SOIL FACTORS AFFECTING THE GROWTH OF CARNATIONS By Jesse Melvin Rawson 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 Soil Science 1953 SOIL FACTORS AFFECTING THE GROWTH OF CARNATIONS By Jesse Melvin Rawson AN ABSTRACT 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 Soil Science Year 1953 SOIL FACTORS A F F E C T I N G T H E GROWTH OF CARNATIONS By Jesse M e l v i n Rawson ABSTRACT An investigation w a s m a d e of the effect of several soiD. factors upon the p r o d u c t i o n and growth of greenhouse carnations. The c a r n a t i o n seems to be less responsive to soil differences than o t h e r major cut flower crops and consequently has been l i t t l e Northland carnations studied. obtained from two sources were grown on three Michigan s o i l s and under three methods of watering. period. All flowers w e r e Total yields w e r e cut an d g r a d e d for a six-month generally similar but consider­ able differences were o b t a i n e d between treatments when com­ mercial or other q u a l i t y g r a d e s were considered separately. Highly significant d i f f e r e n c e s were obtained between plants from the two sources. T h i s was believed to be due largely to differences in cul t u r e time of benching. The b e t w e e n time of propagation and c l a y l o a m soils produced more commer­ cials and high quality f l o w e r s than did a sandy loam soil. Constant water level w a s t h e most variable method of water­ ing but produced high q u a l i t y flox^ers when plants from a commercial source were u s e d . Juno and Achilles c a r n a t i o n s were grown in two clay loam soils in tiles cut t o give five different depths of soil above a water t a b l e . Plant measurements included height increases, g r e e n weights, number, weights and lengths Jesse Melvin Rawson of all breaks and. bottom breaks and flower and bud count.s. Soil measurements included oxygen diffusion studies and moisture determinations at one inch intervals throughout the columns of soil* Four inches of soil above the water table retarded growth of plants in both soils. Growth was similar in the more stably aggregated and better aerated soil when five* six> seven and eight inch soil columns were used. In the less stably aggregated and poorer aerated soil growth improved steadily as depth of soil increased. Adequate aeration of greenhouse soils perhaps is limit­ ing more often than previously recognized. Heavy watering and use of improper soils and soil mixtures limits soil air. In constant water level work the soil is usually not deep enough in the bench to provide proper aeration in the root zone. Evidence has been presented indicating that the depth of soil in a constant water level bench affects both shoot growth and morphological development of carnations. Improving soil aeration caused an increase in the growth and development of lateral buds with both pinched and un­ pinched plants. Growth substance produced in the apical tip which inhibits lateral growth may be inactivated by oxygen in the soil or its concentration may be reduced to such an extent that it becomes stimulating. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Born, March 1, 1915 on a farm near Quincy, Michigan. Graduated from Quincy High School in 1932 as class valedictorian. Undergraduate Studies: Michigan (F.E.R.A. Freshman College, Coldwater, sponsored under supervision of Western State Teacher's College, Kalamazoo, Michigan) 1935-36; Hillsdale College, Hillsdale, Michigan, 1936-39, bachelor of science degree in biology and botany, 1939; Michigan State College, 1940, 1946-47, bachelor of science degree in horticulture (flori­ culture ), 1947. Graduate Studies: Michigan State College, 1947-48, master of science degree in horticulture, 1948; Michigan State College, 1949-51, 1952-53. Experience: Student manager, College Bookstore, Hillsdale College, 1937-39; field supervisor, nursery and bulb farm, Dowagiac, Michigan, 1940; radio operator, 32nd "Red Arrow” Division, 1941-45, two and one-half years overseas service in Australia and New Guinea; graduate assistant, Horticulture and Soil Science Departments, Michigan State College, 1947-51; extension specialist in floriculture and ornamental horticulture, North Carolina State College, Raleigh, N. C. , 1951-52. Member of Phi Kappa Phi, Pi Alpha Xi, Alpha Zeta. Recipient of W. Atlee Burpee Award in floriculture, 1947. iii AG KNO WLEDGEi/LLtklT The author wishes to express his sincere thanks to Dr. R. L. Cook for his sympathetic guidance and help during the course of* his graduate studies. His interest in the problem and continued encouragement has been a most valuable stimulus at times when completion of the work seemed most distant. He is also deeply grateful to Dr. C. E. Wildon for his assistance and inspiration throughout his career at Michigan State College. Thanks are due to Dr. A. E. Erickson for his help in preparing and explaining the oxygen diffusion apparatus used in the problem and others who have been of assistance in one way or another. TABLE OP CONTENTS I. I N T R O D U C T I O N .............................. 1 II. REVIEW OF L I T E R A T U R E .................... 2 A. B. C. III. Methods of* Watering Greenhouse Bench C r o p s ................................ The Effect of Aeration on Root and Shoot G r o w t h ...................... Hormone Theory and the Possible Relation of Aeration E X P E R I M E N T A L ............................. A. B. C. 2 4 S 9 The Effect of Three Watering Methods and Three Soils on Carnation Yields and Quality ...................... 9 Experimental methods and design . . . . 9 Discussion of r e s u l t s ...............15 Summary of results . . . . . 45 The Influence of Depth of Soil Above a Water Table upon Growth and Development of C a r n a t i o n s .......... 47 The importance of aeration in greenhouse soils . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Experimental methods and design . . . . 43 .............. 52 Discussion of results Summary of r e s u l t s .................39 Nutritional Requirements of the Carnation . . . . . . . . . 71 Methods and results ......... . . . . . 71 LITERATURE C I T E D ..........................75 A P P E N D I X .......................... 1 X. INTRODUCTION The carnation (Dianthus caryophyllus), one of* the most important greenhouse flower crops, has been a leading commer­ cial cut flower for several centuries. Despite this, there appears to have been considerably less study of the growth and nutrition of this plant than of other leading cut flower crops. It appears to be somewhat less responsive to varia­ tions in culture than either the chrysanthemum or the rose. Perhaps the most important environmental factors in the pro­ duction of carnations are light and temperature. Carnations grow best under conditions of high light intensity and low night temperatures (50 to 55 degrees Fahrenheit). Consequently, present day production centers In Colorado, New England, New York and Pennsylvania where light and temperature approach the optimum. In southern Michigan the summer temperature is often too high for ideal carnation development and in winter the light intensity is too low. Little can be done economically to alter these two major factors. Nevertheless, because a considerable quantity of carnations are grown in southern Michigan it was decided to study some of those factors which though of second­ ary importance are more easily controlled. type, watering methods, These include soil soil aeration and nutrition and their effect upon carnation growth and development. 2 II. A. REVIEW OF LITERATURE Methods of Watering Greenhouse Bench Crops Because of increasing production costs and the difficulty of obtaining adequate skilled labor the emphasis in the green­ house has been and continues to be on labor saving methods of crop production. Various methods of watering have been tried on greenhouse bench crops with the object of reducing labor costs and providing a more uniform water supply. Rane (21) in 1893 and Ward (31) in 1903 discussed subirrigation in the greenhouse. Ward considered subirrigation better than hand watering in the production of carnations as by that method he was able to increase production. Then for a period of forty, years subirrigation in the greenhouse was out of favor appar­ ently due to erratic results obtained by var*ious operators. Post and Seeley (20) revived the method and endeavored to learn why it sometimes was not satisfactory. were published in 1943. Their findings They investigated various automatic watering methods such as the use of (1) wicks, (2) injection, (3) constant wat e r level and (4) surface tubes. The first three of these methods are types of subirrigation. Bouyoucos (4) and others have used systems of time clocks, solenoid valves and tensiometers to make the injection and surface tube methods completely automatic. 3 Stephens and Volz (27) grew China asters and stocks on four Iowa soils in a constant water level bench. Significantly better flowers were produced on the three soils having over five percent organic matter compared to the fourth soil which contained only two percent organic matter. The higher organic matter was said to give better soil aeration due to increased aggregation. Wright and Volz (34) compared constant water level subir­ rigation, subirrigation by injection, Ohio State nozzle, and surface watering with a hose on two varieties of roses and concluded that constant water level subirrigation produced significantly more salable blossoms and a significantly longer average stem length over a one year period than did the other three treatments. Seeley (23) compared surface watering and constant water level on roses for three years on a sandy loam, a silty clay loam and a clay loam. There were no significant differences the first year even at the 5% level between the two methods of watering. The following two years the surface watered sandy and silty clay loams produced a significantly greater number of flowers than did the same soils under constant water level, three of the differences being significant at the 1% level. 4 B. The Effect of Aeration an Root and Shoot Growth Soil moisture affects root growth not only directly, but also indirectly, because it affects soil aeration. Kramer (12) stated that larger root systems are produced in soil that con­ tains an abundance of moisture if aeration is adequate but a limited supply of water produces a larger ratio of roots to shoots. Cannon and Free (6) made an extensive study of the relation of soil aeration to the physiological features of roots with several plant species and concluded that, there were optimum concentrations of oxygen for root growth which may vary for different species and should be related to definite tempera­ tures. They stated at that time that little had been done on the effect of aeration u po n shoot growth. Soil aeration is largely a function of the larger noncapillary pores which are determined by the soil texture, structure and aggregate stability. The non-capillary pores act as the arteries for the flow of most of the soil water and soil air. Buckingham (5 ), Penman (18 ) and others have established the fact that diffusion is the most important process causing interchange of gases between the soil atmos­ phere and the air above the soil. Gilbert and Shive (11) obtained increased growth of oats and tomato with increased oxygen concentration to the highest concentration used which was twice that of the atmosphere. They concluded, that the oxygen concentration occurring natu­ rally even in well-aerated, fertile soil was not high enough for the best growth of some plants. Durell (9 ) g r e w tomato plants in shallow nutrient solu­ tion tanks having varying degrees of aeration and also in a tank of sandy loam soil. He obtained greater vegetative growth and greater yield of fruit in even slightly aerated cultures than in the well-drained soil. Slight aeration yielded optimum growth of roots and greatest fruit yields but the greatest dry weight of stems and leaves were obtained at the highest rate of aeration. He concluded that for tomato the aeration requirement for optimum shoot growth was much higher than for optimum root and fruit development. Lawton (13) working with corn and Smith and Cook (25) with sugar beets reported increased shoot growth when addi­ tional aeration was supplied to the roots of plants grown in jars of soil in the greenhouse. Arnon and Hoagl&nd (1) found that tomato plants growing in aerated solutions absorbed greater quantities of all nutrients and produced larger yields of fruit than did plants growing in unaerated solutions. It has been established by these investigators and others that proper soil aeration increases root and shoot growth and in­ creases both water and nutrient uptake. This, however, is specific and the optimum aeration for one species may be sub­ optimum for another species. 6 Beach (3) reported "that. carnations grown under very wet. conditions appeared better than those under average moisture or dry conditions during growth but final yields were not significantly different. Van Laan and Cook (30), however, working with Puritan carnations obtained greatly decreased growth and yields under high moisture conditions. If a soil is of such texture and structure that the diffusion rate of the air into and out of the soil is greatly retarded another condition occurs. In this case the oxygen concentration is reduced and the carbon dioxide concentration may be greatly increased due to the respiration of living roots and soil microorganisms, the decay of organic material and the decreased rate of movement of the soil atmosphere. There has been considerable disagreement in the past whether under these conditions root injury was due to low oxygen or high carbon dioxide concentrations. It would appear from the recent work of Leonard (16), Leonard and Pinckard (17) and Erickson (10), however, that carbon dioxide levels are seldom high enough in the soil to cause root injury but that the oxygen concentration is often too low for optimum root growth. C. Hormone Theory and the Possible Relation of Aeration Growth by cell extension takes place almost exclusively by the absorption of water according to Audus (2). Further, it is now widely accepted that there is no growth without 7 growth substance. Thiraann and Skoog (29) showed that auxin produced in the apical buds mainly by young leaves was responsible for the in­ hibition of axillary buds. Dormant axillary buds produce al­ most no auxin but production begins as soon as they begin to develop. They found in Vicia faba that the amount of auxin diffusing from the terminal bud decreased with increased size of the plant. Also, that two factors were concerned in the development of axillary buds, namely, hormone control and the supply of'nutritive material. Thimann (28 ) found that auxin effects were dependent at least in part on concentration of the hormone, relatively low concentrations increasing growth and relatively high concentrations inhibiting growth. Shrank (24) stated that the inactivation of indoleacetic acid, a universally occurring growth hormone, is apparently a first order reaction requiring oxygen. Reinders (22) found that water absorption by potato slices in distilled water was very sensitive to aeration. Water absorbed under aerobic conditions was lost when the potato slices were transferred to anaerobic conditions. Addition of beta-indoleacetic acid to the medium surround­ ing the slices greatly increased the water absorption. Commoner and Mazia (7) confirmed the findings of Reinders and also observed that potassium chloride uptake was in­ 8 creased when het.a-indoleacet.ic acid was added to the medium. It has not been proven, however, that the auxin-water-salt relationship obtained for slices of potato tuber apply in general to the growth of entire plants. Went (33 ) increased the growth rate of tomato and cosmos by dividing the roots in half and placing half of them in a nutrient solution and half of them in moist peat, Haydite or sand over the rate obtained when the entire root system was placed in an aerated nutrient solution. Root growth was satisfactory in either case but maximal stem development re­ quired that a portion of the roots develop in moist air. He concluded that roots which develop in moist air supply one or more factors required for stem growth. he termed caulocaline. This factor He postulated that caulocaline pro­ duced in the aerated roots flows upward In the stem and accumulates near the place of auxin production. Removing the tip of the apical shoot or otherwise inactivating it causes lateral buds with their slight auxin production to divert caulocaline and grow. In greenhouse practice lateral buds are forced into growth in carnation, and other plants as well, by pinching out the tip of the apical shoot. Sometimes the tips of the first laterals are also pinched out to develop several branches and therefore several flowering shoots on each plant. 9 III. A. EXPERIMENTAL The Effect of Three Watering Methods and Three Soils on Carnation Yields and Quality Experimental methods and .design. A greenhouse experi­ ment was begun in September 1949 to determine the effect of three soils and three methods of watering upon the produc­ tion of greenhouse carnations. benches each 48 feet long m d Three new V-bottom concrete 40 inches wide were used. Each bench was partitioned into six equal plots. In the first and third benches the partitions were of one inch wood cut to fit but were not water-tight. In the second bench the partitions were of brick sealed to make each compartment water-tight. A row of bench tile was placed over the V in the bottom of each bench to facilitate drainage in the second and third benches and to aid in the movement of water in the first and second benches. A layer of gravel was placed in the bottom of the bench to just cover the bench tile and one Inch of coarse sand was placed over the gravel. The top layer consisted of five inches of soil. Figure I shows the bench arrangement as regards water­ ing methods and soil plots. The soils were randomized in each, half of each bench giving two replicated blocks in each of three locations (benches) for a total of six blocks. Figure I Diagram of the arrangement of benches and soil plots tank & flo a j [ □ G r a s s ed Brooks t o n Os ht e mo s a n d y l oam Bench T Os ht e mo s a n d y loam G r a s s ed Brookston Conn t a n t Cropped Brookston Bench I I Os ht e mo s a n d y l oa m Cropped Brookston G r a s s ed Brookston B e nc h I I I Cropped Brookston Os h t e mo s a n d y loam Cropped Brooks t o n G r a s s ed Brooks t o n Os ht e mo s a n d y l oam Gr a s s ed Brooks t o n Gr e s o ed Brooks t o n Cropped Brooks t o n Water Level Os ht e mo s a n d y loam Subirrigation Cropped Brookston S u r f a c e Watered 11 Bench I was provided with a small tank and a float in one end to automatically control the water level. The water level was held constant in the lower half of the sand layer. Bench II was provided with a drainage hole in each water-tight compartment. Sach hole was threaded and provided with pipe and elbows so that water could be injected into the bottom of the bench. When the main arm of pipe was vertical the top of the pipe was level with the surface of the soil in the bench. By inserting the hose into the pipe each plot was watered from below until the surface soil was moist. Bxcess water was immediately drained away by turning the vertical pipe arm down below the horizontal. The bench was constructed so that the drainage holes in the four center plots were in the lowest part of the compartment but the drainage hole in each end plot was in the end of the bench somewrhat above the lowest point. normal hand watering, ment. Bench III was set up for called surface watering in this experi­ The drainage holes were all continuously open in this bench. At each watering, water was applied by hose until the soil was wetted and water drained freely. Three soils were used in each bench. They were twice replicated and arranged randomly as shown in Figure I. Cshtemo sandy loam was used as representative of a light sandy soil and Brookston clay loam as a heavy type soil. Two forms of Brookston clay loam differing in past history 12 and present organic matter content and state of physical aggregation were used and were designated as grassed Brookston and cropped Brookston. Both Brookston soils were obtain­ ed near Britton, Michigan from the Stanley Wood farm. The cropped Brookston soil was taken from a field having a history of continuous corn for several years. The grassed Brookston soil was from an adjoining pasture said to have been in sod for many years. The percent organic matter as determined by the dry com­ bustion method was as follows: cropped Brookston, 4.73%; Grassed Brookston, S.12%; Oshtemo sandy loam, 1.28%. The aggregate stability of the Brookston soils as deter­ mined by the Yoder method (35 ) is given in Tables 32 and 33 of the appendix. The first entry under each soil is the aggregate analysis of the original soil before it was placed in the greenhouse benches. Lime was added to the Oshtemo sandy loam plots at the rate of five pounds per hundred square feet of bench and superphosphate (0-20-0) was applied at this same rate to all plots. After the plants were well established a program of soil testing was begun using the Simplex testing method de­ veloped by Spurwav and Lawton (26). An attempt was made to maintain the following levels as recommended by Post (19): 50 parts per million of nitrate nitrogen, 5 parts per million of phosphorus and 20 parts per million of potassium (K^O). 13 Soil tests were made at six to eight week intervals and ammonium nitrate and potassium chloride were added in solu­ tion whenever tests showed that nutrient levels had dropped below the minimums stated above. After the lime and superphosphate had been worked into the soil sixty carnation plants were planted in each plot. The plants were spaced eight inches apart both lengthwise and across the benches. Two varieties were used, Northland, a standard white variety, and Victory Red. Each plot con­ tained 45 Northland and 15 Victory Red plants. plants were obtained from two sources. land plants (four rows) The Northland The first 20 North­ in each plot were obtained from Guy Munt, a commercial carnation grower of St. Clair, Michigan. The next 25 Northland plants (five rows) were field grown during the summer of 1 9 4 9 on the Michigan State College horticultural farm. The 15 Victory Red plants in each plot were also grown on the college farm. The plants were supported by wires lengthwise of each bench and by strings crosswise between the plants according to standard practice. Disbudding was done as needed in order to produce one flower per stalk. The night temperature was kept at 50 degrees Fahrenheit during the winter b y means of thermostatic controls that reg­ ulated the ridge ventilators as well as the heat inflow. warm weather the side vents were also opened. In 14 Red spider mites and aphis were controlled with parathion applied by means of* an aerosol "bomb” . No cultivating was done. Removal of a few weeds consti­ tuted the only soil disturbance during the experiment except for possible changes due to watering. From December 1 to June 22 all blooms were cut and graded according to the Cornell grading system suggested by Post (19). This system classifies the commercial grade flowers as follows: GRADES WEIGHT (QZ. ) MINIMUM STEM LENGTH (INCHES) Special 1 and over 24 Fancy 3/4 to 1 24 Extra 1/2 to 3/4 18 No. 1 1/4 to 1/2 12 No. 2 Less than 1/4 12 All other flowers were classified as rejects of little commercial value and were subdivided into (1) "shorts", good flowers having stems less than twelve inches in length, (2) "splits" having split calyces and (3) culls of no value. Actually the shorts and splits would be used by a retail grower in his own shop but would usually not find ready sale otherwise. On June 22 the plants in each plot were cut at the soil surface and g r een weights of the tops were recorded. samples were also taken at that time. Soil Moisture determinations were made at three depths in each plot of the constant water 15 level bench. Aggregate analyses were made at, two depths in each plot containing the Brookston clay loams using the Yoder method (35). The results were compared with those obtained from samples of the original soil. The Oshtemo sandy loam soil was not considered to be aggregated. Discussion of results. From the time flowrering began it was apparent that the variety Victory Red was of poor quality and badly mixed with Miller's Yellow. Accordingly, the decision was made to keep records on the variety North­ land and leave Victory Red principally as a boundary marker between plots. Total monthly yields, the number of commercial grade flowers and the number of rejects by months for the variety Northland and also the percent of each m o n t h ’s yield com­ posed of commercial grade flowers and rejects are given in Table 1. Good yields were obtained throughout the season with peak production occurring in January and May. Over the entire experiment 18.5% of the total yield were of low quality. It was decided to end the data on May 31 as this gave six full months yield and ended production after Memorial Day as is often done commercially. Therefore, Table 1 and all yield tables and figures which follow are based upon the production data for the six month period, December 1, 1949 to June 1, 1950. table 1 MONTHLY PRODUCTION OF NORTHLAND CARNATIONS Rejects Commercial Grade Month Number Per Cent of Monthly Yield Number Per Cent of Monthly Yield Total MolithiYield December 619 73.7 221 26.3 840 January 1315 81.6 297 18.4 1612 February 87? 84.7 159 15.3 IO36 March 666 77.5 193 2 2 .5 859 April 752 82.2 163 17.8 915 May 1464 84.9 261 15.1 1725 Total 5693 81.5 1294 18.5 6987 H 01 17 Table 2 shows that in terms of all flowers cut soil type rap of little importance. When watering methods are considered surface watering seems to be somewhat better than constant water level. Statistically, however, there were no signifi­ cant differences either between soils or between watering methods. The picture changes somewhat when only commercial grade flowers are considered, as in Table 3. In this case a differ­ ence is noted favoring both of the Brookston clay loam soils over the Oshtemo sandy loam. The differences in yield due to watering methods show that the constant water level bench yielded the fewest commercial flowers while the other two methods were nearly equal. These differences are significant statistically at the 5% level. The Oshtemo sandy loam plots in the constant water level tench yielded the least flowers as shown in Tables 2 and 3. Van Laan and Cook (3 0) obtained an even greater depression in yield under similar conditions with the variety Puritan. They obtained only five flowers per square foot of bench but did not state the length of the cutting period nor whether this value was total yield or only commercial yield. They attributed the depression in yield to lack of soil aeration hut this does not seem to be the entire explanation in view cf the results obtained in this experiment between plants from two sources. This point will be developed later. TABLE £ ilflulece of mltmgds Grassed Brookston or wailhiito CM TOTAL FLOYSR PMOLMCTICM Soil Cropped Brookston Oshtemo Sandy Loam Total Mean Constant Water Level 739 770 709 2218 739 Subirrigation 789 752 CD O VO Watering Method SC H i .-i. U T 2350 0^ CO O- Surface Watered 828 76$ 822 2L19 806 2356 2291 Z}kO 6987 785 764 780 Total Mean AIvA L Y SIS OF 7A5IA1TCE 2o,132 Soils 2 765 Watering Methods 2 6,954 Error 4 18,413 382.5 0.08 O 8 Mean Square Ratio 0.76 • Total Sum of Squares V Degrees of Freedom VD Source ^,603.3 H CD xabiu: 3 Or Watering Method TMRA3 S O IL S -x.D TKH2E Grassed Brookston MITMCDS Or WATM?.IITO 0 " Soil Cropped Brookston C0KMSRCIA1 FLOWSE PBCDiJCTI01T Oshtemo Sandy Loam Total Mean. Constant V/ater level 624 603 520 l?47 582 Subirrigation 677 636 643 1956 652 Surface watered 702 678 610 1990 663 2003 1917 1773 5693 668 639 591 Total Mean ANALYSIS 0? VARIANCE Sum 01 Squares Mean Square Eatio 9,003 4,502 7.03* 2 11,543 5,772 9.01* 4 2,562 Source Degrees of Freedom Total 8 23,103 Soils 2 Watering Methods Error *L3D at 55 level is 30.6 640.5 20 Differences in quantities of flowers produced under the different treatments were nominal in most instances except for the cases cited above. However, because quality is also very important in flower production, quality differences be­ tween the various treatments were analyzed using the Cornell grading system previously described. Further, plants obtained from Munt were compared with those grown at the college and the replications were examined for possible differences. Table 4 classifies the yield data by plant source, by treat­ ment, and by grade. Each value is the sum of two replications. Originally it had been planned to use only plants from the college farm. However, as there were too few of these it be­ came necessary to obtain enough plants from an outside source to fill the benches. Due to the difference in number of plants from each source in each plot some adjustments were necessary in order to compare the Munt carnations with the MSC carnations. In Table 5 the data is expressed in per-cent of total yield in each grade of the plants from each source. The supe­ riority of the Munt carnations becomes at once apparent. The plants from the two sources were grown side by side in each plot and after benching were subjected to exactly the same treatments. At the time of benching the plants appeared to be of comparable size and quality. The quality differences shown in the table may have been due largely to a difference in cultural treatment from the time of propagation to the TABLE k TOTAL YIELD OF NORTHLAND CARNATIONS, DEC. 1, 1949 TO JUNE 1, MUNT NORTHLAND Watering Method I CWL Soil Total Yield 47 144 201 97 3 301 5 24 1 30 331 43 110 165 95 6 2 66 4 32 0 36 302 51 139 205 116 9 330 10 35 2 47 377 141 393 308 18 897 19 91 3 77 113 223 103 6 332 1 25 1 27 359 1—1 37 Rejects Short Split Cull Sum i>- Grassed Brookston 10 Cropped Brookston 12 Oshtemo Sandy L. 15 Sum 113 1010 65 152 245 88 5 338 2 23 0 25 363 45 110 164 143 8 1—1 u~\ 9 37 0 46 361 70 187 375 632 334 19 985 12 85 1 98 1083 88 126 244 115 2 361 2 18 0 20 381 82 147 238 104 6 348 2 13 0 15 363 36 85 127 159 27 313 26 34 1 61 374 609 ,.. 22 1022 30 65 1 96 1118 1126 1812 72 2904 61 241 5 307 3211 Sum Grassed Brookston 30 Cropped Brookston 9 Oshtemo Sandy L. 6 Sum Yield 45 206 152 534 cn Grassed Brookston r>n Cropped Brookston 28 Oshtemo Sandy L. 9 00 II SI Commercials Spec. Fancy Extra Spefex* No. 1 No. 2 Sum ..m 1020 TABLE A (Cent. ) MSC NORTHLAND Watering Method I CWL Soil Grassed Brookston 16 Cropped Brookston 9 Oshtemo Sandy L. 18 Sum II SI 43 Grassed Brookston 6 Cropped Brookston 14 Oshtemo 8 Sandy L. Sum III sw Commercials Spec. Fancy Extra Spefex* No. 1 No. £ Sum 28 Grassed Brookston 17 Cropped Brookston 14 Oshtemo Sandy L. 3 3k 105 Total Yield k7 82 145 155 23 323 22 59 4 85 408 27 71 107 199 31 337 39 88 4 131 468 15 42 75 104 11 190 87 49 6 142 332 89 195 327 458 65 850 148 1*6 14 358 1208 30 39 75 207 63 345 39 44 2 85 430 21 31 66 184 48 298 31 59 1 91 389 k3 58 109 187 32 328 66 45 9 120 448 9k 128 250 578 143 971 136 148 12 296 1267 3k 40 91 206 44 341 38 66 2 106 447 49 55 118 185 27 330 40 34 2 76 406 52 54 109 150 38 297 104 41 6 151 448 135 149 318 541 109 968 182 141 10 333 1301 3.18 47.2 895 1577 317 2789 466 k85 36 987 3776 *A~term coined to represent the three highest grades (SfrEclal, Fancy, EXtra) combined Into one value 21a Sum Total Yield Rejects Short Split Cull Sum TA3LE 5 PERCENT OF TOTAL FLOWER YIELD FOR EACH SOURCE ACCORDING TO GRADE Grade Source Special Fancy Extra Spefex No. 1 No. 2 Commercial Shorts Splits Culls Re.lects Munt 4.7 16.6 35.1 56.4 31.8 2.2 90.4 1.9 7.5 0.2 9.6 MSC 2.8 8.4 12.5 23.7 41.8 8.4 73.9 12.3 12.8 1.0 26.1 to to 23 time of benching although the possibility of disease in the MSC stock can not be overlooked. Unfortunately, at the time of the investigation the disease factor was not investigated. Reduction of all data to "yield per square foot of bench" provides the most satisfactory way of comparing the data and is used in the tables which follow. In addition, yield per square foot of bench is a measure commonly used and under­ stood by commercial growers. was 8 x 3 As the spacing between plants inches there were 2.25 plants per square foot of bench. Data for each grade and .statistical analyses are given in Tables 20 through 30 of the appendix. summarized in Tables 5, 7, 3 and 9. Differences are Table 3 shows the sources of variance that are statistically significant for each grade. The most consistent differences were between the Munt and MSC plants. Soils and watering methods were more important for some grades than for others. cant in some cases. Interactions were also signifi­ The highly significant difference between replications in total flowers was due almost entirely to low yields of the MSC plants in Bench III, replication 1, on all three soils. Flower yields for each grade on each soil are summarized in Table 7. Soil differences did not affect the total yield but did have a significant effect on five grades or combina­ tions of grades. The grassed Brookston clay loam produced TABLE 6 SUMMARY OF ANALYSES OF VARIANCE Grade Soils Replications SOURCES OF VARIANCE Benches Soils Sources X Soils Benches Soils X X X Benches Sources Sources Benches X Sources Total Commercial * Special # Fancy Extra ** Spefex No. 1 No. 2 Rejects Splits Shorts #* ## # #* #* *# * * ## * # *# *# * * # *# *# # *# * * ^Significant at 5$ level ^Significant at 1% level to table 7 THE INFLUENCE OF S O I L TYPE ON FLOWER YIELD PER SQUARE FOOT OF BENCH FOR EACH GRADE Soil Special Fancy Extra Spefex n o .'"T" ** Grade No. 2 Commercial Shorts Splits (Hulls Rejects Total Yield Grassed Brookston 0.98 2.82 4.80 8.60 7.21 1.08 16.89 0.82 1.90 2.79 19.68 Cropped Brookston 0.81 2.51 5.01 8.26 6.95 0.96 16.16 0.90 2.00 2.95 19.12 1 5 .1 0 ## 2.35 2.01 ## 4.54 19.64 Oshtemo Sandy Loam 0.50 2.06 4.29 6.85 7.23 1.02 co Cft significantly more commercial, fancy and spefex grade flowers than did the Oshtemo sandy loam. The Oshtemo sandy loam pro­ duced more shorts and rejects than did either Brookston soil. Yields from the cropped Brookston clay loam were intermediate so that in only one grade (spefex) were yields significantly greater than from the Oshtemo sandy loam. Conversely, they * were not significantly lower than from the grassed Brookston clay loam in any grade. This summary combines both sources of plants so differences between sources on the three soils can not be distinguished. By referring to the tables in the appendix it will be noted that the Munt and MSC plants did not always respond to soil differences in the same manner. This was especially noticeable in the constant water level bench. The Munt plants in this bench yielded well on the Oshtemo sandy loam soil including highest total yield, most commercials, specials, fancys, spefexes, No. l's, No. 2 1s, and also most rejects and splits. The MSC strain on Oshtemo sandy loam soil in the same bench produced the lowest total yield, least commercials, fancys, extras, spefexes, No. l's, No. 2's and most rejects. Table 3 summarizes flower yield for each watering method for each grade. bined. Here again the Munt and MSC plants are com­ Among watering methods, subirrigation by injection and surface watering were both significantly better than con­ stant water level at the I'X level. The constant water level TABLE 8 THE INFLUENCE OF WATERING- METHODS ON FLOWER YIELD PER SQUARE FOOT OF BENCH FOR EACH GRADE Watering Grade Method________ _______________________ ___________________ _________________ Special FaneylExtra Spefex No'.’-! No. 2 Commercial Shorts Splits Culls ReTotal Jects Yield Constant Wat er Level Subirriga­ tion Surface Watered 0.75 1.99 0.87 2.46 0.68 *# 2.94 5.15 4.48 7.81 6.32 0.66 14.79 # 7.80 # 7.47 #» 16.52 I.2 5 0 - n •>> 1.91 - - 3.75 18.53 3.14 *# 19.66 3.40 *# 20.24 * 4.47 8.10 7 .6 0 1.15 16.84 1.67 - to -o 28 bench was least productive yet the yield of* the Munt plants on the Oshtemo sandy loam and the MSG plants on the cropped Brookston clay loam in this bench ranked very high (second and third over the entire experiment). Lowest yields over the entire experiment were also found in the constant water level bench. on the cropped For the Munt plants lowest production occurred Brookston clay loam, and for the lowest production occurred on the Oshtemo sandy MSG plants loam. Thus greatest variation in yields occurred under the constant water level method of watering. The constant water level bench yielded the most rejects and splits and the Oshtemo sandy loam produced the greatest number of rejects and splits in this bench with both Munt and MSG plants. Differences be­ tween subirrigation by injection and surface watering were generally not significant although surface watering gave slightly higher yields in several grades than did subirrigation by injection. Based on these data subirrigation by injection appears to be the most practical method of watering carnations because it resulted in good yields, less variability and would require less labor than surface watering. Theoretically, the constant water level method of water­ ing a greenhouse bench should be the most economical to oper­ ate after the benches are once installed. In practice, however, this system is often unsatisfactory and has been tried and abandoned by many operators. The reasons for failure are not 29 always evident but often appear to be related to unfavorable rir-water relationships in the soils used. Figure II shows that with constant water level the Oshtemo sandy loam was very wet even in the top inch while the Brookston soils varied considerably in moisture content from top to bottom of the soil layer. If aeration Is a limiting factor for carnation production in this type of bench, a sandy soil such as Oshtemo sandy loam would presumably depress yields. In order to graph these data, soil samples were assumed to have been taken from the midpoint of the depth class although this was not actually the case. As shown in Table 9 the greatest variation between replications occurred at the one to two Inch depth and may have been due to errors in sampling. Table 10 presents the commercial each source on each soil. yields by months fox* If each month's production is added to the previous yields cumulative yields can be expressed by a graph as in Figure III. This emphasizes the fact that the M3C plants were more strongly influenced quantity-wise by the soil than were the Munt plants. Table 11 shows commercial yields Cumulative by months for Munt and MSC plants in each bench. yields are graphed in Figure IV. It is noted that the method of watering had little effect upon the Munt plants until May when cumulative yields from subirrigation by injection and surface watering both sur­ passed the cumulative yield obtained in the constant water level Figure II. Moisture percentages of* three soils taken at three depths in the constant water level bench n r\ Percentage Moisture 25 20 15 o x c Oshtemo sandy loam Brassed Brookston clay loam Cropped Brookston clay loam 1 2 3 4 Heiyht above '.Vater Table (inches) A table 9 MOISTURE PERCENTAGES OF THREE SOILS AT THREE DEPTHS IN THE CONSTANT WATER LEVEL BENCH Depth in Bench * 0-1 1-2 Soil Replication 2-5 Grassed Brookston 1 2 Average 7.61 8.32 7.97 19.28 14.06 16.67 31.57 28.00 29.79 Cropped Brookston 1 2 Average 12.35 13.52 12.94 15.49 19.03 17.26 25.13 26.99 26.06 Oshtemo Sandy Loam 1 2 Average 24.37 26.77 25.57 24.91 28.95 26.93 26.41 27.98 27.20 *Inches .from the surface to H TA3LE 10 COMMERCIAL YIELDS PER SQUARE FOOT OF BENCH BY MONTHS AND PLANT SOURCES FOR EACH SOIL M o n t h ___________________ Soli Grassed Brookston Munt MS C Cropped Brookston Munt MSC Oshtemo Sandy Loam Munt MSC December 3.04 1.28 2.66 1.99 2.12 0.56 January 3.89 4.25 4.12 4.0? 3.85 1.91 February 2.41 2.32 2.23 3.26 2.36 2.00 March 1.94 2.16 1.82 1.60 1.80 1.80 April 2.18 1.82 2.09 1.73 2.48 2.34 May- 5.20 3.31 4.95 2.63 5.36 3.60 18.66 15.14 17.87 14.48 17.97 12.21 Total co CO Figure III. Cumulative monthly yields of commercial grade flowers, Munt plants versus MSC plants on each soil Grassed Brookston Cropped Brookston Oshtemo Sandy Loam Mu nt 19 Munt Munt 13 17 16 MSC 15 14 13 12 10 •H 9 4-3 8 o 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 j 0 o ui a> S O TABLE 11 COMMERCIAL YIELDS PER SQUARE FOOT OF BENCH BY MONTHS AND PLANT SOURCES FOR EACH WATERING- METHOD_____ Watering Method Month Constant Water Level MSC Munt Subirrigation Munt MSC Surface Watered Munt MSC December 2.18 0.92 2.61 1.37 3.02 0.74 January 4.19 2.90 3.83 3.96 3.87 3.38 February 2.66 2.45 2.34 2.39 2.00 2.72 March 1.53 1.76 1.87 2.00 2.14 1.78 April 2.16 2.07 2.41 1.94 2.18 1.89 May 4.12 2.63 5.42 2.90 5.96 4.01 16.84 12.73 18.48 14.56 19.17 14.52 Total u & Figure IV, Cumulative monthly yields of commercial grade flowers, Munt plants versus MSC plants for each method of watering Constant, Water Level Siibirrlegation Surface Watered Munt 19 Munt IS Munt 17 16 MSC 15 MSC 14 MSC 13 Cumulative yields 12 11 10 9 S 7 S 5 4 3 2 1 0 ■ o u p, 36 bench.. ’Vhen the MSC plants are considered, subirrigation by injection proved superior to either constant water level sub­ irrigation or surface watering. When only the three highest grades (spefex) are considered as in Table 12 and Figure V not only is a much greater differ­ ence noted between the Munt and MSC plants but it also becomes evident that soil type affected the quality of flcvers produced from the Munt plants much more than it did the quantity. Table 13 and Figure VI show the effect of the watering method on quality. The wide divergence between the Munt and MSC plants is noteworthy. Until May the Munt plants yielded as well in the constant water level bench as in the subirrigat-ion by injection bench and both the constant water level bench and the subirrigation by injection bench produced slightly more than did the surface watered bench. In May, however, the yield from the constant water level bench did not increase to the same degree that yields did under the other two methods of watering. When the MSC plants are considered the constant water level bench produced more high quality flowers each month than did either the subirrigation by injection bench or the surface watered bench. In May, however, production from the surface watered bench was great enough to bring the cumu­ lative yield from this bench up to the cumulative yield from the constant water level bench. Table 14 summarizes the differences found between the TABLE 12 SPEFEX YIELDS PER SQUARE FOOT OF BENCH BY MONTHS AND PLANT SOURCES FOR EACH SOIL Soil Month Brookston Grassed ; MSC Munt Cropped Brookston Munt MSC Oshtemo Sandy Loam Munt MSC December 0.73 0.06 0.51 0.02 0.21 0.02 January 1.74 0.33 1.97 0.20 0.86 0.02 February 1.63 0.25 1.56 0.45 0.92 0.15 March 1.44 0.45 1.42 0.27 0.92 0.24 April 1.89 0.81 1 .8 6 1.02 1.93 0.95 May 5.08 2.76 4.84 2.41 4.46 3.03 12.51 4.66 1 2 .1 6 4.37 9.30 4.41 Total CO 33 Figure V Cumulative monthly yields of spefex grade flowers, Munt plants versus MSC plants on each soil Cumulative yields o Jan Mar Apr. Jan. Mar Apr. 00 <£> (—1 O H H I-* tO H UJ Brookst.on Feb •vj Cropped May Dec. n Gl Brookst-on Feb ca Grassed Dec. CO CO May Jan. Mar. Loam Aor. Sandy Feb. Oshtemo Dec. table 13 SPEFEX YIELDS PER SQUARE FOOT OF BENCH BY MONTHS ALL PLANT SOURCES FOR EACH WATERING- METHOD Month _____________________________ Watering Method Constant Water Level Subirrigation Surface Watered Munt MSC_______________ Munt____ MSC______________Munt______ MSC December 0.54 0.06 0.38 0.03 O .5 2 - January 1.82 0.33 1.54 0.15 1.22 0.06 February 1.52 0.57 1.44 0.20 1.14 0.09 March 1.14 0.54 1.20 0.23 1.44 0.20 April 1.84 1.08 2.12 0.84 1.73 0.86 May 3.84 2.32 5.18 2.31 5.36 3.57 1 0 .7 0 4.90 11.86 3.75 11.41 4.78 Total co CD 40 Figure VT. Cumulative monthly yields of* spefex grade flowers, Munt plants versus MSC plants f o r each method of watering Surface Watered Sub i rr igat ion Constant Water Level 13 Munt 12 Munt Munt 11 10 •H MSC MSC MSC o i f-i Q (Li j TABLE 14 COMPARISON OF THE FLOWER YIELDS PER SQUARE FOOT OF BENCH FOR THE HUNT AND MSC PUNTS, ACCORDING- TO GRADE Source Grade Special Fancy Extra Spefex No. 1 No. 2 ---- T “ " W Munt 1.00 3-3^ 7.04 11.38 Commercial Shorts Splits Culls Rejects Total Yield *# 0.38 1.92 2 0 . 0 7 18.15 1.51 - *# MSC 0.53 1.59 2.36 ♦Significant at the % level ♦♦Significant at the 1$ level 4.48 13.95 ** 2.33 ## 2.43 - ♦« 4.94 18.88 42 Munt and MSC plants when the various grades were analyzed sep­ arately. While the total number of* flowers produced per square foot of bench was not significantly different between the Munt and MSC plants all except two of the grades or combinations of grades showed differences significant at the 1% level. The Munt plants yielded significantly more commercials and more special, fancy and extra grade flowers while the MSC plants yielded a significantly greater number of No. l ’s, No. 2 ’s, rejects, shorts and splits. It appears from the data obtained that the constant water level method of bench watering can be used successfully to produce high quality carnations provided vigorous, well-grown plants are used. A highly organic clay loam soil having a stable, w e 11-aggregated structure may contribute to the im­ provement of quality but this was not definitely proven in sill cases under the conditions of this experiment. however, It was apparent, that constant water level is a method requiring great­ er skill to use successfully than either surface watering or subirrigation by injection. It is often stated that the structure of the soil in a greenhouse b e n c h is broken down because of the heavy watering to which the soil is subjected. If soil aggregates are degrad­ ed by watering then the aeration status will be changed. in turn may affect plants growing in the soil. This With this thought in m ind the aggregate stability of the two Brookston 43 soils in the different benches was compared, with the aggregate stability of the same soils prior to their use in the green­ house. The Oshtemo sandy loam soil was not analyzed as its structure was considered to be practically single-grained and thus would contain few stable aggregates. These data are pre­ sented in Tables 32 and 33 of the appendix. Two samples were taken at two depths in each plot which contained the Brookston clay loam soils. A marked difference was found between the two Brookston soils, the grassed Brookston containing a much larger percentage of stable aggregates. In terms of aggre­ gates four millimeters or more in diameter which remained on the top screen after "dunking" aggregation was improved in all benches and at both depths over the original soils except in three cases. These three were all surface samples of the grassed Brookston and were in benches I and II. In general, the surface aggregation was not improved as much as was the sub-surface aggregation. This was believed to be due to greater root growth at the lower depth. In the constant water level b e n c h the roots may have been nearer the surface thus accounting for the better aggregation of the surface soil in this bench, particularly with the cropped Brookston. Unfortunately, the roots were not examined during this exper­ iment. Surface watering improved the structural stability of the grassed Brookston soil and caused structural disintegra­ tion of the cropped soil. The greatest increase in aggregation 44 in the cropped soil occurred in bench I where the water level was held constant. The method of watering had little degrad­ ing effect u p o n the soil provided the soil contained considerorganic matter and clay and initially was stably aggregated. A number of observations were made as a result of the soil testing program. Nutrient levels fluctuated most in the Oshtemo sandy l oam and least in the grassed Brookston clay loam. This was expected because of the low clay and organic matter content of the Oshtemo soil and the high clay and organic matter content of the grassed Brookston soil. Another property of the sandy loam soil was its high moisture content at all depths in the constant water level bench. Figure IX shows that the Oshtemo sandy loam soil was very wet even at the surface of the bench. This caused poor aeration and produced anaerobic conditions as indicated by positive tests for ammonia. Apparently carnations are able to utilize ammonia nitrogen, however, because some very good yields were obtained with the Munt plants on the Oshtemo soil in the constant water level bench as previously shown. The soil in the west plot of bench II also showed a positive test for ammonia. This plot contained Oshtemo sandy loam soil. Drainage, however, was not complete due to the fact that the drainage hole in the end plots was in the end of the bench rather than in the bottom. The Brookston soils showed blank tests for ammonia in all benches. As shown by Figure II A 45 the moisture content and, therefore, the aeration varied con­ siderably f r o m top to b o t t o m of the Brookston soil layers. In the constant water level bench phosphorus and potas­ sium tended to remain highest w i t h phosphorus decreasing most rapidly in the subirrigation bench and potassium decreasing most rapidly in the surface w atered bench. Nitrate nitrogen was removed most rapidly from the soil by surface watering and least rap i d l y b y the injection method of subirrigation. Summary of results. 1. Northland carnations from two sources were g r own on three soils and in three benches In which different methods of watering were used. Production records were kept for a sox m o nth period and all flowers cut v;ere graded for quality. Almost 7,000 flowers were cut, of which SI.5% were of commercial quality. 2. In terms of total yield over the entire experiment there were no significant differences either between the soils or between the watering methods used. However, in terms of commercial yield both of the Brookston clay loam soils yielded sognificantly more flowers than did the Oshtemo sandy loam. Also, both subirrigation by injection and surface watering resulted in significantly more commercial grade flowers than did constant water level subirrigation. 3. The most consistent quality differences throughout the experiment occurred between plants from the owo sources. The Tiunt plants yielded more flowers in all high quality 46 grades and the MSC plants yielded more flowers in the lower grades and in rejects. In terms of commercial yields the MSC plants were affected more by differences in soils and watering methods than were the Munt plants. In the case of the Munt plants soil differences affected quality more than numbers of flowers. As treatments after benching were identi­ cal for both Munt and MSC plants the differences in quality observed between Munt and MSC plants m a y have been due pri­ marily to differences in culture from time of propagation to time of benching. 4. The grassed Brookston clay loam soil produced signif icantly more commercial, fancy and spefex grade flowers than did the Oshtemo sandy loam. Conversely, the Oshtemo soil produced more rejects than did either of the Brookston soils. Yields from the cropped Brookston clay loam soil were inter­ mediate. In only one case (spefex) were yields significantly better than those from the Oshtemo sandy loam. On the other hand, they were in no case significantly poorer than those from the grassed Brookston. 5. The greatest variation between plots occurred on th constant water level bench as the lowest yielding plot and the second and third highest occurred on this bench. For both MbC and Munt plants more top quality flowers were produced on this bench during the first five months than on either of the other benches. Constant water level also produced most rejects and 47 splits. It appears that constant water level can be used successfully to produce high quality carnations but requires greater management skill than either surface watering or sub­ irrigation by injection. 6. The grassed Brookston soil was more stably aggregate than was the cropped Brookston. Surface watering tended to degrade the surface layer of the latter more than did other methods of w a t e r i n g but did not affect the grassed Brookston. The structure of the cropped Brookston soil was most improved in the constant water level bench. Both Brookston soils con­ tained more stable aggregates after nine months use in the greenhouse than did the original soils. B. The Influence of Depth of Soil Above a Water Table u p o n Growth and Development of Carnations The importance of aeration in greenhouse soils. The differences in commercial yields and qualify obtained in the first experiment as well as the experiences of many growers indicate that some soil property other than the chemical nu­ trient supplying power is often limiting in greenhouse soils. A deficiency of water seldom occurs In a well managed green­ house. In fact, as has been indicated previously in this report, unsatisfactory production has often been obtained on constant w a ter level benches where water is always present in abundance. In recent years a greater emphasis has been placed 48 upon the importance of* proper aeration in field soils. In the greenhouse where watering is much more intense than In the field there is every reason to believe that aeration is limiting much more often than has been recognized in the past. Chemical soil testing has impressed upon many greenhouse people the importance of proper nutrition for their crops. Unfortunately, there has been no good method of measuring soil air and as a conseouence the importance of soil aeration has been largely disregarded. However, soil physicists have been searching for methods of measuring the oxygen supplying power of soils and of correlating the data obtained with the growth and yield of plants. A survey of the modern concepts and methods of characterizing soil aeration has recently been made by Lemon (14). Much remains to be done on soil aeration and its evaluation before a testing method for soil air will be as generally accepted by greenhouse operators as chemical soil testing has been. However, it is believed that measur­ ing oxygen diffusion by the method developed by Lemon and drickson (15) offers to date the most satisfactory way of evaluating ox.ygen supplying ability of a soil In a green­ house bench or pot. For this reason a second greenhouse experiment was designed in an effort to correlate carnation growth with varying conditions of soil water and soil air. Experimental methods and d e s i g n . Sight-inch glazed drainage tiles were cut into 3, 9, 10, 11 and 12 Inch lengths. A 49 One end of* each, section was covered with several layers of cheesecloth. The sections were then set into galvanized pans three inches deep with the covered end down. The tiles were filled with soil leaving a one inch space at the top of each. '.Then the pans were filled with water the effect was similar to a constant water level bench. Depth of soil above the water level in each tile was four inches less than the height of the tile. Thus the actual soil columns above the water table were four, five, six, seven and eight inches. The grassed Brookston clay loam and the cropped Brookston clay loam soils from the Stanley Wood farm as described in the previous experiment were used. There were four replications at. each depth with each soil and three sets of carnation plants were used. Fertilizer was applied on an area basis so it was the same ir all tiles regardless of the depth of the soil layer. Initially ten grams of an 0-10-10 fertilizer was stirred into the soil in each tile prior to the addition of the top inch of soil. Soil tests were made at eight week intervals and equal amounts of K.-HP0. in solution were added to all tiles when testing showed the need. According to the test results nitrate nitrogen was never limiting. Two varieties of carnations were planted, Juno and Achilles, both of which are white flowered. obtained from Yoder Brothers of Barberton, The plants were Ohio. 50 The first set of plants was planted on December 3, 1952. One plant of the variety Juno was planted in each tile. Care was taken to set the plants at a uniform depth and the soil was firmed gent l y around the roots in order to damage the structural aggregates of the soil as little as possible. In the deeper tiles it was necessary to water from above for several days. This watering was carefully done in order to prevent particle erosion. Plants were chosen randomly from those available, the main requisites being that each be single stemmed and have no visible axillary buds. In later trials plants were also chosen for uniformity. In the first trial, growth was measured by increase in height at harvest over the initial height, green weight, total number of "breaks’* and the number and green weight of "bottom breaks"2 . The plants were cut on January 20, 1953 after heights had been recorded and counts made. Some flower buds were -^-Axillary buds that have begun growth. One-half inch was used here as the lower limit of length because shorter breaks were f e w and not readily measured. ^Axillary shoots developed on the lower portion of the stem in the region of short internodes. Of importance be­ cause they flower only after considerable increase in stem length thus y i e l d i n g good blooms for later cutting. This Is in contrast to "top breaks" which flower on very short stems. 51 present but were not counted. More were observed, however, on the grassed Brookston soil than on the cropped Brookston. All height measurements were made one inch from the soil surface and recorded to the nearest quarter inch. A notched guide stick w h i c h rested on the rim of the tile was used to insure u n i f o r m measurements from plant to plant and from one time of measurement to the next. The second and third sets of plants were planted on January 25, 1953. that time. Two plants were placed in each tile at As before, the variety Juno was unpinched and was allowed to develop into a single stemmed plant. The variety Achilles was pinched so that four nodes and four good sets of leaves were left on each plant. The same stand­ ards as before were used but because of the variability noted in the first set of plants initial uniformity within the lim­ its of the plants available was also striven for. The variety Achilles was harvested on April 19th. In­ crease in height, gre e n weight of plants and number and total length of breaks were recorded. The v ariety Juno was harvested on May 27th. Height meas­ urements were made at planting time and at Intervals ranging from eight to fifteen days until harvest to enable growth curves to be drawn. and of bottom breaks, Green weights of plants, of total breaks, counts of total breaks and bottom breaks, total length of breaks and bottom breaks, and the flower and A 52 bud count were r e corded at time of harvest. Later, w h e n the equipment became available, oxygen dif­ fusion studies were made of the soils using the platinum electrode m e t h o d developed by L e m o n and Erickson (15). Five electrodes were used in each tile and readings were made at one inch intervals from one inch below the soil sur­ face down to the w a ter table. Moisture determinations of the various layers were also made on the soil in several of the tiles. D i s c u s s i o n of r e s u l t s . In the first trial perhaps the most important effect was in the development of breaks, cially b o t t o m breaks. espe­ On the grassed Brookston soil the total number of breaks developed was least in the tiles having only four inches of soil above the water table. The number then increased up to seven Inches of soil and dropped off again at eight inches. When the number and weight of bottom breaks alone were considered there was a consistent increase on the cropped Brookston soil as the height above the water table Increased f rom four to eight Inches. Yield data for the first set of plants which were harvested January 19th are presented in Table 15. Carnations grow slowly in tTiohigan during the winter because of low light intensity 'which prevails at that time. Perhaps for this reason other differences in growth were not consistent. On this account and because of the initial TABLE 15 GROWTH OF UNPINCHED JUNO CARNATIONS ON TWO S O IIS USING FIV E DEPTHS OF SOIL ABOVE LKJ THE X WATER X TABLE. X * xi^ FIRST X TRIAL, HARVESTED JANUARY 19, 1953 U X L t ** V ij ilJU M** l-il V xui.i • o -x v-/ j. 4- xwj-***-* s * * * * * u * j-p* GRASSED BROOKSTON Total Breaks Entire Plant dumber** Green Weight Depth of Increase in (grams) Soil (in.) Height (in.) 4 5 6 8 .3 I* 22.70 8.63 8.19 8.50 22.80 8 8.56 25.25 22.48 Average 8.44 23.20 7 v t-*- — / | ✓ V -/ U Bottom Breaks Number** Green Weight (grams) 13.00 4.50 3.50 4.50 4.25 4.50 12.45 4.25 1.83 1.50 0.28 0.45 10.75 11.50 13.25 13.75 22.78 4. 2.45 1.58 1.25 1.60 2.28 CROPPED BROOKSTON 4 5 7.69 8.50 6 6.88 7 8 7.50 7.63 15.98 18.93 15.93 17.70 18,10 Average 7.64 17.33 5.50 9.75 6.00 2.25 0.60 7.00 2.75 3.50 4.25 0.73 1.18 7.20 2.85 0.65 7.75 *A11 values are mean of four replications **Over one-half inch in length Ol to 54 variability, the first set, of plants was harvested early and. the second and third sets were planted in late January. These plants were selected for uniformity within the group of plants available. The variety Juno was grown unpinched as before and the variety Achilles was pinched to four nodes. Because of differences in morphological development caused by pinching, the two varieties must be considered separately. The Achilles plants were harvested on April 19th and the yield data are given in Table 16. removed by pinching, Because the apical bud was lateral buds began to develop immediately. The carnation has opposite leaves but the tendency is for only one bud to develop per node. Therefore, the number of breaks was limited b y the number of nodes remaining. ing to note, however, It is interest­ that two buds per node occurred frequent­ ly enough give an average of somewhat more than four breaks per plant in all but one case the cropped Brookston soil in the four inch depth. Height increases of the tallest branch over the original heights, green weights of the top growth and total lengths of breaks vary in a similar fashion. With each soil eight inches of soil above the water table gave the greatest increase m length of breaks and four inches of soil gave the least. The grassed Brookston clay loam soil which was well aggregated and had satisfactory soil water and soil relations produced t best growth f r o m the pinched plants when the soil column was TABLE 16 G W m : OF PINCHED ACHILLES CARNATIONS ON TWO SOILS USING FIVE DEPTHS OF SOIL AEOVE THE WATER TABLE. SECOND TRIAL, HARVESTED APRIL 19.1953 GBAESED BROOKSTON Depth of Soil (in.) Increase in Height (in.) Green Weight (grams) Number of Breaks 2 5 .7 0 5.00 4.75 5.25 5.00 5.75 33.19 ** 42.19 41.25 40.75 46.75 23.25 5.15 40.83 4 5 6 7 8 2 .31 * 1 6 . 25 4.06 3.38 3.38 3.56 28.45 23.13 22.73 Average 3.34 ' Length of Breaks (in.) CROPPED BROOKSTON 4 5 6 7 8 0.19 0.38 1.31 1.69 3.25 7.10 8.00 12.65 12.55 19.80 3.50 4.75 5.25 4.25 4.50 19.06 23.06 30.38 27.81 34.94 Average 1.36 12.02 4.45 27.05 *All values are mean of four replications **0ver one-half inch in length cn 01 56 over four inches In thickness. The growth pattern varied little as the soil column increased in height from five to eight inches. Thus it appeared that optimum conditions were attained wit h i n this range. Five or six inches of this soil in a constant wat e r level bench would produce satisfactory carnations. In the case of the cropped Brookston clay loam soil there was no indication that optimum growth was reached even at eight inches as the growth continued to improve. If a soil such as this were to be used in a constant water level bench the layer of soil above the water table should be at least eight inches thick. Cook, Erickson and Krone (8) con­ cluded that for proper snapdragon growth a constant water level bench should have nine inches of Brookston clay loam soil or twenty-one inches of Oshtemo sandy loam soil above the water table. When the two soils are compared the grassed Brookston is observed to have promoted greater growth than did the cropped Brookston. However, a yield overlap occurred as the eight inch depth of the cropped Brookston yielded somewhat better than did the four inch depth of the grassed Brookston. The variety Juno was harvested on May 27th and measure­ ments made at that time are presented in Table 17. figure is the m e a n of four replications. Sach Some flowers and a considerable number of buds were present at that time. The commercial practice of removing all but one bud per stem TABLE 17 GROWTH OF UNPINCHED JUNO CARNATIONS ON TWO SO I I S OF SOIL ABOVE THE WATER TABLE, USING FIV E DEPTHS THIRD TRIAL, HARVESTED MAY 27, 1953 GRASSED BROOKSTON E n tire P la n t N um ber In creas e G re e n D ep th o f in S o il(in .) W e ig h t H e i g h t ( i n . ) (gram s) 4 5 21.58 # 8 21.18 57.43 79.20 88.75 82.70 96.85 A verage 22.47 80.99 6 23.64 23.59 7 2 2 . 3k 4.25 5.75 T o t a l B reaks B o tto m B r e a k s ## G reen L e n g th W e ig h t (gram s) ( i n . ) *# N um ber G r e e n F l o w e r s O pen L en g th l an d W e ig h t Flow e: ( g r a m s ) ( i n . ) Buds 10. 25 5.35 13.13 15.90 17.53 21.65 17.50 28.75 34.94 40.63 49.88 6.95 14.71 34.34 6.00 8.50 12 . 13 22.13 26.38 31.56 34.44 7.50 9.50 8.75 1.50 4.50 5.25 9.00 10.00 8.00 6.50 12.43 25.33 8.95 5.15 0.50 0.28 1 . 88 5.50 4.25 5.25 6.75 7.50 0.25 0.25 8.58 1.19 5.75 7.44 14.06 19.75 6.00 3.94 9.64 5.85 2.75 3.25 6.00 6.25 3.83 11.75 13.53 15.08 17.95 4.80 4.00 4.50 CROPPED BROOKSTON 4 5 33.45 8 19.95 17.58 19.84 2D. 75 21.28 60. 23 70. 60 A verage 19.88 49.83 6 7 38.18 46.70 2.00 1.81 7.69 4.25 4.18 6.08 11. 25 16. 25 7.50 11.20 30.44 1.75 1.50 3.75 4.50 3.80 4.76 13.4-9 2.40 0.75 3.25 3.25 0.35 3.55 5.40 2.50 4.75 ♦ A l l v a l u e s a r e mean o f f o u r r e p l i c a t i o n s **Over one-half Inch In length 01 -u 58 war, not used in this experiment. lowed to develop naturally. Instead, all buds were al­ The total number of flowers and "^ell-developed buds did not vary greatly with depth of soil but the earliest flowers were produced on the deeper soils. Growth curves for the plants grown on the two soils at the different depths are shown in Figures VII and VIII. With the grassed Brookston soil five, six, seven and eight inches of soil above the water table produced very similar growth as measured increases in plant height. of this soil growth was retarded. In four inches On the cropped Brookston soil seven and. eight inches of- soil above the water table were definitely better than any shallower depth in improving growth in height throughout the entire growling period. T”'o points should be noted particularly. First, the grassed Brookston soil produced plants which averaged more than 2.5 inches taller than those produced on the cropped Brookston, although, again, eight inches of the cropped Brookston soil was as good as four inches of the grassed Brookston. Secondly, the change in the slope of the curves for the seven and eight inch depths of the grassed Brookston and the eight inch depth of the cropped Brookston on the 37th day was related to flower development. Plants in the seven and eight inch depths of grassed Brookston soil flowered earlier but were shorter stemmed. The other extreme was represented by the four and five inch depths of cropped 59 Figure VII. Growth rates of* Juno carnations on grassed Brookston clay loam soil at five soil h eights above the water table 30 V0 4° , ^ 60 Figure VTII. Growth rates of Juno carnations on cropped Brookston clay loam soil at five soil heights above the water table 24 23 22 21 O' 20 19 18 17 16 Inches of Growth 15 13 12 11 lO 9 8 7 6 4 3 2 1 O O 10 40 50 60 70 80 Davs after Plantiner 9 0 100 120 61 Brookston soil. Flowering had just begun by the ICOth day and the g r o w t h curves h a d not yet changed direction at that t ime. Green w e i g h t s of the tops increased steadily from the shallowest to the deepest tiles in both soils with the ex­ ception of the seven inch depth of the gra s s e d Brookston which dropp e d d o w n somewhat because of two lighter plants. Again there was a n overlap so that the eight inch depth of the cropped B r o o k s t o n soil yielded better than the four inch depth of the grassed Brookston. The p a t t e r n was similar when total breaks and bottom breaks were consid e r e d except that the overlap varied some­ what depen d i n g u p o n the characteristic measured. The over­ lap indicated that five inches of the grassed Brookston and eight inches of the cropped Brookston produced generally comparable results. Tt was evident that less than five inches of soil above the w a t e r table depressed growth even with the grassed B r o o k s t o n clay loam which is undoubtedly one of the best greenhouse soils in Michigan. Soil tests did not show great nutrient differences at any time alt h o u g h nutrient availability is sc inextricably related to soil wat e r and soil air that some differences undoubtedly did exist. The conclusion was reached that the increase in grow t h in the deeper tiles was due primarily to the more favorable soil water-air relationships existing in them. 62 In February it/ was noted tbat wat e r was d is appearing from the pans at u nequal rates so measurements of the water added to each p a n were started. In size and c o n t a i n e d four tiles. Each pan was 16 x 40 inches The amounts of water added over a three and one-half month period are shown in Table IS. A number of conclusions may be drawn from these data. example, For the q uantity of w a t e r used was directly related to depth in the less well aggregated soil but was relatively in­ dependent of d e pth in the highly aggregated soil. In the well aggregated g r a s s e d B r o o k s t o n soil the pore spaces were larger, the water did not rise as high in the columns and considerably less water w a s used. A total of 137 gallons of water was added to the pans h o l d i n g the tiles of grassed. Brookston soil and 209 gallons was added to the cropped Brookston of 42 gallons. a difference The difference was attributed to greater sur­ face evaporation in the cropped Brookston due to its poorer aggregation and consequent increased capillarity. If water was limiting at any time growth should have been greatest in the cropped Br o o k s t o n and poorest in the grassed Brookston. T?ov;ever, because such was not the case, lieved to be the more important. Thus, soil aeration was be­ in the cropped Brooks­ ton soil ae r a t i o n was limited because too much water was drawn Into the root zone. This, in v i e w of the smaller pore space, reduced the oxygen in the soil below the optimum for the car­ nation. As the soil layer above the water table became deeper. TABLE 18 INCHES OF WATER ADDED TO PANS CONTAINING SOIL COLUMNS OF VARYING- HEIGHTS GRASSED BROOKSTON Height of Soil Column MONTH 4 5 6 7 8 February* 1.3 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.5 March 4.8 5.5 5.3 4.8 April 6.9 7.1 7.0 May 7.3 8.1 7.0 Total CROPPED BROOKSTON Height of Soil Column 4 5 6 7 8 8.0 1.8 1.4 3.3 3.8 5.0 15.3 4.1 24.5 4.8 5.6 8.0 8.1 9.9 36.4 5.6 5.8 32.4 6.4 5.8 8.3 7.5 6.8 34.8 6.3 6.1 34.8 7.9 7.8 8.8 7.6 6.5 38.6 20.3 22.5 21.1 18.3 17.5 99.7 20.9 20.6 26.4 2 ? . 0 28.2 125.1 Total *Month incomplete - measurements begun February 15 Total 64 the moisture films in the soil column became thinner and al­ lowed more air to diffuse into the soil. Consequently, a more satisfactory ratio between soil air and soil water was attained in the upper layers of the taller columns. This was directly reflected in increased growth and development. A number of plants were removed from the tiles and the coil was carefully washed from the roots. No roots were found in either* soil in the first two inches above the water table. The root growth v/as almost horizontal in the four inch tiles as the effective root area was no more than two inches thick. In the eight inch tiles the effective root, area was less than six inches thick because of a half inch or more of relatively dry soil at the surface. The roots were longer in the deeper tiles but did not appear to differ greatly in the total amount present. This agrees with the work of Durell (9) who found with the tomato that slight aeration sufficed for optimum growth of roots and yield of fruits but the highest rate of aeration produced the greatest dry weight of stems and leaves. If this same relationship holds true for the carnation then the highest rate of aeration should produce the highest quality flowers if other factors are not limiting. The data presented Indicate that in gen­ eral the heaviest plants and the longest stems did occur* on the deepest soils which were also the best aerated. Figures IT and X present the oxygen diffusion data for 1 4 F ig u r e IX * G r a s s s h ip m ic ro c o lu m t a b l e e d B "b e tw a m p e n s o a n d ro o k een re s f v a th e st-o n c l a y lo a m . T h o x y g e n d i f f u s i o n r a a t o n e in c h i n t e r v a r y in g h e i g h t s a b o v e m o is tu r e p e r c e n ta g e t e l s t e r e l a t i o n ­ s i n i n s o i l h e w a te r c u rv e 12 50 11 55 10 50 9 45 S 40 1 35 6 30 ■H 5 Molsti.i>g eouivfilftr.t, 2 R . & 25 87 20 4 15 3 10 2 1 0 H e ig h t, a b o v e W a te r T a b le ( i n c h e s ) M o ia tu re c u r v e P e rce n tag e M o is tu r e F ig u r e X , C ro p p s h i p m ic r o c o lu m t a b l e e d B r o o k s to n c l a y lo a m . T h b e tw e e n o x y g e n d i f f u s i o n r a a m p e r e s a t o n e in c h i n t e r v a n s o f v a r y in g h e i g h t s a b o v e a n d th e m o is tu r e p e r c e n ta g e t e l s t e r e l a t i o n ­ s i n i n s o i l h e w a te r c u rv e Microamperes n n ^ -\)Cn o oo Heiebt above Water Table (incbe tn P e rc e n ta g e M oisture 67 the t w o soils and E r i c k s o n as o b t a i n e d w i t h the m e t h o d d e v e l o p e d b y L e m o n (15^ at v a r y i n g d e p t h s moisture curves and also shows in a sampling are steeper the roil. slope curves obtained I n slope, o b t a i n e d f o r th e experiment aeration (Figure these constant 2). s t a t u s o f the N e a r t h e w a t e r t a b l e t h e m o i s t u r e w a s h i g h a n d t he t ab l e low. As th e d i s t a n c e i nc r e a s e d the mo isture percentage of o x y g e n d i f f u s i o n i n c r e a s e d of the a nd c o n c l u d e d current a b o v e the w a t e r d e c r e a s e d a nd the e x c e p t n e a r the surface E r i c k s o n u s e d the t o m a t o that readings as t h e i r t es t p l a n t of s e v e n tc e i g h t m i c r o a m p e r e s o f i n d i c a t e d the m i n i m u m f o r s a t i s f a c t o r y t o m a t o growth. tomato is v e r y suc h as r i c e carnation sensitive appears aeration. zone w a s d e f i n i t e l y shove O n e , however, the w a t e r table limiting. Eight f o u n d in the The s en s i­ zero a e r a t i o n in t hi s of th e t e n v a l u e s o b t a i n e d the w a t e r table were b e l o w three microamperes. was 3. 6 a n d one, of t w e n t y r e a d i n g s f o u r replictf.tions. should be e x t r e m e s In its A.s n o r o o t s w e r e above a plant to l a c k o f soil oxygen. t o lie b e t w e e n t h e s e inch distance t wo I n c h e s to p o o r a e r a t i o n w h i l e is v e r y t o l e r a n t tivity to poor to t w o oxy­ t a l l e r ti l es . L e mon and The first th e b e t t e r t h e gen diffusion rate was rate o f t h e tiles. s i m i l a r to t h o s e vector l e v e l b e n c h d u r i n g t h e The the m o i s t u r e as f i v e Perhaps five microamperes 4.7. Each value electrodes were used is the m e a n a n d thei e were f o r c a r n a t i o n the m i n i m u m r e a d i n g or above. i 68 me moi t;oui'e G Q U i v a X G n t s 1o i l o w e : 23 .I S. grassed Tr t h e Thus, 2 3 . 0'S; tiles the moisture 4.5 i n c h e s a b o v e end 5.2 Brookston, for the t w o inches the w a t e r t a b l e above oxygen diffused the area w h e r e soils w s r s as c r o p p e d Brookston, e q u i v a l e n t v:as a t t a i n e d f o r the g r a s s e I B r o o k s t o n the w a t e r t a b l e f o r the c r o p p e d Brookston. f u r t h e r into the g r a s s e d B r o o k s t o n and a e r a t i o n a n d m o i s t u r e w e r e b o t h a d e q u a t e wa s greater. These d a t a (f } t h a t t h e c o n f i r m t he s t a t e m e n t m a d e b y C a n n o n a n d Free members varying relat i o n s gen c o n t e n t (15> m o r e recently diffusion rate and depth and aggregate The g e n e r a l s urface produces ( 3 3 N; to show that pattern strata. system may have Lemon and Erickson significant differences be­ in the soil and also b e t w e e n size. of i n c r e a s i n g o x y g e n t o w a r d the a s y s t e m s i m i l a r to that constructed by soil .vent a p o r t i o n of the r o o t s of t o m a t o g r o w n on s o l u t i o n needed, to d e v e l o p i n a w e l l a e r a t e d m e d i a In o r d e r to p r o d u c e f or s t e m g r o w t h . v£s soil showed highly rate same r o o t o x y g e n o w i n g to d i f f e r e n c e s o f the o x y ­ o f the v a r i o u s t ween d i f f u s i o n nutrient to of one a nd the c a u l o c a l i n e w h i c h he b e l i e v e d e s se ntial T he p a t t e r n s h e w n b y c a rn a ti o n, somewhat different. tion had less In this effect u p o n the case, increase stem than u p o n the green weights a m development. Cook, however. i n c r e a s i n g soil a e r a ­ in h e i g h t of the m a m u p o n the l a t e r a l E r i c k s o n and Krone m m (8) r e p o r t e d a similar 4 69 much b r a n c h e d ce r&tior w a s growth, pattern. T o r increased but Perhaps, suffie;ent to a c t i v a t e d the or r e d u c e d further state that its inhibited over, removal its e f f e c t , it, may improving concentration the a partial apical stimulus t he n u m b e r of strong bottom breaks wants comraerc: si enough were grown mate conditions Two i n ti le- to study acteristics and and d e v e l o p m e n t recorded bud and the 1. shoot stimulated buds. More­ is t o t a l c a n b e varied. in For is i n t e r e s t e d i n a l a r g e for cuttings but the f l o w e r or r e q u i r e s in p a n s continued o b t a i n s a "g r as s y" Two varieties at d i f f e r e n t effect the d e p t h e x t r a pr u ni n g. of c a r n a t i o n s of w a t e r to a p p r o x i ­ heights of v a r y i n g Various increases, a b o v e the w a t e r the p h y s i c a l of s o i l i n t he of c a r n a t i o n s . lengths flower that quality set o n end including height '•eights and it In­ e x i s t i n g i n u c o n s t a n t w a t e r l e v e l bench. soils we re u s e d t ab l e apical of l a t e r a l so m a n y t h a t he of r e s u l t s . is enough becomes known about propagator of g r o w t h w h i c h r e d u c e s Summary It s t r o n g b o t t o m b r e a k s to i n s u r e good p r o d u c t i o n b u t n o t type in the growing point once Instance, grower produced sufficiently that a e r a t i o n control, offer b e e n mace. soil a e r a t i o n e i t h e r development of the coll attempt- t -> e x p l a i n it. studies have substance rather t h a n while did not until growth iragon w h e n the soil b e n c h u p o n the g r o w t h growth criteria g r e e n weights., ..ere number, of t o t a l b r e a k s a n d b o t t o m br e aks, c o un t s. char­ an d 70 2. The per plant. variety A c h i l l e s w a s pinched, to l e a v e f ou r no d es I n the g r a s s e d pinched plants was the w a t e r t a b l e Brookston s i m i l a r w h e n the d e p t h of the was five inches Brookston soil best g rowth was (e i g h t i n c h e s th at the or more. obtained above w a t e r table) colu mns flowers of t h e somewhat 4. the appeared that on B r o o k s t o n soil. i n c h so il of plant height, the five 2 2/3 inches 5. between stems, however*, in shal­ -which w o u l d i n di c a t e cut flowers, and direct­ the u n p i n c h c d p l a n t s si x inch c o l u m n s of the g r a s s e d columns produced taller plants as t h e Th e m o s t plants c o n s i s t e n t d i f f e r e n c e s were t o l l e r t h a n the p l a n t s G r e e n weights, concluded on the c r o p p e d Brookston. t o t a l b r e a k s and b o t t o m b r e a k s v ar i ed soil c o l u m n In b o t h soils. to be du e to m o r e s o i l w a t e r an d t h a n any of o n the g r a s s e d B r o o k s t o n a v e r a g e d d i r e c t l y w i t h t h e d e p t h of th e This w a s The O n t h e c r o p p e d B r o o k s t o n soil the s ev e n and s h a l l o w e r tiles. soils soil. soil. s t e m l e n g t h of the between f l o w e r s w er e present. s h o r t e r t h a n on l a t e r f l o w e r s p r o d u c e d In t e r m s ■were t a l l e s t some on p l a n t s g r o w i n g in the d e e p e s t grassed Brookston lower depths the in the d e e p e s t soil T he v a r i e t y J u n o w h i c h w as u n p i n c h e d was no t h a r v e s t e d The e a r l i e s t eight In the c r a p p e d a n d t h e r e w a s no i n d i c a t i o n u n t i l b u d s w e r e w e l l d e v e l o p e d a nd ly soil o v e r o p t i m u m h a d b e e n r ea ched. 3. were soil g r o w t h of t h e favorable relationships soil a i r in the d e e p e r soil columns. 71 Vith t h e platinum electrode method lesion and E r i c k s o n t h e r a t e films of so i l m o i s t u r e nt l e a s t should produce With unpinched aeration furnishes or b r e a k s . oxygen inactivates or r e d u c e s Apparently Th e soil soil a e r a t i o n s u b s t a n c e p r o d u c e d b y t he concentration stimulating. to suc h a n ex t e n t either a pical b u d that it b e ­ s u g g e s t i o n is ma d e t h a t a e r a t i o n in v a r y i n g the m o r p h o l o g i c a l of carnation. C. Nutritional Requirements of the Carnation Methods o f the and r e s u l t s . effect In t h e six e i g h t fall of v a r y i n g levels and p o t a s s i u m u p o n t h e g r o w t h po t adequate for a biochemical reaction which the g r o w t h i ts i n c r e a s i n g the i n g r o w t h a n d d e v e l o p m e n t of c o n t r o l m a y i n t i m e be u s e f u l made satisfactory aeration around carnation plants caused an increase lateral buds growth a current reading of of carnation. 7. c om e s o f o x y g e n d if-fusion t h r o u g h the f i v e rm'croanperes f o r the r o o t s as d e v e l o p e d b y o f 1950 a study was of n i tr ogen, of c a r n a t i o n s phosphorus in pots. I n c h a s p h a l t c o a t e d c l a y p o t s w er e used. the d r a i n a g e h o l e w a s cheesecloth prior N in etyIn e a c h c o v e r e d w i t h s e ve r a l la y e r s of to f i l l i n g the po t w i t h soil. The soil used was O shtemo sandy loam which is l o w in f e r t i l i t y and o rg a n i c exchange matter thousand grams and h a s a low base o f a i r d r y s oi l and capacity. Five five g r a m s of CaCOo were 72 placed in e a c h pot.. \ f a c t o r i a l d e s i g n ’vas u s e d nitrogen, three potassium. levels containing four levels of p h o s p h o r u s of p h o s p h o r u s in the b y K 0S O 4 a p p l i e d a combination 50 a n d soil soil extract. of dpurway and L a w t o n (20 Carnation plants N i t ro ge n was furnished by The in th e soil nitrate the lime T he s o i l i n a l l e x c e p t the c h e c k and potassium NaMCy for nitrogen checks injured and bleached the s a l t s were complete s u b s e q u e n t l y died. out and were salt instead o f NallO^. O applied established two replications i n one of the b o t t l e s m a y h ave toxic All an d monoc&Icr'uri. p h o s ­ came f r o m all o f t h e p l a n t s r e p l i c a t i o n were P r i o r to d e a t h the a l m o s t whit e. c a u s e w a s n e v e r d e f i n i t e l y d e t e r m i n e d it w a s one extract. C, o f t h e v a r i e t y N o r t h l a n d w er e p l a n t e d c o n t a i n e r s and w i t h i n a few days except the plants 30 a n d 50 p a r t s September after the plants had become different supplied . been mixed with in the p o t s . severely Potassium was S i m p l e x t e s t k i t a s d e v e l o p e d by in A u g u s t after the treatments. p a rt s p e r m i l l i o n a n d NaTTO^ i n s o l u t i o n to p r o d u c e testing was done w i t h the phate h a d extract. 100 parts per million in the p o t s 5 a nd 1^ i n s o l u t i o n t o g i v e 0, 15, per m i l l i o n i n t h e in e a r l y of M o n o c a l c i u m p h o s p h a t e w a s m i x e d i n to th e p r o p e r pots p r i o r t o p l a n t i n g t o g i v e 0, 25, and four levels of Although thought c o n t a i n e d H a N O o or some the that other T h u s the d a t a o b t a i n e d w e r e 73 f r o m o n l y on e terminated set. of* p l a n t s . on D e c e m b e r 31st, O n tin* s a c c o u n t t h e somewhat sooner s t u d y was th a n h a d b e e n planned. During the months wer e p r o d u c e d 31 No. of N o v e m b e r on 43 plants. l ’s a n d 5 sp l i t s . each level of* the Decause Is l i m i t e d . duction the of* f l o w e r s w a s al so d e c i d e d l y of 13 ext ras, of* d a t a obtained e f f e c t of* p h o s p h o r u s notable. limiting. at s t u d i e d Is s h o w n in T a b l e 19. small amount However, consisted T h e d i s t r i b u t i o n of b l o s s o m s nutrients of* t h e These a n d D e c e m b e r 39 f l o w e r s its v a l u e on the p r o ­ N i t r o g e n w h e n a bs e n t w a s P o t a s s i u m a p peared to have little e f le e t d u r i n g th e s h o r t d u r a t i o n of t h i s e x p e r i m e n t . The r esults ranges obtained In this recommended by Post p er m i l l i o n of* n i t r a t e , phorus be t h a t s t u d y a gr e e w i t h the (1.9) w h o suggests 5 t c 10 p a r t s p e r m i l l i o n of* p h o s ­ a n d 25 t o 50 p a r t s p e r m i l l i o n an even higher be b e n e f i c i a l but 35 to 1 5 0 p a r t s rate of* p o t a s s i u m . of* p h o s p h a t e t h i s wa s n o t ft m a y fertilization woulu Investigated. TABLE 19 THE INFLUENCE OF VARYING LEVELS OF NITROGEN, PHOSPHORUS AND POTASSIUM UPON YIELDS OF CARNATION FLOWERS PPM 0 25 50 100 0 5 10 NITROGEN Cornell Grade No. 1 Extra £ 0 2 7 6 4 6 7 1 5 7 PHOSPHORUS 1 7 13 Total 2 , 9 10 13 Splits 6 0 1 k 2 12 20 0 2 3 7 7 9 11 1 1 1 2 POTASSIUM 0 15 30 60 2 2 6 5 5 3 8 -o & 75 L IT E R A T U R E 1 . A rn o n , D . a s a S I* a n d D . R . C IT E D H o a g la n d . r t i f i c i a l c u l t u r e s o p e c i a l r e f e r e n c e t o n d a b s o r p t i o n o f i n o c l . 5 0 s 4 6 3 - 4 8 4 , 1 9 l u f a r g 4 0 C ro p p r o d u c tio n i n t i o n s a n d i n s o i l s , w ith c t o r s i n f l u e n c i n g y i e l d s a n i c n u t r i e n t s . S o i l . 2 . A u d u s , L . J . T h e m e c h a n is m o f a u x in a c t i o n . C a m b rid g e P h i l o s o p h i c a l S o c . (L o n d o n ) , B i o l . R e v ie w s 2 4 s 5 1 - 9 3 , 1 9 4 9 . 3 . B e a c h , G . A . C a r n a tio n y i e l d a n d q u a l i t y a s a f f e c t e d b y w a t e r i n g a n d p h o s p h a te . P r o c . A m er. S o c . H o r t . S c i . 3 7 : 1 0 2 2 -1 0 2 6 , 1 9 3 9 . 4 . B o u y o u c o s , G . s y s te m . 5 . B u c k in g h a m , R . C o n t r i b u t i o n s t o o u r k n o w le d g e c f th e a e r a t i o n o f s o i l s . U .S .D .A . B u r. o f S o i l s B u i. 2 5 , 1 9 0 4 . 6 . C a n n o n , W. A . a n d E . E . F r e e . o f r o o t s , w i t h e s p e c i a l o f r o o t s t o a e r a t i o n o f W a sh . J . A n ew e l e c t r i c A g ro n . J o u r . 4 4 s P u b l. 3 6 8 , a u to m a tic i r r i g a t i o n 4 4 8 - 4 5 1 , 1 9 5 2 . P h y s i o l o g i c a l f e a t u r e s r e f e r e n c e t o th e r e l a t i o n t h e s o i l . C a r n e g ie I n s t . 1 9 2 5 . 7 . C o m m o n er, B . a n d D . M a z ia . T h e m e c h a n is m o f a u x in a c t i o n . P l a n t P h y s i o l . 1 7 : 6 8 2 - 6 8 5 , 1 9 4 2 . 8 . C o o k , R . L . , A . E . E r ic k s o n a n d P . R . K ro n e . S o i l f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g c o n s t a n t w a te r l e v e l s u b i r r i g a t i o n . P r o c . A m er. S o c . H o r t. S c i. ( i n p r e s s ) . 9 . D u r e l l , W. D . T h e e f f e c t o f t h e to m a to I n n u t r i e n t 1 6 : 1 0 . 3 2 7 - 3 4 1 , E r i c k s o n , L . C . b y o x y g e n B o t. 3 3 : a e r a t i o n o n g ro w th o f s o l u t i o n . P l a n t P h y s io l. 1 9 4 1 . G ro w th o f to m a to r o o t s a s i n t h e n u t r i e n t s o l u t i o n . 5 5 1 - 5 6 1 , 1 9 4 6 . in f lu e n c e d A m er. J o u r . 76 11. 12 G ilb e r t. o x T h 1 9 . , S . P . a n d J . W. S h iv e . T he s i g n i f i c a n c e o f y g e n i n n u t r i e n t s u b s t r a t e s f o r p l a n t s . I . e o x y g e n r e q u ir e m e n t. S o il S c i . , 53s 1 4 3 -1 5 2 , 4 2 . ’ K ra m e r, P . J . P l a n t a n d S o i l W a te r R e l a tio n s h ip s , e d . 1 , M c G r a w - H ill B o o k C o m p a n y , N ew Y o rk , 1 9 4 9 , 3 4 7 p p . 1 3 . L a w to n g p 2 1 4 . L em o n , E . R . D o c t o r 's 1 9 5 2 . 1 5 . _______________________ o x y g e n d m i c r o e le 1 6 : 1 6 0 - 1 6 . L e o n a r d , O t o n a b e l t 3 7 : 5 1 7 . _____________________ _ a n d J". A . P in c k a r d . E f f e c t o f o x y g e n a n d c a r b o n d io x id e c o n c e n tr a tio n s c o t t o n r o o t d e v e lo p m e n t. P la n t P h y s io l. 1 8 - 3 6 , 1 9 4 6 . 1 8 . P e n m a n , H . L . G as a n d v a p o u r m o v em en t i n th e s o i l . I . T he d i f f u s i o n o f v a p o u rs th ro u g h p o ro u s s o l i d s . J o u r . A g r. S c i. 3 0 : 4 3 8 -4 6 2 , 1 9 4 0 . 1 9 . P o s t, , K. T h e in f lu e n c e o f s o i l a e r a t i o n o n th e r o w th a n d a b s o r p tio n o f n u t r i e n t s b y c o rn l a n t s . P r o c . S o il S c i. S o c . A m er. 1 0 : 2 6 3 6 8 , 1 9 4 5 . . a n d A . E . E r ic k s o n . T he m e a su re m e n t i f f u s i o n i n th e s o i l w ith a p la tin u m c tr o d e . P r o c . S o il S c i. S o c . A m er. 1 6 3 , 1 9 5 2 . . A . C t u r a l a a n d d e l 5 - 7 1 , 1 8 9 1 R a n e , o tto n r o o t e r a t i o n o f t a s o i l s . 9 4 5 . o f d e v e lo p m e n t i n r e l a t i o n som e M is s is s ip p i b la c k J o u r . A m er. S o c . A g ro n . v a r io u s o n 2 1 : p p . _______________ a n d J . g r e e n h o u s e S ta . 21. a n d i t s c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n . M ic h ig a n S ta te C o lle g e , K. F l o r i s t C ro p P r o d u c tio n a n d M a rk e tin g . O ra n g e -J u d d P u b lis h in g C om pany, I n c . N ew Y o rk , 1 9 4 9 , 20 S o il a e r a t i o n D i s s e r t a t i o n , W. V a. B u ll. F . A g r. G„ S e e le y . A u to m a tic w a te r in g o f c r o p s . C o r n e ll U n iv e r s ity A g r. E x p . 7 9 3 : 1 - 2 6 , Sub-i r r i g a t i o n E x p . S ta . 1 9 4 3 . i n th e g re e n h o u s e . W est B u ll. 3 3 : 2 5 5 —2 7 0 , 1 8 9 3 . 77 22, R e in d e r s , D . p o m ste e e n n io n e l p h A S U d E . t a t o rd a m i n a o f i a , T h e p r o c e s s t u b e r t i s s , P r o c . S e b s t r a c t o n A m e ric a n B 1 9 3 8 . 2 3 . S e e le y , J . G . C o n s ta a n d s u r f a c e w a te t h r e e s o i l ty p e s 5 5 : 4 8 9 -4 9 2 , 1 9 5 2 4 . S h r a n k , A . P l a n t I n c . , 2 5 . S m ith , a c b P e a e r o f w a te r in ta k e d is c s h a p . 1 , 1 9 3 8 . V o l. 1 2 . h ila ­ n t w a te r l e v e l s u b i r r i g a t i o n r in g o f g re e n h o u s e r o s e s in . P ro c . A m er. S o c . H o r t. S c i. 0 . R . P l a n t tr o p is m s . A n n u a l P h y s io lo g y . V o l. 1 , 1 9 5 0 . S ta n f o r d , C a l i f o r n i a . F . W. a n d R . L r a t i o n , m o is tu t i o n a n d o x id a e t s f o llo w in g o c . S o i l S c i. b y u e . K. A k ad . W e te n sc c t. S c i. 4 1 ( 7 ) : 8 2 0 -8 3 ly . B io l. A b s tr a c ts , io lo g ic a l S o c i e t i e s . P . r t c S C o o k . T he e f f e e , a n d c o m p a c tio io n a n d th e g ro w o r n a n d le g u m e s o c . A m er. 1 1 : 4 R e v ie w A n n u a l c t o f n o n n th o f i n p o t 0 2 -4 0 6 s o i t s u c , o f R e v ie w s , i r g u 1 l i a l 9 f i ­ r t u r e s . 4 6 . 2 6 . S p u rw a y , C. H . a n d K. L a w to n . S o i l t i c a l s y s te m o f s o i l f e r t i l i t y M ic h ig a n E x p , S ta . T e c h . B u ll. 1 9 4 9 . 2 7 . S te p h e n s , J . A . a n d E . C . V o lz . T he g ro w th o f s to c k s a n d C h in a a s t e r s o n f o u r Io w a s o i l s w ith c o n s ta n t l e v e l s u b - i r r i g a t i o n . P ro c . A m er. S o c . H o rt. S c i 5 1 : 2 8 . T h im a n n , K. V . b y a u x in . V an O n th e n a tu r e o f A m er. J o u r . B o t. W a rd , S o c . H o r t. C . W. T he A . T . De L a N ew Y o rk , i n h i b i t i o n s c a u s e d 24 : 4 0 7 -4 1 2 , 1 9 3 7 . . S k o o g . S tu d ie s o n th e g ro w th t s . I I I . T he i n h i b i t i n g a c t i o n u b s ta n c e o n b u d d e v e lo p m e n t. . P ro c . 1 9 : 7 1 4 -7 1 6 , 1 9 3 3 . L e a n , G . J . a n d R . L . C ook. m e th o d s o f w a te r in g o n th e t i o n s i n s e v e r a l s o i l s a n d A m er. 3 1 . 1 9 4 8 . a n d F h o rm o n e o f p l a n o f th e g ro w th s N a t l . A c a d . S c i 2 9 . 3 0 . 6 0 5 -6 0 9 , t e s t i n g , a p r a c ­ d ia g n o s is . 1 3 2 , r e v i s i o n 4 , S c i. 5 6 : T he e f f e c t o f th r e e p r o d u c tio n o f c a rn a ­ s o i l m ix tu r e s . P ro c . 4 1 5 —4 2 2 , 1 9 5 0 . A m e ric a n C a r n a tio n , H ow t o G ro w i t . M ere P r i n t i n g a n d P u b lis h in g C om pany, 1 9 0 3 , 2 9 6 p p . 78 3 2 . W e n t, F . W. S p e c i f i c f a c t o r s o t h e r i n g g r o w th a n d r o o t f o r m a tio n . 1 3 : 5 5 - 8 0 , 1 9 3 8 . t h a n a u x in a f f e c t ­ P l a n t P h y s io l. 3 3 . ______________________ E f f e c t o f th e r o o t s y s te m o n g r o w th . P l a n t P h y s i o l . 1 8 : 5 1 - 6 5 , 3 4 . W to m a to 1 9 4 3 . s te m r ig h t, J . A . a n d E . G. V o lz . E f f e c t o f f o u r m e th o d s o f i r r i g a t i o n o n t h e p r o d u c tio n o f g r e e n h o u s e r o s e s . P r o c . A m er. S o c . H o r t. S c i. 5 5 : 4 8 6 - 4 8 8 , 1 9 5 0 . 3 5 . Y o d e r , K . E . A d i r e c t m e th o d o f a g g r e g a te a n d a s tu d y o f t h e p h y s i c a l n a t u r e o f l o s s e s . J o u r . A m er. S o c . A g ro n . 2 8 : 1 9 3 6 . a n a l y s i s e r o s i o n 3 3 7 -3 5 1 , 79 A P P E N D IX T a b u la m e n ts m ad e p l a n t s g ro w w a t e r i n g , w te d r e s u l t s o f y i e l d s o b ta in e d a n d m e a s u re ­ d u r in g a g r e e n h o u s e e x p e r im e n t o n c a r n a t io n n i n t h r e e s o i l s a n d u n d e r t h r e e m e th o d s o f ith A n a ly s e s o f V a r ia n c e TABLE 20 TOTAL YIELDS OF NORTHLAND CARNATIONS PER SQUARE FOOT OF BENCH METHOD OF WATERING Subirrigation Constant Water Level Replication 1 2 21.26 15.98 Hunt Grassed Brookston Cropped Brooks ton 16.65 17.33 Oshtemo Sandy Loam 2 0 . 5 9 21.83 Source Average 17.97 19.91 Replication 1 2 20.25 20.14 19.91 20.93 21.04 19.58 19.88 20.74 Grassed Brookston Cropped Brookston Oshtemo Sandy Loam Source Average 19.71 17.37 20.34 19.14 Source Soil MSC Total Average Bench Average Soil Average 20.16 21.33 14.67 18.72 16. 56 20.?9 15.21 17.52 18.99 17.64 19.98 18.8? 18.34 18.72 19.51 19.81 19.66 18.53 Grassed Brookston Cropped Brookston 19.68 19.12 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE Source Degrees of Freedom Sum of Squares Total 176.18 35 Soils 2 2.40 0 Replications 16.70 Benches 2 18.11 Soils x benches 4 7.58 'i 1"3 Error a (replications x soils) 6 Sources 1 12.75 Soils x sources 2 7.27 Benches x sources 2 0.64 Soils x benches x sources 4 51.64 F.rror h 9 55.96 Surface Watered Replication 1 2 20.;6 22.50 22.39 18.45 20.81 21.26 21.19 20.74 18.54 14.85 17.55 16.98 Average 20.08 19.28 20.85 20.07 19.28 18.95 18.42 18.88 21.69 21.69 22.77 22.05 19.08 21.39 20.24 Oshtemo Sandy Loam 19.64 Mean Square 1.20 5.57 9.06 1.90 0.52 12.75 3.64 O . 32 12.91 6.22 Ratio 2.31 10 .71 ** 1 7 .81 ** ' 3-65 2.05 0.59 0.05 2.08 TABLE 21. COMMERCIAL YIELDS OF NORTHLAND CARNATIONS PER SQUARE FOOT OF BENCH Constant Water Level Replication 1 2 Grassed Brookston 18.68 Munt 15.19 Cropped Brookston 15.64 14.29 Oshtemo Sandy Loam 18.90 18.23 Source Average 17.29 16.35 Source Soil Grassed Brookston Cropped Brooks ton Oshtemo Sandy Loam Source Average 16.02 Total Average Bench Average 1 4 .5 k NBC Soil Average 14.49 7.65 13.05 15.84 9.45 12.72 12.78 METHOD OF WATERING Subirrigation Surface Watered Replication 1 2 18.56 18.79 18.54 19.69 17.21 18.23 18.04 18.90 16.29 12.96 13.50 14.25 14.76 13.86 16.02 14.88 Replication 1 2 21.49 19.13 21.60 17.55 16.88 18.34 19.20 19.13 15.21 12.42 11.88 13.17 Average 18.64 17.85 17.9? 18.15 15.48 17.28 14.85 15.87 15.14 14.48 12. 23 13.95 15T 04 1671k 17789 1O 9 17.50 14.79 16.52 16.84 Grassed Brookston Crooned Brookston Oshtemo Sandy Loam 16.89 16.16 15. 10 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE Degrees of Freedom Source Sum of Squares To tal 322.98 35 Soils 2 19.51 Replications 3 7.59 Benches 2 29.33 Soils x benches 4 4.25 Error a (replications x soils) 6 5.63 Sources 1 159.30 Soils x sources 2 10.60 Benches x sources 2 0.91 Soils x benches x sources 4 50.39 Error b 9 35-47 ■>% level, 0.98; at 1% level, 1.48 Mean Square Ratio 9.76 2.53 14.6? 1.06 0.94 10.38* 2.69 15.61** 1.13 1 59. 30 40.43** 1.35 0.12 3.20 5.30 0.46 12. 60 3.94 cr H TABLE 22 YIELDS OF SPECIAL GRADE NORTHLAND CARNATIONS PER SQUARE FOOT OF BENCH METHOD OF WATERING Source S o i l C o n s t a n t WaterSubirrigation Level Replication Replication 2 1 2 0.34 1.24 0.68 0.75 T .2k 7^8 Replication Average 1 2 -0 7 r ... r:s4 - xrr- 2.81 0.56 1.54 0.34 0.45 1. 09 0. 23 0 . 00 0.49 0. 7 2 0.72 0.36 1.08 0.45 0.54 0.57 0.;b 0.63 0.09 0.;6 0.18 0.63 0.63 0.48 0.45 0.54 0.18 0.39 O . cq " OTW 1 Grassed Brooks ton Cropped Brooks ton Oshtemo Sandy Loam Source Average Munt Grassed Brookston Cropped Brook3ton Oshtemo Sandy Loam Source Average MSC Total Average Bench Average Soil Average Surface Watered ' ' "''6779 1,01 1.01 0.94 0.72 ""0.83 0.75 Grassed Brooks ton 0.98 0.79 0.68 1 . 20 1 . 07 0.56 1.00 1.08 0.59 O . 56 0.44 0.53 0.72 0.09 O.63 0.79 0.44 0.92 0.87 0.68 Cropped Brooks ton Oshtemo Sandy Loam 0.81 0.50 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE Source Degrees of Freedom Total 35 So ils 2 -3 Replications 2 Benches Soils x benches 4 Error a (replications x soils) 6 1 Sources 2 Soils x sources Benches x sources 2 is Soils x benches x sources Error b 9 Sum of Squares 13.69 1.42 0.84 0.22 1.81 2.09 2.04 0.66 0.81 1.40 2.40 Mean Square 0.71 0.28 0.11 0 .45 0. 3 5 2.04 0 ^ 0.41 0.24 0.2? Ratio 2. 03 0.80 0.31 1.29 7.56* 1.22 qq 1.52 N 0.89 TABLE 23 YIELDS OF FANCY GRADE NORTHLAND CARNATIONS PER SQUARE FOOT OF BENCH METHOD OF WATERING Source Constant Water Level Replication Soil Subirrigation Replication Replication 1 1.05 2 1 2 4.61 4. 30 1.91 3.o7 4.61 4.64 2.14 3.29 4.39 1.91 3.66 3.00 1 .0 ^ 1 2 Grassed Broolts ton Cropped Brooks ton Oshtemo Sandy Loam Source Average 2.48 2.23 3.26 2 .Co 2.61 2.59 2 .Ac £..0 ^ 2.61 3.15 2.34 Grassed Brookston Cropped Brooks ton Oshtemo Sandy Loam Source Average C. 5'c I.Od 1.71 1.33 1.35 0 .a-3 0.63 0.72 1.53 1,41 1.26 1 .11 Total Average Bench Average 2.04 1.94 2.22 Hunt MSC 1.99 Grasseu Brookston Soil Average Surface Watered 1.35 1.44 2 .3 l 1.71 1.69 2.C7 1. CO 1.44 2 .32 2 .ol 2 .19 2.69 2. Co 3.03 2.46 Croooea Broo kston 2.62 2 ■51 Average 3.90 2 .56 a. 48 N •j4 1 .6 ? 1 .hB 1.05 1.59 2. ,94 Os nit■mo Sancy Loam 2 .06 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE Source Degrees of Freedom Total Soils Replications Benches Soils x benches Error a (replications x soils ) Sources Soils x sources Benches x sources Soils x benches x strains Error b LSD lor soils and benches: at yfc Sum of Squares 2 3 6.11 3.48 0.7? 5.46 4 1.86 35 2 6 1 2 1.51 27.49 3.90 c 0.96 4 6.39 9 2.29 1'e'veT, 0.49j at Ip TeveT, G.?4 Mean Square Ratio 1. ?4 6 .96* 0.26 2 .73 0.47 O .23 1.04 10.92** 27.49 1.95 0.48 105.96** 7 .80 * 1.92 8.40** 2.10 0.25 1.88 TABLE 28 YIELDS OF EXTRA GRADE NORTHLAND CARNATIONS PER SQUARE FOOT OF BENCH Source Soil Grassed Brookston Cropped Bro oks ton Oshtemo Sandy Loam Source Average Munt Grassed Brookston Cropped Brookston Oshtemo Sandy Loam Source Average MSC Total Average Bench Average METHOD OF WATERING Subirrigation Constant Water Level Replication Replication 1 * 2 1 ' 2 7 . 2 0 5 .51 b.21 7.99 6.30 7*88 7.39 6.08 7.76 7.35 O" £ll 9.A5 5 - 96 6.97 1. 98 1.98 3.69 2.55 A.76 ' 5.8? 3-69 1.62 3.06 2.70 2.16 2.79 1. 53 0.81 1. 53 1 . 29 5.23 5.07 A . 19 5.15 Bro 0ks ton,Gras sec Soil A.verage 7.65 6.A1 7.09 A. 80 Surface Watered Replication 1 2 7.58 9.3A A. 16 7.13 7.20 5 . A0 6.30 6730 1.62 1 . 98 1.98 2.97 1.80 3.06 2.67 1.80 .Average 7.15 7.67 6.26 7.0 A 2.i4k 2.36 2.31 2.36 A.A6 A.A9 A.A? A.AS Brookston,Crooned Oshtemo Sandv Loam 5.01 A . 29 ANALYS13 OF VARIANCE Degrees of Freedom Source 0e Total 2 Soils 0 Replications 2 Benches A Soils x benches Error a (replications x soils) 6 1 Sources 2 Soils x sources 2 Benches x sources Soils x benches x sources A Error b 9 Sum of Squares Mean Square Ratio 2A3.50 'i 1C 1.05 3.63 s .03 A . 95 1 9 6 . 9A 2.82 0.83 15.21 6 .69 1.68 2.02 1 c 0.A2 2.19 2.A2 I ’M 2.01 0.83 1 9 6 . 9A 1.A1 0.A2 3.80 0.7A 2 6 6 . 1A** 1 . 91 0.57 5 . 1A# TABLE 25 YIELDS OF "SPEFEX" NORTHLAND CARNATIONS PER SQUARE FOOT OF BENCH """ ' METHOD OF WATERING Source Munt Soil Grassed Brookston Cropped Brookston Oshtemo Sandy Loam Source Average MSC Constant Water Level Replication 1 2 11.36 11.25 9.00 9.56 12.15 10.91 10.42 10.99 V. 1 1 5.13 0 ^ > •J J 5.19 Grassed Brookston Cropped Brookston Oshtemo Sandy Loam Source Average 5.94 4.50 3.42 4.62 Replication 1 2 12 . 4 9 1 2 .6~6 13. 28 10. 13 11 . 9 7 14.29 8.33 3.24 1.89 3 .51 3.15 2.76 11.74 4.05 6.66 4.74 Surface Watered Replication 1 2 13.73 13.75 14.40 12.38 6.30 7.99 11.48 11.37 3.69 4.41 4.05 4.05 4.50 6.21 5.76 5.49 Average 12 co 12.15 9.30 11.33 TT57 4.37 4.40 4.48 8.09 7.36 6.24 7.52 7.76 8.43 7.80 7.81 8.10 Grassed Brookston Cropped Brookston Oshtemo Sandy Loam 8.60 8.26 6.85 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE Total Average Bench Average Soil Average Degrees of Freedom Source Total 35 2 Soils Replications 3 2 Benches Soils x benches 4 Error a (replications x soils) 6 Sources 1 Soils x sources 2 Benches x sources 2 Soils x benches x sources 4 Error b 9 LSD'for soils: at Subirrigation 5% T e v V l,' 0V 6Y 1 at 1% level, 1.02 Sum of Sauares 549.65 20.63 4.60 0.69 16.79 2.72 422.51 17.03 8.14 44.51 12. 03 Mean Square 10.32 1.53 0.35 4.20 0.45 422.51 8.52 4.07 11.13 1.34 Ratio 22.93** 3.40 0.78 315.31** 6.36* 3.04 . 8.31 TA3LS YIELDS OF NUMBER 1 GRADE NORTHLAND CARNATIONS PER SQUARE FOOT OF BENCH METHOD OF WATERING source Soil Constant Water Level Replic;ation 1 2 3-94 6.98 5.18 5.51 7.20 5.85 5.10 6.k5 Grassed Brooks ton Cropped Brookston Oshtemo Sandy Loam Source Average Munt Grassed Brooks ton Cropped Brookston Oshtemo Sandy Loam Source Average ISC i 0 1 7.92 3.96 6.48 Total Average Bench Average 6.39 9.99 5.40 7.26 Subirrigation Replication 1 2. 6.08 5.51 4.84 5.06 6.64 9.45 6.67 5 •85 11.34 8.91 9.00 9.75 7.29 7.65 7.63 7.59 Surface Watered Replication 1 ‘ 2 5.40 ^7134 6.75 4.95 9.34 6.55 6.90 7.28 9.54 6.93 6.39 7.62 9/00 9.72 7.11 8.61 Average 5.W 5 38 7.84 6.38 6.52 6.52 6.62 7.89 7.80 6.86 7.26 7.94 5.79 / 7.13 7.47 ,60 0 .32 7. Gras sed Brooks ton Crooned Brooks ton Oshtemo Sa ndy Loam 7.21 7.12^ 6.95 Soil Average ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE Source Total Soils Replications Benches Soils x benches Error a (replications x soils) Sources Soils x sources Benches x sources Soils x benches x sources Error b LSD for benches; at 5$ level, Degrees of Freedom 35 2 0 2 4 6 1 2 2 4 ......... 5........ 0.93 Sum of Squares 116.46 0.59 6.18 11.84 11.12 5.14 20.42 34.08 3.71 2.94 2CLM Mean Square 0.30 2.06 5.92 2.78 0.86 20.42 17.04 1.86 Ratio 0.25 2.40 6.86# 0 2^ 9.00* 7.51 0.82 0.33 CO C T \ TA5LE 27 YIELDS OF NUMBER 2 GRADE NORTHLAND CARNATION PER SQUARE FOOT OF BENCH METHOD OF WATERING Source Soil Munt Grassed Brookston Cropped Brookston Oshtemo Sandy Loam Source Average Constant Water Level Replication 1 0.00 2 Replication 1 ' 2 0.34 0.00 0.68 0.57 0.11 0.23 0.45 0.34 0.45 0.49 0.23 0.27 ■ 0.79 0.41 Grassed Brookston Cropned Brookston Oshtemo Sandy Loam Source Average l.'5* 1.44 O . 36 1.08 0.72 Total Average Bench Average 0.66 MSC Soil Average Subirrigation 0.23 1.71 2.16 1.35 1.74 1.35 0.63 0.90 0.66 0 .66 Surface Watered Replication 3.96 2.16 1x 2 *> << j 1 ' 0.00 2 0.23 Average 0.45 0.23 2.02 1.02 0.21 O . 32 O . 83 0.82 0.49 0.45 1.98 1.08 1.44 1.50 1.96 1 'i c 1.98 1.77 1.95 1.59 1. 2 2 1.59 1.52 1.16 1. 13 1.25 1.15 Grassed Brookston Cropoed Brookston Oshtemo Sancv Loam 1.08 0.96 1.02 0.98 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE Source Degrees of Freedom Total 35/■> £ Soils T Replications Benches 2 Soils x benches 4 Error a (replications x soils) 6 Sources 1 Soils x sources 2 r\ Benches x sources C Soils x benches x sources 4 Error b i _ .... Sum of Squares 25“.93 0.09 . Mean Square Ratio 0.05 0.19 1.07 4.48 0.86 0.29 2.42 2,4-8 1.64 11.55 1.21 2.83 0.62 0.27 11.55 1.42 2.09 0.40 1. 0 5 0.10 1 * 5 7 .... ... 0.17 2.30 67.94** g tc ## 6.18* 0 .59 TABLE 26 YIELDS OF NORTHLAND REJECTS PER SQUARE FOOT OF BENCH Source Soil Constant Water Level Replication 1 Grassed Brooks ton Crooned Brooks ton Oshtemo Sandy Loam Source Average 3.79 1.69 2.36 1.61 Grassed Brooks ton Cro onea Brookston Oshtemo Sandy Loam Source Average 4.14 6.84 7.02 Munt MSC Total Average Bench Average Soil Average 6.00 2 2.59 2.36 METHOD OF WATERING Subirrigation Surface Watered Replication Replication 1 2 1 2 1.5& 1.58 1.24 0.79 3.94 1.99 4.23’ S0 *-3-3 3*78 2.43 3*96 5*6? 3.99 3.81 2.93 2.63 2.36 3.51 4.95 5-76 4.74 3.42 4.41 6.84 4.89 1.84 i.*& 1.24 2.81 1.84 Average T. 01 0.90 2.93 1.61 1.45 1.43 2.89 6.21 4.14 4.4? 4.41 7.92 6.18 1.92 6.20 4.94 3.81' -3.68 3.90 3.37 2.91 2.90 j .14 3.75 > •40 Grassed Brookston Cropped Brookston Oshtemo Sandy Loam 2.79 4.54 2.95 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE Source Degrees of Freedom Sum of Sauares 55 Soils 2 Replications O Benches 2 Soils x benches A Error s (replications x soils } o Sources 1 Soils x sources 2 Benches x sources 2 Soils x benches x sources U Error b ___________ 9 ______ LSD for soils; at 5$ level, 0.6 1; at 1% level, 0.9' 1 36 .10 22 .49 o .69 2 .22 ? ■37 c .21 81 .81 0 .57 P .77 2 .15 12 .82 Mean 5 quare 11.25 1. 23 1.11 1.84 0.37 61.61 0.29 0.39 0.54 - J ^ Ratio 30.41** "2 Q? 3.00 4.97* 57.61** 0.20 0.27 O .38 TABLE 29 THE NUMBER OF NORTHLAND SH0RT3 PER SQUARE FOOT OF BENCH METHOD OF WATERING Source ' Soil Constant 7/a ter Level Reollc ation 1 £ 0.00 o .56~ 0.11 0.34 0.34 0.79 0.56 0.15 Munt Grassed Brookston Crooned Brookston Oshtemo Sandy Loam Source Average Subirrigation Surface Watered Replication 2 1 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.23 0.79 0.11 0.34 Replication 1 2 0.11 0.11 Grassed Brookston Cropped Brookston Oshtemo Sandy Loam Source Average 1.26 2.70 4.32 2.76 0.72 2.16 0.81 3.51 1.68 1. 5 3 4.50 2.73 1.35 1.26 1.44 1.35 Total Average Bench Average 1.46 1.12 1.42 0.84 MSC Soil Average Average 0.15 0.23 0.00 0.15 1.58 0.64 1.35 0.49 0.85 0.90 0.99 3.96 1.95 2.52 2.61 5-40 3.51 1.49 1.65 1.30 2.00 0.38 3.86 2.33 1. 29 1. 13 1.65 Brooks ton Crooned Bro ?kston Oshtemo Sandy Loam Grassed 0.82 0.90 2.35 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE Source Degrees of Freedom To■Sal o 35 SoiIs 2 0 Replications m/ Benches 2 Soils x benches A Error a (replication x soils ) 6 Sources 1 Soils x sources 2 Benches x sources 2 Soils x benches x sources A Error b Lbd" for soils; at 5/^ level ’0~.~45"; at 1% level, Sum of Squares Mean Square Ratio 73 .68 17 Ao 2 .31 1 .67 * £ .32 1 .14 34 .16 c .12 0 .22 0 •89 7 .52 0,bF 6.92 0.9k 0.8k 0.58 0.19 3k. 16 2.56 0.11 0.22 0.8k k6.95** 4.95 4.42 3.05 40.67** 3.05 0.13 0.26 TABLE 30 YIELDS OF NORTHLAND SPLITS PER SQ.UARE FOOT OF BENCH METHOD OF WATERING Source Soil Constant Water Level Replication 1 Gras s ed Brooks ton Cropped Brooks ton Oshtemo Sandy Loam Source Average Munt MSC Grassed Brookston Cropped Brookston Oshtemo Sandy Loam Source Average Total Average Bench Average Soil Average " Subirrigation 2 O'."68 1.58 .... ■ 2 .03 2.03 2 . 03 1 .A3 1.91 1.99 2.52 2.79 3.96 2.34 2.94 3.96 2 .0 ? 2.94 2.19 2.4? ■■ Surface Watered Replication Replication 1 1 2 T.75".. 1.46 2.14 1.69 1.13 2.03 1.50 l.i? 2.79 1.62 2.79 2.43 2.25 I. 35 1.26 1.86 2.58 1.62 1. 77 2 1*04 1.4? 2.52 2 T .T J 1: % Average 0.56 2.25 1.31 0.90 0.90 1.58 1.13 3.69 1.71 2.43 2.61 1.26 1.28 1.99 1.51 2.54 2.72 2.03 1.87 2.33 1.91 1.6? Grassed Brookston Croooed Brookston Oshtemo Sandy Loam 1.90 2.00 2.01 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE Degrees of Freedom Source Total 35 2 Soils Replications 3 9 Benches Soils x benches 4 Error a (replications x soils) 6 Sources 1 Soils x sources 2 Benches x sources 2 Soils x benches x sources 4 Error b 9 ""23 'it1vy n Ten -for p v .--. LSD benches; 5% "level,— O.A4 Sum of Squares 24. 36 0.09 0.93 2.66 3.84 1.15 7.56 3.54 0.55 1.39 2.83 Mean Square Ratio 0.05 0.26 1.63 0.31 1.33 0.96 0.19 7.5o 1.77 0.28 0.35 0.32 l.oo* 5 .05 # 23.63** 5 *53* 0.88 1.09 table 31 THE EFFECT OF TREATMENT ON THE GREEN WEIGHT OF NORTHLAND CARNATIONS (Weights iri Grams} METHOD OF WATERING Source Soil Constant Water Level Replication 1 2 Grassed Brooks ton Cropped Brookston Oshtemo Sandy Loam Source Average 385-7 Grassed Brookston Cropped Brookston Oshtemo Sandy loam Source Average 380.9 551.9 416.0 449.6 Munt MSC Total Average Bench Average Soil Average 488.0 W.6 448.4 452.3 517.3 434.0 467.9 335.9 525.0 415.4 435.7 Subirrigation Replication 1 2 484.0 601.9 468.5 518.1 456.3 444.6 429.3 444.1 586.8 465.5 500.9 517.7 48*. 6 541.6 524.3 516.2 Surface Watered Replication 1 2 564.8 5 2 6 . 3 5 01.8 490.1 440.8 518.6 5 0 2 . 5 511-7 479.j 501.3 521.8 56 7 . 0 427.1 476.1 504.8 Average 500.0 510.8 472.4 494.4 444.7 525.5 443.1 471.1 446.2 451.8 449.0 481.1 51?.0 489.3 508.3 499.0 498.8 450 .4 Grassed Brookston Cropped Brookston Oshtemo Sandy Loam 4?2 .4 518.1 457.7 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE Source Degrees of Freedom Sum of Squares Total 115,179.2 li ’ 23,815.4 2 Soils n Replications 4,959.8 C . Benches 18,811.9 4 Soils x benches 20,890.5 6 Error a (replications x soils) 7,253.6 1 Sources 4,890.6 2 Soils x 3 ounces 7,503.7 2 Benches x sources 948.8 Soils x benches x sources 4 4,675.7 Q Error b 21,429.2 ✓ T £ t\ « 1 t— __ -i' V ' \ T'l' '”'"1"'"A "JT " k t7 n _^ W 1. **» LSd for soils and benches; 2 at' 5 % level, '34.?' Mean Square 11,907.7 1,653.3 9,406.0 5,222.6 1,208.9 4,890.6 3,751.9 474.4 1,168.9 2,381.0 Ratio 9.35* 1.37 7.78* 4,32 2.05 1.58 0.20 0.49 TABLE 32 THE EFFECT OF WATERING METHODS ON THE AGGREGATION OF THE GRASSED BROOKSTON CLAY LOAM SOIL Replica­ tion 14.48 14.19 Constant water level 1 12.00 2-5 35-96 45-32 6.04 7.06 0-1 17.02 2-5 33.88 11.76 13.32 10.54 9.46 16.90 11,34 2 0-1 Sub0-1 2-5 1 2 0-1 2-5 0-1 2-5 11.18 9.48 7.46 10.52 10.08 12.66 12.68 7.94 8.82 7.64 7.74 10.24 11.14 9.28 10.28 11.20 11 .cQ 11.46 36.36 34.44 37.44 35.96 10.38 • 0-1 1 X; -> r.1x.pw 11.22 13 .16 11.20 16.62 24.38 13.34 20.48 •0 1 2 * 10.44 14.40 4.25 16.34 8.52 8 .6 0 13.80 1.66 0 ^6 2 .1 2 15.48 21.04 15.12 5.72 4.48 11 IX* s— 17.72 13.78 fo • 2-5 Surface watered 12,20 0 1—1 irrisation 6 .72. less than 0 .1 mm " O c'W 17.70 to 0 .25 mm to 0 .5mm • 18.45* Original soil to 0.25 — 2 mm 0.5 to 1mm <0 2 to 4 mm Depth**^ in over Bench 4 mm 11 Treatment 21.06 17.16 19.24 19.38 14.50 32.00 15.80 15.38 6.00 15.56 15.86 13.60 3.00 16.66 8.20 14.00 1.40 11.18 17.94 1.90 • ■ 1C 4 Aggregate Size Each value is the average of two 50 grain samples expressed as per cent MO TABLE 33 THE EFFECT OF WATERING METHODS ON THE AGGREGATION OF THE CROPPED BROOKSTON Treatment Replication Depth in Bench Original soil Constant water level 1 over 4 mm 1 1 1 to 4mm to 2mm 0.5 to 1mm 0.25 0.1 to 0 .5mm to 0 .25mm i> less than 0 .1mm 9.05 14.34 20.21 11.50 34.69 7.04 7.32 6.50 8.64 4.14 7.64 8.32 7.42 14.38 2 .gc 12.52 13.08 2-5 26.22 36.3^ 34.38 33.86 6.38 14.02 1.38 5.06 6.48 35.96 27.76 28.98 21.44 0-1 27.92 5.68 6.76 14.66 2 - c: 27.68 6.56 0-1 0-1 0-1 16.58 2-5 C