INFORMATION TQ USERS This was produced from a copy o f a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1.The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure you of complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark it is an indication that the film inspector noticed either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, or duplicate copy. Unless we meant to delete copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed, you will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photo­ graphed the photographer has followed a definite method in “sectioning” the material. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand comer of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. For any illustrations that cannot be reproduced satisfactorily by xerography, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and tipped into your xerographic copy. Requests can be made to our Dissertations Customer Services Department. 5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases we have filmed the best available copy. University Microfilms International 30 0 N. ZE E B R O A D , A N N A R B O R , M l 4 8 1 0 6 18 B E D F O R D ROW, L O N D O N WC1 R 4E J, E N G L A N D 1149 C A R L E T O N , WALTER MONROE P R I N C I P L E S A F F E C T I N G THE PERFORMANCE OF MECHANICAL S U G A R B E ET P L A N T E R S . MI CHI GAN STATE U N I V E R S I T Y University Microfilms International PH.D., 300 N. Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor, MI 48106 1948 18 Bedford Row, London WC1R 4EJ, England PLEASE NOTE: In a l l cases t h i s material has been filmed in the b e s t p o s s i b l e way from the a v a i l a b l e copy. Problems encountered with t h i s document have been i d e n t i f i e d here with a check mark . 1. Gloss y photographs l / ' 2. Colored i l l u s t r a t i o n s _________ 3. Photographs with dark background '4. I l l u s t r a t i o n s are poor c o p y _________ 5. ° r i n t shows through as there i s t e x t on both s i d e s o f page __________ 6. I n d i s t i n c t , broken or small p r i n t on s ev er al p a g e s _________ 7. T i g h t l y bound copy with p r i n t l o s t in spin e _________ 8. Computer p r i n t o u t pages with i n d i s t i n c t p r i n t _________ 9. Page (s) lacking when material r e c e i v e d , and not a v a i l a b l e from school or author _________ 10. Page(s) __________ seem to be m issing in numbering only as t e x t f o l l o w s _________ 11. Poor carbon copy 12. Not o r ig in a l copy, several pages with blurred type 13. Appendix pages are poor copy _ 14. Original copy with l i g h t type 15. Curling and wrinkled pages __ 16. Other ^ University Micrdfiirns international 30 0 . \ Z r = = =D. A N N A = 3 0 ? M l J S ' 0 6 ' 3 1 3 ! 7 6 1 -4 7 0 0 throughout PRINCIPLES AFFECTING- THE PERFORMANCE GF MECHANICAL SUGAR BEE? PLANTERS By f a l t e r Monroe C arleton A THESIS Submitted to th e School o f Graduate S tu d ies o f Michigan S ta te C o lle g e o f A g ricu ltu re and A pplied S cien ce in p a r t ia l f u lf illm e n t o f th e requirem ents fo r th e degree o f DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department o f A g r ic u ltu r a l E n gineering 1946 PRINCIPLES AFFECTING KIS PERFORMANCE OF MECHANICAL SUGAR BEST PLANTERS By Walter Monroe C arleton A THESIS Submitted t o th e School o f Graduate S tu d ies o f Michigan S ta te C o lle g e o f A g ricu ltu re and Applied S cien ce in p a r t ia l f u lf illm e n t o f th e requirem ents fo r th e degree o f DOCTOR OP PHILOSOPHY Department o f A g r ic u ltu r a l E ngineering 1946 a m m u m m tm . m m m m go &x\% m g wgg go affimXTTCQ? TPT&dcetf tit TB»Tffi&v uma $® m w m M oSoxieO- ©£«Sfcsjs© i© © to r®mmt of those elements which may l improve the e ffe c tiv e n e ss o f planters or planting methods ©n f i e l d gem ination* ■Some progress has been made In th is work but new devices or t©oh« nlques must be proved in the f ie ld over a period of years* . A n m type ©f r o llin g wheal furrow ©peiier was designed and used in the experimental work.' The r e su lts ©f f ie ld t e s t s indloate that certa in planting treatments which include t h is opener are batter than ©onvantlon&l planting methods tent fin a l judgment must be' reserved u n t il the opener has been tried for mor© seasons* A pneumatic compaction wheel which imparted a uni­ form and co n sisten t pressure upon the s o i l was found to be b etter than a ca st-iro n compaction wheel* Greater u n it pressures by the compaction wheel r e su ltin g In heavier s o i l ©ompaetlotte around the seed wars found to give hotter emerges©® than the lig h te r compactions* esp ecia lly under d rier seed-bed conditions* Qrsenhous* te s t s were used to determine the compare?tiv e perfoimanoe o f the ©xpsriaental openers with th© per­ formance of plantings made under conditions o f known ©ompa©*® W alter M. Ga r ia ton tio a . Compactions re su ltin g from the ap plication of a s ta tic pressure o f a maximum o f 4 pounds per square inch on the s o il m r e found to be s t a t is t ic a lly b etter m measured by plant emergence* than compactions obtained by the appli­ cation of lower pressures down to 1 pound per square inch. I t was found that the a ir permeability t e s t of s o il wm a sa tisfa c to r y method In the laboratory o f comparing the compaction e f f e c t s of furrow openers with the e f fe c t s of known s ta tic pressures on the coil* The ©hooking o f planting procedures by laboratory and greenhouse experi­ ments permitted planter research to be carried out more rapidly than by usual summer f ie ld experiments only. A new machine for more accurately and s c ie n t if ic a lly measuring the compaction of s o il was designed and built.This machine was su ccessfu lly used to evaluate compaction treatments used In the planting experiments and provides a valuable to o l for us© in so ils* planting* and t illa g e research*' TABLE OF CONTENTS Pag© INTRODUCTION ---------------------- ---------- ----- -- ------------— REVIEW OF LITERATURE 1 --------— -------------------- 3 Problems o f Sugar B eet Seeding Machines —— --------— 3 H is t o r ic a l q P r e se n t problems 6 F actors Which In flu e n c e Emergence o f Sugar B e e ts ~ Seed P la n te r Development 9 E valu ation o f P la n tin g T e sts — INVESTIGATION ------ 7 — - — -- ------------ — --------- 11 12 O b je ctiv es 12 Methods o f Procedure 12 Experim ental Work .-— —«— , Summer 1847 a w —* «»«»——~ 13 «»«»«» 13 W inter-Spring 1947«« *48 27 Summer 1948 41 CONCLUSIONS-----------------SUMMARX ——. — --- — LITERATURE CITED------------------— --------- ---- -—— ACKNOWLEDGMENTS — — ---------- —— ---------- 316937 63 65 — —• 68 — ------ - 71 LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES Pag© Pig* 1 M ichigan S ta te C o lleg e Experim ental Two-Row Sugar Beet P la n te r ——— — Fig* 2 — - —»»»— «w»«www, 14 Shoe-Type Opener w ith F e r t i l i s e r Tube f o r D ir e c t A p p lic a tio n w ith th e Seed — — «—— 16 Fig* 5 Experim ental Boat-Type Furrow Opener — — — 17 F ig . 4 Experim ental R o llin g Wheel Furrow Opener — — 13 F ig . 5 Pre-T hinning Stand-Count S heet —— — — — — 22 Fig* 6 Experim ental Sugar-Beet P la n tin g Layout a t Breckeurldge* M ichigan F ig . 7 24 A Glay-Loam S o il Which Formed Crack© a lo n g th e P ath o f th e P la n te r when th e S o il D ried — 25 F ig . 8 The Machine fo r P la n tin g i n th e Greenhouse* Wheel Opener F,qulpped w ith Depth C ontrol Skids 29 F ig . 9 The Machine fo r P la n tin g In th e Greenhouse. Wheel Opener Equipped w ith Depth Bands — — F ig . 10 The Machine fo r P la n tin g In th e Greenhouse* The R evised Boat-Type Opener i s I n s t a lle d — F ig . 11 30 31 The 5 3 .5 Pound C ast-Iron Compaction Wheel U sea f o r Pre-3e©dlng Compaction During the 1947 Summer Experiments — — — 32 LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES Page Fig* 1 M ichigan S tate C o lle g e Experimental Two-Row Sugar Beet P la n te r — Fig* 2 „ 14 Shoe-Type opener w ith F e r t i l i z e r Tube fo r D ir e c t A p p lica tio n w ith th e Seed 16 Fig* 3 Experim ental Boat-Type Furrow Opener — —— 17 F ig . 4 Experim ental R o llin g Wheel Furrow Opener — 18 Fig* 5 Pre-T hinning Stand-Count Sheet ———— ----- — 22 Fig* 6 Experim ental Sugar-B eet P la n tin g Layout at Breckenridge* M ichigan Fig* 7 24 A Clay-Loam S o il Which Formed Cracks a lo n g th e P ath o f the P la n te r when the S o il Dried — 25 Fig* 8 The Machine fo r P la n tin g i n th e Greenhouse* Wheel Opener Equipped w ith Depth C o n tro l Skids 29 F ig . 9 The Machine fo r P la n tin g in th e Greenhouse. Wheel Opener Equipped w ith Depth Bands — — F ig . 10 The Machine fo r P la n tin g in th e Greenhouse. The R evised Boat-Type Opener i s I n s t a lle d — Fig* so 31 11 The 53*5 Pound C a st-Iro n Compaction Wheel Used f o r P re-Seeding Compaction During the 1947 Summer Experim ents — — ------.— ------------ gg IV Page F ig , 1 2 The A p p lica tio n o f a Known S t a t ic P r e ssu r e UpOR tfJl0 @0&3l F ig . 13 33 A ir P erm ea b ility U nit fo r T e stin g th e S o il j[|| IPlStO© —— e» — «—nwnw — »»»■>— nw»—<«■»*»—«»«•*» 33 F ig . 14 Layout o f Experim ental P la n tin g s i n Greenhouse 34 F ig . 15 Cracks in th e S o i l Caused by th e 5 3 .6 Found C a st-Iro n Packing Wheel ——— T able 1 Time i n Seconds fo r the Manometer R eading to Drop from 27 t o 2 C entim eters Table 2 ——— 36 Seed and P la n t Attainm ent by Various P la n tin g Methods — — — —— — —— — — —— — —— 39 Table 3 Comparison o f Germinated Seeds Table 4 Comparisons o f T o ta l P la n ts — —— ------- 4 1 F ig . 16 B ic y c le Wheel Arrangement f o r Compacting S o il Around th e Seed. Fig* 17 57 ~ 40 Shown in P o s itio n on P lan ter 43 Underneath View o f Michigan S ta te C o lle g e Experim ental Sugar Beet P la n te r —- — — — 44 — 43 F ig . 19 Experim ental Sugar Beet P la n tin g Layout — — 47 Table 5 A Comparison o f Experim ental Treatm ents F ig . 18 Sugar B eet P la n tin g Layout f o r Four Experiments A g a in st P aired Check Rows fo r Four Experim ents 48 iv Page F ig . 12 The A p p lic a tio n o f a Known S t a t ic P re ssu re wnwmwiw*»— >■»»»mmwwm UpOll F ig . 13 552* A ir P erm ea b ility U n it fo r T e stin g t h e S o il i n P la c e »«*— — .»■»«».«..»<--»«.«»...» 33 F ig . 14 Layout o f Experim ental P la n tin g s i n Greenhouse 34 F ig . 15 Cracks i n the S o i l Caused by th e 5 3 .5 Pound C a st-Ir o n Packing Wheel Table 1 Time in Seconds fo r the Manometer H eading to Prop from 27 t o 2 C entim eters — T able 2 37 ——— 36 Seed and P la n t Attainm ent by V arious P la n tin g Methods — 39 Table 5 Comparison o f Germinated Seeds —— — — —— 40 Table 4 Comparisons o f T o ta l P la n ts — -------------------------- 41 F ig . 16 B lo y e le Wheel Arrangement f o r Compacting S o il Around th e Seed* Fig* 1? Shown in P o s it io n o n P lan ter 43 Underneath View o f Michigan S ta te C o lle g e E xperim ental Sugar Beet P la n te r — Fig* 18 , 44 Sugar B eet P la n tin g Layout f o r Four Experim ents 46 F ig . 19 Experim ental Sugar Beet P la n tin g Layout —— 47 Table 5 A Comparison o f Experim ental Treatm ents A g a in st P aired Check Hows fo r Four Experim ents 48 V Page Table 6 A Comparison o f Experim ental Treatments f o r Four Experiments —— ‘a—»— Table 7 —— »«»«— »«»— ««» A Comparison o f Experim ental Treatments w ith P aired Che ok Hows fo r th e F if t h « » ■ » « » . » » » » » « »«■ Q'Q Experiment nw—n*.—— Table 3 A Comparison o f th e Experim ental Treatments w ith Eaeh Other f o r th e F if t h Experiment 53 Fig* 20 R ecording S o li Compaction T e ster 68 F ig . 21 Sample Chart fo r R ecording S o li Compaction T e ste r 66 F ig . 22 F ie ld Design fo r S o il Compaction T e s ts Table 9 Treatment Code f o r Compaction T ests Table 10 S o i l Compaction T e s ts . ~ 59 P en etra tio n Force In Pounds a t One In ch Depth Table 11 68 61 Comparison o f S o il Compaction E f f e c t s o f Fourteen Treatments —— — — ; —---------------- - 62 V Page Table 6 A Comparison o f Experim ental Treatments f o r Four Experiments - — Table 7 — —*------ 49 A Comparison o f Experim ental Treatments w ith P aired Chech Hows fo r th e F if th iSjCpOJ^dLdOH^i Table 3 m w — w wi e m w a K i w iiw u i n w f — w » i B M »n p i > a M n « » w > « > 'w i iw » m SS A Comparison o f th e Experim ental Treatm ents w ith Each Other f o r the F i f t h Experiment — • 53 P ig . 2 0 R ecording S o il Compaction T e ste r —--------------- 55 F ig . 21 Sample Chart f o r Recording S o il Compaction Fig* 22 F ie ld Design f o r S o il Compaction T e sts — 53 Table 9 Treatment Code f o r Compaction T ests 59 Table 10 S o i l Compaction T ests.' —- —— P en etra tio n F orce In Pounds a t One Xnoh Depth *««*••*••«►««••»••»•»•••■»-•» 0 1 Table 11 Comparison o f S o i l Compaction E ffe c ts o f Fourteen Treatments —— — ----------------------------- «. Q2 1 INTRODUCTION Sugar b e e t s provide approxim ately 25$ o f a l l th e sugar consumed in th e United S ta te s ( 5 ) . According to th e United S ta te s Department o f A g ricu ltu re (21) th e average annual acreage o f sugar b e e ts In th e Unli«d S ta te s v a r ie s from about 750,000 to 1 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 acres* Production In th e E astern area (p r in c ip a lly Michigan and Ohio) fo r th e l a s t 20 y ea r s has v a r ie d from a low o f about 12 p ercen t to a h ig h o f about 25 percen t o f th e n a tio n a l t o t a l (4)* A grea t d e a l o f e f f o r t has been put fo r th to mechanise th e production o f sugar b e e t s In an attem pt t o low er the h ig h production c o s ts ivhlch are p rim a rily due t o th e la r g e amounts o f hand labor req u ired during two d is t in c t lab or peaks* Mervine and McBlrney (16) quote C a lifo r n ia fig u r e s showing th a t 75 man hours la b o r were req u ired (y ea r 1936) to groiv a crop* The sp rin g work o f h oein g and th in n in g accounted fo r 36 percent o f the t o t a l w h ile 33 p ercen t were req u ired fo r top p in g and lo a d in g a t h a r v e st time* Common p r a c tic e was and i s y e t t o accom plish th e se la b o r peaks by th e use o f tr a n s ie n t or co n tra ct labor* Thus th ere was a danger o f l o c a l shortage o f la b o r even during p erio d s o f unemployment* Much p ro g ress has been made toward m echanization o f th e h a rv est work* According to McBlrney (14) th e acreage o f b e e ts m ech an ically h a rv ested p rev io u s t o 1943 was n e g lig i b l e . He s t a t e s th a t in 1944, sev en p ercen t and in 1946, tw elve p ercen t o f th e U .S. acreage was h a rv ested m ech an ically . C a lifo r n ia growers h a rv este d approxim ately 60 p ercen t o f t h e ir 1945 crop by m echanical means. (82) Gardner ( 6 ) in d ic a t e s th a t in Michigan i n 1946 probably l e s s than 5 p erc en t o f th e sugar b e e t acreage was h a rv ested m ech an ically| i n 1947 the percentage would probably be nearer 2 0 . Walker (82) su g g ests th a t th e immediate problem b efo re th e sugar b e e t in d u stry i s no lo n g e r one o f f e a s i b i l i t y o f m echanization ( o f h a r v e s t) but one o f programs o f development which w i l l b rin g to g r e a te r p e r fe c tio n the m echanization now e s ta b lis h e d . Zn order t o com pletely mechanize sugar b e e t p roduction th e evidence above in d ic a te s th a t the emphasis must now be l a i d on m echanization o f th e spring work. The M ichigan S ta te C ollege p r e le c t on sugar b eet p la n tin g mechanisms and tech n iq u es was i n i t i a t e d in the sp r in g o f 1946. H en tsch el ( 8 ) s t a t e s th a t th e problem was to determ ine the e f f e c t s o f v a r io u s methods o f m echanical seed bed prepara­ t i o n , in c lu d in g t i l l a g e , seed placem ent, seed co v era g e, and s o i l compactness over the seed . 3 REVIEW OF LITERATURE Problems o f Sugar B eet Seeding Machines H is t o r ic a l The problems Involved in p la n tin g sugar b e e t seed have lon g been a source o f study# Grant (7)# p rev io u s to th e year 1880, made a t r i p to France t o I n v e s tig a te th e c u ltu r e o f sugar b eets and th e manufacture o f sugar w ith th e in t e n t o f e s ta b lis h in g th e in d u stry in I l l i n o i s # In h is work d e sc r ib in g h i s fin d in g s he wrote? The ir r e g u la r ity in s iz e and shape o f b e e t seed renders i t n ecessary t o su b jec t i t to c e r ta in tr e a t­ ments in order to f a c i l i t a t e th e o p era tio n o f sowing, and to p rev en t th e c lo g g in g o f th e machine, th e r e s u lt o f which would be to le a v e lon g sp a ces in th e l i n e s (rows) w ith ou t any seed# T his p relim in ary treatm ent a ls o f a c i l i t a t e s i t s germ in ation , and in a measure guards i t a g a in st d e str u c tio n by in s e c ts # The seed should be p assed through a sc ree n w ith meshes s u f f i c i e n t l y f in e to r e t a in a l l th a t would not p ass e a s i l y through th e gauge t h a t r e g u la te s th e passage i n th e machine# The seed which do not p ass must be rubbed between two boards and p a r t i a l l y crushed, in order to reduce th o se which are la r g e and ir r e g u la r ly formed t o a s iz e th a t p erm its t h e ir easy tra n sm issio n through th e screen# As soon as th e seed are sown th e ground should be r o lle d # This h a ste n s germ ination# The b e e t r o l le r i s a c a s t - ir o n o n e, in j o in t s or s e c t io n s . The r o l le r should fo llo w the l i n e s made by th e seed-sow er as 4 e x a c tly a s I s p o ssib le * I n a d d itio n to d is c u s s in g the a c t u a l seeding work Grant d is c u s s e s a method u sed a t th a t tim e fo r m echanically b lo ck in g th e b e e t s t o reduce th e hand la b o r requirement* He adds: In many p a r ts o f Europe th e farmer not on ly runs h is c u lt iv a t o r between the row s, b u t a ls o a c r o ss them, le a v in g h i s p la n ts a t the corners o f squares eig h teen in ch es a p a rt each way, thus doing alm ost a l l h i s work w ith a h o rse c u ltiv a to r * * . • The u se o f the h o rse c u lt iv a t o r i s not re commanded as i t le a v e s th e p la n ts too fa r a p art in th e lin e s * In some c a s e s th e hand hoe { “r a s e t t e a main8) i s used fo r both o p e r a tio n s , and o fte n e r s t i l l fo r c u lt iv a t in g aoross th e lin e s * The " r a sette a main8 i s mounted on low w h e e ls, and i s a sp e c ie s o f th r u s t hoe and c u lt iv a t o r combined* • • • In ca se th e f i e l d i s not c u lt iv a t e d a cr o ss th e l i n e s e i t h e r by th e h o rse or hand r a s e t t e , i t i s n e c e ssa r y , as soon a s c u lt iv a t io n between th e lin e s has taken p la c e , to t h in out th e b e e t s , le a v in g s in g le p la n ts sta n d in g , from tw elve to fo u r te en in ch es apart in th e rows* The g e n e r a l u se o f segmented seed has come in to e x is te n c e s in c e 1941 when B ainer (2 ) succeeded in su ccess­ f u l l y reducing th e number o f germs p er seed unit* Attempts to reduce f i e l d th in n in g o f ex cess p la n t s had been p r e v io u sly t r i e d w ith l i t t l e s u c c e s s . Palmer (1 8 ) w ritin g In 1918 m entions attem p ts to p la n t b e e t - b a lls i n paper tu b es in a 6 seed-bed* The b e e ts were thin n ed w h ile In trays* conveyed to t h e f i e l d i n tr a y s and p la n ted in the tu b es. found to be t o o ex p en siv e. T h is was Palmer fu r th er continued? At th e same time a German seed grower t r ie d to ob viate th e n e c e s s it y o f thinning* by p a ssin g the s e e d -b a lla through a g r a te r and cracking them Into se v e r a l parts* Some o f t h is cracked seed was placed on the American market* but d id not g iv e s a t is f a c t o r y r e su lts * The drawbacks t o t h i s method were b oth numerous and seriou s* Some o f th e seed germs were d estroyed in th e crack in g machine* Others were exposed and th e fu n c tio n o f th e b e e t - b a ll to r e g u la te th e germ ination was destroyed* The o x a la te s i n the b e e t - b a ll did n o t perform t h e ir fu n ctio n o f p r o te c tin g th e young p la n t from i t s m loro-enem ies. And f in a lly * u n le ss a la r g e p o r tio n o f th e germs were ru in e d , I t was im p o ssib le so to crack th e b a l l s but th a t many o f the p ie c e s co n ta in ed more than one germ and the f i e l d had to be thin n ed as usual* W ith th e se experim ents i n mind, th e w r ite r (Palmer) cracked open and examined thousands o f b e e t-s e e d b a lls and f i n a l l y concluded th at th e only manner i n which th e d e s ir e d r e s u lt might be a tta in e d would b e t o breed a s in g le b e e t-b a ll* P resen t problems The problem s which Grant d iscu ssed about s ix t y years ago have not been e n t ir e ly solv ed a t t h i s date but p ro g ress has been made* Walker (23) i n d isc u ssin g th e tren d s in sugar beet machinery i n 1942 sa id th a t f lu t e d fe e d d r i l l s had been g e n e r a lly u sed up t o about 1 0 y ea rs p reviously* The d r ille d b e e t se e d lin g s came up more or l e s s in clumps o f s e e d lin g s . The need fo r a s in g le s e e d -b a ll p la n te r was 6 evident* Mervlne and McBlrney (1?) In 1939 rep o rted on th e development o f s in g le -s e e d plantin g* These two men developed a c h a in -fee d s in g le drop p la n te r which gave s ig n if ic a n t ly more uniform spacing o f the seed b ut they concluded th a t th e ex tra c o s t o f manufacture was not J u s t if ie d provided th e co n v en tio n a l p la n te r s were equipped w ith proper p la t e s fo r s in g le seed in g . The resea rch on and development o f p la n tin g equipment i s an in d ir e c t approach to th e problem o f the m echanization o f p rod u ctio n . McBlrney (12) s t a t e s th a t the production o f sugar b e e t s req u ires approxim ately 1 0 0 man hours per a cre where m echanization o f th in n in g and h a rv estin g i s not p r a c tic e d . Approximately o n e -th ir d o f th e 100 i s requ ired fo r hand th in n in g and h oein g the crop. McBlrney fu rth er s t a t e s th a t m ost o f th e p la n te r development so fa r has been concerned w ith in v e s t ig a t in g p la n ter c h a r a c t e r is t ic s a f f e c t in g seed d is tr ib u tio n . The r e s u lt has been s u c c e s s fu l s in g le -s e e d p la n te r s and p r a c t ic a lly a l l commercial p la n te r s are now o f th e s in g le -s e e d ty p e . The su ccess o f s in g le - s e e d p la n te r s to g e th e r w ith segmented seed has reduced seed ing r a t e s from about twenty pounds o f whole seed per a cre in 1930 t o about fo u r pounds o f segmented seed per acre at th e p r esen t tim e ( 8 ) . 7 I t has been sta te d above th at one o b je c tiv e o f p la n te r development h a s been t o a f f e c t good seed d is t r ib u t io n . This o b je c tiv e has been a t l e a s t p a r t ia lly a tta in e d in p resen t day p la n ters* T herefore g r e a te r emphasis may be l a i d on attem p ting t o determine th o se fa c to r s which may improve the e f f e c t iv e n e s s o f p la n ter s or p la n tin g methods on seed germ ination . In order t o mechanize th e th in n in g op eration i t I s n ecessary th a t th e proper stand o f b e e t s be secu red . Reeve and R lchol (1 9 ) g iv e data from a f iv e - y e a r study o f p er-a cre p la n t p op u la tio n s on 50,000 acres lo c a te d around S t. L ou is, M iohlgan. They d efin e a 100 percen t stan d a s one b e e t every 12 in ch es in 2 2 - in c h rows or a t o t a l o f 23760 b e e ts p er a cre. I f 2 8 -in ch rows are used th en th e b e e t s need be c lo s e r to g e th e r to ob tain a 100 p ercen t stand. The data show th a t th e average y i e l d o f b e e ts d ecrea ses a s the number o f b e e ts per a cr e d ecr ea se s. I t i s shown th a t th e average w eig h t per b e e t does not in c r e a se s ig n if ic a n t ly a s th e number o f b e e ts per acre d ecr ea se s. These d a ta show th e Importance o f proper seed in g tech n iq u e. Factors Which In flu e n c e Emergence o f Sugar B eets Xoder (2 4 ) l i s t s the fo llo w in g s o i l fa c to r s as d ir e c t ly 8 in flu e n c in g th e growth o f r o o t p la n ts: 1. S o il-w a te r supply 4. P la n t n u tr ie n t supply 2. S o i l - a i r supply 5. Depth o f ro o tb ed , and 3. S o tl-h e a t r e la t io n s 6. P resen ce or absence o f in ju r io u s su b sta n ce s. According to H o ffer (9 ) su rfa ce cru st sometimes smothers th e r o o t s o f young p la n ts . B aln er ( 1 ) s t a t e s th a t w eather hazards w i l l con tinu e t o be one o f th e c o n tr o llin g fa c to r s in o b tain in g s a t is f a c t o r y stand s even though th e b e s t a v a il­ a b le p la n tin g equipment and seed i s u sed . McBlrney (11) con clud es th a t: The wide v a r ia tio n in f i e l d emergence on hundred Inch cou n ts w ith even th e b e st ty p e s o f openers on what are ap paren tly good seed beds seems t o in d ic a t e th a t our seed beds are to o v a r ia b le and not as good a s th ey should b e . We know from grease-b oard t e s t s th a t th e v a r ia tio n In seed drop In hundred in ch runs i s not g r e a t and th a t th e extreme v arian ce in emergence must r e s u lt from some oth er ca u se. Further work to o b ta in improved and more uniform emergence should in clu d e s tu d ie s o f seed beds and bed p rep a ra tio n in a d d itio n to th a t on p la n tin g equipment. Tolman and Stout (20) made a comparison o f the g em in a ­ t io n o f sheared sugar b eet se e d , whole seed b a l l s , and naked seed u sin g b lo t t e r s , s o i l in s p e c ia l g la s s gerralna to r s and a ls o on the. greenhouse bench. They found th a t v ery few s e e d lin g s from naked seed s and im perfect sheared 9 seed s emerged from the s o i l when p la n ted more than o n e-h a lf Inch deep* They s ta te th a t the optimum depth o f p la n tin g fo r both whole seed and sheared seed i s th at th ey should be p la n ted J u st a s shallow a s m oisture w i l l permit* Depth o f p la n tin g should th e r e fo r e be governed by s o i l m oisture and not by kind o f seed planted* Baver (3 ) d is c u s se s th e s ig n ific a n c e o f s o i l stru ctu re: I t i s known th a t p la n ts req u ire n u trie n ts# w ater, and a ir fo r growth* The amount o f n u tr ie n ts in the s o i l i s u su a lly tak en as an in d ex o f f e r t i l i t y . The a ir and w ater r e la t io n s h ip s are dependent upon stru cture* , • • The growth o f p la n t r o o ts and the germ ination o f seed s requ ire fa v o ra b le c o n d itio n s fo r r e s p ir a tio n . I f th e r e i s a lim ite d supply o f oxygen w ith in th e s o i l a s a r e s u lt o f poor s tr u c tu r a l condi** t lo n s , r e s p ir a tio n p r o c e sse s are hindered: germ ination and growth are retarded* Moreover, a sm all ro o t system r e s t r i c t s th e volume in which n u tr ie n ts are a v a ila b le to th e p la n t. Consequently a low a ir ca p a city may a f f e c t p la n t development in more than one way* These fa c ts in d ic a t e th a t abundant n u tr ie n ts in th e s o i l do not in su r e good crop production* The in v e s t ig a t io n s o f numerous workers emphasise th a t I n s u f f ic ie n t a t te n t io n has been g iv e n to p ro vid in g a favorab le environment fo r the germ ination o f seed s and growth o f crops. Seed P la n te r Development The p r e c is io n p la n tin g o f sugar b e e t seed has come about in th e l a s t f i f t e e n or tw enty years in an attem pt to reduce 10 th e sp rin g la b o r requirem ents due to b lo ck in g and thinning* llerv in e and McBirney (17) t i n 1959, rep o rted t h a t an I n v e s t i­ g a tio n o f commercial p la n te r s d is c lo s e d th a t none seemed to have a u n ifo rm ity o f seed drop* They developed a ra th er accu rate but ela b o ra te c h a in -fe e d p la n te r b ut i t s manufacture was n o t pushed due to improvements in co n v en tio n a l p la te p lan ters* Success i n producing segmented sugar b e e t seed in 1941 (S ) le d t o th e development o f p r e c is io n p la n te r s f o r seg­ mented seed ; Bainer (1 ) s t a t e s ( i n 1947) th a t s e v e r a l p la n tin g u n it s are capable o f p r e c is io n m etering o f pro­ p e r ly graded seed* He a ls o s t a t e s th a t: • . • th e p r in c ip a l problem y e t to be so lv e d d e a ls w ith proper placem ent o f th e seed in th e ground to In su re maximum germination* The r e l a t i v e l y poor f i e l d germ ination fo r m achine-planted segmented seed I n d ic a te s a n e c e s s it y fo r improvement o f furrow opening and coverin g d evices* P r e c is io n p la n tin g re q u ir es p r e c is io n seed and p r e c is io n farm ing p r a c tic e s I f th e g r e a te s t g a in s are to be r e a lise d * McBirney ( 1 3 ) , r e p o r tin g on 1945 p la n te r in v e s t ig a t io n s i n Colorado, gave recommendations fo r p la n te r d e sig n to improve s e e d lin g d is t r ib u t io n c h a r a c te r is tic s and fo r im proving th e percentage o f f i e l d emergence* f o r improving f i e l d emergence were: The su g g e stio n s 11 1* Use more p ressu re on p ress wheels* p a r tic u la r ly on firm seed b ed s. • • . 2 * I^oosen up the su rfa ce o f firm seed beds by surfaoe harrowing p r io r to p la n tin g * * * • 3* Use deep con ca v ity p r e ss w heels with co n sid era b le p ressu re fo r lo o s e seed beds* 4* b evel* scrape; or smooth out th e bottom o f th e seed furrow b e fo r e dropping seed . Considerable experim ental work should be done to develop s u ita b le equipment to do th is * 5, Use sh allow er depths fo r e a r ly p la n tin g s when g e m in a tio n i s slow and m oisture may be e x c e ssiv e * 6, Use deeper p la n tin g s fo r l a t e r p la n tin g s when s o i l i s l i k e l y t o be dry and germ ination i s rapid* 7* Use furrow p la n tin g on ly when necessary to g e t the seed In to m oisture* » • • 8* Our p la n tin g s have n ot shown th e ridged p la n tin g to b e o f any b e n e fit* * * • E valuation o f P la n tin g T ests In ord er to ev a lu a te th e f i e l d performance o f sugar b e e t p la n te r s some method must be agreed upon fo r measuring th e r e g u la r ity o f spacing o f seed s or seed lin g s* Mervlne (15) d e fin e s th e * stand* a s b ein g sim ply the p ercen tage o f in ch es in th e row In which b e e t s are found* e it h e r s in g le s o r m u ltip le s . T his p ercen tage I s found by p la c in g a hundred in ch s c a le a lo n g th e row and record in g th e number o f in ch es o p p o site which th ere are one o r more s e e d lin g s. For th e sake o f s im p lic ity th e se may sim ply be c a lle d " b eet-co n ta in in g 12 inches" • INVESTIGATION O b jectiv es The o b je c t iv e s o f t h i s in v e s t ig a t io n were c l a s s i f i e d a s immediate and lo n g -tim e o b j e c t iv e s . The immediate o b je c tiv e was to determine th ose fa c to r s* o f sugar b e e t p la n te r s or o f p la n tin g technique# which a f f e c t th e germina­ t io n and emergence o f sugar b e e ts . The lo n g -tim e o b je c tiv e was to co n trib u te to the e lim in a tio n o f the sp rin g labor peak now req u ired in th e th in n in g and b lo ck in g operations* Methods o f Procedure The methods o f procedure were! 1* A b ib lio g r a p h ic stud y o f p a st resea rch on p la n tin g equipment. T his research gave a good p ic tu r e o f work which had been accom plished to d a te and su g g ested c e r ta in l i n e s o f a tta c k fo r th e lab oratory and f i e l d work in t h i s in v e s t i­ g a tio n . 2. A study o f e x i s t i n g p la n tin g equipment w ith the aim o f determ ining i t s e f f e c t iv e n e s s in comparison w ith ex p eri­ m ental p la n te r s and to determ ine what fa c to r s were respon* s l b l e for va ry in g perform ance. 13 2V F ie ld t r i a l s o f p la n tin g equipment* 4. Hand p la n tin g t r i a l s a s a check on seed in g equipment* 8* Laboratory checks on p la n tin g techniques* 6* S t a t i s t i c a l a n a ly s is o f a l l t r i a l s w ith th e aim o f determ ining th e s ig n if ic a n c e o f any d iff e r e n c e s i n t r e a t ­ ments* 7. A lte r a tio n s, and improvements o f p la n tin g equipment based on th e r e s u lt s o f la b oratory and f i e l d t r i a l s * Experim ental Work Experim ental p la n tin g s were made in th e f i e l d In the summer o f 1947, in th e greenhouse during th e w in te r o f 1947-48 and a g a in in th e f i e l d during th e summer o f 1948* She experim ental work w i l l be p resen ted i n c h r o n o lo g ic a l order sin c e c e r t a in m o d ific a tio n s in equipment and tech n i­ ques came about a s th e r e se a r c h progressed* Stammer 1947 Equipment* F ig . 1 shows the M ichigan S ta te C o lleg e p la n te r a s i t was used during th e 194? f i e l d t r i a l s * fh ls two-row p la n te r was d esig n ed t o s im p lify th e Interchange o f experim ental u n its* She l e f t furrow opening and packing u n it was taken from a commercial John Deere su g a r-b eet d r i l l 14 F ig . 1 M ichigan S ta te C ollege Experim ental '.Two-Row SugsrwBeet P la n te r . and served a s th e co n v en tio n a l or check raw u n it . The r ig h t hand u n it was b u i l t fo r th e quick exchange o f v a rio u s experim ental furrow o p en ers. In a d d itio n a heavy o a s t Iron packing w heel shown a t Na N i n F ig . 1 cou ld be used ahead o f th e opener I f d e sir e d . In l i k e manner th e sm all packing w heel 8bH co u ld be used f o r a fte r -s e e d in g com paction. Commercial Cobbley seed in g u n it s were used f o r both rows. Seeding u n it s f o r both segmented and p elleted -seg m en ted seed were a v a ila b le * The se ed in g u n it s were c a lib r a te d i n the lab oratory a t a speed eq u iv a le n t to about two m ile s per hour and found to b e dropping segmented seed a t th e r a te o f 3 .3 15 pounds per a c r e . Since th e p e lle t e d seed u n ite had th e same number o f seed h o le s and were turned a t the same r a te o f speed i t was assumed in th e t e s t s th a t th e same number o f seed b a l l s were d ep o sited in th e furrow fo r e it h e r type o f seed . The f e r t i l i z e r u n it s were d riven by a ground-wheel sep arate from th a t which drove the seed in g u n it s . The f e r t i l i z e r u n it s were c a lib r a te d in th e lab oratory t o apply 175 pounds p er a cre w ith th e seed . T his procedure was in conform ity w ith recommendations which p erm itted up t o 2 0 0 pounds o f f e r t i l i z e r p er a cre to be p la ce d d ir e c t ly in th e row w ith th e s e e d . The p la n o f the experim ent c a lle d only fo r making sta n d counts o f s e e d lin g s . Since i t was not planned t o grow th e b e e t s t o m aturity th e a p p lic a tio n o f th e u su a l a d d itio n a l 200 t o 300 pounds o f f e r t i l i z e r per acre b e sid e th e b e e t row was not deemed necessary* Three ty p e s o f furrow openers were used ex p erim en ta lly during th e 1947 season* 1. C onventional shoe typ e 2m M.S.C. b oat-typ e 3. M.S.C. R o llin g -d is k type F ig . 2 shows the shoe opener a s used in th e e x p e r l- 3.0 m ental combinations* Pig* 2 Shoe-fype Opener w ith F e r t i l i s e r Tube fo r D irect A p p lica tio n w ith th e Seed* An experim ental furrow opener d esig n ed by th e Michigan S ta te C ollege A g ric u ltu ra l E ngineering Department seemed to show some prom ise during p relim inary t r i a l s in th e summer o f 1@46« A s l i g h t l y m odified d esign o f th e opener* to permit th e a d d itio n o f f e r t i l i z e r w ith th e se ed i s shown In F ig. 3* Fig* 3 E xperim ental Boat-Type Furrow Opener In d is c u s s io n o f pre-em ergence weed co n tro l i t was su ggested th a t th e s o i l w hich has been tr e a te d p r io r to p la n tin g sh ould be d istu r b e d a s l i t t l e a s p o ssib le* This was su ggested a s b ein g n e c e ssa r y to p rev en t b r in g in g nearer th e su rface th o se weed s e e d s th a t had n o t been damaged by th e p r e -p la n tin g treatm ent* The opener shown i n Fig* 4 u t i l i z e d as a furrow -opening device a th r e e -fo u r th s inch th ic k p la te w hich was m achined to th r e e -e ig h th s th ic k n e ss a lo n g the o u te r edge* Runners were provided fo r depth con trol# T his u n it worked reason ab ly w e ll but was Improved fo r u se i n th e 1948 season as shown in Fig# 9 . F ig . 4 Experim ental R o llin g Wheel Furrow Opener She seed was su p p lie d by the Farmers and Manu­ fa c tu r e r s B eet Sugar A s s o c ia tio n o f Saginaw# Michigan# ty p e s were used l a th e experim ental work# They w ere! 1# Segmented 2# Segmented, soaked in s a l t s o lu t io n , and d r ie d Three 19 3.‘ P e lle t e d The segmented seed was U .S. 213 x 216 graded through a 9 /6 4 Inch and over a 7 /6 4 Inch screen* The tr e a te d segmented seed was a p a rt o f th e same U .S . 215 x 216 p r e v io u sly mentioned* I t was soaked fo r two hours In water* tr a n sfe r r e d t o a 2 $ Ha 0 1 s a lt b r in e fo r two hours and th en dried* The washing treatm ent was f i r s t sug­ g e s te d to th e author by Din H. S* H all* fo r a e r ly o f the Michigan S ta te C ollege S o i l s Department* as a means o f attem p ting t o overcome t o x ic e f f e c t s a s th e sugar b e e t seed decomposes in th e s o il* She p e lle t e d seed was Ho. 801|« According t o Informa­ t io n su p p lied by th e Farmers and M anufacturers B eet Sugar A sso c ia tio n th e p e l l e t m a teria l* based on the w eig h t o f the seed before p e lle tin g * was a s fo llo w s! Ouprlclde 7*5 p er c e n t Treble Superphosphate 1 0 .0 p er ce n t In ert— remainder Samples o f th e dry segmented and p e lle t e d se e d s were se n t to th e Michigan S ta te seed t e s t in g lab oratory in go Lansing fo r germ ination t e s t s , The t e s t s which showed o n ly the t o t a l p ercen t o f germ inating seed h a l l s were? Segmented 8 6 p ercen t P e lle t e d 47 p ercen t S o il.' S im ila r experim ents were conducted a t th e Michigan S ta te C ollege Farm Crops f i e l d la b o ra to ry and on a farm near B reokenridge, M ichigan. The s o i l a t th e Farm Crops la b o ra to ry was a heavy dense c la y loam which tended to erach upon d ry in g . The s o i l a t Breckenri&ge was a l i g h t sandy loam* and although n ot th e ty p e o f s o i l g e n e r a lly co n sid ered b e s t fo r sugar b eets* th e op erator was very s u c c e s s f u lly growing commercial b e e t s in th e same f ie ld * B o il com paction. The d esig n o f th e p la n te r perm itted packing o f th e s o i l both b e fo r e and a f t e r the seed in g u n it . T h is p erm itted th e u se o f four packing com binations in th e experim ental p la n tin g s a s follow s? P acking Combination Packing ahead o f opener Packer a f t e r seed er 1 HO HO 2 Ho te a 3 te a te a 4 te a m Combinations o f th e th r e e seeds* th r e e openers and fou r 21 pack ings r e s u lt e d In t h i r t y - s i x experim ental combinations* Th© a c t u a l p rocess o f p la n tin g was s im p lifie d a groat d e a l by th e proper ch o ice o f p la n tin g sequence* The ex p eri­ m ental p lo t s were la id ou t b efo re p la n tin g and numbered sta k e s used t o in d ic a te th e p o s it io n o f each* S in ce the com binations had been p r e v io u sly a ssig n e d randomized p o si­ t i o n s w ith in th e b lo ck s i t was p o s s ib le to p la n t th e combina­ t io n s In any o rd er d esired* The most d i f f i c u l t change was th a t o f i n s t a l l i n g th e r o l l i n g w heel openerj th e r e fo r e a l l com binations in v o lv in g I t were p la n ted f ir s t * The seed in g u n it s were th e n ex t most d i f f i c u l t t o change w h ile th e pack ing u n it s were the e a s ie s t * D eterm ination o f r e s u l t s * The r e s u l t s o f th e p la n tin g t r i a l s were ev a lu a ted on th e b a s is o f th e percen t o f % eet~ co n ta in in g 0 in ch es* F ig . $ shows th e typ e o f atand-count s h e e t which was used f o r record in g th e inform ation in the fie ld s Two or more hundred in ch cou n ts were made on each rowv D esign o f th e experim ent a—machine p la n tin g . The machine p la n te d p lo ts were l a i d out according t o a Greoo- L a tin arrangement* The v a r ia b le s o f seed and tim e were f i r s t randomized and th e com binations w ith in b lo ck s were then se p a r a te ly randomized* The exp erim en tal la y o u t f o r the MICHIGAN l COUNT NO — •* nC 'o (S. CO > 0 V ________ O *** * N c? $ 4 COLLEGE T 9» -v ir STATE ZO___________________ 3 0 ____________________ 4 0 ____________________ -SO N l ol l i e s - CO ^ cy i p* {yj 1 «Vi ; I>J 1 r\i PV ^ N o - J . -s 1 N | i t i 3 4 ----- • 1 : — ..... / 1 7--i z i 3 I 4 i NO. in c h e * i T r i ,. W ITH BEETS ■X in c h e s S in g l e PLAN r s Co n ta in in g double three plan ts m o re or I ro r n i. ! - ; ; 1 i 1 ; * ! N a.^ vi CO 1 . — j > ! lz"-zs" J! >0 ^ ^ • IX a* 4. I ** o- x. Ok. 5 > • j 9 “* i loc b 5 0fs.“ Si Ov 8 N TOTfli- j | ! i . i i i ? | NU m BEP Oo t I 1 OF mn GAPs P IA N T S /N /oo *0 1 1 t : l..± i L i V* f£_______________ j ' .s 77 .<4 5* N sA > , i L. ... ■ I i COUNT * ! I- " K S b o v» *n * NO >S sfi N» * ^ 1 N ]I *■> I1 xj.|1 b !1 5 | C* I. N Cs. | K . S N 5 i j i ± I . . J ± L 7? N Q. *0 N s» 5J ! - ® V * i i l T "" — 6 0 ___________________ -TO__________________ go COUNt N *•> > 'n Na <0 in S *> N * * ' \i x >■ i ' -- f _ .5 " ^ j j 1 ; . 2 i^ 3 n m »n 48" Z 4-3S " 3i"-4 7 " overt. 11 i jr. PERCENT CvAH /TV T*ICM£S PLAN T E P ’ B F F IC lC N C y PERCEN t E fn E R G E N C E i Pe Z 3 r c e n t sin g l e BEE T-C O N TAIN IN G 4 Pe r c en t double B e e t - C oh T A / h /NG S PERCENT total. FIG. S. P r e - T h in n in g S t a n d C o u n t S h e e t. I in c h e s flAUi.TIPLE E E E T - C o N T A / N !NG fle e ts INCH ES in c h e s 23 Breekonrldge p la n tin g l a shown l a Fig# 6 * D esign o f th e experM ent-hand p l a n t i n g I n order t o serv e a s a check on machine p la n tin g equipment a hand p la n t­ in g experim ent was made a t th e Farm Crops la b o ra to ry , The p lo t s were l a i d ou t a s 4 x 4 L atin squares fo r both se g ­ mented and p e lle t e d seed , The on ly v a r ia b le in tro d u ced in to t h i s experim ent was th e method e f p ack in g, Packing b efo re and/or a f t e r th e seed was p la ced i n th e hand-made furrow was accom plished by packing th e s o i l w ith th e sid e o f a sm all round s t ic k h e ld p a r a lle l to the ground, Each p l o t was f i f t y in ch es lo n g w ith one seed p la n ted p er inch#' C r itic ism o f d e s ig n s , th e d esig n o f the machine la y o u t made i t p o s s ib le to determ ine th e e f f e c t s o f a la r g e number o f v a r ia b le s and from th a t stand p oint was d e s ir a b le . Although th e procedures which were s e t up made th e task o f f i e l d p la n tin g ra th er sim ple i t was f e l t , a t th e com p letion o f th e exp erim en ts, th a t too la r g e a number o f v a r ia b le s were b ein g t e s t e d and th a t a b e t t e r d e sig n would be one in w hich th e re were few er v a r ia b le s w ith more r e p lic a t io n s o f each com­ b in a tio n . N otes on experim ents, th e s o i l a t th e Farm Crops lab ora to ry was a c la y lo a n s o i l which tended t o form crack s upon d ryin g . F ig , 7 shows one s e c tio n o f a row i n th e b lo ck Z4 '1C to n so U ST. >2Jit n 1S IS tz 14 II J 11 23 u n ie tg to 2Z. 3 | & I 34- it, lb Z 6 i S 33 31 13 zr I- ’ 3b to 1 r u xi n is h n it ib 14- /g ii zo xi is It 30 i . xi is IX. it- 10 9 3*\ n 3b n lb 17 1i zI If 1$ 29 34- He V SsT, 17 ID !b n s,r. s 14 S, n a n /o U n IS 13 I 4 ■S,Tz 7 14 14 12 IS lV lb U I It 1i 23 XI / | 3 S 16 11 14 k 4 33 31 13 3 7 s e e p _____________ 7 c 9 g H 10 XS- 13 II IS 17 If tt n 3S 1 Segm ented OPEN EPS 1 S h o e Type Z 3 Segm ented-Soaked P elleted 3 Z B o a t Type W h e e l Type !g OX 14 It b 32 !b 4 S 34 2b IS 3b SJi 12 31 31 t I3 n IS 13 14 /b 21 IS U It 363 Z6> r 24* 35 to 10 30 32 27 1 22 Z 14 lb 34 24 IJ IS n /S i4 /? U /r if f1 21 tt 23 20 22 24 / I Z 2 3 3 4 I 3 Z (o 3 7 / 8 Z 9 3 fo / il Z IZ 3 13 / 14 Z iS 3 il> / i? Z 18 3 19 / 10 z Zt 3 21 / 23 Z 14 3 zs I ZU 2 27 3 Z8 I 24 2 30 3 3/ / 32 2 33 3 34 1 3S 2 36, 3 t TKEATNH . CODt ze !• / Ig 20 LJ f 23 2/ 21 27 24 " 10 21 u P A C K IN G NO. B e f o r e A F T F R f/O 1 NO yes No Z yes 3 yes /V O yes 4 L a y o u t tz t B r 'e c -te o r id g e M i c h i g a n 194 7 a n /.» /2 3 23 /? 14 /< a It i / 3 / / / Z / 2 2 / / 7 8 3 I Z 2 3 / 3 / 9 3 3 / /o / / z /l Z / 1 Z z 1 2 3 4 S i0 IZ 3 13 / 14 2 IS 3 z z H> 3 Z 20 22 24 / 17 Z 3 18 3 3 19 I / zo Z / Zt 3 / 1 2 ZZ 23 Z Z 14 ZS Z 30 Z / 1 / 2 2 2 z 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 z 3 3 3 zu / 2 3 27 J 3 3 ze 21 / / / 4 2 30 3 / 4 3/ / 2 2 Z 4- 3 4 3 3 4 32 Z 33 3 34 1 3S Z 34. 3 3 f 4 4 4 TREATMENT CODE T h is row was a p a rt o f com bination n in eteen o f which th e sh o e-ty p e f a r r o w opener, was a part* The orach shown was approxim ately 1 / i in c h wide and S in c h e s deep* F ig . f A Clay-bossi S o il Which Formed Cracks Along th e Path o f th e P la n te r When th e S o il Pried.' R e s u lts o f 1947 summer p la n tin g . Stand cou n ts were made and a l l data submitted, to s t a t i s t i c a l a n a ly s is ; A summary o f t h e r e s u lt s showed} 1, Hand p la n tin g a t M*8#C. F ie ld Crops la b o ra to ry ; There were m s ig n if ic a n t d iffe r e n c e s between any o f th e packing treatm en ts f o r e i t h e r the p e lle t e d or th e segmented 26 se e d s. U nusually favorab le m oisture co n d itio n s were encountered d u rin g t i l l s t e a t , 8»“ Machine p la n tin g a t th e M,3.G, F ie ld Crops la b o ra to ry , (a ) A comparison o f experim ental treatm en ts w ith p a ired cheek cou n ts showed no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe r e n c e s in fa v o r o f the experim ental trea tm en ts, (b) Segmented and p e lle t e d seed s were b oth b e tte r than the segmented seed which had been soaked in b r in e , There was no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe r e n c e betw een p e lle t e d and u n trea ted segmented seed , (c ) A comparison o f only exp erim en tal treatm ents# showed th e w heel opener to be s ig n if ic a n t ly b e t t e r than th e boat or shoe op en ers, There was no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe r e n c e between th e b o a t and shoe openers, (d) There was no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe r e n c e between th e experim ental packing treatm en ts a lth o u g h f i e l d obser­ v a tio n s o f p la n t s favored compaction o f th e s o i l around the se e d , 3, Machine p la n tin g a t Breckenridge# M ichigan, (a ) A comparison o f experim ental trea tm en ts w ith p a ired cheek rows showed th e com bination o f th e shoe opener w ith packing b o th b efo re and a f t e r se ed in g to be s ig n i­ f ic a n t ly b e t t e r than the p a ire d check rows on the b a s is o f stan d cou n ts. However# f i e l d o b ser v a tio n s o f p la n t 2? c o n d itio n s d id not su b s ta n tia te t h i s d iffe r e n c e . (b) Segmented and p e lle t e d seed s were both s ig n if ic a n t ly b e t t e r than th e segmented seed which had been soaked In b r in e . Co) A comparison o f only experim ental treatm ents* showed both th e wheel and shoe openers to be b e t t e r than th e b o a t-ty p e opener. Packing a f t e r seed in g was s ig n if ic a n t ly b e t t e r than no packing or packing b e fo r e seed in g . W lnter-Sprlng 1947*48 P lan o f procedure. The d eterm in ation and measurement o f th e e f f e c t o f p la n tin g mechanisms upon the s o i l i s a d i f f i c u l t problem . In order th a t r e se a r c h on th e problem m ight be continued through th e w in ter months* I t was d ecid ed to p la c e a la r g e box o f s u it a b le s o i l i n th e green­ h o u se. A machine was b u i l t to support th e p la n tin g mechanism on th e box and a su ita b le arrangement was provided f o r moving th e machine a lo n g the le n g th o f th e box. The r e la t iv e compaction e f f e c t s o f furrow openers and known s t a t i c p ressu r es were compared by means o f an a ir p erm ea b ility u n it ( 1 0 ) . I n ad dition * th e p re-seed in g packing w h eel used i n th e 1947 summer t e s t s was compared w ith s t a t i c p ressu re p acking. 23 The e f f e c t o f v a rio u s packing procedures on hand and machine p la n tin g s were compared. S o il. loam. The s o i l used in the t e s t s was a Brookaton o la y - This s o i l was p la ce d to a depth o f approxim ately 9 in ch es In th e greenhouse i n a box 3 .6 f e e t wide and IS f e e t lo n g ; Equipment; The b o a t-ty p e opener a s used i n th e summer t e s t s d id n ot p o sse s s u f f i c i e n t f l e x i b i l i t y to s a t i s f a c t o r i l y care fo r unevenness In th e seed b ed. F ig s . 8 , 9 , and 10 show th e mechanism used f o r p la n tin g i n th e greenhouse.1 F ig ; 11 shows th e 5 3 .6 pound c a s t- ir o n wheel which was used f o r p r e -se e d in g packing during th e 1947 summer experim ents. F ig . 12 shows th e method used f o r ap plying a known s t a t i c p ressu re upon th e s o i l . The e f f e c t s o f th e se known p ressu r es were then compared to th e e f f e c t s o f th e ex p eri­ m ental equipment. S ta t ic p ressu res o f 1 , 2 , 3# and 4 pounds p er square In ch were u sed . In p r a c t ic e , fou r c o n ta in e rs were f i l l e d w ith sand so t h a t the w eigh t o f th e co n ta in er p lu s th e b lo ck on which i t r e s te d would e x e r t a p ressu re o f 1 , 2 , 3 , or 4 pounds p er square in c h on th e s o i l . F ig . 13 shows th e u n it designed f o r t e s t in g th e a ir p erm ea b ility o f the s o i l in p la c e . In o p era tio n th e sampling d ev ic e ^A# was In ser te d a g iv e n depth in t o the s o i l b ein g te ste d * A ir was pumped I n to th e ta n k s *B* (con n ected F ig , 8* The Machine f o r P la n tin g In the Greenhouse, Wheel Opener Equipped w ith R evised Depth C ontrol S k id s, to g eth er) u n t i l th e h ig h s id e o f th e w ater manometer "G* In d ica ted a h e ig h t o f about 40 ce n tim eter s above th e eq u ilib riu m p o in t . The clamp on th e h o se lea d in g t o the sampling d e v ic e was th en r e le a s e d . As th e manometer reading dropped t o 2 7 , th e watch was sta r te d and was stopped when th e water reached a p o in t 2 cen tim eters above equilibrium # T his gave th e tim e fo r a d e f in it e volume o f a ir t o p ass through th e s o i l sam pler, Hie w heel HBM was th e same as in F ig . U . T est p ro ced u re^ so ll com m otion. The comparison o f th e so f o r P la n tin g i n th e Greenhouse* Wheel Opener Equipped w ith Depth Bands. compaction e f f e c t o f v a r io u s treatm ents was c a r r ie d out a s fo llo w s: The s o l i was thoroughly w etted by sp r in k lin g b e fo r e s t a r t in g a s e r ie s o f t e s t s . I t was allow ed to drain fo r about two days or u n t i l the s o i l would n ot puddle when cu ltiv a te d * The s o i l was th en worked, th e wheel opener and th e packing w heel were run th e le n g th o f th e box and the v a rio u s a t a t i e p ressu res were a p p lied . P erm ea b ility t e s t s were then made, a s d escrib ed in con n ectio n w ith Pig* 13* fo r each o f the s o i l treatm ents* 31 Pig* 10 The Machine fop P la n tin g in tfte Greenhouse. The R evised Boat Opener i s I n s ta lle d * The s o i l was smoothed a f t e r th e t e s t s , p erm itted to dry fo r two d a y s, and th e procedure repeated* These d eterm in ation s were con tin u ed u n t il th e s o i l became s u f f i c i e n t l y dry th a t d u st tended to blow ou t around the sam pling u n it* T est proeedure-com paotion on emergence* In order to determ ine i f th e r e would be any s ig n if ic a n t e f f e c t s on germ ination due to th e v a r io u s packing and p la n tin g pro* oedures which had been t e s t e d in the a i r p erm ea b ility work, two experim ental p la n tin g s were made* The la y o u t f o r the 32 F ig . 11 fh e 53*6 Pound C a st-Iro n Compaction Wheel Used fo r P ro-S eed in g Compaction During th e 194? Summer Experiments* Fig* 12 fI he A p p lic a tio n o f a Ksown S t a t ic P ressu re Upon th e S o il* 33 Fig* 13 A ir P erm ea b ility U n it fo r S ea tin g th e S o il in Place* second, p la n tin g made on A p r il 7 , 1948 i s shown In Fig* 14 . Seed.* She segmented seed was fu rn ish ed by th e Farmers and M anufacturers B eet Sugar A sso c ia tio n o f Saginaw, Michi­ gan. I t was graded through a 9 /6 4 in ch screen and over a 7 /6 4 Inch screen* The averaged r e s u l t s o f a d e t a ile d germ ination t e s t on th r e e samples was a s follow sa P u r ity — Seeds per gram •<— Seeds per pound 99*7# «-.«.—«» 13S 61830 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- . Rep. 9 | □ 0 1 1 I 0 0 0 ' (I) Rep. S' Reft 7 0 0 0 c n E l Rep. S Rep 3 0 m r a m s d ] H □□ d ] Rep 6 CD 0 8 o a t Opener (/0.7 seeds p e r f o o t) (7-) Wheel O pener( 10.7 seeds p e r foot) (3) H a n d Plant. ( One seed p e r inch) C4-) Ten. S e e d s p l a n t e d p e r r e c t a n g u l a r p r i n t . m s m u) W Rep / s m s m 3 0 1 CD r a m m R e p -2 *$. 4 P la n te d s c r a 4 - 7—48 C o u n te d 4 -21-47 P r e s s u r e s i n p . s . i . a s shouin. Fig. 14. L a yo u t o-f Experimental Plantings in Greenhouse. (4) ■ 36 Germ ination 3 9 .6 $ Sprouts 120 S in g le s *------- ---------------- ------— — 6 1 .3 3 90Ut^leS 3 6 .3 3 I * * * * ** * * * * 1*» tr ip le s ««««»•«.— »■» »» WMlH »«»«IH I>ai^ *> |^ i | l . H ypocotyls »»»»—»•«■»»«.-ww. q 0 Sprouts per pound, minus hypo o c t y ls 70421 T est r e s u l t s - s o l l com paction. She data shown i s T able 1 were tak en by u t i l i z i n g th e a i r p erm ea b ility u n it shows in F ig . 1 3 . A study o f the data shows th a t th e compaction o f th e wheel opener appeared to be approxim ately th e same a s th a t caused fey s t a t i c p r essu r es o f two to th ree pounds p er square in ch . The 6 3 .5 pound c a s t ir o n wheel used during th e com­ p a c tio n t e s t a was shown in F ig . 11. I t was found th a t t h i s w heel had an adverse e f f e c t on th e s o i l sin c e sm all cracks o f about 1 /2 in ch in depth were formed a cro ss th e w heel tra ck a t r ig h t a n g le s to the d ir e c tio n o f tr a v e l a s shown a t Ha ” in F ig . 1 5 . T his r e s u lte d in ra p id drying o f the s o l i to a depth o f about 1 in c h . T est ra su lta -o o m g a ctio n on emergence. Emergence counts 36 Sable 1 Tine In Seconds fo r Manometer Heading to Drop from 27 t o 2 C entim eters, $ M oisture 53,5 lb , Wheel dry b a s is Wheel opener Chech S t a t ic P . s . I . 4 3 2 1 P lo t 27.7 7.8 20.9 13.4 12.1 6.7 5.6 24.2 8.4 12.5 8.9 7.5 6 .9 4.9 22.5 4.6 9 .5 7.9 8.1 6.0 3.7 3.3 21.6 5.6 8,8 n .5 10,2 7.4 7.0 4.6 19.0 xo;x 9.6 173 12.8 10.6 8.5 17.5 10.6 0.6 14.6 13.4 10.3 7.9 XWf 14.6 13.6 16.1 14.7 12.1 10.8 10.8 12.5 15.9 16.3 14.0 14.6 11.2 were used to ev a lu a te th e r e s u lt s o f th e v a rio u s p la n tin g comb m a t lo n e . According to the la b o ra to ry germ ination r e s u lts # page 35# 8 9 ,6 percen t o f th e seeds would b e expected t o germ inate and# due to some seed s b e in g doubles or t r ip le s # one might ex p ect to o b ta in 116 p la n ts p er 100 seed s p la n ted ; On th a t assumption# th e fo llo w in g d e f in i t io n s w i l l apples 1, P ercen t seed attain m en t * seed s a o tu a llv germ inating seed s p la n ted x .897 x 100 3? Flg« 15 Cracks in th e S o il Caused by th e 5 3 .6 Found C ast-Iron Packing Wheel* In o th e r words i f th e number o f seed s a c tu a lly producing s e e d lin g s was *897 tim es the number o f se ed s p lan ted th e seed attain m en t would be equal t o 100 percent* g* P ercen t p la n t attainm ent » number p la n ts a c tu a lly emerging Coer 100 seed s p lanted ) __ 113 ' x 100 I f 100 seeds a c t u a lly produced 115 p la n ts . 58 100 122 153 T ire Area in Contact* 3q. I n . 5 .8 7 .5 8 .1 v a r ia b le w ith th e aim o f determ ining what e f f e c t a f in e ly p u lv e r is e d seedbed might have on em ergence. BK S& bb^m 9 .8 Fig* 17 Underneath View o f M ichigan S ta te C o lleg e Experim ental Sugar B eet Planter* Design o f f i e l d experim ents. Fig* 18 shows th e d esign o f an experim ent which was performed a t four d if f e r e n t tim es* Two furrow op en ers, th ree packing procedu res, and two v a r ia tio n s i n p r o c e e d in g ro ta ry t i l l a g e gave a t o t a l o f tw elve exp erim en tal com binations* The experim ental p la n te r was a two-row machine and p la n ted one co n v en tio n a l or check row f o r each experim ental row. The experim ental com binations a re shown on Fig* 18. O bservations and stand counts on e a r ly -se a so n p la n tin g s O, p. T, o, p, Pi I z 0, Pi Tt 3 O, T, 4- o, Ot B o a t O pener 0, P3 T , 0, p3 71 5 p, B i c y c l e W h e e l j S 8 l b s w h e e l f o r c e on s o i l . B i c y c l e ( A / h e i f t o o l b s W h e e l f o r c e on s o i l Oi p3 71 Oi P3 T, A Pi T 7 Pi p3 T, R o t a r y T i l l a g e in f r o n t o f O p e n e r n N o R o t a r y T illag e. Pi to 8 9 71 to ot P, n // o z Pi T' IZ D rag-in O nly 45 oz Pi Wheel O p e n er L _ P la n ter Combinations q s n n If u g IS 'S /o /2\# / /b t g ID g 4 19 n i) > . ■? -f■1 6 g 11 If * LiU !Z // 4 ^ u Fig 18. a i i 3 s if /s n /(, 3 /9 7 M 7 « 10 t i M II S 9 a a li g '4 Z 10 10 /? •»/ 20 6 li IB 4 3 II S u g a r B eet Planting Layout -for Four Experiments. 7 S I <7 It Z 4 H if.. 14 46 In d ica ted th a t th e wheel opener appeared to be g iv in g b e t te r r e s u lt s than th e boat opener* A lso i t was d e sir e d to t e s t a h e a v ie r com paction than any o f thoB© in d ic a te d on Fig* 16* Consequently a f i f t h experim ent was made, u t i l i s i n g th e w heel opener only* The la y o u t o f t h i s experiment and the V ariab les are shown on Fig* 19* T est r e s u lta - f o u r f i e l d experim ent a. Two hundred-inch stan d -cou n ts o f emerged b e e ts were made on each row# both fo r th e exp erim en tal and th e p aired check rows* P la n tin g d a te s for th© f i r s t fo u r experim ents were made on May 6 # May 22# June 10 and J u ly 20# 1948* were made o f a l l data. A nalyses o f va ria n ce The r e s u lt s o f a comparison o f experim ental treatm en ts w ith p aired cheek rows fo r four experim ents i s shown in Table 5* A comparison o f ex p eri­ m ental treatm en ts only i s shoiwi in Table 6 * The ex p eri­ m ental v a r ia b le s were a s follow s? O3, - Wheel opener. (See Fig* 9) Og - Boat opener* (S ee Fig* 10) P^ - B ic y c le wheel# 58 pounds fo r c e on s o i l , Pg - B ic y c le w h eel, 100 pounds fo r c e on s o i l , Pg - B ra g -in o n ly . (See Fig* 16) T, I n Pz Tz Pz r , Z 3 p, p, T , R o ta ry Tillage in fr o n t o f Opener Ti N o R o ta r y Tillage D ray-in only P, B icycle Wheel. 3 8 Lbs fo r c e an S oil p3 T, Ps Tz 6 Pz B icycle Wheel. 100 L b s . fo r c e o n S o il. F was b e s t in t h i s experim ent. Note th a t a l l fo u r top treatm en ts are th e h ea v ie r p a ck in g s. Compaction t e a t s . A measure o f r e la t iv e compaction e f f e c t on th e s o i l was o b ta in ed during th e 7/inter t r i a l s by ©4 by means o f a i r p erm ea b ility t e s ts * The method o f a ir p erm ea b ility was not deemed s a t is f a c t o r y fo r f i e l d t e s t s s in c e a sm all break in th e s o i l would prevent th e proper fu n ctio n in g o f th e unit* In order t o t e s t th e r e l a t i v e compaction e f f e c t s o f d if f e r e n t trea tm en ts the record in g com­ p a c tio n u n it shown in P ig . 20 was d esig n ed and constructed* I t s fu n ctio n i s as follow s* Crank na s i s turned# which by means o f a raok and p in io n arrangement fo r c e s tube "bH downward. and lin e ttdH co n ta in o il* C ylinder wo" A p is to n in th e low er p a rt o f c y lin d e r "o* I s connected t o rod ae H. S o il probe af a# which i s attach ed t o ae H i s fo rce d in to the s o i l a s crank “a 1* i s turned* As s o l i probe wf H i s forced in to the s o i l o i l p ressu re ca u ses th e record er arm to in d ic a te the fo r c e req u ired to push the probe In to th e s o i l . In order to o b ta in a record o f th e fo r c e a t any g iv en depth th© ch a rt ttg a i s caused to r o t a t e by means o f the s tr in g ah M* The s t r in g wh tt p a sse s around a drum which In turn i s a tta ch ed t o th e rea r o f th e p la te to which th e ch a rt i s fasten ed * S o il probes o f d if f e r e n t diam eters may be r e a d ily I n s t a lle d s in c e th e rod ae a i s threaded a t the lower end. Probes o f f iv e diam eters were machined in ord er to p rovid e s u f f ic ie n t f l e x i b i l i t y fo r vary in g s o i l h ard n esses. The diam eters were 1* 3 /4 # 1/2* 56 F ig . 20 R ecording S o il Compaction T eatesv 3 / 8 , and 5 /1 6 in ch es. I t was n ecessa ry t o c a lib r a te th e u n it fo r b oth depth and fo r c e in pounds* S u ita b le ch a rts were made a s shown in F ig . 21. F ig . 22 shows th e la y o u t o f th e p lo t s fo r f i e l d com­ p a c tio n t e s t s . The p lo t was one o f th o se used e a r l i e r in th e season fo r emergence t e s t s and the s o i l was c l a s s i f i e d Fig. 2!. Sample Chart for Recording So/7 Compaction Tester. Vs FORCE I N POUNDS DEPTH IN INCHES W.W.C. 1 -3 -4 8 §?/ S a m p le C hart for R ecording S o /7 Compaction T este 51 1 i 9 {7 1 r ,I *9 0 0 I 1 t L j / 9 f ♦ 3 r / ^ i S ( 4 ’ 3 4 ■ -v i. ’M i n - ; •r~ ‘. • . V.'* ‘• V - c u l t i p / l a c e d - £ I S fe"i ’ " m L 5 y ; r .-‘ 4 » .... -■ ■ ' 1 .... ‘‘ • r-', Z. (, S o J »- / 0 s s ,• ? ? '■ '<4 . r-:r • z J 3 t t P f l c k e 6 ' s y.v-' z T - i.A S '- . i- r ‘:’ -v ./ ‘ c j J C : > / 5* ' ■ -.V k ;a . 4 ■y ► ■ > > r \..K . . • . 'c - v - " : •• Z 2 i 1 v' •.•<■ * •* ' ■• •• -T --. ■: ► 4 " -.J : t i C U L T l P A C K t D ' * - ffb : ’ < r 4 a '* t 1 3 J : ^ C U L T I P f l C K € p ' : ' 3 r o b e ’ •' •• •• 4 2 0 7 ' ■' \ 9 9 Sfl.iL Plowed $ Disced 9-14-48 Pain .23 inch f-iS-48 D r a p e d I C u l h p a c k .9 - /( .- 4 8 Compaction T ests 9-17-48 \ F lj.Z Z /. i., 1 t. One in c h d ia m e te r in a lt t e s t s . -i 3 t - ? ! 3 ' 9 Royts: 0* S t a n d a r d O p e n e r f Press W heels I 5 £ * p't./Sow. B icycle Wheel S 8 Lbs. Force on Soil. 2 - •• •• 128 •• ......................................... P t S , 1 I 3 S i & f