5“ E." 'A327-1119-15M-L TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT snnon AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE OF TEXAS ' ‘ W. B. BIZZELL, President ‘ EQBULLETIN NO. 254 _ NOVEMBER, l9l9 \ \ _J REPORT OF EXPERIMENTS AT SUBSTATION NO. 11, NACOGDOCHES, TEXAS ~ B. YOUNGBLOOD, DIRECTOR COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, mans STATION STAFF T ADMINISTRATION B. YOUNGBLOOD, M. S., Director A. B. Cowman, B. S., Vice Director J. M. JONES, A. M., Assistant Director CHAS. A. FELKER, Chief Clerk A. S. WARE, Secretary .............................. Executive Assistant CHARLES Sosoux, Technical Assistant VETERINARY SCIENCE *M. FRANCIS, D. V. M., Chief H. Scrmmr, D. V. S., Veterinarian D. H. BENNETT, V. M. D., Veterinarian CHEMISTRY G. S. FBAPS. Ph_. D., Chief; State Chemist S. E. ASBUHY. M. S., Assistant Chemist S. LoMANiTz. B. S.. Assistant Chemist F. B. SCHILLING. B. S., Assistant Chemist J. B. SMITH.‘ B. S., Assistant Chemist HORTICULTURE H. NESS, M. S.. Chief W. S. HoTcmuss, Horticulturist ANIMAL INDUSTRY J. M. Jonas, A. M., Chief; Sheep and Goat Investigations IJ. C. Burms, B. S.. Animal Husbandman in Charge of Beef Cattle Investigations (on leave) R. M. SHFRWOOD, B. S., Poultryman J B NICNULTY, B S , Dairyman ENTOMOLOGY M. C. TANQUARY, Ph. D., Chief; State Ento- mologist H. J. REINHARD, B. S., Entomologist H. B. PARKS, B. S., Apiculturist iii-w Assistant Entomologist AGRONOMY A. B. CONNER, B. S., Chief A. H. Lemma, B. S., Agronomist E. W. GEYER, B. S., Agronomist H. H. LAUDE, M. S.. Agronomist PLANT PATHOLOGY AND PHYSIOLOGY J. J. TAUBENHAUS, Ph. D., Chief_ FEED CONTROL SERVICE e F. I). FULLFR, M. S., Chi JAMES SULLIVAN, Executive Secretary FORESTRY E. O. SIECKE, B. S.. Chief; State Forester PLANT BREEDING E. P. HUMBEBT, Ph. D., Chief FARM AND RANCH ECONOMICS H. M. ELIOT, M. A., Chief SOIL SURVEY O. E. IVICCONNELL, B. S.. Animal Husband- man in Charge of Swine Investigations G. R. WARREN, B. S., Assistant Animal Hus- **\V. T. CARTER, JR., B. S., Chief J. F. S-rRouo, Soil Surveyor T. M. Busnmznu. B. S.. Soil Surveyor bandman _ R. G. BREWER, B. S., Assistant Animal Hus- W. B. FRANCIS, B. 5-. S01! 511F116!!!" bandman SUBSTATIONS No. 1. Beeville, Bee County N 8. Lubbock, Lubbock County o. R. E. KARPER, B. S.. Superintendent D. L. Jomzs. Scientific Assistant G. M. Rows, Forest Nurseryman and Ir- rigationist ~ No. 9. Pecosfllteeves County J. \V. JACKSON, B. S., Superintendent No. 10. (Feeding and Breeding Substation), College Station, Brazos County J. W. LUKER, B. S.. Superintendent E. CAMERON, Scientific Assistant No. l1. Nacogdoches, Nacogdoches County G. T. McNEss, Superintendent - **No. 12. Chillicothe, Hardeman County A. B. CRON, B. S., Su erintendent V. E. HAFNER, B. S., cientific Assistant No. 14. Sonora, Sutton-Edwards Countiel E. M. PETERS, B. S., Superintendent l. E. COWART, M. S., Superintendent No. 2.‘ Troup, Smith County W. S. Horcmuss, Superintendent No. 3. Angleton, Brazoria County E. B. REYNOLDS, M. S., Superintendent No. 4. Beaumont, Jefferson County A. H. PRINCE, B. S., Superintendent No. 5. Temple, Bell County D. T. KILLOUGH, B. S., Superintendent No. 6. Denton, Denton County C. H. McDowELL, B. S., Superintendent No. 7. Spur, Dickens County R. E. DICKSON, B. S., Superintendent TAs of December l, 1919. - flu cooperation with School of Agriculture, A. & M. College of Texas *In cooperation with the School of Veterinary Medicine, A. & M. College of Texas. "In cooperation with the United States Department of Agriculture. BULLETIN N0. 254. NOVEMBER, 1919. REPORT OF EXPERIMENTS AT SUBSTATION NO. ll, NACOGDQCHES, TEXAS. G. T. McNEss, SUPERINTENDENT. The substation at Nacogdoches is located two and three-fourths miles "Wnorth of the town of Nacogdoches upon the Henderson and Nacog- Qdoches road. The soils of the Station are the Orangeburg and Green- i ville series, which soils have a red or gray top soil with a red sandy- clay subsoil. The predominating soil of the Station is the Orangeburg {fine sandy loam, and upon this soil most of the experiments are ~. conducted. A The Station consists of eighty-two and one-half acres of land, of “which thirty and four-tenths acres are used for experimental pur- ., poses, six and-nine-tenths for Station roads and turn roads, one and one-tenth for the public road, two and two-tenths acres for farmstead, Land forty-one and nine~tenths acres for timber and pasture. i‘ The farmstead consists of the Superintendent’s residence, office build- ing, laborers’ cottages, tobacco barn, stock barn, implement shed and }gin house, and an insect-proof seed house. The entire property is enclosed by a Woven wire hog-proof fence. The tillable portion of the Station is laid off into 8x20-rod acre plats qgWith a 16.5-foot road around each acre. _ The buildings and the equipment as well as the platting system on the Station have been developed primarily for the purpose of forward- » ing the conduct and the completion of experiments with crops, soils, and fertilizers. ' ' ‘i In connection with the actual investigation, there is conducted a jystematic crop rotation over that portion of the Station used for iperimental purposes. This rotation consists of eight series, em- . Tracing two, three and four-year rotations. By this system the soil "éertility of the field is maintained and increased. This rotation system, lw connection with early deep fall-plowing, has increased the soil fer- iffty,‘ as shown by the increased yields obtained each year from the iarious experiments. - l? For the past three years an average of three hundred farmers have rited the Station at various times of the year in order to study the i; eriments under progress and to seek information in regard to their i: u problems. Exhibits from this Station have been made at the State Fair at 1i allas during the time covered by this report. The following investigations have been made and are being continued I the Station: "Introduction and testing of new field crops. iiField crop variety test. ,1 Plant breeding. TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. H>~ Methods of production tests with staple field crops. Fertilizer and rotation tests. ' Orchard introduction and variety test. Arboretum. Seed production tests. Forage production tests. Increased plantings of the better varieties of crops. Soil improvement tests. Terracing and draining. Meteorology. METEOROLOGICAL DATA. Since 1913 the Station has been equipped with apparatus for securing climatic data. Records are made of rainfall, snowfall, evaporation from a free water surface, percentage of atmospheric humidity, mini- mum and maximum temperatures, and of wind movements. Observa- tions are made twice daily. . The climatic conditions for the three years, covered by this report, with the exception of the drouth of .1917, have been favorable for crop production. However, the results obtained from the tests conducted with a variety of crops, indicate that the earlier in the season plantings can be made the larger will be the yields. Summaries of the meteorological records for 1916 to 1918 are‘ given in the following tables: Table 1.—Monthly meteorological data, 1916. I . Temperatures. . Total v Humidity Previpi- Evapo- Miles Month Absolute ' Mean tation ration Wind . ——————i— Monthly Per Cent Inches Inches Velocity Max. Min. Mean January . . . . . . . . .. 77 14 54.32 77. 50 8. 30 1.123 4272 February . . . . . . . . . 79 20 53.01 70. 50 0.23 2.263 4079 arc . . . . . . . . . . . 88 28 61 87 51.00 0.72 4.437 3110 April 88 32 63 26 77.90 5.26 4.149 3929 May . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 48 72 24 78.32 11.32 4.724 3328 June . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 57 78 91 78.86 2.22 4.961 2866 July . . . . . . . . . . . .. 99 68 82 19 81.74 4.09 4.443 1731 August . . . . . . . . . . . 98 59 81.93 80.45 1.92 3.904 1780 September . . . . . . . . 99 40 76.15 78.06 0 77 4.450 1850 October . . . . . . . . .. 91 34 67.09 74.00 1 40 3.730 2191 November . . . . . . .. 85 i 19 55.58 76.00 3 73 2.057 2715 December. . . . . . 79 15 50.61 78.45 3 23 1.675 3879 Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 19 41 916 35730 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66. 43 75.23 Extreme... . . . 99 14 I REPORT 0F EXPERIMENTS AT SUBSTATION N0. 11. 5 Table 2.—Monthly meteorological data, 1917. ' Temperatures ‘Total ——— Humidity Precipi- Evapo- Miles Month Abso‘. ute I Mean tation ration Wind ————————— Monthly Per Cent Inches Inches Velocity Max. Min. ean January . . . . . . . . . . 79 21 51.51 86.09 3.12 1.325 3684 , February . . . . . . . .. 84 15 52.8 81.32 3.87 2.313 3623 Marc . . . . . . . . . . . 85 24 58. 78 84.00 2.38 3. 366 4975 April 84 36 63. 5 78. 40 3. 75 4. 350 4090 J May . . . . . . . . . . . .. 92 41 66.5 80.50 2.73 4.614 3503 June . . . . . . . . . . . .. 102 49 79.1 70.96 0.48 6.880 3071 July . . . . . . . . . . . .. 105 62 81.90 81.00 5.92 5.838 2163 . August . . . . . . . . . .. 103 57 82.50 75. 80 0.41 7.173 1917 September . . . . . . . . 97 49 75. 6 79. 3O 2. 77 4. 464 ' 1540 October . . . . . . . . .. 94 26 . 62.64 69.16 1.27 4.496 2985 November . . . . . . . . 8O 28 55. 68 72.83 0. 84 - 2. 608 2073 Derember . . . . . . . . 78 14 46.48 81.54 0.72 1.713 2861 Total. . . .' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 28 26 49 140 36485 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 74 78.40 Extreme . . . . . . 105 14 I Table 3.—Monthly meteorological data, 1918. Temperatures _ _ Total a Humidity Precipi- Evap0- Miles Month Absolute Mean tation ration Wind -—ii—— Monthly Per Cent Inches Inches Velocity Max Min. Mean January . . . . . . . . . . 78 1 41 . 95 84. 45 1 . 18 1 . 568 4238 ..February . . . . . . . . . 88 24 56. 21 87. 17 1_. 1 1 1 . 762 3993 March . . . . . . . . . . . 89 34 64. 19 76.84 1.99 4.011 3713 88 37 65.28 78.51 8.20 3.895 3407 . ay . . . . . . . . . . . .. 92 51 74.50 78.19 2.10 5.451 3685 June . . . . . . . . . . . .. 103 67 83.13 71.79 2.84 6.387 2146 July . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 62 83. 29 72. 16 1 . 39 7. 398 2081 IAugust . . . . . . . . . . . 102 67 82. 41 87.24 5. 18 5. 802 1856 September . . . . . . . . 96 44 72. 65 89.03 2.81 5.028 2027 October . . . . . . . . . . 96 36 69 . 06 93 . 08 4. 91 2. 738 1898 November . . . . . . . . 80 30 54. 11 89-. 5O 7.05 2. 524 ' 2690 - December . . . . . . . . 76 19 53. 11 86.22 2. 86 1.779 2659 l Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 41.62 4s 34s 34393 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 . 65 82 . 84 Extreme . . . . . . 103 1 Table 4.—Summary of meteorological data, 1916-17-18. Temperatures _ _ Annual Humidity Average Total Years Absolute Mean Annual Evapo- Miles ———-i—_— Monthly Per Cent Rainfall ration Wind Max. Min. Mean Velocity 1916 . . . . . . . . . . . .. 99 14 66.43 75.23 43.19 41.916 35730 1917 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 14 64. 74 78.40 28.26 49.140 36485 1918 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 1 66.65 82.84 41.62 48.343 34393 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65.94 78.82 37. 69 Ii 46.465 35536 Table 5.——Precipitat.ion during crop growing season. Year May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Total i»! 1916 . . . . . . . . . . .. 11.32 2.22 4.09 1.92 0.77 1.40 21.72 .1917 . . . . . . . . . . .. 2.73 0.48 5.92 .41 2.77 1.27 13.58 1918 . . . . . . . . . . .. 2.10 2.84 1.39 5.18 2.81 4.91 19.23 Average..... 5.38 1.84 3.80 2.50 2.11 2.52 18.15 6 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. Table 6.——Mean temperature during crop growing season. Year. May June I July Aug. Sept. Oct . h Mean 1916 . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 7s ' s2 s1 7e o 67 7e 1917 . . . . . . . . . . . . 6e 79 s1 s2 ~ 75 e2 74 191s. .. . . . . . . . . . . 74 s3 ss s2 72 c9 77 Average. . . . . 70 so l s2 s1 74 es 75 The growing season is comparatively long, and during the past three years the last freezing temperature in the spring; occurred on March 18, 1917, and the first freeze in the fall on October 19, of the same , year. _ In comparing the climatic conditions for the three years with the records for the past twenty years, We find that the average- precipitation ' Was below the normal of: 15.69 inches. The year 1917, With precipita- tion of 28.26 inches, Was the lowest for the twenty years that records: have been reported. The precipitation for 1916 and 1918 came Within five inches of the normal. This average shortage for the period has been the limiting factor in crop yields. FERTILIZER Tynsrs. The nature of the soil in this agricultural region is such that the use of commercial fertilizer in crop production. is a common practice. A Information is needed as to the amounts and the combinations of Fig. 1.——Showing View of tobacco fertilizer plats. The plat in the foreground received an application of 600 pounds of cottonseed meal, 200 pounds potash and 200 pounds acid phosphate to the acre. fertilizers which Will give the greatest production in acre-yield or acre- money value or both. No commercial fertilizer will give the maximum returnswithout an abundance of organic matter in the soil. y The yields reported here from plats receiving commercial fertilizer REPORT OF EXPERIMENTS AT SUBSTATION No. 11. 7 _ in many cases do not exceed the yields from plats receiving no fertilizer, a fact accounted for in part by the lack of organic matter. TOBACCO FERTILIZER. Acid phosphate, cottonseed meal, and potash were used singly and in combinations as fertilizers for tobacco. The table below shows the yield, the cost of the fertilizer, and the net acre-value of‘ the product from different applications. Tab‘e 7.—Showing value of various fertilizers for tobacco, 1916 to 1918, inclusive. Average Acre Kind of Fertilizer and Plat Amount Applied No. Yield Value in Cost of Value Less Pounds per Acre Lbs. Dollars Fertilizer Cost of Fertilizer 5 1200 Cottonseed Meal, 400 Acid Phosphate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858.333 $ 154.49 $ 30. 73 $ 123. 76 1 1200 Cottonseed Meal, 400 Acid Phosphate, 200 Sulphate of Potash . . . . . . . . . . ~. . . 841 .875 151.53 47.39 104. 14 4 No Fertilizer-Check . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 614.166 100.29 0.00 100.29 3 600 Cottonseed Meal, 400 Acid Phosphate, 200 Sulphate of Potash . . . . . . . . . . . . . 700.833 126. 14 34.49 91 . 65 7 1200 Cottonseed Meal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 589. 166 106.04 25. 80 80.24 2 200 Sulphate or Potash . . . . . . . . . . . . . 551 . 041 89. 99 16. 66 73.33 9 1200 Cottonseed Meal, 200 Sulphate of Potash . . . . . . . . . . . . . 574.333 103.37 42.46 60.91 8 1200 Cottonseed Meal, - 200 Acid Phosphate, a 200 Sulphate of Potash . . . . . . . . . . . . . 552. 5 99.45 44.92 54. 53 6 400 Acid Phosphate, 200 Sulphate of Potash . . . . . . . . . . . . . 465.833 76.08 21.59 54.49 It is seen that three out of the eight fertilizers applied show in- creases in yield over the no-fertilizer plat. However, in average acre- value in dollars only two of the fertilizers show increases over the no- fertilizer plat when the cost of the fertilizer is deducted. The fertilizer composed of 1200 pounds of cottonseed meal and 400 pounds of acid phosphate gave an increase of $23.47 over the no- over no-fertilizer after the cost of fertilizer was deducted. All those fertilizers in which cottonseed meal was used produced a quality of tobacco which sold in 1918 at 25 per cent increase in price over tobacco produced on plats where no cottonseed meal was used. CORN FERTILIZER. Acid phosphate, cottonseed meal, and potash wereused singly and in combination as fertilizer for corn. The table following shows the yield, the cost of the fertilizer, and the acre-money value after deducting the cost of the fertilizer in each case: ’ ’ fertilizer, and it was the only fertilizer showing a marked increase‘ TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. Table 8.—V alue of different fertilizers for corn, 1916 to 1918, inclusive. Kind of Fertilizer and Average Acre Amount Applied Plat ~ Cost of Value No. Pounds per Acre Yield Value in Fertilizer Bus. Dollars Dollars 3 200 Cottonseed Meal, . r 100 Acid Phosphate.- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 859 $ 40.59 $ 6.31 $ 5 300 Cottonseed Meal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 666 40.09 7.55 2 100 Acid Phosphate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 712 33.45 1.28 1 - 200 Cottonseed Meal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 914 35.48 5.03 4-9 No Fertilizer-Check . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20.359 30. 12 0.00 6 200 Acid Phosphate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20.058 31.48 2. 56 7 300 Cottonseed Meal, 200 Acid Phosphate... . . . . 20.321 3 22 10.11 10 400 Cottonseed Meal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18. 925 27 15 9.47 200 Acid Phosphate, 8 400 Cottonseed Meal . . . . ... . . . . . . .. 16.710 23.77 10.06 Fig. ZF-Showing plat of corn on the left without fertilizer and on the right receiving 600 pounds of cottonseed meal and 100 pounds of sulphate of potash to the acre. The results above show plat 3, Which received 200 pounds cottonseed- phosphate, gave a marked increase‘ in- meal and 100 pounds of acid _ average acre-money value after the cost of fertilizer Was deducted. Cottonseed meal alone up to 300 pounds per acre gave a slight gave a slightly loWer average acre- increase, While- the greater amounts value than no-fertilizer. The application of 200 pounds of cottonseed meal and of 100 pounds a .-acid phosphate is found most profitable, and this is especially true» ‘WhQTG the soil is provided With an abundance of organic matter. TOMATO FERTILIZERS. Experiments Were conducted With various fertilizers for use in the production of market tomatoes. Cottonseed meal, acid phosphate, sulphate of potash, nitrate ofsoda, and barn-yard manure Were used singly, and in combination on < 5 i x _~ £5 REPORT OF EXPERIMENTS Ail.‘ SUBSTATION No. 11. 9 diiierent plats. The results shown in the following table are the average results from a four-year experiment and are considered quite reliable: Table 9.-—Value of different fertilizers for tomatoes. Amount and‘ Kind of Average Acre Fertilizer Used Leas Pounds per Acre Yield Value Cost of Cost of " Lbs. Fertilizer Fertilizer“ 20 Loads Stable Manure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3915. 5 $ 117.46 $ 15.00 3 102.46 200 Acid Phosphate, 200 Cottonseed Meal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3269 . 75 98. O9 6 . 76 91 . 33 200 Cottonseed Meal, 50 Sulphate of Potash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3254.375 97. 63 8. 46 89.17 200 Acid Phosphate, 200 Cottonseed Meal, 50 Sulphate o? Potash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3200.05 96.00 10. 92 85.08 200 Avid Phosphate, 100 Nitrate of Soda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3011.45 90. 34 5. 58 84. 76- 200 Acid Phosphate, 100 Cottonseed Meal. 100 Nitrate o? Soda, 50 Sulphate of Potash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3177. 50 95.32 200 Acid Phosphate, 200 Cottonseed Meal, s-A r-A O0 CD 0O 0O b OJ 50 Nitrate of Soda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3018. 625 90.55 10.92 79.63 200 Cottonseed Meal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2357 . 5 70 . 72 4 . 30 66 . 42 200 Acid Phosphate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2067.425 62.02 2.46 59. 56 200 Acid Phosphate, - 50 Sulphate of Potash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..'..... 2118.675 63.56 6.62 56.94 Check—no Fertilizer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1775.3 53.25 0.00 53.25 50 Sulphate of Potash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1870. 625 56.11 4. 16 51 . 95 .Check—no Fertilizer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1664. 600 49. 93 0 . 00 49 . 93 Check——no Fertilizer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1209. 50 36.28 0.00 3 .28 It is seen that the application of twenty loads of stable manure to the acre gave much better yields and much. greater profit than any other fertilizer used. Two hundred pounds of acid phosphate and two- hundred pounds cottonseed meal also gave a marked increase in yield and acre-money value after the cost of fertilizer was deducted. Two Fig. 3.—~Showing view of corn variety test. Note the perfect stand and uniform conditions under which this test is conducted. V‘ 9x1 10 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIQN. Y» ~- hundred pounds of acid phosphate and fifty pounds of sulphate potash gave good results. v _ 3 CORN. A it VARIETY TEST. A variety test of corn, including thirty varieties in 1916, thirty-fi‘ varieties in 1917, and thirty varieties in 1918, was conducted 1' y replicate plantings. The results during this period showed-the ll lowing varieties to be outstanding high yielders in the order Ferguson Yellow Dent, Hastings Prolific, White Mogul, Oklaho” White Wonder, Schieberle, Surcropper, Chisholm and Blount Proli, The results with the corn variety test, conducted from 1912 to 19,’ inclusive, showed the eight best yielding varieties to rank in the or . named, as follows: Oklahoma White Wonder, Hastings Prolific, F‘, guson Yellow Dent, Surcropper, Fentress Strawberry, Chisholm, Whirl" Mogul, and Virginia White Dent. O It is see-n that certain varieties, namely, Ferguson Yellow Den Hastings Prolific, Oklahoma White Wonder, White Mogul, Surcropp and Chisholm have consistently been high yielders throughout period and are considered good varieties for this region. _ In 1918 a test was conducted for the purpose of comparing difiere varieties which had shown good results in previous tests. These van __ ties were planted on three different dates: (1) Early, (2) Medi if and (3) ‘Late, so as to subject each variety to varying conditions in. single season. The average results are presented in the followil; table, in which the varieties are arranged in order of the average yield Table 10.-.—Average results from a comparisonpf some good-producing varieties planted ' three different dates m the same season. \ iDatel Acre Date Acre Date Acre Avr T. S. Variety Plant- Yield Plant- Yield Plant- Yield Yiel No. ed Bus. ed Bus. ed v 3008 Surcropper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mar. 15 16.959 April 1 10.383 April 17 3083 Brazos White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mar. 15 7.660 April 1 3.437 April 17 3007 Chisholm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mar. 15 14.142 April 1 4.174 April 17 3094 Oklahoma White Wonder. . . Mar. 15 16.892 April. 1 2.460 April 17 3137 Blount’s Prol'fic . . . . . . . . . . . . Mar. 15 11.392 April 1 7.120 April 17 _ 327 Thomas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mar. 15 7.464 April 1 6. 875 April 17 3086 Va. White Dent . . . . . . . . . . . . Mar. 15 11.785 April 1 1 .964 April 17 2981 Hast'ng’s Prolific . . . . . . . . . . . Mar. 15 3.928 April 1 2.946 April 17 3009 Fer uson’s Yellow Dent. . . . . Mar. 15 9.821 April 1 8.102 April 17 _ 3060 Coc e's Prdific . . . . . . . . . . . . Mar. 15 11. 589 April 1 1.964 April 17 3467 Grier-Campbell . . . . . . . . . . . . Mar. 15 0 687 April 1 5. 892 April 17 i The supplemental test conducted during 1918 shows the ifive highest’ I varieties to be Surcropper, Brazos White, Chisholm, Oklahoma White Wonder, and Blount’s Prolific. ‘ ' SEEDING ' RATE. TEST. The thickness of planting corn has much to do with the yield and the quality of the product. Just how thick to plant in a given regon- i‘ under certain climatic and soil conditions is a matter of importance t0 the grower. *1?“ 1 REPORT‘ OF EXPERIMENTS AT SUBsTATIoN No. 11. 11 The series of plats, in which all factors other than that of seeding ‘rate were identical, were planted and thinned to different numbers of stalks to the acre. The results are shown in the following table: Table 11.—Corn seeding rate test, 1918. Yield in Bushels Per Acre Average ' Yield 1n Seeding Rate or Number Stalks to Acre. Bushels ' Planted Planted Per Acre Mar. 18 April 2 l 2420 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 14.285 10. 714 12.50 3630 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 15.741 11.071 13.41 4840 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 16.071 8.214 12.14 7260 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9.071 3.035 6.05 9680 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.000 .660 5.33 The results show good yields from the three thinnest seedings and the best yields from the seeding of 3630 stalks to the acre, or one stalk ‘to one and one-third square yards. , The seeding rate of 4840 stalks per acre, or a stalk to every square i‘ yard, gave almost as large yields as the thinner seeding. The soil on which this test was conducted was only in a fair state of fertility. It is possible, therefore, that the seeding on soils in a good state of fer- tility should be as thick as one stalk to the square yard. WIDTH OF ROW TEST. Tests were conducted in 1918 for the purpose of comparing the I yields of corn in wide and in narrow rows, planted at different dates l and at different rates. The results secured are presented in the fol- f lowing table r secured from corn planted in three and in six-foot rows. individual plats comprising the average seem to show a tendency for slightly better yields in the wide rows, and this fact is more or less in ‘ Tab‘e 12.-—Comparing yields of corn in wide and narrow rows. Yield in Bnshels Per Acre. Stalks Per Acre Date Planted 36-Inch 72-Inch Rows Rows 3630 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Mar. 21..... 18.411 22.098 . 3630 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. April 1. . . .. 23.325 29.464 .4840 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ar. 9.330 10.803 ‘4840 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. April 1. . . .. 24.553 13.258 r6050 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Mar. 2l..... 17.678 19.642 ‘"6050 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. April 1. . . .. 9.575 7.857 ‘4840 Average; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17. 145 17. 188 It is seen that there is practically no (lifference in the average yie-ld The several accordance with the former re-sults secured at this Station and re- ported in Bulletin No. 230. TIME or PLANTING LEGUME AS INTERTILLEI) cRoP—-1918. The advisability of planting cowpeas in corn Iappears to depend, to f large extent, on the time at which the cowpeas are planted, or on the p; of the corn when the cowpeas begin competition with it. 12 , TEXAS AG-RICITLTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. Fig. 4.——View of plat of corn in wide rows with cowpeas planted between rows on the same date the corn was planted. Note the large growth of the cowpea vines and the very ordinary development of the corn. The cowpeas have robbed the corn of moisture and plant food. Fig. 5.——View of plat of corn in wide rows with cowpeas planted between the rows when the corn was in full tassel. Note the well developed corn and tl-(B tact that the cowpeas are just coming into vigorous growth. w. w‘. W. z-vrvn". -\;~.~. REPORT or EXPERIMENTS AT SUBSTATION N0. 11. 13 To determine what effect early and late planting of cowpeas would have on the yield of corn, a test was carried out, as shown in the fol- lowing table: Table 13.——Yields of corn as affected by time of planting intertilled legume. Acre Average Yield of Yield 1n Corn Legume Stage of growth of corn when Shelled Bushels Planted Planted cowpeas_were planted ,_ , Corn in 01' Both Bushels Plantings Mar. 27. . . .. Mar. 27. . . .. O0 inches high . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .982 i——— Mar. 27. . . .. May 20. . . .. 12 inches high . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4.907_ i- Mar. 27. . . .. June’ 10. . . .. 36 inches high . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 11.969 ———— Mar. 27. . . .. June 23.. . .. 60 inches hlgh . . . . . . . . . .._ . . . . . . . . .. 6 383 Mar. 27..... June 30..... Tassel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . .. 8.9 Mar. 27... .. Mar. 2 ... .. O0 inches high . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3.683 2.332 Mar. 27..... May 20..... 12 inches high . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 12.89 8.898 Mar.27. June 10..... 36inches high . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 20.871 16.420 Mar. 27. . . .. June 23. . . .. 6O inches high . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 18.415 12.399 Mar. 27. . . .. June 30. . . .. Tassel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 11 339 10. 119 The experiment shows in both the original and the duplicate series, as Well as in the average, that cowpeas planted before the corn is three feet high, results in'a loss in yield of corn. If they are planted when the corn is three feet high or higher, the yield of the corn is greatest. Previous work, as reported in Bulletin No. 237, is in accord with the results presented here, with the exception that the best yields were i" secured when the cowpeas were planted a little later in the stage of the development of the corn. It seems conclusive that cowpeas must not i‘ be planted in corn in the early stages of the development of the corn . crop, unless other benefits are secured to offset the loss in the produc- tion of corn. i COTTON. THINNING AND RATE OF PLANTING EXPERIMENT. This test was made to see what effect the distance between the hills would have 011 the yield of cotton when planted at rates of one, two, if and three plants to the hill. results include the test _of that year. This test was begun in 1915, and the Theresults for the four years’ test with Mebane cotton, planted on upland in rows three feet apart, i show thattwo plants to the hill and twenty-one inche-s apart in the. j’ drill will give the highest yield of seed cotton. VARIETY TEST. The peculiar soil and climatic conditions in any section of the State i‘ make it necessary to determine the varieties best suited to the existing conditions by testing. 1 tested during the past three years. F varieties were planted in duplicate and triplicate plats and the results averaged. Cultivation and treatment have been the same for. all varieties. A number of varieties of cotton have been In the making of these tests, The highest yielders of seed cotton for each year are as follows: 14 Texas AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. y .I Year Variety ’ Pounds Lint Per Cent 1916 Simpkins Prolific, T. S. No. 1834 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 529.66 32 Webber, T. S. No. 1835 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 488. 12 33 Matchless, T. S. No. 1848 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 457. 16 32 1917 Roundnose, T. S. No. 2469 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 548.28 35 Wannamaker Cleveland, T. S. No. 2474 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 503.59 39 Allen's Express, T. S. No. 2484 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 502.73 29 1918 Mebane Triumph, T. S. No. 3002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 629.06 35 Mortgage Lifter, T. S. No. 3021 . . . . . . . . . .' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 587.81 32 Mebane Triumph, T. S. No. 3037 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 577.5 35 Of the different varieties of cotton grown during the years 1916 v; 1918 a number have been discarded for‘ one reason or another, :11» other varieties tested in their place. The following table shows acre-yields and ginning percentage of those cotton varieties which havé C) been grown for the three years: Table lib-Average yields and lint persentage of varieties of cotton, 1916, 1917 and 1918. Q a .1 Average 'I‘. S. 1 _ Average Acre No. Variety Lint Rank Yield in Rank Per Cent Pounds ‘ 1817 l l 3469 i Roundnose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 33.00 5 489.842 1 034 J . 1818 2458 Rowden‘. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .' . . . . . . . . . . 31 . 91 7 _ 458. 328 2 3003 1847 ' ‘ 2476 Mortgage Lifter . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . 32. 892 6 451 . 853 3 3021 J 1819 2470 Mebane Triumph. . . . 35.426 1 433.621 4 3037 1846 1' I 2478 1 Surecrop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34. 151 4 432.248 5 gt 3020 J 1815 \} 2484 Allen's Express . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' 28.562 8 417.352 6 i‘ 3045 j a‘ 1823 ' 2488 Early King . . . . . . . . . . . . .‘ . . . . . . . . . 34.51 3 361.776 7 i 3046 j . 1 1833 1 ~ .2472 f Lone Star . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35.03‘ 2 346.603 8 803s J ~ Owing to the fact that Rowden has a better staple than Roundnose, -. it is to be recommended even though it ranks second t0 Roundnose-in yield. N In addition to the varieties shown in the above table, the following ‘ varieties which ‘have not been tested throughout all the three years have‘ made good yields: Matchless Big Boll, Wannamaker, Mebane, Union Big Boll, Cook, Webb, Bank Account, Kasch, Trice, and Triumph. . x Also, some of the best varieties from the standpoint of ginning per-J @ REPORT OF EXPERIMENTS AT SUBSTATION No. 11. 15 pcentage have not been tested every year. The highest of the-se are {given in order as follows: ' Per Cent Lint Chisholm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (46.51 Improved Champion. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45.80 ' Mexican Big Boll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .4285 Kasch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4222 Half & Half . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4130 Moneymaker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4125 Peterkin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40.81 Rowden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ." . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40.00 Wannamaker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ._ . . . . . . . .40.00 Mebane , . . . . . . .- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .- . . . . . . . . . . .3978 The Half 8E Half cotton, although showing a good ginning per- ntage, is not to be re'commended'on account of its poor quality and tort length of the staple. Three of the varietiesof cotton mentioned, owever, have a higher ginning percentage than the Half & Half, and have also a desirable lint. ~*The length of staple is just as important in selecting a variety of tton as is the yield and the ginning percentage; From the number f varieties tested during the three years the following list shows ,me of the desirable varieties in regard to length of lint: Inches Snowflake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 5/16 Express . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 3/16 Lone Star . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 1/16 Trice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 1/ 16 Acala . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 1 / 16 Mebane Triumph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Webb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 ‘ Kasch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Wannamaker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .* . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 7/ 8 Half & Half . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0 5/8 ‘From the forty-three samples tested for length of lint, the Half & Half ilton showed the shortest staple. The staple of this variety was only qeh, while all others measured -§--inch or more. COWPEAS. VARIETY TEST FOR SEED. luring the last three years, 1916-1918, twenty-five varieties of cow- ‘I; have been tested for seed yields. Plantings were made in May each year. In 1916 quadruple plantings were made, but in 191'?’ _ 1918 only duplicate plantings were made for seed yields. This was conducted in a three-year rotation with corn and cotton. The i, vines were plowed under as a green manure after the seed had been tested. 16 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. The following‘ table shows the average acre-yield of those varieties which have been planted all three years: Table 15.—Average seed yields of varieties of cowpeas, 1916, 1917 and 1918. T. S. Average Yield Clean Seed Per n No. Variety Acre, 1916, 1917, and 1918, Rank ' in Bushels 56 Unknown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,414 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 325 Brabbam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.853 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 59 Whippoorwill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8. 78 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 85 Iron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.414 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 60 Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8. 352 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 196 Iron-Blackeye . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8. 162 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 197 Iron-Blackeye . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.259 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 206 Iron-Whippoorwill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.178 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 86 Groit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 58 New Era . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.961 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 215 Holstein . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.950 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 204 Iron—Whippoorwill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. 538 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 87 Biazzkeye . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.43.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 753 J ap-Blackeye . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.39 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2297 Cream . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. 967 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 F 1685 Black Crowder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.851 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 57 Red Ripper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. 798 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 214 Red Ripper . . . . ..' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4.327 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 218 Chinese Yellow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 The average yields of these cowpeas Were reduced by the low yields of 1917 when this test suffered from the drouth of that year. The Unknown cowpea, T. S. No. 56, which ranks first on the list, made ' eleven bushels in 1916, 14.208 bushe-ls in 1918, and only 3.036 bushels in 1917. The proportionate yields for all varieties show the same variation for the normal years and for the year of drouth. Fig. 6.—View of plat of Brabham cowpeas. Note the vigorous growth of the vines. The Brabham, T. S. No. 32.5}, and Iron, T. S. No. 85, are two varie-l ties that can be recommended as they are both good seed and foragd yielders, both being immune to the nematode. Those varieties that; are hybrids, having Tron cowpea for one of the parents, appear to‘ show the same characteristic as regards the nematode. For early seed < REPoET OF EXPERIMENTS AT SUBSTATION No. 11. 17 ields the‘ New Era‘, T. S. No. 58, is recommended. It is a semi-bunch jriety, having little vine, a.nd maturing early enough to allow two plant- 1 gs during the season, if desired. ' Table 16;——Seed yields of varieties of cowpeas for six years, 1913 to 1918, inclusive. Acre Yield in Bushels Variety Aver- Rank 1913 I 1914 I 1915 I 1916 I 1917 1918 age Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2.46 4.55 11.80 12.80 4.353 7.905 7.311 1 Unknown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3.11 3.41 7.90 11.00 3.03614 208 7.110 2 New Era . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4.65 5.20 11.30 10.80 8.854 1 375 7.029 3 Whippoorwill . . . . . . . . . . .. 3.53 4.59 7.10 10.70 .859 14.781 6.926 4 Iron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3.20 3.60 6.60 9.50 315012.603 6.442 5 Groit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3.36 5.61 4.10 15.20 .859 4 927 5.672 6 Iron-Whippoorwill . . . . . . .. 4.35 5.36 5.60 7.70 2.119 9.796 5.486 7 Backeye . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2.46 2.45 4.60 11.50 5.041 2.749 4.799 8 Red Ripper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 6.16 6.50 9.90 .830 3.666 4.639 9 Red Ripper . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4.91 1.92 4.90 7.50 1.947 3.435 4.102 10 It is seen that Clay, Unknown, New Era, Whippoorwill, Iron, Groit, i1 Iron-Whippoorwill rank in order named. The results for the six arslagrec Witll those for the three years previously presented. The rabham and some other varieties have not been tested for a longer riod than three years. VARIETY TEST FOR FORAGE. . jtNineteen varieties of cowpeas were used in thisltest during 191'?’ and i918. The varieties were planted in 36-inch rows, and as with all l: iety tests conducted a constant was used between the different plats, 1 every tenth row was a soil check. The yields in pounds of cured rage are shown in the following table: Table 17.—Forage yields of varieties of cowpeas. _ Acre Yield in Lbs. Variety ii Average Rank 1917 1918 Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1737.00 3410 2573.50 1 Unknown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1282.25 3450 2366.12 2 on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1875.00 2420 2147.5 3 Japanese Blackeye . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113.75 3080 2096.87 4 Iron-Blackeye . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2158.25 2035 2096.625 5 Brabham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2172. 5 1925 2048.75 6 Iron-Whippoorwill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2145. 00 1705 1925.00 7 Iron-Blackeye . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2145.0 1540 1842.5 8 Earl Buff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1278.72 2025 1651.86 9 Blackeye . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1815.00 1430 1622.5 10 Groit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1072.50 2145 1608.75 11 Cream . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1526.00 1485 1505.50 12 Holstein . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1375.00 1485 1430. 00 13 Black Crowder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1636.25 1210 1423.125 14 Iron-Whippoorwill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1003. 7O 1760 1381.85 15 New Era . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1072. 50 1485 1278.75 16 Red Ripper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 940.00 1485 1212.5 17 Any of the varieties making a ton and over of cured forage to the e can be recommended. The peas which in this test followed oats, planted in June. More cowpeas should be planted. in East Texas for forage, as both soil and the climatic conditions are adapted to their growth. In 18 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. comparing the total dry matter and the digestible nutrients in cowpea.; with alfalfa, we find the following: ' Total Dry Carbo- g Forage Matter Protein hydrates Fat ’ Per Cent Per Cent Per Cent Per Cent 5f Alfalfa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 91.9 10.5 40.5 0.9 Cowpea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 89,5 9.2 39.3 1.3 When one considers the amount of fertility in cowpeas, he finds tha, one ton of cowpeas contains 43 pounds of nitrogen, 4.6 pounds o phosphorus, and 32 pounds of potassium. Therefore, We recommen the growing of cowpeas, not only as a forage crop, but also as a greenff‘ manure crop to plow under. Cowpeas which have been plowed under will supply organic matter and plant food, and thus they save the cost of expensive commercial fertilizers. i SOY BEANS. A variety test with soy beans, in which nine varieties of beans were used, was conducted in 1916 for forage yields. This legume, being. one of the oldest legumes known to man, is grown only to a limited extent in Texas. The planting and cultivation is similar t0 that. of the cowpea. Thehighest yielders in\ the test were Meyer, T. S. No.5 228, yielding 3080 pounds of cured forage to the acre; the Austin, T. S. No. 224,with 2200 pounds to the acre; the Peking, T. S. N0. - 221, yielding 1177.5 pounds to the acre. Some very promising yields-f have bee-n had, yet it is not considered that either the best varieties fori the region have been found or the best method of culture. '~ CANADA FIELD PEA. The Canada Field pea is a winter legume, and is best planted withf oats; both peas and oats were planted at the rate of 60 pounds to the? acre broadcast. Four varieties were used: Golden Vine, Blue Bell, Scotch Blue, and Kaiser. The peas and the oats were planted on T January 11, but were injured by a low temperature of 15 degrees in February, which damage reduced the yields. Blue Bell was the, highest yielder, with, 900 pounds of forage to the acre. This prelimig, nary test, on account of the damage received from low temperature, does not indicate the value of this legume as a winter crop, and furtherl. tests are being made, as a winter legume is badly needed in the cropping '_ system of East Texas. ‘ PEANUTS. This crop is well adapted to the sandy soils of East Texas, and ‘i during the last three years, owing to the demand for the oil, the; acreage has greatly increased in the eastern and southeastern counties" of the State. At present the Spanish peanut is the only variety acceptable to the mills. The Valencia and the Tennessee Red, although 1 giving higher yields, are_of no commercial value for milling, on account‘ 4 of the color of the kernel covering which discolors the oil. ' Some work has been done toward determining the value of wide and; I iiarrow rows, and of cracked seed-pods as compared to uncracked seed- lds. Theresults are presented in the following table: ‘ i’ Table 18.—-Width of row and method of preparing peanut seed for planting 1019116,, - Yield in Pounds to the Acre 18 Inch Rows 36 Inch Rows Rnronr OF EXPERIMENTS AT SUBSTATION No. 11. 19_ Nuts Forage Nuts Forage . _ not cracked . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 590 1230 57o 2330 ells cracked . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . s00 1580 590 1890 e A Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. A e95 1405 I 580 2110 ‘tained from the planting in narrow rows, but the forage‘ yield was eater from the Wide rows. Previous Work has shown better yields nuts from narrow rows, where other conditions are. equal. It seems ivisable, therefore, to plant the peanut seed in rows asclose as will 0w easy cultivation. , gThe table shows that the nuts prepared by cracking the pods have a fight increase-in yield over the nuts which were not cracked, due to a ghtly better stand.- Peanuts are undoubtedly 0f great value as a hay crop, as the test for y age yields shows. The feeding value of peanut hay is high, and the ,p can be planted, as a catch crop following oats, any time in June y hay. In 1917 three acres of peanuts were plante-d on the Station oats on July 24, and under. the existing drouth conditions pro- iced 3420 pounds of hay and 54 bushels of peanuts, or 1140 pounds hay and 18 bushels of nuts to the acre. i; A CROP INTRODUCTION TESTS. SUDAIv crass. his valuable hay-grass was first tested out on the “Station in 1912, ‘f- with other new crops. The results of these early tests are shown iBulletin No. 237 of this Station. In 1917 the seeding rate test was A ~ ftinued using three, six, nine, twelve, fifteen, and twenty-five pounds peed to the acre. The following table shows the results of this test: Table 19.—Forage yields of Sudan grass in seeding rate test, 1916. Seeding Rate Per Acre, Pounds Yield Forage Per Acre, Pounds T‘ . 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v 1300 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1400 “T? ‘ 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1600 f 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2300 _ :1 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2600 25 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3000 I'I'Il,>‘l '!;| he heavy seeding rate yielded best in this test. The see-d" was‘ fled in 36-inch rows, which are wide enough to give plenty of ‘rooms n ‘nalvléfl! i‘ It is seen from the above results that better yields of nuts were " TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. 20 for cultivation. plantings have given larger yields than broadcast-plantings. Sudan grass is now one of the standard. grasses of East Texas and will bef. own more and more each year. While Sudan grass is a valuable hay crop in this agricultural region, f In all tests conducted with Sudan grass the row’ .» it occu ies a ver ' rominent lace in the formation of summer )3.S- l tures. continuous pasture throughout the growing period. SORGHUM. Nine new sorghums, importations received through the U. S. Depart; ment oi Agriculture, were tested for their crop possibilities under conditions in this agricultural region. duced exceptionally large forage yields, and may, after more thorough testing, prove to be of superior value as silage crops. TEFF GRASS, T. s. NO. 1526. A small amount of seed of this African grass Was received from the ' Department of Agriculture and was planted in the spring of 1917. The grass gre-W to a height of 24 inches, was killed down by a tempera- ture of 18 degrees F, reseeded itself, and made a good growth during 1918. From indications it may be possible that Teif grass will become a good pasture grass for this section of the State. RUSSIAN FLAX. This test was conducted to determine the best time to plant Russian» flax. ovember, 1917, and ending in March, 1918. Table 20.—-Yields of flax in date of seeding test. Date Planted Seed Yield Acre, Pounds November 27, 1917 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No gield December 1,1917 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 41. 5 December 15, 1917 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55.0 January 1, 1918 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 82.5 January 15, 1918 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 82.5 February 1, 1918 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 274.5 February 15. 1918 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275.0 March 7, 1918 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 357. 5 The flax planted in November was killed by low tempe-rature the following January. The highest yields were obtained from seed planted on February 15 and March '7, .1918, as shown in the above table. BILOXI SOY BEAN. This soy bean was received from Mr. Tracy of Biloxi, Mississippi. This variety is a rank grower and is well adapted for forage. One-half acre planted in 1918 produced 1990 pounds of cured forage or at the rate of 3980 pounds to the acre. It produces very rapid growth and therefore provides almost Three of these sorghums pro- Plantings were therefore made every two weeks, beginning in - Rnronr OF EXPERIMENTS AT SUBSTATION N0. 11. 21 . ’ MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INTRODUCTIONS. Of three foreign introductions Amostra dehervillas, T. S; No. 2974, roved very promising. This plant has a viney growth similar to the f» wpea, and is a native of Brazil. The blooms and the fruiting habit e the same as those of the pea, and it appears to be well adapted to j_ e soil and the climatic conditions of Texas. Seventeen plants yielded 9.5 pounds of cured forage, which would be at the rate of 9210 pounds 3i the acre. g _ f.‘ Guandu, T. S. Nos. 2992 and 2993, was secured from Brazil and is ‘A1 as Pigeon-pea. This plant is supposed to have been brought g om India to Mexico, and is widely grown in the tropics and in sub- opics for human food. The plants made good growth on the Station, t failed to mature any peas before being killed by frost. I Sesame, T. S. No. 2935, was secured from Mexico and is considered Quable for flour and oil. This plant was, also, imported from India vMexico, and was a crop of the ancient Egyptians from two to three usand’ years ago. This plant blossomed freely here and produced ty ofseed, but the plants were killed down by a temperature of degrees F. The forage appears to be of no value as a stock feed, '" cattle will not eat it either green or cured. ' TRUCK CROPS. i p pouring 1916 and 1917 tests were conducted with varieties of radishes, lish peas, snap and lima beans, Irish potatoes, lettuce, and during 8 also with watermelons and cantaloupes, to determine the varie-ties ,- adapted to the soil and climatic conditions of East Texas, in irds to quality and yield. ' RADISHES. ' elve varieties were planted. Very little difference was noticed in w rapidity of growth. The round varieties, however, matured earlier f: the long varieties. White Summer Turnip, T. S. No. 2239, and te Strasburg,~No. 2286, were two of the highest in quality and ENGLISH PEAS. v een varieties were planted. Champion of England, T. S. No. , and Buttercup, T. S. No. 2217, were the best-yielders. The 3| g varieties were more prolific than the dwarf varieties. BEANS. ifrteen varieties of both snap and wax beans were planted. String- }! Pod, T. S. No. 2227, Golden Wax, T. S. No. 2220, were the ‘a. yielders, while Round Six Week's, T. S. No. 2229, and Hopkins valentine, T. S. No. 2228, gave equally as good yields. No differ- found in the quality of the varieties tested. » - 22 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. . LETTUGE. Six varieties were planted, all of which made good growth. Head, Big Boston, and Iceberg were all good quality. IRISH POTATOES. In 1916 seven varieties of Irish pqtatoes were tested, but in 1' owing to the unusual conditions then existing, only two varieties A planted. In 1916 Early Rose, T. S. No. 2272, gave the highest '1 of 122.933 bushels to the acre. Dreers Early Standard, T. S. -, 2267, and Bovee, T. S. No. 2270, each yielded 115.5 bushels to '_ acre. All varieties produced sound merchantable potatoes free of ease. In 1917 Irish Cobbler and Bliss Triumph were the only . varieties planted. The Irish Cobbler yielded 86 bushels, and .1 Triumph, 66 bushels to the acre. The quality of all the high yielf varieties was good. WATERMELONS. varieties was poor. The Tom Watson, T. S. No. 2289, is a good me i, and the best variety for shipping. The Rattlesnake, Kleckley, Halb Honey, Florida Favorite, and Alabama Sweet are all good varieties. , CANTALOUPES. Twelve varieties of cantaloupes and musk-melons were planted. . netted Rocky-Ford and Paul Rose were by far the best quality c ‘ taloupes in the test. <