TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. BULLETIN NO. 2o. MARCH 1892. VA. loo FILE. GRASSES AND FORAGE PLANTS, A Study oi Composition and Value. TEXAS GRHINSMCOIVIPOSITION. Ash‘ Analyses, Grosses and Grains. COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS. A11 Bulletins of this Station‘ are issued free. Any one interested in any branch of agriculture may have his name placed 0n our permanent mailing list, and secure future numbers, by ap- plication to GEO. W. CURTIS, DIRECTOR, _ . _ College Station, Brazos Co., Tex. In requesting Bulletins, write name and address plainly. _ BRYAN, TEXAS! COX, “THE NEAT PRINTER.” 1892. TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION OFFICERS AN D STAFF. GOVERNING A BOARD. BOARD OFSDIRECTORS A. AND M. COLLEGE. MAS. A. J Ross, President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Sa1ado. HoN. JNo. E. HOLLINGSWORTH, State Com. Agr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Austin. Hon. W. R. CAVITT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Bryan. DR. J. D. FIELDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Manor. HON. J NO. ADRIANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Co1umbia. TREASURER. PRESIDENT L. S. Ross, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Co11ege Station. STATION STAFF. ' GEO. W. CURTIs, M. STA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Agricu1turist_. Director. H. H. HARRINGTON, M. Se. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Chemist. AM. FRANCIS, D. V. M. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Veterinarian. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Hortiou1turist. D. ADRIANC E, M. S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Meteorologist, Asst. Chemist. J. W. CARsoN, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Assistant to Director. J . M. CARSON. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A. . . . .Ass'1stant Agrieuiturist. P. S. TILSON, B. S. A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Assistant in Chemistry. Texas Agricultural Experiment Station. A STUDY OF THE COMPOSITION OF GRASSES. (n. n. HARRnvoToN, M. so.) It is a little remarkable, that in the South, the home of grasses, more attention has not been paid to their propagation and cultivation. \Vhen most of the time on the farm, during cropping season, is spent in killing out grasses, we should expect that some of the many varie- ties would prove useful for grazing or for making hay. This indeed, has been found to be. the case, but the fact is either unknown or neglect- ed by the mass of farmers. Crab Grass (Panicum Sanguinale) produces an excellent hay, but it is not frequently saved as such. There are many others almost equally common, that if properly cared for, would prove useful and valuable. I am not disposed to join the great army of complainers against farmers and their present system of farming. The condition of agri- culture in the South may not be, and probably is not, the most desir- able within our reach; but its defects are to be regretted by nobody so seriously as by the farmer himself. For this condition of agriculture they are scarcely more censurable than are the business men, and cap- italists of the country. These have not kept pace in manufacturing and mining industries with the products of the farm. If land is less valuable than it should be, if cotton is below a price at which it can be marketed for actual cost of production, the fact remains that the farmers have contributed more than their share to the wealth and prosperity of the country. While as consumers they have been most moderate. But it can not be denied that the remedy, not only for the farmers, but for the general condition of the country, must come from the farm. It is predicted that at last, a prevailing system of agricul- ture for a century must undergo a radical change-not a very easy thing to effect. ' Outside of the belt of small grain, we can perhaps look to no other source for relief, so surely, as to stock, forage crops, and grazing. ‘With a view of adding interest and encouragement to this matter the following study of grasses was undertaken-—the analytical work on these and the grains that follow, being done by Duncan Adriance, As- sistant Chemist: JOHNSON GRASS. (Sorghum halapense.) This grass is regarded as one of the pests of Texas agriculture; and a farmer ‘is generally interested in it only so far as some means can be 180 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT sTATIoN. devised to kill it out—-clear his farm of an acknowledged,nuisance. I do not believe that its growth should be encouraged. But in many places of the State it has become so firmly sodded as not to be eradica- ' ted by any easy or economical method. The best thing then, to do, is to make it useful.» Those who are familiar with it, know that it yields an excellent hay and in great abundance. The greatest diflicul- the agency of the animal, the seeds may become introduced on. the farm, and the grass thus allowed to fasten itself, where otherwise care- ful precautions have been used to avoid its growth. We believe that the analytical work below, will show that it may be cut early, with little loss of nutriment, and without the risk of the formation of seed. Samples were collected on the several dates shown in the table, and after estimating the water, the analysis was made in 100 parts of the dry substance. - ANALYSES OF JOHNSON GRASS. r _ 2nd. of 10th. ofi21st. of 29th. of 7th. of 18th. of TIME WHEN CLT- April. April. April. April. May. May. HEIGHT OF GRASS‘ iiiéiil Shilgohin liiiggii.“ lifigg°hinll?§1iil Mature. “later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81.06 77.44 86.09 80.9 76.5 69.33 Ash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.24 11.62 11.68 10.38 7.98 6.36 Ether Extract (Fats) [Foot Notes]. . . . 5.59 8.60 8.10 6.52 4.11 4.07 Crude Fiber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 21.55 18.74 24.56 25.29 33.32 33.66 Carbo-Hydrates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46.2 41.5 32.41 43.75 45.15 46.10 Alburninoids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.42 19.54 23.25 14.06 9.44 9.81 Total Nitrogen. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.78 3.12 3.73 2.25 1.51 1.57 Albuminoid Nitrogen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.55 2.72 2.73 1.96 1.34 1.40 i 0.23 0.40 1 00 0.29 0.17 0.17 Amide hitrogen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. The water content is least in the mature grass, as would be expect- ed. However, little importance can be attached to the per-centage amount of water; since the amount of water in the soil at the time of collecting the sample would greatly influence this. The Crude Fiber, or woody material, may be said to be a gradual increase: greatest at the maturity of the plant. Without enumerating details, it may be seen from the table that the grass may be cut when 18 to 20 inches high, without any serious loss of nutritive material. The albuminoids and fats, are generally considered the most valuable ingredients of a feed stuff of any kind. But in the South, especially for cattle, they can be obtained so cheap from a variety of sources, that they can scarcely be said to have the importance in a hay which could be claimed for them in a district where foods rich in nitrogen- ous material are less easily obtained. lVhat we want in a hay is a sweet smelling, well colored, easily digestible product. It must not be too 0O£1I';z(if, or horses especiallyg will not relish it. It is generally conceded that about the time of flowering is the best time to cut hay. Some farmers wait for mature blossoming, while The ether extract in this and in the analysis of the other grass, especially in the younger plant, represents more than the true fats-owing to the large amount of coloring matter re- moved. ty in the way of its commercial value as a hay, is the fear that through~ GRASSES AND FORAGE PLANTS. 181 others prefer to cut earlier, just as the field is going into bloom. But I believe With coarse grasses, this is Waiting too long-especially if the stems of the grass are inclined to become tough as they mature. There is probably a slight sacrifice of nutritive matter, but it is more than replaced in the increased palatability and digestibility. Hence, if Johnson Grass is cut just on the verge of blooming, there is no risk of seed in the hay, and at the same time, you have a product of most ex- cellent quality. RESCUE GRASS. (Brovnus Unioloides.) p I first noticed this grass four years ago, as a very early spring growth in various spots upon the College campus. early in the spring even after a severe Winter: and after a mild Winter it will frequently make its appearance (here) in early February. the first of April it is in flower; and it may appear even earlier than this. It appears quite By Dr. Phares says of it:—-“\Vhen once started, its growth after succes- sive cuttings or grazings, is very rapid, stock eat it greedily. ciuantity’ of leavesW-[Farmers Book of Grasses, p. 65.] As a voluntary growth here on the campus, it shows a great, dispo- sition to spread, and an ability to protect itself against other grasses?- even the Hardy Bermuda. It is tender, very sweet, and It makes a good. hay, producing an immense Stock do not seem very fond of it for grazing until it seeds—bearing considerable head—When they eat these off With great relish. conriiirxi, it might be much more relished than When grazed. ANALYSES ~OF RESCUE GRASS. I have never seen it cut for hay—in that _ _ 2nd. of 9th. 0f 14th. of 21st. of'29th. 0f TIME “HEN QUT- April. April. April. April. April. 6 to 8 In Head- Dough Ma- HEIMIT m’ ‘iRASF- inches Flower- - ing. state. ture. Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75.84 85.35 71.07 71.64 66.79 A811 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.9 9.98 8.54 9.08 7.54 Ether Extract (Fats) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 7.01 6.90 3.52 4.62 3.89 Crude Fiber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' . . . . . . . . . 24.14 24.44 33.83 32.25 23.90 carbO-Hydra/CGS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37.50 37.09 40.80 40.12 53.05 AlbWminOidS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20.45 21.59 13.31 13.93 11.62 To 211 Nitrogen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3.27 3.45 2.13 2.23 1.86 Ali mninoid Nitrogen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2.62 2.87 1.60 1.88 1.66 Amide Nitrogen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., 0.65 0.58 0.53 0.35 0.20 The second sample, collected on the 9th of April, Was just rain; so that the Water content is greater than it Would be otherwise. The albuminoids appear to be much greater in the young plant—While the crude fiber is lowest, except at time of maturity. The stalk is not coarse or tough; so that it seems to me, the best time to cut it, Would be about the time of flowering. orably With Johnson Grass in composition. after It compares fav- 182 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. ALFALFA——LITCERNE. (Medicavgo Satira.) “When brought from South America to the United States, it was supposed to be a new plant, and called v‘Brazilian Clover.’ A few years ago it was taken from Western South America to California, and thence to the older States, as a new plant, with its spanish name Afaifa. But it was known in the earlier ages of the world. By the Greeks it was brought from Medea—about 500 years B. C. It is still grown in Per- sia, where, as in Peru, it is cut throughout the year. It had been cultivated in the Southern States 5O years before received from Cali- fornia.”—[Dr. Phares Book of Grasses, p. 3.] g Alfalfa is well known in many parts of this State. Especially in the irrigated districts of the Rio Grande valley below El “Paso, and the Concho valley of Tom Green County. It constitutes in these places, the most valuable farm product, and I believe is cultivated entirely for hay-rather than for grazing. Dr. Phares, however, mentions it as best adapted to soiling, after having been cut and allowed to wilt. He says: “For this purpose, the cutting should begin before the plant shows any blooms. It is very rich in milk and butter principles, and especially suited for feeding milk cows.” . I attach here letters from two practical men who have had experi- ence with the plant in. this State; and whose testimony and experience must be of great interest and value to one contemplating the growth of Alfalfa. Hon. H. L. Lewis of Hearne, is well known ask a cotton planter over a large part of the State. His Brazos Bottom farms are a credit not only to his county, but to the State. But he does not neg- lect to raise his own ha_y-——German Millet, Colorado Grass and Alfalfa ——as well as to supply his own pasturage. He has the following to- say of Alfalfa: “About four years ago I planted three acres; this planting was done- in the spring. It being a very hot dry summer, the young plants did not flourish until the fall rains began. I did not get a cutting from it this first year, preferring that it should mature, so as to reseed itself on all the. places, where there was not a stand. Early in February it had covered the land with a beautiful green, and about May 1st I put my mowing machine in, and got a ton per acre of fine hay. This I baled up, but not being familiar with the curing of alfalfa, I did not- allow it to pilrysufficientlyr, and it moulded; not so as to be an entire loss, but it was not good hay. About June the 1st I took off another cutting, and after thoroughly drying it, I put it in the’ barn, loose, without baling it, and fed it to my mules in this way and they ate it with great relish. The crops of July the 1st and August the 1st I cut and baled after thoroughly curing it; which, handled like ordinary German millet, takes about twice as long to cure. The land for Alfal- fa, as we raise it hcrc, I think should be inclined to be moist land; though I believe on any alluvial soil, or hammock bottom, it would do well. Its roots penetrate the soil to great depth, a good deal like the old fashioned blood beet, and the frequent cuttings that we get. ' from Alfalfa are sprouts which stool out from these roots after each cutting. In my opinion Alfalfa should be sown in October, with fall oats, upon a thoroughly pulverized seed bed. Twenty pounds of Al- GRASSES AND FORAGE PLANTS. 183 falfa seed mixed with three bushels of oats per acre. The oats will protect the young plants, and allow their roots to get a firm hold, and after the oats are taken off in the spring, the Alfalfa will grow vigor- ously, and should afford two cuttings the first season, Last spring I sowed with millet; 20 pounds of Alfalfa with one bushel and a half of millet per acre. In due season I harvested the millet; but it being an exceedingly dry hot summer and fall, I did not. expect to see much more of my Alfalfa; but this spring it showed up a beautiful stand; indeed by the middle of January it was quite green, and ~I believe it will be ready for the knife by the lst of April. [Foot note.] “My meadow now comprises ten acres, from which I expect this season to get 4O tons from the four cuttings. When cut green it is as fine feed as there is in the world for hogs; or when they are allowed to graze on it. Cured into hay, it is not surpassed in my opinion, by “timothy.” I believe that running a disc harrow over the meadow to loosen the ground, and the application of a light coat of manure, would be very beneficial; for a growth so vigorous as alfalfa will have a tend- ency to exhaust the soil and die out, if cut three or four times a year without a dressing of manure. Any where on the Brazos river, on our “Elm Land,” I think alfalfa will do well; and all over the country on the creek and hammock bottoms, it will pay to plant it. I ani told that it pays well to reseed the land or to plant over once in five or six years. But of this one could better judge by the condition of their meadow at the expiration of that time.” ¢ Hon. J". M. Carson, who left the fertile black waxey prairies of Ellis county for the plains and valleys of Tom Green county, has this to say of alfalfa, in reply to my inquiry: I “To plant alfalfa, prepare the land nicelyr and sow thirty pounds per acre, harrow in or plow in with double shovels, about like you would put in millet. In this portion of Texas, I think about the 15th of September the best time for sowing-as it then has the advantage of getting ahead of the weeds and grass in the spring. It is the first thing to go to growing in the spring; and will in fact, grow every warm day in winter. It does very well planted the 1st of April, if the I land is not foul. I have only four years experience raising alfalfa, but think mine is better now than it was the first . year. It requires no cultivation, and will continue to do well an indefinite time from sow- mg. “The only difficulty we find is,'tl1at on someiof our land, it dies in spots. [Foot note.] \Ve cut five crops each season, and it averages a. ton to the acre each cutting—or five tons per year. Price per ton fluctu- ates very much—-fron1 ten dollars to twenty dollars per ton. The above yield is on irrigated land, but it requires less irrigation than any other crop.” The above letter was written on the 23rd of February. On April the. 1st he writes, ‘_‘I send by express a sample of alia1fa——l8 inches high—I have a pretty stand of it, and 1t 1s doing iinely. I have 200 pounds of seed which I shall plant with my millet as soon as the ground 1s dry enough.”-—H. grobably due to presence of alkali in the soil—and will in time be removed by cultivation. 184 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. ANALYSES OF ALFALFA FROM CONCIIO‘ VALLEY April May May 20th. April May 30th. ’ 30th, TIME OF CUTTING. 8 t0 10 29th. 11th. Ma- Second inches. ture. growth Water . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . 70.16 75.65 i 69.35 62.44 75.25 Ash . ..; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.91 12.30 10.34 8.00 15.26 Ether Extract (Fats) . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.14 5.18 4.89 3.61 3.10 Crude Fiber’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 27.56 29.87 33.61 34.23 25.20 Carbo-Hydrates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29.02 32.72 31.98 38.85 32.88 Albuminoids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24.37 19.93 19.18 15.31 23.56 Total Nitrogen . . . . . . . . .' .' . . . . . . . . Q . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.90 3.19 3.07 2.45 3.77 Albuminoid Nitrogen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.82 1.97 1.75 1.99 2.67 Amide Nitrogen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.08 1.22 1.32 0.46 1.10 ‘The sample of May the 11 [was in bloom-the usual time of cutting. The large quantity 0f albuminoids is a distinguishing feature 0f the plant. The per vantage amount of Amide Nitrogen is also quite no- ticeable. The albuminoids are. higher than in clover, and about the. same ‘as incow ‘pea vines. It is remarkable how well the plant supports horses, cattle and hogs. _ I believe it can come nearer replacing grain entirely than can any other forage plant. It comes as a perennial plant on various parts of the campus- Where its growth is necessarily much slower than when irrigated; or even when upon fertile soil. But samples of this growth were collect- ed and analyzed in order to compare its composition with that pro— duced under irrigation. ANALYSES OF ALFALFA FROM COLLEGE CAMPUS. - A ril il M WHEN COLLECTED. P 3rd. Apglst. aivlth. , . Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 77.58 81.59 71.74 Ash..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10.94 10.59 8.04 Ether Extract (Fats). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6.30 7.25 6.60 Crude Fiber. .’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 16.64 22.98 30.25 Carbo-Hydrates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40.32 33.5 37.7 Albuminoids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 25.80 25.68 17.37 Total Nitrogen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. -.. . . . . . . .. 4.12 4.11 2.78 Albuminoid Nitrogen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . .. 3.99 2.96 1.94 Amide Nitrogen . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.13 1.15 0.84 There is considerable variation in the table, from the table giving analyses of alfalfa from irrigated distri3t——-the most marked being in thefats, and the albuminoid nitrogen. BURR CLOVER. (M edicago fllaculataLfl) The analysis of this clover was made at the suggestion of Prof. Cur- tis. It grows well on the campus, and seems to be spreading from year to year. On rich spots it makes an excellent growth-quite large enough for cutting. Cattle seem to be fond of it, but horses are not; although they perhaps could soon be taught to like it. It is grown GRASSES AND FORAGE PLANTS. 185 extensively in some parts of Mississippi, and where well known is a great favorite. Dr. Phares says 0f it: “It furnishes good grazing from February to April or May. Many think it the best thing possible for grazing and hay. It is the opinion of some that animals prefer it to other green plants. This does not accord with my experience. They g do not incline to eat it at first; but it is easy to teach them, and they acquire a great fondness for it.” The first sample analyzed was collected before the plant had come into bloom. The other samples as shown in the table. ANALYSES OF BURR CLOVER. WHEN COLLECTED. APrggd. Apléillst. Msugth. B f 1sJeeqS ‘M STAGE OF GROWTH. b13023‘? ilffig “£11m. ing. form. Water. ................ ..- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ...... .. 79.51 84.32 v3.31 Ash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .'. . . . . . . . . . . .. 12.76 12.55 ' 8.89 Ether Extract ." . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 7.73 10.50 ,7.44 Crude Fiber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.34 17.21 22.36 Carbo-Hydrates . . . . . ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 38.55 31.56 40.09 Albuminoids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.61 28.18‘ 21.12 The albuminoids are especially high. So is the ether extracte-while the crude fiber is comparatively low. , _ The Showing made by the an- alysis is a most excellent one. ASH ANALYSES. These were also made of the alfalfa grown under irrigation and that grown on the College campus. The soils are entirely different; and the object was, to See not only any variation that might appear in per centage composition of ash ingredients, at different stages of the growth of the plant, but also to see if soil and climate would exert any influence. ALFALFA A SH A NA LYSES . O SFAGES OF PLANT cRowTrr. 4 {if 2E45€£i£f Calcium Oxide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17.62 16.61 14.22 _, 20.19 Magnesium Oxide.. ..: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4.80 4.40 3.44 p 3.68 Sulphuric Acid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.65 5.45 6.52 6.41 Phosphoric Acid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6.00 4.35 6.34 5.19 Potassium Oxide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28.84 32.35 30.90 30.27 Sodium Oxide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.16 4.73 6.56 2.85 Chlorine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.52 5.07 6.90 8.57. Total Ash percentage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.94 10.59 12.91 12.30 The first two samples were from the campus, and the next two from irrigated land. There appears to be a great falling off of phosphoric acid as the plant approaches maturity, the Potassium remains about the same, the Sodi- um diminishes, the Sulphuric acid increases. The soil exerts little or no influence in this instance. 186 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. CONTRIBUTION TO THE COMPOSITION OF AMERICAN GRAINS. CORN.“ Texas grains have not heretofore been analyzed in a systematic way. Her corn has received some attention, but comparatively few samples of this have been examined. The results reported here are not as com- plete as desired, but it is impracticable to make them more so at present. The following table includes the analyses of- corn from vari- ous parts of the State. Air dried grain. ANALYSES OF TEXAS MAIZE. YARIETY AND LOCALITY Wwter‘ Ash 11337291‘ igilfu‘ gagibo‘ tract. noids. drates. Flat Grain White Corn, Fannin Co. 10.34 1.33 5.38 1.80 9.97 71.18 Red Cor-n-Concho Valley . . . . . . . . .. 10.27 1.16 5.82 1.96 10.44 70.35- "White Corne-Concho Valley . . . . . . . . .. 11.78 1.36. 5.00 1.92 10.18 69.76 White Corn--Ellis county . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9.69 1.40 3.94 2.02 11.18 71.77 White Corn—Hopkins county‘ . . . . . 9.79 1.34 5.26 2.62 10.12 70-87 White Corn, Early Flower-Hopkins Co. 10.54 1.30 4.62 2.15 10.12 71.27 White Corn, Free Milling-Kaufman Co. 10.14 1.24 ’ 3.82 2.42 8.82 73..56 Yellow Corn-Fannin county . . . . . . . . . . 10.48 1.44 5.68 1.85 10.31 70.24 Yellow Corn—Red River county . . . . . .. 9.73 1.30 4.09 1.94 10.42 72.52 Yellow Corn—Ellis county . . . . . . . . . . . . A 9.47 1.34 4.19 2.00 10.36 72.64 Strawberry Corn-Red River county. . . 10.63 1.44 5.55 2.23 10.12 70.03. Strawberry Corn-Concho Valley . . . . .. 12.22 1.57 4.90 2.08 7.60 71.63. Hickory Corn--Kaufman county . . . . . . . 11.82 1.30 4.74 1.94 9.50 70.70 Jefi" Welborn’s Conscience Corn . . . . . .. 10.85 1.13 5.66 1.73 9.19 71.44 Lanning’s Improved Early Corn . . . . . . . 9.85 1.54 4.44 2.01 12.00 70.16 Aboriginal Corn—El Paso county 10.29 1.51 6.50 1.76 10.93 69.01 These corns are all representatives of the best samples, selected from exhibit corn at the Dallas Fair, as well as the other grains that follow. In all cases, where any one ingredient ran much above average, the analysis was repeated. Dr. Jenkins-Conn. Report, 1887—gives the following as the aver-- age of seventy ztnalyses of American flint corn: \Vater, 11.07 per-cent; Ash, 1.44 per-cent.; Fats, 4.96 per-cent; Fiber, 1.65 per-cent; Albuminoids, 10.57 per-cent; Carbohydrates, 70.31 per-cent. A - By inspection of the table above it will be noticed that with the ex- ception of water none of the constituents vary very widely within themselves. The albuminoids in Free Milling corn run low, with correspondingly high Carbohydrates, or starchy matter. Aboriginal corn, with its small blue" grains deserves special notice. I do not know that the variety has ever been analyzed before. The one im- pressive peculiarity about it, is the large quantity of fat it contains, and the low Carbohydrates, as compared with the other varieties pre- sentcd in the table. “\Vhite corn” from Ellis county runs quite low in fats. But the analytical work presents evidence that no matter what- color the corn may have, or what variety it may happen to be, the composition of the whole grain, varies very little. The relative pro- portion of meal to bran may differ considerably; and this may turn the balance of favor t-o certain varieties of corn, regardless of color, TEXAS GRAINS. 187 j, for making into meal. It is a common belief with many farmers that'- = yellow corn is best for feeding and richest in nitrogenous material- But this seems not to be the case. Corns do vary widely in hardness . and yellow or yellowish red corn is usually harder than the white- Climate seems also to exert considerable influence in this respect. OATS. Storer in his book on “Agriculture,” Vol. II, page 397, gives the average yield of oats per acre in the Southern States as 10 to 12 bush- els ; and the general average for the country at 28 bushels per acre‘. The estimate for the Southern States may be correct for the whole‘ area. Because in the older Southern States, much land, nearly or entirely exhausted, is sown in oats for the reasonthat it will produce little else, unless it is cow peas. But in Texas the average yield of ‘ oats per acre for 1889 (See State Agricultural and Statistical Report for 1889.) was 31 bushels and 1890, 27% bushels. The crop is an- im- portant one in the State, and should receive even more attention than is now accorded it. The samples in table below were collected at Dal-- las Fair just as the corn samples were. They represent‘ the best- growth of their several localities. a » A ANALYSES OF OATS . t . . . , , ' - - l r - ,\ ARIETX AM) Locamri . ll a ten Ash. gather Civlilggr. iC%hlr)ol tract. noids.~ Grates. White Oats——Clay county . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9.10 4.21 6.00 13.74 11.06 55.89 White Oats-Ellis county. . . . . . . . . . .. 9.59 4.41 6.35 13.73 9.56 56.36 White Oats—Amarillo country . . . . . . .. 9.72 4.34 4.76 14.41 12.89. 53.88" . Red Oats-Amarillo country . . . . . . . . .. 9.21 4.36 5.96 13.03 11-50 55-94 Red Oats-Fannin county. . . . . . . . . .. 10.22 4.46 5.74 12.75 8.81 58.02 Oats-Red River county . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.91 3.58 5.79 11.64 9.69 59-39 Red Rust Proof Oats—Pe~:os county .. . . 8.89 4.90 5.89 13.42 7.81. 59.09" Red Rust Proof Oats-Fannin county . ., 10.19 3.80 5.49 11.58 11.25 57.69 Average analysis of 25 samples of E i American Oats. [Foot note] .... ..l 10.04 2.97 4.81 8.85 11.88 00.05 There is a much wider variation in the analyses-of the oat samples than in those of corn. They also vary more from the average anal) - ses of American oats as reported by Dr. Jenkins. It is interesting to note the difference in composition of oats and corn. The greater quan- tity of crude fiber in the oats, and the less Carbohydrates markthe principle distinction. 1 The collective samples were grown under widely different conditions as to soil, and in some cases as to climate. Ellis and Fannin counties represent the “black waxeyf’ the Amarillo sample, the Pan Handle, and the Pecos, the irrigated district of the West. The soil of the Pecos and Amarillo are probably nearly the same—sandy loam-—but none y of these different conditions of growth seem to affectper centage com- position. Nor is variation in composition confined to variety although the \Vhite oats from Clay and from Ellis counties are very close in composition. See composition of American feeding stuffs: Dr. E. H, Jenkins, Conn. Exper. Station, annual report, 1886. y 188 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. WHEAT. The wheat crop of Texas is about equal in importance to the crop; but the area in which it can be successfully grown, is mu, smaller. The average yield per acre in the black lands has fallen y‘ considerably from what it once was, although according to the far 1.51" ers’ judgment the land seems scarcely diminished in fertility. T, reason for this is unknown, and presents a subject of great practic importance that should be carefully investigated. The following ta ble shows the composition of representative samples of Texas wheat: ANALYSES OFV WHEAT. ___._¢n _ VARIETYAND LOCALIT,“ Watexz! Ash. Ether Crude Albu- z a , lCarbO" Extr’c Fiber. mi- Hy: .3218; . 1.1.9112 arm 'Me'd'iterranean Wheat-Ellis county. . . 10.66 1.99 2.15 2.36 13.33 69.51; Mediterranean Wheat-Amarillo c0u’try 7.96 2.17 2.01 2.92 15.37 67.5 Mediterranean Wheat-—Clay county. . . 7.97 1.69 1.90 2.81 12.31 73.3 Mediterranean Wheat-Hopkins Co. .. 11.43 1.60 2.05 3.02 12.25 69. ‘Mediterranean Wheat—Pec0s county.. 10.1.5 2.05 2.46 2.54 11.62 71.1 Red Wheat-Concho county . . . .. 8.87 p 1.94, 1.84 2.73 1.7.561 Iii Red Chafl‘ Wheat—-Hopkins county... 10.98 1.92 2.28 2.66 12.43 69.7 May Wheat—-H0pkins county. . .2 . . . . . . 12.01 1.83 2.36 2.41 12.31 69.0 Swamp Wheat-Fannin county . . . . . . . . 10.41 1.52 2.01 2.46 12.81 70.79 Blue-bearded Wheat . ._ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10.78 1.96 2.35 2.54 11.56 70.81; Chinella WheaF-El Paso county. . .. 10.19 1.97 1.95 2.24 12.12 71.53 ‘Sonora WVheat-Pecos county . . . . . . . . . . 10.40 l 1.96 2.45 2.60 9.93 72.66’; The above table presents five samples of Mediterranean whea grown under different climatic conditions, and on different types a soil. Those from Ellis and Hopkins counties represent the ‘black land area. But even there, there is considerable difference in the kind 0 soil. Those from Clay county and the Amarillo country come fro the best wheat district of the State perhaps. While that from Pecos»? was grown under irrigation—upon soil very similar to the upland loam o the Pan Handle. There is considerable difference in the per centage? of the constituent parts; but nothing very noticeable except the dry; ness, or small amount of water, in the samples from the Amarillo; r country and from Clay county——the per cent. of water being smaller? than in any of the other wheats from any part of the State. Of the re maining samples, there is nothing especially noticeable except the large quantity of albuminoids in Red wheat from Concho county. 310 samples reported by Dr. Jenkins in American Feeding Stuffs. none of them reach the above per centetge in albuminoids. The Chinella wheat is the same variety that has been cultivated in Mexico for cent-i turies. l RYE AND BARLEY. So far as the comparative total yield is concerned, these are unimfé portant crops in the State. In 1890, the total product of barley wa 124,089 bushels; and of rye, 83,008 bushels. But with the undoubte value of barley for winter pasture, it is likely to increase in favor Y the State grows more developed, and the system of farming becomes? diversified. Dr. Phares, “Book of Grasses” p. 72 says, “For winte TEXAS GRAINS. \ < ' 189 asturage, nothing has given me more satisfaction. When grazed fdown, it grows again very soon.” He thinks it decidedly more. whole- some than the other pasture grains. His objection_ to_rye being that the leaf lies so close on the ground, much sandand dirt is eaten by the mimal. The above opinion is for rye in Southern MlSSlSSlppl. But he climate is very similar to that of “Southern and Central Texas; if ndeed, a slight change of climate Would exert any important influ- nce. ' a a -‘ a ANALYSES OF RYE. I i 1 . ‘Crude Albu- Carbo- LOCALITX‘ iWater. Ash. Fats. Fiber. mi- Hy- . noids . drates. rom Pecos county . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. y 7.47 2.45 2.15 2.50 10.43 75.00 ,_ ro.m Amarillo country . . . - . . . . . . . . . .. . 11.21 2.25 2.18 2.64 14.00 67.72 Irom Menard county . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.20 1.79 1.77 2.98 13.87 09.49 ANALYSES OF BARLEY. In the analyses of the Rye, there is little that is especially noticeable ,aries widely from the analyses of the other samples. ASH ANALYSES. 7 It was thought Well to take up a study of the ash analyses also. nly a few varieties of each grain were selected. These were taken, as r as possible, from soils widely different in character. " 1 l i . VARIETy AND LOCALITY, _ slvlagne-iSulphui Phos- Sodi- Po_tas-’ Insolu- Linie. 1 sia. ric phoric um- sium ble ___f .;x§_i_q.* 301d. oxide. pgxide; matter, nora \Vheat——Pecos county. . . . .rley—El1is county . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.58 Trme 29.56 1..59 20.79 29.00. rley-Pecos county . . . . . . . . . .. 10.65 1.04 29.49 0.42 16.13 3 .55 oura Corn-Pecos County. . .. 2.32 16.77 , .07 J 40.71 4.45 26.88 4.16 WVe find that there is not only a great difik-i'<,~i.-;;o in mineral co1isti- ents of the same grain from dilfeirent lOva.iif’-"it:=.~~., but that for differ- ": grains the ash composition varies greafilwx. Taking the two most U Z1 portant ingredients, Phosphoric acid and lhtzish, we find the acid gmc: wcnfli- was»? ‘ut the same in wheat, rye and dhoura. a 1:: viwtsi, there is only about e third the amount present in wheat. ’l"j: ~ time ivide difference yails with potash. Insoluble matter in . a. and barley is quite jrge. LOCALITY. l . . . . . .2 . . Crude ‘Albu- Garbo. Water. Ash. Fats. Fiber. ini~ Hy- ’ - a ~ ~ - noids. drates rom Pecos county . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10.10 3.94 2.48 6.18 10.06 67.24 i ,_ rom Amarillo country . ." . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10,14 3.40 2 ()8 7,04 1219 ‘($515 rom Menard county. . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6.26 2.84 1.52 5.92 11.87 72.09 rom Clay county . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.53 2.64 2.43 4.98 10.62 68.8 rom Ellis county . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.87 5.56 2.27 7.28 12.37 61,65 jnd the same is true of barley, except of that from Ellis county, which 4.77 12.38! 0.302 42.3 1.55 27.18 6.46 editerranean Wheat--Clay Co. 3.56 14.21 i 0.12 i 44.26 i 2.25 25.47 2.62 bite Oats-—Clay county. . . . . .. 3.65 10.45 21.43 l 15.73 1.92 14.18 45.36 . hite Oats—E]lis county . . . . . . . 3.73 4.73 0.13 17.79 0.74 10.41 57.53 .-= Rust Proof Oats—-Fannin Co 3.59 2.93 Trace 20.48 0.64 12.64 54.28 e—-Menard county . . . . . . . . . . . . - 10.09 .08 423.74 0.61 30.23 8.16 ' 190 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. WATER ANALYSES. The following analyses 0f waters have been made: SOUTH. GALVESTON ARTESIAN WATER. i Grains to Gallon. ‘Total Solids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175. gSodium Chloride . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165. Calcium sulphate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.58 Magnesium Sulphate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.35 AWATER FROM YVHITNEY. Total Solids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1301.46 Alum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1101.666 a Magnesium Chloride . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73.54 Sulphate of Lime . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65. Magnesium Sulphate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33.10 zSand and Silica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26. - WATER FROM SALONA. ‘Total Solids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331.1 Carbonate of Lime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106.49 -.Sulphate of Magnesia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' 89.155 Alumina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iSoluble Silica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .937 Insoluble Silica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.137 Potassium Chloride . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41.725 Sodium Chloride . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84.275 WX-XTER FROM "ELASCO ARTESIAN WELL. (Duncan Adriance, Analyst.) Grains‘ to Gallon. Total Solids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210. Sodium Chloride . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197.5 Magnesium Chloride . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.495 Calcium Oxide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.546 _ WATER FROM TRINITY, TEXAS. TotalSolids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45.10 "Total Mineral Matter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35. Suspended Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.15 Total Mineral Matter in Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23.25 Sulphate of Lime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - 3.272 Carbonate of Lime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.867 Alkaline Chlorides . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13. Sand and Silica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.25 Nitrates-parts per million . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 ANALYSES OF CARBONATED BIINERAL \VATER, TEXARKANA. Total Solids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.75 Volatile and Organic Matter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A .65 Magnesium Chloride . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.55 Potassium Chloride . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.13 Sodium Chloride . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.32 Silica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42 Potassium Sulphate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21 Calcium Carbonate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41 Free Ammonia—parts per million . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .00004 Free Carbonic Acid Gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Cubic Centimeters to Gallon. . . . . . . . . . . "76.