Pyta+8 2 -4.4 7.6 9.5 2 11.8 Ca+K+R/Ca+P 2 9.0 23.8 4.02 2 25.5 ca4xtpeug4848n2Cu/ba4K-p 2 2.1 4.0 30.8 2 -4.5 8 8 , , 2 Second Stand 8 8 ca/No treatment 2 -18.6 -25.0 2 3.2 CatK/No treatment 8 214.0 200.0 2 339.1 0a+K+Mg/No treatment 2 231.3 225.0 2 364.5 0a+K4Mg48/ho treatment 2 317.0 387.5 No 2 432.3 Ca+K+Mg¥B+Mn+Cu/No treatment 2 281.5 406.3 data 2 377.4 oatx/ta 2 282.0 300.0 collected2 325.0 Ca+K+Mg/ba 2 308.0 333.3 2 350.0 02223 +hig/Ca8-K 2 6.7 8.4 2 5.9 0a+K+Mg+B/batx+Mg 2 25.8 50.0 2 14.6 Ca+K+Mg+B+Mn+Cu/Ca¥Mg£K 2 15.1 55.8 2 2.8 0243+Mg+B+Mn+Cu/6a+Mg+K+B 2 -8.4 4.0 2 -10.3 8 8 tData for series 10 given in Table 1. ttKind and rate of treatments listed in Table 7. 48. In the second stand, magnesium caused slight increases in yield, ranging in percentage from 5.9 in the roots to 8.4 in the tops. An addition of boron caused significant increases in yield in both cuttings and in the yield of roots, the increases amounting to 25.8, 50.0, and 14.6 per cent respectively. No significant increases in yield were caused by applications of manganese and copper. Fox sandy 10am---series 11---According to the results reported in Table 15, the application of boron to a Fox sandy loam soil caused slight increases in the yield of the first and third cuttings of alfalfa and a significant increase in the yield of the second and fourth cuttings. An application of calcium increased the yield slightly at the second cutting and sig- nificantly in the last two cuttings. Potassium in addition to calcium caused significant increases in the yield of all four cuttings but no further increases in yield were obtained by adding phosphorus or magnesium to the fertilizer. Copper, however, when added in combination with magnesium, potassium, and calcium caused significant increases in the yields of the first three cuttings. Fox losm---series 12---As indicated by the results presented in Table 16, calcium did not significantly increase alfalfa yields on F002 loam. In fact, decreases in yield resulted in five out of six cases , considering both tops and roots. Potash in addition to calcium caused significant increases in yield in all cases but an addition of phosphorus to the calcium-potash treatment did not cause further increases in yield large enough to be significant. Phosphorus and calcium, without potassium, did not result in yields significantly larger than those obtained from treatment with calcium alone. 49. Table 15. The mean yield of tops of alfalfa grown on a Fox sandy loan! as affected by various fertilizer and minor element treatments 2 Treatment¥** 2 Cuttings 2 2 2 2 2 1st 2 2nd 2 3rd 2 4th 2 grams grams grams grams 2 Check 2 5.9 2.4 5.0 3.2 B 2 6.2 2.6 5.5 5.12 Ca 2 5.9 2.6 6.9 5.9 Ca+K 2 8.2 3.7 10.2 8.7 Ca¥K+P 2 7.6 3.8 9.8 8.3 Ca4K+Mg 2 7.3 3.4 10.7 8.9 CathMg¥Cu 2 9.3 4.4 12.0 9.8 2 : . P value 2 15.0**. 24.048 43.4¢* 38.6** 2 Difference to be 2 .ignificant at 3 009 Dog 102 104 2 the 5%point *Data for series 11 given in Table l. ttSignificant at the 1% point. sssKind and rate of treatments listed in Table 7. 2 \1 2112‘ 111:1! 50. .e oHpma nH newa epoostconv me oven was constss .H eHeea an eepHm NH eeHae» no» mean... .eeHea 3H e» eneeeaHeme».. .Hanovna nesHm haw echo no women even Hqu ” a a ” vnwommxw . . ».o . ».H . we eneeHaHemHe ” . . a on 0» oononommHa . . ssm.«0« . re».m3 » osHsb m 0.« H.»H . e 3.» 0.» . ».» ».» . scannemewnsmseo ».H ».»H . . ».» ».» . ».» ».e . mama.»+eo o.» o.3H a . ».» ».» . e.» ».» . mnemaeo H.« ».»H « nopooHHoo . a.» 3.3 « ».» 0.0 . M330 ».« 0.« a even 02 e ».3 ».0 e 0.3 0.0 . so 0.« 0.« a . H.3 ».0 e m.» ».H a Moose « e e a 0249» 9200mm » eestupdoavdona » a a a » vnHom R» . ».o . o.H . ~.H . ea eeeeHmHemHe » . a » on 0» oononommHn . es».»« » se».m . 2.3.0H . osHe> m ».H ».»m . «.3 ».3 . 3.» ».» . m.» 3.0H . scannememaamexeeo 0.« 0.0« a «.3 «.» . 3.» 3.» a H.» H.0H . m4M4mu 3.« ».»H a «.3 «.« . 0.» 0.» . e.« H.» . m+s0 0.« 3.»« . ».3 m.« » ».» «.m . «.« H.HH » u+eo 3.« «.mH . 0.3 >.H . a.» a.» a 0.« 3.» a do 3.« ».»H n ».3 0.H a 0.» 0.3 a 0.« ».m u nacho peso hem menu» a pace you name» a 9000 you mean» » anoo mom madam . . pom,uomm . . pommuom,. . pom1uom. » » vom,ummm. demoanz » eHlo e nemousz » 0H0Hh . nowousz » 0H0Hh » demonvfiz . nHlo » a neon . a new: . a use: a u use: . eesevncnveena evoom . wprvso uanH . wdwppso noose» fiIIIIImWvaso pehwm » mmmm, 023Hm1mmmHm . and». dMHsMHm 000w d song sseHHcm EsOH mom a no upon omsonncouw nH oboe» smHmmHs «o evacuees nHoponm 0nd .nowon3Hn vase hon avHlo_ncce on» no apnosvcouv uoNHHanch pneeommHv mo vacuum eoH eree 51. The combination of magnesium, boron, manganese, and copper did not increase yields in the first two cuttings of the first stand but caused an increase in the third cutting, according to Table 17, of 47.5 per cent. In.the second stand calcimm again failed to affectmyields. Potassium applications caused very marked increases in yield. magnesium and boron, considered singly, both caused significant increases in yield in the second cutting but not in the first, and probably not in the root yields. The combination of boron, manganese, and copper caused significant increases in.yield in the top growth from'both cuttings and probably in the roots. .According to the data, much of the increase was due to the manganese and the copper. ‘larsaw'loamp--series 21---In.the experiment with‘warsaw loam from.a poor alfalfa field, Table 18, calcium failed to cause significant increases in yield in.either stand as did also potash, applied in addition to calcium in the first stand. Phosphorus applied with calcium caused a significant increase in the yield of the third cutting but not of the first two cuttings. A.combination.0f potash and phosphorus, applied with calcium increased the yields in the first and third cuttings of the first stand. The group of elements, magnesium, boron, manganese, and cOpper was effective in increasing yields, as shown in Table 19, 10.6, 8.4, and 10.0 per cent, respectiveky, in the three cuttings of the first stand. The increases, considering as a basis the yields obtained from the pots treated only wdth calcium, phos- phorus, and potassium, were significant in the first and third cuttings but not in the second. In the second stand potash again caused very marked increases in yield. Magnesium caused slight increases in yield and boron caused a significant 52. Table 17. Per cent increase in the yield of alfalfa tops and roots grown in greenhouse pots on a Fox 10am 3011* on comparison of various fertilizer ‘and minor element treatments F 1 2 Figgt Stand 2 Topsg 2 Comparison of treatmentstt 2 Cuttings 2 Roots 2 let 2 2nd 2 3rd 2 2 per cent 2per cent 8 8 02/33 treatment 2 15.0 -16.0 -9.2 2 -5.5 0a+K/No treatment 2 51.0 14.3 44.1 2 55.8 0.42/he treatment 2 24.4 -16.5 17.3 2 21.4 0a4K42/he treatment 2 37.0 25.0 68.2 2 59.9 0a+K4paug4B4nntcu/Ne treatment 2 37.7 32.1 148.0 2 75.4 ca43/ta 2 31.5 36.3 66.4 2 47.6 Cats/ta 2 8.3 0.5 29.5 2 15.1 c.434P/ta 2 19.2 48.7 85.4 2 51.2 0a+K+P/ta43 2 -9.2 9.0 16.5 2 2.4 oatxas/batp 2 10.0 49.8 43.4 2 31.3 Cassertmgtstmntcu/tatstp 2 0.4 6.0 47.5 2 10.0 8 8 ' 8 2 Second Stand ___ 8 Ca/No treatment 2 -32.0 -37.5 -23.1 0.43/36 treatment 2 433.0 450.0 419.2 0a+K+Mg/No treatment 2 450.0 550.0 No 438.5 CathMgtB/NO'treatment 2 525.0 712.5 data 488.2 0a+K+Mg284mn20n/he treatment 2 693.0 900.0 collected 519.2 0.43/0. 2 674.0 780.0 575.0 CaJ-Kl-Mg/Ca 2 710.0 940.0 600.0 0a484Mg/0a43 2 4.6 18.2 3.7 0a+x4ng48/ta434 2 13.5 25.0 9.3 catxtmg4s4nn4cu oatxtmg 2 34.0 53.9 15.0 Ca+Ktmg¥BFMn40a/Ca+K¥Mg+B 2 18.3 23.1 5.2 8 *Data for series 12 given in Table l. *‘Kind and rate of treatments listed in Table 7. 53. .n chma dH come mpdcarconp no open new noneees .H oana nH nowa H« aoHnom new events. .edHea RH or neeeeeeema».. .HeHnoan pnch mun echo :0 women even Hdde . . . . enHem mm n u Hem a meH a PG PfidOHMwflwfiu . . . a on on oocouommHa » » ero.m3 e sn».3> » csHmP m m...” menN » a m.» boa...” a He” menvfl » £H4So4m4 4.3243200 o.» ».H» . . ».» ».»H . a.» e.eH . mamanMaao ».» ».»H n . ».» 3.«H . ».» H.0H . manna.» H.« H.0H « novooHHoo . ».» m.0H . ».» 0.» . made 0.« ».3 a even 02 . 3.» ».» . ».» 3.« . so 3.« m.» u a 222 m.« u a.» H.« H noose a e a . pate» gnome» . ....aeeeeeaeae . a e a . anom2RW . ».o . a.o . H.H . re eeeeHaaemae u a . . on.op coccnommHn n {*Neom « Coed. » iimemm « OSHQPLMI ».H ».3. . 0.. ».» . o.» e... . ».» a.»H . aeeaemamndéaeo m.H ».b» . a.» m.» . 0.» 0.0 a 0.» ».«H . m3m4c0 «.« 0.0» a «.3 0.3 e ».» ».» . 0.» 0.0 . m4so «.« 0.H» . H.3 m.» e H.» ».» a a.» 3.0 e m+d0 0.« ».m« a ».3 m.» « ».» ».» a H.» ».m . s0 «.« 0.«» a ».3 0.» . «.« ».» u H.» 0.0H . Moono vcoo nod madam . pace non madam » pace hem madam » peso hem macaw . » pomluomi » . pommnom » » pmm.nom.. » pom noml,. demoanz . oHcHh « nowousz » nHlo » domoanz » 0H0Hh . demoanz . nHlo . . neon a . c362 . . neon . a coca . terseHoQSpceua epoom a wanpSo tawny u manvoo neooo» » mwvapso vnuym211» 9.2.2.» 9%?» . #noo hem .uHlo.qdoE on» do nanosecoAp heaHHHpnem pneneHMHu Mo pooham one». eMHcmHs noon a scam sesHHOm asOH_Isnnez a do .900 endogenouw nH macaw cmHsmHe Mo announce qupoum one anemoanq ewH oHpca Table 19. 54. Per cent increase in the yield of alfalfa tops and roots grown in greenhouse pots on.a warsaw loam soils on comparison of various fertilizer and minor element treatments 2 First Stand 2 Tops 2 Comparison of treatments#* 2 Cuttings 2 Boots 2 1st 2 2nd 2 3rd 2 2 per cent 2per cent 8 - 8 0a/te treatment 2 -13.2 -3.0 3.2 2 -10.2 Ca4K/hb treatment 2 -14.0 -2.2 2.0 2 -3.1 Ca4PVNb treatment 2 -12.6 0.8 21.0 2 -6.2 Ca4K4P/No treatment 2 13.7 6.1 56.0 2 16.6 02+K+P+ug4828n40u/Ne treatment 2 25.2 15.2 71.9 2 30.0 0a4K/ta 2 -0.8 -0.8 -1.2 2 8.8 0242/0. 2 0.7 4.0 17.0 2 5.3 Ca¥K+PyCa 2 30.7 9.6 51.0 2 30.9 0a+K+R/ta-K 2 31.6 8.7 53.1 2 20.3 0a+x+syta-P 2 29.5 5.3 29.0 2 24.3 Ca+K¥P+Mg8Btmn+Cu/ba4K+P 2 10.6 8.4 10.0 2 11.3 8 8 , . 2 Second Stand 8 8 Ca/No treatment 2 61. 3 35 .0 2 18 . 4 CatK/No treatment 2 306.0 343.0 2 323.7 0a+K+Mg/Ne treatment 2 377.0 404.0 2 386.8 ca+x2mg+8/No treatment 2 575.0 465.0 No 2 458.0 0a+K4mg48+Mn+cu/Ne_treatment 2 573.0 368.0 data 2 518.4 0a4K/ta 2 152.0 288.0 collected2 257.8 0a+K+Mg/ta 2 . 196.0 274.0 2 300.0 c.434mg/ta-K 2 17.4 14.0 2 14.9 0a+KtMg+B/ta+x+ 2 42.0 12.0 2 14.6 Ca+K+Mg+B+Mn+Cu CathMg 2 43.5 -5.0 2 26.0 Ca+K+Mg+B+Mn+Cu/Ca+K+Mg{B 2 -1.0 ~15.1 2 10.9 8 8 *Data for series 21 given in Table 1. *tKind and rate of treatments listed in Table 7. 55. increase in.yield in the first cutting but not in the second. The data presented in Table 18 indicate no benefit, at least in yield of tops, from the application of manganese and copper. There may have been a slight increase in the yield of roots as a result of the addition of these two elements. 'Warsaw'loamp--series 22---0n‘Warsaw loam soil, taken from a field where there was a good stand of alfalfa, there was no response as shown in Table 20 to any of the treatments at the first cutting of the first stand. At the second and third cuttings there was no response to calcium, potassium, and phosphorus, but the further addition of magnesium, boron, manganese, and copper resulted in.highly significant increases in yield. Since this soil produced good alfalfa in the field it is not surprising that the response to fertilizer should be less in the first stand than that Obtained on soils where the field crop had been.very poor. After alfalfa was replanted on this soil there was still no response to calcium but a very'marked response to potash and a statistically sig- nificant.response to magnesium, Boron caused a significant increase in the yield of the second cutting and probably of the roots. Manganese and copper did not cause a further increase in yield. Emmet loamy sand---series 24---This soil produced a poor stand of alfalfa in the field. Likewise the yields produced in the greenhouse were low. There were, however, several significant increases in.yields resulting from the various treatments, as shown by the data in Tables 22, 23, and 24. Calcium.alone caused significant increases in the yield of the fourth cutting of the first stand and in both cuttings of the second stand but caused a 56. .b oHpsa QH neme nanoseconp mo open new odewser .H oHpea nH :chw «« moHno» pom updates .enHea 3H 6» eeaeHeaemH».. .HeHnopdE pnde and echo no comes upon Had; seam sssHHoe_EsoH Deane; o no spam endogenouw cH nice» mHHdMHc new anemoann anon hem .eHlo does on» no apnoEpaoup neuHHHpnoh . . . . enHomlm» er a » v.0 » 0.H » pndOHmHane . . a n on op coconommHm . e rem.0m» e .43.»mH . oean m H.« o.»» . 2 m.» o.»H « ».» ».»H . eo+nz+m+mnemaao ».» ».»» . . H.» m.aH . m.» o.»H . manganese ».m ».»» . neeeeHHoe . H.» ».»H . H.» e.aH . mnemaeo «.« H.»« a even 02 a ».» 3.3H » 0.» 3.»H » m+c0 ».« ».» e a 3.3 ».3 a 0.3 3.3 a 00 ».m ».» . . 0.3 ».3 . a.» ».3 . seen» u a n « meta» azoon» . ....meeeeeeeaa . a a a e vnHom m» . e.o . ».o . ».H . ea eneeeamemHe » a . » on.op oonoeommHa « eeoH.»« . team.» . H3.H » 05Hg m ».H o.»e . ».» e.» . ».» m.» . ».» ».»H . eoennamemnsmameeo H.« ».»» « ».» 3 « «.» ».» a 0.» «.«H » m4x+s0 m.« 0.3» . H.3 a a 0.» ».» . 0.» ».HH . m+c0 ».« ».»» s m.» a a H.» ».m . a.» ».«H . m+s0 ».« 3.»» a ».3 0 . ».» 0.0 . H.» 0.«H a so ».« «.0» a 3.3 ».3 a 3.» 0.» e H.» >.«H . noono «:00 mom used» e peso pom menu» a #000 non macaw . peso n00 macaw . » hem hem] . . pom hem, . . pom mom, a » pom7noml,. . nowousz » eHcHh. » nowousz . oHlo a." demoanz » nHlo . somousz » cHeHh . . uses a » use: . » use: a . neon » seesepnospecna epoom » wdevso nana » wdepoo 30000» . .mmvane vuuHm » »mos azaa» ammHa 712 . cusps sthMHc 000m s mo 49:09:00 nHoponm statement to peony» .ow eHnea Table 21s 57. and minor element treatments Per cent increase in the yield of alfalfa tops and roots grown in greenhouse pots on a Warsaw loam.s0il* on comparison of various fertilizer 2 First Stand 2_# Tops 2 Comparison of treatments** 2 Cuttings 2 Roots 2 let 2 2nd 2 3rd 2 2 per cent 2per cent 8 8 Ca/No treatment 2 -1.0 -5.6 0.5 2 -2.2 Oath/No treatment 2 0.5 4.2 2.9 2 -1.9 CatP/No treatment 2 -9.6 -10.6 -18.7 2 -6.1 Ca+K+P7No.treatment 2 -3.5 -3.1 -5.0 2 4.4 0.4Ktr2mg282nn20u/he treatment 2 4.5 16.0 42.0 2 16.0 0.43/0. 2 1.5 10.5 2.2 2 0.3 0.49/ta 2 -8.6 -5.2 -19.0 2 -4.0 0.434270. 2 -2.5 2.5 -5.4 2 6.7 0.«342/0aex 2 -4.0 -7.0 -7.5 2 6.4 c.4322/0a4P , 6.6 8.3 17.0 2 11.2 0.+K+P+Mg+8+Mn+cu/ba+x4p 2 8.4 20.0 49.4 2 11.1 8 8 8 2 Second Stand 8 8 0a/ho treatment 2 -7.7 11.7 2 3.0 0.43/86 treatment 2 221.0 234.9 2 250.0 0a+K+Mg/ho treatment 2 268.0 267.4 2 332.0 c.434mg28/he treatment 2 295.0 316.3 No 2 403.0 0.43+Mg+8+un40u/he treatment 2 312.5 318.6 data 2 430.3 0.43/0. 2 248.0 200.0 collected 2 339.7 CathMg/Ca 2 300.0 229.2 2 319.1 Ca+K+Mg/ba+K 2 14.6 9.7 2 23.4 Cs+K¥Mg+B/Ca+K¥N 2 7.3 13.3 2 16.5 Ca¥K+Mg$B¥Mn40u CatKlMg 2 12.0 13.8 2 22.8 ' 0a+3212g48+11n40u/0.4xmg28 2 4.4 0.6 2 5 .4 8 8 *Data for series 22 given in Table l. ttKind and rate of treatments listed in Table 7. 58. Plate 2. Second stand, second cutting of alfalfa grown on a Fox sandy loam, series 5. Treatments 1. Check, 2. Ca, 3. Ca+K, 4. Ca+K+Mg, 5. Ca+K+Mg+B, 6. Ca+K+Mg+B+En+Cu. Plate 3. Second stand, second cutting of alfalfa grown on a warsaw loam, series 22. Treatments 1. Check, 2. Ca, 3. CaLK, 4. CaLKtMg, 5. Ca+K+Mg+B, 6. Ca+K+Mg+B+Mn+Cu. 59. Table 22. The mean.yie1d of tops and roots of alfalfa grown in greenhouse pots on an Emmet loamy sand soil* as affected by various fertilizer and minor element treatments 2 First Stand 2 Second Stand 2 Tons 2 2 Teps 2 Treatment** 2 Cuttings 2 Roots 2 Cuttings 2 Roots 2 lat 2 2nd 2 3rd 2 4th 2 2 lst 2 2nd 2 2 grams 2 grams 2 grams 2 grams 2 2 2 2 NO treatment 3 408 3e6 104 009 8 405 3 109 105 3 3.5 Ca 3 502 3.8 105 102 3 4.3 3 2.1 1.9 8 3.2 CafiB 2 5.9 4.4 1.9 1.5 2 4.8 2 2.3 2.2 2 3.8 CaflBfiMg 2 6.5 5.2 2.5 1.7 2 5.4 2 2.9 2.1 2 4.0 Cal-BWYgI-Mn 2 5.6 5.5 2.6 1.6 2 5.6 2 2.5 2.3 2 3.6 Ca+B+Mg+Mn+Co4Zn 2 5.0 4.8 2.1 1.3 2 4.4 2 2.3 2.3 2 3.5 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cam 3 505 409 2.4 1.4 3 704 3 2.5 204 3 4.2 Ca+K+B 2 5.6 5.5 3.0 1.6 2 8.0 2 2.7 2.5 2 4.6 Ca£K+B+Mg 2 6.7 6.4 3.4 1.9 2 9.2 2 2.8 3.0 2 5.3 Ca+K+B+Mg¥Mn 2 5.8 5.7 3.2 1.8 2 7.6 2 3.1 2.9 2 5.0 Ca¥K+B4Mg¥Mn¥Co$Zn 2 6.4 6.0 3.3 1.8 2 8.6 2 2.9 3.2 2 5.6 2 2 2 2 *Data for series 24 given in Table l. *tKind and rate of treatments listed in Table 7. 60. " u u n « m.o ” H.o . 9.0 u 0.0 « w.o . sssvnfiom Rm vs o.H . H.o . H.o . ¢.o . e.o . paaoamanwa. op . . s a . op concuommfin n u u :1 41 a . . mm.o pm.m « No.0 mm.o u wo.o mm.o a mm.o ww.n. . nH.o >m.a . ma . an a N m H gm >H.O no.w . No.0 ma.o « NH.o m¢.o . H¢.o pm.¢ . mo.o om.m a ma . am 2 H gm 0m.H ow.¢ « oo.o nm.o « mo.o mm.o n mn.o «m.a « mm.a ow.o « e . HQ 2 H & spa.m mo.m . ssmn.o mn.H . ssmm.a ma.m s simm.m >m.oa u mm.o em.» a e s Aam av s u . a a . apnofioao nonfia mm.o >>.m « Ho.o No.0 . $00.0 Ho.o s ¢H.o H¢.o s No.0 0N.H . n . m N am slon.moH on.moa . same.o m¢.o . sinn.m an.m . «smH.m ma.m . an.H mm.H « H . Amy nuouaawpuom . nw.o s mo.o ma.o . Ho.o no.0 .. mo.o ¢H.o « m~.o mm.o « n ,n Axmv exoOHm mo.>mH « «m.m . nm.ma . mn.om . mm.mm « mm . Hence a . a .. s . mmnl . mm . ma . mm a mm . mm . m2 . mm a ma «-rymm 1‘. n I‘ . » wnwpvso . Awnwpvoo . Ammavpso ” wndpvao . " evoom u apnoea . vaflna . cocoon s panda n ma . oomzom E IPII « wwwoa 1 a a unwam emmHm . mm cases a“ copuwfl as Aew coaueov Haas use» zana panm as no macaw shacmas mo epoch one who» Mo vaewh saw no eonsdudb Mo ewazasss 0:9 .mm canes .mqsos pcosoao nonwa noosvop confisvou oocmpommwc mw moan» noaoH «eases pouwafivaom noosvop couwsvou oesonoMMwn aw coach hommbsss .pnaom my op assessaqmama. .pnaom an on pusoaManwam. 61. s a s u . n.0 . s u «.0 . n-o . essvnflom Rm as 0.0 . s . H.0 . m.0 . vasodmwnwwu on u . . . . on oesoaeMMfin 11 n 1 n u s a . «H.0 «m.a n . a no.0 0¢.0 . 0H.0 0m.a . ma « Hm“: K h M 3m 50.0 Hm.0 n s . m0.0 «0.H . 50.0 $0.0 « NH . Hm_fi H Mm 0¢.0 mm.a u s u HH.0 ««.0 . 0H.0 m0.0 . ¢ . am a H.m >H.H mm.¢ u copooHHoo n vowocaaoo a m¢.0 mm.a n sa¢.0 mm.a « e . Adm EV « sped « spec s . . . uvsoaoao uonwz mm.0 00.H « oz . « oz . H0.0 $0.0 . 00.0 ma.0 a m a m M 3m ..ee.mfl ee.mfl . n . ..mm.n mm.m ...m«.a me.H . H . Aav .uonaafipaoa m¢.0 a . . m0.0 . >0.0 . m . Axmv axooam ¢M.>m ” . a 05.5 . mm.m . an . Hence a . a . . . m2 ” mm a m2 . mm Mlt,ma u mm a mg « mm a m: « mm « a « wquvSO « mfiwpvzo u Aiwwflppse . Awnflppso . « avoom . nunsom .. vawna . cocoon .u .vuawm . mm a season a 1n‘ umoa r 1‘ a a mzeam nzoomm . Aoosnwpooev .nm wanna 62. . a n n H.«- . o.o o.m- . 0.0m- . o.mm- m.om- m.mau o.oH- . n2-wsum\nuuoo-qz-wa-m m.m- . m.m m.ma- . n.m . 0.»- o.e m.m m.¢Hu . wmam\gz+wz+m m.¢- . m.¢ e.m . m.mH . 0.0H «.m» m.¢m o.m- . pxq2+w24m m.« . m.¢- H.mm . N.¢H . «.9H 0.0» «.mH m.m . m\wz+m m.HH . H.Hm m.m . m.~ . ~.o N.mn e.mm 6.»- « ....so.sp\su+oo.n34w2+m m.eH . H.Hm H.ma . ”.mm . m.en m.om o.¢e o.w . ....soosp\qzsm24m «.mm . m.o~ H.mm . H.mm . m.H¢ o.em m.mn «.mm . ....xoogp\wz+m m.HH . m.mH m.m . m.oa . o.m~ m.ma o.oH o.mH . ....~oogp\m n u . u a hONHHfiphorm do u a a u n . . . 1111 411 >.em . H.mm ”.mm . m.»m . o.mn m.mm o.eH o.m~ . nuaooau54w24msep\dnsoo.nzswa+maM1uo m.en . H.8N o.¢m . «.2» . o.m o.HN N.» m.» . nzswzsmssp\nzsws+mxm+so H.~n . m.me ¢.nu . m.mm . H.9H o.mn o.nm o.» . wmsm4.p\w2.msm.so H.Hm . m.»~ «.FH . m.eo . m.m ¢.nm o.mm m.m- . m4¢p\mumaao e.on . ”.mm H.mH . e.He . m.ma 0.08 o.mm ”.5 . ap\M1.o ¢.ma . o.oo m.Hn . o.no . o.m« m.mm o.m» w.mH . ...»noe»aosp oz\m4.o m.mo . e.om n.0H . H.mu . m.mm n.» o.» m.> . usspuospsoup oz\uo « u n a pace pom” once pom a pace hem" pace pom . . cum u pea u « ape « can . tow a and . upoom » awnwppso . upoom a quflppdo . asuvnoEpsoup mo qoawudmsoo . «mos . .111 smog . endow egooom . 11 ecapm pupae . «32568.... pnosoae .353 and aoaaaavaom sneaks» Mo soaausmaoo do endow coda madoa poeem as no upon oasognoouw a“ ssoum avooa use «mop dHHmHHd mo uaowh esp aw smashes“ pace pom .¢N capes 63. .wavcofi noNflHfivuom obwpoommou on» noun: cacao pcoapdoup houfiawpuom op chomou Moonossss .onEpdohp.paoEoHo nonws no nonaafipuom oze*e .e canes no copuflfi .pnospaoup co ops“ and enaa.. .H capes a“ nobfiw em aofiuon pom evens a n a u o.mH . ”.0” m.m- . H.«H . ~.H o.m m.m- m.oa . q2+w2+m\nu+oo+nsswzam m.¢- . 9.”- e.oH . 5.8H- . 0.9- 8.0- m.HH- m.»~- . wa.m\gasmzam m.m . o.mH m.¢H . ¢.¢- . m.m 0.2 m.m e.m . m\qa+wz+m H.¢H . 0.0m a.» . a.«fl . ~.om m.¢~ o.mH «.mH . m\mz+m m.¢m . ».nn o.oH . m.mH . n.H» m.en e.HN o.mH . ....uo.sp\nu+oo+qswmzwm m.om . m.o~ o.¢~ . e.» . m.m~ m.Hm «.mH o.e . ....ao.gp\ns.w2+m m.mm . o.mm o.mH . H.em . m.m¢ e.oe m.on m.om . ....xo.np\w§+m w.0~ . «.« o.m . H.m . m.ma o.nm m.ma n.a . ....acogp\m « a u n a a a u noufiafipaom M+do pace new» pace pom cameo hem” »noo new . . cam . p.” . . ape up» cam pua . uuoom u quappso . upoom u umnfippso . eeupnospsouv mo coawhamaoo ”111 mmwa . u . weapM1mmooom .11. endow sauna . Aeosuapaoov .«m .Hpua it, 64. reduction in the root yields of both stands. Potassium.applied in addition to calcium increased, significantly all yields except the first cutting of the first stand. The increases ranged in percentage from 7.3 to 71.4 (Table 24). ‘ Boron when applied in addition to calcium caused significant increases in.yield in all cases except the first cutting of the second stand and where it was applied in addition to calcium.and potash it caused sig- nificant increases in all cases except the first cutting of the first stand and the tWO‘tOp growth yields of the second stand. magnesium.resulted in increased yields in all cases except one, the second cutting of the second stand in the no potash group. Most of the increases in yield were significant. Manganese was apparently not needed on this Emmet loamy sand soil. There were more cases of decreases than of increases in.yield as a result of the addition of the element to the fertilizer mixtures. cobalt and zinc added tOgether to the fertilizer mixtures caused decreases in yield 9 out of 16 times. Emmet sandy loam---series 25---According to the data shown in Table 25, this Emmet sandy loam, which produced a fair stand of alfalfa in the field responded quite markedly to various mixtures of calcium and magnesium 'with potassium.both with and without certain combinations of the minor elements. However, very slight increases in yield were obtained from additions of calcium and magnesium. lapparently the potassiumnwas the most needed element. 'Where potassium was omitted from the mixtures, boron caused an increase in yield amounting to as much as 25 per cent on 65. « n a a m.m . m.s ».om o.o . m\=usso.m. . . «.8- . o.- 23- m... . 3+oo\8+oo+m. . . o.oa . o.m- o.sa- e.~H- . m\so+oo+m. m.aH . n.e H.s a.s . .qussosmwasma H.o»- . «.mH o.~ 0.« . sooep\quaso.m. m.ma . m.» m.¢ m.o . soaooimaeaw: e.nu- . a.” o.m- «.oa- . eo.eu\so+oo+m. H.ma . a.» o.e o.e . so+oese+wz e.m . e.m o.n- n.¢a- . accep\so+oo. m.oa . o.« a.» m.e . m4m+wz ¢.wn- . H.m m.eH- o.m . so.ep\m. m.oa . a.» m.m e.e . News a a houdeP-uoh a a a a a fi4§n a a a u H a a « e.mH . o.m~ 5.0H o.- . m\nnsso+m. . . «.0H . e.ofi- «.wa- e.HH- . so.op\eo+oo+m. m.a . O.” «.« ~.s . nusso+m4ma+ao m.- . «.« a.»fi- ~.oH- . m\so+oo+m. m.e . m.~ H.» n.m . so+oo+m4wzsao «.me . e.en n.H» n.nn . sooep\¢nsso+m. e.e . m.» m.n o.m . so+oo+waauo H.»« . o.na a.»- m.H- . Moosp\eo+oo+m. o.m . e.m o.» a.» . m+w=+¢o e.« . ».sm m.mH H.HH . sooep\so+oo. e.m . «.« a.» e.m . ‘ maaao 0.m~ . H.m m.~H n.m n MopWM\m. 0.0 . 0.« 0.« n.m . acoaueeuv o: a a hoanwP-noh a u a pace hem. pace hem . «M4euu madam « madam . . can u can . vnH « epuoEpsou» « u can . can u find . evoom . ownappeo . mo . «poem . uwsdpvso « sevscsuseha ” mmme1 u senfineaeoo . . amen . seeevdosuseup mo aeowusmaoo some maeah.qd essence“ pace hem on» use.epseaeao sodas and nuenaadpuom unease» an uepoemue as eaaoa_adoa house peesm as so even eesonseeuw dd abouw.¢aasmad mo epoch and one» me each» uses use .mm capes 66. .wdfidmog honwaflvuom obwwoommou some: macaw pdoEvsouv heuwprnom op nachos xoososse .s .Hpee ea eopmafl enmesheoup so open use eqau.. .H capes aw dobww mm season hem evens u m.mn . m.o~ H.«H w.HH . mxnu+eo+m. . . o.o . H.«- ».n- m.m . so+op\so+oo«m. . . m.e . m.e m.s- m.» . m\puaoo+m. n.ma . n.m m.> m.m .eN+so+m+dwwa+so «.mm s «.m m.m ”.m- . sooep\eaasoamu m.~H . s.« m.m m.a .sosoosmweswzaao m.o- . H.«- m.eH- «.m- . sooep\sosoo+m. m.mH . m.« H.« «.e . so+oo+e+ws+¢o w.o- . o.o H.«H- o.mH- . soogp\so+oo. o.mH . «.«. «.m e.» . aweawz+so 5.5- H m.oa- m.m- o.NH- . so.:p\m. o.ma . m.« H.s e.m . esw2+uo « n u a u . houwawahpm a u a pace you a when hem n M+mmesou «Edam a naeaw . a up» a com « »uH u sequences» a . can com a and . upoom n awnvaso . me . upoom u nwnavpso . esvoospseua » sacs . acuausmEoo a . 1mme a Atomswvnoov .mm canoe 67. the roots, but where potassium was present, no increase in yield resulted from.the boron treatment. Likewise cobalt and copper caused increases in.yield where potassium was not present but not where that element was applied. A.combination of boron, copper, and zinc caused marked increases in yield, ranging from 31.3 to 48.4 per cent where no potassium was applied. In the presence of potassium these elements caused rather large increases in yield in two cases, slight increases in four cases and decreases in yield in two cases. In other words, wherever potassium was applied, the value of the minor elements seemed to be lessened or nullified. Emmet sandy loam---series 26---On this Emmet sandy loam, as shown by the data presented in Table 26, magnesium produced a significant increase in yield in the fourth cutting and perhaps in the roots. The addition of potassium.to the fertilizer treatment resulted in yields which were sig- nificantly greater than those obtained where only magnesium.was applied. Boron had no effect on yields, but a further addition of phosphorus did cause still greater yields. The increases were significant in all four cuttings. manganese caused a significant increase in yield only in the fourth cutting. Copper and cobalt, applied together, in addition to magnesium, potassium, and boron caused a significant reduction in yield in the first cutting, a significant increase in the second and slight increases in the third and fourth cuttings and in the yield of roots. Emmet sandy loamr--series 27---Several elements caused increases in yield on this soil according to the data reported in Table 27. It is interesting to note that only a fair crop of alfalfa was produced in the 68. Table 26. The mean yield of tops and roots of alfalfa grown on an Emmet sandy loam* as affected by various fertilizer and minor element treatments 2 Tops 2 Treatment*** 2 cuttings 2 Roots 2 lst *2 2nd 2 3rd 2 4th 2 2 grams 2 grams 8 8 No treatment 2 9.8 7.1 4.9 5.8 2 9 Mg : 9.5 6.6 5.0 6.6 - 11 Mgtx 2 10.4 8.8 6.4 8.5 2 13 Mg¥K+B 2 10.7 8.3 6.2 8.6 2 13.8 mgpxtstp 2 13.4 10.9 9.0 9.8 2 15.1 mg+K+B$Mn - 10.6 8.5 6.3 10.3 2 13 8 Mg+K+B+Cu+Co 2 9.8 9.3 6.5 9.0 - 14.1 8 8 8 8 F value 2 39.2** 84.4** 28.7** 54.8** 2 24.9** 8 8 Difference to be 2 - significant at 2 0.6 0.5 0.7 0.7 _§%gpoint 2 Per cent increase in yield on comparison of above treatments 2 Tops 2 Comparison of treatmentsttt 2 cuttings 2 Roots - 2 lst 2 2nd 2 3rd 2 4th 2 2 per cent 2per cent 8 8 mg/Ne treatment , 2 -2.8 -2.9 2.0 13.8 - 18. mg+K/he treatment 2 6.1 24.0 .30.6 46.6 - 4o Hg+K+B/we treatment - 9.2 16.9 26.5 48.3 2 40 Mg+K+8+PyNo treatment a 36.7 53.5 83.7 69.0 2 5 mg+K+8+ma/Ne treatment 2 8.2 19.7 29.9 77.6 2 4 M3+K+B+Mn+ou+Ce/Ne treatment - 0.0 30.9 32.7 55.2 2 45. mg+K/Mg 2 9.5 33.3 28.0 28.8 2 1 . mg£K+B/Mgsx 2 3.0 -5.7 -3.1 1.2 2 Mg+K+8+PyMg+K+B 2 25.2 31.4 45.2 14.0 - 1 mg+K+B+sn/Mg+x - 1.9 -3.4 -1.6 21.2 2 Mg+8+8+mn/mg+x+8 2 -1.0 2.4 1.6 19.8 - ug482816u466/Mg4x 2 -5.8 5.7 1.6 5.9 - mg¥K+B+Cu+Co/Mg+K+B 2 -8.4 12.0 4.8 4.7 2 8 8 tData for series 26 given in Table 1. ttSignificant at the 1% point. tttKind and rate of treatments listed in Table 7. .wnweeog heuwfiwppom obwpoommou poems cacao unospsoup nouwawvhom o» enemas xoozosss .b canoe aw cepmfia n9fioEPdoh¥ mo ovdu use unawae .a canes :H scram pm usage» new event 69. 8.4 . m.o» o.»m e.Hm . m\e»+m. . . m.« . ».« m.» o.e . eo+m\eo+eo+m. . . ».»N . o.«H ».NH ».«m . m\eo+eo+m. ».a . ».» o.» ».« . qa+meu+ms+eo m.m~ . ».m ».» ~.eH . m\eoam. «.HH . m.« «.» e.« . eo+eo+meaemseeo H.0H . e.e» «.«» e.m . seeep\enam. m.oa . a.« m.m ».« . eo+m+x+ma+eo H.m~ . ».ma N.oH N.NH . metap\eueeoem. H.e . ».« ».« a.» . maaemneeo «.mm . ».»« H.e 3.« . seerp\eoam. a.» . H.« m.« H.« . sawsaeo ».N . m.« o.m- m.m- . seerpxm. . . . . aeamfiapaea aemmeeo. . . a.e»- . a.m- ».»H- ».m- . m\enem. . . H.«H- . m.m- a.a- e.om . eoem\eoeeo+m. . . m.~«- . ».o»- e.e»- e.eH- . m\eo+eo+m. . . o.»»- . m.»m- ».H»- o.m»- . m\oo+m. t.e . «.« m.« a.» . aNemewseeo ».»m- . ~.H» N.H« m.Hm . semap\ewema H.» . m.» ».» ».» . eo+eoam+ma+eo o.mm- . o.o o.e e.e . meeep\eoeeo+m. H.a . ».» m.» a." . eoememaeeo ».aa- . «.m a.«H «.e- . seeap\eomm. ».oH . e.« a.» ».« . memaeeo a.«m . e.»« e.a» «.«» . eeeepxm. ».» . m.» «.» m.» . mama» . » noufiawvuem wz+eoe . u ».N» . ».»» «.m« m.«» . mxe»+m. . a ».e- . o.» m.a a.» .1 eu+m\eo+eo+m. . . H.0H- . a.»H ».o» «.ma . m\eo+eo+m. . u m.»- . o.oH ~.HN, m.ma . m\eo+me a.mH . 0.« a.« m.« . 6N+m e.e» . o.»« N.»» ».»« a e _\eNam. ».m . ».» ».« a.» . someoem ».a- . o.»m ».»m H.«H . ;\eoeeoam. ».m . ».» 0.« m.» . eoem o.o . 3.4H . ».aH o.e . a eoam. e.m . o.» ».» H.» a m a.» e a.» m.m- H.0- ” psefiveouv oszn n.m « w.m e.» m.» . pacspeou» oz n n a n a vase some unto hem . souwaweuom oz” macaw » macaw . u can . cam » pea » updospdohv » a can a tum » pea » upoom . uwnwppbo . Mo acuHudeoo . evoom » ewawppoo . eepneSvdeue . emoa « e a smog . errapuoapsoup mo soanemEoo some eaofih aw seconds“ pace Mom on» was .mpflofioao ponds end uuoufiafipuem noowasp an copooaws as eawou_asoa hence voEEm as so even emsosnooaw ca macaw memmHe mo epoch was mac» mo ufiofih uses one .bm canoe 70. field on this sandy loam. In the presence of calcium and magnesium, boron caused marked increases in alfalfa yields. Such was not the case, however, 'where the calcium and magnesium were omitted or where potassium was applied. The results obtained from zinc were somewhat the reverse from thoseobtained from'boron. Zinc, in addition to boron caused increases in yield where calcium, magnesium, and potassium were applied and where all three were omitted but not where calcium and magnesium only were applied. .A similar situation resulted with respect to c0balt. Perhaps the explanation for the failure of zinc and cdbalt to cause increases in yield in the presence of calcium and magnesium.and the absence of potassium is that the yields of the pots which received only boron in addition to calcium.and magnesium were too high, or in other words were in error. Copper caused slight but probably not significant increases in yield in 9 out of 12 cases. Again the three cases of decreased yields occurred on the pots where calcium and magnesium.but not potassiumnwere applied. Emmet sandy loamr--series 28--70n a fourth Emmet sandy loam, in which alfalfa under field conditions did rather poorly, marked increases in yield were Obtained as a result of application of calcium and magnesium.and a com- bination of calcium, magnesium, and potassium. Increases in yield also occurred from application of boron, either alone or with calcium and magnesium or with calcium, magnesium, and potassium. In any combination, manganese seemed to depress yields, while further additions of capper and zinc tended to raise them again. Perhaps if the copper and zinc had been added without the manganese they would have proved more advantageous. 71. Kalkaska loamy sand---series 29--dWith the Kalkaska loamy sand represented by series 29, which produced a very poor crop in the field, some very interesting results were obtained, as shown by Tables 31, 32 and 33. Cal- cium and magnesium, applied together without other treatment did not appreciably affect alfalfa yields but an addition of potassium caused very marked increases in yield, 56.6 per cent in the second cutting of the first stand to 191.7 per cent in the second cutting of the second stand. Boron, applied alone or in combination with calcium and magnesium, or calcium, magnesium, and potassium, caused consistent and in most cases significant increases in yield. The addition of manganese and copper to the treatments increased the yields in only 9 out of 24 cases and reduced the yields in 12 cases. Cobalt, added to each of the fertilizer mixtures, caused increases in yield in all instances except that of the second cutting in the second stand where the potassium.was included, and in the first cutting of‘the first stand where calcium, magnesium, and potassium were omitted. In some cases the increases were not significant. Kalkaska loamy sand---series 30---As shown by the results presented in Tables 34 and 35, this soil was badly in need of potassium.for alfalfa but apparently did not need the other elements applied. very little response was obtained from additions of calcium and magnesium,but where potassium was added yields were increased from 25.7 per cent to 144.0 per cent. The increase due to potassium ranged from.l3.4 to 117.8 per cent. No consistent increases in yield were Obtained from any of the minor elements. many of the increases obtained were insignificant. 72. loam 3011* as affected by various fertilizer The mean yield of tops and roots of alfalfa and minor element treatments grown in greenhouse pots on an Emmet sandy Table 28. Secondggtand Tops Cuttings 2 let 2 2nd 2 3rd 2 First Stand 2 2Roots2 Tgps Cuttings 2Roots Treatment** 2 lst 2 2nd 2 3rd 2 4th 2 2grams grams 2grams2 grams 2039 e e e e 34.33 333.0 RwOwBl 1119" 14.38 s e e e 1111 84.08 e e e e 2333 9513 eee 2333 1537 see 1111.. 0537 e 1111 8871 13900 5656 NO'treatment B B+Mh+0u¥Zn BtMn one 2334. 3899 0... 4.54.4. seeseeee 7145 s 1222 5916 e e e e 1122 9879 e 2334. so see... 6282 e e e e 3334. 3333 0559 e e e e 1111 1.4.4.aw 1.1.11.1 4.4.9.»- .3.4.4.4 731...... 6777 Cal-Mgi-B +lén+Cu+Zn Ca+Mg CatMg+B Ca+Mg+B¥Mn oa+Mg+K 0.11-11ng +3 Cal-Mg +K+8 21m oa+Mg+K+B+1m+Cu+Zn *Data for series 28 given in Table l. *tKind and rate of treatments listed in Table 7. 73. .QQdoa vacaoae uoafla nooapon.0ouaswou eoqouommwu 0H onadb hosed «nudes honwafipaom noonon vouwewou oodouommwu a“ nude» hommbu§e .pafiom ad on andoamfinwwmse .pqfiom mm 0» aqaoflmflawfim. 0.0 u n ”.0 « w.0 . 0.0 . . seepnflom,fim n.0 . a «.0 n 0.0 u 0.0 a a pa pqeowmwnwwu . n , . . . . on.op_eoaouommfia ¢H.0 ~m.m . . NH.0 ¢N.N . NH.0 mm.m . NH.0 mH.m . we . HH 2 K m K Mm no.0 n¢.0 « » no.0 n¢.0 . 0H.0 00.0 .. #m.0 NH.~ . m . Hm_: H Mm . «0.0 n>.n « . «m.0 0¢.H . 0H.0 nm.0 . ¢¢.0 mm.m . o . am 2 N m ..H..~ 0H.m . eopooaaoo .. .«¢.0 H0.H ...00.H 0m.» ...mm.m 00... . 0 . .Hm 20 apnoSon hogan 00.0 sn.0 . epeu . $0.0 nm.0 . HH.0 00.0 . >H.0 ~0.H . o a m M 3m .sn>.00n m¢.am> . oz .utom.mhnoo.>mn .ium¢.Hm mm.mwa.*sam.0m ~¢.¢m . m . Amv auouaawpuom 00.0 . . 00.0 . ¢~.0 . mm.0 . n u Ava axooam Hmmmmp . . 0>.~mm . Hm.HmH. m¢.¢0 . 0* . Hopes 0243 w 020 um m .. . n.0 . «.0 u «.0 « ¢.0 . ¢.0 . « eeeanfiomwxm «.0 . «.0 . m.0 . «.0 . 0.0 . . p. pneofimanwfiu . . a g a . on on sonouomqu 00.0 on.H . H0.0 ma.0 « 00.0 «0.0 « mm.0 na.m « mm.0 mm.» a ma . am 2 New K Mm ma.0 pm.a . 00.0 00.0 . 00.0 00.0 . HH.0 00.H . mm.0 mm.m . m " HM a K Mm 00.0 mm.m . mH.0 mo.a . 00.0 mn.0 . 00.0 00.H . mn.H 00.0 . o . am a H m ssmm.0 mw.m . s§m0.a mm.» «summ.0 m>.m .sswm.m 00.0 «se0¢.a mn.¢ . m . Adm Ev apnoaoam you“: 00.0 ¢n.0 . Hm.0 ¢N.H . m0.0 mm.0 . «0.0 «m.0 . mH.0 0H.H . 0 . m K Mm .§¢¢.mm ww.~>a . simm.m n¢.wa .eemw.ma m>.Hn .s§>>.wn em.mm «§*0¢.aw ow.m¢ u w . Amy uuouwawpuok 00.0 . 00.0 . 00.0 . m..0 . 00.0 . 0 . .300 uuooam m0.me . em.¢~ . ”0.0” . 5H.0w . ¢¢.nm . >¢ . advoe . a a a u . ma . mm a ma u mm . ma . mm . m2 . mm .. ma n mm a a 2 . wdwpvso . w¢HP950 . Ammmpvso . mmepso . . avoom . nausea . chana . fluooem . vauwm . m0 . oousom . amoa . . 0z.900000. 00. .0025 000.0 #005900.» .000H.p.0m on 0.0.0. M0000**0* .pq05900.p 00080.0 .0008 .o .00...».0m oz... .0 0.309 n. 00.0.. 09005.00.v mo 0.0. 0..0 00.0.0 .H 0Hp0e a. nobfiw mm 000.00 .0. 0.00. 75. « u a u . 0 . 0.. ..0 0.00 . 0... . 0.0. 0.0. 0.. 0.0. . 0040\00..0+0..0 0 0 . ..0- 0.0 0.00 . 0.0- . ..0 0.0- 0.0- 0.0.- . 0\00.00+00+0 0 0 . ..p- 0.0- 0.0 u 0.0.- . 0.0.- 0.0.- 0.0.- 0.0.- . 0\00+0 0 0 . 0.. 0.0 0.0. . ..0 . 0.00 0... 0.. 0.0.- . .......00\0040040040 0 b . 0.0- 0.0- 0.0- . 0.0- . 0.. 0.0 0..- 0.0.- . .......00\00.0 0.0 . 0.0 0.0 0.0- . 0... u 0.00 ..0. ..0. 0.0 . --. .......0p\0 . . . . 0.....0..0 0.0.4.0 u u n a 0.. . 0.. 0.00 0.00 . 0.0 . 0..0 0.00 0... ..0- . 0040\00400+00+0 ..0.- . 0.0. ..00 0.00 . 0..0 . 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0- . 0\q0400400.0 0.0.- . 0... 0.0. 0..- . 0.0. . 0..- 0.0- ..0- 0.0- . m\0240 0.0. . ..0. 0.0. 0.00 . 0.0. . ..00 0.0. 0... ..0 . .......00\00+00+0.+0 0... n 0... 0... 0.00 . 0.0 . 0... 0.00 0..0 0.0 . .......0p\00+0 ..00 . 0.00 0.00 0.00 . 0... . 0.0. ..00 0.00 0.0 . .......00\0 0 0 n . .00.H.p.0m 03000 a 0 u a 0.0 . 0.0. 0.0. 0.00 . 0.0 . ..00 ..00 .... 0.. . 0240\00400402.0 0.0.- . 0.0. ..00 0... . ..0- . 0.0. 0.0. 0.0 0.0. . m\00+00+00.0 0...- . 0.0- 0.0- 0... . ....1 . 0...- 0...- 0.0- 0.0- . quz+0 ..0 . 0..0 0..0 0..0 0 0.0. 0 0..0 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. . 0..0:08000.» oZ\dN+00+qmwm ..0 . 0.0. .... ..0 . 0.0 u 0.0. 0.00 0.00 0.0. . ...0u.20...p oz\q..0 N.mm 0 0.0H N.~N m.0m 0 p.0m 0 m.nn 0.00 0.0» 0.00 0 0*upqosu00.p 02\m p0.. . . 00.. . . ..0...»... oz .00 0 pace .00 0 .00 . pdoo .00 0 . 0.0 . 0:0 . 0.. . . 0p. . 0.0 . 000 . 0.. . 0.00m . awanpbo 0 upoom 0 uwawpvso . 0009:08v00.p mo n00..0mEoo 0 0&09 0 0 0009 0 0c09m 0nooom . 0:0»m.p0..m 0 3.8.00... .00 0...... 76. Table 31. The mean.yie1d of tops and roots of alfalfa grown in greenhouse pots on a Kalkaska sand soil* as affeeted'by various fertilizer and minor element treatments 3 First Stand 3 Second Stand 3 Tops 3 3 Tops 3 Treatmenttt 3 Cuttings 3Roots3 Cuttings 3Roots 3 lot 3 2nd 3 3rd 3 4th 3 3 lst 3 2nd 3 3 grams 3grams3 grams 3grams 3 3 3 3 No treatment 3 1.9 2.7 1.5 1.2 3 3.6 3 1.9 1.2 3 1.9 B 3 2.2 3.6 2.0 1.5 3 5.1 3 2.2 1.4 3 2.4 Bi-Mni-Cu 3 2.3 3.6 1.8 1.3 3 5.0 3 2.1 1.4 3 2.0 B+Mn+Cu+Co 3 2.3 3.9 2.0 1.6 3 5.4 3 2.5 1.8 3 2.7 3 3 3 3 3 - 3 3 3 CaJ-Mg 3 2.0 3.1 107 1.1 3 400 3 200 1.4 3 2.2 0.545833 3 205 308 202 1.3 3 503 3 2.7 107 3 205 Ca+Mg+B+Mn40u 3 3.0 3.9 2.2 1.7 3 5.1 3 2.8 2.2 3 2.6 Ca+Mg+B+Mn+Cu¥Bo 3 4.6 5.3 3.1 1.8 3 6.0 3 3.3 2.6 3 3.1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Ca+Mg+K‘ 3 3.5 4.2 2.9 1.9 3 8.7 3 2.8 3.5 3 3.8 Ca'l’Mgi'Kw 3 401 5.6 4.0 204 310.7 3 3.4 404 3 4.2 Ca+Mg§K+B£Mn+Cu 3 3.4 4.5 3.1 2.1 310.6 3 3.0 5.3 3 4.7 03+ME+K*B+MJI+CQ+CO 3 305 408 308 202 311.1 3 307 5.1 3 6.7 3 3 3 *Data for series 29 given in Table 1. *tKind and rate of treatments listed in Table 7. n O a t c u I I e . o 3 0 v a 3 0 v O o o a O C D u C t p o I o v n n 0 I . U . I a I ‘ C I O O t n u v o 3 o o - O o o o l n o O o o O o n u o 77. .00008 90080.0 .0q.e.=003¥0n 00..000. 0000.0mm.0 «nudea .00...v.om 000390. 00..500. 0000.0...0 .pn.om 0. 0:.0b .030. 0. 05.0» .0000333 0» 00.0.0.00.m.3 9. .00.00 m0 op p:.o...00.m. 0.0 . u . 0.0 u 0.0 . n 333.0.0000 #0 0.0 a a . 0.0 u 0.0 u . pc0o.m.qw.0 on u n . . a . op 0000.0...0 00.0 00.0 a . . 0..0 00.0 a 00.0 .0.0. . 0. u .m s K 0 K .0 00.0 00.0 n u . 00.0 00.0 . ...o 00.. . 0 . .m 3.x .0 3300.. 00.0 . a « 00.0 00.0 . 00.. 0..0 a 0 a .m a .00 00.0 ...0. a 00.00..00 . 00000..00 .3000.» 00.0 .3300.0. 00.00 . 0 ...m EV upaoso.me.0q.s 00.0 0..0 « 0900 a 0900 . 00.0 00.0 . 00.0 0..0 . 0 . m K .0 0000..» .0.00 . u 02 .0300.00 00.00 .330..00 00.00 . 0 a .00 0.0»...p.00 0..0 . . . 00.0 . 0... . 0 . .000 0.00.0 .0.00 a . . 00.00.” 0..00.. 0NI. .000. 02090 020000 . 0.0 . 0.0 . 0.0 . 0.0 . 0.0 . . 3.300.00100 a. 0.0 . ..o . 0.0 . 0.0 u 0.0 . . 00.0...nm.. on . . u . . u 0» 0000.0...0 00.0 00.0 . 00.0 .0.0 « 0..0 00.. . 0..0 00.0 . 00.0 00.0 . 0. ~ .m a H 0 K .0 00.0 00.0 . 00.0 00.0 a 0..0 0... . 00.0 00.. 0 00.0 00.0 . 0 . .m a N am 0..0 00.0 . 0..0 00.0 . 00.0 00.. . o... 00.0 0 00.. 00.0. n 0 u .m a ..0 3300.0 00.00 . 00.0 00.. ”3300.0 0..0 .3000.0 00... ”3300.. .0.0 . 0 ...m EV updoEo.m .0n.fi 0..0 00.0 . 00.0 0..0 » 00.0 00.0 a 00.0 00.0 . 00.0 00.0 . 0 . m K..m 3300.00. 00.000 . *00.0 00.0 ”3300... 00.00 .330..0 00.0. ”3300.0 00.0. . 0 . .00 0.00...p.00 00.0 . 00.0 00.0 a 00.0 00.0 . 00.0 00.0 . 00.0 0..0 . 0 . Aumv 0.00.0 00.000 . 00.0 a 00.00 . 00.00 . 00.00 . 00 . .0000 u- . u a a . 00 00 . 00 00 n 0. . mm . mall,” 00 . 02 n 00 . . 7 . wn.pp50 . 00.9950 . Iww.9950 . 70¢.p950 . . 0900M . 0..000 . 0..0. . 000000 . p0..0 . 00 . 00.000 3 . umwa . a 02400 000.0 7 +¢0 3‘; .0 0.000 q. 00»... ed 00 00..00 .00 0.00. 000 000» «0.00.0,00 0.0.0 as» .0 0000..0> 00 0.00.000 on. .00 0.00. 78. i « u a u 0.0.: . 0.00. 0.00 . 0.00. . 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 . 00084§+Q00480§+0§+0§8 0.00. . 0.000 0.00 . 0.03 n 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 . 00+§+0\:0+§40§+0§00 0.00 . 0.000 0.00 . 0.000 . 0.00 0.00. 0.00 0.00 . {03200000 0.00 .. 0.02 0.3 u 0.03 . 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 . 150258..» 33:00.00 0 a 0 u 0 a u a 0.0: . 0.00 0.2 . 0.00 . 0.00 0.00 0.0..... 0.00.. . 000840040405000\00300§+0§+0§8 0.00 a 0.02 0.0. . 0.000 . 0.00 0.00 0.0. 0.2 . 0000000400400\84§00§40§00 0.00 . 0.00. 0.00 . «..0. . 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 n m000+00\0§+00+00 0.00 . 0.02 0.00 . 0.0: . 0.00 ..00 0.00 0.00 . 00300000000 0 0 n 0 a 0 a u 0.00 . 0.00 0.00 . 0.0. . 0.0. 0.00 0.00 0.000 . 0008400,.{00480000040230 0.00 . 0.00 0.00 . 0.0 . 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.2 . 80§0Q8+§+m+0§00 0.0 . 0.: 0.00 . 0.0 . 0.2.. 0.00 0.0 0.0. . {0400000 0.: . 0.00 0.0 . 0.: . 0.0.. 0.2 ..0. 0.0 . £500,502» oz\00+¢0 0 0 u n 9000 000“ 9000 000 09000 000. 9000 000 . 0 000 a 90. 0 u 090 0 000 0 000 . 9n. . u9oom . 000.9950 . u9oom . 000.9950 0 . 0000 0 . 0mmw » 000000090009 90 000.000000 008.0 008.0 . 083.0 3.50 . 0900090009 90000.0 000.0 000 hon...9uou 000.00? mo 000.000500 0005 n..o0 0000 0500. 00000.00 0 00 0900 0050000000 0. 03000 09000 000 0009 00.0m.0 mo 0.0.0 009 0. 0000000. 9000 00m .00 0.000 79. .wnwoaon nouwafi#nom obapoomuou on» nouns onoad pucspdouv houaawpuoa on anomou xoo£0§*§§ .pcoEpdouv uuosoao nonwe.uo hoaaawpnom oz§§i .b candy n“ wovuaa apnoevdouv mo away and uu«M** .H candy :« nobww mm noeuon pom dvdnfi « a a a n.~« ” n.¢u «.HN . m.¢ « a.« «.mm o.w ¢.H . =o+nz+m\oo+so+na+m o.oo a ¢.>H o.m . o.n , ¢.m- m.m- m.mH- m.m- a m\oo+so+ns+m ».»H . ¢.Nm ».oH- . ¢.H- u m.nH- ~.>~- ¢.o~- p.mu « m\:o+qz;m m,¢b . p.m« m.»n ” ».mm . o.ma w.on «.¢H o.H ” **.§xoogp\oo+so+uawm m.»m . H.~m o.oH . m.o~ . m.o~ o.» m.> m.ou . ..gxoosp\so+ga+m m.» . n.¢~ m.m~ « o.mm. a o.m~ m.m» m.on o.o~ a ....xo.zp\m a . a . . ponaafipummyu+ma4uo « a u « ~.o~ . m.mH o.mH . “.mfl . o.m ¢.o¢ o.mn o.¢m . ao*na+m\oo+so+nz4m o.m~ . o.mm ~.Hm . N.HH . «.H¢ «po¢ o.H« o.po . m\oo+so+az4m o.¢ . m.¢n 0.« . m.»- . «.mm 0.0 >.o m.am . m\no+qa+m m.n¢ » §.0m p.ao . m.m« ~ 0.0m m.mm m.ah m.mmau u .*..uoogp\oo+so+nx+m m.mH ” m.¢o o.o» . H.w~ ~ b.m« m.om o.mm m.o¢ « §**¢uoogp\so+na‘m m.¢H . «.NN ».»» . m.»n « m.ma m.om 0.«” o.H~ . ...*xoogp\m . u « a . nouwawyuom‘wz+do a n a a m.nn . m.m~ o.mH . H.m . ~.m~ m.~H o.» o.»- . so+na4m\oo+so+nz+m o.m~ . m.m~ «.«H . «.m . «.mfi 0.« o.m o.H , m\oo*ao*nswm w.mH- . o.o m.m- " ¢.n- . ».oH- m.>- m.o m.¢ , m\ao+gs+m ~.pn « 0.0m 0.«» , H.Hm . n.a¢ o.m» m.~n o.o~ . **‘anospaoup oz\oo4so+us+m m.~ ” >.mH m.oa ” m.mn . a.»a o.o~ o.mn 0.«” . ..«pnospaou» oz\so+qs+m m.H~ . p.md n.5H n «.n¢ ” H.»« 0.0» o.mn o.ma . *..pnuapaoup oz\m n n u a houfifidfihoh Oz uuoo you. »fioo hem «pace hum. pnoo you a a cum u and u . ave . can . cum . qu, » 3.00m a awnwvvso a Show a awnwppno ” u umwa . . Ammwa . *§uvnospdoup mo nouwudmaoo aqua» uaooom . gnaw» ».ufim ” Auoanaguoov .n» canny 80. Table 34. The mean yield of tops and roots of alfalfa grown in greenhouse pots on a Kalkaska loamy sandt as affected.by various fertilizer and minor element treatments : Tops : Treatmenttt x Cuttings : Roots : lst 8 2nd 3 3rd 3 4th 8 3 grams a No treatment 3 7.4 3.7 2.5 3.9 x 5.5 Ca¥Mg : 8.2 4.0 2.8 3.7 2 5.8 CangéB : 8.0 3.8 3.0 4.0 s 7.2 Catlg¥8+co+0u : 8.4 4.0 5.2 4.2 x 6.2 Ca+Mg¥B+Co+Cu+Zn : 8.4 4.2 3.8 4.7 a 6.8 a 3 a : Ca+Mg+K : 9.3 7.2 6.1 8.0 x 10.1 Ca+Mg+K+B : 9.3 7.0 6.4 .8.5 3 10.8 Cs+Mg+K¥B+Co+Cu : 9.7 7.1 7.1 8.9 s 12.1 Ca+Mg+K+B+Co+Cu+Zn s 9.2 6.8 7.0 9.3 x 12.3 n : *Data for series 30 given in Table 1. tiKind and rate of treatments listed in Table 7. Analysis of variance of the yield of tops 3 a First : Second a Third 3 Fourth Source : DF 3 cutting. a cutting a cutting a cutting z a SS 3 SS 3 SS 3 SS 3 z z a 8 Total 2 31 a 17.67 a 76.77 3 104.37 a 178.00 Blocks (Bk) 3 ‘3 a 0.06 z 0.20 x 0.59 x 0.18 Fertilizers (F) s 1 : 14.58¢* : 73.21** a 96.26** a 167.45** Bk 1 F 3 3 3 0.62 3 0013 3 0083 I 0056 Minor elements a 3 a 0.68 x 0.96‘1 a 4.43.. x 4.21 (M E1) 3 a 8 3 3 F21 M E1) 3 3 z 0.53 z 0.98 z 0.52 a 0.27 Bk 1 M £1 a 9 s 0.41 : 0.19 a 1.28 z 2.68 Bk 1 F x M 31 x 9 s 0.79 z 0.10 a 0.46 z 2.65 s a s x : tiSignificant to 1% point. 81. Table 55. Per cent increase in the yield of alfalfa tops and roots grown in greenhouse pots on a Kalkaska loamy sand soil* on comparison of various fertil- izer and minor element treatments 3 Tops 3 Comparison of treatments** 3 Cuttings 3 Boots 3 lst 3 2nd 3 3rd 3 4th 3 3 per cent 3per cent 8 8 04+Mg/No treatmenttt¥ : 10.8 8.1 12.0 -5.1: 5.5 c:+mg+x/ho treatmenteee : 25.7 94.6 144.0 105.1: 83.6 Ca¥Mg+K/ba-Mg : 13.4 80.0 117.8 116.2: 74.1 04+Mg+K+B/ba+Mg+B : 16.3 84.2 133.3 112.5: 50.0 Ca£Mg+K+B+Co+Cu/ba+Mg+B+Co+Cu ,: 15.5 77.5 121.9 111.9: 95.2 ca£Mg+K+B+0o+0u+2n/ba4mg+s+0630u+Zn : 9.5 61.9 84.2 97.9: 80.9 8 8 8 8 Catmngertilizer 3 3 B/bheck**** : -2.5 -5.0 7.1 8.13 24.1 B+Co+Cu/bheck*¢** : 2.4 0.0 14.3 13.5: 6.9 B+Co+Cu+Zn/bhecktt** : 2.4 5.0 “35.7 27.0: 17.2 -B+Co+cu/8 : 5.0 5.3 6.7 5.0: -13.9 B+0o+0u+Zn/b : 5.0 10.5 26.7 17.5: -5.6 B30040u+2n/8+0640u : 0.0 5.0 18.7 11.9: 9.7 8 8 8 8 Ca+Mg}K Fertilizer 3 3 B/bhecktttt : 0.0 -2.8 4.9 6.3: 6.9 B+Co+Cu/bheck**** : 4.3 -1.0 16.4 11.3: 19.8 B405+0u+Zn/bhookt*** : -1.1 -5.6 14.8 16.3: 21.8 B40040u/b : 4.3 1.4 10.9 4.7: 12.0 B40630u32n/8 : -1.1 -2.9 9.4 9.4: 13.9 B+Co+cu+zn/8+Co+05 : -5.2 -4.2 -1.4 4.5: 1.7 8 tData for series 30 given in Table 1. ttKind and rate of treatments listed in Table 7. *ttNe fertilizer or minor element treatment. ****Check refers to fertilizer treatment alone under the respective fertilizer heading. 82. mancelona sandy loame--series 31---Very poor alfalfa was produced on this soil in the field. For that reason one would expect a response to treatment and such was the case. Calcium and magnesium applied tOgether, caused significant increases in the yields of all cuttings except the third in the second stand. The increases in root growth were both significant. An addition of potassium to the mixture caused further increases in yield, significant in all cases except in the first cutting of the first stand. The total production of tops and roots for the six cuttings amounted to 14.7 and 6.3 grams respectively on untreated pots, 18.2 and 8.0 grams respectively on pots which received only calcium.and magnesium, and 25.3 and 16.0 grams respectively on pots which received potassium in addition to calcium and magnesium. As indicated by the table, the increase in yield caused by the potassiumnwas greater in the second than in the first stand. Especially was this true of the root growth. Boron seemed to be deficient on this Mancelona soil. Where the element was applied alone it caused significant increases in all yields, both tops and roots. Where calcium and magnesium.was applied, the same result was obtained in the first stand but not in the second. Where calcium, nagnesium, and potassium were applied as a basic treatment, the boron increased six yields significantly and caused decreases in two others. In most of the 24 cases recorded in Table 36, manganese and copper caused reductions in yield. Unaway sandy loam---series 32---A1fa1fa on this soil, which produced a good crop in the field, did not respond to magnesium, as shown in Tables 39 and 40, but did give small increases as a result of applications of potassium. 83. Table 36. The mean yield of tops and roots of alfalfa grown in greenhouse pots on a Mancelona sandy gravelly loam soil* as affected by various fertilizer and minor element treatments 3 First Stand 3 Second Stand 3 Tops 3 3 Tops 3 Treatmenttt 3 Cuttings 3 Roots: Cuttings 3 Roots 3 let 3 2nd 3 3rd 3 3 lst 3 2nd 3 3rd 3 3 grams 3grams 3 grams 3 grams 3 3 3 3 No treatment 3 5.0 2.2 1.5 3 3.7 3 2.9 2.0 1.1 3 2.6 B 3 5.5 2.8 1.8 3 4.3 3 3.3 2.4 1.3 3 3.2 B+Mn+Cu 3 4.7 2.7 1.7 3 3.5 3 2.7 2.1 1.1 3 2.7 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Ca+Mg 3 6.2 2.6 1.9 3 4.5 3 3.7 2.5 1.3 3 3.5 Ca+Mg48 3 7.0 3.4 2.3 3 6.4 3 3.7 2.4 1.4 3 3.2 Ca-l-Mgi-B‘Man 3 6.6 3.4 2.5 3 4.3 3 3.2 2.2 1.4 3 3.3 3 3 3 3 ' 3 3 3 3 Ca+Mg¥K 3 6.4 3.7 2.4 3 6.3 3 4.2 4.4 4.2 3 9.7 Ca4Mg¥K4B 3 6.7 3.3 2.2 3 7.3 3 4.9 5.0 5.0 3 11.0 Ca+Mg¥K+B+Mn4Cu 3 6.8 3.8 2.7 3 6.7 3 4.2 4.4 4.3 3 8.9 3 3 3 3 *Data for series 31 given in Table 1. *tKind and rate of treatments listed in Table 7. 84. .mnmeE Pnoane nonws Goospop nongoveu oooohommflv «enema aoufiaflpaem neospon voaaswoa oesvoMch .paaoa an «H eoaap nogog ma moan» ~0000443 0» pneoaaaewam.. .peaoa em on pasoaaaawam. 0.0 a «.0 n 0.0 u 0.0 a « 3*4pawom mm vs m.0 ” 0.0 u 0.0 « H.0 » . endowanwwm on u u a . « op oceanogmwn HH.0 ww.a « m0.0 00.0 n NH.0 0«.H « 00.0 00.0 n NH « Hm“: N Mm H 0 No.0 na.0 u NH.0 ¢>.0 n mH.0 am.0 « >0.0 ~¢.0 . 0 . Hm E N Mm an.a b¢.m « mm.0 H0.H « ma.0 mm.o « HH.0 ¢¢.0 « w u Hm“: K m «0.m 00.8 n 00.0 00.0 a 3mm.0 80.H « 50.H ¢H.~ a m « Adm EV upooaeam noses 00.0 NN.0 . 0H.0 00.0 a 0H.0 00.0 « H0.0 00.0 n 0 n m N am 3400.00H mn.aem « *3H0.m¢ mm.mm . sewn.mm mm.¢¢ «3*H0.0 no.ma « m « Amv maeufiawpaem Hm.o . mo.o . ma.o . ea.o . m . flamv maooflm a>.mwn.e 00.00 . 55.00 a $0.0H « mm . Hopes madam 0200mm u m.o . 0.0 a 0.0 a ”.0 .. . eeupawommmw as 0.0 u «.0 u H.0 a n.0 a . vasowanwwn on n a a a n on oooeaemmwn 00.0 $0.» a 00.0 He.0 « 00.0 mm.0 . 00.0 mH.H . «H « Hm a N am K m no.0 0H.0 . 00.0 mm.0 n 00.0 mn.0 . NH.0 «v.0 . 0 a Hm 2 K gm 00.0 00.N « ma.0 05.0 n 00.0 mm.a a mn.0 0m.a « 0 u Hmuz H.m 430a.0 an.ma » 4300.0 00.0 « ssm>.0 0¢.H ”3350.0 ¢>.a m m . Aam EV apnoEeHm aoofiz no.0 a¢.0 « no.0 ea.0 . H0.0 00.0 a 00.0 «0.0 a 0 n m H Mm sem>.mm 00.00 . eemm.a 00.0 a seam.» mo.> «seam.m H0.0H a m « Amy uaoawHflpaem 00.0 « 0H.0 . 0m.0 a 00.0 . n « Axmv «Meoam n>.¢0 . Hm.0 . >0.HH . 00.0m u mm ” aspoa IMMW . mm u m: » mm a m2 3 mm . mg a 7mm . . opoom n wmvaso u AwnfivemMH, u wnwvvso « a a chase . cnoeem u veuam . ma . condom . emoa a . nzdam ammHm . .00 capes ow cepeaa as an mowaou pom mvooa was «ac» eMHeMHe mo mama» on» me somewasb no «wezasnd one .an canes 85. u n n u m.ma: . 0.4”- m.ma: n.eau . «.mau . “.3“ «.5H m.” . m\so+na+m e.m: . «.« o.o m.o: . 0.«: . o.oa a.» w.m . 44.4aoogp\aoeqssm e.~H . o.ma «.3H H.8H . m.mH . ».oH: o.m: H.e . .4..aoonp\m « n u a . . . . nouaaapsom u+ma+¢o n a u a u a a u H.» . o.o ».ofl: m.mH: . m.~»: . o.oH m.H m.¢- . m\so+nzwm 8.»- . e.a o.nH: «.«H: . m.»: n 0.0» 0.«» o.» . 4.4.aooap\so+ea+m «.4- . a.a 0.»: m.o . 0.93 . m.mH 0.0» «.ma . ...aooap\m « n a u a u a . heuwaavuemAMW+d0 « a a a . u n u u o.mH: . ».»H: o.~a: o.mH: .. H.3H: . 0.5: «.m: m.ma: . , m\so+na+m Q.” . o.o a.m a.e: . 5.»: . ”.0 m.H~ m.e- . .44668apsous oz\so+es+m o.am . «.ma ”.0" n.5a . «.8H . n.8H m.m~ o.HH . ..3pnospaosp oz\m n u a a . u u a . nonaaavaom oz unee hem” pace Mom u ease hem” pace you . u on» . can a end a a can a van « pea . epoom n uwdfippbo « upoom . ewqupbc . eeeaqoaaeeap mo ocuaaemaoo . omoa u . amen . agape 6666mm:w . ease» wanna . npuofipeeap aaoaeae aonas was aeuaafivaem anoaaeb mo nouaaemsoo no eHHon_Edon haaepdaw hens» dfiOHeoneE e no open ennognoeaw n“ nioam epoch use «mop enadmas no vaofih esp an essence“ pace Mom .0» canoe 86. .wgwcmen neufiawpaom obwpoommea exp nouns onoae pneeneoap nonaavaom ov naemoa Moegoeeee .voospeeap enefioae ponds no aeaaHHpaoM 0234* .5 capes ow copuHH epoesveeav we even use uofixee .H capes ow ne>Hw an uoHaee new 0900* u a u a 0.0mm . 0.0mm 0.0HH 0.00 . 0.05 . 0.00 0.03 0.00 . 00+aa+m\so+nn+m+a+wz+eo 5.000 . 0.00m m.HHH 0.00 . 0.05 n 0.00 0.0H «.00 . m\m+a+wa+¢0 0.H5~ . 0.Hmm 0.00H 0.30 . 0.H5 . 0.mm 0.05 0.wm . 3.406.608040 oz\w+wz+so « u u a a n u « 5.00H . H.500 ”.moH 0.0m . 0.ne . 0.0 5.0H 0.0 . sosez+m.wg+ep\soenawmwmwma+so 0.500 . H.500 «.50H 0.0m . ».»H 3 0.5: 0.0 «.0: . m+wz+8p\m+a+wz+80 0.«0H . H.300 0.05 0.0H . 0.08 . 0.50 0.50 0.» . wa+sp\m+wa+.0 n n a a u u u a 0.00 . n.5m 0.0 0.5H . 0.00 . 0.00 H.0m 0.00 . 00+qa+m\00+6n+m+02+80 0.0 . 5.5 H.« 0.0H . 0.00 . 0.0m 0.0H 0.0m . m\mswa480 0.H0 . «.0H 0.00 0.00 . 0.mm . 0.0m 0.0H 0.0m . 4450580854» oz\ma+80 u a a . a flea .30. £500 .30 a pose pom” 9:00 .30 a a can a 02m . qu . n can a 0mm a Pan . upoom « awnwepso . upoom . awnfippso u. *supnesveehp.mo managemsoo « nmom. . . umoa « eeapm 060000 . 06890 wanna . Aeoanpnoov .0» .H085 87. Plate 4. Second stand, second cutting of alfalfa grown on a Kalkaska sand, series 29. Treatments 1. Check, 2. Ca, 3. Ca4K. Plate 5. Second stand, second cutting of alfalfa grown on a Nhncelona sandy loam, series 31. Treatments 1. Check, 2. Ca, 3. Ca+K. 88. Table 39. The mean yield of tops and roots of alfalfa grown in greenhouse pots on an Onaway sandy loam 5011* as affected by various fertilizer and minor element treatments 3 Tops 3 Treatment** 3 Cuttings 3 Roots 3 lst 3 2nd 3 3rd 3 3 grams 3 grams 3 3 No treatment 3 4.1 5.3 5.9 3 10.5 Mg 3 4.2 5.2 5.9 3 10.5 mg+B 3 4.6 6.2 6.6 3 9.9 Mg+B+Mn 3 4.9 5.9 6.9 3 10.8 Ng+B4Mn4Cu4Co 3 4.7 5.8 6.5 3 12.0 3 3 3 3 mg3K 3 5.6 5.9 7.2 3 11.4 mgflKtB 3 5.7 6.4 7.9 3 12.2 mgfix+s+mn 3 6.6 7.7 8.4 3 16.8 Mg+K+B+Mn+Cu+Co 3 6.3 6.8 8.2 3 11.7 3 3 *Data for series 32 given in Table 1. **Kind and rate of treatments listed in Table 7. 89. Table 40. Per cent increase in the yield of alfalfa tops and roots grown in greenhouse pots on an Onaway sandy loam soil! on comparison of various fertilizer and minor element treatments 3 Tops 3 Comparison of treatments‘* 3 Cuttings 3 Boots 3 lst 3 2nd 3 3rd 3 3 per cent 3per cent 8 A 8 mg/ho treatment 3 2.4 -1.9 0.0 3 0.0 Mg3K/No treatment : 36.6 11.3 22.0 : 8.6 mg3K/hg : 33.3 13.5 22.0 : 8.6 mg+K+B/Mg+8 : 23.9 3.2 19.7 : 23.2 mg3x+8+mn/ug383Mn : 34.7 30.5 21.7 : 55.6 Mg+K+B+1m+ca3Co/hg383m:30uwo : 34.0 17.2 26.2 : -2.5 8 8 8 8 Mngertilizer 3 3 B/Check**** : 9.5 19.2 11.9 : -5.3 8+mn/thooktttt : 16.7 13.5 16.9 : 2.9 B+Mn+Cu+Co/bheck**** : 11.9 11.5 11.0 : 14.3 84Mn/8 : 6.5 -4.8 4.5 : 9.1 8+Mn+Cu+CQ/8 : 2.2 -8.5 -1.5 : 21.2 8+un3ou3Co/8+mn : -4.1 -1.7 -5.8 : 11.1 8 8 8 8 Mg+K Fertilizer 3 3 B/Check**** : 1.8 8.5 9.7 : 7.0 B4Mn/Check**** : 17.9 30.5 16.7 : 47.4 8+mn3Cu306/thooktttt : 12.5 15.3 13.9 : 2.6 8+Mn/8 . : 15.8 20.3 6.3 : 37.7 83Mn306300/8 : 10.5 6.3 3.8 : -1.4 83mn3cu306/83Mn : -4.5 -11.7 -2.4 : -30.4 8 8 *Data for series 32 given in Table 1. *fiKind and rate of treatments listed in Table 7. tttNo fertilizer or minor element treatment. *t***Check refers to fertilizer treatment alone under the respective fertilizer heading. 90. Boron caused an increase in yield in seven out of eight cases, with the decrease occurring in one of the root yields. Manganese also caused increases in yields in all cases except that of the second cutting where potash.was not applied. Copper and cobalt, applied together caused reductions in seven out of eight yields. Onaway sandy loams--series 33---This Onaway sandy loam supported a good crop of alfalfa in the field. In the greenhouse jars, calcium and magnesium did not significantly increaseyields, as shown by Table 41. Potassium.in addition to calcium and magnesium, however, caused increases in yield which ranged from 20 per cent (Table 43) in the first cutting of the second stand to 204.9 per cent in the root growth of the first stand. Boron caused significant increases in yields in all cases. manganese caused significant increases in yields in six of nine cases. There was one decrease and two insignificant increases. Probably the element was actually beneficial. Copper and zinc actually reduced yields where potassium was applied but increased them where it was omitted from the mixture. 91. Table 41. The mean yield of tops and roots of alfalfa grown in greenhouse pots on an Onaway sandy loam soil* as affected'by various fertilizer and minor element treatments First_8tand 1, __3_ Second Stafld 3 3 Tops 3 3 Tops __3 Treatmenttt 3 Cuttings 3Root83 Cuttings 3Roots 3 1st 3 2nd 3 3rd 3 4th 34_, 3 lst 3 2nd 3 3rd 3 3 grams 3grams: grams 3grams 3 3 3 3 No treatment 3 8.3 3.4 1.9 1.43 3.03 3.5 4.4 5.43 4.4 CaH‘Jg 3 904 306 200 . 1053' 3016 305 406 5078 406 Ca+Mg¥B 3 10.7 4.4 2.6 2.03 3.83 4.5 5.5 6.33 5.3 Ca¥Mg+B+Mn 3 9.8 5.7 3.6 2.5: 5.23 4.6 5.6 6.03 6.2 Ca4Mg¥B4Mh¥Cu$Zn 3 11.3 6.5 4.0 2.83 5.53 5.5 7.3 7.13 9.0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Ca+Mg+K 3 12.3 8.9 5.4 2.93 9.43 4.2 6.0 8.03 7.1 Ca+Mg+K+B 3 13.2 10.0 6.6 3.53 10.53 4.7 6.8 9.03 8.3 CaH-lgHfl-B'l-Mn 3 1503 1004 807 5033 16063 703 906 10033 1009 Ca+Mg+K¥B¥Mn+Cu+Zn 3 14.4 9.7 6.5 4.83 12.13 6.1 8.6 8.63 16.3 3 3 3 3 w “ ‘— _‘ Aw *Data for series 33 given in Table l. **Kind and rate of treatments given in Table 7. .mnees pneEeHo 20:05.0003909 00200002 cocoaemch 00 osadb henna .nneea houwaavacm noespop waywsvoa ecneaeHMHn 0H ooadp 00000330 .anom RH on andeHMHanmee 5. 0 2 . 0.0 2 0 0 2 0.0 2 ...0020m,00700 0. o 2 2 0.H 2 0.0 2 0.0 . 00002020020 00 u a u u a O». 00GOMOMHHMQ. 00.0 00.0 2 2 0H.0 HH.H 2 0H.0 00.H 2 00.0 00.0 2 0 2 H0 0 a 0 a 00 0H.0 H5.H 2 2 H0.0 H0.H 2 00.0 00.0 2 0H.0 0H.H 2 0 2 H0 0 2 20 00.0. 00.00 2 2 00.0 00.0 2 05.0 00.HH 2 00.0 00.5 . 0 2 H0 2 a 0 ..00.05 00.0H0 2 00000HH00. ...00.0 00.5 2..00.0H 00.50 2..00.0 0H.00 2 0 2HH0 av 000000Hm 20022 00.0 05.0 2 0000 2 50.H 0H.0 2 00.0 05.0 2 HH.0 00.0 2 0 22 0 a 00 ..00.00H 00.00H . 00 2..00.00 00.00 2.. H0.00 H0.00 ...00.0 00.0 2 H 2 A00 22022H20200 00.H 2 2 00.0 2 00.0 2 0H.0 2 0 2 A000 0000H0 00.000 2 2 00.00 2 05.50 2 50.00 2 H0 2 H0005 . 00000 020000 2 0w 0. 0 2 0.0 2 5.0 2 5.0 2 0.H 2 ...00000.00 00 0. 0 2 0.0 2 0.0 2 0.0 2 0.0 2 0000202002. 00 a a a u a On. ooflohoywwm 5H.0 00.H 2 00.0 00.0 2 00.0 00.0 2 0H.0 00.0 2 00.H 0H.0H 2 0 2 H0 2.x 0 a 20 00.0 00.H 2 0H.0 H0.H 2 00.0 0H.0 2 00.0 00.0 2 00.0 00.0 2 0 2 H0 0 a 00 00.HH 00.00 2 05.0 5H.0 2 00.0 0H.5 2 00.0 00.5 2 00.0 H5.0 2 0 2 H0 2 2.0 ..05.H0 00.00 2..00.0 «H.0H 2..00.0 00.00 2.. 00.0 05.5H ...00.0 05.0H . 0 .AHm 20 000060H0 20020 H0.0 00.H . 00.0 00.0 2 0H.0 00.0 2 00.0 0H.0 . 00.0 00.0 2 0 2 0 a 00 ..05.000 05.000 2..00.00 00.00 ...50.HHH 50.HHH 2..00. 05H 00.05H ...H0.00 H0.00 2 H 2 A00 02022H20200 HH.H 2 mn.0 2 00.0 2 00.0 2 00.0 2 m 2 Axmv exeon 00.000 2 H0.00 . 00.00H 2 05.HHO . H0.00H . H0 . H.005 a u 0 a a n 00 00 211102 00 . 2 00 2 0a 2 00 . 02 2 00 2 2 2 w00vpoo 2 iflwvavno 2 wnappco 2 wqfipvso 2 he 2 evoom 2 nvasom 2 unfina 2 unooem 2 #0200 2 2 eoaoom 2 ewes 2 2 00050 200H0 2 .H¢ candy :0 uevuua ad an 000200 new 09002 was 0009 «Mashas mo vaoflh esp mo eonsausp no udehflsns nae .N¢ manna 93. 2 n 2 2 0.00 . 0.0H 0.00 0.00 . 0.0 2 0.0 0.HH 0.0H 0.0H . 0220\0020020220 0.05 ..5.0H 0.00 0.00 . 5.00 . 0.00 0.00 H.00 0.0 2 0\00+0020220 0.5H 2 0.0- 0.H 0.0 2 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.0- 2 0\0220 H.00 2 0.00 H.00 0.00 2 0.05 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 ....00000\00200+0a+0 0.00 2 0.0 0.H0 0.00 . 0.50 . 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.0 . ....20.0p\0020 0.0H 2 0.0H 0.0H 0.00 2 0.00 2 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.0H 2 ....20000\0 2 2 . 2 2 2ouwafip2omxw2000 a a 2 2 u 2 2 a 0.05 2 0.00 0.5H 0.0H 2 0.0HH 2 0.00 H.00 0.00 0.50 . 0020020220202000\002002002020002200 0.05 2 5.H5 0.H5 5.00 2 0.000 2 0.50H 0.00H 5.00 0.00 2 0220200200\022000200200 0.00 . 0.00 5.00 0.0 2 H.05H 2 0.05 0.00H 0.00H 0.00 2 0202220\020000000 0.00 . 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.000 . 0.00 0.00H 0.00H 0.H0 2 022.0\020a200 0.H0 2 H.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.000 2 0.50H 0.00H 0.00H 0.00 2 ...000000020 0050200200 0.0 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 5.H . H.5 0.0 0.0 0.0H 2 ...00000.020 oz\02+.0 n u u 2 $200 2 2 2200 2 2 200 2 9200 2cm 2 200 2 #000 200 2 2 02m 2 com 2 90H 2 2 £20 2 v2» 2 020 2 pma 2 «poem 2 00209950 2 epoom 2 00205950 2 seepneSpeo2p.mo noufi200500 2 0&1 2 2 amen. 2 02020 020000 2 0c0pm #0200 2 092099002» #205000 20208 020 202000V2om 05002s> no 2000200800 20 laden asoa anode hsseno as no 0300 0050220020 20 nzo2w 09002 one 0009 0000900 00 0Hoflm on» 20 02002020 9200 20m .00 00009 94. .009000: 2009999200 0999000002 009 20005 00090 900890029 2009999200 09 020M02 900000000 .900890029 9000090 2009s 20 200999920m 02000 .5 02002 02 000022 0000000020 00 .002 000 0020 .. .9 09909 09 00990 mm 009200 200 090m» 2 2 2 0.00 2 9.02: 5.02: 2 0.50- 2 0.0: 0.00: 2 00+m\00+00+00+m 5.00 2 0.00 2.00 2 0.02 2 0.00 2.2- 2 m\00200+0020 0.90 2 0.90 0.00 2 9.00 2 0.00 0.90 2 m\00+m 0.009 2 0.00 0.00 2 0.0m 2 m.m0 o.mm 2 0009000p\0w+504024m 0.00 2 0.00 0.05 2 9.00 2 0.90 0.00 2 0009000p\02+m 0.09 2 0.02 0.02 2 0.09 2 0.90 0.00 2 00000000\m 2 2 2 2 2002220200 0000000 2 2 2 2 9000 2 2 9000 2 2 200 2 9000 200 2 200 2 9000 200 2 2 2 2 000 020 2 09oom 2 0w099950 2 09000 2 00099950 2 000900090029 20 0009200000 2 0m09 2 211. 0000 2 00090 000000 2 00090 90200 2 20.00200000 .00 .2002 95. SECTION III. A STUDY OF SOME POTASSIUMeDEFICIENT FIELD-BEANS SOILS IN MICHIGAN In the past few years, especially during dry summer months, a large Innnber of areas of field beans showing a certain characteristic yellowing of the leaves have been noticed in the "Thumb” section of Michigan. Cook (9) has shown by means of plant tissue tests and fertilizer applications that these deficiency symptoms were due to a lack of soil potassium. Muriate of potash, applied as a sidedressing after the starvation symptoms had appeared, greatly increased the yield of beans and produced plants of normal color. Upon the Observation of such potassium deficiency symptoms rather generally over the area in the summer of 1941, it was decided a study should be made of these soils on which beans showing such symptoms were growing. Plant and soil samples were to be collected for chemical analysis, and muriate of potash was to be used as a side-dressing to discover if the yield of field beans could be increased by an addition of potassium at the first appearance of signs of potassium starvation in the growing plants. Location and Sampling of Fields Fields where beans exhibited deficiency symptoms and fields of normal appearing beans on the same soil type were selected wherever possible. The choice of fields was made by driving through the area and sampling as many different soil types as were found. Twelve fields on 96. six different soils were included in the investigation. These soils, together with their assigned series number, their location, and the condition of the bean fields, are listed in Table 1. On the bean fields selected for study, both plant and soil samples 'were taken.during the period of July let to July 23rd. The plant samples 'were composed of from ten to twenty bean plants collected at random along several rows. The plant tissue was dried and ground in the laboratory. Three samples of soil were taken in each field in close proximity to the area fromnwhich the plants were gathered. These samples consisted of top soil or plow layer portions and at least 10 to 15 inches of the B horizon. The soil was dried and then passed through a 2 millimeter sieve. Analyses for the potash content of the bean plants were made by ashing the samples as in Section I and determining potassium as sodium potassium cobaltinitrite. Exchangeable potassium in the soils was run according to Velk's (33) method. Muriate of potash was applied as a sidedressing on the fields of ten farms at the rate of 100 pounds per acre using a hand drill. Two rows of beans were fertilized and the next two rows were left as a check plot. This unit was replicated at least four times in the field. The potash was placed on the inside of the pair of fertilized rows to avoid in- fluencing the growth of plants in adfiacent check rows. The fertilized bean rows varied in length from 100 to 200 feet. 97. Whether Conditions During the Growing Season very little rain fell in the ”Thumb" area during the month of July and the first of August. About the middle of July potassium deficiency symptoms in field beans were first observed in certain sections of east central Michigan. This study was not carried out until a week later when signs of potash starvation appeared more generally throughout the region. Very definite symptoms developed resulting in some cases in entire fields of small yellow beans. At the time of sampling the bean plants were stunted in growth. The lower leaves, especially at the tips, had turned yellow and the chlorosis had worked back between the main veins of the leaves. In extreme cases, these lower leaves were entirely yellow and the margins were turning brown, while the uppermost leaves showed slight to medium signs of potassium.starvation. From the 20th of July to the first of August when daily temperatures were constantly high and rainfall was very light throughout the area, many bean blossoms on plants in both normal and deficient fields were blasted and few pods were set. The field beans on potassium deficient soils that were planted early in the spring were most seriously affected. Since these beans were nearly mature, they failed to recover and produce more blossoms in August. Very few pods were present at harvest time on these stunted plants. Those beans that were planted late in June on soils low in potassium did not suffer as much as those planted earlier since they were not as fully developed. These beans put forth new growth and blossoms during the month of August. Field beans planted on soils adequate in available potassium produced a good crop despite the period of low rainfall in July. These plants likewise made new growth and 98. blossomed in August when light rains fell. The Potassium Content of Soils and Bean Plants In Table 44 the data show a very good correlation between the field condition of beans and the exchangeable potassium in the plow layer, the plant tissue test for potash, and the total content of potassium in the dried plant material. Medium to serious potash deficiency occurred in the bean plants when the exchangeable potassium content of the surface soil fell below 0.10 to 0.15 milli-equivalents per 100 grams of soil in the lighter soils and below 0.15 to 0.20 milli-equivalents in the heavier soils. From a consideration of the latter group, it appears that the bean.plants starved for potassium do not Obtain.any large amount of that element from the subsoil. The normal bean plants had percentages of K20 of 1.90 and above, while the per cent K20 of all potash deficient plants swmpled was below 1.20, except for those from two locations showing a medium.deficiency. Effect of Sidedressing on Yield Observations in early September of those bean fields treated with muriate of potash indicated that there would be a significant difference in.yield between fertilized and check plots at only two locations. The potash deficient plants sidedressed with KCl developed much better color in.the following two months and were somewhat larger than the plants on the untreated strips. The effect of sidedressing field beans at the H. Armbruster farm is shown by data in Table 45. The data indicate that the addition of potash approximately doubled the yield in all but one replicate. 99. Table 44. Partial chemical analysis of field bean plants and soils sampled in July 1941 in the "Thumb" area of Michigan 2 2 2 2 Plant 2 0 in Soil type 2 Field 2 Soil 2 Exchangeable K 2 tissue 2 field and 2 symptoms 2 sample 2 per 100 grams 2 test 2 bean numbggr 2 2 depth 2 air dry soil 2 for K 2 pplants __¢ 2 2 inches 2 m.e. 2 2 per cent 2 2 2 2 2 Miami loam2 2 0-12 2 0.08 2 2 2Serious 2 12-20 2 0.09 2 2 Series 34 spotash 2 0- 6 2 0.07 ~2 Low 2 0.62 2deficiency 2__76-l§‘2 0.07 2 2 2 2 0- 7 2 0.06 2 2 2 2 7-24 2 0.03 2 2 2 2 0- 6 2 0.22 2 2 '_ Conover 2 No 2 6-17 2 0.19 2 2 loam. 2potash 2 0- 6 2 0.18 2 High 2 1.92 2deficiency 2 6-16 2 0.14 2 2 Series 35 2 2 0- 7 2 0.29 2 2 2 2 7-15 2 0.21 2 2 _ _____ 2 2 O- 8 2 0.06 2 2 Oshtemc 2 2 8-18 2 0.03 2 2 loamy sand2Serious 2 O- 8 2 0.05 2 2 2potash 2 8-20 2 0.04 2 Low 2 0.57 Series 36 2deficiency 2 0- 6 2 0.04 2 2 2 2 6-18 2 0.03 2 2 A__ Kawkawlin 2 2 0-10 2 0.09 2 2 sandy 2 2 10-40 2 0.05 2 2 loam. 2Mbdium. 2 0- 9 2 0.07 2 Low 2 0.71 2potash 2 9-30 2 0.08 2 2 Series 37 2deficiency 2 O- 8 2 0.11 2 2 S 3 8'25 3 0.14 3 3 Brockston 2 2 0- 8 2 0.37 2 2 silt 2 No 2 10-18 2 0.31 __2 2 10am. 2potash 2 0- 9 2 0.37 2 High 2 2.94 2deficiency 2 10-30_8 0.41 2 2 Series 38 2 8 0- 8 2 0.45 2 2 2 2 10-24 2 0.47 2 2 Gilford 2 2 0-12 2 0.05 2 2 sandy 28erious 2 12-30 a 0.03 2 2 loam 2potash 2 0- 7 2 0.03 2 Low 2 0.73 2deficiency 2 7L3Q_2 0.02 2 2 Series 39 2 2 0-11 2 0.07 2 2 2 2 11-25 2 0.04» 2 2 100. Table 44. (continued) 2 2 2 2 Plant 2 0 in Soil type 2 Field 2 Soil 2 Exchangeable K 2 tissue 2 field and 2 symptoms 2 sample 2 per 100 grams 2 test 2 bean number!I 2 2 depth 2 air dry soil 2 for K 2 plants 2 2 inches 2 m.e. 2 2 per cent 2 2 2 2 2 Miami loamx 2 0- 7 2 0.08 2 2 2Serious 2 7-16 2 0.21 2 2 2potash 2 0- 8 2 0.07 2 Low 2 1.15 Series 40 2deficiency 2 8-23#_2 0.12 2 2 2 2 0- 7 2 0.06 2 2 2 2 7-25 2 0.13 2 2 Brookston 2 2 0- 8 2 0.36 2 2 silt 2 No 2 8-22 2 0.23 2 2 loam 2potash 2 0-10 2 0.36 2 High 2 1.92 2deficiency 2 10-18 24‘ 0.29 2 2 Series 41 2 2 0- 9 2 0.38 2 2 2 2 10-27 2 0.26 2 2 Gilford 2 2 0- 9 2 0.04 2 2 sandy 2medium. 2 9-20g_2 0.02 2 2 loam. 2potash 2 0- 9 2 0.08 2 Medium 2 1.82 2deficiency 2 9-22 2 0.02 2 2 Series 42 2 2 0-10 2 0.04 2 2 2 2 10-20 2 0.03 2 2 2 2 O- 6 2 0.22 2 2 Miami loam No 2 6-20 2 0.12 2 2 2potash 2 0- 7 2 0.18 2 High 2 2.94 Series 43 2deficiency 2 8-20 2 0.29 2 2 2 2 O- 9 2 0.21 2 2 2 2 9-22 2 0.24 2 2 2 2 0-10 2 0.17 2 2 Brookston 2Serious 2 10-18 2 0.12 2 2 loam. 2potash 2 0-12 2 0.13 2 Low 2 0.59 2deficiency 2 12-20 2 0.20 2 2 Series 44 2 2 0- 6 2 0.10 2 2 2 2 6-16 2 0.11 2 2 2 2 0- 9 2 0.15 2 2 Concver 2Medium. 2 9-22 2 0.14 2 2 loam. 2potash 2 0- 8 2 0.10 2 Low 2 1.74 2deficiency 2 8-24 2 0.11 2 2 Series 45 2 2 0- 7 2 0.17 2 2 2 2 8-25 8 0.12 2 2 *Data for each series given in Table l. 101. Table 45. The yield of field beans on a Brookston loam at the H. Armbruster farm as affected by sidedressing with KCl in late July 1941 2 2 Rows 2 Treatment 2 Yield in pounds per acre 2 2 l- 2 K01 1006 3- 4 Check 649 5- 6 KCl 921 7- 8 Check 461 9-10 KCl 893 11-12 Check 329 13-14 A01 470 15-16 Check 385 17-18 KCl 761 19-20 Check 263 It is believed that the application of fertilizer was not early enough at most locations to increase the yield, though the appearance of the plants was improved. Had appreciable amounts of rain fallen in the area before the end of July, the effect of sidedressing on the yield of beans might have been greater. 102. SECTION IV. THE POTASSIUM EQUILIBRIUM IN SOME MICHIGAN SOILS Release Studies The potassium requirement of legumes, especially alfalfa and clovers, are known to be high. Investigators (3), (5), (34) have found that a ton of alfalfa contains from 25 to 50 pounds of potassium, varying with the time of cutting and the purity of the hay. Ames and Bolts (2) noted one instance where three cuttings from an alfalfa field one season removed 206 pounds of potassium per acre. The power of sandy soils to supply potassium to plants is generally regarded as low even.though a total chemical analysis of such soils shows a fairly high potassium.content. The inability of a sandy soil or sandy loam to provide a continuous supply of available potassium could well be a critical factor in the production of a good alfalfa crop. It is evident from recent soil investigations that the release of potassium.from the weathering of potash bearing primary minerals by hydrolysis cannot entirely account for the amounts of available potassium which some soils are able to supply when subject to intensive crOpping, artificial leaching, or alternate freezing and thawing. Hoagland and Martin (14) have presented greenhouse data in which the potassium taken up by the plant was greater than the accompanying decrease in the ex- changeable form indicating that release of non-replaceable potassium had taken place during the growth of the crop. Experiments by Bray and 103. and DeTurk (6), in which soils were artificially leached with acids and salt solution to markedly lower the level of available potassium, have shown that the rate of release of potassium over a period of six months was too great to attribute to the gradual hydrolysis of primary minerals. In a study on the effect of freezing and thawing of saturated soils on the amount of exchangeable potassium, Fine, Bailey, and Truog (12) found that releases of potassium.from the non-replaceable form occurred in.two-thirds of the soils studied. A number of'explanations have been extended to cover the character of the release and fixation of potassium.in its several defined forms in soils. wood and DeTurk (36), Bartholomew and Janssen (4), Page and Williams (24), Hoagland and Martin (14), Jofee and Kolodny (16), and Bray and DeTurk (6) have used the concept of an equilibrium to relate amounts of water soluble, replaceable, and non-replaceable or fixed potassium found in soils. Some investigators have suggested explanation of the equilibrium.release of potassium on compounds of varying solubility present in the soil, on the formation of stable secondary minerals, or on the formation of potassium phosphate complexes. Other workers have interpreted bacterial fixation and the release of potassium in a double buffer system involving two types of base exchange reactions as more suitable concepts to explain the potassium.cquilibrium. Few studies have been made concerning the release and fixation of potassium.in sandy soils under laboratory and greenhouse conditions. A more comprehensive study of the equilibrium.between the various fractions of soil potassium under different levels of cropping and fertilization is needed in representative soil types in western Michigan. Such an 104. investigation would be helpful in supplementing field data concerning time of application and the amounts of potash fertilizers to be used in a legume pregram, as well as gaining information of a particular soil type with a view to estimating fertility reserves. Experimental Procedure This study was designed to determine the rate of increase in the concentration of water soluble and exchangeable potassium and to follow the equilibrium'between the various fractions in five soil types from 'western Michigan. These soils were brought to a low fertility level in two ways. In the first procedure, the soils were cropped using alfalfa grown in greenhouse pots, while in the second method the soils ‘were artificially leached with a neutral salt solution. Alfalfa was planted on the five soils in one gallon glazed pots. Nine jars of each soil type were set up. The soil types, their original pH values and the amount of lime applied to each are given in Table 46. Every soil was then given a fertilizer increment of 250 pounds super- phosphate, 75 pounds magnesium sulfate, 25 pounds manganese sulfate, 15 Table 46. The soils, their original pH, and the lime applied to each Series 2 Soil 2 pH 2 Peunds of Ca003 number 2 type 2 2 gper acre 3 Plainfield sand 5.5 1000 10 Fox fine sandy loam 6.0 500 25 Emmet sandy loam 5.5 1000 33 Onaway sandy loam 6.0 500 29 Kalkaska sand 5.5 RHIIPPI'II. I..Ili ,, t 6' 105. pounds borax, and 10 pounds copper sulfate on an acre basis. Three pots of each soil were selected at random after the first, second, and third alfalfa clippings. The roots were removed and a composite sample of soil taken from all three jars. These samples were brought to optimum moisture and stored at a uniform temperature of about 20 degrees C. A portion of each soil was air dried to determine the level of potassium.at the beginning of the storage period. At intervals, samples of the moist soil were dried and analyzed. water soluble potassium was extracted with boiled distilled water using a soil-water ratio of l to 10. The soil suspension was shaken for 30 minutes and filtered under suction. Exchangeable K was determined on the same sample according to the procedure in Section I. Using the same sample the acid soluble fraction was found by boiling 10 gms. of soil with 100 cc. 1 N nitric acid in a reflux condenser for 10 minutes and washing on a filter with several portions of boiling 1N HNOS. Potassium was determined using Volk's (33) method. Artificial leaching of the soils was accomplished by allowing three liters of neutral normal ammonium acetate to percolate through one kilogram of soil. The funnels were connected with a suction pump to maintain a constant percolation rate of about one drop per second. Occluded ammonia was removed by leaching with distilled water. The soils were then partially dried, mixed, and stored at optimum moisture and uniform temperature. Exchangeable and water soluble potassium.before and during storage were determined as with the soils planted to alfalfa. 106. Rate of Release of Potassium.as Affected by Cropping and Leaching The mean yield per pot of alfalfa clippings for each soil type at each cutting listed in Table 47 indicate that after three cuttings the differences in yield between soils were reduced to a minimum except for alfalfa grown on the Onaway soil. Table 47. Mean yield per pot of oven dry alfalfa grown on five sandy soils 2 2 Series 2 Soil type 2 Cuttings number 2 2 lst 2 2nd 2 3rd grams grams grams 3 Plainfield sand 6.6 5.5 4.6 10 Fox fine sandy loam 9.5 6.1 4.2 26 Emmet sandy loam. 8.9 6.9 4.3 33 Onaway sandy loam 12.5 9.3 7.5 29 Kalkaska sand 9.1 6.0 5.4 In Figures 2, 3, and 4, the increase of salt soluble (replaceable 4 water soluble) potassium in five soils on storage after one, two, and three cuttings of alfalfa is shown. The release of potassium for these same soils on storage after leaching with a salt solution is given in Figure 5. The data show that continued cropping tends to reduce the level of exchangeable potassium for the soils studied. The rate of release of potassium from the soil after any cutting is most rapid during the first two months of incubation, and as the soils are more heavily cropped the rate of increase over the entire storage period becomes greater, as indicated in a comparison of Figures 2 and 4. The presence of potassium deficiency symptoms on the second cutting of alfalfa grown on the Kalkaska and Plainfield soils, and severe starvation 107. signsron the third cutting of alfalfa grown on all five soils would indicate that further cropping would not lower the potassium level much below that found in the soils immediately after three crops of alfalfa were removed. .A general pattern of release of potassium for the five soils is apparent upon comparing the data in figures 2, 3, 4, and 5. The Fox, Onaway and Emmet soils, having original replaceable potassium contents of 49, 48, and 33 p.p.m. respectively, were cropped to approximately the same potassium level and show very similar increases on incubation. The single exception to this trend is the rapid release shown by the Onaway soil in Figure 4 over the first three months of storage. The Kalkaska and Plainfield soils, being of a more sandy nature, had lower original exchangeable potassium levels of 23 and 24 p.p.m2, and were cropped to lower values than the other soils. 0f the two sandy soils, the Kalkaska released potassium more rapidly after one and two cuttings of alfalfa, but its release rate was lower than that of the Plainfield soil after three cuttings were removed. The Plainfield and Kalkaska samples returned upon storage after each cutting to a potassium content higher than the original. Only on incubation after the first cutting did the exchangeable potassium of the Emmet soil rise above the original level. The potassium level in the Fox and Onaway soils did not rise above a maximum of 36 p.p.m. over a storage of eight months. The effect of leaching with a neutral salt and subsequent incubation on the five soils is given in Figure 5. The leaching procedure reduced the K content to a considerably lower level than the growth of three cuttings of alfalfa. At the beginning of the storage period, the 3393 5 omgopu no 052. m mm em on 3 «H m a. 108. and» «Medium 5.3 hence engage I l. I I I: :33 heads nos-um ..Inl I ..Illl ado." began our“ Nam Eda waoflmnwdflfi III. 4 30m onsosnoouw a.“ .30.. on» 50.5 .938": no weappse one sofas wagon damage“: 25% a.“ 3.303 paw: Mo .03qu d hobo 533309 cansownsnoxo mo ended: on.“ .N 0.33m {toe IsUIStJo JO [east 3 0H 0m 0m x 'm’d'd 332p am swag.» me 259 mm mm «m 0m 2” «a w code .33ng fiaoa hence .3530 II. I. II II ..| Eco.” been: peg Ill. Ill-ll 8.8..” hence seam Mom 9 been 33.3“de 4 .mpom ouscnnoouw ea .36» 23 scan «33.? me $5350 0...... .33.» ago» newwnog 95m 5 «specs ..Ewwo mo v3.39 a hope :53:on cansowndsouo no encode.” 3a 2 \6 \4 J / / "($08 113111.915 JO T9401 - 8 .m enema 'm'd'd use?» a.“ own—hove mo 083. mm mm «N ow ma «a w w o and. insulin / ado." .38: ~33qu II. II II III ado.” huge possum ..III.. 1 III! :30." beads 33 Mom a use» 33.3wde 4 .3om oesofieouw a... Son 05 Eon.“ 93¢.st mo awn—H350 00.23 acorns :30» 53:32 25¢ a.“ «space "Em: no totem .o have engaged caneowneneno mo oneoflon 23 ..v 85mg nos '[eu'gflptc JO teas-f 3; OH O N 8 3 - Om 'urd'd «Moo? 5.. oweuofw Mo 2:3 mm mm «m 0m 3 NH w. 111. as... seaside 50H heads assume ...I. ..I ..II II aBOH heed» »oaam .I 50H .39: our“ norm 0 use» vHoCnHeHm 4 .3323 553233 5.H! :0. on». wdHnOdoH your: oHHou 53:35 at...“ n.“ 23th .309 no vows!“ a yoke 33.33.09 0.2703333 90 oedeHon one . m. 0.3th nos teatfi'gao JO [east 3; OH om ow °m°d°d )1 112. replaceable potassium of all soils was between 4 and 10 p.p.m. .After four months of moist storage the potassium supply varied from 9 to 25 p.p.m. The release of potassium in the Fox sample was greatest, followed by the Emmet, Onaway, Plainfield, and Kalkaska samples. Effect of Cropping on Equilibrium Between Four Fractions of Soil Potassium The release of acid soluble, exchangeable, and water soluble potassium over the storage period for the five soils, as given in Table 48, can be illustrated diagramatically under equilibrium conditions as in Figure 6. Treatment Fixed Available Acid Acid Exchangeable water insoluble soluble soluble lst cutting ~--— - '+ + O 4' 2nd cutting - _. _ O + + + 3rd cutting O -— —- -- + + + + + Figure 6. Diagramatic equilibrium'between the various forms of soil potassium After the eight month incubation the soils that had one cutting of .alfalfa removed showed a gain in the acid soluble and water soluble fractions, no appreciable deviation in exchangeable potassium, and a marked loss in acid insoluble potassium calculated by difference. After two cuttings of alfalfa and incubation, the soils gained in both exchange- able and water soluble forms, decreased in acid insoluble potassium, and .mm .OmH ease cassast hence .m xom «0* «mm .«Hm SdOH house unease “3 .mn .eaH ends eHoHuanHm «mm .oe .m-_as0H sens. posse .ON «we .om .mHm.auoH aches Mom apnoea qH mHepHvoommou_adHaudvom ersHou have: new .oHpsomconoxo .oHpsHon vHos mo mpnsoeu wdHaoHHom can neeHsvcoo comm» HHou esp mnHmmouo ouomome m 0H am- a . mm on mm s eH cm oHH . ease samsaHea «H OH Hm- H- . mm Ne mmH . eH mm maH . asOH aces. assume mH «H mm- H . mm es naH . 0H mm mam . asOH sees. posse eH NH an- HH . «a «e «HH . 0H an HmH . _EsoH some. .u nos «H mH on.‘ e . mm on eoH . m mH oeH . ease eHoHesHsHm eMHoMHo mo uwnvaee cease NH a pm. m . mm on «NH . mH mm HmH . ens. eassaHsa m a an we- . mm as OHN . om an wsH . asOH sees. engage oH a mm mm- . mm as me . mH mm emH . suoH seeds posse ,m 0H m e. mm- . mm as mam . mH me New . euOH sees. .a sea nu nH m mm- m . mm on mmH . NH mm OmH . use. eHoHesHsHm smHsaHo mo ewerpso 039 NH N- e «H- . en mm oaH . mm en mmH . seas samsaHse m 0 Oh me. . en me new . mm mm maH . adoH sense assume 0H o em «a. n e» an mom . em on mmH . adoH sense passe e N- we em- . om oe oem . am we mom . s8H sees» .m nos m a- NH wH- . mm mm mmH . om mm owH . ease eHoHesnsHm « n n n ones pom adewspom no meadow u .Hou a .nexmu .Hom « .HoeeH« .Hom n .sowm « .Hou « .HOu . .noxmu .Hom u moves.” a eHud « vHod. u nepea.. . vHod n have: u n UHod n easy HHow mmOH ho eHaw « qupopseqH Moos mm . noHponSOQH #093 o « saHeeHs co werpso one . upon omsogeoon :H mHHom apnea 050m ho :oHpopsoeH moms nQOHpooum coon» mo unOH no cHdw pnoswounbm can use EdHnuopom HHOu no wagon Hsuebee no eaHsMHe £pH3.wnHmmouo Mo peemmo use .m¢ oHpem 114. averaged little change in the acid soluble fraction. It should be noted that the acid soluble potassium increased in the sandy loams and decreased in the case of the sandy soils. After three cuttings of alfalfa both water soluble and exchangeable forms gained at the expense of the acid soluble form. It can be concluded from this study that during the four months of growth of alfalfa before the first cutting, the more available water soluble and replaceable fractions were mainly utilized thereby drawing upon and reducing the acid soluble form. Upon eight months storage the level of the acid soluble form rose due to releases of potassium from the less soluble fraction. About two months growing period elapsed before the second cutting thus enabling the alfalfa plants to further exhaust the water soluble, exchangeable, and acid soluble supply. Upon incubation at this time the probable facts that the acid insoluble fraction released potassium less rapidly and that the potassium.cquilibrium had been shifted further toward the more available forms by plant removal, would sub- stantiate the gain of water soluble and exchangeable potassium at the expense of the less soluble fractions. The_marked increase in the two more available forms of potassium and decrease in acid soluble potassium'was probably brought about by a further drastic removal of potassium by ~ alfalfa plants and a lower rate of release of potassium from the acid insoluble form. Salt Soluble and water Soluble Potassium.as Related to Cropping and Time of Storagg A.better insight into the relation of water soluble to salt soluble potassium after cropping or leaching and subsequent storage can.be gained 115. from the data in Table 49. For any given treatment for any of the five soils the ratio of salt soluble to water soluble potassium decreases wdth time of incubation, indicating that the proportion of the more soluble form increases. For example, the ratio of all soils after one cutting at initial storage time is quite similar varying from 2.50 to 2.60. At the end of the incubation, with the exception of the Fox soil, these ratios fell to approximately 2.00. The effect of cropping was to change the ratio between the two forms of soil potassium. The data would indicate that the alfalfa plants were obtaining a proportionately larger share of potassium from the soil solution and that the equilibrium between replaceable and water soluble potassium was unable to maintain the proportion of the two forms as found in the original soil. Fixation Studies A considerable number of experiments have been carried out in the past ten years concerning the fixation of potassium in soils and the availability of various forms of soil potassium to plants. The fixation of potassium by soils has been observed by Hoagland and martin (14), Wood and De'l‘urk (36), Joffe and Kolodny (16), Purvis and Blume (28), Lamb, Jr. (19), and others. Most of these investigators regard fixed or non-replaceable potassium as that form not extractable with a neutral salt solution, but yet more available to plants than potassium held in primary minerals. Wood and DeTurk (36) have divided the fixed fraction into the acid soluble and acid insoluble forms. Studies on fixation have been made mainly by adding soluble potassium or salts of potassium Table 49 e 116. have been cropped and artificially leached The effect of incubation on the ratio of salt soluble to water soluble potassium in some sandy soils which Ratio of salt soluble to water : 3 Soil type 3 Soil 8 soluble K over a period of weeks a treatment 2 O 2 4 8 16 32 a : Plainfield x 1 cutting 3 2.60 2.46 2.55 2.16 2.00 sand 3 2 cuttings : 2.83 2.71 2.44 2.31 2.20 z 3 cuttings : 3.25 3.00 3.20 3.33 2.64 x leached : 2.33 2.24 2.00 2.00 1.88 z a a : FOx fine a 1 cutting : 2.61 2.50 2.33 2.43 2.33 sandy : 2 cuttings : 3.12 3.10 2.90 2.80 2.72 loam. : 3 cuttings : 4.20 4.00 3.83 3.33 2.83 8 leached : 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.86 2.05 2 : a : Emmet sandy : 1 cutting 3 2.50 2.40 2.13 2.12 2.06 loam : 2 cuttings x 3.33 3.06 3.06 2.70 2.68 3 3 cuttings 3 4e20 4e20 3.83 3.37 2. 70 3 leached 3 2.35 2.25 2.00 2.00 2.25 x x z z Onaway : 1 cutting a 2.46 2.54 2.32 2.33 2.12 sandy : 2 cuttings : 2.60 2.57 2.54 2.46 2.35 loam. : 3 cuttings : 3.33 3.38 3.23 3.00 2.60 3 108.0th 3 1050 1057 1e45 10% 1047 a x a : Kalkaska : 1 cutting a 2.55 2.33 2.16 2.07 1.94 sand 3 2 cuttings : 2.44 2.21 2.19 2.08 2.08 z 3 cuttings 3 2.43 2.57 2.57 2.50 2.36 8 leached : 2.00 1.70 1.50 1.75 1.80 z : 117. to soils and leaching the soil at intervals with dilute acids or salt solutions after moist storage or heat or freezing treatments to determine the level of various forms of soil potassium. The picture of the mechanism of fixation is still not clear.- Experimental Procedure The application of medium to heavy fertilizer applications to soil and the subsequent sampling to recover all potassium presents difficulties. Hoagland and Martin (14) concluded that sampling from a large lot of soil does not give as accurate results as to the fate of potassium.added to a soil as does the analysis oi'one portion of soil which has been given an inc remerrt of potash. A workable procedure was developed in this study, whereby solutions of KCl'were added to 500 gram portions of air dry soil at the rate of 200, 500, and 1000 pounds per acre of KCl. The partially moistened soil was thoroughly mixed on waxed paper, and the mixing sheets analyzed for potassium. The amount lost was found to be within the experimental error of the method. Seven sandy soils were given the above treatments and then stored at optimum.moisture and at room temperature. Fifty gram portions of soil were removed at intervals to determine the water soluble, exchangeable, and acid soluble potassium. The extraction and analytical methods used were the smme as those employed in studies of release. 118. The Potassium Equilibrium as Affected by Addition of Muriate of Potash to the Soil The various fractions of soil potassium are given in Table 50 for the original soils before incubation and after four months storage for the same soils to which three levels of potash were added. The rate of applying the potassium solutions can be listed as ratios of 03132.5:5 or at rate of 0, 105, 263, and 525 pounds potassium per acre'respectively. Work by other investigators (:55) indicates that the rate of equilibrium reaction varies with time and may be different for each soil. Prelim- inary work in.this study showed little change in the amount of potassium fixed in each soil over a period ranging from 8 to 32 weeks. The exchangeable form in the original soils is about lfi-times that extracted by water, while the acid soluble fraction appears from 2 to 4 times greater than the water soluble and exchangeable forms combined. A value for the fixed or insoluble form is lacking since it is an arbitrary figure obtained by difference. ‘After an incubation period of four months, the test soils to which no potassium was added, showed in general slight increases in water soluble and replaceable potash, and in three out of four soils a small decrease in the acid soluble form. The Onaway and Emmet soils gave minor releases of potassium.from the acid insoluble fraction. Upon analysis of the soil to which potassium.was added, the water soluble fonn was founi to have increased most and in the approximate ratios of 0:1:2.0-2.634.2-5.5. The exchangeable fraction was raised in the ratio 119. Table 50. The effect of added potassium on the proportion of soil potassium in four fractions after 16 weeks' incubation Fox fine sandy loam 8 Poundsfiff 8 Pounds of'K per acre in incubated soil 8 per acre 8 after varying_increments of K‘had been added Fraction 8in original8 8 8 8 8 soil 8 0 8 105 8 263 8 525 8 8 Fixed!I 8 0 8 12 83 102 106 Acid soluble 8 246 8 230 168 176 180 Exchangeable 8 42 8 44 88 150 246 'Whter soluble 8 28 8 30 82 150 310 8 8 Onaway sandy loam 8 8 Fixed* 8 0 8 -12** 46 102 107 Acid soluble 8 194 8 194 146 112 152 Exchangeable 8 56 8 60 88 136 204 water soluble 8 40 8 48 116 202 352 8 8 Emmet sandy loam 8 8 Fixed* 8 0 8 -5** 85 147 139 Acid soluble 8 244 8 235 150 126 164 Exchangeable 8 40 8 5O 84 138 224 water soluble 8 26 8 30 96 162 308 8 8 Emmet sandy 10am 8 8 Fixed‘ 8 0 8 -1ee 127 97 85 Acid soluble 8 222 8 214 124 180 228 Exchangeable 8 54 z 59 92 126 212 ‘Water soluble 8 34 8 38 90 188 328 8 8 *This is considered to'be the acid insoluble form. ttNegative values in the fixed or acid insoluble fraction indicate a release of potassium.from that form. 120. of 08182.0-2.784.7-5.3. Accordingly the rise in the two forms with increasing amounts of potassium added is rather close to the ratio at which the increments were made. The amount of acid soluble potassium as listed in Table 50 is approximately the same for all original samples except for the Onaway soil. Little change occurred in this form over four months of moist storage when no treatment was made. Wfith the addition of 105 pounds potassium per acre, a marked decrease in the level of this form was noted. However, the content of the acid insoluble or fixed form was necessarily increased indicating a shift in equilibrium from the more available to the less available fraction. The same general picture holds for the 263 pound increment with the exception of increases in the acid soluble fraction in two of the four soils. Adding 525 pounds K per acre to the soils changed the equilibrium still more'by shifting a slightly larger amount of potassium into the acid insoluble form. It is interesting to note that the content of acid insoluble fraction is about the same whether potassium was added at the rate of 500 or 1000 pounds K01 per acre. This might indicate a possible "saturation" with respect to this fraction. Amounts of Potassium Fixed The gain in the water soluble and exchangeable potassium content of seven soils, together with the potassium added, and the amount of fixation is given in Table 51. Fixation from -9 to 17 pounds per acre was recorded for the 105 pound per acre addition, from 11 to 37 pounds per acre for the 263 pounds potassium increment, and from 31 to 99 pounds per acre for the 525 pound per acre addition. The Kalkaska sandy soil showed Table 51e 121. The recovery and correlated fixation of soluble potassium added to seven soils after 16'weeks' incubation Fox fine sandy loam Pounds per 8 Exchangeable83hter solub1e8 acre of K 8 K 8 K 8 Fixation 8 Fixation added : lstA. : lbs .L. a lbs./A. : per cent 0 2 2 -4 -6 105 46 54 5 3 263 108 122 33 10 525 204 282 39 4 Onaway sandy loam 0 4 8 ~12 -13 105 32 76 -3 -5 263 80 162 21 9 525 148 312 65 12 .Emmet sandy loam 0 10 4 -14 -21 105 44 70 -9 -5 263 98 136 29 9 525 144 282 59 10 Emmet sandy loam . 0 5 4 -9 -11 105 38 56 11 6 263 72 154 37 10 525 158 294 73 12 mancelona Sandy loam 0 0 2 -2 -3 105 28 64 13 7 263 76 150 37 11 525 164 302 59 10 122. Table 51. (continued) Kalkaska sand .Pounds per 8 Exchangeableawater soluble8 8 acre of K 8 K 8 K 8 Fixation 8 Fixation added 8 lbs.[1. 8 Ibs./l. 8 lbsglh. 8 _per cent 0 4 2 -6 -18 105 46 54 5 3 263 98 154 11 4 525 156 338 31 6 Fox sandy loam 0 -2 4 -2 -2 105 52 36 17 16 263 122 108 33 13 525 198 ' 228 99 19 \h 123. the least tendency to fix potassium, immobilizing only 6 pounds with a 1000 pound increment of KCl on an acre basis. The Mancelona, Onaway, and Fox fine sandy loam soils had the same fixing power with a maximum of about 10 per cent when a half ton of muriate of potash per acre was added. The Fox sandy loam fixed the greatest amount of soluble potassium with the fixation between 15 and 20 per cent. Potassium Equilibrium in.Soils Under Greenhouse Culture It was decided that an experiment be set up to study the potassium equilibrium.of soils at the time they were supporting plant growth. This investigation was carried out using millet grown on ten different Efichigan soils in the greenhouse. Small jars were used to facilitate an intensive removal of potassium as well as other plant nutrients. Six pots of each soil were used with potassium being added as the chloride to three of the jars at the rate of 400 pounds per acre. A.general nutrient addition was given all soils consisting of 400 pounds ammonium sulfate, 100 pounds magnesium.nitrate, 400 pounds monoécalciwm phosphate, 20 pounds manganese sulfate, 5 pounds zinc sulfate, and 5 pounds copper sulfate on an acre basis. The acid soluble, exchangeable, and water soluble fractions of potassium.cf the soils were determined before and after cropping using the methods of extraction and analysis as indicated under release studies. The yield of plant material was taken from each jar and the oven dry tissue analyzed for potassium. The growth of millet on six of the ten soils with and without added potash is shown in 124. Plate 6. With values for plant removal of potassium given in Table 52 and the contents of the various fractions before and after cropping listed in Table 53, a clearer picture can be gained of the source of potassium as used for plant growth. Source of Potassium for Plant Growth The yield figures in Table 52 show that the addition of potassium to the soil gave increases of from 2 to 3 times the dry weight of millet for the sandier soils and from 1 to 2 times for the heavier soils compared with yields where no potassium was added. The per cent of potassium in the plants followed a similar trend with 8 to 12 times more potassium in the plants grown on the lighter soils receiving soluble KCl and 3 to 8 times more potassium.in millet grown on the finer textured soils to which potassium was added. The data in Table 53 indicate that in all soils there is a gain in the water soluble and replaceable fractions after cropping regardless of whether potassium was supplied to the soil. Likewise, it should be noted that the values for the acid soluble form were lower after cropping, and that, in general, this fraction decreased most in those pots to which potassium was added. The figures listed under the column ”absorbed or fixed" refer to that potassium either absorbed by plants or fixed in an acid insoluble form in the soil. Table 54 may be considered a balance sheet listing the losses and gains for each fraction of potassium after cropping. The values for fixed or acid insoluble potassium have been calculated by difference in the following manner: (the sum of the fractions of the original soil) 4 125. Plate 6. The effect of added potassium on the growth of millet in six Michigan soils. 126. The yield, per cent potassium, and potassium content Table see of millet as affected by the addition of potassium to some soils set up in greenhouse pots K added No K added 8Yield8K in 8K in plant8Yield8K in 8K in plant 8 8number8 per 8p1ant8 per 100 {grams soil 8 per 8p1ant8per 100 8grams soil: jar 8 8 jar 8 8gms. 8 Jar Soil type mgms. cent per mgms. 8 gms. per cent 0. O. O. 16.1 16.1 18.0 3 14e7 1e57 8 13.9 1.66 8 14.3 1.80 1.991. QuRvR. Ru9u9u e e e nvnvnv Runvnv e e e RvnvOu 1. 1.9u2u Fbx sandy loam 10.9 11.3 10.4 3 14e0 1e16 3 15e8 1.22 8 14.4 1.08 Ruovflv 1.9.9. Plainfield sand Emmet sandy loam 13.0 12.7 12.6 Vunvnv Rv7aQu O O 0 1.1.1. 4.Ru78 O O O 1.nv0v 1.1. 3 3 3 1.4 1.7 1.4 Kalkaska sand 18.8 21.5 18.2 8 10.5 2.51 8 11.3 2.67 8 11.2 2.38 Onaway sandy loam OuDuRu e e e 7.7.Rv 1.1.1. Ru1.0u RvaOu e e e 1.1.1. nv1.:u O O O 2u9~9w 1.1.1. 0..: Gilford sandy loam 16.5 16.3 17.6 3 10e9 1e85 8 11.2 1.79 3 llee 1.87 DuOvRv 9u1.1. no.0 nezu O O O nunuau "(nonu C O O pDnOnl warsaw’loam cuneil O O 0 anv1. 921.92 9u1.nv .Dnbnb O O 0 1.1.1. nonooo O O C Ru9u2u 1.1.11 : O. .0 Miami loam 14.1 15.0 14.6 3 10.3 1.75 8 11.7 1.64 8 10.4 1.80 nOnlpD 1.1.1. www mum OanRU e nOnOnO Miami loam Concver silt loam 127. Table 52. (continued) 8 8 No K added 8 K added 8 Jar 8Yield8K in 8K in plantineld8K in 8K in plant Soil type 8number8 perzplant8 per 100 8 per 8p1ant8 per 100 8 8 pjar: 8grams soilx jar 8 8grams soil 8 8 gms. per mgms. 8 gins. per mgms. 8 8 cent 8 cent 8 8 8 Brochton 103m 3 1 3 10e4 0.58 5.2 3 lleg 1e45 14e9 8 2 8 11.0 0.52 5.0 8 11.6 1.37 13.8 8 3 8 11.7 0.45 4.6 8 11.7 1.42 14.4 8 8 8 wauseon loam. 8 1 8 8.8 0.35 2.6 8 15.4 1.30 16.8 8 2 8 8.8 0.31 2.3 8 13.6 1.48 16.9 8 3 8 9.6 0.27 2.2 8 12.1 1.52 15 5 128. n.e c.m e.e o.Hm . 0.H 0.« n.m m.» e u e « ssoH e.e m.~ e.n n.om a.HN . m.H n.H m.m Hes . m.H H.H a.OH . m . asses e.n e.n m.n n.0m . m.H «.« ~.m e.e . a H . enoeHac e.m m.m m.e a.Hm . e.m m.e a.e e.s . . n . esoH e.e e.n e.n e.nm o.Hm . o.m e.n a.e n.m . m.m e.m m.eH . m . anon. m.e e.m m.e ».em 1. e.m m.e e.e m.e .1. 11 e H . aeseoo e.e n.e m.» o.cH . e.H a.H o.e o.m . a n . a.e n.s e.» e.nH ~.o~ . ~.H e.H e.n m.m . 0.H n.H o.a . m a nose m.e m.» H.e e.wH . n.H e.H m.m m.m . . H . snesaHse e.e e.m n.e H.eH . H.e m.m a.» e.e . 111 a n . asoH e.e 0.0 n.e m.eH ~.H~ . e.e a.» a.» N.e . o.m e.m a.a . m . asses H.e m.n n.n m.eH . e.n m.m «.4 n.» . c H . poses m.m m.n m.m H.eH . n e.H o.m n.e m.m . a n a nose m.n e.m s.m m.mH e.aH . e.H N.m H.e m.s . m.o e.H s.a . m . eHeau e.m o.n a.e n.nH « e.H a.H o.m n.n . . 11 a m 11. usaeHm a.m n.m w.m H.wH . e.m e.» H.@ e.H . . n . esoH H.n m.m n.e m.eH e.om . n.m m.m m.e e.H . 0.« m.H e.OH . m a anode m.e n.e o.e m.eH . m.» N.» m.e n.H . e H . spa « n a u a « Aflom a « deem .mew 00H mom m .nama « HHom .usw 00H pom m .mst ..mew ooa hem M .mswsu « .Hom . u .HOm «poxwm no” peeps” .Hom u u .Hou neexfim no” .Hom « . .Hon « « hopem.. .onmu peed ”panaceadn M ” swung. .noxm« pwod ”popaomA4. Lopez. .noxm. peed ”goofing” omhp scene a .111 scene a on e a . . use . HHom wqammoao hopmq . 1wnfimmwao ouOMom a . phospscap.Eanospom psonpfls.eqs apes names encu_qw Edwmaepom Hfiou go meaom Homebon mo «assess on» so wcdmmouo go #oomwe one .mm capes 129. wdemwao novH< Aeoanvqoov .mm OHQdH 1qummeao oaomem m.m ¢.m m.m n.mm . m.H m.m «.5 m.H . a n . s.» m.¢ H.m H.Hm >.¢m « m.H H.» ¢.m 0.H « n.H m.m o.m a m « EsOH m.n >.m m.m m.mm . m.H m.m H.> m.H . a H a doomed; 0.8 m.> m.m m.Hm « m.H o.m 0.0 n.o « . n ” SsOH «.« m.m o.¢ N.mm n.mm n o.H m.m o.> $.08 « n.H m.¢ o.m a m « pHHn >.m m.m H.m m.Hm u >.H >.m w.» >.H8 . a H a nobosoo ¢.m m.m o.m m.mm . m.H H.m o.nH o.o . a n « EsoH m.m n.m n.> o.¢m m.mm . N.H m.m m.mH m.o a m.o ¢.¢ m.eH « m 2 nova m.¢ H.m m.o m.mm a m.H w.m n.mH 9.08 a a H . uxooam >.m >.s m.» m.Hm ” >.H m.m H.m m.H « a m a m.> m.m 0.5 v.mH o.nm . m.H m.m w.m m.H . m.H w.H ”.mH . m « EdoH m.m m.m m.m m.mH " ¢.H m.m m.m m.~ a . H . Hedda e.» o.m m.> m.mm a n.m o.» N.m m.H . a m a pm» m.m >.m ¢.¢m m.em . m.H H.» n.m H.« « ¢.H ¢.H n.mH « m . seoH b.» m.m m.w o.mm . H.« «.« m.m m.m ” a H « HEdHE w.¢ m.m 5.0H m.mm . m.m m.m m.eH 0.H « . n u m.¢ o.m m.0H o.um o.¢m . m.m H.m m.mH 9.0 . m.H m.¢ m.om . m . e60H H.¢ w.m n.HH «.mm . m.m m.¢ >.wH n.o « . u H . sense; . a a . a « HHOe . . HHoo .me OOH and x .meE a HHOn .me 00H pom m .meE ..wfiw 00H you x .newsu . .Hom «come to” weeps" .Hon u » .HOm ”pome so” .Hou 2 .Hon . n eHo< .eooaonn4. M u have?“ .nexm. eHo< .eooaOmo<~ henna. .noxmn cHo< spoofing“ camp . popes & oz . HHom 130. The gain or loss in some fractions of soil potassium after greenhouse cropping of some soils treated with and without potassium Table 54e 8 K added No K added 8Fixed*8Acid8Exch.8water 8Fixed*8Acid8Exch. 8water 8 sol. 8 8801.8 8 sol. 8sol.8 8 Jar 8number8 Soil type mgms. of potassium per 100 gms. soil 51.9 0.. .4.4,o 3.0 3.4 3.5 7.4.09 .% e e .4... 7.4.1. e e e 1.1.nv 3 3 3 DuRVA. e e e 1.0an Fox sandy loam Rvfivd. e e e 4.4.4. 3 3 3 nOnU.b nvnvnv lwkwd. nvnunu 7.Rw4. .4.b.4 034.8“ 9u2w9m 1 2 3 Plainfield sand 8 Emmet sandy loam8 iinuno .b.4.b 1.200u e e e ZuluDQ .o.o.4 423 .DAUnc . . . 4.1.99 3 3 3 no.4.l 0.. 1.9u99 1.4.9u e e e “v awnw .On‘no e e e Jesus - nénDnU e e e 9w9u¢9 Kalkaska sand 7.1.9“ alpanb O 2 8 3 3 2 5e5 -IOeO 201 -1009 -899 3.7 leg “Gel 3 1.3 -0.5 8 1.8 ”0.2 3 -6e6 '6e3 -6e3 5 8 7 8 3 8 3 1 2 2 2 3 1 Onaway sandy loam Gilford sandy loam awnweu DwauDu -105 -107 -2e6 3 -109 3 -1e3 l 2 3 8 -0.8 ‘Wareaw loam iuiunv e e e 9u9u9u 4.4 4. 4. slab.” .b.%.o anWfiH 4.Rv¢u :‘8 7.9u0v ..0 nvnvnu nvnan ..0 1.1.1. Runv1. 0.4“ A. .4. RVQnOv 0 00¢ 00:0. 1.9uzu Nflami loam 345 FD.0.4 Nhami loam 131. Table 54. (continued) 8 8 No K added 8 K added Soil type 8 Jar 8Fixed*8Acid8Exch.8water 8Fixed*8Aoid8Exch. 8water 8number8 8sol.8 8sol. 8 8301.8 8 sol. 8 mgms. of potassium per 100 gms. soil 8 8 8 Conover silt loam: 1 8 -8.5 -0.2 1.5 0.4 8 4.0 -5.9 5.3 4.4 3 2 3 “6.7 -100 1.0 0.3 3 5.0 -304 4.3 3.1 3 3 3 -507 '1e4 0.8 0.3 3 5e0 -2e8 3e6 2.7 8 8 8 Brock‘ton 108.111 3 1 3 '4e9 -100 1.0 0e3 3 10e 3 I"lea 4.7 3e4 8 2 8 -4.5 -1.7 0.9 0.3 8 10.2 -7.0 3.9 4.6 8 3 8 -4.6 -1.3 0.7 . 0.6 8 7.8 -6.3 5.1 4.5 8 8 8 wauseon loam 8 l 8 -1.4 -2.5 0.7 0.6 8 6.0 -3.8 3.5 2.2 3 2 3 '005 '3e2 009 Oe5 3 4e2 “1.5 2.7 2.4 3 3 3 0.7 0.2 3 6.8 -297 3.2 1.9 .007 -2e4 1 *This is considered to be the acid insoluble form. 132. (the potassium added, if any) - (the sum of the fractions after cropping) 4 (the potassium removed by the plants). As might be expected the exchangeable and water soluble potassium increased on those soils to which soluble K01 was added. To those pots where no potassium was added and on which plant growth and appearance was poor, the replaceable and water soluble forms also increased over their original values. The latter phenomenon might be explained by the release of potassium.from the less available sources toward the end of the growing period forming an accumulation which was not absorbed by weakened and rather inactively growing plants. The losses exhibited in the acid soluble form in soils to which potassium was added indicated.either that plants are able to feed directly upon this form of potassium or that the equilibrium.shift from the acid soluble to the more available fractions is rather rapid upon intense removal of water soluble and exchangeable potassium. The gains in the acid insol- uble form with additions of potassium would appear inconsistent on the basis of an equilibrium system with the next soluble fraction. However, it could have been possible, over the period of a month or two before the plants removed any large amount of potassium, for a shift of that element to occur from the more available forms to the acid insoluble state. In the case of sandy soils where no increment of potassium.was received, the above explan- ation will not suffice, for it appears that there is a movement of potassium from the acid soluble fraction to both more and less soluble forms. Under similar conditions and upon crop removal the fine textured soils show a distinct equilibrium trend of potassium from the less available to the replaceable and water soluble forms. 133. SUMMARY Plant and soil samples were collected from normal and poor alfalfa fields located on some sandy soils in western Hichigan in an attempt to find the soil factor or factors which were causing the farmers difficulty in establishing and maintaining legume stands. On the supposition that the lack of available potassium might be a partial answer to the problem, the soils and plants were analyzed for this element and other plant nutrients. The soil samples from good and poor alfalfa fields were tested for exchangeable potassium, calcium, magnesium, available phosphorus, base exchange capacity, and reaction. The supply of available potassium and calcium was substantially higher in soils from the good fields. Little difference was noted between the amount of replaceable magnesium in soils from either type of location. Ca4Mg/K ratios of samples studied were lower from the good alfalfa fields. .although there was no signif- icant difference between the per cent base saturation of soils sampled from normal and poor alfalfa stands, it appears that 75 per cent base saturation may be regarded as the lower limit for good alfalfa growth provided there is a plentiful supply of available potassium and phosphorus. The reaction determinations, in general, paralleled the values for per cent base saturation. The available phosphorus content, as extracted with dilute acid, was about the same for soils from good and poor fields. 134. The calcium and magnesium contents of alfalfa from poor fields were found to be higher than that of plants from good stands, while the per cent potash was only one-half as high. The low potassium content of the dried plants as indicated by chemical test was correlated with field observations of a stunted and yellowed growth, known symptoms of potash deficiency, and with tests made on the green tissue. The response of alfalfa grown in greenhouse pots to various fertilizer and minor element treatments was undertaken in 18 experiments on Plainfield, Fox, warsaw, Emmet, Kalkaska, hancelona, and Onaway soils. These soils, of a sandy character, low in organic matter with the exception of the 'Warsaw samples, and subject to drought in periods of low rainfall, were collected from fields that supported good and poor stands. Though some soils which had produced a good growth of alfalfa in the field responded in the greenhouse to plant food additions on cuttings of the first stand, the increases in yield over no treatment were smaller than those obtained from clippings of the second stand. In general there was a negative correlation between the productivity of the field stand and the degree of growth response in greenhouse culture. Potassium.gave significant increases in the yield of tops of one or more cuttings of alfalfa of the first stand in 16 out of a total of 19 greenhouse experiments conducted on ten different soil types. Highly significant response in the growth of tops and roots of the second stand can be attributed to potassium in every experiment where alfalfa was replanted and refertilized. Using the yield of the second cutting of the first and second stands, where available, as an indicator of the relative 135. need of potassium, the average per cent increase in yield of all exper- iments upon comparing calcium, magnesium, and potassium with calcium and magnesium.or calcium and potassium with calcium is 48 for the first stand and 375 for the second stand. The individual effect of potassium on yield for the second stand on two Fox sandy loam soils rose above 1000 per cent increase. It is evident that with heavy cropping of sandy soils, an adequate supply of potassium is needed for continued maintenance and reestablishment of legume stands. In general, applications of lime had little effect on yield even though the reaction of some soils was below pH 5.8. Small decreases in growth were recorded in the cuttings of the first stand on four soils and in the cuttings and roots of the second stand in three experiments. In all other trials alfalfa responded slightly to additions of calcium or calcium.and magnesium. Three greenhouse experiments using a hancelona, a Kalkaska, and an Emmet sandy soil indicate that the beneficial effect of boron, manganese, zinc, copper, and cObalt was increased by the use of lime. Slightly depressed yields of alfalfa were obtained in a single trial on an Emmet sandy loam from the addition of lime to minor element treatments. .1 part of the injurious effect of overliming of sandy soils is probably due to the formation of insoluble compounds of lime with boron, manganese, cobalt, copper, and zinc. It is also possible that the addition of lime without potassium to these sandy soils produced a higher calcium/potassium ratio which would be less favorable for legume growth. 136. In eleven experiments where the individual effect of magnesium.can be determined from calcium, potassium, and magnesium combinations, four showed a significant response in yield from the use of magnesium, while little or no benefit was obtained from additions of this element on seven soils. In general, those soils, nanely a Fox sandy loam, two Warsaw sandy loams, and an Emmet sandy loam, that responded to magnesium had lower amounts of this element in the exchangeable form than did soils not responding significantly. Boron was added alone or in combination.with calcium, calcium.and magnesium, magnesium and potassium, or calcium, magnesium, and potassium in eighteen experiments. In three trials on a Fox, an Emmet, and an Onaway sandy loam, there was no significant increase in either the yield of tops or roots upon the addition of boron alone or in combination with magnesium and potassium. Significant response in top growth of one or more cuttings was Obtained on four Fox sandy loam soils, two'fiarsaw loam soils, three Emmet sandy loam.soils, and on one sample of Kalkaska sand, Mancelona sandy loam, and Onaway sandy loam. Boron was more beneficial for in- creasing the growth of roots than the aerial portions of the alfalfa plant. In general, boron in combination with calcium and magnesium.gave slightly higher increases in.yield than when boron was added together with calcium, magnesium, and potassium. The individual effect of manganese can be determined from the data of six experiments. Significant increases in.yield of tops and especially roots were recorded only on two soils, both Onaway sandy loams with pH values of between 6.0 and 6.5. A slight response to manganese was Obtained 137. on a Plainfield sandy soil. The addition of manganese in experiments on three Emmet sandy loam soils caused slight decreases in yield. In contrast to boron, manganese atmears to give a greater increase in yield when applied with calcium and potassium than when applied with calcium alone. The individual effect of zinc can be calculated in experiments on two soils. addition of zinc with boron and with lime, potassium, and boron gave significant increases in growth of alfalfa tops and roots on an Emmet sandy loam soil, but not with lime and boron. Little or no beneficial effect was found from the use of zinc on a Kalkaska sandy soil. Cobalt added to an Emmet sandy loam soil and a Kalkaska sandy soil in combination with boron, lime and boron, and lime, boron, and potassium produced rather important yield increases. The use of cObalt and zinc together resulted in slight to medium increases in growth on two Emmet sandy loam soils. Cepper, as the sulfate, was added as a minor element increment to soils in 15 experiments. The effect of copper alone can be ascertained in only one trial on a Fox sandy loam soil where copper produced significant increases in growth in three out of four cuttings. In eight experiments a combination of copper and manganese was used. Good increases were found in the yield of tops and roots, especially in the second stand, when these elements were added to three Fox and two‘Warsaw soils. Decreases in yield resulted from the use of this combination regardless of the fertilizer treatment accompanying it on a hancelona and a Kalkaska sandy soil. Additions of copper and cobalt were of importance in raising alfalfa yields on two Emmet soils and one Kalkaska sandy soil. Root growth was stimulated 138. more than top growth. The general condition of yellowed and stunted field beans, which farmers of the "Thumb” area of Michigan ascribe to dry weather,vould appear from this study to be due to the combined effects of low moisture and an inadequate supply of potassium.in the surfacesoil. Those soils low in.available potash produced low yielding, potassium deficient beans. Plants grown on soils high in potash produced a good yield of beans without showing deficiency symptoms despite low rainfall during the month of July and the first part of August. however, under summer conditions of higher rainfall in 1942 when precipitation was above normal for the section, many of the bean fields that showed potash starvation signs in 1941 produced normal appearing bean plants. The data points to the fact that soil moisture is an important factor in determining whether soils low in available potassium will produce potash deficient beans. Whether the greater soil moisture supply actually increases the content of exchangeable potassium.cr whether under such conditions the plant roots have a greater capacity to forage for potassium has not been demonstrated. Sidedressing potash deficient beans with 100 pounds per acre of KCl doubled the yield of beans on two of ten farms. Earlier application of this fertilizer might have produced higher yields on the other fields. With a view to obtaining information on the release and fixation of potassium in some Vichigan soils, studies were made of the equilibrium between the water soluble, exchangeable, and acid soluble fractions of soil potassium.under controlled laboratory conditions. 139. The release of potassium was investigated after soils were brought to a low fertility level either by cropping or by artificial leaching. The rate of release of exchangeable and water soluble potassium was found to be greatest in the first period of incubation and under more intensive cropping, with the soils tending to regain the same level of replaceable potassium as existed before the experiments started. Under heavy cropping of these soils, the acid soluble fraction appeared to be the main source of replacement for the more available forms. The ratio of salt soluble to water soluble potassium was found to decrease with the time of incubation. The average amount of exchangeable and water soluble potassium released over an eight month incubation period from seven sandy soils that had supported 3 cuttings of alfalfa was 25 pounds. This figure would be far too small to support a vigorous stand of alfalfa on soils of sandy texture and low in fertility. Laboratory studies under optimum moisture conditions on the fixation of potassium in seven sandy soils of western.Michigan indicated that very little if any potash of a 200 pound per acre application of KCl was fixed in the acid soluble form. When 500 and 1000 pound per acre additions of muriate of potash were made, the per cent of fixed potassium.in non- exchangeable forms averaged about 10 per cent. Such large applications, however, produced rather large amounts of the water soluble and replaceable fractions, which could be lost through excessive leaching. The effect of the addition of potassium on its various soil forms and on plant growth was investigated on twelve Michigan soils planted to millet in small greenhouse pots. The addition of KCl to the lighterl textured soils was more effective in increasing the yield of millet than 140. when applied to the loam and silt loam soils. Little difference was noted in the yield and per cent potash of the plants on all soils treated, but,the potassium content of plants grown on the heavier soils with no treatment was considerably higher due to larger yields and a higher per cent of potash. The original sandy soils contained less acid soluble and exchangeable potassium.than the heavier soils, but about the same amount of the water extractable fraction. After cropping, the acid soluble and replaceable forms of potassium in the sandy soils were lower with and without potash treatment than those fractions in the loam and silt loam soils. In every case, however, except one, the exchangeable and water soluble potassium of'all soils was higher than at the beginning of the experiment. The apparent source of potassium for plant growth for the sandy soils receiving no treatment was the acid soluble form, while for the heavier soils the main supply came from.the acid soluble and acid insoluble fractions. As in the case of fixation studies, the effect of the addition of potassium was to cause a reduction in the acid soluble form and a definite increase in the acid insoluble form. I The main source of soil potassium.in the sandy soils for plant growth is the acid soluble fraction, which is in equilibrium.with the more available forms. Soils of low fertility or soils having had poor management cannot release enough potash to supply the needs of a vigorous stand of legumes. Fertilizers high in potash are necessary to help establish and maintain alfalfa and clover stands. Since the lighter soils do not fix appreciable amounts of potassium, it would appear that the most 141. economical way of applying this plant food would be small and frequent additions over the life of the stand. Such recommendations have already been placed before the farmers. Experimental greenhouse studies indicate that certain minor elements, such as B, mn, Co, Cu, and Zn, when applied with calcium.and potassium increase the yield of legumes on sandy soils. l. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. ll. 12. 142 0 LITERATURE CITED Alexander, 0. and Harper, H.J. 1938 The quantitative deter- mination of magnesium in soils using 8-hydroxyquinoline. Soil Sci. Soc. Proc. 33153-157. Ames, J.W. and Boltz, G.E. 1912 Nitrogen and mineral con- stituents of alfalfa. Ohio Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 2493755- 772. Ames, J;W} and Gerdel, R;W. 1927 Potassium content of plants as an indicator of the available supply in soil. Soil Sci. 23:199-215. Bartholomew, R.P. and Janssen, G. 1931 The rate of absorp- tion of potassium by plants and its possible effect upon the amount of potassium remaining in soils from application of potassium fertilizers. Ark. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 265. Blair, AJW. and Prince, A.L. 1939 Studies on the nitrogen, phosphorus, and mineral requirements of alfalfa. Soil Sci. 47:459. Bray, R.H. and DeTurk, E.E. 1938 The release of potassium from non-replaceable forms in Illinois soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 32101-106. Chapman, H.D. and Kelly, “.P. 1930 The determination of the replaceable bases and the base exchange capacity of soils. Soil Sci. 30:391-406. Cook, R.L. 1934 Fertilizers increase alfalfa and clover yields on heavy soils. Michigan Agr. Exp. Sta. Quart. Bul. 16:191. Cook, R.L. 1941 Plant symptoms show need for potash. Better Crops with Plant Food 25:10:17. Cook, R.L. and Miller, C.E. 1944 Fertilizers for legumes. Eichigan Agr. Exp. Sta. Spec. Bul. 32831-28. Donaldson, R.W. 1941 Use boron.and potash for better alfalfa. Better Crops with Plant Food 25:239. Fine, L.0., Bailey, T.A., and Truog, E. 1940 Availability of fixed potassium as influenced'by freezing and thawing. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 52183-186. 13. 14. 15. l6. 17. 18. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 143. Gustafson, ‘er 1942 Legumes are essential to sound agriculture. Better Crops with Plant Food 2633317. Hoagland, D.R. and.Martin, J.C. 1933 Absorption of potassium by plants in relation to replaceable, non-replaceable, and soil solution potassium. Soil Sci. 3631-33. Hunter, A080, TOth, SOJO. and Bear, FOE. 1943 cal-011m- potassium ratios for alfalfa. Soil Sci. 55361-72. Joffe, J.S. and Kolodny, L. 1936 Fixation of potassium in soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 13187-192. Killinger, G.B., Glaser, R.E., Hodges, E.M., and Stokes,‘W.E. 1943 Minor elements stimulate pasture plants. Florida Agre EXP. 81:3. 81111. 38481-120 Kolthoff, I.M. and Sandell, E.B. 1938 Textbook of Quantitative Inorganic Analysis. p. 351. The Naomillan Company, New York. . Lamb, Jr.. J. 1935 The availability of soil potassium. Soil Sci. 403365-381. Miller, C.E. 1937 Removal of nutrients from subsoil by alfalfa. Soil Sci. 233261-267. Millar, C.E. 1936 A.1egume program.for sandy soils. Better Crops with Plant Food 2036320. Millar, an. 1938 Quantity and relationship of certain elements in Michigan legume hays. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron. 303507-513. Nfillar, C.E. and Gillam,'W}S. 1940 Manganese, copper, and magnesium contents of some commercial fertilizers. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron. 323722-725. Page, H.J. and'Williams,‘W. 1925 Studies on base exchange in Rothamsted soils. Trans. Faraday Soc. 203573-585. Peach, M; and Bradfield, R. 1943 Effect of line and magnesia on the soil potassium.and the absorption of potassium by plants. Soil Sci. 55337-48. Pierre,‘W}H. and Bower, C.A. 1943 Potassium absorption.by plants as affected by cationic relationships. Soil Sci. 55323-33. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 144. Prince, F.S. 1942 Potash extends the life of clover stands. Better Crops with Plant Food 2635317. Purvis, E.B. and Blume, J.m. 1939 The fixation and release of applied potash on three coastal plain soils. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron. 313857-868. Schollenberger, C.J. and Dreibelbis, F.R. 1930 Analytical methods in base exchange investigations on soils. Soil Sci. 303161-174. Sewell, M.C. and Latshaw, W3L. 1931 Effect of lime, super- phosphate, and potash on reaction of soil and growth and composition d? alfalfa. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron. 233799-8140 Truog, E. 1930 The determination of the readily available phosphorus of the soil. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron. 223 874-882. Vanderford, E.B. 1940 Effect of different lime levels on the growth and composition of legumes. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron. 323789-793. Volk, N.J. 1941 The determination of small amounts of exchangeable potassium in soils, employing the sodium cobaltinitrite procedure. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron. 333684-689. Weathers, E.K. 1938 Mineral and nitrogen content of lespedezas and other hay crops in Tennessee. Tenn. Agl“. Exp. Sta. Eul. 16631-32. Willis, L.G. and Piland, J.R. 1938 Alfalfa response to borax. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron. 30363-67. wood, L.K. and DeTurk, E.B. 1940 Absorption of potassium in soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 53152-161. HICHIGRN STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES lllll "WI W W “I NI“ NI W "I “11 MI 11 1|“ “ll HUI 31293010941551