: ‘ _ __E;_:_:_;_:_;:g l 0‘ .i ‘ Law €<. L4: x u? - e z» :1: a} i"; 8.1: I ~..‘- m“ ---A” ‘1. Wm»; n 3111111111an «111mm? 312 3 01063 2309 - ' «./ THE EFFECT OF DATE OF TAPPING ON THE YIELD OF MAPLE SAP FROM STERILE AND NONSTERILE TAP HOLES By James Edward Douglasa AN ABSTRACT Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree 0! MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Forestry Year 1955 R fi—"h. _- _-__ _. .__...—) ,fl /m / Approved 4/555 M James Edward Douglass Increased interest in maple sap production in recent years has stimulated research into the many factors which affect the flow of sap. Weather forecast of maple sap weather has been utilized to advantage in determining when to tap. The question still remains: "When is the best time to tap?” This experiment was initiated to deter- mine the effects of various tapping dates on the yield of maple sap in hopes of answering this question. Baker Uoodlot on the campus of Michigan State Univer- sity supports a stand of sugar maple which typifies a nat- ural sugar bush. This woodlot has been under management for over fifty years and contained trees of the desired size which.had never been tapped. The experimental design was to test the effects of five different tapping dates on the sap flowef sterilely and nonsterilely tapped trees distributed in the four cardi- nal compass positions. Ten trees were tapped on each tapping date beginning January 10th and approximately every fifteen days thereafter. Each tree was tapped twice in the desig- nated compass position, once sterilely and once nonsterilely. The nonsterile tap corresponds to the type of tapping done in a commercial sugar bush, while the sterile tap was an ex- perimental tap designed to prevent or minimize contamination of the tap hole so as to determine as nearly as possible the James Edward Douglass maximum.possible flow. The nonsterile taps were hung with either a plastic bag or a metal bucket, the purpose being to determine whether either affects the volume of yield. Data of sap flow in pounds and percent of sugar was collected each day that the sap flowed. At the completion of the sap collecting season, it was found that as trees were tapped earlier, the yield from trees tapped sterilely increased and the yield of the trees tapped nonsterilely decreased. From the earliest tapping to the latest tapping, the difference between sterile and non- sterile sap yields decreased. Sterile yields by tapping date were not significantly different at the five percent level. Nonsterile yields by tapping date were not significantly different at the five percent level. The difference between sterile and nonsterile total yields was highly significant. The difference in yields of the January 10th tapping date ‘was significant at the one percent level; the differences in yields of the January 25th and February 10th tapping dates were significant at the five percent level; and the yields of the February 25th and March 10th tapping dates failed to shew significance. The largest sap yield from trees tapped nonsterilely was obtained on the February 25th tapping date. It appears James Edward Douglass that the best measure of when to tap in the future is to follow the forecast of sap weather and to catch the first good sap run. A No significant difference was found in sap yield from plastic bags and metal buckets. There was no significant difference in sap yields be- tween compass positions of trees tapped sterilely or be- tween compass positions of trees tapped nonsterilely. There was a difference between sterile and nonsterile tapping yields by compass position. For the West compass position, the sap yield from.sterile tappings was signifi- cantly greater than the yield from the nonsterile tapping. THE EFFECT OF DATE OF TAPPING ON THE YIELD OF MAPLE SAP FROM STERILE AND NONSTERILE TAP HOLES Thesis for degree of M. S. Michigan State University James Edward Douglass 1955 THE EFFECT OF DATE OF TAPPING ON THE YIELD OF MAPLE SAP FROM STERILE AND NONSTERILE TAP HOLES By James Edward Douglass A THESIS Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Science in.partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Forestry 1955 The author wishes to express his sincere thanks to Professor P.‘U. Robbins of the Forestry Department, Michi- gan State University, who suggested the investigation and under whose inspiration, constant supervision and unfailing interest this investigation.was undertaken. Greatful acknowledgment is also due to Dr. T. D. Stevens, Head of the Forestry Department, Michigan State University, for many helpful suggestions and criticisms. He is also greatly indebted to Dr. H. D. Baten, Statistician of the Experiment Station, Michigan State University, for his kind guidance and valuable help in the statistical analysis of the field data. I. II. III. IV. V. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction A. Importance of the Study B. Historical Background Review of Literature Description of the Area Studied A. Forest and Soil Types B. History of the Area Apparatus and Methodology A. Experimental Design B. Sterile Tapping Techniques 6. Monsterile Tapping Techniques Findings and Interpretations Summary Appendix Bibliography 11 13 26 36 THE EFFECT OF DATE OF TAPPING ON THE YIELD OF MAPLE SAP FROM STERILE AND NONSTERILE TAP HOLES James Edward Douglass INTRODUCTION Brown (1) states that earliest written records indicate the American Indian was producing maple sirup and sugar as early as 1673. Settlers quickly adopted the Indian methods of making maple sirup and sugar and improved on their tech- niques. Early investigations were carried on primarily to devise new techniques of refining the maple sap and to im- prove the woodlot silviculturally to obtain maximum yield. The commercial maple sap area of the United States ex- tends westward from New England to Minnesota and southward to Kentucky. Here are the ten states listed by the Bureau of Agricultural Economics as producing a major part of the maple crop (8). Willits and Porter (20) state that maple sirup is not a major agricultural commodity in any of these states, but that in each there are areas where it is an im- portant part of the economy. In 1955. more than 151,000 pounds of maple sugar and 1,657,000 gallons of maple sirup were made, representing a cash crop of more than 8.h million dollars (11). Moore, Anderson, and Baker (12) state that in Ohio for the period l9h6 to 19h9, average production cost per gallon 2. of maple sirup was $2.9h and average price received by pro- ducers was $h.69 leaving an average net income of $1.75 Per gallon. Bull (Li) operating the Michigan State University Isugar bush? made $1.20 per gallon net profit on 275 gallons of maple sirup during the 1954 sap season. Maple sirup production occurs at a season of the year when other farm activities are at their lowest ebb. Opera- tion of the farm woodlot for the production of sirup offers the Opportunity to transform otherwise unproductive time in- to an income from.the farm woodlot. Increased interest in maple sap production in recent years has stimulated research into the many factors which affect the flow of sap. Weather forecasts of maple sap weather have been utilized to advantage in determining when to tap. The question still remains, ”when is the best time to tap?” An experiment to determine the effects of various tapping dates on the yield of maple sap was initiated in hopes of answering this question. This problem.was conceived with the knowledge of the availability of thousands of woodlots in Michigan for the production of maple sirup and sugar and with the intention of allowing maximization of profits by determining the most profitable time for tapping the trees. 3. REVIEW OF LITERATURE The exact time to tap has been discussed at length by several authors. It has been the consensus of Opinion that it is highly desirable to tap at the beginning of the first run of the season, and these operators who miss the first run lose a considerable portion of their potential yield. Cope (7) states that sap will flow anytime after the first thaw following the fall of leaves in autumn, and that usually March and April are the best sugar making months, but occasionally a good run is obtained in February. He fur- ther states that, "the tapping should be done early enough to catch the first run of sap. In fact, because of acute labor shortages, many producers are tapping ahead of the first run. Reports indicate just as much sap obtained as when tapping is delayed." This view is also supported by Collingwood and Cope (5). However in earlier work by Collingwood, Cape and Rasmussen (6), they had reported that "tapping should be done early enough to catch the first real run of sap, but not a day earlier as every hour tends to dry up the tap hole and to decrease the amount and quality of the sap flow.” Bryon (2), and Bryon, Hubbard, and Sherwood (3) reported that it is a good policy to tap early in the season in order to obtain the earliest runs of sap, which are generally the h. sweetest and therefore the best sugar producers. They re- port producers have lost half and even more of their crops many seasons by not being prepared for the first runs. Robbins (17) reports from.his investigations that tapping the maple tree at the prOper time influences greatly the quality and quantity of sap produced. He further states that sap weather forecasting of the first run is one of the greatest services that may be rendered the sirup producer to increase the quality and quantity of maple sirup production. In his experimental work on early tapping, Morrow (13) found that the early sap runs were of high quality which may be attributed to low bacterial activity during the first part of the sap season. The early tapped trees were sometimes the first to stop flowing, but they also produced the greatest total sap flow. During the middle and last part of the season, the early tapped trees produced less sap than did the late tapped trees. "While early tap holes tend to flow less than late tap holes late in the season, sizeable early runs have more than made up for the loss with more and better quality sap." Early work on the side of the tree in which the tap hole was bored indicated that the compass position of tap- ping has little effect on sap yield. Experiments con- ducted by Robbins (16), Jones, Edson, and Morse (10), and S. Tressler and Zimmerman (19), show that yield of sap for the entire season is about the same regardless of the direction in which the bucket is hung. 5. DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA STUDIED The area utilized for the experiment was approximately six acres of Baker Woodlot. This area was selected for the experiment because it supported sugar maple trees of the desired size which had never been tapped and because it represented a typical "sugar bush". The area is level to undulating in tepography. It is composed of two soil types which are very similar. The soil types present are Miami and Hillsdale. Baker Woodlot, formerly known as Woodlot 17, contains 68.u acres and was part of the original grant to Michigan State University in 1855. Early records of the woodlot date from.189h, when, as a result of a meeting of the State Board of Agriculture, the head of Agriculture and Forestry were to begin management of all forest lands ”in the most up to date methods". At that time Baker Woodlot was in such poor condition, as a result of severe cuttings and burnings, that it was recommended that the land be cleared for agricultural pur- poses. The stand consisted of a poorly stocked stand of seedlings and saplings. Forest management dates from this time. The area was put under good fire protection and some planting was done. By 1928, the woodlot was growing at 7. the rate of 2.2 Standard cords per acre annually. Fuel wood was the chief crop removed from.the area during this time. During the winter of 1938-39. an improvement cut, re- moving some overmature and decadent trees, was made. A se- lective logging was conducted in 19h? and experimental wildlife cuttings over portions of the area were made in 1950. At present the woodlot is managed for student instruc- tion and for research problems conducted by faculty and grad- uate students in the field of conservation. The map on the following page shows the present forest types currently on the experimental portion of Baker Woodlot. 8. r— TYPE MAP EXPERIMENTAL PORTION or BAKER WOODLOT ix costs We!!! LEO“ — MOVED ROAD 2: WOODS ROAD /" I"?! LINK \\ “.0.“ ”OD" \\ 1 want } ' eta-sewn H u H R I; \\ BIO IO ‘I’ \ \\ 4 sues-suns um\ I \ MAYOR! \\ \x \\ \\ \\ ev as. weevvuo 9. APPARATUS AND METHODOLOGY The experiment was statistically designed to determine the effect of five different tapping dates on the yield of sap from plastic bags, metal buckets, and sterile containers distributed in the four cardinal compass positions. The amount of time, equipment, and personnel available limited the number of trees used in the experiment to 50. The 50 trees utilized were 16 inches in D.B.H. or larger which had never been tapped. Ten trees were tapped on each of five tapping dates, one of which.was the normal date of tapping for the region. Tappings were at appro- ximate fifteen day intervals beginning the 10th of January. Subsequent tappings were made on the 25th of January, 10th of February, 25th of February, and 10th of March. Trees to be tapped and position of tapping were deter- mined by utilizing a table of randomly assorted digits. On each tapping date, a minimum of two trees were tapped in each compass position. Each tree was tapped twice in the designated compass position, once with a sterile tap and once with a nonsterile tap. The sterile tapping technique was performed to deter- mine the effect of bacteria on the flow of sap. The tech- nique for sterile tapping was modeled after that of Holgate (9) and Naghski (1h). Bits, seven-sixteenths inches in diameter, 10. were wrapped in paper and sterilized in an aitoclave. The spile assembly consisted of a rubber stopper for a five gallon can, which had an inverted glass U-tube plugged with cotton to equalize air pressure, and a short piece of streight glass tubing which was connected to a spile by a short length of rubber tubing. The spile (closed type especially designed for the experiment) was inserted into the end of the rubber- tubing, wrapped in paper, and sterilized in an autoclave. The neck and opening in the five gallon can were covered with gauze. Then the can was sterilized in an autoclave. In conducting the actual sterile tapping, a section of the tree approximately two and one-half feet above the ground, in the desired compass position, was selectedand a layer of outer bark was removed with a drawrknife at the point of tapping. This area was then saturated with alcohol, ignited, and while still burning, a seven-sixteenths inch hole was drilled with the sterile bit to a depth of two and onedhalf inches. The tree end of the spile was poked through the paper without being touched with hands and hammered into the tap hole by tapping on a screw driver held against the shoulder of the spile. The gauze was removed from.the open- ing of the can and the paper from.the rubber stopper which was immediately insertedinto the opening of the can. By utilizing sterile techniques and precautions throughout, the tap hole remained in as sterile a condition as possible 11. throughout the season. These techniques were not suffi- cient to keep the tap holes sterile for the entire season. Contamination was probably caused by changing the sterilized can when full of maple sap and by expanding ice which pulled the connecting hose loose. Knowledge was gained whereby techniques can be improved for future experiments which.will eliminate these sources of contamination. The nonsterile tapping technique was essentially the same as performed by sugar bumh Operators. The tap was made approximately two and one-half feet from the ground with a seven-sixteenths inch bit. A Souls spile was inserted into the tap hole and tapped snugly into place. Either a plastic bag or bucket was hung on the spile as determined by random.selection. Naghski and.Hillits (15), and Sproston and Lane (18) found that the contamination of sap in plastic bags was considerably less than contamination of esp in metal buckets. To determine whether this difference in contamination causes any difference in sap yield of trees hung with plastic bags and metal buckets, one-half of the trees was hung with plastic bags and one-half with metal buck- ets. Collections of maple sap was conducted each day that the sap flowed and the weight in pounds of sap and percent of sugar were recorded. Sugar percent determinations to the nearest one-half percent were made utilizing a refractometer. 1:;151 1111,";If W11 '1‘ >1 .4 [11 g g U) z 0 2 Q 2 4: >4 i-J £21 b—J E E-0 U) Q [I] in C14 <13 5-! £11 £12] In 5... i=1 1-1 3 A 4 O H E .1 O (‘4 ct: all m 7‘? 5" “1.3 .7". '3“: \ u.» ‘j-x.“ Mil-1. 1 was 13. FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATIONS An analysis of data failed to show a significant dif- ference between sterile sap yields by date of tapping or between nonsterile sap yields by date of tapping. Sterile Tapping The difference between the highest and the lowest flow of sterile taps by date of tapping was 595 pounds or an average of 7h.h pounds per tree as shown in Table 1. This difference was between the tapping dates of January 10th and February 10th. It is thought that the low yield of the trees tapped on February 10th was a reflection of low producing trees and not attributed to the date of tapping, an assumption that can not be substantiated by present data, but is supported by visual inspection of the trees. Nonsterile Tapping The greatest difference between the highest (January 10) and the lowest flow (February 10) of nonsterile tapping by date of tapping was 676 pounds of sap or an average of 8h.5 pounds per tree. This large difference, although not signi- ficant is also attributed to low yielding trees. Sterile vs. Nonsterile The volume of flow from sterile tap holes was greatest on the earliest tapping date, and the yield of subsequent tappings was progressively less, with the exception of the 1h. February 10th tapping. The opposite was true of the non- sterile tapping. The yield of maple sap from the non- sterile tapping was lowest for the earliest tappings and generally increased with each tapping date. Figure l and 2 illustrate the relationship between yields from sterile and nonsterile tappings and date of tapping. Apparently the earlier the tree was tapped, the greater the length of time in which contamination could occur before the heaviest sap flow. TABLE I SAP FLOW OF STERILE AND NONSTERILE TAPPINGS BY DATE OF TAPPINGl Date 0‘ : Sap Flow in Pounds : fl Increase in Yield Tapping_ : Sterile : Nonsterile : by Sterile Tapping Jan. 10 2165 1238 7h.9 Jan. 25 1959 13h6 h5.6 Feb. 10 1570 1118 h0.h Feb. 25 1916 179k 6.8 mar. 10 158;, lace g5.5 1 Based on no sterile and MO nonsterile taps. This greater period of time in which contamination and increase in number of contaminating bodies occurred was thought to be the reason for reduced yield of sap for 15. Gian—(b. no uh: 10¢(2 0 mm :1. O. on 0. mu 0. MAO: a‘r to mark >0 30.: :0 mo U350 J- Oath 3.65.23: 08‘ Hazy-b to ’3; a: .. 0‘30... (SO1)JVO dO 0131A l6. tappings prior to the first run compared with first run tappings.1 Analysis of sap yields of sterile and nonsterile tap- pings by dates shows a highly significant difference between the yields of sterile and nonsterile tappings. For January 10th the difference between sterile and nonsterile tapping yields was significant at the one percent level; for the January 25th and February 10th tapping the differences be- tween yields were significant at the five percent level; and for the February 25th and March 10th tappings, there was no significant difference between yields. Differences between sterile and nonsterile yields were greatest for the earliest tapping date and progressively decreased with each succeeding tapping. These differences for the five tapping dates from.earliest to latest tapping were 927 pounds, 615 pounds, h52 pounds, 122 pounds, and 83 pounds respectively. (See Figure 3). The difference between sterile and nonsterile sap flow was statistically fitted into a straight line curve. Figure 3 shows that the earlier the tapping, the greater the difference in yield between sterile and nonsterile sap 1 Unpublished data collected in conjunction with this experi- ment by the Bacteriology Department, Michigan State Univer- sity, substantiates that as contamination increases, volume of flow decreases. IR YIELD (LDC) DIFFERENCE 17. "CURE 3- CURVE OF DIFFERENCE IN POUNDS BETWEEN STERILE AND NORSTERILE SAP YIELDS BY DATE OF TAPPINO IOOO _. OOO .. COO _. 400 a. ZOO .. o J- 1 j 1 IO 25 10 25 IO JAR ' . FED MARCH DATE OF TAPPINO 18. flow. Although the analysis showed no significant difference between yields by tapping date, it is believed that for the 1955 season early tapping increased the yield of sterile tap holes and decreased the yield of nonsterile tap holes. For sap years similar in climatic conditions to the 1955 season, a commercially feasible method of sterile tapping, equil in quality tothe experimental sterile tap- ping, should give a substantially greater yield for earlier tapping dates than for the normal tapping date. The experiment suggest that February 25th was the optimum time for nonsterile tapping. Tapping before the first run apparently exposes the tap hole to contamination for a longer period of time, and, as in this case, may re- duce the yield of sap. Tapping after the first run may not be as serious as was once thought. The first good run of sap occurred during the February 25th tapping. Trees tapped on this date had 13 days more flowing time than trees tapped March 10th; however, trees tapped on March 10th flowed only an average of 37 pounds per tree less than those tapped on February 25th. This represents an average loss of less than three pounds per tree per day. Bag vs. Bucket An analysis shows no significant difference in yields from.nonsterile tappings resulting from the type container nap‘ .L buck 19. used to collect the sap. On three of the tapping dates (January 10th, February 25th, March 10th), the yield from trees hung with buckets was greater than the yield from trees hung with plastic bags. Trees hung with plastic bags produced more than trees hung with metal buckets on January 25th and February 10th. (See Figure A.) Compass Position There was no significant difference between yields of maple sap by compass position of plastic bags or metal bHCkO 128 e TABLE II SAP FLOW OF STERILE AND NONSTERILE TAPPINGS BY compass POSITIONl ‘Ccmpass: Sa Flow in—Pounds : % Increase Position Bucket : Bag : Non- : Sterile : in Yield : :' : Sterile : : by Sterile ‘__ : : : z : Tap North 837 797 163k 1881; 15.3 East 758 951 1709 229? 314A; South 1200 668 1868 2h30 30.h West 9]_._IL 809 1783 25 80 [£91 1 Based on no sterile taps and to nonsterile taps. Greatest sap flow from nonsterile containers was from.the CAP (LDC) YIELD OF 20. "CURE 4-DAP YIELD DY DATE OF TAPPINO FOR IO PLASTIC DADS AND IS KTAL BUCKET! eco— P «.1. ‘00—. ‘1 a00_ _ I- t- r- e- 0- “ II Isl U U x 3 5 o 3 e 3 o n a o . o n o O 0 ‘ JAN IO JAN as as IO rte as was IO DATE OF TAPPINO 21. South compass position. The lowest yield recorded was for the North position which was 238 pounds less than the yield from.the South position. For the sterile tappings the greatest flow was from the West compass position, followed by the South,East and North positions respectively. The difference in yield be- tween the West and North positions was 696 pounds, or an average of 69.6 pounds per tree. This difference was not statistically significant. The difference between sterile and nonsterile tappings by compass position was highly significant for the West compass position. The remaining three positions did not show signi- ficance at the five percent level. The finding for the non- sterile tappings helps to verify other experimental work conducted on compass position. Sap Flow by Periods The greatest volume of sap flow for all tapping dates occurred between March 15th and April let for both sterile and nonsterile tappings with the exception of the January 10th nonsterile tapping. Nonsterile tappings. For the period from March lst throughout the season, trees tapped on February 25th out- flowed all earlier tappings. Between the time when each of the early tappings was made and March let, the trees tapped before February 25th yielded slightly more maple sap than 22. the trees tapped on February 25th. This may be accounted for by the period of possible flow. Trees tapped on Febru- ary 25th.had a period of six days in which to flow while the trees tapped earlier had from 15 to NS days to flow. With one exception, the trees tapped before February 25th out flowed the trees tapped on February 25th and March 10th until March 15th. From.March 15th until the sap flow ceased, the yield from.trees tapped February 25th and March 10th was greater than from.the three early tappings. The total average sap flow for February 25th and March 10th exceeded the average flow of the early tappings by a minimum.of 18 pounds per tree. Sterile tappiggs. During the period from.the date of each tapping to March let, the earliest tapping pro- duced the greatest sap flow (average), and the average flow decreased for each succeeding tapping. .e .l 1) .sl IJ 'I' ‘- a n‘ .4 K ulst- . . .._ A i . i. «I. C I . a R‘ I II - I In I w .. . J l ‘ . . . r. ..e a ':b . . x _‘ ‘ P l- . . . . n I ‘ e. r. A .. . . ‘ 'a‘ D e . . t. a J IK. l O . O s . . 23. TABLE III AVERAGE SAP FLOW OF 20 NONSTERILE TAP HOLES BY PERIODS OF TIME Date of : Sap Flow inTPBunds b Period of—Time Tapping : Up to : March 1: March 15:ApriI I :Total : March 1 : to : to : to :Yield : : Marchlfi: April 1 :April 1;: Jan. 10 37 62 AB 8 155 Jan. 25 30 6h 69 6 169 Feb. 10 22 52 59 8 1&1 Feb. 25 18 103 28 22h TABLE IV AVERAGE SAP FLOW OF 20 STERILE TAP HOLES BY PERIODS OF TIME Date of Sa Flow In Pounds b Period of Time Tapping Up to : March 1: march l5:ApriI 1 :Total March.1 : to ‘ to : to {Yield nerchlgé April 1 :April 1; Jan. 10 11 65 121 an 271 Jan. 25 37 63 109 37 2A6 Feb. 10 2% S 80 35 193 Feb. 25 1 7 10 39 239 Mar. 10 o _52 lo 38 128 2h. SUMMARY This experiment illustrates the effect of date of tap- ping on the yield of maple sap from sterile and nonsterile tap holes, compass positions, and plastic bags and metal buckets. (1) There was no significant difference between ster- ile tapping yields and date of tapping or between nonster- ile tapping yields and date of tapping. (2) The difference between sterile and nonsterile yields is highly significant. The difference in yields of the January 10th tapping date was significant at the one percent level; the difference in yields of the January 25th tapping date was significant at the five percent level; and the yields of February 10th, 25th, and March 10th failed to show significance. (3) The largest yield was obtained from.trees tapped on the February 25th tapping date. The data indicates that the best measure of when to tap in the future is to follow forecasts of maple sap weather and to catch the first sap run, unless a commercially feasible sterile tapping techni- que can be perfected. Tapping two weeks or more before the first sap run occurs results in a decrease in the yield of maple sap from.nonsterile taps. (A) No significant difference was found in sap yield 25. from plastic bags vs. metal buckets. (5) There was no significant difference in yields be- tween compass positions of tap hole for sterile tappings or compass positions of tap hole for nonsterile tappings. There was a difference in yields between sterile and nonsterile tapping by compass position. For the Host comp pass position the sap yield from.sterile tappings was sig- nificantly greater than the yield from.the nonsterile tap- pings. (6) Tapping sugar maple trees 15 to NS days earlier than the normal tapping date for the region increases the yield of maple sap from.sterile tap holes. 26. APPENDIX TABLE V I. SUMMATION OF DATA BY TAPPING DATE -: Type Tappins Yield in Pounds by Date of Ta in 1 25 : 10 23 Jan. : Feb. E Feb. 0 I0 HQ?“ 286 317 138 215 186 228.h 335 256 1&5 195 225 231.2 Average 1? 210 195 151* 258 110 18 .8 Sterile 326 169 179 271 2N8 23 .6 279 18h 201 280 196 228.0 223 363 ¥g 239 175 2h5o h 301 322 2%1 187 117 235.0 20 2 1 26.8 Average 2 O. ZNW 1‘ .. 22.8 ' 102 1 9 . '9e 231 112 52' 139 177 1h2.2 213 188 87* 279 95 172.1 Non- 225 182 1%} 300 260 222.0 Sterile 97 128 l 319 159 182. 83 2&0 1A9 155 172 159. 80 172 115 175 122 132.8 Everag. 212:2 206e6 168.0 231.2 122ek 202e3 * Values were determined by the lost plot formula. Lost plot formula: c C r R - G 151 Sterile tapping c- r-l 87 Nonsterile tapping 27. ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE A. STERILE VS. NONSTERILE YIELDS BY DATE OF TAPPING Source D. F.1 Mean Sq. Total 77 Date A 9,0982 Tapping 1 60.335** D x T % 7.7117 EPI’OI‘ 6 3m 815 1 D. F. remaining after deducting two D. F. for lost plots. 2 There is no significant difference between yields of sterile and non- sterile taps by tapping date. ** There is a highly significant dif- ference between sterile and non- sterile yields. B. STERILE YIELDS VS. DATE OF TAPPING Source D. F.1 Moan Sq. Total 38 Between 4 8,2982 Within .38 3.732 D. F. remaining after deducting one D. F. for lost plot. Not significant at the five per cent level. 28. C. NONSTERILE YIELD VS. DATE OF TAPPING Source D. F.1 Mean Sq. Total 38 Between h 8,5h72 Within 311 3. 892 1 D. F. remaining after deducting one D. F. for lost plot. 2 Not significant at the five per cent level. D. STERILE VS. NONSTERILE YIELD FOR THE JAN. 10 TAPPING DATE Source ‘gD. F. Mean Sq; Total 15 Between 1 53.7084! Within 11, 23.873 ** Significant at the one per cent lB'Gle E. STERILE VS. NONSTERILE YIELD FOR THE JAN. 25 TAPPING DATE _m Source D. F. Mean Sq, Total 15 Between 1 23sh85* Within 111 01 * Significant at the five per cent level. 29. F. STERILE VS. NONSTERILE YIELD FOR THE FEBRUARY 10 TAPPING DATE Source D. F.1 Mean Sq. Total 13 Between 1 15.853* Within 12 3.196 Significant at the five per cent level. D. F. remaining after deducting two D. F. for lost plots. H G. Sterile vs. nonsterile yields for February 25th and March 10th tapping dates were not significant at the five per cent level. H. Determination of position of straight line curve of differences between sterile and nonsterile tapping yields for Figure 3. x 2‘ 111 1 927 875 2 613 657 3 #52 139 h 122 222 15_ 83 1 ... 1 Expected value of Y' is found from.the equation: Y':a)‘bX . 1093 - 218x 6’ 81 Correlation Coefficient : O.979** ** The correlation coefficient is highly significant. The computed line is significantly different from.a horizontal line. 30. I. Determination of the position of the straight line curve of yield for the sterile tapping for Figure 2. Y1 Y' 2 260 2&5 230 215 209 1 All observations for each tapping date were used. Expected value of Y' is found from the equation: Y':O./bx 27S - 15X ‘f 61 Correlation Coefficient s ~0.338i * The correlation coefficient shows the computed line is significantly different from a horizontal line. NtFwnnoh' P4 J. Determination of position of the straight line curve of yield from.nonsterile tappings. x 11 Y"? 1 151 2 163 3 1 5 § 1 7 1;99 All observations from.sach tapping date were used. 2 Expected value for Y1 is found from the equation on the following page. 31. Expected Value for Y' Y‘ = bX =129 ’1} 121: é 6h Correlation Coefficient = 0.265 The correlation coefficient is not significantly different from a hori- sontal line; therefore, Figure 2 is only utilized to aid in clarifica- tion of written material. Figure 2 is not a statistically sound curve. 32. TABLE VI II. SUMMATION OF DATA BY COMPASS POSITION Type : Yield in Pounds by : Tapping : Co ass Position p__; Average : Nort_:; East : South : Vest :__ 172 231 300 252 238.8 268 213 279 260 255.0 Bucket 87 97 261 159 151.0 128 165 172 189 153.5 182 2 188 9; Average 1 mm 0.0 182.8 ‘- . 1 9 =3 177 ‘ 155 139 80 115 122.3 Bag 189 175 201 112 169.3 1&3 319 122 200 206.0 213 152 182 22% 126.3 Average 459. 12002 1 e 1] o A} 93 Grand Averagel 163.1 110.9 186.8 3178.3 1 .9 175’ 335* 271 186 .8 271 210 258 2u8 246.8 151 279 32h 215 282.3 18h 153 322 227 221.5 Sterile 169 1&5 195 286 198.8 110 196 223 225 188.5 239 195 301 2&8 ZhSoB 201 187 281V 256 231.3 179 280 117 363 23%.8 20E g1] 138 826 2% .g Average 1 . 2 .7 .0 .0 29; Grand Averagez 115.2 200.3 214.2 218.2 202.3 1 Average of buckets and bags. 2 Average of buckets, bags, and sterile containers. 33. ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE A. STERILE VS. NONSTERILE YIELD BY COMPASS POSITION Source D. F.1 Mean Sq, Total 77 Type Tapping 1 60.335** Position 3 7,h06 P X T 3 2.5u3 Error 310 2 1 D. F. remaining after deducting two D. F. for lost plots. ** There is a significant difference between sterile and nonsterile containers. There is no signi- ficant difference between yields by compass position. B. YIELD OF BAG vs. BUCKET BY COMPASS POSITION (NONSTERILE vs. COMPASS POSITION) Source D. F.1 Meag_§g;___ Total 38 Position 3 611.72 Containers 1 5880.72 P X C 3 11123e9 Errog» 3;; 2282.1 D. F. remaining after deducting one D. F. for lost plot. 2 There is no significant dif- ference between positions or containers. D. 3&- STERILE vs. COMPASS POSITION Source D. F.1 Mean Sq. Total 38 2 Between 3 39h5 Within 35 _3807 D. F. remaining after deducting one D. F. for lost plot. There is no significant difference between sterile tapping and comp pass position. Sterile vs. Nonsterile Yields by Compass Position NORTH POSITION STERILE VS. NONSTERILE YIELDS Source D. F.1 Mean 89. Total 17 Between 1 3.1252 Within 16; 2.6 D. F. remaining after deducting one D. F. for lost plot. There is no significant difference between sterile and nonsterile yields for the North position. (2) 35. EAST POSITION STERILE VS. NONSTERILE YIELDS (3) Source D. F. Mean Sq, Total 19 Between 1 17,2871 Within 7;;8 8.975 There is no significant difference between sterile and nonsterile yields for the East position. SOUTH POSITION STERILE VS. NONSTERILE YIELDS Within 18 1 (8) Source D. F. Mean Sq. Total 19 Between 1 15.7921 5.659 There is no significant difference between sterile and nonsterile yields for the South position. NEST POSITION STERILE VS. NONSTERILE YIELDS 'I-I' Source D. F. mean Sq. Total 19 Between 1 31,761** witnin 18 3.36 There is a highly significant dif- ference between sterile and non- sterile yields for the west position. 1. 2. 3. h. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. lhe 36. BIBLIOGRAPHY Brown, N. C. 1919. Forest gggducts, Their Manufacture _:— and Use. John Wiley and Sons, New York. 37H-378 pp. Bryan, A. H. 1917. The production of maple sirup and sugar. U.S. Dept. Agric., Farmers Bul. No. 516. Bryan, A. 3.; Hubbard, W. F.: and Sherwood, 3. F. l92h. Production of maple sirup and sugar. U.S. Dept. Agric., Farmers Bul. No. 1366. Bull, W. I. 1955. Oral communication. Collingwood, G. H. and Cope, J. A. 1938. Maple sugar and sirup. N.Y. State Col. Agric., Cornell Ext. Bul. 397- Collingwood, G. H.; COpe, J.A.: and Rasmussen, M.P. 1928. Production of maple sirup and sugar in.New Yerk State. N.Y. Col. Agric. at Cornell, Ext. Bul. 167. Cope, J. A. 1989. Mq>1e sirup and sugar. N.Y. Col. Agric. at Cornell, Cornell Ext. Revised Bul. 397. Crop Reporting Board. 19MB. Bur. Agric. Econ., U.S. Dept. Agric. Crop Report of May 1, 1988. Holgate, K. C. 1950. Composition of maple sap. N.Y. GODOVI Agric. Exp. Ste Enle 7&2. Jones, C. 3.; Edson, A. W.; and Morse, W. J. 1903. Maple sap flow. University of Vt., Vt. Agric. Exp. St. Bul. No. 103e Mich. Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. U. 8. Dept. Agric. Agric. Marketing Service. Agric. Estimates Division and Mich. State Dept. of Agric. May 18, 1955. Moore, H. R.; Anderson, W. R.; and Baker, R. H. 1951. Ohio maple sirup, some factors influencing production. Ohio AngGe Exp. Ste RBSe Bale 7180 Morrow, R. R. 1955. Early tapping for more quality sirup. Jour. For. 53:22-25. Naghski, J. 1953. The organisms of maple sap: their 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 37. effect and control. Report of Proc. Second Conference on Maple Products. Eastern Utilization Research Branch, Agric. Res. Ser., U. S. Dept. Agric. Philadelphia, Penn. Naghski, J. and Willits, C. 0. 1953. Maple sirup VI. The sterilization effect of sunlight on maple sap collected in a transgarent plastic bag. Food Techno- logy VII: No. 2, 81- 3. Robbins, P. W. 1988. Position of tapping and other factors affecting the flow of maple sap. Unpublished M.S. Thesis. Michigan State College. 35 PP. Robbins, P. U. 19h9. Production of maple sirup in Michigan. Mich. State Col. Agric. Exp. Station Cir. Bul. 213. Sproston, T. Jr.: and Lane, S. 1953. Maple sap con- tamination and maple sap buckets. Vermont Agric. Exp. Stat. Pamphlet NOe 28o Tressler, C. J. and Zimmerman, U. I. l9h2. Three year's operation of an experimental sugar bush. N. Y. State Agric. Exp. Stat. Bul. NOe 699. Geneva, Ne Ye Willits, C. 0. and Porter, W. L. 1950. Maple sirup 1: Research program on maple products at the Eastern Re- gional Research Laboratory. Bur. of Agric. and Ind. Chemistry. Agric. ROSe AdMe Ue Se Dept. Of AgPICe Philadelphia, Penn. ROOM 153E 032‘)! km 5 '37 I? {L ”1% t I: “q I l dui A 7- " ”VI-i “4mg“? "77771171111111” 1711111115 2309 ._.' ‘9 -