MI

1
I

 

THE EFFECT OF FORAGé MANAGEMENT
ON A SUBSEQUENT SUGAR BEET C20?

Thesis far the Dam. of Ph. D.
NUCHIGAN STATE COLLEGE

.Miifon Harian Erdmann
1953

«HE-5‘5

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

The Effect. of Forage Management
On a Subsequent Sugar Beet Crop

presented by

Milton H. Erdmann

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph o D 0 degree in F312 £19133

 

; Major professor

Date 7" 1 I95

1 0-159

 

THE EFFECT OF FORAGE

MANAGEMENT ON A SUBSEQUENT SUGAR BEET CROP

by
Milton Harlan Erdmann

A THESIS

Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of
Michigan State College of Agriculture and
Applied Science in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of

DOCTOR.OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Farm Crops
1953

new:

ACKNOWLEDGI‘ENTS

The writer wishes to express his sincere appreciation
to Dr. C. M. Harrison, Professor of Farm Crops, for his
guidance and encouragement during the course of this investi-
gation and for his helpful advice in the preparation of the
manuscript. Grateful acknowledgment is also given to Mr.
Grant Nichol of the Monitor Sugar Company for his suggestions
and assistance in the conduct of this research project, and to
Mr. Hubert Brown, Assistant Professor of Farm Crops, for his
help with the statistical analysis. Sincere thanks is also
extended to the Monitor Sugar Company for the cooperation and
assistance given during the course of the experiment and to
the Farmers and Manufacturers Beet Sugar Association for the

financial support which made this research possible.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION . . . . .
REVIEW OF LITERATURE 0
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS .
DISCUSSION . . . . . 0
SUMMARY. . . . . . . .

LITERATURE CITED . . .

Page

25
30
32

THE EFFECT OF FORAGE

MANAGEMENT ON A SUBSEQUENT SUGAR BEET CROP
INTRODUCTION

The beneficial effect of forage crops in a rotation on
subsequent crop yields has long been recognized. Forages
benefit soil productivity by improving soil structure, by in-
creasing the availability of mineral elements, and if a legume
forage, by increasing the nitrogen supply of the soil.

The effectiveness of forages in a rotation in increasing
crop yields varies both with the forage species or mixture and
with the management of the forage crop. Forage species vary as
to the amount and quality of organic material which they add to
the soil. Legumes increase the total nitrogen supply of the
soil whereas the non-legumes do not; at the same time however,
legumes often remove greater amounts of the mineral elements
from.the soil when harvested than do the grasses or other non-
legumes.

The beneficial effect of a forage crop on subsequent crop
yields will necessarily vary with the ability of the forage species
to yield under given climatic and soil conditions. Thus such fac-
tors as rainfall, temperature, soil texture, and soil drainage are

involved in determining the effectiveness of a forage species at

a given location.

variation in fertilization of the forage, whether the
forage is used for hay or for pasture, or left on the land, are
management factors which influence the yields of other crops in
the rotation. Other management practices which affect the vigor
and growth of the forage crop, such as time of cutting or degree

of grazing, will also affect subsequent crop yields.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

A considerable amount of research dealing with the
effect of various forage crops in rotations on subsequent crop
yields has been reported. Much of this work has dealt with
winter cover crops plowed down as green manure or with special
summer green manure crops. Other research has been concerned
with the varying effect of forages used for hay or pasture on
yields of crops following in the rotation.

various crops have been used as indicator crops followa
ing the forages. Corn was used as an indicator crop by'MOOers
(16) in Tennessee where he found crimson clover to be superior
to other summer legumes in its effect on the corn crop which
followed. When crimson clover was cut for hay, the corn yield
was only slightly less than when the whole crop was turned under.
Lyon (14) found from.his research that corn yielded 9,226 pounds
per acre after alfalfa compared to 6,413 pounds after timothy.
Obenshain and Gish (19) reported that of a number of crops
tested, vetch, crimson clover, red clover, and soybeans gave the
greatest increase in corn yields. work by Nelson (17) showed
that hairy vetch and crimson clover gave the greatest increases
in corn and cotton yields, whereas winter oats did not give a
significant increase in corn yields.

Brown (1) reported that all the summer legumes tested

in his experiment increased corn yields, with Austrian winter

peas, crotalaria, and velvet beans giving the greatest yields.
Bur clover and crimson clover were the best of the winter leg-
umes tried in regard to increasing corn yields. Harrison gt.§l,
(ll) feund that there was a significant increase in corn yields
following forage mixtures containing alfalfa over mixtures not
containing alfalfa, and that corn yields were significantly
higher when a preceding forage mixture was pastured rather than
out for hay. These workers also found that hay yields were
approximately double where alfalfa was present in the mixture
in comparison with straight grass or red clover mixtures.

Bushnell (2) reported that buckwheat or corn were superior
to sweet clever or soybeans as green manures for potatoes. ware
(27) found that although plowing under summer legumes showed
little increase in potato yields for the first three years, con-
tinued use resulted in an increase in yield by the fourth year of
42 bushels per acre, and for the next three years, an average
annual increase of 67 bushels per acre. Over a six year period,
Purvis and Blums (22) found that turning under sorghum and soyh
beans increased the average yield of potatoes 30 per cent when
compared to plots where kale or collards were grown in the fall.
Headden (12) reported that potatoes after alfalfa yielded 15,AOO
pounds compared to 8,250 pounds when after grain.

Davis and Turk (6) found in greenhouse experiments that
Prose yields were greater when fertilized alfalfa and sweet clover

were used as green manures than when unfertilized alfalfa and sweet

clover were used.

Garner g§_§;, (9) found that tobacco and potatoes
benefited little from.vetch, crimson clover, and cowpeas in the
rotation, but that corn and small grains were greatly benefited
by these legumes. Ripley'(24) reported from.0ntario that barley
and oats showed definitely higher yields following alfalfa, red
clover, or sweet clover than when following timothy, barley, or
cats. Using barley and rye as indicator crops, Lyon (15) found
the ten year average yield to be greatest after alfalfa, with
red, alsike, or sweet clover giving better yields than vetch,
soybeans, peas and cats, or wheat.

Schneidewind gt; 3;. (25) reported from Germany in 1910
that alsike clover plowed down before sugar beets gave a two year
average increase in yield of sugar beets of 2.53 tons per acre.
In the Netherlands, de Ruijter de Wildt 31; 5;. (8) found that
sugar beets yielded higher after vetch than after seradella or
yellow lupine. Decoux gt 9;. (7) reported that vetch, clover, or
a mixture of peas and horse beans were superior to 75 kilograms
per hectare of nitrogen in increasing sugar beet yields, but that
field mustard before beets decreased the yield of sugar beets.

Davis (5) secured significant increases in yields of sugar
beets, corn, field beans, wheat, and cats from sweet clover green
manure, with some of the increases occurring the second year after
the sweet clover was plowed down.

Based on seven years results, Lill.(13) found sugar beet

yields to be highest following soybeans harvested for hay, with

beet yields decreasing after the following crops in the order
listed: soybeans harvested for seed, corn, oats, and sugar
beets. Results obtained by Cook gt El- (4) over a five year
period showed sugar beets to yield best immediately after
alfalfa, with beet yields after sweet clover and red clover
being about equal to each other and slightly inferior to those
after alfalfa. They also found one year of alfalfa in a rota-
tion to be as godd as two years in regard to yields of the crops
following the alfalfa. On the basis of a series of rotation
experiments, Nuckols and Harris (18) reported that omission of
legumes from.a rotation resulted in low sugar beet yields. Of
a variety of grasses tested, Gregg (10) found orchard grass and
brome grass to give the highest sugar beet yields, with sheep
fescue and timothy giving the lowest yields.

Additional references citing the effect of green manures
on crop yields are found in "Green Manuring" by Pieters (20) and

in an article by Pieters and McKee in Soils and Men (21).

EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

A series of forage plots was established by making
spring seedings in oats in 1950. The experimental plots were
located on the grounds of the Monitor Sugar Company at Bay City,
on a Kawkawlin loam soil which had not grown a sod crop fer a
period of at least twenty years.

Forages included in the experiment were alfalfa, ladino
clover, smooth brome grass, and orchard grass alone, and mixtures
of alfalfa-brome grass, alfalfa-orchard grass, ladino-brome grass,
and ladino-orchard grass. Check plots were left on which no
forage was seeded. The forages were fertilized with 2-14-8 fer-
tilizer at three different rates,.400 pounds, 800 pounds, and
1600 pounds per acre, at the time of seeding in the spring of
1950. In addition, check plots were left without fertilizer. All
plots were replicated three times. Yields were obtained from.two
cuttings of the forage species and mixtures in 1951, both cuttings
being left on half of each plot but removed from.the other half.

The area was plowed in the fall of 1951 and fitted for
beets the following spring. Half of each sub-plot was fertilized
with 800 pounds of 3-9-18 fertilizer per acre at the time the
beets were planted in the spring of 1952; soil analysis prior to
planting the beets had shown the soil to be low in available
potash. At harvest in the fall of 1952, best roots were counted,

weighed, and representative samples taken for sucrose analysis.

EXPERIMENTAL.RESULTS

The forage yields from.two cuttings of hay in 1951
showed marked differences between the various forage species
and mixtures, the average yields ranging from.l.16 tons per
acre for smooth brome grass to 5.04 tons per acre for alfalfa
(table 1). It will be noted from table 1 that the weeds and
volunteer alsike clover harvested from.the check plots yielded
an average of 0.86 tons per acre. The legumes and legume-grass
nurtures gave a greater production of forage than did the grasses
alone, and the alfalfa and alfalfa-grass mixtures produced more
hay than did the ladino and ladino-grass mixtures.

The ladino-brome mixture produced slightly over 0.6 of a
ten more forage than did the ladino clover alone, but in this
experiment, the alfalfa-brome mixture and the alfalfa alone pro-
duced about the same amount of forage. Orchard grass produced
over a half ten more hay per acre than did brome grass, but the
brome grass-legume mixtures produced slightly more forage than
did the orchard grass-legume mixtures.

All the forages showed a definite response to the ferti-
lizer applications. The average hay yields for all forages in-
creased from 1.72 tons per acre for those plots receiving no
fertilizer to 4.12 tons for those plots receiving an application
of 1600 pounds of 2-14-8 fertilizer per acre. Considering the
average yields for all forage, the 1.01 ton increase in forage

yields produced by the first 400 pounds of 2-14-8 fertilizer

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 1. Average yield of forage from.two cuttings in 1951,
in tons per acre at 15%:moisture.
Pounds of 2-14-8 fertilizer
applied per acre
Forage ._
0 400 800 1600 Average

Ladino-Brome 1.37 2.36 2.87 5.61 3.05
Brome 0.78 0.80 0.98 2.07 1.16
Alfalfa-Brome 3.43 4.66 5.62 6.09 4.95
Alfalfa 2097 4099 6.05 6016 500k
Check* 0.53 0.71 1.26 0.94 0.86
Alfalfa-Orchard 3.04 4.52 5.35 6.13 4.76
Ladino 0.96 2.41 2.73 3.54 2.41
Ladino-Orchard 1.32 3.05 3.38 3.59 2.84
Orchard 1.07 1.06 2.00 2.93 1.77
Average 1.72 2.73 3.36 4.12 2.98
* volunteer vegetation

Difference necessary for significance:

5% level 1 level
Between forage averages 0.44 0.58
Between fertilizer averages 0.92 1.39

10

applied was the largest increase per pound of fertilizer applied.
The second 400 pounds of 2-14-8 fertilizer applied, bringing the
fertilizer application up to 800 pounds, produced a 0.63 ton
increase in forage yields, and the final 800 pound application,
bringing the fertilizer application up to 1600 pounds, produced
a 0.76 ton increase in forage yields.

Ladino and ladino-grass mixtures responded more to ferti-
lizer than did the alfalfa and alfalfa-grass mixtures. The
ladino and ladino-grass mixtures produced approximately three
times as much forage when fertilized with 1600 pounds of 2-14-8
fertilizer than when they received no fertilizer, and the alfalfa
and alfalfa-grass ndxtures produced approximately twice as much
forage with 1600 pounds of 2-14-8 fertilizer than when no ferti-
lizer was used.

The average yields of sugar beets following the various
forage species and mixtures (table 2) did not show as large yield
differences as were obtained in the case of the forages, and the
differences did not follow any definite pattern. The highest
average beet yield was obtained after the ladino-orchard grass
mixture, 9.87 tons of beets per acre, and the lowest average beet
yield was obtained after brome grass alone, 7.10 tons per acre.
The average yield of sugar'beets on the check plots, where no
forage had been seeded, was greater than the average yields
obtained where sugar beets followed brome grass, ladino-brome
grass, or alfalfa-orchard grass. No one forage species showed

consistent superiority in regard to the effect on beet yields.

Table 2.

regardless of whether the ferage was removed
from.the plot or not and whether the beets
received fertilizer or not.

Average yield of sugar beets in tons per acre,

 

 

Forage before
the sugar beets
in the rotation

Pounds of 2-14-8 fertilizer

_applied per acre on the forage

 

 

 

 

 

level

0 400 800 1600 Average
Ladino-Brena 4.86 6.98 9.69 11.12 8.16
Brome 5.17 6.16 7.73 9.35 7.10
Alfalfa-Brome 6.39 7.23 9.63 11.51 8.69
Alfalfa 6.34 8.34 11.45 11.49 9.40
Check 6.29 8.30 9.79 9.31 8.42
Alfalfa-Orchard 5.99 6.56 9.27 10.32 8.04
Ladino 5.91 7.30 9.53 12.00 8.69
Ladino-Orchard 6.57 8.44 10.98 13.49 9.87
Orchard 6.26 8.40 9.62 11.88 9.04
Average 5.93 7.52 9.71. 11.16 8.60
Difference necessary for significance:
5g.1evel 1
Between averages following forages 1.23 1.63
Between averages following fertilizers 1.99 3.02

Figure 1.

Top:

Bottom:

12

Beets growing on the unfertilized

ladino clover plot.

No fertilizer applied on the

sugar beets.

800 pounds of 3-9-18 fertilizer

applied on the sugar beets.

13

 

The average beet yields, in 1952, on those plots which
received 1600 pounds of 2-14-8 fertilizer on the forage in the
spring of 1950, were more than 5 tons greater than the beet
yields on those plots which did not receive any fertilizer on
the forage (table 2). The beats on the check plots, on which
no forage was seeded, responded the least to the fertilizer
application made in 1950, but even here the beets on these plots
which received 1600 pounds of 2-14-8 fertilizer per acre in 1950
yielded 50 per cent more than those which received no fertilizer
in 1950.

A difference of only 0.2 of a ton of sugar beets was
obtained between the average yield, 8.50 tons, for all plots
from.which both cuttings of hay were removed and the average
yield, 8.70 tons, for all plots on which the hay was cut but
left on the area.

The average yield of sugar beets from.those plots ferti-
lized with 800 pounds of 3-9-18 fertilizer per acre at the time
the beets were planted was approximately three tons greater than
from these plots which received no fertilizer at planting time,
10.08 tons compared to 7.12 tons (table 3). EWen on those plots
which had received 1600 pounds of 2-14-8 per acre in 1950, 800
pounds of fertilizer applied when the beets were planted in-
creased the yield of beets by more than 2% tons per acre over
those plots receiving no fertilizer.

An application of 800 pounds of 2-14-8 fertilizer at the

time of seeding the forage in the spring of 1950 and with no

Figure 2.

15

Beets harvested from ladino clover
plots fertilized at different rates.
No fertilizer applied directly on the
beets.

Pounds of 2-14-8 fertilizer applied
to the ladino clover - left to right:
1600 pounds, 800 pounds, 400 pounds,

0 pounds.

 

17

Table 3. Average yield of sugar beets in tons per acre,
regardless of forage species and mixtures and
whether the forage was removed from the plot
or not.

Pounds of 2-14-8 Pounds of 3-9-18 fertilizer
fertilizer applied applied per acre on the beets
per acre on the

 

 

 

forage O 800* Average
0 4.51 7.44 5.93

400 5.86 9.19 7.52

300 8.23 11.25 9.74
1600 9.89 12.44 11.16
Average 7.12 10.08 8.60

 

Difference necessary for significance:

52 level 1 level

Between averages for fertilizer on forages 1.99 3.02

Between averages for fertilizer on beets 0.28 0.37

*All fertilizer applications directly to the beets were split
applications - 400 pounds applied broadcast with grain drill and

400 pounds applied in the row with the beet planter.

18

fertilizer applied directly on the beets produced 8.23 tons of
sugar beets compared to 7.44 tons where no fertilizer was
applied on the forage and 800 pounds of 3-9-18 fertilizer was
applied to the beets.

Application of 800 pounds of 3-9-18 fertilizer per acre
on the beets produced an average of 13,298 marketable sugar beet
roots per acre compared to 11,468 roots on those plots where the
beets were not directly fertilized (table 4). The application
of 1600 pounds of 2-14-8 fertilizer per acre on the forage
species and mixtures did not bring about an increase in the average
number of marketable beet roots per acre over the 800 pound appli-
cation of fertilizer on the forages. However, the 800 pound ap-
plication of fertilizer on the ferages produced an average of
13,233 marketable beets compared to an average of 12,415 beets
following the 400 pound fertilizer application on the forages
and 10,723 beets where no fertilizer was applied on the forage.
There were only small differences in the number of marketable
beet roots following the various forage species and mixtures.
Whether the hay was removed or not also had little effect on the
number of marketable roots.

Samples for sucrose analysis were taken from all the
plots in one replication, and only from.plots which had the hay
removed in the second and third replications. The sugar beets
from.the check plots, with an average sucrose percentage of 19.0

percent, had a higher sucrose content than the beets following each

 

19

Table 4. Average number of sugar beet roots per acre,
regardless of forage species and mixtures
and whether the forage was removed from.the
plot or not.

 

Pounds of 2-14-8 Pounds of 3-9-18 fertilizer
fertilizer applied applied per acre on the beets
per acre on the

 

 

 

forage O 800 Average
0 9.591 11.356 10.723

400 11,110 13. 721 12,415

800 12,322 14,145 13,233
1600 12,349 13,469 13,159
Average 11,468 13,298 12,383

 

Difference necessary for significance:

52 level 1 level
Between averages for fertilizer on forages 2426 3676
Between averages for fertilizer on beets 495

 

,‘Q

 

20

of the forage species or mixtures (table 5). The beets following
the brome grass had the second highest sucrose percentage. Fer-
tilizer applications, both on the forages and on the beets, did
not result in large differences in the sucrose content of the
beets. The beets on the plots where the forages had received
1600 pounds of fertilizer averaged 0.3 per cent more sucrose
than those from.plots where the forages received no fertilizer.
Beets which received 800 pounds of fertilizer at planting time
averaged 0.2 per cent more sucrose than those receiving no fer-
tilizer at planting time.

Following the various forage species and mixtures, the
highest average production of sucrose per acre, 3,426 pounds,
was obtained from the sugar beets following the ladino-orchard
grass mixture in the rotation (table 6). The sugar beets follow-
ing alfalfa, with 3,383 pounds of sucrose per acre, were next
highest in the average yield of sucrose per acre.

The average amount of sucrose per acre produced by beets
which were fertilized with 800 pounds of 3—9-18 fertilizer per
acre was considerably'greater than the amount produced by the
beets which were not directly fertilized, an average of 3,652
pounds per acre compared to an average of 2,535 pounds per acre
(table 6) .

The average amount of sucrose produced per acre by the
beets which followed the forages fertilized with 1600 pounds of

2-14-8 fertilizer in 1950 was more than twice that of those beets

Table 5. Average percent sucrose from.plots where hay was
removed, regardless of fertilizer applied on the

 

 

 

 

forages.

Pounds of 3-9-18 fertilizer
Forage before the applied per acre on the beets
sugar beets in
the rotation 0 800 Average
Ladino-Brome 17.1 17.4 17.2
Brome 18.6 18.1 18.4
Alfalfa-Brome 17.7 18.7 18.2
Alfalfa 17.8 18.5 18.2
Check 19.2 18.7 19.0
Alfalfa-Orchard 17.5 18.1 17.8
Ladino 17.6 17.9 17.8
Ladino-Orchard 17.7 18.0 17.8
Orchard 18.4 18.1 18.2
Average 18.0 18.2 18.1

 

Difference necessary for significance:

52.1.6131 .12___.l“’ level

Between averages following forages 0.3 0.7

Between averages for fertilizer on beets 0.2 0.3

22

Table 6. Average pounds of sucrose per acre from.plots
where hay was removed, regardless of fertilizer
applied on the forage.

 

Pounds of 3-9-18 fertilizer
applied per acre on the beets

Forage before the

 

sugar beets in

 

 

the rotation O 800 Average
Ladino-Brome 1,999 3,818 2,908
Brome 2,152 3,085 2,618
Alfalfa-Brome 2,472 3,726 3,099
Alfalfa 2,773 3,993 3,383
Check 3,021 3,538 3,280
Alfalfa-Orchard 2, 140 3, 522 2, 831
Ladino 2,350 3,712 3,031
Ladino-Orchard 2, 749 4,104 3, 426
Orchard 3,157 3,372 3,264
Average 2,535 3,652 3,094

 

Difference necessary for significance:

5% level 1 level

Between averages following forages 513 682

Between averages for fertilizer on beets 145 193

23

following the forages which received no fertilizer in 1950, an
average of 4,143 pounds of sucrose per acre compared to an ave
erage of 2,012 pounds per acre (table 7). As was the case with
the yield of sugar beet roots, the beets on the plots which re-
ceived 800 pounds of 2-14-8 fertilizer on the forages in 1950
and no fertilizer directly on the beets produced a greater
amount of sucrose per acre than the beets following forages
which received no fertilizer but were fertilized directly with
800 pounds of 3-9-18 fertilizer per acre in 1952.

Correlation analysis of the pounds of sucrose from the
first replication show a correlation of 0.68 between pounds of
sucrose produced from plots where hay was removed and plots
where the hay remained. This would indicate that the results
obtained with pounds of sucrose produced from.plots where the

hay was removed also apply where the hay remained on the plots.

Table 7.

 

Pounds of 2—14-8
fertilizer applied
per acre on the

Pounds of 3-9-18 fertilizer
applied per acre on the beets

 

Average pounds of sucrose per acre from plots
where hay was removed, regardless of forage
species or mixture.

 

 

forage 0 800 Average
0 1,448 2,573 2,010

400 2,012 3,267 2,640
800 3.045 4.116 3.580
1600 3.633 4.653 4.143
Average 2: 531+ 39 652 31 093

 

Difference necessary for significance:

Between averages for fertilizer on forages

Between averages for fertilizer on beets

5; level 1 level

1:536
193

DISCUSSION

The wide range in forage yields obtained in this exe
periment emphasizes the importance of the proper selection of
a forage species or mixture in order to obtain high forage
production, either for use as livestock feed or for green ma-
nuring purposes. The fact that the legume and legume-grass
mixtures yielded more forage than did the pure grass species
was to be expected, since only a relatively small amount of
nitrogen fertilizer was applied at the time of seeding in 1950
and no nitrogen fertilizer was applied to the forages in 1951.

The greater production of the legume-brome grass mixtures
compared to the legume-orchard grass mixtures, coupled with the
higher production of pure orchard grass over pure brome grass,
points out the high nitrogen requirements of smooth brome grass.
The orchard grass out-yielded the brome grass when nitrogen was
a limiting factor, but brome grass was more productive when
grown in legume mixtures where more nitrogen was available to the
grass. This great responsiveness of brome grass to nitrogen is
reported by Rather and Harrison (23). Although the data shows
that the ladino and ladino-grass mixtures responded more to fare
tilizer than did the alfalfa and alfalfa-grass mixtures, it is
noted that the alfalfa and alfalfa-grass mixtures out-yielded
the ladino and ladino-grass mixtures at all rates of fertilizer

application.

25

26

The yield averages of the sugar beets did not follow the
yield pattern of the forages which preceded them. Thus the aver-
age yield of the sugar beets on the ladino-orchard grass plots
was greater than the average yield of sugar beets following any
other forage species or mixture; however, when comparing the
average forage yields of the various species and mixtures, the
average yield of ladino-orchard grass had been exceeded by the
average yields of alfalfa, alfalfa-brome grass, alfalfa-orchard
grass, and ladino-brome grasS.

When both the average forage yield and the average beet
yield following the forage are considered, alfalfa gave consist-
ently high yields. Thus alfalfa alone or in mixture with the
grasses gave the highest average forage yield of all the species
and mixtures included in this experiment, and the average sugar
beet yield following alfalfa was only exceeded by the yield of
the sugar beets following ladino-orchard grass.

The difference in average tons of forage produced between
the highest and lowest yielding forage species (alfalfa alone and
brome grass alone) was greater than the difference between the
average tons of forage produced after no fertilizer application
and 1600 pounds of 2-14-8 fertilizer, a yield difference of 3.88
tons compared to 2.40 tons. In the case of the sugar beet yields
however, the difference in average tons produced between no
fertilizer application and 1600 pounds of 2-14-8 fertilizer on the

forage was greater than the difference in average tons produced

27

between the highest and lowest yielding beet plots following

the various forage species and mixtures (the beets following
ladino-orchard grass and the beets following brome grass), a
difference of 5.18 tons compared to 2.77 tons. Thus, in regard

to forage yields, the forage species or mixture was comparatively
more important than the fertilizer applied to the forage. How-
ever, in regard to best yields, the fertilizer applied on the
preceding forage crop was comparatively more effective in increas-
ing beet yields than were the forage species or mixtures.

It was noted in the experimental results that an applica-
tion of 800 pounds of 2-14—8 fertilizer per acre at the time of
seeding the forage in the spring of 1950, and with no fertilizer
applied on the beets, produced an average of 8.23 tons of sugar
beets per acre compared to an average of 7.44 tons per acre where
no fertilizer was applied on the forages and 800 pounds of 3—9-18
fertilizer per acre was applied on the beats. It should be pointed
out that in addition to the higher yield of sugar beets obtained by
applying the fertilizer on the forage seeding rather than directly
on the beets, the 800 pounds of fertilizer applied at the time of
seeding the forages also increased the average yield of the forages
by 1.64 tons per acre over those forages receiving no fertilizer.
Thus the 800 pounds of fertilizer applied on the forage seedings in
1950 had the dual role of increasing average forage yields by 1.64
tons per acre in 1951 and increasing average sugar beet yields by
3.72 tons per acre in 1952.

However, at higher rates of fertilizer application, it

was more advantageous to split the fertilizer application,

applying a portion of the fertilizer on the forages and a
portion directly on the sugar beets. Thus an application of
800 pounds of 2-14-8 fertilizer per acre on the forages plus
800 pounds of 3-9-18 fertilizer per acre on the sugar beets
produced an average yield of 11.25 tons of sugar beets per acre
compared to an average of 9.89 tons per acre where 1600 pounds
of 2—14-8 fertilizer per acre alone had been applied on the
forages.

These results indicate that fertilizer should first be
applied on the forage preceding sugar beets in a rotation in
order to obtain the greatest returns. However, based on the
results of this experiment, additional fertilizer applied
directly on the sugar beets will increase beet yields even if
the forage has received a liberal application of fertilizer.

Whereas the application of fertilizer, either on the
preceding forage or on the beets, did increase the number of
marketable roots per acre, forage species and removal of hay
had little effect on the number of marketable roots. However,
stand counts made before blocking and thinning showed differ-
ences in the number of beets following the various forage
species and mixtures, but no one species or mixture maintained
consistent superiority.

The results obtained in this experiment in regard to
sucrose percentages were in agreement with those obtained by

Ulrich (26), Nuckols and Harris (18), and Cook and Davis (4).

29

Ulrich found that a nitrogen deficiency produced beets with

a high sucrose content, and Nuckols and Harris found the
sucrose percentage in beets slightly depressed by legumes.

Cook and Davis found the sucrose content of beets following
corn higher than that of beets following alfalfa. In this
experiment the beets on the check plots and on the plots fol-
lowing brome grass had the highest sucrose percentages. Howe
ever, the pounds of sucrose obtained per acre was greatest for
the beets following the ladino-orchard grass mixture and for the
beets following alfalfa. These results are in agreement with
those obtained by Nuckols and Harris (18) who found that the
slightly depressed sucrose content of beets following legumes
was more than counterbalanced by higher beet yields. Thus the
results from this experiment indicate that sugar beets may be
grown with advantage immediately after legumes in the rotation,
even though the sucrose content of the beets may be slightly
depressed.

Fertilizer applied on the forages increased sucrose yields
per acre by means of increased yields of beet roots rather than by
a higher sucrose content of the roots. In general, it was found
that the various management practices had a greater effect on

yield than on sucrose content of the best roots.

 

F...

l.

2.

3.

4.

5.

7.

SUMMARY

The forage species and mixtures tested showed marked differ—
ences in yielding ability, with the legumes and legume-
grass mixtures giving greater yields than the grasses alone.
All the forage species and mixtures showed a marked response
in yield to applications of fertilizer.

The differences between average yields of sugar beets follow-
ing the various forage species and mixtures were not as great
as the differences between forage yields.

Fertilizer applied on the forages definitely affected the
yield of sugar beets two years later, but whether the forage
was removed from.the plots or not had very little effect on
beet yields.

In addition to producing large increases in forage yields,
fertilizer applied on the forages produced sugar beet yields
two years later equal to beet yields obtained where an
equivalent amount of fertilizer was applied directly on the
beets.

The application of 800 pounds of 3-9-18 fertilizer per acre
directly on the sugar beets produced substantial increases
in beet yields.

The number of marketable beet roots per acre was increased
by the application of fertilizer directly on the beets as

well as by the application of fertilizer on the forages.

30

9.

10.

31

Forage species and mixtures, and whether the hay was removed
or not, had little effect on the number of marketable beet
roots produced.

Forage species and mixtures had a greater effect on sucrose
percentages than did fertilizer applied either on the forages
or directly on the beets.

Because of the greater effect of fertilizer on beet yields,
fertilizer applied either directly on the beets or on the
forages had a greater effect on the pounds of sucrose pro-
duced than did the forage species or mixture.

Results from this experiment indicate that fertilizer should
first be applied on the forage preceding sugar beets in a

rotation in order to obtain greatest returns.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

7.

8.

9.

10.

LITERATURE CITED

Brown, H. B., Effect of certain summer and winter legume
crops in improving corn yields in south Louisiana. La.
Agric. Exp. Sta. Bule 396’ 1945-

Bushnell, J., Non-legumes as green manures for potatoes.
Proc. Am. Soc. Hort. Sci. 33:566-568, 1935.

Cook, R. L. anngavis, J. F., The effect of crop rotation
at two fertility levels on the yield, stand, and quality
of crops grown on the Ferden Farm. Proc. Amer. Soc.
Sugar Beet Technol., pp.5-ll, 1943.

Cook, R. L., Miller, C. E., and Robertson, L. 5., Sugar
beets in seven Michigan systems of crop rotation. Proc.
Amer. Soc. Sugar Beet Technol., pp. 73-87, 1946.

Davis, J. F., The effect of sweet clover green manure on
crop yields on heavy soils of Michigan. Proc. Soil Sci.
SOC. Of Amro 73290-293, 1911.2.

Davis, J. F. and Turk, L. Hg, The effect of fertilizers
and the age of plants on the quality of alfalfa and sweet
clover for green manure. Proc. Soil Sci. Soc. of Amer.

8 :298-303, 1943 .

Decoux, L., Venderwaeren, J., and Simon, M., Green manur-
ing and sugar beets. Pub. inst. belge amelioration
betterave 8:177-186, 1940.

de Ruther de Wildt, J. 0., Mbl, D., and Berkhout, A. D.,
Experiments on the influence of common salt and green
manuring on the yield and composition of the sugar beet '
together with their residual effect. verslag. Landbouwk.
Onderzoek. Rijkslandbouwproefstat (Netherland), pp. 94-
122, 1911. EXp. Sta. Record 26:438.

Garner, W. W., Lunn, W. E., and Brown, D. E., Effect of
crops on the yield of succeeding crops in the rotation,
with special reference to tobacco. Jour. Agr. Res. 30:
1095-1132, 1925.

Gregg, C. M., A study of the effects of some different

sods and fertilizers on sugar beet yields. Ph. D. Thesis,
Michigan State College Library, 1950.

32

12.

13.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

33

Harrison, C. M., Brown, H. M., and Rather, H. 0., The
production of forage crop mixtures under different
systems of management, the consequent effect on corn
yields, and the re-establishment of alfalfa. Jour.
Amer. Soc. Agron. 39:214-223, 1947.

Headden, W. P., The effect of clover and alfalfa in the
rotation. Col. Sta. Bul. 319, 1927.

Lill, J. G., Influence of crop-sequence and fertilizers
upon the sugar beet crop. Proc. Amer. Soc. Sugar Beet
Technol., pp. 54-63, 1946.

Lyon, T. L., Legumes as a source of available nitrogen
in crop rotations. Cornell, N. Y. Sta. Bul. 500, 1930.

Lyon, T. L., The residual effects of some leguminous
crops. Cornell, N. 1. Sta. Bul. 645, 1936.

Hooers, C. A., The effect of various legumes on the yield
of corn. Tenn. Agric. Exp. Sta. Bul. 142, 1930.

Nelson, Hg, Effect of the use of winter legumes on yields
of cotton, corn, and rice. Ark. Agric. Exp. Sta. Bul.
451, 1944.

Nuckols, S. B. and Harris, L., Effect of crop rotation and
manure on the yield and quality of sugar beets, United
States Scotts Bluff (Nebr.) Field Station, 1930-41.

U. S. D. A. Circular Bul. 779, 1948.

Obenshain, S. S. and Gish, P. T., Effect of green manure
crops on certain properties of Berk's silt loam. Va.
Agric. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bul. 73, 1941.

Pieters, A. J., Green manuring, principles and practice.
John Wiley and Sons, 1927.

Pieters, A. J. and McKee, R., The use of cover and green
manure crops. Soils and Men, U. S. D. A. Yearbook of
Agriculture, pp. 431-444, 1938.

Purvis, E. R. and Blume, J. M., The role of green manures
in potato production. Am. Pot. Jour. 16:32-36, 1939.

Rather, H. C. and Harrison, C. M., Alfalfa and smooth
bromegrass for pasture and hay. Mich. Agric. Exp. Sta.
Circ. B111. 189, 1944.

Ripley, P. 0., The influence of crops upon those which
follow. Scient. Agric. 21:522-83, 1941.

25.

26.

27.

34

Schneidewind, w., Meyer, D.,.Munter, F., Graff, J., and
Grobler, W., Die wirkung der grundungung; siebenter
berichte uber die versuchsawirtschaft—lauchstadt. Landw.
Jahrb. 39. Erganzungband 3:80-91, 1910.

Ulrich, A., The relationship of nitrogen to the formation
of sugar in sugar beets. Proc. Amer. Soc. Sugar Beet
TBChHOJ-e’ ppe 66-80, 1942e

Hare, L. M., Summer legumes for the commercial potato crop
in South Alabama. Am. Pot. Jour. 15:183-188, 1938.

 

  
 

    

 
 

"'TITI'IMHILMIM!HAWAII!MW!“

6 1983