A187-11 17-10m TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 1 NOVEMBER, 1917 BULLETIN NO . 221 PROGR.ESS REPORT, SUBSTATION NO. 9, PECOS, TEXAS 1910-1914 yybwqgmqvw, q, ,4._.\... flu,‘ .. B. YOUNGBLOOD, DIRECTOR COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTYQTEXAS. “fi” AUSTIN, TEXAS: VON BOECKMANN-JONES c0., PRINTERS, 1917 H AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE OF TEXAS I. W. B. BIzzELL, A. M., D. C. L., President TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS ' OHN I. GUIQN, Ballinger, President HART, San Antonio, Vice-President J. H. AsTIN, Bryan........_ R. KIJBENA, Fayettevllle B. DAvIDsoN, Cuero .......... .. ILL A. MILLER, JR., Amarillo. 01m T. DICKSON, Paris . A. BREII-IAN, Bartlett ..... .. m“g>Pmr '11 L. J. HART, Chairman GOVERNING BOARD, . M. LAW, Houston ..................................................................................................... ..Term expires 1 A ‘ MAIN STATION COMMITTEE STATE SUBSTATIONS WILL A. MILLER, P. L. DowNs, Temple, President ...... .. CnARLEs RocAN, Austin, Vice-President ..... ..; ...... .. J. E. BOOG-SCOTT, Coleman ...................... .. W. A. JonNsoN, Memphis ............................................................................................ ..Term expires '_ *STATION STAFF ‘k ADMINISTRATION B. YOUNGBLOOD, M. S., Director A. B. CoNNER, B. S., Vice Director CRAs. A. FELKER, Chief Clerk A. S. WARE, Secretary W. T. BRINK, B. S., Executive Assistant in Charge Library and Publication . EDITH H. PHILLIPS, B. S., Technical Assistant - DIVISION OF VETERINARY SCIENCE **M. FRANcis, D. V. S., Veterinarian in Charge _ _ ' H. SCHMIDT, D. V. S., Veterinarian DIVISION OF CHEMISTRY _ _ GJS. FRAPs,_Ph. D., Chemist in Charge; W. T. P. SPROTI‘, B. S., Assistant Chemist CHAS. BUCHWALD, M. S., Assistant Chemist T. B. LEITH, B. A., Assistant Chemist ‘DIVISION OF HORTICULTURE H. NEss, M. S., Horticulturist in Charge W. S. HOTCHKISS, Horticulturist DIVISION OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY J. C. BuRNs, B._S.,_Animal Husbandman, Feeding Investigations _ J. M. JoNEs, A. M., Animal Husbandman, Breeding I nvestigations_ P. V. EWING, M S , Animal Husbandman in Charge Swine Investigations **L. B. BURK, B S., Collaborating Animal Husbandman, Swine Investigations DIVISION OF ENTOMOLOGY F. B. PADDOCK, M. ., Entomologist in Charge; State Entomologist H. J. REINRARD, B. S., Assistant Ento- mologist _ \V. E. JACKSON, M. S., Assistant Ento- mologist County Apiary Inspectors R. C. Abernathy, Ladonia; William Atch- ley, Mathis; J. W. E. Basham. Barstow; _ T. W. Burleson, Waxahachie; W. C. Col- lier, Goliad: E. W. Cothran, Roxton; G. F. Davidson, Pleasanton; John Done an, Seguin; A. R. Graham, Milano; J. B. ing, Batesville; N. G. LeGear, Waco; R. A. Little, Pearsall: S. H. Stephens, Uvalde; M. B. Tally, Victoria: E. Watson, Heidenheimer; W. H. White, Green- ville; F. C. Belt, Ysleta; R. A. Nestor, Buffalo; H. A. Jones, Oakville: T. A. Bowdon, Palestine; E. R. Jones, Beeville. DIVISION OF AGRONOMY A. B. CoNNER, B. S., Agronomist in Charge A. H. LEIDIGH, B. S., Agronomist ***H. H. JoBsoN, B. S., Agronomist Louis WERMELSKIRCHEN, B. S., Agronomist DIVISION OF PLANT PATHOLOGY AND PHYSIOLOGY J. J. TAuDENnAUs, _Ph._ D., Plant Patholo- gist and Physiologist in Charge CLERICAL ASSISTANTS . J. M. ScRAEDEL, Stenographer DAISY LEE, Registration Clerk C. L. DuRsT, Mailing Clerk R. C. FRANKS, Copyist W. L. HEARN, Stenographer *As of October 1, 1917. ***fin leave. .................................................... ..Term expires 1 * **In cooperation with A. 8c M. College of Texas. ..Term expires I 4 ...... ..Term expires l DIVISION OF POULTRY HUSBANDRYi ' R. N. HARVEY, B. S., Poultrgman in C , DIVISION OF FORESTRY i J. H. FOSTER, M. F., Forester in Ch State Forester ' DIVISION OF PLANT BREEDING E. P. HUMBERT, Ph. D., Plant Breeder i ' Charge 1 . DIVISION 0F DAIRYING W. A. DOUBT, Dairyman DIVISION OF FEED CONTROL SERVI F . FULLER, M. S., Chief JAMES SuLLIvAN, Erecutive Secretary . H. RooERs, Inspector . H. W00D, Inspector . D. PEARcE, Inspector . M. WICKES, Inspector . F. CHRISTIAN, Inspector SUBSTATION NO. 1: Beeville. Bee Co f‘ I- E- COWART. M. S., Superintendent ‘ SUBSTATION N0. 2: Troup, Smith Cou I W. S. HoTcHKIss, Superintendent; SUBSTATION N0. s: Angleton, Brazorlsi County N. E. WINTERs, B. S., Superintendent SUBSTATION NO. 4: County H. H. LAUDE, B. S., Superintendent ‘ J. B. COCKRELL, B. S., Scientific Assistant‘ SUBSTATION NO. 5: Temple, Bell Coun ’ D. T. KILLovcH, B. S., Superintendent SUBSTATION N0. s, Denton, Denton Cou A C. H. McDowELL, B. S., Superintendenl SUBSTATION NO. 1: Spur, Dickens co R. E. DICKSON, B. S., Superintendent = SUBSTATION N0. s= Lubbock, Lubbock Coun ' R. E. KARPER, B. S., Superintendent Q SUBSTATION NO. 9, Pecos, Reeves Co’ J. . JAcRsoN, B. S., Superintendent A SUBSTATION NO. l0: (Feeding and Bree , Substation), College Station, B: . County E'.-§"o§.i’5§.°§; ?;.§.;.A"”"“' ””‘”“"" SUBSTATION NO. ll: Nacogdoches, NI. doches County . G. T. McNEss, Superintendent SUBSTATION NO. 12: Chillicothe, H man County ‘ ****R. W. EDWARDS. B. S., Superintendent I V. E. HAFNER, B. S., Scientific Assistant . SUBSTATION NO. 14. Sonora, Sutton co E. M. PETERS, B. S., Acting Superinlend ' i ééwé“ Beaumont, Jefler I M. B GARDNER, Stenographer MAE BELLE EvANs. Stenographer IRENE PEVERLEY, Copyist RUTH CAMPBELL, Stenographer H. L. FRAzIER, Stenographer mary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2Q CONTENTS PAGF 5 oreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5 eteorological Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 87 a rigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10 otton a. . .- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 . . . . . . . 10 b mall Grain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 A 1mm .... . .1 ........... .1 ............................... . . 12 rn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 éanuts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . z 13 ’w‘peas . . . . ..» . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .._ . . . . . . . . . .. 13 raih Sorghums . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0016'. 100m Corn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '16 9 dan Grass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 ‘ago-legume Mixtures for ‘Hay. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1'?‘ , Hscellaneous Plant Ihtroductibn Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Bacco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Beans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 ' dén Crops A. .' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .' . . . . . . . . . . . . ..V . . . . . . . . . 19 ieyard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . .; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19 éhard . . . . . . .'. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..‘ . . . . . . . . . . 19 [Blank Page in Original Bulletin] FOREWORD. , The annual progress reports of the various substations may be con- sidered part of the general annual report. Much credit is due Mr. A. B. Conner, in his capacity as Vice-Director, and Mr. A. H. Leidigh, a in his capacity as Agronomistr, for painstaking work in checking fig- .'/*‘ _. ures and editing this an-d all other substation progress reports, and jgrateful acknowledgment is hereby made. B. YOUNGBLOOD, Director. [Blank Page in Original Bulletin] BULLETIN N0. 221 NOVEMBER, 1917 PROGRESS REPORT, SUBSTATION NO. 9, PECOS, TEXAS, 19111-1914 J. W. JACKSON, Surnanvcriazvnnzvr. Substation No. 9 is one of the thirteen experiment substations which constitute the out-of-door laboratory of the Texas Agricultural Experi- ment Station, administered by the Director. Substation No. 9 was established in 1910 in accordance with an act of the Thirty-first legislature. The site selected is three ‘and one-half miles West o-f Pecos, Reeves county, and consists of an eighty-acre tract of land. ' This location is approximately 31° 25" north latitude; 103° 31’ West longitude. The elevation is approximately 2,580 feet above sea level. The soil on the substation is of a somewhat gyppy and salty nature, and is more or less typical of a. considerable area. in this part of the Trans-Pecos region. Abundant water for pump irrigation is avail- able, the large pump at the substation being set only about forty feet deep in a 135-foot well. The water is slightly salty but the minerals are probably not present in such a large quantity as to be injurious, if proper methods of irrigation are used. Of the eighty acres, three acres were cleared, but had not been cul- tivated at the time the State came into possession of the land. The improvements. at that time consisted of a four-room house and shallow dug well. Water was pumped from the well to a surface tank or reservoir by means 9f a windmill. As soon as possible, a superintend- ent’s house was built, as were also a two-story barn and an implement shed. An eight-inch Well was drilled 135 feet deep, and a Fairbanks- Morse ten-horse power engine and a No. 4 American pump were in- stalled. With these improvements, the work of 1911 was carried on. Ten acres were planted to cotton and feed stuff during this year, but soon after the work was started it was found that there was insuflicient water for this acreage and part of the crops failed to mature. In spite of the shortage of water, however, three-quarters of an acre planted to cotton yielded at the rate of 1,300 pounds of seed cotton to the acre. Texas Rustproof oats made 34. bushels to the acre and spring sown alfalfa made one and one-half tons of hay to the acre. June corn was a ’t'a.ilure, while milo made bushels to the acre. During this sea- son, a small orchard was set out but has failed to give promising results. Thirty-five acres were cultivated during the year 1912. This area was devoted to variety tests With cotton, grain, sorghums, sorgos, cow- NoTE.—-Gratefu1 acknowledgment is hereby made to Mr. H. C. Stewert for compilation of data during the time he was superintendent of Substation N0. 9. Hr. Stewert served as superintendent at Pecos from 1910 to 1915. 8 TExAs IXGRIOULTIIRAL EXPERINIENT STATION. peas, and newly introduced crops. The season was very dry, making frequent irrigation necessary. Since that time a larger engine and plump have been installed for irrigation purposes, also the platting of the substation has been changed to give more uniform irrigation The major Work during the years 1913-14 consisted of variety tests to discover What varieties and crops were best suited to this part of West Texas. This being a territory in which scarcely any crop farm- ing had been practiced, the first work of the substation was to deter- mine the money a.nd feed crops suited to local conditions; then to de- termine the best variety or varieties of the particular crop. The irri- gation and soil conditions peculiar to this substation have necessitated more preliminary work than has seemed to be necessary at most of the substations conducted by the State Experiment Station. There are anumber of crops that have been found to be adapted -to this country and which would justify the extra cost of irrigation, but some of these cannot be grown extensively, due to lack of a market, 01' due to lack of facilities and organizations for profitable marketing. Oantaloupes, watermelons, asparagus, tomatoes and celery are among the possibilities for money crops when the problems of marketing are solved. Considerations of this kind and the necessity of investigating the best means of securing water have governed the development of this substation and its investigations. 1t is believed that enough of im- portance has been learned to justify the preparzition 0t this material for a bulletin. METEOROLOGICAL DAJIXA. Meteorological instruments were not installed on the substation until 1913. It is impossible, therefore, to present climatic data in detail for any considerable series of years. Such data, however, are available for Barstoyv, approximately ten miles east of this substation, where the United States Weather Bureau has a co-operative observer. These records are shown in Tables 1 and 2. TABLE 1. Monthly Absolute Maximum and Minimum, Mean and Mean Annual Temperatures, Bin-stow, Texas, 1906 to 1914, Inclusive. Degrees F. Monthly Absolute. Mean Monthly. Maximum. Minimum. January . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' 891' _ —4* 48. 1t February . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86* 9* 48.6 March . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 98* 19* 57.9* A ril . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 99* 26* 635* ay.....'. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 106 39 72.8 June . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .._ . . . . . . . . . . . .. 112 52 80.8 July . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1lO** 60** 81 .5** August . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..~ . . . . . . . . . .. 111 56 81.3 September . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .» . . . . . . . . . 106** 40** 75 7** October . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99** 21** 64 8** November . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ._ . . . . . . 96** lltt 53.91% December . . . . . . . . . . . . . ._ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89** 3** 44. 5** Mean annual (for above months). .' . . . . . ‘ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64.4 ii i <4 T1906 and 1914 missing. *1906 misslng. **191O missing. - ‘H1910 and 1912 missing. Pnoennss Rnronr, SUBSTATION N0. 9, Pecos, TEXAS. 9 The last killing freeze in the spring occurs as early as February or as late- as April. These facts emphasize the great variability of the temperature of the region, and in connection with the very low monthly mean temperature show a slow or late spring. This requires late plant? ing of common farm crops. The requirement of the region is well recognized by the residents here, but is scarcely appreciated by even well informed people from Central Texas who visit here. The firstkilling freeze in the fall occurs as early as October and as late as December. Even with the cold, late spring the temperature of the fall is such as to- make it possible to raise cotton and practically all types of sorghums. TABLE 2. Rainfall by Months—l907-l9l4, Inclusive, Bar-stow, Texas. 1906 1907 1908 1909 I 1910 ‘ 1911 R 1912 1913 1914 January . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 0.00 0.12 0.00 T 1.02! 0.05 0.00 T February . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.39‘ 0.00 0.02 0.50 Mareh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 0.85 0.65 T‘ 0.20 1.37| 0.00 0.75 0.02 April . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . .. 0.15 1.01 0 00 2.10 0.30 1.22 0.00 May . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 0.53 T 0.55 T 1.41 0.16 0.00 3.93 June . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1.20 0.06 0 54 0 55 1.55 0.18. 0.00 1.46 0.75 July . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4.23 0.76 3 30 4 50 1.46’ 0.85 1.92 0.20 2.14 August . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2.02 0.40 1.54 010 1.02 0.00 1.95 0.59 2.05 September . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 0 54 0.86 1.36 0 50 ' 0.69 1.32 2.20 4.70 1.40 October . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 0.24 5.55 0.65 T - 0.15 0.70 3.10 6.59 November . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1.46 1.22 0.18 0 55 0.01 0.85‘ 1.70 0.85 1.52 December . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 0.92 0.02 0.00 0 75 0.05 1.39 1.50 0.55 1.46 Annual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. '9.87 9 90 6 95 4.98| 13 03‘ 10.48 13 44 20 36 Average annual 11.12 The records presented above indicate a small and very irregular rain- fall ranging from. less than five to more than twenty inches per annum. Rains are most likely to occur in the summer. It will be observed that the rainfall is on the whole very well suited to irrigation farming, 21s too many small rains are really a detriment in an irrigation region. The precipitation as. recorded at this substation since the installa- tion of the mcteorologrical instruments is as follows: TABLE 3. Rainfall by M0nths——19l3-1914. Inches. Month. 1913 1914 January . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .00 February . . . . . . . . . . . .' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 March . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 ADTIl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .93 May . . . . . . . . . . . . .- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.53 June . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 .32 July . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.47 August . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.79 gelztegmber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c o er . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . November . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' . . . . . . . . . . . . .85 2.54 December . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55 1 .00 Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.97 10 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. IRRIGATION. The cost of irrigation under existent conditions has not been ex- tremely great. A considerable amount of investigating a.nd “cutting and trying” has been necessary to get a.n adequate supply of Water cheaply. y The cost of operation each year for the past three years is shown in _ Table 4. TABLE 4. Cost of Pump Irrigation, 1912 to 1914, Inclusive. Average inches Year. No. acres Supply of of water *Total cost Remarks. irrigated. water. supplied. to the acre. 1912 . . . . . .. 35 Not enough... . 26.73 $ 8.88 1913. . . . . . . 35 Enough . . . . . . . 29.40 10.82 Fuel expensive. 1914 . . . . . . . ‘ 44 Enough . . . . . . . 19.92 6.23 Fuel cheaper, also more rain. *Total costs include fuel, oi_l, ten per cent depreciation on machinery, labor to care for engine I and labor of one man to distribute water. The rainfall in 1914 was so much greater than in the two preceding years that this was the governing factor in the cost. If the rainfall was fairly constant, the-n the depreciation and fuel cro-st would be very important. There has been added economy of fuel with each added improvement in the pumping plant, the economy‘ being due to the abil- ity to use cheaper fuel oil. H COTTON. One of the most successful crops produced on this sub-station has been cotton. The late spring in no way favors this crop», but it seems peculiarly suited to the extreme heat of the summer. As a crop for Fig. 1.—Cotton under irrigation. Protecting the flower to secure self-fertilization so that pure seed may be obtained from the field on the Station. Paoeanss REPORT, SUBSTATION N o. 9, Pecos, TEXAS. 11 the irrigated farm, the cotton plant is satisfactory, in that it requires and also pays for a comparatively large» amount of Work. Further- more, the cotton makes a comparatively light demand fo-r water and is thus especially satisfactory Where pump-ed xvater is used. _ V While it has been possible to make some investigations as to the best methods of producing cotton under irrigation, this Work has been frag- mentary and-only of value as preliminary observation. Thus far it ha.s seemed advisable to irrigate the cotton very slowly, in a rather deep narrow furrow. - A The variety tests Were uniformly conducted. All the variety tests Were irrigated once before planting and three times during the grow- ing season. About five inches of Water was app-lied at the first irriga- tion, while the three later Waterings amounted to from three to four inches each. As yet, the cotton investigations on this sub-station consist of a study of varieties. This Work has included the following tests: I In 1911———itl1ree-fourths acres of cotton. In 1912-—-thirt'lv-twvc> varieties, of Which only seven made a crop. In 1913——fc»rty-five varieties, repeated four times. ln 1914—fifty-six varieties. ln some eases a variety was in the test more than once in a single year, seed having been secured from two places. 0f the above varieties, four Were grown during each of the three years, 1912, 1913 and 1914, While iforty-three Were grown in 1913 and 1914. Table 5 gives the acre yields of the cotton varieties tested for two or more years. TABLE 5. Summary. Variety Tests of Cotton 1912, 1913 and 1914. 0 Average yield lbs. seed cotton to acre. T. S. No. Variety. 1913 and 1914 1912 to 1914 l - 487 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Dongola . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1187.0 446 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Simpkin’s Prolific . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1167.5 118 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Long Staple . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1116.0 1144.0 469 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hawkin’s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112.5 494 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cannon’s World Skinner . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1108.0 414 and 504 . . . . . . . Durango . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1106.0 6. 128 and Ck... . Mebane Triumph... . -. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1087.0 884.6 348 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Black Rattler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080.0 486 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Roberts’ Big Boll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1044.5 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Burns’ Long Staple . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .' 995.0 16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Crowder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .l 978.5 485 and 951 . . . . . . . Cleveland Big Boll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 965.0 475 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Texas Wood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 960.0 415 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Huffman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 953.5 129 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Edgeworth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942.5 444 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Haaga’s Extra Long Staple . . . . . . . . . . ., 941.5 135 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Uaion Big Boll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..l 917.0 412 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Foster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 901.0 482. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . Bwhler’s Triple Jointed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .! 898.0 152 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mortgage Lifter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .l 893 f5 411 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hites’ Early Prolific . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890.0 _ 5’, 478, 121 . . . . . . Allen’s Long Staple . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885.0 775.0 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lon Staple . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873.0 443 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hal and Half . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 869.5 481 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cook’s Improved Big B)ll. . .1 . . . . . . . . 865.0 472 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Peterkin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 815.0 413 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Snowflake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812.5 445 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Webber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., 811.5 474 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trnitt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 804.0 130 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bank Account . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .l 796.5 1.2 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. TABLE 5—-Continued. Summary. Variety Tests of Cotton 1912, 1913, and 1914. Average yield lbs. seed _ cotton to acre. T. S. N0. . Variety. ' 1913 and 1914 1912 to 1914 470. . . ._ . . . . . . . . . . . Sunflower . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 793.0 479 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Toole . . . . . . . ._ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 792.0 480 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Culpepper’s Big Boll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 775.0 11 and 942.. . . . . . . Lone Star . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 741.0 476 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Texas Oak . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 730.5 466 . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..' e ber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 715.5 169 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Webber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 703.5- 170 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hartsville . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 693.5 77 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rowden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 677. 5 473 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Willet’s Red Leaf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 582 O 471 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dillon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563.0 1O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yuma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449.0 472.6 477 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Improved Webber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266.0 SMALL GRAIN. A Each year since the establishment of the substation some small grain ha.s been planted. In 1912, 1913 and 1914 a total of eighty-seven variety tests of wheat, oats, barley, rye, emmer and spelt have been conducted. As a rule, these tests have been attended by comparatively unsatisfactory results. Among the causes of poor crops have been attacks by rabbits and ex- cessive damage by wind storms. In 1914 the variety test was very satisfactory. Nineteen lots of wheat yielded at the rate of from 9 to 27 bushels to the acre, while three varieties of barley yielded at the rate of from 27.5 to 38.75 bushels to the acre. Thus far it is not possible to say what varieties or types of these grains are probably best here. Fig. 2.—Taking notes on cowpeas in variety test. ALFALFA. In 1911 alfalfa was seeded in the spring" with and urithout a cover crop of oats and with and without manure. Four light cuttings of PROGRESS REPORT, SUBSTATION No. 9, Pnoos, TEXAS. 13 hay were obtained. Additional seedings were made in 1912. This in- cluded plats inoculated with alfalfa tubercle bacteria furnished by the Bureau of Plant industry, United States Department of Agriculture. All plats showed tubercle development, whether inoculated artificially 0r not treated, indicating that artificial inoculation of alfalfa is un- necessary here. _ In 1913 five lots of alfalfa and one lot of Sand Lucerne were seeded in the spring on duplicate pl.ats. The resultant standswere good, but satisfactory growth was made. In the fall, four and one-half acres were seeded and gave every appearance of success. In 1914 selections of alfalfa, numbering twenty-three, were seeded, the seed being furnished by the Bureau of Plant Industry, United States Department of Agriculture. The alfalfa planted the previous fall made three light cuttings, amounting to two tons to the acre. ' _ On the whole, the alfalfa tests on this sub-station have not been en- couraging. The deeper soil seems to produce-the crop fairly well, but the water requirement is very great. Of the varieties tested, the Peru.- vian a.nd the home-grown American have given most promise. CORN. Corn has been planted each year and fair yields of rather inferior corn have been produced. The crop requires much more water than the grain sorghums and the yields are smaller. As a crop’ for this part of Texas, corn cannot be recommended except for protected places. PEANUTS. Peanuts havebeen planted each season for four years. The crop has not given satisfaction. Whether this is because of the hard, baked condition‘ of the soil is not yet known. The three varieties tested were: ITirginia Improved, Tennessee Red. and Spanish. Of these, the Spanish has given the best stands and gen- erally the most satisfactory yields. Bows thirty-six inches apart and eighteen inches apart were compared for three yfears. Slightly the larg- est yields were made by the eighteen-inch width rows, but the increase for the narrow rows was not enough to make such narrow rows ad- visable. i ‘ OOWPEAS. Cowpea variety tests were started in 1912 and have been continued each year, a total of licftyr-five lots having been used. The comparable yields from the cowpea seed production tests are shown in Table 6. TABLE 6. Cowpea Seed Yields 1912, 1913 and 1914. Average yield. pounds clean seed i0 the acre. T. S. N0. Variety. . 1912 to 1914 1913 and 1914 56 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unknown. , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 425 448 57 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Red Ripper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . 454 406 87 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Blackeye . . . . . . . . .- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 388 86 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Groit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356 55 and 85 . . . . . . . . . Iron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . 257 170 14 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL. EXPERIMENT STATION. Of the varieties not tested during each of the above years, T. S. No. 58, New Era, has ‘made especially good yields. i Seven lots of cowpeas were compared in a forage production test in 1912, the yields. being as shown in Table 7. TABLE 7. Cowpea Forage Production, 1912. ' Yield pounds forage T. S. No. Variety. to the acre. _56 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unknown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2500 55 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Iron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2330 58 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. New Era . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..~ 2160 59 . . . . . . . . . . . . . ; . . Whippoorwill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2140 5O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Peerless . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1920 60.. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1560 57 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Red Ripper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1330 ‘ Fig. 3.—Cowpeas as a seed crop; date of planting test. It is app-arent that for general seed and forage purposes T. S. No. 56', Unknown, should be given first‘ rank. T. S. No. 58, New Era, is also very good. GRAIN SORGIIUBT S. The grain soi-ghums have been rather sirccessful crops here. In 1911 three varieties of grain sorghums were planted and made good growth. These were used for seed production tor the next year’s seed. Milo made the best yield, iaroducingi 32 bushels to the acre. In 1912 the sorghum tests were greatly enlarged. The grain sorghums are. the most successful and reliable grain crops yet grown on the substation. They are resistant to the climatic varia- tions. Their water requirements are such as to make them economical for the pump irrigation farm and, furthzermore, they are in no sense eX- acting as to soil. The most serious handicap in grain sorghum here PROGRESS REPORT, SUBSTATION 0. 9, Pnoos, TEXAs. 15 has been loss due to birds at harvest time. This loss will doubtless be greatly lessened if the area of these crops is increased. Table 8 gives the comparable yields for such varieties as have been grown for more than one year. Fig. 4.—Al1 sorghgims grow well here. This crop was turned under green, thus supplying a large amount of humus- forming material to the soil. TABLE 8. _ Summary of Grain Sorghum Variety Tests, 1912, 1913 and 1914. t Average yield bushels t0 the acre. T. S. No Variety. 1912,1913,1914| 1912 and 1914 i . 1423 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .’ Dwarf Milo* . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 . . . . . . 35.23 I 38.59 46 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Red Kafir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * 21.25 44 and 674 . . . . . . . . Blackhul Kafir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20.51 81 and 811 . . . . . . .. Feierita . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19.75 35 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Early Blackhul Kafir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.87 19.46 34 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dwarf Blackhul Kafir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i 19.19 *The 1911 yield was 32 bushels t0 the acre, hence a four-year average for this variety would be 34.42 bushels to the acre. . In 1914 kafir and 1111lO were planted in eight plats each, in a rate of seeding test, in rows thirty-six inches apart. The results are re- ported in Table 9, which, gives the yields secured. TABLE 9. Spacing Test With Kafir and Milo, 1914. Yield in bushels to’ the Acre. Rate of seeding.—Distance between plants in the row, inches. Kafir. 1 Milo. 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.60 24.82 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.75 18.39 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.78 y 19.82 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.39 | 16.60 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.42 20.71 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.96 i 12.67 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20.35 26.01 1e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.46 l 23.76 16 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. These results, while not conclusive, indicate very strongly that the grain sorghums should not be planted too thickly for best grain yields. In this experiment the heaviest "forage yields, both green and dry, were obtained from the thicker plantings, while the smallest yields of forage were from the thinner to- medium thin plantings. - o SORGOS. Sweet sorghums or sorgos are very important here for silage and hay crops. The Sumac- variety has been the best variety grown here. Table 10 gives the data secured in tests of these crops. TABLE 10. Summary of Sorgo Variety Tests, 1912 and 1914. Yield in ppunds to the acre. Variety. - Average Green silage 1912 1914 1912 and 1914 material, 1914. Sumac . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 16,000 l 15,216 15,608 i 22,770 Minnesota Amber . . . . . . . . . 8,000 16,500 12,250 23,100 Red Amber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,620 l 12,870 9,745 20,845 Orange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 ,740 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,300 . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 21,780 Texas Seed Ribbon Cane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BROOM CORN. Broom. corn varieties Were tested in 1912 and 1914-. The results were as shown in Table 11. TABLE 11. Broom Corn Variety Tests. Yield of cured brush in pounds to the acre. Name. Average 1912 1914 two years. l Standard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820 1210 1015 Dwarf Standard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 560 = 1210 i 885 Dwarf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 370 ] 1210 790 l Not only (lid the Standard xiarietyi produce the heaviest yields, but the quality and sale values of the brush of the Standard variety were much. the best of. the three lots tested. ' SUDi-VN GRASS. Sudan grass, a crop introduced as a result of plant introduction ex- periments, has been tested for the last three seasons and is a very promising new crop for this region. The crop is a heavy producer of hay and roughage. It also is a good grazing crop. Experiments to determine the best planting date tor the crop for hay are shown in Table 1?. PROGRESS REPORT, SUBSTATION ‘No. 9, Pnoos, TExAs. 17 TABLE 12. Tests to Determine Planting Date for Sudan Grass. Yield in pounds of cured roughage Planting Date. to the acre. 1913 y 1914 1 April 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,500 5,000 April 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,000 N0 stand May 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5,600 4,500 May 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,200 une 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N0 stand It would appear from these two tests that the time of seeding in the spring is not extremely important. In 191~1 seedings 0n two dates were abandoned because rains came before the plants broke through the soil and the field baked so badly that no stand was secured. ln 1913 an experiment was carried out to determine the best rate of seeding of Sudan grass. The results are given in Table 13. TABLE 13. Rate of Seeding Tests of Drilled Sudan Grass. Yield 0f cured roughage in pounds to the acre. Pounds seed planted to the acre. 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . .. 2,500 20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3,770 3O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4,390 40 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5,160 The heaviest seeding rate not only gave double the yield of the lightest rate, but the heavy seeding rate also produced hay of a much finer quality. One of the problems in Sudan grass growing has been the produeé tion of seed as a money crop. Seed production has been very satisfac- tory here, the yields having been from 209 to 745 pounds to the acre. Tests conducted indicate that for seed the crop may be planted in rows at the rate of five to ten pounds to the acre, planting being done at the same time of year as for hay. ‘ SORGO-IJEGUlWE MIXTURES FOR HAY. After some preliminary trials, sorgo mixed with cowpeas as a hay crop was tested in 1914. The two best sorgos shown in Table 1O were grown in mixtures with three different varieties of cowpeas. Sorghum grown alone yielded 6 to 8 tons of forage to the acre and cowpeas yielded 1 to 1.25 tons, but it was possible to secure only about 2 to 2.75 tons of the mixture of cowpeas and sorghum. This one experiment indicates that while the mixed hay is probably of better feeding value than sorghum alone, it is doubtful if the yield obtained will justify the practice. The detail data are given in Table 14. 18 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. TABLE 14. Sorgo-Legume Mixture for Hay Experiments, 1914. Mixture. _ _ Yield in tons of cured hay Sorgo Variety. Cowpea Variety. to the acre. Sumac . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Groit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2.74 Minnesota Amber . . . . . . . . . . . . Groit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.14 Sumac . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . New Era . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.65 Minnesota Amber . . . . . . . . . . . . New Era. . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.84 Sumac . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unknown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.02 Minnesota Amber . . . . . . . . . . . . Unknown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.35 Average of Sumac Sorgo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.70 Average of Minnesota Amber. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.11 Average of Groit Cowpeas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.44 Average of New Era Cowpeas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.24 Average of Unknown Cowpeas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.18 The results of the 1914 test indicate that Sumac sorgo and Groit cowpeas are superior to the other varieties tested. The yields, however, were very low. MISCELLANEOUS PLANT INTRODUCTION TESTS. In 11912, 1913 and 1914 numerous crops not grown in this region were tested, including varieties being tested in the United States for the first time, the seed being furnished by the United States Department of Agriculture. ~ These plant introduction tests have included, in addition to the varieties treated of in other parts of this report, the following: Varieties. i No. of lots. Soy bean- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 55 Guar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lyon bean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Kulthi bean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Moth bean . . . . . . . . .9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yokahomra bean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Velvet bean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dolichos Zablab . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Beggar weed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Chick pea. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 522 White clover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sweet clover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Crimson clover . . . . . . . . . . . . . r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lupine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bur clover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hairv vetch . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cana-zialia ensifornzi< . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Field. pea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l-‘OUP-‘(QIOKOC/‘Jl-l l—*®l\'Jl—*OQ}-Pl—*l\') Of these plants, only the Moth bean gave the appearance of possess- ing potential importance. The failure of several lots was due to depre- dations by rabbits. PROGRESS REPoRr, SUBSTATION No. 9, Pecos, TEXAS. 19 TOBACCO. . Cuban Sumatra tobacco was planted in 1911. The crop- made fine sinewy leaves eight to ten inches long and four to six inches wide,. with a very light color. The test was not repeated. DRY BEAN S». This region is probably adapted to the production of dry beans. tIn- vestigations on this subject have consisted in the testing of varieties or strains of snap beans, Lima beans and Frijoles. Lima beans have not been a success. Garden varieties have been difficult to produce and the yields have been small. The beans have yielded as follows: TABLE 15. Bean Production, 1911, 1912, 1913 and 1914. Number Year of Lots. Yields. 1911 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Good. 1912 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Rather poor. 1913 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 bu. to acre. 1914 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Failure. GARDEN CROPS. Only preliminary work has been done with vegetables and truck crops. In general, it may be said that the soil must be heavily manured before these crops may be grown with any large degree of success. The application of at least twenty tons of partially rotted manure has made it possible to grow garden crops satisfactorily, both in regard to yield and quality. Nearly all the kinds of vegetables usually grown have been tried and have been reasonably successful except the garden pea, the Irish potato and the sweet potato. Cantaloupes have been grown on a rather extensive scale, having yielded at the rate of 1'75 crates to the acre. They must be carefully cultivated and require spraying for the aphis. - Repeated extensive experiments have been conducted with onions. The Denial onion producing 95 per cent. marketable onions, yielded at the rate of 15,860 pounds to the acre in 1913. ' VINEYARD. Grape varieties to the number of fifty-four have been planted. Gen- erally from three to turenty vines of each variety have been used. The greater proportion of the varieties tested have been of the European type. To date, the vineyard has not been very successful. ORCHARD. In 1911 an orchard of four and one-half acres was set out. The trees planted included a number 0t varieties each 0t peaches, plums, apples, pears, prunes, quinces, apricots, cherries, almonds, walnuts and 20 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. pecans. Approximately fifty per cent. of these trees died during the late summer. In 1912, two acres were set to fruit trees. The weather was very unfavorable and only about ten per cent of the trees ever started to grow. At the end of the summer but 150 trees remained alive. These consisted of pears, peaches, apricots and plums. In 1913, the orchard continued to deteriorate. The apple trees ap- peared to be most severely affected, while the peaches and apricots semed to be making the best growth. In 1914 replanting was again resorted to but the growth has not been encouraging. Various small fruits, including blackberries, Himalaya berries, rasp~ berries and strawberries have been tested but with very poor results. SUMMARY. This bulletin is in fact a detail of a portion of the Directofs report. A brief history is given of Substation No.9 and a report of the more important Work accomplished up to the close of the crop year 1914. The Station is located near Pecos in Western Texas. The soil is somewhat gyppy and irrigation is necessary. The meteorological data presented shows temperatures ranging from 112 degrees to #1 degrees Fahrenheit, with a mean annual temperature of 64.4 degrees. Because of cold nights the spring is slow and late. The rainfall is decidedly variable in arnount,-ra11ging from approxi- mately 5 to 20 inches per annum. The years covered in this report had probably more than the usual amount of precipitation. Cotton has been one of the most successful crops grown in the experi- ments, a number of tests having produced a bale to the acre. Variety tests have been carried out and indicate that cotton varieties of excel- lent staple may be grown with profitable yields. No one best variety 4 is named, although Durango, Mebane Triumph and several less well known varieties made good yields. Alfalfa has been only partially successful. Variety tests indicate that home grown seed and the Peruvian are the better of the sorts tested. Fifty-six lots of cowpeas have been tested. The Unknown has been the best yielder of hay and seed. Grain sorghums are well adapted and‘ have been the most. successful of all grain crops grown here. Milo ha.s made an average yield of 34.4 bushels to the acre for four years. In rate-of-planting tests the results secured indicate that too thick planting should not be attempted. Variety tests of the sorgos or sweet sorghums are in favor of Sumac and Minnesota Amber, and the Sumac variety is advised for use. Broom corn has made good yields. The variety tests are in favor of the Standard type. _ Sudan grass has been very successfully grown both for hay and as a seed crop. It may be seeded in April or May. Forty pounds of seed tothe acre gave greater hay yields than less heavy seedings. The seed production has been good. PROGRESS Bnronr, SUBSTATION N0. 9, Pecos,‘ TEXAS. _ 21 lVIixtures of sorghums and cowpéas have been grown. Their use is not advised. A large number of new legumes and some other plants have been tested for adaptation with rather few favorable results. Cantaloupcs and onions have made good yields. Garden crops re- quire that heavy manuring be practiced. An experimental vineyard and orchard have been planted but with ' indifferent success.