430-810-20M TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS BULLETIN NO. 132 Report 0f the Co-operative Forage Crop Work By the United States Department 0f Agri- culture and the Texas State Experi- ment Station at Chillicothe, I Texas, 1909 BY A. B. CONNOR, Scientific Assistant U. S. Department of Agriculture POSTOFFICE COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS AUSTIN, TEXASZ VON BOECKMANN-JONES CO., PRINTERS. 1910 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS GOVERNING BOARD. (EoAnn OF DIRECTORS A. AND M. COLLEGE.) K. K. LEGETT, President . . . . . . . . . . . . .o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Abilene T. D. RoWELL. Ilice-President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . “Jelferson A. IIAIDUsEK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .La Grange J AMEs CEAvENs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Houston WALTON PETEET . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Eort IVQrth E. R. KoNE, Commissioner of Agriculture, eX-officio . . . . . . . . . . . .Austin A. R. IIOCOLLUAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Waco W. P. SEBASTIAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .‘ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Breckenridge PRESIDENT OE THE COLLEGE. R. T. MILNER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..College Station STATION OFFICERS. H. H. HARRINGTON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Director J. \V. CARSON . . . . . . . . . .Assistant to Director and State Feed Inspector M. FRANCIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Veterinarian G. S. FRAPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Chemist J. C. BURNS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Animal Husbandry H. NEss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Horticulturist RAYMOND H. POND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Plant Pathologist WrLixroN NEWELL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Entomologist H. L. MCKNIGHT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Assistant Agriculturist N. C. HAMNER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Assistant Chemist J. B. RATHER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Assistant Chemist E. C. CARLYLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Assistant Chemist C. W. CRIsLER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Chief Clerk A. S. WARE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Stenographer NOTE.—The Main Station is located on the ground of the Agricul- tural and Mechanical College, in Brazos County. The postoffice address is College Station, Texas. Reports and bulletins are sent upon appli- cation to the Director. Samples should not be sent for analysis without precious correspondence. GOVERNING BOARD. His Excellency, Govnnxon T. H. OAMPBELI . . . . . . . . . . “Austin, Texas Lieutenant Governor, A. B. DAVIDSON... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . “Cuero, Texas Commissioner of Agriculture, HON. ED. B. KONE. . . . .Austin, Texas DIRECTOR OF STATIONS. H. H. HARRINGTON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . “Oollege Station, Texas ‘SUPERINTENDENTS OF STATIONS. A. T. Porrs, Becville Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Beeville, Bee county J. L. WELorI, Troupe Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Troupe, Smith county W. S. IJOTCHKISS, Lubbock Station . . . . . . . ..Lubbock, Lubbock county J. T. CRUsE, Fort Worth Station . . . . . . . . . .Fort Worth, 'I‘arrant county J. H. ToM, Pecos Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pecos, Reeves county H. C. HOLMES, Denton Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Denton, Denton county , ’.I‘en1ple Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Temple, Bell county I. S. YORK, Spur Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Spur, Dickens county ——— , Anglcton Station . . . . . . . . . . . ..Angleton, Brazoria county J. K. FITZGERALD, Beaumont Station . . . . . .Beaumont, Jefferson county AVAILABLE BULLETIN S. The following is a list of Bulletins of this Experiment Station avail- able for distribution. letins will be sent free of charge. The others are out of print. Any of these Bu]- Requests should be directed to the Director of the Experiment Station, College Station, Texas. 79. 90. 9v. 9s. 100. 105. 10v. 10s. 109. 110. 111. 112. 11s. 114. 115. 119. 190. 121. 12s. 19,4. 195. 126. 127. 12S. Cotton Breeding. Commercial Fertilizers and Poisonous Insecticides, 1906-07. Kaffir Corn and Milo Maize for Fattening Cattle. Summary of all Bulletins from No. 1 to 94, inclusive. Chemical Composition of Some Texas Soils. Notes on Forest and Ornamental Trees. Commercial Fertilizers and Poisonous Insecticides, 1907-08., Winter Bur Clover. Alfalfa. Steer Feeding Experiments. Texas Fever. Nature and Use of Commercial Fertilizers. Spray Calendar. Composition of White Lead and Paints. Fertilizer Test with Onions. Infectious Anaemia of the Horse. Corn and Cotton Experiments for 1908. Report of Progress at the Troupe Substation. Commercial Fertilizers and Poisonous Insecticides, 1908-09. The Pecan Case-Bearer. Chemical Composition of Some Soils of Angelina, Brazoria, Cameron, Cherokee, Delta, Lamar, Hidalgo, Lavaca, Mont- gomery, Nacogdoches, Robertson, Rusk, Webb and Iiililson counties. Active Phosphoric Acid and Its Relation to the Needs of the Soil for Phosphoric Acid in Pot Experiments. Commercial Feeding Stuffs. Cottonseed Meal as Human Food. First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, Ninth, Tenth, Eleventh, Txveltth, Thirteenth Annual Reports. H. H. HARRINGTON, Director. CONTENTS. Int1'oduction— Scope of Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Seasonal Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 7 Soil Preparation and Seeding‘ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 7 Cultivating and Harvesting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8 Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Sorghums— Promising New Introductions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8 Recent Sorghum' Introductions»; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 New Introductions Received Late . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..10 Pennisetums . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 Breeding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 Sorgo Seeding Rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..13 Kaffir and Milo Varieties at Seeding Rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..16 Kaffir and Milo Date Seedings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..19 Sorghum Legume Mixtures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..20 Legumes- Cowpeas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..23 Kulthi and Moth Bean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..25 Peanuts _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27 Alfalfa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . f . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..28 Hairy Vetch with Oats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29 Miscellaneous Legumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..29 Millets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29 Grasses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..32 Ieguna Corn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..33 Small Grains . . . . . .' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33 Laganaria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .- . . . . . . . . . . . .33 [Blank Page in Original Bulletin] REPORT OF THE CO=OPERATIVE FORAGE CROP WORK BY THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICUL= TURE AND,THE TEXAS EXPERIMENT STATION AT CHILLICOTHE, TEXAS, 1909. The co—operative forage crop work at Chillicothe, Texas, has this sea- son embraced test plots of newly introduced sorghums and pennisetums, sorghum-breeding plots, seeding rates Work with the sorgos, kaffirs and milo, and date-seeding plots of, kaffirs and milo. This work has also included the growing of sorghum legume mixtures, varieties of eowpeas, Kulthi and Moth bean, peanuts, alfalfa, hairy vetch xvith oats, and other miscellaneous legumes. Plots of millet, ' grasses, leguna corn, small grains and laganaria have also been grown. SEASONAL CONDITIONS. This season has been an exceptionally dry one, in that the total pre— eipitation was only twenty and one-half inches as compared to the nor- mal twenty-six, and a good portion of this rainfall has either come within a short period of time or in alternating months. The total pre- cipitation for the year up to June 1.0 was only 4.08, showing an entire lack of proper distribution in the first half of the year. From June 10 until June 30, 8.06 inches precipitation was recorded. This short period of heavy rainfall was followed by only 3.66 inches during the succeeding four months, and in considering the latter fall it must be remembered that several showers were recorded which were of no benefit to growing crops. The table below shows the monthly distribution of rainfall for the season of 1906 to 1909, inclusive. a Month. 1906 1907 1908 1909 l . January .................................................................. .................................................... .. February. ................................................. . .1 ............................................... .. . 22 March .................................................. .. .90 3 .42 .28 1 .89 April ................................................... .. 3.92 .98 3.51 1.41 May ..................................................... .. 1.78 7.81 6.40 .56 June ...................................................... .. 4.20 2.58 8 41 8.06 July ...................................................... .. 8.71 1.46 5 68 .49 August ................................................. .. 2 .67 1.52 ................ .. 1.07 September .......................................... .. 5 .02 1 .71 2 .22 .26 October ................................................ .. 4 .58 6 .60 1 .84 1 .84 November .............................................................. .. .80 4 .13 4 .57 December .................................................................................................................. .. 31 78 26 88 32 47 2O 37 By observing the monthly rainfall for 1909, as compared to that of 1906-08, it will be seen that there was no spring season, the first good 8 Texas AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS. rain coming in June. In each of the thre epreceding seasons good rains came as early as March or April. Furthermore, after the June rains, there was no precipitation sufficiently great to be of use to crops until November, which was long after the crop season was past. As will be seen, April, May, June and July are usually the seasonal months, but this year. April, May and July were exceptionally dry. Because of this such crops as alfalfa, corn, sorghum, wheat and oats were greatly affected. SOIL PREPARATION AND SPIEDING. The Station field was plowed about four inches deep in December of last season and left through the winter without being harrowed because of the danger of blowing. This land was harrowed and thoroughly pre- pared for seeding in the first part of March. Perhaps because of the dryness of the season, very few weeds appeared and it was not difficult to keep the field in good condition until seeding time. Seeding was done by opening a shallow furrow with a 16-inch sweep in front of the planter. In this furrow the planter followed and, by using a planter with a pack-wheel attached, no difliculty was experi- enced in getting a stand. CULTIVATING AND HARVESTING. All crops were cultivated well and as nearly fiat as possible. The cultivation was suflicicntly frequent to give a good surface mulch. A six-shoveled cultivator was used to great advantage throughout. the sea- son. After the crops were pretty well advanced the cultivation was shallow. All plots were harvested as nearly as possible when the seeds were in the early dough stage. Except on a few plots, all harvesting was done by hand, using a corn hook. Plots were immediately shocked and left to cure as many days in each case as was thought necessary to make the data comparable. Seed yields were taken whenever seeds were pro- duced. SORGHUMS. PROMISIN G NE W INTRODUCTIONS. From the sorghum test piots grown in 1907, seven lots were picked as being promising sorts. These seven numbers were planted in one- tenth acre plots April 15. The germination was good and the growth made was very satisfactory. In these plots a considerable quantity of volunteer sorgo came up, making them somewhat less uniform than they should have been. The lots grown were Nos. 1974A, 19749, 19751, 1977-5, 19695, 19517 and 21936. Of these only one, 19749, was con- sidered worthless. The remaining six promise to be of some commer- cial value. No. 19744 is an excellent strain of Pink kaffir, apparently equal or superior to our Pink kaflir No. 1974.2. No. 19751 is a tall, slender sweet-stemmed Red kaffir, which may become a valuable dual purpose sorgo. Nos. 19596 and 19517 are excellent strains of white- hulled White kaffir and Feterita sorghum respectively. Figure 1 shows Rnrorrr or THE CO-OPERATIVE Fomcn CRoP WORK. .9 a hill of Feterita sorghum. Figures 1 and Nos. 21936 and 19775 are both promising sorgos, the former a leafy dwarf type (shown in fig- ure 2), apparently very resistant to drought, While the latter is a tall, slender, sweet-stemmed type, entirely distinct from the other sorgos. Fig. 1. Showing a hill of Feterita sorghum. This newly introduced sorghum promises to be of some considerable value for grain and perhaps for forage purposes. RICCENT SORGI-IUBT INTERODUUJYIONS. Sixty lots of recently introduced sorghums Were planted April 3O in rod row test plots. Only four of these, Nos. 22913, 241897, ‘Z4899 and 2132M), failed to germinate. The growth of the remaining ones, al- though very slow until. June 1O,'w:-1s good from that time Lmtil about July 8. At this time all plots ceased to make satisfactory growth, and. thirty-nine lots, therefore, failed to head. Of these, four deserve spe- 10 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS. cial mention, on accoun.t of their unusual leafiness. These were Nos- 22820, 22327, 22326 and 24128. The two former grew to a height of about three and one-half feet and carried from eighteen t0 twenty-three leaves (figure 3 shows a typical plant of No. 22820), while the stems were very tender and juicy. (Figure 3.) The two latter carried about seventeen leaves and were also quite promising. These leafy strains may be of some value for hybridization as well as of some probable value for soiling and ensilage purposes in the Southern States. Of the seventeen that produced heads, all were more or less pithy and dry and lacking in sweetness. Five of these, Nos. 23355, 23356, 23357. - 232358 and 22332 were white-hulled White kaffirs. Nos. 24123 and 24125 were pithy-stemmed black-hulled kaffirs, neither of which showed unusual laromise. Nos. 23361 and 24126 were fairly good Red kaflir types, but other than being resistant to drought showed no especial value over the native Red variety. Nos. 20813 and 22942 were sorgo types; the former L Fig. 2. Showing a veryjdwarf type of sorgo, perhaps of considerable value for broadcast seedings. very similar to our honey sorgo and possibly of some value; the latter a very ordinary amber type of no value over the common ambers. No. 22328 appeared to be a very poor type of Féterita, while Nos. 23331 and 26305 wvere tall djougara types of no value. No. 22010 is a dwarf red kowliang of considerable value, while No. 22664 is a tall. white kowliang of no promise. Specimen heads were saved in all cases. A This test was by no means satisfactory, and it seems desirable to duplicate it another season, so as to get further and more accurate data as to the value of these sorghums. NEW INTRODUCTIONS RECEIVED LATE. During the first part of May, fifteen lots of sorghums, Nos. 25328- ‘25342, inclusive, were received and, later, planted May 21 in rod row >- REPORT or THE CO-OPERATIVE FORAGE CRoP Worm. 11 test plots. The seeds were all apparently in good condition, and germin- ation was perfect. The growth was very good until August 4, at which time most of the plants Were about two and a half feet high and show- ing from two to four bottom leaves fired. The drought continued and the firing was greater and greater, until the plants were entirely dead. Fig. 3, No. 22820. This plant is about 3% feet high and carries 23 leaves. It promises to be valuable for use in hybridizing with other sorghum types and for soiling and ensilage purposes. If some resisted drought more than others, it was scarcely noticeable. These lots should all be tested the coming season. PENNISETUMS. Eight pennisetums received from Africa and “India were planted May 21 in rod row test plots. These germinated perfectly and made good 12 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS. growth ‘until about July 730, when they had reached a height of about two feet and begun to be affected by drought. This droughty condi- tion continued through August and the firing Was greater until the plants were entirely dead without having produced seed heads. These millets were farther advanced than the late sorghums and perhaps for that reason some Were affected greater than others by drought. Nos. 25344, 24336 and 24445 were the first to be affected and by August 26 these three WQTG entirely dead. Nos. 22643 and 24444 withstood. the conditions somewhat better than the three just mentioned, being at this time (August 26) fired about two-thirds. In the course of a short time, however, these also succumbed to drought. Nos. 25343 and 534446 were much more resistant than any of the above. The latter number, which is "a cross between the Common Country and the Pure African Bazra appears much more resistant than either. No. 24447, known in India as Bearded Bazra, was far more resistant to drought than any other of the eight tested. No material difference was noticeable in the foliage of this and other varieties. ‘ These pennisetums were by no means as drought-resistant as the sorghums planted at the same date, since they not only first begun fir- ing but were dead because of drought some days before the sorghums. BREEDING. The sorghum-breeding work this season has embraced tl1e improve- ment of several varieties by selection, and the cross-pollination of certain other types. , Selections have been carried by the head to row method, using varie- ties as follows: Milo, Feterita, Black-liiulled Kaffir, Red Kafiir, Minna-- sota Amber, Red Amber, Or-(inge, Planter, Sumac, Little Dutch, and an open-headed Orange type. (Figures 4, 5 and 6.) iFrom eight to ten rows of each variety was grown. Selections have been made with a view to increasing the leafiness, juiciness and sweetness of stem, and for in- creasing as well the seed yield where it was desirable to increase the feeding value of the variety in this manner. In making selections for leafiness, desirable rows and individuals have been determined by actual count. The sweetness and juiciness of stem has been determined ‘as accurately as possible, and seed yields were observed where such was desirable. The seed heads of selected individual plants were bagged to prevent cross-pollination with other less desirable forms. Milo rows grown from different individual plants have been found this season to vary from 11.8 to 13.8 in leafiness. This variation is not as great as that credited heretofore; in fact, the average leafiness is considered lower that shown last season, though greater than unselected strains. Un- doubtedly, seasonal conditions affect leafiness. Count has also shown that the rate of seeding, also the date of seeding, affect leafiness. These variations. tend to complicate selections. On the whole, the selections this season have shown no advancement; nevertheless, future selections were rigidly made with the expectation of showing some progress in a reasonably favorable season. A number of attempts were made to obtain cross-pollinated seeds REPORT or THE Co-oPERATrvr; FORAGE Oaor Worm. 13 from the Feterita and the‘ Black-hulled kaflir, but, for some reason, these attempts Were Without results. Numerous other trials were made with- out results. These attempts were attended with great care, bagging the flower early and removing the stamens before the pollen was scattered. Other pollen ‘was distributed two and three times in each casebut did not take. Seeds have been obtained hertoiore, but inmost cases have shown to be self-fertilized. Hereafter the flowers will be washed with the expectation of better results. . The cross-fertilized seed of kaflir and milo, which was this season in its second year, produced no seed other than a. few poorly-filled kaffir heads. This planting will be made again this next season. . Fig. 4 An Orange selection showing the development of a loose, open type of seed head which may be valuable in sections where birds destroy the_se_ed. SORGO SEEDING RATES. Five sorgo varieties, namely, Minnesota, Amber, Red Amber, Sumac, Orange and Planter were seeded, each at three different rates, both in close drills and in rows. "llhe close-drill. seedings were made June 6, while the row seedings were made April 26. This work is in continua- tion of a test begun in 1908. The seeding rates used were one-half, one and two bushels per acre in close drills and about five, ten and tvsrenty pounds per acre in rows. Al]. plantings were made without walks between plots, so that field conditions were obtained. Soon after the close-drilled seedings were made, a heavy fall of rain packed the ground very hard, but, in spite of "this, germination. was perfect. This moisture was about all that was had by this crop and 14 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS. ' was sufficient to put the growth about eighteen inches high. The plots were so afiectcd by drought that they WOTQ harvested at this time. No difierence was noticeable in the different varieties used, neither was there Fig. 5. Showing head to row plot of Red Amber sorgo, No. 17548. Fig. 6. Side view of the Red Amber head to row plot showing the evenness of the crop. any diflierence apparently in the amount of firing shown on the thick and thin plots. This hay was not weighed separately, as it was not considered sufficient to give accurate results. The test carried last sea- son showedSumac thebest yielding variety, and that one bushel per REPORT or THE CO-OPERATIVE FORAGE CRoP Wonx. 15 acre in all cases was the best rate for seeding in close drills at Chilli- cothe. The row seedings all germinated well and grew to a height of six t0 seven feet, producing quite well, considering the dryness of the season. The stands averaged stalks about one inch apart in the row of each of the two thickest seedings, While the thinnest planting showed stalks about every two inches. All plots were harvested when the seed were in the late dough stage, and each was allowed to cure the same number of days before weighing. The table below shows the yields given by this test, as Well as the yields from a similar series of plots planted in 1908. ROW SORGOS. 1908 Rate. Minn. Red Sumac Orange Planter Amber. Amber. Rows 1g"; Plants 3;”; about 40 5 6 0 8 600 8 050 poun s. ................................... .. 8,100 7,8 0 ,40 , , Rows 3g"; Plants %”; about 20 poun s ................................... .. 9,600 8,400 9,250 9,700 8,500 Rows 36"; Plants 1"; about 1O pounds........................ 8,650 8,800 9,600 10,200 6,950 Total ................................ ., 26,350 24,550 25,250 28,500 23,500 1909 glows 1g"; Plants 1"; about 20 "poun s .................................... .. 6,7'0 6,100 6,050 7,500 5,650 Rows 36"; Plants 1"; about 10 O Fpounds .................................... .. 8,700 7,500 6,800 9,150 6,000 Rows 36"; Plants 2"; about 5 pounds .................................... .. 7,900 7,150 6,550 9,200 6,100 Total ................................ .. 23,350 l 20,570 I 19,400 t 25,850 I 17,750 The above table, for the-past season, shows the Orange to be the heav- iest yielding variety, with Minnesota Amber, Red Amber, Sumac and Planter ranking as given. The fact that the early-maturing varieties produced heavier yields than the late-maturing ones, is accounted for by ‘the fact that they escaped drought to a greater extent than Sumac and Planter. This is considered an exceptional condition, although it will be noticed, from the figures of 1908, that the results obtained were almost identical. However, in that season, the August drought pro- duced the same unusual condition. As to seeding rates, the planting in thirty-six-inch rows with stalks one inchin the drill, gave the best yields consistently in 1909. In 1908, rows thirty-six inches apart, with stalks every half inch in the drill, gave the best yields from all varieties. It can, therefore, be pretty safely concluded that plantings in thirty-six-inch rows should have 16 TEXAs AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS. stalks rtinging somewhere between cite-half and one inch in the drill for the best yields. Such a planting would also give a crop with stems sufficiently small to make it an excellent quality of feed. From the results of the two seasons, it seems evident that row seed- ings will most likely give, in this section, the best average forage yields.. Also that, in case of: extreme drought, the early varieties may. perhaps be the heaviest yielders. About twelve to fifteen pounds of seed per acre- in rows and one bushel per acre in close drills can be recommended with reasonable certainty of good results. KAFFIR AND AIILO VARIETIES AT SEEDING RATES. The purpose of this test, which is in continuation of work begun in 1907, is to secure relative data on the forage and seed yields of varie- ties at different seeding rates, as xvell as to afford an opportunity to study the effect of the seeding rate on the erectness of the seed head and leafiness of the milo. Accordingly, Blackhull, Red and Pink kaffir and Dwarf milo were seeded April 13 in one-tenth acre plots, each at eight different seeding rates in drills. These rates were two inches in eighteen-inch rows, and two, four, six, eight, ten, twelve and sixteen inches in thirty-six inch drills. N0 walks were made between plots, so that practically field conditions Xvere obtained and. plantings were made thicker than l1GCOS6211'_V, so as to be thinned to the desired rates. The cultivation vas thorough and in all eases identical. Harvesting was done VJlIQH the seed were in the late dough and each plot allowed to- cure the same number of days. The table below shows the results ob- taiued this season along vrith those of the two preceding seasons. FORAGE AND SEED YIELDS OF KAFIR AND MILO AT SEEDING RATES. 1907 Size l Forage Per Acre. Seed Per Acre. Rate. of ~ Plot. ‘*"~ "l B.H.K. R. K. P. K. Milo. B.H.K R. K P. K. Milo Rows 21"; Plants 1".. 1-10 A. l 9,100l 8,000 .......... .. 6,200 Rows 42"; Plants 1”.. 1-10 A. l 7,920‘ 7,20 .......... .. ,850 Rows 42"; Plants 3'4. 1-10 A. l 6,737 6,63 .......... .. ,25 Rows 42"; Plants 6".. 1-10 A. 7,750 7,25 .......... .. ,07 Rows 42"; Plants 10”.. 1-10 A. 6,400 6,80 .......... .. 6,000 Rows 42"; Plants 12”.. 1-10 A. 6,350 6,65 .......... .. 4,460 Rows 42"; Plants 14".. 1-10 A. 6,200 6,15 .......... .. 5,100 Rows 42"; Plants 16".. 1-10 A. 6,250 5,950 .......... .. 5,550 Total .................................... .. 56,707i54,337 .......... .. 46,493 8,520 1908 Size Forage Per Acre. Seed Per Acre. Rate. of Plot l _ B.H.K. R. K. P. K. Milo. B.H.K. R. K. P. K. l M110. Rows 1s”; Plants 2'4. 1-10 A. 5,000 5,700 5,600 4,500 ................................................ .. Rows 36"; Plants 2".. 1-10 A. 6,520 6,050 6,200 4,700 1,160 1,510 1,180 900 Rows 36"; Plants 4".. 1-10 A. 5,750 5,980 5,850 4,750 1,520 1,820 2,090 780 Rows 36"; Plants 6'4. 1-10 A. 6,560 7,630 5,550, 4,500 1,710 2,220 1,970 1,440 Rows 36"; Plants s".. 1-10 A. 5,910 5,971 ,s5o 4,900 ,750 ,9o1 2,6801 1,310 Rows 36"; Plants 10".. 1-10 A. 5,740 5,140 5,150 4,600 1,750‘ 1,620 2,260 940 Rows 36"; Plants 12”.. 1-10 A. 5,970 5,600 5,750 6,200 1,550 1,620 1,840 1,560 Rows 36"; Plants 16”.. 1-10 A. 6,250 4,510 3,750 4,750 1,660, 1,630 1,470 1,000- Total .................................... .. 47,700 46,581 44,700 38,900 11,100‘12,321 13,49079, 30 1 REPORT on THE UO-OPERATIVE BORAGE urwr vv can. .L| 1909 Size Forage Per Acre. Seed Per Acre. Rate. of __ Plot. _ B.H.K. R. K. P. K. Milo. B.H.K. R. K. P. K. M110. Rows 18"; Plants 2”.. 1-10 A. 5,550 4,500! 6,000 4,450 .................................... .. 980 Rows 36"; Plants 2”.. 1-10 A. 4,650 4,050 4,000 3,800 .................................... .. 660 Rows 36'“ Plants 4”.. 1-10 A. 4,000 4,200 6,350 3,460 * * * 580 Rows 36 ; Plants 6".. 1-10 A. 3,700 3,500 4,000 3,000 * * * 620 Rows 36"; Plants 8”.. 1-10 A. 4,000 2,850 4,100 2,850 * * * 590 Rows 36'“ Plants 10”.. 1-10 A. 4,200 3,750 4,000 2,350 * * * 630 Rows 36 ; Plants 12”.. 1—10 A. 4,000 4,050 4,100 2,500 * * * 610 Rows 36"; Plants 16”.. 1-10 A. 3,450 3,450 3,700 1,700 * * * 390 Total .................................... .. 34,550 30,350 36,250 24,100 .................................... .. 5,060 *Scattering heads. ' Fig. 7. . Rate seeding of blackhulled kaffir, showing the 2-inch rate in 18 and 36-inch rows. The 18 -inch rows gave the heaviest forage yield. The above figures indicate that Blackhull kaflir is the heaviest for- age-yielding variety, with Red kaflii“ or perhaps Pink kaffir as second, While milo is the lowest in forage field. . The percentage of grain, how- ever, included in the total forage affects to some degree its feeding value. The six-inch plots of Blackhull kaffir and milo in 1907 show a difference of 7 per cent grain in favor of milo. In 1908 this difference was 6 per cent, whereas in 1909 the difference in the percentage of grain was 15 per cent in favor of milo. Such a difference is not consid- ered sufficiently great to make the feeding value of the total. milo forage had from a given area equal to that of the forage received from the same area of kaffir from these plots. However, this difference in percentage of seed indicates that in certain dry regions milo is preferable as a forage crop to the kaffirs. This region is undoubtedly in the high alti- tudes and drier sections. In total seed yield these varieties rank as fol- lows: Blackhull kaffir, Pink kaffir, Red kaffir and milo. 44v: LU-L\J v.14; \J-Ll/~-l-J.J 444x; 1_'JL\,.L.L\.LJJJ.\ .1. kJJULZLLLUJN D. The heaviest forage yield was had from the thickest rate in 1907, from the second thickest rate in 1908, and the thickest rate in 1909, The percentage of grain in each of these cases, except that in 1908, was Fig. 8. Blackhulled kaffir at 4 and 6-inch seeding rates in 36-inch rows. Fig. 9. Blackhulled kafiir seeding rate, showing ‘=2-inch seeding in rows 36 inches apart. The yield from this seeding rate was not as large as that from thicker plantings. very small and would lessen their feeding value considerably. In 1907 the six-inch rate WilS the thickest that gave a high percentage of grain. During the present year the four-inch rate gave about as much seed as itnrontr on THE UO-OPERATIVE FORAGE URoP WORK. 19 any' thicker planting. It seems safe to assume that the greatest feed- ing value will be had from seedings as thick as two or four inches in rows three feet apart. (Figures 7, 8 and 9.) None of the kaffir rates~ this season produced more than an estimated amount of 5 per cent seed. While the thickest milo rate produced 20 per cent of total forage or nineteen and a half bushels per acre weighed. In previous years the kaflirs gave the highest seed yield at the six-inch rate, While milo in 1907 gave approximately the same seed yield at the two-inch rate. This yield was also nearly as good as the six-inch and greater than the four, eight 0r ten-inch seeding. One the Whole, it seems that milo or kaffir in rows three feet apart, and with stalks every four inches Will give more satisfactory seed yields than thinner seedings. . Observation shows that plantings of milo four inches in the drill or thicker will give a high percentage of erect heads. The two-inch seed- ing will ordinarily give at Ohillicothe 100~ per cent erect heads, bar- ring the ends the plots where moisture is more abundant. Plots thin- ner than four inches give a greater proportion of goose-necked plants. At ten or twelve inches, nearly all plants produce goose-necked heads. It was also observed during the past season that thick seedings have a tendency to reduce the leafiness of individual milo plants. The aver- age leafiness of individual plants in milo seedings were as follows: Four-inch rate, 9.2; six-inch rate, 8.6; eight-inch rate, 9.4; ten-inch rate, 9; twelve-inch rate, 10, and sixteen-inch rate, 10 leaves per plant. This phase will be considered in the future. KAFFIR AND MILO DATE SEEDINGS. Blackhull kaflir, Red kafifir, Pink kaffir and milo were seeded through the season at intervals of fifteen days, beginning April 15 and ending July 15. These seedings were all made in the same manner and at the same rate, and cultivation for all plots was as nearly the same as possi- ble. Where the plantings were made late the land was clean fallowed. The table below shows the forage and seed yields, not only for the sea- son of 1909 but for the two preceding seasons, during which this same test was conducted. FORAGE AND SEED YIELDS FROM KAFFIRS AND MILO SEEDED AT DIFFERENT DATES. 11907 Size Forage Per Acre. Seed Per Acre. - Date of, Seeding. of Plot B H.K. R. K. Milo. B.H.K. R. K. Milo. April 15 ........................ .. 1-10 A. 7, 600 6, 700 5, 450 2, 070 1 , 890 1 , 620 May 1 ........................... .. 1-10 A. 7,200 6,800 6,200 1,920 1,790 2,000 May 18 .......................... .. 1-10 A 4, 450 4, 050 5, 650 720 830 680 June 4 ............................ .. 1-1.0 A. 6,900 5,900 7,000 660 600 860 June 15 .......................... .. 1-10 A. 8,650 6,550 5,850 440 830 1,100 July 1 .... ... ..................... .. 1-10 A. 5,400 4, 150 5, 100 290 590 350 July 15 .......................... .. 1-10 A .......................................................................... .. IIEXAS AGRlCULTUHI-XL Llflfitilivljfibll 01.21.111.134»:- 1908 Size Forage Per Acre. Seed Per Acre. Date'of of Planting Plot. ' B.H.K. R. K. P. K. Milo. B.H.K. R. K. P. K. Milo. Apr. 27.. 1-10 A 7,050 5,800 5,650 4,700 1,740 1,700 1,350 1,200 May 1.... ‘1-10 A. 7,800 6,300 6,350 6,200 1,240 1,810 1,610 1,560 May 15.. 1-10 A. 7,200 6,700 9,400 6,500 1,860 870 1, 140 1,450 June 1.... 1-10A 11,400 9,500 7,350 6,650 1,010 1,040 870 1,690 June 15.. 1-10 A. 8,600 7,400 6,500 6,750 ................................................ .. July 1.... 1-10 A. 5,800 5,300 5,500 5,050 ................................................ .. July 15.. 1-10'A. 6,200 6,600 5,600 3,900 ................................................ .. 1909 Size Forage Per Acre. Seed Per Acre. Date 0f 0f A ___ Seeding Plot. B.H.K. R. K. P. K. Milo. B.H.K. R. K. P. K. l Milo. Apr. 15.. 1-10 A 6,400 6,500 5,200 3,300 .................................... 830 May 1.... 1-10 A 4, 150 5,000 5,150 3,860 .................................... ..| 710 May 15.. 1-10 A 4,600 4, 150 6,400 5,100 .................................... .. 360 June 1.... 1-10 A 2,350 2,150 2,550 ................................................ .......... .. June 15.. 1-10 A 2,850 2,250 2,900 .......................................................... .. July 1.... 1-10 A .................................................................................................. .. July 15.. 1-10 A .................................................................................................. .. l The above figures for the past season (1909) show the heaviest for- age yields from the earliest plantings, while the two last seedings gave no forage. No seed. yields were had from the kalfirs this season, while the first three plantings of milo gave fair seed crops. The later plant- ings gavre none. Undoubtedly, in this case, early seeding was desirable without regard. to variety. Since the milo gave considerable seed, its feeding value would this season have approached very close to that of the kaflirs, although the yield was considerably less. In 1908, the heav- iest forage yields were had from the June seeding, which grew, on ac- count of the season, unusually tall. This planting produced about half a crop of seed. The early plantings which gave fair forage yields also gave good yields of seed which added to their feeding value, making the A early seedings most profitable. The results in 1907 were much the same. (Figures 10, 11 and 12.) On the whole, it seems conclusive that, without regard to the variety, the early seedings (April 15 to May 1) give the most and the best forage and seed. The results also indicate that seeding as late as June 1.5 or later are undesirable. These results are much the same for all varieties. . - SORGHUM IJCGUME MIXTURES. This test was conducted to secure data as to the best proportions and varieties of sorghurns and legumes to use in preparing and planting mixtures for hay. Accordingly, thirteen mixtures were prepared and REPORT or THE Co-oPERATrvE FORAGE CRoP WORK. 21 planted June 5, hotli in roxvs and. in close drills, using in each case plots one-tent acre in size. The mixed. seed were planted with a wheat drill h sot for seeding four peeks of ‘wheat per acre. It was found that the Fig 10. Blackhulled kaffir seeded April 15 and May 1, showing little or no difference in the two date seedings. The earliest seeding in this figure shows the best yield while neither appears to be ‘ig. 111. Blackhulled kafiir, seeded May l‘, and June 1. The center of the picture divides the two p ots. as good as the April planting shown in the previous figure. mixed seed did not feed out evenly and, for that reason, the plots were somewhat uneven. Otherwise the germination was good and the growth at first very satisfactory. The row seedings grew about five feet high 22 y TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS. urhenever amber was used in the mixture, but where a late maturing sorghum, such as Sumac, Orange or kaffir was used, the growth was only about three feet. The seedings in close drills grew only about eighteen inches high and were harvested before entirely dead. Amber-Whippoorwill mixtures Were prepared, mixed and planted, using parts by measure of sorghum and cowpeas as follows: 1-2, 1-5, 1-7, and 1-10. In both the row and the close drilled seedings the 1-7 mixture gave the most satisfactory stand and crop. There seemed in both cases to be somewhat more legume plants than sorghum. It is judged that one part of sorghum to six or seven parts of cowpeas will a give about the right proportionate mixture. Amber sorgo was used in mixtures with Brabham, Iron, Blackeye, Dolichos bifiorus and the Moth bean. These mixtures were propor- Fig. _12. Blackhulled kaffir seeded June 15, and July 1. The July seeding is only about 18 inche high and not at all equal to the seeding of June 15 At this time these plots had made their maximum growth. tioned as nearly alike as possible, using the relative sizes of the seeds as a basis. Results in both cases indicate that Brabham, Iron and Doli- chos biflorus are the best legumes for mixtures. While Brabham and Iron cowpeas made better growth than Dolichos bifiorus, neither was considered as drought-resistant as the latter in mixture. Amber, Sumac, Orange and kaffir sorghums were grown in mixtures with Whippoorwill cowpeas, both in rows and in close drills for the best sorghum variety to use in making mixtures. In the row mixtures this season Amber gave decidedly the best giforvth and results. The late varieties, Sumac, Orange and. kafiir did not "make as good growth but seemed to divide moisture with the legume better than early varieties. In close drills, no difference was noticeable in favor of any sorghum variety. The close- drilled seedings were not weighed separately. Yields are given below REPORT or THE Co-ornelirivii FORAGE CRQP WORK. 23 from the row seedings; however, they are not considered altogether de- pendable: a SORGHUM LEGUME MIXTURES IN ROWS. Approx- Forage Mixture. Propork Rate imate Per tion. Planted. Stand. Acre. Amber Whip.. 1 — 2 4pks.oats.. 5 — 1 3,300 Amber Whip ........................................... .. 1 — 5 4pks. oats.. 3- 1 3,000 Amber Whip .......................................... .. 1 — 7 4pks.oats.. 1 ~ 1% 3,600 Amber Whip ........................................... .. 1 ~10 4pks. oats.. 1 ~ 2 3,150* Amber Brab. .......................................... .. 1 — 4 4pks. oats.. 3 — 1 2,450* Amber Iron ............................................ .. 1 "— 4 4pks. oats.. 3 — 1 3,400* Amber Blk. Eye .................................... .. 1 ~ 4 4pks. oats.. 5 — 1 2,450* Amber Dol. 1 - 2 4pks.wh’t 1 — 1 4,400* Amber Moth....... 1 — 1 2pks.wh’t 1 — 2 2,950 Sumac 1 — 8 4pks.oats. 1 — 2 T Orange Whip....... 1 — 5 4pks.oats.. 1 — 2 T Kafir Whip. ........................................... ..l 1 — 2 4pks. oats.. 4 — 1 1' Kafir Whip. ............................................ 1 — 5 4pks. oats.. 1 — 3 T *Stands not regular, due to planting mixed seed. TToo short to harvest separately. Undoubtedly, the most satisfactory way to grow these mixtures in this locality is in cl.ose drills, as this compels the legume to grow more erect than When planted in rows; Furthermore, some considerable dif- ficulty was experienced in harvesting the row mixtures at Chillicothe. A vertical cornharvezster was used, and although in most cases it seemed to get all the legume it xvas not at all satisfactory, because the cowpeas invariably drop their lower leaves When jarred, as when struck by the sickle. These leaves fall in the butter trough and by some means get packed under the lower elevator chains and in the bottom of the trough, so that in order to avoid breaking the chains or the supporting boards it is necessary to stop the machine and remove the leaves. a This must be done every two hundred or four hundred yards. No one can realize how thoroughly these leaves can be packed without having had the ex- '-f"'th 1' 'l‘h'd'fl“i1t b perience o reinovung em a ew times. is 1 cu y may e a great l factor to be considered in growing-mixtures in rows. In seeding, it is found impracticable to plant the seeds mixed, and no doubt better results will be had by drilling the parts of the mixture separately, although this will require somewhat more labor. LEGUAIE S. COWPEAS. Five cowpea varieties, Brahham, Iron, Whippoorwill, Cream and Chinese Whippoorxvill, were planted May 3, each at two different seed- ing rates.‘ These rates were approximately twelve and six pounds per acre, planted in eighteen and thirty-six-inchrows, respectively. Since the same drill was used for each planting, their relative stands were accurately two to one. All plantings germinated perfectly and made .24 ~ TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS. good growth through May and June; however, with July begun a very S_€"J€1'€I‘ drought, which ‘not only soon checked vine growth, but as well prevented the setting of a heavy seed crop. The table below gives yields of the different varieties at each of the two seeding rates. COWPEA YTARIETY YIELDS IN 18 AND 86-inch ROWS. a ’ Size ‘ Date Yield Yield S.P.I. Variety. of Date Har- in 18" in 36" No. Plot. Planted. Vested. Rows. Rows. .......... .. Brahbam............................ 1-5 May 3 Aug. 23 3,350 3,350 .......... .. 1-5 May 3 _ Aug. 23 3,000 2,100 .......... .. Ch. 1-5 May 3 July 20 2,325 2,675 Cream .............................. .. 1-5 May 3 July 27 2,525 2,175 6 1-5 May 3 Aug. 27 2,375 2,050 These plots gave equal forage yields, although the peas (to the right of the picture) planted in 36-inch rows, show a taller growth. Fig. 13. Brabham cowpeas, seeded in 18 and 36-inch rows. These figures show Brabharn in both rates to be decidedly the best variety. The Iron and Chinese Wliippoorivill were also heavier crop- yielders than the Common. Vllhippoorurill or the Cream; however, the r Chinese Whippoorvrill was earlier and, therefore, not so allfected by drought, as ivas the Common Vilhippoorwill and other varieties. In thought-resistance, the Iron ivas decidedly superior to the other cow- peas, holding its leaves on the lower part of the plant with persistence. Whippoorurill also shoiverl considerable resistance to drought, urhile Brabharn appeared less resistant than either, although the total growth was greater than either. Chinese lVhipigoorwill and Cream were both early varieties and, therefore, were not so subjected to drought as the other three. There are no consistent differences in the yields given by Fig. 14. lilaeonu? or run Oo-oricnlifrivic FoRAeE ORoP WVoRK. Whippoorwill peas, planted in 18-inch rows, shown 0n the left of the picture. right, Brabham cowpeas are shown in 36-inch drills. the eighteen and the thirtyf-six-inch seedings. (Figures 13 and 111.) Figures 13 shows zipparentlyi some difiierence in the heights of the Brah- ham from the two seeding rates, but the yields were about the same be- cause of the thicker growth made by the eighteen-inch planting. Hlhis can be accounted for only by the fact that the severe drought through July would only allow a certain amount of. foliage growth dependent on On the _the moisture and not on the thickness of seeding, as in either case the crop was amply large to harvest. Inasmuch as the total yields are about equal in this, an unusually dry season, it may be safely assumed that ordinarily the heaviest crops xvould be had from the thicker seed- ing. However, for drier regions, the results indicate that eighteen-inch seedings would be of questionable value. The cowpeas appear to be the best annual legumes for Chillieothe and adjacent regions, although Kulthi and Moth Bean have heretofore compared favorably. KULTPII AND ‘BIOTH. BEAN. The Kulthi and the Moth Bean were planted at the same time and in thesame manner as the cowpeas. The table below shows the yield of each of these crops. both in eighteen and thirtyY-siX-inch. seedings. KULTHI AND lVfOTH BEAN YIELDS. ' Size Date Yield Yield S.P.I. Name. of Date Har- in 18” in 36" No. Plot. Planted. vested. Rows. Rows. 21600 Moth 1-5 May 3 _ Sept. 3O 1,300 1,425 21286 Kulthi .............................. .. 1-5 May 3 Sept. 3O *825 *1 ,30O *TA small portion lost in harvesting. a 2 C71 26 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS. > The itretti Bean lIl this case gave a better yield theh the Kulthiyfl though in harvesting the latter a small portion of the hay was lost, yet not a suflicient amount to more than balance the yields. However, in. Fig. l5. This figure shows the relative growths made by Dolichos biflorus and Phaseolus aconi- tifolius. The upright growth is the Dolichos biflorus. . Fig. 16. This figure shows Phaseolus aconitifolius, growing in 18 and 36-inch rows. my judgment, the Kulthi should outyield Moth Bean and even rival the cowpeas. It showed considerable more drought-resistance than the Moth Bean or any of the cowpeas for that matter, having kept its foliage in REPORT or THE CO-OPERATIVE FORAGE CRoP WoRK. 27 cellent condition all through July, .August and September. The oth Bean, this season, shoived a lack of resistance to drought, as it 1 ed considerably at the base. (Figure 15 shows the growth made by iulthi and Moth Bean.) (Figure 15.) It Was perhaps resistant to ‘bout the same degree as the Brabham cowpea. Neither of. the two ops produced seed. The yields show the best results from the thinner irdings. Figures 16 and 17 show the growths made by eighteen and irty-siX-inch seedings of Kulthi and Moth Bean. (Figures 16 and These two legumes have heretofore been quite promising, but this in yield did not compare with the cowpeas. They will be tested a ther. ». new. i“ 17. Showing Dolichos biflorus growing in 18 and 36-inch rows. The best yield was had i » from the 36-inch row. " PEANUTS. he peanut plots this season consisted of the small Spanish, the Ten- ee Bed and a spreading type planted for field yields, and in addition his, row test plots of nine other peanuts. _ e field plots were Planted May 18 in rows three feet apart and all I in.ated to a good stand. The growth made until through June was satisfactory and carried the peanuts up to the period of flowering. ithis time the July drought, which was very severe, begun to affect gvarieties alike and, although the cultivation was more frequent and per than. the ordinary farmer would have given, neither of the three produced good seed. There were a good number of pods set, but were small and immature, because of the continued dry weather. d- forage secured, therefore, consisted almost altogether of vines and ably gave about one-half ton of cured forage per acre. It was in- ed to weigh these plots, but before the hay was cured rainfall and . growth, the vines of each measuring about three feet in diameter, b ; ‘production and the entire plots, from that. standpoint, were failures. 28 - TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS. succeeding cloudy weather so damaged it that it was necessary to it time and again to prevent molding. In spite of moving, it mold to some extent and a.lso shattered the leaves so that the weights were co sidered inaccurate; however, it was judged that the small Spanish t, the Tennessee Red were about equal in the production of forage, W the fiat, spreading type was inferior to either. There is little doubt t‘, either the small Spanish or the Tennessee Red is the best type for for in this region. » The nine new lots were planted June 7 and all germinated to a fa stand. Six of these, Nos. 18,295, 18,523, 18,524, ].6,940, 22,032 an 24,114, were the flat, spreading sort with dark green leaves and usuall? a large or medium large seed pod. The first two numbers made the :11‘, only five or six inches high. The four latter numbers measured abou‘ two feet across, or, in other words, were about two-thirds as good as first two. None of these, howevegprodueed more than a few seed ‘ althoughthe pods seemed well formed. No. 18,296 was a Tennesse Red type and grew about thirteen inches high. It produced a few ve poorly filled pods. It is considered not very promising. Nos. 18,33 " and 16,944 were both the small» Spanish type and grew about fourteen inches high, the former was perhaps slightly the best of the two. Each? of these produced quite a good many well filled seed pods. These two? are considered promising sorts. ALFALFA. The several alfalfas which were thinned to eighteen and thirty-inch. rows last fall, for the purpose of getting seed yields, had to be rethinned‘ , this spring. These plots were cultivated and the first crop, which was? very short, harvested during the first part of May. The second crop “grew very ragged and uneven until the June rains came and caused it: to put out new growth. This produced a fair cutting of hay’, but, ofi course, gave no seed. During the remaining part of the season the growth was not. sufficient for either hay or seed. For some reason, prob- ably the time of clipping, the conditions were not favorable for seed These alfalfas will be cultivated next season with a view to getting seed , yields. ij On October 16, 1908, one-fourth acre plots of alfalfas, Nos. 18,628» and 21,769, were broadcasted on an adjoining farm with the expectation of later securing seed. The germination was fairly good, but during the , severe dry winter these plots were killed. f Fifteen lots of alfalfa were seeded at the Station in rows during April ’ of this season. These came to a fair stand, but, in spite of cultivation, 1 the weeds and grass came so thickly that it was necessary to plow under the entire lot. These were reseeded October 21, but the stand secured was not very good. These alfalfas were Nos. 19,508, 19,968, 19,556, 19,210, 19,522, 19,594, 19,751, 19,922, 19,559, 19,922, 19,929, 19,969 and three samples received from the Texas Seed and Floral Company, Dallas, Texas. These will be cultivated next season for seed. 1 It is considered useless to attempt to seed alfalfa in rows in the spring? 2 i REPORT OF THE CO-OPERATIVE FORAGE CROP WORK. 2'9 in this region. lt is more difficult to get satisfactory results than when planted broadcast. HAIRY VETOH WIrH OATS. About one-tenth acre was seeded October 16, 1908, to hairy vetch with oats. The germination was fairly good and the plot came through the winter in fairly good condition. The oats made good growth in the spring, but for the most part the vetch was not over four to six inches high and had thinned out to spots. Hairy vetch apparently does not make satisfactory growth in this region. MISCELLANEOUS. The following miscellaneous legumes were planted May in rod row test plots: No. 22,732—Indigofera Glandulosa. No. 23,535—-Indigofera Glandulosa. No. 22,734-—Unidentified legume. No. 23,626—-L. tuberostls. No. 24,205—Vicia leavenworthii. No. 24,266—Lupinus sp. No. 24,120—Dolichos. No. 17,()?’7——Astragulus falcata. Of the above only one, No. 24,266, Lupinus species, germinated. This plot appeared thrifty but died at a height of about four inches. The results with this lot of legumes, therefore, was very unsatisfactory. BULLETS. Thirty-one lots of millet were planted in rows May 7, for the purpose of comparing the different strains, and of securing a greater quantity ~ of seed of the best of these. The sizes of these plots depended on the amount of seed. available. Germination was fairly good on all but three lots, Nos. 24,110, 24,111 and 24,112. All millets, being planted in rows thirty-six inches apart, were given about the same cultivation that any other crop planted in this manner would receive. They, there- fore, had every opportunity to produce good yields regardless of the droughty season. The table below gives a list of the different lots grown, the dates when in full head, the average height and the amount of seed of each secured. 30 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS. -~.frr.LETs—1909. l 1 , 1 Amount _ S.P.I. Name. Date Date Average ee Promise. No. . Plfint- Headed Height. SoWn. e . 0841 C. ' 7- 5 Full heat‘: 3% ft. 6 lbs. Promising Big German type. ' glalFaill head 3 4ftft. None rllfromising. d l t 5 . ' o ea s . . .............. .. oo coarse an a e. 1237682 28511182 22- 5m G 505 . - u ea . s romising 1g erman. 18621 C. ' 7-15 Full head 2% ft. None N. G._ _ _ 18622 C. ' 7- 5 Full head 3% ft. 14% lbs. Promising Big German. 20653 C. ' 6-28 Full head 2% ft. 8 s. Fine stemmed common xnille 20694 ' ‘7-15 Ilieag 3%-l4fft. 46 gpry Promising Big German 20701 . ' - 2 u ea 32 t. 10 s. some promise. 21073 C. ' 7- 2 Full head 3 ft. 5% lbs. Not promising. s22 ' 113111613 2 a is . ' - u ea t. s. . . 22491 C. ' 6-24 Full head 3 ft. 76 lbs. Good common millet. 24810 C. Z 7- 5 Full head 3% ft. 16 lbs Big Germansort. 2510410. _ 7-17 Full head 3% ft. % lbs. Fairly promising. 2222 8 1 212521121 2 N 5 an m1 ......... .. - u ea % . one . . 18620 Pan mil ......... .. 7- 2 Full head ,2 ft. None N. G 21074 Pan mil ......... .. 6-28 Full head 2 ft. None N. G. 24110 Pan mil ......... .. No germination .................................................................................. .. 24111 Pan mil ......... .. No germination 24112 Pan mil ......... .. No germination 20363 P. crusgalli..... May 7 6-28 Full head 2 ft. N. G. 24113,P. crusgalli... .. May 7 7- 2 Full head 2 ft. N. G. 21540 P. frumenta- i ceurn .......... .. May 7 7-13 First heads 2% ft. None N. G. 22565 Eleuslne cor. May 7N0 heads- 2 ft. .............. .. N. G. 23722,Eleusine cor. May 7 7-10 First heads 2 ft .............. .. N. G. 24335jEleusine sp..... May 7 No heads 1 2 ft .............. .. N. G. 24343fEleusine cor. May 7 7-10 First headf 2% ft. None N. G. 3% ft. 1 lb. Fairly promising. 25106 C. italica ........ .. May 7 7-17 First heads} ' 1 Of the eighteen Fox-tail millets grown, about nine numbers (0841, 15,827, 18,505, 18,522, 20,858, 20,891, 20,701, 22,191 and 21,810) were quite promising sorts. Seven of these were big German types, while the two remaining ones, Nos. 20,653 and 22,491, were very leafy, fine stemmed common millets. Of the big German types, No. 20,694 deserves special mention, having grown to a height of about four feet. It was somewhat later in maturing than the other big German sorts, but pro- duced a heavy yield of forage. The fodder was considered a bit coarse. (Figures .18 and 19.) This plot appears to be mixed about half and half with a red-seeded and a yellour-seeded sort. The remaining big German types mentioned above were about equal in promise. Three other millets were considered worthy of further trial. These were Nos. 25,104, 25,105 and 25,106, all from Burmah. These made very promis- ing growth and reached a height of about three feet, but were somewhat later than the other millets, and produced fodder perhaps a little coarse. (if the three numers, 25,105 W88 perhaps three days earlier in maturity than the other two, but showed no special drought resistance; in fact, all three of these millets seem to lack in drought resistance. Only a small quantity of seed of each of these were secured. Only three of the six Proso millets germinated. -These were Nos. 0846, 18,620 and 21,074. Neither of these grew taller than two feet, and, although they came into full head, produced little or no seed, being attacked by chinch bugs. The Prosos are considered of no value in this locality for forage purposes. Seven of the thirty-one millets grown were barnyard sorts. Four of REPORT or THE Co-ornmtrrxm Fomon CRoP WORK. 31 V. these Were Eleusine, none of xvhich produced seed. The average height was about two to two and a half feet. N o. 241,343 made perhaps the best outgrowth of the four. No. 20,363 and No. 524,113,- both Panicum crus- . Fig. 19. The shock on the right shows the coarseness of Millet No. 20694. grew‘ to a height of about two and a half feet, and began to put heads but produced no seed. The former number made the most p’ th. No. 21,540, Panicum frumentaceum, made about the same 32 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS. growth and produced no seed. Apparently the barnyard millets A in nowise resistant to droughty conditions. a The promising lots were all Ohaetochloa forms. GRASSES. About fourteen grasses were planted, most of them in rod row I Except in the case of the Rescue, which was planted in the fall pr‘ ing, all lots were seeded May 8. The germination throughout was i, poor. No germination was recorded from the following num 13,953, 17,135, 22,966, 23,332, 23,630 and 23,712. a RESCUE GRASS. In October of 1908 a plot of Rescue grass was seeded for the pu {A of determining whether or not it would be possible to secure, in addi -‘ to the grass, asummer crop each year without destroying or injuring i, Rescue so as to make it necessary to reseed. Although the stand secuii was rather poor it came on beautifully and produced a good crop seed early in the spring. As soon as a portion of this seed had sh: tered the grass was turned under and the land seeded to cowpeas in r0 The soil was pretty dry, but for the most part a reasonably fair sta of peas was secured. Through the season these cowpeas were cultiva ’ three times and the growth was about sixteen to eighteen inches hi The crop was left unharvested and no evidence of the Rescue grass 1f seen until the latter part of October, when it seemed to germinate spo, taneously. The stand appeared to be about four times too thick, showini that no injuries were done the seed by summer cultivation. By the la; of November this Rescue grass would have afforded excellent grazing Although our experience with this system is limited it can undoubtedl be recommended safely to this region. There is no reason why kaifiri milo or the sorgos could. not be utilized as the summer crop instead 0 r cowpeas were it desirable. SORGHUM HALAPENSE. Of the plots that germinated, two were Sorghum Halapense. These were Nos. 25,017 and 23,488. The former germinated perfectly and. came into full head about two months after being planted. On examiner tion, this strain of Johnson grass was found entirely devoid of root, stocks. It grew to a height of about four and one-half or five feet and seemed to SUCRGI‘ to about the same degree as the native Johnson grass. ig It is perhaps more seriously affected by drought, but after the first crop was cut it put out new growth quickly, even under droughty conditions. ‘ Careful examination shows the seed to be slightly larger but the same shape as seed of native Johnson grass. If this grass proves to be a perennial in the Southern States it will be of great value. About one pound of seed was saved. The latter number (23,488) proved to be ordinary Johnson grass with the averaged sized root stock. It is of no value. REPORT or THE CO-OPERATIVE FORAGE CROP WORK. 33 OHLORIS GAYANA. Chloris gayana, No. 19,959, germinated scatteringly along the row. phese plants seemed to grow off rather slowly, but before frost had ched a height of about three feet. Although it put out seed heads fdid not set seed. The thinness of this grass in the row seemed to be jvorable to its stoloniferous habit, and by this means it seemed to jead considerabl . , ‘Two plots of ragrostis, Nos. 13,871 and 15,338, were planted, but each case only one plant germinated. Each of these grew about two ;tw0 and a half feet high and were fairly leafy at the base, but other- .=- made a very poor showing. They are considered of no value in _ s region. Two other grasses, Astreble Triticoides, No. 15,950, and dropogon Leucopogon, No. 24,658, were planted and in both cases ination was poor. The former produced a. very leafy plant about hteen inches high and resembling, on account of its coarse alternating yes, the Southern wire grass. Its root stocks appeared to have a ten- cy toward knuckling down. It is not considered of any value. The yer number (24,658) appeared about the same as the native Andro- on Sachroides. It is apparently of no special value. LEGUNA CORN. plot of Leguna corn was seeded April 14 and made excellent growth the first part of July. The drought came on about this time and corn, which was beginning to tassel, was affected very severely, the ‘es firing almost to the top. This corn was cut before it was entirely '1 and utilized as forage. In grain production this variety, which is _ of the most drought resistant June corns, was in nowise equal to c» or kaffir planted at the same time. A.n earlier seeding would have vuced some seed. i LAGANARIA. _our gourd ‘plants volunteered from seed shattered la-st season. These ts were cultivated well and appeared reasonably thrifty but produced two or three poorly shaped gourds per plant. Only one from the le lot could have been utilized for pipe making. It is evident that l plant is not adapted to the drier regions. It requires considerable ture for the best gourd production. The vines were not attacked ugs this season as is usually the case when there is a greater amount oisture. I ' _ ' SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS. Close drilled seedings of sorghums were severely injured by ight and harvested when eighteen inches high. No difference I bservable in varieties or amount of firing. Last season Sumac was lest yielding variety. and one bushel per acre in all cases was the l ate" for seeding in close drills at Chillicothe‘. ’ Stalks in thirty-six-inch rows somewhere between one-half and one lapart gave the best yield. Such a distance also gives‘ a stem suf- tly small to make an excellent quality of feed. _ pink kaffir as second, while milo is the last. The milo, hoyvever, carri 34 TEXAS AGIIICUIJITURAL EXPERIMENT Srarrons. 3. Black hull kaffir yields the most forage, with red kaflir or perhai about 1 per cent more grain, which increases the feeding value, but n sufficiently for milo t0 excel kaflir in this locality. In total yield of t”? the varieties ranked as follows: Black hull kaflir, red kaffir and f- 4. It seems safe to assume that the greatest feeding value of mill or kaffir will be had from seeding as thick as two or four inches in r0? three feet apart. ‘ 5. Milo or kaffir in rows three feet apart, and with stalks every fou inches, will give more satisfactory yields of seed than thinner seedings 6. Planting of milo four inches in the drill or thicker will give high percentage of erect heads. The two-inch seeding will ordinarily’; give, at Chillicothe, 100 per cent erect heads, barring the ends of plots Where moisture is more abundant. Plots thinner than four inches give. a greater proportion of goose-necked plants. At ten or twelve inches” nearly all, plants produced goose-necked heads. - '2’. Thick seedings have a tendency to reduce the leafiness of indivirl-t ual milo plants. The average number of leaves per individual plant in 5 milo seedings was as follows: Four-inch rate, 9.2; six-inch rate, 8.6;’ eigh-inch rate, 9-4., ten-inch rate, 9; twelve-inch rate, 10, and sixteen- inch rate, 10 leaves. 8. Early seedings, such as from April 15 to May 1, give the most and the best forage and seed. Seedings as late as June 15, or later, are undesirable. These results are much the same for all varieties. 9. One part of sorghum to six or seven parts of cowpeas will give about the right proportion for mixtures. 1‘). Results in these cases indicate that Brabham and Iron cowpeas, and Doliclzos biflorus are the best legumes for these mixtures, but the cowpeas do not resist drought so well as the other plant. 11. The most satisfactory way to grow these mixtures in this locality is in close drills, as this compels the legume to grow more ‘erect than when planted in rows. 12. In seeding it is found impracticable to plant the seeds mixed, and no doubt better results will be had by drilling the parts of the mix- ture separately, although this will require somewhat more labor. 13. Brabham was decidedly the best variety of cowpeas. tested. The Iron and Chinese Whip-poor-yvill were also heavier yielders than the common Whippooryvill or the Cream. The Chinese Whippooryvill were earlier and, therefore, not so affected by drought as was the common Whippoorwill and other varieties. 14. In drought resistance the Iron was decidedly superior to other cowpeas. 15. There is little doubt that either the small Spanish or- the Ten- nessee Bed is the best peanut for forage in this region. 16. It is useless to attempt to seed alfalfa in rows in the spring in this region. It is more difficult to get satisfactory results than when planted broadcast. 17. Of the eighteen lots of Fox-tail millets grown, about nine lots were quite promising. Seven of these were big German types, while the two remaining ones were very leafy, fine stem common millets. a! ,1 a REPORT or THE Co-ornaarrvn FORAGE CR0? WORK. 35 18. Of the big German" types, Ho. 20,694 deserves special mention, having grown to a height of about four feet. 19._ 'l.‘hree other millets were considere-d Worthy of further trial. These were from Burmah. They made very promising growth and reached a height of about three feet, but were somewhat later than the other millets, and produced fodder perhaps a little coarse. .All three of these millets seemed to lack in drought resistance.