A294-7l 8-1 Om TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION BULLETIN N0. 230 JUNE, 1918 DIVISION OF AGRONOMY SPACING 0F ROWS IN 001m AND ITS“ EFFECT UPON GRAIN YIELD B. YOUNGBLOOD, Dnmcwon OOLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS. AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE OF TEXAS W. B. BizzELL, A. M., D. C. L., President TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS JOHN 1. GUION, Ballinger, President L. J. HART, San Antonio, Vice-Pre-"Ie-I‘ E. H. ASTIN, Bryan... Term expires 1919 Term expires 1919 J. R. KUBENA, Fa ettevilla A. B. DAVIDSON, uero ....... .. WILL A. MILLER, JR., Amarillo Joan T. DICKSON, Paris H. A. BHEIHAN, Bartlett F. M. LAW, Houston ................................ ............. .. Term expires 1919 Term expires 1921 Term expires 1921 Term expires 1921 Term expires 1923 Term expires 1923 .................................................... ..Term expires 1923 MAIN STATION COMMITTEE L. J. HART, Chairman WILL A. MILLER, JR. GOVERNING BOARD, STATE SUBSTATIONS P. L. Downs, Temple, President.. CHARLES RooAN, Austin, Vice-President J. E. Booc-ScoTT, Coleman... Term expires 1919 Terin expires 1923 R. M. JOHNSTON, Ilauston ...... .. Term expires 1921 Term expires 1918 *STATION STAFF ADMINISTRATION B. YOUNGBLOOD, M. S., Director A. B. CONNER, B. S., Vice Director CHAS. A. FELRER, Chief Clerk A. S. WARE, Secretary W. T. BRINK, B. S., Executive Assistant in Charge Library and Publication Enrru H. PIiILLIPs, M. S., Technical Assistant DIVISION OF VETERINARY SCIENCE "M. FRANCIS, D. V. S., Veterinarian in Charge H. SCHMIDT, D. V. M., Veterinarian D. H. BENNETT, V. M. D., Assistant Veterinarian ' DIVISION OF CHEMISTRY G. S. Faxes, Ph. D., Chemist in Charge; State Chemist T. B. LEITI-I, B. A., Assistant Chemist FRANCES SUMMERELL, B. S., Assistant Chemist —E———-—, Assistant Chemist DIVISION OF HORTICULTURE H. NEss, M. S., Horticulturist in Charge W. S. HoTcIIKiss, Horticulturist DIVISION OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY J. C. Bonus, B. S.,_Animal Husbandman, Feeding Investigations J. M. Jones, A. M., Animal Husbandman, Breeding lnvesti ations P. V. Ewmc, M. ., Animal Husbandman, Swine Investigations DIVISION OF ENTOMOLOGY F. B. PADDOCK, M. S., Entomologist‘ in Charge; State Entomologist ‘ ' - ' " ‘ H. J. REINRARD, B. S., molouist gist i; County Apiary Inspectoii R. C. Abernathy, Ladonia; Willi jfi ley, Mathis; J. W. E. Basham, w T. W. Burleson, Waxahachie; W. CI‘ 0.1- lier, Goliad; E. W. Cothran, Roxton; G. F. Davidson, Pleasanton; John Hcrbold, Seguin; S.T. Graham, Milano;J. B. King, Batesville; N. G. LeGear, Waco; R. A. Little, Pearsall; S. H. Stephens, Uvalde; M. B. Tally, Victoria: . . Watson, Heidenheimer; M. E. Van Every, Fabens; R. A. Nestor, Buffalo; J. E. Bush, San Antonio; H. A. Jones, Oakdale; T. A. Bpwdon, Palestine; E. R. Jones, Bee- ville. DIVISION OF AGRONOMY A. B. CoNNER, B. S., Agronomist in Charge A. H. LEIDIGH, B. S., Agronomist ———-——— ———, Agronomist Louis “fizmiiELsKIRcIiEN, B. S., Agronomist DIVISION OF PLANT PATHOLOGY AND ~»PH-1'»SlOLOG¥-~ I . . a .1. J. TAUBENHAUS, _Ph._ D., Plant Patholo- gist and Physiologist in Charge ASUBSTATION NO. 3: Ass istaitvilirl DIVISION OF POULTRY HUSBANDRY R. N. HARVEY. B. S., Poultryman in Charge DIVISION OF FORESTRY E. O. SIECKE, M. F., Forester in Charge, State Forester ~ DIVISION OF PLANT BREEDING E. P. HuunERT, Ph. D., Plant Breeder in Charge DIVISION OF DAIRYING W. A. DOUBT. Dairyman “WSOIL SURVEY ————~——~—, Soil Surveyor J. F. STROUD, Soil Surveyor DIVISION OF FEED CONTROL SERVICE F. D. FULLER, M. S., Chief JAM Es SULLIVAN, Executive Secretary H. RocERs, Inspector . H. Woon, Inspector . D. PEARCE, Inspector . M. WICKES, Inspector . F. CHRISTIAN, Inspector . W. SNELL, Inspector . J . KELLY, Inspector SUBSTATION NO. 1: Beeville, Bee County ‘ I. E. COWART, M. S., Superintendent SUBSTATION NO. 2: Troup, Smith County W. S. HoTcI-Iiciss, Superintendent Angleton, Brazor a =~2s“2P County _ E. A. MILLER. B. S., Superintendent SUBSTATION NO. 4: Beaumont, Jetferson County H. H. LAUDB, B. S., Superintendent G. PuRvis, Scientific Assistant SUBSTATION NO. 5: Temple, Bell County T. KiLLoucI-i, B. S., Superintendent ‘D. SUBSTATION NO. 6: Denton, Denton County .Q C H McDowELL, B. S., Superintendent LTSUBSTATWON NO. 7: Spur, Dickens County R. E. DicKsoN, B. S., Superintendent E M. SMELTZER, Scientific Assistant fksunsTsriou no. s. Lubbock, Lubbock County R. E. KARPER, B. S., Superintendent D. L JONES. Scientific Assistant SUBSTATION NO. 9; Pecos, Reeves Count} J. W. JACKSON, B. S., Superintendent SUBSTATION NO. l0: (Feeding and Breedln| Substation), College Station, Brssoi County N. E. WINTERS, M. S., Superintendent L. C. WILKINSON, Scientific Assistant SUBSTATION NO. 11: Nacogdoches, Nseoli doches County _ G. T. McNEss, Superintendent SUBSTATION NO. 12: Chillicothe, Horde man County *"*A. B. CRoN, B. S., Superintendent _ V. E. HAFNER, B. S., Scientific Assistant SUBSTATION NO. 14, Sonora,_ Sutton Count; E. M. PETERs, B S., Superintendent ‘ ‘ liitlS/ZTSISTIAINTAIS 5 D 1S L E,R ' ion. .3 . q HS X r, H. *7 m,» EYJ/Iailinv Clerk fiiACfFnlisnxsfgg ' wrap eh’? i i‘ Azielfithgilffgtfihfilolgfif phat Eirliiinéatw‘ RAZIER, Steno- MARGARET SHELDON, Stenographer RUTH GILLIAM, Stenographer ‘As of Ju'y 1, 1918. grapher "In cooperation with A. s’ M. College of Texas. our“ nnnnflrniiflfl with United States Department of Aariculture CONTENTS ‘ PAGE Location of the Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .5 Methods of’ conducting tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 7 At College Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '7 At Beeville . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9 At Troup .. _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ._ . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 At Angleton . . . . . . . . . . . 'I .1 . . . . . . . . .- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 At Beaumont . . . . . . . . . . . . . u. . . . . . . . . . . . .‘ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 At Temple . . . . . . . . . . . . . .' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 At Nacogdoches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19 Summary of lresults . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . 19 Conclusions,‘ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 [Blank Page in Original Bulletin] SPACING OF ROWS IN CORN AND ITS EFFECT UPON GR-AIN YIELD A. B. Coxxna, AGRONOMIST Much has been said about growing corn in widely spaced rows as a. means of increasing the grain yield. Experience seems to show that corn planted in rows spaced widely apart; produces a better quality of grain than corn planted in regular width rows; and, no doubt, this 0b- servation has led to the belief that wide. row planting of corn is con- ducive to higher yields. The width of the row might also involve cer~ tain advantages in farm practice. such as the introduction of intertillcrl legume crops, the eradication of weeds and grass, or the early prepara- tion of the land for small grain. It is the purpose of this bulletin to deal onlv with that phase of width of row work which has to do with the yield of grain per acre. treating the other phases involved in sue-- ceerling papers. The Division of Agronomy has conducted a series of test-s, embrac- ing a. total of 234 plats, at seven different points in the State, over a period of from two to five years at each point. for the purpose of deter- mining the efliect of the width of the row on the grain yield. LOCATION OF THE WORK The experiments reported in this paper havelbeen conducted for five successive years at the Main Station, College Station; for four years at substations at Beeville, Troup, r/Xngleton and Temple; for three years at Beaumont; and for two years at Nacogdoches. These points rep- resent dilferent soil and climatic conditions existing in the corn-grow- ing regions of Texas, and the results secured would seem applicable to the different agricultural regions in this State that grow corn. METHODS OF CONDUCTING TESTS Every possible p-recaution has been taken in the conduct of these tests to eliminate errors due to conditions surrounding the work. The previous treatment of the land, as regards cropping and soil prepara tion, has been the same for all plats under comparison at any one place each year. The same variety of corn has been used in comparative tests, the same time of planting used, and the same cultivation prac— ticed throughout. The matter of stand, which is one of the most com- mon sources of error, has been determined in every case, with two or three exceptions, by actual count of the mature plants on the land. Some differences in stand have been noted, nearly alwayfs in favor of the narrowly spaced rows. These differences, however, are so slight in most cases as to- be considered insignificant. It must be borne in mind that while the spacing of the rows was varied, the number of stalks per , acre was constant. Tllhus, one stalk wvas. grown on each square yard, whether the middles were three feet ivide with three feet between the - 6 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION "z [fiver UBSTPTION O // \ \ Q i ‘w 1;- h. Figure 1.—'1:he shacled tion of the map is the firincipal corn growing region of Texas. The points designa show the location of t e work reported in this bulletin. Map adapted from “Geography of the W0rld’s Agriculture” United States Department of Agriculture, 1918. r SPACING Rows IX (fonx AND EFFECT UPoN GRAIN YIELD 7‘ stalks in the row, or six feet wide with, eighteen inches between the stialiks in the row. The further precaution of using guard rows, both at the ends and at the sides of plats, was taken to obtain conditions comparable ‘and applicable in the field under the systems of planting used. Figure 2.—Spacing of rows three feet apart, with individual stalks 36 inches apart in the row. This distribution carries 4840 stalks to the acre. _ _ t apart, with individual stalks 18 inches apart in the row. This distribution carries 4840 stalks to the acre. Figure liq-Spacing of rows six fee D RESULTS At College Station The test at College Station has covered a period of five successive years, 1912 to 1916, inclusive. Each year comparisons were made bee-- tween rows spaced three feet apart and rows spaced six feet apart. In 1912, 1913 and 1914, an additional series, in which two rows spaced three feet apart alternated with two fallow rows spaced three feet apart, was added as a third distribution. The results for the five-year period are shown in the following table. TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION wmwh; 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I332 08> v 030m . 0.0m m mwmmm 3w“ _ ........fimnn $3 m mBoFBo=m~ 93 52B mcfiwcporm :25 30.3 m v.33 oEP 2 5.3 M98 v $.03 2 0502 7R. w 00.03 2K m mwaw 5E H ........:_._mnm 3o80 3 03.5.. 20.2w v wmzmm _ M32 7% v 52E 0.0m 0 seam 0.32 3 .........t....Q_§@£m .35 .352 32a .25 32a .25 .323 .332 .35 053m 32a .35 .35»? .32: .322 32> 58 dZ 32> d2 32> 3:2. dZ 32> 52. dZ 32> 5o... .c.Z d: wit... 3m 30¢ 96¢. 5m 96¢. 5m u$< 5m .32! .5 @555 23oF , 0Z2 22 v23 22 N13 doimwm 23:00 3m v53.» zm 5.. 32> QmmEE/w irzwqvm 23 35 3233 M22352» .5 $.55 E03 98v we 32> >imo> wmm$>< 73cm. P5< hi v.6< _ 5m . v.64 0.34 $32 we miuaam £2 :2 .22 N23 .o_=>oom~ t» mbwuw =m .5.“ EwT». Quartz“ ifivcom 23 wax mfiE? mcTCE» “o mkFC Eob Eco Mo Eat». him?» omw~o><||d Esau. SPACING Rows IN CoRN AND EFFECT UPON GRAIN YIELD 11 During the seasons of 1912 and 1913, Weather conditions were quite favorable for corn production. In both 1914 and 1915, the rainfall was rather limited in June and July, the time when the corn most needed water. This point is brought out to emphasize the fact that» during these two years conditions were more or less favorable to the thinner stands shown in the six-foot spacing. The yields, however, are consistently in favor of the three-foot spacing showing an average, for the four-year period, of 23.83 bushels per acre for the three-foot spac-- ing and 22.33 bushels per acre for the six-foot spacing. The third dis- tribution, i. e., two rows spaced three feet apart alternating with two fallow rows spaced three feet apart, showed practically the same results as the six-foot spacing. At Troup The test at Substation No. 2, Troup, has covered a. four-year period, 1914 to 1917, inclusive, and in each year a. comparison was made be- tween rows spaced three feet apart and rows spaced Six feet apart. The results are shown in the following table. TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 12 a .-. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . ., ...-...}_....... . . -. . . .. . . . . . ... &..% % .-...--..--..---.-@.~NQ“ W wand m E53 30:3 c>5 s23 . . . - _ . . . . cinch: a ~22? $3 $50k c? $52 i 3...: m Q m. Em wH m w 2 ww m m a w 3 w .........T.........w.3§2¢.w ow 2 E mo on w 2w w. ‘Q13 N v.2 3 m v.2 58 w ....................t§H32m Q5 6cm? 5E3 .25 dam a .25 653w 42m a d _ 6E3 dam a .25 ESQ 22> .39. d Z 32> .Q7- 22> E3 67¢ Him.» 880w .o7_~ wwmwumwn ._.wo~H./.HH E04 Sm 33» ofi< 5m P6< Sm £33 .3 wiomnm Quasi . 22 22 m2: E2 dsofifi 2w fiwoh =m 3w wflvw» Qmm~o>m wfiucow of wax £338 w=r€m> Mo v52“! 59c :3... Mo Eur» htwoh vwm~o> dfifla 32h $6.. dZ 32> 26v d2 32>. dZ E22 dZ 98m dc v84 3m E04 5m 98¢. v.64 .222 .3 @3225 omw~u>< 13cm. :2 £2 32 .22 £2215... .2“ F50» z.“ .3» 32> owmgo?» ikocvw v5 ucm ESE? M5252» we v.30» Eob Eou mo 32> his?» vmm~o><'.v 03mm. sPACING Rows IN CORN AND EFFECT UPON GRAIN YIELD 15 The average yearly yields here favor the three-foot spacing through- out. Thc average yield for all years is 22.93 bushels per acre for the three-foot spacing and 20.03 bushels per acre for the six-foot spacing, a difference of 2.90 bushels per acre. In 191.2 and 1914, the third distribution showed no marked difier- ence from the six-foot sp-acing. At Becvuvno-nt The results at Substation No. 4, Beaumont, covered a period of three years, 1915, 1916 and 1917. Rows spaced three ‘feet apart were coIn- ‘ pared with rows spaced six feet apart with the results shown in the fol- lowing table. TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 16 x23 mwnmm w. $.05 2m m ans». mo? m 3S 9Q . . . . . . . . .......t.w.awafi. g R 8. g c $4: mam m 8am 2Z5 m wwem we.“ . . . . . . . . ................t~%$8m .25, 653w _ .25 écwi AGE .25 652w $33 .22 £53m 32> .29. fifia v3?» Boo dZ 32% “coo dZ v1?» QCOO > v.64 Lwm iwngzmh. P6< Sm P6< 5m o.6< Ewm £3“: “o x283. ¢w§>< .22 £2 22 Jcofismwm “F. Em?» =w .5.“ 32> ommhz/a Ehocww o5 can 233B M??? .3 n33 59¢ F8“. we ma»? 3.59» wwm$>< $2.0M. £2 £2 v23 22 d-QEQA Hm mhaoz zm he.“ 33a owEoZw 123% v5 wan v.53? $18.? “o 2&2 E9: E8 we 32> >13» @w§»><|.w 2am’... / SPAOING Rows IN CORN‘ AND EFFECT UPON GRAIN YIELD 19 1t is observed that the results show consistently better yields from the three-foot spacing than from the six-foot spacing. The stands in 191-1 were considered unsatisfactory. The third distribution shows lower yields than either the three-foot spacing or the six-foot spacing. At lVacog/d 0 cites The test at Substation No. 11, Nacogdoches, has covered a period of two Ivears, 1913 and 1914. During this time a comparison ivas made between three-cfoot spacing and six-foot spacing. The results are shown in the following table. Table 7.——Averag,e yearly yield of corn from rows of varying widths and the general average yield for all years at Nacogdoches. 1913 - » 1914 l _ Total Average Spacing of rows. Acre Per Acre no. acre N0. yield No. a cent yield plats. yield plats. bus. plats. stand. bus. bus. 3 feet apart . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2 9.60 4 100.0 6.07 6t 6 feet apart . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2 8.20 4 77.2 8.821 6 In 1913, the results favored the three-foot spacing. In 19111, how- ever, the ‘results seemed to favor the six-foot spacing. The months of June and July, l10VV€VG1‘,-WQ1'Q verv drv and favored the thinner spac- ing. The average yields for the two jvears show 7.81 bushels per acre for the three-foot spacing and 8.51 bushels per acre for the six-foot spacing, or an advantage of .70 bushels for the six-foot spacing. Salv/nmarg/ 0f Results The following table shows the average results for regular and wide spacing of rows at the several (lifferent points where the test was con- ducted. No attempt has been made to average the results for the third distribution in this summarv table, as an average of this distribution would in nowise be comparable to the other material presented. Table 8.—Average yield of corn planted in wide and narrow rows at different points, and average for all points. Acre yield bushels. Spacing of rows. v College Bee- ' Angle- Beau- Nacog- Aver~ Station. ville. l Troup. ton. rnont. Temple. doehes. age. '3 feet apart . . . . . . . . . . . .. 27.40 23.83 16.80 22.93 27.94 27.18 - 7.81 21 .98 6 feet apart . . . . . . . . . . . .. 24.20 22.33 15.99 20.03 26.84 22.82 8.51 20.10 It is seen that the average results at College Station, Beeville, Troup, Anglcton, Beaumont, and Temple favor the regular, or three-foot, spac- ‘ing; while the average results at Nacogdoches are slightly in favor of the xvide, or six-foot, spacing. The general average at all points is 21.98 bushels per acre for the regular, or three-foot, spacing, and 20.10 bushels per acre for the Wide, or six-foot spacing, a difference of 1.88 bushels per acre in favor of regular spacing. i n 2O TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION CON CLUS-I ONS Experiments reported in this paper deal only with the comparative- yields secured from corn 1n xvidely and narrowly spaced rows, having“ the same number of plants to the acre. The experiments reported cover 234 separate trials at seven points in the State, for a period of from two to five years, and are regarded as reliable. _ Better stands were secured from plantings made in regular rows spaced three feet apart than from rows spaced six feet apart. Regular distribution of corn plants on the land favors as large or larger grain yields than irregular distribution. Irregular distribution, i. e._, six-foot spacing, may prove more profitable than regular spacings Without actually resulting in greater yields of grain, inasmuch as Wide middles are better suited to the in- troduction of intertilled legume crops, allow cheaper cultivation where the land is weedy, and under certain conditions give better preparation for small grains. Whether or not wide spacing is more profitable than regular spacing depends upon local conditions in every individual case. The results presented in this paper emphasize the fact that the mere widening of the rows will not increase the grain yield, and the practice- should not be followed except in cases where other advantages result. ._ ,__...n.._..n.‘_..~.i.;