CORRELATION BETWEEN POTATO
PRODUCTION DRAC'E'ICES AND
X’IELDS 1N THE, UPPER PENINSULA
OF M!C‘3~%IGAN

Thesis for the Degree of M S.
MICHIGAN 3TATE COLLEGE

Karl Albert Vary
1945‘

‘l_fl312

“1111 111111 1111 11111111111

3 01739 6122 _

 

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

"Correlation Between Potato
Production Practice and Yields
in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan."

presented by

Karl Albert Vary

has been accepted towards fulfihnent
of the requirements for

M. 80 degree h; Farm Management

Elton B. Hill

Major professor

Date June 9, 1945

 

W103 BETWEEN POTATO PRODUCTION PRACTICES All) YIELDB

I! UPPER mum OI MICHIGAN

by
mu. A. us!
\

A more
lubeitted to the Graduate School of Michigan
State College of Agriculture and Applied
Science in partial fulfil-cut of the
require-en“ for the degree of

MASTER 01' some!

Deputnent of I‘m Henngemnt

1914-5

VITA

Earl A. Vary

PERSONAL:
Age - 30 years. l'e'bruary l. 19% Religion - Protestant
Birthplace - Covert. Michigan Height - six feet
Rationality - American Weight - 180 pounds
Marital status - Married Health - Excellent

EDUCATION:

High School - Creeton. Grand Rapids. Michigan: graduated 1933
College «- Olivet College. Olivet. Michigan: attended 1933—3H
Michigan State College. East Lansing. Michigan; graduated
September. 19%. 3. S. Degree in Vocational Agriculture.

June. 1915. M. S. Degree in Earn Management and Economics.
Upon obtaining M. S. Degree I shall leave Michigan State Col-
legs to go to Purdue University to work on u doctor's degree.

PRACTICAL TRAINING AND EXPERIENCE:
)‘ive years had complete charge as manager of l§OO-acre general
purpose dairy and poultry farm.

Three years operated own lGO-acre farm. renting other farms
and doing extensive farm power contracting for farnere.

One year sold insurance. Auto. Pin. and Life. for State farm
Mutual Insurance Company of Bloomington. Illinois.

Six months - U. 8. Government Refrigeration Engineer at Il'ort
Custer. Michigan.

Past four years attended Michigan State College and have
aanaged own farm at Marshall. Michigan.

Early training and experience gained from father who had
charge and managed l500—acre farm before me. (During my

youth I lived on a 350-acre stock and fruit farm in South-
western Michigan. There we maintained a show herd of Dutch
Belted Cattle which we exhibited at Michigan Pairs and Inter-
national Livestock Shows. We raised peaches. apples. cherries.
pears. plums. and had one of the first large commercial grape
vineyards in that section of Michigan.)

Particular egerience:
Dairy: Registered Holstein herd of 109 head of cattle. Marketed
and produced many kinds of dairy products.
Poultry: Raised broilers. turkeys. ducks. geese. guineas. Battery

:5

“J"P’ e
P... I {}{_);)Q;

Sheep :
Hogs:

Beef 8
Horses:

l‘ish:
Crops:

and floor experience with both laying hens and broilers.
Hatched own chicks for broilers and layers. Marketed -
eggs. chicks. broilers. and fowl at dressed and live
weights.

200 grade Oxford and Hampshire ewes. Marketed Easter and
fancy dressed lambs.

15 to 20 Chester White brood sows. Marketed and dressed
their litters.

Raised. bought and dressed baby beef.

Maintained and used four Belgian draft teams and two thor—
oughbred saddle horses.

Reared brook trout as a specialty food for hotels.

Alfalfa hay and pasture. clover. timothy. field and silage
corn. wheat. barley. oats. rye. soybeans. navy beans. sudan
grass. sweet clover. bromegrase. small vegetables. and as a
specialty 25 acres of Idaho baking potatoes every year.

Machinery Used: Tractors .- John Deere model A. D. D. G. IHC-l‘armall:

Caterpillar Rd—M. Ran-6; Oliver '70 Row
Crop; lord 19140 and Pordson; Allie Chal-
mers. (I can handle and repair these
tractors with skill.)

Trucks - lord 1% ton: GMC 5 ton: Chevrolet
1% ton; lord and Chevrolet Pick-ups.
(Skilled in use and repair.)

Care - lord. Dodge. Hudson. Chevrolet. Ply-
mouth. Oldsmobile.

Other nachinery - Pick-up hay beler. two combines.
cornpicker. plows. disks. barrows. cal-
tipackers. silo filler. numerous water
pumps. irrigation equipment. electrical
motors and devices: had own shop and
did own welding: 2-ton and SO-ton ice
machines. oil burners. feed grinders.
elevators and many other types of farm
machinery.

WERSHIP 8

Directed 15 to 55 employees: planned each day and year's
work. Did all the bookkeeping. including income tax re-
ports. payroll. statements. bills. correspondence. etc.

AHILIATIOH:

Phi Alpha. Exchange Club. Grand Rapids Engineers' Club.
Eational Honor Society. Phi Kappa Phi. and Kappa Delta Pi.

ACUOWWTS

The writer wishes to egress his appreciation to Dr. I. T.
Vright. Dr. M. D. Daten. Professors D. R. Churchill. Ernest J.
healer. and E. D. Hill for the very helpful suggestions and
counsel offered during the preparation of this manuscript.

The writer also wishes to egress his gratitude to Profes-
sor D. L. Clanehan for his cooperation and the use of the Premier

Potato Growere‘ Upper Peninsula records.

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

Potato Club
Premier Growers
Development of first score card

Purpose of study
PRACTICES

Variety

Number of sprays
Bushels of seed
Planting date

Times worked

Loads of manure
Pounds of fertilizer

SCORE CARDS

Present
Proposed

APPLICATION 01 TECHNIQUE TO EARN MANAGEMENT
SUMMARY
APPENDIX

Table of significance
Formulas

h’h‘k‘h‘

‘JIU'IK’IWWW F

1L1
1:2

‘86

consumer harms POTATO rsonucnoa essences £32 YIELDS

_I§_ 2g! UPPER PENINSULA g: MICHIGAH
Karl A. Very
Introduction

Eor many years a Three Hundred Bushel Potato Club has been
promoted in Michigan. Prom this there was developed a Premier
Potato Growere' contest for certified seed growers. Still later
a Premier Tablestock Growers' contest was added.

Through the efforts of the merchants and the Chamber of
Commerce of the city of Escenaba a county contest. for Delta County
potato growers was proposed. A score card was made by D. L. Clan-
ahan. H. C. Moore. and others giving points for recommended cultur.
al practices. Previous to this time the contests were based only
on total yield. percent of U. S. Ho. 1 potatoes. and placings at
either county or district potato shows. Because of the interest
shown in the Delta County contest. other counties have started sim-
ilar contests. It has now been suggested that the results obtained
from the Premier Potato Growers' contests of the Upper Peninsula be
used in deve10ping a new score card to be used for future contests.

Vs were asked by D. D. Clanahan to make a study of the
score card and past records of each Premier Potato Grower's prac-
tices to determine the validity of the weight assigned to the var-

ioue cultural practices used on the score card. The importance of

the major cultural practices was measured by correlating their
influence with the potato yields of these growers.

One reason for choosing this subJect for study is that
we have wanted to investigate the possibility of developing a

score card for use in measuring management of the entire farm

business.

rectors Affecti_n_g Potato Yields

There are many factors which may affect potato yields.

However. only factors over which farmers had some control were

considered on the score card. The factors selected in develop-

ing new score cards are:

1.
2.

3.

It.

5.
6.

Humber of sprays per acre

Bushels of seed planted per acre

Planting date - May m. taken as 1. (Example:
June 2 g 33.)

Number of times worked after plowing and before

cultivating

Number of loads of manure per acre

Pounds of fertilizer per acre

These factors were selected from the score card as the most

important cultural practices to potato production with the

help of E. J. Wheeler and B. R. Churchill of the l'arm Crepe

Department.

Relationship 23 Practices _t_9_ Yields

In the Upper Peninsula potato contests for the years
MHZ-mt. there were 1’45 Russet Rural Premier Potato Growers.
They were located principally in the counties of Menominee.
Delta. Iron. and Schoolcraft. For this same period there were
109 Green Mountain Premier Potato Growers. and these men were
largely in the counties of Houghton. Marquette. and Baraga.
Each of the contestants produced 300 bushels or more per acre
and followed one or more of the recommended cultural practices.
The records of the yields and cultural practices of the above
growers were made available to us for this study by D. L. Clan-
shah.

Correlations for the year 19% were first computed. pay-
ing no attention to variety differences. Correlations were
then calculated separately for the two varieties. Russet Rursls
and Green Mountains. Premier Growers of these two varieties
made up 70% of all contestants for Elba-Ml. The other 30% grew
Chippewa. Pontiac. Menominee. and Sebago varieties. Correla-
tions for the two varieties (Russet Rural and Green Mountain)
were determined for each year of the three year period. 19142-104».
Data for the three years was then combined to form a more rep-
resentative grouping of factors than could be had by using any
one year by itself.

Separate correlations for the tableetock and certified

potato growers were worked out for l9h2 to find out if the effect
of the cultural practices differed significantly. No significant
differences were found; therefore this separation was not made in
the other years.
Symbols were used in the study to designate factors as

follows:

11 - yield in.bushels of U. S. No. 1 potatoes

x2 - number of sprays per acre

:3 - number of bushels of seed planted.per acre

Xh - planting date

XS - number of times worked

X6 - number of loads of manure per acre

X7 - number of pounds of fertilizer per acre

 

% «JR wag Q?! Nam: a .m 2h aflm «.mm . .385

898” :8; flats Rim main «2. find. manila; imam nausea

Emma» 30."... 09.8 Re; mmnd 3». H513 EQNmm Swan .33 mm

«and... :mm 23. in :8; an." n86 83.3 at”; 99 2

amt? new.” $3: 5. Rm; Rm ”9.? Wham? 3a.... ~33 R
3350: 596

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mime gum mam mam mafi was man 73mm” ~63 ”image:
soma: mmm.n «2.2. mama «3.: 2m; mmmfim nmiutk Shams ”.33
$36 Rafi. 59% Rm; 8%: man $23 $0.96; 83 £2 2.
”no.2 E3 main 33 km... a... 3.92 films my} 92 mm

and” an: enema 8m seam :8 was.» main mafia «:9 mm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:u an was nu NM NM 33»! an an ass» 323.6
swam—$33 e388 doom .8 .wzmu no .3 sienna 83$ .3 .on .3 no .on
"11!
HIE—pm v0.33

319m." 3.3.8.6 Seven we scammed one edeaoa 63.8 no unseen

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

a. «mm 22 gnaw lama 8a tun—24
«2.2. Rafi 3?: 82.9... 893a Sui. «doom
2.2.9 2.3.2 «ii 292.... SHEA 2.3... .22
892 non; 8m.~ 2%? 93.2 23.2 92
denim mag.» 29m 332 .292 6&5 22
5353. 896
23% a mom Wan New umwljg
22.8 22.2 222 8293 98.39. 93.02 238..
23... 3.3.2 32.2 unfiomu $2.2m 3...: .32
26.9. 23.2 «$.02 «2.9: 2.12 2o.~n 92
8Q: mam... ~36 29m: tang 2m.n~ ~32 ‘
inn gums nuwu and“ mean Nada use»
“F 1.3 «3.3

 

 

3193a 3.3.5.8 eoeaem no eeueuebd was ages mg no unseen

 

 

{In

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

an 102 .33 E 2.03 2.0 an :22. «fig:
«imagine n26» 05m an. 03.2 08 32.0.. ”2.0%." 28.02 .153.
993mm.“ 9...: .35 93 «a... in 5.3 :33 can .32 3
0325.2 09...: 002.2 :2 2...; 9: 80.0 81:2 2:; 92 2
83.2.2 89% ~26 Sm 216 Ba .32 02.2.. 206 22 F.
338... 880
Mafia «.8. as: m 0.22 ”no..." any, Nag?
20.39% 02.3 22.2 mom; Sunken»; momma Eliza 02.2 3.4.8
22.02.: .92.... :2.» 02. 20.2 .mnm $0.5 :3...sz 80.» i2 2.
000.204.... 000.2 02.0 02 2a.. 03 3&2 5.2. mean 9.2 mm
0262.2 000.2 30$ 2m .92.... TN .2.» .802 new.“ 22 2
~.H NH mm W Lorna a. mu 3.0m? an an ass» 0.22.0.5
.3. 2:...“ .038 . a... a. .33 eat... .25 1.53 82w. .2 .3 an a. .on
1.3— 2......

31.93.." .3253 330.2 no sensuevd .oqs edges 23.8 «0 dueoen

a a .
0 A .
0 ~ ~
0 ~ A
.r A. o
. . .
a n _
_ . ‘.
a . 0
.4 Q . .» 1

 

 

.5
_ ..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4.193 .3330 330." no now-no.5 05 0.7009 05.6 we 0.803

4.4.30.0 wwmmwi 3:. «30:5. mqau 1W0” .§
20.03 03.02. 000.0 000.0006 $1.00 02.00 838
33.3 000.00: 000.: 9.5.0:... Ed? $0.00 .32
000.2. 003.3 :00.” 0.8.0010 000.3 0.3.3 90»
000.03 03.08 n0n.~ 000.000.~ 023R Exam .23
3355: 880
33 H.306 Afiflljgfllg 0.009” .34
000.000 3.0.00.0..." $0.0” 80.83.00 000.00” $0.80 1033
0330? 000.000 003. 0.3.20.0 30.00 30.03 .33
03.3” 000.03 02.0 000.00."... 00.3.0 $0.00 #3
£0.02 02.60 000.0 00m.~0m.a 02.....0 90.00 20."
Puma sum.— wnmu ran was" mafia anon
1.80 :33 till

10

0.003.000.0000 0.0000300
200.000.000.000 0.4.3.00
0000.00» 0003500: 0000.00

0000.00» 0.03 van-00am
200.000.000.000 0.0.00.0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0000. 0000. 000.0

0000. 0000. 00.0

0000. 0000. 00.0 0000. 0000. 00.00 0000. 0000. 0.00 0000. 0000. 0.00 0000. 0000. 00
umme. 0000. 00.0 0000. 0000. 0.00 0000. 0000. 0.00 0000. 0000. 00
0000. 0000. 000.0 0000... 0000. 0.00 0000... 0000. 0.00 0000... 0000. 00
0000. 0000. 00.0 0000.: 0000.n 00.00 0000.: 0000.: 0.00 0000.: 00m00u.0u00 0000.: 0000.n,0m
0000. 0000. 00.0 0000. 0000. 0.00 0000. 0000. 0.00 0000. 0000. 00
0000. 0000. 00.0 0000. 0000. 0.00 :0000. 0000. 0.00 0000. 0000. 00
30.0 .000 4 .210 00.0 4.: 32.0 00.0 #320 00.0 A. 000.0 00.0 WI

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

00.0000 300.0080 020.00 200 00
000.0» 330.0 05 03008.00 00.80000 00 3000000080 800008.000

RUBBER OF SPRAYS AS ELATED TO RUSSEI‘ RURAL
POT. '“O YIELDS IN THE UPPER PEIINSUIA 1942-44

 

BU .
ACRE

0+ " ,

 

 

 

 

400 - 0
0L
n - I 1
0 6 9 12 18

IWZIBER CF SPRAYS

12

NUMBER OF SPRAYS

Regression lguations

317.21 (bushels) + 7.9 (No. of sprays) as
plotted on preceding graph

l9ka-hh average I

l9hh Y = 299.80 (bushels) 4 12.“ (No. of sprays)
19M} I 0 287.86 (bushels) + 9.6 (No. of sprays)
l9h2 Y = 286.10 (bushels) + 6.2 (No. of sprays)

Gross and.Partial Correlations 19N2153.kvergggs
12 = 02535
.0327
. 21m

1'

r12.3

r12A =
.8532

R1.23h

Spraying is mainly done to control the following:
1. Insects
2. Fungus diseases
3. Virus diseases
The number of sprays is governed by the following:
1. Prevalence of the above
2. Thoroughnees of spraying
3. Climatic conditions
M. Date of planting and first killing frost
Increasing the number of sprays from four or five times
to fifteen increased the yield per acre of the Premier Growers

of Russet Rural potatoes an average of 7.9 bushels for each spray

during l9h2—‘IJ4. assuming that other factors remained average.

NUMBER OF SPRAYS AS RELATED TO G. WEN 3.!0UNTAIN

POTATO YIELDS IN THE UPPER PEIINSULA 1942-44

 

gas

 

1 L I I I

 

 

0 .3 5 7 9 11
NUMBER OF SPRAYS

14

13

1%

NUMBER OF SPRAYS

Regression Rguations

326.27 (bushels) + 6.I49 (no. of sprays) as

19h2-NJ» average I
plotted on preceding graph

19“” I

a 333.30 (bushels) + .19 (No. of sprays)
19“} Y : 2 .70 (bushels) +1 .8 (No. of sprays)
19152 I . 286.10 (bushels) 4- 6.2 (No. of sprays)

Gross _a_n_d_ Partial Correlations Qua—1+5 Averages

r12 = .2910
r12.3 : .2h88
r12.“ = .2069

R1.231; 3 “33°?

Spraying is mainly done to control the following:

1. Insects

2. fungus diseases

3. Virus diseases
the number of sprays are governed by the following:

1. Prevalence of the above

2. Thoroughness of spraying

3. Climatic conditions

1+. Date of planting and first killing frost

Increasing the number of sprays from four or five times
to nine or ten times increased the yield per acre of the Premier
Growers of Green Mountain potatoes an average of 6A9 bushels

f or each spray during l9h2—M», assuming that other factors re-

mained average.

‘—
0

 

 

II

 

 

15

30311515 01“ SEED AS :ELAIED TC RUSSET RURAL

POTATO YIELDS IN THE UPPER I‘E‘IINSULA 1942-44

 

 

 

 

 

m. 1- I fl
FER
AC
0
600
a . : O
Q 0
400 II' .-
. O
200
J0 L .I
O 11 22 33 44

16

BUSHELS OF SEED

Regression Ignations

l9h2—hh average I : 222.hh (bushels) + 7.lh(bushe1s of seed) as
plotted on preceding graph

19% I 3 196A“) (bushels) + 8.85 (bushels of seed)
191+} I g 215.50 (bushels) + 7.1% (bushels of seed)
19u2 r = 275.95 (bushels) + 3.91 (bushels of seed)

Gross £93 Partial Correlations 12112-3 Averages

. M508

1‘13 :
1.13.)" I .WO

r13.2 = '3365
31.231: = 'h532
The number of eyes on Russet Rural seed potatoes is fewer
than on the Green Mountain seed potatoes: therefore. they tend to

make fewer seed pieces per bushel.

flo

I (2 to k seed pieces
I when potato is in-

(9
Q <3 clined to be round.)

\

 

‘-

 

Certified seed growers often plant whole tubers; this
requires more bushels of seed per acre and makes for a smaller

average sis ed potato.

17

Increasing the number of bushels of seed from twenty
bushels to thirty bushels increased the yield per acre of the
Premier Growers of Russet Rural potatoes an average of 7.1M
bushels for each bushel of seed planted during 19h2-hh. assum-

ing that other factors remained average.

13

BUSELS OF SEED AS EELATED TO om MOUNTAIN
POTATO YIEIDS IN THE UPPER PENINSUIA 1942-44

 

 

HI.

 

 

 

O 15 Z) 25
sum 0? SEED

l9

BUSHELS OI SEED

.Reggession Eguations

277.9% (bushels) + n.7u (bushels of seed) as
plotted on preceding graph

l9h2-hh average Y

19141; 'f = 383.2 (bushels) + .08 (bushels of seed)
1913 Y : 102.0 (bushels) .,. 12.6 (bushels of seed)
l9h2 Y 3 286.1 (bushels) + 6.20 (bushels of seed)

Gross and Partial Correlations 1932023.Lvergges

 

r13 : e1778
1'13.“ : .0868
r13“? 3 .0866

31.231. = 33°?

The number of eyes on Green Mountain seed.potatoes is
more than on the Russet Rural seed.potatoes; therefore. they tend

to make more seed pieces per bushel.

(h pieces or more when
the length is greater
than the width.)

 

Increasing the number of bushels of seed from fifteen
'bushels to twenty-five bushels increased the yield per acre of
the Premier Growers of Green Mountain potatoes an average of “.7“
bushels for each bushel of seed planted during l9h2-hh, assuming

that the other factors remained average.

(

Pmnmowza AS m TD RUSSET RURAL
mm Ymos IN THE UPPRR mmsum 1943-44

 

31.
PER .
ACRE'
s
600 ’
s ..
‘0 ... ..;.. O .
4m 0 .00 :0 :. 8.! ...: .e .
‘ Ogoos.' ’.0 . is g t
. ‘ e' . ‘.. s s
' .'.’-..!|".'.i‘..
. s
330

n I l .
o 10 20 27 34 44
PLANT ms DATE

 

21

PLANTING DATE

Regression lggations

386.6 (bushels) - .05 (planting date after

l9h2-hh average I
May 1.) as plotted on preceding graph

191m 17 z hog.6 (bushels) - .39 (days after May 1)
19143 I : “22.0 (bu‘hel.) '- 107 (day. after “8’ 1)
19142 I = 1111.3 (bushels) - 1.9 (days after May 1)

Gross and Partial Correlations 12142-33 Averages

r1” : n.0810
1.1“. 2 = "0007
rlu.3 = -.0576

r1“.32 : -.0’422

Russet Rural potatoes are grown in a district of the
Upper Peninsula where climatic conditions generally favor an
earlier planting date than thatwhere Green Mountain potatoes
are grown.

Increasing the number of days from May fifteenth to June
thirteenth decreased the yield per acre of the Premier Growers
of Russet Rural potatoes an average of .05 bushel for each day
of delayed planting during l9h2—hh. assuming that the other fac-

tors remained average.

0')
5b

PLANTING DATE AS RELIED T0 GREEN M‘UNTAIN
POTATO YIELDS IN THE Lr'PER PEIINSUIA 1942-44

.— -n‘

-_—_______.

BU.
PER I
ACRE.

‘00

 

 

a.’

 

 

 

23

PLANTING~DATE

Regression Rguations

1&15.89 (bushels) - 1.25 (planting date after

19212-111; average I
May lst) as plotted on preceding graph

19’“) Y : M153 (bushels) - 1.016 (days after May I)
19u3 r = 280.2 (bushels) - 1.96 (days after May 1)
19u2 I = M37.0 (bushels) - 1.85 (days after May 1)

Gross and Partial Correlations 12142-53 Averages

r1“ = '0 2917
r1“. 2 = -. 2080
lath} : -. 21‘97

r1u.32 = "1399

Potatoes in the Green Hountain area are generally planted
ten days later than in the Russet Rural area. Green Mountain
potatoes are more susceptible to drouthy weather conditions and
earlier planting is important.

Increasing the number of days from May 15 to June 20 de-
creased the yield per acre of the Premier Growers of Green Moun-
tain potatoes an average of 1.25 bushels for each day of delayed
planting during 1942-“, assuming that the other factors remained

average.

mm

amok mama ho 9.th

 

 

J

 

 

 

o O o o o m o m w e O m a O s. u s
o . a s m e o. n a s s e e
Islle e wlsllul‘ e o o m e o)mIIuII[II-sllo1 e s
a . a a . . . u u . . u . r Ifiov
e a n e o s s

 

 

alum 535 was E a

MOHMH> 08¢?
:2 3a Ema 9H .
Q9; Ma... g0». mw...
.. .EHB [no @3552

 

25

NUMBER 01' TIMES WORKED

Regression Rguations

1942-1414 average I a 353.18 (bushels) 4- 2.52 (times worked) as
plotted on preceding graph

19% I = 369.6 (bushels) + 2.2 (times worked)
19143 I = 3346.11 (bushels) + 2.39 (times worked)
1911-2 I 3 382.6 (bushels) - 1.1 (times worked)

Gross and Partial Correlations Que-y}; Averages

r15 = .1820
1.15.6 3 .1502
r15.7 : e168].

The number of times worked refers to the working of the
soil after plowing and prior to the planting of potatoes. An
effort is made to secure a deep mellow seed bed that is rela-
tively free from weeds and one which will require a minimum of
cultivation during the growing season.

Increasing the number of times worked from five to eight-
een increased the yield per acre of the Premier Growers of Russet
Rural potatoes an average of 2.52 bushels for each time worked

during 1918-14-14. assuming that the other factors remained average.

[law
3

~33
£3
file-4
H
01
(x
If)
v)
o

 

 

 

 

 

3IN¢0H 495ququ M‘s-mama 2 .JH
moAmH» 09.48% 32,539.. ”ammo OH Omgqmm ma... AHMED... mrnflHB Mo Mmmwudm

27

NUMBER OF TIMES WORKED

Regression Eguations

l9he-hh average T 300.3 (bushels) - .05 (times worked) as

plotted on preceding graph

l9hh I = 395.0 (bushels) - 1.6 (times worked)
19“} Y a 329.2 (bushels) e 2.hl(times worked)
19N2 Y = 280.2 (bushels) - l.96(times worked)

Gross and Partial Correlations l9h21E&.sver§ges

r15 2 '00295
’15.6 .-. -.0623
1.15.7 : .5019
R1.567 = 3“”

The number of times worked refers to the working of the
soil after plowing and prior to the planting of potatoes. An
effort is made to secure a deep mellow seed bed that is rela-
tively free from weeds and one which will require a minimum of
cultivation during the growing season. In the Green Mountain
area the above is more of a.problem because of the type of soil.
a shorter length of time in which to prepare the seed bed. and
the prevalence of more quack grass.

Increasing the number of times worked from five to eleven
times decreased the yield per acre of the Premier Growers of
Green Mountain potatoes an average of .05 bushel for each time
worked during l9h2-hh. assuming that the other factors remained

average.

NUMBER OF LOADS OF EIAUURE AS RELATED TO KISSET RURAL
POTATO YIELDS I}? THE UPPER PENINSULA 1942—14

 

 

 

 

 

BU.
PER
AC-
0
5m
' 3
C
O
z , .80
: ' 3 5': .
.'.t . - a
400 . .M. I
0" lg. . . ... .
0 . ‘..i.. e .
. ‘:e .:

 

 

NIJLCBER OF LOADS OF MAZIJHE

NUMBER OF LOADS OF MANURI

Regression Iguations

361.1 (bushels) + 2.68 (loads of manure) as
plotted on preceding graph

lShZ-Mh average I

l9hh I

: 372.0 (bushels) + 3.20 (loads of manure)
19h3 Y : 357.6 (bushels) + l.8h (loads of manure)
l9h2 Y : 3M6.3 (bushels) + 2.h3 (loads of manure)

Gross gn_d Partial Correlations lQhZ—‘fl Averages

r16 g o 21%
r16.5 : .2130
r16.7 : .2322

R g ”4068
1.567

In general. loads of manure applied to potato ground in-
creased the yield. This was true where manure alone was applied
and where manure and fertilizer tagether was used.

Increasing the loads of manure from six to fifteen increased
the yield.per acre of the Premier Growers of Russet Rural potatoes
an average of 2.7 bushels for each load of manure added during

lShZ—Hk, assuming that the other factors remained average.

NUMBER OF IDADS OF ELAINE AS mm TO GREEK; LDLJNPAIN
POTATO YIELDS IN THE UPPER :muusuu 1942-44

 

'f

egg

 

 

 

 

 

 

600-
C
O
400'
. .i
0 e
O
6
4
200-
1 I 1 1
O 4 8 12 16

NLJBER CF LOADS OF I'AZ‘IURE

‘. :4
..I

31

NUMBER OF LOADS OF MANURE

REGBESSION EQQATIONS

355.5 (bushels) + l.88 (loads of manure) as
plotted on preceding graph

l9h2—uh average I

l9hh I 3 355.5 (bushels) e .03 (loads of manure)
l9h3 Y s 322.8 (bushels) + “.1“ (loads of manure)
l9h2 Y a 355.0 (bushels) + 2.50 (loads of manure)

Gross and Partial Correlations 12112-313 Averages

r16 = .19h1
r16.5 . .287R
’16.] : .2015
R1.567 = .3u83

In general. loads of manure applied to potato ground
increased the yield. This was true where manure alone was ap-
plied and also where manure and fertilizer together was used.

Increasing the number of loads of manure from six to fif-
teen increased the yield per acre of the Premier Growers of
Green Mountain potatoes an average of 1.88 bushels for each load
of manure added during l9h2-GN. assuming that the other factors

remained average.

O i

 

POUNDS OF F "RTILIZJR AS iiZ‘sz'liD TO RUSSIZT RURAL
POTATO YIELDS IN THE UPPER PEIIIIJSULA 1942-44

 

 

 

 

 

BU. m"
PER
ACRE
O
800 - '
e . 8 .
O
400 - 3 ° :
O
200 _
l l l l
0 400 700 1000 1800 1800

MEIR-3.: CF POUNDS OF FERTILIZER

33

NUMBER OF POUNDS O? FERTILIZER

Regression Iguations

301.3 (bushels) + .12 (pounds of fertilizer)
as plotted on preceding graph

l9h2-hh average I

19% I a 381.0 (bushels) + .03 (pounds of fertilizer)
19343 I 3 300.8 (bushels) + .12 (pounds of fertilizer)
19u2 r 3

3M3.) (bushels) + .Oh (pounds of fertilizer)
Gross and Partial Correlations mus-33 Averages

1‘17 2 ”4080
.h028

r17.5
r17.6 : .h163

31.567 " 01.068

Increasing the amount of fertilizer from l$00 pounds to
1000 pounds increased the yield per acre of the Premier Growers
of Russet Rural potatoes an average of .12 bushel for each
pound of fertilizer added during 191124111. assuming that the

other factors remained average.

.h‘('..

 

POUNDS OF PERT ILIZER AS 111-4111111313 TO GREEN LITUNTAIN
POTATO YIELDS In.T THE LIFER PEJINSULA 1942-44

BU.
PER
ACRE

 

O 400 700 1000 1400
NUMBER OF POUNDS OF FERTILIZER

35

NUMBER OF POUNDS OF FERTILIZER

Regression Eguations

19h2-hh average I 333.7 (bushels) + .05 (pounds of fertilizer)

as plotted on preceding graph

19Nh I s 355.5 (bushels) + .03 (pounds of fertilizer)
19h3 I 3 327.1 (bushels) + .03 (pounds of fertilizer)
l9h2 I s 303.0 (bushels) + .11 (pounds of fertilizer)

Gross and.Partial Correlations 13h2gfifl.sveraggs

 

r17 : .1969
r17.5 : ~1953
r17.6 : .2892

r17.65 : .2885

Increasing the amount of fertilizer from N00 pounds to
1000 pounds increased the yield per acre of the Premier Growers
of Green Mountain potatoes an average of .05 bushel for each
pound of fertilizer added during 19h2—hh. assuming that the oth-

er factors remained average.

36

Score Cards Used 33 12%

Following are examples of the actual score cards
used in some counties in 191m for determining contest win-
ners. Score cards used in the remaining counties are sim-

ilar.

ISCARABA POTATO BOOSTER ASSOCIATION
Tablestock Growers Contest

Open to any farmer growing 2 acres or more of potatoes.
Points will be awarded on the basis of total acreage of all
varieties grown on any one farm. Only one entry for each farm
unit.

22 bu. or more per acre Points

°°rt1fiod ..ed 0 O C O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O .&
lyesrfromcertification.................‘|O
2yearsfromcertification.... .. .. . . .. .. . ..30
Othorued........................m

Seed treatment-Semesan Bel. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .65
Greensprouting (at least 10 days) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Planting on summer fallowed hay or sod field . . . . . . . 60
8 loads manure per acre or plow down crap of hay . . . . . 60
Comercial fertilizer 500 lbs. per acre. equivalent of

135 plant feed units per acre or more . . . . . . . . . .50

PlantingDates
UptoMay3l.......................100
Jamel-5(inclusive)................... 75
June6-10(inclusive) 50

Sprayine
5‘ne............00000000.00... 1m
Stiles.........................l50
7°r‘0r.t1no.0000000000.0.0.0...O.m

11014
i; point per bushel

Amy grower with 50 per cent or more of his acreage
planted for certification will be automatically entered
in certified contest.

Quality
l'oreachpercentoffio.lquality.............1

Show Sample
The show sample will consist of 100 lbs. handpicked. brushed
(do not wash) 0.8. No. 1. nothing smaller than 2% inches
andnoneweighingmore thanlO oz. . . . . . . . . . . . 100

BhowPlacing
Bestfivesamples.each.................100
Iextfivesamples.each................. 9°
llextfivesamples.each.etc............... 30

37

ESCARABA POTATO BOOSTER ASSOCIATION
Certified Growers' Contest

Open to any farmer growing 2 acres or more of potatoes.
Points will be awarded on the basis of total acreage of all
varieties grown on any one farm. Only one entry for each farm
unit.

22 bn. or more per acre Points

Certified seed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
1 year from certification e e e e e e s e e e e e e e e e e "0
2yearsffomcertification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30
Othorlood.........................20

Planting 1-10 of acreage in seed plot and i of this in tuber
mt Plo‘ . O C O O C C O I O O C O O C O C O . O . C O . 1m

Seed treatment-Semesan Bel. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Greensprouting (at least 10 days) . . . . . . . . . .
Planting on summer fallowed hay or sod field . . . . .
8 loads manure per acre or plow down crop of hay . . .
Commercial fertilizer 500 lbs. per acre. equivalent of
135 plant food units per acre or more. . . . . . . . . . 50
PlantirgDates
UptoJune‘j........................100
JunOG-lo.........................75
(Planting dates do not apply to Seed Plots of certified
growers but does apply to main field)

132132.125
5tnes............. .............100
6times............................I50
7ormoretimes......................200

Iield

8‘

} point per bushel
Any grower with 50 per cent or more of his acreage
planted for certification will be automatically entered
in certified contest.
Show Sample
The certified show sample will consist of 128 tubers that have
been hand selected for uniformity of size. shape and freedom
of blemish and must be brushed and wrapped before being brought
to the show. Do NOT WASH.

Show Placiflg
rirstplace........................100
8.60ndpl‘ceOOeee.eeeeeeOeeeeeeeeoee98
Thirdplac..0tc...............o......96

U.P. Show Baggy:

Samples from the county show will be selected for the
Upper Michigan show on the basis of yield and placing at the
county show. Samples shown at the county show and selected for
the U. P. show must be wrapped and packed for the U. P. show by
Uh. “0'91...

38

NOMINEE OOUNTI POTATO IMPROVEMENT CLUB

Open to any Farmer in Menominee County. growing 2 acres or
more of Potatoes

BASIS 01‘ AIARDS
Points will be awarded on the basis of total acreage
of all varieties grown on any one farm. Only one entry for
each farm unit.
I. SEED
Points
Planting certified seed 20 bu. or more per acre . . . . . . .50
Planting seed 1 yr. from certification . . . . . . . . . . . ’10
Planting seed 2 yr. from certification or 1093 inspected
..OdPIOUeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeoBO
Otherlood...................c.....10
Treating with corrosive sublimate. formaldehyde. or
organicmorcury..................... 65
GrQOn.Pr0ut1ne for 2'00)“ e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e 65
II. SEED BED PREPARATION
Plowing under a sod crop or a green manure crop . . . . . . 60
Tall plowing or spring plowing after summer fallowing with
thorough spring fitting (6 or more harrowings or dissing!
beforsplantinc)....e.eoe...........
Applying stable manure. 5 points per load - Total. . . . . 50
Applying at planting time. I+00 pounds or more per acre
of commercial fertilizer. such as 14-16-83 3-12-12 or
108plantfoodun1tl..........c....... 50
III. CULTURAL PRACTICES
PlantingDates-UptoMay31. . . . . . . . . . .. . . .100
JuneltoJunOSinC........... 75
June6toJune10 inc. . .. . . . . . . . 50
TrenChplmtmeOceeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee25
Shallow cultivation dragging field with spike-tooth harrow
or weeder. 3 or more times before plants are 6" high. . . 50
IV. DISEASE AM) INSECT CONTROL
Control of leafhopper. beetles. blights. etc.. with copper lime
and calcium arsenate spray or dust. At least 5 applications
are necessary.

leprayordust.....10 5sprayordust......110
2sprayordust.....20 6sprayordust......130
3sprayordust.....MO 7sprayordust......170
ltsprayordust.....70 8sprayordust......200

V. GRADE AND YIELD
Iield - f point per bushel field run yield . . . . . . . ...
Percentage of U.S. No. 1—1 point for each per cent . . . ...
Inhibiting 100 lb. sample of representative table stock po-
tatoes at the Potato Show; graded as though you were
selling them as aU.S. Ho. 1 Potato. . . . . . . . . 10 ~100

39

Preposed Score Cards

Iollowing are examples of the proposed score cards.
The present score card is included so one may contrast it

with the prOposed.

1&1

omotdop'doo. ’OHHOfl 90g om e. oooooooo 60p
...coea none: @009

603.32 .259

on 0 0 e “0&6” a H 05.!” ON 0 O O O 0 Road” .05 H 05.“

ms . . . . an o» Hm aux mm ..... . . an o» Hm ac:

8H. 0 O O O 8 h“: g on O 00000 C O 8 3 5a
38 225.8

on .. £28 32. 238 on . . 6.3828 3.: 338
mm .. .550 48 233 mm . . :58 33338 323
o . . £28 can 238 o . . . c.3828 a8 233
8a . . . . . 350.51.3- o."

OWN e s e e e e .hdfim‘ m om eeeee O .hflhmi m
08 e s o o s e .hflhe w 8 e e e e e e e Ihflhe M
omH .- e e e 0 e Ugh“. N ON e e e e e e e e e Ugh“. N
8H s e e e e 0 .3“. m 00 e eeeeee e e Ian-fie W
on s s e a e e .h‘kfl‘ m on e e eeeee e e Cb‘Hm. m
ehaumm we con

CON e e o e c o e “GPO G8 on

OWH eeeeee o e mOmN 00 WW
on e s s e e eHOFO a ON OOH sssss e e e me:N 00 ON
MN o e e e e o e ON “OUQD on e e e e e e e e e e 8 HOCQD
aaaaom uaaaom

can a. 33.3

 

 

 

 

3.3552 deans dram nee-am

angm

@530 300m

00 eeeee 0 CW s e e e ‘dflvfldfl
£96.38.“
38: 85a

Ghee-oesomeeemfloafi03h.
ma . . . . . . ma . . . m cc a case
ooa . . . . . . cod . . . an ac: on an

3.5 339.8
own . . . :93- 0..”
SN 0 e e G Chanda. ¢
com . o . . Panama m
g e eeeee 8H0 e e e e Dike -
omd O O O 0 a“. O O O .huhn. m
8H 0 00000 8 00000 .huhm. m

. . . 23.3. n
. . . unnum- m

CH s e e e e 0 ED.”- H
uhuumm no :5

”mm”... 93.3.:

on O O o O o 0 cm e e e e s 8 “sub.
:33 :53
coca. as 33.3

g

gawk

 

 

 

is
33

8 e c o c c c 0 CW 0 e e e e OCPH 08
ON 0 c c c c . e ON c c c o e eIPH CON
8 e e o e e o e 00 e c o 0 CUP.” 00W
om e o e e s 0 on e o e o e 0.3.." 8m
0 O O O O O 0 O O O O . ..pfl
OCH 0 0 "0’0 Q 0"." 8M omfle e s c 0 “0’0 .05 O'pfl com ”M e o e o s 0 mm e e o e e 0.3..” “gm”
3....flmmm38 8~........£m¢n38 8.......o~.......£8~
om....flmmm38~ on........£mmmc»8~ S.......oa.......£oo.n
assuaaaueh no cannon negates” Mo .2“qu
on e e e e e s O 8 s e s s O .30." OH
m: 0 e o s s s 0 9A 0 e o s H .660." m
c e c o s e e e e e s ..OdOH m
0 mm s e e e e e 0 mm s e e e O Cgofl N
one o e OHOE H0 .30." OH one e s e e 0 Ounce MO ..UGOH OH on e e o e s e 0 on e s e e O .30H m
geeeceeOCGdOHm FeeoeseeeeOCfldOHm fleeseeeofleeeeo.ddo.flm
QMceeeeoeCQQOHU QMeeeecoceeegOHw Sec-cocoaceseeOCd‘OH
mcscoeseOdGOHN MeecooseoeeadOHN MHeoocoseMHecocceIddOH
oneeeeeee§OHm oneeeeeceeeeIUdOHW OHeoeeooOOHecoeoeCVdOHN
“NeeeesOOUgOHm “NeeeeseseeeCaOHm meseeesemseeeeeeddo.fl.fi
.aauom cannon. oaaaom nadaom
shad: we canon 0.33 no ocean

 

 

Sandal? 598 1.3m Sella-a. m g as;
. . 3 3.3a

30.3mm Ewan

Application 3; 593 Technigue Used _ig this :5th

_t_g farm flagement Studies

This study was undertaken with the idea that it might
be the fore-runner to similar studies in farm management. It
is felt that there is a definite need for a better way to get
farmers interested in recommended practices. Considerable
interest has been aroused in the Upper Peninsula area through
the holding of contests and the awarding of prizes based upon
the score card. Enthusiasm in the potato growing areas has
prompted this question to be asked: “my wouldn‘t it be pos-
sible to introduce contests in other type-of-farming areas?“

This study has shown that one can statistically relate
practices to the results obtained in a specific enterprise
and set up a score card. l‘rom previous study of farn nanegs-
nent data. it is felt that a similar approach can be nade
through farm management practices of operating a farm.

If such a study were to be made. one would have to run
multiple correlations deter-ining the relative importance of
various factors in their effect on farm earnings. The labor

income would be a as the dependent factor comparable to the

yield in potatoes. Some of the independent factors which might

be related to labor income and evaluated by a score card are as

follows 3

1E5

 

 

.l' a.

 

J‘J‘ek‘ofié‘d‘ J‘J‘
I

labor income

livestock production index (dairy. beef. hogs.
poultry. sheep)

crop yield index

size of business (total P. M. V. U.)‘

intensity (P. M. V. U. per tillable acre)

labor efficiency (P. M. I. U. per men)
machinery efficiency (eqense per tillable acre)

building efficiency (expense per animal unit)

‘Productive man work units

Two of these are indexes which are results of efficiency

in several enterprises. namely. the livestock and crop yield

indexes. Rate of production would have to be measured in dairy.

beef. hogs. poultry. and sheep and each enterprise weighted ac-

cording to its relative importance. This can be done in the

case of livestock by multiplying the production index by the

productive man work units on that enterprise. These would then

be combined into a single figure indicating the average rate of

livestock production. A similar procedure can be followed with

crops using acres as a measure of their relative importance.

Size of business could be measured by total P. M. V. U.; inten-

sity could be measured by P. M. V. U. per tillable acre. labor-

efficiency by P. H. I. U. per man. machinery efficiency by ex—

pense per tillable acre. and building efficiency by expense per

1th

 

If there were a difference in soil productivity. it
might be that a separate score card.would.have to be made up

for different classes of soils.

h5

m: “T“.f‘Fe—‘F‘. if M
I

 

Summer:

The purpose of this study has been to make an analysis
of past records of the Premier Potato Growers in the Upper
Peninsula. to determine the validity of the weight assigned
to various cultural practices used on the score cards. and
from the results obtained to deve10p a new score card. It was
also hoped that this investigation might lead to the possibil-
ity of developing a score card for use in fans management.

Seventy percent of the Premier Growers in the Upper Pen-
insula grew either Russet Rural or Green Mountain potatoes; the
remaining thirty percent grew Chippewa. Pontiac. Menominee and
Sebago varieties. The growers of Russet Rural potatoes were
principally located in the counties of Menominee. Delta. Iran.
and Schoolcraft and the Green Mountain growers in the counties
of Houghton. Marquette and Baraga.

After working many statistical calculations. data for
three years (Qua-Mb) have been combined to present a more rep-
resentative relationship of factors than could be had by using
any one year by itself. The two cultural practices found to be
of most importance in the growing of Russet Rural potatoes ac-
cording to correlation analysis. were bushels of seed used in
planting and pounds of fertilizer applied. In the growing of

Green Mountain potatoes the correlations found with the great—

h7 z

est significance were early planting and number of times sprayed.

The effect of the various cultural practices on the yield

of potatoes. as shown by correlation analysis. was not as great

as is frequently supposed. One possible explanation of this

situation is the fact that all growers having under 300 bushels
per acre were omitted, as they were not included in the contests
and no data were available for them.‘

over 300 bushels per acre followed the recommended.practices to

Most of the growers having

 

a fair degree, so there were few who represent poor practices.

In.keeping with the above information. the facts presented in

this study are valid only as they are presented within these lim—

its of the practice.

Regression equations combining the years 19h2-uu showed

the effects of the cultural practices on yields to be as follows:

Effect of Cultural Practices on.Yields

of Premier Potato Growers in the Upper Peninsula. 19Ma-hh

 

The.Additlon of:

Changed the Yield

 

 

 

 

Russet Rural Green Mountain
’(Buehels) ‘_CBushelsy

1 Spray + 7.90 + 6.50
1 Bushel of seed + 7.10 + 1570
1 Day planting (after May let) - .05 - 1.30
1 Time worked (after plowing

&'before cultivating) + 2.52 - .05
1 Load of manure 5 + 2.70 + 1.88
1 Pound of fertilizer E + .12 + .05,

 

Preposed score cards have been develoPed which more
nearly present a valid weight to the cultural practices based
upon data from Premier Potato Growers contests. 19N2-hh. The
points assigned to each recommended cultural practice have met
with the approval of certain members of the Farm Crops Depart-
ment. (Score card illustration on page 4/.)

This study has shown that one may statistically relate
practices followed in a specific enterprise with the results
obtained. and develop a score card for use in a contest to pro-
mote better cultural practices. It also points out the possi-
bility of statistically determining the effect of certain farm
management factors on farm earnings for use in setting up a

score card to encourage better farm management.

MS

Correlation Coefficients at the 5% and 1%
Levels of Significance*

 

 

 

 

Degrees of Degrees of '
freedom 5% l$ freedom 5% 1%
1 .997 1.000 at .388 .996
2 .950 .990 25 .381 .u87
a .878 .959 26 .37u .m
.811 .917 27 .367 .320
2 .751. .87: 28 .361 '1; g
.707 . 83 29 .3 5 .
7 .666 .798 30 e3% snag
8 .632 .765 33 .32 .MIS
9 .602 .735 .30 .393
10 .576 . 08 #5 .288 .372
11 .553 . 81+ 50 .273 .3511
12 .532 .661 60 .250 .325
1 .511; .6u1 70 .232 .302
1 .h97 .623 80 .217 .283
15 .982 .606 ‘ 90 .205 .267
16 .u68 .590 100 .19 .2514
17 .36 .575 125 .17 .228
18 . .561 150 .159 .208
19 .1133 .5119 200 .138 4::
so . 3 .53 0 .113 .1
21. .111 .526 336 .098 .128
22 .110 .515 500 .088 .115
23 .396 .505 1.000 .062 .081

 

 

'George H. Snedecor. Statistical Methods. 1938. page 133

50

Pormulas

Gross Correlation Coefficients:

“1’2 " (“1‘12”
1'12 =

 

 

J11: - (1:1)2 Jug; - (12:2)2
- 12113 '- (”1‘13)
Juf - (n1)? 7...; - (1.3)?

1‘

 

13

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

fun: - (n1)? Jug - (A392

“116 - (“1“6)

1‘

16 '-'-’ ‘
\luf - only? In: - (1:6)

 

 

 

2

_ Arm-(“1“?)
17 -
\lnf - (1:32 J11; - (up?

1‘

 

 

A1213 - (1.22113)
1'23 :

 

 

 

J11: - (1x292 #1:? - (1:92

51

Item - (“2‘1“)
[A15 - (1:32 1Ax: - (an)?

rah =

 

 

 

 

”31+ :

 

 

M - “=92 Jufi - We

55 = “516 - (1.51.6)
x/Axg - (1:5)? Jug 41:6)2

- “‘5*7 ' (1.51:7)
57 -.Jixg - (A15)2 \[Axi - (A17)?

‘Axsx7 - (‘36"7)

\/A:§ - (A16)2 .733; ; (A17)2

1‘

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1'67 :

 

 

Iirst Order Correlation Coefficients:

’12 ' (’13) (’23)
J1 " (1'13)2 \fl '- (1'23)2
1'13 " (’11:)(1'210

J1 "' (”1102 J1 " (”214)T

1‘12.3 =

 

 

 

1'

 

123+ :

 

 

 

52

1‘13 "’ (1'12)(1‘32)
\ll -(1'12)2\/1 - (1‘32)2
r13 - (rlu) (r3u)

Ji - (r1792 J1 41-3792

 

 

ll13.2 '-'-'

 

11331 =

 

’11; " (’12) (”219

 

r19 2 "
' 2 2
J1 - (r12) J1 41-217)

1'11; "' (’13) (1'3 “1)

 

 

iu.3-
Jl-(ru) 23\/l-(ru )2

-(r16) (r5 6)

 

1.l‘j.6'-'
J11-(r126) \[1-(r56)2

" (1'17) (1'57)

 

 

 

1'15.? '-'-' .

J1 - (r17)? J1 - (r57)2

’16 " (’15) (’56)

J: - l6(r15)Z J1 .. (r56)2

" (1‘1?) (1'6?)

 

1'16.5 =

 

 

 

53

r - r17 ' (r15) (:57)
17.5 " _

2 2”
J]. - (r15) \/1 - (1'57)
r17 - (r16) (r67)

\/1 - (r16)2V/1 - (r67)2

Second Order Correlation Coefficients:

 

 

 

117.6 :

 

rlueS - (r1203) (rzu.3)

 

 

 

1311.32 = 2
7/1 " “12.3) \/1 " "2u.3)2

1.17.6 - (115.5 ) “57.6)

 

117.65 3 _ 2
2
7/1 ’ (”15.6) J1 " “57.6)

 

 

Multiple Correlation Coefficients:
321.23 I (1 " ”122) (1 - r132)

2 2 2
a 1.211 z (1 - r12) (1 - r1“)

2 2
321.31; = (1 - r13 ) (1 - r“)

e .L‘

5M

1 I9 321.2314 3 (1 as r122)” '- 113.22)“ '- rm.322>
2 2
1121.56 3 (1 - r15 ) (1 - r15)

2 2
321.57 : (1 - r15 ) (l - r17 )

2 2 2
31.67:(1-r16) (It-1'17)

1 s- 321.557 2 (1 " r152)(1 - 1“16.52)(J' - r17e652)

Normal lquation (to find gross predicting equation):

1. 2(1) n n + bib)
n. my) = aflb) + cm)?-

was: “A ..u “WW
. w

55

 

:NNHH N I :HHMN

 

MHNHH N I MMHHN

 

NHNHNNI NNHNN

f+nflo+mflp+e u an
9533.36
caseinnzenmezpao-+a£ us

as non warden

Q d a

dflmcflwv I mzuNga. o _deNnMNI :HmHNMa ... p THNNNNI :NNHNQ

 

emaumnww: lmuieunwuM ... o TAPNV I mmuNgt ATHNNQNI mumuwg

 

 

 

d d d

uTHNmNNI :KNHNW ... o TNNNHNI nnmuwg ... n—mamnwv I NNHNQ

 

 

 

”neaasaoaaoo .333: new 33563 ....cmaen

56

53rd .. and:

Amman: .. «an; ... oTud I 5"an + pTlmud .. 5"an

para .. hard

672m: .. (NHL + o Tnud .. «mu; + pTlmfi. .. mumuL

Natl .. Nara 6 Tim“: .. :«muL + 0 film: .. Maui; + p Twat .. «mu;

:SImzmu 50333.80 393.3: you aouagdn 6250: 5 decade-pun cowuuobd

22-20% USE 0m , x » . I * I

 

 

 

' T6 51 170695
' V527 Vary

nICHIan STnTE UNIV. LIBRnRIES
¥|lWIN”"WWIWWWWWI”WI
31293Q17396122